ROTTEN TOMATOES: 20th Century Fox Butchering Hitman? Comments

20th Century Fox Butchering Hitman?

by Jeff Giles | October 11, 2007

Summary

A few weeks back, we discussed the news that 20th Century Fox had pushed back Hitman's release date, from October 17th to November 21st. Now, according to a report from Twitch, we might know what prompted the change. Back to Article

(1-55 of 55 posts) | Reply

kobe8byrant writes:
on Oct 11 2007 06:56 AM

Even with no edit, bet my dollar it'd be crap as well.

(Reply to this)

jacog writes:
on Oct 11 2007 06:59 AM

I bet the "logic" that the studios are applying here is that "video games are for kids" and that the film has to be child-friendly. I don't think a lot of non-gamers actually realise just how violent some of these games can be.

(Reply to this)

FILMCZY writes:
on Oct 11 2007 06:59 AM

Sounds like a pre-press release statement promoting the "unrated" dvd

(Reply to this)

DirectorG13 writes:
on Oct 11 2007 07:05 AM

I HATE FOX. They screwed up Kingdom of Heaven, they screwed up X-Men, they screwed up Live Free or Die Hard to a certain extent, they screwed up AVP. I can't stand this studio. Can't stand them. I'm gonna start boycotting films.

(Reply to this)

BarbarianMonster writes:
on Oct 11 2007 07:11 AM

They should have heads explode firing confetti. What a bunch of sallys.

(Reply to this)

tawo writes:
on Oct 11 2007 07:13 AM

YOU KNOW WHAT RHYMES WITH FOX RIGHT? Starts with a "C"-- THATS WHAT THEY ARE!!!

(Reply to this)

Crusader of Melnibone writes:
on Oct 11 2007 07:14 AM

"A bloodless film about a hitman on the run? It sounds utterly ridiculous"
that says it all.

Damn that studio, it's massacred so many movies and tv series... Best boycott them either way, making the film bloodless is not gonna grant them any box office boost.

(Reply to this)

tawo writes:
on Oct 11 2007 07:20 AM

BULLOCK!!!

(Reply to this)

blank blank writes:
on Oct 11 2007 07:23 AM

i think that the crappy box office numbers of Shoot 'Em Up had something to do with this. that was a hard R movie about shooting people and it didnt do well (although i thought it was a pretty good movie in the most ridiculous way)...

whatever, its not like this was sacred territory anyways...

(Reply to this)

rpgedgar writes:
on Oct 11 2007 07:26 AM

When are we going to start living by the smartest quote in history, "if you stop going to bad movies, they'll stop MAKING bad movies" - The Critic.

(Reply to this)

Young Turk writes:
on Oct 11 2007 07:35 AM

All you have to do is watch the trailer to know this movie is going to be "utterly ridiculous".

(Reply to this)

BuckyMatt writes:
on Oct 11 2007 07:40 AM

In reply to this comment (#1183434)
"I HATE FOX. They screwed up Kingdom of Heaven, they screwed up X-Men, they screwed up Live Free or Die Hard to a certain extent, they screwed up AVP. I can't stand this studio. Can't stand them. I'm gonna start boycotting films."

fox also screwed up daredevil. it seems like they frequently chop films up while warner bros just brings in a new director to reshoot most of the film. why cant these studios let the directors do what they were hired to do.

(Reply to this)

underoath18 writes:
on Oct 11 2007 08:10 AM

I'd be more upset by this if I had a feeling this movie wasn't going to suck anyway. After RE: Apoc I have decided never to see a video game movie again.

(Reply to this)

Gimy writes:
on Oct 11 2007 08:23 AM

woo hoo...thank god i don't have to watch an entertaining kick 2ss action flick. any chance of seeing this(i LOVE Olyphant in Deadwood) is out the window. 16 Blocks-the sequel(aka live free or die hard) was RIDICULOUSLY edited and looked like a sh3tty toned down action flick much of the time. had they just gone CREATIVE and let the thing be a DIE HARD movie...it woulda been ALOT better

rpgdude, they'll ALWAYS make bad movies. for the same reason fat chics like to wear little clothing and THINK they're hot...its called self delusion. there will ALWAYS be studios thinking "hey, this is gonna be a good flick!" when everybody else knows its gonna suck.

(Reply to this)

dOiNk writes:
on Oct 11 2007 08:42 AM

even though this film was bound to be crap it still upsets me to hear it's been toned down... im just so sick of people being pussies and removing violence to appeal to the masses, it's ridiculous.

(Reply to this)

ossimer writes:
on Oct 11 2007 08:54 AM

I know what rhymes with "Fox" that starts with "c"!

is it "Clocks"? That doesn't make much sense....

(Reply to this)

FireflyFan4evr writes:
on Oct 11 2007 08:56 AM

I was actually looking forward to this film (along with many people I know as well) because from the looks of the trailer, it would actually be an accurate vision of the games and deliver all that and more in the film. However, with FOX at the helm it will be no surprise that they will screw it up. the director's cut of Kingdom of Heaven and Daredevil were vastly superior to the theatrical cuts (even though I DID like Daredevil to begin with), and those should both serve as reminders that FOX are idiots when it comes to having something good on their hands.

(Reply to this)

Xavier Telouran writes:
on Oct 11 2007 09:03 AM

Wow, the mythical "PG-13" whore teat knows no shame. Their only possible defense is a game playable by 14 year olds should be a movie watchable by 14 year olds. It's a shoddy defense though, as either way at least one parent is involved in purchase. And yes, I think this will only find the audience with an unrated DVD.

(Reply to this)

aconline writes:
on Oct 11 2007 09:09 AM

Look at it this way, video game movies do not perform at the box office. The people who play the games can't be bothered to stop playing and go watch the movie. So, the "logic" seems to be that if they get a PG-13, more people will be likely to attend this. I also agree with Blank Blank that Shoot 'Em Up had the same premise to an extent and it did horribly in the box office. As for Fox rhymes, "chalks" doens't make sense either.

At least Fox is going with an R for AVP2.

(Reply to this)

PrecentorEpsilonXVI writes:
on Oct 11 2007 09:23 AM

Yep, this settles it. I'm waiting for the director's cut DVD.

(Reply to this)

knowingtoast85 writes:
on Oct 11 2007 09:43 AM

Crocs? Fox is comprised of crocodiles? I knew it!

Smells like anger-gauging hype to me. "We had a lot of totally sweet head shots and eXtReMe GoRe but then we had to make it PG-13. You're mad, right? You have a vested interest in our video game movie, right?" Either way, I'm not storming the Crocs lot demanding retribution.

(Reply to this)

nathanpoitras writes:
on Oct 11 2007 10:11 AM

That movie could have been released by Pixar and it still would have been junk, it is after all, a video game movie, and there still hasn't been a good one despite the many efforts made.

(Reply to this)

Defmonkey writes:
on Oct 11 2007 10:29 AM

-BarbarianMonster

Tell me, you've played Halo 3 with the Grunt Birthday Party Skull turned on.

Confetti is awesome!

(Reply to this)

There's a soup in my fly! writes:
on Oct 11 2007 10:36 AM

Well I'm won't be seeing it in the theatres anymore. This news ****ing sucks.

(Reply to this)

Foxwood writes:
on Oct 11 2007 10:43 AM

I saw a TV spot for this and it was R rated so maybe this doesn't hold that much water.

(Reply to this)

krawchi writes:
on Oct 11 2007 11:27 AM

This movie looked stupid from day one.

(Reply to this)

arendr writes:
on Oct 11 2007 11:29 AM

The audience that played the video game certainly won't be shocked by headshots. In fact, that's probably why they're seeing the movie. This is pretty silly.

(Reply to this)

xenogears writes:
on Oct 11 2007 11:43 AM

Did they even bother to notice that the game Hitman is rated M (pretty much the game equivilant of R), and if done right, filled with head shots and extreme violence. I mean come on, you can strangle a man to death, take his cloths and then put his body in a freezer. Why even make a film if your not gonna do it right.

(Reply to this)

solid79 writes:
on Oct 11 2007 11:46 AM

What a dissaster!!! I wont see this movie in theaters now, I'll wait for the unrated original director's cut! if they make it...

(Reply to this)

Mr. Kong writes:
on Oct 11 2007 12:43 PM

This is ridiculous, though if it turns like LFODH, it could be pretty damn good.

I still think it'll suck and I have little hope for it, but like most movies, I don't want it too suck.

(Reply to this)

deneco4 writes:
on Oct 11 2007 12:51 PM

the video game was more violent than the film will ever be.

(Reply to this)

POPCORNLUMPY writes:
on Oct 11 2007 01:03 PM

omg, NOOO!!! THIS CANT BE, CRAP!!!!

(Reply to this)

Dread writes:
on Oct 11 2007 03:06 PM

Crap. I love this series, but I've been wary of this flick since the get-go, and this seems to confirm it... It's gonna be ****e.

(Reply to this)

adb89 writes:
on Oct 11 2007 03:14 PM

god *****ing damn it. fox is nothing short of stupid. not only would a r rated, bloody film probably make more money, but the fan base (i include myself in that fan base) for the Hitman series is going to be furious.

(Reply to this)

damvbat writes:
on Oct 11 2007 03:18 PM

burn him at the stake

(Reply to this)

BrianInSD writes:
on Oct 11 2007 03:22 PM

Has there ever actually been a case where turning an R-rated movie into a PG-13 movie has demonstrably INCREASED the box office? Even though it was considered a hit, when you allow for increased ticket prices, Die Hard 4 actually sold fewer tickets than any of its R-rated predecessors. If the movie is good people are going to go, no matter what it's rated. If it sucks*, they can reduce the rating all they want but even if it opens big, the movie won't be around for long.

*I hasten to add: This statement is not meant to reflect on the quality (or lack thereof) of Die Hard 4 which I still haven't seen.

(Reply to this)

Daniel Aaron writes:
on Oct 11 2007 04:38 PM

i think they are pushing it back becuase they realise they might have a good film on their hands Oct 21 st for a this type of film is..."well..it sucks but its a good inbettweener and a tax write off" But after seeing the preview for this one I actually think it might be a good film it is shot well and it seems to have a great tone. I think thats what they saw and it looked classy enough to release around thanksgiving and hopefully pull that money get positive press and lead thru the holiday season and by dropping the blood you can get better audieance besides a good hitman is clean anyway what is more impressive walking into a blood splatterd room or walking into a nice living room with a man at the table with his head in his soup and a card on his napkin.
People worrying about blood are short sighted infact after seeing the preview i was pretty suprised to see it thrown in the nomans land of late October who knows hopefully its a beutiful protrayal not that killing people is an art but to some it is; and like we all know professionals dont spill paint.

(Reply to this)

TheBerserker writes:
on Oct 11 2007 05:02 PM

Wow! The games got M Ratings (Mature 17 ), while the movie gets a PG-13? This is as illogical as it can get.

(Reply to this)

bsideleau writes:
on Oct 11 2007 05:41 PM

what a bunch of bull****...it would be a ****ty film most likely regardless....but the whole point of it is violence.....without violence this film has nothing. Screw censorship......I thought we lived in "the land of the free"- HA! What a joke. For a modern nation America is damn pathetic.

(Reply to this)

Novastar. writes:
on Oct 11 2007 05:57 PM

It's the same as if 'The Hitman' got green lighted to wear a tutu and dance on the nutcracker while he shoots villains.Come on,stop labeling action movies with disney ratings!

(Reply to this)

bigpk writes:
on Oct 11 2007 06:06 PM

Live free or die hard was an okay movie. But it was a disgrace as far as callling itself Die Hard. Bruce Willis should kick his own a s s for it! I love the die hard movies, but it really felt like I was watching the tnt version shown on saturday at 1 in the afternoon. You know he didnt even say it! It was Yippy KAY Yay mother gunshot! What the gunshot is that!

(Reply to this)

bribios writes:
on Oct 11 2007 06:41 PM

I was really on the fence about seeing the movie before. I love the game series, and Olyphant is just a cool guy all around. On the other hand it's a movie based on a game, and the only such movie I ever liked was Silent Hill, and even then most people think that movie was total crap anyway.

Now that it's pg-13, I'm definitely gonna hold off on it. Leave this movie for people who thought "Red Line" was cool.

(Reply to this)

LFMartins writes:
on Oct 11 2007 06:44 PM

"Studio sources confirmed that De Toth has been hired as an editor, but not "controlling the project" as TwitchFilms stated. We were informed, "Director Xavier Gens is still working on the film. The film still has intense action and will definitely be rated 'R.'" Our source strongly denied that Fox is softening the final cut and called the original report untrue. They emphasized that it will still be a true "R" and a not a "bloodless version"."

I�m hoping this is true.

(Reply to this)

Phobiabuzz writes:
on Oct 11 2007 06:46 PM

damnit

god damnit

(Reply to this)

tawo writes:
on Oct 11 2007 07:08 PM

In reply to this comment (#1183495)
maybe ur too slow to get it-- cox..or should i say cocks? Dumba33es GOSH!!!

(Reply to this)

tawo writes:
on Oct 11 2007 07:10 PM

-- THATS WHAT THEY ARE COCKS!!!! FOX OF COURSE!!!

(Reply to this)

Ruckas356 writes:
on Oct 11 2007 11:40 PM

whats the big deal about an R rating?

(Reply to this)

jasperoosterveld writes:
on Oct 12 2007 01:50 AM

No matter if this was going to be a good movie or not its unbelievable this happens, typical hollywood, no respect for movie directors and their vision.

(Reply to this)

Simsgil writes:
on Oct 12 2007 03:31 AM

In reply to this comment (#1183495)
or Crocs? What wrong with those shoes?

(Reply to this)

JpPrewitt789 writes:
on Oct 12 2007 05:28 AM

EVERYONE-Before you get your panties in a bunch-Suck on this.

http://www.joystiq.com/2007/10/11/variety-confirms-hitman-getting-hard-r-rating/

(Reply to this)

musiclc writes:
on Oct 12 2007 06:12 AM

"why cant these studios let the directors do what they were hired to do."

- Because they're trying to make money! If McDonalds hired a "director of new menu items" and the guy spent 30mil on research and then brought presented the new "Fois Gras Happy Meal", they might be inclined to find another director too.

(Reply to this)

Si-Fi writes:
on Oct 12 2007 06:13 AM

hey why do you think Matt Groening takes the piss out of fox on the Simpsons all the time.

(Reply to this)

CandyMountain writes:
on Oct 13 2007 12:17 AM

*** I hope the DVD is the correct cut

(Reply to this)

Deubion writes:
on Nov 04 2007 05:43 PM

The trailer appealed to me when I first saw it, but upon further viewing of it I notice how a lot of people who haven't played the games would think of it as absurd. An R rating really would have made me happy mainly because it would be more in keeping with the story and games. I'll still go see it, and I'll probably like it when I first see it just because it has that oh-so-familiar, bald, bar-coded killer as it's main character.

(Reply to this)

The_Duckling writes:
on Nov 08 2007 06:01 PM

If it does end up being r (not sure if it is yet), I'll be happy only to the extent that I can see it. A lot of people my age (13) can see r movies, but not me. Artistically, LFoDH was a very well done movie, and they made it without being bloody, just violent. I thought it was one of the best movies of the summer, despite being PG-13. Just saying. This movie would make a good R regardless. It's called Hitman. So it's kinda hard for it to be PG-13. But I agree. Fox ruins movies and it tells both the president's and the vice president's side of the story, but nobody else's. (Thank you Stephen Colbert.)

(Reply to this)

Related Links

Hitman

Related Articles

Most Discussed

Latest News

Latest Interviews

Latest Features

Sponsored Links