Universal topples del Toro's Mountains of Madness.

[trekgeezer]

This is a shame,

http://www.darkhorizons.com/news/19770/madness-collapses-del-toro-s-mountains-

[Doc Daneeka]

This is the kind of s**t boycotts are made of; I'd start one, and show a petition to every horror fan I know of if the genre fanbase weren't made so largely up of such sarcastic and jaded people. F**K Universal, and doubly F**K all this even-more-so-than-usual "demographically-minded" bull that infects all studios now. Honestly, this gets me so ticked, I'd pass up on Strangers 2 if Universal funded it, and I thought the first film was one of the best American horrors to come out in years.

[InformationGeek]

Dang, you beat me to the punch!  I was about to post the same article, but from a different source.

According to the article I saw, Universal wouldn't give them the money because they wouldn't drop the film down to a PG-13 rating.  What a load of crap.  You had a great director lined up and two big names that bring in the cash in almost all of their films (James Cameron's Avatar & Titanic are the higgest grossing films of all time and Tom Cruise still manages to draw tons of people in.   His last film did bring in $262 million).  Why not jump at this?!

It reminds of how BioShock got screwed over because the company would only allow a PG-13 film.

[feiyen]

Really? PG-13? Guess it all comes down to the same thing over and over, money! If they can get the whole family to see it that's more money for them. Although I can't say I was enthusiastic about the 3D part. Still I would have watched this (non 3D), thanks Universal for making me lose all hope in you guys.

[akiratubo]

Tom Cruise was supposed to play the lead?  No big loss, then.

[Doc Daneeka]

Tom Cruise was supposed to play the lead?  No big loss, then.

Guillermo Del Toro was supposed to direct, it was supposed to be a fiercely non-"Hollywood" (though not superficially "anti-Hollywood") picture, and people gush over Heath Ledger playing the Joker and Jean-Claude Van Damme playing a good himself in "JCVD," so getting Cruise into a Lovecraft character wouldn't be absolutely unheard of. Quite possibly a big loss.

[dean]

ARrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrghhhhhh!!!!


Del Toro must be thinking what does he have to do to get a movie made these days.  First The Hobbit, now this!   

[Jack]

Too bad, it sounds kind of interesting.  Not making a movie simply because it would have to be aimed at adults and not families...sad.  Shows that all those old notions of movies being a mix of art and business have been done away with - it's all business now. 

[InformationGeek]

ARrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrghhhhhh!!!!


Del Toro must be thinking what does he have to do to get a movie made these days.  First The Hobbit, now this!   

Don't worry!  We still got Don't Be Afraid of the Dark coming this summer.  He'll get a movie of his in theaters soon!  Sure, he isn't directing, but he wrote and produced it!  Plus it'll be R, so we are still getting a rated R horror film soon enough from him.

[akiratubo]

Guillermo Del Toro was supposed to direct, it was supposed to be a fiercely non-"Hollywood" (though not superficially "anti-Hollywood") picture, and people gush over Heath Ledger playing the Joker and Jean-Claude Van Damme playing a good himself in "JCVD," so getting Cruise into a Lovecraft character wouldn't be absolutely unheard of. Quite possibly a big loss.

Eh, I'm not a big Del Toro fan.  IMHO, his movies are just kind of "ok".  Pan's Labyrinth is probably his best, and I actually liked the "real" parts of that movie much more than the fantastic parts.  I honestly wasn't all that excited about him making "In the Mountains of Madness".

[Barack Clinton]

Speaking as someone who has actually READ Lovecraft and was appalled at the terrible adaptations of his work so far I'd have to say this is perhaps good news.

[wickednick]

The studios get so caught up with trying please every demographic that they forget that people sometimes want to see something truly different. Think about if Alien,Jaws, The Exorcist or Poltergeist would be made now days. The studios would be like "what, no love story? We need to apeal to that female demographic" or "we need to slip in a real world message to make this movie more poinent to the times we live in."

Seriously, f**k Universal.

[AndyC]

The studios get so caught up with trying please every demographic that they forget that people sometimes want to see something truly different. Think about if Alien,Jaws, The Exorcist or Poltergeist would be made now days. The studios would be like "what, no love story? We need to apeal to that female demographic" or "we need to slip in a real world message to make this movie more poinent to the times we live in."

Seriously, f**k Universal.

Very true. The film industry was built on a lot of successful movies that would never get made today. I get really annoyed when studios brag on their track record and pay a lot of lip service to past movies they'd undoubtedly micromanage and focus-group to death if they didn't reject them outright. Sorry, the studio that backed those movies was not the same studio, even if it did have the same name. No studio exec has any right to brag about past success, as if there's some kind of tradition that's alive and well today.

[Couchtr26]

Eh, I'm not a big Del Toro fan.  IMHO, his movies are just kind of "ok".  Pan's Labyrinth is probably his best, and I actually liked the "real" parts of that movie much more than the fantastic parts.  I honestly wasn't all that excited about him making "In the Mountains of Madness".

I actually prefer it in reality with the fantasy as escapism from the horrors surrounding the character.  He seems to work best in tragedy.

[dean]

The studios get so caught up with trying please every demographic that they forget that people sometimes want to see something truly different. Think about if Alien,Jaws, The Exorcist or Poltergeist would be made now days. The studios would be like "what, no love story? We need to apeal to that female demographic" or "we need to slip in a real world message to make this movie more poinent to the times we live in."

Seriously, f**k Universal.

Very true. The film industry was built on a lot of successful movies that would never get made today. I get really annoyed when studios brag on their track record and pay a lot of lip service to past movies they'd undoubtedly micromanage and focus-group to death if they didn't reject them outright. Sorry, the studio that backed those movies was not the same studio, even if it did have the same name. No studio exec has any right to brag about past success, as if there's some kind of tradition that's alive and well today.

Kind of like how certain sports are so dominated by the science of it, rather than just get out there and do you thing.  Analyse every statistic, give them all sorts of oxygen boosters or 'legal enhancers' and study the sport to death.  Half the time it seems like the people they're managing are wrapped in cotton wool: ooh I busted my fingernail, better have the week off to 'recover'.