"That this short was posted online is a sign that “Hollywood” already passed on it. This short was already circulated around town and no one took interest."
Yeah, no. Even film projects sought by established directors, with script teams working on them, and even concept design having been made, take years or even a decade to be greenlighted.
That a short was posted online, or whether some studio people had a look at it and didn't immediately snatched it to make it into a movie, tells us nothing about whether this will or wont be made into a movie.
Which is also beside the point, the director could still get some sweet Hollywood gigs he wouldn't get otherwise, even if this doesn't get made.
"A 'Joker' Sequel Is Reportedly In the Works - But Should You See it?"
Assuming it was indeed in the works, please tell me more about what movies I should see or not see...
After all, that's what we come in nofilmschool for... being lectured at...
You have been hitting us with your opinion on Scorsese which almost every reader here (judging from the comments) disagrees with (with your opinion that is, not with Scorsese).
""But where the hypocrisy sneaks in is when you consider his own major release… The Irishman. Just at first blush, consider that his comments target large budget VFX laden features based on previously published IP with star-studded casts.
Which is precisely what The Irishman is. OK… to be fair that’s not his entire point. He’s talking about movies that take creative risks and explore the soul, not ones that take you for a thrill ride. The Irishman certainly does the former and NOT the latter."
Which makes the whole argument moot. Not to mention that the VFX in the Irishman are supposed to be transparent and used as make-up to make actors younger for historical parts, not the whole point of the movie...
As is the second "argument" (but he got so much money to make it). Well, he earned that money over a great career. Today 20-something and 30-something directors which never made anything special to begin with get 2x that money to direct the n-th cookie cutter superhero-in-spandex movie.
"Progressivist consumes anything new with a shit eating grin just because it's new".
If they make a new Ebola virus, some people will rush to get it, because "progress"
> Yes, this is an open cash-grab. But is it that wrong? Yes. It is.
A problem (or issue) with a society like the American one, with no shared ethical and cultural code, is that you can never say something is wrong or tasteless, etc.
If it makes bucks for someone, and some people pay to see it, etc, or consider it OK, then that's that.
There's no cultural shared ground to stand on to say anything about anything. Superhero movies are just as good as Apocalypse Now or Cassavetes, dead actors images milked is OK, since it can be done and some people are fine with it, etc.
No wonder there are so many crazies in a place where money and the individual caprice is the only shared value... Enjoy your cultural wasteland...
The showrunners fucked up the last season of GoT so badly, it left a bitter taste to many fans.
I was a hardcore fan, and I will mostly likely skip any spin-off just because of that, I don't care about that "universe" anymore....