Paul Thomas Anderson to Write Robert Downey Jr.'s 'Pinocchio' (Exclusive)
Warner Bros. and Team Downey are moving forward with their live-action take on Pinocchio and have enlisted Paul Thomas Anderson to write a draft with an eye toward directing.
Though the film would seem far outside of Anderson's wheelhouse, the move shouldn't come as too much of a surprise. Downey was poised to star in Anderson's Inherent Vice until his Avengers: Age of Ultron obligations got in the way, and Joaquin Phoenix stepped in to play the lead. Downey and Anderson are good friends and have been looking to work together for some time.
The Giver writer Michael Mitnick penned the latest draft of Pinocchio, and Downey has been quietly tweaking the script for the past six months. Downey has been developing Pinocchio for years, but the project has found new urgency in the wake of a string of live-action hits based on kids classics, most recently Disney's Cinderella.
Ever since auteur Tim Burton turned Alice in Wonderland into a billion-dollar franchise and the Angelina Jolie starrer Maleficent earned $758 million worldwide last year, the studios have been angling to set up projects based on live-action kids tales, with A-list directors flocking to the projects across town.
Disney is bringing Beauty and the Beast to the big screen in March 2017 with Emma Watson in the lead and Bill Condon directing. Jon Favreau is filming The Jungle Book, also for Disney, for an April 2016 release. Not to be outdone, Warners has its own Jungle Book in production that stars Benedict Cumberbatch, Christian Bale and Cate Blanchett. That version, which will be released Oct. 6, 2017, will be a mix of live-action and performance capture CGI.
Over at Universal, a live-action version of The Little Mermaid is in the works, though Sofia Coppola recently dropped out due to creative differences. Burton, who was initially attached to direct Pinocchio, will instead direct a live-action Dumbo for Disney.
Downey is onboard to play Geppetto in the tale about a wooden puppet who wants to become a human boy. Bryan Fuller and Jane Goldman wrote previous drafts of the story that is based on a novel by Carlo Collodi. Downey, who most recently starred in Ultron, has a long-standing relationship with Warners (he recently starred in The Judge for the studio). He will produce Pinocchio alongside Team Downey partner Susan Downey as well as Dan Jinks (Milk).
Anderson is a six-time Oscar nominee who received a director mention for 2007's There Will Be Blood.
Anderson is repped by CAA and Jackoway Tyerman Wertheimer.
Mitnick is repped by WME, Grandview and Sloane, Offer, Weber.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/paul-thomas-anderson-write-robert-783978
oh boy.
No. Or a porn version.
Dude needs a hit.
Disney is doing their own Pinnochio live. It will be the hit.
What the fuck?
Seriously what the fuck.
Alice in Wonderland, well I'll be. As far back as my thoughts had gone was Snow White and the Huntsman. It's outrageous business nonsense that one makes a billion dollars and they think "we need eight of these." Cinderella, 2015: $200,286,777. Disney, Universal, Warner Bros. May it be, obvs, that the young cannibalize the old and the best of all "live-action kids tales" is Pete's Dragon, which'll open on 3.5K+ screens at least, that's at least how many screens these movies open with.
Most recent credited examples like PT/Pinocchio was Noah Baumbach/Madagascar 3: Europe's Most Wanted, and before that Jim Taylor and Alexander Payne/Jurassic Park III. Did I forget some? I think they're fun. Why not.
One more thing via The Wrap (http://www.thewrap.com/will-paul-thomas-andersons-pinocchio-have-a-fairy-tale-ending/):
Quote
Anderson has not announced his next directorial effort but he is rumored to be considering an original horror movie.
We have long waited for this day (http://xixax.com/index.php?topic=10094.msg257828#msg257828), hopefully it's not bullshit this time?
Modage with the quick trigger finger, I was just about to post that Wrap piece. Thanks, homey.
Cocks
Fathers
Surrogate families
etc.
I remember my younger self doubting PTA casting Adam Sandler; I won't make the same mistake twice.
Quote from: modage on July 01, 2015, 02:35:31 PM
Quote
Anderson has not announced his next directorial effort but he is rumored to be considering an original horror movie.
Give me it.
If he does direct, this would definitely excite me more than Inherent Vice. Imagine the possibilities.
I don't care about another version of Pinocchio. Even a great one. After Inherent Vice, I don't want another adaptation. Anyway, it seems like he's just helping his friend.
Most Likely Scenario: Nothing comes of this. PTA turns in a draft, Downey + WB aren't feeling it, he moves on. They hire someone else to do another pass on the script.
Less Likely Scenario: PTA turns in a draft, gets really excited, Downey + WB are on board to make PTA's vision. Downey as producer takes the backseat, knowing he's gambling short term gains (the movie is an audience pleasing hit) for long term rewards (he makes a great movie with PTA). WB, the same studio that let Spike Jonze make Where The Wild Things Are without sanding off any of the idiosyncrasies and on a smaller scale let PTA do Inherent Vice, let's him do his thing. And then PTA makes a great Pinocchio movie which seems as unlikely as "Adam Sandler rom com" did back in 2001, but makes just as much sense after you see it.
Impossible Scenario: PTA needs a hit badly enough to compromise his artistic integrity, plans his sellout movie and attempts to deliver what he thinks WB + audiences want. It makes $800m+ worldwide.
Even More Impossible Scenario: polka directs
Yeah, I'm going to be super busy with this Twin Peaks thing.
It's funny because PTA is more defending of Hollywood fare than other auteur type directors. He seems more willing to see and appreciate a lot of Hollywood flicks for what they are. Because of that, I always wondered what he would do if he really took on a bigger type of movie. Putting Adam Sandler in a movie wasn't the same because he was adapting Sandler to his world and doing a psychological breakdown of Sandler's persona from other movies. A report is a report and can't be taken for much, but what if PTA really does make a film like this? I hate when good directors attach themselves to comic book movies because it entails a series and long commitments, but this is just one movie. Wouldn't be end of the world and even if the film gives into more staples of standard entertainment, could be interesting.
Besides, Downey played down connection of him anywhere near to being in Inherent Vice. Because the world knows PTA and Downey are friends, do they also come up with reports like this every few years? A few loose words could have produced this article.
Quote from: Drenk on July 01, 2015, 01:09:48 PM
No. Or a porn version.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs22.postimg.org%2Fjyfqxz2m9%2Fimage.jpg&hash=cdf0435a8d29bdff6c66b82e5784c7d4fa53f91f)
"I'm a star. I'm a star, I'm a star, I'm a star. I am a big bright shining star."
He needs to bring in that $$ he has a growing brood and it would be nice for his kids to see something he did
I'm picturing PTA's Pan's Labyrinth. I know that's probably not in the cards, but I can dream.
Or imagine a PDL type fantasy energy channeled into the Pinocchio story. This could be the greatest thing ever if he directs.
"When You Wish Upon A Star" is sung by all the established characters in their various locations. Let's have Pinocchio languishing inside the whale at this point. Gepetto gazes out his window, crooning as the rain beats against the glass.
Gepetto: (need help with this one)
Jiminy Cricket: John C. Reilly, Paul F. Tompkins, or Kevin J. O'Connor
Stromboli: Ricky Jay or Alfred Molina
Lampwick: Jesse Plemons, Paul Dano, or Luis Guzman
Gepetto should obviously be Bill Macy.
I wasn't at all convinced that he was old enough, but then I googled him.
Gepetto found.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg2.wikia.nocookie.net%2F__cb20110926173350%2Fdisney%2Fimages%2Fthumb%2F8%2F87%2FPinocchio-disneyscreencaps_com-5930.jpg%2F258px-Pinocchio-disneyscreencaps_com-5930.jpg&hash=404952004e46de6c3746bad079df5ca1ad64bfc5)
Philip Baker Hall as the old man from Pleasure Island, and he's called Mumbles O'Malley.
gepetto is downey jr, right? and he would be the lead. his take sounds interesting. but the whole thing sounds like a massive respectable bomb.
New scenario: Downey steps aside and lets John Cusack play Gepetto.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nw2X4nzuVsA considering hes a radiohead fan, PTA better choose this as the end credits music
this can't be true!
what the fuck happened with metal gear solid!?
This is not as bad as everyone is making it seem. You know A.I is a Pinocchio story, sort of, that movie has some good moments in it. I was re watching some of it the other day, its such a tragedy that Kubrick did not make that movie, it would of been probably his magnum opus. I was yearning for the Kubrick's darkness and lightness, can you imagine how Kubrick would of shot the stuff with G. Joe. It would of been epic. Anyway it will be interesting to see what P.T Anderson cooks up, I have faith in him, its RDJ and the studios who I lack faith in. Anderson could write a brilliant script but in the end if another director is tasked with directing the movie, like a Marc Forester or Webb or one of these guys who has recent success, like the guy who did Jurassic World, or the guy who did District 9, all lame directors who just turn out products for the studio. It is pretty sad to see that in 2015 the most edgy director working within the studio system is in his 70s and his name is Scorsese, it only took decades for him to be accepted into that world, oh and working with a matinee idol like DiCaprio, he is basically locked into DiCaprio because working with him ensures box office success, young men will always go see a Scorsese movie but woman esp in the 18-30 range were not always his biggest audience, ever since Gangs of New York, he found a new audience and reaped the financial success a director always wants. I digress but it all kinda of ties together, P.T Anderson honestly needs to make a movie that also makes money, Inherent Vice was awful, and i love P.T Anderson, but as an adaption it fails, and as a P.T Anderson movie it fails, so what your left with is nothing. Visually it was semi-interesting to see Paul shoot in 1:85 with spherical lenses. I think Paul should work with DiCaprio and hopefully he will garner box office success. One thing I can say is that once a director has a smash success @ the box office, its is ADDICTIVE, and a domino effect could happen.
Its interesting to see Woody Allen and the Coen Brothers achieve great box office numbers and maintain their integrity as filmmakers. Especially Woody Allen. I was watching Blue Jasmine the other day and I was like this is such a good fucking movie, but i am a New Yorker so I am probably biased, a lot of those themes in the movie are relevant to today, not with everybody, Allen has a way of depicting the affluent Upper West Side/ East Side/ Central Park west + east lifestyle well and his attempts at doing bridge and tunnel are funny if not somewhat cliched and ha-misted he gets away with it because he always makes those latter characters goofy with hearts of gold Again I digress.
Basically Anderson has to work with an actor that has the ability to pull in a large audience, his skills as a director are ACE but he needs to maneuver himself so that he can make money so that he can continually be in the driver's seat ( meaning in the position having the opportunity to make a movie, he basically rides on that fact the he is an auteur, and that he is "an artist" filmmaker, its like the kid that doesn't work cause his folks earn and make a lot of money, and the kid is now 25, its like are you ever gonna go out and get a job or will you continue to bank on the fact the your folks are the breadwinners.)
Quote from: OpO1832 on August 19, 2015, 10:39:59 AM
This is not as bad as everyone is making it seem. You know A.I is a Pinocchio story, sort of, that movie has some good moments in it. I was re watching some of it the other day, its such a tragedy that Kubrick did not make that movie, it would of been probably his magnum opus. I was yearning for the Kubrick's darkness and lightness, can you imagine how Kubrick would of shot the stuff with G. Joe. It would of been epic. Anyway it will be interesting to see what P.T Anderson cooks up, I have faith in him, its RDJ and the studios who I lack faith in. Anderson could write a brilliant script but in the end if another director is tasked with directing the movie, like a Marc Forester or Webb or one of these guys who has recent success, like the guy who did Jurassic World, or the guy who did District 9, all lame directors who just turn out products for the studio. It is pretty sad to see that in 2015 the most edgy director working within the studio system is in his 70s and his name is Scorsese, it only took decades for him to be accepted into that world, oh and working with a matinee idol like DiCaprio, he is basically locked into DiCaprio because working with him ensures box office success, young men will always go see a Scorsese movie but woman esp in the 18-30 range were not always his biggest audience, ever since Gangs of New York, he found a new audience and reaped the financial success a director always wants. I digress but it all kinda of ties together, P.T Anderson honestly needs to make a movie that also makes money, Inherent Vice was awful, and i love P.T Anderson, but as an adaption it fails, and as a P.T Anderson movie it fails, so what your left with is nothing. Visually it was semi-interesting to see Paul shoot in 1:85 with spherical lenses. I think Paul should work with DiCaprio and hopefully he will garner box office success. One thing I can say is that once a director has a smash success @ the box office, its is ADDICTIVE, and a domino effect could happen.
Its interesting to see Woody Allen and the Coen Brothers achieve great box office numbers and maintain their integrity as filmmakers. Especially Woody Allen. I was watching Blue Jasmine the other day and I was like this is such a good fucking movie, but i am a New Yorker so I am probably biased, a lot of those themes in the movie are relevant to today, not with everybody, Allen has a way of depicting the affluent Upper West Side/ East Side/ Central Park west + east lifestyle well and his attempts at doing bridge and tunnel are funny if not somewhat cliched and ha-misted he gets away with it because he always makes those latter characters goofy with hearts of gold Again I digress.
Basically Anderson has to work with an actor that has the ability to pull in a large audience, his skills as a director are ACE but he needs to maneuver himself so that he can make money so that he can continually be in the driver's seat ( meaning in the position having the opportunity to make a movie, he basically rides on that fact the he is an auteur, and that he is "an artist" filmmaker, its like the kid that doesn't work cause his folks earn and make a lot of money, and the kid is now 25, its like are you ever gonna go out and get a job or will you continue to bank on the fact the your folks are the breadwinners.)
Inherent Vice is not awful. It's quite good.
Quote from: martinthewarrior on August 20, 2015, 08:12:39 PM
Quote from: OpO1832 on August 19, 2015, 10:39:59 AM
This is not as bad as everyone is making it seem. You know A.I is a Pinocchio story, sort of, that movie has some good moments in it. I was re watching some of it the other day, its such a tragedy that Kubrick did not make that movie, it would of been probably his magnum opus. I was yearning for the Kubrick's darkness and lightness, can you imagine how Kubrick would of shot the stuff with G. Joe. It would of been epic. Anyway it will be interesting to see what P.T Anderson cooks up, I have faith in him, its RDJ and the studios who I lack faith in. Anderson could write a brilliant script but in the end if another director is tasked with directing the movie, like a Marc Forester or Webb or one of these guys who has recent success, like the guy who did Jurassic World, or the guy who did District 9, all lame directors who just turn out products for the studio. It is pretty sad to see that in 2015 the most edgy director working within the studio system is in his 70s and his name is Scorsese, it only took decades for him to be accepted into that world, oh and working with a matinee idol like DiCaprio, he is basically locked into DiCaprio because working with him ensures box office success, young men will always go see a Scorsese movie but woman esp in the 18-30 range were not always his biggest audience, ever since Gangs of New York, he found a new audience and reaped the financial success a director always wants. I digress but it all kinda of ties together, P.T Anderson honestly needs to make a movie that also makes money, Inherent Vice was awful, and i love P.T Anderson, but as an adaption it fails, and as a P.T Anderson movie it fails, so what your left with is nothing. Visually it was semi-interesting to see Paul shoot in 1:85 with spherical lenses. I think Paul should work with DiCaprio and hopefully he will garner box office success. One thing I can say is that once a director has a smash success @ the box office, its is ADDICTIVE, and a domino effect could happen.
Its interesting to see Woody Allen and the Coen Brothers achieve great box office numbers and maintain their integrity as filmmakers. Especially Woody Allen. I was watching Blue Jasmine the other day and I was like this is such a good fucking movie, but i am a New Yorker so I am probably biased, a lot of those themes in the movie are relevant to today, not with everybody, Allen has a way of depicting the affluent Upper West Side/ East Side/ Central Park west + east lifestyle well and his attempts at doing bridge and tunnel are funny if not somewhat cliched and ha-misted he gets away with it because he always makes those latter characters goofy with hearts of gold Again I digress.
Basically Anderson has to work with an actor that has the ability to pull in a large audience, his skills as a director are ACE but he needs to maneuver himself so that he can make money so that he can continually be in the driver's seat ( meaning in the position having the opportunity to make a movie, he basically rides on that fact the he is an auteur, and that he is "an artist" filmmaker, its like the kid that doesn't work cause his folks earn and make a lot of money, and the kid is now 25, its like are you ever gonna go out and get a job or will you continue to bank on the fact the your folks are the breadwinners.)
Inherent Vice is not awful. It's quite good.
Here we go again.
Kubrick would have never made A.I., as he had abandoned the project once he build a real "robot" and saw it was impossible to make it perform as he felt was right. Years before his death he had already decided that it was Spielberg or it would never get made. And Gigolo Joe was a Kubrick creation, but one pretty much incomplete, according to Spielberg. Sketches and other stuff, but nothing too developed. And the film is a masterpiece as it is.
At this point I roll my eyes every time someone refers to DiCaprio as a "matinee idol". Really, that's lame. The dude is a great actor who hits it out of the park most of the time. Big name directors don't have to work with anyone they don't want to. Not seven times or whatever. Also, of course Inherent Vice is good, and it was studio financed, so in that sense PTA could be the most "edgy" director working in Hollywood.
District 9 was really good too.
And the Pinocchio project sounds problematic at best.
I thought district 9 was awful and so was the other movie he did with matt damon but again thats me.
A.I is not a masterpiece but a really great movie, I just wish Kubrick stopped tapping out because of Spielberg. He could of made Aryan Papers, and A.I but for some reason he didn't. He got intimated, Waterloo came out and and ruined his chance at making Napoleon so he figured why make a holocaust movie if Schindler's List is out which I think sucks, think about how many movies come out that are exactly the same, remember when white house down came out and the other movie just like it came out. or when two movies about capote came out. Eyes Wide Shut is such a great last movie though. Spelberg's masterpieces are Saving Private Ryan, Schindler's List and Jaws, and Close Encounters.
Spiralling ever more off topic, but: ET. ET deserves Spielberg masterpiece status. Watch that shit again it's amazing
best post of the year:
Quote from: Pozer on July 01, 2015, 08:23:01 PM
Quote from: Drenk on July 01, 2015, 01:09:48 PM
No. Or a porn version.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs22.postimg.org%2Fjyfqxz2m9%2Fimage.jpg&hash=cdf0435a8d29bdff6c66b82e5784c7d4fa53f91f)
"I'm a star. I'm a star, I'm a star, I'm a star. I am a big bright shining star."
Paul Thomas Anderson Won't Be Directing Robert Downey Jr.'s 'Pinocchio'
Jeff Sneider of The Wrap tweeted last night that Anderson won't be helming "Pinocchio." No word as to why, but I'd guess having more people to answer to in a major studio environment at Warner Bros., for what would be a decidedly more mainstream picture, probably wasn't that enticing. No word yet on the status of his screenplay and if it'll be used or if Downey Jr. and co. will get someone else to take a pass at it. My guess is that whichever director comes on board will want to take a run at it to position the material to something closer to their own voice.
http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/paul-thomas-anderson-wont-be-directing-robert-downey-jrs-pinocchio-20151112
this is the true sound of a bottle movie in one's career.
So we're back to Square One in terms of knowing what PTA might direct next?