You are not logged in.
Twilight has entered the top 100 films of all time.
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/domestic.htm
Beginning on Thursday 3/5, for five days, Access Hollywood will be running the Twilight DVD deleted scenes. Michael will probably be shown.
Check your local listings.
I can speak to whether or not his wanting to go back to movies was a "bad move or just bad timing." It was neither. It was bad brains.
FWIW casting directors have a very short memory. They basically look at the last thing you did. So even though Chris has an incredible body of work, as soon as he left TV the reason he couldn't get cast in a movie was because he was seen as a TV actor. Michael was in the exact same boat. Casting directors couldn't get over that. Twilight was a big breakthrough and he was very lucky to get it because he was doomed to only work the small screen.
Chris needs to be bankable, i.e., have a lead role in a film that does good box office. That's when the casting directors will notice him.
It's a catch-22.
In case anyone missed this saga. Particularly how Nikki describes him:
This would get me very angry if it weren't so pathetic. Because Harvey Weinstein constantly pleads poverty on behalf of his The Weinstein Co so that filmmakers will dig into their own wallets for re-shoots that he demands yet won't fund. But suddenly he's got big bucks to spend on the nation's highest priced lawyers, Bert Fields and David Boies, to fight Lionsgate over control of Push: Based On The Novel By Sapphire which may have won awards at the Sundance Film Festival but which you, me, and the world knows isn't going to make a dime. (Though I personally encourage the film biz to support these urban dramas and let them try to find an audience.) Now there are two dueling lawsuits: one by Lionsgate claiming that TWC has no right, title or interest to the film, and the other by TWC claiming sales agent Cinetic Media promised the theatrical rights to Harv & Co and even went to contract but the pic landed with Lionsgate. Deal or no deal? It's gonna take a suitcase of cash to find out -- which could have been better spent on promoting Push or other urban indies.
Having followed the careers of dozens of actors in a similar league over the years, one can see patterns emerging. There are 3 main routes to go (you guys probably know this already):
1) Indie forever (Trevor Morgan, Ryan Kelley, Rory Culkin -- so far, at least)
2) Indies then Hollywood movies and rarely, if ever, going back (Shia LaBeouf -- so far, at least)
3) Indies, occasional Hollywood movie to keep food on the table and get good scripts coming in, alternating (Johnny Depp, Keanu Reeves, and possibly -- finally -- Emile Hirsch, Michael Angarano, Michael Welch -- although the "Hollywood movies" they did were really indies)
We don't yet know where Anton will fall but I hope it's #3.
To my mind, #3 is the way to go. Depp and Reeves are the most-often cited examples of actors who have used indies as a launching pad to stardom, but stayed true to their roots. That's what most indie actors want. Emile thought he had it when Speed came along. We all know what happened there. But Milk has helped put him on the map, although he has yet to have that really big movie. Angarano got it with Forbidden Kingdom. Welch if you count Twilight. Technically those weren't studio films but it's not about technicalities -- it's about mass appeal and box office.
Anton really scored big and lightning struck twice, to mix metaphors. Just 2 years ago he was a relatively unknown indie actor. Look how rapidly things can change.
Chris is at the level Anton, Emile, Michael Welch, and Michael Angarano were 2 years ago. In fact, just a year ago we saying how Welch needed that jumping-off point and were hoping it would be Twilight, and we were right.
All it takes is one film, and Chris needs that film.
I sure hope he turns it down, or at least does some indies between now and then. One tentpole -- maybe two in a row -- but three??? Sorry, but real actors do Hollywood movies in order to do indies, and he'd better get back to doing what got him there in the first place. Knowing Anton I'm sure that's his plan.
"Ever notice how the colors of the real world only seem real when we see them on a movie screen?" - Alex, A Clockwork Orange.
:applause::applause::applause:
You can see Michael onscreen with Dakota Fanning!
No, not in New Moon, although it's a distinct possibility. I'm talking about the small screen. Michael and Dakota played brother and sister on an episode of Malcolm in the Middle that first aired on January 21, 2001 (Michael was 13).
It will air on Tuesday 3/3 at 2 PM Eastern and again on Wednesday 3/4 at 7 AM Eastern on FX.
EDITED my previous post with new info.
The latest Early Report just out still says "select markets."
Interestingly, though, Adventureland hits 1000+ screens on the exact same day. I doubt that Jesse Eisenberg is very happy.
It's funny, the one thing I left out (and was going to go back and add but just didn't) was that the basic problem is what we're used to -- "movie cancer." In fact, there are endless situations/conditions/occurrences in movies which are depicted a certain way so often that we believe that's the way it is. Reality may be very different, however. For example, the way people react when a loved one dies in an accident is often quite different than what we are used to onscreen or on television shows. So when we see the way it really is, people call that "fake." I've argued this point time and time again about various films.
You are correct about the chemo, though. It's almost certain chemo would cause his hair to fall out. It's rare that it doesn't. But not everyone with cancer has chemo. So I don't think the fact that he still had hair can be considered incorrect.
She said the only thing that bothered her was that Chris looked too healthy to be dying, which we know.
Deja vu. They said the same thing about Michael Angarano in One Last Thing. It was actually a hotly debated topic until the doctor who was a consultant on the film spoke out. He had taken Michael and his dad on a tour of a cancer facility where kids that age were dying. Instead of a few hours they ended up there all day. Michael and his dad's biggest surprise? Many of the kids looked perfectly healthy. I met the doctor myself -- he participated in Q&As at a couple of screenings. He said that the depiction was accurate.
Bottom line: Linus could look healthy but still be dying of cancer. That said, we don't know what kind he had, of course. But the most common cancer for young people that age is leukemia.
And Deb might be adding another $10-ish to that today.
-TeeJay
"And you, Deb, have put the film over 1/2 mill!!! Here's your grand prize...(fill in blank)"
They're gonna film New Moon and Eclipse back-to-back, wouldn't it just be easier to just keep Chris Weitz on?
Drew Barrymore will definitely not be directing Eclipse. However, it is true that Chris Weitz will not be directing it but that is because he will be more valuable in the post-production of New Moon.
Therefore, his brother Paul Weitz will be directing Eclipse.
New Moon and Eclipse will not be shot back-to-back, however. Eclipse will have a separate production company (i.e., personnel, crew, etc.).
New Moon begins shooting on March 23 in Vancouver. They may also be shooting in Volterra, Tuscany, Italy.
Breaking Dawn is now officially an optioned property, that is, Summit has acquired the rights. Production will begin mid-2010.
Here are some more details about the hour-long extras on the 2nd of the two-disc DVD to be released on March 21:
* Audio commentary by Catherine Hardwicke, Kristen Stewart, and Robert Pattinson
* Muse music video: "Super Massive Black Hole"
* Paramore music video: "Decode"
* Linkin Park music video: "Leave Out All the Rest"
* Five extended scenes with director introductions
* Five deleted scenes with director introductions
* Seven-part documentary: "The Adventure Begins: The Journey from Page to Screen"
* Comic-Con "fandom" piece
* Comic-Con NY sizzle reel
* Three trailers
* Penelope trailer
In addition, the Borders set will have:
1. Exclusive Twilight Cast Interviews with Kristen Stewart (Bella) and Robert Pattinson (Edward)
2. Exclusive Twilight Cast Interviews with Cam Gigandet (James)
3. Exclusive Twilight Cast Interviews with Edi Gathegi (Laurent) and Rachelle Lefevre (Victoria)
4. Exclusive Red-Carpet Interviews from the Twilight Movie Premiere
5. Exclusive Never-Before-Seen Red-Carpet Footage! Includes extra interview footage with Kellan Lutz (Emmett), Ashley Greene (Alice), rock band Paramore, and Nikki Reed (Rosalie)
6. Exclusive Borders Book Club: Stephenie Meyer talks about the Twilight Saga
Tri-Fold Packaging
* The finish of the rigid case is a tactile coating called "soft touch", which is a smooth, almost velvety/rubbery matte finish. A pattern of tree branches will be foil stamped over the matte coating, which creates beautiful tone on tone imagery. The title treatment is foil stamped in a silver/blue, which completes the effect.
Exclusive Photo Cards
* The exclusive photo cards are printed on 2-sided pearlescent shine stock, which has a sparkle effect imbedded in the paper. The (10) photo cards look really amazing on this special stock, and the back sides have the same tree pattern from the inside of the rigid case, carrying the design throughout.
Here's a quick box office update.
41 films have issued weekend numbers. Out of all films that dropped, Fanboys had the smallest percentage decrease of all of them (2.4%). It moved up from #48 to #38.It took in another $64K for a total of $483K.
Here's a quick box office update. Twilight has broken $190M domestically.
The film is still showing legs. Of the top 36 films this weekend, of all the films that dropped, Twilight had the smallest percent decrease (6.1%). In fact it was the only single-digit drop of all the films that declined.
It went from #27 to #24 an took in another $460,000, for a domestic total of $190,094,000.
Oh, I know. Like I said, the post wasn't about this auction in particular. Just wanted to fill in anyone who might be following this and be confused about how they label things. For all I know everything maybe labeled wrong here.
Just a quick note in general to anyone who's curious how they do this (not directing this at TeeJay)...and I'm not saying that any of the info they posted is correct...but most of the time when they do these auctions they include items that were in the wardrobe or prop department for that character's use but just not seen onscreen.
They have 3 types of items:
1) Intended for that character's use but never worn or used
2) Worn or used during shooting but not seen onscreen (i.e., deleted, w/e)
3) Seen onscreen
They are supposed to tell you which it is. If they say seen onscreen and it wasn't, that is definitely mislabeled. But if it says "Jim's shirt" and you don't see it onscreen it doesn't necessarily mean Jim didn't wear it. It can mean he wore it but it didn't show up in the final cut or that it was there for him to use but he never did.
Like I was saying earlier, I have a skateboard that was supposedly ridden by Michael in Dogtown but I don't see that skateboard anywhere in the film. But he told me there were so many skateboards he rode and so much that never made it into the movie. So it doesn't mean he didn't actually use it.
Of course, if Sean comes on here and says "I never wore that Godforsaken ugly thing" then I think we can rely on that lol.
Thanks for the insight, Larry. That's just so sad when bad companies happen to good films. Senator was just tragically naive. WTF is wrong with Harvey and Bob that they can't be grown-ups and get their shit together?
Haha. I fight with my bro all the time. But I sure as heck wouldn't have gone into business with him lol.
BTW great line: "That's just so sad when bad companies happen to good films." I'll have to remember that one. You could fill a book with those stories.
It would be amazing if it ends up being released in theaters on July 17. My birthday is July 18 so it would be awesome to see it on my birthday!
July 17 is also the date for 500 Days of Summer:
http://www.pronetworks.org/index.php/in … of_summer/
Andy Fickman has said repeatedly that it was his intention to make a darker, more grown-up film. He's a real UFO buff. He was actually born in Roswell, NM. And he has enlisted both Whitley Strieber and Bill Birnes to lend some real life UFOlogy cred to the movie. It has a black budget shadow government agency lead by Ciaran Hinds as one of the two main villains, the other being a very destructive alien bounty hunter. Yeah, it's definitely a big sci-fi epic, with a squishy mythology centering around children and hope at its center. I've got my full geek on for this one.
Thanks for that. It really cements my decision to see the film. What I don't get, then, is why they are releasing it under the Disney imprint and not Touchstone, which is their adult label. Or even Miramax. If the want to present it as a darker, more grown-up film they should definitely have put it under Touchstone.
Yeah, see? That's probably TWC not giving a crap again. I'm sure Premiere had nothing to do with labeling the props. How would they know what's what?
Wouldn't the Propmaster of the film be the one responsible for all the props?
And if it's clothes then it would likely be the Costume Supervisor.
It could be that one/both of them labeled something wrong.
I could only see the TWC being responsible if they were the ones that actually gave Premiere the props and changed labels, which could fall into the realm of conspiracy theory.
That person, whoever they are works for TWC though. And there's so much sloppy work surrounding this movie it's just unbelievable. Kinda like how the publicist who was sent out to photograph the Atlanta event didn't know how to work her camera and didn't know a single thing about the controversy surrounding the movie.
Some of us won stuff on eBay from Alpha Dog. Their packaging was very classy and everything was correctly labeled. There's just no excuse for this kind of mislabeling bullshit. None. I'm glad we didn't get involved in this auction like Premiere wanted us to. I'd be be ripping my hair out by this point.
Premiere would have to get the information from someone who works for the production company (which could include the propmaster, costume supervisor, etc.). The production company itself has nothing to do with TWC -- they are just the distributor in this case since they didn't produce the film. Someone in publicity for TWC may have been the one responsible for getting the gear and info to Premiere, but TWC's person would have to have gotten it from the production people who don't work for TWC. Of course, one could argue that someone at Premiere or TWC should have done fact-checking but that is generally quite insulting and disrepectful to the person giving them the information. You don't ask the propmaster, "are you sure you labeled these correctly?" Whoever dropped the ball wasn't someone at TWC.
I want to echo the comments about Alpha Dog too. They did a pretty good job. I bought a shirt and skateboard that Michael wore and used. Fortunately, since I know him personally and saw him shortly afterward I was able to ask him if I had actually purchased a board he rode (it was $500). He said that he used dozens of boards lol. I never saw any picture of him holding a board which was the one I bought. It did say Sid on the carriage. But they always let you know if it was actually USED in the film or just available but NOT used. All you can do is trust what Premiere says.
maybe you can come to Atlanta for Race To Witch Mountain.
I just saw my first TV commercial for it. For a Disney film, they are marketing it as pure sci-fi, more along the lines of Star Trek or Terminator. It actually made me want to see it. Defintely does not look like a kids' film from the broadcast trailer.
I wsih Mandy Lane would be released on DVD already. It sounds like it's never going to be released..
It will be in theaters on July 17, we believe. That's the latest official word from Senator, who just announced their upcoming schedule.
A DVD would follow about 3-4 months later, most likely, which would put it late October at the earliest.
I was thinking more along the lines of why in the world would they buy it only to offload it? Why do they buy things that the don't really believe in? That's exactly what they did with Fanboys.
Good question. They paid $1M for it, which was the single largest purchase of the Toronto Film Festival and really made waves. So what reason could there possibly be?
Well, I wrote a long article about it a couple of years ago but here it is in a nutshell.
The producers wanted a 1000+ screen opening and Harvey agreed that it was mass appeal enough to warrant a wide release. That was a condition of the deal in the first place. But then Bob and Harvey had an internal disagreement over how to market the film (sound familiar?). Bob preferred a smaller, niche opening.
While they argued, the producers shopped around for another distributor who would promise them the 1000+ opening they wanted. When Senator said yes, they bought it from the Weinsteins.
So they never intended to buy it only to get rid of it. Harvey did believe in it. Bob wasn't so confident.
What happened after that is where the real crap comes in. Senator did not know how to release a film, literally. So they just sat on it waiting for "the right window" to come along. Every time they narrowed down a release strategy some other studio would come along and set a date which scared them away. They let one season after another go by, always promising a 1000+ screen release, but being afraid of getting beaten by the competition.
What it ultimately came down to was that the powers-that-be at Senator wanted their inaugural U.S. release to be a hit. They knew that if their very first release was a flop that they would lose their investors and it would essentially doom the company. Thy had to get off on the right foot. So they waited and waited, hoping to pick up a sure thing -- a film with big names that they could release to great fanfare. Then they could afford to take chances on films like Mandy Lane.
They would not admit this to anyone, however, not even the film's producers or director. I only found this out from someone else close to the company.
They eventually got the film they wanted, Fireflies in the Garden, with Julia Roberts, Ryan Reynolds, Willem Dafoe, Emily Watson, Carrie Ann Moss, and Hayden Panetierre. Once they did, the strategy became to release Fireflies first. Then Mandy Lane would be safe.
Something intervened, though. There was a big shakeup at the top due to all the missteps along the way. The head of Senator was ousted. The person brought in to take over all of Senator's release strategy was Mark Urman, who was the head of distribution at ThinkFilm, arguably the most successful indie distributor since the early glory days of Miramax.
At that point the word going around was that Urman looked at Mandy Lane as a loss and wanted to dump it straight to DVD. After all, it had already been released theatrically overseas. It had even come out on DVD overseas already. It was available online. Who would go see it?
But what would they lose by dumping it to a few theaters? Not much. It already has enough buzz to get some people into the theater. It would be advertising for the DVD. So all they had to do was release Fireflies. Well, they botched that one as well and a planned late 2008 release date was pulled. But now a date of June 19 is set for Fireflies, leaving them free to release Mandy Lane about a month later while the company's name is in the news, assuming Fireflies does well.
And looky there, the movie's got TWC's grubby fingerprints on it. And it has gotten jerked around? Go figure.
Well, not to give them any credit, but they got rid of it almost 2 years ago. 95% of the jerking around has been by Senator, who had never released a move in the U.S. before and had no clue what they were doing.
Senator makes Weinstein look like Fox Searchlight.
OOpsy...meant to post this here:
"All the Boys Love Mandy Lane" RELEASE DATE? (insert "ya right" here)