Comments on: Harvey Weinstein Explains What Happened With ‘Grace Of Monaco,’ Says He Was Right About ‘Snowpiercer’

By: jojo

jojo — Mon, 23 May 2016 04:22:46 +0000

In France, a reaaly small portion of the population read the original comic-book. There may be more french people knowing Bong Joon-Ho than the original book.
What made the difference was that the distributor (also co-producer) put up a big marketing campaign, that\’s all.

By: Tad Sallee

Tad Sallee — Mon, 23 May 2016 04:22:46 +0000

Snowpiercer was one of my favorite films of 2014. I respect Harvey\’s decision to promote the film via VOD and limited release, after all he had the power to not release the film at all as such what happened with Grace of Monaco. Snowpiercer is a film that not a whole lot of Americans would be used to. Its formula is different from that of traditional American films. I would have preferred to see it Wide-Release, but then again having seen the movie in a small local theater gave me the chance to help spread the film via word of mouth. In the end, I believe it all worked out.

By: Paul

Paul — Mon, 23 May 2016 04:22:46 +0000

Nope. Snowpiercer is fine the way it is. I can also predict the number one thing Harvey would have cut is all the stuff with Chris Evan\’s character in the third act so he could stay the "heroic ideal".

By: Will

Will — Mon, 23 May 2016 04:22:45 +0000

Snowpiercer was probably one of the worst films I\’ve seen in years, and I\’m a filmmaker who loves all kinds of films. There is even a website dedicated to how God awful that crap film was.

By: Kiel

Kiel — Mon, 23 May 2016 04:22:45 +0000

Snowpiercer is one of the best films in recent years. Weinstein\’s preference to cut it calls into question his judgement.

By: Go Harvey

Go Harvey — Mon, 23 May 2016 04:22:45 +0000

They should\’ve cut that ridiculous, hammy "babies taste best" scene.

By: JMD

JMD — Mon, 23 May 2016 04:22:45 +0000

Yeah, I think a lot could have been cut after Evan\’s arrives at the end of the train, to me, it "derails" the film… hahahahahahahahahahaha!

By: Cde.

Cde. — Mon, 23 May 2016 04:22:45 +0000

Harvey is lying. Snowpiercer played on only one screen in Sydney. They didn\’t go wide in Australia at all.

By: A Voice

A Voice — Mon, 23 May 2016 04:22:45 +0000

Snowpiercer still hasn\’t had a UK release, so to be determined if the film would have worked there or not.

By: Tom

Tom — Mon, 23 May 2016 04:22:45 +0000

Hated Snowpiercer. I have no idea what Weinstein wanted to cut, but that movie had some serious pacing problems at the beginning and the ending, whether you like the content or not, felt so bloated.

By: Ashley

Ashley — Mon, 23 May 2016 04:22:45 +0000

Snowpiercer was good movie. I believe if it was released in the US it would have gotten good reviews.

By: GKN

GKN — Mon, 23 May 2016 04:22:45 +0000

yes…GraceKelly deserved more … and Weinstein is to be applauded for trying to present his vision – however, the original script was weak from the very beginning so the writer himself should take some accountability as the real story as portrayed in he book "My Days with Princess Grace of Monaco" would have been just as intriguing.

By: Cde.

Cde. — Mon, 23 May 2016 04:22:45 +0000

To add to what I wrote before, Snowpiercer had one of the best per screen averages of the year in Australia, which shows they screwed up in not going wide, just as they did in the US where they went VOD only.

By: Michael

Michael — Mon, 23 May 2016 04:22:45 +0000

One of the most compelling science fiction films I\’ve seen, and I\’ve been watching film since 1955. Wish it had gone theatrical; I would have gone to see it on the big screen, too.

By: billy

billy — Mon, 23 May 2016 04:22:45 +0000

If Harvey had opted to market the movie the same way he whores himself in marketing Oscar baiting flicks, Snowpiercer would\’ve been a huge hit, as it already made double its budget worldwide. Instead he chose a new platform to release it as an experiment, you could tell Harvey did not trust in the movie and the director\’s vision. It was a great movie as it is and he wanted to commercial and dumb it down. All he had to do was come up with a savvy marketing and Americans would flock to watch it, it has Captain American for frack\’s sake, and hell of a reconisable cast. It would\’ve done good business as it proved by its worldwide tally. Harvey just can\’t stop tempering with Director\’s visions. Why does he even bother with buying these films if he knows he can\’t control the director\’s vision. Just keep buying oscar baiting films like King\’s Speech and Imitation Game crap. And yeah, nobody\’s going to write that article, cuz they know you\’re bullshitting anyway.

By: P

Mon, 23 May 2016 04:22:45 +0000

Snowpiercer didn\’t need a trim. It needed a better distributor. Does anyone really expect such an arrogant guy to admit he was wrong?

By: McBain

McBain — Mon, 23 May 2016 04:22:45 +0000

He said he would cut it for wide release. Harvey has a different opinion about what will play over 2500 theaters than what will play in 800. Instead, he left the film how it was and did a smaller distribution and it was a success. We don\’t know how it would have played over a wide release.

By: Eliza

Eliza — Mon, 23 May 2016 04:22:45 +0000

I can\’t help but be reminded of what happened with Brazil. When making a film like Snowpiercier that has such a clear vision and story arc to cut any of it would have been a crime ( not literally but figuratively).
However Harvey has always made it clear that he is looking out for his company first and doesn\’t give a –bleep— about the integrity of a film.
Money is his bottom line.

By: Nick

Nick — Mon, 23 May 2016 04:22:45 +0000

Snowpiercer is undoubtedly one of the greatest movies released last year and was a personal favorite for me.

Living in Australia I agree that the film commercially was relatively unsuccessful. But that had nothing to do with the decision to "go wide". It was very poorly marketed before release in major theaters for the entire year pre release. To give you an idea – I was super excited to see this from the overseas and festival hype and I had little to no idea as to what date it was coming out – let alone what month. The commercial failure is indicative of a poorly marketed film rather than the film not having a chance to do better in larger theaters. Maybe that\’s just me and the philosophy would be lost on the larger audience though

By: DL

DL — Mon, 23 May 2016 04:22:45 +0000

my thought is that if Weinstein himself has that much power over the industry for what he says, how about just putting the films as it is and let the art speak for itself. Put efforts in promoting and advertising and critics will do their work, and people will go see the great films.These people think the audiences are dumb and impatient. Don\’t corner our culture into your idea of what it is.

By: Patrick

Patrick — Mon, 23 May 2016 04:22:45 +0000

Harvey\’s crime was trying to cut Snowpiercer in the first place. Only cut it, if it\’s a bad film. Never cut a good film to try to maximize audience appeal.

By: Ant

Ant — Mon, 23 May 2016 04:22:45 +0000

Harvey\’s talking out his backside about the release of Snowpiercer in Australia. Either that or he\’s a little confused about what constitutes a wide release down under! To quote the Sydney Morning Herald\’s 25th July 2014 edition, a story headed Snowpiercer: the quirky little film that could —
"…given its singular achievements, and universally favourable reviews, why has Snowpiercer arrived in Australia with so little fanfare? And why is it such a limited release? It has opened on single screens in Melbourne and Sydney…"

By: Aaron

Aaron — Mon, 23 May 2016 04:22:45 +0000

Snowpiercer never got a wide release in Australia. It played at the Sydney Film Festival & was then released on 2 screens in July 2014, averaging $26,000 per screen on opening weekend.
Now, Australia may not be a huge market, but 2 screens is not a wide release. I\’m from Perth, and we didn\’t get it in cinemas here.
So how can Harvey say it bombed in Australia with a wide release that it never had???

By: Charles

Charles — Mon, 23 May 2016 04:22:45 +0000

"I owned Australia on the movie and I told them, go wide. We bombed." What a crock. It opened in just one cinema in Melbourne. Population 4+ million. If that\’s going wide, then easy to see why it \’bombed\’

By: Yu Laff

Yu Laff — Mon, 23 May 2016 04:22:45 +0000

"On paper, it had all the trappings of a potentially strong film, with Nicole Kidman taking the lead role in a drama about Grace Kelly, with "La Vie En Rose" director Olivier Dahan at the helm."

Yeaaahhhh.