Home Arts We’re not buying this — film rejection letters

We’re not buying this — film rejection letters

by The Concordian March 25, 2014 0 comment
We’re not buying this — film rejection letters

The Concordian retroactively attempts to set things right, refusing to produce disastrous movies

 

Dear Alec Berg, David Mandel and Jeff Schaffer,

Last year, you did the impossible — you ruined a Dr. Seuss story. Now, you’ve written Eurotrip, which is repulsive, idiotic and utterly uninteresting.

Eurotrip is a failure on all levels. It is not an excursion into Europe, as you claim. It is an excursion into the lowest forms of screenwriting. It could, and should, be used in film classes as a counter-example to, say, Casablanca, or Citizen Kane. Your cardboard vision of Europe is artistically bankrupt.

I didn’t believe in the characters. I doubt that you did either. Have you ever had friends? A relationship of any kind? Gone on a real trip, or at least dreamt of doing so? You should have written a film about these experiences. Eurotrip might as well be a science fiction film about aliens who have worked to master our looks, but couldn’t grasp the essence of humanity.

I was about to call the story ‘offensive,’ but you know what, I didn’t even care about it enough to be offended. You can’t just throw a few morally reprehensible concepts together and expect people to have their feelings hurt. Offending is a more subtle art than that. The fact that you used incest as comedy is sad and misguided. I wasn’t offended; I was appalled that none of you could tell the joke would fall flat.

The working title of Eurotrip was Ugly Americans. Stick with that.

Sincerely,

Elijah Bukreev

[divider]


Dear Mr. Levin,

Thank you for submitting your script for the movie Mutant Vampire Zombies from the ‘Hood! While we appreciate new and original idea submissions for horror movies, it is with a heavy heart that we must reject your request for production.

Due to the sensitivity of our audience, the inclusion of black and Asian ‘gang’ stereotypes (“G-Dog” and “Dragon” for example), as well as the idea of cannibal zombie vampires having a blood-fuelled orgy in an old strip club, are not aligned with the content we seek to push forward to the silver screen.

Despite our rejection, we strongly encourage you to seek independent film studios to help materialize your idea, no matter how silly it is.

Regards,

Jocelyn Beaudet

[divider]

On behalf of Disney Studios, we at The Concordian are writing to acknowledge the receipt of your pitch for a Lion King sequel. Unfortunately, we will not be pursuing this concept at this time.

As you are aware we have recently undergone a change in management and have shifted our focus as a result. We will no longer be funding franchise attempts through sequels.

Rather, we will be focusing on cultivating the Disney brand name by carefully crafting timeless stories.

The cornerstone of Disney has always been imagination and innovation; your script shows neither. The story is lifted from Romeo and Juliet while being less effective. Why is Simba xenophobic? When did Scar have children? Where were the outcast lionesses at the end of the first film? These elements were not present in the original because they were not necessary. This is not the story we want to tell. Producing this movie would be as ludicrous as retelling the original movie from the viewpoint of a set of secondary characters.

Thank you,

 

Robin Stanford

[divider]

Dear creators of this fourth opus of the celebrated Indiana Jones series—previously known as a trilogy.

Sincerely,That is why we decided, as a favour to humanity and to preserve the collective memory of Indy’s fans, to refuse you the right to produce The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. The iconic hat-and-whip-aficionados community would find this to be an unnecessary Indiana Jones movie. We also feel it necessary to tell you that a cheap alien twist is never the answer to your scripting problems.

Oh, and concerning the fridge versus bomb larger-than-life scene: seriously, what were you thinking?!Your manuscript has been returned because the idea has been done before. Your concept has actually been wonderfully done three times before and gifted us with one of the most entertaining trilogies of all time, not to mention one of the most lovable characters we have encountered in American filmography.

Frédéric T. Muckle

[divider]

 

Re: Mr. Marlon and Shawn Wayans,

Unfortunately, we will not consider producing Scary Movie at this time. While we can entertain the idea of spoofing conventional tropes of horror films, the script, as it stands, shows no humour. We believe that the slapstick brand of comedy is taking its last breaths as we enter into the new century.

Additionally, we find that your proposal to star in the films yourselves, and have your brother, Keenan Ivory, direct it, feels like too much of a family affair. It seems to be a script written solely to create jobs for yourselves.

We also find some of your proposed casting choices questionable, especially that of Carmen Electra — who has proven in the past that she cannot act, and is indeed not funny.

Finally, we feel that Scary Movie will not have mass appeal and would not be financially profitable — we can hardly foresee a sequel, let alone a franchise, develop based on this movie.

All the best with your future endeavours,

Alex Lau

[divider]

Mr. Nguyen,

While we appreciate your script submission for Birdemic: Shock and Terror, it is with absolute certainty that we express not only our unanimous rejection, but also our complete bafflement into your submission in the first place.

Birdemic is quite possibly one of the least competently hacked-together scripts to have ever graced our presence. To this moment, we are still unsure of how or why the birds in your movie can simultaneously spray acid and explode on impact because of global warming. With that being said, we strongly suggest you give up your career as a film writer immediately and perhaps take up knitting or stamp collecting.

Regards

Jocelyn Beaudet

Related Articles