Captain America: Brave New World | February 14, 2025 | Harrison Ford is General Thaddeus "Thunderbolt" Ross

[Porthos]

It is the Year 2024 and some people STILL think reshoots, extensive or otherwise, are a *BAD* thing.

 

Like, it boggles the mind. 

[Joyous Legion]

20 minutes ago, Porthos said:

It is the Year 2024 and some people STILL think reshoots, extensive or otherwise, are a *BAD* thing.

 

Like, it boggles the mind. 

Think about it porthos. If a movie was going to be good, they would just get everything perfect on the first take 😤

Edited June 1 by Legion Again

[Ryan Reynolds]

1 hour ago, Porthos said:

It is the Year 2024 and some people STILL think reshoots, extensive or otherwise, are a *BAD* thing.

 

Like, it boggles the mind. 

well the movie won't be massive no matter what, its a mid tier film , so the extra budget will be washed away by middling gross if good , better off deleting film , since most don't care

[BadOlCatSylvester]

2 hours ago, Ryan Reynolds said:

well the movie won't be massive no matter what, its a mid tier film , so the extra budget will be washed away by middling gross if good , better off deleting film , since most don't care

As someone who isn't all that excited for this either, can we stop with all the casual film deletion talk? That sets awful precedents every time. We should at least be able judge the movie for ourselves.

[Firepower]

4 hours ago, Porthos said:

It is the Year 2024 and some people STILL think reshoots, extensive or otherwise, are a *BAD* thing.

 

Like, it boggles the mind. 

Why? Extensive reshoots are never a good sign and there are more examples when extensive reshoots made the movie worse, not better. For every Fury Road or Rogue One we have Justice League, Rollerball, Gigli, Dark Phoenix, Suicide Squad etc.

 

11 hours ago, SpiderByte said:

All the endless talk here of months of reshoots, of the entire movie being scrapped and redone, people saying "why are they showing footage at Cinemacon since they're obviously cutting it all", and the actual amount of resboots is:

 

Three weeks. And it's mostly action scenes.

 

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/captain-america-brave-new-world-reshoots-1235912919/

Didn't it already have massive reshoots? So it's not 3 weeks, but more like months overall and multiple rounds of them.

Edited June 1 by Firepower

[cinema pal]

22 minutes ago, Firepower said:

Didn't it already have massive reshoots?

No

Scoopers said January-May reshoots window, but it never happened. 

Edited June 1 by cinema pal

[Firepower]

7 minutes ago, cinema pal said:

No

Scoopers said January-May reshoots window, but it never happened. 

So they changed their mind and rewrote planned reshoots? That's new.

[Youngstar]

13 minutes ago, cinema pal said:

No

Scoopers said January-May reshoots window, but it never happened. 

the reported window was May-August. But yeah it's much less than that.

[vale9001]

35 minutes ago, Firepower said:

Why? Extensive reshoots are never a good sign and there are more examples when extensive reshoots made the movie worse, not better. For every Fury Road or Rogue One we have Justice League, Rollerball, Gigli, Dark Phoenix, Suicide Squad etc.

 

Didn't it already have massive reshoots? So it's not 3 weeks, but more like months overall and multiple rounds of them.

 

 

films were terrible and you didn't need re shots to save them but to make them from the start again 😅

 

reshots are a good sign. Hollywood makes them since ever, most Hitchcock movies had reshots. You test movies and then you work again on them to make things better seeing the audience reaction. What's wrong? It's like the work of an editor for a book.

 

It's a bad sign if a studio send a real author back to the set but if they are blockbusters, commercial movies you cook with a formula there is nothing wrong to have a second moment to refine the formula. Chances to make everything right at the first attempt are really low. Every produver actually would make second shots if they can cause you can always improve thing once you see the first shoot, if often you don't see it it's because of course you have to invest new money and it's not easy to have all the cast and crew involved again in time for what's the release date for the movie.

So often the winning idea it's "let's hope what we have it's gonna be enough and good like it is" 😊

 

 

Edited June 1 by vale9001

[cinema pal]

22 minutes ago, Youngstar said:

the reported window was May-August. But yeah it's much less than that.

No. In november 2023 Jeff Sneider told about January-May

https://www.comingsoon.net/movies/news/1398628-captain-america-4-reportedly-getting-extensive-reshoots-after-cutting-major-scenes

Edited June 1 by cinema pal

[cinema pal]

10 minutes ago, Firepower said:

So they changed their mind and rewrote planned reshoots? That's new.

No, they just moved it to june-august or it was always supposed to be that way

[fmpro]

A Jan-May window for reshoots does not mean its going to reshoot in all 5 months. Just that is going to take place sometime in that period. In this case its 3 weeks very late in that window

[Porthos]

1 hour ago, Firepower said:

Why? Extensive reshoots are never a good sign and there are more examples when extensive reshoots made the movie worse, not better. For every Fury Road or Rogue One we have Justice League, Rollerball, Gigli, Dark Phoenix, Suicide Squad etc.

 

Gee it's almost as if "90% of everything is crud".  

 

Pointing out that films with reshoots, extensive or otherwise, aren't always successful simply proves Sturgeon was on to something. 

 

Also?  the very first SW film had what would be termed today as "extensive reshoots".  As would be just about every original SW film:

 

 

(start of a very long set of tweets)

 

====

 

if I didn't make my point clear, what I didn't say was that was that reshoots were a sign of a film being *GOOD*. 

 

What I did imply, and now outright will state is: THEY SAY NEARLY NOTHING ABOUT THE *FINISHED* QUALITY OF A FILM.

 

About the only thing it really says in nearly all cases is that TPTB collectively felt that A] a film could be made better and B] They're willing to spend time and money to attempt to make it better.  Attempt being the operative word.

 

But what I *will* push back on, and quite strongly, is the idea that reshoots, again extensive or otherwise, are a sign that something WILL be bad,

 

That is utter bullshit, I am not at all afraid to say it.  Complete and utter horseshit, actually. 

 

If there is any sort of correlation between "extensive reshoots" and "poor film", I'd be more than a little surprised to see if it was that much stronger (or weaker for that matter) than an overall correlation between films being good or bad that didn't have more than industry standard additional photography.

 

Hence the invocation of Sturgeon's Law. 

[cinema pal]

It's funny, there's some amount of people who believed those fake plot leaks from last year (where She Hulk betreys Hulk just because) and when the final film is nothing like that they will go screaming "You see??!!!! They reshot the whole movie!!!!"

[SpiderByte]

2 hours ago, Firepower said:

Didn't it already have massive reshoots? So it's not 3 weeks, but more like months overall and multiple rounds of them.

Nope. The article itself says that this is the only round of reshoots they had. The "they rehot the whole movie" stuff was never, ever true, just like I've always said.

Edited June 1 by SpiderByte

[Firepower]

55 minutes ago, Porthos said:

Pointing out that films with reshoots, extensive or otherwise, aren't always successful simply proves Sturgeon was on to something. 

80% of movies with massive reshoots aren't successful, "aren't always" is to say the least.

 

56 minutes ago, Porthos said:

What I did imply, and now outright will state is: THEY SAY NEARLY NOTHING ABOUT THE *FINISHED* QUALITY OF A FILM.

They say the movie doesn't work in studio's mind, extensive reshoots and normal reshoots/touch ups are not the same thing, what happend to, let's say, Justice League weren't normal reshoots, extensive reshoots happen when the movie tests poorly.

 

58 minutes ago, Porthos said:

But what I *will* push back on, and quite strongly, is the idea that reshoots, again extensive or otherwise, are a sign that something WILL be bad,

 

That is utter bullshit, I am not at all afraid to say it.  Complete and utter horseshit, actually. 

 

If there is any sort of correlation between "extensive reshoots" and "poor film", I'd be more than a little surprised to see if it was that much stronger (or weaker for that matter) than an overall correlation between films being good or bad that didn't have more than industry standard additional photography.

It's not 100% guarantee, but numbers are numbers, in most cases massives reshoots don't save the movie, but make it even worse, those reshoots are often done with poor intentions. For every film with extensive reshoots that turned out to be good I can give you at least 5 where it made things worse. And again, I don't mean "normal reshoots", I mean reshoots which completely change the movie.

 

2 hours ago, vale9001 said:

reshots are a good sign. Hollywood makes them since ever, most Hitchcock movies had reshots. You test movies and then you work again on them to make things better seeing the audience reaction. What's wrong? It's like the work of an editor for a book.

As I said, I don't mean any reshoots, I mean specifically very extensive reshoots that change the movie completely. The problem is when reshoots made the movie worse and it tests worse, they don't reverse it to better cuts, but lock the last one and call it a day. 

[JimmyB]

Reshoots are a normal part of filmmaking. Is hiring a new writer and a new actor to play a new villain, normal?  Following the entertainment world for a long time,  the article feels like a late Friday night PR spin/damage control for this film.  Disney knows the rumors about this film and are trying to change the narrative....might be a little to late.

[SpiderByte]

Hiring new writers and even new actors has happened before, yes.

[SpiderByte]

34 minutes ago, Firepower said:

As I said, I don't mean any reshoots, I mean specifically very extensive reshoots that change the movie completely.

Yes, but those didn't happen on this. The reshoots currently happening are the only ones that have taken place.

[SpiderByte]

Atlanta Filming said in the comments of his old post that someone had guessed the name of who he heard it was, and the only name that isn't just Count Nefaria or Doom or whatever that's actually fit is an obscure Marvel mercenary named Paladin. He's fought Cap before but he's more associated with Daredevil, so if he's involved in Born Again or Spidey 4 that would explain why Esposito said he's recurring

 

 

Edited June 1 by SpiderByte