• Welcome to the Muppet Central Forum!
    You are viewing our forum as a guest. Join our free community to post topics and start private conversations. Please contact us if you need help.
  • Christmas Music
    Our 24th annual Christmas Music Merrython is underway on Muppet Central Radio. Listen to the best Muppet Christmas music of all-time through December 25.
  • Macy's Thanksgiving Parade
    Let us know your thoughts on the Sesame Street appearance at the annual Macy's Parade.
  • Jim Henson Idea Man
    Remember the life. Honor the legacy. Inspire your soul. The new Jim Henson documentary "Idea Man" is now streaming exclusively on Disney+.
  • Back to the Rock Season 2
    Fraggle Rock Back to the Rock Season 2 has premiered on AppleTV+. Watch the anticipated new season and let us know your thoughts.
  • Bear arrives on Disney+
    The beloved series has been off the air for the past 15 years. Now all four seasons are finally available for a whole new generation.
  • Sam and Friends Book
    Read our review of the long-awaited book, "Sam and Friends - The Story of Jim Henson's First Television Show" by Muppet Historian Craig Shemin.

New Muppet movie in development for potential 2013 release

Status
Not open for further replies.

BobThePizzaBoy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2007
Messages
1,688
Reaction score
476
I don't think it would, because compared to some of those other projects he green-lit, the Muppets are much more affordable.
Yeah, I ultimately agree. Following John Carter's massive flopping and Lone Ranger and Oz possibly being hit or miss, Disney probably is going to stick to lower-budgeted films for the next year or two (probably explains why wer're getting another Muppets so quickly). It would make sense from a business standpoint. Either that or recoup everything by making another Pirates of the Caribbean :eek: (I honestly forgot until right now that there even was another Pirates movie last year). :skeptical:
 

jvcarroll

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2012
Messages
1,660
Reaction score
1,999
I really hope this doesn't affect the movie in any way... :embarrassed: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/rich-ross-disney-314584
I wondered that too, but it's probably a good thing. Ross is the executive scapegoat for John Carter. The movie was reportedly good, but they gave $250 million to an animation director who had never worked in live action. The extra $100 million dollars in marketing didn't capitalize on the fact that the original book, from the same author of Tarzan, was the inspiration for most sci-fi fare long before Star Wars was even a thought or George Lucas was even born. If they'd slashed the budget in half, scaled it down to a tight 95 minutes and advertised the majesty of this Martian film (rather than hide it or apologize for it) John Carter of Mars would have been a sequel-spawing success.

Muppet movies make economical sense and have endless merchandising possibilities. They can easily make back the $45 million investment and advertising budget at the box office and make a profit too. Home video sales and product branding, if they actually go all-0ut this time by releasing more Muppet Show seasons and merchandise, could prove to be an industry unto itself!

I think the Muppets are safe. :smile:
 

zoebell

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2011
Messages
367
Reaction score
91
i hope. changes at the top can always have trickle down effects though. i actually thought that the muppets didn't get moving until bob iger had stepped down in 2009, is that not true?
 

BobThePizzaBoy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2007
Messages
1,688
Reaction score
476
I wondered that too, but it's probably a good thing. Ross is the executive scapegoat for John Carter. The movie was reportedly good, but they gave $250 million to an animation director who had never worked in live action and another $100 million to market it. The extra $100 million dollars in marketing didn't capitalize on the fact that the original book, from the same author of Tarzan, was the inspiration for most sci-fi fare long before Star Wars was even a thought or George Lucas was even born. If they'd slashed the budget in half, scaled it down to a tight 95 minutes and advertised the majesty of this Martian film (rather than hide it or apologize for it) John Carter of Mars would have been a sequel-spawing success.
It's not so much John Carter was a bad movie, just a severely misguided movie. Stanton isn't disciplined in live-action filmmaking which is really what screwed him up. Way too much of the budget went toward frequent reshoots that skyrocketed the budget. Had Stanton worked elsewhere, something like Brad Bird did with the most recent Mission: Impossible, he could have done something great. John Carter wasn't the film to kick start his live-action directing career, if he even ends up having one.

And yes, to answer your questions: from my understanding, Rich Ross was the one who was set on getting the Muppets made by 2011.
 

jvcarroll

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2012
Messages
1,660
Reaction score
1,999
It's not so much John Carter was a bad movie, just a severely misguided movie. Stanton isn't disciplined in live-action filmmaking which is really what screwed him up. Way too much of the budget went toward frequent reshoots that skyrocketed the budget. Had Stanton worked elsewhere, something like Brad Bird did with the most recent Mission: Impossible, he could have done something great. John Carter wasn't the film to kick start his live-action directing career, if he even ends up having one.

And yes, to answer your questions: from my understanding, Rich Ross was the one who was set on getting the Muppets made by 2011.
Exactly right. That's what I was saying. I hear the film is pretty good! I missed seeing it before Disney yanked it here. The failure was in the budget and the advertising. It could be that Ross is taking most of the fall in order to keep the heat off Stanton because Pixar wants him for future animation projects. This is all hindsight, of course, but none of this made much sense to me when the film was in development either. It's disappointing that people are treating John Carter like it's an awful film when the truth is it was probably a fairly good popcorn movie that didn't make financial sense.

The Muppets have such a lean and capable strategy. It still amazes me how long Disney took to see that potential. Now that they know, Disney seems to really want to be in the Muppet business no matter the studio head.
 

zoebell

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2011
Messages
367
Reaction score
91
a new ceo could have different expectations for the sequel though. like maybe concerning the release date or something
 

Drtooth

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2002
Messages
31,717
Reaction score
6,710
I wondered that too, but it's probably a good thing. Ross is the executive scapegoat for John Carter. The movie was reportedly good, but they gave $250 million to an animation director who had never worked in live action. The extra $100 million dollars in marketing didn't capitalize on the fact that the original book, from the same author of Tarzan, was the inspiration for most sci-fi fare long before Star Wars was even a thought or George Lucas was even born. If they'd slashed the budget in half, scaled it down to a tight 95 minutes and advertised the majesty of this Martian film (rather than hide it or apologize for it) John Carter of Mars would have been a sequel-spawing success.
It's like they didn't even bother marketing it as Sci-Fi, and it just looked like another fantasy fighting flick... especially since Wrath of the Titans and Hunger Games came out the same month too. But something tells me it's going to hit DVD hard, due to everyone's curiosity, and it will make it's budget back that way at least.

Still... hiding the sci-fi roots was just idiotic. There was so much they could have done and John Carter could have been Disney's next big Franchise. Some how it really feels like they knew that this wouldn't hit big, treated it like a failure and said to themselves... Heck with it. We got Avengers and a Pixar film this summer... anything we lose on this we can make up with the mere marketing of those alone. Not to mention whatever merchandising stake they have in the Spider-Man movie
 

bandit

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2012
Messages
846
Reaction score
509
The sad truth is that....as much as we can bash the media...it is still a necessary tool to promote things. There's very little we learn on our own in this life anyway. Think about it, almost anything we learn comes from a book or a television broadcast. Something happens, it's how we find out about. I guess that in itself is kind of a scary thought. People decide what we need to know....how much are we missing?

But as far as movies go.....It all comes back to the payoff being better than the money you put into it. So basically, even if the studios don't believe in it 100%...spin it the right way...get the people behind it and suddenly...WOW! WE GOTTA HAVE IT!

And that's how a fad is born. ^_^;
It's all about PR. Like Edina Monsoon says, "Names names names!"
 

Avilos

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2011
Messages
66
Reaction score
51
when is this so called script coming out?
Sorry, that was just a joke. Based on some people's concerns the movie might be rushed.

If I can be serious, very serious - I been thinking about something a lot lately. As I mentioned on another thread here, I was in a very serious accident last year. While I am fully recovered now I could have died.

Life is Short. Look at Jim Henson's life. We should be grateful they are so motivated to make a new movie so soon. No one knows what tomorrow will bring for me or any of us. Including the Muppeteers.

We waited a long time for the last one. We need to seize each moment we get. To live each day to it fullest and appreciate the good things we have.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top