Hoodwinked Too! Hood vs. Evil
Posted 18 January 2010 - 02:31 AM
Cory Edwards has a new blog post up, which addresses the question of when this sequel is going to come out; it was originally scheduled to come out this weekend, but then the Weinsteins delayed the release indefinitely at some point in mid-December. In a nutshell, Edwards doesn't know when, exactly, the film will be coming out -- but apparently you can already get some Hoodwinked Too! toys at Burger Kings in Great Britain and the United States, so hopefully that means the movie won't be delayed for TOO long. (Then again, hmmm. The British Burger King site says we can watch the trailer at a certain website, but when I checked that website just now, I couldn't find said trailer. Indeed, I haven't seen a trailer for this film ANYWHERE yet, and whenever I try to Google it, all I get is a bunch of YouTube pages that claim I can watch the entire movie for free online.)
Anyway, if the MPAA website is anything to go by, it would seem that the movie has been complete for a while, since a PG rating was listed for it way, way back in July. Is it fair to assume that this movie's release date was a casualty of the Weinsteins' financial woes?
Posted 30 March 2010 - 05:26 PM
Kanbar Entertainment is feeling hoodwinked by the Weinstein Co.
The San Francisco-based movie producer has filed a petition in Superior Court to try to force the Weinstein Co. to begin arbitration proceedings to resolve disputes between the two companies over the production and release of the animated movie "Hoodwinked Too: Hood vs. Evil." The movie was originally going to be released Jan. 15, but in December the Weinstein Co. said it was postponing the release to February at the earliest. Since then, no new date has been unveiled. . . .
Los Angeles Times, March 30
Posted 03 April 2010 - 01:40 PM
In a petition filed with San Francisco County Superior Court, Kanbar Entertainment is seeking to force Weinstein into binding arbitration to resolve the dispute. The petition also claims that Weinstein stopped making contributions to monthly production accounts after February, 2009, and failed to consult them on the release strategy. Kanbar also says that Weinstein never responded to proposed changes to the sequel, even though Kanbar has "final authority on production decisions." . . .
Kanbar financed 100% of the production of "Hoodwinked, the True Story of Little Red Riding Hood," which was released in North America by the The Weinstein Co. in 2005. According to the petition, Kanbar says that it was prepared to finance 100% of the sequel, called "Hoodwinked Too! Hood vs. Evil," but at the urging of Weinstein, entered into a co-financing arrangement with the company.
Posted 09 February 2011 - 07:07 PM
In semi-related news, I've been taking advantage of a mailbox service in Blaine, Washington the last few months (it's across the border, but it's actually closer to my kids' preschool than my home is, so it's relatively quick'n'easy to pick up mail there... and since a lot of websites charge extra bucks big-time for shipping stuff across the border, it saves me money to have that stuff sent to Blaine instead... and that's before we take into account the fact that I save even more money by filling up with cheap American gas while I'm down there... but I digress...). And the mailbox service is across the street from a Burger King -- an American Burger King, natch. So now I'm filled with pangs of regret, as I ponder how easily I could have picked up those sure-to-be-collector's-items Hoodwinked tie-ins over a year ago. Ah well.
Posted 10 February 2011 - 12:18 PM
Incidentally, when I interviewed the director of the first film, five years ago, he said he was "pretty proud that we have a family film that doesn't have any innuendo, doesn't have anybody getting kicked in the crotch, doesn't have any fart jokes, because I see those as the easiest kind of jokes to do, and I think they're inappropriate if you're going to make a film that kids can go see."
So what does the trailer for the sequel (which was directed by someone else) have? By my count, two fart jokes and three crotch-trauma jokes. And that's just the trailer.
AND WHAT'S WITH ALL THE TEAL AND ORANGE!? AAAAH!! MAKE THE MADNESS *STOP*!!
Edited by Peter T Chattaway, 10 February 2011 - 12:19 PM.
Posted 16 February 2011 - 01:08 AM
And to address the amount of crass humor in the trailer — yes, this is indicative of the jokes in the film, sorry to say. Not much I can do when I’m not the director. I have it on good authority that Weinsteins were eager to push for more “Shrek humor” and kept tweaking the jokes with punch-up writers ’til the last minute. I’m disappointed by that approach, and it’s my hope that those ruder moments don’t overwhelm what we originally wrote. I say I “hope,” because I haven’t seen the final movie yet. Yeah, that’s weird.
Posted 03 March 2011 - 04:48 AM
- - -
Weinstein Co. Sued for $50 Million; Filmmakers Say They Were Paid to Keep Quiet Before Oscars
The Weinstein Co. was sued today by two animated filmmakers who claim that Harvey and Bob Weinstein botched the release of computer-animated movie Escape from Planet Earth and then paid $500,000 in hush money to keep the dispute quiet on the verge of the Academy Awards.
The complaint, filed in New York Supreme Court, paints a portrait of "two out-of-control movie executives...who sabotaged what should have been a highly profitable movie through a potent combination of hubris, incompetence, profligate spending, and contempt for contractual obligations."
Specifically, the Weinsteins are alleged to have bought the rights for Escape from Planet Earth, about an alien prison break from Area 51, from writer/director Tony Leech and film producer Brian Inerfeld.
When the plaintiffs signed the deal, they expected a fortune. The duo had success with the 2005 Weinstein hit Hoodwinked, and their follow-up was supposed to be bigger. Leech-Inerfeld signed a deal whereby they allegedly were to receive at least 20% of Escape's adjusted gross profit, which they estimated would be worth close to $50 million in back end participation alone.
Instead, the film has languished in a turbulent development process.
Leech claims that the Weinsteins have repeatedly unlocked the script and forced him to rewrite it no less than 17 times despite the fact that reconfiguring animated characters is not so simple.
Harvey Weinstein is also said to have disagreed with the casting of Kevin Bacon in one of the roles and paid Bacon $25,000 not to take the job.
In addition, TWC is alleged to have "eviscerated" the movie's budget by keeping 200+ animators on payroll to essentially sit on their hands as Leech says he tried in vain to get a locked script. . . .
The Weinsteins are vigorously denying the allegations.
"This is a completely frivolous lawsuit," says TWC attorney Bert Fields. "The pleading contains little more than false, gratuitous, slanderous, preposterous and totally irrelevant personal attacks on TWC and its principals."
Fields says that Leech and Inerfeld were let go after they refused to make the picture the Weinsteins wanted, and were paid $2 million, as called for in their contract. Fields says that the plaintiffs' threat to "go public" is "unethical and reprehensible" and says, "I can't wait to get them under oath." . . .
Hollywood Reporter, March 2
Producers File Lawsuit Against Weinsteins, Who Are Quick To Hit Back
Protocol Pictures partners Tony Leech and Brian Inerfeld filed a 60-page legal claim today against The Weinstein Company in New York State Supreme Court. The $50 million suit is over their removal from the animated film Escape From Planet Earth, and it is a colorful document containing a litany of volatile charges ranging from the assertion that Harvey and Bob Weinstein were out of control, and tried to hush up the plaintiffs by giving them $500,000 to keep quiet the complaint until the Oscars were over. Most of these kinds of battles get settled in arbitration, but you can read the entire complaint here:
The Weinsteins, who are in a dispute with Michael Moore over profits he said he's owed on Farhenheit 9/11, were quick to hit back in the stereo effect of two high-powered attorneys. . . .
Mike Fleming, Deadline.com, March 2
Posted 03 March 2011 - 12:45 PM
I don’t know which side is going to win the case, but every Brew reader is a winner because the plaintiffs created a hilariously detailed 60-page complaint that can be downloaded as PDF file. The torturous production process of a misguided animated feature hasn’t been this lovingly documented since The Sweatbox, the film by Sting’s wife about how Disney fumbled The Emperor’s New Groove. The punchline is that the Weinsteins have blown $19 million so far on an unproduced film with some of the most generic-looking computer animation this side of Everyone’s Hero . . .
Leech and Inerfeld also attack Rainmaker, a studio which they claim “did not have the expertise to make Escape, let alone the desire to do so within the confines of the movie’s budget.” All that may be well and true, but let’s not forget that Leech, who was directing the film in addition to writing it, is also a relative animation newbie. I’m sorry, but working on Hoodwinked! doesn’t make you John Lasseter nor does it instantly qualify you to direct a staff of hundreds, and one has to wonder how much his inexperience contributed to the film’s woes.
According to the documents, nobody could settle on a script, characters, voice actors, or even the animation studio that would make the film. That’s not a surprise for the Weinstein Company (formerly Miramax) which has a pathetic track record of distributing animated clunkers like The Thief and the Cobbler, Doogal, Freddie as F.R.O.7 and Tom and Jerry: The Movie. . . .
In addition to documenting a failed animation production, there is ridiculous gossip like the claim that Harvey Weinstein fell asleep during a screening of the story reels. And then, during that same meeting, he “attempted to consume an entire bowl of M&M candies despite being diabetic. When a [Weinstein company executive] sought to retrieve the bowl of candy out of obvious concerns for Harvey Weinstein’s health, he fought to keep it, and in the tumult the M&Ms scattered all over the floor. Then, instead of watching the reel, Harvey Weinstein got down on his hands and knees and began eating M&Ms off the floor.”
An anonymous artist who emailed us yesterday summed up his experience working on the film at Rainmaker when he wrote, “I had the rare pleasure of working on Escape for several years. The production itself was fodder for a movie. A true comedy of errors. Wish I had a cam rolling through it all.”
Posted 22 April 2011 - 10:43 AM
I talked about this briefly with Cory when I interviewed him five years ago:
Me: A few days later [after I saw the film] I was at a press junket organized by a firm that promotes movies to Christian media, and very often they promote family films that have no particular religious content, but just because they're family films, it's just assumed that a Christian audience will want to see it. And so I asked if they were promoting Hoodwinked, and they said no, though they recognized your name. I just found it interesting, because I've been on junkets for films like Racing Stripes and Yours Mine & Ours which do have lots of the, shall we say, pander-to-children's-baser-desires kind of comedy, with the farting jokes and so forth -- and these were promoted to Christian audiences just because they were family films, and I found it kind of striking that a family film that just happens to be made by Christians was not being promoted that way. Was there any reason for that, or can you speculate about that?
Edwards: Man, I don't know. I know that the Weinsteins took the reins on how this film was promoted, and they have no idea of our Christian roots or that there is this Christian subculture that knows who we are. And we thought about, Well, should we tell them about that? But the campaign became so much bigger than that, that we thought, Well, if that happens, that's great. But we never really used it, and I've had other Christian publications and websites just suddenly sprout up and champion us, and that's great, but we haven't really used it to our advantage, and I think the reason is just because we were worried about the scrutiny. "Is this a Christian film and how Christian are these guys?" There are a lot of traps you fall into when it is not a biblical production about the life of David or something. I've had friends who are pastors of an entire church buy out a whole screening and go, "We're going to Hoodwinked and we're supporting this guy!" And that's great, but I don't feel comfortable telling a whole church to see Hoodwinked, because it's not like Red gets saved in the end. It's a pretty basic fairy-tale story. But I really appreciate that everybody wants to support it just because it is good stuff for families.