(I didn't write this to be contentious. I wrote it to have an interesting conversation).
I for one am not arguing against the point of the thread. But even though I am not a middle child (
), I'm typically inclined to try and see it from the other side, too. It probably -is- crass commercialism. But I still feel like supposing that Sony might -not- be the bad guy...entirely.
Here's a narrative that can be taken directly from the article that, I think, paints Smith as the villian, and not necessarily Sony:
Scene I:
There -is- a script. It is written by Etan Cohen (see second quote below). The ducks are in a row, if shakily. Sony thinks, damn, we better kick it while the kickin's good.
But several observers suspect the studio moved ahead with production largely because all of the key players -- including Smith, Jones and director Barry Sonnenfeld -- were finally ready to go, and a delay might have jeopardized that.
Scene II:
But wait, Smith isn't happy. It seems he's taken an interest in screenwriting, himself. In fact, he expects to have hands-on participation, and his box office pull damn well says he will. But hey, who knows...maybe he is a better writter than Etan Cohen. And, he must also know better than the studio, Sonnenfeld, and Parkers (see quote below) --he is Will Smith, you know.
Smith and the others agreed to reunite based on a script from Tropic Thunder writer Etan Cohen. But though that version found favor with the studio, Sonnenfeld and producer Walter Parkes, Smith wanted changes. "He's become very enamored with aspects of screenwriting," says a source involved with the production. The source believes Smith has earned the right to weigh in on the script, but he says the actor's process "takes a long time."
Scene III:
Oops, Smith won't be satisfied. Sony brings in another writer. Still, Smith knows best, and production is in jeopardy. But what can be done? Smith more-or-less
is MIB. The project needs his star power if it's to move anywhere, at all. If I'm the producer, I'm starting to lose sleep, if I wasn't already. (Yeah, the article points out that Parkers may be a villian. I have no idea. I won't touch that).
One former studio chief is not surprised that Sony did not come up with a script that passed muster with Smith in the time allotted. "If he wasn't satisfied after it's been years in development, how are you going to fix that at Christmas?" this person asks. And though the prolonged pause in production is costing Sony millions, Smith is under no pressure to approve a script that is not 100% to his liking.
A key player on the film explains that the nature of the project has made it difficult to get the screenplay right.
In other words, Smith is being a prima donna bitch and has sent the whole thing into a tailspin. I think this article's contents have pretty adequately established this --though, it seems, against its will or its intention.
Scene, er, IV:
So, what a pretty mess we have here. Maybe the tax break wasn't the initial goal. Maybe it's just (in this situation, uneviable) Sony trying to salvage what they can and do some damage control. Though, yeah, it doesn't sound like much of a silver lining.
Now the hiatus has been extended until March 28, and a new writer, David Koepp, who did uncredited work on the first MIB, has been brought on board to work out complex script issues involving time travel. Although the delay is costing millions, Sony says those expenses will be more than offset because the studio started shooting in late 2010 -- in time to save millions thanks to New York state tax breaks.
But the decision to start filming a complicated, effects-driven tentpole without a finished script has some in Hollywood baffled. The top executive at one production company expressed skepticism that "the tax break is covering the chaos cost," adding, "There isn't any tax break that would convince me to do [what Sony did] -- ever!"
So the article, of course, doesn't give us all sides of the story. I'm certainly not trying to say with any kind of authority that it's Smith's fault for putting the mess into motion. How could I? I'm just looking at the contents of the article, and, based upon those, thinking that it is far from clear that Sony is the villian. Smith does seems like a nice guy. Unlike the other six billion people on this planet, I am not in love with him. I do not particularly love his movies. Maybe that gives me some perspective. Despite the evidence trail that is presented by this article -in black and white- its conclusion and sentiment seem to have been formed in willful blindness of that evidence. Of course I'm not a decision maker in Hollywood. But if anything, I think, and based solely upon the information provided by this article!, if I was such a decision maker, I think I might be incline towards putting Smith on my Difficult to Work With, Becareful About Committing Big Money Attached to Him List. I'm sorry to say. That's, of course, without benefit of hearing his side of his story from him...or from his agent.
Anywayyyyyys. I agree about the time travel thing. Why?! Maybe the only films that pulled that off well were the Back to the Future movies.
(Oops, an apology. Maybe it's not the best choice of how to spend one's time...writing a long post on a forum, that is, heheh. But who's to say. Eh, I got caught up in it, I guess. But the work is done, so...). Sigh.
sorry, shallow I know
