Seems the Weinsteins have jumped on the North American distribution rights of Richard Kelly's new 'PG-13' horror-thriller, The Box. The film is still in pre-production, but should be going in front of cameras shortly (if not already) with a hefty $30M budget. The film is based on Richard Matheson's short story Button, Button and starring Cameron Diaz, Frank Langella and Sean William Scott. With Kelly's curse of difficult distribution (Donnie Darko's calamitous 2001 theatrical release and the forthcoming (Nov 14) year-and-a-half-late Southland Tales) who knows what will happen with the Brothers W. in charge of the release; hey, in an instance of reverse karma, things could actually go quite smoothly. Admittedly things I've been hearing about The Box indicate that it will be the director's most mainstream effort to date (although NASA is somehow involved in the production, so don't count those normal chicks before they've hatched.) Distribution outside of the US was bought by Icon for UK, Australia and New Zealand and Eureka for South Korea.
The film surrounds a troubled married couple who find a small wooden box on their doorstep, which brings with it unforeseen fortune. Their good luck, however, comes at a high price to others.
This is great news. Usually I root for directors to be left alone and allowed to make the movies they want to make completely undisturbed by studios and/or producers. But in the case of someone suffering from hubris as badly as Richard Kelly I hope and pray for some nasty studio interference and the Weinsteins are just the guys to get Kelly back to reality.
If I may, our mr. caterpillar is likely alluding to the fact that the 'studio-mandated' cut of Donnie Darko mops the floor with the extended 'Director's Cut' of the film. Likely trimming Southland Tales will be good for it too (can't say that yet with any authority as I've not seen either version). Kelly does shoot for the moon though, and there is something to be said for that kind of filmmaking. As long as someone is paying him to keep working, then I'm happy enough. But Donnie Darko is the most common example I use if I have to play devils advocate to studio interference (i.e. it sometimes being a good thing).
If that's what he's referring to, then I supposed I don't have a problem with it, except that the Weinsteins are more known for hacking up good movies rather than improving movies, aren't they? And the movie's already going to be PG-13, so they're not going to hack it for the rating are they?
Besides which, maybe it's just the way I'm reading it, but I don't think that Caterpillar's post was that benevolent...