'GATSBY' BUMPED TO 2013 - ANOTHER BLACK EYE FOR 3D?

Big Hollywood ^ | August 6, 2012 | Christian Toto

[C19fan]

The 2013 summer movie slate will feature the standard popcorn bait, from the third installment of "Iron Man" to a "Superman" reboot and a new "Star Trek" adventure. Now, "The Great Gatsby" is joining that blockbuster-heavy crowd. Director Baz Luhrmann's update on the F. Scott Fitzgerald novel is being moved from December 2012 to Summer 2013. Why? Warner Bros. insists the switch means the film's potential audience will be best served by a summer crowd. The LA Times says its sources pin the blame on the film's 3D effects. They just aren't ready for their close up yet.

[C19fan]

This is not a Summer type movie. It is going to be destroyed. I hated the trailer with the hip hop music and if I might see it inspite of DiCaprio being in it.

[jimbo123]

They’re pulling the movie because it sucks and they want to delay the massive writeoff until next year.

[napscoordinator]

They should release this in December 2012 or wait until December 2013...it just seems like a Winter type of movie. Wasn’t Titanic released in December and went on to be (for awhile) the highest grossing film of all time.

[Vaquero]

a way over hyped new movie from a way over hyped book and a mediocre Redford/Farrow vehicle from the 70s.

was in college and the literature class I was taking made the F-stop Fitzgerald book madatory(Zelda...is that you??).

Not impressed.....not impressed at all, then or now.

[Eye of Unk]

Release the stinker overseas. may do well in Britain.

Thats what Disney did to John Carter, made more money outside the US.

Otherwise Caprio sucks as an actor.

Looking ahead to a new Iron man and especially the JJ Abrams Star Trek. I am a fan of the new alternate history version and I hope there is another 40 plus years after these new episodes.

[Blueflag]

Amen to that!

[freedumb2003]

>>Looking ahead to a new Iron man and especially the JJ Abrams Star Trek. I am a fan of the new alternate history version and I hope there is another 40 plus years after these new episodes.
<<

I am ambivilant on “reboots.” It is really lazy to not find plots using the storyline canon. Also, you are throwing out decades of painstaking work by writers, producers and fans to establish a solid and predictable universe.

It is up there with the ST:TNG fallback of time travel: “didn’t happen in this timeline, happened in another one — OUR Enterprise is just fine thankyouverymuch.”

The Star Trek movie was entertaining but creates an itch we can’t scratch.

[Vaquero]

loved the Abrams vehicle.

its science FICTION.

time travel is a staple...

...and now they can expore that particular universe and one can never be sure if Scotty or Sulu or even Kirk or Spock will die(well Spock dies...loses his brain whatever, and they always get him back somehow....)

[martin_fierro]

This version was like watching paint dry, Old Sport.

[Dr. Sivana]

Also, you are throwing out decades of painstaking work by writers, producers and fans to establish a solid and predictable universe.

Having grown up on superhero comic books, I used to agree with this sentiment. I have since aprtially changed my mind.

Even though Start Trek takes place in a future century, in its own way it is subject to anachronisms well beyond 60s hair.

What's more, since TOS, continuity has been played with.

For instance. The famous 2 parter "The Cage", had Mr. Spock on trial for a Code 4 Violation. Penalty: DEATH.

The first episode of TNG, had Q ready to annihilate the entire Federation over the Red Scare (Differing Economic Systems) and the Death Penalty. Frankly, Eros of Plan 9 from Outer Space had a more coherent and reasonable motivation.

But Picard had a retort for Q regarding the death penalty, "Bah! Pfui! We did away with that barbarism eons ago!" Oh, really? Was TOS THAT much earlier than TNG? They did this in the OPENING episode of TNG. If they had a serious intention to stick with canon instead of pushing an '80s version of political correctness over the tired '0s version, that would have never made it passed the pimply nerd who would be assigned to check continuity against TOS.

That said, if Superman didn't have Earths 1,2,Prime, S, B, etc. to monkey around with, he would have run out of gas a long time ago.

If I were to be assigned a Superman movie, I would stick him wither in the pre-war 40s or the tween war '50s. His whole artionale for being a reporter has pretty much disappeared. Also, his powers would have to be dialed down to '40s levels so that the stories don't have to all have a practically onipotent Kryptonian, alien or magician for an opponent of any credibity. Clark Kent/Superman wouldn't work these days. DCFS would be all over teh Kents like white on rice.

[longtermmemmory]

i think this is an accounting trick.

this movie is a dud. by parking it with the blockbusters the studio can reduce the net profit and ofset the gatsby losses.

[C19fan]

Beautiful to look at but as you mention beyond that awful.

[dfwgator]

The only movie I’m excited about is next year’s 3D Movie about Stalingrad the Russians are producing....The Russians know how to make good war films.

[dfwgator]

Sounds like they’ve entrusted the movie to the firm of Bialystock and Bloom.

[Joe 6-pack]

"This version was like watching paint dry, Old Sport."

That movie had more than its share of faults, but I do think Sam Waterston made a decent Nick Carraway.

I think he might have still been sober then.

[freedumb2003]

>>well Spock dies...loses his brain whatever, and they always get him back somehow...<<

Ah yes, the coining of the liberal lament:

“Brain, brain what is brain?!?!?”

[freedumb2003]

>>What’s more, since TOS, continuity has been played with. <<

Well, I don’t want to go all Sheldon on your Penny ;), but even in TNG they mentioned (or maybe that was Voyager) Code 4 is the only death penalty statute on all the books in the UFP.

When they started ST:TOS it never occurred to them there would be canon (in those days no one kept track — for example Lucy and Ricky have 2 separate anniversary dates and I Dream of Jeannie has 2 birthdates).

But eventually they really tried — Kirk’s brother dying is consistent and TNG references the original Enterprise pretty frequently.

I guess I feel about the time travel “get out of jail free” card like Annie Wilkes felt in Misery about easy exits from cliffhangers: someone should be hobbled!

[discostu]

They’d put it in February then, the dumping zone, not Summer. It’s all around weird. A 3D movie that’s not at all an FX movie, a clear award chaser in summer instead of late fall/ early winter. I think they’re thinking it’ll counter program, kind of like the recent rise of the summer comedy, stuff other than tent poles for the “normal” audience. We’ll see.

[discostu]

Trek canon is more a myth than a reality. They broke it frequently and often. And eventually it grew too huge, which was a big version for the reboot. With almost 1000 hours of TV and movie to deal with, some all or none of which was canon at any given moment it was just too big an albatross, it needed to die. Then there’s this:
http://www.postmodernbarney.com/category/star-trek/

[Dr. Sivana]

but even in TNG they mentioned (or maybe that was Voyager) Code 4 is the only death penalty statute on all the books in the UFP.

Which is kind of silly, as going to Talos IV just doesn't seem as bad as, say using photon torpedoes on a large civilian population, for example.

Anyway, in that first TNG episode, Picard did not acknowledge the Code 4 violation, so they must have mopped up afterwards.

As at best, a casual TOS viewer, who has seen maybe four of the TNG movies, and only a handful of TNG episodes, I had no problem spotting continuity errors and anachronisms. I remember one episode where a tombstone st up for Kirk had his middle initial as "S." rather than the "T." which would be used later.

Regarding "I Love Lucy", Lucy would be easily conceived of throwing multiple anniversary dates at a busy and easily confused Ricky to get more anniversary presents. Jeannie's birthdate might change depending on whether you are using Gregorian, Julian, or Djinn calendars!

While I am no trekkie, I was a silver age DC comic book fan in my youth. Time travel was a constant device. Back in the weird Mort Weisinger era, time travel, interdimensional travel, alternate earth travel, was all a constant. However, back then it followed one simple rule: you CANNOT change the past. If Superman goes back to deal with Al Capone, the stuff already happened and even winds up in the existing history books. If (the biggie) Superman goes back to Krypton before it exploded (he did), whatever he would do to try to make people behave differently would be to no end. You couldn't even go back into pre-historic time and change the time stream by stepping on an ant, or whatever. It already all happened.

Now, that was done away with in a very big way, because idiot Warner bought DC, and thought it would be a good idea to get a mob story writer, Mario Puzo, to tackle Superman. BAD IDEA. Puzo writes himself into a corner, doesn't let Superman use the full extent of his silver age powers until he has to "push back the clock" to save Lois Lane. Puzo can write great stories. He cannot write great superhero stories. And Marlon Brando was a dumbo choice to play Jor-El. Ad, yet they keep on recycling that crap because they paid him the big bucks for 15 minutes of work back in the 70s. Sort of like Universal making all of theose King Kong movies because the mechanical monkey cost so much, I guess.

Of course the DC approach ran into problems, because it wrote extensively about the future, including the near future, which before long would become the present (see World's Finest, featuring Superman's and Batman's sons). Superboy would go to the 30th cenutry to pal around with the Legion of Superheroes, and never asks anybody, "So how do I finally wind up dying? Or do I?"

For TNG, it was the Holodeck, NOT the time travel, which made for too many cheap episodes.