nodandsmile 10,708 Posted February 22, 2024 Share Posted February 22, 2024 13 hours ago, hieronymus said: that's just wholly untrue and it's not even the worst take on this thread Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr S 8,676 Posted February 22, 2024 Share Posted February 22, 2024 54 minutes ago, Monet said: Why? She isn't a producer in this That should be her next step. Producing or executive producing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ziggy 11,877 Posted February 22, 2024 Share Posted February 22, 2024 So the movie’s going to suck? Historically, it’s never a good thing when the sequel suddenly gets alllll the resources the first picture never had. Just winds up making a bloated movie. And lbr it also means that it’s a bigger gamble for WB which means they’ll be more involved than the first one. s i g h . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEANGT 5,299 Posted February 22, 2024 Share Posted February 22, 2024 Damn okay they must really believe this movie will do well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyler1992 2,264 Posted February 23, 2024 Share Posted February 23, 2024 On 2/21/2024 at 10:10 AM, Didymus said: That is a crazy budget, geez... More than double of the first film. Budgets like that are usually reserved for CGI blockbusters It’s not as crazy when you break it down. Everyone from the first movie is back- Director, producers, screenwriters, music, actors, etc. Considering the success of the original, negotiating for double the pay wouldn’t be a hard ask. Add on top of that the additions- Gaga, larger set pieces, Brendan Gleeson, Catherine Keener, Steve Coogan. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyler1992 2,264 Posted February 23, 2024 Share Posted February 23, 2024 19 hours ago, Ziggy said: So the movie’s going to suck? Historically, it’s never a good thing when the sequel suddenly gets alllll the resources the first picture never had. Just winds up making a bloated movie. And lbr it also means that it’s a bigger gamble for WB which means they’ll be more involved than the first one. s i g h . Not necessarily. Every sequel has a higher budget. Joker was supposed to be a one off movie. No one would have joined the sequel unless they believed in the script. Yet everyone from the first movie is back. Joaquin Phoenix and Lady Gaga aren’t looking to be in a bloated movie, and with luxury of time in the editing bay, they won’t have to be. FAD is going to have double the amount of set pieces and effects, but that doesn’t mean it’s going to be bloated. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ziggy 11,877 Posted February 23, 2024 Share Posted February 23, 2024 8 hours ago, Tyler1992 said: Not necessarily. Every sequel has a higher budget. Joker was supposed to be a one off movie. No one would have joined the sequel unless they believed in the script. Yet everyone from the first movie is back. Joaquin Phoenix and Lady Gaga aren’t looking to be in a bloated movie, and with luxury of time in the editing bay, they won’t have to be. FAD is going to have double the amount of set pieces and effects, but that doesn’t mean it’s going to be bloated. But WB will have a bigger hand bc of said budget: that’s more my concern of it. And lbr Gaga has a so so track record of script picks. ASIB was solid, HoG kinda bad (she was good with the material but it itself was not amazing). it being a one off that was then given a sequel is worrying to me BUT that said I’m excited that at minimum they’re at least pushing the envelope and making it a musical. It’s been a while since big Hollywood movies took risks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Featured Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.