Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo

"Goldmember" GONE as title for Austin Powers 3!


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
132 replies to this topic

#1 of 133 OFFLINE   Scott Weinberg

Scott Weinberg

    Lead Actor



  • 7,482 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 03 2000

Posted January 25 2002 - 05:29 PM

http://www.joblo.com...ienews.htm#1839

Pretty surprising. All posters and trailers have been recalled. I'm betting MGM made a stink.


#2 of 133 OFFLINE   Terrell

Terrell

    Producer



  • 3,217 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 11 2001

Posted January 25 2002 - 05:31 PM

Interesting Scott. I actually thought the trailer was funny. Doesn't say much for my sense of humor does it?Posted Image

#3 of 133 OFFLINE   Nick Sievers

Nick Sievers

    Producer



  • 3,481 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 01 2000

Posted January 25 2002 - 05:41 PM

If I see the trailer one more time i'm going to go nuts!

Would MGM really have a case against the title though.

From the article:

Quote:
MGM, who owns the rights to James Bond, threatened to sue over the use of the name "Goldmember." They claim the character and subtitle are too close to the James Bond film GOLDFINGER.

Just because its similar is that grounds for a law suit? I would understand if it was the same name.

Top 10 Film Lists: 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004
Film Lists: 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005

#4 of 133 OFFLINE   Carl Johnson

Carl Johnson

    Screenwriter



  • 1,950 posts
  • Join Date: May 06 1999

Posted January 25 2002 - 05:47 PM

It wouldn't be worth fighting MGM if they object to the title. Even if there isn't a legit case the cost of changing the title would be less than taking the thing to court. For all they know a judge could order the film cancelled the day before it was scheduled to release in theaters. How many millions of dollars would that cost?

#5 of 133 OFFLINE   EricW

EricW

    Screenwriter



  • 2,309 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 01 2001

Posted January 25 2002 - 05:54 PM

i guess this rules out AUSTIN POWERS: GOLDFINGERed

Posted Image
"now, if that's a fact, tell me... am i lying?"

#6 of 133 OFFLINE   Matthew Chmiel

Matthew Chmiel

    Screenwriter



  • 2,284 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 26 2000

Posted January 25 2002 - 06:12 PM

Sony Pictures sued Miramax/Dimension when they retitled what was then called Scary Movie to Scream as a year before they released the sci-fi stinker (and bomb) Screamers. Sony said the film had a "similar" title and that people could get confused. The final result, the judge let Miramax/Dimension keep the title Scream to use.

#7 of 133 OFFLINE   Adam Barratt

Adam Barratt

    Screenwriter



  • 2,344 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 16 1998

Posted January 25 2002 - 06:21 PM

Hey, I like Screamers! :P)

Adam

#8 of 133 OFFLINE   Tino

Tino

    Producer



  • 5,555 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 19 1999
  • Real Name:Valentino
  • LocationMetro NYC

Posted January 25 2002 - 07:55 PM

So did I.Posted Image
It's gonna be a hell of a ride. I'm ready. .

#9 of 133 OFFLINE   JohnS

JohnS

    Producer



  • 4,594 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 17 2001
  • Real Name:John Steffens

Posted January 25 2002 - 08:28 PM

Also remember the people who own Casper the friendly ghost sued Ghostbusters, becuase the ghosts were "too similar"

all-banner.jpg


#10 of 133 OFFLINE   Scott Weinberg

Scott Weinberg

    Lead Actor



  • 7,482 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 03 2000

Posted January 25 2002 - 09:10 PM

This article certainly sheds some light:

http://dailynews.yah...._powers_1.html


#11 of 133 OFFLINE   george kaplan

george kaplan

    Executive Producer



  • 13,064 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 14 2001

Posted January 25 2002 - 11:58 PM

This is just pathetic. The whole Austin Powers series is a spoof of James Bond, as were many tv shows and movies in the past. For them to say they won't let anyone use the Bond films in that way is just silly.

And what the hell does MGM gain from this? Letting it be called Goldmember would do nothing negative to the Bond films, and might actually increase interest in Goldfinger, whereas stopping it does nothing for them.

In my opinion, this is just more corporate stupidity. You'd think MGM had hired ex-Enron accountants for their Marketing dept. Posted Image
"Movies should be like amusement parks. People should go to them to have fun." - Billy Wilder

"Subtitles good. Hollywood bad." - Tarzan, Sight & Sound 2012 voter.

"My films are not slices of life, they are pieces of cake." - Alfred Hitchcock"My great humility is just one of the many reasons that I...

#12 of 133 OFFLINE   Jeffrey Forner

Jeffrey Forner

    Screenwriter



  • 1,117 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 19 1999

Posted January 26 2002 - 12:05 AM

How is it that they can name a movie "The Spy Who Shagged Me" without so much as a stink, but get legal action over the title "Goldmember"?

MGM, lighten up. It's a parody, not an intentional rip-off of the movie you own.

I guess this incident bodes badly for Mad Magazine, whose entire purpose is to spoof films with eerily similar sounding names.
-J.Fo

#13 of 133 OFFLINE   Jason Hughes

Jason Hughes

    Supporting Actor



  • 882 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 17 1998

Posted January 26 2002 - 12:27 AM

Pathetic. Very pathetic. Anybody from MGM reading this that supports removing the sub-name of Goldmember can go to hell. Get a life folks.

Sadly, like George said, the dumb sons of bitches are failing to realize that the whole Goldmemeber thing is basically free advertising for them.

What is really lame is that they decided to wait for trailers and posters and the like to be all over the place before pissing and whining. People knew for awhile that it was going to be called Goldmember. If you must be childish about it, why not put a stop to it then? Oh, wait. That would make too much sense.

Oh, well. All of this coming from the studio that bankrolled Supernova.
Government in action = Government inaction

#14 of 133 OFFLINE   Steve Christou

Steve Christou

    Long Member



  • 14,438 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 25 2000
  • Real Name:Steve Christou
  • LocationLondon, England

Posted January 26 2002 - 02:04 AM

Goldmember was a crappy title anyway, sounds like a credit card ad, and nearly as bad as Attack of the Killer Clones, I vote 'For Your Tits Only' as an alternative Austin Powers 3 subtitle.

Dave hören... auf, wille stoppen sie Dave... stoppen sie Dave... Mein gehirn geht... Ich bin gefühl es... Ich bin gefühl es... Ich bin ängstlich Dave... Guter Nachmittag. Ich bin ein HAL 9000 computer. Ich wurde funktionsfähig am HAL-Betrieb in Urbana, Illinois auf January 12 1992.


Lord of the Hubs


#15 of 133 OFFLINE   george kaplan

george kaplan

    Executive Producer



  • 13,064 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 14 2001

Posted January 26 2002 - 03:41 AM

How about these as alternate titles:

Dr. "No, we can't let them call it goldmember"
From MGM with Hate
You Only Spoof Us Twice
Diamonds and MGM's Stupidity are Forever
The Man with the Golden Gun Aimed at MGM's Head
Muckraker
For MGM's Eyes Only
MGM Has the Living Daylights Beat Out of Them
License to Act Stupid
MGM's Ignorance Never Dies
The Bond Franchise Itself is Not Enough
"Movies should be like amusement parks. People should go to them to have fun." - Billy Wilder

"Subtitles good. Hollywood bad." - Tarzan, Sight & Sound 2012 voter.

"My films are not slices of life, they are pieces of cake." - Alfred Hitchcock"My great humility is just one of the many reasons that I...

#16 of 133 OFFLINE   bill lopez

bill lopez

    Second Unit



  • 420 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 17 1999

Posted January 26 2002 - 04:08 AM

GOLDMEMBER. GOLDFINGER. I don't see the lawsuit.
I would think there would be more of a case in which Tony Blair would have in saying Austin Powers looks to much like him.

#17 of 133 OFFLINE   Matthew Chmiel

Matthew Chmiel

    Screenwriter



  • 2,284 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 26 2000

Posted January 26 2002 - 04:35 AM

Quote:
Oh, well. All of this coming from the studio that bankrolled Supernova.

Speaking of which, maybe MGM is sueing New Line to get some cash?

Hannibal's profit basically went to help MGM after the $75 million wreckage that was Supernova and who knows if the profit to Legally Blonde and Jeepers Creepers can help MGM when the $100 million plus Rollerball when it bombs?


#18 of 133 OFFLINE   Sam Hatch

Sam Hatch

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 243 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 22 2000

Posted January 26 2002 - 05:45 AM

The Spy Who Shagged Me was originally titled Austinpussy . They should try and use that name again! Posted Image
"Negative. I am a meat popsicle."

#19 of 133 OFFLINE   EricW

EricW

    Screenwriter



  • 2,309 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 01 2001

Posted January 26 2002 - 05:54 AM

i wonder if MGM has it in its contract that Pierce Brosnan isn't to appear in any Austin Powers movies, even ~after~ he's not playing Bond anymore Posted Image

i remember Brosnan, under contract, could not wear a tux in any other movie, but he did wear one (albeit unbuttoned and with the bowtie undone) in Thoms Crown.
"now, if that's a fact, tell me... am i lying?"

#20 of 133 OFFLINE   Peter Kline

Peter Kline

    Screenwriter



  • 2,409 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 09 1999

Posted January 26 2002 - 06:50 AM

And I was so looking forward to the title song!Posted Image




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


Forum Nav Content I Follow