How Does Paramount's Leaked Slate Rank on the Movieline Development Chart?
As you may have seen today elsewhere, a (very) rough look at the status and depth of Paramount's 2010-11 development slate has found its way online. There is a lot there, folks, but rather than break down one nascent Kathryn Bigelow, Tony Scott on Ben Stiller project after another, this seems like an opportune time to let the scientifically calibrated Movieline Development Graph sort it all out. It's a maiden voyage! Get the Champagne and compare your notes below.
According to the Wrap, the 'Mount's projected lineup made its way over via e-mail; "It has some correct information and some inaccurate information," a studio spokesperson responded." But assuming that the source didn't just make up an abomination Hasbro Factory ("Hearing takes from writers on this. This is a Night at the Museum in a toy factory idea"), let's just rank their potential across the board and let you weigh in with your own rankings as well.
[Screencaps with brief project descriptions follow via the Wrap, obviously. Click the graph for a full-size version.]
Subscribe to the new Movieline on YouTube
Comments
So:
ZOOLANDER 2 is a Non-Ambitious, Desperate Classic
and
BAY WATCH is a Desperate Debacle?
Thanks for the clarity.
This did cause me to move some of my HSX properties around.
What's not clear? Do you need me to spell out why a Charlie's Angels-style Baywatch adaptation is both desperate and a probable debacle? Or why a sequel to a cult classic nobody saw is not the pinnacle of ambition for any of the principals involved, but at least has the potential for a long tail among fans?
I mean, it's all just one guy's opinion anyway, but it's not a terribly complicated one.
Any chart that has MI4 in the ambitious/classic category probably needs reworking. That project has been a train wreck since day 1.
Now, now. It's in the ambitious/classic quadrant, and relatively far from classic, at that. I'm not doubting it's been a train wreck, but it is a MI film, and as such is entitled to at least some benefit of the doubt.
Do I think it will be a mess? Sort of, yes. But do I also think Paramount, Tom Cruise and Brad Bird all sincerely need to make the best film of the franchise? Call me naive, but the stakes for each are too high for me to believe otherwise.
I hear you. Then again, making a 110+m 4th installment of a franchise with a star that nobody believes can open a movie anymore probably falls more on the "insanity" line than ambitious or desperate.
If it wasn't for JJ this project wouldve been shelved June 28th, the Monday after KNIGHT AND DAY opened.
Also don't buy THE ASSOCIATE as that far in the "debacle" category w/ Monahan and Tony Scott. Those guys are top notch
Totally agreed about JJ. The Associate is cold. Tony Scott is the last guy I wanna see adapt a John Grisham book -- hell, any book, Pelham 123's "updating" notwithstanding -- and Shia doesn't have reach in this demo. Wall Street 2 ain't gonna do it. Disturbia and Eagle Eye were goofs, action larks. I'd say go for it if they could do it under $100m, but they can't/won't, so... I'll be shocked if it's even made with this package.
Good points. I have more faith in Shia than you do but I think youre right that he falls off the project. Too pricey now. If nothing else the script is going to be good which is more than can be said for TNMT
Now we're talking! Let's consolidate: Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, by William Monahan.
Maybe Diablo Cody and Mark Boal could pair up their projects, too, on something "from the Academy Award-winning screenwriters who brought you JUNO and THE HURT LOCKER." Triple Young Adult? Young Frontier? This is where we're heading, after all.
Clearly I've been drinking.
Clearly I like where your heads at
purely semantics. however the training routines for size and strength can be totally different...