05 Mar 2013• • 8 Comments
Joe Lynch's horror comedy Knights of Badassdom created the buzz two years ago at San Diego Comic Con but despite the hope that the long-shelved film could have a theatrical release on the first half of 2013, the question remains in March 2013; where is it?
We learned today that a drastically recut 70-minute version of the film should be screened for potential distributors tomorrow, March 5th, 2013; but as director Joe Lynch tweeted today, it won't be his cut and it's in no way a refection of his vision of the movie.
A site, created by someone who is probably an investor in the film, called Badassdom.com sheds some sobering light on this really tricky situation. The site reveals that basically the film has been taken hostage by certain entities at IndieVest Pictures, and they have been screwing things up as much as possible for a while now.
Wade Bradley is the named culprit on the site, and apparently he has been editing the movie without the involvement of the producers and/or the director:
“Mr. Bradley set about editing KoB independently and in violation of his contract with director Joe Lynch per the Directors Guild of America Creative Rights Handbook. The most recent edit is roughly 70 minutes long and includes significant changes to the original story and concept.”.
The bottom line is that Knights of Badassdom is a victim of some nasty business and there is no telling when we'll see the film.
Read the full story published at Badassdom.com (link to the archived message)
UPDATE: Badassdom.com has published a second message inwhich they thank the fans who showed their support and helped them spread the word about the REAL Knights of BADASSDOM.
Joe's Lynch and the early producers's feeling to have been stolen and cheated is perfectly understandable; on the other hand, it also means that the movie has a chance to be released under one form or another. What do you think?
|Total comments: 8|
Message #2 | robbo | 05 Mar 2013, 01:43 GMT
great poster for knights of badassdom, its a shame its been butchered does this mean there will be scenes taken out of summer glau, very confused was looking forward to the release in the spring 2013. sounds as tho wade bradley wont be very popular boos and rotten tomatoes,
Message #3 | Alex | 05 Mar 2013, 04:03 GMT
Well this is just bad news. I feel badly for Joe Lynch (as well as for the the cast and everyone else who worked on the film). He had a really good story to work with and he seemed to so enthusiastic.
This film in its butchered form could be truly horrible.
Message #6 | chrisdvanne | 05 Mar 2013, 16:20 GMT
At this stage, it's impossible to say how big Summer's part was in Joe Lynch's cut (though we can imagine she had a leading role), let alone in this new cut.
It could go both ways; if they decide to emphasize on Ryan Kwanten's character, they could decide to highlight his "love story" with Summer's character. If they decide to emphasize the horror story, they could decide to highlight Margarita Levieva's part.
From my experience, new cut always cut back on character development scenes in favor of action and horror scenes. My two cent is that a shorter version of the movie is not good for Summer Glau's screentime >(
Message #8 | Metal | 08 Mar 2013, 02:33 GMT
hats really disappointing.
My first impression of the movie when I red the plot, was amazing. I was like yay this is gonna be great.
After I saw the first trailer I was kinda both ways...
But after I've seen some more I really fell in love and was expecting this movie with so much avidness it be hard to contain or explain. Close to terminator movie to say maybe. :P
So I can't even begin to say how disappointed & frustrated I am.
What a f#@$er!
I barely even bothered using censoring here, but w/e.
So I see it going only two ways tho I doubt the 2nd will happen.
1 We get this massacred version and thats all, 2 Lynch gets ahold of his movie and we get to see a quite decent piece of a movie(given that other guy thats responsible for this already broke so many rules it's enough for the director to get his movie back undmg) or thew final option, if this Lynch is a really cool guy, is that if everything go south, he can just "anonymously leak" his version, et voila.
1 fine example of similar thing is Static-X and their "When and where... " dvd.
It couldn't be released because it contained material from Ozzfest, but still I have seen from start to end. So what I guess happened it that some good man/woman accidentally uploaded it somewhere.
I just want to say that I respect one's author rights, but it seems that those who are supposed to respect exactly those even more aren't even an inch. Srsly eff Indy anything if one can't really be independent. I never liked that word or term, nor that it does matter in this case, thats just my own preference, but still, like nu-"metal", I never liked it.
Why would you bump a sticker on your bumper saying "Indy", since commercial was never a part of the whole being independent thing.?! To me this whole thing is just another good thing turned into an industry, and as I see it's no different than Fox or any other canceling garbage box out there, 'scuse moi, I meant to write television.
All in all it really suck about the movie.
That guy still has the chance to do the right thing, tho. I would if I was him. That way he will not only give us something we can love to watch, but will be the only chance he has of saving his reputation as a director, cause if this version is indeed that bad, it can't be good for his name at all. I only appeal to that if he fails to achieve any success through lawyers etc. But if it is the only choice, I don't care, I wanna watch it the way it was supposed to be. Punto.