It looks like Damon Lindelof has taken his final internet ass-kicking on Twitter as the prolific writer/producer has seemingly deleted his Twitter account. I know cyber-bullying is a hot issue right now, but to think that even a Hollywood player like Lindelof can have his ego so shattered that he gives up his Twitter account… Well boy, I don’t know. (more…)
Damon Lindelof is one of the busiest screenwriters currently in show business, and it’s all thanks to his six years show running Lost. Well, we all know how that ended, and if we had forgotten, the internet reminded us the other night following the final episode of Breaking Bad.
Lindelof was recruited to write a piece commemorating the end of Breaking Bad by The Hollywood Reporter, and at some point it turned into a pseudo-apology slash admission of guilt concerning the alleged crapiness of the end of Lost. “I agreed to write this piece because I am deeply and unhealthily obsessed with finding ways to revisit the Lost finale and the maddening hurricane of shit that has followed it,” Lindelof wrote.
“In the comments section of the piece I did not write, the following sentiment would have been echoed dozens of times over: ‘What the f— do you know because you f—ed up Lost?!?’” he continued. “How do I know this? Well, for starters, my Twitter feed was pretty much a unanimous run of, “Did you see that, Lindelof? That’s how you end a show.”
That’s true, and some of it was pretty nasty. Still, Lindelof admits that he’s got a problem. “Alcoholics are smart enough to not walk into a bar,” he explained. “My bar is Twitter. It’s Comic-Con. It’s anytime someone asks me to write an article even casually relating to Lost.
“And what do I do? I jump at the opportunity to acknowledge how many people were dissatisfied with how it ended. I try to be self-deprecating and witty when I do this, but that’s an elaborate (or obvious?) defense mechanism to let people know I’m fully aware of the elephant in the room and I’m perfectly fine with it sitting down on my face and shitting all over me.”
Well, there’s an image. Lindelof goes on to say that he’s tired of the fight, and that he appreciates the quiet number of Lost fans who are fans of the finale and feel like lepers because of it. So he’s decided to offer us a truce:
“I’d like to make a pact, you and me,” he said. “And here’s your part: You acknowledge that I know how you feel about the ending of Lost. I got it. I heard you. I will think about your dissatisfaction always and forever. It will stay with me until I lie there on my back dying, camera pulling slowly upward whether it be a solitary dog or an entire SWAT team that comes to my side as I breathe my last breath.
“And here’s my part: I will finally stop talking about it. I’m not doing this because I feel entitled or above it — I’m doing it because I accept that I will not change hearts nor minds. I will not convince you they weren’t dead the whole time, nor resent you for believing they were despite my infinite declarations otherwise.”
There. Everybody happy now? That’s what I thought. But because he can, Lindelof decided to get one last word in before signing off.
“I stand by the Lost finale,” he said. “It’s the story that we wanted to tell, and we told it. No excuses. No apologies. I look back on it as fondly as I look back on the process of writing the whole show. And while I’ll always care what you think, I can’t be a slave to it anymore. Here’s why: I did it for me. I liked it. I was good at it. And I was really … I was alive.”
So there you go, internet, you won. Lindelof is broken-ish. Lesson learned.
Last night’s series finale of Breaking Bad was excellent, and people seemed to have really responded to it. In what was the most anticipated episode of series television since the series finale of Lost, Breaking Bad not only secured 10.3 million viewers, but it was a critical success and a rave with fans of the show was well. As we all know, the reception to the finale of Lost was somewhat less than congenial. Oh forget it, people hated the crap out of it. But still, three years on you’d figure that fans might have gotten over it. And you’d be wrong.
As Breaking Bad drew to a close, fans of the show took to Twitter to voice their satisfaction with the finale – by mocking Lost co-creator Damon Lindelof and his lack off finale writing finesse. In fact, Lindelof was getting so much Twitter traffic, he decided to re-tweet some of the sass of he was getting.
Damon Lindelof – some find him to be a brilliant writer, including all of those in Hollywood that keep giving him job after job. Others of us think a bit less of the man, annoyed with his tendency to use intentional obscurity to spice up his scripts. But whatever you think of him, he has his fame and when he has something to say, people listen. And he does have something to say right now, and it’s about how Breaking Bad’s Walter White and Batman are the same character at their core. Check it al out after the jump:
Without Star Wars Episode VII and a Comic Con retread of the Marvel slate, the fan excitement level at D23 was dependent on what was revealed about Brad Bird‘s next film Tomorrowland. Director Bird and writer/lightening rod Damon Lindelof literally had a mystery box at D23 where they give hints of what the film might be about. But if you’re more a fan of the direct approach, Disney put out a press release today featuring a compelling, though brief, plot description.
Bound by a shared destiny, a bright, optimistic teen bursting with scientific curiosity and a former boy-genius inventor jaded by disillusionment embark on a danger-filled mission to unearth the secrets of an enigmatic place somewhere in time and space that exists in their collective memory as “Tomorrowland.”
Drew McWeeney from Hitfix got into a bit of hot water because he published a detailed plot description that, as it turns out, was rather accurate. It looks likely that Britt Robertson is playing the “bright, optimistic teen,” and George Clooney is the “former boy genius.”
The press release also included detailed information about the producing team, the cast, and the production crew:
Principal photography has begun on Disney’s mystery adventure “Tomorrowland,” starring two-time Academy Award winner George Clooney (“Michael Clayton,” “Syriana”), Hugh Laurie (“Monsters vs. Aliens,” “Arthur Christmas”), Britt Robertson (“Under The Dome”), Raffey Cassidy (“Dark Shadows,” “Snow White and the Huntsman”) and Thomas Robinson (“The Switch”). The film is directed, produced and co-written by two-time Oscar winner Brad Bird (“Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol,” “The Incredibles”). Damon Lindelof (“Star Trek Into Darkness,” “Prometheus”) and Jeffrey Chernov (“Star Trek,” “Star Trek Into Darkness,” “Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol”) are also producers. The screenplay is written by Brad Bird and Damon Lindelof from a story by Lindelof & Jeff Jensen and Brad Bird.
Jeff Jensen and John Walker (“The Incredibles”) will executive produce with Bernard Bellew (“Les Misérables,” “28 Weeks Later”) and Tom Peitzman, VFX producer (“Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol,” “Alice in Wonderland”) serving as co-producers.
Bird has gathered a great team behind the lens with Oscar winning director of photography Claudio Miranda (“Life of Pi,” “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”), production designer Scott Chambliss (“Star Trek,” “Star Trek Into Darkness,” “Cowboys & Aliens”), Oscar nominated costume designer Jeffrey Kurland (“Inception,” “Ocean’s Eleven”) and Academy Award-winning editor Walter Murch (“The English Patient,” “Cold Mountain”).
Tomorrowland will be in theaters on December 12, 2014. Excited about the project? Disinterested? Sound off in the comments section below.
On the eve of World War Z‘s release, movie fans are wondering if the often-reported rumors of production difficulties and emergency re-writes and re-shoots are going to show in the final big screen product. Fair question, and The Huffington Post thinks it has an answer.
To recap, Paramount took a look at the work in progress cut of World War Z last year and realized that their third act was a mess. Needing to rethink the issue, the producers – including star Brad Pitt – brought in Damon Lindelof (Prometheus, Star Trek Into Darkness) to pen a page one re-write of act three. Lindelof, in turn, brought in Cabin in the Woods filmmaker Drew Goddard to help him out. At some point along the way Christopher McQuarrie (Jack Reacher) was brought in to do a polish, but mostly the structure of the third act was the work of Lindelof and Goddard.
So when you’re watching World War Z later this weekend, or whenever, at what point does the Lindelof/Goddard script take over from the original version? Interestingly, one doesn’t need to spoil anything to tell, at least you won’t be spoiled if you’ve already seen the trailers. Apparently, the third act begins after Pitt’s character gets on the plane in Israel, the same plane scene that closes out the recent trailer. Further, HuffPo says that Lindeloff and Goddard wrote a couple of scenes to beef up the Pitt character’s familial relationship to give his plight greater gravitas and to make the stakes of the film more personal for the audience.
It’s worth noting that the HuffPo article also said that no footage from the re-done third act has been used in any of the trailers, so movie viewers may be in the rare position of going into the final portion of the movie complete unawares. It will be interesting to see what the reaction to World War Z will be this weekend, if it can overcome some of that negative buzz and deliver something that audiences can get excited about. I guess we’ll know for sure in about 24 hours.
What say you Bastards, are you going to check out World War Z this weekend?
So, Brad Pitt‘s forthcoming fast running zombie wave movie with the title loosely based off a book by Mel Brook’s kid, World War Z, has had it’s share of trouble. After a pile of reshoots and rewrites (including expert rewriter Damon Lindelof ) not to mention a lot of bad press (and an even worse couple of trailers) most if not all of the internet were predicting disaster for the flesh eating flic.
Now with it’s world wide release looming (June 21,) WWZ just had its first public screening which led to the first batch of tweets from people in attendance, tweets that make the movie sound like something other than a train wreck, tweets that you can read after the jump! (more…)
At the time of this article Star Trek Into Darkness has earned over $91 million, just under the $93 million made in the first five-day of Star Trek‘s release. In the eyes of Paramount that’s an under par release. To fans this translates as no Star Trek 3, but to J.J. Abrams, that’s illogical.
Even with the director being brought under the wing of Lucasfilm and attaching himself to Star Wars: Episode VII, Abrams has said not to count out the likelihood of a future installment of Trek. A sentiment he continues to back up in a recent interview,
The idea of working with these people again would be a thrill and a privilege. One of the reasons I wanted to do the second one was so I had a chance to work with this cast and crew again…It really would depend if there’s a third movie that the studio wants to make. It would depend what the schedule was. Would I be open to it? Of course I would.
Would they be open to it? Of course Paramount would, they’d be foolish not to set up something after production wraps on Episode VII. An opportunity to pair up Abrams, co-writer Damon Lindelof and the producer Bryan Burk once again shouldn’t be missed. And speaking of the duo, Lindelof and Burk recently sat down with Cinema Blend to discuss some of the finer points to the twists and turns of Into Darkness. Read on after the jump.
When preparing this article I considered for a moment using the image of Alice Eve from the scene in question, especially because it was soooo prevalent in every aspect of the film’s promotion. But I reconsidered, because one, even if you haven’t seen Star Trek Into Darkness you know exactly what scene we’re talking about, and two, maybe if we focus on Carol as a character and Alice as a person we can all understand why the scene’s inclusion was wrong.
I’ll also preface this with saying I’ve got no qualms with scantily clad women, there’s just a time and place for it. For example, Kirk in bed with two sexy, space kittens. I’m fine with it. J.J. Abram‘s Kirk is a player, a bit of a womanizer, and those women were used in that scene to demonstrate that point. Sure, it’s a tired, overused trope, but I can forgive it. Reducing Carol Marcus, brilliant scientist and weapons specialist, to nothing more than mere eye candy? That’s distasteful, and judging from how often we were bombarded with the image of Eve in her bra and panties, it’s how they wanted us to remember her. Sexy lady, not integral member of the crew.
Thankfully, I’m not the only who thought the scene was out of place and it’s been brought to screenwriter Damon Lindeloff‘s attention. And, gratefully, his response wasn’t defensive or angry, but understanding, and hopefully means he’ll work against something like this happening in the future. Lindelof tweeted (read from bottom top),
And, in a MTV-hosted Q&A, the topic of the gratuitous underwear scene came up again, with Lindeloff responding,
Q: OK, down to the nitty gritty. I feel like I have to start with the biggest mystery/conversation that’s surrounded the film from the get go. Why is Alice Eve in her underwear at one point?
Lindeloff: Why is Alice Eve in her underwear, gratuitously and unnecessarily, without any real effort made as to why in God’s name she would undress in that circumstance? Well there’s a very good answer for that. But I’m not telling you what it is. Because… uh… MYSTERY?
Obviously, there is no good answer, which is why it’s a “mystery”. Maybe the flick’s creators were surprised to hear such outcry over this scene? That wouldn’t be all too surprising since scantily clad women with little to no effect on a film’s plot is the trend. A recent study by the University of Southern California Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism has shown that speaking roles for women in films have reached a five-year low, with men receiving over 70% of the speaking roles. And, as if that weren’t depressing enough, over 30% of female roles are usually depicted with at least some exposed skin or wearing sexually-revealing outfits. It’s a sorry state of affairs, and I’m sad Star Trek has to be included. Especially for a franchise that’s broken countless gender and racial stereotypes over its long history.
And would things have been better had the men of the Enterprise been given equal treatment? For me? Yes. Where was the scene of Kirk, McCoy, and Sulu stripping off their wetsuits? Y’know, Enterprise may not have been very good Star Trek, but I’ll give them credit for showing the whole crew, men and women, in their skivvies while in the decontamination chamber after an away mission.
Apparently there was a shirtless scene for villain Benedict Cumberbatch, but it never made it into the film. Why’s that, Lindeloff?
As for the shirtless scene… we scripted it, but I don’t think it ever got shot. You know why? Because getting actors to take their clothes off is DEMEANING AND HORRIBLE AND…
My point, exactly.
What did you think of Eve’s revealing scene? Were you bothered by it? Did it come off as unnecessary?
There’s something you guys should know about me right away, before we even get in to talking about Star Trek Into Darkness. It’s gonna make some of you uncomfortable, and it might even make some of you distrust every single thing I say about this movie from here on, but it needs to be said, because you need to know the perspective from which I was approaching seeing this particular film. So brace yourselves, Trekkies. Take a deep breath. We’re all gonna get through this. Ready? OK: I loved J.J. Abrams’ first Star Trek movie. I mean, flat out, caveat-free, absolute love. I came out of that movie feeling refreshed and overjoyed and itching to see it again, and then of course I looked at the internet. I was sincerely baffled by all the hate some viewers threw at that flick. I thought they were nit-picking. I thought they were actively seeking reasons not to like it, instead of just sitting back and enjoying this new interpretation. “You don’t get to decide what ‘real’ Star Trek is,” I would argue. “It’s for everybody. It always has been. Just because the Kobayashi Maru scenes didn’t live up to your particular moral interpretation doesn’t mean it’s not a good movie,” I said. I embraced the popcorn exuberance of that film, and four years later I’m still unabashedly embracing it. I still love that movie. So, why am I telling you all of this? Because, Star Trek haters, after seeing Star Trek Into Darkness, I can finally feel your pain.