2011-12 Season Network Rankings: Fox Still On Top But Down, … 
HLN Set To Air Daytime Emmy Awards 
Grant Bowler Cast As Richard Burton Opposite Lindsay Lohan … 
UPDATE: Dish Network And Broadcasters Ask Courts To Decide … 
Cannes Surprise Screening: Change Of Plans On Juan Antonio … 
Kevin Hart In Talks To Join Kevin James In ‘Valet … 
Anthony Hopkins Up For ‘Red 2′ Villain; Can … 
Cannes Conflicted Over ‘The Paperboy’ As … 
RATINGS RAT RACE: ‘American Idol’ Posts … 
Ghost Of 2004 Hovers Over L.A. Screenings As Int’l … 
On The Road To Awards Season? Kerouac Book Finally Makes It … 
Michael Bay’s Name Pushed Paramount To Settle Injured … 
Several More New Series In Recasting Mode; Returning Ones … 
‘G.I. Joe: Retaliation’ Moving To March 2013 To … 
Directors Fortnight Says It Must “Police … 
‘Chronicle’ Helmer Josh Trank Takes On … 
Will ‘Pan Am’ Take Flight With Amazon? 
TOLDJA! ICM Management Buyout Complete 
DESPERATE: HuffPo & Oprah Team Up Now 
Hot Trailer: ‘The Great Gatsby’ 
How Did Women Pilot Writers Fare For 2012? 
Roland Joffe is back the volatile political terrain he covered in films like The Mission and The Killing Fields. It’s There Be Dragons. Producer Ignacio Sancha said the film takes place during the Spanish Civil War. A journalist who looks back on the volatile conflict uncovers his father’s violent role. Joffe helped finance the film, and he and Sancha (who used his banking background) raised the funding to cover the budget, as well as P&A for a spring 2011 release. They are in talks with distributors right now.
-
Marketplace
-
-
News/Opinion Poll
Loading ...Box Office Poll
Loading ...
- REVIEW: Josh Brolin Makes Men in Black 3 Matter — Almost
- Robert Pattinson Talks Cosmopolis Re-Team, Says Cronenberg Wanted to Film His Junk
- Prometheus Promo: Up Close with Logan Marshall-Green's Hot Scientist, Holloway
- Barry Sonnenfeld On His Post-Converted Men in Black 3: It's 'The Best Use of 3-D'
- Breaking Dawn - Part 2 Character Posters: Photoshop Forever
This looks terrible. Unbelievable melodrama and no one really cares about the Spanish civil war. Straight to video with a one screen release if they are lucky.
As someone who believes in dragons, very disappointed about this trailer. And where’s the Ennio Morricone score?
Saw a screening of this in Pasadena Arclight a few weeks ago. It was a really good film. They somehow managed to make the murk that was the Spanish Civil War understandable for the 18-year-old that attended with me, so that’s one in their favor. Agree, however, that this is an AWFUL trailer… the hokey voiceover combined with sweeping shots and almost no talking by the cast makes it look like a foreign film from the Weinstein-era Miramax.
BORING… What a snor fest.. the trailer looks awful and the voice over guy is too cheesy.. another Hollywood film that sucks
keep in mind this is a trailer for DISTRIBUTORS…if you want to see the real trailer go to http://www.therebedragonsfilm.com. Also, in response to roland….i was fortunate enough to be on the set for some of the filming, and can say, in all honesty, he is a brilliant director. He is neither arrogant or difficult. People like to sensationalize things to make a hollywood person seem more interesting, but having talked with him, hung out with him, and seen him in action, i can tell you, he is a genuinely great person. From what i saw of the filming and read of the script, i can tell you it was amazing. I hope it translates to the screen. Also, this is NOT a hollywood film. It was independent and did much filming overseas. It was amazing to see how the Argentinians adapted their own sense of flimmaking to this movie, and i have never seen a harder working crew. I work in film normally and was more than amazed at what they pulled together. Anyways, it is a good movie so hopefully people see it. Just wanted to add my opinion having been present for a lot of it….
Apparently, except for two of the actors, everyone on the set found Joffe to be smug, pretentious, old-hat in his techniques, and arrogant to the point of many wanting to quit the film. How bad the script was was a constant dialogue on the set (of course, this raises questions as to why these complainers signed onto the film, but if you look at the prior credits of the crew and cast perhaps there’s your answer – THEY ALL NEEDED WORK!. ‘Film Girl’ (who submitted the comment this is a reply to) is probably Roland’s wife, girlfriend or Roland himself.
Apparently, except for two of the actors, everyone on the set found Joffe to be smug, pretentious, old-hat in his techniques, and arrogant to the point of many wanting to quit the film. How bad the script was was a constant dialogue on the set (of course, this raises questions as to why these complainers signed onto the film, but if you look at the prior credits of the crew and cast perhaps there’s your answer – THEY ALL NEEDED WORK!. ‘Film Girl’ (who submitted the comment this is a reply to) is probably Roland’s wife (don’t know if he has one), girlfriend (ditto) a producer, or Roland himself.
Okay, in that case – I’ll suspend judgment until I see the real trailer, because this is amateur-city.
I saw the film in Pasadena. It’s dreadful. Not ‘bad’. ‘Dreadful’. Written by Joffe (based on another script with others supposedly rewriting) he is not a professional screenwriter, and, therefore, the film is a tangle of scenes comprised of 4-5 different storylines.
None engage.
That is why it’s apparently been a year in post production (recutting, reshooting and added scenes) and still no distributors (all of which, big and small, have already seen it and passed apparently). Note how the trailer says ‘Spring 2011′. That will be nearly two years since shooting on a nearly $45 million dollar film! (which looked like $12 million in the Pasadena screening).
Opus Dei, who financed the film is now burdened with four-walling this sad result, and they will do so because it attempts to be anti-Davinci Code, setting the story straight on Josemaria Escriva, founder of Opus Dei. (Josemaria’s true-life story is interesting. The problem is that his life takes up only about 20% of the film – the rest is all FICTION! And boring fiction at that.)
Joffe has made 8 unwatchable bombs since his two successful films with David Putnam. It’s stunning that anyone would give him money to make another. Ever. Oh, wait, this one was financed by Opus Dei as a propoganda film, one which, according to the New York Times, was passed on by other directors (including Hugh Hudson – remember him?) before going to Joffe.
I stand corrected.
Well, filmboy2, I also saw the movie in Pasadena, and I think it is awesome!!! I think this movie is so complex and sophisticated than you did not even get 10% of it. The story lines flow in such an intelligent way… and it all comes together at the end. The acting is amazing. Charlie Cox is an oscar for sure. The cinematography is jaw-dropping. And the production and costume design (Zanetti and Blake, both Oscar winners) is out of this world… I am sorry that you did not get it…
A comment like ‘you didn’t get it’ freezes all intelligent response for it’s nothi8ng more than critical bigotry. No professional critic, despite disagreeing with another critic, would ever respond to dissenting criticism with ‘you didn’t get it’. It’s pointless and would make them sound stupid. Like your comment which is like saying women won’t ‘get’ a man’s film; a white man doesn’t ‘get’ a black man’s film. If you disagree with a criticism, be specific or be silent.
Charlie Cox is, in fact, very good, but his part constitutes about 20% of the film. Yvonne Blake costumed two women (hardly seen in the film). The rest of the actors are priests and soldiers (black robes and army duds) so it’s a pass on what her talents are. Zanetti did do a good job. But we go to the cinema for stories. And this has none. It’s a tangle of unprofessional ideas and narrative snippets. The most grievous sin is fixing utter fiction (and boring and near-incomprehensible) onto a biopic. Like making a movie about Mother Theresa and giving most of the screen time to an imaginary childhood ‘friend’ who became a whore, or something, and then not even making the whore story interesting. In this case that’s Wes Bentley’s fictional part. He’s charismatic and photogenic as an actor but there’s no story or character for him to play. The poor guy obviously needed work.
Eventually the film will come out (two years after production with P&A paid by the producers?) Doesn’t that say everything on a $40+ million dollar film). I wonder who really ‘gets this’.
filmboy2, you said everyone did a good job…great….and your main criticism applies to “The Mission”, where Fr. Gabriel is a true character and Robert de Niro’s character is fictional. No doubt this movie will do well. If you were there in Pasadena, you heard the big applause that most of us gave to the movie. As I said, it will be a great success.
It’s complete rubbish to say that Opus Dei financed this movie. If you can’t get your basic facts straight, why should anyone take anything else you say seriously?
I’ve read (no less in the New York Times) that Opus Dei members financed the film. When dentists finance a film, for example, (as they sometimes do) it’s said the film was ‘financed by dentists’. So, wouldn’t it be correct to say the same with reference to Opus Dei? Apparently Opus Dei is comprised of a very small, wealthy, elite membership of a few thousand only. And this membership financed the film (along with, apparently, the director, which probably just means he took a pay cut, which, given his track record, he’d probably have to take on any film now, anyway.)
I stand by my statement.
I agree with film girl, Joffé is genious, if not, why would he be nominated for an Oscar, twice. The film looks pretty good, I’ll buy a ticket, in my opinion the film looks awsome. It’s good to see a movie that has dialogue, it makes the plot deeper. It’s way better than just seeing pure action and brainless scenes. What happened to movies that actually made you think. I trust Roland on this one.
One reason Joffe was nominated for an Oscar twice is because both films were produced by David Putnam. You’re drinking the ‘director as auteur’ kool aid if you don’t factor that in. All films since bombed both critically and financially. The last two were unreleasable. One just has to do the math to figure out how bad this is. As a prior commentator said, it’s over $40 million and will be ‘released’ (so they claim) two years after production, with the producers having to raise their own P&A. If you know the business you’ll know that means 1) no distribtor wants it and 2) test screenings have gone badly (therefore, much reediting and reshooting taking up almost two years). Get real and stop relying on a trailer to tell you whether a film is any good, and two films from a director made over 30 years ago. Geesh.
I’ve read the script of the movie, so I know what it’s about, I’m not relying on the trailer.
This trailer is terrible! I don’t know the story and I’ll assume it’s great, but it deserves a better film than this trailer makes it out to be. Sheesh.
Im not rolands wife or girlfriend. But i knew that douchebag who posted that would assume so. Which just proves how people love to gossip and spread rumours. Again, while i was actually present on set, the crew enjoyed the movie, and seemed proud of it. I have no idea how it actually turned out as a movie….however, from what i saw during filming, it is worth seeing.
and yes i agree this trailer is not great….the voice over is really bad
Joffe came onboard this project two years in. He eventually proceeded to rewrite the script without meeting with the original writer. Joffe’s rewrite retained the same time period, genre and many of the same settings, events and characters as the original screenplay. He also worked with another writer during the development process. Now, the production company behind “There Be Dragons” is claiming the sole “written by” credit for Joffe which is being disputed in three different appeals before the WGA.
It is an ironic history for a movie that presents itself as judging the injustice of the Spanish Civil War. There sure be dragons alright.
Apparently there are FOUR appeals going on with the WGA. And a ‘based on’ novel being written of dubious paternity. So much for honesty in Opus Dei (or with Mr. Joffe. Shame on him).
No one denies that Joffe peaked with his first two films and never reached that level of success again. However, this film, looks like it has the potential to match his other great work. Religion is his forte and I’d like to see how he handles the founder of Opus Dei. As for intergrating real characters with fictional ones, I guess that means you had problems with Milos Forman having Mozart along side Salieri in Amadeus?
If someone is going to make a film about a Priest becoming a Saint, you probably need a fictional sinner character to create comparison and contrast. In the same fashion Milos Forman created contrast and comparison between genious and lameness in Amadeus.
Salieri was very real, my friend. There have been plays, operas and movies about his life and relationship with Mozart (although each likely exaggerates the relationship as interpretations usually do – even biographies.)
The Wes Bentley character in “There Be Dragons”, however, appears to be entirely made-up. And it shows. There is no rhyme or reason to his insertion. And it’s not a musical, like ‘Evita’, where the Che character is clearly inserted as a fictional commentator.
Also, ‘Amadeus’ was created and written by the brilliant playwright Peter Shaffer, not Milos Foreman as you state (he was the director of the film adaptation only). The play starred (and was directed by) Roman Polanski in the Paris production, by the way.
Facts are so easy these days. Haven’t you heard of Google? Here, I’ll do it for you: (From Wikipedia): “‘Amadeus’ is a stage play written in 1979 by the English dramatist Peter Shaffer, based on the lives of the composers Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and Antonio Salieri. Amadeus was inspired by ‘Mozart and Salieri’, a short play by Aleksandr Pushkin which was later adapted into an opera of the same name by Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov…”
Well, it seems that this movie has the same narrative structure as The Mission and many others: a true historical character in his real life (Fr. Gabriel, Jeremy Irons) and a fictional one (Fr. Mendoza, Robert de Niro) created to dramatize the story: Escrivá and the role of Wes Bentley. Or in the “English Patient”, where Count Almasy never had a love affair as shown in the movie….