The Full List of "Crimes" Committed by Fox's Tom Rothman - Part 1

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]303032[/split]

 

[TMC1982]

Tom Rothman, is the current is Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Fox Filmed Entertainment, the parent company of Twentieth Century Fox. Everywhere I go on the internet, when this guy is mentioned, it's always in a very negative light. For instance, under Rothman's watch, Fox's movies (particularly their summer blockbusters) are mandated to not run under two hours in order to fit in more theater showings (thus automatically guaranteeing more money).

Things that Fox under Tom Rothman's eye has been bashed for (as far as I know):
*Editing "Die Hard 4" to make it a PG-13 film even though the previous three, had been R-rated. This pretty much meant that Bruce Willis couldn't say John McClaine's trademark "Yippie-ki-ya, mother ****er!" line as it was fully intended.

*The mismanagement of the production for "X-Men 3". For instance:
**Not waiting for Bryan Singer to finish working on "Superman Returns", and not having a replacement director until I believe weeks before filming was due to start. And when a director is finally hired, it's Brett Ratner, who has grown a reputation for being a hack, *****bag, MTV music video, action director.

**Not waiting for several actors (e.g. James Marsden, Rebecca Romjin, and Anna Paquin) to take care of prior engagements before filming. For in the process, certain characters were "killed off" as a matter of convinence.

**Seemingly rushing the production as means of retailiating against Bryan Singer for heading off to make "Superman Returns" (which also opened in the summer of 2006).

**Tom Rothman also allegedly didn't want Sentinels (the gigantic, mutant hunting robots) appearing in an X-Men film because he believed that audiences would immediately think that giant robots appearing in live-action would be too "silly". This was of course, before "Transformers" (a movie for which Tom Rothman allegedly turned down) came out.

*Ordering Ridley Scott to edit his movie "Kingdom of Heaven" to make it look like a more formulaic action-adventure film, when Scott intended for it to be much deeper.

*Having "Daredevil" edited to make it appear more like a summer blockbuster (i.e. more CGI) in the mode of "Spider-Man". "Daredevil" was initially conceived as a more violent, R-rated film in the mold of Frank Miller's run with the comics.

*Not giving the "Fantastic Four" films a better budget, to go along with hirining Tim Story (who is primarily known as a comedic director rather than a sci-fi, action-adventure director) and aiming for a campy, cookie-cutter, sitcomy feel. Rothman also allegedly thought that it would be better for us to see Galactus as a cloud.

*Trashing plans for an "ID4" sequel.

*Browbeating "LXG" director Stephen Norrington until he quit the business altogether. Rothman also allegedly almost convinced "I, Robot" director Alex Proyas to give up filmmaking.

 

[chaseter]

Well lets add to the list Fox causing Aronofsky to leave Wolverine. Now that movie is going to blow chunks. I won't even bother. My interest is 0%.

 

[KenK]

Well lets add to the list Fox causing Aronofsky to leave Wolverine. Now that movie is going to blow chunks. I won't even bother. My interest is 0%.

Must EVERYTHING that goes wrong on a Fox production be their fault? If Aronofsky didn't want to spent a year directing Wolverine, that's his problem. For all the complaining about how rushed some of these X-Films have been, you'd think it'd be great that Fox is taking the approach of giving the director more than enough time to get the movie done right. But as it stands, I wouldn't be surprised if this were on the up and up, and it's Aronofsky not wanting to commit. Furthermore, there's an established pattern of him ultimately leaving projects he swears up and down to be really passionate about wanting to do. He was hell bent on doing a Year One Batman film (which is what we did essentially get anyway), he was on board for a good couple of months, bailed. He was gung ho about doing Robocop, bailed on that, too.

Aronofsky has a habit of getting in on these kinds of projects, but for one reason or another, he never follows through. And it's multiple studios we're talking about here. If it's a situation that it's never his fault, then trying to single out Fox is a moot point.

Furthermore, I love this whole mentality of "Oh, he's not doing the movie anymore? Now it's DEFINITELY going to suck!" Seriously? I may have been a big supporter of Aronofsky doing Wolverine, but I'm not about to take the stance that NO ONE could do a good job directing the film in his place.

 

[dark_b]

how do you know that its Fox fault?

 

[MOVIELORD101]

how do you know that its Fox fault?

Fox isn't to blame. Canada is.

[YT]wOzG7bBylRo[/YT]
t:

 

[dark_b]

Must EVERYTHING that goes wrong on a Fox production be their fault? If Aronofsky didn't want to spent a year directing Wolverine, that's his problem. For all the complaining about how rushed some of these X-Films have been, you'd think it'd be great that Fox is taking the approach of giving the director more than enough time to get the movie done right. But as it stands, I wouldn't be surprised if this were on the up and up, and it's Aronofsky not wanting to commit. Furthermore, there's an established pattern of him ultimately leaving projects he swears up and down to be really passionate about wanting to do. He was hell bent on doing a Year One Batman film (which is what we did essentially get anyway), he was on board for a good couple of months, bailed. He was gung ho about doing Robocop, bailed on that, too.

Aronofsky has a habit of getting in on these kinds of projects, but for one reason or another, he never follows through. And it's multiple studios we're talking about here. If it's a situation that it's never his fault, then trying to single out Fox is a moot point.

Furthermore, I love this whole mentality of "Oh, he's not doing the movie anymore? Now it's DEFINITELY going to suck!" Seriously? I may have been a big supporter of Aronofsky doing Wolverine, but I'm not about to take the stance that NO ONE could do a good job directing the film in his place.

when he was dong Robocop MGM was in trouble.

 

[MOVIELORD101]

when he was doing Robocop MGM was in trouble.

And he left that, too. Grrr...

 

[KenK]

when he was dong Robocop MGM was in trouble.

Now they're not, and the remake's going forward. The turnaround time between Aronofsky leaving and this new guy coming in and everyone back on track was like less than six months. Other directors have been on projects much longer before finally deciding to jump ship. Hell, The Fountain was like a five year + ordeal to finally get to the big screen! Yes, it was his baby, his idea, and of course he's going to stick with it, but my problem is that he gets on all these other projects, he goes out of his way to talk about how he's going to put his signature stamp on it, while staying true to what came before, here's what we're gonna do differently, here's what's gonna stay the same, here's how we're gonna explain this and that, and the other thing, etc., etc., etc. It hypes up a lot of people, and then for whatever reason, it never comes to fruition.

Believe me, it could definitely be plausible that Fox was giving him too much of a runaround, but this bulls*** mentality so many of you seem to have that FOX is ALWAYS gonna be the one screwing up when things like this happen, it has to stop.

What would be the point of signing Aronofsky in the first place? He's been a critically acclaimed director for like the last 8 to 10 years, who cares if The Fountain didn't make the money the studio hoped it would, 'cause the man's still riding high off his nominations for the Wrestler, Black Swan, and an Oscar win for Black Swan's Natalie Portman. He'd borrow that joint from her to use as a club on anyone from Fox who would try to pull **** on him.

Furthermore, they were willing to spend a year shooting IN JAPAN!!! We could site the devastation that country has been dealing with as a possible issue, but for one, Fox could have easily gone and sprung for set construction somewhere else and passed it off as Japan. This would have most likely happened stateside, or somewhere in South America. Aronofsky's excuse would eventually be revealed as bold face lie. People would pay more attention to that than whatever Fox may underhandedly try to do that would hinder the film.

Bottom Line: While FOX may have their track record when it comes to comic/genre related films, so does Aronofsky, and that has to be taken into consideration.

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

I love how fan*****es act like Rothman is this total bastard but no other studio head ever is. You don't get to the position of running a multi-billion company by being Mr. Nice Guy who walks old ladies across the street and works in the local soup kitchen.

This is a business and it's all about making money and Rothman has done that in spades. For all the whining and *****ing about how he doesn't care, the man was clearly wise enough to back off and let James Cameron do this own thing on Avatar - a movie that a lot of people (general public and nerds/geeks/fan*****es) loved. Same thing as Robinov and Nolan over at WB. Funny how nobody likes to point that out.

I'm not a fan of the guy personally. Then again, I'm not a fan of any studio executives/heads. But people need to take off the diapers and get a grip with the reality of how this stuff works.

Whole thing is amusingly stupid.

 

[KenK]

I wouldn't bring up Cameron as an example, if only for that fact that they weren't going to f*** with him after Titanic. For a movie EVERYONE thought would fail, it's one of the biggest success stories in Hollywood history. When Avatar came around, you really think they had that much to say? They were like "Cameron wants to make a movie that he's had to create new technology to do, and he's already paid for most of it?! His last movie made a billion flippin' dollars?!? Hell yeah we wanna make that movie!"

I'd more look at stuff like Predators, Machete, Prometheus, etc. With Grindhouse underperforming the way it did, Fox was the last studio I would think would want to put out Machete. And even with that film not really doing gangbusters at the box office, it's got the support of a lot of people who loved the trailer from Grindhouse, and wanted to see a whole film with that character.

They realized their mistakes with the Alien Vs. Predator films, and said "let's fix both franchises separately", giving us Predators, which may not have been great, but there was a strong focus on getting back to the core of that character.

And for the fans who keep complaining about Fox not letting Ridley Scoot and James Cameron work together on their own pitch for a new Alien movie, they've got Ridley Scott back for a prequel, or at least some within that universe.

Why doesn't Fox get any credit whatsoever for all of that?

 

[chaseter]

Must EVERYTHING that goes wrong on a Fox production be their fault? If Aronofsky didn't want to spent a year directing Wolverine, that's his problem. For all the complaining about how rushed some of these X-Films have been, you'd think it'd be great that Fox is taking the approach of giving the director more than enough time to get the movie done right. But as it stands, I wouldn't be surprised if this were on the up and up, and it's Aronofsky not wanting to commit. Furthermore, there's an established pattern of him ultimately leaving projects he swears up and down to be really passionate about wanting to do. He was hell bent on doing a Year One Batman film (which is what we did essentially get anyway), he was on board for a good couple of months, bailed. He was gung ho about doing Robocop, bailed on that, too.

1) Aronofsky knew he would be filming out of country the minute he signed on. It's not like they told him one day that he would be in Japan for the better part of a year.

2) He wanted full creative control to achieve his vision. Do you really think Fox was going to give him the control to do whatever he wanted with a tentpole summer movie? There was an interview in which Darren hinted about discussions in which he wanted Japanese dialogue with English subtitles and the studio wanted them all in English.

3) http://www.cinemablend.com/new/The-...nofsky-Isn-t-Directing-Wolverine-2-23723.html

Fox ****ing with the creative talent coupled with Darren having troubles at home lead him to quit. I would too. They released the same BS family issues statement that they did with Vaugn back in the X3 days and then we all found out what really happened; he left because Fox kept meddling in the production.

Furthermore, I love this whole mentality of "Oh, he's not doing the movie anymore? Now it's DEFINITELY going to suck!" Seriously? I may have been a big supporter of Aronofsky doing Wolverine, but I'm not about to take the stance that NO ONE could do a good job directing the film in his place.

You think the movie is going to be amazing? Rofl. It will suck. They will get some yes man director to come in and do what they want. Aronofsky knew the level of suck that was Wolverine Origins. He wanted this movie to have ZERO reference to that turd.

Fox has a terrible track record and is easily the worst studio in pushing out complete crap. Look back in this thread and see all the crap movies Fox produces. Look back in this thread and read about how they continually manage to **** things up. Fox is easily the worst studio to do a movie with.

Look at how they rushed Vaughn and Singer with First Class for another recent example.

 

[KenK]

1) Aronofsky knew he would be filming out of country the minute he signed on. It's not like they told him one day that he would be in Japan for the better part of a year.

2) He wanted full creative control to achieve his vision. Do you really think Fox was going to give him the control to do whatever he wanted with a tentpole summer movie? There was an interview in which Darren hinted about discussions in which he wanted Japanese dialogue with English subtitles and the studio wanted them all in English.

While I would have definitely liked to see that, as Inglorious Bastards made great use of that, so to the point that it was absolutely vital to that story, I don't see that being such a major breaking point that Aronofsky couldn't make that concession. And for the sake of this argument, that's a really minor example of difficulties between him and the studio.

3) http://www.cinemablend.com/new/The-...nofsky-Isn-t-Directing-Wolverine-2-23723.html

Fans will believe just about anything that paints FOX in a negative light, and with the least amount of credible information.

Fox ****ing with the creative talent coupled with Darren having troubles at home lead him to quit. I would too.

Even you're establishing the likelihood of Aronofsky having an issue completely unrelated to the studio! This has been my whole argument. Not that FOX can do no right, but the fact that when it comes to certain filmmakers, they're untouchable. Don't nobody see nothin' bad about Aronofsky!"

They released the same BS family issues statement that they did with Vaugn back in the X3 days and then we all found out what really happened; he left because Fox kept meddling in the production.

Well, between the leaked script that most fans hated, and a lot of double talk and flat out lying from Fox, and actors making public statements about their issues with the studio, that's understandable, and that production was clearly short. Aronofsky had a whole year to make the best film he could, even with "studio interference". They could have easily gone the cheap route and said, "We're gonna pass off Vancouver for Japan!". No, they had a commitment to at least shoot in the appropriate location.

You think the movie is going to be amazing? Rofl. It will suck. They will get some yes man director to come in and do what they want.

Unlike you, I'm not making declarative statements on how the film will turn out. I'm not saying the movie will be amazing. Even when Aronofsky came on board, I wasn't cheering to the mountain tops that, "THIS MOVIE WILL BE AWESOME!!!". I've always taken the stance that Aronofsky was a fitting director for the film given his previous work. I'm definitely disappointed, and I do acknowledge FOX's interference with other comic-related projects, but there are two sides to every story, and I hate that fanboys refuse to believe that their darling director might have left without provocation for the "oh so evil!" Fox studios.

Fox has a terrible track record and is easily the worst studio in pushing out complete crap. Look back in this thread and see all the crap movies Fox produces. Look back in this thread and read about how they continually manage to **** things up. Fox is easily the worst studio to do a movie with.

If you were at all observant, you'd know that I've actually posted on that original thread on a number of occasions. This whole "FOX IS THE WORST MOVIE STUDIO FOR EVERYTHING" campaign is boring, and for the most part self-indulgent.

Look at how they rushed Vaughn and Singer with First Class for another recent example.

The big problem most fans have with this film is that it's not the original X-Men (although Beast is present). If they were all in the film, I'd guess few would have as much issue with it as they do. For all the fans who wanted certain comic book films to take place at a certain time and not be present day, we've got a film that takes place in the 60s, when the comic was created. It's timely in coinciding with the civil rights movement. For all the people who whined and complained about the look of the costumes and whatnot in the first X-Men film, now they've got costumes that are a closer representation of what was seen in the comics in the past. You've got two strong lead actors. You've got Vaughn directing, who's been a fanboy darling since Kick-Ass, Brian Singer's on producing. By rights, this shouldn't have even happened?!? Singer and Fox are like the last two people I'd have expected to return to the X-Franchise.

 

[BestGirl]

Well lets add to the list Fox causing Aronofsky to leave Wolverine. Now that movie is going to blow chunks. I won't even bother. My interest is 0%.

My interest was nearly 0% even before Aronofsky quit. I'm just tired of the character.

 

[chaseter]

Ken...what was the last great movie Fox put out?

Some might say it was Avatar. They let Cameron do whatever he wanted, reluctantly, but they did and look how that paid off. So I really wouldn't count that as a usual Fox production.

Lets look at their 2010-current.
Tooth Fairy
Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief
Diary of a Wimpy Kid
Date Night
Marmaduke
The A-Team
Knight and Day
Predators
Ramona and Beezus
Vampires Suck
Matching Jack
Machete
Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps
Unstoppable
Love and Other Drugs
The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader
Gulliver's Travels
Big Mommas: Like Father Like Son

Lets look at their 2009 schedule:
The Rocker
Babylon A.D.
City of Ember
Max Payne
The Haunting of Molly Hartley
Australia
The Day the Earth Stood Still
Marley & Me
Bride Wars
Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun-Li
12 Rounds
Dragonball Evolution
X-Men Origins: Wolverine
Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian
Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs
I Love You, Beth Cooper
Aliens in the Attic
All About Steve
Jennifer's Body
Fantastic Mr. Fox
Avatar
Alvin and the Chipmunks

I left out Taken because they didn't produce it. Their 2008 list is sad, their 2007 list is sad...Jesus was a **** studio. I bolded the movies that had any inkling of being good and were responded well by critics.

And you think Wolverine is going to be good when they haven't produced a truly amazing big budget summer film in what...4 years? 5 years?

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

Ken...what was the last great movie Fox put out?

Black Swan and 127 Hours come to mind. The A-Team was ridiculously awesome, Unstoppable was surprisingly solid and I liked Predators too, like you.

I left out Taken because they didn't produce it.

They didn't produce Machete either yet you've got that listed in their ****-list?

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Fox searchlight is completely different from Fox.

 

[danoyse]

Black Swan and 127 Hours come to mind. The A-Team was ridiculously awesome, Unstoppable was surprisingly solid and I liked Predators too, like you.

I liked Date Night too.

 

[Passdom]

In terms of movie CONTENT, 2010 was not bad for Fox

Like others, I really liked Date Night, A-Tea, Machete, and to a lesser extent Predators. However, despite the overall quality of their slate being higher, they still failed to meet expectations at the BO, which is a shame. A-Team was easily the highlight of last summer for me.

 

[FilmNerdJamie]

Fox searchlight is completely different from Fox.

It's still Fox.

 

[Catman]

there's an established pattern of him ultimately leaving projects he swears up and down to be really passionate about wanting to do. He was hell bent on doing a Year One Batman film (which is what we did essentially get anyway), he was on board for a good couple of months, bailed. He was gung ho about doing Robocop, bailed on that, too.

Aronofsky reminds me of Kevin Smith. He WANTS to be a mainstream filmmaker, but is AFRAID to leave his comfort zone. Just look how many years it took for Smith to do a movie like Red State. I imagine it'll be a long time till Aronofsky gets the guts to do a studio picture. It's a shame because he could follow in Christopher Nolan's footsteps and make some fascinating blockbusters.

 

[Crockett]

Every year there isn't a good movie from Fox except for a few which are good that are here and there. Searchlight does a better job of releasing great movies, and quite few of their movies don't do that bad in the box-office as well, yes they are part of Fox but they seem to function better.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

He was hell bent on doing a Year One Batman film (which is what we did essentially get anyway)

No we didn't. We got a watered down blockbuster version.

 

[Octoberist]

Fox Searchlight is the main reason why Fox gets recognized for anything at this point.

Though, I hope 'First Class' and even 'Abe Lincoln' shapes up good b/c I'm weary of 'The Wolverine' now since Darren left.

 

[KenK]

Ken...what was the last great movie Fox put out?

Some might say it was Avatar. They let Cameron do whatever he wanted, reluctantly, but they did and look how that paid off. So I really wouldn't count that as a usual Fox production.

Lets look at their 2010-current.
Tooth Fairy
Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief
Diary of a Wimpy Kid
Date Night
Marmaduke
The A-Team
Knight and Day
Predators
Ramona and Beezus
Vampires Suck
Matching Jack
Machete
Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps
Unstoppable
Love and Other Drugs
The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader
Gulliver's Travels
Big Mommas: Like Father Like Son

Lets look at their 2009 schedule:
The Rocker
Babylon A.D.
City of Ember
Max Payne
The Haunting of Molly Hartley
Australia
The Day the Earth Stood Still
Marley & Me
Bride Wars
Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun-Li
12 Rounds
Dragonball Evolution
X-Men Origins: Wolverine
Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian
Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs
I Love You, Beth Cooper
Aliens in the Attic
All About Steve
Jennifer's Body
Fantastic Mr. Fox
Avatar
Alvin and the Chipmunks

I left out Taken because they didn't produce it. Their 2008 list is sad, their 2007 list is sad...Jesus was a **** studio. I bolded the movies that had any inkling of being good and were responded well by critics.

And you think Wolverine is going to be good when they haven't produced a truly amazing big budget summer film in what...4 years? 5 years?

Aside from your list just being remarkably skewed to serve your argument, you keep trying to turn this into an argument about how the Wolverine sequel will turn out that I'm not really apart of. I've responded to your "My opinion is an indisputable FACT" declaration that the movie has no chance of even being decent, let alone "truly amazing", but that's only because I can't stand this black-and-white, "If it's not absolutely, positively, life-changingly awesome, than it sucks" hive mind mentality among a lot of comic movie fans. The fact that you can't even wait to see who replaces Aronofsky doesn't even matter, because you believe to your very core that whoever they chose won't be anywhere near as good, and that FOX will make every decision to make the film bad.

And this is just such a fairweather situation it's ridiculous. By extension of Aronofsky, a whole heap of y'all would have been on FOX's d***, but sh** hits the fan, and you're back to hating with a vengeance. No one wants to take the stance of, who's gonna replace Aronofsky, it's "Oh they're just gonna get another hack yes-man that'll do whatever they say. FOX is the worst studio ever!!! Tom Rothman slept with my ex-wife to make this investigation look like a personal vendetta!!! He's pissing all over my cereal!!!"

It's seemingly impossible for a large majority of you to express your dissatisfaction of FOX as a studio without making them out to be Nazi war criminals, and it just makes no sense to me, quite frankly.