New Predator Film "Skulls" Casting Info & Speculation
https://www.avpgalaxy.net/2021/05/27/new-predator-film-skulls-casting-info-speculation/
As always neat article Voodoo.
Oh, man, I really need this film to happen. I hope an injunction isn't served.
I hope it is, but that the film can continue once things are sorted. And that it being held up expedites the issue.
Quote from: SiL on May 28, 2021, 01:57:50 AM
I hope it is, but that the film can continue once things are sorted. And that it being held up expedites the issue.
Just send the cast and crew home packing? I don't think taking that roll of the dice hoping for a cease and desist can be anything other than a dangerous detriment to Skulls, regardless if a settlement is reached down the line or it's trial by jury - no guarantees which even if a preliminary injunction was ordered.
There's also no guarantee of a film just continuing down the line. Actors, crew many will find other work and make other commitments as the months roll by. If one wants specifically Skulls itself to continue in its current form or even continue, I strongly believe a preliminary injunction is the last thing they should be hoping for. I'm sure not! :) 🤞
Quote from: BigDaddyJohn on May 27, 2021, 11:00:46 PM
As always neat article Voodoo.
Thanks BDJ! :)
Quote from: Voodoo Magic on May 28, 2021, 03:03:02 AM
Just send the cast and crew home packing? I don't think taking that roll of the dice hoping for a cease and desist can be anything other than a dangerous detriment to Skulls, regardless if a settlement is reached down the line or it's trial by jury - no guarantees which even if a preliminary injunction was ordered.
There's also no guarantee of a film just continuing down the line. Actors, crew many will find other work and make other commitments as the months roll by. If one wants specifically Skulls itself to continue in its current form or even continue, I strongly believe a preliminary injunction is the last thing they should be hoping for. I'm sure not! :) 🤞
The issue at hand is bigger than the film. I care a lot less about whether this film gets made than whether a precedent gets set that forces major borderline-monopolies to acknowledge they're actually beholden to the rights of the people whose work they exploit.
It would be awful for the people involved on the film, but Fox never should have let it get this far without sorting out this mess. And at least everyone would be paid for the time they've already spent on production. A small silver lining, but one nonetheless.
Quote from: SiL on May 29, 2021, 12:22:26 AM
The issue at hand is bigger than the film. I care a lot less about whether this film gets made than whether a precedent gets set that forces major borderline-monopolies to acknowledge they're actually beholden to the rights of the people whose work they exploit.
Since it appears Disney/20th Century Studios is not fighting the third termination letter and not fighting that the US copyright of Hunters will change hands to the Thomas Brothers on January 13, 2023, I think the only precedent this will set is -
hey creators, make sure your damn copyright termination letters don't have major errors before you serve them! :laugh:
Since they waited four years before noticing an issue the precedent could just as easily be hey studios, pay attention to your obligations when it comes to controlling your rights.
As awful as it would be to the makers of Skulls, torpedoing them at the 11th hour could be just the wake up call needed for studios to never put something into production without being damn sure they have their rights in order in the future. :-\
Quote from: SiL on May 29, 2021, 01:08:31 PM
Since they waited four years before noticing an issue the precedent could just as easily be hey studios, pay attention to your obligations when it comes to controlling your rights.
I see it as less a studio paying attention to obligations and more a studio taking advantage of a situation. It appears more calculated to me. I see it as the studio understanding a copyright termination letter requires notice upon serving, and upon the realization the first termination letter had errors, waiting until the final year to point out such errors so the new notice from the date of the corrected letter would maximize the length of their copyright ownership. That's my take at least.
Quote from: Voodoo Magic on May 29, 2021, 02:11:15 PM
Quote from: SiL on May 29, 2021, 01:08:31 PM
Since they waited four years before noticing an issue the precedent could just as easily be hey studios, pay attention to your obligations when it comes to controlling your rights.
I see it as less a studio paying attention to obligations and more a studio taking advantage of a situation. It appears more calculated to me. I see it as the studio understanding a copyright termination letter requires notice upon serving, and upon the realization the first termination letter had errors, waiting until the final year to point out such errors so the new notice from the date of the corrected letter would maximize the length of their copyright ownership. That's my take at least.
So what do you speculate, Voodoo? You think the judge passed this injunction which could force Disney to dangle those dollar signs? And if so, do you think there's a settlement the brothers accept? I hate to think Disney would give up on a production that's about to start without using every option.
Quote from: Voodoo Magic on May 29, 2021, 02:11:15 PM
Quote from: SiL on May 29, 2021, 01:08:31 PM
Since they waited four years before noticing an issue the precedent could just as easily be hey studios, pay attention to your obligations when it comes to controlling your rights.
I see it as less a studio paying attention to obligations and more a studio taking advantage of a situation. It appears more calculated to me. I see it as the studio understanding a copyright termination letter requires notice upon serving, and upon the realization the first termination letter had errors, waiting until the final year to point out such errors so the new notice from the date of the corrected letter would maximize the length of their copyright ownership. That's my take at least.
And that arrogance could lead to shooting themselves in the foot having a production shut down with an injunction.
Whatever way you come at it, there's something for studios to learn by setting a precedent here.
Quote from: Proteus on May 29, 2021, 04:13:12 PM
Quote from: Voodoo Magic on May 29, 2021, 02:11:15 PM
Quote from: SiL on May 29, 2021, 01:08:31 PM
Since they waited four years before noticing an issue the precedent could just as easily be hey studios, pay attention to your obligations when it comes to controlling your rights.
I see it as less a studio paying attention to obligations and more a studio taking advantage of a situation. It appears more calculated to me. I see it as the studio understanding a copyright termination letter requires notice upon serving, and upon the realization the first termination letter had errors, waiting until the final year to point out such errors so the new notice from the date of the corrected letter would maximize the length of their copyright ownership. That's my take at least.
So what do you speculate, Voodoo? You think the judge passed this injunction which could force Disney to dangle those dollar signs? And if so, do you think there's a settlement the brothers accept? I hate to think Disney would give up on a production that's about to start without using every option.
Personally, I don't believe there is any incentive for Disney/20th Century Studios to settle and share a piece of the profit pie with the Thomas Brothers
if they think they can keep it all to themselves until January 13, 2023. And Disney appears confident, or at least is projecting confidence that this will be the case and the courts will agree with them, considering the money they have already invested in "Skulls" to this point.
Disney's lawyers are probably the best that money can buy, so if I had to speculate, I'd lean towards their apparent confidence and believe a preliminary injunction will not occur. That's what's going on in my head space at least. :)
Hopefully, this film will never come true.
Sad fan is sad.
Very sad, indeed. :(
Sad Fan doesn't like the idea of a Native American woman being the lead. Poor, poor sad fan. So tired of "woke culture," and would rather have a rehash of the first film with sweat, muscular Dude Bros.
Quote from: Proteus on Jun 07, 2021, 05:34:06 PM
Sad Fan doesn't like the idea of a Native American woman being the lead. Poor, poor sad fan. So tired of "work culture," and would rather have a rehash of the first film with sweat, muscular Dude Bros.
Maybe if they served more ice cream to employees at work, there would be more fans of "work culture"! ;)
But in all fairness, to avoid putting words in one's mouth, we don't know for certain why sad fan is sad. He might be fearing Autism seeking Predators - part 2 perhaps. Or more ADI Crabators! ;D
The crabators definitely are one thing to be feared ! :laugh:
And one we can be fairly certain about ;)