SURELY A MOVIE (was: New new news! It's on!!!!)

by **arrestedfanuk5** » November 21st, 2008, 7:30 pm

I would much rather see Portia in the movie than cera, i love both characters, but lyndsay is definetly funnier, even if she is easier to write out.

It's an interesting point you make about Portia though, why cant we just have all the cast in the movie! :evil:

by **rhpot1991** » November 22nd, 2008, 2:08 am

Not sure if anyone has posted this yet, I did a quick browse and didn't see it.

http://www.eonline.com/uberblog/watch_w ... _deal.html

Lets hope that the hold out (rumored to be Cera) actually gives in.

by **Eiraqucam** » November 22nd, 2008, 4:19 am

It would be a big mistake if they made the movie without all the cast members. How could they even consider making it without the entire original cast? Especially if it's Michael Cera then the whole George Michael/Maeby romance would never be resolved, which I feel was one of the really important reasons to make the movie in the first place.

I don't want to get worked up here but if the entire cast is not involved in the movie I would have to really reconsider whether or not I even want to watch the movie.

by **arrestedfanuk5** » November 22nd, 2008, 4:22 am

Are you serious? I trust Micth to create a great storyline with or wihout a main cast member. And I'd watch it no matter who's in it!

by **Eiraqucam** » November 22nd, 2008, 4:31 am

The fact of the matter is that it wouldn't be the same if they weren't all involved. I want an AD movie as much as everyone but I don't want a movie just for the sake of a movie. I want the movie be perfect, like the show was.

The reason we all want the movie is to see the Bluth's together again. But it's seems like they're going to go ahead despite this person holding out. Hopefully everything works out.

by **Eiraqucam** » November 22nd, 2008, 4:37 am

Why wouldn't any of them not want to make it?!?!?!?! I don't think I'd watch it without Cera, without any of them.

Trying not to freak out here.

by **Beatriceblake** » November 22nd, 2008, 8:13 am

I don't mind if they are missing one person. A lot changes in a few years. And I'm sure Mitch is clever enough to integrate it into the plot in a cool way. Like S.O.B.S, The Iraq war and FOX news :-)

In fact I would sell my soul to see this movie. Twice. Two times.

by **arrestedfanuk5** » November 23rd, 2008, 6:05 am

It would be weird without cera, but i'd rather have a movie withou cera, than no movie at all. And like i said, Mitch will know what to do.

by **arrestedfanuk5** » November 23rd, 2008, 6:07 am

[quote="Beatriceblake"]And I'm sure Mitch is clever enough to integrate it into the plot in a cool way. quote]

Completely agree with you.

by **arrestedfanuk5** » November 23rd, 2008, 6:16 am

http://www.thehdroom.com/news/Report_Ar ... _Deal/3852

If this is true, Cera is missing out.

by **Frightened Inmate #2** » November 25th, 2008, 1:49 pm

From Editor:

SURELY A MOVIE

Ron Howard and Mitch Hurwitz have now reportedly signed deals for an Arrested Development movie. Most of cast members sound on board with the probable holdout being Michael Cera.

Huzzah!!!

by **Kid Viravax** » November 25th, 2008, 6:31 pm

You know what.. if Cera is holding out.. screw him.

Mitch should write him out of it for good, so if the film ever does result in the TV show being re-commissioned he'll be missing out on the hot ham water.

I'm sorry but this TV show made him. This TV show created his whole persona which he has been used for in every film since.

He's Anakin Skywalker... and not just because of those dodgy lightsaber moves.

by **arrestedfanuk5** » November 26th, 2008, 2:31 pm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7745562.stm

Oh look the Bbc are reporting on the movie, maybe they should have marketed the show better from the start! The Bbc should have put AD on at a decent time! Instead they put shows like Two Pints Of bleeping Larger And A bleeping Packet Of bleeping crisps on at 9pm.

by **Kid Viravax** » November 27th, 2008, 2:28 pm

arrestedfanuk5 wrote:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/7745562.stm

Oh look the Bbc are reporting on the movie, maybe they should have marketed the show better from the start! The Bbc should have put AD on at a decent time! Instead they put shows like Two Pints Of bleeping Larger And A bleeping Packet Of bleeping crisps on at 9pm.

True that.

It was on at shoddy time slots and there was no advertising for it. I get the feeling if somone like Paramount or More4 got a hold of this it would have done more succesful... Channel 4 seems to be the 'hot place' for humor and modern comedy, wouldve been nice to see it on one of it's sky channels even.

by **Beatriceblake** » November 27th, 2008, 2:50 pm

Yeah but the BBC even move Doctor Who around for endless reality programming and put stuff on hold for ages to show endless golf and darts tournaments.

It's not as if they decided AD was not worthy of the effort. They used to put a Buffy Season Finale on hold for two or three weeks to show sport in it's place and they aired Buffy way too early at 6.45pm and then at 12.10am the following Friday or something.

Besides I doubt AD's scheduling in the UK would have stopped it being cancelled. I doubt they care whether or not shows do well overseas if networks buy the rights and consumers buy the DVDs.

SURELY A MOVIE (was: New new news! It's on!!!!)

Movie Confirmed!

Who is online