Latest Movie News Headlines

Darren Aronofsky and Paramount are at odds over the final cut of Noah

Oct. 16, 2013by: Jesse Giroux

Multiple sources have told THR that Paramount and Darren Aronofsky are battling over the final cut for NOAH. The studio has recently been holding test screenings for the film, and they are concerned with the results. The screenings have been for key groups who might have more of an interest in the subject matter than others in New York City (largely Jewish audience), in Arizona (Christians) and Orange County, California (general public). Apparently Paramount hasn't liked the reactions for NOAH, and the studio has suggested some "helpful" changes to Aronofsky, although it isn't known if the director owns the final cut of the film or not.

But Darren Aronofsky is resisting, and according to one source, "Darren is not made for studio films. He's very dismissive. He doesn't care about [Paramount's] opinion."

The problem seems to be the third act for NOAH, which some say may alienate or offend Christian movie goers. That's not good for Paramount, who is expecting a large turnout from Christians for NOAH. Aronofsky has previously described Noah as "the first environmentalist," and how the character is represented in the film is rubbing some people the wrong way.

Several members of the faith community have already expressed concerns for NOAH. Brian Godawa got his hands on one version of the script, and in an online summary titled "Darren Aronofsky's Noah: Environmentalist Wacko," said it will be "an uninteresting and unbiblical waste of a hundred and fifty million dollars that will ruin for decades the possibility of making a really great and entertaining movie of this Bible hero."

Mark Joseph (who has worked on the marketing for films such as RAY and THE CHRONICLES OF NARNIA: THE LION, THE WITCH AND THE WARDROBE) hasn't been to a test screening for NOAH, but is worried it is "an example of a director not listening to those voices that would have been warning of the dangers of veering too far away from the biblical text. The director is there to serve the studio and the audience, not veer off into directions that go against the core audience's beliefs -- at least if the goal is to get them to come to the theater." Joseph also says Paramount knew there would be some issues with the film and "allowed for a very long postproduction period, which allowed for a lot of test screenings."

But Paramount vice chairman Rob Moore says Noah is going through a "normal preview process" and the outcome will be "one version of the movie that Darren is overseeing."

Meanwhile, God has not made any public comments on the situation with NOAH.

I'm on Darren Aronofsky's side with this, but Paramount does have a right to be concerned. The budget for NOAH is over $125 million, and like all investments, the studio expects a return. It's going to be hard if the people most likely to see NOAH (Christians) are upset with how the material is handled.

However, Paramount did hire Darren Aronofsky, and they should trust his vision. NOAH might not be the film some Christians want, but there are plenty of people (regardless of faith) who are very interested in the project. Hell, I'm an atheist and I can't wait to see NOAH. Knock on wood that Paramount doesn't make Aronofsky change his film too much, if at all, and it won't have a negative impact on NOAH.

NOAH stars Russell Crowe, Jennifer Connelly, Ray Winstone, Anthony Hopkins, Emma Watson, Logan Lerman and Kevin Durand, and will be in theaters on March 28th, 2014.

Extra Tidbit: Five months until the release date and still no trailer for NOAH?
Source: THR

MORE FUN FROM AROUND THE WEB

Strikeback
Not registered? Sign-up!
Or

+2
12:47AM on 10/18/2013
Darren is one of the best directors of this era (ie Requiem, Pi, The Wrestler) let him do what he wants. The man is a genius. And I still say his Wolverine would have been EPIC. Dare I say on par or better than TDK? I mean it would have been Aronosky directing a Wolverine movie. ARONOFSKY DIRECTING A FUCKING WOLVERINE MOVIE! Think about it.

They knew what they were getting into. If they were that concerned they should have hired McG.
Darren is one of the best directors of this era (ie Requiem, Pi, The Wrestler) let him do what he wants. The man is a genius. And I still say his Wolverine would have been EPIC. Dare I say on par or better than TDK? I mean it would have been Aronosky directing a Wolverine movie. ARONOFSKY DIRECTING A FUCKING WOLVERINE MOVIE! Think about it.

They knew what they were getting into. If they were that concerned they should have hired McG.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
8:45AM on 10/17/2013
"Darren Aronofsky's Noah: Environmentalist Wacko,"
Maybe he talks about Global Warming and that is off-putting religious republican who still refuse to believe the worlds environment is changing.
"Darren Aronofsky's Noah: Environmentalist Wacko,"
Maybe he talks about Global Warming and that is off-putting religious republican who still refuse to believe the worlds environment is changing.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:18PM on 10/16/2013

I'm taking a wait-and-see attitude

As much as I dislike suits interfering with an artist's vision, I can respect that Paramount has 125 million reasons to be concerned about NOAH. Then again, they should have known what they were getting into when they hired him.

Management 101: hire the best worker then get out of their way. If they were concerned about his vision, they should have dealt with that before throwing all the $$$ around. Aronofsky's not exactly an unknown quantity.
As much as I dislike suits interfering with an artist's vision, I can respect that Paramount has 125 million reasons to be concerned about NOAH. Then again, they should have known what they were getting into when they hired him.

Management 101: hire the best worker then get out of their way. If they were concerned about his vision, they should have dealt with that before throwing all the $$$ around. Aronofsky's not exactly an unknown quantity.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:00PM on 10/16/2013

Aronofsky is a genius, even when his genius is overly ambitious and overwrought.

This could be perfect like The Wrestler or overly ambitious (but still interesting, at least) like The Fountain. It'll probably be more of the latter, and it could very well become notorious for being a great example of an 'auteur' taking a huge Hollywood budget and running amuck. But seriously, controversy sells. A lot of people tried to boycott Passion of the Christ, too, and look what happened.
This could be perfect like The Wrestler or overly ambitious (but still interesting, at least) like The Fountain. It'll probably be more of the latter, and it could very well become notorious for being a great example of an 'auteur' taking a huge Hollywood budget and running amuck. But seriously, controversy sells. A lot of people tried to boycott Passion of the Christ, too, and look what happened.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
10:37PM on 10/16/2013
"Darren Aronofsky's Noah: Environmentalist Wacko," ....
Sounds like the wise sayings of the kind of redneck fundamentalists that called Avatar "Anti-American"
"Darren Aronofsky's Noah: Environmentalist Wacko," ....
Sounds like the wise sayings of the kind of redneck fundamentalists that called Avatar "Anti-American"
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
10:19PM on 10/16/2013
As a non-believer I kinda wonder what's going on behind the lines. Are the religious groups upset because it's not a cut and dry straight forward telling of the biblical story based in faith or does Aronofsky have some deeper theological point of view meant to make people think instead of just believe? We may never know. I guess it all depends on what was planned what was expected. That aside, religious or not, ease up peeps. As long as you aren't hurting someone, you can believe in wearing a
As a non-believer I kinda wonder what's going on behind the lines. Are the religious groups upset because it's not a cut and dry straight forward telling of the biblical story based in faith or does Aronofsky have some deeper theological point of view meant to make people think instead of just believe? We may never know. I guess it all depends on what was planned what was expected. That aside, religious or not, ease up peeps. As long as you aren't hurting someone, you can believe in wearing a strainer on your head for all I care. To each their own...except Scientology. Them crazy folk.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:47PM on 10/16/2013
If he has to edit it, just make sure you give Aronofsky a chance to make a director's cut for blu-ray. Because I'm pretty sure this will be another example of having a studio-approved version for theaters and a director's cut that are vastly different, much like Ridley Scott's Kingdom of Heaven. And I think we all know what version of that film is the best.
If he has to edit it, just make sure you give Aronofsky a chance to make a director's cut for blu-ray. Because I'm pretty sure this will be another example of having a studio-approved version for theaters and a director's cut that are vastly different, much like Ridley Scott's Kingdom of Heaven. And I think we all know what version of that film is the best.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:41PM on 10/16/2013
Aronofsky needs to get his head out of his ass. If you make a studio film, then you have to collaborate with the studio. You can't expect someone to hand you $150million dollars, then you tell them to fuck off cause you're an artist. If you are willing to take their money, then you need to be willing to work with them. If you want to play with gigantic budgets like that, then you have to play nice with the people who trusted you with their money. If not, then the entire movie will fall apart,
Aronofsky needs to get his head out of his ass. If you make a studio film, then you have to collaborate with the studio. You can't expect someone to hand you $150million dollars, then you tell them to fuck off cause you're an artist. If you are willing to take their money, then you need to be willing to work with them. If you want to play with gigantic budgets like that, then you have to play nice with the people who trusted you with their money. If not, then the entire movie will fall apart, and both sides get fucked.

I'm willing to bet anything that this is why he never made The Wolverine.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:24AM on 10/17/2013
Very valid point. It's the studio's money, they have a say.
Very valid point. It's the studio's money, they have a say.
8:30PM on 10/17/2013
It may be the studios money but it comes down to the contract if the director has final cut its the studios fault for signing him, and they have to suck it up and take what he gives them.
It may be the studios money but it comes down to the contract if the director has final cut its the studios fault for signing him, and they have to suck it up and take what he gives them.
8:28PM on 10/16/2013

they knew what they were into

...when they hired this man. How do you screen his previous films , especially The Fountain, and not know how he questions God as a driving force behind religious choices?

And I was always under the impression that Aronofsky took this project on for himself. Isn't this why he left Wolverine, because the strike forced that production to stall and cut into preproduction time for Noah? If Noah is his "one for them," why not just stay on with wolverine?

I'd guess its because he had a very
...when they hired this man. How do you screen his previous films , especially The Fountain, and not know how he questions God as a driving force behind religious choices?

And I was always under the impression that Aronofsky took this project on for himself. Isn't this why he left Wolverine, because the strike forced that production to stall and cut into preproduction time for Noah? If Noah is his "one for them," why not just stay on with wolverine?

I'd guess its because he had a very specific vision for Noah he was passionate about. Meaning the studio knew what he was planning from day one.

I agree with downplaying the role of the voice of God, and making this truly a story about a man who is only remarkable for his heroic deed in saving animals. I'm a Christian myself, but the Good Book doesn't exactly paint a full picture of the lives of any of its denizens, only retells the legendary moments that make myths of those men and women. Why not explore the possibilities of their full lives up to and including those moments, figure out just bow they were motivated to do the things they did?

I hope the execs get over themselves and let aronofsky give us the full monty.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
8:03PM on 10/16/2013

Get it Right

Who would have guessed this guy would screw Noah up. He has had one successful film and I thought it sucked. The wrestler was okay but made a whole $26 ,million. Why would you give this creep $125 million. This is all on Paramount and the idiot that didn't see this nerd trying to undermine religion and a studio trying to sell it to the Judeo/Christian Audience. Even the nutty Rachel Weiss ran from this weirdo.
Who would have guessed this guy would screw Noah up. He has had one successful film and I thought it sucked. The wrestler was okay but made a whole $26 ,million. Why would you give this creep $125 million. This is all on Paramount and the idiot that didn't see this nerd trying to undermine religion and a studio trying to sell it to the Judeo/Christian Audience. Even the nutty Rachel Weiss ran from this weirdo.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
7:39PM on 10/16/2013

Fairytale or not...

Regardless of what you believe the Bible to be its a tad disingenuous (IMO) to dismiss this situation as "Ah its a fairytale get over it!". Last I heard people weren't building their personal faith around Hansel and Gretel and Little Red Riding Hood (as far as I know...) and to compare the two shows a fundamental lack of understanding the Bible's historical (gasp!) role and what it means for millions. I'd be saying this about any religion btw. It IS a big decision and Paramount has every right
Regardless of what you believe the Bible to be its a tad disingenuous (IMO) to dismiss this situation as "Ah its a fairytale get over it!". Last I heard people weren't building their personal faith around Hansel and Gretel and Little Red Riding Hood (as far as I know...) and to compare the two shows a fundamental lack of understanding the Bible's historical (gasp!) role and what it means for millions. I'd be saying this about any religion btw. It IS a big decision and Paramount has every right to try to handle this with care considering the hefty investment. THAT BEING SAID I love me some Aronofsky, had the opportunity to meet him once, think he's a genius, have been deeply moved by almost every film he's made and am super excited to see the thunder he brings. But this is a sensitive matter and I don't envy Aronofsky or Paramount in this situation.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+6
3:16PM on 10/16/2013

Why bring in a director like Aranofsky

And try and block his obvious supreme vision? Dude is an artist and story teller at a high level and has proven himself time and time again. It seems very stupid to not let the dude just do his damn thing!
And try and block his obvious supreme vision? Dude is an artist and story teller at a high level and has proven himself time and time again. It seems very stupid to not let the dude just do his damn thing!
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:52AM on 10/18/2013
Well said. IM WITH THIS GUY!
Well said. IM WITH THIS GUY!
+3
2:21PM on 10/16/2013

Why bring in a director like Aranofsky

And try and block his obvious supreme vision? Dude is an artist and story teller at a high level and has proven himself time and time again. It seems very stupid to not let the dude just do his damn thing!
And try and block his obvious supreme vision? Dude is an artist and story teller at a high level and has proven himself time and time again. It seems very stupid to not let the dude just do his damn thing!
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
2:18PM on 10/16/2013

FUCK EM

Darren you get you fuckin movie out there fuck Paramount, nobody will ever understand the mask genius of your movie making skills. The fountain is still one of the most highly underrated films. Fuck if it offends people. people get offended over everything. It's called not watching it. Nobody is tellin you to see this movie. I hate when people bitch and moan esp stupid religious people about nothing and you see it and you're like wow thats what they were bitchin about. Seriously!!! So I have a
Darren you get you fuckin movie out there fuck Paramount, nobody will ever understand the mask genius of your movie making skills. The fountain is still one of the most highly underrated films. Fuck if it offends people. people get offended over everything. It's called not watching it. Nobody is tellin you to see this movie. I hate when people bitch and moan esp stupid religious people about nothing and you see it and you're like wow thats what they were bitchin about. Seriously!!! So I have a feeling we will get the cut of what darren made. with or without paramount
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+11
1:51PM on 10/16/2013
I wonder how well a movie like The Lone Ranger tested.

I guess my point is with these tests they've picking a very small sample of a specific audience. It's not an indicator of how a wide audience will react. I can't imagine DA walking into Paramount and pitching this movie like "We're really gonna get the religious crowd with this one!" I don't think he's that kind of filmmaker.

I understand that Jews and Christians will be very interested in this movie, but it never seemed like this
I wonder how well a movie like The Lone Ranger tested.

I guess my point is with these tests they've picking a very small sample of a specific audience. It's not an indicator of how a wide audience will react. I can't imagine DA walking into Paramount and pitching this movie like "We're really gonna get the religious crowd with this one!" I don't think he's that kind of filmmaker.

I understand that Jews and Christians will be very interested in this movie, but it never seemed like this version of Noah was meant to be a religious film preaching to its choir. At least that's what I gained from following the production.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+22
1:18PM on 10/16/2013
I love how people below are saying its ok to stray from source material.. especially on this website where we (myself included) go in up roars, when comic book films are changed, or our heroes are not being depicted as accurately as our "fairy tales" have told us. And just because this isn't your fairy tale? its ok for it to be changed and altered? Just because this isn't your heroes story doesn't make it ok to alter it, thats ignorant! This story book is the oldest of our kind (and has a
I love how people below are saying its ok to stray from source material.. especially on this website where we (myself included) go in up roars, when comic book films are changed, or our heroes are not being depicted as accurately as our "fairy tales" have told us. And just because this isn't your fairy tale? its ok for it to be changed and altered? Just because this isn't your heroes story doesn't make it ok to alter it, thats ignorant! This story book is the oldest of our kind (and has a fan base largest in the world), be it true, fake, altered, or whatever you think it.. It should be preserved, as should all great literature should be. All that being Said there should be a common ground found between the director, test groups, and production company. Aronofsky wouldn't be making a film without the production companies 125 million, and he should respect their opinion as well as the fans.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
1:28PM on 10/16/2013
Well said.
Well said.
1:28PM on 10/16/2013
Boom, that's the exact same point I just brought up. Good job, Heero. Directors are free to manipulate the source material however they want, but if you take everything some loved about the original story and toss it out the window you shouldn't be surprised when they get upset.
Boom, that's the exact same point I just brought up. Good job, Heero. Directors are free to manipulate the source material however they want, but if you take everything some loved about the original story and toss it out the window you shouldn't be surprised when they get upset.
3:10PM on 10/16/2013
I see what you're saying but this has nothing to do with the fans, it has to do with the studios.

The fans bitch about staying true to source material and the studios consistently ignore them. So why do the studios all of a sudden care if Noah is true to the Bible or not?

As for fucking with the source material, my opinion is that sometimes it works for me (Iron Man 3, Last Temptation of Christ) sometimes it doesn't (I Am Legend, World War Z) It all depends on why and how it is altered. I
I see what you're saying but this has nothing to do with the fans, it has to do with the studios.

The fans bitch about staying true to source material and the studios consistently ignore them. So why do the studios all of a sudden care if Noah is true to the Bible or not?

As for fucking with the source material, my opinion is that sometimes it works for me (Iron Man 3, Last Temptation of Christ) sometimes it doesn't (I Am Legend, World War Z) It all depends on why and how it is altered. I suspect that given Arronofsky's track record, he probably has good or interesting artistic reason for any alleged changes that were or were not made. If it was someone like Michael Bay I would be a bit more worried.

You also have to consider how many people who follow The Bible ACTUALLY have read it. It's been my experience that the number is very small.

But again, this isn't about the fans view on altering source material it's about the studio's which is grossly inconsistent to their past decisions.
3:19PM on 10/16/2013
Yea but that 125 million is essentially a purchase. They're purchasing the ability to make more money. When studio choose who to employ that where they truly hedge their bets. If they don't know what they're buying, then maybe they shouldn't buy it.
Yea but that 125 million is essentially a purchase. They're purchasing the ability to make more money. When studio choose who to employ that where they truly hedge their bets. If they don't know what they're buying, then maybe they shouldn't buy it.
4:39PM on 10/16/2013
Thanks Direction, Thanks Luke.

Hamslime: The reason why the production company are saying anything at all, is because of the 3 focus groups they held, on top of watching it themselves. They have alot invested in their product so they did their research and are making changes based on ppls comments. Regarding the source material, im not sure how much they changed. my premiss and argument is also based on ppl's comments below about how religious ppl are apparently not allowed to speak up.
Thanks Direction, Thanks Luke.

Hamslime: The reason why the production company are saying anything at all, is because of the 3 focus groups they held, on top of watching it themselves. They have alot invested in their product so they did their research and are making changes based on ppls comments. Regarding the source material, im not sure how much they changed. my premiss and argument is also based on ppl's comments below about how religious ppl are apparently not allowed to speak up. Everyone is entitled to speak up, no matter what "fairy tale" it is, and we condemn ppl for doing it when its convenient, and now we condemn a movie company for making changes based on fans. and condemn them when they don't. Basically its their money, they are going to make the decision that will please their mass audience to get their return.

scoot: A company purchased the rights to the film, then they HIRE the director. It is their film, not the director they hired with their money. Essentially the director is an employee who works for the production company. Everyone seems to forget that, and it becomes said directors film.
5:02PM on 10/16/2013
I understand and agree with you about the fans to a point. Although most fans thoughts on what would make a better comic book movie are not very good ones. That's why fan films on youtube are at best, REALLY GOOD... for a fan film. But I agree that it's silly that they bitch one way about source material and when it isn't "theirs" then it's okay.

As for the studio making money on this movie, instead of changing what the movie is after they already agreed to make it. I'm sure they had read
I understand and agree with you about the fans to a point. Although most fans thoughts on what would make a better comic book movie are not very good ones. That's why fan films on youtube are at best, REALLY GOOD... for a fan film. But I agree that it's silly that they bitch one way about source material and when it isn't "theirs" then it's okay.

As for the studio making money on this movie, instead of changing what the movie is after they already agreed to make it. I'm sure they had read the script and if not that's on them not Aronofsky, they should help perpetuate the controversy of the changes in the movie which is most likely what this article is. Just fake controversy made up by the studio to generate interest. (Good job studio, you got everyone's attention.

Now that I think about it, that explains why the studio all of a sudden seems to "care" about changes in the source material. It's not the fans, it's never because of the fans. They're gonna watch it regardless and the studios know this, it's why they buy rights for this stuff. (Although I'm pretty sure The Bible is public domain. I could be wrong though)
8:49PM on 10/16/2013
Very well said Heero. It's nice to see a movie fan with a level head.

As for hamslime I just want to point out that there is one major difference between the audience of comic book fans and Christians. There are only about several thousand (if that) "hardcore" comic book fans to get upset when they make a change to the character. There are over two billion Christians around the world. With comic book movies, pissing off a small portion of the hardcore fans (which are notoriously difficult
Very well said Heero. It's nice to see a movie fan with a level head.

As for hamslime I just want to point out that there is one major difference between the audience of comic book fans and Christians. There are only about several thousand (if that) "hardcore" comic book fans to get upset when they make a change to the character. There are over two billion Christians around the world. With comic book movies, pissing off a small portion of the hardcore fans (which are notoriously difficult to please as is) is a drop in the bucket compared to the 2 billion plus potential ticket buyers they may be missing out with Christians.
3:13AM on 10/17/2013
Of that 2 billion I suspect only a small percentage of that actually give a shit. If I'm wrong then perhaps Paramount should do a sequel to Faith Like Potatoes and REALLY rake it in. It's surprising that Kirk Cameron isn't the mega star he should be with a faithful fan base that is 2 billion strong.

The more I think about it the more I believe that this is all an advertising scheme. When Noah comes out, it will be the movie Aronofsky wanted to make, there will be controversy, and because of
Of that 2 billion I suspect only a small percentage of that actually give a shit. If I'm wrong then perhaps Paramount should do a sequel to Faith Like Potatoes and REALLY rake it in. It's surprising that Kirk Cameron isn't the mega star he should be with a faithful fan base that is 2 billion strong.

The more I think about it the more I believe that this is all an advertising scheme. When Noah comes out, it will be the movie Aronofsky wanted to make, there will be controversy, and because of that it will be a hit.
8:32PM on 10/17/2013
You lost me when you called the Bible great literature.
You lost me when you called the Bible great literature.
+8
1:17PM on 10/16/2013

Two Thoughts

1. Aaronofsky is pretty much an arthouse director through and through. They should have known darn well what they were getting into when they hired him and expecting him to turn out anything resembling a traditional tentpole film is just silly or at least naive.
2.On the otherhand, I really don't see how this is any different from making weird/ perhaps unnecessary changes to a comic book movie. In both instances you are taking a well known story that has a devout readership and pretty much
1. Aaronofsky is pretty much an arthouse director through and through. They should have known darn well what they were getting into when they hired him and expecting him to turn out anything resembling a traditional tentpole film is just silly or at least naive.
2.On the otherhand, I really don't see how this is any different from making weird/ perhaps unnecessary changes to a comic book movie. In both instances you are taking a well known story that has a devout readership and pretty much expecting them to be okay with you tossing the things that made them love the material to begin with right out the window. I'm sure a lot of Christians and Jews will be upset with this movie just as a lot of fans were upset with Iron Man 3 and Man of Steel, and I feel that they're just as entitled to be. Directors are free to spin the material however they like and the fans are free to hate it just as vocally as they like.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
1:08PM on 10/16/2013
Let Aronofsky tell his version of the story, let him present Noah as an eco-terrorist if he wants to. It would be a bad idea to try to please all the purists. And even though he is basing the movie on Noah, there are other legends of the great flood from other cultures, neither christians nor jews have the copyright to that story
Let Aronofsky tell his version of the story, let him present Noah as an eco-terrorist if he wants to. It would be a bad idea to try to please all the purists. And even though he is basing the movie on Noah, there are other legends of the great flood from other cultures, neither christians nor jews have the copyright to that story
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:57PM on 10/16/2013

Why is this a problem?

"...an example of a director not listening to those voices that would have been warning of the dangers of veering too far away from the biblical text."

You mean like World War Z?

Since when do studios care whether or not a film maker holds true to the source material?
"...an example of a director not listening to those voices that would have been warning of the dangers of veering too far away from the biblical text."

You mean like World War Z?

Since when do studios care whether or not a film maker holds true to the source material?
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+8
12:27PM on 10/16/2013

It isn't that they should trust his vision...

It is that they hired him likely knowing his vision. If he has strayed from what he pitched and wrote before giving him $125 million, then fuck him, they don't owe him any level of deference to his vision.

if he is just putting to film what he told them he was going to do, fuck them.
It is that they hired him likely knowing his vision. If he has strayed from what he pitched and wrote before giving him $125 million, then fuck him, they don't owe him any level of deference to his vision.

if he is just putting to film what he told them he was going to do, fuck them.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
3:18PM on 10/16/2013
Yeah. I'm sure Aronofsky pulled a fast one on Paramount and "strayed" from his original pitch. You know, because nobody from Paramount had any idea of what he was really working on. It's a conspiracy by Aronofsky! To the gallows with this one!!!
A not so wise man once said that this "reveals your lack of understanding of what is actually the issue."
Yeah. I'm sure Aronofsky pulled a fast one on Paramount and "strayed" from his original pitch. You know, because nobody from Paramount had any idea of what he was really working on. It's a conspiracy by Aronofsky! To the gallows with this one!!!
A not so wise man once said that this "reveals your lack of understanding of what is actually the issue."
12:27PM on 10/16/2013

Let DA do what he wants.

Seriously, let the man work his magic. If people get offended then so be it. Nobody cares and few people bring religion into the movies they see. I don't believe in fairy tales and I see this movie as being one too. Let DA just do hat he wants, he has proven in the past that he knows what is best for his movies (Black Swan, Wrestler). Don't let fear of religious backlash hurt this movie.
Seriously, let the man work his magic. If people get offended then so be it. Nobody cares and few people bring religion into the movies they see. I don't believe in fairy tales and I see this movie as being one too. Let DA just do hat he wants, he has proven in the past that he knows what is best for his movies (Black Swan, Wrestler). Don't let fear of religious backlash hurt this movie.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:25PM on 10/16/2013
If Christians want a more "Christian" take on this story, forget it. This is Darren Aronofsky, not fucking Kirk Cameron.
If Christians want a more "Christian" take on this story, forget it. This is Darren Aronofsky, not fucking Kirk Cameron.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:31PM on 10/16/2013
it has nothing to do with what Christians want, it has to do with what the people paying for the movie want so they can recoup their money and profit. and if what they want is for Christians to be appealed to, that is whose opinion is the topic of discussion.

making this a topic to simply mock Christians reveals your lack of understanding of what is actually the issue.
it has nothing to do with what Christians want, it has to do with what the people paying for the movie want so they can recoup their money and profit. and if what they want is for Christians to be appealed to, that is whose opinion is the topic of discussion.

making this a topic to simply mock Christians reveals your lack of understanding of what is actually the issue.
2:12PM on 10/16/2013
So they wanted a complete retelling of a four page story by a guy who has been frequently quoted as saying he's an atheist, but still has some of the cultural aspects of the Jewish religion? Makes perfect sense...
So they wanted a complete retelling of a four page story by a guy who has been frequently quoted as saying he's an atheist, but still has some of the cultural aspects of the Jewish religion? Makes perfect sense...
3:11PM on 10/16/2013
"it has nothing to do with what Christians want, it has to do with what the people paying for the movie want so they can recoup their money and profit. and if what they want is for Christians to be appealed to, that is whose opinion is the topic of discussion.

making this a topic to simply mock Christians reveals your lack of understanding of what is actually the issue."

Your reply contradicts itself. Nice work.
"it has nothing to do with what Christians want, it has to do with what the people paying for the movie want so they can recoup their money and profit. and if what they want is for Christians to be appealed to, that is whose opinion is the topic of discussion.

making this a topic to simply mock Christians reveals your lack of understanding of what is actually the issue."

Your reply contradicts itself. Nice work.
-4
12:24PM on 10/16/2013
No big surprises. I mean, what a travesty it would be if Aronofsky were to defy people. Everyone knows we can't do anything to offend the religious and their precious beliefs. Sigh. But I guess the studio wants to make their money back. My question is: why would they pick Aronofsky for a movie like this instead of a safe director if they don't want to offend anyone? Aronofsky isn't the kind of guy who makes a safe film for a general audience. He's a niche director who makes art house fare. I
No big surprises. I mean, what a travesty it would be if Aronofsky were to defy people. Everyone knows we can't do anything to offend the religious and their precious beliefs. Sigh. But I guess the studio wants to make their money back. My question is: why would they pick Aronofsky for a movie like this instead of a safe director if they don't want to offend anyone? Aronofsky isn't the kind of guy who makes a safe film for a general audience. He's a niche director who makes art house fare. I guess they thought that because The Wrestler and Black Swan were popular, handing him 150 mil. to make a bible film would bring in an audience. Now, Paramount knows better.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
1:00PM on 10/16/2013
Would it be okay for anyone to tread on your beliefs? Why would it be ok for anyone to Tread on anyone's precious beliefs?

Peoples faith is exactly that, it is precious to them... i don't understand why its not ok for anyone to stand up for what they believe in. Not sure when believing in God became such a bad thing.. Sigh.
Would it be okay for anyone to tread on your beliefs? Why would it be ok for anyone to Tread on anyone's precious beliefs?

Peoples faith is exactly that, it is precious to them... i don't understand why its not ok for anyone to stand up for what they believe in. Not sure when believing in God became such a bad thing.. Sigh.
2:05PM on 10/16/2013
Heero, it became such a bad thing when people started killing each other in the name of their god(s). I wonder how Christians would feel if when Ridley Scott's Moses' film finally releases and he doesn't include the part where Moses receives permission to kill thousands of infidels?
Heero, it became such a bad thing when people started killing each other in the name of their god(s). I wonder how Christians would feel if when Ridley Scott's Moses' film finally releases and he doesn't include the part where Moses receives permission to kill thousands of infidels?
12:17PM on 10/16/2013
You get what you get. You hire Aronofsky and you're going to get a divisive film. Just because Black Swan was a crossover success doesn't mean that he's a mainstream director. If the studio was smart they would stoke controversy about the film and market it as "the most controversial movie of the year".
You get what you get. You hire Aronofsky and you're going to get a divisive film. Just because Black Swan was a crossover success doesn't mean that he's a mainstream director. If the studio was smart they would stoke controversy about the film and market it as "the most controversial movie of the year".
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:16PM on 10/16/2013

As a non-believer . . .

. . . I'm still intrigued for the film regardless of the cut.
. . . I'm still intrigued for the film regardless of the cut.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:15PM on 10/16/2013
If it is true that Aronofsky is trying to make a political point with Noah then yeah I have to side with Paramount here. But I have a feeling we don't really know the entire story.
If it is true that Aronofsky is trying to make a political point with Noah then yeah I have to side with Paramount here. But I have a feeling we don't really know the entire story.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+9
12:08PM on 10/16/2013
I'm excited about this movie now. I'd much prefer a controversial and challenging religious movie than a version that plays like a Sunday school lesson. I hope Darren Aronofsky sticks to his guns on this one.
I'm excited about this movie now. I'd much prefer a controversial and challenging religious movie than a version that plays like a Sunday school lesson. I hope Darren Aronofsky sticks to his guns on this one.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+2
12:06PM on 10/16/2013
Why Paramount? I understand Aronofsky probably wants to play the studio ball game, so he can get other movies funded, since he almost directed Wolverine. But Fox and Paramount just seem like bad ideas for a director like him. I'm sure Lionsgate has the money to cough up and would back off, Focus Features could swing it, hell, even Warner Brothers treats big name directors well (for the most part).
Why Paramount? I understand Aronofsky probably wants to play the studio ball game, so he can get other movies funded, since he almost directed Wolverine. But Fox and Paramount just seem like bad ideas for a director like him. I'm sure Lionsgate has the money to cough up and would back off, Focus Features could swing it, hell, even Warner Brothers treats big name directors well (for the most part).
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:06PM on 10/16/2013
Double
Double
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:06PM on 10/16/2013
Double
Double
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:58AM on 10/16/2013

Thumbs down me all you want

We wouldn't want to offend Christian movie goers now would we? I'm sorry, but this is a fair tale and whoever takes this myth serious, completely deserves to be offended. I'm sure the movie will do just fine. I'm still a bit confused why Aronofsky is doing a biblical movie considering he's an Atheist.

I will go see this movie but I know not to take it serious. you know, like The Lord of The Rings.
We wouldn't want to offend Christian movie goers now would we? I'm sorry, but this is a fair tale and whoever takes this myth serious, completely deserves to be offended. I'm sure the movie will do just fine. I'm still a bit confused why Aronofsky is doing a biblical movie considering he's an Atheist.

I will go see this movie but I know not to take it serious. you know, like The Lord of The Rings.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:01PM on 10/16/2013
As an atheist, I can personally say I still enjoy certain religious stories similar to how I like great poetic epics. Aronofsky is an artist, he doesn't filter himself when it comes to picking content to explore.
As an atheist, I can personally say I still enjoy certain religious stories similar to how I like great poetic epics. Aronofsky is an artist, he doesn't filter himself when it comes to picking content to explore.
12:49PM on 10/16/2013
good job missing the point. while you may be fine with offending christians(are you also cool with offending muslims?), there is still a STORY that should be adhered to. kind of like how the hobbit introduced a ton of shit that the book didn't have and the fans of the book shit their collective pants, this movie needs to adhere to the actual story, believed to be real or not.
good job missing the point. while you may be fine with offending christians(are you also cool with offending muslims?), there is still a STORY that should be adhered to. kind of like how the hobbit introduced a ton of shit that the book didn't have and the fans of the book shit their collective pants, this movie needs to adhere to the actual story, believed to be real or not.
1:48PM on 10/16/2013
Sequencer, I don't go out of my way to offend them but I see all religions the same. It doesn't bother me if someone doesn't like my opinion.

I understand where you are coming from but the story is short. I may be wrong and correct me if I am but I think it's only 2 or 3 chapters in Genesis ( I may be an Atheist but I was brought up Roman Catholic and still remember the stories.) Of course it needed to be changed if they want to make this movie epic and of course people are going to pissed
Sequencer, I don't go out of my way to offend them but I see all religions the same. It doesn't bother me if someone doesn't like my opinion.

I understand where you are coming from but the story is short. I may be wrong and correct me if I am but I think it's only 2 or 3 chapters in Genesis ( I may be an Atheist but I was brought up Roman Catholic and still remember the stories.) Of course it needed to be changed if they want to make this movie epic and of course people are going to pissed about certain things. You can't please everyone. To me, It doesn't matter what they do to the story since I don't consider it historically fact. I just want it to be a damn good movie and with Aronofsky directing, I know it will be.
2:31PM on 10/16/2013
My g/f is christian and she believes in all that bible nonsense and that god will save her and shit. whenever she tells me I turn the other cheek and try not to listen to it. I am jewish but not that religious at all. I think religion is just silly but if it helps people so beat it. But I hate when people get their panties in a bunch over it, thats stupid. And the really funny thing that makes me laugh is the bible is so damn violent its filled of rape, murder, revenge, brutality, sex, the list
My g/f is christian and she believes in all that bible nonsense and that god will save her and shit. whenever she tells me I turn the other cheek and try not to listen to it. I am jewish but not that religious at all. I think religion is just silly but if it helps people so beat it. But I hate when people get their panties in a bunch over it, thats stupid. And the really funny thing that makes me laugh is the bible is so damn violent its filled of rape, murder, revenge, brutality, sex, the list goes on. All those things I just said people who study the bible and what not preach against those so called things, yet they are filled from the brim in the bible so what they are preaching isn't nothing so in the end they are fuckin hypocrites. Sorry for the rant. but its the truth. And its a myth, its not real, if this was about zeus would people be flippin a shit nooo because they know zeus isn't real but Oh my my my when its noah and some other religious mumblejumbo they go apeshit. It was written by people like us now who prob were on some heavy shrooms and they were prob laughing about it saying HAHAHAHAHAHA stupid humans in the future will praise this in a book and read all about and worthship it.
11:30AM on 10/16/2013

The Flood Myth is not exclusive Christianity

Darren is an exceptional director who doesn't need to be tamed. Let the man do what he does best. Who cares if the budget has exceeded the price tag the studio quoted him for (they're loaded anyway--especially from iron man 3). This will make loads of cash internationally so who cares what a small group of Christians and Jews thought? Btw, I'm not a Christian, but I loved the martyr gory flick known as The Passion of Christ (although The Last Temptation was a better film).
Darren is an exceptional director who doesn't need to be tamed. Let the man do what he does best. Who cares if the budget has exceeded the price tag the studio quoted him for (they're loaded anyway--especially from iron man 3). This will make loads of cash internationally so who cares what a small group of Christians and Jews thought? Btw, I'm not a Christian, but I loved the martyr gory flick known as The Passion of Christ (although The Last Temptation was a better film).
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:30AM on 10/16/2013
Double
Double
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:30AM on 10/16/2013
Fuck Paramount and fuck the religious assholes who don't like that their made up story is getting a different treatment.
Fuck Paramount and fuck the religious assholes who don't like that their made up story is getting a different treatment.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:37PM on 10/16/2013
ya fuck anyone who has an opinion on stories that matter to them,, god forbid ppl tamper with original material of a comic book.. but when it comes to religious ppl fuckem right? i mean comic books are much more worthy of defence of source material, ppl who have faith in something should be called assholes for wanting one of the oldest stories ever told protected.. Not like any Superhero stories are "made up" , and no one wants to see their heroes origins tampered with..

ya fuckem
ya fuck anyone who has an opinion on stories that matter to them,, god forbid ppl tamper with original material of a comic book.. but when it comes to religious ppl fuckem right? i mean comic books are much more worthy of defence of source material, ppl who have faith in something should be called assholes for wanting one of the oldest stories ever told protected.. Not like any Superhero stories are "made up" , and no one wants to see their heroes origins tampered with..

ya fuckem all and their ignorance , Keep it classy MooPoo
-2
11:29AM on 10/16/2013

Hate to say it but...

I think this movie will prolly be good. In the VERY LEAST it'll be an interesting failure. But I kinda expected this and I def wouldn't have dropped 125$ million if I felt the script could offend ignorant Christians (and no - of course not all Christians are ignorant but there's like a small group who it seems like almost TRIES to get offended by entertainment), and I feel like it's pretty safe to say that a Darren Aranofsky film based on a character/story from the bible is going to offend
I think this movie will prolly be good. In the VERY LEAST it'll be an interesting failure. But I kinda expected this and I def wouldn't have dropped 125$ million if I felt the script could offend ignorant Christians (and no - of course not all Christians are ignorant but there's like a small group who it seems like almost TRIES to get offended by entertainment), and I feel like it's pretty safe to say that a Darren Aranofsky film based on a character/story from the bible is going to offend Christians who believe the bible word for word, and from a business perspective, that's could very easily hurt the movie. So if I were bankrolling this film, I don't think I could give him a budget more than 10-20 million. This is gonna be a real tricky balance, and I'm interested to see if he does it, or even cares, and just makes his own film, but I'm looking forward to the reaction of this wondering if they'll be stupid protests and things
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:06AM on 10/16/2013

The Flood Myth is not exclusive to Christianity

Darren is an exceptional director who doesn't need to be tamed. Let the man do what he does best. Who cares if the budget has exceeded the price tag the studio quoted him for (they're loaded anyway--especially from iron man 3). This will make loads of cash internationally so who cares what a small group of Christians and Jews thought? Btw, I'm not a Christian, but I loved the martyr gory flick known as The Passion of Christ (although The Last Temptation was a better film).
Darren is an exceptional director who doesn't need to be tamed. Let the man do what he does best. Who cares if the budget has exceeded the price tag the studio quoted him for (they're loaded anyway--especially from iron man 3). This will make loads of cash internationally so who cares what a small group of Christians and Jews thought? Btw, I'm not a Christian, but I loved the martyr gory flick known as The Passion of Christ (although The Last Temptation was a better film).
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:03AM on 10/16/2013
Some how I get the feeling this is another WALLE type situation. As much as the movie is cute and cuddly there is also a serious social and environmental message hidden amongst the story. While some people like the story they do not like the hidden message because it goes against the ideals of certain individuals. That is why there is such a sudden hate towards this.
Some how I get the feeling this is another WALLE type situation. As much as the movie is cute and cuddly there is also a serious social and environmental message hidden amongst the story. While some people like the story they do not like the hidden message because it goes against the ideals of certain individuals. That is why there is such a sudden hate towards this.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
10:34AM on 10/16/2013
Sock it to 'em, Darren! Fuck Paramount. That's what I say. Christians get the happy, cuddly version of this tall tale in that children's novel called, "The Bible". This is a movie. A movie by a master of his craft.
Sock it to 'em, Darren! Fuck Paramount. That's what I say. Christians get the happy, cuddly version of this tall tale in that children's novel called, "The Bible". This is a movie. A movie by a master of his craft.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:10AM on 10/16/2013
I agree. I think most Christians wanted an Evan Almighty remake with a serious tone. Too bad they're getting something from a guy who likes to focus on the psychological problems of his characters (something Jews/Christians want to pretend wasn't prevalent for the people who made their books).
I agree. I think most Christians wanted an Evan Almighty remake with a serious tone. Too bad they're getting something from a guy who likes to focus on the psychological problems of his characters (something Jews/Christians want to pretend wasn't prevalent for the people who made their books).
10:31AM on 10/16/2013
I think letting a director like Aronofsky interpret an age-old story from the Bible is a great decision. If anyone can put a new, interesting spin on things, it's him. Like JimThePariah and man_of_bat, I'm Christian and I am glad that a Bible story is getting the epic cinema treatment just as in the golden age of Hollywood. I'm sure there will be aspects that go against tradition or that audience members will disagree with, but I trust that Aronofsky did not set out to make the film to blindly
I think letting a director like Aronofsky interpret an age-old story from the Bible is a great decision. If anyone can put a new, interesting spin on things, it's him. Like JimThePariah and man_of_bat, I'm Christian and I am glad that a Bible story is getting the epic cinema treatment just as in the golden age of Hollywood. I'm sure there will be aspects that go against tradition or that audience members will disagree with, but I trust that Aronofsky did not set out to make the film to blindly step on toes or ignite controversy, and am looking forward to how it will turn out.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
-14
10:13AM on 10/16/2013

people need to calm down

Dear Everyone (Christians, Studio Execs, etc),
IT'S A MOVIE, A MOVIE. Not a documentary, not a tale based on true events. The Bible IS a work of fiction. No different than Grimms Fairy Tales. I think it's great that people are using it's insane and creative stories and giving them a spin and a new life.
Dear Everyone (Christians, Studio Execs, etc),
IT'S A MOVIE, A MOVIE. Not a documentary, not a tale based on true events. The Bible IS a work of fiction. No different than Grimms Fairy Tales. I think it's great that people are using it's insane and creative stories and giving them a spin and a new life.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:13AM on 10/16/2013
You're getting down voted because people don't want to hear that their religion couldn't possible be wrong in comparison to the thousands of other religions.
You're getting down voted because people don't want to hear that their religion couldn't possible be wrong in comparison to the thousands of other religions.
+6
10:04AM on 10/16/2013
There have been plenty of movies based off of fiction books that have changed the character, revised a character or straight out removed a character, this book is no different. Let the director direct the movie he wants.
There have been plenty of movies based off of fiction books that have changed the character, revised a character or straight out removed a character, this book is no different. Let the director direct the movie he wants.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
10:00AM on 10/16/2013

hmm

They should leave him alone. Christians will flock to it even if it's not accurate. I will go just because it's Aronofsky.
They should leave him alone. Christians will flock to it even if it's not accurate. I will go just because it's Aronofsky.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:57AM on 10/16/2013
Even if Noah decides he wants to make love to the animals by the third act of the movie it will still gross more than $125 million. Christians and Catholics eat this type of shit up.
Even if Noah decides he wants to make love to the animals by the third act of the movie it will still gross more than $125 million. Christians and Catholics eat this type of shit up.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+17
9:57AM on 10/16/2013
If they wanted a less polarizing film, they should've gone with a different director. Everyone knows who Aronofsky is and how he works. The best thing to do now would simply be to step back and let him do his thing. The movie will be far better for it in the end.
If they wanted a less polarizing film, they should've gone with a different director. Everyone knows who Aronofsky is and how he works. The best thing to do now would simply be to step back and let him do his thing. The movie will be far better for it in the end.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:48AM on 10/16/2013

just remember

Passion of the Christ was a huge risk and look how much that movie made.
Passion of the Christ was a huge risk and look how much that movie made.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:39PM on 10/16/2013
Passion of the Christ as a huge risk because it was the first Movie to come out of Holly Wood that kept true to the original content, and actually blame a race for the death of Jesus as the bible says, along with actually seeing him rise from the dead. Every other film was always edited to not blame the jews for having Jesus killed. That was the risk, and it was a risk cause Mel decided to pay for it himself, otherwise no production company would have allowed it. The point im making here,
Passion of the Christ as a huge risk because it was the first Movie to come out of Holly Wood that kept true to the original content, and actually blame a race for the death of Jesus as the bible says, along with actually seeing him rise from the dead. Every other film was always edited to not blame the jews for having Jesus killed. That was the risk, and it was a risk cause Mel decided to pay for it himself, otherwise no production company would have allowed it. The point im making here, is that they stayed true to the content in the bible, and it was never done before in that regard.
2:21PM on 10/16/2013
Actually, PotC was a Mel Gibson propaganda film that painted the Jews as a bunch of evil doers who didn't like Jesus because he was disrupting their power over the people.(Although, Christians like to forget that Jesus and his disciples were in fact Jews themselves.) However, if you actually listen to historical scholars it was the Roman concentration who were ultimately responsible. The movie succeeded because Western religions like martyrs. They like blood and this idea of sacrificial idols
Actually, PotC was a Mel Gibson propaganda film that painted the Jews as a bunch of evil doers who didn't like Jesus because he was disrupting their power over the people.(Although, Christians like to forget that Jesus and his disciples were in fact Jews themselves.) However, if you actually listen to historical scholars it was the Roman concentration who were ultimately responsible. The movie succeeded because Western religions like martyrs. They like blood and this idea of sacrificial idols who would be willing to die for them. It's actually quite lethargic when you think about it.
9:43AM on 10/16/2013

Christian and loving Aronofsky's idea

Hold on here. Before we start blasting any persons of a denomination I've gotta admit this sounds a lot like us reacting to fan news.

I actually agree with Jeff knite because that is a lot of money to invest on one director. There are multiple cuts Aronofksy could do. Just go with a Theatrical release to make the studio happy and let the Director's cut be even better. I'm all for him doing the cut the way he wants to but the at the same time if it doesn't make money then we're that much
Hold on here. Before we start blasting any persons of a denomination I've gotta admit this sounds a lot like us reacting to fan news.

I actually agree with Jeff knite because that is a lot of money to invest on one director. There are multiple cuts Aronofksy could do. Just go with a Theatrical release to make the studio happy and let the Director's cut be even better. I'm all for him doing the cut the way he wants to but the at the same time if it doesn't make money then we're that much farther from us getting better Aronofksy projects. And about the whole Christian issue: aren't we the same way when a director deviates from comic source material or what's canon? Can't they have their fan moments too? The Bible is technically their beloved comic, I'm sure I'd be a little aggravated if it was altered differently... regardless if it was for the better or worse. I'm just keeping an open mind here.

But again, the idea of having Noah as the first environmentalist sounds amazing. I never though of it that way. This shouldn't be marketed as a definitive "re-telling" of the original story but at the same time Paramount should earn some of it's money back too. Can't wait to for this film to come out and see how this develops!
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:38AM on 10/16/2013
Darren's forgetting who paid for the movie. As someone who works in film and has to work with clients often regarding final cuts- he needs to find a middle ground, professionally speaking.

The studio, while not near the vicinity of always "right," is very good at one thing: making money. They have it down to a science, so things like test screenings are apart of the process. Most often, the test screening leads to positive changes.

28 Days Later would have had Cillian Murphy dying alone
Darren's forgetting who paid for the movie. As someone who works in film and has to work with clients often regarding final cuts- he needs to find a middle ground, professionally speaking.

The studio, while not near the vicinity of always "right," is very good at one thing: making money. They have it down to a science, so things like test screenings are apart of the process. Most often, the test screening leads to positive changes.

28 Days Later would have had Cillian Murphy dying alone in a hospital bed if it wasn't for a test screening.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
1:36PM on 10/16/2013
"Most often, the test screening leads to positive changes."

I've heard plenty of filmmakers say otherwise.

Not saying they can't be helpful, but they are testing for a very specific audience, hardly an indicator of how the general public will react.
"Most often, the test screening leads to positive changes."

I've heard plenty of filmmakers say otherwise.

Not saying they can't be helpful, but they are testing for a very specific audience, hardly an indicator of how the general public will react.
1:01AM on 10/18/2013
Oh you mean like the test screenings they had for John Carter. I understand.
Oh you mean like the test screenings they had for John Carter. I understand.
9:38AM on 10/16/2013

I'm a Christian

I say let the director have the final cut. I've seen plenty of movies that depict various faiths and religions in a less than savory light, but The Last Temptation of Christ didn't make me upset or make me question my beliefs it actually made my faith stronger because it made me confront things I would otherwise not want to confront about temptation and taking the easy path. If I wanted to hear/see the story of Noah I would just go study it in the Bible and other religious texts. I would like
I say let the director have the final cut. I've seen plenty of movies that depict various faiths and religions in a less than savory light, but The Last Temptation of Christ didn't make me upset or make me question my beliefs it actually made my faith stronger because it made me confront things I would otherwise not want to confront about temptation and taking the easy path. If I wanted to hear/see the story of Noah I would just go study it in the Bible and other religious texts. I would like to see somebody else's point of view on Noah, not a cookie cutter studio version to generate unneeded profits by exploiting multiple religious institutions.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:43AM on 10/16/2013
Amen to that brother!
Amen to that brother!
9:51AM on 10/16/2013
Yep, couldn't have said it better myself.
Yep, couldn't have said it better myself.
10:26AM on 10/16/2013
This is the best comment of the day. Amen also!
This is the best comment of the day. Amen also!
9:26AM on 10/16/2013
Studio execs, religious fanatics, etc., keep your paws out of this.
Studio execs, religious fanatics, etc., keep your paws out of this.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:22AM on 10/16/2013
If I make a deal with you to make me a product and hand you $125 million to create that product and you come back to me with your version of said product instead of mine.. You know what, shit is going to hit the fan.. I would be fucking pissed. I love Aronofsky, but when you're working for the studio, you're working for the studio. You can't take their money and do what you want with it, because you are an AR-TEEST. Ofcourse they hired you for your signature and because of your talent, but the
If I make a deal with you to make me a product and hand you $125 million to create that product and you come back to me with your version of said product instead of mine.. You know what, shit is going to hit the fan.. I would be fucking pissed. I love Aronofsky, but when you're working for the studio, you're working for the studio. You can't take their money and do what you want with it, because you are an AR-TEEST. Ofcourse they hired you for your signature and because of your talent, but the film is still there's under contract. That's just how i feel.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
10:41AM on 10/16/2013
1. Then hire Brett Ratner

2. This wasn't there movie. This was Aronofsky's movie. He developed it, pitched it, got rejected everywhere, made it into a French comic, re-pitched it, and they agreed to make it. That's the risk they take.
1. Then hire Brett Ratner

2. This wasn't there movie. This was Aronofsky's movie. He developed it, pitched it, got rejected everywhere, made it into a French comic, re-pitched it, and they agreed to make it. That's the risk they take.
9:12AM on 10/16/2013
What that guy thinks the duties of a director are is depressing?
What that guy thinks the duties of a director are is depressing?
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:07AM on 10/16/2013
This doesn't seem at all surprising.
This doesn't seem at all surprising.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
8:55AM on 10/16/2013
I understand it is just business, but let the guy do his thing. He pisses excellence.
I understand it is just business, but let the guy do his thing. He pisses excellence.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
8:45AM on 10/16/2013
C'mon, Paramount. Let him decide!

C'mon, Paramount. Let him decide!

Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
View All Comments

Latest Movie News Headlines


Top
Loading...
JoBlo's T-Shirt Shoppe | support our site... Wear Our Gear!