Iron Man’s Endgame Fate Was Destiny, According To The Russo Brothers

Iron Man’s Endgame Fate Was Destiny, According To The Russo Brothers
Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark in Avengers: Endgame

Avengers: Endgame marked the end of several stories of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, but among them was the story that started it all. Robert Downey Jr. played Tony Stark in Iron Man, the very first MCU film, and Endgame saw him sacrifice himself so that the universe might survive.


For the Russo Brothers, that end was something that was always going to happen. Joe Russo told our own Sean O' Connell on the Reelblend podcast that Tony Stark was always going to be looking toward to the potential dangers of humanity and would never be able to rest until he had done whatever he could to protect people, so the way to let him rest was to let him do that. According to Russo...



In a certain sense, Tony Stark was always meant to die. He’s a very complicated character who had a haunted existence. And I think as a futurist, he could always see that the end of humanity was on the horizon, and he could not rest, spiritually, until he defeated what was coming for humanity: Thanos.





Tony Stark certainly has one of the more interesting character arcs over the course of the MCU. In the first Iron Man he comes face to face with the damage that his products are actually capable of, and decides to do something about it. From that point forward, he becomes essentially obsessed with making up for the destruction he has caused.


Even Tony Stark's apparent mistakes, like the creation of Ultron, are part of a desire to protect the world. In Captain America: Civil War Tony is even willing to take steps to help protect the world from himself when he questions how much good he is actually doing.


In the end, as Joe Russo says, the story had to come down to Tony putting himself between the world and the threat that wanted to destroy it. Tony sacrificing himself to do that not only makes sense, it's the only thing that really does. If Tony survives then he'll probably just start looking for the next threat, and the man would never find peace.




It's an ending that many saw coming. Because we knew that Robert Downey Jr. was wrapping up his time in the MCU, it was clear that Iron Man would be written out of the universe in some way, and as sad as his death was, it's difficult to be too upset about it, because it feels like a satisfying conclusion to his story,


The death of Tony Stark isn't entirely the end of the story, however. The event itself is going to weigh heavily on Peter Parker, as we've seen in the newest trailer for Spider-Man: Far From Home. It's possible his death could have other repercussions as well as we get into the MCU's Phase 4 starting next year.

Avengers: Endgame Proved We Should Stop Worrying About Toy Spoilers

Avengers: Endgame Proved We Should Stop Worrying About Toy Spoilers
Endgame's poster

Spoilers ahead for Avengers: Endgame. Look away if you haven't seen Marvel's latest


After a long year of waiting, Avengers: Endgame is finally in theaters. The Russo Brothers' (last?) MCU blockbuster held no punches, wrapping up a narrative that has spanned 22 movies and over a decade of filmmaking. Endgame is breaking all types of box office records, and really delivering for the hardcore fans who have spent countless hours and dollars to follow along with every new Marvel release.


Ahead of Endgame's release, the public was largely kept in the dark regarding the film's mysterious contents. The Russo Brothers urged the fans to keep the film's secrets and see Endgame on opening weekend to get the full theatrical experience. The film's marketing primarily used footage from the film's first 15 minutes, but potential spoilers came in the form of merchandise.




Toys have become a common source of spoilers over that past few years, arriving in shelves prior to major movies' releases. As such, fans have looked to merchandise like Lego sets to learn upcoming film's contents. Endgame's lego sets were no exception, but after Avengers: Endgame arrived in theaters, it became clear that that fans had been (literally) sold a false bill of goods.


Just look at this Lego set as proof. Following Hulkbuster's reappearance in Avengers: Infinity War, fans were delighted to see that War Machine would be getting his own massive robot in Endgame. The War Machine Buster lego set teased that Rhodey's armor would be getting a serious upgrade, and that he'd working alongside Paul Rudd's Ant-Man in the process.


Of course, none of these things happened. War Machine never got his own Hulkbuster armor, and he wasn't paired with Ant-Man on Endgame's big time heist. So while the Lego sets might be cool, they're ultimately not based off of anything from the film. Bummer.




One of the biggest Lego sets that ties into Avengers: Endgame is the Ultimate Quinjet. The set teases a big group of Avengers getting into their matching Quantum Suits, and jet setting on a mission to battle Thanos. The play set features the likes of Hawkeye, Rocket, Black Widow, and Thor, and shows them battling some Chitauri.


Of course, this is another scene that simply is never in Avengers: Endgame. The survivors never actually go anywhere with their Quantum Suits, instead using them within the Avengers Compound to travel through time and space. What's more, the Quinjet barely makes an appearance in the blockbuster, save for a few brief scenes.


In the end, only one set from Lego's Avengers: Endgame merchandise actually ended up coming to fruition in the film. That is the biggest and most expensive set, which depicts the Avengers Compound Battle. It shows Thanos and his forces attacking the good guys' hideout, with characters like Hulk, Iron Man, Captain Marvel, and Nebula fighting off the Mad Titan.




And this scene did in fact happen, albeit differently than depicted in the Lego version. The Avengers Compound was all but leveled when Thanos came knocking, and it seemed like he could take another victory. Ultimately the biggest Marvel battle occurred and the good guys won, but the compound and a few characters fell in the process.


Related: 11 Times Toys Did Spoil Movies


What's clear from Avengers: Endgame's Lego sets is that Marvel Studios is cognizant of toys being potential spoilers. While still able to make money on merchandise, the studio is keeping its secrets at all costs. As such, we should probably stop worrying so much about potential toy-related spoilers, at least as far as the MCU is concerned. The Lego sets for Spider-Man: Far From Home have already hit shelves, but smart money says that they've also got some red herrings regarding the upcoming blockbuster's plot.




Avengers: Endgame is in theaters now, and noticeably missing the events shown in the film's merchandise. In the meantime, be sure to check out our 2019 release list to plan your next trip to the movies.

A Stalin Reference Was Reportedly Removed From Hellboy In Russia

A Stalin Reference Was Reportedly Removed From Hellboy In Russia
Hellboy and Ben Daimio

Every now and then, you’ll come across an instance where a movie has been edited because it’s airing in a particular country, like how some of the entries on Steve Rogers’ to-do list in 2014’s Captain America: The Winter Solider were different depending on where the film was released. In the case of the Hellboy reboot, its Russian release was apparently adjusted so that a reference to Joseph Stalin was replaced with a different notorious historical figure being mentioned.


If you’ve already seen Hellboy, you might recall a moment when the eponymous protagonist mentions how the one-eyed with Baba Yaga, one of the movie’s side villains, once tried to resurrect Joseph Stalin. Here are his exact words:



I recall you tried to raise Stalin's ghost from a necropolis.





However, per BBC News, Russian moviegoers heard this line instead:



I want to remind you, you tried to raise Hitler's spirit from a necropolis.



That’s right, rather than reference the man who led the Soviet Union from 1922 to 1953, the Russian version of Hellboy decided to mention Adolph Hitler instead, another dictator from the mid-20th century. This isn’t the first time that a movie in Russia has had to deal with Stalin-related censorship, as last year the UK comedy The Death of Stalin was denied release in the country because it was deemed “disgusting” and “extremist.”




Going off social media responses, evidently many Russian viewers were not pleased with Stalin’s name being replaced with Hitler’s in Hellboy. It was also noted online that Baba Yaga mentioning Hitler doesn’t really make any sense since she’s a Russian folklore character.


For the English screenings of Hellboy in Russian, Stalin’s name was bleeped and the subtitles included Hitler’s name instead. This was one of only two ways that Hellboy was censored in Russia, the other being a Russian curse word that Grigori Rasputin (another Russian historical figure) utters being removed.


While the exact reasoning for why Stalin’s name was taken out of Hellboy, BBC’s article also noted that a recent poll showed that 70% of Russians believe Stalin played a positive role in Russian history. So this could just be an instance of not wanting to portray such a notable individual in a negative light.




In any case, the rest of Hellboy played the same in Russia as it did domestically. Hitting theaters last week, the reboot has taken a beating both critically and commercially, collecting a lot of negative reviews (it ranks at 15% on Rotten Tomatoes and has a C CinemaScore) and making only $15 million worldwide so far. There was also reportedly some major drama that went on during production.


Keep checking back with CinemaBlend for more news about Hellboy, and don’t forget to look through our 2019 release schedule to learn what movies are coming out later this year.

This Rotten Week: Predicting Godzilla: King of the Monsters, Ma and Rocketman Reviews

This Rotten Week: Predicting Godzilla: King of the Monsters, Ma and Rocketman Reviews
godzilla: king of the monsters roar

Man (or kaiju), there is quite a bit to look forward to with this week’s run of movies. It’s got big ol' monsters, a suburban teen horror and a biopic about one of the greatest living entertainers. Get ready for Godzilla: King of the Monsters, Ma and Rocketman.


Just remember, I'm not reviewing these movies, but rather predicting where they'll end up on the Tomatometer. Let's take a look at what This Rotten Week has to offer.


Watching the Godzilla: King of the Monsters trailer, which shows off some of the large-scale fighting sequences between the ancient monsters who’ve come to life on Earth, it’s tough to imagine there’s any planet left for survivors to live on when the credits start to roll. It sure looks like every little speck of everything is wiped out except for, of course, the key human characters who help drive the plot line. Millie Bobby Brown and Vera Farmiga's characters mostly look fine, but everything else gets annihilated.




This is the third movie in this particular Monster-verse franchise, following Godzilla (75%) and Kong: Skull Island (75%). King of the Monsters will unleash a whole host of “new” creatures on the world, like Mothra and Ghidorah, with Godzilla called back out to fight them off. These movies mix somewhat tongue-in-cheek stylings with somewhat grounded reimaginings, and this one doesn’t look any different. The trailer looks enjoyably ridiculous, and that might not be the worst thing when it comes to the critics if they feel like they're in on the perceived joke.


In Ma, a group of high schoolers seem to stumble upon a Shangri-La-Like drinking environment when they start partying in the basement of some old woman who once bought them liquor. That sounds like a pitch for a teen comedy, but the darkness comes when the woman (the titular Ma) ends up being a total psycho apparently hellbent on taking revenge on the kids of those who mistreated her back in her own high school days. If the binge-drinking doesn't kill those teens, something will.


I like how director Tate Taylor thought to himself, you know who would be perfect as a psychotic, manipulative, borderline serial killer of teenagers? Octavia Spencer! He worked with her before, of course, having directed her in both The Help (80%) and Get on Up (76%), while also helming Girl on the Train (45%). Her latest character looks downright freaky, though I’m a bit torn on how critics will receive a story about kids getting worked over this way by a batshit crazy lady. Random thrillers aren't usually kind to Hollywood's elite, as seen by Dennis Quaid's The Intruder (30%).




The musical biopic is all the rage right now. We are fresh off the Queen-ly waves made by the Freddie Mercury-inspired Bohemian Rhapsody, which earned Rami Malek a Best Actor Oscar a few months ago. Now we get a look into the early years of Taron Egerton's Elton John as he goes from a struggling and shy kid to the flamboyant, eccentric, and world-renowned musical phenom that we know him as today.


Unlike the aforementioned Bohemian Rhapsody (61%), which left critics feeling somewhat meh with its retelling of Mercury’s life, Rocketman has come out of the gate quite strong. It’s sitting at 88% through 80 reviews, with critics praising the style, tone and performances from the leads. Taron Egerton plays Elton after starring in the Kingsman (74%, 52%) movies and voicing Johnny in Sing. He also worked with director Dexter Fletcher on Eddie the Eagle, and this latest looks like a complete hit that doesn't seem to suffer some of the more negative critiques facing more sanitized biopics of late.


Recapping last week:


We went two for three with the predictions last week, and it's been a relatively impressive run in the short-term. Aladdin (Predicted: 57% Actual: 58%) was a near direct hit, missing by only a percentage point while keeping Will Smith’s *Rotten” streak alive. He hasn’t had a positively reviewed movie earning a "Fresh" Tomatometer score in seven years now, though this one at least came close.




As the score would indicate, critics were rather mixed on the final result for the live-action remake of the Disney classic. Smith had some rather large shoes to fill, considering what Robin Williams did with just the voice role in the original. It landed for some critics but not others ,and the range of complaints and compliments varied.


I had a head start with Booksmart (Predicted: 99% Actual: 97%), since a number of reviews were in already up at the time of post. The drama was sitting at 100% through the first 50 or so reviews, and dropped only a few percentage points over the course of the next week. This will now go down as one of the best-rated wide releases of the year and it likely enters the discussion for the short list of all-time great high school, one-nighter movies.


Finally, Brightburn (Predicted: 37% Actual: 59%) was a mighty miss. Though technically rotten on the Tomatometer, this comic-adjacent scored higher than I thought, with more than half the critics finding something to like about the twist on the superhero genre. Considering the film basically just went Bizarro Superman, but not so Bizarro to wow everyone, this score can probably be considered a win.




Next time around, we’ve got Dark Phoenix, Late Night and The Secret Life of Pets 2. It’s gonna be a Rotten Week!

All The Transformers Movies, Ranked Best To Worst

All The Transformers Movies, Ranked Best To Worst
Transformers Optimus Prime standing in the middle of buildings, in a fighting stance

It’s almost hard to believe it’s been over a decade since the Transformers movies started taking the world by storm back in 2007. With director Michael Bay overseeing the first five films as director, the franchise has quite an identity it’s made for itself with those five entries. His tenure seeing him direct Transformers through Transformers: The Last Knight, with Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, Transformers: Dark of the Moon, and Transformers Age of Extinction filling the middle.


But with last year’s Bumblebee, the Transformers movies have seemed to switch tactics and approach their source material with a more family friendly approach. Which makes ranking the franchise itself all the more exciting, as there’s plenty to talk about when not only comparing the tone between the original franchise run, but also that of those previous Transformers movies and the latest film in the line.


Ranking the in order from the best to worst, we’ll run the table through all six entries currently present in the Transformers canon, and describe what makes them great or not so great. Let’s roll out, and start with the top of the heap.




1. Bumblebee (2018)


There are so many things that Bumblebee gets right about being a Transformers movie. With an '80s setting that allows fans to get a bit of era-appropriate nostalgia mixed in with robot action, the stage is pretty well set for last year’s big Transformers kinda/sorta reboot to take flight.


What's even better is the fact that Bumblebee’s breakout star actually takes his original form of a Volkswagen Beetle. Crafted as a film to warm the hearts of Transformers die-hards, going back to his original look was more than wise. However, there’s more than meets the eye when it comes to what makes this particular film work.


At the heart of Bumblebee’s entire effort to do something new is a story of Haliee Steinfeld’s Charlie, and her friendship with Bumblebee himself. Telling the most personal story in the series, while also including a ton of Transformers movie action, is the largest reason of why this film works the best out of the six.




2. Transformers (2007)


Out of all of the Michael Bay directed Transformers movies, the closest his series has ever come to setting the same sort of tone that Bumblebee did was with his first Transformers film. As Shia LaBeouf’s Sam shares a relationship with Bumblebee, similar to the one that particular Autobot shared with Charlie in the ‘80s, the core of human and Transformer co-operation is its strongest in this particular Bay-fueled story.


Though the action is definitely a stand out when comparing 2007’s Transformers to Bumblebee, as there’s tons of frenetic heroism to enjoy in this more modern paced blockbuster. Quite frankly, this film probably works the best because it’s where the entire franchise started, allowing this particular Transformers movie to be a little more experimental in what it wanted to do.


It takes a while to get to the actual gigantic action of Autobots and Decepticons fighting each other in public, which is actually best in hindsight, as it gave Transformers more time to really build its human component But by time things take off, it’s full steam ahead for the rest of the film, as well as the Transformers franchise.




3. Transformers 4: Age of Extinction (2014)


Sometimes, a soft reboot is all you need to boost a series that needs a pick-me-up, and that’s what Transformers: Age of Extinction did in the series’ fourth outing. With a pretty much completely new human cast, led by Mark Wahlberg’s protective father-turned Transformers crusader Cade Yaeger, the possibilities for the series opened pretty wide.


By reintroducing some of the human element that would go missing in the two Sam Witwicky sequels, Transformers: Age of Extinction gave the franchise a new lease on life, as well as room for a new trilogy dealing with an Earth that no longer ignored the presence of Transformers, but in some cases wanted to hunt them down and destroy them for good.


Capped off with the addition of Grimlock and other Dinobots into the fray, Transformers: Age of Extinction was more fun than most sequels get to be in a series that spans over three entries.




4. Transformers 3: Dark of the Moon (2011)


After the writer’s strike of 2007-2008 interfered with the writing process of Transformers: Revenge of The Fallen, it felt like the series had lost a good amount of the wind that was once in its sails. Then Transformers: Dark of the Moon happened, which showed that while it had definitely taken a hit, the series wasn’t out of the game just yet.


The third and final film in the Sam Witwicky trilogy, Transformers: Dark of the Moon had a hell of a secret weapon to help tell the story of a race against time between Autobot and Decepticon forces trying to recover an artifact from the moon, in hopes of ending their conflict for good.


This is where the Transformers movies started to depend a bit too much on human historical events and the secret Transformer involvement in such moments. But even when it things started to sag with this third film, Transformers: Dark of the Moon did have a show-stopping battle in Chicago, and an impressive turn by Leonard Nimoy as Sentinel Prime.




5. Transformers 5: The Last Knight (2017)


Considering how much of a breath of fresh air Transformers: Age of Extinction felt like, the Transformers movies would find themselves dipping in quality yet again with the fifth film, Transformers: The Last Knight.


Doubling down on the “secret history” of humans and Transformers, this adventure would see Mark Wahlberg’s Cade Yeager returning on his own, with some new sidekicks in tow. Throw in a heel turn for Optimus Prime, an evil Transformers sorceress trying to resurrect Cybertron and a sassy robot butler that knows the words to “Move, Bitch,” and you basically have the gist of where this one went wrong.


For all of the care that was taken in laying down somewhat of a mythos for the Transformers and their lost home of Cybertron in the previous films, Transformers: The Last Knight was the fifth and final Michael Bay directed Transformers film, and one hell of a slap in the face to fans.




6. Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen (2009)


When pressed to give a reason as to why Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen was as unimpressive a sequel as it was, director Michael Bay basically blamed it on the hoops he and the series’ writers had to jump through in order to complete the film before various industry strikes took place.


It certainly feels like it, as the second of the Transformers movies really feels like the worst of the lot. Taking Shia LaBoeuf’s Sam Witwicky for a second ride in the Transformers universe, our hero found himself saddled with cosmic knowledge that could swing the war between Autobots and Decepticons in favor of the villains. But, of course, what Transformers movie would be complete without zany comedy.


With a story that felt as incomplete as it was offensive in some places, the rush to keep the series up and running definitely showed in Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen’s second bite at the apple. If there was more time and attention paid to the story, this could have been a pretty interesting follow-up, especially with legendary genre actor Tony Todd playing The Fallen, a rogue member of the Prime order.




There you have it. Six Transformers movies, not-so alike in dignity, just waiting for an opportunity to be unified into one whole franchise. While they might not all be amazing, each Transformers film does have its own unique pros and cons in the series. And as always, rankings are personal, so the fans of the series may not agree with our rankings above. So if you have a different opinion on which Transformers movies are good, bad, or indifferent, share your answers with us in the comments below.

Why Annabelle Comes Home Is Very Much A Homecoming For The Conjuring Universe

Why Annabelle Comes Home Is Very Much A Homecoming For The Conjuring Universe
Annabelle sitting on a chair in Annabelle Comes Home

In the last six years, The Conjuring Universe has become one of the most successful active franchises in Hollywood. It all started when James Wan’s The Conjuring turned out to be a massively huge hit in the summer of 2013, and since then the brand has expanded to include multiple spin-off series, which have actually mostly performed as well or better than the core titles.


As the franchise has continued, it’s expanded in interesting ways and gone to some exciting new places – and it’s in recognition of this that Gary Dauberman’s upcoming Annabelle Comes Home holds a special place the brand’s direction. It turns out the title has a semi-double meaning, as in addition to the movie featuring a plot that sees the titular doll come to live in the Warren house, it’s also seen by the filmmakers as a homecoming of sorts for the entire Conjuring Universe.


This was a sentiment shared by producer Peter Safran during an interview late last year when I had the chance to visit the set of what was then only called Annabelle 3:





The idea bringing it back to the Warren family was something that we've been toying with for a while. We had the Perrons, we had the Hodgsons, we took it all away to Romania – a totally different vibe and feel for The Nun. And we just liked the idea of bringing it closer to home, back to ordinary people and extraordinary circumstances, which was kind of the touchstone for it. And it just really made sense.



To fill in the gaps for the uninitiated, The Conjuring started the franchise with a story that actually spent a fair amount of time in the Warren home, in addition to following an investigation of the relatively-local Perron household. But the movies have slowly moved away from that ever since. Annabelle was really only a slight crawl away as a prequel story with a direct link-up featured at the end, but then The Conjuring 2 took Patrick Wilson and Vera Farmiga’s Ed and Lorraine Warren to England for the infamous Enfield Poltergeist case with the Hodgson clan. Annabelle: Creation then took audiences back nearly 20 years before the events of The Conjuring; and then The Nun doubled down on both elements of setting by not only going further back in time (by three years), but also by featuring events primarily set in the Vatican and Romania.


It’s been six years since audiences have seen any legitimately spooky action inside of the Warren’s house, but Annabelle Comes Home will break that streak when it’s released this summer. Set over the course of one night, the story centers on Ed and Lorraine’s daughter, Judy (McKenna Grace), as she spends the night with a babysitter (Madison Iseman) the night Annabelle is brought into household’s notorious artifact museum. Unfortunately for them, it’s evil winds up having a very strong influence over the other objects in the room, unleashing all kinds of terrors.




Further discussing the approach of bringing the action back to the Warrens’, Peter Safran explained that there has long been a creative curiosity when it comes to the aforementioned artifact museum, and Annabelle Comes Home will finally be the movie that sees the potential there explored. Plus, he added, it’s an opportunity to directly follow-up on the very first case that audiences were introduced to in the first Conjuring. Said the producer,



We always loved the idea of the artifact room being the potential source of more stories. The idea of actually setting a film around that was something, again, that we had in our mind for a while, and Gary [Dauberman] and James [Wan], and myself just thought this was the opportunity – that the third Annabelle movie is the opportunity to really raise the stakes. And that was it. Also the opening scene of The Conjuring is so iconic when it opens up on the half face of Annabelle, we just always liked the idea of, what happened after they left there? We see them taking the doll, what happens? It was actually something other people had asked us in the past as well. We just thought we will explore that story.



There will still be plenty more opportunities for The Conjuring Universe to explore new cities, countries, and time periods, as there are multiple projects actively in development, but Annabelle Comes Home is specifically being made as the film that brings us full circle.




The directorial debut of Gary Dauberman – who previously wrote the scripts for Annabelle, Annabelle: Creation, and The NunAnnabelle Comes Home is scheduled to freak out audiences this summer with its June 28th release. And be sure to stay tuned here on CinemaBlend, as I have plenty more stories coming your way in the coming days from my time visiting the set.

The Fast And Furious Franchise Has Fired Its Longtime Producer

The Fast And Furious Franchise Has Fired Its Longtime Producer
Vin Diesel in The Fate of the Furious

Ever since the Fast and Furious franchise launched in 2001, Neal H. Moritz has been working on it as a producer, but that nearly two decade-long tenure has come to an abrupt end. Rather than Moritz deciding to leave the car and explosion-filled series of movies on his own terms, he’s been fired due to a legal dispute with Universal Pictures.


Last October, it was reported that Neal Moritz filed a lawsuit against Universal, alleging that the studio was in breach of oral contract and committed promissory fraud when it removed him as the lead producer on the upcoming Fast and Furious spinoff, Hobbs and Shaw. He demanded he be reinstated as lead producer or be paid “tens of millions of dollars in damages in lost compensation.”


Seven months later, the news has come out that not only has Neal Moritz been dropped from Hobbs and Shaw, but he’s also been removed from all future Fast and Furious movies, starting with Fast and Furious 9, which begins shooting in a few weeks. Because Moritz has a pay-or-play deal, Universal will still need to compensate on the Fast and Furious movies, but evidently that’s a better course of action than keeping him around, both financially and mentally.




Universal’s stance is that Neal Moritz is not entitled to be a producer on Hobbs and Shaw, while Moritz says he had an oral agreement with the studio’s president, Jimmy Horowitz, to produce the spinoff and was working on it up until he was dropped from it right before principal photography kicked off. Moritz also claims that he came up with the idea for Hobbs and Shaw with screenwriter Chris Morgan and spent months developing it.


So where did everything go wrong? According to a “studio insider” who spoke with The Hollywood Reporter, Universal tried to work out a deal with Neal Moritz, but due to a “a long, torturous history” with fighting him on every previous Fast and Furious movie, the studio got sick of his combative behavior.


Because Universal is trying to expand the Fast and Furious franchise into more of a cinematic universe, as well as Hobbs and Shaw’s budget growing before production, the studio asked the franchise’s top talent to contribute to a “pool” that would allow Universal to break even before others were cut in on the profit. Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson was among those willing to play ball, but Moritz reportedly instead “wound up for his usual game of hardball.”




As for why Universal decided to kick Neal Moritz off all future Fast and Furious movies, that came about when he named Jimmy Horowitz in his lawsuit. While it’s unclear what the thought process that the studio’s bigwigs had after that, evidently there was incentive enough for them to toss Moritz out.


With Hobbs and Shaw hitting theaters this summer, two more main Fast and Furious movies on the way and a female-centric spinoff in the works, obviously this blockbuster franchise is sticking around for the foreseeable future. Still, considering how involved Neal Moritz was from the start, this definitely marks the end of an era.


We’ll see how the Fast and Furious franchise’s first foray into spinoff territory goes when Hobbs and Shaw comes out in theaters on August 2, and Fast and Furious 9 will follow on May 22, 2020.