People seem to think Hugh Jackmandeserves better than a boxing robot movie. But seriously, is his starring inReal Steelany worse than his appearances in Van Helsing, Swordfish or pretty much anything else he’s done since breaking out as Wolverine in the first X-Menmovie? Sure, he’s an entertaining Oscar host, and he’s apparently very enjoyable on the stage. But try to name one movie he’s really good in that warrants him roles better than a robot boxer trainer in a silly sci-fi sports flick directed by Shawn Levy. And don’t say The Prestige, because that film wasn’t great for any doing of his.
Interestingly enough, Real Steel, which has a very ’80s-action-film-sounding title, is being produced by Steven Spielberg, who also oversees the Transformersmovies. Are robots his new aliens? Okay, I guess Transformers are also aliens, and before that he’d already given us alien/robot crossovers like *batteries not includedand (sort of) Artificial Intelligence: A.I.(because so many people think those robots at the end of the film are aliens). But in all likelihood, Real Steel will be released in summer 2011, which has just been announced as when we’ll also be getting Transformers 3.
Although I have no interest in seeing either of these movies, I can’t wait to see which of the dueling Spielberg-produced robot blockbusters wins the season’s box office. Maybe Spielberg can even ready Indiana Jones 5by then, too, and include robots in it. After the ridiculousness of Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, I wouldn’t be surprised by such an idea.
Check out what the other film blogs are saying about Jackman signing on to Real Steel after the jump: …Read more
Disney’s acquisition of Marvel Entertainment has given the Internerds a lot to think about today. We have already shared a list of crossover movies we’d like to see, while Twitter users suggested other team-ups and battles to the hashtag meme #disneymarvel and other blogs have speculated that one day we could get a Pixar-produced Marvel movie. Not that we really need one of those after The Incredibles, but it could still be a cool thing to see.
Then there are the seriously curious and worried who wonder what will happen to the Marvel attractions at Universal Studios. Will Wolverine and Spider-Man begin walking around Disneyland alongside the classic Disney characters? And will Northstar only be allowed out during the annual Gay Days? Will the Mouse House do any damage to the Marvel movies already in the works or have any adverse effect on the comic book titles?
It will be a while before we know the answer to any of these questions, but the blogosphere was hot today with speculation, so let’s see what some of them had to say specifically on the subject of movies. Check out the film blog responses to the news after the jump:
The news that Disney is buying Marvel for $4 billion has taken the entertainment industry by surprise. But while the deal itself came out of nowhere, it’s not too shocking that these companies would see the benefit of coming together. They each involve an enormous universe full of characters, stories and, most importantly, licensing opportunities. And at a time when original plot ideas are difficult to come by, this acquisition could mean a surplus of comic book and film synopses based solely on the possibilities of team-ups, battles and other crossovers between the Disney and Marvel worlds.
To give you an idea of where this deal could lead, we’ve come up with ten potential movies that we’d love to see come out of the Disney-Marvel relationship. Check them out after the jump. …Read more
This has been a good week for remakes (or a bad week, depending on how you feel about them), but while announced redos of our beloved mystery comedies, sci-fi actioners and neverending fantasy flicks are shocking enough, there’s not a blogger in the world who saw a new “contemporized” version of Damn Yankeescoming. Let alone one starring Jim Carrey and Jake Gyllenhaal as Mr. Applegate (aka Satan) and soul-selling baseballer Joe Hardy, respectively.
Yet Hugh Jackman and the rest of the all-singing-all-dancing stars of Sunday’s Oscars telecast did tell us that the musical is back, so maybe we should be making bets on what classic songfest gets reworked next (I’m putting money on West Side Story). This isn’t even the first musical remake we’ll be seeing in the next few years. New films of My Fair Lady, Carousel, Bye Bye Birdieand Jesus Christ Superstarare apparently already on their way to theaters. Anyhoo, let’s see how the ol’ blogosphere reacted to the Damn Yankees news today:
Ratings were up 10% from last year, and polls indicate that viewers of the Oscars last night mostly enjoyed the telecast and would like Hugh Jackman back to host next year. So why am I still harping on the negatives? Well, no matter how many entertaining elements of the ceremony people remind me of, I have to argue that while the awards themselves were great, the television show was not. And unfortunately, I was not inside the Kodak auditorium where I might have better appreciated the things we all at home should have been able to appreciate. And anything I found entertaining from where I sat in my apartment was pretty much thanks to talented presenters and winners, such as Philippe Petit, Tina Fey, Janusz Kaminski, Dustin Lance Black, Kunio Kato and Danny Boyle.
And I’m not the only one who has complaints. Below you’ll find some criticisms from bloggers who either thought the show was completely terrible or thought it was mostly good with only a few minor gripes.
Never mind last night’s show being the gayest Oscars ever (I doubt it). And never mind it potentially being the most predictable (nuts to the Academy for not going with any of my badly foreseen surprises). Here’s my biggest criticism of the ceremony: the 81st Academy Awards had surely the worst directed telecast in history. Throughout the show I found myself commenting over and over, “show the clips, not the [stage; musicians; Queen Latifah; etc.].” There were great injustices done to the deceased, to Baz Luhrman’s choreography (even if it wasn’t a great musical number) and to the nominated actors and actresses, many of who could have used a spotlight on their performances rather than isolated praise from a random peer.
But apparently this year’s ceremony wasn’t designed for the TV viewers, possibly because the Academy didn’t expect anyone to tune in anyway (we showed them; ratings were actually up!). It was a big insular party for Hollywood — and a number of foreigners with excellent accents (and Styx tributes) — during which we were all better off reading the live-blogging and live-Twitterings found all over the interweb than watching the actual program. Often, awards live-blogging is pointless; too many bloggers merely list wins and incidents as they happen, which is redundant for people actually watching the show, while others comment without details, which is insufficient for people who missed the event. But overdone Snuggie references aside, this year’s type-it-as-they-see-it bloggers were better than usual. Chalk it up to boredom, but the commentary on the disasters and disappointments of the Oscars was witty, insightful and actually worth reading. Maybe not on all websites, but on a lot of them.
So, for my final Oscar column of the 2008 awards season, I’d like to circumvent celebrating the event (which doesn’t deserve much praise, in my opinion) and instead celebrate five of my favorite live-blogged/Twittered moments of the night. Though everyone loves to watch a train wreck in progress, sometimes it’s better to turn your head away and listen to someone else describe the tragedy for you. Here is a sampling of the best such observations of the worst such wrecks at this year’s ceremony:
I had heard a couple of weeks ago that Bennett Miller, director of The Cruise and Capote, had directed a short film that was to be shown at the Oscars. The short apparently included interviews from “regular filmgoers.” I know that at least two known film bloggers were interviewed for it, including one who has contributed to SpoutBlog (not me). But as the show stretched into its third hour and nothing resembling what I had heard about the Miller short had yet shown on the broadcast, I started to wonder about its fate. I Twittered to that effect, and I got a private email in response from someone close to the production of the short (and not one of those interviewees, I assure you):
People at Radical Media (the producer) said it wasn’t great - too many old white men - more Mickey Rooney than Mickey Rourke - apparently it got cut…Also, as of Friday night they thought it was in, I don’t know who or when the decision to cut it was made. That being said, the show was 4 hours without so…
I had heard that the short had been set to open the show; I was personally surprised when the telecast started with Hugh Jackman on stage, just because that seemed extraordinarily abrupt in comparison to the montages that have opened the show in years past. The New York Times reports that the Miller short was seen in the Kodak Theater, but didn’t make it to telecast. Did you see it? Do you have any idea why it wasn’t shown to TV audiences? Please let us know.
UPDATE: I’m now hearing that four clips were cut hours before broadcast, as producers calculated the show would run 40 minutes over if they left them in. More details as they come in, until I stop caring…
UPDATE 2:40 PM: The short film is embedded above, via Vanity Fair. Looks like none of our blogger friends made the celebrity-studded final cut, but Jay and Mark Duplass did.
With just a week and a half left until the Academy Awards, news of and commentary on the details of the event are a hot topic lately. Part of the heat comes from recent announcements, hints and rumors about what’s in store for this year’s telecast, which has so far been mostly a top secret production. Here’s the big question: is there anything known or unknown about the ceremony that’s appealing at all to casual viewers or even diehard fans of the Oscars? Going by what people are writing on the web this week, it doesn’t seem so. In fact, it appears the biggest threat to the program’s ratings, even more than the Dark Knightsnub, is the telecast itself. Seriously, wouldn’t you draw more viewers by telling them what great things you have in store rather than hope they’re curious enough for surprises?
For thoughts on why Queen Latifah, Hugh Jackman and especially producers Bill Condon and Laurence Mark are killing the Oscars this year, check out our roundup of quotes and links after the jump.
Hugh Jackman has removed himself from discussions to star with Catherine Zeta-Jones in Cleo, a 3-D live action musical which Steven Soderbergh will direct as his next project…Soderbergh has said he wants to inject the famous historical love story with rock n’ roll songs and a style akin to an Elvis musical.
Jackman’s exit is attributed by insiders to scheduling conflicts, though it is not clear what other project is on his plate.
Above: Elvis Presley in the 1965 harem-sploitation musical comedy, Harum Scarum. Discuss.
I wish I were more familiar with the cartoon Thundercatsso that I could properly appreciate this new fan-made trailer. And yet it’s such a well-done video that it’s hard to even think I could appreciate it more than I already do. Someone clearly put way too much time into this thing, picking out appropriate segments from Troy, the Lord of the Rings trilogy and other films, and digitally painting the faces of Brad Pitt, Vin Diesel and Hugh Jackman (and an actress nobody seems to be able to identify). It’s so terrific that the real Thundercats movie (potentially arriving in 2010) will no doubt be a disappointment in comparison (perhaps as bad as this old fake Thundercats movie trailer). In fact, this version’s awkward CG-rendered Snarf is likely better than what Warner Bros. will give us (the actual film is reportedly going to be entirely computer-animated).
I was going to initially say that this is the best fake trailer I’ve ever seen, but I probably say that too often. Plus, I’m going to stick with the Where’s Waldo parody of The Bourne Identity for that honor. Still, this is one of the best I’ve seen in terms of technical achievement.
The Academy Awards barely recognize comedic talent in film, so it’s kind of ironic that the Oscars have typically been hosted by a comedic personality. Since the Academy primarily honors serious movies and performances, it’d be more fitting to have Sean Penn leading the show. But TV audiences love a funny variety program, and the tradition has worked out well thanks to humorists like Will Rogers, Bob Hope and Billy Crystal, so the comedy has been a constant.
This year, however, the ceremony will feature Hugh Jackman as emcee, and the joke-filled monologue has been axed. But is it still ironic that an actor best known for playing a superhero is hosting an award show that fails to regularly celebrate blockbuster franchises like his X-Men series? And are the producers capitalizing on this irony by hiring Jackman, who will certainly be promoting his upcoming spin-off, X-Men Origins: Wolverine?
When the choice was announced, plenty of people immediately thought of the ratings-boosting possibility of having Jackman wear his Wolverine costume while performing his hosting duties. For an Oscars ceremony that may end up nominating a superhero film for Best Picture and will be secretly recognizing Robert Downey Jr.’s performance in Iron Man as much as in Tropic Thunder (if he’s indeed nominated for the latter), the singing, dancing Australian is quite appropriate for the gig.
But despite his ratings appeal to comic geeks and old ladies who read People magazine, could this relatively humorless host be setting himself up for a roast? Here’s hoping he’s at least better than the following Oscars embarrassments: …Read more
Eric Fensler created one of the first viral video sensations when he overdubbed the GI Joe PSAs. He’s a rare artist who, like Andy Kaufman, is hard to describe in a sentence or two. One thing is certain, he’d rather not be called, “The GI Joe PSA guy.”
Listeners respond with what their families watched on Thanksgiving, while Karina Longworth was transfixed by Australia and Indecent Proposal over the holiday weekend.
I might as well get this out of the way first: I loved Baz Luhrmann’s epic Australia. I was on the fence about seeing this, especially once I heard about the 165 minute running time, but I gave in and boy was I glad. It’s a sprawling epic with nods to classic films of the 30s and 40s, and besides featuring the eye candy combo of Nicole Kidman and Hugh Jackman, it also introduces Brandon Walters, who is possibly the cutest child actor alive. If there was some sort of scientific cuteness scale, he’d break it.
Despite the beautiful vistas and the sweeping storyline, not everyone is loving it. After the press screening I attended, a bunch of us gathered on the street outside the theater to debate reactions. It was oddly dividing: people either hated it or loathed it. I’d spent part of the week with a friend from Australia, and he’d denounced it as cheesy, because they have two Aussies in the lead roles: Jackman doing a faux “crikey!” Australian accent, while Kidman actually has a faux British accent. He said most of his friends in Sydney felt the same way.
Here in the States, Australia’s detractors are saying a lot of the same things. So, I’m taking the top five critiques of Australia and refuting them. I might not be able to change the critics’ minds, but I’m hoping you’ll at least give the movie a chance in theaters. Spoilers ahead!
FOX Studio really does it up at Comic-Con 2008 with Keanu, Jennifer Connelly (The Day the Earth Stood Still) Mark Wahlberg, Ludacris (Max Payne) and a surprise appearance by Hugh Jackman with footage “from his bag” of Wolverine.
Highlights:
- Surprise preview reel of Wolverine joins previews of The Day the Earth Stood Still and Max Payne.
- TDESS should really piss of conservatives with it’s heavy human vs. environment condemnation.
- Mark Wahlberg speaks Russian? (Of course, girls love it)
- Max Payne looks like “The Departed with 1,000 times more violence.”
- Wolverine will cut Liev Schreiber’s “goddam head off.”
Read the full liveblogging transcript below. …Read more
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