Sign in to follow this  
JakeHolman

HOLLYWOOD & ENTERTAINMENT NEWS

367 posts in this topic

38 minutes ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

The latest 'oh, my,  this actress got less money than this man' with Wahlberg and Williams sounds like just more BS crying by women.

The real questions here are:  Why did Williams agent accept what appears to be very low pay?   Was it because her prior contract include re-shoots as part of the terms,   but Wahlberg's didn't?     

The question is NOT: why did they low ball Williams?    This re-shoot, due to removing Kevin Spacey from the film, cost the studio a lot of money;  the job of the producers and director is to keep cost as low as possible.    

When compensation is based on negotiation there is NO concept of too-little or too-much paid.  It is what one can negotiate.     So to me the only one at fault here is Williams' agent;  all the agent had to do was demand that Williams receives 80% of whatever Wahlberg gets for the re-shoot.   Especially in this case where to remove Williams from the film just wasn't an option.  I.e. ALL the ace cards were with Williams' agents:  the clown just didn't know how to play poker!!!!

Williams was represented by the same agency as Wahlberg. Williams agreed to come back to reshoot the scenes for virtually nothing because she's a team player and wanted to get the film completed. Wahlberg refused to return unless paid at least $1 million. 

I would also point out that Williams did not bring up this pay disparity. It was someone else who discovered the details and reported it. As far as I've seen, Williams has repeated that she didn't ask for more pay, so she's not upset about this situation, even if it looks sketchy in print.

It's also ironic that Wahlberg won the dubious distinction of being the most overpaid Hollywood performer for 2017. That "award" goes to the actor or actress who has the worst return on investment between salary and eventual box office take.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LawrenceA said:

Williams was represented by the same agency as Wahlberg. Williams agreed to come back to reshoot the scenes for virtually nothing because she's a team player and wanted to get the film completed. Wahlberg refused to return unless paid at least $1 million. 

I would also point out that Williams did not bring up this pay disparity. It was someone else who discovered the details and reported it. As far as I've seen, Williams has repeated that she didn't ask for more pay, so she's not upset about this situation, even if it looks sketchy in print.

It's also ironic that Wahlberg won the dubious distinction of being the most overpaid Hollywood performer for 2017. That "award" goes to the actor or actress who has the worst return on investment between salary and eventual box office take.

Thanks for those details that I wasn't aware of.    I see that I was wrong to single out Williams' agent since both agent and Williams got what they wanted.     

But it does make the point that women activist are using this as "fake news" to make a point about lack of 'equal' pay.   E.g. there was an article on CNN by an angry women that bordered on the insane.     It only looks sketchy in print because most of the media is misusing this to advance an agenda.  E.g. my local papered covered this and didn't mention anything about what you posted here.   All they did was state the dollar differences and with the implication something very bad was going on here.

PS:  I don't know if I should praise Wahlberg or think he is a skunk (ha ha).   Like I stated the producers really had no leverage (other than just leaving Spacey in which is what I believe they should have done).   So did Wahlberg play hardball just because he could or was he making a political point as well (that an actor shouldn't be taken out of a film for 'conduct' and if you want me to help you do that,,,  well it is going to cost you, big time!).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

Thanks for those details that I wasn't aware of.    I see that I was wrong to single out Williams' agent since both agent and Williams got what they wanted.     

But it does make the point that women activist are using this as "fake news" to make a point about lack of 'equal' pay.   E.g. there was an article on CNN by an angry women that bordered on the insane.     It only looks sketchy in print because most of the media is misusing this to advance an agenda.  E.g. my local papered covered this and didn't mention anything about what you posted here.   All they did was state the dollar differences and with the implication something very bad was going on here.

PS:  I don't know if I should praise Wahlberg or think he is a skunk (ha ha).   Like I stated the producers really had no leverage (other than just leaving Spacey in which is what I believe they should have done).   So did Wahlberg play hardball just because he could or was he making a political point as well (that an actor shouldn't be taken out of a film for 'conduct' and if you want me to help you do that,,,  well it is going to cost you, big time!).

 

I think Wahlberg, and his agent, were just trying to get as much money as possible. I don't blame them, since that's what they are after, and Wahlberg certainly has never pretended to be an "artist for art's sake" kind of person, which is more of how Michelle Williams comes across, as she frequently makes indie films for next to nothing. Now that you mention it, in none of the articles on this subject that I have seen have there been quotes from either Wahlberg or Williams specifically about Spacey, or their thoughts on him or the situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, LawrenceA said:

I think Wahlberg, and his agent, were just trying to get as much money as possible. I don't blame them, since that's what they are after, and Wahlberg certainly has never pretended to be an "artist for art's sake" kind of person, which is more of how Michelle Williams comes across, as she frequently makes indie films for next to nothing. Now that you mention it, in none of the articles on this subject that I have seen have there been quotes from either Wahlberg or Williams specifically about Spacey, or their thoughts on him or the situation.

Wahlberg just announced he is donating the 1.5 million,  in Williams name, to assist victims of sexual harassment.

Got to  hand it to him for this one.     Those women activist that completely, and incorrectly used this event to try to advance their agenda are looking like real dummies. 

But I will admit that I don't agree with the concept of equal-pay-for-equal-work for negotiated high valued contract.    

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, JakeHolman said:

Hollywood gets rude wake-up call from Americans about biased & boring movies at the box office http://dlvr.it/QBswfm 

DT5hJ-EU0AA5FQo.jpg

serves 'em right! they have left everyone but millennials behind now we shall leave them behind.

you just cannot narrow the subject matter of 99% of your film output to captain planet weaned teenagers and not damage something.

not everybody is into talking space raccoons.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the raccoon wants to know how contemporary hollywood reasoned that sentient animals would behave like millennial generation earth humans.

Image result for guardians of the galaxy raccoon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, JakeHolman said:

Hollywood gets rude wake-up call from Americans about biased & boring movies at the box office http://dlvr.it/QBswfm 

DT5hJ-EU0AA5FQo.jpg

the message ain't really gonna help because today's hollywood schtootzes wouldn't know how to make good films anyway lacking the skills to do so.

congratulations, hollywood is destroyed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JakeHolman said:

 

I hope Reagan gets an Oscar. Bedtime for Bonzo is truly a golden age classic of the silver screen. :lol::D 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/19/2018 at 10:51 AM, NipkowDisc said:

the raccoon wants to know how contemporary hollywood reasoned that sentient animals would behave like millennial generation earth humans.

Image result for guardians of the galaxy raccoon

 

This movie ending could make it worth watching.

raccoon_fur_davy_crockett_hat_side.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WSS doesn't really need a remake. :unsure: Wish they would make a film version of Bernstein's Candide instead. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Gershwin fan said:

WSS doesn't really need a remake. :unsure: Wish they would make a film version of Bernstein's Candide instead. 

I really don't understand the POV of 'need a remake';   'need' in what sense? 

First I don't agree with the term 'remake' but instead adaptation from the original source material (book, play, short story).   This is especially true in this case since the original source material is Romero and Juliet.    E.g. is WSS a remake of the Howard \ Shearer version of Romero and Juliet or My Fair Lady?     The actual answer is clearly neither.   Instead creative people look the Shakespeare play and My Fair Lady,  and make something uniquely their own.

This can be done again. 

People always focus on prior FILM versions of original source material instead of the actual source material when using the term 'remake'.    I view this as misguided.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

I really don't understand the POV of 'need a remake';   'need' in what sense? 

First I don't agree with the term 'remake' but instead adaptation from the original source material (book, play, short story).   This is especially true in this case since the original source material is Romero and Juliet.    E.g. is WSS a remake of the Howard \ Shearer version of Romero and Juliet or My Fair Lady?     The actual answer is clearly neither.   Instead creative people look the Shakespeare play and My Fair Lady,  and make something uniquely their own.

This can be done again. 

People always focus on prior FILM versions of original source material instead of the actual source material when using the term 'remake'.    I view this as misguided.

 

I meant that I think the first film version of WSS is okay and instead of making another production of it they should make a movie version of Bernstein's other less known works. That is just my opinion though. Yes, I know most people think WSS is his best composition and that's why it's getting remade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Gershwin fan said:

I meant that I think the first film version of WSS is okay and instead of making another production of it they should make a movie version of Bernstein's other less known works. That is just my opinion though. Yes, I know most people think WSS is his best composition and that's why it's getting remade.

I admit I don't know much about this latest project.   Are you saying the producers plan to dust off the WSS screenplay and the music and make a version that is very, very similar to the WSS version?  

IF that is the case,  I would classify that as more of a 'remake' than an adaptation,  since doing that wouldn't be very creative.    But I still don't agree with the 'need' concept.    Why not let current singers and actors make an attempt?    For one thing I assume there would be no dubbing!    While I really enjoy WSS,  I find dubbing to be artistically limiting, bordering on fraud.     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jamesjazzguitar said:

I admit I don't know much about this latest project.   Are you saying the producers plan to dust off the WSS screenplay and the music and make a version that is very, very similar to the WSS version?  

IF that is the case,  I would classify that as more of a 'remake' than an adaptation,  since doing that wouldn't be very creative.    But I still don't agree with the 'need' concept.    Why not let current singers and actors make an attempt?    For one thing I assume there would be no dubbing!    While I really enjoy WSS,  I find dubbing to be artistically limiting, bordering on fraud.     

I posted about this remake in the Musicals Genre section last week. Steven Spielberg's version will feature a script by Tony Kushner, and be updated to contemporary times. No word on the music, if it will use the same songs and same arrangements, or same songs with new arrangements, and/or completely new songs. If it's contemporary, then I can't see it being done without a hip-hop element. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jamesjazzguitar said:

I admit I don't know much about this latest project.   Are you saying the producers plan to dust off the WSS screenplay and the music and make a version that is very, very similar to the WSS version?  

IF that is the case,  I would classify that as more of a 'remake' than an adaptation,  since doing that wouldn't be very creative.    But I still don't agree with the 'need' concept.    Why not let current singers and actors make an attempt?    For one thing I assume there would be no dubbing!    While I really enjoy WSS,  I find dubbing to be artistically limiting, bordering on fraud.     

Here's the link. 

http://www.showbiz411.com/2018/01/25/its-official-steven-spielberg-is-remaking-west-side-story-pro-forma-casting-call-goes-out-for-leads

From what I gather it's going to be the exact same story and music - just a straight remake. I don't mind if current singers or actors sing in it but I am more of a purist when it comes to that and wouldn't want a pop music rendition of the score though that is only my opinion. I realize that is probably more popular and would make it sell.

3 minutes ago, LawrenceA said:

I posted about this remake in the Musicals Genre section last week. Steven Spielberg's version will feature a script by Tony Kushner, and be updated to contemporary times. No word on the music, if it will use the same songs and same arrangements, or same songs with new arrangements, and/or completely new songs. If it's contemporary, then I can't see it being done without a hip-hop element. 

I highly doubt they would scrap the Bernstein score but I could see them maybe doing non-orchestral, pop music renditions of the songs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Gershwin fan said:

I highly doubt they would scrap the Bernstein score but I could see them maybe doing non-orchestral, pop music renditions of the songs. 

Spielberg seems to be fast-tracking this into production after talking about it for a decade or more. He may have had time to work on the music during that time (or relegate other people to), but in all likelihood, due to the speed of pre-production, he will largely use the original music. Like most musicals, though, they will probably add one or two new songs to try for a Best Song Oscar. 

It also depends on what the script is like, the tone of the piece. Setting it in contemporary times may make the gang milieu breaking out into show tunes even more absurd to a general audience than the original is. Yes, I know the movie is beloved, and I even count as one of the few musicals that I like, but it's silly and preposterous in its naivete regarding street gangs, something I don't think will fly with modern audiences. Maybe if they cast it with big names from the music world that would draw in the young viewers, it will seem less goofy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gershwin fan said:

and wouldn't want a pop music rendition of the score though that is only my opinion.

Thanks to both you and Larry for the info;   I pulled the above from your post because I found it slightly ironic.

I believe we agree that there is less of a 'need' for a 'straight remake',  but then you appear to want the music for a new version to be the same as the prior.     

Changing up the music to appeal to current taste is the type of change that many would say is necessary (and therefore be a 'need' for making the film).

Hey doing so wouldn't suit my taste since I'm an old school jazz cat that isn't a fan of the current "style",  but this type of change is what makes a film more of an adaptation than a remake. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us