With ten spots available this year for potential Best Picture nominees, it’s been easy to consider every other new movie a candidate for the top Oscar. But for every pundit who believes something like Upor The Hurt Locker or, now, This Is It, is a shoo-in for a nomination there is an opposing argument available for why each of these films might not get the Academy’s votes. Finally, there’s at least one title that can not possibly be denied: Clint Eastwood’s Mandela and rugby movie, Invictus.
Our first look comes via this new trailer, which shows us Invictus has a winning combination of biopic and underdog sports drama. The only thing that would make it even more Academy-friendly would be something Holocaust-related. Yet apartheid should be enough of a substitute given the film’s other worthy elements.
Personally, as much as I appreciate the obvious Morgan Freeman casting, I kinda wish Nelson Mandelawas playing himself. I’d love to see him get the Oscar that Freeman will probably be up for. As for Matt Damon, I’m unfortunately having trouble distinguishing his performance in this trailer so soon after watching him recycling his Jason Bourne act in the Green Zonetrailer that hit yesterday. Still, it is his year for a nomination, so hopefully he’s better here than he was in The Informant!
Check out what the other film blogs are saying about the trailer after the jump:
While most water cooler discussions today focused completely on the Kanye West VMA controversy, the playground likely had room for another topic related to MTV’s award show: the new trailer for The Twilight Saga: New Moon. But were the boys participating in that talk? Summit probably hopes so given that the spot seems to be trying harder to appeal to that young male demographic.
I don’t think the attempt will work, however. For the first Twilightfilm, after reaching out to the true, female-dominated fanbase, Summit released a trailer that admirably sold the thing as if it were a superhero movie. It came really close to getting me in the theater. This time they’ve got another more action-heavy trailer, which at times makes New Moon seem like The Matrixas directed by Stephen Sommers. Which I guess might seem cool to teenage boys. But there’s still enough obligatory beefcake shots and romantic fluff to overpower that idea.
Male moviegoers, feel free to prove me wrong. First, though, let’s see where the other film blogs stand on the issue after the jump:
Disney probably should have saved its Marvel acquisition news for this week’s big D23 Expo (”The Ultimate Disney Fan Experience”), because nothing announced at the event could possibly top it. Plus, many of us would rather now hear about Disney’s plans for the comic company’s film adaptations instead of plot details on Toy Story 3and Cars 2 and a title reveal for the fourth Pirates of the Caribbeaninstallment. The fact that Guillermo Del Toro’s secret “D” project ended up being just some animation production company rather than a Deadmanmovie doesn’t help fanboy reactions, either.
Still, I was glad to hear that the screening of the first 30 minutes of The Princess and the Frogwas well received. I’m also grateful for comedian Paul Scheer for this image of a robot Abe Lincoln. Although it’s probably just a relic from the Halls of Presidents exhibit at Disneyland, I’ll be dreaming tonight of the Lincoln film I wishSteven Spielberg would make.
Oh, and umm, any update on the next Muppet movie is obviously going to put a smile on my face. Presumably this is the Jason Segal project we’ve been excited about for 18 months now. And it’s title is: The Cheapest Muppet Movie Ever Made. Hopefully this means Gonzo will be directing and that it will therefore be as silly as possible.
Check out the other film blog reactions to the D23 announcements after the jump:
Following the Disney acquisition of Marvel, and now seeming a response to that deal, Warner Bros. has announced a new company called DC Entertainment, which will apparently be an umbrella for DC Comics as well as, presumably, whatever film projects the WB plans to adapt from its publications. This may just be another false promise that the corporation is finally getting its shit together in order to compete with the more prolific Marvel Studios, but DC fans at least have a new hope until the next round of disappointments.
Really, there’s not even official word that the creation of DC Entertainment has anything to do with plans to get more comic book movies into gear. There’s some general implication, but no specific revelations. Regardless, the geeks are jumping on this as a sign of such, so if Warner Bros. is smart they will have something movie-related — something big and specific — to announce by the end of the week. Okay, I’ll give them until the end of next week since it’s DC we’re talking about.
Check out what the other film blogs are saying about and hoping for with this announcement after the jump:
I apologize for being such a negative S.O.B. this week, but at least it seems to help with other blogs‘ dry spells as far as comments go, so I’m going to continue my “concern trolling” today in order to announce my low expectation for this Alienprequel, for which Fox reportedly is now bringing Ridley Scott back to the franchise to direct. I have a general distaste for prequels, so I’m obviously biased. I admit this completely. But what could really be the benefit to this? So we can actually witness the back story of the xenomorphs? If this is to be like most villain origins, I anticipate finding out the aliens were all orphans and/or had lost a childhood love to disease.
Okay, fine, I’ll end on a positive, hopeful note: if Scott can make the prequel less an explanation for why the xenomorphs are so evil and instead make an Alien film that’s basically Black Hawk Downin space (or is that what Cameron’s Alienswas?), I will totally be on board for this. I do like both Alien³and Alien: Resurrection, so I guess I’m pretty much obligated to give this a chance.
Check out the rest of the film blog reactions after the jump: …Read more
It seems impossible these days for a film franchise to keep its cast intact for a full run. This time it’s the Twilightseries that has succumbed to the switcheroo game, as Bryce Dallas Howard was announced to be taking over Rachel Lefevre’s character, “Victoria,” as of the third film, Eclipse.This sort of thing nearly happened before for the Twilightseries when Taylor Lautner came close to being fired from the part of “Jacob” after the first film, because he wasn’t seen as a strong or fit enough actor for the demands of the role in New Moon.
With this news, Howard cements herself as the official go-to actress for filling in vacated roles. In the past she has been a substitute in Lars von Trier’s USA - Land of Opportunities trilogy, taking on the lead role “Grace” originated by Nicole Kidman in Dogvillefor the sequel Manderlay, and she more recently filled in for a non-returning Claire Danes as “Kate” in the Terminator franchise (for which she also replaced the first-choice substitute, Charlotte Gainsbourg) Also, let’s not forget that she replaced Kirsten Dunst as the lead in M. Night Shyamalan’s The Village, when Dunst departed to make Elizabethtown.
Can the San Diego Comic-Con really make or break a movie? That’s a yearly question asked in the days leading up to the annual geekfest, and few experts ever provide a definite answer. Most people point to weak Con receptions of footage from ultimately failed films like The Spirit and Catwoman as proof of the event’s influence. Meanwhile, there’s the corresponding recognition that positive buzz at the Con for certain niche titles like Twilight and 300 led those films to boffo box office.
But despite the few times Con attendees have been on the same wavelength with the rest of the moviegoing public, it’s important to remember the many movies that had geeks excited in San Diego but which couldn’t garner much interest from mainstream audiences in theatrical release. After the jump, we take a look at ten such movies that buzzed well at Comic-Con only to fizzle at the box office. …Read more
SpoutBlog is sitting out this year’s San Diego Comic-Con International, but that doesn’t mean we’re not paying attention to the geek mecca from afar. In a way, we get to have a more sane perspective without all the screaming and crowdedness (between Twilightand Johnny Depp, it’s apparently madness). Plus, we’re checking out all of the direct coverage, and I do believe we’re getting a more comprehensive experience this way.
I’ve selected some of my favorite coverage from the last 24 hours so that you may share in the appreciation as a fellow outsider (or maybe you’re there and want to see what others have seen/heard). Check out all the best comments, videos and links after the jump:
Warner Bros. has narrowed down the choices for the star of its Green Lanternmovie, and considering the three candidates have been publicly named, courtesy of The Hollywood Reporter,I’m thinking the studio should let the fans decide. Put the screen tests up online, allow us to ask a few questions of each of the eligible bachelors actors and then permit us to pick our favorite as though it were some kind of movie-casting version of The Dating Game.
In a way, we, the moviegoers, will end up entering a long relationship with the person put in the role of Hal Jordan, aka Green Lantern, and we don’t want this to be the old-fashioned arranged-courtship sort of ritual we typically get from Hollywood. It didn’t work for the last Superman movie, and many of us aren’t even that happy with the current Batman. Warner Bros. needs to learn from its mistakes and embrace democracy.
So, who should it be? The runners-up are: Bradley Cooper; Ryan Reynolds; and Justin Timberlake.
If you need help making up your mind, check out what the film bloggers have to say after the jump. I’m sitting this one out due to my unfamiliarity with the superhero, but I’d be curious to see how Timberlake would do in such a role.
If you were a movie producer looking to make a lot of money, and you had the chance to do this with a Buffy the Vampire Slayer movie, would you put the project in the hands of the people who made the first film, which was not successful in any way, shape or form, or would you put it in the hands of the guy who wrote the first, crappy film but who later redeemed himself with an enormously popular, long-running TV series adapated from that film?
Obviously, most of us would choose the latter, but then I guess we just don’t know something Roy Lee and Doug Davison (of the Asian-horror-remake factory Vertigo Entertainment) know. The duo is teaming up with Fran Rubel Kuzui, who hasn’t directed a film since Buffy but who “served” as an exec producer on the TV show, and her husband, Kaz Kuzui (producer of the original movie), to relaunch the franchise with a new, darker, event-sized Vampire Slayer movie, which will have nothing to do with the show, and which, as of yet, has no involvement from Joss Whedon.
Due to the success of Twilightand True Blood, I can see why someone would want to kick start another vampire franchise, especially one with name recognition, but is there anyone who would look forward to anything Buffy without Whedon? And even with him, would anyone accept a new actress in the title role after Sarah Michelle Gellar made it iconically her own? Let’s check out the film blog reactions to this ridiculous announcement after the jump: …Read more
If these Bloggery roundup posts were truly meant to represent the hottest film news of the day, they’d always be about Twilight, or at least its star, Robert Pattinson. As I’ve learned from regularly monitoring movie sites, there’s something relative to the franchise to report on at least once every 24 hours (today we somehow got double news, with Pattinson announcing he’s committed to a fourth installment). And it will continue to be this way for the next few years. So forgive me this one time for caving in, like others, to turn the spotlight on an advertisement for a movie I know little about and likely will not see.
At least I do have an appreciation for posters, as an artform. And at least a lot of the commentary coming from the blogs regarding this new The Twilight Saga: New Moonone-sheet is humorous. Otherwise, I wouldn’t bother with it. Everyone knows we’re going to see another hundred or so marketing images for the sequel before its November release (this wasn’t even the first), so why bother talking about just one? Here’s why: to point out that between this and the official teaser poster for Where the Wild Things Are, movie marketers are really into forestry shots with background light sources.
Okay, that wasn’t very funny (honestly, it wasn’t really supposed to be, anyway), so I’ll just leave it to the film bloggers with more wit to make us laugh at this heavily airbrushed poster. Check out the Twilight jokes after the jump:
Footage of next summer’s video game adaptation Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time has popped up online, and with it has popped up some minor controversy. Apparently, viewers are speculating that Jake Gyllenhaal’s abdominal muscles, seen prominently in at least one shot, are not actually his own. Because this footage is from the set and not from some post-production house, it can’t be an airbrush job, but it might be a prosthetic plate covering up his own less-toned abs. The “conspiracy” theory originates with commenters at Towleroad and was brought to most people’s attention via Kyle Buchanan at Movieline. But is it worthy of discussion?
I just recently watched Chris Bell’s steroid documentary Bigger Stronger Faster*, so I’m concerned with the allegations, and whether or not they’re of importance. Shouldn’t we be glad that Gyllenhaal may not have needed to get juiced? Or, should we instead demand that the actor, if not so ripped, show off his own body, so as not to fool young men who might grow up thinking they need a body type that isn’t in fact real? We know, thanks to Bell’s film, that such image issues are as harmful to men as skinny model types are damaging to women, so perhaps this is indeed a necessary discussion.
Unfortunately, the ab conspiracy/controversy has only been brought up by a few so far, while other blogs are merely taking the bait and talking about how amazing Gyllenhaal looks. Check out parts of both discussions after the jump:
While everyone in the world is dreading the remake of The Karate Kid, I have learned new information today that has me at least a little excited: the redo will retain the original title, despite the fact that it will be set in China and involve kung fu, not karate. Why is this exciting? Because it reminds me of my favorite bad movie, Bob Clark’s The Karate Dog, of course (check out this clip for martial arts insanity featuring a talking pooch and Oscar-winning actor Jon Voight). Despite the title of that atrocious family film, the canine protagonist was a master of kung fu.
Okay, so the news that the remake won’t actually be titled Kung Fu Kidisn’t really that cool. In fact, it’s annoying and potentially racist. But if Will Smith, as producer, can slip in some sort of reference to that other mistakenly titled movie, either by casting Voight or (please, please, please) giving Jackie Chan’s Mr. Miyagi Mr. Han a pet named Cho-Cho (with or without the voice of Chevy Chase), I might actually decide to see it. At least on YouTube, anyway, which is the only place I’ve watched scenes from Karate Dog.
In case you’re interested in anything pertaining to this Karate Kid remake — instead of seeking out more Karate Dog clips, that is — Clint Morris at Moviehole shares the exclusive synopsis details today. And reactions (i.e. complaints) from the blogosphere can be found after the jump:
I know what brings traffic to movie blogs: Megan Fox wearing as little as possible. Case in point: Movie Gab debuted some paparazzi pics of Fox on the set of Jonah Hexa few weeks ago, but she was wearing a robe, and not surprisingly I heard nothing of the photos. Today the same site presents more images, this time of Fox in an Old West Prostitute costume (i.e. corset, stockings, boots, gloves) and the internerds explode with posts. Sure, it’s also yet another slow news day in terms of stuff that excites the collective film bloggery, but I’m sure these shots would still have shown up on every movie and gossip site on a much busier day. Why? Because Megan Fox pays our bills, of course.
Not that I understand the attraction. I don’t mean to insult Fox, who is indeed an attractive woman. But I don’t get what she’s got that at least a thousand other hot young actresses don’t have. Aside from the fact that she’s sold on sex, be it through cleavage-exposing publicity photos or that recent Transformers: Revenge of the Fallenfootage of her stripping, what is it about her that makes her the Clara Bow of the late 2000’s? (Confession: Bow never did “It” for me either, so maybe I’m just out of touch). Anyway, I am noticing that these new Fox photos are garnering some criticism for how skinny her corset makes her look, and I do appreciate that not everyone is positively spellbound by her.
Anyway, check out what other bloggers are saying about the images after the jump. Meanwhile, I’ll be checking out that sexier wet, tattooed back shot of Sandra Bullockthat Mark Graham has posted over at Vulture.
Eric Kohn talked to the film student responsible for the above mashup. You may think you’re over the 1 +1 = LOL equation, but Miss Piggy as a skeptical caper widow is perfect casting.
We’ve had a bit of trouble getting this episode to go through the iTunes feed, so we hope this re-post will fix the problem. The original post, with episode description and embedded player, is here.
filmcouch-114