LOS ANGELES (AP) –  Universal Pictures has announced J.A. Bayona will direct the sequel to "Jurassic World."

Bayona will be taking up the mantle from Colin Trevorrow, who relaunched the "Jurassic" franchise in 2015. "Jurassic World" earned over $1.7 billion worldwide.

Trevorrow will still co-write and executive produce the sequel, but is stepping aside from directing as he'll be busy in a galaxy far, far away shooting "Star Wars: Episode IX" for 2019.

Stars Chris Pratt and Bryce Dallas Howard will return for the sequel, set for a June 2018 release, but little else is known about the film.

Bayona, a native of Spain, previously directed "The Impossible," which earned star Naomi Watts an Oscar nomination. The film revolved around the devastating 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami.

Check this out on latino.foxnews.com

By Mark Hess, Senior Vice President, Office of the Chief Technology Officer, Business and Industry Affairs, Comcast Cable in TV

by CreativeFuture

The quick adoption of new technologies and delivery systems for television programming is widely seen as a good thing, because it is. Creatives benefit from more options to get their work seen; networks and studios can deliver their shows on-demand across multiple platforms. Consumers have become more sophisticated about the ways in which they consume media. Whether watching via Smart TVs, Roku, AppleTV, Chromecast, Amazon Fire, and other app-based streaming services now provided by cable networks, consumers have more choices than ever. It would appear, then, that the new set-top box proposal put forth by FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler is long overdue and a win-win for everyone.

More accurately, it’s a win for tech companies.

And it’s also not necessary.

Wheeler contends that he is “opening” the set-top box and liberating the consumer from clumsy rental agreements with cable companies. This liberation of restrictions is not designed with the consumer in mind, however, but is the result of an aggressive push from tech companies to have access to collect data straight from our living rooms. Opening the set-top box, in fact, opens the living room… to piracy.

The FCC proposal also forces networks who have already negotiated licensing contracts with television providers to now compete with giant tech corporations who will not have to negotiate for anything.

What does this mean?

According to the Executive Director of the Hispanic Technology & Telecommunications Rosa Mendoza, this means that minority programming may lose many of the gains it has made in the past decade, and that data giants will mine our viewing habits and target ads against content they do not own.

Mendoza writes in her letter to Chairman Wheeler:

The FCC’s new set-top box regulations provide no real guarantee that minority-owned programming will be easily accessible to minority communities. The proposal could instead harm programmers by making their content harder to find in programming guides or search menus provided by third party boxes since their priority is to collect data to sell more ads. Furthermore, tech companies will have the ability to expand their own advertising businesses around programming without sharing the revenue with the programming creators. This lopsided regulatory interference could ultimately weaken minority voices in the television marketplace and threaten development of the diverse programming that Hispanic audiences demand.

This sentiment is echoed by Multicultural Media, Telecom and Internet Council President Kim M. Keenan, who argued recently in the Los Angeles Times: “Why choose a model that blows up the ecosystem with not even a promise that it will be better in the new ecosystem? We're going to trade one gatekeeper for a diversity-worse gatekeeper."

If Tom Wheeler’s set-top box proposal makes it so much easier for tech companies to provide multiple search results for pirate sites offering stolen content – and makes it so much harder for minority-owned programs to be visible – then how exactly can it be a good thing?

Comcast NBCUniversal is a committed sponsor of NALIP. Together we focus on producing change and shaping the future of creative expression and content creation by boosting inclusivity and diversity in the industry. Our successful collaboration has presented opportunities for Latino creators through programs like the Media Summit, the Latino Media Market, and the Latino Lens Incubator and Showcase. We are thankful for their commitment to diversity in media.

“Comcast brings together the best in media and technology. We drive innovation to create the world’s best entertainment and online experiences.”

Check out Comcast/NBCUniversal HERE

A Special Thank You to all of our Sponsors

Thank you to all of our generous sponsors for their continual support.  Because of their financial involvement, our organization continues to be very successful in helping content creators further advance projects and matching industry leaders with talent. We have exciting plans for our upcoming NALIP Media Summit, which would not be possible without the support of our sponsors.

If you have questions regarding your sponsorship or would like to know how you can support NALIP, please email Karla, NALIP’s Outreach Coordinator, at [email protected]

by Paul Bond

 Steve Granitz/WireImage

Former WME agent and production executive at Paramount Pictures Gary Pearl, who recently spoke at the THR-sponsored TV & Film Finance Forum East, talks about the state of the industry and reveals that “the financing game is not for everyone.”

Gary Pearl, formerly a William Morris agent and production executive at Paramount Pictures, now is co-chairman of Aquarius Television and an executive producer on The CW series Jane the Virgin. He is set to speak April 13 at New York's Dream Downtown hotel during the eighth annual TV & Film Finance Forum East, as part of "Independent Moves: Strategies for Transitioning From Film to Television" (Jane was independently financed and later partnered with CBS). THR, the event's media sponsor, spoke with Pearl about the state of the industry.

What are the similarities between financing movies and TV shows?

Independent filmmaking has always been about finding money in various ways and making projects that feed your passion. TV has been about selling to the broadcast networks, so it necessitated a level of pragmatism in story choice. It is also more commonplace for TV producers to find distributors across the world and soft money — in the past associated with independent film models — to offset some of the upfront costs associated with making projects for the small screen. This has made coming to television easier for indie film producers to understand than for people who grew up as TV creative producers.

International has become increasingly important. How has this changed TV finance?

It used to be you'd have a deal with NBC, for example, and they'd sell the international. Now, as financiers, we have more control: We can decide to make something, and the U.S. is just one more territory. The last few years have seen the importance of foreign financial partners.

How are OTT services affecting TV financing?

When you go to Netflix, Hulu or Amazon, they ask you how much money you need — they tell you to make it and come back. In broadcast, you have an internal budget: They know they'll have a deficit, then they'll break even after selling internationally, then they'll have a library of 100 shows for syndication. They don't do that at Netflix. They see a show that could increase subscribers by a million, so they know they can make $7 million more a month. The large OTT companies are functioning more like studios, where their appetite is to co-own or own entirely the homegrown productions that reinforce and build their brand accordingly.

What is your opinion of television in general, creatively speaking?

The studios are making a lot of franchises, leaving a lot of talented people without the ability to make films. The audience is embracing that quality on television. Take Jane the Virgin, for example: We could have told that story in a movie, but we've gone deeper as a TV show — and I love that.

International has become increasingly important. How has this changed TV finance?

It used to be you'd have a deal with NBC, for example, and they'd sell the international. Now, as financiers, we have more control: We can decide to make something, and the U.S. is just one more territory. The last few years have seen the importance of foreign financial partners.

How are OTT services affecting TV financing?

When you go to Netflix, Hulu or Amazon, they ask you how much money you need — they tell you to make it and come back. In broadcast, you have an internal budget: They know they'll have a deficit, then they'll break even after selling internationally, then they'll have a library of 100 shows for syndication. They don't do that at Netflix. They see a show that could increase subscribers by a million, so they know they can make $7 million more a month. The large OTT companies are functioning more like studios, where their appetite is to co-own or own entirely the homegrown productions that reinforce and build their brand accordingly.

What is your opinion of television in general, creatively speaking?

The studios are making a lot of franchises, leaving a lot of talented people without the ability to make films. The audience is embracing that quality on television. Take Jane the Virgin, for example: We could have told that story in a movie, but we've gone deeper as a TV show — and I love that.

Networks often want to own their shows. Is that a problem?

It's great for independents who had a problem getting real ownership. The easing of fin-syn [network program-ownership rules] 15 years ago caused problems for studios and their ownership, but that model has now matured — and the small independent is one of the beneficiaries of that changing model. There's more opportunity in TV because banks are valuing television, so more independent producers can function the way studios have. Independent producers are getting presales and estimates across the world that they show banks to validate their shows. WME started an independent TV division, saying there's a lot more opportunity in TV to finance shows without having to go to the principals with the lines of credit.

What are the big challenges that could derail your optimism?

Quality of product. It's a lot more democratic than it used to be, but alternatively we live in a very fast period — fast to market and fast to judgment. The audience is insatiable at the moment. The challenge is the same as always: Once something works, everyone copies it.

What's the learning curve?

The financing game is not for everyone. It's complicated beyond what we've discussed, and it's worth partnering with producers and others who understand the process rather than trying to take the entire pie. There are a lot of producer titles on projects in indie film and increasingly more in television as the one- stop shopping of network pilot sales disappears. It's the people who spend their lives in television that will have access, and people should not think as a rule they can just walk in and make it work.

Check out the rest on hollywoodreporter.com