Jump to content

Deadlines? What Deadlines?

Members
  • Content Count

    2,159
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Deadlines? What Deadlines?

  • Rank
    Council Member

Recent Profile Visitors

1,978 profile views
  1. Jason Kilar appears to be quite a supporter. If they define it as a success, We'll see more. Both. Separate universes with different versions of the character and multiple versions in films that explore the multiverse concept. Matt Reeves is his own continuity while Keaton and Affleck will both appear in the Flash film. (roughly in order) Smith was actually a massive fan of Man of Steel as I recall. He was really disappointed with BvS-theatrical but considerably warmer to BvS ultimate, which seems to be a near universal opinion. What Smith is pondering is the timing of that statement (before the release), not the sentiment. And I doubt opinion on this at Warner Media is so monolithic. The biggest DC films success was a very loose Joker adaptation and that landed in WB's lap. Even when it did, it took two years to Green-light and they funded less than 50% of the production, supposedly in the hope it would discourage Phillips from making it. Phillips having to find partners was probably a good thing as it might have given him more creative control. The highest grossing R rated film in history and WB had to split the profits. Brilliant! In the meantime, they let Chris McQuarrie's Green Lantern and MoS 2 proposals evaporate. Of the "modern" CBM's, which I would argue starts with Bryan Singer's X-Men; Man of Steel, at the time it was released, was the 3rd highest grossing CBM origin story behind Maguire's Spider-Man and Garfield's Amazing Spider-Man. It outgrossed the previous DC origin film, Batman Begins, all extant X-Men films, and every Marvel phase 1 film except for The Avengers. Other than Joker, the post MoS "non-Snyder projects" are actually among the lowest grossing DC films: Birds of Prey and Shazam!. In fairness, BoP was likely impacted somewhat by Covid, but even then I don't see it crossing $250 mil. I don't really know what happened with Shazam, except that the critical praise was a bit much IMO. Saw it once. Aquaman and Wonder Woman? Directed: no. Involved: yes. WW84? Less involvement, and how did that turn out? I know my niece didn't care for it, though it's so goofy and baffling to me that I actually kind of love it. But Jesus, what train wreck. I actually haven't seen Aquaman. "Cynical exercise" or "redemption story", there is a demand for it. At a time when every streaming service is desperate for exclusive content, why not? I want see it.
  2. I think this is a distinct possibility, and transparently so. I wonder what the higher ups at ATT think about Warner Media people undermining their own IP. It's also not clear if this is a replacement for Cavill's Superman or an extension of the multiverse concept. There's already more than one Cyborg, superman and soon there will be 3 batmen after all. It's a bit like Kevin Smith's reaction to the "storytelling cul-de-sac" comment in the recent Walter Hamada piece from about a month ago. "Why would you put that out now? Why not wait and see how the thing does?" A few people had the same question, but Kevin is considerably more media savvy than I am so what do I know? It may also be more than just a desire to "move on". If ZSJL is significantly better received than the 2017 film, there may be some uncomfortable questions that need to be answered; like, "Why diid you guys spend $25-$50 million on re-shoots and rewrites to make the thing worse?" Did you see the recent Vanity Fair article? To say the 2017 film has been "disowned" is a massive understatement. While they're at it, they might also want to explain why WB sat on Army of the Dead for almost a decade when Netflix apparently likes what they see so much they've already filmed a prequel and are producing an anime series based around it. The first teaser dropped 2 days ago. I've never been a big admirer of the CW stuff but I will check out Superman and Lois. It seems like a definite step up from their previous efforts. This is what I find the most funny in all this. For years, I've been hearing endless commentary from various CBM related news sites and personalities about "red trunks" and how Superman needs to be more colorful, more light hearted, more "Donner-esque". So much so that it has actually soured me on the Donner films, which I've loved since I was a kid. I even saw Superman Returns on opening weekend in 2006 and really liked it. Now you have a Superman TV series that so obviously mimics the cinematography and style of those films it isn't even funny. And whatever Abrams and Coates develop, I promise you, "Donner-esque" it won't be. I wonder what those same so-and-so's will have say. I bet not a damn thing.
  3. Her comments related to her experience with Geoff Johns. Johns still has some WB producer/story credits in his future (Shazam 2, WW3, possibly this new Superman film). A recent tweet of hers also suggested she participated in the Justice League re-shoot investigation. So, "Separate" but not completely separate.
  4. For what its worth, that is how the trades are reporting it. https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/ta-nehisi-coates-to-write-new-superman-movie-for-warner-bros I just wonder if the timing of the announcement isn't designed to distract from Nadria Tucker's recent comments. Maybe it's just a coincidence.
  5. Here's a question: exactly how credible are drops like this from Warner Brothers? What was it, 2015 when they announced a whole slate of DC films? Green Lantern Corps never happened and might instead become a series on HBO Max (eventually); The Flash went through half a dozen directors and is only now starting production; Cyborg is unlikely to ever happen. They announce Ava DuVernay will be helming a New Gods movie. Fantastic! That was 2-1/2 years ago and they are still working on the script. Plus Ava has worked on a bunch of other things in the mean time. Not to mention all the false reporting related to ZSJL that was taking place right up to the moment it was announced, (the November screening was a disaster, it will never happen, WB will never work with him again), and after, (He's going reuse some of Whedon's footage, WB refused additional photography, Affleck not returning, etc.). All from "Studio insiders" and "credible sources". The timing of this is also interesting. Even money says this will become yet another WB CBM that comes to nothing; JL: Mortal, Superman: Flyby, Superman Lives, Brett Ratner's Superman project, and Whedon's infamous WW script, to name a few.
  6. And presumably Black widow will be before all of those. If Spider-Man NWH is out Dec. 17, Disney must have some pretty optimistic projections for theaters reopening. That or they'll release them on top of each other... or one or more of them go to streaming.
  7. Closer to $5 billion than to $3 billion I would think. With the debt they're carrying from the Fox acquisition and the losses due to Covid, Sony might be too rich for them for some time. My understanding of the Disney/Sony deal is that Disney gets to produce Tom Holland Spider-Man related merchandise, from which they keep all profits, and Sony pays Marvel Studios to produce Tom Holland Spider-Man films which Sony then distributes and keeps the profits. Sony sees nothing from Spider-Man appearances in the broader MCU. If what I've heard about Spider-Man merch is true, this is an incredibly lopsided deal in Disney's favor. IMO, Sony has struck gold with Lord and Miller and the Spider-Verse film. Not only did they produce a brilliant Spider-Man film (the best IMO), but they may have stumbled on a hell of a ready-made shared universe concept with a single film. If tom Holland appears in a non-MCU film, It will be there, as a voice actor. Fun fact: Tom Holland has been Spider-Man longer than Maguire or Garfield. Here lies a potential wrinkle. He was 19 when he filmed Civil War. He turns 25 this year. In the MCU continuity he and his friends are still 16 years old. I don't know if this occurred to anyone else watching FFH, but he's having a harder time passing for 16 than his co stars. Just how much time does he have left in this role? Are audiences going to want to see a 30 year old Spider-Man or will it be time to reboot the character by then?
  8. So, he's suggesting re-branding the previous films to retroactively suck them into the MCU? Might as well. Disney will end up owning it all in 10 years anyway. I just hope we get another animated Miles Morales film before that happens.
  9. I was less thrilled with Picard, but I'll tune in when season 2 hits. I assume they are working on the Strange New Worlds spin off now. Not sure when it's out but I'll definitely be watching it. Season 3 of Discovery: everything up to and including the episode with the Ni'Var was great, although I was a little fuzzy on what was going on with the sphere data. It's been a while since I saw season 2 so I was a bit confused as to what mom was doing there, but I just went with it. After that the show went down hill a little. Still, I love the direction the show is going. As for Star Wars, sad to say I'm done with it. I'm saying this as someone who had a lot of great memories related to that mythology; from sitting in the aisle of a dangerously crowded small town theater to see ESB when I was a kid, to seeing the re-release of ANH in the 90's (that was so much fun) to taking off work on a Friday afternoon and seeing RoTS with a bunch of co workers. The final episode of Clone Wars gave me literal chills. But somewhere along the way, that mythology became less and less about "where-can-we-take-this-next" to more and more about nostalgia. The biggest moments of last season? The return of Luke, Boba, and Ashoka; characters that were created roughly 50, 40 and 20 years ago, respectively. Similar comments could be made about the recent films. As much as I loved that stuff, I think it's being overdone.
  10. Just finished season 3. I liked it a lot though at times it felt like it was trying to do too much. It got a bit random in places and there were some things about the final 3 episode arc that either I missed or weren't explained well, but overall I liked it. As much as I hate to admit it, I think I liked this better than the last season of The Mandalorian. The production values are amazing. I miss Lorca.
  11. The assembly cut was almost 5 hours, but the cut that was screened for IMDB The rumored runtime in March of 2017 was 2h 50m. The original directors cut was 3h 24m. The 120 minute mandate was a late change, but it came from Tsujihara to Snyder, before Whedon came on board. This is 24 minutes shorter than the first Avengers movie. A film that develops literally zero new characters. Brilliant. I'm not sure what "troubled production" means in this context. I think it's true that management was leaning pretty hard on Snyder, but I've seen zero evidence that this was bleeding into the day-to-day production activities or causing friction among the cast and crew prior to Whedon's arrival. I'm skeptical of the email and its motivations to say the least. Did Whedon walk into a house on fire or was he one of the people pouring gasoline on and lighting matches? Don't know. Given everything that's coming out, I'm inclined to think the latter. Edit: I took out the IMDB reference because the twitter exchange where that come from was unclear and reported on multiple ways.
  12. Joss must be spectacularly unlucky when it comes to dealing with cast members. https://www.cbr.com/opposing-views-on-justice-league-toxic-set/
  13. Everyone has their quirks and complexes. Everyone goes through a rough patch and sometimes take it out on those around them. This thing with Whedon sounds like another level. Worth noting: Ray fisher's earliest public allegation about the JL reshoots was that he took his complaints through the proper internal channels and was rebuffed. You'd be surprised. I had one boss who was always a bit quirky and demanding but also supportive and fair. He was laser focused on his job and really good at what he did. He was one of those people you couldn't imagine working anywhere else for any reason. A few years later I was shocked to discover he had been forced out. For reasons that's still a total mystery, his quirky behavior got more and more extreme. He wasn't doing anything illegal per se but he was definitely unprofessional and making his subordinates lives miserable. His superior quietly investigated by interviewing his people one by one. "I've been hearing some things and I'd like you to tell me your side of things", he'd say. the more these stories started to rhyme, the clearer it was that action needed to be taken. To make a long story short, he had it made clear to him that he'd wind up V.P. of mops and brooms if he stuck around. He left on his own. At a different company, I had a superior who practiced a very "kiss-up, kick-down" style of management. She fostered the most corrosive work environment I've ever experienced. Either management was oblivious or just didn't care. The people who didn't quit only stayed on in the hope of making a lateral move into another department. There were a lot.
×
×
  • Create New...