A CENTOPÉIA HUMANA 3 perde um de seus astros
30/03 - 10h28
por Heitor Valadão
A Centopéia Humana não é uma franquia de grande sucesso financeiro. Os filmes passaram quase despercebidos pelos cinemas em poucas salas que atrairiam os fãs de filmes de horror. Mas isso não quer dizer que não tenha se tornado um cult, ou que seu elenco não tenha o ego um pouco inflado.
De acordo com a revista Empire, o problema é que o ator Dieter Laser, que interpretou o Dr. Heiter no primeiro filme, desistiu de participar de A Centopéia Humana 3, e pode ser processado pela produtora. Em sua conta no Twitter, o diretor Tom Six postou o seguinte:
Para a revista Fangoria, a produtora Ilona Six, irmã do diretor, deu a inflamada declaração: "por causa do sucesso de A Centopéia Humana, parece que o ego do senhor Dieter Laser cresceu a risíveis e grandes proporções. Primeiro assinando o contrato e dizendo que o roteiro de A Centopéia Humana 3 era fantástico, e depois exigindo suas próprias e inaceitáveis mudanças de roteiro, e agora recusando-se a interpretar o papel quando faltam apenas sete semanas para o início das filmagens. Six Entertainment Company vai entrar com uma ação contra Dieter Laser. Tom Six diz para não nos preocuparmos: as filmagens serão adiadas e começarão ainda este ano".
Em resposta ao site alemão Screen Read, Laser diz que "é muito simples: eu amei a história quando me contaram, assinei o contrato e me prometeram que eu teria o roteiro de quatro a seis semanas. Quando chegou - seis meses depois e apenas após o anúncio oficial - eu não gostei nada do resultado, não me identifiquei com o personagem da forma que foi escrito e imediatamente e entusiasmadamente desenvolvi, em uma maratona de um dia e noite inteiros, uma versão cheia de sugestões práticas e concretas que me permitiriam interpretar o personagem com força total - o mesmo procedimento foi feito com o Dr. Heiter no primeir filme - mas desta vez também haveria efeitos inevitáveis à estrutura dramática. E isso foi demais para o Tom e como ele não conseguiu viver com as minhas sugestões e eu, como um method actor não conseguia me identificar com essa versão, eu disse a ele que não vejo outra forma a não ser 'trocar os cavalos'. Só isso."
Como Dieter Laser interpretaria ele mesmo no novo filme, talvez seu problema seja que ele não ficou satisfeito com a forma que o diretor o vê. Não se sabe se isso seria apenas uma jogada de publicidade para atrair atenção ao filme, ou mesmo dar mais tempo para pré-produção e captação de recursos.
É que eu vi Estrada Perdida. Paguei tanto pau que eu vou todas as músicas que eu tenho aqui do Rammstein no máximo! Está tudo lá: esquizofrenia, lembranças, manipulação, aquelas cenas pesadelo que ele não só faz com que não fiquem enfadonhas, mas que sejam absurdamente assustadoras. A consciência do protagonista personificada em vários personagens. Bom ver quem já é mais calejado na filmografia dele (principalmente Cidade dos Sonhos), porque embora esse seja o filme mais doidão dele, eu não tive tanta dificuldade. Mesmo assim, é um deleite pros masturbadores mentais, e pode ganhar novas roupagens cada vez que revisto. E, basicamente a trama é muito simples. Só precisa juntar os pedaços e deixar o pesadelo fluir.
Meu rank dos filmes dele:
01. Cidade dos Sonhos
02. Estrada Perdida
03. Veludo Azul
04. Coração Selvagem
05. O Homem-Elefante
06. Eraserhead
07. História Real
Os 4 primeiros são OPs.
Mesmo quando ele usa uma narrativa mais clássica ele consegue colocar um elemento bizarro. Tanto pela inacreditabilidade (O Homem-Elefante), quanto pelas ironias (Veludo Azul), ou pela segurança em algo completamente destoante da filmografia (História Real, que mesmo assim, gosto pacas). Flertando com o fantástico (Eraserhead), ou com o delírio (Cidade dos Sonhos, Estrada Perdida) ele consegue ser pessoal. Gostaria de ressaltar também Coração Selvagem, injustamente esquecido e subestimado por aí, é o filme mais pessoal dele, reúne os anos 50, o cinema, Elvis, o exagero, em uma viagem pelos EUA e ser muito crítico exagerando todo o modo de vida. E Bobby Peru, um dos vilões mais engraçados por aí. Mas que fica um pouco ofuscado (ok, justamente) por outros mais interessantes, como o Mistery Man, de Estrada Perdida ou o Frank de Veludo Azul...
LEGENDS OF TOMORROW DEVE SER O TÍTULO DA SÉRIE DERIVADA DE ARROW E THE FLASH
Atom, Mulher-Gavião e a primeira Canário Negro estrelarão o novo programa 21/04/2015 - 12:40 - MARCELO HESSEL
Segundo a Variety, Legends of Tomorrow deve ser o título da série derivada de Arrow e The Flash . A informação casa com declarações do ator John Wesley Shipp - que vive o pai de Barry Allen em The Flash, que chamou o derivado de Legends em encontro com fãs.
Estarão na série Atom (Brandon Routh), Capitão Frio (Wentworth Miller), Onda Térmica (Dominic Purcell), Dr. Martin Stein (Victor Garber) e a primeira Canário Negro (Caity Lotz), além dos já anunciados novatos Mulher-Gavião (Ciara Renée) e Rip Hunter (Arthur Darvill).
A ideia é que essa nova série seja exibida a partir de janeiro ou fevereiro de 2016, nos EUA. Greg Berlanti, Andrew Kreisberg e Marc Guggenheim são os criadores do programa, que ainda não tem previsão de início para suas gravações. Nos quadrinhos, não há nenhuma série com esse nome, mas a DC já publicou uma antologia entre 1998 e 2001 chamada Legends of the DC Universe, com histórias isoladas de personagens vários da editora.
Gosto muito da câmera do Lumet. Ele parece não conduzir o filme, sua câmera aparenta apenas estar estar lá, como parte do cenário. Bem subliminar. Talvez seja por isso que eu sempre me pegue imerso nos seus filmes, sejam eles clássicos como Rede de Intrigas e Doze Homens ou filmes menores como Sombras da Lei e Sob Suspeita. Lumet é definitivamente um dos meus favoritos.
Meu Top:
* Até os Deuses Erram
* O Príncipe da Cidade
* Antes que o Diabo Saiba que Você Está Morto
* Um Dia de Cão
* Rede de Intrigas
* Doze Homens e Uma Sentença
* Sérpico
* Armadilha Mortal
* Equus
* Sombras da Lei
* Q & A - Sem Lei, Sem Justiça
1) A Lista de Schindler
2) O Resgate do Soldado Ryan
3) Império do Sol
4) Tubarão
5) Contatos Imediatos do Terceiro Grau
6) E.T. - O Extraterrestre
7) A Cor Púrpura
8) Indiana Jones e a Última Cruzada
9) Munique
10) A.I. - Inteligência Artificial
Opa pessoal, beleza?
Eu estou com um projeto de um curta metragem de star wars ( fan filme ).
Acredito que seja do conhecimento de vocês, que não há muitas produções nesse estilo brasileiras (VFX)
Pois bem, eu conto com a ajuda de um amigo meu que é formado em artes cênicas, e, coordenador de um projeto de teatro em minha cidade. (ele vai atuar)
No geral, tenho a sinopse pronta, e gostaria que avaliassem, obrigado.
Título: Legado
Sinopse: Numa galáxia tão, tão distante, ocorre uma guerra étnica com os humanos e as demais espécies da galáxia, exilando os humanos em um planeta chamado Terra, fazendo com que eles regredissem milhares de anos em tecnologia, e, também esquecer que sequer foram ao espaço algum dia, até os conhecimentos sobre a força.
Uma ordem secreta se escondeu na Terra no período da guerra étnica, preservando os segredos sobre a força por milhares de anos, escolhendo famílias selecionadas aptas a controlar a força ( que possuíssem midi-chlorians ) ao decorrer da história da humanidade, para que um dia, o líder da ordem achasse algum discípulo capaz de tomar seu lugar e fazer tudo voltar a ser como já foi um dia.
Uma discussão interessante sobre o Crispin Glover, no IMDB (quem abriu o tópico fui eu). Pra quem entende inglês, estou postando todas as mensagens trocadas aqui, até porque depois de um tempo os tópicos são apagados desse site. Onde aparecem asteriscos o autor do post está citando uma mensagem de outra pessoa.
Recomendo a leitura na íntegra e que os links do Youtube também sejam vistos inteiros, do contrário vocês não vão entender.
In this interview the actor Crispin Glover talks about BTTF. He says if I recall correctly that the whole story about him wanting to earn more money than Michael J. Fox is false.
I noticed in the sequences they used money in the plot. In BTTF 3, too, since Doc is killed for the same reason.
What do you think? Who is the real s**mbag, Crispin or the BTTF staff?
It's like the Eric Stoltz footage: we'll never get all of it. Bob Gale has parroted the "Crispin wanted too much money" story for so long (over various commentaries and interviews) that it just kinda sinks in. Maybe Crispin did turn them off with his speaking out on the financial gain aspects of Back to the Future. Who knows? Or maybe he did get caught up in the movie's success and think he deserved a big raise.
What do I think? It is ancient history and I choose not to think about it.
All kinds of things go on behind the scenes in getting most movies made, I only concern myself with what the final form of the movie looks like. In my opinion BTTF 2 and 3 didn't suffer by not having Glover as part of the cast so to me it is a non-issue.
We'll never know but he is or seems an eccentric, so I can't really take what he says seriously. Tom Wilson (Biff) said Crispin's a bit different but definetly exaggerates that act in public.
Anyway I'm glad he wasn't in the sequel. I loved him in the first movie but if he had reprised his role, Marty and Doc would have gone back to the 60's to get the Almanac in part 2, which sounds terrible.
Going back to the 50's was a much better idea, so I didn't miss Crispin.
Here's the whole story:
************
Crispin Glover was asked to reprise the role of George McFly. Glover expressed interest, but could not come to an agreement with the producers regarding his salary. Glover later stated in a 1992 interview on The Howard Stern Show that the producers' highest offer was $125,000, which was less than half of what the other returning cast members were offered. Gale has since asserted that Glover's demands were excessive for an actor of his professional stature at that point in time. Later, in an interview on The Opie and Anthony Show in 2013, Glover stated that the primary reason was a philosophical (and ethical) disagreement on the overall moral that the film was conveying.
For George McFly to appear, Zemeckis used some previously filmed footage of Glover from the first film and inter-spliced Jeffrey Weissman, who wore prosthetics, including a false chin, nose, and cheekbones, and used various obfuscating methods, such as background, sunglasses, rear shot, and even upside-down, to resemble Glover. Dissatisfied with the results, Glover filed a lawsuit against the producers, including Steven Spielberg, on the grounds that they neither owned his likeness, nor had permission to use it. Due to Glover's lawsuit, there are now clauses in the Screen Actors Guild collective bargaining agreements which state that producers and actors are not allowed to use such methods to reproduce the likeness of other actors.
************
We can't really say that if he didn't left things would turn out to be worse than they did, even though the sequences are great, this is not a valid argument.
Anyway, I only listened to this interview a while ago, and I find very strange that the producers decided to use money in the plot of both movies after all the problems they had with Crispin.
One thing we forgot to mention was the fact they used the footage from the 1st movie and that Jeffrey Weissman to fool the audience into thinking he was still there. Probably (that's obvious) not paying him for anything. It sounded like a mockery to me.
We will never know what really happened, but one thing we can all be sure, neither one of them are saints.
I am interested to know why the Eric Stoltz footage (if exists, since we only have pictures until now) is never going to be released. Did someone ask Eric if he would agree to this and if his departure from the movie was something so awful that justify this decision?
I'd say they were trying to get him cheap...plus he knew they were filming two movies back to back and just wanted fair pay that his costars were getting. He is a weirdo but it wasn't cool what they did and he made them pay.
Crispin says Bob Gale is the one who continues to spread lies about him:
"even though the sequences are great this is not a valid argument"
It is to me. The 60's idea would be stupid and boring. Marty just trying to retrieve the book from Biff without the fun and danger of interfering with the events of the first movie. Sounds lame. Crispin not doing it made that happen as well as George been dead in alternative 1985 which gave it a unique darker tone. And why would Biff give his younger self the almanac when he's 30? Makes zero sense. At least as it exists he gives his 17-18 year old self it and gives him a few years to hear results for the next few years and realise the book is true and to be prepared for when he's 21 for a great future. I'm glad Crispin didn't do it even though he's great in the first.
I think Crispin Glover got too full of himself and thought he was Marlon Brando. By his own admission he was analyzing every scene and line, proving to be difficult to work with trying to change the focus instead of remembering his lines and taking direction. After watching him on the Sirius radio interview I can see why the director must have got seriously annoyed. They were under a very tight shooting schedule and for the first film, money would have been fairly tight with the studio heads breathing down their necks. In movie production, time is money. When you are churning out a light comedy quickie, you don't want an egotistic unknown actor in a supporting role rewriting the script, analyzing the character's motivation and the scene's focus. They were doing comedy not Eugene O'Neill! No one knew that it would be the enormous success it turned out to be and spawn two sequels. For all they knew it would have been a summer holiday teen movie then straight to video. I guess that Crispin just wasn't a team player. The question is, why was he hired in the first place?
Steve Buscemi's 'Living in Oblivion' was a hilarious 1995 film about a low budget 'one take' filmmaker whose project was being ruined by an egotistical no name actor (allegedly based on a young Brad Pitt) who was ruining the budget and throwing off the other actors by changing every scene and demanding retake after retake because he had thought of another way to play the part.
If they were capable of creating a great story with the absence of Crispin, don't you think they would have done a better one (or at least similar) with him? I think you are underestimating the competence of all people involved in this.
One aspect I didn't like from the 3rd movie was that Seamus Mcfly character. The 2nd also became dull when they decided to cast that Jeffrey Weissman to look like Crispin.
We may deny, but the sequences were affected by this bickering.
I actually think that 1960s would've been much better idea for the Part III instead of Western.
I don't think the western idea was bad. Actually it was even better than what they did in the 2nd movie. What spoils that third movie is the romance between Clara and Emmett.
Here's what think really happened:
Bob Gale and Robert Zemeckis originally wanted Michael J. Fox for the role, but he was unavailable because of "Family Ties", so to buy themselves more time to work a deal and to keep the studio from canning the project, they went ahead and started filming with Eric Stoltz, going through the charade of filming almost the entire movie with what was essentially Fox's stand-in. Then when they finally scored a deal with Fox, they used the "Stoltz just isn't funny enough" excuse to can Stoltz and give the job to Fox.
Crispin Glover was very critical of the way Gale and Zemeckis treated Stoltz and was uncooperative on set when refilming new scenes with Fox. For instance, a close-up filmed during the first production would have Glover looking left, but when it came time to shoot the two-shot with Glover and Fox, Glover would quickly look right just as the camera rolled in order to blow the continuity. Glover was also apparently vocally critical of the ending of the film which seemed to equate financial prosperity with moral correctness, and he thought it was a bad message.
When it came time for the sequel, Glover noticed that he was being offered substantially less than his returning co-stars, so he asked for equal pay. Gale and Zemeckis turned him down, and to add insult to injury spread the rumor that Glover had overestimated his own worth and asked for too much, implying that his demands were unreasonable. Then they turned around and used footage from the first film and an actor wearing prostectics so they could have Glover in the film anyway, which seems like a real slap in the face.
So in the end, I think Glover may have pushed things when he shouldn't have, but I have to respect him for standing on his principles. Gale and Zemeckis, on the other hand, unfairly screwed at least two actors during the production of these films, so I don't think too highly of them at all, but they knew how to play the Hollywood game, so they came out on the top.
Casting someone to look like George and in the way it was presented in the 2nd movie was a low move, that's for sure. It's one thing to cast another dude, but they made it look like Crispin was still there.
That future George walking upside down was ridiculous.
Given what the trilogy earned for the studio, it makes sense for actors to hold out for as much as they can get. Especially if it won't really boost their credentials (since Glover already done one bttf movie). It's not like before the first movie, when it's popularity wasn't assured. the sequels were a pretty sure bet in scheme of things.
If that's true, it's Crispon Glovers own fault. The average person earns between 30 to 40k a year, give or take, and this *beep* wants 125k for 3 to 6 months work?
Greed is what it is. Hell, offer me a movie deal to earn 50k a year, and I'll do it... it's better than average.
I never have understood why actors get paid so much to act? They're not putting their lives on the line, they chose to be actors, so stiff *beep* if you don't get to see your family during shooting, but come on, 125k or more for standing in-front of a camera and speaking the way someone wants you to act? You couldn't enjoy the money and time you have off after the film, to between then and your next film?
I wanna bitch slap people like Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman who wont even look at a script for under a million bucks and then demand millions to do the film... what the *beep* makes them think they're so special and worth that much? It's acting, not saving the world.
I even get sick when I hear a movie coming out cost such and such millions of dollars to make. It just makes me wonder who the greedy prick was who demanded so much to act in the film? A budget of 40 million to make the movie? Or 30 million of it went to some greedy son of a bitch with an ego thinking no matter what they are in, it will make all that money back. Yeah, so the studios make more than the actors, so what, they make movies, thats how they do business and make money to make more movies... but one person thinks they are worth it? get *beep* They need to be kicked out on the street and made to live in the real world for a while to appreciate what you have and what lifes about, not giving them millions so they can live the lifestyle of the rich and shameless.
And the actors strike? HA... i'd like to see doctors and fireman etc go on strike and demand more money and have it given to them then some snobby actor who demands it because he thinks his *beep* doesn't stink.
*******
If that's true, it's Crispon Glovers own fault. The average person earns between 30 to 40k a year, give or take, and this *beep* wants 125k for 3 to 6 months work?
*******
No, he was offered 125K, he wanted more because it was less than HALF of what the other cast was getting who has similar screen time as he was. Why shouldn't he want to be paid equally to his co-stars. Acting isn't exactly a secure job either, right after they finish a movie, they're on looking for their next gig, and it's bad it'll be hard if they don't get anything. Work is competivitive yes, but acting is sometimes even more so and the work is usually very temporary.
You also have to consider that his agent will take a cut of that 125K if he accepts it.
*****
I never have understood why actors get paid so much to act? They're not putting their lives on the line, they chose to be actors, so stiff *beep* if you don't get to see your family during shooting, but come on, 125k or more for standing in-front of a camera and speaking the way someone wants you to act? You couldn't enjoy the money and time you have off after the film, to between then and your next film?
*****
I don't think you're fully aware of the long times and hours it is on set making movies. The days can be really tiring, and hours long. It's not like a 9-5 shift, it can last the entire day. That's not even considering that they would have to go through hours in makeup chair for the old age sequences.
You two have missed my point... They chose to be actors, so not working 9-5 or being with familly is a choice they made... 125k or 250k whatever... Wouldn't 50k be a decent price to take? He'll, actors shouldn't even be paid that much. Do it for the love of it, not the money. If someone demands more, tell them to get lost and find someone else happy to accept what's on the table.
********
Anyway I'm glad he wasn't in the sequel. I loved him in the first movie but if he had reprised his role, Marty and Doc would have gone back to the 60's to get the Almanac in part 2, which sounds terrible.
************
Im not sure if that is true. I read the "60's" script online, and George has an even smaller role then in the final film. In the 2015 scenes he is actually dead from old age or something. In 1985-A he was murdered by Biff, just like in the final version. And in 1967, Marty meets Lorraine, but George doesn't show up until the last minute. I'm assuming that this version was written after it was decided that Crispin wouldn't be in the movie. I wonder if there ever was a story that was written before he dropped out. it would be interesting to see what they did with George.
You're correct about the script. I don't there's a story that was written with a bigger role for George.
*******
They chose to be actors, so not working 9-5 or being with familly is a choice they made...
************
Yes, but they expect to get decent compensation for it, which is usually the case.
******
125k or 250k whatever...
Wouldn't 50k be a decent price to take?
******
Not if you're getting stiffed compared to everyone else. Again, it was LESS THAN HALF of what his other co-stars were getting. How would you feel if you worked for 8 hours and only got 44 while everyone else 88? I'm sure you'd be jumping for joy.
Added to that, $125,000 was the SECOND offer he got. The FIRST one was $150,000. Can you see what's wrong here? The second offer was lower.
******
He'll, actors shouldn't even be paid that much.
******
You mean they shouldn't be compensated for working almost 24 hours a day, memorizing lines for scenes, rehershals and such? Also, doing stuff that's possibily dangerous (Micheal J. Fox accidently got hanged during the third film when Buford's gang hung him at the courthouse). Maybe you should try working the movies before you start saying "They shouldn't be paid that much". Outside perspective isn't the same as inside.
******
He'll, actors shouldn't even be paid that much. Do it for the love of it, not the money.
******
Yeah, they love it. But they also need to pay for food, ulitlites, house, car. You know things, you need to live on. Agents will take a chunck of their pay, then the government will take another. That $50K may be the only pay for the year if the acting gig is 6 months and it's the only thing he gets.
*****
If someone demands more, tell them to get lost and find someone else happy to accept what's on the table.
*****
Which is what they did, by hiring another actor to impersonate him, putting him in makeup and reusing shots that he did for the film without his permission and not paying him for reusing those shots, which in turn caused them him to sue them in court and winning.
Crisp in Glover sounds like a greedy bastard
*******
So in the end, I think Glover may have pushed things when he shouldn't have, but I have to respect him for standing on his principles. Gale and Zemeckis, on the other hand, unfairly screwed at least two actors during the production of these films, so I don't think too highly of them at all, but they knew how to play the Hollywood game, so they came out on the top.
*******
Not necessarily regarding Gale. As a result of Glover's lawsuit, in which Steven Spielberg was a co-defendant, Spielberg got mad at Gale and retaliated against him by buying up a number of scripts Gale had written and then refusing to produce them, effectively blacklisting him from Hollywood.
Falando nisso, aqui vai o link (também em inglês) para o primeiro roteiro (rascunho/esboço) de DVPF 2:
http://backtothefuture.wikia.com/wiki/Back_to_the_Future_Part_II_first%20_draft_screenplay
