When it was revealed Tuesday that Across the Universewas having some creative control issues, a lot of people (myself included) sided with the film's director, Julie Taymor. While I didn't go so far as to compare Taymor to Orson Welles (that would be the NY Times), I had to put in my usual two cents about how a visionary director should at least be in the loop regarding the final cut if he or she isn't actually given authority over the final cut. Apparently Taymor is too stubborn for such a privilege, though, as she has a reputation for not being willing to compromise. L.A. Weekly's Nikki Finke wrote up a story on how difficult Taymor is and why it is in fact her fault that Universe is having troubles.

Finke goes into great detail regarding Taymor's career and cites examples of problems she's had since becoming a big hit on Broadway with the stage adaptation of The Lion King. Both of the director's previous films had their share of difficulties and Finke finds it surprising that anybody would even hire Taymor for anything anymore. So, in a way, Joe Roth is at fault for not knowing any better. This story is illustrative of what I and others despise about Hollywood, how the business side of the movies is always more important than the art side. And I understand this is the way it is and I understand this is best for the industry. But as much as whining doesn't help, it is often our job as writers to complain about the system, and Finke sure isn't going to change my mind about supporting Taymor on this one.
categories Cinematical