Started By
Message
locked post

the girl with the dragon tattoo sequel...the girl who played with fire...

Posted on 12/15/13 at 7:32 pm
Posted by betweenthebara
nowhere
Member since May 2013
6183 posts
Posted on 12/15/13 at 7:32 pm
I was wondering if any of you guys had news on whether or not the US remake is going ahead? I know there has been struggle between fincher and the studio. I can't believe this hasn't been started yet. Last I heard was fincher was waiting on Andrew Kevin walker's (seven screen writer) rewrite after what I can only assume was a screenplay by steven zaillian that wasn't too impressive. I'm just fricking bummed this hasn't been done yet, and looking for some good news.

Fincher has already signed on to direct Gone Girl next, so that's probably another year before he could do it. At this point I just want someone to make the sequels if he can't. Obviously he's my first choice, but fricking goddamnit get it done.

Links would be greatly appreciated.
This post was edited on 12/15/13 at 8:31 pm
Posted by Brosef Stalin
Member since Dec 2011
42292 posts
Posted on 12/15/13 at 7:35 pm to
The first one didn't make a lot of money. If a second one gets made it will be with a different director and a much smaller budget.
Posted by classictiger
Member since Mar 2007
5795 posts
Posted on 12/15/13 at 7:41 pm to
quote:

The first one didn't make a lot of money. If a second one gets made it will be with a different director and a much smaller budget.


Huh?

quote:

The 2011 thriller, co-starring Daniel Craig and directed by David Fincher, earned more than $100 million domestically, with Sony greenlighting a sequel in early 2012.


LINK

$100 mill domestically is not a lot of money? I don't know how much profit it made but this does not even include what it did internationally.
Posted by betweenthebara
nowhere
Member since May 2013
6183 posts
Posted on 12/15/13 at 7:44 pm to
Link?

I'm not sure of the production costs of the first one, I know they were high, but I'm pretty sure it made its money back and then some and topped 100 mil domestically. I know it was widely reported that the studio was disappointed about the money, but I felt like that was pretty damn good considering the subject material, being rated r and them releasing it on Christmas and promoting it as the "feel bad movie".
Posted by betweenthebara
nowhere
Member since May 2013
6183 posts
Posted on 12/15/13 at 7:45 pm to
Yeah, exactly my thoughts.
Posted by Marciano1
Marksville, LA
Member since Jun 2009
20044 posts
Posted on 12/15/13 at 8:05 pm to
Trent Reznor's soundtrack was incredible. I really enjoyed the movie.
This post was edited on 12/15/13 at 8:06 pm
Posted by cjared036
Houston, tx
Member since Dec 2009
9569 posts
Posted on 12/15/13 at 8:14 pm to
Awesome flick
Posted by TotesMcGotes
New York, New York
Member since Mar 2009
27900 posts
Posted on 12/15/13 at 8:15 pm to
Rooney Mara said a couple months ago that she hopes to film it. Problem is, the main cast and Fincher have a ton of shite they've moved onto. House of Cards, Gone Girl, Bond 24, Mara is in everything.

Also, they recently announced a script rewrite for the sequel.
Posted by LuckySo-n-So
Member since Jul 2005
22657 posts
Posted on 12/15/13 at 8:15 pm to
Budget was $90 million.
Posted by musick
the internet
Member since Dec 2008
26131 posts
Posted on 12/15/13 at 8:21 pm to
quote:

Trent Reznor's soundtrack was incredible. I really enjoyed the movie.


+1000

I'm the biggest NIN/Reznor fan and two of my favorite albums of his are The Social Network and TGWTDT Scores, I own the both on CD, and I don't really buy physical music anymore
Posted by Dr RC
The Money Pit
Member since Aug 2011
61479 posts
Posted on 12/15/13 at 8:26 pm to
quote:

Budget was $90 million.


and it made $230 million worldwide.

give or take the studios cut would be about $115 million of that.

without adding in whatever they sold the TV rights for, DVD, bluray etc that really isnt a big enough profit to warrant a super quick turnaround for a sequel.
Posted by TotesMcGotes
New York, New York
Member since Mar 2009
27900 posts
Posted on 12/15/13 at 8:38 pm to
That's a great haul for that film. It's a hard-R drama in December starring zero bankable actors (at the time). I doubt Sony expected much more than that.
Posted by StringedInstruments
Member since Oct 2013
20914 posts
Posted on 12/15/13 at 8:43 pm to
How does the American version compare to the Swedish version?

I watched the trilogy with subtitles and found it to be rather lackluster. Not bad. But just barely good.
Posted by betweenthebara
nowhere
Member since May 2013
6183 posts
Posted on 12/15/13 at 8:48 pm to
Yeah, that's pretty much how I felt. I prefer mara's lisbeth to rapace's lisbeth, and fincher is tits...and reznor's ost kicks fricking arse.

I enjoyed the original Swedish flicks, but not as much as others.
This post was edited on 12/15/13 at 8:50 pm
Posted by alajones
Huntsvegas
Member since Oct 2005
35934 posts
Posted on 12/15/13 at 8:51 pm to
I liked the American version better, except I liked the Swedish girl better.
Posted by Dr RC
The Money Pit
Member since Aug 2011
61479 posts
Posted on 12/15/13 at 8:53 pm to
quote:

That's a great haul for that film. It's a hard-R drama in December starring zero bankable actors (at the time). I doubt Sony expected much more than that.


if it was supposed to be a single film sure

but it was supposed to launch a franchise and those are not franchise launching numbers.
Posted by TotesMcGotes
New York, New York
Member since Mar 2009
27900 posts
Posted on 12/15/13 at 9:01 pm to
Again, it's a hard-R drama. Franchise or not, those are great numbers. There's no way Sony looked at the source material and thought they had a blockbuster on their hands. That amount of money was probably as good as they could've expected with that material.
Posted by betweenthebara
nowhere
Member since May 2013
6183 posts
Posted on 12/15/13 at 9:20 pm to
quote:

that amount of money was probably as good as they could've expected with that material.


If they had any other ideas they were high off their fricking asses. I'm sure they thought because of the phenomenon of the books it would be like hunger games/twilight type shite, but that was crazy unrealistic for a number of reasons.
Posted by thatguy1892
That place you wish you were.
Member since Aug 2011
4629 posts
Posted on 12/15/13 at 9:49 pm to
I made sure to read the books before watching anything, and I've seen both American and the Swedish trilogy. The American version is a better in my opinion because it follows Mikael and Lisbeth's relationship a closer than the Swedish one, plus, it's doesn't move points of the plot around to make it more convenient for the film maker. Fincher did a fantastic job, and hope that he comes back for the next films.

Also the problem with its release wasn't the material, but more of the timing. It came out four days before Christmas. Not exactly the best time to release a film like that. Should have been released at the beginning of November.
This post was edited on 12/15/13 at 9:52 pm
Posted by TotesMcGotes
New York, New York
Member since Mar 2009
27900 posts
Posted on 12/16/13 at 2:02 pm to
quote:

Also the problem with its release wasn't the material, but more of the timing. It came out four days before Christmas. Not exactly the best time to release a film like that. Should have been released at the beginning of November.

Maybe. They thought they had an awards challenger on their hands and decided to release it when they did. They sort of had to pick their poison and get demolished by Twilight in November or Sherlock Holmes and Ghost Protocol in December.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 2Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram