Jump to content


Free Account+
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation


About Alexdube

  • Rank
    Indie Sensation

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I never ignore people, not my style. But everyone is welcome to ignore me 😉 I do get too caught up in these arguments, I can't help it
  2. That's a good article, I gotta give you some points, you did some research! But I want to look at how it went with the production of Avatar: Why I'm sharing this is that you could easily assume all these VFX guys and Landau would have probably said the same thing if asked whether Avatar would go forward. "we're waiting on Fox!" "go talk to Fox!" "it's up to Fox!" "keep peppering fox!". What I'm asking is very precise and technical, and that doesn't really touch it. As far as we know Cameron owns the film rights, but it has to be greenlit by a studio (of course!). But in the advent that Cameron really wants to go forward, and Disney doesn't, is he really fucked? This article gives me no information on exactly what kind of arrangement he has with Disney. Do you understand how there's a difference between Alita and something like Star Wars which Disney indubitably owns? to me that's meaningless until we've proven there's no possible alternative to Disney That's absolutely right, and I don't think it will happen, I'm only interested to know if it's possible. Listen I don't think an Alita sequel is around the corner and, believe it or not, it doesn't bother me all that much. I'm more so interested in Cameron's hugely ambitious approach to filmmaking, and the Avatar sequels will give me that. And it's no surprise they all refer to Disney and not Cameron. He has a huge project on his hands already and he's apparently very single-minded, so I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't give a single fuck about Alita at the moment. But if he decides eventually to take a break from Avatar and decides to start pushing for more Alita, who knows what will happen? Who knows if the fanbase won't keep growing? There's a lot of positive things in that article you linked with how everyone wants to work on it and how there's significant enthusiasm from the fans. No one is writing it off.
  3. No. Of course not. That's not what I'm saying. At all. Please quote me on where exactly I'm saying this. You have this problem where you're putting words in people's mouth, just how Landau never actually said "it was up to Disney", that's just your interpretation. No matter what the arrangement is with the rights, of course Landau's first choice would be to go with Disney since it's now as he put it "their family", and just the fact that they will be working with them on Avatar. That doesn't mean there are no other alternatives, he isn't saying that. This is from the wiki: "Director James Cameron acquired film rights to Battle Angel.[22] It was originally brought to Cameron's attention by filmmaker Guillermo del Toro" Do I see Fox anywhere? Does it say Fox acquired the film rights? Please show me proof that Disney has now complete control over these rights or the power to block Cameron from looking elsewhere
  4. Lol you assume a lot from that one sentence Landau said. Of course he wants people to push Disney, if I wanted to make my case to Disney that a sequel could be viable. I'd welcome anyone pushing for it. That doesn't mean he will roll his thumbs waiting on a call from Disney. Something you don't seem to understand is that not all movies are initiated by movie studios. This is the case for the Star Wars sequels for example. Disney sees potential to make $$ out of Star Wars so they go "we want a Star Wars movie". They don't have a story yet, all they know is that they want a Star Wars movie and they want to make money out of it. So they go hire a bunch of random writers and directors to craft something that looks vaguely like a Star Wars movie (I'm parodying a little but you get the idea). Then you have guys like Cameron who, as a producer/director will get the script first, get the general idea of what he's going for, and then present the vision to a studio who will decide to go with it or not. That's how it would happen if there was to be an Alita sequel. Because no, I don't think Disney will jump on the idea by themselves, but do we even know if they really have final say? We're making this all about Disney, but Cameron owns the IP, not them. I don't see any reason why he would have sold it to Fox, since one of his biggest regret was to have sold the Terminator IP. I know Cameron had a deal with Fox after Titanic that his next movie would have to be with them, but if they refused to finance it, he could go elsewhere. That almost happened with Avatar, Fox nearly chocked but they decided to go with it once another studio showed interest in the project (that was Disney, speaking of the devil). I imagine there could be something similar with Alita, meaning they would have to propose the sequel to Disney, but they could potentially go elsewhere if they refuse. No one has "cold hard numbers" friend, and I'm sick of people pretending like they do. Show me a detailed financial breakdown, including marketing, ancillaries, streaming / tv contracts, etc. Oh you don't have that? Then don't say anything The life of a movie doesn't necessarily end after the theatrical run, hope I'm not teaching you anything
  5. Why do some people seem to be jerking themselves over this idea that Disney is the sole decider of everything? Hail corporate much. Yes Disney has final say, but that doesn't mean they don't negotiate with people they have a business relationship with. The point is Landau has more information than any of us on the financial aspect of the movie, and if he hasn't moved on, that means there's a possibility. Because both were made by Lightstorm / weta? Both Produced by Landau and Cameron? Essentially all the same people, same team. If I'm Disney and I see these guys can still make billion dollar movies, I'm probably more inclined to listen to them.
  6. Yeah absolutely. Laugh at it all you want, but these things pill up and Jon Landau notices. He clearly wants to go back to that world. At this moment, Lightstorm has all its resources focused on Avatar. But if those movies have any kind of success, coupled with the support Alita is getting, having a sequel greenlit will be a formality.
  7. Sure they tried to recapture the manga aesthetics, in that sense yes. But I don't see that as a negative. And the CG was much more advanced than whatever was in Endgame or Star Wars. Lion King was pretty impressive though. They had a plane fly over the Oscars. Some guy worth 40 billion just game a clear endorsement to the movie. "Guys the Alita movement is losing steam!" Maybe you'd be sounding less ridiculous if you had made this comment any other day.
  8. And in that case I wouldn't have any problem with it. Let me clarify, I don't have a problem with multiculturalism and I think China has a fascinating culture. It's really just the idea that you know the movie was made in a way to please the Chinese government. Unfortunately you can't separate Chinese culture from the government entirely, I wish we could. lol maybe it sounded like that, but how good a Trump supporter would I be if I defended a movie that had a Mexican girl as the leader of the human resistance? Also I'm not American.
  9. I'm basically opening a huge can of worm with this, someone could easily write a doctoral thesis on how different countries portrait foreign cultures in their movies. Each case is different and complex, and just because I think something of Mulan, doesn't means it applies to everything. For instance, Ride With the Devil is pretty much all American except for the director, so is it really that same thing? But it's still a somewhat relevant example and I wasn't aware of that, thank you I learned something today. As for Dr. Zhivago, a quick search gave me this relevant info: So basically just the fact that this movie was made was a huge middle finger to the Soviet Union. It's kinda like the complete opposite to Mulan in a way, which is made to pander to China. And see that's part of the problem I have, it seems like more and more, western culture is influenced by China for profit or other reasons. It wouldn't be such a problem if China wasn't a goddamn dictatorship. Trading with China is one thing, but Mulan is a marriage of cultures that makes me uncomfortable. edit: Also as the Cameron stan of service, I would be crazy to ignore Titanic. An American movie, made by a Canadian director about a mostly British tragedy. But again, the cultural dynamic between these countries and China isn't the same. With that said, I wouldn't be surprised if the fact that that movie was made by Americans made a few Brits uncomfortable. It's their tragedy after all and they had made their own movie already.
  10. the more I think about this movie, the more I think it has no real reason to exist It's an American produced movie with a very Chinese story, Chinese actors, made as a Chinese style wuxia movie. It's kinda like the Chinese were producing a movie about the American Civil War Not quite because it's a fantasy, but they seem to play it pretty straight. I think it's easier to get away with this kind of cultural appropriation with a cartoon, more detached from reality. Otherwise, Disney should probably leave these kinds of movies to the Chinese themselves, their industry is mature enough. Understandably, it exists because Disney wants to make money in China, but it might be for the best if it fails.
  11. oh right... grandfather doesn't make much difference since the parents are basically non-existent characters
  12. I think it absolutely can. What you need is a movie that becomes an event and that everyone has to see (like Avatar, Titanic, Jurassic Park, Star Wars etc.). There just hasn't been a movie like that since. I didn't mention Endgame because I think it's a different animal. Endgame never had that element of next level spectacle everyone had to see, it was massively successful because of a loyal fanbase it gathered over a decade of pumping out Marvel movies. Hence why you had the massive opening but the legs weren't impressive as much because it didn't reach strongly across every demographic (or every country). Some people seem to think that just because Endgame didn't have great legs, no movie can, I think that's bs. Make something that is truly unique and offers a next level experience and you'll get phenomenal legs.
  13. Fair enough but Titanic 3d is still over even without China isn't it? Jesus in Czech Republic Lion King 3d made $68,401 while Titanic 3d made $3,524,061, not sure what happened there https://www.boxofficemojo.com/releasegroup/gr1276465669/ https://www.boxofficemojo.com/releasegroup/gr4211823109/
  14. No one can refute that Titanic could be an absolute monster if released today. Those 2 words are important, what I mean is that I can't prove Titanic would make 3b+, but no one can deny the potential is there.
  15. around 1.6 times more to be exact, but then Titanic almost made twice as much worldwide? So what's the point? Besides, a Lion King 3d re-release seems like a much more obvious fit than for a movie like Titanic. And look, we could nitpick endlessly about small details that don't make both Lion King runs comparable, but at the end of the day it is still essentially the same movie, reaching the same demographics, just with different graphics. Besides as @Barnack demonstrated, the logic still holds for other franchises who had new but similar movies in recent years. Bottom line is, market growth and inflation is absolutely much more significant than theater runs being generally shorter. No one can refute that Titanic could be an absolute monster if released today.
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.