Believe the hype. "X-Men: First Class" is incredible, easily superior to all four previous films in the series and a must-see for fans of the franchise and genre. Obviously, you're likely to hear more details from me at a later date, but wanted to get that down for the record because I know many people are still approaching this one cautiously, and it would really suck if this movie wound up paying for the sins of "X3" and "Wolverine" in the public-consciousness.
I Don't Care About Anthony Weiner's Penis...
...BUT I'm not above aluding to it for attention ;)
More after the jump, for benefit of people who have an issue with political stuff on the main page:
In case you hadn't heard, Democrat Congressman Anthony Weiner - best (only?) known for being young, photogenic and willing to let fly with a catchy firebrand eff-you quote directed at his Republican colleagues whenever anywhere near a TV camera - may or may not have Tweeted a picture of someone's underwear-clad junk late Friday night, then quickly deleted it, and that the junk in question may or may not belong to Weiner himself, and may or may not have been originally meant as a private message to a college girl he may or may not be having an affair with. On the one hand, Occam's Razor favors the "may" option. On the other hand, the folks driving the story are primarily working under utterly-discredited right-wing douchebag Andrew Breitbart; so "bullshit" is also totally feasible.
Whatever. I don't really give a shit about stuff like this - I happen to like Weiner (get it out of your systems now, I'll wait) and precisely NONE of the reasons I like him involve "seems like a guy who doesn't cheat on his wife." I don't give two shits about the penny ante moral-fortitude of - well... anything, technically, but especially politicians. Does he vote the way I'd prefer on things I care about? If YES, then I don't give a shit about his "decency." I want pro-choice federal judges, well-funded arts/sciences/infrastructure, a rigidly enforced barrier between Church and State and for "social conservative" lawmakers and lobbyists to go home every weekend squealin' from the feelin'; and if I get those things the guys who do the gettin' can fool around with whoever they like - at least until they're within reach of their spouse, i.e. the ONLY person whose business ANY of this is.
I've never really been able to understand WHY people react with such horror to politicians' sex lives. Right now, Newt Gingrich is aaaaaalllll kinds of trouble because he fools around, buys lavish gifts for women and remarries a lot. Seriously? THAT'S the problem with Newt, as opposed to the mountains of other stupid/dangerous things he promotes and stands for? Being a not-terribly-attractive/charismatic guy who takes advantage of his late-blooming fame and wealth to score chicks doesn't make Gingrich a bad candidate for office - being a willing shill for corporate douchebags and religious-right assholes makes him a bad candidate; the other stuff just makes him slightly more relatable. (Though NOT "likable," I stress - cheating isn't cool, Newt ditching his dying wife for someone younger much less so.)
Innevitably, someone is going to come back on this with the old "if they cheat on their wife, they'll cheat on The Country!!!" saw, which is one of those analogies that sounds pointed and insightful for all of a second before you realize it's just DUMB. What the hell does "cheat on the country" mean? Are people worried that insufficiently-monogamous Presidents will start slipping out on the weekends to Govern some other younger, better-looking nation? Actually... maybe that IS what a depressing number of people are actually worried about - think about how often "you'd rather be Canadian!!!" is used as somebody's idea of a slur against American liberals, or how frequently President Obama is derrided for seeming to have a preference for certain aspects of European culture over American.
Just once - ONCE! - I want to see a politician - ANY politicians - of either party caught in one of these "sex scandals" get up to the mic and give some version of the following statement:
"Hell yes, I had sex with that woman. And not just that one, either. A WHOLE bunch of women - seriously, you don't even know. You know who DID know? My wife, here." ::wife nods:: "Hell, she was THERE half the time! Yeah, that's right, we've got an 'arrangement.' It's 2011, fucking deal with it. Oh, don't misunderstand - she's pissed off at me alright... pissed off that I got stupid and got CAUGHT and now we have to do this dance for you media dipshits. Hell, the only reason we didn't just say this shit right upfront is that we were trying to get my ass ELECTED and you tools would've acted exactly like you're acting now, on account of being beholden to a voting/media-consuming public about 50% of which actually DO care more about this meaningless parochial bullshit than they do about things that actually effect their well-being." ::wife makes obscene gesture at aghast NY Post Reporter:: "Well, guess what? This is me, this is us, this is how we roll. And WHILE I've been in office, all y'all made out DAMN well. You like all those well-paid cops and firefighters? You enjoy that properly-scheduled mass-transit and functional roads and rails? You're welcome. Want it to keep comin'? FOUR MORE YEARS, bro! OR, you wanna go and toss all that out and roll the dice because how we run our bedroom is soooooo offensive to you? Well then good luck to ya, fucko - this press conference ALONE just landed me enough book deals, speaking engagements and 'on-staff contributor' gigs to live like royalty for the rest of our lives, so we're all good. Now, if you'll excuse us, the Missus and I have a dinner date with Miss July - don't worry, I'm sure there'll be a tape in a month or two. DONE!"
And that's why I am not a campaign manager.
More after the jump, for benefit of people who have an issue with political stuff on the main page:
In case you hadn't heard, Democrat Congressman Anthony Weiner - best (only?) known for being young, photogenic and willing to let fly with a catchy firebrand eff-you quote directed at his Republican colleagues whenever anywhere near a TV camera - may or may not have Tweeted a picture of someone's underwear-clad junk late Friday night, then quickly deleted it, and that the junk in question may or may not belong to Weiner himself, and may or may not have been originally meant as a private message to a college girl he may or may not be having an affair with. On the one hand, Occam's Razor favors the "may" option. On the other hand, the folks driving the story are primarily working under utterly-discredited right-wing douchebag Andrew Breitbart; so "bullshit" is also totally feasible.
Whatever. I don't really give a shit about stuff like this - I happen to like Weiner (get it out of your systems now, I'll wait) and precisely NONE of the reasons I like him involve "seems like a guy who doesn't cheat on his wife." I don't give two shits about the penny ante moral-fortitude of - well... anything, technically, but especially politicians. Does he vote the way I'd prefer on things I care about? If YES, then I don't give a shit about his "decency." I want pro-choice federal judges, well-funded arts/sciences/infrastructure, a rigidly enforced barrier between Church and State and for "social conservative" lawmakers and lobbyists to go home every weekend squealin' from the feelin'; and if I get those things the guys who do the gettin' can fool around with whoever they like - at least until they're within reach of their spouse, i.e. the ONLY person whose business ANY of this is.
I've never really been able to understand WHY people react with such horror to politicians' sex lives. Right now, Newt Gingrich is aaaaaalllll kinds of trouble because he fools around, buys lavish gifts for women and remarries a lot. Seriously? THAT'S the problem with Newt, as opposed to the mountains of other stupid/dangerous things he promotes and stands for? Being a not-terribly-attractive/charismatic guy who takes advantage of his late-blooming fame and wealth to score chicks doesn't make Gingrich a bad candidate for office - being a willing shill for corporate douchebags and religious-right assholes makes him a bad candidate; the other stuff just makes him slightly more relatable. (Though NOT "likable," I stress - cheating isn't cool, Newt ditching his dying wife for someone younger much less so.)
Innevitably, someone is going to come back on this with the old "if they cheat on their wife, they'll cheat on The Country!!!" saw, which is one of those analogies that sounds pointed and insightful for all of a second before you realize it's just DUMB. What the hell does "cheat on the country" mean? Are people worried that insufficiently-monogamous Presidents will start slipping out on the weekends to Govern some other younger, better-looking nation? Actually... maybe that IS what a depressing number of people are actually worried about - think about how often "you'd rather be Canadian!!!" is used as somebody's idea of a slur against American liberals, or how frequently President Obama is derrided for seeming to have a preference for certain aspects of European culture over American.
Just once - ONCE! - I want to see a politician - ANY politicians - of either party caught in one of these "sex scandals" get up to the mic and give some version of the following statement:
"Hell yes, I had sex with that woman. And not just that one, either. A WHOLE bunch of women - seriously, you don't even know. You know who DID know? My wife, here." ::wife nods:: "Hell, she was THERE half the time! Yeah, that's right, we've got an 'arrangement.' It's 2011, fucking deal with it. Oh, don't misunderstand - she's pissed off at me alright... pissed off that I got stupid and got CAUGHT and now we have to do this dance for you media dipshits. Hell, the only reason we didn't just say this shit right upfront is that we were trying to get my ass ELECTED and you tools would've acted exactly like you're acting now, on account of being beholden to a voting/media-consuming public about 50% of which actually DO care more about this meaningless parochial bullshit than they do about things that actually effect their well-being." ::wife makes obscene gesture at aghast NY Post Reporter:: "Well, guess what? This is me, this is us, this is how we roll. And WHILE I've been in office, all y'all made out DAMN well. You like all those well-paid cops and firefighters? You enjoy that properly-scheduled mass-transit and functional roads and rails? You're welcome. Want it to keep comin'? FOUR MORE YEARS, bro! OR, you wanna go and toss all that out and roll the dice because how we run our bedroom is soooooo offensive to you? Well then good luck to ya, fucko - this press conference ALONE just landed me enough book deals, speaking engagements and 'on-staff contributor' gigs to live like royalty for the rest of our lives, so we're all good. Now, if you'll excuse us, the Missus and I have a dinner date with Miss July - don't worry, I'm sure there'll be a tape in a month or two. DONE!"
And that's why I am not a campaign manager.
"Bait 3D"
hat-tip: io9
Later this Summer we're getting "Shark Night 3D," a just-for-lulz B-movie about vacationing teenagers trapped in "salt water lake" that someone has filled with sharks. Not a bad premise, but the prospective PG13 rating doesn't bode well for "Piranha"-level excellence.
So, instead, I'll look forward to "Bait 3D," an Australian(?) production wherein a sudden flood (tidal wave?) during a grocery-store robbery traps a group of shoppers and robbers with a pack of hungry sharks carried-in by the water. Yes, really:
I like how "slick" it looks - the production values are pretty impressive, particularly for a movie about a shark attack in a grocery store.
Later this Summer we're getting "Shark Night 3D," a just-for-lulz B-movie about vacationing teenagers trapped in "salt water lake" that someone has filled with sharks. Not a bad premise, but the prospective PG13 rating doesn't bode well for "Piranha"-level excellence.
So, instead, I'll look forward to "Bait 3D," an Australian(?) production wherein a sudden flood (tidal wave?) during a grocery-store robbery traps a group of shoppers and robbers with a pack of hungry sharks carried-in by the water. Yes, really:
I like how "slick" it looks - the production values are pretty impressive, particularly for a movie about a shark attack in a grocery store.
"Happy Feet" Returns
Yeah, I'll say it: I wanna see this.
George Miller's original "Happy Feet" is easily one of the most bizzare family movies ever to be embraced as a mainstream hit (and Oscar winner!): Sold primarily in the guise of a cash-vacuum kiddie-flick about singing penguins, the actual film was something closer to a meta-commentary on the whole "singing animal" subgenre: The penguins are born capable of belting out pop-standards as a means of extra-sensory communication, and a "deformed" young bird (he can't sing, but tapdances instead) ends up in conflict with the Penguin Elders over his contention that the collapse of their food supply and ecosystem has been caused by Alien Invaders (read: humans) rather than being the will of the Penguin God. And yes, all this weirdness is acted out by - for the most part - photo-realistic CGI animals.
So... yeah, REALLY odd, unique movie; even if most people only remember it for the cute baby penguins - who, of course, star in this trailer.
Supposedly most of the original cast is back in some form, save - sadly - for Brittany Murphy, who passed away last year and has been replaced by Pink. On the worrisome side - the one penguin at the end looks like Mumble as a baby again; so I hope this isn't an "in-between-quel."
George Miller's original "Happy Feet" is easily one of the most bizzare family movies ever to be embraced as a mainstream hit (and Oscar winner!): Sold primarily in the guise of a cash-vacuum kiddie-flick about singing penguins, the actual film was something closer to a meta-commentary on the whole "singing animal" subgenre: The penguins are born capable of belting out pop-standards as a means of extra-sensory communication, and a "deformed" young bird (he can't sing, but tapdances instead) ends up in conflict with the Penguin Elders over his contention that the collapse of their food supply and ecosystem has been caused by Alien Invaders (read: humans) rather than being the will of the Penguin God. And yes, all this weirdness is acted out by - for the most part - photo-realistic CGI animals.
So... yeah, REALLY odd, unique movie; even if most people only remember it for the cute baby penguins - who, of course, star in this trailer.
Supposedly most of the original cast is back in some form, save - sadly - for Brittany Murphy, who passed away last year and has been replaced by Pink. On the worrisome side - the one penguin at the end looks like Mumble as a baby again; so I hope this isn't an "in-between-quel."
Takashi Miike to direct "Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney" Movie!!!
HELL. FUCKING. YES.
Takashi Miike - one of Japan's most prolific and unusual filmmakers - has signed to direct the live-action adaptation of "Ace Attorney" video games. For a stateside comparison... I don't know that there is one, but it's pretty damn awesome.
For reference, here's two examples of what tends to happen when Miike dips into material of this nature: The trailers for the anime-adaptation "Yatterman" and "Zebra Man 2: Attack on Zebra City":
Awesome.
Takashi Miike - one of Japan's most prolific and unusual filmmakers - has signed to direct the live-action adaptation of "Ace Attorney" video games. For a stateside comparison... I don't know that there is one, but it's pretty damn awesome.
For reference, here's two examples of what tends to happen when Miike dips into material of this nature: The trailers for the anime-adaptation "Yatterman" and "Zebra Man 2: Attack on Zebra City":
Awesome.
Plugged
This week's (excellent) Extra Credits threw a plug to one of my personal favorite old(er) Game OverThinker episodes. Here's the EC (though you should already be watching this every Thursday anyway...)
Smurfs Trailer
Memo to Neil Patrick Harris: You've already proven that you're the coolest cat on the planet, and thus can come out of even the most awful project clean and unharmed. You don't need to test that theory by appearing in shit like this:
For those without the fortitude to actually watch the damned thing - a position I can respect - here's the basic rundown:
The question of "how do you make a big-budget movie out of The Smurfs?" has been answered: They didn't. The CGI used to render the Smurfs themselves (which you'd think would be the ONLY thing you HAVE to get right on this) looks shockingly bad, and Hank Azaria's Gargamel makeup looks like something that wouldn't pass muster as a store-bought Halloween kit.
Yes, they do a "Blue Man Group" joke.
Yes, it sounds like we can look forward to a dance-remix version of the theme song.
Yes, there's a gag dedicated to how lame something from the series was (the theme song, again.)
Yes, scene with a Smurf falling in a toilet.
Azrael appears to be played by a real cat, which is going to make it kinda uncomfortable when The Smurfs have to beat up on her(?)
For those without the fortitude to actually watch the damned thing - a position I can respect - here's the basic rundown:
The question of "how do you make a big-budget movie out of The Smurfs?" has been answered: They didn't. The CGI used to render the Smurfs themselves (which you'd think would be the ONLY thing you HAVE to get right on this) looks shockingly bad, and Hank Azaria's Gargamel makeup looks like something that wouldn't pass muster as a store-bought Halloween kit.
Yes, they do a "Blue Man Group" joke.
Yes, it sounds like we can look forward to a dance-remix version of the theme song.
Yes, there's a gag dedicated to how lame something from the series was (the theme song, again.)
Yes, scene with a Smurf falling in a toilet.
Azrael appears to be played by a real cat, which is going to make it kinda uncomfortable when The Smurfs have to beat up on her(?)
An Epic For Our Age
Via EW...
The whole "race to the bottom" story of studios greenlighting a "franchise movie" based on ANYTHING seems to have cooled down a bit, as high-profile "what, really?" projects like Monopoly and Stretch Armstrong stalled out, but a few of the early pickups from the initial feeding-frenzy are still en-route; and one of them is getting closer to reality... "CANDY LAND: THE MOVIE."
I'm reasonably certain most everyone played this at one point, right? It's basically a "roll the dice and move" game for pre-literate children, so drawing random color-cards replaced a dice or number-wheel.
What's ironic is that it probably lends itself more readily to a movie than, say, "Battleship" because there was a nominal narrative and set of characters attached to hold the kiddie's interest. So very, very soon we may learn which actors-in-need-of-work will be vying for such choice roles as King Kandy (tailor-made for aging, retirement-minded British thespians!) Queen Frostine ("hottie" TV actresses making the jump to features?) and mincing, vaugely-"fey" villain Lord Licorice (Mr. Depp? Mr. Cage? Start your engines.)
The "big story," of course, is this delightful quote offered to EW by Glenn Berger, one of the films two (!!!) writers, about their ambitious vision for the project:
“We envision it as Lord of The Rings, but set in a world of candy.”
And elaborating...
“We don’t see it as a movie based on a board game, although it has characters from that world and takes the idea of people finding themselves in a world that happens to be made entirely of candy where there are huge battles going on,” Berger says. “We are going for real comedy, real action, and real emotions at stake.”
...
Y'know what? Fuck it. Fuck being snarky. I want this movie to come out NOW. I want to see the Battle of Pelennor Fields being fought by gingerbread men with giant-ass peppermint sticks and lollipops. I want to see $200 Million worth of CGI used to render a giant fortress made of Licorice. I want to see Mr. Mint wailing on dudes with his axe. I want to see Plumpy getting the ever-living shit beaten out of him - don't care what context.
Modern War 3 Trailer Teases World War III
A new trailer reveals that the new story "Call of Duty" fans will be skipping entirely on their way to engage in online deathmatches with Ritalin-addled 12 year-olds involves a world-wide conflict.
As the previous game involved full-scale military operations underway in North America, the Middle East and Europe I'm not 100% clear why this is a "new" development; but whatever.
As the previous game involved full-scale military operations underway in North America, the Middle East and Europe I'm not 100% clear why this is a "new" development; but whatever.
Where Did "Green With Envy" Trailer Come From?
Now this is a puzzle. Why would Jason Segel and Amy Adams - two stars with rapidly-rising bigtime cache - step up for what looks like just another relentlessly-formulaic romantic comedy? And for that matter, why would a relentlessly-formulaic romanctic comedy need it's own special YouTube page?
Heh. Very, VERY clever "gotcha" debut for "The Muppets" trailer; which reportedly caught a lot of folks off guard at this weekend's "Pirates" showings. Lucky them - though, on the down side, they DID have to watch "Pirates" afterwards...
Heh. Very, VERY clever "gotcha" debut for "The Muppets" trailer; which reportedly caught a lot of folks off guard at this weekend's "Pirates" showings. Lucky them - though, on the down side, they DID have to watch "Pirates" afterwards...
McWeeny Raves For "First Class"
Drew McWeeny, pound-for-pound the best overall film-journalist to emerge from the "movie-geek boom" of the late-1990s (as AICN's "Moriarty"), has the web's first semi-detailed (and basically spoiler-free) impressions of "X-Men: First Class" up on HitFix... and he sounds happy with it. Go give it a read.
Money quote from Drew:
"This is ground zero, and I think Fox just got it right, really right, in a way I can't say it feels like they have on any of their Marvel films so far. With the right support, and with this film's key creative team onboard, a sequel to this could well be the "X-Men" epic we've been waiting for since day one."
It's going to be interesting to see how this is recieved. It's flown largely under the radar as the "and the rest" of the "Summer of Superheroes;" mostly because it's not part of the two BIG film-press narratives i.e. "build-up to The Avengers" (Thor, Captain America) and "Warner Bros. setting up the DC Universe characters to supplant the Potter cash-cow" (Green Lantern.) But the marketing has been strong, the cast is a who's-who of stars-in-training and Matthew Vaughn has major fanboy-cred after "Kick-Ass."
On the other hand, the decision to hedge bets by keeping vague continuity with the previous three films (this is still technically a prequel, not a "re-boot") means a dearth of ultra-recognizable characters; and after the twin disasters of "X3" and "Wolverine" audiences could certainly be forgiven for approaching another X-Men movie with trepidation. Also... there's a weirdly-resentful undercurrent in a lot of the fandom for any further Marvel movies being made outside of the Marvel Studios "shared universe" umbrella - as though fans are actively hoping for them to fail on the assumption that Marvel will then scoop the rights back up and make "Wolverine vs. Avengers" or whatnot.
We'll find out in about two weeks, one way or another.
Money quote from Drew:
"This is ground zero, and I think Fox just got it right, really right, in a way I can't say it feels like they have on any of their Marvel films so far. With the right support, and with this film's key creative team onboard, a sequel to this could well be the "X-Men" epic we've been waiting for since day one."
It's going to be interesting to see how this is recieved. It's flown largely under the radar as the "and the rest" of the "Summer of Superheroes;" mostly because it's not part of the two BIG film-press narratives i.e. "build-up to The Avengers" (Thor, Captain America) and "Warner Bros. setting up the DC Universe characters to supplant the Potter cash-cow" (Green Lantern.) But the marketing has been strong, the cast is a who's-who of stars-in-training and Matthew Vaughn has major fanboy-cred after "Kick-Ass."
On the other hand, the decision to hedge bets by keeping vague continuity with the previous three films (this is still technically a prequel, not a "re-boot") means a dearth of ultra-recognizable characters; and after the twin disasters of "X3" and "Wolverine" audiences could certainly be forgiven for approaching another X-Men movie with trepidation. Also... there's a weirdly-resentful undercurrent in a lot of the fandom for any further Marvel movies being made outside of the Marvel Studios "shared universe" umbrella - as though fans are actively hoping for them to fail on the assumption that Marvel will then scoop the rights back up and make "Wolverine vs. Avengers" or whatnot.
We'll find out in about two weeks, one way or another.
20 Things That Still Don't Make Sense From "Pirates"
"Pirates of The Caribbean: On Stranger Tides" is over 2 hours long. Despite that, by the time it's over a HUGE number of seemingly important things remain unexplained. What follows is a breakdown of the stuff that's STILL bugging me - how about you?
SPOILERS, obviously, follow...
What happened to the Priest? Seriously. She pulls him down under water and...? Did I nod off? I mean, this isn't my first rodeo so I get what the vauge implication is, but still - is he a mer-man now? Is he dead but it's okay because he got some half-fish nookie first? Hell, for that matter he's technically a drowned sailor; oughtn't Will Turner - Captain of the Flying Dutchman charged with overseeing who lives and dies at sea - have something to say on that matter?
For that matter, oughtn't The Dutchman be popping up to collect whoever's left from that ship Barbossa let's the Mermaids sink?
If BlackBeard's magic sword lets him remote-control every facet of the Queen Ann's Revenge from the sails down to the riggings, why does he require ANY crew - let alone one comprised of zombies and kidnappees?
For THAT matter, given the same circumstances (magic sword, total-control of giant floating Death Star) why is BlackBeard having his men awkwardly corrall Mermaids like runaway seals when just driving them up onto land would work just as well?
Hell, if "man-made-light" is needed to draw out the Mermaids, why do they need to use a lighthouse when The QAR has a ginormous flame-thrower already built into it?
Also, if BlackBeard has the (unexplained) magic power to shrink whole boats (and crew, and localized weather conditions) down into bottles, why do they need to lug the Mermaid around in a full-sized glass casket?
Also, if Mermaids have been captured for harvesting their tears multiple times before, why doesn't ANYONE - including the Mermaid herself! - already know that letting one "dry off" for less than 10 seconds makes them sprout legs? And if they DID know - why the casket, again?
Why is Jack Sparrow suddenly vaugely concerned about getting into Heaven and/or the afterlife in general? He's been undead, dead-dead and back-from-the-dead, keeps regular company with mystics and a literal Sea Goddess, plus he's besties with the current Captain of The Flying Dutchman - aka the guy who makes the live/die call for those who die in the environment Sparrow is 98% certain to meet his end in the first place?
...and wait a tic - HOW is Christianity or Monotheism in general taken as hugely important by Sparrow or ANY pirate when said literal Pagan Sea Goddess, Calypso, was a regular aquaintance/prison/comrade/whatever of hundreds of thousands of pirates for decades in the very recent past? And even before we knew about her; Jack, Barbossa and the rest all hand firsthand experience with a very real curse handed down by "the heathen gods?"
Speaking of Calypso; if The Spainards are on a crusade to exterminate sources of Pagan supernatural power; why are they sailing ACROSS an entire ocean controlled by a source Pagan supernatural power without incident?
How is a magic map previously shown to exist outside the laws of basic material physics vulnerable to an oil fire?
BlackBeard is "the pirate all pirates fear"... so why haven't we seen or heard ANYTHING of him until right now? Like, say, at the big "every pirate in the world meet n' greet" in the 3rd movie?
If BlackBeard, Angelica and Jack needed the Chalices and the Magic Words to enter the Fountain, how did everyone else - including two small armies - just walk there?
Why does Angelica need to be in Jack Sparrow Drag to recruit for BlackBeard? Sparrow's reputation is for surviving when almost everyone else around him dies - why is that MORE attractive to anyone than working for a preposterously hot Latin chick whose apparently got the cash to throw around? "They don't trust a woman to lead them" doesn't wash - we've seen female Pirate Captains in the series already... in fact, the ENTIRE "Pirate Nation" only a couple years ago fought and won the biggest and most-decisive battle in their history under a female Pirate KING, Elizabeth Swan.
Why didn't The Spainards takes Barbossa's wooden leg when they captured him? Seems like kind of an obvious oversight.
For that matter, master-schemer Barbossa thinks to conceal a compartment of rum in his peg-leg... but not a gun? A knife? A weapon of some kind?
If the water in the pools where the Mermaid-tear harvesting was done is connected directly to the water pooling around the fountain; why do you NEED to get the healing-water directly from the fountain "tap?" Does immortality get added to "regular" spring-water through some mechanism in that sculpture-thingee? If so, why not just take that thing - which can be easily broken-apart - back home to wherever and brew up a fresh pot of live-forever-juice whenever you need it?
If not, and the Immortality Water DOES come directly out of the spring itself, why is it "the end" when The Spainards knock over the already-crumbling temple? Fresh water springs come up from DEEP in the Earth; with a little digging that whole setup will be good as new.
Why does the Priest randomly decide that the Mermaid needed to have a proper name; and where did he get "Syrena?"
And, hell, if "Syrena" is hyper-perceptive enough tell that the Priest is "different... a protector" (?) seconds after encountering him for the first time in the middle of an organized mass-assault on her people by his, why is she not bothered by his first two instincts on meeting her to be, in order: A.) "Treat her like an exotic pet" and B.) "Want to fuck her?"
SPOILERS, obviously, follow...
What happened to the Priest? Seriously. She pulls him down under water and...? Did I nod off? I mean, this isn't my first rodeo so I get what the vauge implication is, but still - is he a mer-man now? Is he dead but it's okay because he got some half-fish nookie first? Hell, for that matter he's technically a drowned sailor; oughtn't Will Turner - Captain of the Flying Dutchman charged with overseeing who lives and dies at sea - have something to say on that matter?
For that matter, oughtn't The Dutchman be popping up to collect whoever's left from that ship Barbossa let's the Mermaids sink?
If BlackBeard's magic sword lets him remote-control every facet of the Queen Ann's Revenge from the sails down to the riggings, why does he require ANY crew - let alone one comprised of zombies and kidnappees?
For THAT matter, given the same circumstances (magic sword, total-control of giant floating Death Star) why is BlackBeard having his men awkwardly corrall Mermaids like runaway seals when just driving them up onto land would work just as well?
Hell, if "man-made-light" is needed to draw out the Mermaids, why do they need to use a lighthouse when The QAR has a ginormous flame-thrower already built into it?
Also, if BlackBeard has the (unexplained) magic power to shrink whole boats (and crew, and localized weather conditions) down into bottles, why do they need to lug the Mermaid around in a full-sized glass casket?
Also, if Mermaids have been captured for harvesting their tears multiple times before, why doesn't ANYONE - including the Mermaid herself! - already know that letting one "dry off" for less than 10 seconds makes them sprout legs? And if they DID know - why the casket, again?
Why is Jack Sparrow suddenly vaugely concerned about getting into Heaven and/or the afterlife in general? He's been undead, dead-dead and back-from-the-dead, keeps regular company with mystics and a literal Sea Goddess, plus he's besties with the current Captain of The Flying Dutchman - aka the guy who makes the live/die call for those who die in the environment Sparrow is 98% certain to meet his end in the first place?
...and wait a tic - HOW is Christianity or Monotheism in general taken as hugely important by Sparrow or ANY pirate when said literal Pagan Sea Goddess, Calypso, was a regular aquaintance/prison/comrade/whatever of hundreds of thousands of pirates for decades in the very recent past? And even before we knew about her; Jack, Barbossa and the rest all hand firsthand experience with a very real curse handed down by "the heathen gods?"
Speaking of Calypso; if The Spainards are on a crusade to exterminate sources of Pagan supernatural power; why are they sailing ACROSS an entire ocean controlled by a source Pagan supernatural power without incident?
How is a magic map previously shown to exist outside the laws of basic material physics vulnerable to an oil fire?
BlackBeard is "the pirate all pirates fear"... so why haven't we seen or heard ANYTHING of him until right now? Like, say, at the big "every pirate in the world meet n' greet" in the 3rd movie?
If BlackBeard, Angelica and Jack needed the Chalices and the Magic Words to enter the Fountain, how did everyone else - including two small armies - just walk there?
Why does Angelica need to be in Jack Sparrow Drag to recruit for BlackBeard? Sparrow's reputation is for surviving when almost everyone else around him dies - why is that MORE attractive to anyone than working for a preposterously hot Latin chick whose apparently got the cash to throw around? "They don't trust a woman to lead them" doesn't wash - we've seen female Pirate Captains in the series already... in fact, the ENTIRE "Pirate Nation" only a couple years ago fought and won the biggest and most-decisive battle in their history under a female Pirate KING, Elizabeth Swan.
Why didn't The Spainards takes Barbossa's wooden leg when they captured him? Seems like kind of an obvious oversight.
For that matter, master-schemer Barbossa thinks to conceal a compartment of rum in his peg-leg... but not a gun? A knife? A weapon of some kind?
If the water in the pools where the Mermaid-tear harvesting was done is connected directly to the water pooling around the fountain; why do you NEED to get the healing-water directly from the fountain "tap?" Does immortality get added to "regular" spring-water through some mechanism in that sculpture-thingee? If so, why not just take that thing - which can be easily broken-apart - back home to wherever and brew up a fresh pot of live-forever-juice whenever you need it?
If not, and the Immortality Water DOES come directly out of the spring itself, why is it "the end" when The Spainards knock over the already-crumbling temple? Fresh water springs come up from DEEP in the Earth; with a little digging that whole setup will be good as new.
Why does the Priest randomly decide that the Mermaid needed to have a proper name; and where did he get "Syrena?"
And, hell, if "Syrena" is hyper-perceptive enough tell that the Priest is "different... a protector" (?) seconds after encountering him for the first time in the middle of an organized mass-assault on her people by his, why is she not bothered by his first two instincts on meeting her to be, in order: A.) "Treat her like an exotic pet" and B.) "Want to fuck her?"
Green Lantern's "3D Trailer"...
...doesn't raise hopes that they've fixed the problem:
Good gravy, how AWESOME is the first leg of this trailer? Sombre, epic, powerful... a million times better than anyone could've reasonably hoped a "Green Lantern" movie might look. Cosmic, epic in scope, the stuff of fanboy wish-dream made real... until 1:25, when Ryan Reynolds turns up and the whole 'groove' just completely disintegrates.
How did this happen? He's a good actor. It seemed like good casting. But ALL of the scenes here featuring the TITLE CHARACTER just look and sound so awkward. Even setting aside that the outfit still looks ridiculous on him (it looks good on all the others) and that the CGI-skinsuit concept doesn't fit and his mostly live-action head floating around makes the otherwise excellent CG look bad - the performance just doesn't seem to be there.
Granted, it could just be that every trailer has "messed up" his performance in exactly the same way... but it's looking more and more like a miscast (misdirected?) lead actor could end up torpedoing what would otherwise look like a truly remarkable feature.
Good gravy, how AWESOME is the first leg of this trailer? Sombre, epic, powerful... a million times better than anyone could've reasonably hoped a "Green Lantern" movie might look. Cosmic, epic in scope, the stuff of fanboy wish-dream made real... until 1:25, when Ryan Reynolds turns up and the whole 'groove' just completely disintegrates.
How did this happen? He's a good actor. It seemed like good casting. But ALL of the scenes here featuring the TITLE CHARACTER just look and sound so awkward. Even setting aside that the outfit still looks ridiculous on him (it looks good on all the others) and that the CGI-skinsuit concept doesn't fit and his mostly live-action head floating around makes the otherwise excellent CG look bad - the performance just doesn't seem to be there.
Granted, it could just be that every trailer has "messed up" his performance in exactly the same way... but it's looking more and more like a miscast (misdirected?) lead actor could end up torpedoing what would otherwise look like a truly remarkable feature.
Randy "Macho Man" Savage has died
Pro-wrestling legend Randy Savage (born Randall Mario Poffo) is dead. He suffered a heart-attack while driving, lost control of his car, and ultimately died from injuries sustained in the subsequent crash. His wife, traveling with him, survived with only minor injuries.
He was "only" 58 years old, which is comparatively young for most people but, tragically, not so for men in his particular profession; who routinely put their bodies through incredible amounts of punishment in their "prime." If I remembered offhand what his "greatest" match was, I'd try to find a clip and post it - anybody recall?
UPDATED: By popular consensus, Macho Man vs. Ricky Steamboat at Wrestlemania 3:
He was "only" 58 years old, which is comparatively young for most people but, tragically, not so for men in his particular profession; who routinely put their bodies through incredible amounts of punishment in their "prime." If I remembered offhand what his "greatest" match was, I'd try to find a clip and post it - anybody recall?
UPDATED: By popular consensus, Macho Man vs. Ricky Steamboat at Wrestlemania 3:
Escape to the Movies: "Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides"
Summer 2011 has it's first official dud.
The embed isn't working for some reason, here's a link to the site itself again until it does: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/escape-to-the-movies/3272-Pirates-of-the-Caribbean-On-Stranger-Tides
"Intermission" offers some stuff you can do INSTEAD of watching the shitty Pirate movie. You're welcome.
The embed isn't working for some reason, here's a link to the site itself again until it does: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/escape-to-the-movies/3272-Pirates-of-the-Caribbean-On-Stranger-Tides
"Intermission" offers some stuff you can do INSTEAD of watching the shitty Pirate movie. You're welcome.
Bane looks more-or-less like Bane...
...in as much as he's very big, and has black mask.
The obligatory "Dark Knight Rises" viral campaign begins today, with this first teasing look at how Christopher Nolan and Company will try to transform BANE from one of the most singularly boring "Dark Age" villains into someone worth watching a movie about.
That's Tom hardy under the mask, BTW, so I expect the DEAFENING roars of protest that a prominent Latino/South-American character is being played by a white actor from all the "racially conscious" white people who were OUTRAGED at making Heimdall black to begin any minute now...
...right?
The obligatory "Dark Knight Rises" viral campaign begins today, with this first teasing look at how Christopher Nolan and Company will try to transform BANE from one of the most singularly boring "Dark Age" villains into someone worth watching a movie about.
That's Tom hardy under the mask, BTW, so I expect the DEAFENING roars of protest that a prominent Latino/South-American character is being played by a white actor from all the "racially conscious" white people who were OUTRAGED at making Heimdall black to begin any minute now...
...right?
"Zookeeper"
Y'know, the problem isn't that "talking animals help a dipshit zookeeper get laid" is in itself a bad idea for a comedy...
...but it's probably a bad idea for THIS comedy.
...but it's probably a bad idea for THIS comedy.
This again
Below, the new(er) trailer for "Friends With Benefits." Might as well be right upfront about this: YES, it is in fact kinda funny that Mila Kunis has made a movie with an identical premise to a Natalie Portman movie from a few months ago.
Eh, can't say it doesn't look funny. A big plus is Timberlake - guy has turned out to be a crazy-good onscreen talent, especially in comedies.
Eh, can't say it doesn't look funny. A big plus is Timberlake - guy has turned out to be a crazy-good onscreen talent, especially in comedies.
"We Are The Night" U.S. trailer
Of the many crimes the "Twilight" phenomenon has committed against genre fiction and the vampire-subgenre in particular, by far the worst is it's very conscious attempt to suck the decadence and debauchery right out of the whole enterprise. Seriously, think about it: Co-opting a fictional creature that functions almost exclusively as a sex-metaphor as fodder for abstinence propaganda? That'd be genius satire... except Stephenie Meyer isn't joking.
Fortunately, the "fun part" of the bloodsucker genre proves hard to kill. Below, the U.S. trailer for "We Are The Night," a German production that just got picked up for a stateside run under the IFC Midnight label...
The basic pitch seems to be: "What if Paris, Kim, Lindsay etc's ability to 'survive' in the fast-lane was that they were a coven of lesbian vampires?" I've heard worse ideas, and I like how "big" it looks - i.e. it's not just the low-end sofcore cheapie they could've made - and of course that German filmmakers are unlikely to wimp-out on the good stuff.
This opens stateside in SOME capacity next Friday.
Fortunately, the "fun part" of the bloodsucker genre proves hard to kill. Below, the U.S. trailer for "We Are The Night," a German production that just got picked up for a stateside run under the IFC Midnight label...
The basic pitch seems to be: "What if Paris, Kim, Lindsay etc's ability to 'survive' in the fast-lane was that they were a coven of lesbian vampires?" I've heard worse ideas, and I like how "big" it looks - i.e. it's not just the low-end sofcore cheapie they could've made - and of course that German filmmakers are unlikely to wimp-out on the good stuff.
This opens stateside in SOME capacity next Friday.
Extra Consideration (UPDATED!)
I'm back on "Extra Consideration" this week, talking the School Shooter Mod with James Portnow and Jim Sterling.
ALSO! The Other Blog has some preview-images of "Game OverThinker: Episode 51," which is set to go live this Thursday night at 11pmET.
ALSO! The Other Blog has some preview-images of "Game OverThinker: Episode 51," which is set to go live this Thursday night at 11pmET.
"The Help"
This is good, because I was just the other day thinking "y'know what we need another of? Movies where enlightened White People teach Black People how to stand up for themselves."
You've gotta love the naked, self-congratulatory (and yet UTTERLY unself-conscious) pandering involved in a setup like this - i.e. how, in this scenario, an early kickoff for the Civil Rights movement is basically a happy side-effect to the REAL important triumph: An upscale white girl learning to stand up to her tradition/marriage-fixated mother.
You've gotta love the naked, self-congratulatory (and yet UTTERLY unself-conscious) pandering involved in a setup like this - i.e. how, in this scenario, an early kickoff for the Civil Rights movement is basically a happy side-effect to the REAL important triumph: An upscale white girl learning to stand up to her tradition/marriage-fixated mother.
"Straw Dogs" remake has a trailer
Sam Peckinpah's "Straw Dogs" is one of the most controversial movies ever made; and certain parts of it remain a tough sit to this day. It'd easily be near the top of my list of films that NO ONE has any business remaking; and that goes double for when the remaker in question is well-meaning but chronically-heavy-handed Rod Lurie...
The original featured a young Dustin Hoffman as a nerdy American college professor who moves into a rural farmhouse in his new wife's backwater British hometown; where his intellectual/pacifist nature puts him on the wrong side of the leader of the local hooligans... who happens to be the wife's ex-boyfriend. Infamously, it includes a scene where said ex participates in the gang-rape of the wife, and the staging of the scene implies that she partially (or wholly) welcomes/encourages the experience because she's somehow not "over" the bad guy or the brute/caveman 'type' he represents.
In turn she (and other events) "goad" Hoffman's character with escalating moments of emasculation (the "battle" for The Girl is symbolic of the caveman/"new-man" culture-clash, is the idea), culminating in a "fight or flight" seige sequence where he's forced to improvise a brutal defense of the homestead, "Die Hard" style, when the bad guys attack. It's all played pitch-black, right down to the implication that the wife's "rescue" is unimportant next to Hoffman's "rescue" of his own alpha-confidence over the heavies.
This trailer for the new one looks about like I'd feared it would: Overly-slick and void of the key moral ambiguity that made the original more than just another revenge-exploitation movie. The action has moved to the American south, and it looks like Lurie's most consistent weakness - blunt socio-political message-mongering is on full display: The hero (James Marsden) is now a "liberal" atheist/agnostic Hollywood screenwriter (author-insert much?) while the main baddie is an ex-jock redneck churchgoer. Yeesh.
Don't get me wrong, I appreciate where Lurie is coming from, but it seems a bit much even just from this trailer. The original had it's omnipresent bigger themes (America vs. Europe, urban vs. rural, brains vs. brawn, etc.) but they were dressing for the main setup of a modern person's forced-descent into primal survival-mode; remaking it into a straight-up "Red State vs. Blue State" thing seems like a tremendous missed-opportunity.
The original featured a young Dustin Hoffman as a nerdy American college professor who moves into a rural farmhouse in his new wife's backwater British hometown; where his intellectual/pacifist nature puts him on the wrong side of the leader of the local hooligans... who happens to be the wife's ex-boyfriend. Infamously, it includes a scene where said ex participates in the gang-rape of the wife, and the staging of the scene implies that she partially (or wholly) welcomes/encourages the experience because she's somehow not "over" the bad guy or the brute/caveman 'type' he represents.
In turn she (and other events) "goad" Hoffman's character with escalating moments of emasculation (the "battle" for The Girl is symbolic of the caveman/"new-man" culture-clash, is the idea), culminating in a "fight or flight" seige sequence where he's forced to improvise a brutal defense of the homestead, "Die Hard" style, when the bad guys attack. It's all played pitch-black, right down to the implication that the wife's "rescue" is unimportant next to Hoffman's "rescue" of his own alpha-confidence over the heavies.
This trailer for the new one looks about like I'd feared it would: Overly-slick and void of the key moral ambiguity that made the original more than just another revenge-exploitation movie. The action has moved to the American south, and it looks like Lurie's most consistent weakness - blunt socio-political message-mongering is on full display: The hero (James Marsden) is now a "liberal" atheist/agnostic Hollywood screenwriter (author-insert much?) while the main baddie is an ex-jock redneck churchgoer. Yeesh.
Don't get me wrong, I appreciate where Lurie is coming from, but it seems a bit much even just from this trailer. The original had it's omnipresent bigger themes (America vs. Europe, urban vs. rural, brains vs. brawn, etc.) but they were dressing for the main setup of a modern person's forced-descent into primal survival-mode; remaking it into a straight-up "Red State vs. Blue State" thing seems like a tremendous missed-opportunity.
"Horrible Bosses"
Another one of these, huh?
Don't get me wrong, looks alright... but at this point I'm expecting the next Friedberg/Seltzer project to be "Barely-Functional Emasculated Thirty-Something Douche Movie." (alternate title: "Man! White Surburban Asshats In Middle-Management Have It ROUGH!")
And THIS is why Hugh Jackman is so desperate for more "Wolverine" sequels...
...because it's apparently either that or make movies about a deadbeat dad who reconnects with his precocious, smart-mouthed son amid the world of competitive Robot Boxing. For the Shawn "Night At The Museum" Levy.
Dear lord... it's only a TRAILER, but how bad to do you already want to see that fucking kid get crushed by falling debris?
This is technically based on a Richard Matheson story best remembered as a Twilight Zone episode, though presumably without the brutal twist. Yes, it was also the basis of that Simpsons episode you're thinking of.
I hope the whole movie is actually like this trailer, though: Played completely straight and "serious" in the most earnest way possible. Not because it'll make it any better, but because I want to witness the spectacle of the director of "Cheaper by the Dozen" (and STAR of "Zombie Nightmare!") trying to wring pathos out of what amounts to "Rock'Em Sock'Em Robots: The Movie." You have to learn to love the little things.
Oh, and Levy is apparently still the guy WB wants for "The Flash," so... yeah.
Dear lord... it's only a TRAILER, but how bad to do you already want to see that fucking kid get crushed by falling debris?
This is technically based on a Richard Matheson story best remembered as a Twilight Zone episode, though presumably without the brutal twist. Yes, it was also the basis of that Simpsons episode you're thinking of.
I hope the whole movie is actually like this trailer, though: Played completely straight and "serious" in the most earnest way possible. Not because it'll make it any better, but because I want to witness the spectacle of the director of "Cheaper by the Dozen" (and STAR of "Zombie Nightmare!") trying to wring pathos out of what amounts to "Rock'Em Sock'Em Robots: The Movie." You have to learn to love the little things.
Oh, and Levy is apparently still the guy WB wants for "The Flash," so... yeah.
Next Year's Answer to "Soul Surfer" Greenlit at Sony
via Deadline...
When I had my wisdom teeth out, the combination of lingering anasthesea and (I think) Vicodin had me swearing to my parents that there was a Unicorn walking on the ceiling, along with several varieties of dinosaur. Fortunately for the world at large, neither of my parents were part of a profession built around selling reassurances to worshippers of either horned equines or thunder-lizards - so nobody wrote a book or made a movie out of my delusions...
4 year-old Colton Burpo, on the other hand, came back from near-death during an emergency apendectomy claiming to have hung out in Heaven with cheerful winged angels (you know, the type that aren't actually anywhere in the Bible), and The Big J.C. Himself; and has a dad who is an Evangelical minister bytrade "calling." So... you can probably guess the rest.
Colton's father, Todd, collaborated with Lynn Vincent (who also - shocker! - "worked with" Sarah Palin on "Going Rouge") on the book, "Heaven is For Real," which became a New York Times bestseller last year. Just so we're clear: We're talking about MILLIONS of people paying good money to read a second hand account of a toddler's near-death experience as-told by his minister dad and a political "journalist" best (only?) known for shaping one of the most widely-disparaged cash-in autobiographies in recent memory.
And now it's going to be a movie, and the "big news" is that a legitimate studio is stepping in as opposed to one of the smaller religiouspropaganda "entertainment" outfits: Instead it's being set up at Sony, courtesy of an alliance between Texas MegaVangelist Bishop T.D. Jakes and Sony exec DeVon Franklin, who made a lot of ink recently with his autobiography detailing his "double life" as a bigshot Hollywood player AND an ordained minister and offering advice on how to succeed in both (looking at his filmography, step one is apparently "make a lot of movies with Will Smith," which I don't think one really needs divine guidance to figure out...)
Question: Am I the ONLY person who has noticed that, despite all this constant talk about "The Passion" having opened up the market for explicitly Christian films, the ONLY one since that's made any real money or had any crossover success has been the Narnia movies - i.e. the franchise where Christ/Christianity is NEVER mentioned by name and is instead couched in an explicitly-"paganized" allegory? Shouldn't there be a lesson in that?
When I had my wisdom teeth out, the combination of lingering anasthesea and (I think) Vicodin had me swearing to my parents that there was a Unicorn walking on the ceiling, along with several varieties of dinosaur. Fortunately for the world at large, neither of my parents were part of a profession built around selling reassurances to worshippers of either horned equines or thunder-lizards - so nobody wrote a book or made a movie out of my delusions...
4 year-old Colton Burpo, on the other hand, came back from near-death during an emergency apendectomy claiming to have hung out in Heaven with cheerful winged angels (you know, the type that aren't actually anywhere in the Bible), and The Big J.C. Himself; and has a dad who is an Evangelical minister by
Colton's father, Todd, collaborated with Lynn Vincent (who also - shocker! - "worked with" Sarah Palin on "Going Rouge") on the book, "Heaven is For Real," which became a New York Times bestseller last year. Just so we're clear: We're talking about MILLIONS of people paying good money to read a second hand account of a toddler's near-death experience as-told by his minister dad and a political "journalist" best (only?) known for shaping one of the most widely-disparaged cash-in autobiographies in recent memory.
And now it's going to be a movie, and the "big news" is that a legitimate studio is stepping in as opposed to one of the smaller religious
Question: Am I the ONLY person who has noticed that, despite all this constant talk about "The Passion" having opened up the market for explicitly Christian films, the ONLY one since that's made any real money or had any crossover success has been the Narnia movies - i.e. the franchise where Christ/Christianity is NEVER mentioned by name and is instead couched in an explicitly-"paganized" allegory? Shouldn't there be a lesson in that?
Almodovar's "horror movie"
Pedro Almodovar, who's spent the last decade or so alternating between arthouse-inflected High Camp and arthouse-inflected Douglas Sirk riffs, has made what he calls "a horror story without screams of frights": "The Skin I Live In." And now we have a trailer (or, rather, a Cannes clip):
The "horror" part makes a little more sense once you know that Antonio Banderas is supposed to be playing a mad scientist who's experimenting on a captive woman (women?) to create indestructible skin for his wife; who was horribly burned in a car crash. It's based (very, very loosely) on the novel "Tarantula" by Theirry Jonquet.
Anyone who has seen more than one entry in the alarming wide canon of "mad-doc-ostensibly-trying-to-help-injured-wife" genre are requested to at least act surprised when said mad doctor's beautiful, fiercely-devoted assistant/doormat complicates matters by developing romantic feelings for him. All told, it sounds very similar to "Eyes Without a Face;" which American horror fans may be more familiar with as "The Horror Chamber of Dr. Faustus:"
Nobody has seen this yet, but it's set to debut at Cannes.
The "horror" part makes a little more sense once you know that Antonio Banderas is supposed to be playing a mad scientist who's experimenting on a captive woman (women?) to create indestructible skin for his wife; who was horribly burned in a car crash. It's based (very, very loosely) on the novel "Tarantula" by Theirry Jonquet.
Anyone who has seen more than one entry in the alarming wide canon of "mad-doc-ostensibly-trying-to-help-injured-wife" genre are requested to at least act surprised when said mad doctor's beautiful, fiercely-devoted assistant/doormat complicates matters by developing romantic feelings for him. All told, it sounds very similar to "Eyes Without a Face;" which American horror fans may be more familiar with as "The Horror Chamber of Dr. Faustus:"
Nobody has seen this yet, but it's set to debut at Cannes.
Tarantino Wants Will Smith For "Django" - Would He Do It?
People "in the business" tend to say, only half-jokingly, that Will Smith's career path is pretty-much set right now: Coast comfortably in blockbuster-territory until "The Barack Obama Story" has an ending, star in Obama biopic, win Academy Award. It's a cynical, borderline-"race-ish" view (i.e. "of course the #1 black star wants to play Obama!")... but let's face it, it's a sort of plausible track for the industry's premiere "business-first" movie star; a guy who's famous for avoiding risky roles (even his biggest disaster, the surreally-awful "Seven Pounds," probably worked on paper.)
But if there's one name in Hollywood who can summon almost any star to lay down their guard for a risky, offbeat part just for the chance to work with them, that name is Quentin Tarantino. And now Variety says QT wants Smith for the lead in his next project, an ultraviolent "Western" (though set in the 19th Century American South) called "Django Unchained."
For those who've not been keeping track, the project ("top-secret" but with the usual widely-leaked handwritten QT script already in circulation) is a "spiritual successor" to the infamous Italian western "Django," with original star Franco Nero supposedly appearing in a wholly different capacity. The lead part of the "new" Django is (reportedly, I've not read the script myself and don't plan to) written for a black actor, and if your mind is putting that together with the 1800s Southern setting... yes, the "Unchained" part of the title (supposedly) means exactly what you think it does: Django is an escaped slave turned bounty-hunter, and the early buzz is already touting that it's a "slavery-revenge" sibling to the "holocaust revenge" setup of "Inglorious Basterds." Holy shit.
This would, without question, be the edgiest role Smith has ever taken - much of his early fame came from much-vaunted "crossover appeal" (a rapper who got play in "white" pop circles when that was still unusual, the star of one of the few post-Cosby black sitcoms that became mainstream hits), and "ex-slave exacting brutal vengeance on white bad guys" is as incendiary and far-removed from that as you can get. Nevermind the visceral backlash that could be provoked from audiences by the sight of a symbol of 21st Century black achievement (which Smith is, in-and-of himself) being the victim of slavery-era lashings both verbal and literal. I mean, good God... a Quentin Tarantino movie about slavery? Somebody check on Spike Lee, make sure he's breathing okay.
Thing is... I can totally see Smith pulling it off. He doesn't get enough credit for it, but he's a terrific "dialogue actor" (watch his interplay with Martin Lawrence in the terribly-scripted "Bad Boys" and observe how much he elevates that material) and would be well-matched with Tarantino's signature rapid-fire joke-serious-joke-dead-serious patter. Executed properly, this could change the trajectory of Smith's career and persona (for the better) overnight.
But do I think he'd do it? I'd be surprised, honestly. The thing of it is, Smith is notorious for demanding rewrites and script-supervision on any project he signs for (he's supposed to be a devotee of the screenwriting book "The Moral Premise," and is said to employ writers to bring scripts in line with it's precepts) and that's just not going to fly on a QT project. I believe he wants him, as Tarantino famously starts out looking at the biggest possible actors (at one point "Basterds" was framed as an "Expendables"-style aging-action-guy team-up movie, with Leonardo DiCaprio offered Hans Landa); and I'm sure the Weinsteins have made the offer - but I'll be BLOWN AWAY if it happens.
But if there's one name in Hollywood who can summon almost any star to lay down their guard for a risky, offbeat part just for the chance to work with them, that name is Quentin Tarantino. And now Variety says QT wants Smith for the lead in his next project, an ultraviolent "Western" (though set in the 19th Century American South) called "Django Unchained."
For those who've not been keeping track, the project ("top-secret" but with the usual widely-leaked handwritten QT script already in circulation) is a "spiritual successor" to the infamous Italian western "Django," with original star Franco Nero supposedly appearing in a wholly different capacity. The lead part of the "new" Django is (reportedly, I've not read the script myself and don't plan to) written for a black actor, and if your mind is putting that together with the 1800s Southern setting... yes, the "Unchained" part of the title (supposedly) means exactly what you think it does: Django is an escaped slave turned bounty-hunter, and the early buzz is already touting that it's a "slavery-revenge" sibling to the "holocaust revenge" setup of "Inglorious Basterds." Holy shit.
This would, without question, be the edgiest role Smith has ever taken - much of his early fame came from much-vaunted "crossover appeal" (a rapper who got play in "white" pop circles when that was still unusual, the star of one of the few post-Cosby black sitcoms that became mainstream hits), and "ex-slave exacting brutal vengeance on white bad guys" is as incendiary and far-removed from that as you can get. Nevermind the visceral backlash that could be provoked from audiences by the sight of a symbol of 21st Century black achievement (which Smith is, in-and-of himself) being the victim of slavery-era lashings both verbal and literal. I mean, good God... a Quentin Tarantino movie about slavery? Somebody check on Spike Lee, make sure he's breathing okay.
Thing is... I can totally see Smith pulling it off. He doesn't get enough credit for it, but he's a terrific "dialogue actor" (watch his interplay with Martin Lawrence in the terribly-scripted "Bad Boys" and observe how much he elevates that material) and would be well-matched with Tarantino's signature rapid-fire joke-serious-joke-dead-serious patter. Executed properly, this could change the trajectory of Smith's career and persona (for the better) overnight.
But do I think he'd do it? I'd be surprised, honestly. The thing of it is, Smith is notorious for demanding rewrites and script-supervision on any project he signs for (he's supposed to be a devotee of the screenwriting book "The Moral Premise," and is said to employ writers to bring scripts in line with it's precepts) and that's just not going to fly on a QT project. I believe he wants him, as Tarantino famously starts out looking at the biggest possible actors (at one point "Basterds" was framed as an "Expendables"-style aging-action-guy team-up movie, with Leonardo DiCaprio offered Hans Landa); and I'm sure the Weinsteins have made the offer - but I'll be BLOWN AWAY if it happens.
Do Leaked Pix Change EVERYTHING We Thought Knew About Nolan's "Batman?"
...Probably not, but I'd LOVE to be wrong.
A set of photos purportedly taken from an exterior "Dark Knight Rises" set in Jaipur, India - which I'm unable to directly link to at this time - show a deep pit with a huge green-screen tarp at its bottom. Typically, this technique is used for making a "real" hole appear filled with something (lava, slime, water or "something else") in post-production CGI. And if you know your Batman, animated series in particular, you know what conclusion people are jumping to.
Do I think that's what it is? No, I doubt it. But would it be awesome? Yes. Yes it would.
A set of photos purportedly taken from an exterior "Dark Knight Rises" set in Jaipur, India - which I'm unable to directly link to at this time - show a deep pit with a huge green-screen tarp at its bottom. Typically, this technique is used for making a "real" hole appear filled with something (lava, slime, water or "something else") in post-production CGI. And if you know your Batman, animated series in particular, you know what conclusion people are jumping to.
Do I think that's what it is? No, I doubt it. But would it be awesome? Yes. Yes it would.
Pulled Punch?
I've been curious about "The Ledge" for awhile now, mostly based on it's killer premise: A Christian Fundamentalist traps an avowed Atheist in a Jigsaw-esque mindgame - if the Atheist doesn't jump to his death from a skyscraper ledge within a certain amount of time, the Fundamentalist will kill someone else in his place; his idea being to "prove" the moral-inferiority of Atheism by showing that said Atheist will be less willing to lay down his life without the promise of an afterlife to reassure him.
Unfortunately, the trailer seems to display a dissapointing though unsurprising dodge on the "bite" of the premise...
So... apparently, what's "really" bugging the bad guy is that the Atheist in question had an affair with his wife.
Sigh. This will live or die by the acting, either way, but it's endlessly frustrating (and I'm NOT an Atheist) that movies about Religion-as-pathology always need to add "something else" to be the "real" reason for the psychosis. How much darker/scarier/edgier a premise would it be to just SAY what a lot of people already know - that "harmless" sincere-to-the-point-of-creepy spiritual faith is NOT all that far removed, psychologically, from a full-on dangerous break with reality and sometimes people's switches just "flip?" The notion that Ned Flanders is one misfired-synapse away from Norman Bates is creepier, to me, than "don't sleep with a crazy guy's wife."
Incidentally, looking at the reaction this around the web, this trailer ALSO provides a handy way to test the "worth-my-time-ness" of your aquaintances: If you show this to someone and their first reaction is along the lines of "Ugh! Always picking on the Christians! Why couldn't it have been a MUSLIM, everyone knows they do more of this stuff!", that person is probably not worth taking very seriously.
Unfortunately, the trailer seems to display a dissapointing though unsurprising dodge on the "bite" of the premise...
So... apparently, what's "really" bugging the bad guy is that the Atheist in question had an affair with his wife.
Sigh. This will live or die by the acting, either way, but it's endlessly frustrating (and I'm NOT an Atheist) that movies about Religion-as-pathology always need to add "something else" to be the "real" reason for the psychosis. How much darker/scarier/edgier a premise would it be to just SAY what a lot of people already know - that "harmless" sincere-to-the-point-of-creepy spiritual faith is NOT all that far removed, psychologically, from a full-on dangerous break with reality and sometimes people's switches just "flip?" The notion that Ned Flanders is one misfired-synapse away from Norman Bates is creepier, to me, than "don't sleep with a crazy guy's wife."
Incidentally, looking at the reaction this around the web, this trailer ALSO provides a handy way to test the "worth-my-time-ness" of your aquaintances: If you show this to someone and their first reaction is along the lines of "Ugh! Always picking on the Christians! Why couldn't it have been a MUSLIM, everyone knows they do more of this stuff!", that person is probably not worth taking very seriously.
Post-Movie Podcast: "Thor"
Steve Head and John Black graciously invited me to join their PMP show this week, to run over our immediate reaction to "Thor." And also Collegiate Quidditch, for some reason...
Finding funny words to rhyme with "Conan" is harder than you'd think
Here's the easiest prediction I or anyone else will make all summer: Come August, the most obnoxious strata of the nerdscape by far will be the folks swearing that the awful-looking Marcus Nispal directed "Conan" movie - which has a new, awful-looking trailer below - is in some way superior to John Milius/Arnold Schwarzenegger "Conan" on the grounds that it's "closer" to the original Robert E. Howard "Conan" stories.
I'm not myself 100% sure how one GET'S "closer" to REH's work unless it's a direct adaptation of one of his actual stories - which this new film isn't. The original "Conan" canon is many things (awesome, for example) but what it's NOT is imbued with a particularly dense continuity or consistency. For the most part they are united solely by the fact that the main character (whose profession and disposition change from tale to tale) is named Conan.
Oh, I'm sure that it'll be chock-full of REH references - it's a given that someone calling himself Thoth-Amon will turn up, and that Howard's myriad fictional civilizations and peoples will get name-checked as it goes, and maybe they'll toss in some of the more public-domain-ish Cthulhu jargon if they want to really work people up... but no, that's not enough to make this look like anything beyond the mid-level "Hercules: The Legendary Journeys" knockoff it continues to resemble.
Also: Jason Momoa looks like a guy who fronts "totally-brutal" local metal band in Wisconsin but on weekdays works the key-making station at Home Depot - dunno why, but that's the impression I get.
I'm not myself 100% sure how one GET'S "closer" to REH's work unless it's a direct adaptation of one of his actual stories - which this new film isn't. The original "Conan" canon is many things (awesome, for example) but what it's NOT is imbued with a particularly dense continuity or consistency. For the most part they are united solely by the fact that the main character (whose profession and disposition change from tale to tale) is named Conan.
Oh, I'm sure that it'll be chock-full of REH references - it's a given that someone calling himself Thoth-Amon will turn up, and that Howard's myriad fictional civilizations and peoples will get name-checked as it goes, and maybe they'll toss in some of the more public-domain-ish Cthulhu jargon if they want to really work people up... but no, that's not enough to make this look like anything beyond the mid-level "Hercules: The Legendary Journeys" knockoff it continues to resemble.
Also: Jason Momoa looks like a guy who fronts "totally-brutal" local metal band in Wisconsin but on weekdays works the key-making station at Home Depot - dunno why, but that's the impression I get.
New "Green Lantern" trailer... still isn't doing it for me
The good news: It looks big, and it looks original:
The bad news: Everything about the lead character still isn't working for me. Reynolds is a good actor, but this STILL looks like epic miscasting. He looks like he's hosting next year's MTV Movie Awards, and he's been edited into the clips "everyone remembers" from "Green Lantern" to make funny faces and do piss-takes on all the "weird stuff."
The bad news: Everything about the lead character still isn't working for me. Reynolds is a good actor, but this STILL looks like epic miscasting. He looks like he's hosting next year's MTV Movie Awards, and he's been edited into the clips "everyone remembers" from "Green Lantern" to make funny faces and do piss-takes on all the "weird stuff."
MovieBob's Disturbingly Not-As-Insane-Sounding Wii2 Theory: Revisited
Being right about something in the realm of technology-speculation happens to me so rarely I'm actually a little scared when it looks like it might... happen, I mean. So right now... I'm actually a little alarmed...
Awhile back, when we first got word that Nintendo's yet-unamed, supposedly E3-bound Wii successor was going to have an iPad-esque touchscreen incorporated into it's controller, I was struck by a crazy notion: What if the touchscreen IS the controller - as in, the WHOLE controller?
The "big idea," as I imagined it, was that instead of having one controller with a pre-set arrangement of buttons that each game needed to be mapped to, it'd just be a blank touchscreen upon which each individual game would generate it's own specific, tailor-made set of "virtual buttons." Think about it: A six-button arcade setup for Street Fighter, SNES-style setup for platformers or retrogames, etc.
One HUGE problem with that idea: "Virtual buttons" SUCK, and for a very specific reason: You can't feel them. There's no texture, no tacticle-resistance, no "feedback." At least, not on any of the virtual-buttons we've used so far...
Check out this story from The Escapist, which details some new Wii2 rumors including a Swedish site's report that the controller's touchscreen - whatever else it is - is utilizing a form of HAPTIC TECHNOLOGY, which basically means "artificial feedback." Haptic Touchscreens, something Apple and Toshiba have been experimenting with and/or demonstrating, use an electrically-charged "film" on the screen surface to make different areas of the display "feel" noticeably different to the user's fingertips. The practical application is obvious: You can make the "clickable" parts of a website, options-menu or even a virtual keypad feel distinguishable to the touch. Theoretically, that could ELIMINATE the one drawback to virtual-button game-controls.
Now, realistically, it'd probably still have physical analogue sticks and shoulder-buttons, but otherwise... yeah, until proven wrong (which is probably what'll happen) I'm stickin' with this insane theory: Wii2's controller, to some degree, will be built around virtual-buttons on a touchscreen, and that aspect - "one controller that becomes ALL CONTROLLERS!" - will be central to the marketing.
Awhile back, when we first got word that Nintendo's yet-unamed, supposedly E3-bound Wii successor was going to have an iPad-esque touchscreen incorporated into it's controller, I was struck by a crazy notion: What if the touchscreen IS the controller - as in, the WHOLE controller?
The "big idea," as I imagined it, was that instead of having one controller with a pre-set arrangement of buttons that each game needed to be mapped to, it'd just be a blank touchscreen upon which each individual game would generate it's own specific, tailor-made set of "virtual buttons." Think about it: A six-button arcade setup for Street Fighter, SNES-style setup for platformers or retrogames, etc.
One HUGE problem with that idea: "Virtual buttons" SUCK, and for a very specific reason: You can't feel them. There's no texture, no tacticle-resistance, no "feedback." At least, not on any of the virtual-buttons we've used so far...
Check out this story from The Escapist, which details some new Wii2 rumors including a Swedish site's report that the controller's touchscreen - whatever else it is - is utilizing a form of HAPTIC TECHNOLOGY, which basically means "artificial feedback." Haptic Touchscreens, something Apple and Toshiba have been experimenting with and/or demonstrating, use an electrically-charged "film" on the screen surface to make different areas of the display "feel" noticeably different to the user's fingertips. The practical application is obvious: You can make the "clickable" parts of a website, options-menu or even a virtual keypad feel distinguishable to the touch. Theoretically, that could ELIMINATE the one drawback to virtual-button game-controls.
Now, realistically, it'd probably still have physical analogue sticks and shoulder-buttons, but otherwise... yeah, until proven wrong (which is probably what'll happen) I'm stickin' with this insane theory: Wii2's controller, to some degree, will be built around virtual-buttons on a touchscreen, and that aspect - "one controller that becomes ALL CONTROLLERS!" - will be central to the marketing.
