I want a film/tv set about noble drew ali and the mystery shrine! Throw in master wd fard..with a young robert poole soon to be the honourable Elijah Muhammad.
Malcolm X (1992) is this the definitive version or should there be another adaptation?
- Thread starter Dr. Narcisse
- Start date
Leave it alone. I know Hollywood is obsessed with remakes, but they are usually cash grabs.
Like someone said, make more biopics of legends like Huey Newton. I'm annoyed that Jimi Hendrix and James Brown's biopics were not that great (Hendrix because of song licensing, JB shoud've been directed by Spike).
Like someone said, make more biopics of legends like Huey Newton. I'm annoyed that Jimi Hendrix and James Brown's biopics were not that great (Hendrix because of song licensing, JB shoud've been directed by Spike).
CROM
Pray. I will not listen, but I will laugh at you
Highly doubt any film studios would get behind this in today's racial climate, and if they did, just how truthful and accurate would it be? With all that we know about Hoover, they didn't even skim the surface of how evil that b*stard was in the biopic DiCaprio starred in. No chance we'll get a truthful movie about Black Panthers.
Take It In Blood
Banned
I don't think anyone could have done a better job than Spike/Denzel
Lawd have mercy, plz don't remake this.
the movie theaters stole the other 50 mill it made by switching movie ticketsAppreciate that @Ziggiy
Here's some other cold hard math: Spike's budget was 28 mil, he went over to make it 33 mil. The movie only made 48.2 million. So the studio took a big L on that one from a money standpoint. 33 mil today would be about $60 mil. Selma, for comparison sake, costs 20 million to make. You're not getting $60 mil to make a Malcolm X movie or any biopic about anyone, not even Jesus Christ, in 2018. It would be on the 20 million level like Selma. You can't make the movie Spike made on $20 mil unless you're Houdini and I'm sure even he'd have a few issues. So the movie we got will be the Definitive Malcolm X movie if only because of numbers and numbers will never ever ever lie.
Busby
Real name no gimmicks..
nightwing2016
All Star
Rell84shots
Veteran
Don't want it because Lena Waithe would produce it and have him fukking dudes for half the film.
Actually you can because the cost to make a movie actually decreased.Appreciate that @Ziggiy
Here's some other cold hard math: Spike's budget was 28 mil, he went over to make it 33 mil. The movie only made 48.2 million. So the studio took a big L on that one from a money standpoint. 33 mil today would be about $60 mil. Selma, for comparison sake, costs 20 million to make. You're not getting $60 mil to make a Malcolm X movie or any biopic about anyone, not even Jesus Christ, in 2018. It would be on the 20 million level like Selma. You can't make the movie Spike made on $20 mil unless you're Houdini and I'm sure even he'd have a few issues. So the movie we got will be the Definitive Malcolm X movie if only because of numbers and numbers will never ever ever lie.
When you see big budget movies, the budget is primarily going to the cast of established stars, special efx and CGI, international and nationwide locations (multiple locations), city permits, marketing (greasing palms), and shooting on film. Cinematically and with some cheap Brit fresh out of theater school, you can make Malcolm X for less than $10M and shoot on an ARRI Alexa LT.
The issue is never truly how much a movie will take to make (they want to invest their money and flip it), it’s how much people are willing to pay and see it. That’s not so cut and dry. As a filmmaker, you’re competing with so much to convince someone to leave home and give you their money and 90+ minutes of their life.
No leave that shyt alone Spike movie was dope. It's a long ass movie but I was pretty much hooked by the first 5 minutes. I saw it when I was a kid a few times and have seen it as an adult a fews. Still a great movie. Everybody killed their roles.
I'm a huge fan of Spike Lee so I'm bias
I'm a huge fan of Spike Lee so I'm bias