In this thread and in the Star Trek thread on this page there seems to be a lot of discussion about the financial success or failure of the films and I sort of wonder if we have a lot of accountants visiting this website. Mainly I don't have much interest in discussing the financials of these films unless I had a specific investment in them outside of that it is not really my concern.
I think there are many interesting things to discuss with regards to the film, including the idea that Beatty's preferred cut of it is 135 minutes long...which may have fleshed out the story in a better way.
I also think it is odd that Disney entrusted a film like Dick Tracy to Warren Beatty whose output in the previous decade had consisted of Reds and Ishtar...showing he was neither a box office draw nor a likely person to helm a comic book blockbuster.
I also think the production history and how Dick Tracy made it to the screen is pretty interesting. So many stars and directors were considered as the project went along that it is sort of interesting to think what Walter Hill's version would have been like (supposedly more realistic and bloody...an R-rated Dick Tracy?) or what Martin Scorsese directing would have produced (Scorsese loves noir and B-pictures and has had a lot of fun with this sort of material). John Landis probably would have tilted the film in a more comic direction had he stayed in the director's chair.
I mean all of this seems more interesting than debating the film as a financial concern.
Edited by Reggie W, May 30 2013 - 05:03 AM.