|
|
Post by politicidal on Nov 9, 2017 0:53:25 GMT
...who were intended to be the planned franchise's 'grand visionaries' (oh dear lord  ) for future installments. TEXT: The dubbed Dark Universe of films, designed to showcase 21st century updates of Universal’s beloved classic black-and-white monster movies, have hit a snag. With Universal using this past summer’s The Mummy as the intended franchise starting point, director Alex Kurtzman and producer Chris Morgan were to be the grand visionaries for the ensuing films. However, after notable setbacks and delays, that will no longer be the case. In a devastating development for Universal’s monster movie revival plans, appointed continuity masterminds Alex Kurtzman and Chris Morgan, whose deals lapsed in September, have left the Dark Universe for brighter pastures, reports THR. The duo had been attached to oversee a lengthy list of Dark Universe follow-ups, starting with the 2019-scheduled Bride of Frankenstein, which has Beauty and the Beast director Bill Condon attached and courted Angelina Jolie as its star. Other would-be entries include The Invisible Man, Van Helsing, Dracula, The Creature from the Black Lagoon, The Wolfman, Frankenstein, The Hunchback of Notre-Dame and The Phantom of the Opera. www.denofgeek.com/us/movies/dark-universe/268835/universal-s-dark-universe-loses-producers-alex-kurtzman-and-chris-morgan |
|
|
|
Post by rateater on Nov 9, 2017 1:38:39 GMT
they should talk to the "old horror guys". anyone from the 80s that was big or was just producing fun horror (indie or hollywood) that are still around these days. get a team of old professionals that understand these films more than the new kids. that's what i'm thinking right now. just fantasizing.
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Nov 9, 2017 1:39:14 GMT
they should talk to the "old horror guys". anyone from the 80s that was big or jwas ust producing fun horror (indie or hollywood) that are still around these days. get a team of old professionals that understand these films more than the new kids. that's what i'm thinking right now. just fantasizing. No you're absolutely right. Joe Dante, John Carpenter, Sam Raimi, Tom Holland, or even people like Tim Burton or James Cameron (make the fool go back to his roots). Ffs get the band back together and do real horror. Not this wannabe Avengers shyte. |
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Nov 9, 2017 1:41:37 GMT
This whole thing has got to be embarrassing for Universal. They were really pushing the Dark Universe as a big thing earlier in the year, and now it might not even go beyond a single film.
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Nov 9, 2017 2:25:12 GMT
This whole thing has got to be embarrassing for Universal. They were really pushing the Dark Universe as a big thing earlier in the year, and now it might not even go beyond a single film. It's too bad because I'd actually love a 'classic monsters' shared universe. But not this 'Avengers: Impossible Jones' crap. |
|
|
|
Post by hardball on Nov 9, 2017 8:28:51 GMT
This whole thing has got to be embarrassing for Universal. They were really pushing the Dark Universe as a big thing earlier in the year, and now it might not even go beyond a single film. It's too bad because I'd actually love a 'classic monsters' shared universe. But not this 'Avengers: Impossible Jones' crap. If Universal still plans to go ahead with the DU, they should accept the classic monsters for what they are: for horror movies, not big budget action adventure fodder. |
|
|
|
Post by spooner5020 on Nov 9, 2017 14:55:55 GMT
That's a shame cause I was actually looking forward to the Invisible Man remake.
|
|
|
|
Post by darkknightofgotham on Nov 9, 2017 15:15:32 GMT
Really disappointing. I think that this universe had major potential. It's a shame The Mummy reboot was such a major fail.
Maybe they can redeem the universe with a good film like Wonder Woman did for the DCU.
|
|
|
|
Post by taylorfirst1 on Nov 9, 2017 15:51:22 GMT
I really want this thing to work but it is not looking good right now.
|
|
|
|
Post by NewtJorden on Nov 9, 2017 15:51:32 GMT
Good. Universal went way too fast with that and they are paying the price now. They should wait to see they actually have a good movie first before planning a whole cinematic universe.
|
|
|
|
Post by spooner5020 on Nov 9, 2017 17:21:38 GMT
I feel if the Mummy remake/reboot hadn't relied on so much of the Fraser Mummies, this might have had a chance. Don't try to tell me either that it was nothing like the Fraser movies because it totally was. It was nothing like the 1932 movie they said they were trying to recreate.
|
|
|
|
Post by leesilm on Nov 9, 2017 18:00:37 GMT
they should talk to the "old horror guys". anyone from the 80s that was big or was just producing fun horror (indie or hollywood) that are still around these days. get a team of old professionals that understand these films more than the new kids. that's what i'm thinking right now. just fantasizing. Wasn't it the Gary Oldman-starring DRACULA where they had someone tell them, "We need WAY more CGI" and that got the person fired in favor of someone who would do practical effects and try to make the atmosphere and scariness be more like the Bela Lugosi-era horror films? Perhaps that would be of some help in this new DARK UNIVERSE of Universal's horror classics. Go back to basics. I don't even mind a shared-universe, where the Frankenstein castle and Transylvania castle both exist and Dr.Frankenstein might make some crack about religion making men crazy rather than science and pointing to Vlad impaling all those people and a DRACULA sequel could see Drac checking out some science text books and one of them is written by Dr.F. Frankenstein but if you weren't looking at the volumes in his hands/on his desk, you wouldn't notice it. I don't need a Monster Mash at castle Dracula. I've got HOTEL TRANSYLVANIA for that. I don't even really mind there being someone who has contact with all of them (be it Dr.Jekyll, the Invisible Man, Dr.Van Helsing, or some other) in order to help strengthen the ties among the pieces of the shared universe. But I think that going back to basics on the horror would be good , and the new DRACULA UNTOLD movie they did seemed like a good set-up for a shared universe and it was also a good movie, not cheesy and perhaps not the horror film I was expecting, but overall a good movie about Dracula- the guy willing to become a monster to protect his family. I'd honestly go for having a DRACULA series that was based from the UNTOLD version- then have a separate "Shared Universal Horror" where Frankenstein's monster, the Creature from the Black Lagoon, Dracula, etc. were all truly HORROR films but in the old style from Lugosi/Karloff era, where you didn't need CGI, copious amounts of blood, or expensive action sequences in order to have a good, scary movie. They used camera angle, music, dramatic pause, drawn out silence, lighting, and the like to scare you using your own imagination/fears to do it.
|
|
|
|
Post by SciFive on Nov 9, 2017 18:51:22 GMT
Good. Universal went way too fast with that and they are paying the price now. They should wait to see they actually have a good movie first before planning a whole cinematic universe. Yeah, that's true!! Sometimes movies are unexpectedly huge - but few people really know how to predict such things every single time. There are surprises. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 10, 2017 5:57:43 GMT
They needed to go slower, even slower than the MCU did. No Russell Crowe MiB agency, no Jekyll and Hyde. Just tell this female Mummy's story.
|
|
|
|
Post by BexxyJ on Nov 10, 2017 13:10:59 GMT
The Mummy was a turd. I gotta be honest here. The Dummy, Blade Dunner and Spiderturd are all on my worst movies of 2017 list but as far as the franchises goes I think they deserve another chance and hope they can pull it together.
|
|
|
|
Post by leesilm on Nov 10, 2017 17:44:33 GMT
They shouldn't have shoved Tom C. down everyone's throats, and just stuck with the she-mummy. Honestly, a female mummy story could have been great. The idea that her father, the pharaoh, never had a male heir get to the right age (and honestly, the life expectancy for a pharaoh was like 40-something, tops, for the average cause there were a couple who lived to be in their 90s- but most of those outlived all of their children-- so if the movie alluded to such a thing where either the pharaoh lived so long he outlived all his sons so only his one really capable daughter was left as an option, or he was a younger pharaoh who just happened to have mostly female children and none of the few males lived long since infant & child death rates were very high at the time) to be named as the official successor to the crown, so he named this daughter who was highly intelligent, gifted with languages and diplomacy, skilled and fearless in battle, and incredibly loyal to her father. Only for him to have one of his younger wives gives birth to a male, making him think that if this bride could provide more male heirs- he was now blessed by the gods and wouldn't have to leave his kingdom in the hands of a daughter... that story is a bit less done-a-thousand-times than the priest falling for someone the pharaoh had put off limits (be it daughter, concubine, wife, or priestess) to the priest, and they defied the pharaoh so they were killed and cursed. They didn't need Cruise and he didn't help it, in fact I think people kind of rolled their eyes with a groan when they heard it was going to be a Tom Cruise action/adventure movie instead of the Mummy (I mean that it should have been Sofia Boutella/Princess Ahmanet's story- not Tom Cruise's).
If they were doing these movies, and they wanted a shared universe and all that, they need to stick with the monsters' stories. I didn't really mind the idea of having someone like Dr.Jekyll sort of bridging the characters, just their execution of the ideas that has been lacking. I really liked DRACULA UNTOLD, so I think it is unfortunate that they seem to be rebooting DRACULA again and dropping UNTOLD from the shared universe/any future plans.
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Nov 11, 2017 18:20:51 GMT
They shouldn't have shoved Tom C. down everyone's throats, and just stuck with the she-mummy. Honestly, a female mummy story could have been great. The idea that her father, the pharaoh, never had a male heir get to the right age (and honestly, the life expectancy for a pharaoh was like 40-something, tops, for the average cause there were a couple who lived to be in their 90s- but most of those outlived all of their children-- so if the movie alluded to such a thing where either the pharaoh lived so long he outlived all his sons so only his one really capable daughter was left as an option, or he was a younger pharaoh who just happened to have mostly female children and none of the few males lived long since infant & child death rates were very high at the time) to be named as the official successor to the crown, so he named this daughter who was highly intelligent, gifted with languages and diplomacy, skilled and fearless in battle, and incredibly loyal to her father. Only for him to have one of his younger wives gives birth to a male, making him think that if this bride could provide more male heirs- he was now blessed by the gods and wouldn't have to leave his kingdom in the hands of a daughter... that story is a bit less done-a-thousand-times than the priest falling for someone the pharaoh had put off limits (be it daughter, concubine, wife, or priestess) to the priest, and they defied the pharaoh so they were killed and cursed. They didn't need Cruise and he didn't help it, in fact I think people kind of rolled their eyes with a groan when they heard it was going to be a Tom Cruise action/adventure movie instead of the Mummy (I mean that it should have been Sofia Boutella/Princess Ahmanet's story- not Tom Cruise's). If they were doing these movies, and they wanted a shared universe and all that, they need to stick with the monsters' stories. I didn't really mind the idea of having someone like Dr.Jekyll sort of bridging the characters, just their execution of the ideas that has been lacking. I really liked DRACULA UNTOLD, so I think it is unfortunate that they seem to be rebooting DRACULA again and dropping UNTOLD from the shared universe/any future plans. Didn't catch Dracula Untold. It had that Resident Evil/Underworld vibe when I watched the trailers. |
|
|
|
Post by sdrew13163 on Nov 11, 2017 21:11:12 GMT
No you're absolutely right. Joe Dante, John Carpenter, Sam Raimi, Tom Holland, or even people like Tim Burton or James Cameron (make the fool go back to his roots). Ffs get the band back together and do real horror. Not this wannabe Avengers shyte. Seeing Tim Burton or Sam Raimi embrace their old style of the 80's and 90's to make The Invisible Man or Frankenstein would be incredible. |
|
|
|
Post by leesilm on Nov 13, 2017 1:18:15 GMT
They shouldn't have shoved Tom C. down everyone's throats, and just stuck with the she-mummy. Honestly, a female mummy story could have been great. The idea that her father, the pharaoh, never had a male heir get to the right age (and honestly, the life expectancy for a pharaoh was like 40-something, tops, for the average cause there were a couple who lived to be in their 90s- but most of those outlived all of their children-- so if the movie alluded to such a thing where either the pharaoh lived so long he outlived all his sons so only his one really capable daughter was left as an option, or he was a younger pharaoh who just happened to have mostly female children and none of the few males lived long since infant & child death rates were very high at the time) to be named as the official successor to the crown, so he named this daughter who was highly intelligent, gifted with languages and diplomacy, skilled and fearless in battle, and incredibly loyal to her father. Only for him to have one of his younger wives gives birth to a male, making him think that if this bride could provide more male heirs- he was now blessed by the gods and wouldn't have to leave his kingdom in the hands of a daughter... that story is a bit less done-a-thousand-times than the priest falling for someone the pharaoh had put off limits (be it daughter, concubine, wife, or priestess) to the priest, and they defied the pharaoh so they were killed and cursed. They didn't need Cruise and he didn't help it, in fact I think people kind of rolled their eyes with a groan when they heard it was going to be a Tom Cruise action/adventure movie instead of the Mummy (I mean that it should have been Sofia Boutella/Princess Ahmanet's story- not Tom Cruise's). If they were doing these movies, and they wanted a shared universe and all that, they need to stick with the monsters' stories. I didn't really mind the idea of having someone like Dr.Jekyll sort of bridging the characters, just their execution of the ideas that has been lacking. I really liked DRACULA UNTOLD, so I think it is unfortunate that they seem to be rebooting DRACULA again and dropping UNTOLD from the shared universe/any future plans. Didn't catch Dracula Untold. It had that Resident Evil/Underworld vibe when I watched the trailers. I've never seen a RESIDENT EVIL movie, but when watching it, the to me it was more like one part the original UNDERWORLD movie, one part 2010's ROBIN HOOD (w/ R.Crowe), one part KING ARTHUR (Clive Owen version) for tone and all. But I would say DRACULA UNTOLD was to the Lugosi version what EVER AFTER was to the Disney cartoon of CINDERELLA, where it told the story in such a way you could almost believe that it had actually happened. |
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Nov 13, 2017 1:44:45 GMT
It was a stupid idea--trying to create a Universal monsters version of the Marvel Universe.
Secondly, Kurtzman has no talent.
He and Orci said that they had wanted to make "Waiting for Godot" type movies. How are they qualified for SF or F? And one of them apparently hates dinosaurs too. What a jerk.
The studios cant do a faithful version of Dracula anyway-he is supposed to be a bad guy--the foreign invader seeking to exploit the homefront. They prefer the foreigner being the good guy and the home being corrupt and needing rescuing from the foreigner.
|
|
) for future installments.
