This Business of Show

Page 8 of 9 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: This Business of Show

Post  Gillian on Thu Dec 11, 2014 12:58 am

Welp, there went my night.

The winner in all this is Fincher. I know nothing of Scott Rudin, but he is obviously a humongous asshole who is right about a Cleopatra movie. And as much as Angelina Jolie irrationally annoys me, his hatred of her kind of makes me like her more, because if someone who's that big of a dick talks that much shit about you, you're probably doing something right. That movie, though. I find myself hoping it gets made so it can play out exactly the way Rudin said it would.

I guess the silver lining in all this (for Rudin and whoever else has a stake in the film) is that I will definitely go see the Steve Jobs movie now. I mean, how could I not? Plus, Fassbender! I didn't know he was attached to it. Is he still? I'll go see it if he's in it.

Gillian

Posts : 472
Join date : 2011-10-24

Back to top Go down

Re: This Business of Show

Post  Carrie Ann on Thu Dec 11, 2014 12:17 pm

I love that that Fassbender dick conversation seemed completely serious. Like, no--don't let him watch Shame because then he'll just feel inadequate and turn against Fassy. Try these less penis-filled movies instead.
avatar
Carrie Ann

Posts : 1227
Join date : 2011-10-23
Age : 36
Location : Minneapolis, MN

Back to top Go down

Re: This Business of Show

Post  bookworm on Thu Dec 11, 2014 12:42 pm

I love that Joel McHale was all "OF COURSE I USED MY EMPLOYEE DISCOUNT."

Also, I had no desire to see The Interview, but now that this has happened I'm totally going to go see a matinee.
avatar
bookworm

Posts : 1082
Join date : 2011-10-22
Age : 37
Location : Georgia

Back to top Go down

Re: This Business of Show

Post  whatthedeuce on Thu Dec 11, 2014 2:27 pm

Carrie Ann wrote:I love that that Fassbender dick conversation seemed completely serious. Like, no--don't let him watch Shame because then he'll just feel inadequate and turn against Fassy. Try these less penis-filled movies instead.
That part had me rolling! I wonder if Fassbender's heard about those emails yet.

whatthedeuce

Posts : 2615
Join date : 2011-10-26
Age : 32

Back to top Go down

Re: This Business of Show

Post  blixie on Thu Dec 11, 2014 2:42 pm

I didn't know he was attached to it. Is he still? I'll go see it if he's in it.

Yes I believe Fassbender/Boyle/Rudin combo just took it over to was it Fox? I think, but it still seems like it may never happen. I did find it funny that after Fassy screwed up Jane's Got a Gun, that Natalie Portman was so anxious to work with him again, she must of got over it or wasn't that pissed at him.

blixie
Mod Squad

Posts : 1840
Join date : 2011-10-21

http://thesnarkening.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: This Business of Show

Post  whatthedeuce on Thu Dec 11, 2014 3:00 pm

How did he screw up Jane's Got a Gun? I never heard about that though I saw photos of them filming certain scenes a few months ago.

whatthedeuce

Posts : 2615
Join date : 2011-10-26
Age : 32

Back to top Go down

Re: This Business of Show

Post  blixie on Thu Dec 11, 2014 3:10 pm

It was last year that they were filming (A Terrence Malick film), he dropped out late in the game and Ewan McGregor took over, but by then she'd lost her hand picked director Lynn Ramsay, and basically it was a hot mess. It was her passion project and she was a producer.

blixie
Mod Squad

Posts : 1840
Join date : 2011-10-21

http://thesnarkening.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: This Business of Show

Post  whatthedeuce on Thu Dec 11, 2014 3:30 pm

Ohhh, I'd have been pissed in her shoes, too. If she's eager to work with him though, that is awesome news for me because I love them both.

whatthedeuce

Posts : 2615
Join date : 2011-10-26
Age : 32

Back to top Go down

Re: This Business of Show

Post  Kiran on Thu Dec 11, 2014 4:47 pm

Yeah, I think he'd mostly signed on to work with Lynne Ramsey, but I think he and Portman are friendly because they worked on those Malick films together, and with all the other cast changes they settled on before they got Joel Edgerton to take on the part they wanted Fassbender to play (I think Ewan MacGregor took on Jude Law's part not Fassbender's...if that movie ever gets released I want to see if it turns out to be as much of a mess as it sounds) she might have just shrugged it off.
avatar
Kiran

Posts : 2583
Join date : 2011-10-21

Back to top Go down

Re: This Business of Show

Post  biakbiak on Fri Dec 12, 2014 5:14 pm

This might be the best photo ever taken!
avatar
biakbiak

Posts : 1454
Join date : 2011-10-24

Back to top Go down

Re: This Business of Show

Post  Corvus on Fri Dec 12, 2014 7:30 pm

Per co-workers who were at that event: "Extreme politeness all around. And some terror. And frostbite."
avatar
Corvus

Posts : 268
Join date : 2011-10-24

Back to top Go down

Re: This Business of Show

Post  biakbiak on Fri Dec 12, 2014 9:16 pm

Maybe Angie's revenge will be giving Amy chicken pox!
avatar
biakbiak

Posts : 1454
Join date : 2011-10-24

Back to top Go down

Re: This Business of Show

Post  blixie on Tue Dec 16, 2014 12:35 pm

I'm just gonna leave this Grantland piece on Hollywood's toxic addiction to franchises here. I agree so much about the perpetual hamster wheel of anticipation without any time spent on actually savoring the THING, though that's a wider cultural phenomenon from the news cycle to movie production.

blixie
Mod Squad

Posts : 1840
Join date : 2011-10-21

http://thesnarkening.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: This Business of Show

Post  Red Wolf on Tue Dec 16, 2014 7:11 pm

That article is depressing, even though I do love the shiny action tentpoles. It's sort of like, they spend all this time making addictive fast food, there's no place for the proper meal. And sometimes, I'd prefer the proper meal. Well, there's always books.

Red Wolf

Posts : 699
Join date : 2011-11-01

Back to top Go down

Re: This Business of Show

Post  Agent Sculder on Tue Dec 16, 2014 9:53 pm

Red Wolf wrote:That article is depressing, even though I do love the shiny action tentpoles. It's sort of like, they spend all this time making addictive fast food, there's no place for the proper meal. And sometimes, I'd prefer the proper meal. Well, there's always books.

I feel the same way. I know that I am part of the problem because most of the movies I do make it to a movie theater to see are based on comic books or are a sequel. Most the "adult" and "good" movies I watch are through Netflix or Redbox. And I like those movies, a lot. I just rarely make the trip to the cinema to see them.

The article mentions it in passing, but the other thing really killing "good" movies is the proliferation of excellent television shows. It's format allows for more complete stories and deeper characters. And you get a new episode each week, no waiting. Plus, serious actors no longer see TV as a lesser medium, so the acting is also great.

Agent Sculder

Posts : 263
Join date : 2012-01-26

Back to top Go down

Re: This Business of Show

Post  BrightEyes on Wed Dec 17, 2014 10:56 pm

I keep going back and forth on the Sony leak. The gossipy 13 year old who lives inside of me is dying at all of the random details about celebrity minutiae that's come out:
a) Joel McHale's "employee discount"
b) Alex Trebek won't placate a helicopter parent
c) Angelina Jolie is worried about being a bald Clepatra

Then I think about the precedent that this might be setting, now that Sony isn't releasing "The Interview", maybe at all. I know that they really had no other choice, especially when theater chains refused to show it. This whole thing could blow over in a few days, but it doesn't seem like it will. Sony is a private company that is in the business of making money, not protecting free speech, but...ugh.
They should just release it as a VOD.

BrightEyes

Posts : 262
Join date : 2011-10-23

Back to top Go down

Re: This Business of Show

Post  Snarryfan on Wed Dec 17, 2014 11:31 pm

I think that up until the threat of violence Sony was going to go through with the release while swallowing the embarrassing gossip that continues to pour out. I honestly believe that the theatres are having a post Dark Knight Rises response. In my view they seem less concerned with some massive incident than some idiot lone gunman who thinks his dog is telling him to defend North Korea. And I would guess that other studios opening big family films played a big part in having theatres drop out. I hope they release it as VOD and then blanket North Korea with flip books of the film.

Snarryfan

Posts : 407
Join date : 2011-10-21
Age : 36

Back to top Go down

Re: This Business of Show

Post  Corvus on Wed Dec 17, 2014 11:57 pm

Sony could have opted to cancel and barely felt the financial blip, but for the theaters to do so is much more costly. Contractual obligations, rescheduling the screens with other films - while I'm frustrated that it looks like 'the terrorists got their way' I applaud their willingness to put lives above money.

(Of course the cynic voice in my head wonders if its a liability issue, because suffering an attack is also very very expensive, but shut up cynic voice in my head.)
avatar
Corvus

Posts : 268
Join date : 2011-10-24

Back to top Go down

Re: This Business of Show

Post  year of the cat on Thu Dec 18, 2014 1:38 am

That photo of Angie w/ Amy... I'm like "plzdon'ttouchher" I'm afraid Angie will turn into a green dragon and rainhellfire. Serious.
avatar
year of the cat

Posts : 390
Join date : 2011-10-26

Back to top Go down

Re: This Business of Show

Post  Skyblade on Fri Dec 19, 2014 2:51 pm

Jolie's Malificent doesn't turn into a dragon : /

The article mentions it in passing, but the other thing really killing "good" movies is the proliferation of excellent television shows.

See, people say this, but if you look at the actual ratings of TV shows...Mad Men was never a real hit, Breaking Bad was only a big hit towards the end. AMC's biggest show is about zombies and based on a comic book. HBO's signature show has dragons and wizards, and has the same mapped out production schedule as Marvel. The most popular show on TV is still about people who read comic books. Orange is the New Black and House of Cards are kind of hazy on actually being TV shows, and starts getting into the territory of "new media".

I mean, my own theory is that generations are more evenly divided so it's very hard to make an "adult" movie that doesn't offend the sensibilities of the older crowds but that's made by an actually creative person that is going to be enough of an asshole to fight for it to get made. (Basically just David O. Russell)

Skyblade

Posts : 89
Join date : 2012-05-06

Back to top Go down

Re: This Business of Show

Post  blixie on Fri Dec 19, 2014 3:05 pm

But I think those shows not being hits is just exactly the POINT, TV (particular pay, basic cable) can financially survive in ways movies can not. All those mid-budget stories that don't get funded as films can be funded in the less costly medium of television. I will say I'm not so sure this isn't a chicken-egg argument though, are there no good mid-budget movies because there is more good tv or is there more good tv because no one will make good mid-budget movies.

I fall in the latter, I think mid-budget films stopped getting made and creatives started to think about telling their stories in a medium that is increasingly willing to be cinematic in it's scope, without a lot of the huge financial commitments that come with movie making.

TV particularly network tv has to re-imagine what success looks like for your average show up against 300 channels instead of one massive captive audience divided between three channels. Hollywood keeps scaling up and making their margin of financial success thinner and thinner, while TV has had to scale down and niche the hell out.

blixie
Mod Squad

Posts : 1840
Join date : 2011-10-21

http://thesnarkening.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: This Business of Show

Post  Skyblade on Fri Dec 19, 2014 4:50 pm

The thing is, I think for the most part, the "mid-budget movie" is a "middle quality" movie. Of course, there's no fixed number for what "mid budget" actually means--this article puts tha figure at "5-60" million, which is kind of elastic. The article of also describes movies like In and Out and Kiss the Girls as examples, which aren't actively bad, but is this the era of film we mourn? Is Gary Fleder's voice a casualty of millenial Hollywood? To be honest, a lot of non-genre Hollywood film budgets are pretty superfluous and wasteful. I mean, if anything on TV is making film redundant, it's the procedurals. (or for that matter, non-fiction crime shows like you see on ID)

Skyblade

Posts : 89
Join date : 2012-05-06

Back to top Go down

Re: This Business of Show

Post  QueenSix on Sat Dec 20, 2014 11:40 am

Corvus wrote:Sony could have opted to cancel and barely felt the financial blip, but for the theaters to do so is much more costly. Contractual obligations, rescheduling the screens with other films - while I'm frustrated that it looks like 'the terrorists got their way' I applaud their willingness to put lives above money.

IIRC from my cinema management days, a huge chunk out of daily film takings goes to the distributors - which is why there have been a few instances here where a cinema chain hasn't gotten the big releases from one film studio in the past, I think it was Warner Brothers, because they felt the money that the WB Distributors for UK/Ireland were charging was much too high. If they have taken pre-bookings for The Interview, then okay there are some refunds going on there and no head office likes to see a huge refund report coming in from their sites. But if they add on extra screenings for a film that's already busy, then there'll be no big loss there.

Unless things have vastly changed in the past ten years and it might well be a different story in the US when it comes to film distributors.

But yes, no cinema chain would want to take a chance on something happening at one of their sites. It would leave them too open to legal proceedings and frankly, I don't think staff would put up with it. They're not paid enough to deal with the usual loo-lah's who cause trouble at cinemas and give them guff, never mind something where you are wondering if the next person is going to complain about the price of popcorn or shoot the place up.

QueenSix

Posts : 1313
Join date : 2011-10-22
Location : City of the Tribes, West of Ireland

Back to top Go down

Re: This Business of Show

Post  Snarryfan on Sat Dec 20, 2014 12:54 pm

Watching What the Flick Matt Atchity, the editor of Rotten Tomatoes, brought up a good point re: attacks. North Korea may not be able to do much to the U.S BUT Sony is a Japanese company and that country faces a greater chance that North Korea could do something horrible, like a missile, thus the higher-ups may have been the one to pull the final plug.

Snarryfan

Posts : 407
Join date : 2011-10-21
Age : 36

Back to top Go down

Re: This Business of Show

Post  puddingcup on Sat Dec 20, 2014 1:10 pm

QueenSix wrote:They're not paid enough to deal with the usual loo-lah's who cause trouble at cinemas and give them guff

This made me laugh and I love the word "loo-lahs". I keep picturing loiterers lolling around with their tongues hanging out.

puddingcup

Posts : 633
Join date : 2011-10-25

Back to top Go down

Re: This Business of Show

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 8 of 9 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum