Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

The Business: News, Rumours, Analysis, and More

sdpfeiffy

By sdpfeiffy
in Everything Else About Movies

  • Reply
  • Start Topic

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

vibeology
vibeology

Matt's statement is crap because the "I have daughters" line is so very dismissive of women as a whole. It suggests sexual assault only matters because a father or a brother or a husband is impacted.

AshleyN
AshleyN

Meryl's statement: Also, I had heard this story about Haley Atwell and Emma Thompson before, but I didn't know that Harvey was the producer in question: In related news, I love Emma Thom

aradia22
aradia22

To me those aren't hugely different problems. Because a system is in place where someone like Wahlberg (or Robert Downey Jr. or whatever white male it is at the moment) has more bargaining power. And

Posted Images

methodwriter85

methodwriter85

(edited)

I enjoyed Mama Mia...but exactly how would a sequel work? Does Sophie have a 9-year old daughter with three possible fathers?

Anyway, The Power Rangers is dunzo as a film franchise, it seems.

I've reiterated this many times- you don't take a PG-rated kids story and turn it into a PG-13 half gritty/half campy movie. It was really good and entertaining, but if I were an 8 year old, I don't think I'd be that into the movie they made.

Edited by methodwriter85
  • Love 3
Bruinsfan

Bruinsfan

On 5/19/2017 at 8:38 PM, Spartan Girl said:

Oh Jesus, you mean we will have to listen to Pierce's terrible singing again?! Pass.

At least this time everyone knows to run from the theater if it looks like he's about to sing.

I'm more concerned with what the songs would be for a sequel. What's left of their hits after the first one, "Fernando" and "Knowing Me, Knowing You"?

  • Love 1
aradia22

aradia22

I thought the Mamma Mia sequel was a terrible idea when I heard about it. I liked the show (for what it was), hated the movie. But success breeds sequels.

As for other ABBA songs... Waterloo, Lovers (Live A Little Longer), Fernando. We're scraping the bottom of the barrel when the musical is so packed with the hits. Then again, the guys aren't foreign to musicals so they might take a chance and write new music. 

Morrigan2575

Morrigan2575

On 5/19/2017 at 9:32 PM, BetterButter said:

‘Mamma Mia: Here We Go Again!’ On Universal Pictures’ Schedule Next Summer

The Muscial was great, the movie sucked. Can't believe their making a sequal

14 hours ago, aradia22 said:

I thought the Mamma Mia sequel was a terrible idea when I heard about it. I liked the show (for what it was), hated the movie. But success breeds sequels.

As for other ABBA songs... Waterloo, Lovers (Live A Little Longer), Fernando. We're scraping the bottom of the barrel when the musical is so packed with the hits. Then again, the guys aren't foreign to musicals so they might take a chance and write new music. 

Didn't the write Chess? Maybe we can get One Night in Bangkok?

  • Love 2
xaxat

xaxat

To revive its flagging movie business, one Hollywood studio is censoring its films

Quote

With fewer people buying DVDs and Blu-rays, business that gives movies a long and lucrative lifespan, Sony Pictures is releasing its films online—stripped of “graphic violence, offensive language, sexual innuendo, and other adult content”—to open them up to wider audiences.

These are the same cleaned-up copies that are played on broadcast TV and airplanes.

Sony is doing this for 24 titles to start, including the original Ghostbusters, Step Brothers, and the Spider-Man films. These family-friendly versions are being included for free with the theatrical editions that are sold on the digital platforms iTunes, Vudu, and FandangoNOW.

Joe

Joe

6 minutes ago, xaxat said:

To revive its flagging movie business, one Hollywood studio is censoring its films

Sony Pictures is releasing its films online—stripped of “graphic violence, offensive language, sexual innuendo, and other adult content”—to open them up to wider audiences.

No, I won't be watching these bowdlerised abominations. It's not like I need adult content to hold my interest, but I dislike censorship. The adult content was in there for a reason. You can't remove it without changing the spirit of the movie, and I can't believe the spirit would be changed to make a better movie. If I don't enjoy a particular movie with adult content, I just don't watch it. Hacking it up won't help at all. I hope they actually lose more money with this, just so other companies learn the lesson and don't follow their lead.

  • Love 8
xaxat

xaxat

(edited)

Unlike the Lucas/Disney Star Wars original trilogy, it doesn't appear that Sony will stop distributing the unedited versions from what I can gather from the article. So if you want a movie uncut, I think it will still be available.

Quote

Sony is doing this for 24 titles to start, including the original Ghostbusters, Step Brothers, and the Spider-Man films. These family-friendly versions are being included for free with the theatrical editions that are sold on the digital platforms iTunes, Vudu, and FandangoNOW.

Edited by xaxat
Shannon L.

Shannon L.

(edited)

People aren't buying DVDs and Blu-Rays because you can get most of these movies on Netflix or Amazon Prime (etc, etc) for free or buy/rent them from regular Amazon.  My son and husband still buy a lot of DVDs and I wish they'd stop because we are running out of places to store them and we can get them on the tv through Amazon. 

Edited by Shannon L.
  • Love 2
GHScorpiosRule

GHScorpiosRule

12 minutes ago, Shannon L. said:

People aren't buying DVDs and Blu-Rays because you can get most of these movies on Netflix or Amazon Prime (etc, etc) for free or buy/rent them from regular Amazon.  

Neither Netflix or Amazon Prime is free. You have to pay a monthly fee in order to stream on Netflix, and you have to pay an annual fee of $99 to see movies free on Amazon Prime-and not ALL movies are available to see on Prime. I still buy the dvds/blurays because you don't get the special features/interviews when you watch the movies on Netflix or Prime, or if you rent them online.

  • Love 6
Shannon L.

Shannon L.

1 minute ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

Neither Netflix or Amazon Prime is free. You have to pay a monthly fee in order to stream on Netflix, and you have to pay an annual fee of $99 to see movies free on Amazon Prime-and not ALL movies are available to see on Prime. I still buy the dvds/blurays because you don't get the special features/interviews when you watch the movies on Netflix or Prime, or if you rent them online.

Good point--I hadn't thought about that. 

methodwriter85

methodwriter85

9 hours ago, Bastet said:

If it's something I'll want to watch multiple times, I buy the DVD/Blu-Ray.  I like having a physical copy that is mine forever, not just for however long Netflix has the rights to it, and that I can take with me to a friend's house for movie night (or anywhere).  I also like the special features, as mentioned above.

I have Netflix, and yeah, the movie content isn't what it used to be even 5 years ago. They make up for it in some awesome original content, but I wouldn't just use Netflix to replace movies or t.v. shows I want to watch more than once.

  • Love 8
Kel Varnsen

Kel Varnsen

On 2017-6-9 at 9:46 AM, Joe said:

Sony Pictures is releasing its films online—stripped of “graphic violence, offensive language, sexual innuendo, and other adult content”—to open them up to wider audiences.

No, I won't be watching these bowdlerised abominations. It's not like I need adult content to hold my interest, but I dislike censorship. The adult content was in there for a reason. You can't remove it without changing the spirit of the movie, and I can't believe the spirit would be changed to make a better movie. If I don't enjoy a particular movie with adult content, I just don't watch it. Hacking it up won't help at all. I hope they actually lose more money with this, just so other companies learn the lesson and don't follow their lead.

I think this is kind of cool. My kids are dying to see the Guardians of the Galaxy movies after i showed them the baby groot trailers. But I don't really need them learning a bunch of new words. If Disney did this i would so buy GotG.

  • Love 1
netlyon2

netlyon2

(edited)
3 hours ago, Kel Varnsen said:

I think this is kind of cool. My kids are dying to see the Guardians of the Galaxy movies after i showed them the baby groot trailers. But I don't really need them learning a bunch of new words. If Disney did this i would so buy GotG.

When I read the original post, I was thinking that this sounded like the KidzBop of movies.  I wonder if that's their primary market/intent.

Edited by netlyon2
Added hyperlink
aradia22

aradia22

My favorite use of Netflix and Amazon lately is if I want to remember something or look up something in a movie to make an argument. For instance... what are the similarities/differences in Love Affair and An Affair To Remember. I have a smaller laptop so it doesn't have a CD drive and rather than fire up the desktop computer, it's easier to just pull something up on Netflix or Amazon. But I find the vast number of possible things to watch a bit daunting... until I actually want to watch something and find it's been pulled. I rarely watch DVDs anymore but I have purchased a few in the last 5 years or so because you can't always trust things to stay on Netflix and also I have weird taste. 

  • Love 1
kiddo82

kiddo82

And the Netflix instant library is spotty at best.  It's nice when I can find the exact movie I'm looking for but it's a rarity.  My List consists primarily of "when I get around to it" titles.  When they expire it's not the end of the world.  I don't watch much of their original programming because there's no urgency to.  I could live without Netflix  Like I and others have said up thread, if it's a title I know I'm going to want to watch over and over I'm buying a hard copy.

  • Love 6
Kel Varnsen

Kel Varnsen

3 hours ago, xaxat said:

That was quick.

Sony Backs Down on 'Clean Version' Movies, Will Let Directors Opt Out

Since they are already doing it for tv broadcasts i wonder if they will just get permission to do this by rolling it all into the same part of the contract  studios make with directors. Like, want the money associated with the clean version of your movie showing up on TBS? Well then you also need to let us include the same version on the dvd.

  • Love 1
topanga

topanga

On 6/10/2017 at 0:50 PM, Kel Varnsen said:

I think this is kind of cool. My kids are dying to see the Guardians of the Galaxy movies after i showed them the baby groot trailers. But I don't really need them learning a bunch of new words. If Disney did this i would so buy GotG.

I've never seen either GoG. Are there curse words?

That reminds me of the time I showed my kids 'Stand By Me.' They were 10 and 12 at the time. I forgot it was 'R' rated. And I forgot about the language that the kids used throughout the movie. My kids weren't traumatized, but I kept explaining to them that I'd forgotten about the language. They weren't bothered one bit. 

 

On 6/15/2017 at 2:23 PM, xaxat said:

That was quick.

Sony Backs Down on 'Clean Version' Movies, Will Let Directors Opt Out

 

On 6/15/2017 at 5:55 PM, Kel Varnsen said:

Since they are already doing it for tv broadcasts i wonder if they will just get permission to do this by rolling it all into the same part of the contract  studios make with directors. Like, want the money associated with the clean version of your movie showing up on TBS? Well then you also need to let us include the same version on the dvd.

Do TV networks have to get permission from movie studios regarding what they cut when they make edited TV versions ? 

absnow54

absnow54

Do TV networks have to get permission from movie studios regarding what they cut when they make edited TV versions ?

I thought most TV edits were from the studio/filmmaker these days. Often the actors dub their own "clean curse words" and some movies will replace scenes with cleaner versions. Two examples I can think of is Good Will Hunting where they replace Minnie Driver's old couple blow job joke with some joke about angels (I think) and then there MallRats, which is almost a completely different movie when it's played on TBS (there are actually some funnier scenes in the safe cut than the theatrical.)

Trini

Trini

A stuntwoman has died filming for Deadpool 2; the linked article also mentions some other recent stunt accidents. I know there's always pressure to top what's been done before, but I hope that things would be safer with today's technology. (However, I realize that accidents and human error happens in that high-risk business.)

Dejana

Dejana

(edited)

A Tribute to the Truly Bungled Release of Tulip Fever. Tl;dr, after filming and first test screening back in 2014, it's finally set for release on September 1...unless Weinstein pulls it, again. The current iteration is on its fourth scheduled release date (the others were July 15, 2016, February 24, 2017 and August 25, 2017).  That's not even counting the first attempt to bring it to the screen:

Quote

Has there ever been a film as enjoyably cursed as Tulip Fever? A period romance about a painter and his married muse who try to play the tulip market, Tulip Fever at least had an auspicious debut: Dreamworks optioned the 2000 novel by Deborah Moggach at the proof stage, long before it would become a best seller, and some of the biggest names in Hollywood flirted with adapting it. Four years later, Tulip Fever nearly got off the ground with Jude Law and Keira Knightley starring and Shakespeare in Love director John Madden at the helm, but shortly after planting 12,000 tulip bulbs at the start of production, the British government closed a critical tax loophole that blew up the budget, closed down the film, and left all those poor little tulips to wither.

Call it the Tulip Fever cycle: Every time this movie is ready to bloom, someone comes along to sow the crop with salt.

Edited by Dejana
  • Love 3
xaxat

xaxat

On 8/20/2017 at 10:38 PM, Dejana said:

A Tribute to the Truly Bungled Release of Tulip Fever. Tl;dr, after filming and first test screening back in 2014, it's finally set for release on September 1...unless Weinstein pulls it, again. The current iteration is on its fourth scheduled release date (the others were July 15, 2016, February 24, 2017 and August 25, 2017).  That's not even counting the first attempt to bring it to the screen:

Holy shit! The Weinsteins have been reduced to selling movies to Lifetime?

aradia22

aradia22

@xaxat That's what happened to the Grace of Monaco movie, right? I feel like the actors will all be fine. I feel the worst for that author. Maybe it's because I recently finished a book on writing but it's a tough business and it used to be that something like getting a movie deal or a spot on Oprah's list could launch you to relative stardom and actually making a decent living.

Quote

Is Tulip Fever deserving of this hilariously shoddy treatment? Most of the people I’ve talked to who have seen it describe it as just so-so, a mediocre period drama that’s clearly been recut by its studio a few too many times. Perhaps its status as a ’tweener is why the film simply can’t get off the ground: Tulip Fever isn’t classy enough to be the Oscar-contending drama that Weinstein had hoped to engineer by adding thespians like Judi Dench and Christoph Waltz to the film’s sprawling cast, but it’s also not juicy enough to be the populist hit he wanted when he cast popular-in-2014 figures like Glee’s Matthew Morrison, the Hangover-hot Zach Galifianakis, and Prince Harry’s then-girlfriend Cressida Bonas. So much time has elapsed since then that DeHaan spent the interim shooting Valerian, a megabudget space movie with minor Tulip Fever player Cara Delevingne, which came out last month and bombed.

I could have easily seen it as another The Other Boleyn Girl. Once they knew it wasn't going to be a Shakespeare in Love, why didn't they just cut their losses and release it? Why keep messing with it?

  • Love 1
Dejana

Dejana

(edited)
9 hours ago, xaxat said:

Holy shit! The Weinsteins have been reduced to selling movies to Lifetime?

 

1 hour ago, aradia22 said:

@xaxat That's what happened to the Grace of Monaco movie, right?

Also Suite Française, another period movie with a prestigious cast (Michelle Williams, Kristin Scott Thomas) and based on a book. It got a theatrical release in the UK in March 2015 and a US Lifetime debut this May. The Weinstein Company has faced major financial troubles in the last year or two:

 

Quote

For decades, Weinstein bestrode the Oscars like a colossus, pulling off coup after coup (pushing Shakespeare in Love to a best-picture victory over Saving Private Ryan; winning two in a row with The King’s Speech and The Artist). He held sway over a stable of actors: “Working for Harvey is like working for the mafia,” Gwyneth Paltrow once told me, laughing. “There are all these favours.” Pop-culture fare such as Entourage referred to him by first name alone.

He’s regularly been dogged by money woes, both at TWC and his previous company, Miramax – mainly, he says, because he releases the bulk of his films in the fourth quarter of the year, as Oscar bait, so his cash flows in late.

But 2016 was an exceptionally horribilis annus. From 2012 to 2015, TWC’s share of the U.S. box office ranged from 2 per cent to 4.3 per cent, and its grosses from $222-million (U.S.) to $492-million. In 2016, however, its box office was a mere 0.6 per cent, and its grosses were only $64-million. Worse, most of that came from prior years’ films; his 2016 slate earned only $15-million. Weinstein publicly admitted TWC was seeking investors, and considering selling off its lucrative film and TV libraries.

 

 

1 hour ago, aradia22 said:

I could have easily seen it as another The Other Boleyn Girl. Once they knew it wasn't going to be a Shakespeare in Love, why didn't they just cut their losses and release it? Why keep messing with it?

Weinstein didn't earn the "Harvey Scissorhands" nickname for nothing (too many stories to link them all but here are a few good starting points. He has a long history of tinkering with movies and withholding them from release if he can't get a cut to his satisfaction. As for why he held onto Tulip Fever longer than some others, I don't know, maybe it's taken him this long to let go of the dreams he had of TF being a critical success and awards player...

Edited by Dejana
  • Love 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...