Birth of a Nation | Fox Searchlight | Sundance Grand Jury Prize. ONLY DISCUSS THE MOVIE AND BOX OFFICE IN THIS THREAD.

[DeeCee]

I have to assume he knew about Gabrielle Union's history and to have cast her in this role is sickening. 

 

Powerful and eloquent article on her part. 

Edited September 4, 2016 by DeeCee

[Nova]

7 hours ago, Blankments said:

You know, just gotta say I got the trailer at Equity and ignoring the controversy I still think it looks kinda meh

It's not as good as some were trying to make it out to be earlier. Months ago, the industry was trying to paint it out to be this great movie but it's not. 

[Frozen]

I have not see any advertising for this. I have not gotten the trailer at a single movie I have been at. No upcoming magazines or interviews. Nothing but Nate Parker defending himself. No tv spots. 

 

Likewise Girl on the Train has trailers and upcoming magazine covers. Are they just going with it?

[filmlover]

FWIW even though I rarely watch the Schmoes Know guys, I did catch their episode where they discussed the controversy surrounding this and they mentioned something of interest. When the movie screened back at Sundance, the standing ovation came before the movie started and not after (most likely because we were in the middle of the #OscarsSoWhite scandal), and that the reaction afterwards was mostly of the "eh" variety, with most of those people keeping quiet.

 

All of this has been really quite fascinating to watch unfold.

[Jandrew]

Did Gabrille Union know what she was signing onto? Did Parker say "Hey Gabrielle, I have a mystery project for you. Dont ask questions, just read your lines." What about her agent?

 

I know Parker is a POS, but yall trying to put literally everything on him. Gabrielle didnt have to be in this. She wasnt forced by Parker or her agent (or D Wade).

[Alpha]

11 minutes ago, Frozen said:

I have not see any advertising for this. I have not gotten the trailer at a single movie I have been at. No upcoming magazines or interviews. Nothing but Nate Parker defending himself. No tv spots. 

 

Likewise Girl on the Train has trailers and upcoming magazine covers. Are they just going with it?

 

 

I think Fox is just going to dump it and not even bother giving it a campaign.

[filmlover]

4 minutes ago, jandrew said:

Did Gabrille Union know what she was signing onto? Did Parker say "Hey Gabrielle, I have a mystery project for you. Dont ask questions, just read your lines." What about her agent?

 

I know Parker is a POS, but yall trying to put literally everything on him. Gabrielle didnt have to be in this. She wasnt forced by Parker or her agent (or D Wade).

I'm sure if she had known about Parker's past (and considering the bidding war that occurred at Sundance, it's safe to say no one did), she would've never agreed to be in it.

[Jandrew]

11 hours ago, DeeCee said:

I have to assume he knew about Gabrielle Union's history and to have cast her in this role is sickening. 

 

Its not Parker's responsibility to say "hey Gabrielle, I cant let you do this. You shouldnt do this." It's her decision whether to sign on and provide her work, or walk away and pursue other projects. 

 

Respect for Gabrielle, but again, you cant put everything on Parker. He can say that he doesnt feel comfortable with her in that role, but ultimately if she wants to work, she can work.

[Jandrew]

2 minutes ago, filmlover said:

I'm sure if she had known about Parker's past (and considering the bidding war that occurred at Sundance, it's safe to say no one did), she would've never agreed to be in it.

 

The diatribe that you guys seem to be going on is that Parker shouldnt have cast a rape victim in a role of someone who was raped. Its not his responsibility.

 

She said she chose the role because she could relate, and she wanted to give a voice to this issue. So how is Parker sickening to have cast her? 

[filmlover]

2 minutes ago, jandrew said:

 

The diatribe that you guys seem to be going on is that Parker shouldnt have cast a rape victim in a role of someone who was raped. Its not his responsibility.

 

She said she chose the role because she could relate, and she wanted to give a voice to this issue. So how is Parker sickening to have cast her? 

No one is saying he shouldn't have casted her. What everyone is saying is that if she had known about his past, there's no way she would've said yes in the first place.

[Jayhawk the Hutt]

3 minutes ago, filmlover said:

No one is saying he shouldn't have casted her. What everyone is saying is that if she had known about his past, there's no way she would've said yes in the first place.

Yeah, no shit. Very few people would've done the movie had they known.

[filmlover]

Just now, Jayhawk said:

Yeah, no shit. Very few people would've done the movie had they known.

Heck, that bidding war looks hilariously sad in retrospect. There are already rumors that studios are going to be doing background checks of unknown filmmakers at these festivals for now on before signing deals with them (especially 8-figure ones).

[Jandrew]

14 minutes ago, filmlover said:

No one is saying he shouldn't have casted her. What everyone is saying is that if she had known about his past, there's no way she would've said yes in the first place.

 

Why does this even matter? As Jayhawk said, no shit. This seems to be just more anti-Parker talk for the sake of it. 

[filmlover]

1 minute ago, jandrew said:

 

Why does this even matter? As Jayhawk said, no shit. This seems to be just more anti-Parker talk for the sake of it. 

Because all of this just makes it even more uncomfortable, especially when

 

Spoiler

Parker's fictionalized motivation for Turner in the movie involves rape.

 

[cookie]

41 minutes ago, filmlover said:

FWIW even though I rarely watch the Schmoes Know guys, I did catch their episode where they discussed the controversy surrounding this and they mentioned something of interest. When the movie screened back at Sundance, the standing ovation came before the movie started and not after (most likely because we were in the middle of the #OscarsSoWhite scandal), and that the reaction afterwards was mostly of the "eh" variety, with most of those people keeping quiet.

 

Whenever I hear this it reminds me of Mark Kermode's review of Babel:

 

 

[TalismanRing]

Toronto Film Buyers Beware: 'Birth of a Nation' Blowup Casts Shadow on Dealmaking

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/toronto-film-buyers-beware-birth-926113

 

Quote

 

The Sundance frenzy involved some of the most seasoned and sophisticated dealmakers in Hollywood, yet none of them discussed the personal backstory of Parker, who as co-writer, director, producer and star of the movie would be used as the primary marketing tool and, more importantly, a moral voice in the theatrical and awards-season campaign. This despite Parker's own Wikipedia page including the fact that he had been charged with rape in 1999 (Parker was acquitted, while Birth co-writer Jean Celestin was convicted of sexual assault, though the verdict was later overturned).

 

Now, as Searchlight grapples with damaging fallout from resurfaced details of the rape case, the question circling the independent film community as the Toronto Film Festival gets underway Sept. 8 is how the Birth aftermath will impact future festival dealmaking. Multiple sources say Searchlight executives, including co-presidents Steve Gilula and Nancy Utley, learned the lurid details about Parker's past well after agreeing to buy the film. But the sale pact did not include a morality clause for Parker, which could have given Fox a claim against him or allowed the studio to void the deal. Still, sources say Fox lawyers have looked into this issue. Searchlight declined comment.

 

 

Quote

"The finger that should be pointed should be at WME — period," says one top buyer involved in the Birth hunt. "These are people who will have repeat customers, and it's their reputation that is affected. If you're selling tainted goods, you're screwing over the buyer."

Quote

But sources say exhibitors who had made verbal commitments to book Birth for its planned wide rollout Oct. 7 are re-evaluating their plans, reducing screen counts or keeping the film on a short leash if it doesn't perform in the first week.

 

 

[filmlover]

Wouldn't be surprised if this opens in 600 theaters now as the bare minimum to qualify for wide release.

[TalismanRing]

9 minutes ago, filmlover said:

Wouldn't be surprised if this opens in 600 theaters now as the bare minimum to qualify for wide release.

 

My guess is over 1000, maybe even 1500 but it won't have a 2 week guarantee in many of them

[WrathOfHan]

The deal requires 1,000, right?

[filmlover]

9 minutes ago, WrathOfHan said:

The deal requires 1,000, right?

1,500