Jump to content
grim22

Barbie | Warner Bros | Margot Robbie is Barbie. Ryan Gosling is Ken.. Greta Gerwig and Noah Baumbach writing. Gerwig to direct

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, filmlover said:

Gerwig's previous movie was the PG-rated Little Women. Clearly she is fully capable of working in the family-friendly arena.

It'll be family friendly, but its target demographic isn't gonna be nine-year-old girls, unless they like Noah Baumbach a lot more than I thought.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Last Man Standing said:

It'll be family friendly, but its target demographic isn't gonna be nine-year-old girls, unless they like Noah Baumbach a lot more than I thought.

Just looked up that Baumbach was actually co-writer for Madagascar 3 (along with Fantastic Mr. Fox alongside Wes), so he's not a novice to kid cinema either. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, filmlover said:

Just looked up that Baumbach was actually co-writer for Madagascar 3 (along with Fantastic Mr. Fox alongside Wes), so he's not a novice to kid cinema either. 

Yeah, cause he needed to pay for his divorce quickly, I assume that's not the issue here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Eric Atreides said:

Guys...it's a Barbie movie. The six-year-olds that will drag their parents to this will not care about how "sexy" Ryan Gosling is as Ken. And honestly excel, your obsession over the casting of this movie for six-year-old girls is extremely weird.

 

Obsession? It's a basic observation. This movie also won't be aimed at 6 year old girls. If they cast Melissa McCarthy as Barbie, it would have raised eye brows, the same apples for the ken doll. There are many actors more handsome than Gosling out there so it is strange to see him in the role.

 

also re: bolded = :ban:

Edited by excel1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, excel1 said:

 

Obsession? It's a basic observation. This movie also won't be aimed at 6 year old girls. If they cast Melissa McCarthy as Barbie, it would have raised eye brows, the same apples for the ken doll. There are many actors more handsome than Gosling out there so it is strange to see him in the role.

 

Ryan Gosling and Meillissa McCarthy aren't exactly equivalents...

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, excel1 said:

 

Do you remember the years 2001-2003? Josh Hartnett was offered $100 million - $100 million! - to play Superman in 2003. He was the biggest teeny bopper heart throb on the planet for the time frame all thanks to Michael Bay. Hartnett has also had one of the more bizarre and fascinating career trajectories that I can think of. 

 

That a bit of a sensationalist way to present that I think

 

Warner Bros in a three-picture deal that potentially could have paid him $100 million

 

He was obviously not offered 100millions to play Superman, it was probably an around $10m a movie salary + 5% ramping up to 10% participation bonus type of deal, that could have paid him $100 if the trilogy would have turned out like Spider Man or Batman trilogy around that time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Barnack said:

 

That a bit of a sensationalist way to present that I think

 

Warner Bros in a three-picture deal that potentially could have paid him $100 million

 

He was obviously not offered 100millions to play Superman, it was probably an around $10m a movie salary + 5% ramping up to 10% participation bonus type of deal, that could have paid him $100 if the trilogy would have turned out like Spider Man or Batman trilogy around that time.

Obviously true.  Regardless.  None of this matters, because Hartnett turned it down.  I'm pretty sure Gosling has been offered a few big superhero roles over the years that he's turned down, too.  But Gosling is totally a "Ken."  The studio and Robbie and most of us here understand that.  But Excel apparently knows better.  😉🤣  He's making a value judgment on Gosling's "handsomeness" when everyone defines it slightly differently.  The industry clearly values Gosling more than most other dudes, lately.  It's a fact.  Somebody's making money from him somewhere...even if his movies don't *seem* to...

Edited by Macleod
Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't believe this became such big discussion. The guy isn't a box office draw and there are much more attractive people than him. What is so shocking?

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Barnack said:

 

That a bit of a sensationalist way to present that I think

 

Warner Bros in a three-picture deal that potentially could have paid him $100 million

 

He was obviously not offered 100millions to play Superman, it was probably an around $10m a movie salary + 5% ramping up to 10% participation bonus type of deal, that could have paid him $100 if the trilogy would have turned out like Spider Man or Batman trilogy around that time.

 

 

As an internet web geek all the way back then, I remember this vividly. It is noted in more detail in the 2008 book Superman vs. Hollywood. Josh Hartnett was the most famous "young" (under 25) actor in the world at the time and had seemingly made the transition from teeny bopper heartthrob to movie star with Pearl Harbor, Black Hawk Down, his name alone got that insane sex comedy to open to $15m (which is the equivalent of $30m today) and had just signed on to lead David Fincher's next film (became 2006s The Black Dhalia) . In mid 2002 during the peak of his career explosion, WB wanted him as either Superman or Batman. He met with Brett Ratner about Abrams Superman but turned it twice. They then turned their focus to Brendan Fraser and Matt Bomer. Hartnett then met with Chris Nolan once who they thought would be more up his non-mainstream alley and it was made clear (by the studio) the role was Hartnett's if he wanted it. Fans all over the web hated the idea of someone who was basically a wooden male model getting the role and desperately wanted American Psycho star Christian Bale. Hartnett seemingly agreed the internet's perception of him and started passing on near every role thrown his way.

 

At the same time, the Ratner Superman film than began to really sputter and was danger of totally falling apart if it didn't find a big name lead to star opposite Anthony Hopkins Jor-El. WB made what was viewed at the time an unprecedented 3rd offer that was supposedly the highest dollar figure ever offered to one actor. The $100 million mark was the rumor but WB and Hartnett's thought it was an offer he truly could not refuse. But Hartnett did refuse it and was dropped by his agent not longer after. 😂

 

SUPERMAN FLYBY - or whatever it was called - would have made so much money if had been released June or December of 2004 as they wanted to. I wanted that movie to get made in the worst way and was indifferent to Hartnett in the role. Instead WB had to move Harry Potter 3 to June 2004 and fast track Oceans 12 since they suddenly had a huge gaps in their schedule. At the end of the day, ee got the unmarketable and bleak "Notebook rip-off" Superman Returns.

Edited by excel1
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, excel1 said:

I can't believe this became such big discussion. The guy isn't a box office draw and there are much more attractive people than him. What is so shocking?

It's because your argument makes absolutely no sense. How is someone who headlined a $150M+ blockbuster followed by a movie that nearly made $100M right after it (even if the latter's large budget made it unprofitable) within the last five years with multiple memorable heartthrob types of roles throughout his career (The Notebook, Crazy Stupid Love, previously mentioned La La Land) and is widely considered one of the best actors today not a name that would get audiences excited but someone whose career was fading into obscurity 15 years ago following a short period where he was lucky to land some big gigs is? The only one pushing for some super big Josh Hartnett comeback seems to be you, it's not like Hollywood's been asking "where have you been?" when his career was already going down at the same time guys in the same age range like Gosling and Jake Gyllenhaal were starting to see their careers take off (and are now considered stars as much as anyone in the industry circa 2021).

 

And the fact you seem to be assuming that a Barbie movie, of all things, is going for a "sexy" vibe based on nothing but Robbie breaking out as a sexpot character in a movie from almost a decade ago and not because she's gone on to establish herself as one of the very best actresses of today just came across as odd and perhaps a little insulting towards Robbie (which I'm sure wasn't your intention but it came off that way). She's not a Megan Fox (someone who got some big roles for a short time based on sex appeal alone and was always going to fade once everyone figured out she couldn't act) and the concept of selling new stars based entirely on sex appeal was already becoming a dinosaur back around 2013 even before the #MeToo era killed it forever a few years later. There's no reason to overthink what sounds like a completely harmless project that will allow a bunch of people not usually associated with these kinds of movies to have some fun is trying to be anything more than that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also FYI we all know the actor who will really be making The Big Comeback this decade is going to be Brendan Fraser (already has collaborations with Scorsese, Soderbergh, Aronofsky + the villain in Batgirl) and anyone who says otherwise gets an automatic "I don't understand the question and I won't respond to it."

Edited by filmlover
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/25/2021 at 7:25 AM, excel1 said:

 

Do you remember the years 2001-2003? Josh Hartnett was offered $100 million - $100 million! - to play Superman in 2003. He was the biggest teeny bopper heart throb on the planet for the time frame all thanks to Michael Bay. Hartnett has also had one of the more bizarre and fascinating career trajectories that I can think of. 

 

Josh Hartnett has the charisma of a dried up prune. Sorry to say but he was an idiot for passing out an any deal that could have gotten him millions.

 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Moderation

 

Alright, I think this argument has gone on long enough. Gosling is Ken, end of story. Excel, quit talking about the actors you think deserved it more, because you're just derailing the whole thread by this point.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

As a proud Sacramentan (Grew up in Sacramento and moved back a few years ago) I should be interested in this because of Hometown Heorine Gretta Gerwig directing, and I like Margot Robbie a lot, but still just cannot get interested in this project.

Now the Amy Schumert "Fish Out of Water..a Barbie gets kicked out of Barbieland for not being perfect enough" plotline was interesting, but that is not happening.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Eric Atreides said:

Moderation

 

Alright, I think this argument has gone on long enough. Gosling is Ken, end of story. Excel, quit talking about the actors you think deserved it more, because you're just derailing the whole thread by this point.

And this film will stand or fall on how Robbie does as Barbie anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, filmlover said:

Also FYI we all know the actor who will really be making The Big Comeback this decade is going to be Brendan Fraser (already has collaborations with Scorsese, Soderbergh, Aronofsky + the villain in Batgirl) and anyone who says otherwise gets an automatic "I don't understand the question and I won't respond to it."

 

Gotta love Brendan Fraser no doubt. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.   Paste as plain text instead

  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.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • 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.