Legendary Hollywood Director

After the "Shrek 4" released by Paramount did not get the box office momentum it deserved, their publicity offensive changed and they played the emotional card. On the Tuesday after the first week, Paramount held a press conference at the press conference. , and personally told the entertainment reporters that the Shrek series will not be filmed again, and their stories have ended.

When such a rhetoric came out, it made many viewers sigh. Anyway, this series is also a beautiful passage in the memories of many viewers, which has restrained the downward trend, but after all, there are too many negative feedbacks, and it is impossible to want to explode. , this is not what public opinion offensive can change.

Of course, the most sensational event in Hollywood at the end of May was not the end of the Shrek series. On May 19, Fox suddenly reached an agreement with Disney, announcing that it would officially take over the third installment of Disney's "The Chronicles of Narnia" series. The production and director candidates are still Michael Apter, who was previously selected by Disney.

Then, how sacred is the director Apter, who can be valued by Disney and Fox one after another?

Well, when it comes to this one, that's amazing, he's very famous in the circle. First of all, this former chairman of the Directors Guild of America, but he is a British director and a top student in the law department of Cambridge University. He set foot in Hollywood for the first time and topped the film critics with "The Miner's Daughter", which was praised as Just like the proposition of Andersen's "Red Shoes", it was bright and filled with sadness, and strength rose from the bottom of my heart. In the same session, he won the Oscar nomination for Best Picture, and then in 1988, he was nominated for the Oscar for "Eighteen Years of the Misty Forest", and finally won the Oscar. Best Actress Award.

In other words, when being invited out this time, Disney originally thought that he hoped that director Apter could use his rigorous structure-perhaps born in the law department, this work's narrative structure was well controlled to make up for the previous The narrative that was criticized in the ministry was chaotic, and the climax was out of balance.

But why did Disney make so much effort and finally give it to Fox?

It is also very simple to say.

Didn't the screening of "Prince Caspian" in 2008 not meet expectations, the rate of return was not high, and even almost lost money because of the negative reviews from many parties? Because it could not bear the destruction of the good situation, Disney fired the director of the film, Andrew Adamson, in a fit of rage. And in the subsequent split, there was a quarrel with Walton, an external producer.

Of course, the global market for the film was sluggish, and it was okay to be angry. Disney then decided to cut costs and start the third film in its production plan, and hired Michael Apter as the director of the new film. However, in the middle of preparations, I felt that it was unpredictable and the fiasco of "Ink Heart" also reminded that the magic theme is gradually becoming less popular.

As a result, after Disney executives discussed the possibility of the film becoming a hit for many times, they still felt that the risk of unknown market was too high, and finally decided to withdraw from the investment in the film.

Somehow, Fox executives, who had not made any big moves for a long time, heard the news, but felt that Disney was too cowardly. There must be a market for magical themes, but they just needed some control of quality and high visual effects-Fox is confident, After all, action scenes like Wolverine sell very well, but they suffer from lack of suitable theme projects for their team to play. No, they felt that the opportunity was coming, and quickly went to Disney to discuss that they should take over the investment.

As we all know, Fox paid a part of the price, and Disney could also rely on Fox's funds to increase the popularity of the series and the breadth of IP. The two sides hit it off, and Disney transferred the production rights of the series to Fox, allowing them to produce and distribute.

At this press conference, compared with the fans who paid attention to the main actors' reservations, the new director's appointment, and the cast team and cast, the media reporters were interested in a character who appeared in attendance, that is Fox head Rupert Murdoch, who has not been seen in public for a while.

Yes, the strange thing is that Murdoch almost hid himself since the eavesdropping door fermented, but now he is a lot more upright.

But soon, everyone found that politicians in the UK did not continue to focus on this topic, and even no longer advocated talking about the "stupid things" that News Corporation controlled too many public opinion media.

You see, this world is so magical, such a fuse that is enough to destroy a behemoth, except for the loss of a few newspapers to News Corporation, and the slowdown in the development of the established layout, it has been low-key for a period of time, as if nothing has happened.

No one knows what actions Murdoch took to overcome this incident, but everyone knows that Fox also came to life. Crisis lifted.

For a time, Fox's actions in the field of production continued. In addition to taking over the banner of "The Chronicles of Narnia" in a high-profile manner, it also ensured that the sequel to "Wolverine" has been put on the agenda, constantly revealing its own strengths. , a pair of energy to compete with Paramount, the top performer, for the final year's crown.

By comparison, Warner Bros. looks very different.

This year, they are still a little confused, and they seem to have personally confirmed Hollywood's strange circle theory, that is, if a studio goes up, another studio goes down. Luck sucked.

In this way, before I knew it, at the end of the fourth week of May, "Iron Man 2" only made 660 US dollars this weekend, and the decline became more and more obvious, but the total North American box office reached 250 million, and the global box office results were 487 million US dollars. Said, although it did not continue the strong reputation of the first part, but in terms of performance, it must be better, after all, is there a sequel bonus?

It is worth mentioning that this week, Disney's "Prince of Persia: The Blade of Time", which is based on the classic video game of the same name, has been ridiculed by gamers.

Among them, one of the leading actors, Jake Gyllenhaal, was severely criticized for playing the lead role of Middle Eastern descent as a white man, forcing him to publicly express his inadequacy in taking the show and that he had learned a lesson from it: "I think I learned a lot from this movie myself, it made me be more careful about casting and thinking about why I chose them. You do get frustrated with characters that don't work for you, but also There are other suitable options."

Poor Jack may only be glad that although he was scolded for playing this film, the film's performance was not bad. Generally speaking, the negative public opinion did not cover up passers-by and audiences' sense of satisfaction with the action scenes presented in the film.

Under the hustle and bustle of the summer movie market, Lehmann was also very busy and fulfilling for the later stage of "The Tuner", and it was quite a pleasure to see a movie that was reversed, reversed and reversed in his own hands. , that kind of taste is quite happy for the director.

: . :