By Ray Pride Pride@moviecitynews.com

Bill Block Sets First Look Deal With Warner Bros

Posted Friday, February 26th, 2016 - Comments Off on Bill Block Sets First Look Deal With Warner Bros
Be Sociable, Share!

“Warner Bros is an extraordinary studio and we are grateful and thrilled to be in business with Greg and his creative team as we develop movies with worldwide box office potential.  Starting with a film by Sam Raimi kicks off what we hope will be a long and fruitful relationship,” said Block.

  • Billblock Media has closed a first-look production deal with Warner. Bros. Pictures who will handle global distribution for all titles
  •        The first film in development under the two-year deal is Sam Raimi’s near-future feature film World War 3, based on predictions in George Friedman’s non-fiction best-selling book The Next 100 Years.
  • Billblock Media optioned the book and is actively developing the adaptation.
  • As part of the production deal, Block has closed a multi-million dollar private development fund to acquire and develop projects with global distribution potential for packaging.
  • Block recently closed a multi-year agreement with Red Granite International to act as the exclusive international sales agent for the company’s upcoming production slate outside of the Warner Bros. deal.
  • Block’s recent production titles include Dirty Grandpa, starring Robert De Niro and Zac Efron, which has taken in over $55 million at the worldwide box office since its US release on January 22nd through Lionsgate;, and Bad Moms, produced for STX who takes worldwide rights. The film stars Mila Kunis and Christina Applegate and is in production.
  • A leading independent feature film producer, Block also produced David Ayer’s Fury,starring Brad Pitt, Neill Blomkamp’s District 9 and Elysium; Oliver Stone’s W.; and Fading Gigolo, starring Woody Allen and John Turturro.

 

Be Sociable, Share!

Posted in MCN Curated Headlines, Movie City News, Press Releases | Comments Off on Bill Block Sets First Look Deal With Warner Bros

Comments are closed.

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon