PDA

View Full Version : The Dukes of Hazard movie will not be released




_bnkr612
Jun 24, 2005, 09:37 AM
It might not the greatest idea in the world to get legal council from someone whose email starts with “SmoothB” (although Anton Scalia’s email is BadMuthaFu**a19, so maybe I should) but worldly reader and local heartbreaker Tom sent in two stories yesterday in regards to an injunction that went down yesterday afternoon and will prevent Warner Brothers form releasing the feature version of the Dukes of Hazard, previously due out August 5th. The full public record can be found on the website for the Federal District Court for the Central District of California. The heart of the record says the following:

“Order by Judge Gary A. Feess: granting motion for preliminary injunction. WHEREFORE, IS IT HEREBY ORDERED that … Warner Brothers … (is) preliminarily enjoined during the pendencey of this action from preparing producing, editing, distributing, advertising, exploiting, copying, publishing, or licensing, for theatrical sequels based on or derived from the feature motion picture “Moonrunners”

Moonrunners is the 1975 movie that is credited as the premise for the Dukes of Hazard, and they were so similiar they both even featured Waylon Jennings as the narrator. I never saw that movie because I hadn’t been born yet and also because, based on an recent poll of my grandparents, I’m adorable and a precious angel and shouldn’t watch movies like that, although you’d never know it by reading my t-shirt with a kitten in sunglasses on it and the phrase “Here Comes Trouble!”.

Could this be true?

The write up is here (http://www.thesuperficial.com/archives/001025.html).

Not too worried about it, but Jessica probably is.



Mr LuLu
Jun 24, 2005, 09:39 AM
I'm pretty sure that WB will cough up a couple of quid and buy their way out of bother!

liketom
Jun 24, 2005, 09:40 AM
glad to hear it , if it's as bad as starsky and not much then i would steer clear .

lol

efoto
Jun 24, 2005, 10:09 AM
glad to hear it , if it's as bad as starsky and not much then i would steer clear .

lol

Starsky and Not Much, haha, that is great.
I actually liked that movie though, retarded it was but it did make me laugh. The little circus midget with knives was hilarious!

I actually wanted to see Dukes of Hazard, mostly because Jessica is skantily clad to a given degree, and that can't be all bad. Plus I figure with her in it the lines can't be all that complex and therefore I was banking on them spending authoring time acutally developing some decent humor, albeit at a low-level word usage. Oh well, if it doesn't come out it won't exactly break my heart :rolleyes:

FoxyKaye
Jun 24, 2005, 10:21 AM
And I should be upset that it isn't being released, because??

devilot
Jun 24, 2005, 10:23 AM
I agree, was lookinig forward to see Jessica S. looking 1/2 decent for once (at leas she looked good in the previews/screenshots). But I am relieved because if this movie is released there will be a mass flooding of Daisy dukes... gag, my boyfriend is already looking for some to slap onto me. :mad: When will you hetero boys realize that short and tight do not do not do not equate comfortable?! Sexy maybe... but not comfortable, especially in the summertime heat.

jayscheuerle
Jun 24, 2005, 10:36 AM
When will you hetero boys realize that short and tight do not do not do not equate comfortable?! Sexy maybe... but not comfortable, especially in the summertime heat.

That's funny, because most of the short shorts I see are on the gay guys stepping out of the 12th St. Gym in the Gayborhood, pulled up tight enough in the crotch to give the Brawny Man a run for his money...

Besides ladies, LESS is MORE. Daisy Dukes are not sexy, they're slutty. They'll get you ogles, but not respect...

_bnkr612
Jun 24, 2005, 10:44 AM
That's funny, because most of the short shorts I see are on the gay guys stepping out of the 12th St. Gym in the Gayborhood, pulled up tight enough in the crotch to give the Brawny Man a run for his money...

Besides ladies, LESS is MORE. Daisy Dukes are not sexy, they're slutty. They'll get you ogles, but not respect...

That's humorous, "Gayborhood".

efoto
Jun 24, 2005, 10:48 AM
<snip>pulled up tight enough in the crotch to give the Brawny Man a run for his money...

Besides ladies, LESS is MORE. Daisy Dukes are not sexy, they're slutty. They'll get you ogles, but not respect...

That first line is funny as hell, can't stop laughing :D

The second line is quite true as well. Some girls prefer the slutty approach, some look better in it :rolleyes:, and some should avoid it all costs. All three should realize that it isn't getting them any respect, just a lot of stares accompanied by drool.

Daveway
Jun 24, 2005, 10:49 AM
This is disappointing. The movie was shot in my neighborhood for a few weeks.

Mr. Durden
Jun 24, 2005, 11:39 AM
Thats OK. I'm happy enough watching Jessica in the trailer say "I think something bounced up into my undercarriage.Over and over and over again.

SFVCyclone
Jun 24, 2005, 11:47 AM
Besides ladies, LESS is MORE. Daisy Dukes are not sexy, they're slutty. They'll get you ogles, but not respect...

They'll get my respect..... BUT not in public.

clayj
Jun 24, 2005, 04:59 PM
It's been settled... from IMDb:

After a federal judge last Friday granted a preliminary injunction that would have forced Warner Bros. to cancel its Aug. 5 release of The Dukes of Hazzard, the studio has settled a lawsuit filed by producer Robert B. Clark for an undisclosed sum. Clark had charged that when Warners bought TV rights to his 1975 film Moonrunners, on which the original Dukes of Hazzard series was based, it did not also buy movie rights. In issuing injunctive relief last Friday, Judge Allen Feess remarked, "Plaintiffs have shown a likelihood that they will be able to prove at trial that they have an ownership interest in the Dukes of Hazzard film." Neither side would discuss the settlement outcome.

_bnkr612
Jun 24, 2005, 06:43 PM
Well, regardless... Jessica Simpson is a bad singer and this movie will not merit her as an actor either.

This film will be a "hazzard" to your eyes.

efoto
Jun 27, 2005, 02:24 AM
It's been settled... from IMDb:

After a federal judge last Friday granted a preliminary injunction that would have forced Warner Bros. to cancel its Aug. 5 release of The Dukes of Hazzard, the studio has settled a lawsuit filed by producer Robert B. Clark for an undisclosed sum. Clark had charged that when Warners bought TV rights to his 1975 film Moonrunners, on which the original Dukes of Hazzard series was based, it did not also buy movie rights. In issuing injunctive relief last Friday, Judge Allen Feess remarked, "Plaintiffs have shown a likelihood that they will be able to prove at trial that they have an ownership interest in the Dukes of Hazzard film." Neither side would discuss the settlement outcome.

I'm hoping that settlement amount came out of somewhere else in Warner Bros. than from the movie budget. Last I heard (on this forum) was that it was put on hold due to the lawsuit and not finished yet. If that is the case, I would hate to see the settlement amount come from the movie budget and make a potentially poor movie all the worse. I'll still see it of course, but that doesn't change my point ;)

Abstract
Jun 27, 2005, 02:47 AM
When will you hetero boys realize that short and tight do not do not do not equate comfortable?! Sexy maybe... but not comfortable, especially in the summertime heat.

Who cares? Guys don't stare at girls like that because we're concerned their legs will get cold, so I don't see your point.

dejo
Jun 27, 2005, 03:25 AM
I saw the trailer for this movie at Batman Begins, so they are still advertising it...

devilot
Jun 27, 2005, 08:36 AM
Who cares? Guys don't stare at girls like that because we're concerned their legs will get cold, so I don't see your point.
I care! And I'm sure there are some other females who care as well... "shorter and tighter" clothing is almost never comfortable. :(

FriarTuck
Jun 27, 2005, 09:13 AM
Lt. Dangle cares!
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v358/twistinmelon/LtDangle.jpg

yellow
Jun 27, 2005, 09:25 AM
I think something bounced up into my undercarriage."


Now THAT'S good writing.

Toppa G's
Jun 27, 2005, 09:34 AM
This film will be a "hazzard" to your eyes.

I don't know about all that...I think Jessica is a fairly attractive young woman...certainly not "hazzardous" to look at ;)

Dagless
Jun 27, 2005, 10:47 AM
films with ex-singers dont work, especially female ones. you have to wait years, like Rose/Billie Piper in Doctor Who. patience is key :cool:

that and i dont like the look of this film. im probably the only person in the world who's never seen the originals either.

Lacero
Jun 27, 2005, 11:07 AM
Well, she's a great actress. I never heard of her before Doctor Who. I'm sure she's reaching a whole new generation of fans. Me included.

evilernie
Jun 27, 2005, 11:31 AM
Just show me Jessica Simpson in a bikini for two hours and I'll be happy. No need for sound.

They must have destroyed hundreds of 69 Dodge Chargers to make the original tv show and now the movie. Was it worth it? No way! Those cars are getting harder and harder to come by and are truly one of the greatest to come out of the musclecar era.