Ridley Scott's All the Money in the World

[Kane52630]

Surprised nobody made a thread for this but...

[YT]6x62O8A8qHw[/YT]

 

[Kane52630]

Kevin Spacey Dropped From ‘All The Money In The World;’ J Paul Getty Role Recast With Christopher Plummer

http://deadline.com/2017/11/kevin-s...plummer-ridley-scott-j-paul-getty-1202204437/

 

[David H.]

That’s one way to remind people your movie exists.

 

[Hurm...]

What the ****? That's ridiculous.

 

[elgaz]

Logistical nightmare and very tough to re-film all those scenes with a new actor in the limited timeframe they have.

They must still see that as a preferable option to releasing a film which may bomb because Kevin Spacey's name has suddenly become toxic.

 

[MadVillainy]

Well apparently Spacey only filmed for like 8-10 days and they said they start immediatlely.

So I think that's SOME time. But yeah they should just push it back a year. I don't see why they're so determined to keep the release date

 

[harlequinade]

 

[Darepool]

What the ****? That's ridiculous.

Maybe for the film, but as a symbolic gesture it carries much greater weight moving forward.

 

[Doctor Jones]

This is nuts. Granted, he didn't film long, but damn. It's just nuts. Scott can do it though. Though I can't help but feel they could have just delayed this for a while to let time kind of separate Spacey's involvement.

 

[Heretic]

They weren't going to delay this.
1. This year is seen by many to be a fairly weak Oscar field...so...since this film was going to be pushed for Oscars, 2017 is better than waiting a full year for "Oscar season" to roll back around to release it (in what may end up being a much stronger year).
2. Apparently a cable network is going big on a tv series that deals with this same story...so...it's strike now or risk being a movie no one cares about because either the tv show is first and awesome, or the show is terrible and the concept is soured in people's minds.

Plus...even though he hasn't filmed any scenes yet, I bet Oscar voters CAN'T WAIT to cast a ballot for Christopher Plummer as best supporting actor.

 

[Mysteryman]

Pretty sure that they already gave Plummer that very same Oscar a few years back.

 

[Heretic]

They gave Plummer an Oscar as a "screw you" to Kevin Spacey a few years ago?

 

[Mysteryman]

They gave Plummer an Oscar as a "screw you" to Kevin Spacey a few years ago?

I was referring to the Best Supporting Actor Oscar.

 

[samsnee]

Well apparently Spacey only filmed for like 8-10 days and they said they start immediatlely.

So I think that's SOME time. But yeah they should just push it back a year. I don't see why they're so determined to keep the release date

Ten days for him. But they need to rebuild suits, maybe hire new extras, etc. I read it will cost $30 million for the reshoots and the budget was already $40. No way this movie turns a profit now.

 

[MadVillainy]

Ten days for him. But they need to rebuild suits, maybe hire new extras, etc. I read it will cost $30 million for the reshoots and the budget was already $40. No way this movie turns a profit now.

Yeah this is dumb if true about the 30 mill
So now they have $70 mill before marketing. And now marketing will be even harder because they can't show what was meant to be the showiest role.

Honestly, again if the 30 mill is true, they would've saved more money just scrapping the film.

 

[Marvolo]

Ten days for him. But they need to rebuild suits, maybe hire new extras, etc. I read it will cost $30 million for the reshoots and the budget was already $40. No way this movie turns a profit now.

Eh with a film like this it doesn't really matter. This isnt a film that needs to be profitable, and the budget is so low that the studio can write it off if it doesn't turn a profit.

Look at mother!, a box office disaster, but the studio shrugs and stands behind it. Studios only really panic and get upset when their tentpole blockbusters fail.

Yeah this is dumb if true about the 30 mill
So now they have $70 mill before marketing. And now marketing will be even harder because they can't show what was meant to be the showiest role.

Honestly, again if the 30 mill is true, they would've saved more money just scrapping the film.

Nah, that wouldn't be fair to the director, crew, and cast.

 

[terry78]

They showed the trailer with Orient Express and it got subsequently booed, lol.

 

[MadVillainy]

Eh with a film like this it doesn't really matter. This isnt a film that needs to be profitable, and the budget is so low that the studio can write it off if it doesn't turn a profit.

Look at mother!, a box office disaster, but the studio shrugs and stands behind it. Studios only really panic and get upset when their tentpole blockbusters fail.



Nah, that wouldn't be fair to the director, crew, and cast.

You really think Hollywood cares about being fair. Come on now.
Spacey's Gore Vidal movie got cancelled. CK's new movie got cancelled. Both were done filming with CK's being scheduled for release this week.

Sucks but it's stupid to spend another $30 mill.

and the mother! comparison doesn't fit that well.

 

[Roose Bolton]

I think Hollywood is applauding Ridley Scott's decision, and if he can indeed make the date and Plummer is indeed as good of a replacement as they hope then I can see this getting genuine Oscar buzz. If that's the case, then that'd be the win the studio/cast/crew is hoping for, regardless of financial intake.

 

[MadVillainy]

I think Hollywood is applauding Ridley Scott's decision, and if he can indeed make the date and Plummer is indeed as good of a replacement as they hope then I can see this getting genuine Oscar buzz. If that's the case, then that'd be the win the studio/cast/crew is hoping for, regardless of financial intake.

Very true

 

[Mysteryman]

They showed the trailer with Orient Express and it got subsequently booed, lol.

Because Spacey was in the trailer.
They might not boo at Christopher Plummer.

 

[Hurm...]

Maybe for the film, but as a symbolic gesture it carries much greater weight moving forward.

It's a stupid symbolic gesture too. What do audiences expect? For filmmakers to look into their crystal ball prior to production and foresee Spacey's career downturn? No one could have predicted Hollywood's present state, and by deleting him from the picture, it's like acting like Spacey never existed. Let's go through House of Cards next and just superimpose another actor's face onto Spacey's while we're at it too.

What's done is done. Let today's lessons inform our future decisions -- not our past ones.

 

[Darepool]

It's a stupid symbolic gesture too. What do audiences expect? For filmmakers to look into their crystal ball prior to production and foresee Spacey's career downturn? No one could have predicted Hollywood's present state, and by deleting him from the picture, it's like acting like Spacey never existed. Let's go through House of Cards next and just superimpose another actor's face onto Spacey's while we're at it too.

What's done is done. Let today's lessons inform our future decisions -- not our past ones.

The gesture on Scott's part isn't just for the sake of audiences and box office, it's also a sign to Hollywood itself.

 

[Heretic]

Too many people in Hollywood DID know about the rampant sexual abuse and harassment. Too many companies had long line of hush money pay-outs. While Spacey MIGHT have been a bit of a secret, replacing him is an important message. It's saying "we have overlooked and excused this behavior for too long...and will do so no longer." We can only HOPE that they mean it.

 

[James.B]