comment #1

Rich S. says ...

Here we go again...

comment #2

rr3333 says ...

Liked your Grateful Dead reference Jeff. Didnt know you were a Deadhead.

Also, Jackman doesn't die at the end? Who knew?

comment #3

actionman says ...

I am shocked that Fox sunk so much cash into a project like this. I am not saying that the film is gonna be bad -- based on the trailers it looks quite good -- but isn't this exactly the type of film that Fox never makes? Director intensive, huge budget, personal touches, war themed...what was the last film from Fox that was like this one? They always fight with their filmmakers, impose stupid studio-mandated "fixes" and "changes." I mean, they duked it out with a guy like Gavin Hood on Wolverine; is it just that Baz has made them some big money in the past that they greenlit this sucker to begin with?

I am really hoping that the film is as epic and expansive as the gorgeous looking trailers seem to promise. I have always liked Jackman and while I am hot-and-cold with Kidman, she looks stunning in the trailers.

comment #4

Jack Price says ...

I'm with you here. I can't see how the revised ending will have anything close to the same lasting impact that the original, bittersweet ending was intended to have. After all, don't most films try to build every scene towards delivering the most satisfying ending possible?

There are times when a massively reworked ending can work in the film's favor (see: Jacob's Ladder, Fatal Attraction), but I just don't see how this won't come across like the Brazil "Love Conquers All" ending.

comment #5

p.Vice says ...

I have a better idea. Why not release one film with BOTH ENDINGS in succession? First he dies, then the film rewinds and he lives.

comment #6

rgmax99 says ...

Wells! DAMN YOU! I can't believe you spoiled the ending to this anticipated film! Why couldn't you have warned the readers?!?

Kidding.

By the way, what was the last big Fox hit? Simpsons Movie? Seriously...I can't remember.

comment #7

DarthCorleone says ...

Just for the record, I'd like to thank you for the increase in spoiler sensitivity. Although I probably wouldn't care about Australia specifically, I do very much appreciate the general practice.

comment #8

TVMCCA says ...

p.vice wrote:
I have a better idea. Why not release one film with BOTH ENDINGS in succession? First he dies, then the film rewinds and he lives.

As a young pup, I remember reading Stephen Farber's review of Peckinpah's CONVOY in NEW WEST--and he claimed that's what occurred re Kris Kristofferson's lead character (minus the rewind).

comment #9

actionman says ...

I saw Convoy once. In college. Very stoned at the time. Don't remember the ending per se, but remember the film being pretty much a disaster. And I LOVE Peckinpah.

comment #10

BurmaShave says ...

How about let the audience vote on whether he should live or die?

comment #11

Rich S. says ...

Hey Burma, I think William Castle would approve of your idea (although he would probably have the choice be whether Jackman turns out to be a man or a woman).

comment #12

crsryan says ...

I think it would be retarded to have multiple versions floating around in theatrical release. I'm also surprised that Baz would roll over on a key storytelling element -- he let Kidman die in MR, after all. Is Baz fighting with Fox over something else? Is the movie over 3 hours?

comment #13

The Bandsaw Vigilante says ...

"Director intensive, huge budget, personal touches, war themed...what was the last film from Fox that was like this one?"

I could be wrong on this one, but I'm gonna say: THE THIN RED LINE?

Maybe?

comment #14

tjfar67 says ...

Fox should do something f'ed up like randomly distribute Live Hugh and Dead Huge to theaters and not publicize the fact that there a two different endings at all. Let the audience figure it out when they talk about the movie with friends and co workers who saw the other ending.

Stoopid idea, I know, but I'm sure it'd be more interesting in anything in the movie itself.

comment #15

p.Vice says ...

In any event there'll definitely be a director's cut DVD someday... I just noticed an upcoming theater listing that puts the running time at 2:35, which is a half hour lean per test screening reports.

The other day I was a bit disappointed by this news considering I would prefer the opportunity to see a promised epic on the big screen that also doesn't happen to be a movie microwaved to death in the testing process, but really, it just hit me... this is fucking BAZ LUHRMANN we're talking about. His movies have gotten progressively longer and progressively worse.

comment #16

The Hey says ...

Fox did this a LONG time ago with Lucky Lady in '75. Stanley Donen had killed Reynolds and Hackman off at the end. Fox freaked out and made him reshoot a happy ending.

And it didn't make a bit a good. The film was a huge financial failure.

I can't help but think this is history repeating itself. A big budget holiday Fox release with a controversial ending issue.

comment #17

actionman says ...

yes, The Thin Red Line was the last type of picture like this for Fox.

Something tells me that Australia won't be anywhere near as good as The Thin Red Line.

comment #18

Jack Price says ...

I'm just worried there's not a clear ending to be made from something that was deliberately designed with a tragic ending in mind.

I know the first release of Cinema Paradiso had a sizeable chunk of its original story excised, but again, I feel like the best we'll get is a "Love Conquers All" Brazil ending out of this one.

Hope Oprah is half-right about the film being exceptional, even with a last-minute ending switch.

comment #19

erniesouchak says ...

I think this should happen along red state/blue state lines.

I wonder if Luhrmann got the same heat for Kidman's death in "Moulin Rouge"?

comment #20

polarbear2 says ...

Killing off one of the leads does not make a film automatically better. Sometimes a tragic ending is just a pointless and cheap attempt at melodramatic depth. Or the writer couldn't think of any other way to end the movie (see American Beauty).

The suits might be right on this one. Baz killed off romantic leads on his last few pics. He might feel obliged to do it again in this movie out of habit. We should see the movie ourselves first before we judge whether the happier ending is less appropriate.

comment #21

BurmaShave says ...

polarbear2, the original script of AMERICAN BEAUTY had it framed by the daughter and Ricky on trial for Lester's murder, but I get what you're saying.

comment #22

theultimatebiu says ...

The death in American Beauty was actually neccessary and I do remember reading, although it is very obvious with the beginning video camera sequence, that Lester's murder was actually going to be put to trial.

Fox are notorious for changing endings and manipulating their films...sometimes it is for the better other times it is not.
The fact this has Nicole Kidman in it already dooms it to failure :)

comment #23

theultimatebiu says ...

And yes, there last hit was The Simpsons Movie. That was over a year ago. Fox really need a hit soon.

comment #24

janeygotagun says ...

SPOILER: Newspaper reports in australia today quote baz luhrmann as completely denying he was forced to change the ending. He said that on a Baz Luhrmann film, no one tells him what to do...he said he shot around 3 different endings.

comment #25

Rich S. says ...

So it's like a really big budget Clue?

comment #26

janee says ...

Si vous etes interesses par le dossier, ou desirez en savoir plus, contactez-moi par mail, et je vous mettrai en contact.
Best regards,Jane, CEO of high availability servers