Dream House - news and tidbits

[Dunda]

Not that bad

http://www.yesweekly.com/triad/article- ... house.html

[calypso]

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/movies/ ... witterfeed
Jim Sheridan wanted his name off 'Dream House'

EXCLUSIVE: Since it came out a week ago, Jim Sheridan’s horror picture “Dream House” hasn’t made many people happy. Less than 10% of critics on Rotten Tomatoes have given it a “fresh” rating, and the film, which stars Daniel Craig and Rachel Weisz as a couple tormented by ghosts, has taken in a paltry $9.5 million.

Apparently there was someone else who wasn’t tickled with “Dream House”: Jim Sheridan.
The six-time Oscar nominee was in fact so displeased with the finished film he sought to have his name removed from it.

This summer, the director went to the Directors Guild of America with the aim of striking his name from the credits, said two people familiar with the action who declined to be identified because they were not authorized to talk about it publicly. If his bid had gone to term — the DGA would have had to rule that the finished film differed significantly from the movie he attempted to make — “Dream House” could have gone out with the director credit “Alan Smithee,” Hollywood’s equivalent of John Doe.

The bid was dropped after a series of events that included the company that was financing the film, Morgan Creek Productions, agreeing to a new set of reshoots. But the incident marked only the latest challenge for the genre film.

According to a person familiar with production, Sheridan began deviating from David Loucka’s script early on, using an improvisational method he favors. That was followed by a disastrous test screening, rampant anxiety at Morgan Creek, a first round of reshoots, and the production company ultimately taking control of the film in the edit room.

(Like most directors, Sheridan did not have “final cut” — essentially the right to release the movie as he would like. The film's final version, then, reflects Morgan Creek's edit of a movie that Sheridan shot.)

As the tension between the parties grew -- the movie was being released by Universal Pictures, but the company’s involvement was primarily of the marketing and distribution variety -- Sheridan moved forward with the DGA. When it came out, he also declined to do any publicity for the film.

A representative for Sheridan and a spokesman for Morgan Creek declined to comment.

The news surrounding “Dream House” underscores how much Sheridan’s Hollywood stock has dipped. The Irish-born filmmaker surged on to the movie scene in 1989, when at 40 his debut feature, “My Left Foot,” became a cultural sensation and a multiple Oscar nominee. A fact-based story about a painter with cerebral palsy, the movie wound up landing Daniel Day-Lewis a lead actor Oscar statuette and yielded director and screenplay Oscar nominations for Sheridan.

In the 13 years that followed, he wrote and directed acclaimed films such as “In the Name of the Father” and “In America.”

But Sheridan has now endured three consecutive disappointments, including 2005’s hip-hop story “Get Rich Or Die Tryin’” and “Brothers,” the Tobey Maguire-Jake Gyllenhaal 2009 remake of a Danish-language war picture.

To some, the failures are the result of Sheridan moving too far away from his wheelhouse. “Father” and “In America” are both Irish-themed stories that are close to his heart — the latter, about a poor Irish family’s arrival in New York’s rough-and-tumble Hell’s Kitchen neighborhood, is semi-autobiographical — but a war picture and a horror movie are, well, not.

Perhaps as a result, Sheridan is now debating directing a smaller film, said a person familiar with his plans: “Sheriff Street Stories,” about his childhood in Ireland.

[sf2la]

WOW... If that isn't interesting...

Thanks, Luna!

I still liked the movie though. My only disappointment is that it got changed from an R to a PG, with the heavy makeout scene dropping to the cutting room floor.

[Cyanaurora]

WOW... If that isn't interesting...

Thanks, Luna!

I still liked the movie though. My only disappointment is that it got changed from an R to a PG, with the heavy makeout scene dropping to the cutting room floor.

And with possible nudity in the bath scene <sigh>

[Germangirl]

Sheridan began deviating from David Loucka’s script early on, using an improvisational method he favors

Thinking purely logic here - what is a decision to do or not do a film based on? The script. So - obviously the script was in good enough shape to interest all this talent down to Bale and Pitt. So - he changed it, ending up with a test screening, saying - too much was given away too early and some made no sense. In my book, Sheridan is trying to blame it on everybody but himself to save some of his reputation.

I feel, that changing too much of the script DURING filming is a dangerous thing and you can easily loose track, which - IMO - had happened here. I don't see the studio as being the bad boys or at least just partly. The damage was done by Sheridan IMO.

Just my two...and I might be dead wrong.

[Sylvia's girl]

He didn't actually change the script but the actors were encouraged to improvise what came naturally to them.

[sasha]

This quote is great, but the rest is very-very painful to read.

http://www.thestar.com/article/1069563- ... ream-house

Craig remained a trouper through it all. The man who plays 007 was neither shaken nor stirred by Sheridan’s shenanigans.

“He’s a sweetheart, he really is, just the sweetest guy. Very approachable. Whenever they’d call ‘cut!’ and we had a break or reset, he’d dash back to his Winnebago. But he was very approachable, he had a great sense of humour and was really, really nice to his fellow actors.”

[caramel]

This quote is great, but the rest is very painful to read.

http://www.thestar.com/article/1069563- ... ream-house

Craig remained a trouper through it all. The man who plays 007 was neither shaken nor stirred by Sheridan’s shenanigans.

“He’s a sweetheart, he really is, just the sweetest guy. Very approachable. Whenever they’d call ‘cut!’ and we had a break or reset, he’d dash back to his Winnebago. But he was very approachable, he had a great sense of humour and was really, really nice to his fellow actors.”

That was interesting
From what he says both JS and the studios don't come out looking good.
The funny thing is it must have been a good enough script with some promise to begin with to have attracted such talent. How could things go drastically wrong if you stick to it?

[calypso]

This quote is great, but the rest is very-very painful to read.

http://www.thestar.com/article/1069563- ... ream-house

Craig remained a trouper through it all. The man who plays 007 was neither shaken nor stirred by Sheridan’s shenanigans.

“He’s a sweetheart, he really is, just the sweetest guy. Very approachable. Whenever they’d call ‘cut!’ and we had a break or reset, he’d dash back to his Winnebago. But he was very approachable, he had a great sense of humour and was really, really nice to his fellow actors.”

to do what?

[caramel]

This quote is great, but the rest is very-very painful to read.

http://www.thestar.com/article/1069563- ... ream-house

Craig remained a trouper through it all. The man who plays 007 was neither shaken nor stirred by Sheridan’s shenanigans.

“He’s a sweetheart, he really is, just the sweetest guy. Very approachable. Whenever they’d call ‘cut!’ and we had a break or reset, he’d dash back to his Winnebago. But he was very approachable, he had a great sense of humour and was really, really nice to his fellow actors.”

to do what?

That blind gossip rumor of him sitting naked in RW's trailer comes to mind!

[calypso]

This quote is great, but the rest is very-very painful to read.

http://www.thestar.com/article/1069563- ... ream-house

to do what?

That blind gossip rumor of him sitting naked in RW's trailer comes to mind!

i know... is what i was thinking..

[tampa]

Sheridan began deviating from David Loucka’s script early on, using an improvisational method he favors

Thinking purely logic here - what is a decision to do or not do a film based on? The script. So - obviously the script was in good enough shape to interest all this talent down to Bale and Pitt. So - he changed it, ending up with a test screening, saying - too much was given away too early and some made no sense. In my book, Sheridan is trying to blame it on everybody but himself to save some of his reputation.

I feel, that changing too much of the script DURING filming is a dangerous thing and you can easily loose track, which - IMO - had happened here. I don't see the studio as being the bad boys or at least just partly. The damage was done by Sheridan IMO.

Just my two...and I might be dead wrong.

I agree. The press and public always like to blame the "studio." They are always the bad guys in all of these instances where the studio takes the film away from the director. I think the situation is usually pretty extreme, like this one, before the studio does this. It's sad, a NY Times reviewer just attacked DC and RW about "didn't they read the script" Well it's incredibly obvious that Sheridan kept changing everything IN the script during the shoot. Unless a film is a very inexpensive indie, it seems very dangerous to be changing stuff during an expensive shoot like DH. Its a shame. There is a really good movie inside DH. I still enjoyed it.

[sasha]

This quote is great, but the rest is very painful to read.

http://www.thestar.com/article/1069563- ... ream-house

Craig remained a trouper through it all. The man who plays 007 was neither shaken nor stirred by Sheridan’s shenanigans.

“He’s a sweetheart, he really is, just the sweetest guy. Very approachable. Whenever they’d call ‘cut!’ and we had a break or reset, he’d dash back to his Winnebago. But he was very approachable, he had a great sense of humour and was really, really nice to his fellow actors.”

That was interesting
From what he says both JS and the studios don't come out looking good.
The funny thing is it must have been a good enough script with some promise to begin with to have attracted such talent. How could things go drastically wrong if you stick to it?

But it seems that troubles started on a very early stage, I'm afraid that with script as complicated as this one, one have to be very careful. It's like the house of cards- if you touch one -everything is falling apart.

Yes I was thinking about his possible occupation in Winnebago too

[Germangirl]

Sheridan began deviating from David Loucka’s script early on, using an improvisational method he favors

Thinking purely logic here - what is a decision to do or not do a film based on? The script. So - obviously the script was in good enough shape to interest all this talent down to Bale and Pitt. So - he changed it, ending up with a test screening, saying - too much was given away too early and some made no sense. In my book, Sheridan is trying to blame it on everybody but himself to save some of his reputation.

I feel, that changing too much of the script DURING filming is a dangerous thing and you can easily loose track, which - IMO - had happened here. I don't see the studio as being the bad boys or at least just partly. The damage was done by Sheridan IMO.

Just my two...and I might be dead wrong.

I agree. The press and public always like to blame the "studio." They are always the bad guys in all of these instances where the studio takes the film away from the director. I think the situation is usually pretty extreme, like this one, before the studio does this. It's sad, a NY Times reviewer just attacked DC and RW about "didn't they read the script" Well it's incredibly obvious that Sheridan kept changing everything IN the script during the shoot. Unless a film is a very inexpensive indie, it seems very dangerous to be changing stuff during an expensive shoot like DH. Its a shame. There is a really good movie inside DH. I still enjoyed it.

Yes, I stand by it, that Sheridan is the one, who screwed it up and everybody had no chance but to go along, until ste studio tried to put a end to it or save whatever. Well - neither of them succeeded - even though i reviewed the film as being not that bad actually. Just imagine, what it could have been.

But yes, ain't it great to hear - again and again - how he would be the team player, being nice and all.

[sasha]

The next project of David Loucka - the screenplay writer of DH is a "House at the End of the Street" with description:"A mother and daughter move to a new town and find themselves living next door to a house where a young girl murdered her parents. When the daughter befriends the surviving son, she learns the story is far from over." The movie will be out next year.

Sounds like deja vu, but it's interesting what is his script looks like (hopefully) unchanged.