Guest El Satanico Report post Posted March 17, 2005 Is Whedon even responsible for the final product of Alien Resurrection, or did the studio screw it up like they did with Alien 3. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mole 0 Report post Posted March 17, 2005 Is Whedon even responsible for the final product of Alien Resurrection, or did the studio screw it up like they did with Alien 3. I'll forever hate Whedon for Alien Resurrection. That wasn't his fault. The studio had it written, and re-written over and over again. But I am a bit biased. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest El Satanico Report post Posted March 17, 2005 You have too much of a bias for me to take your word on it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mole 0 Report post Posted March 17, 2005 Still true... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest El Satanico Report post Posted March 17, 2005 Show me someplace where I can see it for myself. It's not that I don't believe you, I just don't trust the bias of Whedonuts. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mole 0 Report post Posted March 17, 2005 I know I read it somewhere, but I read a lot of Whedon stuff. I'm pretty sure he said it himself in some interview, but that is all I can remember. I am sure some Whedonmark knows the answer to this. EDIT: Here is some stuff from IMDB about different changes that were made, but nothing stating that Whedon didn't make the changes. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndrewTS 0 Report post Posted March 17, 2005 Actually, I take it back. The Salkinds still were the producers when Supes 3 was being made. In fact, they were the ones who came up with the "hip' and "contemporary" flick that saw a declining Richard Pryor mugging for the camera with the threat of some lameass super computer taking over the world. It should have been about Brainiac. Ah, okay. I figured Reeves probably wouldn't have been up for it. Braniac would have worked with the right director, but considering the way the series was going, it isn't like it makes that much difference. I never saw 3, actually, although I saw the original, 2, and 4. By all accounts it isn't worth it, since its most important contribution was providing some inspiration for Office Space. Reeve, after the movie bombed, said he'd never do another Superman movie but was persuaded into doing 4 when he got script approval rights, along with a fat, fat pay day for the film. Cannon Films had licensed the the movie rights from the Salkinds and it was downhill from there. The budget was ridiculously low and about half of the movie and it's filmed scenes never made the final cut, making for one lame abortion that was meant to be released in time for Supes' 50th Anniversary but instead showed up a year later in theatres. Cannon and Golan-Globus, don't forget. Yech. There were actually *two* Solar Men in the 4th film but the 1st one was completely cut out. It went from being about 3 hours long to 90 minutes of head scratching woe for the Man of Steel. Oh man, the masochistic MiSTie in me kinda wants to see the entire thing, but I could only imagine how stupid, hammy, and preachy the full thing is. Reeve said he'd never do another Superman flick after this but much of the blame should have been shouldered by him. He had co-written the script and agreed to star in the abomination after getting script approval power before asking if he could co-write the flick itself. Superman 4 will go down as one of the biggest fuck-ups in movie history. What began as Superman 4 and what ended up being the finished product were two very different things. Hideous, hideous stuff, with this X-Men 3 news almost mirroring the problems the post 2 movies faced after Richard Lester took over as director for 3. It was all downhill from there. I don't think X3 is going to face that severe a drop in quality, but at best it might be as iffy as 2. Although with any director that may not really get how to film these stories, there's a big possibility of majorly screwing up. Apparently there's a solid script, so provided Matthew Vaughn doesn't completely screw it up and decide to make changes on his own whim, it should be alright, but a new director helming a project is hardly inconsequential. Of course, Fox thought the director of Taxi and Barber Shop would be just perfect for Fan 4, so I'm not expecting them to have actually made a careful decision either way. There's no way the Superman symbol net would have made the final cut in 2 if Donner had been directing. Hell, it probably wouldn't have been used at all. That thing always bugged me. The SUPER FRUIT ROLL UP WRAPPER OF JUSTICE!~ At least it wasn't as stupid as Bricklayer Vision. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
starvenger 0 Report post Posted March 23, 2005 Looks like Moriarty was right. It's now official A NEW HEADMASTER AT XAVIER’S SCHOOL Some new blood is joining some familiar faces for "X-Men 3." 20th Century Fox and Marvel Entertainment have tapped Brit filmmaker Matthew Vaughn ("Layer Cake") to helm the second sequel to the beefy franchise. Filming's skedded to start in early summer with many of the cast from the first two films expected to reprise their roles. Hugh Jackman is set for Wolverine, and Fox is in negotiations with Halle Berry, Ian McKellen and Patrick Stewart to return. Alex Young is overseeing "X-Men 3" for Fox, which is aiming for a Memorial Day May 26, 2006, release date. A Brit gangster drama, "Layer Cake" grossed $8.3 million in the U.K. "Cake" will be released in the U.S. by Sony Classics later this spring. His work on the pic, starring Micahel Gambon and Sienna Miller, made Vaughn a serious contender to direct a "Harry Potter" and the next James Bond installment. Vaughn also produced 1998's "Lock, Stock And Two Smoking Barrels" and 2000's "Snatch," both helmed by Guy Ritchie. Bryan Singer directed the first two "X-Men" pics but ended negotiations for "X-Men 3" in July and quickly signed to helm the new "Superman" movie for Warner Bros. The first "X-Men" grossed $157 million domestically and $139 million overseas after its July 2000 release; "X2: X-Men United" grossed $215 million domestically and $191 million foreign following its May 2003 opening. (As reported by VARIETY) Anyone think that Sienna Miller would make a good White Queen? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
2GOLD 0 Report post Posted March 23, 2005 If the script is good, Ian has already said Patrick and himself will return. So if they don't return, that gives you some idea what kind of script they are looking at for the third one. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
starvenger 0 Report post Posted March 23, 2005 If the script is good, Ian has already said Patrick and himself will return. So if they don't return, that gives you some idea what kind of script they are looking at for the third one. In Patrick's case, it has to be worse than the last two Trek films, so I'd say he'll be back... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vyce 0 Report post Posted March 23, 2005 Anyone think that Sienna Miller would make a good White Queen? Now that you mention it, yes. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
