Here’s hoping they don’t muck up The Lone Ranger, though as long as they stay away from that self-indulgent combination that is Bruckheimer + Depp it PROBABLY won’t be as bad… should note that I don’t dislike Depp, so much as I’ve grown tired of his “quirky eccentric” schtick (itself having killed my appreciation for Jack Sparrow, after the Franchise Zombie that PotC became did half the job already). Though I take some schadenfreude in River Phoenix seemingly taking his place in Tim Burton’s Creator Posse (which hopefully sets River on a happier final destination than OTL), I also hope Depp at least has a decent career (speaking of which, what’s the status of What’s Eating Gilbert Grape? ITTL? Asking also because Di Caprio…)
It feels to me like Depp was basically pigeonholed into those sort of roles after the breakout success of the Pirates of the Carribean movies. Depp is a genuinely talented actor but he was crammed into that niche after Pirates succeeded. Or at least that's my take on it.
I honestly thought the same of Dafoe’s batsuit; it does tickle me that it actually has COLOUR however, hindsight has made the last few decades of live-action Movie Superheroes Wear Black that is Batman a bit… dull. And tired-out.
My idea was that Dafoe's batsuit would feature a more muted version of the Adam Wat batsuit's color scheme. Which, ironically, would make him a bit more stealthy.

Keaton's batsuit was iconic. But so many iterations of the all-black batsuit have made it tiresome.

Candy, OTOH? There’s personal feelings for me, in regards to the disgusting way that the industry treats its actors. By the account of a woman who was once John Hughes’ penpal, Hughes stated he was disillusioned with Hollywood for its practices and felt that they’d worked John Candy, a dear friend of his, to death, disregarding his poor health until it did him in. In all honesty, a part of me strongly suspects that Carrie Fisher’s death two decades later rings similar alarms; a woman in her late 50s, who had put on considerable weight and struggled with drugs, having to work her ass off because Disney wanted to turn Star Wars into a yearly franchise? I cannot shake the feeling that if Carrie had been given more time and breathing room, instead of being run ragged by her schedule (for which the blame doesn’t lie SOLELY with Disney, but they can’t have helped the situation) she might have decreased the chance of the heart attack that killed her happening (or at least increased her chances of survival), much like John C. had his “Hollywood’s favourite uncle” rep exploited by the system as John H. suspected had happened.
Candy's death was a result of working on the forgettable film Wagons East. Butterflying that away would be the easiest step since it's a 1994 film. I wonder how much longer he could have survived had he survived long enough to lose a bunch of weight like Drew Carey did in OTL.
I won’t deny there’s some wishful thinking, but I don’t think I’m being unrealistic by suggesting such. It’s not like I’m advocating for Robin Williams’ survival, just that his career not becoming a shell of itself (sadly, Williams was diagnosed post-mortem as having Lewy Bodies dementia, which can itself cause Parkinson’s Disease-like symptoms, so even if he lasts longer I expect his condition will continue to deteriorate even if his support network prevents his suicide… make of that what you will).

Oh… that’s. That suggestion is just pure, unadulterated EVIL.

I love it.

Hmm… what say you to my addendum: that he be Simba’s Evil Twin?
I agree. Williams not spending so much of his career on mediocre films would be a good thing.

So both of them are played by the same actor? If you can get anactor who can do both roles, brilliant.
I hadn’t strictly considered that, but… Sure, Why Not?
Just imagine one actor having to balance young Simba and young Scar and another Simba and Scar. Maybe you'd have at least one guy asking for the Academy to nominate at least one of them for Best Actor.
It seems like the best solution. Why hire two actors when one would suffice? I'd have "Scar" be a dark reflection of Simba. Or Simba without his redeeming qualities.

And while Broderick was actually pretty good as Simba in OTL he wouldn't be up to also playing the villain.
 
Candy's death was a result of working on the forgettable film Wagons East. Butterflying that away would be the easiest step since it's a 1994 film. I wonder how much longer he could have survived had he survived long enough to lose a bunch of weight like Drew Carey did in OTL.
Saving Candy for much more than a few years will be a challenge. It wasn't just weight and stress, but a history of huge cycles of extreme short-term weight gain and loss (100+ pounds up, down, and up again), a family history of cardiovascular issues, and a history of substance abuse including pack-a-day smoker (nicotine is really bad on the cardiovascular), and frequent cocaine use. Possibly a real close call ala Kevin Smith could see a real, meaningful long term change in habits and a much-needed extended time away from Hollyweird.
 
What if TTL’s Scar was Simba’s brother instead of Mufasa’s?
So Scar as the elder brother who got passed over as the heir?

Scar's lines "As far as brains go, I got the lion share. But when it comes to brutal strength, I'm afraid I'm at the shallow end of the gene pool." could work if he's the runt of the litter.
 
Last edited:
So Scar as the elder brother who got passed over as the heir. Why did this happen?
Because lions use ultimogeniture and it's the youngest who inherit?

More practically speaking, one could say that Scar was adopted, or Mufasa noticed his...dark tendencies and was hoping Simba would be better, or Scar was older but from a less "legitimate" heritage, e.g. a minor spouse instead of the main spouse (though that's probably too complicated for viewers). Or just not address it, most people aren't really experts on royal succession and probably won't care whether or not there's a "legal" justification for Simba being the heir and his older brother not.
 
So Scar as the elder brother who got passed over as the heir. Why did this happen?
Why d’you think I suggested evil twin? Doing that would give him “I should have been firstborn but my mewling, soft-touch of a brother was SO eager to see the world he went first!”
Because lions use ultimogeniture and it's the youngest who inherit?

More practically speaking, one could say that Scar was adopted, or Mufasa noticed his...dark tendencies and was hoping Simba would be better, or Scar was older but from a less "legitimate" heritage, e.g. a minor spouse instead of the main spouse (though that's probably too complicated for viewers). Or just not address it, most people aren't really experts on royal succession and probably won't care whether or not there's a "legal" justification for Simba being the heir and his older brother not.
Or that could work, yeah.
Saving Candy for much more than a few years will be a challenge. It wasn't just weight and stress, but a history of huge cycles of extreme short-term weight gain and loss (100+ pounds up, down, and up again), a family history of cardiovascular issues, and a history of substance abuse including pack-a-day smoker (nicotine is really bad on the cardiovascular), and frequent cocaine use. Possibly a real close call ala Kevin Smith could see a real, meaningful long term change in habits and a much-needed extended time away from Hollyweird.
I see your point and I hear you. I did remember that Candy had numerous other issues, just wasn’t sure about what they were (though I suspected the smoking habit).

Don’t fret too much; I’m not expecting miracles from you, and the way you tell the story as-is intrigues me. The tragedies are both part of life in general and something which makes it sll more compelling, honestly. It’s just suggesting things which could be interesting to see, in terms of how they affect the world around them in little ways…

What about Gruenwald? His death came about as a result of a health condition he didn’t even know he had, which I feel might be countered if circumstances made him aware of it… If you weren’t familiar with the name, don’t worry because I’d only heard of him thanks to Tv Tropes referencing his legendary Captain America run. It was TFATWS (which used his characters as a base) that compelled me to look him up, and while I knew he was deceased I was shocked how relatively young he was.
 
I know this is a bit down the line, but what about a Deadpool film in 2004 (OTL, this was the earliest such an idea was being bounced around; but Ryan Reynolds and crew were pretty much forced to make Blade: Trinity instead) produced/directed by Mel Brooks?
 
What about Gruenwald? His death came about as a result of a health condition he didn’t even know he had, which I feel might be countered if circumstances made him aware of it… If you weren’t familiar with the name, don’t worry because I’d only heard of him thanks to Tv Tropes referencing his legendary Captain America run. It was TFATWS (which used his characters as a base) that compelled me to look him up, and while I knew he was deceased I was shocked how relatively young he was.
Looking at it, it was a Congenital Heart Defect (i.e. something you're born with). Those can be tricky. If you catch them in time you can sometimes get them surgically fixed. But they can be really hard to find without getting a full checkup by a cardiologist (EKG, stress test, etc.) and cardiologists usually don't see you unless you have a known heart issue. John Ritter had a similar issue kill him early. Possible to change if there's a reason to suspect a defect.
 
I know this is a bit down the line, but what about a Deadpool film in 2004 (OTL, this was the earliest such an idea was being bounced around; but Ryan Reynolds and crew were pretty much forced to make Blade: Trinity instead) produced/directed by Mel Brooks?
Kill Tom Rothman - come to think of it, a lot of movies can be fixed by killing Tom Rothman.
 
Kill Tom Rothman - come to think of it, a lot of movies can be fixed by killing Tom Rothman.
have no idea who he is, but 'killing' people might happen also ittl, or to better phrase it, there are people that lived longer than otl, so there no doubt will be people who's life was cut short ittl compared to otl,
 
have no idea who he is, but 'killing' people might happen also ittl, or to better phrase it, there are people that lived longer than otl, so there no doubt will be people who's life was cut short ittl compared to otl,
Used to be chairman of 21st Century Fox, is now chairman of Sony Pictures, will always be movie cancer - almost every single bad and/or mismanaged movie from either studio (e.g. the X-Men sequels, 2001's Planet of the Apes, Kingdom of Heaven, Aliens vs Predator, Fanta4stic, both Amazing Spider-Mans) can be blamed on him being a dick, and the movies that actually worked (Titanic, Avatar, Deadpool) he tried to reject.
 
Used to be chairman of 21st Century Fox, is now chairman of Sony Pictures, will always be movie cancer - almost every single bad and/or mismanaged movie from either studio (e.g. the X-Men sequels, 2001's Planet of the Apes, Kingdom of Heaven, Aliens vs Predator, Fanta4stic, both Amazing Spider-Mans) can be blamed on him being a dick, and the movies that actually worked (Titanic, Avatar, Deadpool) he tried to reject.
If there's any consolation of possibly not butterflying him away (I'm personally not a fan of killing specific people for no reason in a TL), Disney-MGM could probably do X-Men, Fantastic Four, and Spider-Man a lot better than Sony/Fox OTL.
 
Ok, Tom Rothman. Lots of fanboy hate, and I can see way. Certainly seems to be an avatar (no pun intended) for Executive Interference. From a business standpoint, though, he was reportedly earning 13% returns when other studios were making 6%, so exactly the type of guy the shareholders want, so that needs to be kept in mind.

IOTL his first executive position was a Executive VP at Columbia after Coke sold it and before Sony bought it. ITTL Turner bought Columbia at this point. So the question becomes whether Turner would hire him. And if not, who would? Katzenberg hated him, so ABC isn't an option.

After Columbia he went on to 20th Century Fox and eventually became the Chair, but ITTL Gulf+Western bought them and became Triad. Triad would put one of their own people there, so the studio presidency would go to someone like Sid Ganis for 20th Century.

Universal? Perhaps goes to Samuel Goldwin per OTL at first.
 
Ok, Tom Rothman. Lots of fanboy hate, and I can see way. Certainly seems to be an avatar (no pun intended) for Executive Interference. From a business standpoint, though, he was reportedly earning 13% returns when other studios were making 6%, so exactly the type of guy the shareholders want, so that needs to be kept in mind.
Yeah, I've heard the profit argument before.

From an armchair perspective though, it could be easily argued that it was in spite of him rather than because of him; Fox's Top 5 are Avatar (~$3 billion by itself) and either the Star Wars or Ice Age movies - all during Rothman's time - and the most he did for any of them was declare that Avatar would fail miserably. TTL itself is proof that making a good story is far more profitable than min-maxing its budget.
 
Last edited:
OK, so the way I see Mel Brooks potentially approaching Deadpool is not approaching it like a traditional superhero film, but more like a Scorsese film: an anti-Taxi Driver, if you will. Think a 70s or 80s period piece set in the New York of that time period.
 
Yeah, I've heard the profit argument before.

From an armchair perspective though, it could be easily argued that it was in spite of him rather than because of him; Fox's Top 5 are Avatar (~$3 billion by itself) and either the Star Wars or Ice Age movies - all during Rothman's time - and the most he did for any of them was declare that Avatar would fail miserably. TTL itself is proof that making a good story is far more profitable than min-maxing its budget.
Not here to defend him. mind you, just pointing out his reputation. Also, if we grade every exec on the "hit that they turned away" they'll all fail. Choosing what to greenlight is hard. and even the best ideas can fail miserably.

That said, he was clearly a serious micromanager who chased away talent. Probably should have stuck to the finance side and let others handle the creative.
 
That said, he was clearly a serious micromanager who chased away talent. Probably should have stuck to the finance side and let others handle the creative.
From what I gather, I don't think his personality allows for a hands-off approach... or even an awareness that he needs to have more of one:
“When he left Fox, he told everyone, ‘I have changed. I realized I was a problem,'” said one individual close to the situation. “And, of course, when he came back to Sony he was the exact same person, and probably worse."
The source called Rothman “the biggest micro-manager I have ever dealt with,” adding: “He thinks he can do everybody’s job better — from writer, to director, to producer, to business affairs to marketer — any position anyone would have on a movie — he thinks he can do better than they can.”
 
Still, there's nothing preventing Rothman going to one of Triad, though he'll still bring some meddling to the table of whatever projects are there.

Hmm, perhaps Titanic gets a major dose of Troubled production more ITTL?
 
Still, there's nothing preventing Rothman going to one of Triad, though he'll still bring some meddling to the table of whatever projects are there.

Hmm, perhaps Titanic gets a major dose of Troubled production more ITTL?
Could be - Rothman or no Rothman, James Cameron being a perfectionist, budget-hog and a diva could've easily convinced Fox to shut it down midway.
 
Top