Once Upon a Time in... Hollywood | July 26 2019 | Digital Foot Technology | RIP Cinerama Dome

[dudalb]

On ‎11‎/‎3‎/‎2017 at 12:35 PM, Squadron Leader Tele said:

This seems really skeezy. Not sure about it at all.

I wonder if Tarantino is trying, finally, to step away from his "every movie I make is a homage to some action genre film" and make something a bit more "serious" and mainstream. it's also, I think, the first time he is doing a film that is based on real events. But to pull it off, he will have to give up some of the gimmicks he has been using. They can be fun with his
homage to a genre films, but won't cut it here.

[Jake Gittes]

You'd think after 25 years QT has earned more trust than this. He can work in different modes and knows perfectly well which one to apply when. Unless the actual movie shows otherwise I'm pretty sure he knows what he's doing. 

[dudalb]

I disagree. I have liked some of QT's films a lot, but he is always doing the same shtick: A movie that is a homage to some genre film or films  that Tarantino loves. This is something totally different.

Edited November 7, 2017 by dudalb

[Jake Gittes]

12 hours ago, dudalb said:

I disagree. I have liked some of QT's films a lot, but he is always doing the same shtick: A movie that is a homage to some genre film or films  that Tarantino loves. This is something totally different.

Some of his movies go lighter on homage, some heavier. It depends on the material. The Hateful Eight was never described as an homage to anything in particular during its production (unless you consider even the basic fact that it's a western to be an homage already), until it came out and it became apparent that the biggest influence on it was The Thing of all movies. Even then, it was its own story first, just like all of his movies are, and in that sense I don't expect anything different here. He'll tell the story he wants to tell and give nods to whatever films or genres he feels like wherever he finds it appropriate. 

[The Futurist]

 

Discussing something ladies ?

 

 

[WrathOfHan]

http://www.indiewire.com/2017/11/quentin-tarantino-charles-manson-family-movie-1201896797/

 

5 studios met with Tarantino for worldwide distribution. Disney was not one of them, and given these are WW rights, Annapurna is out of the running. Gonna take a guess and say the 5 are Universal, Fox, Sony, Lionsgate, and Paramount

Edited November 13, 2017 by WrathOfHan

[Barnack]

7 minutes ago, WrathOfHan said:

http://www.indiewire.com/2017/11/quentin-tarantino-charles-manson-family-movie-1201896797/

 

5 studios met with Tarantino for worldwide distribution. Disney was not one of them, and given these are WW rights, Annapurna is out of the running. Gonna take a guess and say the 5 are Universal, Fox, Sony, Lionsgate, and Paramount

 

The way it is said:

Tarantino just completed a round of pitch meetings last week set by WME from five studios (not including family-friendly Disney) with worldwide distribution seeking to back his untitled Manson Family Project,

 

Make it sound like the MPAA studio except Disney, Liongates also do not have worldwide distribution.

[Jonwo]

35 minutes ago, Barnack said:

 

The way it is said:

Tarantino just completed a round of pitch meetings last week set by WME from five studios (not including family-friendly Disney) with worldwide distribution seeking to back his untitled Manson Family Project,

 

Make it sound like the MPAA studio except Disney, Liongates also do not have worldwide distribution.

Lionsgate could still do it and sell the OS rights to their local distributors

[Barnack]

1 hour ago, Jonwo said:

Lionsgate could still do it and sell the OS rights to their local distributors

Would that not be true for every domestic distributor ?

 

I am not sure why Warner Brother would not have met with Tarantino.

[Jonwo]

3 minutes ago, Barnack said:

Would that not be true for every domestic distributor ?

 

I am not sure why Warner Brother would not have met with Tarantino.

It's possible WB have met with Tarantino but they don't have any history with him unlike Universal or Sony

[Boxx93]

I really hope QT goes with Paramount for the Scorcese connection.

[Barnack]

53 minutes ago, Jonwo said:

It's possible WB have met with Tarantino but they don't have any history with him unlike Universal or Sony

But that would also be true for Fox and Paramount, just trying to figure what would be the logic of WB not being interested in a Tarantino movie or why Fox but not them.

[WrathOfHan]

28 minutes ago, Boxx93 said:

I really hope QT goes with Paramount for the Scorcese connection.

One of the biggest reasons I think Paramount is a likelier studio is because of how well they treat directors. Scorsese and Aronofsky got midsize budgets on movies that weren't GA-appealing whatsoever. This movie will probably have a higher budget than Silence (50M), but it'll also be much more GA-friendly, especially if that cast comes to fruition; Leo alone would probably guarantee 100M, and adding in people like JLaw, Pitt, Pacino, and Robbie would sweeten the deal. This is what I think the likelihood of each studio getting this is:

 

Universal (distributed Basterds OS and is in very good financial shape)

Sony (co-distributed Django but doesn't have as good financials as Uni)

Paramount (well-respected among filmmakers but has some financial concerns)

Fox (specializes in R-rated and adult blockbusters but has no prior experience with Tarantino)

WB/Lionsgate (I don't see much of a reason why Tarantino would go with these over the others; WB only gives total control to filmmakers they've worked with before like Nolan and Eastwood, and Lionsgate is Lionsgate) 

[Barnack]

29 minutes ago, WrathOfHan said:

One of the biggest reasons I think Paramount is a likelier studio is because of how well they treat directors. Scorsese and Aronofsky got midsize budgets on movies that weren't GA-appealing whatsoever. This movie will probably have a higher budget than Silence (50M), but it'll also be much more GA-friendly, especially if that cast comes to fruition; Leo alone would probably guarantee 100M, and adding in people like JLaw, Pitt, Pacino, and Robbie would sweeten the deal. This is what I think the likelihood of each studio getting this is:

 

Universal (distributed Basterds OS and is in very good financial shape)

Sony (co-distributed Django but doesn't have as good financials as Uni)

Paramount (well-respected among filmmakers but has some financial concerns)

Fox (specializes in R-rated and adult blockbusters but has no prior experience with Tarantino)

WB/Lionsgate (I don't see much of a reason why Tarantino would go with these over the others; WB only gives total control to filmmakers they've worked with before like Nolan and Eastwood, and Lionsgate is Lionsgate) 

Rumors are more into Django budget territory (80-90m)

https://fastlane.louisianaeconomicdevelopment.com/Film/FilmSearchDetails.aspx?ProjNum=COZMLilOLt0a61ZZC4TSUA%3d%3d

Estimated Total Budget: $86,500,000

 

I am pretty sure WB would give conditionnal final cut + creative control (do not need to respect their notes) to someone like Tarantino if Dicaprio is involved and if they like is script.

 

I am not sure how much Silence was financed by Paramount, they just bought US release territory rights but it was decades logn process for Scorsese of building a large group of partner to finance it:

 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0490215/companycredits?ref_=tt_ql_dt_5

Production Companies

• Cappa Defina Productions
• CatchPlay
• Emmett/Furla/Oasis Films (EFO Films)
• Fábrica de Cine
• IM Global
• SharpSword Films
• Sikelia Productions
• Verdi Productions (in association with)
• Waypoint Entertainment

With like 35 different distributor, Paramount being US/Canada only

 

Very different than mother! that only had 2 logo at the start of the movie, Paramount and Aronofosky, we rarely see that outside Disney now a day.

 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt5109784/companycredits

Production Companies

• Protozoa Pictures (that the director company)

Edited November 13, 2017 by Barnack

[Boxx93]

WB does have somewhat of a relationship with QT. They released True Romance and Natural Born Killers, both scripts written by Tarantino. Granted those where directed by Tony Scott and Oliver Stone respectively but the connection with Quentin is there.

 

I still prefer Paramount as the new home for QT.

Edited November 13, 2017 by Boxx93

[Barnack]

Apparently it is a 3 way race between Sony, Warner and Paramount.

 

With the 5 studios did some pitch to the project:

http://deadline.com/2017/11/quentin-tarantino-movie-bidding-david-heyman-producer-margot-robbie-tom-cruise-brad-pitt-leonaro-dicaprio-1202208169/

http://variety.com/2017/film/news/quentin-tarantino-film-bidding-manson-1202614085/

As for the studios, all the majors are in (Fox has been least aggressive, perhaps with all that is going on over there).

 

Agressive seduction game is apparently going on:

with Warners engaging in some splashy wooing in hopes of landing the film. When Tarantino arrived at the studio’s Burbank lot, he found the circular entrance in front of the administration building adorned with cars from the late 1960s. The Warner Bros. logo circa 1969 was on the marquee outside the studio, and the executive conference room was outfitted with vintage furniture from the era and mock posters for the movie. Much of Tarantino’s film unfolds in August of 1969, a time when Manson’s commune of followers murdered actress Sharon Tate and four of her friends.

 

The financial terms scared away many suitors, leaving Warner Bros., Sony and Paramount as the final bidders.

 

It is strange than financial would have scared people but not Tom Rothman....

[trifle]

On 11/13/2017 at 11:07 AM, Barnack said:

Would that not be true for every domestic distributor ?

 

I am not sure why Warner Brother would not have met with Tarantino.

 

On 11/13/2017 at 11:11 AM, Jonwo said:

It's possible WB have met with Tarantino but they don't have any history with him unlike Universal or Sony

Looks like WB is indeed going for it.

 

 

 

Also deadline tossed out Tom Cruise's name as a possibility.

 

 

 

 

Edited November 14, 2017 by trifle

[Plain Old Tele]

That's a pretty fun thing for WB to do.

[Barnack]

1 minute ago, Squadron Leader Tele said:

That's a pretty fun thing for WB to do.

Yep and not sure about stupid, selling studio old school history/prestige sound like a good move if you are trying to get Tarantino to joint you.

 

I am sure all 5 studios talked to him about some form of 35mm/others film release possibilities also.

[CoolioD1]

all these studios rolling out the red carpet so they can fund a $100 million charlie manson movie they're guaranteed to take a bath on. pretty funny.