Friday, August 23, 2013
Thursday, August 22, 2013
Headline kind of says it all. Nothing else to report, but there you go. Ben Affleck is the new Dark Knight for "Batman vs. Superman." This only just now happened, so not much else to say. A few thoughts do come to mind immediately, however...
Okay, Internet? Get it out of your system: Bennifer. Gigli. Jersey Girl. Reindeer Games. Armageddon. Ha ha ha. None of that matters. Literally. Affleck is basically a post-larvae actor/director at this point - nothing before "Gone Baby Gone" matters. Ben's the man.
Besides, he wasn't the problem in "Daredevil." If he played Batman/Bruce Wayne in the same basic manner as Daredevil/Matt Murdock he'd be the best one apart from Keaton, Conroy, Bader and Adam West (Fuck you, Adam West was good.)
This doesn't automatically mean the movie is that much closer to not sucking. Not using Christian Bale means this won't totally be the played-out Nolan Batman, yes. Not casting someone appreciably older than Henry Cavill means it can't be that close to "Dark Knight Returns;" but those pernicious influences are still there.
Fun Fact #1: Unless I'm forgetting someone, this makes Ben Affleck the only actor who has ever played Batman AND Superman (look it up.)
Fun Fact #2: This actually isn't a total surprise: Back when Warner Bros. was still committed to "Justice League" coming out opposite "Avengers 2," they offered Affleck the director's chair on that one with the caveat that he also play Batman. Supposedly he said no at the time. One thing changed... I wonder if the other thing has, too?
Poor Henry Cavill. Not only do they think you need Batman's help to make people want to see you as Superman again, they think you need Oscar-Winning-Megastar-Batman.
Honestly? I'm immediately fond of this decision - and not just because it means he might possibly maybe bring some (or all?) of the production of a DC movie or two here to Boston. This guy is a good actor, he can play tough, he has range... but he's also funny and "regular." I'm sure the paycheck on this is big enough that he'd do the part in helium-voice if they asked, but if they let him play Batman as something other than the one-note growling asshole we've been putting up with for the last decade he could really be something special. Enough time has passed since George Clooney - we can have a stable, semi-happy Batman again.
Seriously, though - Ben? Mr. Affleck? Please bring some or all of this production to Boston. The last Gotham City was in fucking Philly for crissakes.
Let's get THIS dull idiocy out of the way: No, Matt Damon would be a shitty Robin. Casey Affleck for Robin, though? That I like. Jennifer Garner would be a not-awful Wonder Woman, but that's not gonna happen. No, Kevin Smith doesn't need to be anywhere near this - he's probably gonna launch another fucking circlejerk podcast just to "cover" this, let it be.
Now, Matt Damon for Lex Luthor, on the other hand? I'm listening.
PERSPECTIVE: Honestly, whether or not "Batman vs. Superman" is good is ultimately a negligible thing at this point. They're not gonna stop making superhero movies anytime soon, if this one doesn't work they'll get right eventually. This is good news strictly on the basis that the guy behind "Gone Baby Gone," "The Town" and "Argo" is going to have enough Fuck You Money to make whatever the HELL he wants for the forseeable future. That's why we call these things "tentpoles," kids.
Y'know what's funny? The logic used to be that DC heroes (or, more specifically, anyone from "Superfriends") were well-known/iconic enough to sell themselves, while Marvel's roster would probably need A-list megastars to make mainstream audiences give a shit.
Okay, Internet? Get it out of your system: Bennifer. Gigli. Jersey Girl. Reindeer Games. Armageddon. Ha ha ha. None of that matters. Literally. Affleck is basically a post-larvae actor/director at this point - nothing before "Gone Baby Gone" matters. Ben's the man.
Besides, he wasn't the problem in "Daredevil." If he played Batman/Bruce Wayne in the same basic manner as Daredevil/Matt Murdock he'd be the best one apart from Keaton, Conroy, Bader and Adam West (Fuck you, Adam West was good.)
This doesn't automatically mean the movie is that much closer to not sucking. Not using Christian Bale means this won't totally be the played-out Nolan Batman, yes. Not casting someone appreciably older than Henry Cavill means it can't be that close to "Dark Knight Returns;" but those pernicious influences are still there.
Fun Fact #1: Unless I'm forgetting someone, this makes Ben Affleck the only actor who has ever played Batman AND Superman (look it up.)
Fun Fact #2: This actually isn't a total surprise: Back when Warner Bros. was still committed to "Justice League" coming out opposite "Avengers 2," they offered Affleck the director's chair on that one with the caveat that he also play Batman. Supposedly he said no at the time. One thing changed... I wonder if the other thing has, too?
Poor Henry Cavill. Not only do they think you need Batman's help to make people want to see you as Superman again, they think you need Oscar-Winning-Megastar-Batman.
Honestly? I'm immediately fond of this decision - and not just because it means he might possibly maybe bring some (or all?) of the production of a DC movie or two here to Boston. This guy is a good actor, he can play tough, he has range... but he's also funny and "regular." I'm sure the paycheck on this is big enough that he'd do the part in helium-voice if they asked, but if they let him play Batman as something other than the one-note growling asshole we've been putting up with for the last decade he could really be something special. Enough time has passed since George Clooney - we can have a stable, semi-happy Batman again.
Seriously, though - Ben? Mr. Affleck? Please bring some or all of this production to Boston. The last Gotham City was in fucking Philly for crissakes.
Let's get THIS dull idiocy out of the way: No, Matt Damon would be a shitty Robin. Casey Affleck for Robin, though? That I like. Jennifer Garner would be a not-awful Wonder Woman, but that's not gonna happen. No, Kevin Smith doesn't need to be anywhere near this - he's probably gonna launch another fucking circlejerk podcast just to "cover" this, let it be.
Now, Matt Damon for Lex Luthor, on the other hand? I'm listening.
PERSPECTIVE: Honestly, whether or not "Batman vs. Superman" is good is ultimately a negligible thing at this point. They're not gonna stop making superhero movies anytime soon, if this one doesn't work they'll get right eventually. This is good news strictly on the basis that the guy behind "Gone Baby Gone," "The Town" and "Argo" is going to have enough Fuck You Money to make whatever the HELL he wants for the forseeable future. That's why we call these things "tentpoles," kids.
Y'know what's funny? The logic used to be that DC heroes (or, more specifically, anyone from "Superfriends") were well-known/iconic enough to sell themselves, while Marvel's roster would probably need A-list megastars to make mainstream audiences give a shit.
Tuesday, August 20, 2013
Monday, August 19, 2013
Saturday, August 17, 2013
Remember "Will It Blend?" A viral-marketing campaign for high-end blenders that was kinda funny on YouTube a few years ago? No? Well, it was funny. Did you ever wonder what Kels Goodman, the independent filmmaker who put the campaign together, was up to now? No, again? Well, too bad - I'm gonna show you anyway.
As it turns out, Utah's own (because of course) Kels Goodman thinks of himself as a right-wing agent provocateur. His statement to the world? "The Last Eagle Scout," a paranoid "Dramedy" action-fantasy seemingly comprised (if it's trailer is any indication) entirely of Michelle Bachman talking-points (and which it's website repeatedly calls a "dramedy." The premise? The Liberals (embodied by, I shit you not, Congressman Jude Marx) have established a "political correctness" dictatorship in America - depriving the citizenry of Baby Jesus Sanctified RIGHTS!!! to shitty snack foods, enforcing a secularized version of the Pledge of Allegiance, a "citizen's task force" (PRIVATE OBAMA THUG ARMY OH NOES!!!) etc. But when they cross the line by using a terrible accident ("false flag operation," calling it right now) as pretext to defund and dismantle The Boy Scouts, one lone heroic smug blonde douchebag with a slingshot opts to go all "Red Dawn" on their asses.
Trailer and other sundries below the jump, kiddies - I swear, as near as anyone can tell, this is not an elaborate joke, it's the real thing:
...Yeah. It's not quite the divine vintage of 9/11-broke-my-brain idiocy as, say, "Liberality For All," but it's not for lack of trying. Amid all the more obvious stupidity ("LOL because gun-free-zones in schools is EXACTLY the same thing as banning nail-clippers!") I think my favorite thing is the uber-earnest Aryan goodber playing the hero "Cliff" trying so hard to pull off the Dirty Harry/Snake Plissken/John McClane grim, disaffected hero thing. That's it, kiddo - cock that head at an angle, glare n' stammer, act like there's a weird sound only you can hear going off behind you during dialogue scenes. Reach for the stars.
Oh, and in case you thought maybe this was just some harmless goofery by jerks with cameras, check out this rancid scene from the movie itself; which introduces "Boys Of The Nation," the Evil Liberal Government's replacement for The Boy Scouts that drops outdoor activities and moral instruction for "tolerance," male/male hugging, fashion, shopping, baking and a badge called "The Flaming Torch." GET IT!!??
What, you thought you were gettin' out of this without a nice big helping of feminization/gay-bashing? You should know better than that by now.
This... thing apparently hit DVD last week or so. Has anyone had the (dis)pleasure?
As it turns out, Utah's own (because of course) Kels Goodman thinks of himself as a right-wing agent provocateur. His statement to the world? "The Last Eagle Scout," a paranoid "Dramedy" action-fantasy seemingly comprised (if it's trailer is any indication) entirely of Michelle Bachman talking-points (and which it's website repeatedly calls a "dramedy." The premise? The Liberals (embodied by, I shit you not, Congressman Jude Marx) have established a "political correctness" dictatorship in America - depriving the citizenry of Baby Jesus Sanctified RIGHTS!!! to shitty snack foods, enforcing a secularized version of the Pledge of Allegiance, a "citizen's task force" (PRIVATE OBAMA THUG ARMY OH NOES!!!) etc. But when they cross the line by using a terrible accident ("false flag operation," calling it right now) as pretext to defund and dismantle The Boy Scouts, one lone heroic smug blonde douchebag with a slingshot opts to go all "Red Dawn" on their asses.
Trailer and other sundries below the jump, kiddies - I swear, as near as anyone can tell, this is not an elaborate joke, it's the real thing:
...Yeah. It's not quite the divine vintage of 9/11-broke-my-brain idiocy as, say, "Liberality For All," but it's not for lack of trying. Amid all the more obvious stupidity ("LOL because gun-free-zones in schools is EXACTLY the same thing as banning nail-clippers!") I think my favorite thing is the uber-earnest Aryan goodber playing the hero "Cliff" trying so hard to pull off the Dirty Harry/Snake Plissken/John McClane grim, disaffected hero thing. That's it, kiddo - cock that head at an angle, glare n' stammer, act like there's a weird sound only you can hear going off behind you during dialogue scenes. Reach for the stars.
Oh, and in case you thought maybe this was just some harmless goofery by jerks with cameras, check out this rancid scene from the movie itself; which introduces "Boys Of The Nation," the Evil Liberal Government's replacement for The Boy Scouts that drops outdoor activities and moral instruction for "tolerance," male/male hugging, fashion, shopping, baking and a badge called "The Flaming Torch." GET IT!!??
What, you thought you were gettin' out of this without a nice big helping of feminization/gay-bashing? You should know better than that by now.
This... thing apparently hit DVD last week or so. Has anyone had the (dis)pleasure?
Hear me out on this one, folks.
By tonight, the movie news of the weekend will be that "Lee Daniel's The Butler" (a not particularly good but well-intended film) will be the boxoffice champ of the weekend - probably by more so than will even be initially reported because the film press tends to ignore Sunday, a day on which "black films" almost always over-perform. Fairly or not, much like for Daniels' "Precious" a lot of the credit for that is going to be laid on the presence of media omni-figure Oprah Winfrey. For whatever reason, the fact of this made something "click" in my head:
Warner Bros. should cut whatever check would need to be cut to get Oprah to turn up in "Batman vs. Superman" as Amanda Waller.
Technically, Waller started out as a government-affiliated bad guy in mid-80s comics, but the character has evolved over time (before being ruined, along with everything else, by The New 52), thanks in part to memorable turns by CCH Pounder in the DC Animated Universe shows, into a kind of morally-ambiguous counterpart to Nick Fury (movie version); a human official unafraid to try and "manage" the presence of superhuman beings on Earth by whatever means necessary. Angela Bassett played a version of the character in "Green Lantern," but nobody cares about anything that happened in or around "Green Lantern."
Here's the thing: WB wants very badly to imitate the profitable shared-universe that Disney/Marvel have going on, but they clearly have no plan or idea how to get there - the latest gossip is that they're willing to give Christian Bale one of the biggest paydays in history to do ONE more appearance for "Batman vs. Superman," which would means they're right back to re-casting Batman for "Justice League." A character like this - who can easily turn up in multiple related films for a memorable cameo - is a good way to at least start getting there; and it'd fit with the residual Nolanized downer vibe that WB is still insisting on for "their version" to be an alternately friendly or villainous buzzkill.
The main thing that's always made Waller unique is, frankly, that she's a middle-aged, plus-sized black woman; a character type that practically doesn't exist in mainstream comics, to say nothing of holding a position of substantial power. If that's the character your casting, why wouldn't you make an offer to the actual most powerful/influential middle-aged plus-sized black woman on the planet who also happens to be a not-terrible actress? And who is really, really well-suited to the part?
Yes, you'd get a tidal-wave of reflexive fanboy hate right off the bat. College Humor etc. would have spoof material for weeks ("You get a Batmobile! You get a Batmobile!"), the whole shebang. But it would dissipate if/when they see her being good in the first SDCC sizzle-reel - besides, they're still gonna go see it. The benefit you get - namely the immediate attention of several huge audience segments that normally couldn't give less of a shit about these movies: She shows up in the trailer, even for a moment? Suddenly your on a ton of radars you weren't before. There's a whole nation of moms out there with superhero-junkie kids who would flip for the idea of Oprah turning up to essentially tell Batman to finish his vegetables and clean his goddamn room, for starters.
Also... let's face it, she's one of the best self-promoters on the planet and there's no way you don't benefit from that: DCU movies would likely have prime booking and promotion on her TV network and affiliated shows, an even bigger segment of the press is paying attention, and the only possible downside would be if she somehow proved unable to convincingly portray a character that could be summarized as "You, but a hardass and wearing a suit."
Would it be a risk? A little bit, yeah. But a better investment (with much better potential payoff) than dropping $50 Million for another 150 minutes of "BWHEREIZZET?? BWHERSTHATREGGAR!!!???"
By tonight, the movie news of the weekend will be that "Lee Daniel's The Butler" (a not particularly good but well-intended film) will be the boxoffice champ of the weekend - probably by more so than will even be initially reported because the film press tends to ignore Sunday, a day on which "black films" almost always over-perform. Fairly or not, much like for Daniels' "Precious" a lot of the credit for that is going to be laid on the presence of media omni-figure Oprah Winfrey. For whatever reason, the fact of this made something "click" in my head:
Warner Bros. should cut whatever check would need to be cut to get Oprah to turn up in "Batman vs. Superman" as Amanda Waller.
Technically, Waller started out as a government-affiliated bad guy in mid-80s comics, but the character has evolved over time (before being ruined, along with everything else, by The New 52), thanks in part to memorable turns by CCH Pounder in the DC Animated Universe shows, into a kind of morally-ambiguous counterpart to Nick Fury (movie version); a human official unafraid to try and "manage" the presence of superhuman beings on Earth by whatever means necessary. Angela Bassett played a version of the character in "Green Lantern," but nobody cares about anything that happened in or around "Green Lantern."
Here's the thing: WB wants very badly to imitate the profitable shared-universe that Disney/Marvel have going on, but they clearly have no plan or idea how to get there - the latest gossip is that they're willing to give Christian Bale one of the biggest paydays in history to do ONE more appearance for "Batman vs. Superman," which would means they're right back to re-casting Batman for "Justice League." A character like this - who can easily turn up in multiple related films for a memorable cameo - is a good way to at least start getting there; and it'd fit with the residual Nolanized downer vibe that WB is still insisting on for "their version" to be an alternately friendly or villainous buzzkill.
The main thing that's always made Waller unique is, frankly, that she's a middle-aged, plus-sized black woman; a character type that practically doesn't exist in mainstream comics, to say nothing of holding a position of substantial power. If that's the character your casting, why wouldn't you make an offer to the actual most powerful/influential middle-aged plus-sized black woman on the planet who also happens to be a not-terrible actress? And who is really, really well-suited to the part?
Yes, you'd get a tidal-wave of reflexive fanboy hate right off the bat. College Humor etc. would have spoof material for weeks ("You get a Batmobile! You get a Batmobile!"), the whole shebang. But it would dissipate if/when they see her being good in the first SDCC sizzle-reel - besides, they're still gonna go see it. The benefit you get - namely the immediate attention of several huge audience segments that normally couldn't give less of a shit about these movies: She shows up in the trailer, even for a moment? Suddenly your on a ton of radars you weren't before. There's a whole nation of moms out there with superhero-junkie kids who would flip for the idea of Oprah turning up to essentially tell Batman to finish his vegetables and clean his goddamn room, for starters.
Also... let's face it, she's one of the best self-promoters on the planet and there's no way you don't benefit from that: DCU movies would likely have prime booking and promotion on her TV network and affiliated shows, an even bigger segment of the press is paying attention, and the only possible downside would be if she somehow proved unable to convincingly portray a character that could be summarized as "You, but a hardass and wearing a suit."
Would it be a risk? A little bit, yeah. But a better investment (with much better potential payoff) than dropping $50 Million for another 150 minutes of "BWHEREIZZET?? BWHERSTHATREGGAR!!!???"
Friday, August 16, 2013
Thursday, August 15, 2013
From Simon Pegg's official Twitter, presented without commentary:
Fun at Marvel #3 pic.twitter.com/2hcVhG7695
— Simon Pegg (@simonpegg) August 15, 2013
Tuesday, August 13, 2013
John Turturro has written, directed and starred in a movie wherein Woody Allen is his best friend who shows up at his workplace to announce that he's arranged for him to earn a quick $2,000 for having a threesome with Sharon Stone and Sofia Vergara. Huh.
Following that logic, I can only assume that the sequel will involve Werner Herzog tossing him the keys to a space-shuttle with it's own private onboard Whattaburger, after which he draw Excalibur from the stone to defeat King Ghidorah, for which he will be awarded the WWE Championshp.
Saturday, August 10, 2013
Anyone who cares probably already knew this, but today (August 10th, 2013) is K-DAY - the date, in "Pacific Rim's" timeline, when the first Kaiju (Trespasser) appears in San Francisco. I can think of at least one way to mark the occasion (technically, the "event" runs through 8/15 since it takes five days to kill the thing) - though it's kind of sad that there aren't more screens left to go see it on...
Friday, August 9, 2013
Get out there and support this one, guys. It's a winner.
Intermission: "Let's Watch The New Thor Trailer."
ALSO: Since the cat is now out the bag, yes - I'll be doing an appearance to sell and sign copies of "Brick By Brick" at the American Classic Arcade Museum at Funspot in Weirs Beach, New Hampshire on Saturday, Sept 14 from noon to 3pm. ACAM is located on the third floor of Funspot, 579 Endicott St North (Rt 3) in Laconia, NH 03246. Hope to see some of you there.
Intermission: "Let's Watch The New Thor Trailer."
ALSO: Since the cat is now out the bag, yes - I'll be doing an appearance to sell and sign copies of "Brick By Brick" at the American Classic Arcade Museum at Funspot in Weirs Beach, New Hampshire on Saturday, Sept 14 from noon to 3pm. ACAM is located on the third floor of Funspot, 579 Endicott St North (Rt 3) in Laconia, NH 03246. Hope to see some of you there.
Thursday, August 8, 2013
I run hot or cold on Paul Greengrass, particularly when he's in psuedo-blockbuster mode, but I'm really glad he's the guy who wound up making "Captain Phillips." True story or not, the setup of America's Most Beloved Human Tom Hanks at the mercy of ruthless Somali pirates could've made for some profoundly uncomfortable (in a bad way) "optics" in the hands of a more sensationally-inclined filmmaker; but Greengrass' judgement-free, fly-on-the-wall psuedo-verite style makes that pretty unlikely. Either way, the film's new domestic trailer looks intense.
Been waiting on "Monuments Men" for awhile, and it looks good. George Clooney directs and stars alongside Matt Damon, Bill Murray, John Goodman, Cate Blanchett and Bob Balaban in the true story of a U.S. special division that enlisted architects, professors and art-history experts for the purpose of minimizing damage to Europe's artistic and cultural treasures from the fighting and, eventually, tracking and reclaiming priceless art stolen by the Nazis themselves.
This looks really, really good. I'd been a little worried that they were going to impose some kind of unnecessarily more "humanistic" story-arc on this, i.e. the unit rolls up on some blighted village that gets all sad when they find out the soldiers are to save "some paintings" instead of the people and a choice has to be made and everyone learns about what really matters and blah blah blah.
But that doesn't seem to be the case - this trailer, at least, is selling a straightforward guys-on-a-mission movie where the "gimmick" is that much of the unit is comprised of decidedly un-soldier-like academics who have to learn the ropes on the fly to go do their job. To me, that's a compelling enough story on it's own - plus, I like the idea of an A-list, big-star "prestige picture" being built around the message that art, culture and knowledge are worth fighting for.
This looks really, really good. I'd been a little worried that they were going to impose some kind of unnecessarily more "humanistic" story-arc on this, i.e. the unit rolls up on some blighted village that gets all sad when they find out the soldiers are to save "some paintings" instead of the people and a choice has to be made and everyone learns about what really matters and blah blah blah.
But that doesn't seem to be the case - this trailer, at least, is selling a straightforward guys-on-a-mission movie where the "gimmick" is that much of the unit is comprised of decidedly un-soldier-like academics who have to learn the ropes on the fly to go do their job. To me, that's a compelling enough story on it's own - plus, I like the idea of an A-list, big-star "prestige picture" being built around the message that art, culture and knowledge are worth fighting for.
Wednesday, August 7, 2013
Let's get this out of the way: The trailer for "CBGB" - about NYC's legendary punk rock club - looks like just about the "least punk" thing you can picture, even moreso than the decidedly un-punk initial notion of doing a glossy Hollywood "triumph over adversity" version of this particular story. But it doesn't look precisely "bad." The downside of the punk movement's own gleeful embrace of mainstream music journalism's refusal to pay it's artists any mind was that the era didn't really get the shot to inject it's own mythology into the popular culture the way 60s rockers, disco composers or even the 80s metal scene guys have; so maybe stuff like this is at least something.
We're probably heading into a looooooong stretch of every other fantasy movie trying to look as much like "Game of Thrones" as possible. "THOR: THE DARK WORLD," at least, has the excuse of being directed by actual GoT-veteran Alan Taylor.
Either way; DAMN, but this looks good. I still enjoyed Kenneth Brannagh's cheeky "Golan-Globus with money" take in the first one, but this one looks appropriately bigger and grander as befits the first Marvel movie that's really going to feel constant pressure to "live-up" to "The Avengers" thanks to it featuring the return of Loki.
The God of Mischief is, of course, all over the new trailer - dig that moment with him and Jane Foster. I like that we're still running firmly on comics-logic, wherein a villain can nearly destroy an entire city, likely killing thousands, and because it's good-guy/bad-guy team-up time the "blowback" can be limited to dirty looks and maybe a slap from the supporting cast. Yeah, sure, this guy is technically the greatest force of evil in this history of this universe's Earth... but we'll deal with that later - there's a quest to be had! Still preferable to not acknowledging it at all, though...
Pre-release has been marred by talk of an intensely troubled production; reports of Natalie Portman being furious at her preferred director being removed from the film (I will be very surprised if Jane Foster is alive at the end of this) and rumors of Taylor clashing with the producers to the extent that large portions of the film have actually been (discreetly) handled by other directors. All that could be true, apart from Whedon's relative free-reign on "Avengers" the Marvel movies are the most openly and overwhelmingly producer-driven blockbusters in awhile, but the if the movie turns out good that's really beside the point.
UPDATE: 2:20. That's a KRONAN. Awesome.
Either way; DAMN, but this looks good. I still enjoyed Kenneth Brannagh's cheeky "Golan-Globus with money" take in the first one, but this one looks appropriately bigger and grander as befits the first Marvel movie that's really going to feel constant pressure to "live-up" to "The Avengers" thanks to it featuring the return of Loki.
The God of Mischief is, of course, all over the new trailer - dig that moment with him and Jane Foster. I like that we're still running firmly on comics-logic, wherein a villain can nearly destroy an entire city, likely killing thousands, and because it's good-guy/bad-guy team-up time the "blowback" can be limited to dirty looks and maybe a slap from the supporting cast. Yeah, sure, this guy is technically the greatest force of evil in this history of this universe's Earth... but we'll deal with that later - there's a quest to be had! Still preferable to not acknowledging it at all, though...
Pre-release has been marred by talk of an intensely troubled production; reports of Natalie Portman being furious at her preferred director being removed from the film (I will be very surprised if Jane Foster is alive at the end of this) and rumors of Taylor clashing with the producers to the extent that large portions of the film have actually been (discreetly) handled by other directors. All that could be true, apart from Whedon's relative free-reign on "Avengers" the Marvel movies are the most openly and overwhelmingly producer-driven blockbusters in awhile, but the if the movie turns out good that's really beside the point.
UPDATE: 2:20. That's a KRONAN. Awesome.
Oh c'mon, you didn't forget Lisa, did you?
Remember all those jokes about guys getting "crushes" on technology from the seemingly-distant past when vocal-interfaces having gentle, nonthreatening, compliant female-sounding voices was a brand new thing? A chuckle-worthy gag so immediately dated that it got a showing in the "Sex & The City" movie? (Hell, remember THAT being a thing?)
Well, now it's the premise of "HER;" a movie which stars Joaquin Phoenix as, essentially, a lonely guy who wants to fuck Siri. BUT! It's a Spike Jonze movie, with Scarlett Johansson as the voice of Babe In The Machine, so it's probably going to be good and definitely going to be worth seeing.
Remember all those jokes about guys getting "crushes" on technology from the seemingly-distant past when vocal-interfaces having gentle, nonthreatening, compliant female-sounding voices was a brand new thing? A chuckle-worthy gag so immediately dated that it got a showing in the "Sex & The City" movie? (Hell, remember THAT being a thing?)
Well, now it's the premise of "HER;" a movie which stars Joaquin Phoenix as, essentially, a lonely guy who wants to fuck Siri. BUT! It's a Spike Jonze movie, with Scarlett Johansson as the voice of Babe In The Machine, so it's probably going to be good and definitely going to be worth seeing.
Tuesday, August 6, 2013
Have you ever suspected that everything you've been told by the LAMEstream media was a lie? That forces far, far beyond your conception were pulling the strings of the world to nefarious ends? Have you ever suspected that Morgan actually is Nelson Mandela? That conservative talker Laura Ingraham, Tea Party Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann and Caroline Kennedy are all the same person? That the notorious Haditha Massacre was actually a "false flag" operation conducted in part by Vin Diesel and "Jackass" star Steve-O? Well, an insane man somewhere in Texas wants to tell you that you're right...
Part of the beautiful madness of The Internet is that the things otherwise-harmless folks none the less afflicted with with severe mental illnesses might have in previous years kept locked in their own heads or scrawled on the basement walls now get made into searchable websites. Digging around for gems in that vein is a perverse hobby of mine, and today I found the rare one worth sharing... and yes, I looked into it - apparently this is NOT a joke.
Wellaware1.com is the website of an apparently-prolific conspiracy theorist alternately known as Ed Chiarini or "DallasGoldBug;" who appears to be A.) a conspiracist of the "New World Order" stripe (I'm not seeing any David Icke/"Reptiloid" stuff here) and B.) afflicted with some sort of disorder (OCD?) that leads him to fixate on human facial anatomy. His topic of choice: "They" (whoever "they" are) control the world so extensively that most powerful politicians and/or public figures, plus the known-players in various tragedies like 9-11 or Newtown (which he believes to be staged-events used to manipulate public opinions) are actually actors; a common enough spew from the "WAKE UP MAN!!!" set... but this fellow adds an extra wrinkle: They aren't just actors, they're really - really - famous actors! I assume his justification is a "hiding in plain sight" kind of thing. (He traces a surprising amount of this back to the British Royal Family, which makes it even more surprising he does go "full Reptoid.")
The site itself (which is the quintessential paranoid-delusional mix of exhaustively-compiled yet utterly disorganized) is quite the rabbit hole, though most of it is just links to JPG posters of him "proving" that various politicians look sort-of like various other famous people. I've stuck one off to the side here, but some noteworthy highlights include:
Former New York Gov. David Patterson and Moammar Ghaddafi? SAME PERSON!
Jay Rockerfeller is actually CHEVY CHASE!
Jovan Belcher? WILL SMITH.
ONE mysterious woman is Michelle Bachmann, Laura Ingraham AND Caroline Kennedy.
Robert Blake was also POPE BENEDICT.
No direct link for this one, but he makes an especially tasteless leap alleging that Holly Robinson Bush - George W. Bush's sister who died in infancy from leukemia - is in fact alive and walking among us as... HILLARY CLINTON.
Also un-linkable: Ron Paul is SIR IAN MCKELLAN.
Not only was Gabby Giffords NOT actually shot in the head, she's really just TINA FEY... who is in turn really just Jennifer Greenberg Sexton - a member of a wealthy family he is deeply obsessed with.
Jim Jones is hiding in plain sight as the grandfather from "PAWN STARS."
Sen. Joseph Lieberman is the dad from "ALF."
And, of course, Steve-O and Vin Diesel participated in faking The Haditha Massacre.
All kidding aside, this is all actually kind of sad - this guy is clearly unwell (though my sympathies are blunted considerably by the fact that he's actively slandering dozens upon dozens of people here - many of whom are deceased and cannot defend themselves) and is in serious need of psychiatric help. But the site, as an artifact, is kind of an amazing relic - especially if you read a lot of more "mainstream" political-conpiracy stuff and can thus see how amusingly close some of this comes to the standard-issue Bilderberg/Rothchild/Rockerfeller drivel clogging up certain Tea Party (and Anon/Occupy) fringe blogs before he gets to his "big revelation."
Part of the beautiful madness of The Internet is that the things otherwise-harmless folks none the less afflicted with with severe mental illnesses might have in previous years kept locked in their own heads or scrawled on the basement walls now get made into searchable websites. Digging around for gems in that vein is a perverse hobby of mine, and today I found the rare one worth sharing... and yes, I looked into it - apparently this is NOT a joke.
Wellaware1.com is the website of an apparently-prolific conspiracy theorist alternately known as Ed Chiarini or "DallasGoldBug;" who appears to be A.) a conspiracist of the "New World Order" stripe (I'm not seeing any David Icke/"Reptiloid" stuff here) and B.) afflicted with some sort of disorder (OCD?) that leads him to fixate on human facial anatomy. His topic of choice: "They" (whoever "they" are) control the world so extensively that most powerful politicians and/or public figures, plus the known-players in various tragedies like 9-11 or Newtown (which he believes to be staged-events used to manipulate public opinions) are actually actors; a common enough spew from the "WAKE UP MAN!!!" set... but this fellow adds an extra wrinkle: They aren't just actors, they're really - really - famous actors! I assume his justification is a "hiding in plain sight" kind of thing. (He traces a surprising amount of this back to the British Royal Family, which makes it even more surprising he does go "full Reptoid.")
The site itself (which is the quintessential paranoid-delusional mix of exhaustively-compiled yet utterly disorganized) is quite the rabbit hole, though most of it is just links to JPG posters of him "proving" that various politicians look sort-of like various other famous people. I've stuck one off to the side here, but some noteworthy highlights include:Former New York Gov. David Patterson and Moammar Ghaddafi? SAME PERSON!
Jay Rockerfeller is actually CHEVY CHASE!
Jovan Belcher? WILL SMITH.
ONE mysterious woman is Michelle Bachmann, Laura Ingraham AND Caroline Kennedy.
Robert Blake was also POPE BENEDICT.
No direct link for this one, but he makes an especially tasteless leap alleging that Holly Robinson Bush - George W. Bush's sister who died in infancy from leukemia - is in fact alive and walking among us as... HILLARY CLINTON.
Also un-linkable: Ron Paul is SIR IAN MCKELLAN.
Not only was Gabby Giffords NOT actually shot in the head, she's really just TINA FEY... who is in turn really just Jennifer Greenberg Sexton - a member of a wealthy family he is deeply obsessed with.
Jim Jones is hiding in plain sight as the grandfather from "PAWN STARS."
Sen. Joseph Lieberman is the dad from "ALF."
And, of course, Steve-O and Vin Diesel participated in faking The Haditha Massacre.
All kidding aside, this is all actually kind of sad - this guy is clearly unwell (though my sympathies are blunted considerably by the fact that he's actively slandering dozens upon dozens of people here - many of whom are deceased and cannot defend themselves) and is in serious need of psychiatric help. But the site, as an artifact, is kind of an amazing relic - especially if you read a lot of more "mainstream" political-conpiracy stuff and can thus see how amusingly close some of this comes to the standard-issue Bilderberg/Rothchild/Rockerfeller drivel clogging up certain Tea Party (and Anon/Occupy) fringe blogs before he gets to his "big revelation."
Friday, August 2, 2013
Thursday, August 1, 2013
Wednesday, July 31, 2013
Is James Thurber's short story "The Secret Life of Walter Mitty" Still in the rotation of things everybody is forced to read in English Lit? Well, in the event that it's not, the premise is that Walter Mitty is a mildly-henpecked average schlub who escapes from the crushing boredom of a shopping tripwith his wife by slipping into self-aggrandizing heroic daydreams touched-off by mundane events of his day (putting on his gloves conjures a fantasy of himself as the world's greatest surgeon, for example.) So... yeah, the framing device used by like 70% of TV sitcom "anthology episodes?" This is where that comes from.
Anyway, it's now being (loosely) adapted into a movie directed by and starring Ben Stiller. Yeah, I was immediately kind of queasy too, but take a look at this thing...
See? NOT exactly the "Along Came The Fockers To Watch The Envy Museum" shitstorm Stiller's name too often conjures of late, right? Right.
What worries me is that there's almost no dialogue, and when we DO get a closeup, line or anything that doesn't look like it was chosen for how well it cuts together as a "quietly soaring" indie-rock video looks just a little bit closer to the schtick that's more expected of this pedigree. But, for now, I'll choose to be optimistic about this. Stiller remains talented enough to still put out a "Tropic Thunder" or "Greenberg," so maybe this'll be one of those...
Anyway, it's now being (loosely) adapted into a movie directed by and starring Ben Stiller. Yeah, I was immediately kind of queasy too, but take a look at this thing...
See? NOT exactly the "Along Came The Fockers To Watch The Envy Museum" shitstorm Stiller's name too often conjures of late, right? Right.
What worries me is that there's almost no dialogue, and when we DO get a closeup, line or anything that doesn't look like it was chosen for how well it cuts together as a "quietly soaring" indie-rock video looks just a little bit closer to the schtick that's more expected of this pedigree. But, for now, I'll choose to be optimistic about this. Stiller remains talented enough to still put out a "Tropic Thunder" or "Greenberg," so maybe this'll be one of those...
Tuesday, July 30, 2013
A big-ish rumor (which I joked around about last week) coming out of the "Batman vs. Superman" SDCC announcement was that the "bridge" movie between Sad Building-Puncher Meets Broody Sulkington would be "The Flash;" which was curious and kind of terrifying since The Flash and his "world" are made almost-entirely out of the very things that the DC Movie team of Nolan, Goyer and (now, to my endless disappointment) Zack Snyder have committed to siphoning out before these things get to screen.
Well, it looks it's going to take the long road in getting there: Warner Bros has announced that they're putting the somehow still-kicking "Amazon" (aka "Wonder Woman in High School") project on the back-burner in order to focus on a TV version of "Flash," who'll make his debut in a forthcoming episode of "Arrow"* before spinning-off into his own series...
The Flash actually makes a lot of sense for a TV series, in that he has a really easily-understood power-set, an origin story you can knock out in a minute and change (he's a scientist futzing with some chemicals, he gets hit by lightning, now he can do things really really fast) and his day-job is a police-forensics scientist (before you ask, they already said they're going with Barry Allen.) This might be why there already was a short-lived TV show back in the 90s, which was actually a lot of fun and feature Mark Hammill's first DCU turn as The Trickster:
Part of me actually hopes this really is the route Warners goes to get to "Justice League" - building half the roster in shitty CW series, so that the movie is grumpy middle-aged Henry Cavill and Christian Bale being followed around by a posse of interchangeable Twilight-bait boytoys in bad costumes ("Flash" will probably get just a reddish-brown tracksuit, right? To go with "Arrow's" hoodie?)
Both this series and the still-apparently-happening movie (it's not specified if they'll be connected in any way - it wouldn't surprise me if they weren't because WB just. Does. Not. Care.) are happening under the supervision of Greg Berlanti, whose previous crimes include "Dawson's Creek," "Everwood," "Green Lantern" and (naturally) "Arrow."
*Please don't bother trying to convince me that "Arrow" isn't shit. Because "Arrow" is shit.
Well, it looks it's going to take the long road in getting there: Warner Bros has announced that they're putting the somehow still-kicking "Amazon" (aka "Wonder Woman in High School") project on the back-burner in order to focus on a TV version of "Flash," who'll make his debut in a forthcoming episode of "Arrow"* before spinning-off into his own series...
The Flash actually makes a lot of sense for a TV series, in that he has a really easily-understood power-set, an origin story you can knock out in a minute and change (he's a scientist futzing with some chemicals, he gets hit by lightning, now he can do things really really fast) and his day-job is a police-forensics scientist (before you ask, they already said they're going with Barry Allen.) This might be why there already was a short-lived TV show back in the 90s, which was actually a lot of fun and feature Mark Hammill's first DCU turn as The Trickster:
Part of me actually hopes this really is the route Warners goes to get to "Justice League" - building half the roster in shitty CW series, so that the movie is grumpy middle-aged Henry Cavill and Christian Bale being followed around by a posse of interchangeable Twilight-bait boytoys in bad costumes ("Flash" will probably get just a reddish-brown tracksuit, right? To go with "Arrow's" hoodie?)
Both this series and the still-apparently-happening movie (it's not specified if they'll be connected in any way - it wouldn't surprise me if they weren't because WB just. Does. Not. Care.) are happening under the supervision of Greg Berlanti, whose previous crimes include "Dawson's Creek," "Everwood," "Green Lantern" and (naturally) "Arrow."
*Please don't bother trying to convince me that "Arrow" isn't shit. Because "Arrow" is shit.
Monday, July 29, 2013
This is being reported as a HUGE FUCKING DEAL in the industry because Harvey Weinstein and Disney are speaking again, except all the people at Disney who Harvey was initially at odds with kinda got washed-away post-"John Carter" so it's not really that impressive. Also, it's still just business: Disney finally wants to make a movie based on what has to be the last yet-unfilmmed Harry Potter coattail-rider franchise - which is published by one of their subsidiaries - but Harvey bought the movie rights to it years ago and has been sitting on them.
In any case, "Artemis Fowl" (basic pitch: What if Bruce Wayne was Harry Potter and also sort-of a villain?) will no go into pre-production, to be released to the clenched consternation of it's fans and the complete and utter ambivalence of everyone else probably sometime in 2015; with depressing tabloid headlines involving whatever poor child actor donates his body to the title role to follow a few years down the road.
In any case, "Artemis Fowl" (basic pitch: What if Bruce Wayne was Harry Potter and also sort-of a villain?) will no go into pre-production, to be released to the clenched consternation of it's fans and the complete and utter ambivalence of everyone else probably sometime in 2015; with depressing tabloid headlines involving whatever poor child actor donates his body to the title role to follow a few years down the road.
Friday, July 26, 2013
Below, an extended music video for Biting Elbows' "Bad Motherfucker." The premise: "What if a 'Transporter' sequel was 4 1/2 minutes long and seen entirely from first-person perspective?" Okay, fun enough - really hate 0:25, but that's a taste thing.
In any case, this is "news" because the video's director has been hired to turn the concept into a full feature, with Sharlto Copley apparently set to star. I can't help get the sense that this is the sort of idea that sounds good until you actually see it, but what do I know?
In any case, this is "news" because the video's director has been hired to turn the concept into a full feature, with Sharlto Copley apparently set to star. I can't help get the sense that this is the sort of idea that sounds good until you actually see it, but what do I know?
Hey! Have you by chance been in one of those hypersleep pods from "Prometheus" since around 1998 or so and thus might still find jokes about dweeby White kids with a charmingly-naive fixation on Black culture really funny? Well, then "American Milkshake" - an indie pickup from the new Kevin Smith Movie Club imprint - is the movie for YOU!
Wednesday, July 24, 2013
Ryan Coogler is having the dream year of an indie filmmaker. His devastating debut, "Fruitvale Station" was already racking up accolades before it was yanked into the spotlight by tangential association to the Trayvon Martin story ("Fruitvale" is a fact-based account of a police shooting of an unarmed black youth.) Now he's lining up his first studio gig, and it's anything but what you'd expect...
"CREED," which Coogler will write and direct as a star vehicle for his "Fruitvale" lead Michael B. Jordan (whose also supposedly on the shortlist for The Human Torch), is a spin-off/continuation of the "ROCKY" franchise. The story will center on the grandson of Apollo Creed (Carl Weathers' character from the first four films) opting to follow his grandfather's footsteps into professional boxing; with a returning Sylvester Stallone as Rocky Balboa for a trainer. Why did it take so long for someone to think of this??
I don't know if "Rocky" means the same thing to audiences who didn't grow up in the late-70s/80s - watching the series gradually transition from Oscar-winning throwback melodrama to bombastic action-hero fantasy - but I did, so I'm intrigued as hell by this. My one concern would be whether or not Stallone (who didn't just play Rocky, but created the character and wrote the original screenplay) can be part of the production without trying to assert control on a "green" young filmmaker. On the other hand, he was very much where Coogler was once, so maybe he'll have a certain amount of respect.
I hope this works out... and not just because I'd like to maybe find out what happened to Clubber Lang, Ivan Drago and Tommy Gunn in "Creed II, III," etc. (Lang was at one point supposed to appear as a ringside commentator in "Rocky Balboa," which would be amazing.)
"CREED," which Coogler will write and direct as a star vehicle for his "Fruitvale" lead Michael B. Jordan (whose also supposedly on the shortlist for The Human Torch), is a spin-off/continuation of the "ROCKY" franchise. The story will center on the grandson of Apollo Creed (Carl Weathers' character from the first four films) opting to follow his grandfather's footsteps into professional boxing; with a returning Sylvester Stallone as Rocky Balboa for a trainer. Why did it take so long for someone to think of this??
I don't know if "Rocky" means the same thing to audiences who didn't grow up in the late-70s/80s - watching the series gradually transition from Oscar-winning throwback melodrama to bombastic action-hero fantasy - but I did, so I'm intrigued as hell by this. My one concern would be whether or not Stallone (who didn't just play Rocky, but created the character and wrote the original screenplay) can be part of the production without trying to assert control on a "green" young filmmaker. On the other hand, he was very much where Coogler was once, so maybe he'll have a certain amount of respect.
I hope this works out... and not just because I'd like to maybe find out what happened to Clubber Lang, Ivan Drago and Tommy Gunn in "Creed II, III," etc. (Lang was at one point supposed to appear as a ringside commentator in "Rocky Balboa," which would be amazing.)
A friend and colleague of mine recently offered "South Korea!" as a one-word response to all that was right in modern cinema. Now, courtesy the YouTube Channel of Vietnamese theater-chain comes another argument in favor of that perspective: The full trailer for "MR. GO."
It's... it's honestly really better that you just watch...
h/t BAD
It's... it's honestly really better that you just watch...
h/t BAD
Saturday, July 20, 2013
Fox Television gave Seth MacFarlane a big leeway for "whatever he wanted to do" in exchange for keeping ratings-juggernaut "Family Guy" on the air. He decided to spend that clout on two passion projects. One wasn't too surprising: A new version of "The Flintstones," which is still pending. The other? "COSMOS," a 13-part science documentary - a sequel to the legendary Carl Sagan series of the same name - hosted by Neil DeGrasse Tyson.
Yes. The creator of "Family Guy" is going to run a science documentary on a major network because he can. And now there's a trailer:
Yes. The creator of "Family Guy" is going to run a science documentary on a major network because he can. And now there's a trailer:
I'm on the record with not being in love with what we were being told was Captain America's new threads for "Captain America: The Winter Soldier." It's not a bad-looking getup in and of itself, mind you, it's just... yeah, it's the lack of red and white in there. That matters, not just aesthetically - he's Captain America, not the Blue-Denim Power Ranger. And it's especially unfortunate, since the original concept-art for the movie was showing off a really good-looking fusion of the WWII and Avengers-era costumes.But now there's some SDCC snaps from ComicBookMovie (sourced from another site that's now down) that make me think maybe there's more to this...
So, here's the thing: For awhile now, people have been assuming that the all-blue outfit is some kind of "stealth suit" or something specifically tied to S.H.I.E.L.D; given that there's a S.H.I.E.L.D-logo patch on the shoulders. Speaking of shields, it now looks like the new outfit comes with it's own version of Cap's shield, which replaces the red rings with light-blue (cyan?) ones. Maybe blue is "stealthy?" But take another look:
That's an official display from Marvel/Disney's display for the film at SDCC. Why is he standing with The Howling Commandos (you can tell it's them, because that's Dum-Dum Dugan's bowler hat) from the first movie? Is it just gag for the display (apparently it rotates around into an identical version but with Cap in his WWII era uniform and pre-vibranium shield)? It's probable that the film will use flashbacks to WWII to help remind us all who [REDACTED] was, is the blue outfit something from that period used to help us keep past/present scenes straight (or vice-versa?) I will say that the S.H.I.E.L.D. patch looks old-timey: Brown and gold, with a WWII-style right of stars. Will we be seeing the founding of S.H.I.E.LD?
One particular guess I keep seeing floated around is that since this and "Thor 2" are supposed to be the (thematically) "darker" movies this cycle (the "Empire Strikes Back" rule that mid-trilogy entries are dark and end on bleak notes,) this one will be about Cap getting all disillusioned about present-day political/military/spycraft business - i.e. he starts out working with S.H.I.E.L.D. or the Government in official capacity but eventually braces against it (maybe they lied to him about [REDACTED]?) and goes off on his own, and the blue get-up is for his "working for The Man" phase?
Maybe we'll find out more when Marvel/Disney's official panel stuff hits later tonight.
UPDATE I: Zack Snyder takes the stage at SDCC, officially announces Batman joining "Man of Steel" sequel. Says will be "informed" by "Dark Knight Returns" but NOT an adaptation. Bat/Shield-fusion logo shown a'la the Batman/Superman comic, Bat-symbol is NOT the one from the previous Nolan-trilogy.
ORIGINAL POST: Actual news is starting to hit from ComicCon (Legendary supposedly just now surprised everyone who showed up for the "Godzilla" trailer with a teaser for Duncan Jones' "World of Warcraft" movie); and now we've evidently got the first actual word from Warner Bros. about how they plan to handle their DC line going into the future. This is the panel I'd most want to have seen had I been there, because the business/politics of it are intriguing: Warners was expecting to roll into San Diego as conqueror's post-"Man of Steel," which they'd presumed would be a "Dark Knight"-level Summer-crushing juggernaut. Instead, their position is closer to "Well... we made a shitload of money but not as much as we were expecting to, the reviews were pretty bad and it's biggest presence in the dialogue right now is as a punchline about inappropriately-grim adaptations."
Given that, I'd say it's a surprise but not a BIG surprise that Warner Bros. seems to be going right back to the eternally-reliable Batman-brand rather than given "Man of Steel" it's own solo sequel: The report is that the film's follow-up will instead be "Superman Meets Batman" (not the final title, obviously - though I can't imagine they'll actually CALL it "World's Finest") in 2015, with Christopher Nolan and Zack Snyder returning to executive produce and direct (wouldn't be my first choices, but okay - we all have our bad days) and David Goyer once again writing (ugh.) The current plan is for "The Flash" to follow in 2016 and "Justice League" in 2017.
Hm. Somebody's missing - and it ain't The Martian Manhunter.
It seems kind of inconceivable that "League" will happen without at least one female character (worth noting: Marvel's continuity-experiment put War Machine and Black Widow in front of audiences before getting to Thor or even Captain America); and apparently WB is still trying to get Wonder Woman onto The CW as "Amazon" (an "Arrow" companion-piece with a teenaged Diana in an American high-school. Really.) A lot of people are still thinking the "empty pod" cutaway in "Man of Steel" was supposed to be a tease for Supergirl - confirmed, at least in-part, by a tie-in comic - so maybe her? One of the bigger recent Batman/Superman comic arcs (it also got an animated movie) intro'd a new-ish version of her (basically Golden/Silver-age Kara, but "for today") so maybe she'll get the spot? Dunno. Right now, the only "safe bet" I can imagine is that if they bother with a Green Lantern at all it'll be John Stewart, and if not him Cyborg will get the "We Need At Least One Black Guy" call.
Still not mentioned: Whether or not they've picked a Batman yet, and if they're shooting for 2015 they kinda need to do that pretty soon. I wouldn't be surprised at all if they were still trying to get Christian Bale back (maybe that's Nolan's role here, since everyone was expecting him to bail at this point.)
ORIGINAL POST: Actual news is starting to hit from ComicCon (Legendary supposedly just now surprised everyone who showed up for the "Godzilla" trailer with a teaser for Duncan Jones' "World of Warcraft" movie); and now we've evidently got the first actual word from Warner Bros. about how they plan to handle their DC line going into the future. This is the panel I'd most want to have seen had I been there, because the business/politics of it are intriguing: Warners was expecting to roll into San Diego as conqueror's post-"Man of Steel," which they'd presumed would be a "Dark Knight"-level Summer-crushing juggernaut. Instead, their position is closer to "Well... we made a shitload of money but not as much as we were expecting to, the reviews were pretty bad and it's biggest presence in the dialogue right now is as a punchline about inappropriately-grim adaptations."
Given that, I'd say it's a surprise but not a BIG surprise that Warner Bros. seems to be going right back to the eternally-reliable Batman-brand rather than given "Man of Steel" it's own solo sequel: The report is that the film's follow-up will instead be "Superman Meets Batman" (not the final title, obviously - though I can't imagine they'll actually CALL it "World's Finest") in 2015, with Christopher Nolan and Zack Snyder returning to executive produce and direct (wouldn't be my first choices, but okay - we all have our bad days) and David Goyer once again writing (ugh.) The current plan is for "The Flash" to follow in 2016 and "Justice League" in 2017.
Hm. Somebody's missing - and it ain't The Martian Manhunter.
It seems kind of inconceivable that "League" will happen without at least one female character (worth noting: Marvel's continuity-experiment put War Machine and Black Widow in front of audiences before getting to Thor or even Captain America); and apparently WB is still trying to get Wonder Woman onto The CW as "Amazon" (an "Arrow" companion-piece with a teenaged Diana in an American high-school. Really.) A lot of people are still thinking the "empty pod" cutaway in "Man of Steel" was supposed to be a tease for Supergirl - confirmed, at least in-part, by a tie-in comic - so maybe her? One of the bigger recent Batman/Superman comic arcs (it also got an animated movie) intro'd a new-ish version of her (basically Golden/Silver-age Kara, but "for today") so maybe she'll get the spot? Dunno. Right now, the only "safe bet" I can imagine is that if they bother with a Green Lantern at all it'll be John Stewart, and if not him Cyborg will get the "We Need At Least One Black Guy" call.
Still not mentioned: Whether or not they've picked a Batman yet, and if they're shooting for 2015 they kinda need to do that pretty soon. I wouldn't be surprised at all if they were still trying to get Christian Bale back (maybe that's Nolan's role here, since everyone was expecting him to bail at this point.)
Friday, July 19, 2013
For a minute there, it looked like the positive buzz on "Kick-Ass 2" - a sequel I'm still kind of amazed we got, given that the original was considered another ComicCon-Hit/Mainstream-Bomb scenario until the long-term numbers came back - was going to be eclipsed by Jim Carrey's latest public spectacle (Ugh. Maybe someone should've stopped him back when he asked us to.) But this extended trailer just hit from SDCC, and I remain optimistic.
The boxoffice "problem" with the first film is that it really was a "naughty kid" film - an R-rated movie that, if we're being honest, is largely "for" an audience that was too young to (legally) buy tickets for it. But there's a huge fanbase for this that discovered it on DVD and cable, so maybe this one will hit bigger. My only concern is that Mark Millar's comic sequel was actually pretty awful, but a movie can correct that (see: Most movies based on Mark Millar comics.)
The boxoffice "problem" with the first film is that it really was a "naughty kid" film - an R-rated movie that, if we're being honest, is largely "for" an audience that was too young to (legally) buy tickets for it. But there's a huge fanbase for this that discovered it on DVD and cable, so maybe this one will hit bigger. My only concern is that Mark Millar's comic sequel was actually pretty awful, but a movie can correct that (see: Most movies based on Mark Millar comics.)
Thursday, July 18, 2013
Thus far the details are scarce (as expected, it sounds like there'll be concurrent Peter/Homer, Marge/Lois, Bart/Stewie, Lisa/Mega storylines,) but since it's technically a "Family Guy" episode one imagines there'll be a lot of glib commentary about Springfield being perpetually stuck in an early-90s vision of early-60s TV sitcoms, and I'll be dissapointed if there isn't a "whoa, that's not cool..."/uncomfortable-silence bit involving Homer strangling Bart... though even better would be seeing McFarlane (via Brian) trade some oldschool lounge-lizard schtick with similarly unstuck-in-time Krusty. I'll settle for Brian getting hammered at Moe's, though.
Wednesday, July 17, 2013
Okay, I'm starting to get excited. Not TOO excited, mainly because the director is still Gareth Edwards and I really, really, really, REALLY HATED his previous giant-monster movie.If I can just throw one tiny, futile sliver of advice/request to the filmmakers (or, rather the marketers) on this one: Just fucking show him already. We already did this "show the tail, show the foot, oooooh what does he look like??" thing on the previous movie, and look how that turned out. Besides, the whole point of doing "Godzilla" is that Godzilla is an ICON. Everyone knows what Godzilla looks like - even people who've never actually watched a Godzilla movie. The "hype" shouldn't be about "what does he look like??", it should be about how good you made him look.
Film is due out just under a year from now, apparently some kind of bigger reveal is due at some point during SDCC.
OFFICIAL ANNOUNCEMENT:
I can now confirm that I will be appearing at COMICAZI in Somerville Massachusetts (407 Highland Ave Somerville MA 02144, I believe Davis Square is the closest MBTA stop) to sell and autograph copies of my book "Super Mario Bros. 3 - Brick By Brick" (also still available online in print and ebook formats exclusively through Fangamer.net) from 11am to 2pm ET on Saturday July 27th.
I will also, of course, happily sign any copies that were purchased previously or really anything else you were to bring up (within reason.) The books themselves will cost $8.00 US, supplies are limited.
This will be the first time the book has been available for in-person sales and/or signing since SGC. I'm working on a few other (local) events for similar setups, but this will be the first - plus, Comicazi is a great local business and deserves the attention. Hope to see some of you there!
Tuesday, July 16, 2013
Every Movie Awards Season needs at least one "controversial" current-events film that receives reams of breathless coverage in the political media but that ultimately not even most "engaged" audiences actually bother to go see - regardless of whether or not it's any good.
This year's entry looks to be "The Fifth Estate" (trailer below), with Benedict Cumberbatch as WikiLeaks mouthpiece Julian Assange. Directed by Bill Condon, the film looks to be making a game effort toward balancing an apparent sympathy for WikiLeaks' actions (or at least philosophy) and an acknowledgement that Assange is a pretty sketchy individual. For the record, Assange (currently in and Ecuadorian embassy ducking extradition for sexual-assault charges) has called the film's script "a serious propaganda attack" and "a lie built upon a lie."
This year's entry looks to be "The Fifth Estate" (trailer below), with Benedict Cumberbatch as WikiLeaks mouthpiece Julian Assange. Directed by Bill Condon, the film looks to be making a game effort toward balancing an apparent sympathy for WikiLeaks' actions (or at least philosophy) and an acknowledgement that Assange is a pretty sketchy individual. For the record, Assange (currently in and Ecuadorian embassy ducking extradition for sexual-assault charges) has called the film's script "a serious propaganda attack" and "a lie built upon a lie."
In reality, of course, that's the first new poster for "Edge of Tomorrow," which is the crushingly-generic title that replaces the infinitely catchier "All You Need Is Kill" on the eve of it's big SDCC rollout. Based on a Japanese YA novel, the basic premise is either "Groundhog Day" in "Starship Troopers" or "What if you got infinite continues in real life??" Cruise is a future-war soldier (that's presumably him in the suit) who dies in combat but finds himself stuck in a temporal loop - he keeps starting over from the beginning of the fight every time he dies, getting a little more skilled and making a little more progress each time.
Interestingly, Emily Blunt is playing Earth's most-decorated super-soldier; a living-legend that Cruise's character keeps meeting up with and (presumably) trying to measure up to. That's a fun inversion, given Cruise's propensity for playing omnicompetent supermen. We'll presumably find out whether this looks any good when it breaks at Comic-Con.
"Dear Mr. Watterson" - which was just picked up for distribution by Gravitas Ventures - is not, unfortunately, a "Calvin & Hobbes" movie at least in the form many fans have been hoping to see. Instead, it's a documentary about the strip, it's influence on the comics medium (Bill Amend and Berkley Breathed feature prominently) and it's enigmatic creator Bill Watterson. I don't believe they ever got Watterson himself to be interviewed on camera - that would be a pretty big deal, as he's notoriously reclusive and private.
As we inch ever closer to Oscar Season, here's the first trailer for "Shame" director Steve McQueen's "Twelve Years A Slave;" which stars Chiwetel Ejiofor as real-life figure Solomon Northup - a born-free black man from New York who, in 1841, was kidnapped and sold into slavery; a condition from which he spent twelve years attempting to free himself. Benedict Cumberbatch and Michael Fassbender are two of Northup's four known owners, while Brad Pitt is one of the good guys. Screenplay comes from John Ridley, story was filmed once before as a TV movie by Gordon Parks.
In the interest of keeping things straight, this would be the "black-themed" early-Fall Oscar Bait movie that doesn't look like embarrassing schlock. If nothing else, good to see Ejiofor finally headlining a big movie.
In the interest of keeping things straight, this would be the "black-themed" early-Fall Oscar Bait movie that doesn't look like embarrassing schlock. If nothing else, good to see Ejiofor finally headlining a big movie.
Saturday, July 13, 2013
George Zimmerman, found not guilty of the murder of Trayvon Martin. Take it away, Bugs...
Hypothetically speaking... exactly how bad do things in Florida have to get before it can be declared a failed state? Because right now, I would not have one single ethical, moral or even political issue with federal troops being deployed to occupy the damn place on the grounds that it's leaders and citizenry have - by electing a government that ultimately includes this incompetent prosecution and corruption-infected police department - demonstrated themselves dangerously incapable of self-government. I'm aware that this is probably "un-Constitutional" (whatever that means anymore) - I just don't think it would wrong at this point. And Texas? You're gettin' there, too.
Y'know... certain entities in the U.S. media (who, incidentally, are celebrating tonight) like to bray on about how "urban" youth - mostly, but not all, "persons of color" - often go about with a reflexive, deeply-ingrained mistrust of the law, legal-authority and police in general. Well, let me ask you a question: When you demonstrate to people, time and time again, that the law will not protect them... that the law will favor, assume-just and ultimately allow the acquittal of those who would wrong them up to and including murder... what the FUCK do you expect they're opinion of the law to be?
I'm aware that some people are worried about "rioting" over this verdict. Sadly, that's a legitimate concern. Know what's sadder? That while they (or I) might have to fear a riot after this or that few and far-apart court cases, there are many more people who have to fear the presence of gun-toting, race-profiling, vigilante dipshits like George Zimmerman (and the legal system that ignores and abets them) every day of their lives.
Hypothetically speaking... exactly how bad do things in Florida have to get before it can be declared a failed state? Because right now, I would not have one single ethical, moral or even political issue with federal troops being deployed to occupy the damn place on the grounds that it's leaders and citizenry have - by electing a government that ultimately includes this incompetent prosecution and corruption-infected police department - demonstrated themselves dangerously incapable of self-government. I'm aware that this is probably "un-Constitutional" (whatever that means anymore) - I just don't think it would wrong at this point. And Texas? You're gettin' there, too.
Y'know... certain entities in the U.S. media (who, incidentally, are celebrating tonight) like to bray on about how "urban" youth - mostly, but not all, "persons of color" - often go about with a reflexive, deeply-ingrained mistrust of the law, legal-authority and police in general. Well, let me ask you a question: When you demonstrate to people, time and time again, that the law will not protect them... that the law will favor, assume-just and ultimately allow the acquittal of those who would wrong them up to and including murder... what the FUCK do you expect they're opinion of the law to be?
I'm aware that some people are worried about "rioting" over this verdict. Sadly, that's a legitimate concern. Know what's sadder? That while they (or I) might have to fear a riot after this or that few and far-apart court cases, there are many more people who have to fear the presence of gun-toting, race-profiling, vigilante dipshits like George Zimmerman (and the legal system that ignores and abets them) every day of their lives.
The Samurai/Cowboy remake dance hasn't been done for awhile, mostly because the U.S. stopped making westerns with any real frequency. But now we've got a new entry: "Yurusarezaru mono" is a remake of Clint Eastwood's "Unforgiven," set during the waning days of the Samurai era with Ken Watanabe in the Eastwood role. The trailer (embedded below) doesn't have English subtitles yet; but if you remember "Unforgiven" it's pretty easy to pick out who is supposed to be who and what's going on. Either way, looks GOOD.
Friday, July 12, 2013
Case in point: They're apparently going to go ahead and make a film of "X-Force," at one point the most popular thing in the entire Marvel/Mutants cycle, today often regarded as an unofficial "patient-zero" for everything that went wrong in the 90s (mostly because it's where Rob Liefeld made his big breakthrough.) The original team was the "all-grow'd-up" version of The New Mutants - who in turn were a teenage team of characters who didn't quite rate the marquee lineup - organized into a more militarized version of an X-team by Cable, the poster-child for characters whose history is just convoluted enough to distract from how lame he is.
Cable's origin involves time-travel, so one assumes that (unless Fox just plans to stick whichever marketable mutants they haven't used yet in a movie and call it "X-Force") this will tie into Bryan Singer's "X-Men: Days of Future Past" next year.
I have it on good authority that "I Declare War" is awesome. The premise, at least, is head-slappingly brilliant in that "Why didn't I think of that??" way: Film follows a group of kids "playing war" in the woods, and uses editing and FX to show their sticks and balloons turning into the guns and grenades they imagine them to be. I'll be interested to see how it's received, since even though this is all supposed to be imaginary the sight of moppets swinging around automatic weapons has become incendiary in and of itself.
Remember: This weekend is your chance to support original filmmaking at theaters.
("Intermission" is down right now for unknown reasons, will re-post when it re-appears)
Below, the trailer for "Saving Mr. Banks," the "making of 'Mary Poppins" movie with Tom Hanks as Walt Disney and Emma Thompson as author P.L. Travers. Looks pretty good to me - obviously leaning on a fairly fictionalized version of the story (the real events didn't exactly have a cinematic arc, and neither character would come out particularly likable) but the basic idea of Walt having to realize that this isn't just one more fairytale to monetize vs. Travers possibly coming out of her own shell a bit re: the personal trauma that informed the book (Travers' father was a banker who died young, leaving her and her sisters in the care of their mentally-unwell, suicidal mother.) There doesn't appear to be anyone in the cast playing Madge Burnand, who is believed to have been Travers' partner at the time.
Unless there's a film I'm forgetting, this is the first time Walt Disney as a "real" figure has been the central character of a film, which is sort of incredible given... well, that he's Walt Disney. The Disney company put the money behind the production, but the screenplay wasn't developed in-house, it's a Black List pickup. I assume they'll probably end the film at or around the conclusion of Travers' actual collaborations with the production - Walt slightly cowed by having come up against an underestimated "children's entertainer" as headstrong as himself, Travers headed back to England having experienced some sort of self-purging catharsis - and sidestep the less-than-amicable way they ultimately split: Travers turned up at the L.A. premiere uninvited, accosted Disney at the after-party with demands to get rid of the the animated sequence (she hated cartoons) and was told matter-of-factly that "the ship has sailed;" hence why there were never any sequels even though Walt tried for them.
Unless there's a film I'm forgetting, this is the first time Walt Disney as a "real" figure has been the central character of a film, which is sort of incredible given... well, that he's Walt Disney. The Disney company put the money behind the production, but the screenplay wasn't developed in-house, it's a Black List pickup. I assume they'll probably end the film at or around the conclusion of Travers' actual collaborations with the production - Walt slightly cowed by having come up against an underestimated "children's entertainer" as headstrong as himself, Travers headed back to England having experienced some sort of self-purging catharsis - and sidestep the less-than-amicable way they ultimately split: Travers turned up at the L.A. premiere uninvited, accosted Disney at the after-party with demands to get rid of the the animated sequence (she hated cartoons) and was told matter-of-factly that "the ship has sailed;" hence why there were never any sequels even though Walt tried for them.
Thursday, July 11, 2013
"Seventh Son" is apparently an adaptation of yet another YA Fantasy franchise I've never once heard anyone talk about, and looks more-or-less like the rest of them save that halfway through I started getting a strong sense that the "Castlevania" logo was about to pop up.
But whatever. It's got Jeff Bridges as some kind of wizard/paladin/whatever and Julianne Moore as a... witch, I assume? That's enough.
Wednesday, July 10, 2013
Tom Hanks is Walt Disney. Emma Thompson is "Mary Poppins" creator P.L. Travers. The movie is "Saving Mr. Banks," a dramatization of the contemptuous relationship that developed between the two (both notorious egomaniacs known publicly for children's entertainment) during the lengthy process of Disney trying to secure film rights (and then an actual film) to her books.
Here's the first (red-band) trailer for Spike Lee's version of "Oldboy," which does a decent enough job of laying out the basic story while also making sure to pre-warn fans of the Chan Wook-Park film that no, they probably aren't going to bother with that last plot-twist (which wasn't in the Manga both films are based on) ...but that they are apparently going to try and do the hammer fight.
PfffffFFFFFF... BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!Ahem...
...HEH. HEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHE HA HA!
Laughter is not technically a comment.
Tuesday, July 9, 2013
On the one hand, this Chinese Johnnie Walker commercial featuring a CGI Bruce Lee (from "Torque" amd "Detention" director Joseph Khan) is creepy in the way that dead people "endorsing" products generally are. On the other hand, if there's any celebrity living or dead for whom it can be argued that their cultural presence as a "mythic figure" has so transcended their actual existence that something like this isn't really that much more "offensive" than Santa Claus selling Coca-Cola... I guess Bruce Lee would be it.
Either way, it can't be denied that the effects used to pull this stuff of, while still not "there," are really close to getting "there." I wonder who the first celebrity will be to "star" in an (otherwise live-action) film as their own years-younger self? It's not that far outside the realm of possibility for a studio to say "Y'know who would've been good in this? Bruce Willis, but like ten years ago Bruce Willis..." and for Bruce Willis (or whoever) to just do the mocap and voice work for that.
Either way, it can't be denied that the effects used to pull this stuff of, while still not "there," are really close to getting "there." I wonder who the first celebrity will be to "star" in an (otherwise live-action) film as their own years-younger self? It's not that far outside the realm of possibility for a studio to say "Y'know who would've been good in this? Bruce Willis, but like ten years ago Bruce Willis..." and for Bruce Willis (or whoever) to just do the mocap and voice work for that.
Let's support new things.
Monday, July 8, 2013
via Jezebel
Here's the interesting-looking trailer for "Wadjda," notable for being the first full-length movie ever directed by a woman in Saudi Arabia, currently booked for a U.S. opening later this year. Story concerns a 10 year-old girl, Wadjda, doing anything she can think of (including entering her school's Koran-memorization competition) to cobble together enough money to buy a bicycle. For cultural context: The bike is kind of a big deal because it has only been legal for women to ride bikes in The Kingdom since April - as in, this past April.
Here's the interesting-looking trailer for "Wadjda," notable for being the first full-length movie ever directed by a woman in Saudi Arabia, currently booked for a U.S. opening later this year. Story concerns a 10 year-old girl, Wadjda, doing anything she can think of (including entering her school's Koran-memorization competition) to cobble together enough money to buy a bicycle. For cultural context: The bike is kind of a big deal because it has only been legal for women to ride bikes in The Kingdom since April - as in, this past April.
Yeah, it'll be fun to see "classic" lets-pretend-this-is-actually-scary Chucky again; but I think I'll end up in the minority that REALLY misses Glen and Tiffany...
Sunday, July 7, 2013
Y'know, guys? I understand we're all very, very fond of our tablets and phones and such and there's an innate tragic irony to a man of vision dying young... but do we really need to be in a rush to enshrine the legacy of Steve Jobs? I mean, it's not like he was President. Or some kind of great humanitarian (or great villain, for that matter). He didn't CURE something, and "invent" is kind of the wrong word for his (still exceptionally substantial) contribution to the tech field. Given, couldn't we have waited for the distance necessary to get a full picture of the man's life before we churned out the glamorous movie-star biopic version ready for the pedestal?
It's not so much that "Jobs" (with Ashton Kutcher as Steve Jobs and Josh Gad as Steve Wozniak) looks "bad," but that it looks so depressingly expected - the Legend of Jobs (offbeat hippie visionary revolutionizes home computing, exiled for being too awesome for square colleagues, returns like Gandalf The White and CHANGES THE WORLD, MAN!!!) meticulously maintained by the iCult solidified into a "Social Network" wannabe. This is actually one of TWO Jobs bios we'll be getting, incidentally.
It's not so much that "Jobs" (with Ashton Kutcher as Steve Jobs and Josh Gad as Steve Wozniak) looks "bad," but that it looks so depressingly expected - the Legend of Jobs (offbeat hippie visionary revolutionizes home computing, exiled for being too awesome for square colleagues, returns like Gandalf The White and CHANGES THE WORLD, MAN!!!) meticulously maintained by the iCult solidified into a "Social Network" wannabe. This is actually one of TWO Jobs bios we'll be getting, incidentally.
Friday, July 5, 2013
Were you feeling, perhaps, that the "Earth = Third World, Space-Station = America" border-control/immigration/class-uprising allegory in "Elysium" didn't look quite on the nose enough? Well, here are two trailers for Bong Joon-ho's (of "The Host" and "Mother") upcoming "Snowpiercer," in which an ice age has so blighted the planet that the remainders of human society now exist entirely on a gigantic train that travels constantly on a globe-circling track - the richer you are, the closer you live to the engine and get to run the show, while the progressively-poorer live further and further back into the tail. Chris Evans is guy who leads a rebel-uprising among the poor to storm the engines.
The Weinsteins have U.S. distribution on this one, so you'll probably see it sometime between tomorrow and never.
Tuesday, July 2, 2013
I don't necessarily believe that all things in the world have a purpose - a reason that they come into existence. But, if I did, I would probably conclude that Syfy's purpose has now been served.
Depressingly (both in content and because I haaaaaaate "tracking numbers" bullshit being part of the film discussion, but such is life) the "story" of "Pacific Rim's" impending release has turned toward suspense because it's tracking numbers (of likely domestic boxoffice) aren't anywhere near what the people who paid $200 Million+ to make it wanted to see (it's currently projected to open behind "Grown-Ups 2.") But I'm still pulling for it and "Elysium" as the champions of original studio genre-movies this year, and this epic new (final?) trailer is a good reminder WHY:
I can't say that I'm shocked by the tracking though - it feels like the massive ad push that Warner Bros. threw behind making sure "Man of Steel" didn't disappoint (which, incidentally, thanks to the studio's own sky-high projects it still somewhat has) sucked all the oxygen out of their schedule. The press for this thing should've been choking the airwaves (especially on the kiddie networks) and overflowing the toy-aisles to the point that every parent of a school-aged child should be sick to death of hearing about it by now; but it still feels like they're only really pitching to an audience that was already sold back when they greenlit it based simply on the name "Guillermo Del Toro." I'm glad Warner Bros. likes seeing guys like me go nuts for their SDCC rollouts, but guys like me were going to see this anyway - your job is to making my mom want to see your robot movie.
The film is still unlikely to "bomb" given the fact that basically none of this Summer's tentpoles other than "Iron Man 3" have had strong legs for the long-haul; "The Lone Ranger" is almost-certainly DOA, "Man of Steel" will be on its way out of the top-ten by then. And it's all-but garaunteed to do extended, long-term, gangbusters business in the now-vital Chinese/Asia market. But "optics" still count, and the spectacle of one of Summer 2013's few non-sequel/reboot/franchise blockbusters opening second (or worse) to Adam Sandler's yearly "my comedian friends have bills to pay" make-work project is a persuasive-looking argument for turning down good original scripts in favor of "what the hell can we make out of 'Knight Rider'??"
In the background of all of this, by the way, are the substories that A.) Warners and "Rim" co-producers Legendary Films are in the midst of a nasty break-up and B.) WB is supposedly devoting the vast majority of it's attention to turning the post-"MoS" DCU movies into another decade-spanning corporate safety-net a'la "Harry Potter." Such is the way of things.
I can't say that I'm shocked by the tracking though - it feels like the massive ad push that Warner Bros. threw behind making sure "Man of Steel" didn't disappoint (which, incidentally, thanks to the studio's own sky-high projects it still somewhat has) sucked all the oxygen out of their schedule. The press for this thing should've been choking the airwaves (especially on the kiddie networks) and overflowing the toy-aisles to the point that every parent of a school-aged child should be sick to death of hearing about it by now; but it still feels like they're only really pitching to an audience that was already sold back when they greenlit it based simply on the name "Guillermo Del Toro." I'm glad Warner Bros. likes seeing guys like me go nuts for their SDCC rollouts, but guys like me were going to see this anyway - your job is to making my mom want to see your robot movie.
The film is still unlikely to "bomb" given the fact that basically none of this Summer's tentpoles other than "Iron Man 3" have had strong legs for the long-haul; "The Lone Ranger" is almost-certainly DOA, "Man of Steel" will be on its way out of the top-ten by then. And it's all-but garaunteed to do extended, long-term, gangbusters business in the now-vital Chinese/Asia market. But "optics" still count, and the spectacle of one of Summer 2013's few non-sequel/reboot/franchise blockbusters opening second (or worse) to Adam Sandler's yearly "my comedian friends have bills to pay" make-work project is a persuasive-looking argument for turning down good original scripts in favor of "what the hell can we make out of 'Knight Rider'??"
In the background of all of this, by the way, are the substories that A.) Warners and "Rim" co-producers Legendary Films are in the midst of a nasty break-up and B.) WB is supposedly devoting the vast majority of it's attention to turning the post-"MoS" DCU movies into another decade-spanning corporate safety-net a'la "Harry Potter." Such is the way of things.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
