The next "Jump Street" movie will be a crossovver film. What the actual ****?

[pr_capone]

You might be asking yourself... who the hell are they going to crossover with? The answer is obvious, of course.

Men in Black (MiB)

http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2014/...eet-crossover/

Sony Pictures has surprising plans for its “Jump Street” and “Men in Black” franchises: Combining them.

E-mails from the studio’s motion picture chief Amy Pascal leaked onto the Internet this week by hackers reveal that a follow-up to this year’s comedy hit “22 Jump Street” will have cops played by Jonah Hill and Channing Tatum interacting with the universe of the sci-comedy franchise “Men in Black,” which previously starred Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones.

Details on the movie are scarce, but the e-mails do indicate Messrs. Smith and Jones would not be included in the movie, at least in prominent roles. Phil Lord and Chris Miller, who directed the last two “Jump Street” films, are producing the picture and may direct it.

In an e-mail to Ms. Pascal, Mr. Hill says “jump street merging with mib i think that’s clean and rad and powerful.”

In another e-mail, Hannah Minghella, a president of production for Sony’s Columbia Pictures label, says of the joint sequel, “We don’t have a script yet so we’ll be greenlighting the movie off the concept and the talent involved.”

E-mails indicate it is one of the highest profile projects on the studio’s slate and that executives are eager to move ahead with the film as soon as possible. Sony is hoping to release the movie in 2016 or 2017.

A mash-up of franchises is unusual, but could fit the irreverent tone of the “Jump Street” movies. In addition to providing an unexpected follow-up to a hit, Sony executives say in e-mails that they hope the crossover will reinvigorate “Men in Black.” 2012’s “Men in Black 3” grossed $624 million worldwide, but lost money for the studio and did not excite fans for a quick follow-up.

In a letter to Steven Spielberg’s attorney seeking to secure the filmmaker’s participation (Mr. Spielberg was an executive producer of the “Men in Black” films), Sony Pictures president of worldwide business affairs and operations Andrew Gumpert wrote, “We didn’t do as well as we had hoped for on the last MIB film, but that hasn’t caused us to lose faith in the franchise. In reality, the exact opposite has occurred where we all have an opportunity to take an interim step on the way to hopefully forging ahead again in the pure-play MIB universe.”

[ragedogg69]

Originally Posted by Valiant

Yeah that is some BS.. They are probably cooking the books to not pay their actors some more royalties...

More like Sony creates an LLC for the movie, this LLC pays Sony studios for advertising the movie and that makes the LLC appear to have made no money or even loss money.

This is exactly how the writer for Forest Gump got zero royalties for that movie and why he will never sell the rights for a sequel.

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Not residuals, because those are agreed to with SAG and can't be negotiated on a per film or TV project basis, but escalators, which are far more important.

Dane, How can these companies get away with saying we lost money on a movie that took in $625? If you can't make money on a film that brings in $625 million, why bother being in the business?

Is it some cook the books BS that everyone is in on?

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

Dane, How can these companies get away with saying we lost money on a movie that took in $625? If you can't make money on a film that brings in $625 million, why bother being in the business?

Is it some cook the books BS that everyone is in on?

There is no "cooking of the books" in studio accounting. GAAP Standards are preached throughout all finance and accounting departments and the CFO at Paramount held those departments to "beyond" GAAP standards.

But the first thing in understanding the accounting is that while a film might gross $625 million (or whatever) is that it all doesn't go directly to the studio. The exhibitioners (movie theaters) receive a percentage that increases over the run if the film. So it might be as little as 15% the first week but might grow as high 25% or more by the sixth week.

Also, marketing budgets are not included in a film's budget. So for example, a film might cost $250 million to make with another $100 million in worldwide advertising. I don't know what it's like in cities like Tampa or KC these day but the marketing in New York and Los Angeles is omnipresent. I can't drive two blocks without seeing billboards, buses and 15+ story buildings covered in ads for films and TV shows. For a few years, electronic billboards where everywhere, rotating film ads, but citizen groups banded together have them removed (for the record, I actually thought they were less of an eyesore than traditional billboards).

So essentially, the finance and accounting departments will expense as much as possible in order to avoid hitting certain escalators, which would require further payout to actors, directors, etc. I'm pretty sure I've mentioned it before but Disney made the first POTC a "loser" in order to avoid escalators. I knew the assistant CFO personally at the time and it was explained to me that it was just part of the job.

As for Forrest Gump, I was at Uni at the time and never heard about the writer not receiving due compensation. Most of the talk was how Hanks eschewed a large upfront salary for a percentage of the back end, which became $42 million dollars, and was unprecedented at the time.

[ragedogg69]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

As for Forrest Gump, I was at Uni at the time and never heard about the writer not receiving due compensation. Most of the talk was how Hanks eschewed a large upfront salary for a percentage of the back end, which became $42 million dollars, and was unprecedented at the time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forrest...or_controversy

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by ragedogg69

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forrest...or_controversy

Groom's dispute with Paramount was later effectively resolved after Groom declared he was satisfied with Paramount's explanation of their accounting, this coinciding with Groom receiving a 7-figure contract with Paramount for film rights to another of his books, titled 'Gump & Co.'

I wasn't at Paramount at the time and never heard about this issue but it seems as if it was resolved.

Screenwriters, musicians, composers, et al, rarely have an understanding of their business dealings, which is sad, but also reality.

[Sure-Oz]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

The Sony emails are hilarious. Various execs saying that Adam Sandler is a "hack" and they're embarrassed to be involved with him, Scott Rudin calling Angie Jolie talentless and an ogre, salary releases and even Sony having internal discussions about giving Spider-Man back to Marvel.

I'm certain these releases from the Sony hack are just the tip of the iceberg...

Lol nice

[J Diddy]

Originally Posted by Deberg_1990

Sounds like a way to help boost a sagging franchise like MIB more than anything.

sagging?

I thought it was done. Should have been after the last 2 anyway.