Director leaving HL remake
none Morty Abzug
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/justin-lin-exits-summits-highlander-222325
- Morty
bc
Based on the story link, he won't have the time in the near future
due to his recent popularity filming sequels to other projects.
Fair enough.
Summit claims to be trying to fast-track Highlander in an effort
to create a success to follow the demise of the Twilight films.
After all, Highlander spawned four additional films and three TV
series (per the story).
From my perspective, all the later films were failures. I can only
think of two TV series, and one of those didn't fare so well
either.
Speaking less specifically, why else would a director leave a
project with which he's been associated? I'd imagine there could
be "creative differences", there could be budget problems which
prevented the filming from continuing, there could be actor issues
(what if Heath Ledger died?!). Did I miss anything obvious? Just
thinking about the headline before I read the story.
--
Bruce Davidson Cantor, CPA, JD
Admitted in Colorado
none Morty Abzug
"bc " <can...@ix.netcom.com> spake thusly:
> Summit claims to be trying to fast-track Highlander in an effort
> to create a success to follow the demise of the Twilight films.
> After all, Highlander spawned four additional films and three TV
> series (per the story).
>
> From my perspective, all the later films were failures. I can only
> think of two TV series, and one of those didn't fare so well
> either.
There were three series: (1) Highlander: the Animated series
(Quentin); (2) HL: the series (Duncan); (3) HL: the Raven (Amanda).
> Speaking less specifically, why else would a director leave a
> project with which he's been associated? I'd imagine there could be
> "creative differences", there could be budget problems which
> prevented the filming from continuing, there could be actor issues
> (what if Heath Ledger died?!). Did I miss anything obvious? Just
> thinking about the headline before I read the story.
(1) If the director became "too good" for the project. For example,
if the director was considered a "B" director and then one of
their projects was highly acclaimed or highly successful. At that
point, the director might be considered an "A"-lister, and get
better offers. The director might then want to break existing "B"
grade commitments. Reading between the lines, I assume this is
the real story of what is happening here.
(2) The director might get impatient if the project is taking too long
to get funded or is otherwise having problems.
(3) If the director sued the producer, rights-holder, or someone else
associated with the project, that person might want the director
off other projects they control. [See "The Hobbit."]
(4) The director might decide that the film will keep him away from
family for too long. [See "The Wolverine."]
- Morty
bc
(Morty Abzug) wrote:
>In article <ar5b471jo2cdig2df...@4ax.com>,
>"bc " <can...@ix.netcom.com> spake thusly:
>
>There were three series: (1) Highlander: the Animated series
>(Quentin); (2) HL: the series (Duncan); (3) HL: the Raven (Amanda).
I forgot Quentin (having never watched). Thanks for clearing that
up.
>(2) The director might get impatient if the project is taking too long
> to get funded or is otherwise having problems.
Would a director be unable to work another project if the current
one was on hold? Would the new project be worried the director
might suddenly have a conflict? Would the stalled project try to
prevent the director from taking another project for fear the
director might not be available when the problem cleared?
>(3) If the director sued the producer, rights-holder, or someone else
> associated with the project, that person might want the director
> off other projects they control. [See "The Hobbit."]
Not familiar with this story.
>(4) The director might decide that the film will keep him away from
> family for too long. [See "The Wolverine."]
Nor with this story.
D. Stussy
Is "Hollywood" so out of ideas that the only thing they can think of is to
ruin previously made movies?
none Morty Abzug
"bc " <can...@ix.netcom.com> spake thusly:
> I forgot Quentin (having never watched). Thanks for clearing that
> up.
I also initially forgot. :)
> Would a director be unable to work another project if the current
> one was on hold?
Multiple projects are not a problem at all, in and of themselves.
Successful directors (and actors) usually have multiple projects lined
up at any given time, one after another. The only problem is if there
is a schedule conflict. The director can always negotiate. If the
director is important enough to one of the projects or if the project
is still tentative, it's possible that the project will change their
schedule to accomodate the director. Otherwise, the director has to
choose between the projects and break one of the commitments.
Sounds here like the director accepted a whole bunch of new projects,
including Terminator 5, which is scheduled to be released in 2014.
The HL remake is officially not on hold -- it's also scheduled to be
released in 2014. So presumably the Terminator and HL schedules
(development, pre-production, filming, post-production, promotion,
other?) overlap, and are mutually exclusive. Whether or not the HL
remake will actually be funded (and therefore able to make their
schedule) is another question.
[disclaimer: the above is based on my observations, not personal
experience. :) ]
> Would the new project be worried the director might suddenly have a
> conflict?
Until they get him to sign a contract, probably. Although in this
case, I think he'd be nuts to leave a Terminator movie to go back to
HL, at least from a money perspective. If he were a really big fan of
HL, thought HL had better creative possibilities, etc., maybe he would
do it anyway.
> Would the stalled project try to prevent the director from taking
> another project for fear the director might not be available when
> the problem cleared?
Uunless they got him to sign a contract with negative consequences for
leaving, I don't think they would have much legal grounds to stop him.
And if they're stalled, it's unlikely there is a strong contact, since
they're probably stalled because they aren't funded, in which case
they can't write strong contracts. And if the project is stalled, I
don't think there would be moral issues with leaving, either.
> >(3) If the director sued the producer, rights-holder, or someone
> > else associated with the project, that person might want the
> > director off other projects they control. [See "The Hobbit."]
> Not familiar with this story.
Peter Jackson sued New Line for not paying him enough for the Lord of
the Rings movies. He was also scheduled to direct "The Hobbit" for
New Line. So New Line decided they didn't want him to direct "The
Hobbit" any longer.
You can google for more info, although note that there were other
lawsuits (i.e. the Tolkien family) as well. Here is an article:
But New Line still wanted his production company, so for a while
Guillermo Del Toro was going to direct, while working for Jackson.
Then Guillermo left and now Jackson is directing again. There has
been tons of drama around this movie, and the actual movie hasn't even
been released yet. Google for more info.
> >(4) The director might decide that the film will keep him away from
> > family for too long. [See "The Wolverine."]
> Nor with this story.
Darren Aronofsky was scheduled to helm "The Wolverine." He left.
Officially this was because "The Wolverine" would require a lot of
filming in Japan, and he didn't want to spend that much time away from
his family.
http://insidemovies.ew.com/2011/03/17/darren-aronofsky-wolverine-leaving/
- Morty
none Morty Abzug
"D. Stussy" <rep...@newsgroups.kd6lvw.ampr.org> spake thusly:
> I'll make this simple: Remake? Why?
Because remakes (and sequels) of movies with net positive reputations
tend to make more money than original movies, all other things being
equal. :(
- Morty
D. Stussy
news:j36cml$gn7$2...@dont-email.me...
However, most remakes aren't even their predecessor's equal let alone
better.
none Morty Abzug
"D. Stussy" <rep...@newsgroups.kd6lvw.ampr.org> spake thusly:
> However, most remakes aren't even their predecessor's equal let
> alone better.
Yes. More's the pity. :(
I think there is a better-than-even chance that the HL remake won't
actually be made anytime soon. They keep slipping the release date.
It's currently scheduled for 2014, and with the loss of the director,
they will probably slip it still further.
If/when it is released to theatres, even if it's awful, it will
probably result in a brief renaissance for all things Highlander.
Although if it's bad enough, it may be released direct-to-video.
While I'm fairly pessimistic, there is a chance that the remake will
actually be good. Some remakes have been awesome. True Grit and
Battlestar Galactica were great remakes. I'm ever hopeful.
- Morty
Edgar Governo
Nevertheless, Highlander has a history of coming back from the dead
(so to speak) any number of times, so I'm sure this particular
permutation of the franchise will see the light of day eventually.
Edgar Governo
Historian of Things That Never Were
http://www.mts.net/~arphaxad/history.html
You can also visit my homepage:
http://www.mts.net/~arphaxad
Personal email is encouraged, as always.
none Morty Abzug
"Edgar Governo " <arph...@TAKEOUTmts.net> spake thusly:
> Nevertheless, Highlander has a history of coming back from the dead
> (so to speak) any number of times, so I'm sure this particular
> permutation of the franchise will see the light of day eventually.
Fresnadillo.
http://www.sneakpeek.ca/2011/09/summits-highlander-makes-cut.html
- Morty