The Avengers International Fan Forum Forum Index The Avengers International Fan Forum

 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

the movie.
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Avengers International Fan Forum Forum Index -> The Avengers Spun-Off
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
steve.othen
Nutshell


Joined: 01 Jul 2012
Posts: 13
Location: united kingdom

PostPosted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 4:12 am    Post subject: the movie. Reply with quote

Just thought I'd throw my hat in the ring, ( bowler, of course !), & say that I actually like the movie !, I think it captures the whimsical essence of the late 60's show, ok the plot is poor, & Patrick macnee will always be the definitive steed, & no-one will ever truly replace him, but as a visual tribute, I like the movie.
I here there was a lot of unused footage, & its a pity there hasn't been a directors extended cut yet.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Andrew Pixley
Have Fingers... Will Type!


Joined: 02 Sep 2008
Posts: 419

PostPosted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 7:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

For all its faults (and it has many), I have still always enjoyed watching the movie. I can never be the same as the series (and in some respects wisely didn't attempt to be), but there was the same essence of fun and I always enjoy viewing it.

A full cut one day would - indeed - be terrific! Smile

All the best

Andrew
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lhbizness
How to Succeed... at Posting!


Joined: 01 Feb 2014
Posts: 975

PostPosted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 12:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Y'know, although I hate the movie I would kind of like to see if it could have been better, given all the footage and recutting that the director had to do. Perhaps there was a better film in there somewhere.
_________________
"It's a conflict of science and humanity! Equations, isotherms...I have a dynamic too."

Avengers Episode Reviews: The Undertakers
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
MikeR
Epic


Joined: 19 Jul 2009
Posts: 1091
Location: UK

PostPosted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 1:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I donít mind the film at all, as I find it captures something of the spirit of the series and if it happens to be on TV then Iíll watch it. Unfortunately, as with most of these revival films it is just about impossible to recreate the atmosphere of the original TV series. Thereís a Man from Uncle feature film being shot at the moment and Iím sure however it turns out true blue Uncle fans will be disappointed.

As for all the missing footage that Jeremiah Chechik claims Warner Brothers made him remove from The Avengers film, personally I think thereís a big question mark there. I believe the amount of missing material could be as little as 13 minutes. In order to get to this figure, I have logged every missing scene from the shooting script as well as having read through three earlier versions of the screenplay. Should this edited footage ever be reinstated then unfortunately I donít think that the narrative would be much better.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Alan
Site Admin


Joined: 01 Sep 2008
Posts: 2941
Location: The Edge of Avengerland

PostPosted: Sat Jul 19, 2014 6:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

13 minutes could make a heck of a difference to the success of the narrative. It's about 1/7 of the current length of the film.
_________________
Alan
--
The Avengers Declassified

Hidden Tiger Books - now available: Avengerworld
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Lhbizness
How to Succeed... at Posting!


Joined: 01 Feb 2014
Posts: 975

PostPosted: Sat Jul 19, 2014 6:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It could shift the balance of the narrative, depending on where it was and what was removed - so if it was just a snipping of a minute here and a minute there, it might not make much difference, but if it was the cutting of whole scenes or pieces of dialogue, then it could be significant. I'm not certain if it would improve the performances of the two leads, though, which are my biggest problems with the film - they missed the characterizations entirely (that's where the "spirit of the show" lies, when you come down to it) and quite honestly those two make me angrier than any other narrative issues the film might have. It's a good argument for not trying to remake certain narratives outside of the time period/culture that created them.

We'll probably never seen a director's cut, though. Warner Brothers doesn't want to spend much time on it, and given the pretty round failure of the whole thing there's no reason why they should. It's not like Gilliam's Brazil or Scott's Blade Runner, which developed a cult following and a demand for the "uncut" versions. The Avengers film is pretty much an aberration to a lot of people, even if it might have been better.
_________________
"It's a conflict of science and humanity! Equations, isotherms...I have a dynamic too."

Avengers Episode Reviews: The Undertakers
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
MikeR
Epic


Joined: 19 Jul 2009
Posts: 1091
Location: UK

PostPosted: Wed Jul 23, 2014 3:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

About 18 months ago I spoke with Mick Audsley who edited the film and he informed me that early on in production he could see that there were problems as he was watching the dailies and there was no rapport between Ralph Finnes and Uma Thurman. Having the film stopped, Mick called for Jerry Weintraub and Jeremiah Chechik and then ran the film again and pointed out the problem, saying, ďSomething needs to be done about this.Ē However, not enough was done. Mick lays the blame 50/50 on Weintraub and Chechik. In his opinion Weintraub should take fifty percent of the blame as he hired Chechik, who was too inexperienced to handle a multi million pound movie. The other fifty percent of blame goes to Chechik, who failed to stamp his authority on the production and allowed the three leads to interpret their characters as they wished.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mousemeat
A Touch of Brimstone


Joined: 04 Sep 2008
Posts: 4203
Location: Elvis Central, U.S.A.

PostPosted: Thu Jul 24, 2014 4:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MikeR wrote:
About 18 months ago I spoke with Mick Audsley who edited the film and he informed me that early on in production he could see that there were problems as he was watching the dailies and there was no rapport between Ralph Finnes and Uma Thurman. Having the film stopped, Mick called for Jerry Weintraub and Jeremiah Chechik and then ran the film again and pointed out the problem, saying, ďSomething needs to be done about this.Ē However, not enough was done. Mick lays the blame 50/50 on Weintraub and Chechik. In his opinion Weintraub should take fifty percent of the blame as he hired Chechik, who was too inexperienced to handle a multi million pound movie. The other fifty percent of blame goes to Chechik, who failed to stamp his authority on the production and allowed the three leads to interpret their characters as they wished.


sums it up nicely. no chemistry between ralph and Uma. period.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Frankymole
A Touch of Brimstone


Joined: 01 Sep 2008
Posts: 4019
Location: Carmadoc research establishment

PostPosted: Thu Jul 24, 2014 7:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Not only that, but they couldn't even "act" some chemistry between the characters. Performers of Romeo and Juliet manage that in school plays. Ralph Fiennes was okay in Schindler's List but acted off the screen by Liam Neeson, and Uma Thurman seems unable to act at all, in anything, ever.
_________________
Last watched: The Man in the Mirror.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mousemeat
A Touch of Brimstone


Joined: 04 Sep 2008
Posts: 4203
Location: Elvis Central, U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sat Jul 26, 2014 5:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Frankymole wrote:
Not only that, but they couldn't even "act" some chemistry between the characters. Performers of Romeo and Juliet manage that in school plays. Ralph Fiennes was okay in Schindler's List but acted off the screen by Liam Neeson, and Uma Thurman seems unable to act at all, in anything, ever.


i used to get fiennes and Neesom confused ...and don't ask me why?

in any event, the film was ill fated, no decent script, good budget, but where did the money go to ? no chemistry between ralph and Uma. Connery was wasted in his role..and WB knew they had a turkey, when they refused to let the press in the U.S. screen and review..just put the film out with no press or reviews, and hence, a huge bomb....probably killed forever, the chance for another avengers film..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MikeR
Epic


Joined: 19 Jul 2009
Posts: 1091
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sun Jul 27, 2014 12:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mick Audley accompanied Jerry Weintraub and Jeremiah Chechik to Warner Brothers in Hollywood with the first edit of the film and it was screened. Weintraub was very nervous because he knew the film was not what he had promised Warners. After the screening there was a stunned silence as the executives tried to comprehend what they had and the fact that it had cost them £30 million. It was decided to hold a test screening and see what an audience thought of it....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
anti-clockwise
The Bird Who Wrote Too Much


Joined: 17 May 2013
Posts: 1683

PostPosted: Sun Jul 27, 2014 5:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

MikeR wrote:
Mick Audley accompanied Jerry Weintraub and Jeremiah Chechik to Warner Brothers in Hollywood with the first edit of the film and it was screened. Weintraub was very nervous because he knew the film was not what he had promised Warners. After the screening there was a stunned silence as the executives tried to comprehend what they had and the fact that it had cost them £30 million. It was decided to hold a test screening and see what an audience thought of it....
Wow sounds like the 30 million GBP could have gone to homeless animals. What a waste of resources. I can't imagine it was popular among the audience either. But question, what is the story with Weintraub? Does he hold the future rights to any future Avenger movies? I had recently heard he was bitter about the film and now won't let anyone make another Avengers film. Is that true? What has made him so bitter if so? I wonder if he ever really watched an Avengers episode.
_________________
"He likes his tea stirred anti-clockwise."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MikeR
Epic


Joined: 19 Jul 2009
Posts: 1091
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sun Jul 27, 2014 6:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Margo

There were two test screening in the States and generally the film got a big thumbs down and so Warners decided to throw more money at the project to improve it and this resulted in some reshooting.

Jerry Weintraub wanted to create a franchise to rival the Bond movies and Iíve seen interviews where he was already talking about a second film. Both Weintraub and Chechik were self confessed fans of the TV series and yet they failed to see what made it work, on the other hand Mick Audsley, who was only an editor and knew little about the series seemed to have more understanding of it. The bitterness I can only put down to Weintraub having put many years of effort into developing the movie, only to have things not work out, but as the producer he has to take some responsibility for that.

Iím not completely certain, but I would think that Warner Brothers would hold the rights for any future Avengers/John Steed/Emma Peel product. Jerry Weintraub did own the rights with his own film company Weintraub Entertainment, but they went out of business and the amusing part is that Jerry resigned from his own company just before the receivers were called in. From that point of view I would think that Jerry would be lacking the finance to acquire the rights from the company he once ran. However, Jerry walked straight into a highly paid job for Warner Brothers, where he would develop and produce new film projects and I believe that The Avengers film was such a project. It would appear that Jerry interested Warner Brothers in making an Avengers film and they bought the rights.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lhbizness
How to Succeed... at Posting!


Joined: 01 Feb 2014
Posts: 975

PostPosted: Sun Jul 27, 2014 6:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'd imagine that there also has to be a conflict of interests now, with The Avengers title being so closely associated with the Marvel franchise - and Warner Brothers is in partnership with DC Comics. So it's all very complicated. They'd probably have to go the route of the new comics and call it Steed & Mrs. Peel or something like that, just to differentiate.

Frankly, I'm not in the least bit sad that The Avengers might never again be made into a feature film. Other than the possibility of drumming up renewed interest in the show, it's one of those things that seems much better if left alone and allowed to remain in its own time period with its original cast. It's probably always going to be a cult/niche concern, and there's nothing wrong with that. Some things should just be left alone.
_________________
"It's a conflict of science and humanity! Equations, isotherms...I have a dynamic too."

Avengers Episode Reviews: The Undertakers
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
MikeR
Epic


Joined: 19 Jul 2009
Posts: 1091
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sun Jul 27, 2014 6:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's a very good point whenever The Avengers is mentioned nowaday, its more Iron Man, Captain America and the like people think of.

It would be a massive P.R. operation to establish the Steed/Peel Avengers against such opposition, hence I don't think Warner Brothers would see this as a sound investment.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
anti-clockwise
The Bird Who Wrote Too Much


Joined: 17 May 2013
Posts: 1683

PostPosted: Sun Jul 27, 2014 9:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

MikeR wrote:
Margo

There were two test screening in the States and generally the film got a big thumbs down and so Warners decided to throw more money at the project to improve it and this resulted in some reshooting.

Jerry Weintraub wanted to create a franchise to rival the Bond movies and Iíve seen interviews where he was already talking about a second film. Both Weintraub and Chechik were self confessed fans of the TV series and yet they failed to see what made it work, on the other hand Mick Audsley, who was only an editor and knew little about the series seemed to have more understanding of it. The bitterness I can only put down to Weintraub having put many years of effort into developing the movie, only to have things not work out, but as the producer he has to take some responsibility for that.

Iím not completely certain, but I would think that Warner Brothers would hold the rights for any future Avengers/John Steed/Emma Peel product. Jerry Weintraub did own the rights with his own film company Weintraub Entertainment, but they went out of business and the amusing part is that Jerry resigned from his own company just before the receivers were called in. From that point of view I would think that Jerry would be lacking the finance to acquire the rights from the company he once ran. However, Jerry walked straight into a highly paid job for Warner Brothers, where he would develop and produce new film projects and I believe that The Avengers film was such a project. It would appear that Jerry interested Warner Brothers in making an Avengers film and they bought the rights.
thanks Mike. So besides the obvious obstacle with the Marvel comic Avengers, technically another movie could be made with Warner Brother's blessings? Has anyone tried that you know of? Throwing more money into the old movie sounds a bit absurd, but that's Hollywood for you.
_________________
"He likes his tea stirred anti-clockwise."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MikeR
Epic


Joined: 19 Jul 2009
Posts: 1091
Location: UK

PostPosted: Mon Jul 28, 2014 3:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Margo

Yes, Warner Brothers could finance another Avengers movie or they could sell the rights on to another company. During the summer of 1998, there was another big budget movie that failed to reach the box office figures that its makers were hoping for and that was Godzilla, which was actually supposed to be the first of a trilogy of films. Several companies were involved in the making and financing this film, although Tri-Star (who were/are connected to Columbia) seemed to the biggest. This year there was a new Godzilla movie released and again the makers are looking at expanding this concept into a franchise, though this time around Warner Brothers are the biggest company involved. So from that evidence I would not completely rule out seeing another Avengers/John Steed/Emma Peel feature film.

Alternatively, Warner Brothers could simply lease the rights to a production company, for them to obtain finance from a third source and then allow Warners to distribute the picture. So there are various options.

Another point worth noting was that when Jerry Weintraub convinced Warner Brothers to go with an Avengers movie, the people running the company were completely different to those running it several years later when the film was ready for distribution. The result of this could well have been that the people running Warners were concerned about the film being a flop, but not worried because they did not commission it and as such they cannot be held responsible on whether the decision to make it was good or bad. The hierarchy within large film companies can be subject to immediate changes and I believe there is a high turnover of staff in these pressurised positions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
why bother
Thingumajig


Joined: 09 Jan 2012
Posts: 65
Location: Sussex

PostPosted: Mon Jul 28, 2014 4:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Never ever rule anything out. The top people are always changing. I've had shows were I've been booked by one person , a few weeks later when I've gone to do the gig that persons no longer there and somebody else is in charge.
So there is always a chance. Films Godzilla has already been quoted, but also look at Buffy the Vampire slayer and Stargate, both were medioca films, both spawned incredibly successful TV series. So there is always the chance.
Now wheather they should do it or not is a completely differnt question.
_________________
Little Storping Museum. The Online museum of Television. www.murdersville.co.uk
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
mousemeat
A Touch of Brimstone


Joined: 04 Sep 2008
Posts: 4203
Location: Elvis Central, U.S.A.

PostPosted: Mon Jul 28, 2014 11:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

MikeR wrote:
That's a very good point whenever The Avengers is mentioned nowaday, its more Iron Man, Captain America and the like people think of.

It would be a massive P.R. operation to establish the Steed/Peel Avengers against such opposition, hence I don't think Warner Brothers would see this as a sound investment.


you know, when the series debut on U.S. TV in 1966, I thought the AVENGERS, was gonna be about Antman, Hulk, Iron man, etc...I was
wrong, and quite frankly, I'm glad to have been intoduced to Steed,
mrs. peel, and their universe.....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MikeR
Epic


Joined: 19 Jul 2009
Posts: 1091
Location: UK

PostPosted: Thu Jul 31, 2014 10:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

why bother wrote:
Never ever rule anything out. The top people are always changing. I've had shows were I've been booked by one person , a few weeks later when I've gone to do the gig that persons no longer there and somebody else is in charge.
So there is always a chance. Films Godzilla has already been quoted, but also look at Buffy the Vampire slayer and Stargate, both were medioca films, both spawned incredibly successful TV series. So there is always the chance.
Now wheather they should do it or not is a completely differnt question.


Hi John

You have a very valid point there as both Buffy and SG1 movies were okay, but not brilliant, but as you pointed out, they both led to very successful (and incidentally ones I regularly watched) TV series.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Avengers International Fan Forum Forum Index -> The Avengers Spun-Off All times are GMT - 9 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 1 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group. Hosted by phpBB.BizHat.com

Free Web Hosting | File Hosting | Photo Gallery | Matrimonial


Powered by PhpBB.BizHat.com, setup your forum now!
For Support, visit Forums.BizHat.com