Jump to content

AndyK

Rub & Tug | Now a TV Series. ScarJo found dead in a ditch! | Trans Rights are Human Rights

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Zakiyyah6 said:

I am shocked that Scarjo chose Rupert Sanders to direct her desperate Oscar plea. If she was going to do this she could at least have gotten a real director. 

Yeah, I have to admit that choosing the director of Snow White and the Huntsman and Ghost in the Shell is even more mind-boggling than her absurd idea of playing a trans man. What makes her think that this hack director will somehow make her limited acting skills blossom into an Oscar-level performance?? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



28 minutes ago, StevenG said:

Yeah, I have to admit that choosing the director of Snow White and the Huntsman and Ghost in the Shell is even more mind-boggling than her absurd idea of playing a trans man. What makes her think that this hack director will somehow make her limited acting skills blossom into an Oscar-level performance?? 

You know...this may sound "unprofessional" but...they've worked together before...they're both recently divorced...and he has a bit of a history bedding his star(s).  So...take that thought down the road.  Total speculation, but could be a factor here, in getting the project going. 

Edited by Macleod
Link to comment
Share on other sites



8 minutes ago, The Futurist said:

The surviving journalists of the Pravda must be so emotionnal & proud when they look at what the world has become.

They were right all a along.

The People are now THEM.

Poetic Justice.

So sad, Alexa play despacito.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Macleod said:

You know...this may sound "unprofessional" but...they've worked together before...they're both recently divorced...and he has a bit of a history bedding his star(s).  So...take that thought down the road.  Total speculation, but could be a factor here, in getting the project going. 

Oh, no. What’s gonna happen to ScarJost? 😜

Link to comment
Share on other sites



On 7/6/2018 at 2:40 PM, baumer said:

 

Quick, name a trans actor who can headline a movie, who can open one, and give the studio confidence enough to sink millions of dollars into it.  You can't because there isn't one.  That's why A-list actors get roles like this.

Laverne Cox, Candis Cayne, Chaz Bono, Ian Harvie. 

  • Disbelief 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



11 minutes ago, baumer said:

 

No one knows any of them.  Maybe Bono.

In the US Cox is known at least I knew her, had to google the others one, but I imagine being on Transparent make you know at least a little bit in the US.

 

I am unsure how you would be received at the bank or by a japan/france/greece/russian/south america, etc... buyer, looking at the filmography has anyone ever appeared in a 2,000 wide release or an acclaimed significant role in a movie ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In 2017, not a strong genre / franchise live action movie with a rumored budget of 25-35m were (According to the-numbers)

 

Queen of the desert: Kidman/Franco/Pattinson

Foreigner: Jackie Chan

Snowman: Fasbender/Ferguson/Kilmer/Simmons, well that was a popular book series also I think

Baby Driver: Good example here of not necessarily a strong lead, getting it done with a really strong director and very strong star loaded supporting cast. He was still paid 500k and even asking for a pay or play deal so I imagine studio felt all that divergent/fault in our star build some awareness (he had 3 movie doing around 300m before Baby Driver, one co-lead), far from an unknown for sure.

Hitman Bodyguard: Reynolds / Sam Jackson

Atomic Blonde: Theron / McAvoy

Collide: Hoult / Jones (release timed to be after her Star Wars  lead movie + Inferno co lead)

Logan Lucky: really big assemble cast, Tatum/Driver/Craig/Stan/Gleeson/Holmes/MacFarlane

Girl Trip: Pinkett Smith, Queen Latifah,  acted in over 1.5b at the box office Hall, etc..

Bad Mom Christmas: Well sequel do not count obviously, but still 3 names actress here.

Dog purpose: Quaid / Robertson

Fist Fight: Ice cube / Charlie Day

Chips (Well a franchise): Pena, Shepard, Brody, Onofrio, et.c....

Father figure: Wilson, Helms, Simmons,

Tulip Fever: Vikander

Going in style: Freeman, Caine, Arkin

Battle of the sexes: stone / carell

 

In that price range you almost never see an unknown lead, we could try other year's to try to find some, I could have missed it (was manually made) or the-numbers could be missing some budget obviously, but people that say that it happen all the time, would be nice to see some example in the price range period piece mobster movie to be well done cost.

 

 

 

Edited by Barnack
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Frankly, the "We need a star and there are no trans stars" excuse is a depressing self-fulfilling prophecy. There are no huge trans stars because they don't get cast in movies because they're not huge stars. And when they can't even get in the room to audition for major cis parts - a complaint that popped up in the reactions Trace Lysette and Jamie Clayton had in their responses to Scarlett Johansson's casting here - the fact that they can't even be the ones to tell their own stories is even more frustrating.

 

Like, I get that Hollywood is a business and I can kinda cut this production some slack on account of the fact that I can't name a single trans-masculine actor off the top of my head (though perhaps I could if they actually, y'know, got cast in something other than shoestring-budget direct-to-Netflix indie fare every once in a while). But Hollywood needs to take a chance on trans-feminine actresses like Cox (Orange Is the New Black), Clayton (Sense8), and Lysette (Transparent) (among others) who have at least built something of a following through popular TV shows.

  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites



This isn't the kind of project that should be worrying too much about "commercial" appeal. So when they cast a cis female superstar in Scarlett Johansson in the role of a trans man and hire a commercial hack director like Rupert Sanders to helm, I'd expect a bomb in the making. If they're gonna cast her, they might as well make it a completely fictional story about a lesbian crime lord.

Edited by Jay Beezy
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jay Beezy said:

This isn't the kind of project that should be worrying too much about "commercial" appeal.

I would be curious about your reasoning here, isn't a 20m-30m movie not in a strong genre that sell itself (like horror / SH /etc..), no IP etc.... the kind of project that worry the most about commercial appeal ?

 

2 hours ago, Webslinger said:

Frankly, the "We need a star and there are no trans stars" excuse is a depressing self-fulfilling prophecy. There are no huge trans stars because they don't get cast in movies because they're not huge stars... .... though perhaps I could if they actually, y'know, got cast in something other than shoestring-budget direct-to-Netflix indie fare every once in a while

 

WIth studio doing less and less movies that would be an hard problem to fix.

 

But you can get cast in movies without being a huge stars

1) Strong franchise often does not need star powers (Solo will maybe make them more cautious but you get it).

2) The very small budget (the excellent Tangerine for example)

3) Supporting roles

4) By becoming big enough on TV

5) Crowdfunding (you do not need that many people investing that much to make a 20-30m movie), if people want to see it happen they could eventually just make it happen, we starting to see it for nerd/fanbase franchise, but a project like that could caught up.

 

The obvious possible entry door today for writer/director and actor is small budget horror, that were we will see very diverse casting I think (and studio franchise affair), Crazy Bitches (2014) had a trans-actor for example.

 

The mid-budget affair award possible is maybe the hardest place to start with, all the big name will fight for any chance to be in those even cutting their quote sometime, they are often the hardest sales, attract often an irrational fanbase that is not just there to make money but to be financing movies, for who the chance to sit a the golden globes with a star or having star name to drop when talking about the movie they are involving with is a plus.

 

Edited by Barnack
Link to comment
Share on other sites



6 minutes ago, Barnack said:

I would be curious about your reasoning here, isn't a 20m-30m movie not in a strong genre that sell itself (like horror / SH /etc..), no IP etc.... the kind of project that worry the most about commercial appeal ?

I'm saying this kind of story shouldn't cost that much to make. This should be made as an indie flick. Frankly, when you say this is costing 20M-30M, how much of that budget is going to ScarJo?

Edited by Jay Beezy
Link to comment
Share on other sites



6 minutes ago, Jay Beezy said:

I'm saying this kind of story shouldn't cost that much to make. This should be made as an indie flick. Frankly, when you say this is costing 20M-30M, how much of that budget is going to ScarJo?

The reported budget is "north of 30M", and because that was a project on a bidding block I imagine reporting is probably accurate:

 Sources said the hope is to start production in February at a budget north of $30 million.

 

I am saying 20M for a rough cost if you didn't had to pay a director/actor combo (I imagine them making say 12m on this at the most but with large back end).

 

It is not an independant movie ? The barrier is really muddy now but I doubt Fox have must say in those New Regency distribution made by 

Films is a co-production between Silver Pictures, Maguire’s Material Pictures and Johansson’s These Pictures banners. (And that usually when having a star attached must be so important, they needed to convince a lot of people to invest maybe sell some market also)

 

Legend (Studio Canal) was 20-25m and that was a way to make a period mob movie on the not so expensive side.

 

Really hard to judge without reading the script how much it should cost to make obviously, but if it is similar to American Made / American Hustle going to cheap tend to hurt those story quite a bit.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



1 hour ago, Barnack said:

The reported budget is "north of 30M", and because that was a project on a bidding block I imagine reporting is probably accurate:

 Sources said the hope is to start production in February at a budget north of $30 million.

 

I am saying 20M for a rough cost if you didn't had to pay a director/actor combo (I imagine them making say 12m on this at the most but with large back end).

 

It is not an independant movie ? The barrier is really muddy now but I doubt Fox have must say in those New Regency distribution made by 

Films is a co-production between Silver Pictures, Maguire’s Material Pictures and Johansson’s These Pictures banners. (And that usually when having a star attached must be so important, they needed to convince a lot of people to invest maybe sell some market also)

 

Legend (Studio Canal) was 20-25m and that was a way to make a period mob movie on the not so expensive side.

 

Really hard to judge without reading the script how much it should cost to make obviously, but if it is similar to American Made / American Hustle going to cheap tend to hurt those story quite a bit.

 

 

It's more commercially appealing these days to pick the right person for the right role over the bigger star for a biopic with a very particular type of character.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



On 7/7/2018 at 3:12 PM, Barnack said:

Define excuse, she just got that project picked-up no ? Why do you think people accepted to invest in a Rupert Sanders movie like this one, you think Johansson being a big star (specially if the project release next to Black Widow) was not part of their decision ?

 

People need some level of precision here or we will be talking over each other, some seem to simplify the situation as if the people making the movie, financed it, distributing it and the exhibition were the same people so that a decision can easily be made by "they", like in the golden age. At least if this was a studio project (but now even those are almost always co-financed in part pre-sold to share risk) that would be closer to the truth but there is no studio involved here. But they are all different group (and even each category splitted in many different player, that all need the ok of the all the future one for it to work, often before even making the movie for it to get a go if the story require a big enough budget)

 

Do you mean to say world buyer's/pre-buyer and third party investor to not really care in reality about star attached to a project (director or actor) specially outside proven genre ? That people bringing that point are lying and that it is a film Internet made up myth ?

 

Or do you mean that maybe they do but they should stop doing so ?

 

As for Gits or RN, movie with a 44% RT rating not turning successful financially is not really that indicative of an audience rejection of the lead, even freaking Denzel movies can flop when they go rotten nowaday like Roman J Isreal, Bullock with Our Band is Crisis or Ferrel with The house (that did considerably less than Rough Nigh), you still need a movie obviously outside the franchise / well establish trope/genre that audience already love to work with.

 

I work in the industry, so save that bullshit for someone who needs it and do not project whatever on to me because NOTHING in my post insinuates that exhibitors and financiers are the same. I ostensibly question why they financed the movie at $30,000,000. Whoever believes that Scarlett Johansson is about to carry critically reviled (Rupert Sanders being the one helming it), mid-budget, lowbrow Oscar bait to success, is an imbecile. No one sees Scarlett Johansson movies outside of the Marvel movies, and even then, she is not even the star of those movies. They especially are not seeing her "serious" movies. Executives and financiers believe that she is a star who is able to sell anything, but her history says otherwise especially with "prestige" movies. That is what the point is. 

Edited by PenguinHyphy
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



1 hour ago, PenguinHyphy said:

I work in the industry, so save that bullshit for someone who needs it and do not project whatever

The precision was about using the star power excuse (who is using that excuse ?)

 

Same for justifying (who ?) 

 

1 hour ago, PenguinHyphy said:

Executives and financiers believe that she is a star who is able to sell anything, but her history says otherwise especially with "prestige" movies. That is what the point is. 

That comment make my difficulty to understand your previous comment:

Are people still trying to use the star power excuse with Scarlett Johansson a year after proving that same excuse futile with Ghost in the Shell and Rough Night?

 

What do you mean by are people still trying to use the star power excuse while executive and financier believe that she is a start who is able to sell anything (I kind of doubt that, why such a small budget and why no studio and it is common for her project to get no studio support on board then and why do all those marvel movies small role stuff is she was able to sell anything.... I mean you must be doing an Internet hyperbole right ?)

 

1 hour ago, PenguinHyphy said:

I ostensibly question why they financed the movie at $30,000,000.

What do you think the intl pre-sales could look like ? If it follow American Hustle financial structure that one was almost fully financed by pre-sales.

Edited by Barnack
Link to comment
Share on other sites



16 hours ago, filmlover said:

You're kidding re: Laverne Cox, right? She's become arguably the most famous face of the transgender movement and even made the cover of Time once.

 

Image result for time magazine laverne cox

 

Pravda Approved.

Politburo aproved.

Da !

Edited by The Futurist
Link to comment
Share on other sites



On 7/8/2018 at 3:32 AM, StevenG said:

Yeah, I have to admit that choosing the director of Snow White and the Huntsman and Ghost in the Shell is even more mind-boggling than her absurd idea of playing a trans man. What makes her think that this hack director will somehow make her limited acting skills blossom into an Oscar-level performance?? 

Stop it, you're better than this !

Link to comment
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.