Some ‘Divergent’ Stars Expected to Opt Out as Finale Shifts to TV
Sources say the studio will reconfigure the project, dubbed 'Ascendant,’ as a TV movie and position it for a spinoff series. In a shocking move, Lionsgate is jettisoning the finale of its Divergent Series to the small screen. Sources say the studio will reconfigure the project, dubbed Ascendant,
as a TV movie and position it for a spinoff series, with Lionsgate TV
taking the reins on production. Lionsgate declined comment. Shailene Woodley starred in the first three movies, which never lived
up to expectations as the next big YA franchise. It is unclear whether
she or her co-stars Miles Teller and Ansel Elgort would return for a TV
version, but a source close to the actress wouldn’t rule it out. It’s
worth noting that Woodley has made the leap to the small screen with
HBO’s upcoming limited series Big Little Lies, but that likely would be a prestige project. Woodley, who stars in the series as a woman living in a dystopian
world where people are into groups based on their priorities, has been
approached to join the TV version of Ascendant, but everything
at this point is to be determined, with the ultimate network being a
major consideration. Lionsgate will begin shopping the project to
networks in the coming days. Though Woodley has been approached, other
talent that are signed on for the fourth chapter in the franchise have
not received word. Sources say many were blindsided by Lionsgate’s plan. “They haven’t come to us to discuss deals, but if they think they can
skimp on actors’ options, they can think again,” said the rep of one of
the co-stars. Agents say they expect very serious negotiations for their clients. But some feel it would set a dangerous precedent if actors simply go
along with a move from film to TV. Sources say Lionsgate had an option
for all of the main talent for the fourth and final film, but it had a
theatrical requirement. This new arrangement would involve complete
renegotiations of their contracts. Ascendant was dated for June 9, 2017, but after the franchise’s third installment, Allegiant,
became a box-office dud — earning just $66 million domestically
— Lionsgate began to rethink its strategy for the fourth film based on
Veronica Roth’s book series. Sources say the stars have not even
received a script for the final installment. For Lionsgate TV, the Divergent series could be a win for the independent studio. The TV arm recently fought to save ABC’s Nashville
after the network canceled it and was able to ink the cast — including
star Connie Britton — to return for a new season at Viacom-owned CMT.
The studio’s other TV credits include Netflix’s Orange Is the New Black and Dear White People adaptation as well as E!’s The Royals. Lesley Goldberg contributed to this report.
I don’t think it was Zelena’s curse that cost Emma her magic. I think it was her own unwillingness to believe in herself, her power and her love for Hook. Once Emma accepts those things, I think her magic will come back.
I said this to someone the other day. People think shouting that they hate a character all over social media is a good way to get that character killed off. But all it does is let the network/producers/studios see that people are talking about the show. Chatter = win.
- Mandy, writer for TVSource Magazine via her Tumblr blog (12/4/13)
Lately I’ve been getting messages worrying about what X or Y is saying (and no, I’m not talking about stuff like the last post with the Blind Item thingie) or how to best support shows/character/couples/ships & making sure people “know” we love Oliver and Felicity, or worrying about other people talking “hate” about characters they like and that meaning bad things for that character’s future.
I hate seeing people worry about stuff like this. See, the thing is people are going to do and act and talk and behave however they want. Nobody is going to stop them.
This is why I keep saying: Don’t worry about what XYZ is saying about a fanbase. You don’t control that fanbase. You can’t “control” your own fanbase. You control you. Period.
What you can control is who/what you choose to read, the sites you visit, whether you put yourself in a position to read nothing but hate for the things you like or to hang with people who love the things you do. It’s all up to you.
Oh and those ignore features on places like Tumblr, Twitter, etc.? Gold! They make it so easy to prune all that junk out of your day and stay in your Happy Bubble.
Anyway, what I can add to the above quote is another (non-Arrow related) comment from another executive producer from another show that helps demonstrate how TV as a business interprets things vs. how fans think things are interpreted, which people seem really concerned about lately.
When asked in 2009 how much fan comments help form storylines, Jill Farren Phelps said:
It depends – we certainly pay attention to what the fans say. There was once an old-timer in the business who said, “If they’re mad, that’s good, they’re watching." Sometimes you have to take into account that the thing that people say they don’t like is the same thing that’s keeping them glued to the set.
So it’s pretty clear how this works and how to best support stuff, right?
Like something & want people to know it? Talk about it! Be excited and vocal and visible.
Don’t like something? Don’t talk about it. Period. Just… silence.
It really is that simple.
Above all else? Please don’t stress over online stuff or what somebody else who doesn’t like the stuff you do says.
Like what you like, embrace it, be passionate about it and just block everything else out. Never feel you have to explain or justify those things.
But most importantly? Remember that TV - whether its enjoying a show or a couple or a ship - shouldn’t be work. It’s entertainment. It should be fun! So have fun! (and use those block features!)
So…I don’t normally do these, but I have a lot of thoughts/feelings on the matter and I can’t put them into my regular review because the limited screen time veers too far into ‘only fellow shippers will care for the most part’ territory.
I want to start by pointing out that these are my opinions and I don’t expect everyone to agree with them. Everyone can disagree and I wouldn’t be offended in the slightest. We all see TV shows differently and that’s fine.
Anyway, overall, I loved the episode and I will post my official review at TVSource later today (Procrastination: 700 million Mandy: 0). But let’s talk about Captain Swan and I want to start with Killian and Henry.
Killian was 100 percent wrong to try to send Henry out of Storybrooke (and with Smee of all people. Come on, Captain!). His heart was in the right place - he loves Henry and wanted to protect him from the witch and he was obviously getting desperate after the trunk incident. Now I know Henry wanted to leave and Killian stopping him was good. But he easily could have just stalled for time until Emma inevitably showed up. Instead, he chose a seriously risky plan that easily could have gotten Henry in more danger.
He had no right to do that without Emma’s permission. If he would have told her first, she might have agreed with him (but probably not the Smee part - so much side eyeing here). But it had to be her decision because she’s his mother. Even if Captain Swan were married at this point, it still wouldn’t have been okay for him to do that behind her back.
But here’s the thing: it was a mistake. Killian is not perfect. No human is and we make mistakes so we can learn from them and this show has shown us time and time again that Killian can and does learn from his mistakes. And that’s a good thing. I think he’s so used to being on his own and being captain and making the decisions that he doesn’t really think about how other people might react (pretty much the same way a certain savior we all know and love thinks. Just one more parallel for the kindred spirits column).
I’m going to give everyone a really good rule of thumb when it comes to all of these “spoiler” articles floating around: Who is the source?
Did the person writing the article quote the producer/cast directly? As in, “When we spoke to so and so earlier today” or does it begin with, “So and so told an entirely different media outlet that this is going to happen…” and then launch into a scenario that is speculation based on the quote given to someone else?
If the person writing the article did not speak to the producer/cast directly, that person literally knows nothing more than you or I do. The person writing the article watched an interview done by someone else or read an article written by someone else and then speculated on it.
Is that good journalism? No. It would basically be like if I took the asks people sent me and wrote articles around them and published them at TVSource. Would I get hits on those articles? Absolutely. But they wouldn’t be news or spoilers. They’d be speculation based on someone else’s conversation with the producers/actors. And I find that gross.
Legitimate media outlets - the ones who have access to PR people and screeners and have a shred of respect for their careers - they’re never going to write an article like that. There’s literally one exception and that’s a casting exclusive. If TV Guide gets a casting exclusive, the other media outlets will credit TV Guide when they report it as well. But you’re never going to see a reputable site quoting one part of another site’s interview just to make their point.
You will see pieces like the one EW posted today based on ABC’s Season Four Description that are clearly speculation. The writer presented the facts from ABC and then suggested possible scenarios (like the Will/Ana one that upset people). I’ve written articles like that. We tag them opinion/feature and make it crystal clear which part is directly from the source (in this case ABC) and which part is just pure speculation.
These tabloid-y blog sites pop up more and more, but just remember: if it’s not a direct source, it’s basically a game of telephone that’s being made up as people go along and there’s no reason to take it seriously.