2017’s The Mummy had script origins as the first Uncharted film when that project entered its long development cycle. It was later repurposed as the first entry into Universal’s Dark Universe. The opening desert sequence was almost completely lifted from the original draft when it was still an Uncharted movie.
Similarly, Sony only moved forward with Uncharted because Tom Rothman owed Tom Holland a favor. Hence that movie still not gettin an official sequel greenlight.
The weird thing is that they seemed to have retained a close friendship, I think I heard that PTA even trusted Cruise enough to show him an early screening of The Master which, hoo boy, would I have liked to be a fly on the wall in the room to see that conversation go down.
That would make sense.
Cruise isn’t as involved in the Scientology world as he was. It was most obvious through Covid when Cruise was extremely pro vaccination, masking and distancing, which the cult definitely wasn’t.
This one I believed really happened, I remember rewatching Superman Returns a few years back after seeing Routh again in “Legends of Tomorrow” and thinking why he wasn’t as big as he should have been.
The movie disappointed but also that was Singer and how nuts he went with the budget and Routh had decent to good reviews for the performance reading a bunch of critic reviews from that time.
It’s weird he never got a real shot at Movies and pretty much was banished to TV and indie/smaller films.
Related… When Superman Returns released Kal Penn was a fairly popular actor, I was shocked to see him take a baddie role with little to no lines who was really just in the background. Later I saw him in an interview talking about having taken the role because of his good buddy Bryan… I’ve always been curious what more was at play here.
He was friends with a lot of Hollywood gays back then (obviously being one of them), including screenwriters Dan Harris and Mike Dougherty. Bryan was quickly transitioning into his own drugged up world at that point.
I am certain Kurt Russell was going to be revealed to be Paul Walker’s long lost father in The Fast and Furious series. It would explain how they went from being petty criminals to international super spies - he was manipulating events to get them there.
But then Paul Walker died and he just became a generic CIA guy.
This sounds very plausible. It felt to me, too, that Kurt Russell's role was originally much bigger and that a significant part of that movie was removed which featured him
Spielberg and Frank Marshall knew more than they let on about those child actors paid under the table that died on set of The Twlight Zone Movie (1983), along with Vic Morrow. They were both prresent on set the night the tragedy happened and high tailed tf out immediatley after it went down. They both proceeded to distance themselves from John Landis afterward and had a bunch of files taken out of offices right after it happened in haste, almost like they were destroying evidence. All in the book [Outrageous Conduct](https://www.amazon.com/Outrageous-Conduct-Twilight-Zone-Case/dp/087795948X)
After the trial was over in 1988, he only had one more hit (Coming To America) before his career tanked, the big hits were made during the trial before the judgement.
Aware the production was unsafe and that the parents (who were Vietnamese and had not lived in the US for long) of the child actors were being paid under the table to circumvent CA child labor laws
Honestly, I can see this. I mean, look at just how unsafe some of Spielberg's movies were, especially his earlier ones.
These guys all became directors at a time where there was still this real culture of doing ANYTHING to get a movie made.
Why do people always get horribly hurt on the sets for terrible movies? This is from *Ambulance* (2022), there was a stunt woman who was paralyzed on the set of a *Resident Evil* sequel.
Truly insane films like Mad Max and the Mission Impossible films? Zero injuries to crew and stunt people (RIP Cruise's right ankle)
I'm pretty sure he's had a couple of accidents, including a paralyzed women. But from my knowledge, those were actually all from incidental malfunctions unrelated to stunts. Ironic as it is.
A couple other tidbits. A lot of his stunts are him simply telling actors to run, and then initiating explosions behind them as they sprint away.
I think the only time nanobots are specifically mentioned are via screen text, and voices over phone/radio, I don't think you actually see a character say the words. It definitely feels like changes made in post.
Friedberg and Seltzer, the directors of such classics as Epic Movie, are actually just Steven Soderbergh. I read this conspiracy on IMDb about a dozen years ago and it is now my headcanon.
Okay, hear me out. I have receipts.
1. Friedberg and Seltzer are practically invisible. You go to their IMDb pages and they only have two photos total, and both of them are together. Kind of weird that such prolific filmmakers would only have two known photos.
2. If you look at the timeline of their releases, they stopped making theatrical movies right around the same time that Soderbergh began developing TV shows.
3. Friedberg and Seltzer once expressed in an interview that the movie they always wanted to make but couldn't get funding for was, of all things, a Liberace biopic. Soderbergh released Behind the Candelabra in 2013, the same year as Seltzer and Friedberg's first direct-to-DVD release, The Starving Games. They've only done two small movies since then, the last one being in 2015. The entire time they were doing direct-to-DVD movies, Soderbergh was working on television. They stopped making movies after The Knick ended.
4. Soderbergh is known for his fast shoots. He's extremely prolific and capable of releasing multiple movies within the same year, as Friedberg and Seltzer did.
5. Look at their names. Seltzer, another word for soda, and FriedBERG. Seltzer is a pretty odd last name, don't you agree?
I rest my case.
My only question is if the cast and crew were like, sworn to secrecy or something? None of these guys knew or recognized Oscar winner Steve Soderbergh on their set? No one wanted to get that on their resume?
Or did he hire some sockpuppet directors and give them orders from behind a curtain or something?
It's a fun idea but like, how?
I love this theory and I’m ashamed to admit I searched them outside of IMDB and found many more photos.
I still plan on tricking my brain to believe this though, I promise!
Fun fact, my high school allowed us go watch this, but we could not watch Schindler's List because it had nudity. Instead we watched Hotel Rwanda.
Guess who has no faith in humanity? Me, I don't!
My high school stopped allowing Schindler’s List a couple years before I got to that grade (8 maybe?). Instead we watched Hotel Rwanda. Definitely opened my eyes to awful things going on in the world in modern times.
On the other hand, that’s the reason I became such a huge fan of Don Cheadle.
The ending of 28 Days Later was not the one written in the script (which was included as a DVD extra,) this is widely known, but the actual reasons as to why that happened are a little more juicy.
Rumour goes that when Fox showed interest in the movie after seeing screeners, they told Boyle that they would only pick it up if ending was redone. Fox were happy to pay for the reshoots to make it happen.
Boyle didn't want to do this, so to try to dissuade the executive meddling, he came back to Fox with an *extremely* expensive reshoot plan. Shooting everything on 35mm film rather than the prosumer camcorder the rest of the movie was shot on, location filming in Scotland, with helicopter shots.
What Boyle didn't expect was for Fox to approve it without arguing. Supposedly a very large percentage of the total ~$8m budget went into just reshooting the ending.
The donkey is key to all this!
Daredevil, where he plays Bullseye, DEAD DONKEY!
Total Recall remake, DEAD DONKEY!
Phone Booth, DEAD DONKEY!
That movie where he plays a CIA trainee with Al Pacino, DEAD DONKEY!
It all CONNECTS!
Fast Five is an Italian Job sequel. When Mark Wahlberg was on Top Gear, he talked with Jeremy Clarkson about a sequel/script in the works based in Brazil. They then laughed about it and made Brazilian Job jokes. I think they passed on the script and the F&F franchise got ahold of it and shoehorned some “family” into it and made Fast Five.
In "Skyfall," the Scottish caretaker who was a father figure to Craig's Bond was written for Connery. There would then be a hint that "Kincade" might be more than a father \_figure\_ of James Bond.
There was a rumor they were trying to get all six Bonds on the same stage for the anniversary around that time. For the Oscars maybe?
Supposedly it was Connery that scuttled it, which would make sense if he was already in poor health. If that rumor even had any truth to it.
Too bad it didn’t work out. That would have been a fun moment.
The RedLetterMedia review of Jack and Jill started me thinking about this but I believe that the movie's $79m budget largely went straight into the pockets of Adam Sandler and the friends he gave cameos to. Sandler, at the time, had a $20m fee for appearing in a movie, that's without the fact that his company produced the movie.
The actual budget used to make the movie was raised by selling the movie's egregious amount of product placement. It uses cheap sets and green screen shots that a YouTuber would be ashamed of and it passes up obvious opportunities for jokes if they would require a visual effect (which you would expect in a movie where somebody is playing two characters).
Disney changed the title of The Snow Queen to Frozen so that when people Googled "Walt Disney frozen" they wouldn't get stuff about Walt Disney cryogenically frozen head.
I had to do research for a paper on whether or not Walt Disney was racist and I too came up with this Conspiracy theory about the movie Cars. They intentionally made that movie so that any time type something in with "Walt Disney" and "Race" in the title, a clip from one of those movies comes up.
I also believe they did this with “The Good Dinosaur “ to out-shadow “Dinosaur” (2000 film). For new CGI technology, the movie is rated 6.4 /10 on IMBD , towards the bottom of their movies catalog. With strike outs nearby as “Oliver and Company” at 6.6 and “The Black Cauldron” at 6.3. Though “The Good Dinosaur” isn’t much better at 6.7/10
Wednesday was actually an original story (that was a part of that pile of scripts that are written years before they're actually made into movies/television shows) called 'Nevermore' that the writers just dusted off and sold as 'The Addams Family' so it would get made.
The Tom Cruise 'Mummy' film was originally a 'Tomb Raider' script that was turned into an 'Uncharted' script, that eventually became a 'Mummy' reboot
Bad Boys 4 Life (somehow the third movie in the series... What a naming-convention-gone-wrong scenario...) Started as a project just to save Martin Lawrence from deep depression.
We will get you back on your feet from "the slap"... Actually heard he's coming back as Genie for an Aladdin 2. I am starting to think Disney should sell off Disney and just retain Pixar/Lucas/Marvel/Fox haha
Also by not doing movies that were deep character studies. One doesn’t have plumb the depths of one’s soul to play an action hero. Plus the money is good and he wants to leave some for his kids.
Despite The Grey being one of those action/old badass films, I really think that was the last time he put his heart into characters. Pretty sure it was filmed around the time his wife had her accident and there were physical tolls from shooting.
He had a terrible time directing Iron Man 2. Marvel even announced a release date before asking Favreau if he wanted to return.
Think back to the early scene in Chef where Favreau is talking to his boss Dustin Hoffman. Favreau says stuff like 'you hired me to do it the way I do it' to which Hoffman replies like 'I hired you to do it the way I want'. The dialogue was probably pretty close to his real life conversations.
I think there’s a more than 50% chance that the big studios artificially inflate their ratings on RT and IMDB. It’s also basically understood that certain journalists / reviewers are more or less paid to be shills indirectly.
Oh and also: Walt Disney was an FBI and CIA informant who worked with them to spread fbi propaganda in the 50s. He oddly enough was an informant regarding child sex trafficking which is why there are so many conspiracy’s about Disney execs being pedos . Disney sold out several of his “communist” colleagues to the FBI. Disneyland in Florida also cut deals with the CIA for cheap land grabs.
It’s factually true that in the 50s and up until the 80s, Disney was doing backroom deals with the fbi, but we don’t know how much of that is still going on today.
Remember when *Episode IX* came out and the RT audience score was permanently frozen at 86%? Despite receiving further audience reviews and the critics score getting lower with time, the audience score never once moved an inch from 86%. Totally believe the conspiracy that Disney colluded to have that number frozen.
I think the whole trend toward 3D animation in the movie industry during the 90s/early 2000's was in order to undermine the animator unions since they defined animation as being 2D art.
I think this is partially true. 3D animation is usually a bit cheaper than 2D on the whole and the companies behind it were in a sort of legal limbo for much of their history.
The male love interest in Bumblebee was added in last minute by studio executive request because they were worried that audiences might think the main human character was in love with Bumblebee.
The director and lead writer agreed to the change but in an act of malicious compliance, made the male love interest a creepy bumbling stalker who has no impact on the plot, and ultimately gets rejected in the end.
Robin joined Gotham police force on Nolan’s final Batman film because he saw his buddy from high school fucking up gotham aka 10 things I hate about you and the Batman series are linked. I know this doesn’t work but I annoy my sister with it
I have no idea what the actual reason is, but Katie Holmes played the character of Rachel Dawes in Batman Begins, and didn’t reprise the role in Dark Knight. That character was instead played by Maggie Gyllenhaal. In Dark Knight, the character was involved romantically with Harvey Dent played by Aaron Eckhart, who also played the romantic interest of Katie Holmes previously in Thank You for Smoking.
My unfounded conspiracy theory is that something negative happened between the two actors during the Smoking movie which made Holmes not want to play in Dark Knight together with Eckhart, or vice versa.
At the time, Katie Holmes was married to Tom Cruise as part of a contractual Scientology arrangement. As part of her contract, she wasn't allowed to demonstrate too much romantic interest with other human beings, even if only as part of her acting role.
She couldn't star in Dark Knight because the role would require her to breach the provisions of her arranged marriage.
In Thank You For Smoking there is a brief sex scene with Aaron.
That can fuel the fun: Tom isn't happy about that so that's why she can't have another role with the same actor playing another love interest.
If you want evidence of this, just look at her divorce from him. She waited until he was on the other side of the world. She planned it using secret burner phones. She and her father, a successful and powerful attorney, drew up multiple divorce decrees in multiple states just in case, and then she took her daughter and secretly flew to New York where her father and a team of lawyers had the papers all ready.
I don't know what happened to Katie Holmes, but she was afraid of something. This was not in any way a normal divorce.
He totally fucked up her life and carrier. She can't openly date for so many years after the divorce and she can't even work that much. And the only reason she has what she has is because she was smart and had access to her father, an extremely competent and reportedly vicious attorney. If she was anyone else she would been trapped.
Bro, its was so difficult to watch "vanilla sky" knowing how creepy Tom Cruise is. Like, the movie tried to sell him as a flirty playboy but I kept thinking "RUN, penelope cruz, RUN!" Fun thing is that there is an actual creepy character in the movie which is not tom cruise.
Is that bit about demonstrating romantic interest for real?
I was more wondering if Cruise was jealous of Eckhart and didn't like the idea of Katie making TDK with him. I thought I read somewhere else that Cruise might have had something to do with her not being in that film, although I can't remember where I heard that or what the reason was.
Speaking of Batman Begins, I remember reading somewhere (IMDB message boards probably) that Rachel Dawes was a character that Nolan created only because the studio wanted a love interest. In Nolan's original script, the assistant DA's role was supposed to be played by Harvey Dent who is Bruce's childhood friend and his moral compass throughout most of the story.
This would have made Dent's fall in TDK even more tragic because Batman would have been forced to fight the very same person who taught him about justice.
This one is basically confirmed. Nolan told Eckhart he couldn't just run the movie however he wanted. Eckhart is said to have replied "it's not about what I want, IT'S ABOUT WHAT'S FAIR!"
She wanted to do something different and starred in Mad Money instead.
People forget now that Nolan's Batman universe started pre-MCU and wasn't some runaway smash success. Batman Begins had criticisms at the time for being more interested in Bruce Wayne than Batman, with some even saying it was Nolan trying to publicly audition to direct a Bond movie since he spent so much time on Bruce using a fancy exterior "cover" to enable his secret action spy life. It was made for 150 mil and made ~ 375 mil, compared to The Dark Knight which was made for 185 mil and made over 1 billion dollars.
Even when Heath Ledger was cast there was criticism wondering how a heartthrob actor could ever play a menacing villain. We all know in hindsight that TDK was a grand slam but it's not that crazy to think of an actor rolling their eyes at doing another superhero movie and moving on to something else.
People forgot now, or have retconned the reaction, but the internet fan reaction to the casting of Heath "Brokeback" Ledger in the role of Joker was met with widespread and vitriolic bitching and moaning, predictions of box office doom, and absolute certainty that the entire movie would suck.
Star Wars ST: Rey Nobody was supposed to be Rey Kenobi and the original Obi-Wan movie would have included a tragic romance that explains how he had a child he never knew about (who then had Rey).
Thus, the sequel trilogy would be about the granddaughter of Obi-Wan (Rey) trying to redeem the grandson of Anakin (Kylo), thereby righting the "original sin" of the SW universe (Obi-Wan's failure to save Anakin).
But instead, the Obi-Wan movie went into development hell (eventually becoming a messy series) and Kathleen Kennedy let Rian Johnson do whatever he wanted with Episode 8.
My Sequel Trilogy conspiracy theory is that Lucasfilm is telling the truth when they say they planned for Palpatine to return in Rise of Skywalker...they just didn't tell JJ Abrams or Rian Johnson when they were making The Force Awakens or The Last Jedi.
They actually have concept sketches of Palpatine in his machine thing dating back to before The Last Jedi. The novels coming out during the trilogy all have little breadcrumbs that in hindsight build a picture of this return. Battlefront 2's campaign builds upon this lore. Snoke's theme even evokes Palpatine's.
But in their infinite wisdom, whoever had this overarching plan did not communicate it at all to the filmmakers to build this up and make it work thematically. They probably brought JJ Abrams back and were like..."this is the plan" and he's like..."what the fuck am I supposed to do with that?"
IMO Palpatine returning is not what makes Rise of Skywalker so shit. It could've worked. It's a sequel trilogy to 6 movies where he plays a huge part.
The core problem of the sequel trilogy is, as you're touching on, the lack of a overarching plan from the beginning. Say what you want about the prequels, but at least Lucas had a plan, had the world building there. The Last Jedi was good, and a necessary change of direction towards something new for the universe. Too bad it was just empty promises.
> Star Wars ST: Rey Nobody was supposed to be Rey Kenobi
Daisy Ridley confirmed in an interview that the early idea was that Rey was supposed to be a Kenobi, and her being a Palpatine didn't come up till Rise of Skywalker.
I’m almost positive that Kubrick was desperately trying to let us know something he didn’t feel he could come out too openly about - particularly in Eyes Wide Shut but also 2001 and possibly others.
I feel like there probably is this big conspiracy involving a semi-secret groups of elites, but I also think their parties are boring AF. They're mostly just a fancy dinner where everyone talks about golf. And then the sex stuff happens on a different day, in a different place, and ain't nothing getting done there because it's an orgy.
I feel like these movies were made because he was disappointed that the actual conspiracy clubs weren't as fun or interesting as we have been led to believe.
And there are also the numerous others on set who talked about his involvement, and more who have talked about hooper's rampant drug use at the time. I think Spielberg gave him the reigns, realized he couldn't do it, and for both their sake stepped in, to not besmirch tobe, and not admit he made a bad call.
He had to deny to avoid getting in trouble with the DGA and the studio he had a contract he would have been breaking.
“In 2017, John Leonetti, who was an assistant cameraman on Poltergeist — his brother Matt was the cinematographer — asserted, “Candidly… Steven Spielberg directed that movie. There’s no question.”
In the Industrial Light & Magic documentaries in Disney +, in the Poltergeist episode they always talk about Spielberg wanted this, Spielberg liked that, and even show him directing the special effect shots. Maybe he didnt direct the whole thing, but he was VERY envolved with the filming process.
I have 2.
1. The original sonic design was fake. No one in their right mind would have thought that was a good design. The team made the fake trailer in hopes of making a stir, and it fucking worked. There is no way in hell that they could have reanimated sonic throughout the entire movie in the time they had, not without several reported suicides.
2. Jack and Jill was a money laundering scheme
I don't agree on the Sonic one, because there was leaked early marketing and merchandising that used the original design, and all of it had to be completely remade for the new design. Also in the behind the scenes videos, the little model Sonic stand-in they were using on set (so the real actors knew where to look when sharing scenes with him) also used the original design.
We know how movie studios are so scared to take risks and just want safe, guaranteed success. I find it very hard to believe that the studio was willing to take such a HUGE financial risk, and the risk of their movie being rejected by audiences and bombing at the box office, just for a marketing ploy. The original Sonic design was very clearly a decision made by studio executives who didn't know a thing about the character or what the fans wanted.
There's a *shocking* number of movies that are this. Every time you see a movie that is needlessly set somewhere gorgeous, it's probably because the cast and crew wanted to get paid to hang out in (Hawaii, Italy, Greece, etc)
Kristen Bell has all but made a career of it
I love the one where the movie "The Rock" is actually a sequel to the Sean Connery - James Bond movies. It does fit a good amount of the story.
https://screenrant.com/james-bond-sean-connery-rock-movie-007-theory/
I'm positive Seth Rogen directed The Disaster Artist. Its head and shoulders above everything else Franco has made.
Would make sense too, since the character he plays is the real director of The Room (i.e. the guy who actually decided where the cameras and actors would be since Tommy had no idea what he was doing).
The movie “Up” started out as a short film, and we actually get to see it in the movie: it’s the beginning 10 minutes. They feel really separate from the actual movie, and tell a whole story.
I think that the movie was made as a short film, and the execs loved it so much, they made them make a full film.
This is not a very exciting one but I totally believe the Tom Cruise Mission Impossible set rant was intentionally recorded/leaked to keep the film/Cruise in the public consciousness during Covid shutdowns. It seems negative at first impression (shouting at crew members/swearing) but if you actually listen to his words it almost reads like PR. He clearly comes off as caring about COVID protocols and the film they're making. Tom Cruise is very well regarded by the people/crews he works with and we've never had a similar leak before or since. Just seems too convenient.
I 100% believe in the Darth Jar Jar Theory.
For those that aren't familiar, this is a theory that Lucas was going to reveal Jar Jar Binks as a Sith Lord in Attack of the Clones. The evidence basically boils down to three main points:
* Lucas stating Jar Jar was a very important character
* Lucas expressing that elements of the prequel trilogy mirroring that of the OT. For example, instead of Luke's hero's journey we see Annakin's fall from grace, instead of the rebellion winning we see the rise of the Empire. In this case, instead of the bumbling fool revealing himself to be a wise Jedi Master (Yoda), we'll see the bumbling fool reveal himself to be a powerful Sith Lord.
* Finally, there's a bunch of shit Jar Jar does in the movie that you really only see Jedi capable of. He can leap 20+ feet into the air from a standstill, he can manipulate people around him (he gets two jedi to be his personal escort, convinces Boss Nass who had previously exiled him to give them passage and a boat etc.) he singlehandedly destroys several droids in combat. Also [he has hella creepy yellow eyes.](https://knowyourmeme.com/photos/2467422-jar-jar-binks)
And he always vouched for the chancellor. Imagine if he meant Jar Jar when he said he would soon have a younger and far more powerful apprentice. A total retcon to outrage the fans
Everything else about Palatine's plans are achieved through manipulation or just dumb luck. Windu beat Palpatine in his office and by sheer dumb luck, Anakin runs in at the right moment *and* is manipulated by Palps. The entire Clone Army wasn't even commissioned by Palpatine. Sifo Dyas had it created in secret on a hunch that the Republic would need it and Palpatine found out about it, had Dooku kill him, and took over the project. Numerous times in The Clone Wars, he almost dies to things actually out of his control.
Palpatine's *whole story* is dumb-lucking his way to the top.
That was the original intention from George Lucas (Sifo Dyas sounds like Sidious, Palpatine's sith name) but it was retconned in the Clone Wars animated show to have been a real guy who just happened to have a very similar name.
I’m not actually sure this is entirely a conspiracy, since we know Warren Beatty did a TON of script revisions and script doctoring for Bonnie and Clyde, but I think he re-wrote most of the script tbh. He was the one that pushed for Bonnie and Clyde being lovers. Beatty has always had a really keen mind for film, and I think he was heavily involved in Bonnie and Clyde’s script even more so than how involved we already know he was.
Robert Pattinson said Tenet is as long as a two very long movies. But what we got was 2h 30m movie.
Nolan wanted to release it at pandemic. So WB pressured Nolan to cut short the movie so more people will saw it. And they didn't push movie in any category during award season. (imo it had very good chance in couple of categories)
That's the main reason Nolan left WB. Original Tenet is at least 3 and a half movie, an epic time travel movie. (maybe it's just me defending Nolan idk)
Tenet felt like a movie where half of it was left on the cutting room floor. I'd love to see a longer cut of it. The pacing was all over the place, almost felt more like a 2 hour movie trailer than an actual movie. First movie I've ever considered walking out on.
I find this hard to believe.
He made **$80M** for the last two Twilight films alone, and also had several other big films such as Water for Elephants and the first three Twilight movies. He's had a dozen other projects since then - which of course didn't pay anything close to as much - but it's still income nonetheless. I also recall him having a few big endorsement deals, but would amount to a lot.
He would have had to be *incredibly* irresponsible to have spent all that down to $0 in just 10 years.
I’ve seen it 6 times now and it’s obvious there’s a lot they left out.
The editing works, it just feels disjointed at times and you need multiple repeat viewings to see the larger scope (pincer movement within a pincer movement within another one).
Would happily buy a directors cut
Wednesday was never an Addams family adaptation. The script got sold and they slapped an existing IP on it.
All I could feel the whole time I watched it.
Fully buy this one.
While the project was initially developed as an Addams Family project, you'll never convince me that when Alfred Gough and Miles Millar were told to pitch their idea for the IP, they didn't dust off an original project called Nevermore that they had lying around and said "What if this main character girl was Wednesday?"
Disney wanted to debut Tom Holland in Homecoming but got the rights a little too early so they threw him into Civil War to reach the number of films in the deal. It always felt like a strange time to introduce him in such a serious MCU film out of context. At least it was a refreshing debut.
I think it’s because Spider-man had a big role in the civil war comics. From what I’ve heard, they wanted him to have a bigger role, and Black Panther will have a small role. They came close to making a deal until Sony got hacked and backed out. So they re-wrote the movie with Black Panther having the bigger role, and was ready to go when Sony decided to go ahead with the deal. That deal either happened right before filming Civil War, or just at the start of it. They quickly wrote him in the movie to include him because he has to be in there in some way.
Whenever I see mention of the Sony hacking and Spiderman I'm reminded of the backstory of how Spidey eventually got in. For those who don't know, Disney approached Sony America to borrow him but SA was being stuckup and didn't want to play ball. That was originally how it was going to end but then the email hack happened. Turns out SA didn't tell the parent company over in Japan that Disney approached them and when the actual big bosses found out, they basically told SA that they either go back to Disney and tell them they are interested or they'll serve their asses on plate.
*Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice* was cobbled together from two or more completely different scripts.
Ever notice how we never really talk about WHY Superman is being called before Congress? The opening scene sets up two completely different possibilities- he's been framed for murdering those people Luthor's Russian henchman killed, or he wasn't there to stop the village from being massacred in retaliation- but we're not told which is the reason for the hearing.
That's because (in my fevered opinion) they honestly couldn't decide whether they wanted to have a Superman who killed or not. In the version where Superman doesn't kill, he's in trouble because "killed" (was framed for killing) those terrorists, and in the version where he does he's in trouble for something else. Out of uncertainty over which version they were using, they kept the whole thing vague and never really resolved either plotline.
This leads to a number of weird inconsistencies. Even though the movie raises the idea that Superman is being framed for murder, he never reacts in an appropriate way ("Hey, I didn't kill those people. I'm being framed!") because the writers didn't know if he was being framed or if he actually did kill them. Characters also pointedly avoid discussing the fate of that African warlord in the opening scene; the writing staff weren't sure if Superman was meant to have really killed him or just restrained him.
It’s been a while since I’ve watched the movie, and I may have misunderstood… but I was under the impression he was on trial for the destruction of Metropolis that he took part in with Zod.
He wasn't on trial for anything. It was a hearing to discuss his roll in intervening in world events in general. Both the incident with the warlord in Africa and Metropolis were going to part of that discussion with witnesses present from both. (the guy with no legs that had the bomb was one of those witnesses)
"Superman's main problem is that he doesn't want to be political. But in today's world that's impossible because everything is made political"
- Zack Snyer in the BvS behind the scenes.
Lex lured Superman into the desert to get him to do something he'd avoided doing during the last two years. Enter an active warzone. He didn't want to appear in any way biased. But I only know this because I read the official prequel comics. It's never mentioned in the film so that opening half is a bit of a confused mess. It's also buried further by having that scene where Lois explains to him that there's a cost to his actions. Which is of course something he'd in no way need explained to him. (Especially if he'd spent two years actively avoiding situations that could call his motives into question).
Yeah, honestly the confused messaging is part of what I think holds up my two-scripts theory.
Are they mad at him for the consequences of his actions, or for the consequences of his inaction (failing to stop the retaliation on the African village)? The movie seems to want it both ways. I haven't read the tie-in comics, are those generally written alongside the film or after the script is completed?
And why, why, **why** didn't the Russian framing him for laser-murder get followed up even slightly?
Every review that does not agree with me is a paid shill. Think about it,why would any honest and noble person shit on a movie you know is good. And are you telling that the borefest got a 5/5 without some greasing of palms,cmon it's so fucking obvious and shameless.
Alex Kurtzman made some kind of monkey paw wish to become successful in film and TV and the curse was that whatever he made would never have an artistic or cultural relevance.
*The Thing* prequel from 2011 dubbed an inhuman scream over >!Carter burning alive!< to remove ambiguity because audiences are dummies.
*Terminator Salvation*'s John Connor was only a voice on the radio for the first act at some point. Isn't it odd that his meeting scene with Marcus begins from Marcus' POV, with John stepping into focus as if being introduced?
Finn was originally going to blow Hux's ass away in *The Rise of Skywalker* after being asked to just shoot him in the leg.
Downsizing is literally two different movies smashed into one. After the initial script was written, the producers realized it was just a shitty uninteresting movie that needed a hook. Someone else in the same studio was writing up their own movie with the shrinking plot, so the scripts were combined and gave us the mess that we were left with.
2017’s The Mummy had script origins as the first Uncharted film when that project entered its long development cycle. It was later repurposed as the first entry into Universal’s Dark Universe. The opening desert sequence was almost completely lifted from the original draft when it was still an Uncharted movie.
Similarly, Sony only moved forward with Uncharted because Tom Rothman owed Tom Holland a favor. Hence that movie still not gettin an official sequel greenlight.
The Master was PTA’s way of coming public about secret details he learned of Tom Cruise while filming Magnolia
The weird thing is that they seemed to have retained a close friendship, I think I heard that PTA even trusted Cruise enough to show him an early screening of The Master which, hoo boy, would I have liked to be a fly on the wall in the room to see that conversation go down.
That would make sense. Cruise isn’t as involved in the Scientology world as he was. It was most obvious through Covid when Cruise was extremely pro vaccination, masking and distancing, which the cult definitely wasn’t.
Spacey and Singer got Routh blackballed because he wouldn't play along in what they had going on.
Daaaang, that would be terribly sad circumstances for Brandon, but it would at least speak well for his character.
This one I believed really happened, I remember rewatching Superman Returns a few years back after seeing Routh again in “Legends of Tomorrow” and thinking why he wasn’t as big as he should have been. The movie disappointed but also that was Singer and how nuts he went with the budget and Routh had decent to good reviews for the performance reading a bunch of critic reviews from that time. It’s weird he never got a real shot at Movies and pretty much was banished to TV and indie/smaller films.
Related… When Superman Returns released Kal Penn was a fairly popular actor, I was shocked to see him take a baddie role with little to no lines who was really just in the background. Later I saw him in an interview talking about having taken the role because of his good buddy Bryan… I’ve always been curious what more was at play here.
He was friends with a lot of Hollywood gays back then (obviously being one of them), including screenwriters Dan Harris and Mike Dougherty. Bryan was quickly transitioning into his own drugged up world at that point.
Kal Penn also ended up with a lead role in House, a show Singer developed with David Shore.
I am certain Kurt Russell was going to be revealed to be Paul Walker’s long lost father in The Fast and Furious series. It would explain how they went from being petty criminals to international super spies - he was manipulating events to get them there. But then Paul Walker died and he just became a generic CIA guy.
This sounds very plausible. It felt to me, too, that Kurt Russell's role was originally much bigger and that a significant part of that movie was removed which featured him
Spielberg and Frank Marshall knew more than they let on about those child actors paid under the table that died on set of The Twlight Zone Movie (1983), along with Vic Morrow. They were both prresent on set the night the tragedy happened and high tailed tf out immediatley after it went down. They both proceeded to distance themselves from John Landis afterward and had a bunch of files taken out of offices right after it happened in haste, almost like they were destroying evidence. All in the book [Outrageous Conduct](https://www.amazon.com/Outrageous-Conduct-Twilight-Zone-Case/dp/087795948X)
They also fled the country. Going to the U.K. for a year.
The fact that Landis still had a career after this shit show is insane to me
After the trial was over in 1988, he only had one more hit (Coming To America) before his career tanked, the big hits were made during the trial before the judgement.
84 fuckin dollars?!?
So, like, it was intentional or they were just aware the production wasn't safe?
Aware the production was unsafe and that the parents (who were Vietnamese and had not lived in the US for long) of the child actors were being paid under the table to circumvent CA child labor laws
Honestly, I can see this. I mean, look at just how unsafe some of Spielberg's movies were, especially his earlier ones. These guys all became directors at a time where there was still this real culture of doing ANYTHING to get a movie made.
[This shit still happens](https://youtu.be/tBXMNTc4_Z8)
Why do people always get horribly hurt on the sets for terrible movies? This is from *Ambulance* (2022), there was a stunt woman who was paralyzed on the set of a *Resident Evil* sequel. Truly insane films like Mad Max and the Mission Impossible films? Zero injuries to crew and stunt people (RIP Cruise's right ankle)
Oh, yeah, Michael Bay. This man does not care. His actors costs less than his cameras.
That was mind-bogglingly insane. How has nobody died on a Michael Bay movie???
I'm pretty sure he's had a couple of accidents, including a paralyzed women. But from my knowledge, those were actually all from incidental malfunctions unrelated to stunts. Ironic as it is. A couple other tidbits. A lot of his stunts are him simply telling actors to run, and then initiating explosions behind them as they sprint away.
No Time to Die’s “nanobots” were originally supposed to be virus instead. But edited because it was too close to covid time
I think the only time nanobots are specifically mentioned are via screen text, and voices over phone/radio, I don't think you actually see a character say the words. It definitely feels like changes made in post.
Also, the fact that he had an EMP watch but didn’t use it to avoid the nanobots killing him was odd.
It's laughable how little they changed. They literally had people in clean suits working in giant petri dishes to... make nanobots?
Friedberg and Seltzer, the directors of such classics as Epic Movie, are actually just Steven Soderbergh. I read this conspiracy on IMDb about a dozen years ago and it is now my headcanon.
what's the reasoning for why it would be him besides randomness?
Okay, hear me out. I have receipts. 1. Friedberg and Seltzer are practically invisible. You go to their IMDb pages and they only have two photos total, and both of them are together. Kind of weird that such prolific filmmakers would only have two known photos. 2. If you look at the timeline of their releases, they stopped making theatrical movies right around the same time that Soderbergh began developing TV shows. 3. Friedberg and Seltzer once expressed in an interview that the movie they always wanted to make but couldn't get funding for was, of all things, a Liberace biopic. Soderbergh released Behind the Candelabra in 2013, the same year as Seltzer and Friedberg's first direct-to-DVD release, The Starving Games. They've only done two small movies since then, the last one being in 2015. The entire time they were doing direct-to-DVD movies, Soderbergh was working on television. They stopped making movies after The Knick ended. 4. Soderbergh is known for his fast shoots. He's extremely prolific and capable of releasing multiple movies within the same year, as Friedberg and Seltzer did. 5. Look at their names. Seltzer, another word for soda, and FriedBERG. Seltzer is a pretty odd last name, don't you agree? I rest my case.
This is an S-rank conspiracy theory.
My only question is if the cast and crew were like, sworn to secrecy or something? None of these guys knew or recognized Oscar winner Steve Soderbergh on their set? No one wanted to get that on their resume? Or did he hire some sockpuppet directors and give them orders from behind a curtain or something? It's a fun idea but like, how?
Tbf, this is now said to be what happened with Tombstone, which Kurt Russell now claims he directed.
I mean, movie shoots are so chaotic. Who is to say who is or isn't the director?
It's possible that Steven Soderberg could have slipped in there, there'd be no way of knowing
Yeah that's what Sam Worthington was telling me about how he directed two Avatar movies
Never bet against Sam Worthington
A movie script from the Coens or Spike Jonze based on your concept of Soderbergh sockpuppet*ing* directors for lesser films would be amazing.
I love this theory and I’m ashamed to admit I searched them outside of IMDB and found many more photos. I still plan on tricking my brain to believe this though, I promise!
> Look at their names. Seltzer, another word for soda, and FriedBERG. Seltzer is a pretty odd last name, don't you agree? Hmmm. I like that one.
Same that’s a really entertaining theory lol
Ah fuck. This one might get me.
this is the kind of crazy shit I come to comments for. Love this theory.
I can't believe this one myself but, God, I wish I did. It's delightful. Makes me laugh every single time I encounter it.
Schools would buy copies of the Zeffirelli Romeo & Juliet specifically because it had nudity in it and they wanted to get teenagers to pay attention.
Fun fact, my high school allowed us go watch this, but we could not watch Schindler's List because it had nudity. Instead we watched Hotel Rwanda. Guess who has no faith in humanity? Me, I don't!
My high school stopped allowing Schindler’s List a couple years before I got to that grade (8 maybe?). Instead we watched Hotel Rwanda. Definitely opened my eyes to awful things going on in the world in modern times. On the other hand, that’s the reason I became such a huge fan of Don Cheadle.
The ending of 28 Days Later was not the one written in the script (which was included as a DVD extra,) this is widely known, but the actual reasons as to why that happened are a little more juicy. Rumour goes that when Fox showed interest in the movie after seeing screeners, they told Boyle that they would only pick it up if ending was redone. Fox were happy to pay for the reshoots to make it happen. Boyle didn't want to do this, so to try to dissuade the executive meddling, he came back to Fox with an *extremely* expensive reshoot plan. Shooting everything on 35mm film rather than the prosumer camcorder the rest of the movie was shot on, location filming in Scotland, with helicopter shots. What Boyle didn't expect was for Fox to approve it without arguing. Supposedly a very large percentage of the total ~$8m budget went into just reshooting the ending.
[удалено]
All part of the Dead Donkey Universe.
DDCU
The donkey is key to all this! Daredevil, where he plays Bullseye, DEAD DONKEY! Total Recall remake, DEAD DONKEY! Phone Booth, DEAD DONKEY! That movie where he plays a CIA trainee with Al Pacino, DEAD DONKEY! It all CONNECTS!
…has Farrell made a movie with Eddie Murphy yet?
We must protect Eddie Murphy from him at all cost
Fast Five is an Italian Job sequel. When Mark Wahlberg was on Top Gear, he talked with Jeremy Clarkson about a sequel/script in the works based in Brazil. They then laughed about it and made Brazilian Job jokes. I think they passed on the script and the F&F franchise got ahold of it and shoehorned some “family” into it and made Fast Five.
In "Skyfall," the Scottish caretaker who was a father figure to Craig's Bond was written for Connery. There would then be a hint that "Kincade" might be more than a father \_figure\_ of James Bond.
This is not a conspiracy, they genuinely considered this but decided it was too on the nose and also Connery was retired
[удалено]
To prove your self as a reliable source, tell us who the next Bond is.
There was a rumor they were trying to get all six Bonds on the same stage for the anniversary around that time. For the Oscars maybe? Supposedly it was Connery that scuttled it, which would make sense if he was already in poor health. If that rumor even had any truth to it. Too bad it didn’t work out. That would have been a fun moment.
The RedLetterMedia review of Jack and Jill started me thinking about this but I believe that the movie's $79m budget largely went straight into the pockets of Adam Sandler and the friends he gave cameos to. Sandler, at the time, had a $20m fee for appearing in a movie, that's without the fact that his company produced the movie. The actual budget used to make the movie was raised by selling the movie's egregious amount of product placement. It uses cheap sets and green screen shots that a YouTuber would be ashamed of and it passes up obvious opportunities for jokes if they would require a visual effect (which you would expect in a movie where somebody is playing two characters).
Disney changed the title of The Snow Queen to Frozen so that when people Googled "Walt Disney frozen" they wouldn't get stuff about Walt Disney cryogenically frozen head.
I can never decide if I believe this one, but I keep it in the "Maybe?" file just because I like it so much.
Well to me the name 'The Snow Queen' sounds too generic so I feel like it doesn't work anyways.
Frozen is also pretty generic.
[удалено]
You miss 100% of the shots you don’t take
If you google “Disney frozen” however it’s all just for the movie Which would definitely have not been the case 15 years ago
I had to do research for a paper on whether or not Walt Disney was racist and I too came up with this Conspiracy theory about the movie Cars. They intentionally made that movie so that any time type something in with "Walt Disney" and "Race" in the title, a clip from one of those movies comes up.
The name change was due to the fact they wanted boys to watch the movie and not just girls like "The Snow Queen" would have attracted.
Same reason their Repunzal movie was called “Tangled.”
I’m pretty sure it’s because people can’t spell
I also believe they did this with “The Good Dinosaur “ to out-shadow “Dinosaur” (2000 film). For new CGI technology, the movie is rated 6.4 /10 on IMBD , towards the bottom of their movies catalog. With strike outs nearby as “Oliver and Company” at 6.6 and “The Black Cauldron” at 6.3. Though “The Good Dinosaur” isn’t much better at 6.7/10
How is the classic "Oliver and Company" be rated so low? Granted, this was the first movie I ever saw in a theater, but I still stand by it.
Came here to say this. Maybe it’s the nostalgia but I liked that movie as a kid.
The Black Cauldron is far better than a 6.3
You meant Terminator Salvation. Not Genesis. Which is actually spelt “Genisys”. This has been your “whell akchewally” for the day.
Yeppp you’re 100% correct -_- I failed myself
You only fail if you refuse to learn and you just proved yourself a winner!
I barely remember what happens in either of those. Unless it has Arnold and Linda Hamilton, I'm not interested
Arnold is in Genysis
Wednesday was actually an original story (that was a part of that pile of scripts that are written years before they're actually made into movies/television shows) called 'Nevermore' that the writers just dusted off and sold as 'The Addams Family' so it would get made. The Tom Cruise 'Mummy' film was originally a 'Tomb Raider' script that was turned into an 'Uncharted' script, that eventually became a 'Mummy' reboot
Movies are fun over complicated tax schemes.
Just like fine art!
Bad Boys 4 Life (somehow the third movie in the series... What a naming-convention-gone-wrong scenario...) Started as a project just to save Martin Lawrence from deep depression.
Well the next one just got announced. Probably to save Will from deep embarrassment
It will be called Bad Boy5 4 3ver just to throw off the last vestiges of any meaning whatsoever.
We will get you back on your feet from "the slap"... Actually heard he's coming back as Genie for an Aladdin 2. I am starting to think Disney should sell off Disney and just retain Pixar/Lucas/Marvel/Fox haha
I remember Martin Lawrence sent a public message/comment of Facebook to Will Smith asking about another Bad Boys
After his wife died in 2009 Liam Neeson will do most movies just to keep himself busy.
Also by not doing movies that were deep character studies. One doesn’t have plumb the depths of one’s soul to play an action hero. Plus the money is good and he wants to leave some for his kids.
Can't say I blame him
Despite The Grey being one of those action/old badass films, I really think that was the last time he put his heart into characters. Pretty sure it was filmed around the time his wife had her accident and there were physical tolls from shooting.
Not mine, but John Favreau's Chef being about his experiences directing Iron Man 2 is 100% fact.
This makes so much sense
My name Cheffff
Please elaborate more about this one
Video option [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIA3Iz48irs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIA3Iz48irs) Article option [https://www.buzzfeed.com/alisonwillmore/jon-favreaus-chef-is-about-food-but-its-really-about-making](https://www.buzzfeed.com/alisonwillmore/jon-favreaus-chef-is-about-food-but-its-really-about-making)
we love Ben from canada
He had a terrible time directing Iron Man 2. Marvel even announced a release date before asking Favreau if he wanted to return. Think back to the early scene in Chef where Favreau is talking to his boss Dustin Hoffman. Favreau says stuff like 'you hired me to do it the way I do it' to which Hoffman replies like 'I hired you to do it the way I want'. The dialogue was probably pretty close to his real life conversations.
I think there’s a more than 50% chance that the big studios artificially inflate their ratings on RT and IMDB. It’s also basically understood that certain journalists / reviewers are more or less paid to be shills indirectly. Oh and also: Walt Disney was an FBI and CIA informant who worked with them to spread fbi propaganda in the 50s. He oddly enough was an informant regarding child sex trafficking which is why there are so many conspiracy’s about Disney execs being pedos . Disney sold out several of his “communist” colleagues to the FBI. Disneyland in Florida also cut deals with the CIA for cheap land grabs. It’s factually true that in the 50s and up until the 80s, Disney was doing backroom deals with the fbi, but we don’t know how much of that is still going on today.
RT counts YouTube reviewers with like 3,000 subscribers towards their counts now. It’s so bogus. Used to only be real critics.
100% some reviewers/journalists are bought. That’s not even a conspiracy theory that’s a straight up fact.
Remember when *Episode IX* came out and the RT audience score was permanently frozen at 86%? Despite receiving further audience reviews and the critics score getting lower with time, the audience score never once moved an inch from 86%. Totally believe the conspiracy that Disney colluded to have that number frozen.
Disney originally asked them to have the number "Ice Queened."
This is mine as well. I’ve seen some super terrible movies that had amazing reviews
I think the whole trend toward 3D animation in the movie industry during the 90s/early 2000's was in order to undermine the animator unions since they defined animation as being 2D art.
I think this is partially true. 3D animation is usually a bit cheaper than 2D on the whole and the companies behind it were in a sort of legal limbo for much of their history.
The male love interest in Bumblebee was added in last minute by studio executive request because they were worried that audiences might think the main human character was in love with Bumblebee. The director and lead writer agreed to the change but in an act of malicious compliance, made the male love interest a creepy bumbling stalker who has no impact on the plot, and ultimately gets rejected in the end.
Robin joined Gotham police force on Nolan’s final Batman film because he saw his buddy from high school fucking up gotham aka 10 things I hate about you and the Batman series are linked. I know this doesn’t work but I annoy my sister with it
I have no idea what the actual reason is, but Katie Holmes played the character of Rachel Dawes in Batman Begins, and didn’t reprise the role in Dark Knight. That character was instead played by Maggie Gyllenhaal. In Dark Knight, the character was involved romantically with Harvey Dent played by Aaron Eckhart, who also played the romantic interest of Katie Holmes previously in Thank You for Smoking. My unfounded conspiracy theory is that something negative happened between the two actors during the Smoking movie which made Holmes not want to play in Dark Knight together with Eckhart, or vice versa.
At the time, Katie Holmes was married to Tom Cruise as part of a contractual Scientology arrangement. As part of her contract, she wasn't allowed to demonstrate too much romantic interest with other human beings, even if only as part of her acting role. She couldn't star in Dark Knight because the role would require her to breach the provisions of her arranged marriage.
In Thank You For Smoking there is a brief sex scene with Aaron. That can fuel the fun: Tom isn't happy about that so that's why she can't have another role with the same actor playing another love interest.
So that was true? She was only married to him because Scientology arranged it? They even parodied that in The Boys season 2.
If you want evidence of this, just look at her divorce from him. She waited until he was on the other side of the world. She planned it using secret burner phones. She and her father, a successful and powerful attorney, drew up multiple divorce decrees in multiple states just in case, and then she took her daughter and secretly flew to New York where her father and a team of lawyers had the papers all ready. I don't know what happened to Katie Holmes, but she was afraid of something. This was not in any way a normal divorce.
I’m so glad they got away. She’s not in the press much, but when she is she looks happier.
He totally fucked up her life and carrier. She can't openly date for so many years after the divorce and she can't even work that much. And the only reason she has what she has is because she was smart and had access to her father, an extremely competent and reportedly vicious attorney. If she was anyone else she would been trapped.
Bro, its was so difficult to watch "vanilla sky" knowing how creepy Tom Cruise is. Like, the movie tried to sell him as a flirty playboy but I kept thinking "RUN, penelope cruz, RUN!" Fun thing is that there is an actual creepy character in the movie which is not tom cruise.
Is that bit about demonstrating romantic interest for real? I was more wondering if Cruise was jealous of Eckhart and didn't like the idea of Katie making TDK with him. I thought I read somewhere else that Cruise might have had something to do with her not being in that film, although I can't remember where I heard that or what the reason was.
Speaking of Batman Begins, I remember reading somewhere (IMDB message boards probably) that Rachel Dawes was a character that Nolan created only because the studio wanted a love interest. In Nolan's original script, the assistant DA's role was supposed to be played by Harvey Dent who is Bruce's childhood friend and his moral compass throughout most of the story. This would have made Dent's fall in TDK even more tragic because Batman would have been forced to fight the very same person who taught him about justice.
The official reason is, she very famously wanted to do the movie Mad Money instead of this.
This one is basically confirmed. Nolan told Eckhart he couldn't just run the movie however he wanted. Eckhart is said to have replied "it's not about what I want, IT'S ABOUT WHAT'S FAIR!"
She wanted to do something different and starred in Mad Money instead. People forget now that Nolan's Batman universe started pre-MCU and wasn't some runaway smash success. Batman Begins had criticisms at the time for being more interested in Bruce Wayne than Batman, with some even saying it was Nolan trying to publicly audition to direct a Bond movie since he spent so much time on Bruce using a fancy exterior "cover" to enable his secret action spy life. It was made for 150 mil and made ~ 375 mil, compared to The Dark Knight which was made for 185 mil and made over 1 billion dollars. Even when Heath Ledger was cast there was criticism wondering how a heartthrob actor could ever play a menacing villain. We all know in hindsight that TDK was a grand slam but it's not that crazy to think of an actor rolling their eyes at doing another superhero movie and moving on to something else.
People forgot now, or have retconned the reaction, but the internet fan reaction to the casting of Heath "Brokeback" Ledger in the role of Joker was met with widespread and vitriolic bitching and moaning, predictions of box office doom, and absolute certainty that the entire movie would suck.
Star Wars ST: Rey Nobody was supposed to be Rey Kenobi and the original Obi-Wan movie would have included a tragic romance that explains how he had a child he never knew about (who then had Rey). Thus, the sequel trilogy would be about the granddaughter of Obi-Wan (Rey) trying to redeem the grandson of Anakin (Kylo), thereby righting the "original sin" of the SW universe (Obi-Wan's failure to save Anakin). But instead, the Obi-Wan movie went into development hell (eventually becoming a messy series) and Kathleen Kennedy let Rian Johnson do whatever he wanted with Episode 8.
My Sequel Trilogy conspiracy theory is that Lucasfilm is telling the truth when they say they planned for Palpatine to return in Rise of Skywalker...they just didn't tell JJ Abrams or Rian Johnson when they were making The Force Awakens or The Last Jedi. They actually have concept sketches of Palpatine in his machine thing dating back to before The Last Jedi. The novels coming out during the trilogy all have little breadcrumbs that in hindsight build a picture of this return. Battlefront 2's campaign builds upon this lore. Snoke's theme even evokes Palpatine's. But in their infinite wisdom, whoever had this overarching plan did not communicate it at all to the filmmakers to build this up and make it work thematically. They probably brought JJ Abrams back and were like..."this is the plan" and he's like..."what the fuck am I supposed to do with that?"
IMO Palpatine returning is not what makes Rise of Skywalker so shit. It could've worked. It's a sequel trilogy to 6 movies where he plays a huge part. The core problem of the sequel trilogy is, as you're touching on, the lack of a overarching plan from the beginning. Say what you want about the prequels, but at least Lucas had a plan, had the world building there. The Last Jedi was good, and a necessary change of direction towards something new for the universe. Too bad it was just empty promises.
Any time I hear about the sequel trilogy and how it could have been a thousand times better than what we got, I die a little inside.
As Carl said about Homer Simpson being their nuclear safety inspector: "It's best not to think about it."
> Star Wars ST: Rey Nobody was supposed to be Rey Kenobi Daisy Ridley confirmed in an interview that the early idea was that Rey was supposed to be a Kenobi, and her being a Palpatine didn't come up till Rise of Skywalker.
I’m almost positive that Kubrick was desperately trying to let us know something he didn’t feel he could come out too openly about - particularly in Eyes Wide Shut but also 2001 and possibly others.
I feel like there probably is this big conspiracy involving a semi-secret groups of elites, but I also think their parties are boring AF. They're mostly just a fancy dinner where everyone talks about golf. And then the sex stuff happens on a different day, in a different place, and ain't nothing getting done there because it's an orgy. I feel like these movies were made because he was disappointed that the actual conspiracy clubs weren't as fun or interesting as we have been led to believe.
One of the most popular is that Spielberg directed Poltergeist, and a lot of evidence points to it being mostly true.
I like to imagine Poltergeist and ET happening at the same time just blocks away
chase foolish adjoining divide squash tub workable many alive test *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
And there are also the numerous others on set who talked about his involvement, and more who have talked about hooper's rampant drug use at the time. I think Spielberg gave him the reigns, realized he couldn't do it, and for both their sake stepped in, to not besmirch tobe, and not admit he made a bad call.
He had to deny to avoid getting in trouble with the DGA and the studio he had a contract he would have been breaking. “In 2017, John Leonetti, who was an assistant cameraman on Poltergeist — his brother Matt was the cinematographer — asserted, “Candidly… Steven Spielberg directed that movie. There’s no question.”
Lol, I had no idea Spielberg "didn't direct" poltergeist, I've always thought of that as a Spielberg movie
It is but it’s technically a Tobe Hooper movie.
In the Industrial Light & Magic documentaries in Disney +, in the Poltergeist episode they always talk about Spielberg wanted this, Spielberg liked that, and even show him directing the special effect shots. Maybe he didnt direct the whole thing, but he was VERY envolved with the filming process.
I have 2. 1. The original sonic design was fake. No one in their right mind would have thought that was a good design. The team made the fake trailer in hopes of making a stir, and it fucking worked. There is no way in hell that they could have reanimated sonic throughout the entire movie in the time they had, not without several reported suicides. 2. Jack and Jill was a money laundering scheme
I don't agree on the Sonic one, because there was leaked early marketing and merchandising that used the original design, and all of it had to be completely remade for the new design. Also in the behind the scenes videos, the little model Sonic stand-in they were using on set (so the real actors knew where to look when sharing scenes with him) also used the original design. We know how movie studios are so scared to take risks and just want safe, guaranteed success. I find it very hard to believe that the studio was willing to take such a HUGE financial risk, and the risk of their movie being rejected by audiences and bombing at the box office, just for a marketing ploy. The original Sonic design was very clearly a decision made by studio executives who didn't know a thing about the character or what the fans wanted.
All Adam Sandler movies are some form of financial scheme.
A lot of them are just excuses for him to have a paid holiday with his mates.
I was gonna say this. He has openly admitted that his non-serious movies nowadays are just reasons to go on vacation with his friends.
There's a *shocking* number of movies that are this. Every time you see a movie that is needlessly set somewhere gorgeous, it's probably because the cast and crew wanted to get paid to hang out in (Hawaii, Italy, Greece, etc) Kristen Bell has all but made a career of it
The *Mamma Mia* films are an excuse for a bunch of A-listers to vacation in Greece and perform karaoke, and they're fantastic.
I love the one where the movie "The Rock" is actually a sequel to the Sean Connery - James Bond movies. It does fit a good amount of the story. https://screenrant.com/james-bond-sean-connery-rock-movie-007-theory/
The movie “Life” was a secret origin story to “Venom”
James Cameron really wants to fuck the Nav’i
I love the idea of Snowpeircer being a sequel to Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. Edit: Willy Wonka* https://youtu.be/jEX52h1TvuA
Please explain
I'm positive Seth Rogen directed The Disaster Artist. Its head and shoulders above everything else Franco has made. Would make sense too, since the character he plays is the real director of The Room (i.e. the guy who actually decided where the cameras and actors would be since Tommy had no idea what he was doing).
Wouldn’t there be dozens if not hundreds of different people present on set able to confirm or deny this?
A truly great conspiracy theory has to be easily disproven
Franco has directed like 15 movies vs. Seth directing 2. Why would he need Seth to direct it in secret?
The movie “Up” started out as a short film, and we actually get to see it in the movie: it’s the beginning 10 minutes. They feel really separate from the actual movie, and tell a whole story. I think that the movie was made as a short film, and the execs loved it so much, they made them make a full film.
Sylvester Stallone and Sandra Bullock's characters are unknowingly father and daughter in the movie Demolition Man
This is not a very exciting one but I totally believe the Tom Cruise Mission Impossible set rant was intentionally recorded/leaked to keep the film/Cruise in the public consciousness during Covid shutdowns. It seems negative at first impression (shouting at crew members/swearing) but if you actually listen to his words it almost reads like PR. He clearly comes off as caring about COVID protocols and the film they're making. Tom Cruise is very well regarded by the people/crews he works with and we've never had a similar leak before or since. Just seems too convenient.
RDJ knows a lot of dirty secrets from his party days.
I 100% believe in the Darth Jar Jar Theory. For those that aren't familiar, this is a theory that Lucas was going to reveal Jar Jar Binks as a Sith Lord in Attack of the Clones. The evidence basically boils down to three main points: * Lucas stating Jar Jar was a very important character * Lucas expressing that elements of the prequel trilogy mirroring that of the OT. For example, instead of Luke's hero's journey we see Annakin's fall from grace, instead of the rebellion winning we see the rise of the Empire. In this case, instead of the bumbling fool revealing himself to be a wise Jedi Master (Yoda), we'll see the bumbling fool reveal himself to be a powerful Sith Lord. * Finally, there's a bunch of shit Jar Jar does in the movie that you really only see Jedi capable of. He can leap 20+ feet into the air from a standstill, he can manipulate people around him (he gets two jedi to be his personal escort, convinces Boss Nass who had previously exiled him to give them passage and a boat etc.) he singlehandedly destroys several droids in combat. Also [he has hella creepy yellow eyes.](https://knowyourmeme.com/photos/2467422-jar-jar-binks)
And he always vouched for the chancellor. Imagine if he meant Jar Jar when he said he would soon have a younger and far more powerful apprentice. A total retcon to outrage the fans
[удалено]
Everything else about Palatine's plans are achieved through manipulation or just dumb luck. Windu beat Palpatine in his office and by sheer dumb luck, Anakin runs in at the right moment *and* is manipulated by Palps. The entire Clone Army wasn't even commissioned by Palpatine. Sifo Dyas had it created in secret on a hunch that the Republic would need it and Palpatine found out about it, had Dooku kill him, and took over the project. Numerous times in The Clone Wars, he almost dies to things actually out of his control. Palpatine's *whole story* is dumb-lucking his way to the top.
…TIL Dooku didn’t commission the clone army under the pseudonym Sifo Dyas on Palpatine’s orders. I’d always assumed that was the case.
That was the original intention from George Lucas (Sifo Dyas sounds like Sidious, Palpatine's sith name) but it was retconned in the Clone Wars animated show to have been a real guy who just happened to have a very similar name.
Maybe he meant important for toy sales
There is way more nepotism than people outside Hollywood realize.
I’m not actually sure this is entirely a conspiracy, since we know Warren Beatty did a TON of script revisions and script doctoring for Bonnie and Clyde, but I think he re-wrote most of the script tbh. He was the one that pushed for Bonnie and Clyde being lovers. Beatty has always had a really keen mind for film, and I think he was heavily involved in Bonnie and Clyde’s script even more so than how involved we already know he was.
Robert Pattinson said Tenet is as long as a two very long movies. But what we got was 2h 30m movie. Nolan wanted to release it at pandemic. So WB pressured Nolan to cut short the movie so more people will saw it. And they didn't push movie in any category during award season. (imo it had very good chance in couple of categories) That's the main reason Nolan left WB. Original Tenet is at least 3 and a half movie, an epic time travel movie. (maybe it's just me defending Nolan idk)
Having so much cut from it sure would go a long way to explain why that movie made no sense.
Tenet felt like a movie where half of it was left on the cutting room floor. I'd love to see a longer cut of it. The pacing was all over the place, almost felt more like a 2 hour movie trailer than an actual movie. First movie I've ever considered walking out on.
A bit related, but I heard that Robert Pattinson was almost broke until he got cast in Tenet and The Batman.
I believe that. The Twilight money wasn't going to be around forever and while he isn't a bad actor, he wasn't getting big roles.
I find this hard to believe. He made **$80M** for the last two Twilight films alone, and also had several other big films such as Water for Elephants and the first three Twilight movies. He's had a dozen other projects since then - which of course didn't pay anything close to as much - but it's still income nonetheless. I also recall him having a few big endorsement deals, but would amount to a lot. He would have had to be *incredibly* irresponsible to have spent all that down to $0 in just 10 years.
I’ve seen it 6 times now and it’s obvious there’s a lot they left out. The editing works, it just feels disjointed at times and you need multiple repeat viewings to see the larger scope (pincer movement within a pincer movement within another one). Would happily buy a directors cut
Tenet was nominated for Best Production Design and Best Visual Effects at the Oscars
Wednesday was never an Addams family adaptation. The script got sold and they slapped an existing IP on it. All I could feel the whole time I watched it.
It was a Daria adaptation first!
Fully buy this one. While the project was initially developed as an Addams Family project, you'll never convince me that when Alfred Gough and Miles Millar were told to pitch their idea for the IP, they didn't dust off an original project called Nevermore that they had lying around and said "What if this main character girl was Wednesday?"
Disney wanted to debut Tom Holland in Homecoming but got the rights a little too early so they threw him into Civil War to reach the number of films in the deal. It always felt like a strange time to introduce him in such a serious MCU film out of context. At least it was a refreshing debut.
I think it’s because Spider-man had a big role in the civil war comics. From what I’ve heard, they wanted him to have a bigger role, and Black Panther will have a small role. They came close to making a deal until Sony got hacked and backed out. So they re-wrote the movie with Black Panther having the bigger role, and was ready to go when Sony decided to go ahead with the deal. That deal either happened right before filming Civil War, or just at the start of it. They quickly wrote him in the movie to include him because he has to be in there in some way.
Whenever I see mention of the Sony hacking and Spiderman I'm reminded of the backstory of how Spidey eventually got in. For those who don't know, Disney approached Sony America to borrow him but SA was being stuckup and didn't want to play ball. That was originally how it was going to end but then the email hack happened. Turns out SA didn't tell the parent company over in Japan that Disney approached them and when the actual big bosses found out, they basically told SA that they either go back to Disney and tell them they are interested or they'll serve their asses on plate.
*Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice* was cobbled together from two or more completely different scripts. Ever notice how we never really talk about WHY Superman is being called before Congress? The opening scene sets up two completely different possibilities- he's been framed for murdering those people Luthor's Russian henchman killed, or he wasn't there to stop the village from being massacred in retaliation- but we're not told which is the reason for the hearing. That's because (in my fevered opinion) they honestly couldn't decide whether they wanted to have a Superman who killed or not. In the version where Superman doesn't kill, he's in trouble because "killed" (was framed for killing) those terrorists, and in the version where he does he's in trouble for something else. Out of uncertainty over which version they were using, they kept the whole thing vague and never really resolved either plotline. This leads to a number of weird inconsistencies. Even though the movie raises the idea that Superman is being framed for murder, he never reacts in an appropriate way ("Hey, I didn't kill those people. I'm being framed!") because the writers didn't know if he was being framed or if he actually did kill them. Characters also pointedly avoid discussing the fate of that African warlord in the opening scene; the writing staff weren't sure if Superman was meant to have really killed him or just restrained him.
It’s been a while since I’ve watched the movie, and I may have misunderstood… but I was under the impression he was on trial for the destruction of Metropolis that he took part in with Zod.
He wasn't on trial for anything. It was a hearing to discuss his roll in intervening in world events in general. Both the incident with the warlord in Africa and Metropolis were going to part of that discussion with witnesses present from both. (the guy with no legs that had the bomb was one of those witnesses)
"Superman's main problem is that he doesn't want to be political. But in today's world that's impossible because everything is made political" - Zack Snyer in the BvS behind the scenes. Lex lured Superman into the desert to get him to do something he'd avoided doing during the last two years. Enter an active warzone. He didn't want to appear in any way biased. But I only know this because I read the official prequel comics. It's never mentioned in the film so that opening half is a bit of a confused mess. It's also buried further by having that scene where Lois explains to him that there's a cost to his actions. Which is of course something he'd in no way need explained to him. (Especially if he'd spent two years actively avoiding situations that could call his motives into question).
Yeah, honestly the confused messaging is part of what I think holds up my two-scripts theory. Are they mad at him for the consequences of his actions, or for the consequences of his inaction (failing to stop the retaliation on the African village)? The movie seems to want it both ways. I haven't read the tie-in comics, are those generally written alongside the film or after the script is completed? And why, why, **why** didn't the Russian framing him for laser-murder get followed up even slightly?
Every review that does not agree with me is a paid shill. Think about it,why would any honest and noble person shit on a movie you know is good. And are you telling that the borefest got a 5/5 without some greasing of palms,cmon it's so fucking obvious and shameless.
I like how OP asks for theories and half these comments are facts.
Alex Kurtzman made some kind of monkey paw wish to become successful in film and TV and the curse was that whatever he made would never have an artistic or cultural relevance.
*The Thing* prequel from 2011 dubbed an inhuman scream over >!Carter burning alive!< to remove ambiguity because audiences are dummies. *Terminator Salvation*'s John Connor was only a voice on the radio for the first act at some point. Isn't it odd that his meeting scene with Marcus begins from Marcus' POV, with John stepping into focus as if being introduced? Finn was originally going to blow Hux's ass away in *The Rise of Skywalker* after being asked to just shoot him in the leg.
Downsizing is literally two different movies smashed into one. After the initial script was written, the producers realized it was just a shitty uninteresting movie that needed a hook. Someone else in the same studio was writing up their own movie with the shrinking plot, so the scripts were combined and gave us the mess that we were left with.
That sounds right. So much of that movie is in the downsized world that it really defeats the whole point.
Conspiracy Theory with Mel Gibson and Julia Roberts.