Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
38 minutes ago, Brandon said:

If people can avoid posting spoilers and to much details for the last Jedi on this particular thread that would be appreciated.    With two little kids and a massive amount of Christmas activities planned I will not be able to watch the movie until the New Year... please and thanks!!

Darth Vader is Luke Skywalkers father!

  • Replies 5.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted (edited)

Well if TFA was a remake of ANH then TLJ will be a remake of TEPB and someones parentage will be revealed. Guessing Luke is Reys father.

But it could also be Chewbacca.

 

Edited by FrostyWinnipeg
Posted
12 hours ago, Brandon said:

If people can avoid posting spoilers and to much details for the last Jedi on this particular thread that would be appreciated.    With two little kids and a massive amount of Christmas activities planned I will not be able to watch the movie until the New Year... please and thanks!!

We usually create a separate Spoiler thread for that.  So just don't go in there.

If anyone posts spoilers in here they're just being a jackass.

Posted
12 hours ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

I don't know- But I am 100% for this! 

This gained steam so fast, its almost unbelievable.  Which tells us a few things (maybe):

QT has a ton of stroke that even JJ Abrams takes notice.

QT's idea might closely align with JJ's idea of bringing back George Kirk and doing a time warp story.

QT's proposed story requires a lesser budget.

Talk of summer 2020 being a potential release date.

Posted
2 hours ago, The Unknown Poster said:

This gained steam so fast, its almost unbelievable.  Which tells us a few things (maybe):

QT has a ton of stroke that even JJ Abrams takes notice.

QT's idea might closely align with JJ's idea of bringing back George Kirk and doing a time warp story.

QT's proposed story requires a lesser budget.

Talk of summer 2020 being a potential release date.

2020 long time to go.

Will Zoe Saldana have time with her doing Avatar 2-4, GOTG3 and the next 2 Avengers LOL.

 

 

 

Posted

Couple of movies I saw over the holidays. 

Spider Man Homecoming. I really liked it.  I disliked the Iran Man-ification of the suit though. But what Marvel does well is heart and Humor. And Tom Holland is a great Peter. He would have made a terrific **** Grayson too. 

Good cast. Zendaya was an interesting character too. 

 

Also saw Get Out. Knowing nothing about it other then it was supposedly a horror film that didn’t look like one and it had a strong cast, I really enjoyed it. Really good. 

Posted (edited)

Been watching a couple of Oscar screeners. Both 3 Billboards and Florida Project are great on diff budget levels.

Blade Runner 2 looked and sounded great but i found it to be confusing mess and am shocked that Ridley Scott said...

Spoiler

Harrison Ford was a replicant in the first film!

 

Edited by FrostyWinnipeg
Posted

Supposedly Justice League is on pace to end up being a $50 million loss for Warner.  So they have shaken things up and promoted Walter Hamada to oversee the DC film franchise.  He was involved in IT and The Conjuring.  Not sure a guy without intimate knowledge of the source material is the best way to go but Geoff Johns is still there as an advisor.

I think they hamstrung themselves with the "old Batman" thing and its going to be tough to regroup.  But good film is good film so hopefully they get their **** together.  I was also a DC guy rather than a Marvel guy.

Posted

When they decided to quickly reshoot scenes to replace Kevin Spacey with Christopher Plummer in the film "All The Money In The World", it was stated that the actors all came back for "free" to accommodate the re-shoots.

Turns out Michelle Williams who said she'd be there anytime, anyplace, was given an $80 per diem.  Mark Wahlberg? $1.5 million.  They're represented by the same agency and no one told Williams of the disparity.  Booooo

http://money.cnn.com/2018/01/10/media/mark-wahlberg-michelle-williams-pay-gap/index.html

Posted
1 hour ago, The Unknown Poster said:

When they decided to quickly reshoot scenes to replace Kevin Spacey with Christopher Plummer in the film "All The Money In The World", it was stated that the actors all came back for "free" to accommodate the re-shoots.

Turns out Michelle Williams who said she'd be there anytime, anyplace, was given an $80 per diem.  Mark Wahlberg? $1.5 million.  They're represented by the same agency and no one told Williams of the disparity.  Booooo

http://money.cnn.com/2018/01/10/media/mark-wahlberg-michelle-williams-pay-gap/index.html

I'm not disputing any of this, and I'm fully on board as saying it's totally ******, BUT.......when talking about pay parity, they really need to break down how much work is being done by each party. I'm all in favour of equal pay for equal work, but we can't just assume that's the case either...

Posted
2 hours ago, Noeller said:

I'm not disputing any of this, and I'm fully on board as saying it's totally ******, BUT.......when talking about pay parity, they really need to break down how much work is being done by each party. I'm all in favour of equal pay for equal work, but we can't just assume that's the case either...

That’s true. In this case I believe Williams has top billing. She’s an accomplished and acclaimed actor. I can’t tell you who is a bigger box office driver though Wahlberg does maybe more tent pole film like transformers and was the highest paid actor last year. 

But id certainly argue Williams is a better actor and as big a star. 

But I don’t think the issue is who got paid more to make the movie. It’s that a big deal was made about the fact the actors were willing to donate their time to reshooting the scenes. And mark was quietly paid a lot and Michelle wasn’t. 

If she was led to believe they were both donating their time then it’s wrong. If mark wasn’t willing to donate his time then her Agency should have secured her the same pay and she’s be free to do whatever she wanted with it. 

I think on its face it smells a bit. 

Posted
5 hours ago, The Unknown Poster said:

That’s true. In this case I believe Williams has top billing. She’s an accomplished and acclaimed actor. I can’t tell you who is a bigger box office driver though Wahlberg does maybe more tent pole film like transformers and was the highest paid actor last year. 

But id certainly argue Williams is a better actor and as big a star. 

But I don’t think the issue is who got paid more to make the movie. It’s that a big deal was made about the fact the actors were willing to donate their time to reshooting the scenes. And mark was quietly paid a lot and Michelle wasn’t. 

If she was led to believe they were both donating their time then it’s wrong. If mark wasn’t willing to donate his time then her Agency should have secured her the same pay and she’s be free to do whatever she wanted with it. 

I think on its face it smells a bit. 

this is all 100% a fair point....I have no doubts something funky happened here.

Posted
13 hours ago, Noeller said:

this is all 100% a fair point....I have no doubts something funky happened here.

the funky thing that happened was Wahlberg's people called and said "pay the man" after they both agreed to do the re-shoots without any bonus compensation..  Williams people apparently didn't.. 

 

only oddity here that I've seen.. I don't see it as a "he gets more cuz he's a guy.." thing.. more so, a "his people did more due diligence then hers did"

 

Posted
10 minutes ago, SPuDS said:

the funky thing that happened was Wahlberg's people called and said "pay the man" after they both agreed to do the re-shoots without any bonus compensation..  Williams people apparently didn't.. 

 

only oddity here that I've seen.. I don't see it as a "he gets more cuz he's a guy.." thing.. more so, a "his people did more due diligence then hers did"

 

Same people.

Posted
22 minutes ago, SPuDS said:

the funky thing that happened was Wahlberg's people called and said "pay the man" after they both agreed to do the re-shoots without any bonus compensation..  Williams people apparently didn't.. 

 

only oddity here that I've seen.. I don't see it as a "he gets more cuz he's a guy.." thing.. more so, a "his people did more due diligence then hers did"

 

They're represented by the same people.

Wahlberg is well known as being a tough negotiator and a "pay me" type.  Which is totally his right.   And Williams immediately offering to work for free is her right.  What is a bit stinky here is the appearance that the agency representing both actors were more interested in protecting Wahlberg from negative backlash of getting paid when others donated their time rather then making sure Michelle got paid.

The right thing to do would have been to insist that both get paid and Michelle is free to donate her pay.  BUT...that would then lead to the public known Mark did not donate his time.

Its not a huge deal to me other then Ridley Scott gave interviews where he said they all donated their time for re-shoots (except the crew and Plummer since he was new to the role).  So it seems Mark was "protected".  Williams did a really nice thing of her own volition.  I dont think this is so much a pay disparity as an attempt to protect Mark from negative pub.

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
×
×
  • Create New...