'Nashville' Might Sound Very Different Next Season ...
Fight for Your Right To Party
Jason Bateman Thinks the 'Arrested Development' Movie is Still Alive. Really?
by Joel Keller, posted Apr 21st 2010 4:02PM
Perhaps you folks saw the tidbit from the LA Times late last week where Jason Bateman was asked to respond to David Cross, who told me in an interview last week that the 'Arrested Development' movie is "not going to happen."Bateman took pains to not only say the movie was still on, but to say that "bloggers" made way too big a deal of Cross' opinion.
"I think he was simply saying, 'Who knows?' " he told the LA TImes. "He wasn't saying anything definitive, but a lot of people with blogs and whatnot, in the interest of making a splash headline, stretched things a bit."
Yeah, those damn bloggers. Always quoting people directly and then reporting on it. How dare they!
Here's the flaw in Jason's argument: We already knew that this was just David Cross' opinion. Neither I nor any of the other "bloggers" who wrote about this presented it as anything but.
This is how I introduced the interview:
"Fans of 'Arrested Development' might not be too happy with David Cross after they read this interview. Why? Because he has doubts that an 'AD' movie is ever going to come to pass."
By saying "he has doubts" sets things up right away that this was his opinion and his opinion only. He never said "I heard it wasn't happening." He was just speculating that in his mind, there was too many obstacles to getting the movie done.
Could Cross have been taking this stance simply to get his stand-up special on the new-and-obscure Epix network a little publicity boost? Sure. But Cross isn't the type of guy who will just say stuff for controversy's sake. And pretty much every story I read that linked to the interview presented the story correctly: that, as far as Cross was concerned, the movie wasn't going to happen.
If you read the rest of what Bateman told the LA Times reporter, it seems like he's putting a positive spin on the same (or similar) factors that led Cross to think the movie was dead:
"Mitch Hurwitz is busy shooting a new pilot with Will Arnett, and perhaps when they're done shooting and editing and he's delivered that, perhaps he'll jump into writing the script," he said. "Once the script is done, it goes to the studio and they decide if it's a script they want to make, and the actors will decide if they want to be in it."
So, let me get this straight: IF Hurwtiz writes the script and IF the studio wants to make it and IF the actors agree to be in it, the movie will get done. Wow. I didn't know it had gotten that far.
Seriously, what Bateman is really saying is that the project hasn't gone anywhere and won't anytime soon. And, knowing how long some projects take to get made in Hollywood, by the time the script is in shootable shape, everyone involved will have likely either gotten too old or decided to move on. Huh. Isn't that what Cross said?
By the way, we put word out to Bateman's people that we wanted to speak to him in reference to the LA Times article. They turned us down flat. It's too bad; I like Bateman, and I just wanted to know why he's trying to keep a project alive that looks like it hasn't even gotten off the ground yet. I also wanted to know why we thought we were "stretching" when we printed the words of a co-star who just seems to be giving his unvarnished opinion.
Ball's in your court, Jason.
[Follow @joelkeller on Twitter.]
14 Comments