If you’ve already checked out our list of directors who made great remakes of their own films, you won’t think it that strange that David Cronenberg is reportedly involved in a remake of his version of The Fly, itself an update of Kurt Nuemann’s 1958 classic of the same name. And few movie bloggers could argue that it’s a bad idea given Cronenberg’s talent as a filmmaker.
Still, nobody can figure out any kind of logical motivation behind the change of heart, given that Cronenberg has always been against the idea of a remake (despite the fact that he was okay with remakes enough to do one himself). And most of us would really, really, really like to see the Goldblum brought back for the lead, as redundant as that may seem.
Check out what the film blogs are saying about this reboot idea after the jump:
…Read more
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 Alien prequel, 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 Down in space (or is that what Cameron’s Aliens was?), I will totally be on board for this. I do like both Alien³ and 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
In a couple of weeks it will have been 25 years since Ridley Scott’s hammer-tastic 1984 commercial introducing the Macintosh was seen during Super Bowl XVIII. Though it wasn’t seen on television again until popular demand brought it back years later, it wasn’t for lack of quality. Ridley Scott was just coming off of Blade Runner, and the spot, which cost over a million dollars to produce, has been named the best television commercial of all time. Not too shabby.
But in a day and age of TiVos and DVRs, are commercials still relevant? In fact, it’s hard to remember more than a handful of commercials that have had the cultural impact of Scott’s 1984.
Ad agencies often turn to big talent to try and draw attention to a commercial, and the pendulum often swings the other way when Hollywood taps a commercial director to direct a feature. That’s what launched the careers of David Fincher, Michael Bay, and many other high-profile filmmakers. While 1984 might be the most famous commercial by a famous director, there have been a slew of others that have been equally as strange, from artists ranging from Spike Jonze to the Coen Brothers. Here’s a look at a some of the better ones, including both Ridley Scott’s 1984 (and it’s updated 2003 version, along with the Hilary Clinton version from last year’s Presidential race).
…Read more
If you haven’t already heard the news, I’ll sum it up for you: Ridley Scott is directing a feature film version of Monopoly. It’s probably the single strangest thing I’ve ever heard in the film business. I’m not sure if Scott himself seems to know what this movie will be about, because he keeps waffling on the subject: one moment he says it’ll be a broad family comedy, and the next minute it’s going to be dark like Blade Runner. He seems to have only been wooed by the fact that it’s one of the best-selling board games in the world.
This doesn’t mean that making a movie out of a board game is a bad idea, necessarily. It worked for Clue, after all. But unless Scott’s movie features Rich Uncle Pennybags jumping around with his monocle screwed firmly in place, I’m going to have to call shenanigans on it. Check out our list below of the 10 Board Games We’d Like To See As Movies, complete with fantasy casting.
…Read more

Two movies, both adapted from novels, open in theaters tonight. One is a children’s fantasy, the other is a political thriller. One poses intriguing questions about the nature of authority and value of disobedience, the other is a tangled collection of tired clichés.
City of Ember tells the story of two children becoming heroes thanks to their suspicion and rebellion. While it may seem strange to make a children’s movie that encourages young people to defy authority, there are psychological tests that suggest it may be a really good idea. The Human Behavior Experiments, a little known documentary by Oscar winner Alex Gibney, provides interesting insights.
Body of Lies, the latest from director Ridley Scott, stars Leonardo DiCaprio and Russell Crowe as dueling CIA agents. Does the film have what it takes to overcome the deadly Iraq-fatigue that has destroyed so many of its comrades at the box office? Or is it another example of Ridley Scott taking super-charged material and delivering a super-flat film?
(Subscribe to FilmCouch–Spout’s weekly movie podcast–in the iTunes store or to our RSS feed and an episode will download each Friday)
0:00 - Intro
3:33 - City of Ember, The Human Behavior Experiments
21:31 - Body of Lies
37:23 - Adam Forrest’s “Cup of Comfort”: A Russell Crowe anecdote
filmcouch-91
io9 has confirmed an earlier report that Ridley Scott will direct an adaptation of Brave New World, Aldous Huxley’s classic dystopian future novel. Scott says that Leonardo DiCaprio approached him about adapting the book, and it looks like he will star in the film as well. This is exciting news; not only does it herald the return to science fiction for the director of Blade Runner and Alien, it also means that Leo, who is working on a live action adaptation of Akira, has two dystopian future projects in progress.
Brave New World is one of my favorite books, and Blade Runner is one of my favorite movies, for many of the same reasons, but I’m still having trouble getting excited about this news. Scott’s work on Blade Runner was amazing, but that was 26 years ago, and he hasn’t made a science fiction film since. I’d like to believe he can jump back in the saddle, but considering what he’s been up to for the past two and a half decades, I have my doubts. While the quality of Scott’s filmography is admittedly debatable, it’s safe to say he’s made some pretty terrible movies, Kingdom of Heaven and A Good Year come to mind. Even his films that have some potential end up falling short. American Gangster, while not a bad movie, felt like only like a sufficient execution of a script Scorsese would have passed over in the nineties.
Even if Scott can get his Blade Runner mojo working again for Brave New World, it could still be really bad. …Read more
In the new issue of Entertainment Weekly, Mark Harris declares that sci-fi movies are in trouble, that they’re not giving us any new ideas and are in fact too nostalgic and derivative. Harris himself is saying nothing new — Blade Runner director Ridley Scott expertly stated this last summer at the Venice Film Festival — but I applaud his solution and his call for someone to rise to the occasion and save the genre from itself:
Perhaps science fiction needs to be saved from the very people who love it the most. Nostalgia for a form can be annihilating to creativity, so while its devotees are swamped in their own canon, trying to mine now-sacred texts for any new material, I wish a great writer or director with no particular affection for the genre would let his imagination loose and see what it yields. It happened 40 years ago, when Stanley Kubrick, following his own ice-cold muse and his fascination with science itself, decided he wanted to create something that ”extended the range of science fiction,” a genre that didn’t particularly impress him. What nerve! The result was 2001: A Space Odyssey, which changed the game so completely that in movies, the sci-fi genre immediately vanished for a few years while everyone surveyed an irrevocably altered landscape.
…Read more

Fame. Money. Success. These are the accolades reserved for only the Hollywood elite, the great artists of the silver screen. Or not. Some adored filmmakers leave us scratching our heads. Paul and Kevin look at Ridley Scott’s latest, American Gangster, in light of his yet-again re-released classic Blade Runner. Does he belong in the pantheon of great gangster-epic directors or is he just an imitator? Karina questions whether the Coen brothers are anything more than competent genre directors. She calls Erica Rowell, author of The Brothers Grim: The Films of Ethan and Joel Coen, to discuss No Country for Old Men and other their other “masterpieces.”
FilmCouch 46