criterionforum.org

I haven't seen the new one yet but the producers brought this on themselves by splitting the last book into two movies and not filming both simultaneously. When it bombed, I'm sure no one wanted to fund a finish to the series even if there was only one film left. Seriously doubt some of the name cast carry over to a TV movie unless their contracts foresaw and stipulated this

domino harvey wrote:Seriously doubt some of the name cast carry over to a TV movie unless their contracts foresaw and stipulated this

The idea is to finalize the storylines involving the current cast and to introduce a new cast, who would then continue the series on either a traditional or streaming network.

Also:

No deals appear to have been made, and sources say that the studio has yet to pitch the project to networks.

Reportedly circling World War Z 2

This is such a far-out weird pairing and I want it to happen.

I mean, if he's made it this far into discussions about this movie without going mad remembering Alien 3, maybe there's something there.

This is just about as strange as the PTA Pinocchio thing, and I hope it goes the same way.

Fincher must have his hands in the UN pot, or is under threat by them, otherwise why would he do it?

I think we all know why.

Oh c'mon, we're not talking about the BFI here.

The Narrator Returns wrote:The final sequel to Divergent has been deemed too good for theaters, will be made as a TV movie with a spin-off TV series

Woodley: "I’m not necessarily interested in doing a television show". That Lionsgate didn't even bother to consult the stars of the film before floating this idea is ridiculous

It seems highly unlikely this fourth installment of the Divergent series will ever materialize, so I've moved discussion here. Should production somehow occur, I will move the discussion elsewhere

Matt wrote:That movie is never going to happen. If I had a dime for every time I saw an actress' name (or, more usually, a pop singer's name) attached to a Janis Joplin biopic, I'd...have a lot of dimes.

Yup. Shelved indefinitely.

Numero Trois wrote:Judging by this outstanding Grover Lewis Rolling Stone article, an Allman Bros. pic would be pretty good in the right hands.

Butch Trucks wrote this, what's effectively a reply to the article 12 years ago after it was mentioned in the New York Times.

flyonthewall2983 wrote:This IMDB trivia tidbit from Gone Girl kind of says it all

On set one day, Affleck changed the lens setting on a camera an almost indiscernible amount, betting a crew member that Fincher wouldn't notice. Affleck lost the bet as Fincher brought up, "Why does the camera look a little dim?"

I wonder if he's gone the route of his friend Soderbergh and is just dedicating himself to television now. There's not been much news as far as movies he's been attached to since Gone Girl, and everything since has seemed to revolve around his brief time developing stuff for HBO and now his 2nd Netflix series Mindhunters.

I've heard he's working on a remake of Hitchcock's Strangers on a Train with Ben Affleck and Gilliam Flynn.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0455788/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

He was in the mix to replace J. A. Bayona on the now-indefinitely-delayed World War Z sequel. If you believe the scuttlebutt he still wants to do it, but Paramount's CEO is supposedly unsure whether the movie should be made at all.

You have to question if he's suffering from some memory-loss if he's considering doing a big action/horror/sci-fi sequel. Or that maybe he's thinking if it's for his buddy it's all good. Or that maybe seeing so many potentially good projects go down the drain has been that debilitating to him.

It's probably just about money. He was originally attached to direct Jobs but was replaced by Danny Boyle after Fincher refused to direct the film for less than $10 million. The financiers balked stating that was a payday reserved for summer blockbusters.

The Fanciful Norwegian wrote:He was in the mix to replace J. A. Bayona on the now-indefinitely-delayed World War Z sequel. If you believe the scuttlebutt he still wants to do it, but Paramount's CEO is supposedly unsure whether the movie should be made at all.

Probably smarter for Paramount's CEO to develop a time machine and unmake the first one.

Now back to our regularly scheduled programming.

"Close" to a deal. Nothing is green-lit yet.

This was leaked for leverage, it's happening

Eh, I'll believe it when Paramount releases a one-sheet and a trailer. There's still plenty of time for this to fall apart, even if all the talent is lined up.

At any rate, it blows my mind that a studio is willing to shell out money for this: a sequel to a serviceable-but-already forgotten movie that will be over a half-decade old before the new one comes out, starring an actor way past his peak drawing power, long after the zombie fad has passed. If that's a worthwhile business proposition, then anything is.

The first movie was a total disaster during production, costing way, way more than it was supposed to and coming in super later and not being that great but still managed to overcome that to a tidy profit; I expect the thinking is that if this can be done without any production hassle it'd be a big moneymaker for the studio

I won't believe it til the press tour for World War Z 3 when Brad Pitt is on the Tonight Show and Fallon says, "So, this is the third film in the series," and Pitt doesn't correct him and no one in the studio audience acts confused but instead sits quietly in mass confirmation that the second one occurred

As a zombie film I found the first film rather rote and uninspiring, but when looked at from the perspective of a WHO representative/UN peacekeeper observing horror from a safe distance before putting down dissent in a brutal manner; or a megastar celebrity's whistlestop tour of world locations with his ever-growing entourage, I thought it was pretty good! I'm still not sure whether that aspect of the first film was entirely intentional or not, but hopefully the second film might even expand on that satirical element!

I thought the first movie was fine for what it was, but the only upside of Fincher spending months or years on this project (outside of the release of an unusually well-made blockbuster) would be if it earns him enough financial studio credibility to more easily fund a couple more original/personal projects.