![]() “About a year ago, I came to the realization that if my movie was going to be seen, that I just had to finish the film. Under DGA rules, I could have used a pseudonym, but in that process, I wouldn’t ever be allowed to talk about the film again and I wouldn’t have had the ability to release my version of the film.” ![]() He also revealed why he chose to keep his name on the producer’s version, stating: The filmmaker went on to reveal that he’d agreed to a deal with the distributor where he would spend his own money to complete his cut of the film, if they agreed to give it a limited release on a select number of screens (it opened on 10). There’s a reason why they said that Martin Amis’ book was unfilmable”.Ĭullen isn’t entirely to blame for the reviews the version that was released to critics and audiences was not his cut of the film, but rather that of the producers – a situation which led to a lengthy legal tussle between the two parties. ![]() Speaking to The Hollywood Reporter in the wake of the troubled film’s release, director Mathew Cullen stated that: “I’ve read the reviews. last month, although the movie – which features a cast that includes Amber Heard, Billy Bob Thornton, Jim Sturgess and Cara Delevingne – was roundly savaged by critics, scoring a rare 0% on Rotten Tomatoes, and debuting to the second-worst wide box office opening in history. ![]() ![]() Three years after it premiered in Toronto, the long-delayed London Fields finally made it into theaters across the U.S. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |