Movie News

Warner Bros. Looking To Shift GANGSTER SQUAD's Release Date, In Addition To Those Reshoots!!

Published at: July 25, 2012, 12:31 p.m. CST by The Kidd

The Kidd here...

Warner Bros. is really cutting themselves with the double-edged sword here in regards to Ruben Fleischer's GANGSTER SQUAD. Not only are they looking to make significant cuts to the film, including reshooting a crucial theatre shooting scene, following last week's tragic events in Aurora, Colorado, but the studio is looking into their options as far as shifting the film on the release schedule. 

When Nordling wrote up the news that reshoots were in order earlier this week, I wondered why Warner Bros. didn't just put the film, starring Ryan Gosling, Sean Penn and Josh Brolin, on the shelf for a little while, until things settled down a bit, and sensitivity wasn't so heightened. It looks like they are doing that for a short time, but mostly to make sure they can bring the cast back together for the reshoots, the cast's availability to do press to support the film and when they might have a spot to stick the movie. 

January 11 is the date being currently eyed, according to The Hollywood Reporter, which would line GANGSTER SQUAD up against HANSEL AND GRETEL: WITCH HUNTERS, a competition the mobster movie should easily win... but by rushing into what seems like a kneejerk reaction so quickly following what happened in Aurora, Warner Bros. really has painted themselves into a no-win situation. If they don't cut the scene, they look insensitive. If they do cut it, they've got no backbone. Shelving the film might have diffused some of the attention that'll be paid to the film, solely because of this one scene, but now bringing it back still reshot... well, it's just a big mess over at Warner Bros. right now trying to figure this dicey situation out. 

I would have liked to see GANGSTER SQUAD as presently constituted sometime next March or April... or even next August. That should have created enough space between now and then... but Warner Bros. is playing this one as safely as possible.

 

-Billy Donnelly

"The Infamous Billy The Kidd"

BillyTheKidd@aintitcool.com

Follow me on Twitter.

Readers Talkback

comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • July 25, 2012, 12:35 p.m. CST

    It is a conundrum

    by TallanDagwood

    I think it is best to delay with no reshoot

  • July 25, 2012, 12:36 p.m. CST

    This isn't a dicey situation -

    by Anderson

    You delay the film out of respect to those affected, and you don't alter the film out of respect to those who worked on it. The only ones who will truly complain are those whose only solution would be to shelve the film entirely.

  • July 25, 2012, 12:37 p.m. CST

    I was a proponent for keeping the scene in, but shelving it.

    by Ian Masterson

    but shelving it AND taking the scene out is understandable, but gravely disappointing.

  • July 25, 2012, 12:37 p.m. CST

    by Cobra--Kai

    Before you can comment on Harrys locked TDKR thread you must chop down the mightiest tree in the forest wiiitth... A HERRING!

  • July 25, 2012, 12:38 p.m. CST

    I had to kill WB for making a mistake...

    by Dick Jones

    ...and that mistake being BOTH cutting the scene AND pushing it back. Just push it back folks.

  • July 25, 2012, 12:40 p.m. CST

    @cobra--kai

    by TallanDagwood

    Or, you must needs have your nostrils raped

  • July 25, 2012, 12:40 p.m. CST

    Sometimes exclamation points are unnecessary....

    by truedog67

    I'm pretty sure this news isn't that cool to the people who worked on this film... Probably kind of sucks, and frankly it's the type of censorship we shouldn't be promoting.

  • July 25, 2012, 12:43 p.m. CST

    by Cobra--Kai

    Thats... thats enough talkbacking for now lads. Brave Sir Harry ran away... Brave Sir Hary turned about gallantly he chickened out...

  • July 25, 2012, 12:45 p.m. CST

    by Cobra--Kai

    Brave Sir Harry ran away... When profound disappointment reared its ugly head he bravely turned his tail and fled...

  • July 25, 2012, 12:46 p.m. CST

    really cutting themselves with the double-edged sword

    by ScreamingPenis

    Ha. It hurts twice as much, doesn't it?

  • July 25, 2012, 12:47 p.m. CST

    No! I didn't! All lies! I never!

    by TallanDagwood

  • July 25, 2012, 12:50 p.m. CST

    thank God Inglourious Basterds was released a few years ago

    by julia

  • July 25, 2012, 12:53 p.m. CST

    I think everyone can agree that the most logical decision

    by Riley Harrison

    would be to keep the movie as it is, without reshooting anything, and just shelving it for quite a while until everyone has forgotten about it. Ands makes a good point that only those that gripe about the theatre scene will be the ones that can only be pleased if the movie was shelved entirely. Warner Bros: Keep it in. Just wait a while.

  • July 25, 2012, 1:01 p.m. CST

    This film looked terrible before the tragedy in Colorado

    by Samuel Fulmer

    And it looks awful now. ThWB is probably just using the tragedy as an excuse to try to salvage the film and dump it in January. I mean, the flick looked horrible, Sean Penn with a fake rubber nose straight out of Dick Tracy, terrible HD camerawork, and a story that looked like it wasn't bringing anything new to the table. Funny how now it's being martyred when weeks ago when the trailer premeired eveyone was saying it looked like a shitty L.A. Confidential.

  • July 25, 2012, 1:01 p.m. CST

    Should just keep the scene and release it video demand

    by Samuel Fulmer

    At this point. Give it the Get the Gringo treatment.

  • July 25, 2012, 1:13 p.m. CST

    Why is everyone acting like Aurora was the first shooting ever?

    by Erik Radvon

    12 people probably just got shot in LA as I was reading this post. Why is the world freaking out about this? My hearts go out to the victims, as I'm sure all of our hearts go out to anybody who is murdered....but wtf. Just because this happened in a place most of us frequent (movie theater) doesn't make it any different from any other mass shooting. Would we all feel better if it happened at an Orange Julius instead? The Warner Brothers archives are stuffed to the gills with violent gangster movies. Why are they betraying their long legacy of delivery gritty crime films to their audience just because of one random event? Obviously, the answer is money, and WB doesn't want violence attached to their image at the moment...but I'm sure in six months when we all collectively forget about Aurora they will be right back at it, shilling Bonnie and Clyde blu rays without batting an eye. In the crossfire, a movie that hundreds of people worked on for a couple years is going to get chopped and mangled because the majority of this country is too retarded to understand that a movie is a work of fiction. I for one feel demeaned by these actions.

  • July 25, 2012, 1:13 p.m. CST

    Because Nolan can't just fuck up his own movies

    by PTSDPete

    That he needs to fuck up another one. Nice one, dipshit. Now think of all the 'good' your Batman 'inspired'...

  • July 25, 2012, 1:20 p.m. CST

    Won't see it unless it's the original cut.

    by Judge Briggs

    Just sayin ...

  • There have been repeatedly stated in these lines thoughts in the line of: "what if you'd been one of the victims? what if your little daughter had been killed that night?" Well, I'm willing to bet that most of us would be damning not only the Gangster Squad trailer that inspired the killer (which could be argued, for sure, although so far as the leaked information tells us, Holmes mentioned The Joker) but The Dark Knight Raises and Ledger's performance, but most of all, I think most of us - I for sure- would be merely wanting to die. The thing is, I was not one of the victims. My hypothetical little daughter was not killed that night. So I can- and do- focus on this apparently trivial (undoubtedly really so for the truly affected) matter. Does that make me a bad person? Not showing that degree of empathy towards those people I never even met? I ask the people who think so, does the fact that you don't light up a vigil candle for all the victims of brutal violence dying all over the world on a daily basis, that you don't even stop eating while watching news of ethnic cleansing on t.v. make you bad people? I think the answer to all these questions is, No. It is simply the way life and the world work. Does it suck? I leave the answer to you, but that´s not the point being discussed here. There have also been lots of mentions of how the scene cutting should be made out of respect for the people who, in watching, would feel personally affected. Fact is, in thinking like that, people who support that stance are assuming they know what is the expiration date for human grieving. How long those struck by this tragedy will feel the resulting devastation? A week? A month? A year? Ten years? Do you think you could actually recriminate any of these people for not overcoming the aftermath ever? Not ever? There may be some people among them who will never overcome grief and/or trauma. I watched Jaws when I was about five and, to this day, a 36-year-old man, I still cant watch shark films without half-covering my eyes with my slightly spread fingers. I've got the feeling the result could be way worse for those who sat in that hellish, dark, smoke-filled place, formerly a theater, then a slaughterhouse. So what about those people who won't recover? What about the 9/11 living victims who still don't recover? Should all mentions of 9/11 be banned? Excised? If so, that's not happening. The fact of the matter is, the people whose lives were destroyed last Friday will never be able to look at the theater-shooting scene in Gangster Squad- or the climax of Inglorious Basterds, for that matter- without being reminded of that day and emotionally responding in consequence. The rest of the world can, will, and do. Again, does it suck? Again, that's not the point here. Life is what life is, the world is what the world is, and we all are completely free to qualify them as we please. Someone mentioned that it wasn't about all movies from now on being scrutinized or butchered but specifically this one. That may (may) be true, but the precedent-setting will make it way easier for the wrong people to make even more wrong calls for even way shadier and wrong reasons in the future. Finally, someone said that, if the filmmakers didn't mind the cutting (not that I've personally read any statement from anyone involved regarding the matter, but let's go with it anyway) why should any of us care? The simple truth is, most of the people here, typing and watching the movies on this end of the line, care way more about those (and all) movies than most (and I mean most) of all the people on the other end of the line, making them. We all can name the obvious exceptions -Dante, Scorsese, Tarantino, Rodriguez, Linklater, Spielberg and some other lesser-known names- but Hollywood is nothing more than a business and a money-making machine for most of all the agents, producers, actors, writers, directors and overall craftsmen working there. It is for us, the audiences in love with the final result (product, for most of those involved in its making; magic, for us, when it amazingly turns out more than merely well) that this matters, and matters so much, for us for whom movies and life intertwine so deeply, all the time, that they become one single thing, one sole desire. But that's, like, my opinion, man

  • ...they issued a statement announcing that Gangster Squad was to be released on its already announced date, uncut, and that all profits from its box-office performance once they cleared their original investment would be going to those personally affected by last Friday's tragedy. Stressing, obviously, that it was all a gesture of empathy stemming from the obvious similarity between the movie and the actual events, rather than an acceptance of responsibility which, I firmly believe, they have none of. I guarantee the movie would overperform their original tracking estimates.

  • July 25, 2012, 2:29 p.m. CST

    Shit like what happened in LA happens on a regular basis

    by Kyle DeMattio

    As to what happened in Aurora, which is a very safe town. The massacre at the Century 16 Theater came straight out of left field, no one saw that coming. If 12 people were gunned down at a movie theater in LA, it would be sad but I wouldn't be surprised. But that happened in Aurora, once again nobody saw that coming. If that happened in my hometown, it'd also be all over the news.

  • That is the long and short of it. If it happened at some theatre in the hood, as it were, no one would give a fuck. Sad, but it would be true.

  • July 25, 2012, 3:14 p.m. CST

    it worked for boondock saints

    by Alex Hughes

  • If that was even necessary. Now millions suffer from them screwing with it. If there was a re-released classic being released in the next few months with a similar shooting scene, would they be editing that? Are networks editing or pulling similar scenes in TV shows or movies they're showing? It would be completely unnecessary to re-edit the movie if it was released a year from now. In a year (or even next month) would anyone outside the US viewing this film even think about this tragedy when that scene played or after the movie? Yeah a few bright sparks might mention to their friends, "Yeah, actually there was this shooting in the US last year similar to that scene" but their reaction and their friends would still be nonplussed. This is a complete over-reaction and this type of behavior (guilty with The Watch as well) is only fueled by money. WB are just trying to protect their investment in the movie in order to bank the most. They are only doing this to appear that they are not insensitive to the event in order to minimize backlash and still have the most amount of people come to see the movie. It's just the perception of being sensitive to others and caring.

  • July 25, 2012, 3:50 p.m. CST

    I won't see it unless it's the original cut.

    by seymour_scagnetti

    Oh for fuck's sake. Get over it, assholes.

  • And a scene showing Penn's Mickey Cohen taking up surfing after assuming a new identity as Marvin Spicolli. That's right folks, this is a Fast Times At Ridgemont High prequel and a hint at the origins of Jeff Spicolli. I hear Josh Brolin is Mr. Hand's uncle as well.

  • July 25, 2012, 4:15 p.m. CST

    Might as well leave the film as is then.

    by AnarchyWorldsEnd

    No one will be talking about this in 2013. Our hyper media saturated culture can't hold a topic for more than a few months anyway...

  • July 25, 2012, 4:20 p.m. CST

    Wait, it's still not a done deal...

    by SlappyBones

    Yes, they pushed back the date, but haven't actually decided on the re-shoots. Perhaps they are monitoring this forum, wondering what to do, what to do...

  • July 25, 2012, 4:36 p.m. CST

    millions suffer from them screwing with it???

    by martinprince

    Who, exactly, is "suffering" as a result of this movie being pushed back and/or edited?

  • July 25, 2012, 4:36 p.m. CST

    Delay it and release it as is.

    by grendel69

  • July 25, 2012, 4:59 p.m. CST

    I might not even bother seeing this now.

    by Jarrete Barnett

    Fucking blows... Besides, not like movie theatres are safe anymore.

  • July 25, 2012, 4:59 p.m. CST

    I might not even bother seeing this now.

    by Jarrete Barnett

    Fucking blows... Besides, not like movie theatres are safe anymore.

  • July 25, 2012, 5:18 p.m. CST

    This didn't happen at some upper middle class white suburb...

    by Terry Powell

    ...I've put this on here before, Aurora is the most racially diverse town in Colorado. The theater where the shootings took place is just a few blocks south of Colfax street which I guarantee you would not be considered an upper middle class area. In fact, this particular theater is right by the Aurora mall, which has had some incidents as well. The Aurora police provide security for the theater on the weekends, and that asshole probably knew that, so it was fortunate for him that the film had a thursday midnight showing. While much has been made of the response time, with some coimplimenting the police(and really, good job) while others will say that the police wouldn't react as fast to a theater in the "hood:. In fact, this theater is the closest thing to a "hood" theater Aurora has. Also, the mall is only a couple of blocks from the police station and jail, so that helps.

  • Now back to your regularly scheduled cookie cutter 3D movie.

  • July 25, 2012, 5:30 p.m. CST

    @radvon4realz, the media decides what we should care about.

    by IronEagle74

    That's the bottom line. The media chooses a story to run with, then they move on. Hell, why do we even know about Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman? It's ONE case where someone was killed, and it's probably not even what we can call "murder." Who cares? We do, because the media told us we should. In the meantime, a couple hundred babies/kids died in urban neighborhoods from bullets flying through the living room window.

  • July 25, 2012, 5:58 p.m. CST

    If the people still went out in droves to see the movie

    by Phategod2

    That inspired or fuled that lunatic? Why give this guy any power over your artform or release day or anything, by succumbing your giving this monster more influence then he should have over anything other then the size of the bullet that should be in his head.

  • July 25, 2012, 6:07 p.m. CST

    Y'know what really scares me?...

    by Terry Powell

    ...not a nut like that fuckup here in Aurora. that's an isolated incident, unless it happens a couple more times, I'm not worried about it. But I do fear all these hysterics out there who have rushed to gun stores. Sorry, but I am not gonna feel any safer sitting in a theater knowing that half of them are armed.

  • July 25, 2012, 8:09 p.m. CST

    Not true, I heard they needed to add more Channing Tatum

    by JimDarko

    The focus groups have spoken!

  • July 25, 2012, 10:27 p.m. CST

    senor_spielbergo, yeah you could say that's a poor choice of words

    by moonlightdrive

    Who is affected though? The creatives involved in making the picture who now have to have their work and vision tampered with by outside forces with no real positive result but potentially a negative one if it is really a key scene in the story. Moviegoers, those people who are really into film and want to see a finished product as it was intended to judge and enjoy on that basis as part of the communication from creator to recipient.

  • and then the whole "Life imitates Art" will be discussed by talking heads.

  • July 26, 2012, 5:34 a.m. CST

    Always The First Port of call...Popular Entertainment.

    by Darkness

    You can not doubt that the shooting in Aurora was horrific - it was, but to target a particular scene in a movie because it shares some resemblance to what had taken place that night, will not change a thing...It happened; and cutting - what will probably be a pivotal scene in the movie - will not change that. Like many have stated: "Why not remove the scene from "Inglourious Basterds"? Why not? Just because the movie was released a few years ago, makes it no less susceptible to changes whether it was released then or now. Same thing with "Fight Club". As soon as 9/11 unfolded i would have assumed that they would remove that scene from being broadcast on t.v because of it's similarities to that fateful day, But, alas, it never came to pass. As for Warner Bros' situation: They should postpone the film for another year - because i assume for oscar contention - and then release it. Cutting the film will not bring back those victims, it's the government who should be tending to the situation. There must be stringent measures to make sure more James Holmes' do not massacre one of you, or a loved one. But thats not gonna happen. This will go on and on until the next incident, and then blame the film that is released within that time-frame.

  • July 26, 2012, 6:03 a.m. CST

    Boycott this Film and the Pussies at WB!!!!

    by Bob Craft

Top Talkbacks