The 3D revolution (or fad, depending on how you see it) has finally engulfed the classics. Specifically, the format has reached out to Alexandre Dumas’ swashbuckling adventure story The Three Musketeers, which Paul W.S. Anderson has co-scripted and will direct as a 3D feature.

On the same day we heard about this news, Harry Knowles of Ain’t It Cool News relayed a rumor that Iron Man 2 – and possibly the first Iron Man – could also get the 3D treatment, through a retrofit conversion process. Provided he didn’t simply mishear some kind of reference to Dumas’ The Man in the Iron Mask this would be another big step in the development of 3D cinema.

But is it still too early for all these 3D movies to be getting the greenlight? Sure, The Final Destination 3D did great business over the past weekend, but its 3D effects were terrible. And we’re still unsure whether or not Avatar will be the success that Hollywood hopes it will be.

Since TFD3D topped the box office, though, we’ve been hearing about more sequels and more old movies that we can expect to hit theaters in 3D over the next few years and beyond (provided they continue doing well). So, many a film blog has begun suggesting other movies to be fitted and retrofitted with the technology. Some of them are sampled after the jump and we encourage you to submit your own pitches in the comments section below.

…Read more

As if the problems with Fox’s “Avatar Day” promotion weren’t enough, the marketing of James Cameron’s Avatar continued to hit snags today with the faulty debut of the film’s trailer. Despite there being a literal countdown until its premiere, at 10am EST this morning Twitter was abuzz with complaints that the thing not only didn’t work, but that it was a massive failure on the part of Fox, Apple and whoever else was responsible. Not helping matters was the fact that while we waited for the thing to be available on Apple’s site, we looked around the page and noticed the embarrassing copy that reads “FROM THE DIRECTOR OF THE ‘TITANIC.’” Meanwhile, others found they could view the trailer on a French MSN site.

Then came the biggest fail of all: the trailer was a disappointment! Derivative visuals aside, the movie looks to be a letdown in terms of its responsibility to be a groundbreaking work of cinema. Of course, there could have been no other reaction coming off so much hype. And it is indeed possible that the backlash will turn back around once people see some of the film as its meant to be seen, in 3D. But that’s just the problem of this marketing blunder. While some are saying the trailer shouldn’t have hit the web before “Avatar Day,” I think this particular trailer shouldn’t have been made, let alone released, at all. As I wrote earlier this year in anticipation of Avatar’s marketing, “You really don’t need to show one second of footage. Because we’ll be there no matter what.” However, now that I’ve seen a disappointing mess of CGI and familiar-looking footage, maybe I won’t be there after all — unless I hear legitimate reason to bother (fortunately, I’m sure I will hear one).

Check out what the rest of the film blogosphere has to say about the trailer’s failure — or success — after the jump:
…Read more

James Cameron’s Avatar is supposed to be like nothing we’ve ever seen before. So why does it look so familiar? One of the most disappointing things about the film’s promotion so far is how derivative the film looks in the trailer that (eventually) debuted online today. And much of what we’re reminded of wasn’t even that great to begin with. To help illustrate our feeling of déjà vu, we’ve captured a few screenshots from the trailer and, where available, put them next to their older visual counterparts.
…Read more

Get your introduction to the future of cinema in little more than a weeks time, if you’re lucky. Apparently, as the LA Times reported yesterday, “Avatar Day” will consist of a mere two screenings of the 16-minute sneak preview of James Cameron’s Avatar next Friday, one at 6pm and one at 6:30pm, only in IMAX theaters. And the only way to get in is to acquire one of the first-come, first-serve tickets made available this Monday via the film’s website.

I’ve never been very good at getting tickets for high-demand concerts and events, so I’m going to assume I’ll be missing this special promotion. Which is fine by me. I’m pretty much over the entire idea of being teased by movie marketing. Besides, the current hype circling this “groundbreaking” 3D sci-fi movie has me expecting to be disappointed. And judging by some of the comments posted around the blogosphere, there are many people not interested in making the effort Monday.

Seriously, let’s just wait until the whole thing arrives in theaters this December. And in the meantime, go see another, more modest harbinger of the future of science fiction cinema this weekend: District 9.

Also, check out a sampling of film blog commentary on and commenter responses to the details of “Avatar Day,” and whether it’s really that anticipated, after the jump:
…Read more

I would title this Bloggery “Comic-Con 2009 Day 2,” but I’m going to reach back a little to the second half of Day 1 since yesterday’s post went up before the Avatar panel, plus people are still talking about that New Moon presentation more than 24 hours later. Unfortunately, there’s so much news and hype coming out of the Con today (Gary Oldman spills Batman 3 beans! Saw VII is greenlit!) that I may ignore some the stuff I care less about, like all the “awesome!!” responses to movies that will more than likely be commercial failures (like the ten listed here). Unless they’re really hilarious or profound.

Without further ado (I have little to say in this intro because I’m not at the Con), check out my favorite coverage from San Diego from the last 24 hours after the jump:
…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 Twilight and 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:

…Read more

So, this week almost had an ABAB pattern as far as Bloggery topics go. Two posts devoted to Bruno and now two devoted to Wolverine. If only we had six of these a week I could make it all paired up with an additional Bloggery post focused on how Regal cinemas allegedly won’t show Ice Age 3 in 3D if Fox indeed pushes the entire cost of 3D glasses onto theatre owners. I guess it’s not that big a deal to film bloggers, though, anyway. They’re much too excited about the non-trade-confirmed casting news of Jackie Earle Haley as Freddie Krueger for the Nightmare on Elm Street reboot (all I can think of is Freddie cutting off penises — even his own — with his glove). As one of the few horror franchises I liked growing up, Elm Street is too sacred for me, as is Robert Englund as Krueger, to bother skimming the posts celebrating the remake, and Haley in it. So, instead, I’m going back to the other clawed character making headlines this week, because the X-Men Origins: Wolverine piracy story is just too big* to have been covered in one post:

…Read more

First of all, kudos to all the bloggers who downplayed the Monsters vs. Aliens box office triumph over the weekend by recognizing how inflated the gross is thanks to premium 3D fees that have some people paying as much as $20 per ticket. Second of all, shame on all of you who are posting “exclusive” photos of posters on display at ShoWest while ignoring the story (coming out of the same convention) about Fox fucking exhibitors with its decision to put the cost of 3D glasses solely to the cinemas. I wish I could say that this news has inspired me to boycott Fox’s upcoming 3D animated film Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs, but I actually wouldn’t go see that piece of crap anyway.

What has me so angry over Fox’s decision? The fact that this adds to a long history of studios bullying theater owners. Hollywood acts like it’s only the cinemas who need the studios, yet it’s totally a reciprocal relationship. On top of that, though, Fox doesn’t need to make 3D movies if it doesn’t want to. Or, it can make them and just have nowhere to show them. Unfortunately theater chains are submissive and would never attempt to put the studios in their place by refusing to put up the cost for something like this.

Sadly, either way, moviegoers will continue paying a premium fee, even if they bring their own 3D glasses saved from the last 3D feature. Because once the studios and the exhibitors manage to get people to pay a certain price, that price isn’t ever going to come down. When it comes to moviegoing, the savings are never passed on to the customer.

Quotes from the few bloggers who thankfully wrote on this story after the jump.

…Read more

Jeffrey Katzenberg, for all his attempted promotion of digital 3D as the future of entertainment as we know it, may have done irreversible damage yesterday by attempting to advertise DreamWorks Animation’s upcoming digital 3D feature Monsters vs. Aliens by way of an anaglyphic 3D Super Bowl commercial necessitating outdated red/blue glasses. Here is a collection of scathing reactions found around the blogosphere:

• Cinematical is polling readers for their reactions to the 3D ads, and so far the majority response, at 43%, is “I never picked up the glasses to begin with.” The most popular response from those who did have the glasses: “They were okay.”
• One Cinematical reader asked the most important question in the poll’s comments section: “Why promote the amazing current gen tech that would wow the majority of public that hasn’t seen it with antiquated red/blue-lackluster crap?”
• CrunchGear also has a poll, and the current majority is of the opinion the 3D ads were lame.
• A sample comment on David Poland’s Hot Blog: “The unanimous opinion here was that the 3D in the Monsters Vs. Aliens ad sucked it” and simply. “
• Alex of FirstShowing.net rants against the ads: “This whole Monsters vs Aliens gimmick, or publicity stunt, or whatever you want to call it, only achieved the act of being a gimmick and nothing more. All of those millions of people who did have glasses were caught up in a frenzy of enthusiam over the novelty rather than genuinely interested.”
• I Watch Stuff also complains about the gimmickry: “I thought all the animation studios were pushing hard to legitimize 3-D as more than a gaudy bell and/or whistle. If that’s the case, maybe they should starting cutting all the look-at-this-coming-at-the-screen!-for-no-reason crap. A paddleball zooming at me? Come on. And furthermore, a paddleball at all? Does this generation of kids even know what a paddleball is? Why not a guy using a stick to roll a hoop out of the screen?”
• Too little too late? DVICE got a response from someone who will be harmed by the responses: “The good news: The CEO of RealD Cinema, the technique in which Monsters and Aliens will be shown in theaters when it’s release this March, assured us this morning that his effects are much better. ‘It’s important to recognize that today’s RealD 3D in theatres is a quantum leap better than what they saw on TV or may remember from years past.’ The only thing we can gather from that damage control: RealD sucks less.” Exactly, and this still doesn’t explain why millions of viewers were marketed to with the outdated effects.
• At Defamer, Seth ignores the 3D issue altogether and instead offers some criticism regarding the film itself, but ultimately he notes that negative responses don’t matter, because “This will make a gazillion dollars.” Well, if he’s right, then this won’t be a misstep for the technology after all. But I completely disagree with that box office prediction.
• And now, in case you found the glasses (I hear some people had trouble getting their hands on them) and want to watch the commercial again (or for the first time), here is the Hulu embed:

…Read more

These days, it seems like everyone is going on and on about “IMAX this” and “3-D Special Release that.” Even the lede to this article is so utterly bored by it that it resorts to one of the laziest tricks in writing. Just like the current state of gimmick cinema that is desperate to recoup box office by any means necessary.

Okay, that’s a stretch, but the whole 3D craze is at a fever-pitch ever since we’ve apparently cured cancer and ended world suffering by electing Obama. So why not be happy I can see Watchmen in 3-D IMAX for $20? Why not be overjoyed at seeing Monsters Vs. Aliens as if the adorable cash-in characters are right in front of me? Because 3-D Film is ultimately depressing. It talks a good game, remember the disappointment of when the reds and blues wouldn’t mix that well and just gave you a headache? We’ll be damned if we can’t ruin 3-D for you.

…Read more

We know you can hardly wait until My Bloody Valentine decide to come back, but at least the tacky My Bloody Valentine 3D comes out in two weeks! (Send your friend a “bloody valentine” over the Internet! Or, you know, don’t.)

Luckily, this clip from the 3D “masterpiece” that detail just how subtle and scary a remake of an underrated 80s slasher can be–especially in 3D! The original story involves a crazed, cannibalistic miner who raped a bunch of trapped mine victims (we’re betting this is tweaked in the new release) and who threatens to repeat his carnage if the town ever has another Valentine’s Day celebration. And yes, the original is only meant for those with a soft spot for crap/hack/slash films that have an unwarranted taboo–i.e. “9 minutes too graphic for the MPAA!”

Luckily we’ll get plenty of useless 3D shock scares in this needless remake, and see another clip at MTV. To be fair, that trailer promised flames bursting into a theater and a miner’s flashlight illuminating us. Then again, we are very confident that this will explode at the box office. Or implode. A fiery downfall either way.

…Read more

• According to Variety, Steven Soderbergh “is plotting a 3-D live-action rock ’n’ roll musical about Cleopatra,” for which he “is courting Catherine Zeta-Jones” for the title role. We’re sure this will never actually happen., because obviously, S.S. is just pulling a fast one on the trades by convincing them that he’s moving on to Cleo immediately after Che. Right? He must have either lost it, or have lost the ability to make a convincing joke… right?
  
• John Patrick Shanley’s Doubt will replace The Soloist as the opening night film at AFI. A better win-win couldn’t have been planned.
• The Academy is parcelling out almost half a million dollars in grants to various film fesitvals, including Sarasota, Seattle, and Ebert Fest.

• As expected, Eagle Eye came in at #1 at the box office over the weekend with $29.2 million, and as speculated, adult moviegoing was down Friday because of the presidential debate. The real box office news, though, is the success of the Christian-themed Fireproof, which came in at #4 with $6.5 mil. despite playing on fewer than 1,000 screens. Especially interesting because another seemingly red-state-geared (though definitely more blue-state-friendly) limited release, The Lucky Ones, opened to a tiny fraction of that amount ($209,000) on only half as many screens.
• In one of the best ideas from Hollywood ever, Kenneth Branagh has been offered the gig to direct Thor for Marvel Studios. An appropriate move given that Stan Lee originally wrote the character as speaking in a Shakespearean manner.
• Still on the subject of comics, Hollywood continues its feeding frenzy on the work of Mark Miller (Wanted; the upcoming Kick-Ass), whose super-soldier tale War Heroes (created with Tony Harris) will be made into a film by Columbia Pictures.
• A majority of the major studios has apparently finally agreed on a suitable virtual print fee. In the next two weeks, Universal, Paramount, Disney and Fox will announce the long-overdue, billion-dollar-financed plan to put 15,000 digital projectors in theaters owned by Regal, Cinemark and AMC. Interestingly enough, as the deal will allow more screens to be 3-D-equippable, Warner Bros. is not reportedly involved, despite the fact that it could have done better with its Journey to the Center of the Earth had there been more 3-D screens. Also, it has the fourth installment of Final Destination, which has been shot for 3-D, out next year.

• I’m skeptical about James Franco portraying Allen Ginsberg in the courtroom-set biopic Howl (can anyone but David Cross be cast after I’m Not There?), but now that Paul Rudd, Jeff Daniels, Mary-Louise Parker, Alan Alda and David Straithairn are also aboard, it could at least be a decent ensemble piece.
• Hannah Montana/Miley Cyrus, the Jonas Brothers, U2 and now … Blue Man Group? The painted trio is the latest group to be given a 3-D concert film. I wonder if David Cross just blue himself in the hopes of getting a part in it.
• New Line has acquired an upcoming novel from Richard Doetsch about a man accused of killing his wife and his trip back in time — in one-hour increments — to save her. Titled The Thirteenth Hour, Variety says it’s being described as The Bourne Identity meets The Time Traveler’s Wife, but obviously it’s more like The Fugitive meets Memento (meets — hopefully — David Cross).
• New Line is also making a romantic comedy that’s an obvious cross between Slap Shot and The Devil Wears Prada. And, not obviously, it’s based on a true story.