Quantcast
Channel: Movies – Den of Geek
Viewing all 23983 articles
Browse latest View live

Interview with Elysium's Faran Tahir

$
0
0
InterviewDavid Crow8/9/2013 at 11:02AM

Den of Geek sits down to discuss Elysium with Faran Tahir, as well as the finer points of big budget, high-concept acting, including his work in Star Trek, Iron Man and this October's The Escape Plan.

If you have enjoyed any of the better blockbuster launches in the last five years, then chances are you have enjoyed Faran Tahir’s fine work as an actor. Whether it is motivating Tony Stark to build his first armored suit or literally being there for the birth of Captain Kirk, one could say he has the ability to facilitating the genesis of these heroes.
 
And as a respected character actor with a long history in theatre, he continues to appear in interesting projects every year, such as Warehouse 13 and this weekend’s opening Elysium. It is in build-up to the latter, as well as his upcoming work in October’s The Escape Plan with Sylvester Stallone and Arnold Schwarzenegger, that allowed us to sit down with Tahir last month and discuss the finer points of working in this kind of high-concept cinema.
 
DoG: You’re appearing in [this week’s] Elysium. In that film you play Minister Patel, so do you have the inside details of what’s going on in this guarded community among the stars and why Matt Damon wants to get there so badly?
 
Faran Tahir: The movie is a real spectacular feast as far as the science fiction and all that is concerned. But it also has some very serious issues that they’re dealing with. The [hostility toward] immigration and all of that. The way that the movie is set up is that there are two places: A utopian place called Elysium, which is a space station, where life is just wonderful and all the people who work for Elysium are on Earth, where life is miserable. So, naturally the people who are miserable want some greater [way] to get to Elysium and the people on Elysium really don’t want that to happen.
 
Also, if you were to change those names, Elysium could become a developed country and Earth became a developing country, you would have the same dynamic. It also deals with the haves and have-nots of the world. I think it is that conflict you’re dealing with. We have just set that conflict slightly in the future. Not so far in the future that we don’t have a connection with these people, but far enough that we can actually examine these issues and see where we stand on them.
 
DoG: It follows the science fiction tradition, including in Neill Blomkamp’s District 9 of dealing with the issues of today in the future.
 
Tahir: Exactly and he does it so beautifully. I think it’s such a wonderful way of examining ourselves that that was one of the reasons I was attracted to this project, because Neill is such an amazing person, such an amazing storyteller, and such an amazing artist who can create this world that you become a part of.
 
DoG: How would you say working on this would compare to other science fiction films you have worked on in the past?
 
Tahir: It’s right up there, because the storyline is intelligent; because Neill is one of those great directors who knows exactly what he wants, what his vision is. But he never shoves it down your throat. He is confident and smart enough, and patient enough to let you find your own truth organically. And he puts his trust in the actors, in his crew and in his people that they will find that truth for him. He will guide it, but he will not shove it down their throats.
 
DoG: If you’re the executive officer of Elysium does that mean you run the station? What role does Secretary Rhodes [Jodie Foster’s character] fill in that capacity?
 
Tahir: I am the leader of Elysium, so she is my secretary of defense. There is an interesting conflict between the two. My character, being the politician, is a little more sensitive to the nuances of the issues and wants to find a more political, a more rare solution to the problem. Her character, being the secretary of defense, has a whole other approach of how to deal with this issue of people trying to get in. And you find that discussion, that conflict, between these two and it’s an interesting one.
 
DoG: Do you enjoy doing high-concept, spectacle films?
 
Tahir: I love ‘em. It’s not the only thing I do and I wouldn’t want to just do that. I’m very fortunate by the end of this year that there’s four very different movies I’ve been a part of. I do like them because you can get your imagination transported to a whole other reality; there’s some beauty to that.


 
DoG: In Star Trek you were the first Federation captain of Middle Eastern ethnicity in the franchise’s nearly 50-year history. Given the brand’s legacy of crossing cultural norms, did the casting have a special significance for you?
 
Tahir: I look at all of this in this way: I am going to play the character as truthfully as I possibly can. The ethnicity and all that should inform the character, but the thing I focused on was mostly the man’s competence more than anything else. Everything else is an attractive sidebar to the storyline. We didn’t approach it that way. We just wanted it to be a part of this character of who this guy is without pulling focus to it.
 
DoG: When you were working on Iron Man, were you able to talk to Jon Favreau or anyone at Marvel about what significance the Ten Rings could have meant down the line or in other Iron Man movies?
 
Tahir: Yeah, we had very open conversations and discussions about it. And much to my delight, all points of views were heard and listened to. One of the things we did was it could have been very easy to make these guys, the bad guys, to be of a certain face or a certain ideology. But we stayed true throughout our discussions to informing each other to the idea that these Ten Rings were being soldiers of fortune to whom faith and culture and all that is just a tool to gain power. It was that kind of dialogue that was the basis and you could steer clear of making these guys of a certain terrorist or faith based [group].
 
DoG: I understand, but I know that the Ten Rings are associated with the villains in the third movie—
 
Tahir: Yes, we knew loosely where we wanted it to go and loosely it got there. I think the vision more than changed as they made other movies, which is part of the process. You start someplace then you see where it’s going to go. The last one had some allusions to the Ten Rings, not completely focused on that, but it did have that. It just leaves that question open if that whole side of Iron Man and the Ten Rings will come back if they make a fourth one.
 
DoG: What draws you to acting?
 
Tahir: I think mostly because it’s a great way to empathize with people if nothing else. When you play a character, you get to see the world through their eyes. Whether it’s a fictional world or a real world, you do get to see somebody else’s point of view, whether he’s a good guy or a bad guy. To me, that’s what draws me to acting. It’s a learning process. It’s understanding other people and their point of view, whether you subscribe to them or not. Just trying to find that connection with another person, a human being, a character.


 
DoG: How does that work compare to television roles, such as on Dallas and Warehouse 13?
 
Tahir: There’s certain stories, which I always say, that are best told on the big screen, and there’s a great kind of challenge and excitement in creating characters that can stretch over a period of time, which television affords you that luxury, where you can see these characters episode after episode and discover something new about them. To me that’s a great challenge. Film gives you that opportunity of creating something and transporting the audience there for about two hours and holding their attention, and television affords you this great opportunity to hold the audience for an hour and somehow you have to make it interesting enough that they’ll come back next week and continue with you while taking a breather in the middle.
 
DoG: Do you hope to continue doing both in the future?
 
Tahir: Yeah, I come from a theatre background also, so I like doing all of that. It depends on the character, it depends on the story, it depends on the project, but I’m hoping that I can create a body of work that’s equal amounts of film, television, and theatre.
 
DoG: Speaking of the future, you are also appearing in October’s The Escape Plan with Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sylvester Stallone. Can you talk a little bit about working with them on that project?
 
Tahir: Those guys are icons of that genre, of the action genre. There haven’t been bigger stars in the history of moviemaking than those two, and to be able to see them—they’ve done cameos and little scenes together—but to see them both work together on a full project was very amazing. It was kind of history in the making. You learn a lot, because when I was not acting, I wanted to watch how they approached it. And there are people who know that dance inside and out; they know every step of it, and it was great. It puts you in the student mode.
 
The movie itself is a [story] about the three of us eventually having an escape from an impenetrable prison. So, it was great to be working with these two icons and trying to find the fun and the reality of it. It was a real treat.
 
DoG: So you can say that in the movie, you will be trying to help them in this great escape?
 
Tahir: Yeah, we join forces at some point and it’s a lot of fun. I think people will enjoy it.
 
DoG: I just have to ask: Will there be any motorcycle jumps across border fences?
 
Tahir: [Laughs] Well, I wouldn’t give you that….there are jumps. Whether they’re motorcycles or not, I’ll leave that to people to discover as they watch the movie.
 
Like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter for all news updates related to the world of geek. And Google+, if that's your thing!

The Canyons, Review

$
0
0
ReviewNick Allen8/9/2013 at 11:29AM

The Canyons, channeling American Psycho, attempts to be bad art about the death of movie houses starring Lindsay Lohan; It turns out that it's just bad.

To humbly borrow from the last line of the late Roger Ebert's great review of The Human Centipede, The Canyons"is it what is, and occupies a world where the stars don't shine." This movie, meant to poke the anxieties of a dying cinematic experience, is its own type of film project, but its bizarre existence isn't something to be readily categorized along with the expansive film population. The Canyons, with its junky intent of making a serious expression out of dumb waste, certainly isn't the stunning bad art of its titular location that it dreams of being.
 
By all means, this movieis ugly, terrible and trashy. The film's worst offense, however, is that it is not an interesting piece of bad art. Like this past year's Spring Breakers, the ironic and serious intents of The Canyons are so indefinable that they cancel out the purpose of one another. Worse still, this movie is devoid on the inside and out of anything that strikes as good; at least Spring Breakers had James Franco's meme-ready performance, as well as a fascinating opening scene. Here, The Canyons can only be marked as an entertaining experience because large chunks of it are so, so, so bad.
 
In a story from writer Bret Easton Ellis that would be even duller without the strange lead casting of Linday Lohan. The former celebrity plays Tara, a vapid Los Angeles woman working in the production business of Hollywood. She shacks up with her boyfriend Christian (porn performer James Deen, who has more IMDb credits than Shakespeare) in his swanky mansion, maintained more by his rich kid trust fund than his own artistic success as a filmmaker. A highly possessive date mate, Christian has a habit of sharing his dominance of Tara with other men, sometimes inviting strangers to masturbate and watch while the two lovebirds make hanky panky.
 
Despite this open field of sexuality, Tara still has to sneak around with her fling Ryan (Nolan Funk), who is also dating her friend Gina (Amanda Brooks). And despite his own affair with a woman named Cynthia (Tenille Houston), Christian goes crazy when he deduces that Tara might be cheating on him.


 
Likely hired primarily for the off-screen gossip magazine baggage she can bring into the aura of this movie, Lohan flat lines about as much as one would expect in the role considering her track record of performances in the past few years (which certainly includes her work on recent Lifetime biopic Liz & Dick). At the most, Lohan herself stands as a decaying monument of memorable cinematic experiences of the past, such as when I saw Mean Girls at the National Amusements 7-14 Cinemas in Lawrence, MA when I was 15. Regardless of its unintentional dark humor, this role marks another downward tragedy for Lohan, sending her further beneath the dark currents that directionally oppose an artistic revival.
 
She shares a fair amount of brooding screentime with Deen, who seems to be Ellis' own attempt to regain the American Psycho character from the previous famous embodiment by Christian Bale in Mary Harron's adaptation of that novel. Deen is a vacant staring man who isn't colored by his irritated sociopath attitude, or by his awkwardly delivered dialogue, which he and Lohan exchange like they haven't finished rehearsing it. With opposing hints that Deen may be in on the mysterious joke of this movie, but also that he may not, this performance is one of The Canyons' own special contributions to the world of bad movies.
 
For moviegoers who don't just enjoy bad movies for gaudy effects or hammy acting, but giddily shotgun them to see mind-blowingly unfortunate choices in the craft that is filmmaking, The Canyons is for them. This movie a readymade drinking game for those who appreciate filmmaking goofs, especially those who have witnessed enough film school student projects to identify the plain aesthetic mistakes that are the result of simple incompetence. To the film’s benefit, these are the elements that make the picture a relatively brisk viewing experience, a seedy disaster that holds the attention more than a lot of better movies. With their official status pending, my rules for a “Canyons Drinking Game” as submitted to the Vatican are:
 
-Take a sip for every scene that is wildly overexposed, as if it were a missing scene from Danny Boyle's Sunshine.
 
-Take a sip for every shot that seems like it was stitched together with the wrong take.
 
-Take a sip anytime a conversation is framed poorly, take a second drink when negative space becomes highly distracting (such as when, I don't know, a UPS truck comes barreling in the direction of Lohan and a lunchmate, a la the end of The Final Destination).
 
-Waterfall with your fellow drinking buddies whenever there's a mopey chapter interlude that includes more abandoned movie theaters from the opening credit sequence. 


 
Giving director Paul Schrader some credit, the direction is likely making all of these distracting filmmaking snafus intentionally. As indicated by the decaying images of cinemas, moviehouses and multiplexes across the country, along with all of the banter about “going to the movies,” The Canyons aims to expose the technical craft of filmmaking. This is indeed what bad digital filmmaking looks like when all of these accessible cameras are put in the hands of low budget, low idea storytellers, complete with lazy construction of image framing and even an obligatory masturbatory extended take that follows a character around of the movie's heavily modern LA settings.
 
But such cynicism only reaches to the level of damning dumb student films that unintentionally look like The Canyons, as opposed to criticizing the products, of various budgets, that once gloriously played at the decaying cinema paradisos now photographically presented with a Tumblr's subtlety in the movie's interludes. The highly bizarre picture never gets recognized for feeling like another movie; it certainly doesn't remind us of any memory we would have seen in a regular theater in this dimension.
 
Den of Geek Rating: 1 out of 5 Stars
2

Planes, Review

$
0
0
ReviewDavid Crow8/9/2013 at 2:26PM

Disney's Planes uses a generic and mediocre story structure to uncover a truly gripping and disheartening exposé on vehicular inequality among planes, trains and automobiles.

Stop me if you have heard this one before: There is a wonderfully lifelike inanimate object with a celebrity voice who has big dreams of becoming something more than his designated lot in existence. So, he goes out to prove those dreams in a race/competition/cook-off/whatever, even if everyone tells him that “you’re going to fail.” And guess what? His dreams come true.
 
Planes is a movie about animated, talking airplanes. Planes who verbally communicate with the voices of Dane Cook, Teri Hatcher, Brad Garrett and Julia Louis-Dreyfus among others. You should know going in if this movie is for you or not. But unfortunately, Disney’s insistence of setting this in the world of Pixar’s Cars, without the Pixar, draws far too many comparisons to a studio that has done this formula exceedingly well. And throughout the whole movie, the only interesting thing this Disney project brought to that computer generated table was a fascinating, if only implied caste system.
 
Okay, sure, there is a main plotline about Dusty Crophopper (Cook) wishing to one day be a racing jet, despite having been built expressly for crop dusting. And against the odds of a disbelieving eye from maintenance truck Dottie (Hatcher) and other racing planes like Ripslinger (Roger Craig Smith) and Bulldog (John Cleese), he gets the mentoring wing of wise WWII dogfighter Skipper (Stacy Keach). A few romantic and troubling subplots ensue, including with Rochelle (Julia Louis-Dreyfus) and, what do you know, Dusty really is a jet stream kind of guy.
 
But that has been all done a thousand times, as the animators and storytellers clearly know, since they don’t even make a pretense of adding anything new to this rote, banal mediocrity parading around as if it were a narrative. Ergo, there has to be SOMETHING under the surface. Right?
 
Vehicular Serfdom.
 
The real meaning of the film’s existence is to expose the inequality in the planes, trains and automobiles world in which the winged and aerodynamic rule the skies and everything beneath. When viewed in this light, Planes must surely be a harrowing exposé of the suffering that ground-locked transportation has endured, and I’m speaking of more than just Cars 2.

 
Early on, it is established that Dusty Crophopper is the most important piece of mechanical machinery in his small world. Chug (Garrett) is a truck whose sole purpose is to cheerlead and hoist the crop duster predisposed to bouts of self-doubt onto his shoulders and raise him high until takeoff. And while Dottie has the nurturing give-and-take with Dusty like a big sister, she kindly reminds Dusty that he was “built” for crop dusting. If that is so, what was she built for? Slowly, the horrific realization seeps through that she was constructed to serve Dusty’s every whims like Hattie McDaniel to his Vivien Leigh.
 
Eventually, the whole unjust structure of automotive oppression is unraveled and lay raw. Not only does friendly Skipper have his own four-wheeled sidekick, but so does every single plane in the global race that Dusty enters for the majority of the film’s running time. Indeed, Leadbottom (Cedric the Entertainer), another truck, exists like a particularly useful maitre d’ who must put on a sycophantic air of inferiority around all the planes. At first glance, he rolls his eyes at the manure-smelling cropper from the Midwest, but as soon as he realizes that Dusty can fly high, he reacquaints himself into a forced and inauthentic subservient position, kneeled before the entitled cloud rider.
 
Once Dusty arrives at JFK International Airport, radioed in by a voice that sounds like it grew up in Chappaquiddick, he sees the runway not unlike how tourists view Times Square. And all the cars are subordinate to the guy fresh off the gulfstream. This is crystallized no better than when Dusty meets his single fan during the movie’s second act, Ned/Zed (Gabriel Iglesias). When Dusty first lays eyes upon the meekly voiced car calling himself Ned, he is a bit disappointed to learn that he only has one fan and it is such an introverted little fellow. But he is even more puzzled when Ned reveals that he has second personality, Zed, due to being a Convair from the 1940s, one of the few cars that ever could transform into an airplane. Besides suggesting that if a car wishes to rise beyond its indentured servitude in life, that it must develop a split personality and bouts of schizophrenia to do it, the scene also implies that only once you give it wings does a vehicle hold its self as valuable or of worth.

 
It is an unsettling message that Planes has bravely thrown a taillight on. One can only fathom how down on the class system food chain boats are in this repulsive, human-less world. Boats are clearly lifelike creations too, as a harbor tugboat is seen with a smiling face early on when Dusty makes his descent. Yet later, we are introduced to a slew of aircraft carriers that are used to support Skipper’s old flying division in the Pacific. Beyond a curious question of why talking planes would go to war with each other in the 1940s, and who has been designing them to keep missiles, it also chillingly demonstrates that boats are not even allowed to show their faces in the presences of jets and bombers. While that early tugboat is seen smirking earlier, these massive ships of war are as inanimate as your pulse is while watching this movie. Are the carriers even allowed to speak or do the F-22s hold their faces underwater like they’re performing a perpetual swirly?
 
These are questions wholly raised but never addressed throughout Planes’ sluggish 90-minute running time. Yet, the fact that my mind kept returning to them over the typical, “Dreams really come true when you believe hard enough,” schtick, tells me that Disney did its job right for me to be picking up on these gentle undertones….
 
…I mean otherwise, it is just a poorly written, averagely constructed and thanklessly voiced family film with so-so 3D. And who wants to see that?
 
Den of Geek Rating: 2 out of 5 Stars
4

Disqus - noscript

Ha. fully expected this with Dane Cook in the cast. Talk about generic...

The Star Wars: A Trailer for New Dark Horse Star Wars Comic!

$
0
0
NewsMike Cecchini8/9/2013 at 2:50PM

Dark Horse Comics is bringing George Lucas' original vision for Star Wars to the comics page...and they've even got a trailer for it with appropriate music!

 
When you think about the words "original Star Wars" most people immediately spring to "Greedo shooting first" and other examples of pre-Special Edition, untampered with, midichlorian-free aspects of the Star Wars universe. But it is, believe it or not, possible to go even more old school and "original" than this. While there was indeed a time when Star Wars referred to the 1977 film, and we all knew its title was Star Wars and not "Episode IV" or "A New Hope" or anything of the sort, you can go back even further to: The Star Wars.
 
What is (are?) The Star Wars? This was George Lucas' original draft of the film, which had a number of familiar elements, but not necessarily as familiar as some of the names might indicate. Want a non-human Han Solo? An older Luke Skywalker? An Anakin with a very different spelling? Now, Dark Horse is adapting George Lucas' screenplay in comic form from J.W. Rinzler and Mike Mayhew. Interested? We sure are! Check out the nifty trailer right here! 

The Star Wars #1 hits shops on September 4th!

Like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter for all news updates related to the world of geek. And Google+, if that's your thing!

New International Hunger Games: Catching Fire Trailer, Soundtrack Announcement

$
0
0
TrailerDavid Crow8/9/2013 at 3:16PM

The new international trailer of Jennifer Lawrence's Katniss showcases more of the revolution at hand, and the one girl who can try to stop it with the flick of her bow.

Jennifer Lawrence’s Katniss may be “The Girl on Fire,” but her overall Hunger Games franchise is definitely the one poised to most burn up the American box office this Thanksgiving. Having grossed a stunning $400 million domestic take in 2012 when they were just that “other YA series,” they are now a force to be respected like well-aimed bow.
 
For that reason, Lionsgate is trying to expand its reach with this international trailer, which promises more visual eye candy to go hand-in-hand with its practical 1970s styled science fiction and Battle Royale premise. Sure, it may essentially be, “Survive the Hunger Games…Again,” but damned if they do not appear intimidating:
 
 
One of the smartest things about the marketing of both Hunger Games films to date is that they never actually show those titular Hunger Games. If the first trailer was about the personal survival of a pair of teenagers (and a viscous send-up of reality television), then the second installment promises the goal of attempting to survive a revolution. Our heroine must fight to protect District 12 from being slaughtered in an avoidable war. Good luck with that, Katniss.
 
The Hunger Games: Catching Fire lights the match on November 22.
 
**UPDATE** And in related news, it was announced via press release earlier today that Coldplay will release the first track on the Catching Fire soundtrack! Titled "Atlas," it is scheduled to be available for iTunes download on August 26 in preparation for the Republic Records and Lionsgate release for later in the year.
 
Like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter for all news updates related to the world of geek. And Google+, if that's your thing!

Lovelace (2013), Review

$
0
0
ReviewTony Sokol8/9/2013 at 7:00PM

Lovelace brings the audience to a happy climax only to make us choke on the laughter.

Lovelace was playing in two theaters, I felt the theater in Times Square made more sense and I got there early. I should have gone to Diamond Club or Private Eyes to continue the theme but having reviewed Caligula I don’t want to go from Gangster Geek to Porn Geek so I made the kid who sells tickets at Time Scare do card tricks for me instead. People yelled at the screen during the trailers and a guy was snoring loudly in the row behind me. Some things don’t change in Times Square. I only saw Deep Throat once, when I was a teenager working construction. The super projected it against the wall of the laborer’s shanty. I never really was a porn person, B-movie horror is porn enough for me, and no, that doesn’t mean I’m into S&M. Doing it beats watching it and having it done unto you is what Deep Throat was all about.

Deep Throat was a phenomenon. It made $600 million and Linda Lovelace made about $1,200. Deep Throat went beyond porn, it became culture. Bob Hope and Johnny Carson joked about it. It gave Mark Felt a code name for Woodward and Bernstein. Called the “Gone With the Wind of Porn,” Deep Throat was more like the Jaws of porn. It opened wide, to paraphrase David Crow, and swallowed movie audiences whole. It was the second and final porn crossover hit. George Hamilton and Jackie O lined up to see it. Dick Cavett interviewed the cast. It was an important piece of film. It was a blow across the bow of the First Amendment in the middle of the sexual revolution. And no one knew the abuse Lovelace went through.

Lovelaceopens with the phenomena, set amid radio friendly 70s hits that used to be the stable of CBS-FM until they got jacked and lost their flow. Songs like Norman Greenbaum’s “Spirit in the Sky” and Elvin Bishop’s “Fooled Around and Fell in Love” undercut happy moments of sexual and romantic discovery. The credits roll over a four-on-the-floor disco beat with synthetic strings. Directors Rob Epstein and Jeffrey Friedman filmed it in seventies faux-grain. I love grainy movies, they have character. The grains are the warts and the pores on the skin that most filmmakers cover with makeup like Debi Mazar’s Dolly Sharp does to Linda’s freckles.

Linda Boreman is shown to be more or less innocent. Her mother, Dorothy Boreman, played by an almost unrecognizable Sharon Stone, gave Linda's baby up for adoption by making Linda sign what she thought were circumcision papers. Penises (penii?) loom large in Linda’s life. She and her family are wooed and won by Chuck Traynor. Traynor is played by Peter Sarsgaard in a balanced off-balance performance (but who absolutely makes the throat hungry for lines of coke as it goes up his nose in delicious snorts) who is the picture of charm and working class sophistication.

The first part of the movie rises with the dream of Deep Throat, the fame, the fun, the goofy characters who all seem so affable and funny. Little hints come here and there to show there’s a darker underside, like welts on a creamy leg, to what we’re seeing. But it’s all sweetness and light. Chuck, the generous lover, goes down on Linda in her parents’ kitchen while they are watching Jimmy Stewart deal with a crying baby in Frank Capra’s It’s a Wonderful Life. Chuck teaches Linda to give head like it’s a new age affirmation. Chuck saves Linda from an overbearing mother and aloof ex-cop father, John Boreman played by Robert Patrick. I always called Robert Patrick “the Terminator” guy even though I haven’t seen the Terminator movies. I followed him through The X-Files, The Sopranos and watch him now on True Blood and he is the picture of repressed pain. The more he holds it in, the more it wrenches.

Snippets of darkness come when Chuck gets in trouble at work. “Don’t ask me about my work?” Who does he think he is? Michael Corleone? But she asks and then winds up paying for it. Chuck runs a tittie bar and the local cops want their take and they’re going to get it from Linda’s hide. They head off to New York and meet the nicest couple of pornographers you ever want to meet, Bobby Cannavale’s Butchie Peraino and Hank Azaria’s Gerard Damiano, the director of Deep Throat. Cannevale smoking his American Spirits, the cigarettes that are so natural they’re almost good for you, Azaria with that wonderful mismatched rug. Cannevale and Azaria play it full of humor and bonhomie. They are making art. Not mere porn. Their money man is Anthony Romano, played by Chris Noth, always too charming for his own good. I almost stopped watching Law and Order when he left.

Linda Boreman is the girl next door you want to fuck. She’s not the ideal: blonde with bit tits and a nice round ass. Damiano is the first to recognize Boreman’s talents in a home-made porno Chuck shot. “That’s art. Can she do that with a big cock? No offense,” Peraino asks and Chuck says his lovely Linda can swallow anything. Porno stars have to “have many talents” Dolly advises, like she’s Xena, the warrior princess of porno. Of course, the name’s got to go, and Linda Boreman becomes Linda Lovelace.

On set Linda meets Harry Reems (Adam Brody from The Gilmore Girls, Thank You for Smoking and Jennifer's Body) who used to be known as Dick Long, but that was too obvious. Linda’s talents are such that even a seasoned pro like Reems turns into a teenaged amateur ruining a take by prematurely ejaculating. Linda asks “Did I do anything wrong?” “No,” Azaria and Cannavale chorus good-naturedly. Andy Bellin, who wrote the script based on Linda Lovelace’s confessional, anti-pornography book, Ordeal, brings the humor of Deep Throat and its producers to the front, all the better to make you gag on your laughter later.

Deep Throat becomes the hit we know today. Every late-night joke tears apart Linda’s mother Dorothy. But Linda becomes a star. She is feted by Hugh Hefner, an underplayed James Franco, and meets Sammy Davis Jr. Things look like they couldn’t get any better. Deep Throat 2 and 3 are already in the works and Romano promises to double Linda’s fees. And then it all comes crashing down as the movie retraces its steps and fills in the blanks. Chuck is too sleazy for the sleaziest of smut mongers. He beat his wife, threatened her with his .38, pimped her to be gang banged and drove her to take refuge on The Phil Donahue Show. I got a big kick out of Romano whipping Chuck’s ass with his belt, like an old-school Italian father protecting his daughter.

This is Amanda Seyfried’s movie. She gives a nuanced performance of ravaged innocence and Long Island redemption as the married Linda Marchiano. She never loses the Bronx girl trapped in the Florida breakaway. Amanda, who was one of the stars of Big Love, shows more big love here. When she is in love with Chuck, it looks like real love. When she is being broken, she hides her pain until it comes oozing through those expressive eyes, even behind the brown contact lenses, down her cheeks. All the performances are stellar and the alternative realities are a new cinematic twist. Linda Lovelace in the film says her life will forever be judged by 17 days. Lovelace herself made nine adult films including Dogorama and Linda Lovelace for President. This film fudges that to make her a one-hit wonder, but why quibble?

Den of Geek Rating: 4 Out of 5 Stars

 

Like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter for all news updates related to the world of geek. And Google+, if that's your thing!

8

Disqus - noscript

I think you may be too generous to Miss Lovelace. You have included nothing about the numerous refutations of her book. Not that I know the truth myself, but with so many people saying she was exaggerating or even making things up, I think that angle should get a mention. Anyway, your review of the film is encouraging. I don't trust the moralistic mainstream press so I will take your review more seriously. By the way, I think Dogorama is her best picture.

Antonio Banderas and Mel Gibson in Expendables 3

$
0
0
NewsDavid Crow8/9/2013 at 8:01PM

Antonio Banderas and Mel Gibson are joining Sylvester Stallone, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Harrison Ford and more in an even more star-studded love letter to '80s action.

The same week that Sylvester Stallone could confirm that Harrison Ford is in the sequel, and Bruce Willis is out (with a kick in the pants) of The Expendables 3, there is now even more intriguing developments.
 
Deadline is reporting that actors Mel Gibson and Antonio Banderas are suiting up to stand side-by-side Stallone, Dolph Lundgren and any other leftover from the 1980s who once held a gun or machete on a poster.

 
Banderas is an intriguing addition, because he is primarily elevated by action fans from 1990s action series, such as the Desperado films and The Mask of Zorro. However, both he and the 1980s’ Mad Max and Lt. Riggs are currently both appearing in October’s Machete Kills. Could this be a crossover to that universe where Danny Trejo is the FBI, CIA and DEA all rolled up into one? I wouldn’t be surprised if Stallone was up for the Marvel-like world building.
 
The Expendables 3 is coming in August 2014.
 
Like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter for all news updates related to the world of geek. And Google+, if that's your thing!

Interview With Roger Craig Smith, the Voice of Batman, Captain America, and More!

$
0
0
NewsMike Cecchini8/10/2013 at 8:12AM

How many actors are lucky enough to play Captain America AND Batman? Roger Craig Smith is that lucky, and he tells us all about it!

You might not think you know Roger Craig Smith, but you definitely know his voice! The prolific voice actor should be thoroughly familiar to fans of superheroes, video games, and animation by now. Currently, Mr. Smith is the voice of Captain America on Disney XD's Avengers Assemble cartoon, but that's not his only claim to geek fame! Gamers know him as the voice of Chris Redfield in Resident Evil, he's been the voice of Ezio for most of the Assassin's Creed series, and he'll be taking over as the voice of Batman in the highly-anticipated Batman: Arkham Origins game! Mr. Smith is even poised to reach a whole new audience with his role as Ripslinger, the villain in Disney's Planes! He's a busy guy, but we were lucky enough to chat with him for a bit about these projects and more!

Den of Geek: You're playing Captain America on Avengers Assemble, and there's never really been a truly definitive version of the character in other media. You have the chance to really make the role your own if Avengers Assemble is a big success. Do you have a particular approach to Cap that you to take?

Roger Craig Smith: I wish I had the luxury of walking in and saying, "Alright everybody! Here's how Cap's gonna sound!" But really, we sit down and talk about the tone of the show and the dynamic that we want to play between the individual characters and what role everybody fulfills within the group. We basically just start off by workshopping things. It's a collaborative effort.

But Cap is definitely more of the "boy scout" in comparison to some of the other folks he's dealing with in the Avengers. I'd say that this version of Cap is fairly closely aligned with the film version, without being an impression or an impersonation of what Chris Evans is doing with the live-action character. A lot of us are working on this, and I get to be the lucky guy who goes into the booth and bark out the lines! We try and "square jaw" the lines up a bit without it being too much. The direction I usually get is "a little more fists-on-hips!" to make him more heroic. The thing is with Cap, since this is animation, is that if you get too casual with his lines, it could come off a little snarky, and that's not the direction we want him to go.


DoG: There's a real ensemble dynamic on Avengers Assemble. Do you guys do live read-throughs before you all get in the booth to help capture that?

RCS: Oh yeah! We sort of treat it like a giant radio play. The entire cast is almost always there. So I'm sitting there working with Fred Tatasciore (Hulk), Liam, Travis Willingham (Thor), Laura Bailey (Black Widow), Troy Baker (Hawkeye), Adrian Pasdar (Iron Man)...whoever is in the episode will be there. David, We're all in a semi-circle. I sometimes feel for the director who has to sit through all of the juvenile humor we find ourselves engaging in during this stuff!

We get a chance to work through a lot of the dialogue, and a lot of jabs are taken at one another's expense, and since everyone in that room gets along really well, even outside the business, it all works out really well. In fact, we're probably more vicious too each other than the Avengers are on the show! (laughs) I don't think you'd get the same kind of vibe if people were all going in one at a time and they were all sort of piecing it together.

DoG: Is it more intimate than the work you're doing with Disney? Is there more of that interplay with this cast then there is on a bigger production or in your gaming work?

RCS: It all depends on the project, really. Most of the time with video games, you're recording by yourself. Although, on the last Assassin's Creed game, I was doing facial motion-capture at the same time as an audio capture with another actor in the room. But even then, we were in a fairly small recording space, and we weren't interacting like we would in some other environment.

With Disney, most of the time I was on my own, just to kind of isolate all the recordings. But I think that any time you can capture this kind of ensemble cast energy, it's to your benefit as a production. There's a pace and a timing to things, but I know that it presents a lot of problems for the production sometimes, because we can't overlap our lines of dialogue with one another at all. Even when we're all recording in the same room, if someone else's mic picks up my line, and I flub it, that means neither line can be used. But with comedy, that ensemble approach dynamic is important.

DoG: You're the villain in Planes. Is this a big switch for you? This seems like it's your first lead villain role.

RCS: Just to be involved in anything Disney, whether it's Avengers Assemble or Planesor straight-to-DVD work, it's great. The only way to describe my involvement in Planesis that it's an absolute dream come true for me. Getting to be a bad guy in any project is fun, let alone being a Disney villain. I can't imagine anything getting better than that!

DoG: You've done quite a bit of work in video games between Assassin's Creed, Resident Evil, and now you're going to be Batman. Are you much of a gamer yourself?

RCS: Of course! I'm far less of a gamer than I want to be these days, just because of all the work that I'm getting. The days of staying up until three in the morning playing games seem to be behind me right now. But right now in my PS3 is The Last of Us, and one of my cohorts, Troy Baker, is in there, along with lots of other talented people that I work with.

I'm definitely an avid gamer, though. I grew up playing games, and I remember Christmas 1981 when my Dad got us an Intellivision and we all sat around and played Astrosmash for hours on end. It was a big part of my youth. We had everything from Intellevision to the Commodore 64 and video games were a part of my youth. I still really enjoy playing. I'm very much looking forward to Arkham Origins. Sadly, I'm pretty far behind in my other games. I don't think I finished Assassin's Creed: Revelations yet!


DoG: You have the opposite experience with Batman as you do with Captain America, as there have been so many high-profile Batmen, and you're following Kevin Conroy. Have you looked anywhere in particular for inspiration on your take on Batman?

RCS: It's not lost on me the shoes I have to fill. I don't know if there's much else I'm allowed to say right now but, October 25th can't get here fast enough. We're all very excited about this game!

DoG: You were Captain Marvel on Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes, and you were the first guy to play him in other media. What was that like?

RCS: I wasn't a comic book kid when I was growing up, so I didn't know a lot about the character's backstory. But the interesting thing about Mar-Vell was the kind of stilted approach to his delivery to indicate that he's an alien. They didn't want me to be too casual and contemporary with the delivery, but we also didn't want to push it too far where he'd get boring.

It was interesting, though. Compared to everybody else in his circle he had a very proper, measured way of speaking. He wasn't an overly emotional character. But that was a collaborative effort, too. You're working with a director, writers, producers, and everyone kind of throws their two cents in about their vision. But trying to finesse his delivery to where he isn't your "normal human being" but also not "trying-to-sound-like-a-robot" was a fine line. That was a great series, though, and an immensely talented cast. Hopefully the same thing is in store for Avengers Assemble. The writing is phenomenal, the performances are great, and it all feels right!

Like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter for all news updates related to the world of geek. And Google+, if that's your thing!


Captain America: The Winter Soldier News From D23

$
0
0
NewsMike Cecchini8/11/2013 at 10:15AM

The cast and crew of Captain America: The Winter Soldier were on the scene at D23 and had a few words to say about the upcoming film!

The stars of Captain America: The Winter Soldier were on hand at the Disney's D23 expo alongside directors Joe and Anthony Russo to tease fans about what's in store for Cap and friends in the film. Chris Evans (Captain America), Sebastian Stan (Bucky/Winter Soldier), and Anthony Mackie (Falcon) were greeted by enthusiastic fans, and dropped a few hints about the tone of the highly-anticipated sequel. In particular, co-director, Anthony Russo, was very specific about what fans can expect.
 
“We had a strong vision for the movie, a specific direction to move in that was different from everything they've done up to this point, and the Marvel team were very supportive...Cap fights very differently than he did in his previous films, but we were able to re-set him in a way, because time has passed and he's embraced the modern world. Now he's working for S.H.I.E.L.D., he wants to be the best operative he can be, study different forms of fighting.” 
 
As for the style of the film, Russo said, "There are a lot of clips we pulled from '70s thrillers, some of our favourite films to show to the creative team,” he continued. “Things we were looking for, we're big fans of De Palma and the way he would eke out tension in scenes. We grew up cinephiles and film fanatics, and for us this was a chance to try our hand at stuff that inspired us as kids.”
 
There's more from the D23 panel, including quotes from Anthony Mackie and Sebastian Stan over at Empire Online!
 

Like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter for all news updates related to the world of geek. And Google+, if that's your thing!

What an Older Batman Could Really Mean

$
0
0
FeatureDavid Crow8/11/2013 at 11:31PM

We examine what WB's quest for a middle aged Batman could really mean for the approach to 2015's Batman/Superman film, as well as the latest Internet rumors about the casting.

Batman fans have had a rollercoaster of a month. It is hard to believe that just 30 days ago, many were confident that the always suspect rumors of a Batman Beyond film being the next caped and cowled adventure would come to fruition. And in the lead-in to Comic-Con, reports sprang up of Warner Bros. licensing the Batman name again for 2015. Were they going to truly reboot the superhero so soon after his heartfelt closing bow in The Dark Knight Rises?
 
The answer, of course, turned out to be yes, no, but also maybe. When Zack Snyder had character actor Harry Lennix clear his throat and read an iconic page from The Dark Knight Returns, fans went into a fit about who could play Batman in the a forthcoming 2015 “World’s Finest” (likely not the title) film. We even ran a list of possible names to fill those leathery boots. But many of these early reactions took something for granted: It would be a fully rebooted Batman to stand as a peer to Henry Cavill’s Superman, not a veteran superior. It is here that we may have been missing more clearly what Warner Brothers is aiming to do in 2015.
 
In multiple reports last week, including from such varied sources as Batman-On-Film to the major trade The Hollywood Reporter, it became clear that WB is seeking a Batman who will be in his late 30s or even possibly his early 40s. THR even announced the early surfacing names of Josh Brolin (46), Richard Armitage (41) and Max Martini (43). Besides the initial satisfaction of deafening silence from self-assured fanboys, who had insisted amongst themselves that the next Batman must be around 30 or younger to match Cavill, this news presents a whole host of important things to consider about the next Batman/Superman film. And I mean more than who is going to wear the cowl.

 
NOT A NEW BEGINNING
 
The most obvious, but important aspect to address is that this represents an about face away from how Nolan rebooted the Batman franchise in 2005.
 
During the week of Man of Steel’s release, David Goyer said in an interview that his and Zack Snyder’s first Superman movie marked the first superhero in their film universe. There is no Batman, no Wonder Woman and no Aquaman. Or if there are, then they have yet to put on the costume to fight the good fight.
 
The idea is that Superman is the first one. There might be people helping people, but not in costumes, and that Superman comes forward and announces himself to the world. In him announcing himself, he’s the one that changes things.
 
This coupled with certain Easter eggs, such as a Wayne Enterprise satellite, led many fans to believe that the new Batman franchise would go the full reboot. If Cavill’s Last Son of Krypton is this DC Cinematic Universe’s paterfamilias hero, then at best Bruce Wayne could just be stepping off the boat back to Gotham. Could that mean another Batman Begins? Hopefully not, and it would appear that the studio had the same thoughts, as they turned the Super-sequel into an extension of franchise world building.
 
The truth is that as late when Goyer talked toDen of Geek that the plan was to focus on expanding Superman’s role in the world. In that interview, the discussion veered more toward one bald billionaire, as opposed to the batty kind. And last month, Superman Homepage quoted Snyder as saying, “However, regardless of how I feel about Superman, ultimately I have to go along with the direction that Warner Bros. thinks is best.”
 
Taken together, the information tends to point to the obvious: WB wanted Batman in the Man of Steel sequel for a primarily financial reason. While Man of Steel is an inarguable box office success, taking in an impressive $600 million in the worldwide tallies alone at the moment, it has not lived up to the billion dollar dreams whispered about in pre-release predictions. Considering that the previous Superman film, 2006’s Superman Returns, couldn’t even crack $400 million in the global market, this 2013 run is nothing to smash IHOP over. But do you know what else is coming out in summer 2015? Pirates of the Caribbean 5, The Avengers 2 and a little sequel called Star Wars: Episode VII. Besides all being owned by Disney, these three films have one other thing in common: their previous entries all earned over $800 million worldwide, and a clean billion in the case of Avengers and Pirates. Superman’s $600 million, alone, looks a might bit intimidating as they enter that competitive global field. Luckily, the last two movies that just so happened to feature Batman both cleared $1 billion as well.

 
Thus, instead of spending a whole second adventure with the Man of Tomorrow building his status quo today, we are receiving WB’s finest counter to Disney’s three-headed box office hydra. Suddenly, a green around the gills Batman, less than 10 years after Nolan did the full Batman reboot, no longer looks so appealing. Especially considering the backlash Sony suffered in 2012 when they rebooted 2002’s Spider-Man origin with The Amazing Spider-Man, an “untold” origin story that…roughly told the same story.
 
To differentiate itself from the previous Batman reboot that will be nary a decade old in 2015, the new Batman will have to be older. But even the most diehard Bat-fans who had dreams of Karl Urban can remain somewhat hopeful about the flipside. An aged Batman means the reboot, by necessity, will have to ignore the more grounded take of Nolan’s approach where the human body can eventually age and give out like that of any athlete. Bruce Wayne was roughly 40 by the end of The Dark Knight Rises, give or take six months, and was ready to retreat away to Italy for charming coffees by the Arno with Selina Kyle forever after. This team-up Batman is one who is ready to grapple with a god. Why not a plant lady or a man made of clay? But rest assured, with this god he will clash.

 
THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS
 
As detailed in Mike Cecchini’s fantastic piece about direct correlations with The Dark Knight Returns and the upcoming film, the project will likely take more from Frank Miller’s groundbreaking graphic novel than just a cool auditory prompt for Lennix’s voice.
 
As it stands, the graphic novel has been on the minds of many people prior to this announcement. Consider that in the late 1990s, after the legendary failure of Batman & Robin forced WB to scrap a fifth franchise entry already entitled Batman: Triumphant, the studio would begin a long and hazardous road of false starts and failed ideas until Christopher Nolan unleashed his back-to-basics approach eight years later. In that time, WB went through many treatments, not least of all a shortly considered Batman Beyond live-action film to be written by Paul Dini and a Batman vs. Superman movie directed by then-hot Wolfgang Petersen with stars Josh Hartnett and Colin Farrell.
 
My how subject matters have changed in these comic book movie discussions.
 
But one of the earliest, and more desperate, attempts to reboot the series came from Joel Schumaucher himself, who suggested that he adapt The Dark Knight Returns into a film. Rumor has it that he even wanted Clint Eastwood for the role. While Warners decided it was best to go in a new direction of directorial talent, there is no denying that the studio’s antagonistic view of the Batman/Superman relationship in the following years, as emphasized by the aborted 2004 project of “Batman VERSUS Superman,” could only be informed by Frank Miller. Zack Snyder certainly is.
 
In 2009, while doing promotion for Watchmen, future Superman director Zack Snyder famously said that he would be interested in adapting The Dark Knight Returns. And as every geek now knows, the director has since met with Miller to discuss his own upcoming team-up movie, one that Goyer says could possibly be called “Batman VERSUS Superman.”

 
We have come full circle, because it seems that the only source of information on the Batman/Superman relationship that is being read behind the scenes is the one in which Batman beats Superman to a bloody pulp. Yes, Snyder says this is its own film with a unique and original storyline, yet all of the recent DC films from Christopher Nolan, or his former collaborators, have their literary roots. Batman Begins drew liberally from Year One, The Dark Knight was clearly informed by The Long Halloween and The Killing Joke, while The Dark Knight Rises drew direct parallels to Knightfall and No Man’s Land. And Snyder, for all his machismo-laced, chest hair popping, Kryptonian neck-breaking flourishes, obviously at least glanced at the Superman story Birthright. And when this kind of guy is meeting Frank Miller to discuss the team-up film, you know that they are not going over how awesome the Paul Dini/Bruce Timm World’s Finest animated film was from the 1990s.
 
An older Batman does not just mean merely a more seasoned approach in introduction to get the ball rolling, which is actually how both Batman: The Animated Series and the video game Arkham Asylum approached their adaptations; it is quite evident that we are going to get a Batman designed to kick Superman’s ass and be his SUPER-ior.
 
When the movie is released in 2015, studly Superman actor Henry Cavill will be 32. At the moment, his youthful but commanding face has given him an advantage in demanding respect over certain other recent actors who’ve play the role. However, the newly emerging fan favorite for Batman, Josh Brolin, shall be 48 around the same time. In other words, one is going to look like Robert Redford’s inexperienced and wild Sundance Kid in the shadow of the other’s Paul Newman/Butch Cassidy. Audiences will have no doubt who is calling the shots, and in a superhero movie toying with the word “versus” for its title, this means the older, crusty Batman is going to have to assert himself over this uppity whippersnapper in a red cape. Heck he could even say, “I want you to remember my hand at your throat.”

 
Casting an older Batman almost guarantees an influence on their relationship stemming from The Dark Knight Returns; a relationship built on some form of hostile confrontation. Even when the undoubted friendship is built by the end, following the likely defeat of a certain baldhead, it will more probably be one resembling mentor and a pupil or father and son, as opposed to brothers in arms.
 
Currently, it appears that WB wants a Dark Knight who can lord over the less box office successful Man of Steel, and one who can allow a certain level of creative adaptation of The Dark Knight Returns. Not a direct transfer with Superman taking orders from Ronald Reagan, but possibly one that allows Snyder to realize his dream of a Batman returning from the shadows to butt heads with a Superman who currently has a cozy relationship with the U.S. Air Force. Perhaps an Air Force who is still reeling, for some reason, at the existence of Batman. It wouldn’t be the first time fans could witness a closet adaptation of Miller’s 1985 comic masterpiece. After all, Nolan took cues from it in his final 2012 crusading opus. And WB liked that $2.5 billion take on the character. They liked it a lot.

 
*THE* DARK KNIGHT RETURNS?
 
There is no doubt that when the credits went up, along with Joseph Gordon-Levitt upon a rising platform, at the end of The Dark Knight Rises that the Nolan interpretation of the character was over. Not least of all because Nolan said so and as goes Nolan, so goes his cast.
 
It is for that reason that the March rumors, propagated by Latino Review,stating Nolan would produce a Justice League film while playing the role of a Joss Whedon like shepherd of the DC Universe in which Bale would return to the Bat-mantle, always seemed farfetched. Indeed even now, new rumors from the same site suggest that Christian Bale has been offered $50 million to reprise the role of Bruce Wayne for the Man of Steel sequel. Though in the last day, it appears that this latest Latino Review rumor is from a quote taken out of context from an unpublished eBook that was merely playing at speculation.  Obviously, WB has said goodbye to their prodigal Dark Knight. Right?
 
Whether the internet-forum booming unsubstantiated news from an eBook by Victor Russell is correct or wild speculation, it points to the same inevitability: WB cannot let the general audience-beloved Nolan/Bale take go, even if they are going through the motions of it.
 
Five years ago, Marvel Studios released its second film. It was a clean reboot of the famed Bruce Banner alter-ego, The Incredible Hulk. Yet, despite clearly announcing that they would be rebooting and differentiating themselves from the maligned 2003 Ang Lee film, Hulk, with an entirely new cast to boot, the semi-remake conveniently picked up exactly where the 2003 box office flop left off; Bruce Banner is on the run from the U.S. military in the jungles and favelas of South America.

 
At the end of 2003’s Hulk, Bruce Banner has said a tearful goodbye to Betty Ross, as he flees the country to South American jungles, all to escape the grasp of Betty’s distant and obsessive father, U.S. Army General Thaddeus “Thunderbolt” Ross.   In 2008’s The Incredible Hulk, Bruce Banner is living in the squalor of Rio de Janeiro when Ross finds him, setting Bruce on the road for the first time in years, which takes him back into the arms of Betty Ross. While all three principals are played by different actors in the two films, and there is no mention to an evil Hulk dad in the 2008 movie that also features a confusingly muddled new origin tacked on to the opening credits, there is little separating the films’ continuity. In fact, if you wandered into a screening of The Incredible Hulk five minutes late, it could play entirely as a sequel to the previous film with a new cast and tone.
 
Huh.
 
So, if Marvel Studios is that unwilling to give a full reboot five years after the first one bombed at the box office, to the point where they literally pick up where the previous film left off in their “reboot,” then what are the odds that Warner Brothers is going to entirely scrap at least the loose setting of the billion-dollar Dark Knight franchise? Indeed, it makes far more sense to even pursue such a soft reboot with this franchise, as just the faintest brand recognition will mean many more seats filled at the theaters.
 
To be clear, I am not suggesting that Man of Steel 2 will directly pick up after The Dark Knight Rises with a new actor playing that distinct Bruce Wayne. I am suggesting that they will IMPLY it. To the point where the uninitiated who don’t follow internet rumors or connect inter-film continuity through dozens of repeat screenings may just assume it is a follow-up. Especially if the only thing differentiating the continuities is a three-minute opening sequence.

 
There is no denying that the first half of The Dark Knight Rises is incredibly influenced by The Dark Knight Returns. In the graphic novel, Bruce Wayne has retired for ten years after the death of his beloved second Robin, Jason Todd, and become a self-destructive alcoholic with a death wish in racecar driving. It is only after he sees his city decay into complete anarchy and old friend Harvey Dent/Two-Face return to his criminal ways that Bruce Wayne comes out of retirement to save the day. In The Dark Knight Rises, Bruce Wayne has been written, a little less cynically, to have retired for eight years after the death of his beloved confidant Rachel Dawes, and has thrown himself into reclusive Howard Hughes behavior when he isn’t feeding his hero complex by developing (and failing) a fusion project meant to solve our energy crisis and climate change problems. When old friend James Gordon is injured by a mysterious terrorist named Bane, he dons the costume once more.
 
In both stories, Batman retires at the end, after faking his death, while leaving a successor(s) to carry on the mission. However, one crucial part of that graphic novel that Nolan skipped for obvious reasons is that the U.S. government is furious about the return of the strangely creepy Dark Knight and that they send the Man of Steel in to teach him a lesson.
 
Imagine now, a Man of Steel 2 where Superman’s introduction to the world, which led to a fistfight that leveled Metropolis, catches the eyes of a retired caped crusader who thought his work was done, a Dark Knight living in Europe after a long history of Gotham City crimefighting. The movie never even has to mention Catwoman or John Blake/Robin. It simply has to suggest that a retired Batman discovers that aliens walk amongst us and returns from Europe to investigate this Kal-El in Metropolis. Even if Josh Brolin or any other middle aged actor portrays him, the mental dots for the less ardent comic book movie enthusiasts will be made within seconds.

 
And that, in this humble writer’s opinion, is the real reason why we are getting an older Batman in 2015. It is not just to differentiate itself from Nolan’s early Batman films; it is to BECOME Nolan’s Batman through ambiguous and unspecified plotting and tonal similarities. Considering that Bale’s Batman was about 40 in 2012, it is remarkable how familiar and comforting a mid-40s Batman will feel in 2015.
 
Agree? Disagree? Still convinced Batman will be played by Ryan Gosling? Leave a comment below and let us know what you think!
 
***Thanks to Mike Cecchini for being an idea soundboard.
 
Like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter for all news updates related to the world of geek. And Google+, if that's your thing!

31 Video Games Heading to Film

$
0
0
NewsMegan McGill8/12/2013 at 7:25AM

Some are due out relatively soon, while others are stuck in development hell. Here are 31 videogames with movies planned...

Out of the hundreds of thousands of films in the world currently in development, a large number of them serve as adaptations for (mostly) successful videogames and videogame franchises. Some have been seen on our screens before either via a previous adaptation or television series, while some are just getting their first shot on the big screen.

[Related: Video Game Movies: What Makes Them Fail So Hard?]

Whichever category they fall into, they still have to navigate their way through the difficult world of filmmaking with many of them inevitably forever damned to development hell. The following are just a few of these adaptations hoping to someday become a success.

Agent 47 (Hitman) - TBA

The Fast And The Furious’ Paul Walker is set to take to the screen as Agent 47, taking over where Timothy Olyphant left off after the 2007 Hitman film quietly and unsuccessfully graced our screens. The new film intends to serve as a reboot of the previous one, telling the origin story of the red tie, black suited protagonist. Filming is due to begin this summer.

Angry Birds - 2016

The Angry Birds franchise currently stands as the largest mobile app success in the world, so a film appears to be the next step of progression for this massive money-making vehicle. A 3D CG animated feature, Angry Birds will be produced by Marvel Studios former CEO, now Rovio senior advisor David Maisel, and is set for release in 2016.

Assassin’s Creed - 2015

A film adaptation for the Assassin's Creed franchise has been on the cards for several years now, with Michael Fassbender both co-producing and starring in this 2015 release. Intended to be made in 3D, it's unknown which character Fassbender will be playing, whether old favourites Altair ibn-La’Ahad or Ezio Auditore de Firenze, the newcomers Ratonhnhaké:ton or Edward Kenway, or a new character altogether. By the looks of it this film may actually happen, but only time will tell.

Asteroids - TBA

In 2009, Universal acquired the rights to vintage blaster Asteroids. Very little has been released about this title other than Lorenzo di Bonaventura, the producer of Transformers and the GI Joe series, being involved. What story would this film have? Two years ago we had no idea, and today is the just the same. It looks to us that this one may be stuck in development hell.

Bioshock - TBA

Now an even bigger franchise since the release of Bioshock Infinite, Bioshock seems an interesting yet natural progression for this award-winning collection of stunning games. Pirates Of The Caribbean’s Gore Verbinski was set to direct before he dropped out, and in March this year, it was cancelled completely after the box office failure of the R-rated Watchmen.

Universal were wary of spending too much on an adult-themed movie, and suggested a less expensive, $80 million version of Bioshock instead. Verbinski refused to accept a lower budget, so a new director was brought in and swiftly carted back out again. As of today the project has, disappointingly, been canned - by none other than Bioshock's creator, Ken Levine.

"It may happen one day, who knows," Levine said of the stalled project, "but it'd have to be the right combination of people."

Deus Ex - TBA

Deux Ex is the perfect example of a videogame adaptation that looks set to not actually happen. Originally announced in 2002, it was scheduled for release in 2006, only to be completely cancelled two years before. Nothing has been heard since.

Devil May Cry - TBA

In 2011, the company that gained great success with the Resident Evil franchise, Screen Gems, announced the plans for a Devil May Cry film. Little has been revealed about this plan other than it will be an origin story with the original character style.

Far Cry - TBA

Uwe Boll may have done his very damnedest to break any chance of a compelling Far Cry movie being made with his own unique take on the material, but Ubisoft is coming back around for another go. This time, it's looking to invest more heavily and retain a greater degree of creative control over the film. It would be no understatement - as much as Mr Boll brings a smile to our face - to suggest that's a good idea.

Gears Of War - TBA

Gears Of War is the perfect example of a film adaptation stuck in development hell. New directors have been constantly reappointed and the $100 million budget reduced. It doesn’t look promising.

Ghost Recon/Splinter Cell - TBA

Warner Bros and Michael Bay are reportedly teaming up to create a film adaptation of Tom Clancy’s Ghost Recon. Little else has been said other than Warner’s statement regarding the release of Assassin’s Creed and Splinter Cell too. More has been revealed about Splinter Cell, with Tom Hardy cast as Sam Fisher and Eric Warren Singer being appointed as screenwriter.

God Of War - TBA

God Of War was originally announced in 2005 after the game's release, but was dropped four years later by the director. Daniel Craig turned down the lead role and that seemed to be the end of it. However, last year Pacific Rim’s writers were hired for the story and a few details were released. The film will hopefully strive to humanise the character of Kratos and focus on his backstory, heading in a ‘bolder’ direction than that of the games. But the film has moved no further than this, and there's still with no director even though a $150 million budget has been earmarked. Can it be done?

Gran Turismo - TBA

Further down this list, we're going to be mentioning the currently-in-post-production Need For Speed movie. Sony, not wanting to be outdone, has decided to bring its own fast cars game to the big screen as well. As such, a film based around Gran Turismo is in the very early stages of development, guided by producers Dana Brunetti and Mike De Luca. The pair are also working on bringing Fifty Shades Of Grey to the screen, so it might be best if they work on different projects on different days. Just a suggestion...

Halo – TBA

It was announced in 2005 that Peter Jackson was set to produce a Halo film adaptation, helmed by director Neill Blomkamp. After numerous script rewrites and the stopping and starting of preproduction, the project was declared dead two years later. The two directors later collaborated on District 9, and in spite of occasional discussions and rumours that spring up, the Halo movie seems stuck in development, where it's likely to remain for some time to come.

Heavy Rain - TBA

Noir masterpiece Heavy Rain seems naturally cinematic on its own, but a film adaptation is in fact in the works. The rights were acquired by New Line days after the game’s demo at 2006’s E3 and sold at auction to production company Unique Features. The film was soon after fast tracked by Warner, and NYPD Blue writer David Milch was hired to write the story in 2011. Little else has been released about the film since then.

Heavenly Sword - TBA

A CG animated film version of Ninja Theory’s Heavenly Sword is currently in production with no known release date. Scripted by the writer of Drive Angry, the film will star the voice talents of Fringe’s Anna Torv, Spider-Man 2’s Alfred Molina and The Punisher himself, Thomas Jane.

Kane & Lynch - TBA

It was initially planned for an adaptation of the Kane & Lynch series to burst onto our screens this year, starring Bruce Willis and Jamie Foxx respectively. Saturday Night Live’s Jon Lovitz was rumoured to star in a mystery role, but as of this year the release date has been set to ‘unknown’, and the two lead roles are still unconfirmed. A release this year is more than unlikely.

Mortal Kombat - 2014

In 1995 we saw a Mortal Kombat adaptation and in 1997 a sequel. By the looks of it, we’re in with the treat of another, directed by Kevin Tancharoen. Tancharoen previously released a short film in 2010 titled Mortal Kombat: Rebirth as a concept for a franchise reboot, which was later the pilot for the web series of the same title. In 2011, it was confirmed he was to direct a full-length film adaptation of the game franchise.

Metal Gear Solid - TBA

Metal Gear Solid film adaptation was put into preproduction late last year after six years of development. With supposed interest from Christian Bale, all we know is that the film will be set in Alaska. Watch this space.

Need For Speed - 2014

Need For Speed is one videogame film adaptation that actually looks as though it's moving along nicely. Due for release next March, we’ve been graced with stills and footage from the film. Starring Breaking Bad’s Aaron Paul, Dominic Cooper and Kid Cudi, this $75 million budget feature may actually be a film worth seeing. Writers from Real Steel have penned the story and Act Of Valor’s Scott Waugh directs this as his second feature.

Ratchet And Clank - 2015

A 3D CGI adaptation of the ever-popular Ratchet And Clank series has been announced for 2015. Starring the same voice actors as the original games, the film will retell the events of the original story and the meeting of the two characters.

Raving Rabbids - TBA

Very few details have been released about a Raving Rabbids film other than the plan for it to be live action with CG rabbits, a completely new story and Ubisoft in charge of development.

Resident Evil - 2014

The Resident Evil film franchise boasts a large number of sequels, and this number is set to increase to seven with the sixth and seventh installments already in the works. Milla Jovovich is set to return as Alice in Resident Evil 6, set for a release late next year. Director Paul WS Anderson already has the original film, Afterlife and Retribution under his belt, so he's well versed  in the series' trappings by now. A reboot of the series is also planned for the future.

Rollercoaster Tycoon - TBA

Sony picked up the rights to Rollercoaster Tycoon in 2010, and now a live action/CG hybrid film is set to be made. Norwegian director Harald Zwart supposedly helms this interesting choice of adaptation and a storyline has not yet been released. What can we expect from this? We honestly have no idea.

Street Fighter - 2014

At the Capcom panel at this year’s Comic-Con, it was announced that filming has begun for a live-action series titled Street Fighter: Assassin’s Fist. A cast list has been announced and the show is set to be bilingual. The series will be directed by The Bourne Ultimatum and Street Fighter: Legacy’s Joey Ansah and is set for release next year.

Spy Hunter - TBA

The rights for Spy Hunter have been owned by Universal since 2003, with Resident Evil’s Paul WS Anderson hired as director in 2007 after John Woo and appointed star Dwayne ‘The Rock’ Johnson dropped out. He was soon replaced by Zombieland and Gangster Squad director Ruben Fleischer. Little else is known as of today.

Tekken - TBA

A prequel to the 2010 Tekken adaptation is currently in development, set to be directed by Thai martial arts director Prachya Pinkaew. No date is attached to this film as of yet.

Tomb Raider - TBA

The first Tomb Raider adaptation starring Angelina Jolie was the highest-grossing film adaptation of a videogame ever released in the US. A complete reboot of the franchise is currently in planning stages after the rights were received in 2011 by GK Films. Planned as an origin story with a younger Lara, MGM are officially involved and Buffy writer Marti Noxon will provide the script.

Uncharted - TBA

Uncharted and Nathan Fillion would have been the ideal combination, but this dream has finally been crushed, with it looking almost certain that Mark Wahlberg will be starring in this popular franchise's adaptation. The writers of National Treasure have signed up, so expect plenty of treasure hunting goodness.

Warcraft - 2015

Things are finally looking set to happen with Warcraft, with it recently being announced that Moon director Duncan Jones would be grappling with this enormous task. Set to shoot next year, early planning footage was revealed only days ago at Comic-Con, with the director himself present to discuss the project. A 2015 release has been estimated.

[Related: 5 Potential Plots for the World of Warcraft Movie]

Watch Dogs - TBA

UbiSoft has plenty of confidence in its upcoming winter gaming release Watch Dogs. So much so that it's already looking to bring the property to the big screen. Given that the game isn't even out yet, this isn't the top priority for the firm as it stands. It'll likely look for a production partner once the videogame is in stores.


Disqus - noscript

how in the world would they make a rollercoaster tycoon movie? I mean, especially a live action/cgi combo. Those are badddd

No Mass Effect? Is there a better story out there? Can Hollywood tycons not see the potential for this?

Yeah I'm also surprised by this. I'd definitely like to see a mass effect movie

same way on how they made a movie out of the baord game Battleship haha

Some games I never heard of; all on PS3.

I hate Xbox 360. I hate that bought one. I hate that I had to buy a second one. I hate that I paid all those years of sub when 90% of the time it was for netflix or renting movies. I hate all the controllers I went through even though I am moderate gamer and very clean. I hate that I can't even use it as a blu ray player.

I heard PS4 was going to make you pay for a sub if you wanted online gaming but not for apps. That sounds fine. Wonder if its PS3 game compatible.

They better not touch it unless a really really good writer gets his hands on the script and then hands it over to James Cameron. He has the chops to direct it but if he writes it, it'd be nothing like the game and it'd be cliched.

Batman casting rumor round-up

$
0
0
NewsSimon Brew8/12/2013 at 7:34AM

Casting rumours abound for Zack Snyder's Batman/Superman movie. Specifically surrounding who's going to play Batman...

We suspect that, until the moment that Warner Bros confirms its choice to play Batman in the upcoming Batman/Superman movie, we're going to see a lot of names linked with the role of the Caped Crusader. Director Zack Snyder and writer David S Goyer haven't yet got a screenplay in place for the movie, the follow-up to Man Of Steel, but that hasn't stopped the speculation game.

Last week, for instance, names included Ryan Gosling, Josh Brolin (the reported frontrunner), Richard Armitage, Matthew Goode, Max Martini and Joe Manganiello.

Since then, though, a few more faces have been thrown into the mix. Watchmen star Jeffrey Dean Morgan, for instance, was rumoured to be reuniting with director Zack Snyder by taking on the Batman role.

Then, at the end of last week, on British actor Scott Adkins' official Twitter account, a Tweet appeared reading "Some BIG news fans!! Warner Brothers have approached Scott Adkins to audition to be the new Batman & he has". Said Tweet has since, perhaps unsurprisingly, disappeared.

The latest name to be thrown into the mix we suspect can be thrown straight back out again, given that it's turned up in a British tabloid. But for the sake of completion, the paper quotes a senior Warner Bros source as saying Orlando Bloom is in line for the role. Specifically, that "Orlando looks odds-on to get the part even before our first casting call".

Appreciating our recent track record on this isn't great, we would be willing to bet that Orlando Bloom isn't odds-on to get the part, and we'd be surprised if he got it. That's nothing against the man, it's just we've never really got a Batman vibe off him.

The casting of Batman may be a little way off yet, given that the Batman/Superman movie isn't supposed to start shooting until next year. As we hear more, we'll, of course, let you know...

Twitter.
Express.

Follow our Twitter feed for faster news and bad jokes right here. And be our Facebook friend here.

Disqus - noscript

Valet, Odds-On? What kind of chav dialect are you typing in? At least you're info is correct and up to date.

Scott Adkins and his flying spin kicks would be right out the comic book! Cast him !

I wish Christian Bale would just give in and do one more movie!!! Jeffrey Dean Morgan would be a great choice and Richard Armitage.

Scott Adkins would be perfect

Josh Brolin is my favorite for the role. Manganiello, Armitage, Goode would be watchable. However, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE don't cast Ryan Gosling or Orlando Bloom as Batman. I will not see a movie with either of these two actors as Bats.

Scott adkins doesnt have the smart look to him sorry but batman must be good looking and smart looking. Get Bale back offer him downey jr type money I mean jesus christ you want and older looking batman hmmmm wonder who that is.

Max Landis on his unused concept for Chronicle 2

$
0
0
NewsRyan Lambie8/12/2013 at 7:38AM

Over the weekend, screenwriter Max Landis tweeted about his unused script and concepts for Chronicle 2...

Last month, screenwriter Max Landis confirmed that he was no longer involved in the sequel to Chronicle, the found footage superhero movie that became a critical and financial hit in 2012.

"Fox had a different direction they wanted to take the series," Landis said on Twitter, a few months after it was reported that he'd completed a Chronicle 2 script that studio bosses were unsure about - in interviews elsewhere, Landis had said his screenplay was "really dark", and that darkness, it seems, wasn't what Fox wanted.

Over the weekend, Landis tweeted again about his screenplay, and afforded an insight into what it contained - and a better idea of exactly what Fox rejected.

"In retrospect, I'm not even sure if fans of the first movie would've been ready or eager for my second instalment as originally written," Landis wrote, in a series of tweets posted between the 10th and 11th of August. "Gone was the aspirational 'what would you do,' gone were the pranks and bromance, gone were lovely tragic Andrew and hopeful, bright Steve."

"In their place was a dark, frustratingly unblinking stare into a complicated world that posed the question, is it worth it to be a hero... Told from the point of view of a heartbroken and insane woman who would martyr herself to the cause of being the world's first villain."

It certainly sounds like a brave and very different direction for the fledgling series, and while we can see why the concept would have scared the life out of Fox executives, it could have provided a complementary chapter in the story rather than a straight retread of the first Chronicle's themes. Landis himself hoped that it would expand on the first movie, just as the best sequels have in the past.

"It was, in my estimation, a sequel that elaborated on the ideas and situations from the first to create a different genre of movie," Landis wrote. "In the best of worlds, in my optimistic but wildly prejudiced eyes, this could make it an Aliens, a Terminator 2... in the worst [case] a Grease 2."

Shortly after, Landis revealed what may have been his title for the movie - would it have been called Chronicle 2: Martyr?

"So [...] maybe it's better that Martyr never saw the light of day. Sad I didn't get to do some of my other versions."

These other versions, Landis later revealed, would have culminated in an Avengers-style team-up movie:

"The multi-movie low budget Chronicle-based found footage superhero universe culminating in an Avengers type team up was a real good one."

It's sad to think that this concept has been rejected so roundly by Fox; the original Chronicle was marked out by being so unafraid to explore adult themes, such as bullying and domestic abuse, so while the sequel does indeed sound as dark as Landis said it would be, it would also be of a piece with its predecessor. Plus, it would have had robot suits in it:

"Martyr also had two pretty cool robot suits in it. Sorta hyper realistic Iron Man stuff. Magnetic flight, sonic weaponry. Cool, cool stuff."

A new writer's been put on the Chronicle 2 production, and while we'll have to wait and see what direction it'll go in next, we can only look back on those Martyr tweets and wonder at the sequel that could have been.

Disqus - noscript

Chronicle was terrible. I don't understand the love of it and of course the desire for a sequel. I really wanted to like it, but I had to apologize to my dad after we had seen it.

It was a mish-mash of stuff we've seen before and as predictable as the sky is blue. I as well am curious why the film gets praise, considering its lazy structure and its inability to give us -the audience- a character to root for.

Then again, this is Hollywood, be it a small budget film or a tent-pole. It's all about the plot and nothing about the characters. I mean, Brooks does give it a shot, but in the end you clearly saw everyone in black and white. No one does anything the viewing audience did not see coming two weeks before seeing it.

I predict that Chronicle 2 will be, basically, the same film as the first. Because the folks from the low end of the gene pool -both the studio and the people who will see it -don't want the next step in the evolutionary life of a franchise. They just accept dullness because it has cool CGI effect and explosions.

I'm of the same camp that doesn't understand the fan worship Chronicle/Landis gets. Landis' style was novel, to a degree, but the narrative was anything but. Especially coming from someone who is as vocal as he is, Landis should take his own advice that he harps on other blockbuster movies about and focus on the character. His characters are hardly creative, cliche at best.

Director Alan Taylor on Thor: The Dark World rumors

$
0
0
NewsSimon Brew8/12/2013 at 7:39AM

The director of Marvel's Thor 2 comments on rumours of all not being well behind the scenes...

Some rumours sprang up earlier in the year that suggested all was not well behind the scenes of Marvel's upcoming Thor: The Dark World. In particular, that Marvel and director Alan Taylor were at loggerheads over the running time of the movie, with the latter delivering and fighting for a cut that the former wasn't happy with.

Chatting to Collider, Alan Taylor has addressed some of those rumours. "There's a rumour out there that I was hanging on to a long cut and that Marvel wanted a shorter cut", he acknowledged. "Hilariously, that was never an issue because I don't know what the running time is. The change it's going through now had nothing to do with running time. There're some tonal pushes and shoves".

Not everything with the studio had gone swimmingly, he admitted. "The one fall-out I had with Marvel was over music. I had a composer that I really wanted to go with, and it didn't work out with Marvel". Taylor had wanted Carter Burwell to score the movie, while Iron Man 3's Brian Tyler has now got the job.

"So, I was unhappy with that, but I heard the rumour about running time. Not true, I have no idea how long the movie is now. It's all about making the movie better and better and arm-wrestling over what 'better' means. But there have been no running time issues", he added.

It's well worth reading the full interview, where Taylor confirms one or two reshoots, and talks about working with Marvel. You can find it at Collider here.

Is this Vin Diesel's mystery Marvel role?

$
0
0
NewsSimon Brew8/12/2013 at 7:43AM

Remember Vin Diesel teasing a meeting with Marvel? Looks like he's signing up for Guardians Of The Galaxy...

Production is now underway on Marvel's second movie release of 2014, Guardians Of The Galaxy. James Gunn is directing, and the movie was on location in London over the weekend.

And it seems as if one mystery may well have been solved, that's to do with the movie. Just before Comic-Con, Vin Diesel teased on his Facebook page both that he'd been asked for a meeting with Marvel Studios, and subsequently that said meeting had taken place.

So what was the mystery role that Diesel was linked with? Well, multiple sources are now reporting that he's going to be lending his vocal talents to Groot in the movie. Groot is a living tree creature, who doesn't have too much to say, but it looks like he'll be saying it with Diesel's voice. It'd be remiss of us not to give Vin Diesel's excellent voice work in Brad Bird's classic The Iron Giant a nod at this point.

Guardians Of The Galaxy is set for release on 1st August 2014. More details as we get them...

Disqus - noscript

Groot keeps what he kills.


Guardians of the Galaxy: Everything We Know

$
0
0
NewsMike Cecchini8/12/2013 at 12:05PM

Just like the title says, everything we know about Marvel's Guardians Of The Galaxy movie in one place. UPDATED with news on Vin Diesel's role!

Guardians of the Galaxy hits theaters on August 1st, 2014, and we'll continue reporting everything that comes our way. But until then, we figured that now is a good time to put everything we know about one of Marvel's riskier films in one place for your reading convenience. 

The cast of Guardians of the Galaxy is pretty impressive for a movie based on a relatively unknown Marvel comic book. Since the Guardians' roster has changed considerably (and constantly) since their introduction in 1969, this particular selection of members, while familiar to readers of recent Marvel Comics, may reveal a bit more about the film's plot and the future of the Marvel Universe than you might expect.


We've seen Chris Pratt make a dramatic physical change in order to play the leader of the Guardians, Star-Lord. Michael Rooker is Yondu, one of the few Guardians characters that has been around since the concept was first introduced. There are now multiple reports that Vin Diesel has been cast as the voice of Groot, including this not-so-cryptic update from the actor's own Facebook page! As of now, the voice of Rocket Raccoon hasn't been cast, but since he's a CGI character, there's still plenty of time to get the right person (or...erm...raccoon) for the role.

The casting of John C. Reilly as Rhomann Dey (a heroic Nova Corps leader) and Glenn Close as Nova Prime increases both the scope of the film and the reach of the Marvel movie universe. The question is whether or not the Nova Corps still exists, or if they've been wiped out and John C. Reilly is playing a survivor of a bygone era. Still, San Diego Comic-Con attendees did at least get to see the Nova Corps uniforms up close, and nobody (and I mean NOBODY) ever thought that would happen. Just as Marvel has been positioning the Guardians of the Galaxy comic for big things over the last six months, they've been doing the same with Nova. Don't be surprised if Novais one of those mystery Marvel Phase Three projects released between 2016-2017.


The presence of Zoe Saldana as Gamora, a green-skinned beauty known in the comics as "the most dangerous woman in the galaxy," hints at another potential plot point. You see, Gamora is the adopted daughter of Thanos, the cosmic madman who was famously teased at the end of The Avengers. It is still somewhat vague how large a role Thanos' role in  Guardians of the Galaxy will be, other than as a mastermind, but it's likely that his presence will be heavily felt, especially when you consider that Drax the Destroyer (played by former WWE Superstar, Dave Bautista) has an origin which, at least in the comics, relies fairly heavily on his involvement. 

As far as baddies go, Lee Pace is playing Ronan the Accuser and Djimon Hounsou is Korath the Pursuer, both of whom are members of the alien Kree (a race who have played quite heavily into the mythology of the Avengerscomics). Neither are really the kind of villain you hang your entire production on. A more likely source of villainy for the film comes in the form of Karen Gillan as Nebula. Who is Nebula, you ask? She's a ruthless space-pirate. Not high-stakes enough for you? She's also the granddaughter of Thanos. 

In theory, Benicio del Toro as The Collector is the big baddie of Guardians of the Galaxy. But here's the thing about the Collector: even though he's one of the "elders of the universe" this isn't necessarily a villain you hang a new franchise on. Especially not a risky one. Among the Collector's abilities is that of prophesy, and he's the guy who foresaw the coming of, you guessed it, Thanos. Yes...him again. If nothing else, Guardians of the Galaxy is going to make tremendous strides towards establishing Thanos as THE cosmic threat in the cinematic Marvel Universe.

Guardians of the Galaxy is directed by James Gunn (Slither, Super), and written by Gunn and the relatively unknown (although not for much longer!) Nicole Perlman. Marvel Studios' President, Kevin Feige is (unsurprisingly) producing, while Louis D’Esposito (you may know him from the recent Agent Carter short film), Victoria Alonso, Jeremy Latcham, Alan Fine, and Stan Lee all claim Executive Producer credit, with Nik Korda as co-producer. It's currently shooting in the UK at Shepperton Studios, but will also lens around London, including at Longcross Studios.

Like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter for all news updates related to the world of geek. And Google+, if that's your thing!


Disqus - noscript

Thanos was confirmed as being in the movie about 2 weeks ago...I don't know why you're saying he's not in it...

Thanks for catching that! Feige did confirm it at Comic-Con, the omnibus of comic book movie news. We'll avoid that in the future.

New Guardians of the Galaxy Set Photos

$
0
0
NewsDavid Crow8/12/2013 at 2:23PM

The first set pics of Guardians of the Galaxy spy some funky alien style on London's Millennium Bridge from over the weekend.

Despite a great showing at Comic-Con, Marvel’s 2014 mystery box known as Guardians of the Galaxy has remained hidden to the public at large. Halfway through production, just what will this cosmic space adventure be like?
 
It appears that we are getting our first taste of exactly that thanks to some pics snapped by sources at ComingSoon, which were gathered over the weekend when the James Gunn’s space opera moved production briefly to London’s Millennium Bridge.

 
The images promise a far funkier and far-out Marvel Universe than we have yet seen and has us intrigued about just where the Nova Corps are going to take us in August 2014. Particularly with news breaking from Vin Diesel’s Facebook page that the actor has been cast as the voice of Groot for the upcoming film.
 
You can see even more pictures at ComingSoon’s groovy link.
 
Guardians of the Galaxy releases August 1, 2014 and will star Chris Pratt, Zoe Saldana, Michael Rooker, Ophelia Lovibond, Benicio Del Toro, Djimon Honsou, Karen Gillan, Glen Close and John C. Reilly.
 
Like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter for all news updates related to the world of geek. And Google+, if that's your thing!

Disqus - noscript

yeah these look weirdddd

Kick-Ass 2 review

$
0
0
ReviewJames Hunt8/12/2013 at 8:19PM

Kick-Ass is back, but can it match the humour and impact of the original? Here's James' spoiler-free review of Kick-Ass 2...

You can't take three steps this year without tripping over a superhero sequel at the box office, and that makes it the perfect time for a follow up to Kick-Ass, the superhero-skewering action movie that was part-homage, part-parody, and all-brilliant. Three years have passed since the original, and although still produced by Matthew Vaughn, it now has a new writer-director in the shape of upstart Jeff Wadlow. But has it retained what made the original great?

For the most part, yes. It's at least as violent and satirical and funny as the original, and at times it's actually more shocking. But rather than just remake the first movie, Wadlow has done something a little different with Kick-Ass, producing a movie that's far more character-focused. It's a risk, there's no doubt about it, but it's also necessary: Kick-Ass was a firework of a movie: bright and fast and ending just at the moment you were most impressed. Wadlow's task was to turn the ashes of that into something new, and what Kick-Ass 2 lacks in spectacle, it makes up for in heart.

The movie, set a little while after the first, revisits the exploits of Dave Lizewski (Aaron Johnson) aka Kick-Ass, as he continues to fight crime armed with little more than batons and a wetsuit. Meanwhile, Mindy Macready (Chloe Grace Moretz), aka Hit-Girl, has been adopted by her late father's former partner, and sneaks out to train Dave using the techniques developed by Big Daddy. At the same time, Chris D'Amico (Christopher Mintz-Plasse) aka Red Mist (now calling himself The Motherf**ker) gets back on the path to supervillainy, desperate for revenge against the costumed crime fighters who killed his father.

There's no question that Hit-Girl was the breakout star of the original, and her role is wisely beefed up this time around. The essence of the character has definitely changed, thanks to Moretz's advancing years, but this allows her greater range. Originally a character with one (admittedly hilarious) note, the sequel sees a more subtly-written Hit-Girl, uncertain of her place in the world and pulled in multiple directions by her new, more complex obligations to both her friends and adopted parent. As she struggles to fit into high school, hers is an arc seen in a thousand teen movies - but the broad social satire that made the original Kick-Ass so identifiable is still there, preventing it from becoming trite or predictable.

It's still Dave's superhero name in the title, though, and he's continuing to fight the good fight, his enthusiasm buoyed by the imitators who've followed in his footsteps. He's soon inducted into the super-team Justice Forever, a group of Kick-Ass-style heroes led by born-again Christian Captain Stars (Jim Carrey). The diverse characters can't quite match the show-stealing genius of Hit-Girl and Big Daddy, but they're still great fun to spend time with, thanks in no small part to the affable nature of Carrey, Lindy Booth ("Night-Bitch") and Donald Faison ("Doctor Gravity").

Some have speculated that the original's British sensibilities made it less palatable to a wider American audience, but if that was true, there's no evidence that the sequel has been toned down as a response. If anything, Wadlow has made the humor more extreme. Mintz-Plasse is fantastic as Chris D'Amico: petulant, dim-witted, borderline crazy - and yet somehow sympathetic in his simple desire for parental approval. Together with aide Javier (John Leguizamo) he gets the best jokes of the entire movie.

While Kick-Ass 2 is certainly no less funny than the first, it is, by virtue of being a sequel, less novel. There are sequences which nod and reference the original – a scene featuring villainess Mother Russia (Olga Kurkulina) fighting to the folk song Korobeiniki is particularly overt in making a direct comparison with Hit-Girl's mobster-rampage from the first – but Wadlow wisely avoids getting too close to the first for fear of making it into a retread.

What this means is a sequel which takes the rare decision not to engage in a war of escalation with the first. The fights are bigger because there are more characters involved, but this means less space for the energy and stunt-work that made the originals so stunning. Still, if they're largely less spectacular, then at least this time around you care about every punch that lands.

The focus on character undoubtedly makes the movie feel more intimate, but it also makes it more complex. The victories have a cost, and it you're looking for the simple, triumphant highs that the first delivered, you're unlikely to find them here. Instead, you get a movie that's actually about something: about finding yourself, about trying to be who you want to be, and about how you know when you get there.

Whether this is what the fans of Kick-Ass will want is another matter. There's a danger that those who loved it the first time around will want it to be crazier, more violent, less grounded - but although they don't deliver that, Wadlow and crew can be sure they've made a great sequel to one of the most original superhero concepts around, and done so in a way that'll make anyone accusing them of delivering "more of the same" look foolish.

It's maybe not the sequel Kick-Ass fans will have wanted, but it's the one that the story deserves.

Jobs, Review

$
0
0
ReviewMatthew Schuchman8/13/2013 at 1:26AM

The latest piece of Steve Jobs hagiography is worse than just pandering; it's boringly inept at covering the life of the troubled Apple "iCEO."

First things first, I don’t suckle at the teat of Steve Jobs and the corporate façade that is Apple Computers. Should my pre-conceived image of Jobs play into my assessment of this Jobs? Absolutely not, and it doesn’t; yet, there are certain aspects of what is shown to the audience of this mixed message film that cannot go unmentioned. Condensing his life into two hours that span only 20 of the years he spent building his company, Jobs skips over too many important sections of the man, creating a cut and paste story of some big shot who won’t take no for an answer, instead of exploring the deeper aspects of an obviously troubled mind.
 
From his days as a college dropout to his wave of highs and lows within this company, Jobs focuses mainly on the start of Apple Computers all the way to 1996, when Steve returned to the company following a controversial exile. It’s the chronology of man who built an empire from his garage with the help of some friends, and the desire to retain the public’s view of what they want in life. Within that time period, Jobs did work with other companies in real life, most especially Pixar. These events are not covered in the film though, as this is a movie about what Steve Jobs built, and nothing else; and that right there is the problem.
 
Unless you’re making a multi-part biography, it’s impossible to cover every facet of someone’s life. The scary thing about this film though is that it swiftly breezes over all of the important issues in the man’s existence to zero in only on his struggles to make Apple in his image. In the opening section of his life as a drifting college burnout, the story drops a quick mention about his biological parents abandoning him as a child, and wraps back around to the notion of how it affects him as an adult when he willingly refuses to admit he is the father of his girlfriend’s baby for years. This side of his life is something I’m more interested to delve into and explore, not the stubborn jerk who belittles people into realizing his dreams for him. Jobs was an overwhelming control freak who couldn’t build any of his creations for himself, but could bend the will of almost anyone to get it done for him.
 
Yet too much of his background, the real meat of the troubled childhood that informed his later unstoppable force, is left so shadowed. This begs me to question how he ever got anywhere in life, if I didn’t know any better. After dropping out of college, he spends his days sleeping on campus couches and walking barefoot around the school. Though he is not enrolled or paying tuition, he still has the dean telling him he can attend any class her wants, free of charge. He cannot decide what he wants to do with his life, and the film hints that he isn’t even interested in computers; sneaking out of the classes he isn’t paying for because it bores him.
 
Cut to him sitting in a cushy job at Atari after a trip to India where the company bends over backwards to give him what he wants, even though he spends his day reeking of body odor and yelling at programmers who won’t listen to his orders to change everything. To appease his seemingly precious mind, they leave him to lead his own project, letting him come in at nights to work alone so his offensive odor won’t disrupt the other employees. Of course, he gets stuck working on his project and has to call in his pal Steve Wozniak to finish it for him, telling Wozniak he will get $300 for his work, even though Jobs will collect $5,000 for the finished product.

 
I never read Jobs’ book, I don’t know if this is how those events really happened, but this is where Jobs fails as a sloppy mess of a movie. It runs with the idea that everyone thinks Steve Jobs was God’s official re-imagining of his presence, put on Earth to deliver us gadgets to play time-consuming games on after checking our email while taking a piss. I need information that is not being provided. The film does paint the portrait of a practical cheater who never created anything for himself, just pimping other people’s ideas off as his own, burning every bridge along the way and, to steal a lyric from Elvis Costello, “taking all of the glory, and none of the shame.”
 
Whether he was right or wrong in any situation, Jobs presented himself as an insufferable twit who railed against the world when he didn’t get what he wanted. The fact that the film shows that image onscreen is fantastic, but it all comes wrapped up by playing the, “This guy is a genius card, and he knew he had to fight for what he wanted.” Take this idea as a single message and the point of film is, “You can be a complete jerk to anyone who talks to you, as long as you create something world-changing in the end.’
 
I still don’t know what the biggest draw for the film is; the fact that it’s all about people’s nerdy deity, or that he’s portrayed by Ashton Kutcher. Kutcher certainly doesn’t give a poor performance, but will it change the way some of his detractors feel about him? Maybe, but he doesn’t offer anything that could be considered earth shattering in terms of his acting abilities. He came in and did the job without ruining the picture, and that’s about it. In the end, that’s possibly the best the filmmakers could have asked for, and put in the middle of such an uneven storytelling experience; he actually is the only thing that holds the whole thing together.

 
When all is said and done, Jobs falls in line with every other thought that has been spent on Steve Jobs and what he brought to the world. It doesn’t care about the cracks and faults of a seriously troubled man, it’s just happy people on Macbooks around the world are sending messages to other people with Macbooks about how there’s a movie out there on the dude who totally created the machine their on. And he’s played by that oh so dreamy, Ashton Kutcher.
 
Den of Geek Rating: 2 out of 5 Stars
4

The Expendables 3: casting latest

$
0
0
NewsSimon Brew8/13/2013 at 8:53AM

Glen Powell is the latest to sign up for The Expendables 3, and Milla Jovovich appears to be confirmed too...

Filming on The Expendables 3 is finally set to begin next week, with Sylvester Stallone and his latest team of recruits heading to Bulgaria. And it turns out he's had time to bring in one more newcomer, with Glen Powell, of NCIS fame, joining up. He's going to play, according to The Hollywood Reporter, a combat veteran who also happens to be a drone pilot and expert computer hacker.

Furthermore, as Moviehole notes, the Bulgarian press appears to be confirming Milla Jovovich as an addition to the movie (she's certainly been rumoured), and she'll join the cast, it seems, that already includes Stallone, Dolph Lundgren, Harrison Ford, Mel Gibson and more.

The movie is set for release in August 2014 with Patrick Hughes directing. More news on it as we hear it...

Moviehole.
The Hollywood Reporter.

Viewing all 23983 articles
Browse latest View live


<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>