The Dark Knight Rises Fighting Studio Corruption

[chaseter]

Alright, I haven't seen anybody discussing this in here but it is a very very important subject/topic that needs to be addressed.

Warner Brothers isn't highly known for ****ing out franchises like the lovely studio known as Fox, but there comes a point when writers and directors are given an agenda that they have to meet by the people funding the project. At the end of the day, the people that pay for the movie can either be risky and allow the creative team to have a lot of control over the movie or they are money hungry pricks and put a lot of restrictions on the creative process because they want to use a formula in which they know they will get a good rate of return on at the box office. This is where the famed trilogy curse comes into play. Why are third installments usually so crappy? Because the first movie is a risk, usually not a big attraction. The second movie is where the franchise is judged solely on. If it is a hit and a big earner, a third film is greenlit and the studio sees a final opportunity to make as much or more profits. Just look at all the examples: SM3, X3, Shrek 3, POTC 3, Matrix 3, the list goes on and on.

So, my big question is: Do you think Batman 3 will be subject to more interjections by Warner Brothers? It has already started to happen with Harry Potter by them cutting corners because they know it will still be a success. Or, do you think Nolan and the writers will demand creative control much like he had over Batman Begins and TDK?

Discuss...even if we can come to no agreement, maybe someone important will see this thread.

 

[JokerLedger]

Warner Bros will not bother Nolan at all. They left him alone for BB and TDK and made a killing. I don't think they want to jeopardize their relationship with their moneymaker.

 

[chaseter]

Warner Bros will not bother Nolan at all. They left him alone for BB and TDK and made a killing. I don't think they want to jeopardize their relationship with their moneymaker.

Same was said for Raimi

 

[Doc Samson]

I just dont think Nolan would stick around if they attempted anything like that.

 

[Gianakin_]

Well, there's always a possibility that something like this might happen. I really pray that this day won't come, should Nolan decide to return.

 

[chamber-music]

There has been alot of people moaning about this movie not being for kids so I could see WB insisting Nolan adds Robin or something like that

 

[Doc Samson]

But Nolan isn't contractually bound to another film like the actors is he? I know all those guys signed on for 3, but I don't think Nolan has that obligation

 

[Gianakin_]

No, he hasn't signed. But hopefully he will...

 

[chaseter]

I also hope they don't dull down the next one for the kiddies. We will never get a major studio backed R rated Batman movie but this was the edge of PG-13 and it was perfect.

 

[DieSmiling]

Nolan has all the leverage -- they're going to be dying for him to come back. I don't think they'll be able to force anything on him that he doesn't want... At most they'll make "suggestions."

 

[Dark Sentinel]

I think WB has seen what happens when studios are too controlling of their franchises. They're not going to risk another B&R

 

[chaseter]

I think WB has seen what happens when studios are too controlling of their franchises. They're not going to risk another B&R

What about with Harry Potter OOTP butchered the source material.

 

[jmc]

Nolan has all the leverage -- they're going to be dying for him to come back. I don't think they'll be able to force anything on him that he doesn't want... At most they'll make "suggestions".

Suggestions that will be ignored, Nolan's not gonna cave in like Raimi did, pretty much what he says goes with this Batman series at the moment.

 

[DieSmiling]

Suggestions that will be ignored, Nolan's not gonna cave in like Raimi did, pretty much what he says goes with this Batman series at the moment.

I know... That's essentially what I was saying in my post, Nolan has all the leverage and all the control.

 

[chaseter]

Everyone has a price...

 

[jmc]

^ money will only buy you so much, it can't buy story, it can't buy effort, it can't buy desire. All the money in the world won't bring Nolan back unless he feels he can expand the universe once again.

 

[ross2287]

Same was said for Raimi

Yeah, but there's no Avi Arad to screw with Nolan.

And to this one being too dark, damn right it's dark. It's Batman, for goodness' sake. If you want something for the kiddies, take them to see Kung-Fu Panda or Wall-E. Or run out to Wal-Mart and pick up The Batman cartoon show.

Too dark my ass. This is how Batman is meant to be.

 

[Doc Samson]

I could maybe understand if the movie wasn't this successful, but I mean, it's broken all the records, and its far from kid-friendly, so what could they gain by trying to tamper with the formula and tone? Just based off of this film's quality, the next one will open huge as well, just like spiderman 3 did off of the success of the previous film, NOBODY needs to interject any kind of advice at this point, unless it's Nolan himself to another director

 

[zenith16]

I'm sorry X-men 3 didn't suffer from this, it suffered from Brian singer leaving cause he wanted to do super man cause he read that as kid (compaird to X-men which he didn't) and wanted to make it. It was cause he jumped ship thing's went wrong. and the fact that it was too hard to make both cause the schedule of both movies conflicted it's the other way around there.


Spider man 3 problem was cause sony wanted to out do the whole super villains thing happen with batman begins. WB was grandstanding with two villains and sony wanted three to push and show they can compete. every one here use's the whole venom thing and yet after seeing the movie Nolan made of Harvey dent and seeing other talks about what happened to venom and basically the same thing already happened with out fans pushing for dent to show up.

LOL. This kind of talk is unjustified now. Two face got the same raw deal with out what others like to bring up about venom often. And there other circumstances besides fan want there for Spider man 3. though I was arguing with/against those venom fans originally that venom can show up in the movies in after the sinister six are made befor they put him in period. but they jus had to put him in 3 blech.

Nah the Spider man 3 movie got messed up cause they (the Studio producers) wanted to out do "Bat man begins" with their two villains so they added three villains in spidey 3 to try and top bat man. it wasn't just venom fan b.s. Unfortunately. Any way seeing what happened in the Dark night movie with two face. I really think the venom thing has become moot point now.

Thanks guys for holding that grudge that it showed up in dark knight to bite you again with out fans pushing it. grudges ain't good. sheesh. you sent Harvey to his doom with it. Damn it.
And leave Avi Arad alone he had nothing to do with the screw up's he was ticked after he saw what happened in the 3rd movies of both which is why marvel Studios was built and they did iron man. They followed frank miller's idea of going independent

Sin City' Not A Hollywood Film
Dan Rather Uncovers Secrets Of How This Blockbuster Movie Was Made

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/04/12/60II/main687601.shtml
after fox screwed up.

marvel saw this and went independent after wards. since studios keep screwing them over.

Any way marvel is already in the process of correcting Spider man 3 and X3 they said in earlier reports that They'll use their Sequels and Spin offs to correct their mistakes. both those third movies I have it on video of those connected to films. so they'll do it. Too many people are holding them too it.

 

[chaseter]

You are absolutely wrong. Brian Singer left and the studio could have pushed back the start date but what did they do? They hired yes men to get it out that summer at no matter what cost.

 

[ManofmyWord]

I don't care how sucessful a Movie can be...Sequels tend to not live up to it.

POTC 3, Matrix 3, Spider-man 3, Shrek 3....

Spider-Man 2 was TDK of 2004, yet that did not stop the studio from shoving their opinions on Sam Rami for SM3, even though in theory was More of a fan of his Character than Nolan is of his.

But I have a major feeling that Nolan is a MUCH smarter director who won't be shoved aside or pressured.

 

[souvlaki]

I'm sorry X-men 3 didn't suffer from this, it suffered from Brian singer leaving cause he wanted to do super man cause he read that as kid (compaird to X-men which he didn't) and wanted to make it. It was cause he jumped ship thing's went wrong. and the fact that it was too hard to make both cause the schedule of both movies conflicted it's the other way around there.


Spider man 3 problem was cause sony wanted to out do the whole super villains thing happen with batman begins. WB was grandstanding with two villains and sony wanted three to push and show they can compete. every one here use's the whole venom thing and yet after seeing the movie Nolan made of Harvey dent and seeing other talks about what happened to venom and basically the same thing already happened with out fans pushing for dent to show up.

LOL. This kind of talk is unjustified now. Two face got the same raw deal with out what others like to bring up about venom often. And there other circumstances besides fan want there for Spider man 3. though I was arguing with/against those venom fans originally that venom can show up in the movies in after the sinister six are made befor they put him in period. but they jus had to put him in 3 blech.

Nah the Spider man 3 movie got messed up cause they (the Studio producers) wanted to out do "Bat man begins" with their two villains so they added three villains in spidey 3 to try and top bat man. it wasn't just venom fan b.s. Unfortunately. Any way seeing what happened in the Dark night movie with two face. I really think the venom thing has become moot point now.

Thanks guys for holding that grudge that it showed up in dark knight to bite you again with out fans pushing it. grudges ain't good. sheesh. you sent Harvey to his doom with it. Damn it.
And leave Avi Arad alone he had nothing to do with the screw up's he was ticked after he saw what happened in the 3rd movies of both which is why marvel Studios was built and they did iron man. They followed frank miller's idea of going independent

Sin City' Not A Hollywood Film
Dan Rather Uncovers Secrets Of How This Blockbuster Movie Was Made

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/04/12/60II/main687601.shtml
after fox screwed up.

marvel saw this and went independent after wards. since studios keep screwing them over.

Any way marvel is already in the process of correcting Spider man 3 and X3 they said in earlier reports that They'll use their Sequels and Spin offs to correct their mistakes. both those third movies I have it on video of those connected to films. so they'll do it. Too many people are holding them too it.

How can you even compare the two? Harvey Dent was arguably the backbone of the story. He was probably developed more than any other character in the movie. Eddie Brock got maybe five minutes of back story. The only people whining about Two-Face only being in the movie for a half hour are people just looking for stuff to nitpick. There were basically two options here. Either have Two-Face show up a half hour into the movie with practically no character development, or make the movie a half hour longer. While I wouldn't have minded the second option, it's just not realistic. The first option would have been lame. I'm personally fine with the amount of time Two-Face got. Anything more would have made the movie too busy.

 

[zenith16]

You are absolutely wrong. Brian Singer left and the studio could have pushed back the start date but what did they do? They hired yes men to get it out that summer at no matter what cost.

no i'm not wrong he jump ship cause he couldn't wait to do super man once the job was offered to him and left in the middle of finishing his stuff to paper.
he was that enthrolled by doing superman cause that's what he really wanted to do.

Superman Returns star Brandon Routh and director Bryan Singer explain why the man of steel lives on.
http://www.spacecast.com/videoplayer_2335.aspx

the way he talks here says it all.


fox and singer already set the date for X3 long befor they had the script set unfortunitly.

 

[zenith16]

You are absolutely wrong. Brian Singer left and the studio could have pushed back the start date but what did they do? They hired yes men to get it out that summer at no matter what cost.

no i'm not wrong he jump ship cause he couldn't wait to do super man once the job was offered to him and left in the middle of finishing his stuff to paper.
he was that enthralled by doing superman cause that's what he really wanted to do.

Superman Returns star Brandon Routh and director Bryan Singer explain why the man of steel lives on.
http://www.spacecast.com/videoplayer_2335.aspx

the way he talks here says it all.


fox and singer already set the date for X3 long be for they had the script set unfortunately. He was so happy when he got superman he happy skipped off to it. when they were in production of writing it all up for X3 . and any way those weren't even really X-Men movies, those wolverine movies . so much so it funny he(wolverine) has one of his own titled movies when he was forced down peoples throtes that wanted to see the organization of heroes rather then too much focus on one character. but that's a thing for another time this is about the bat.

 

[zenith16]

god damn forum site shut downs it made me make a double post. damn

How can you even compare the two? Harvey Dent was arguably the backbone of the story. He was probably developed more than any other character in the movie. Eddie Brock got maybe five minutes of back story. The only people whining about Two-Face only being in the movie for a half hour are people just looking for stuff to nitpick. There were basically two options here. Either have Two-Face show up a half hour into the movie with practically no character development, or make the movie a half hour longer. While I wouldn't have minded the second option, it's just not realistic. The first option would have been lame. I'm personally fine with the amount of time Two-Face got. Anything more would have made the movie too busy.

umm the thing I mostly see fans( that wanted venom) complain about and bring up about venom every time is that he was killed off period. man i met one at the videogame testing job i work at and that was his and alot of peoples complaints.

and that's why their ticked off. that's what I'm talking about here.