Following the release of 2004’s Godzilla: Final Wars, a film that marked the resilient series’ 50th anniversary, Toho Co. announced they would be taking a hiatus from Godzilla for a bit. It might be another decade before we saw a new film, they warned, which would give the King of the Monsters a rest and give the screenwriters a chance to come up with some new ideas. They’d done it before, back in 1975 and 1995, so there was no widespread panic at the news. Godzilla would be back, because Godzilla was always back. In fact it was only a few months before rumors began swirling a new Godzilla film was already in the planning stages. Some said it would be in 3-D, others that Toho was bringing back the much-maligned director of Godzilla vs. The Smog Monster. But for all the rumors, nothing ever materialized.

Nearly a decade passed before it was announced a new Godzilla film really and truly and finally was in the works. Thing was, though, this wasn’t going to be a Toho production. No, it would be an American film from Warner Brothers directed by hip youngster Gareth Edwards, who’d already cut his teeth on the giant monster front with his hit, Monsters. As the hype began to grow and Edwards stayed tight-lipped about the project, people started to get excited.

Can’t say I did, though. Yes, it’s foolish to dismiss any film before seeing it, but fact was I wasn’t a big fan of his Monsters. More importantly though, I kept recalling George Santayana’s famous quip about those who don’t remember the past and so forth. So let’s go back almost 20 years to 1995.

After Godzilla was decisively snuffed for only the second time in his then-40-year career at the end of Godzilla vs. Destroyah, Toho’s Tomoyuki Tanaka announced the studio would be giving their cash cow a breather. Let the Big Guy take a little vacation or something. But he never mentioned Godzilla would be taking that vacation in Manhattan.

After announcing the hiatus, Tanaka turned around and sold the licensing rights to Sony on a limited basis for what was supposed to be a three-picture deal. Sony immediately got to work, bringing in the sure-fire team of Roland Emmerich and Dean Devlin, who at the time were still riding high on the mega-success of their Independence Day. It was a dream match-up, right? Emmerich and Devlin obviously had a taste for mass destruction, so why not hand them an established property about a monster whose taste for mass destruction might conceivably surpass their own?

The pair was given a jaw-dropping budget, rounded up an all-star cast the youngsters would like (including Matthew Broderick and most of The Simpsons’ cast), arranged for a killer soundtrack, and started blowing up New York. Sony’s hype machine went into overdrive, the public became very excited, the merchandise began appearing on store shelves, and a new tie-in cartoon series went into production. It was a sure thing. Then in 1998 the film hit theaters, where it promptly crashed and burned. When the film is remembered at all today, it’s usually with sneers and derision.

Plans for those two sequels were quickly scrapped. Toho snatched the licensing rights back from Sony, and immediately began damage control by pushing ahead with their own Godzilla 2000 in an effort to get the true series back on track. There’s even a sly, snide jab at the Emmerich/Devlin film at the beginning of 2001's Godzilla, Mothra, King Ghidorah: Giant Monsters All Out Attack. Upon hearing about a monster attacking the East Coast of the US in 1998, a student asks, "That was Godzilla, right?" A fellow student responds, "The Americans say it was, but the guys over here have their doubts.”

So what the fuck happened?

Well, I can think of a few things off the top of my head.

First of all, Devlin and Emmerich made the same boneheaded mistake Peter Jackson would make when he set out to remake King Kong. In the 1933 original, Kong was a mythological figure, a legend, a character from a fairy tale who was still more human than any of the human actors around him. Even though he made a big deal of sticking (to a point) to the original script, in the end Jackson’s Kong was, well, just a big gorilla.

Likewise, from his debut in 1954, Godzilla had always been a myth, an allegory, a symbol, and an embodiment of recent Japanese history. Even as his character changed over the course of the series (from vengeful demon to savior and back again) all those things remained consistent. So much so that countless academic papers have been written attempting to interpret what Godzilla represents. As re-imagined by Emmerich and Devlin, Godzilla was nothing more than a mutated dinosaur. That what we’re dealing with is merely a big animal behaving like a big animal is a point Matthew Broderick’s character makes repeatedly throughout the film. The Toho pictures (like the original Kong) gave us reason to care about Godzilla because he knew what he was doing. He had purpose. This was more akin to having some stranger’s pit bull break loose and knock your trash cans over.

It’s even emphasized by the monster’s revamped design, which bears no resemblance to any Godzilla we know. The thick legs are gone, the back spines are gone, the cruel, humanoid eyes are gone. What it is, in short, is a plain old allosaurus (or whatever paleontologists are calling it these days). Godzilla’s profile was always absolutely unique and unmistakable, but this thing here? I saw pictures of that in dinosaur books when I was a kid. I mean, Christ, he doesn’t even breathe radioactive fire! What the hell’s THAT all about?

Then there’s the effects question. Without diving headlong into the useless CGI debate, the 1998 model Godzilla was a state of the art CG creation. It was smooth and slick and virtually hyper-realistic (and to my mind anyway utterly lifeless). At the time of the film’s release it was dazzling and kapow. But the trouble with state of the art anything, especially computer FX, is that they have a very short shelf life. It’s only going to be a blink before the next generation of digital effects comes along, leaving everything that preceded it looking clunky and silly and sad (remember Lawnmower Man? That was pretty wowza in its time too.) Forget 20 years, by the time you get four or five years down the line, things can start looking pretty dusty. A man in a rubber suit, however much the knotheads may mock it, is eternal. Even the shabby Toho Godzillas from the ‘70s had more personality than this thing, and seemed much more real and present because they were.

There was a much bigger problem afoot with the Emmerich/Devlin Godzilla, however. For all the lifts and outright thefts from other, better films scattered throughout Godzilla (last time I made a list I counted at least 40 individual ideas lifted from everything from Larry Cohen’s Q: The Winged Serpent to Jaws), at its heart the Emmerich/Devlin Godzilla isn’t even a remake of Godzilla.

Consider the bare bones of the plot after scraping away all the surrounding soap opera nonsense: Nuclear tests awaken an amphibious prehistoric creature. Driven by some primordial urge it sets out in search of its natural spawning ground. Along the way it destroys a few ships and coastal towns, and as those reports are collected it soon becomes obvious to authorities the creature is headed straight for New York. It crashes its way onto the docks in New York harbor and stomps into Manhattan where, as such things do, it wreaks havoc (including walking through a building, leaving a monster-shaped hole). Scientists and the military both scramble to stop it, but learn it has the pesky ability, big as it is, to disappear for long stretches. Eventually they track it to a famous NYC landmark where, after our heroes are placed in grave danger for a few moments, the military destroys the monster.

Sounds about right, right? Trouble is, that’s the plot synopsis for 1953’s The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms.

Yeah, it seems that student at the beginning of 2001’s Godzilla, Mothra, King Ghidorah was right after all, and it wasn’t really Godzilla we were dealing with.

Now granted, Emmerich and Devlin obviously know their B-film history, and that being the case may well have been aware Beast from 20,000 Fathoms (along with King Kong) was a fundamental inspiration for 1954’s Gojira, but that doesn’t change the fact that, despite their use of the name, what they made was a reboot of the 1953 film, not the 1954 film or any of the Godzilla films that followed.

Maybe it was a marketing decision. Maybe the team wanted to remake Beast from the start (which would allow them to savagely rip off the Great Ray Harryhausen for a second time without giving him a lick of credit or paying him a dime) but figured “Godzilla” would mean better box office in terms of name recognition alone. Or maybe they were just confused.

When you get down to the nut, the real curse facing any attempt to create an Americanized Godzilla is a simple one. Although inspired by two American films, when Tanaka first came up with the idea of making a monster movie (a first in Japan at the time) he insisted there be something about it that made the monster in question uniquely Japanese. To this end his writers came up with a creature representing the horror of not just Hiroshima and Nagazaki, but the nearby H-bomb tests that followed the war. As the series progressed the films dealt with other issues facing Japan at the moment, from the decision to use nuclear power to the environment to Japan’s role in the world. Moreover, the series, in a convoluted way, remained aware of its own history and mythology, even as it was rewritten from decade to decade. One of the reasons the Godzilla films seem so silly to American audiences is that this self-consciousness and the deep, specifically Japanese roots were often excised by American distributors or were simply missed by American audiences. Any attempt to Americanize Godzilla means stripping away everything he represents to his original audience, leaving us with nothing more than a big mutated dinosaur.

That’s why, as history seems to be in the process of repeating itself, I suspect the upcoming Edwards film, as good and dazzling and action-packed as it may be, will likely, like the Emmerich/Devlon film, be a monster movie, but not a Godzilla film.

Jim Knipfel’s latest book, A Purposeful Grimace: In Defense of Godzilla, may be ordered here. http://electronpress.com/oscommerce1/

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!

Walt Disney Pictures essentially won the lottery with Frozen, a film whose success and overwhelming response from audiences was largely unexpected. Frozen is currently the 19^th highest-grossing film of all-time worldwide and 19^th highest domestically, with a $1 billion global total within grasp. And oh yes, it is the frontrunner this at this weekend’s Academy Awards in two categories where it will likely take home the Oscar: Best Animated Film and Best Original Song.

If you’ve been living in total isolation from people and/or technology, Frozenis about an awkward lovelorn princess named Anna (voiced by Kristen Bell) missing her older sister Elsa (Idina Menzel), who has been kept in isolation for years due to dangerous abilities that she was born with and is unable to tame. Frozen has resonated so well with audiences that nearly three months after its theatrical release that it’s still playing in nearly 2,500 theaters nationwide. During the weekend of January 31 to February 2, it made nearly $9 million dollars at the U.S. box office alone, thanks in part to a special one-week-only subtitled sing-along version. To date, it has grossed $867 million worldwide, a number that’s rising every day.

You get the picture: people like Frozen and its place in Disney Animation, one of the most classic, time-honored traditions in film history with very few duds on the resume. However, if you look closer, you’ll notice something even more startling.

Frozen is nothing like any Disney movie you’ve ever seen before.

When we think of the classic Disney Princesses, we think Aurora of Sleeping Beauty, Snow White, and Cinderella. Yet all three princesses were rescued by a prince in the end, and were all saved by “true love’s kiss.” In Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, the character’s name was even just “The Prince.”

Not only that, but these characters fell hard for their “true love”…and fast. Right-away fast. If you’re a girl who’s pure of heart, and simply has been dealt a rough hand, don’t worry because a strapping young man—rich in spirit and in pockets—will come rescue you. That’s Disney for you.

Well, old Disney, not new Disney. But we’ll get to that soon.

[related article: The Disney Renaissance]

The individualistic, headstrong, self-sufficient princess was conjured with Mulan. However, one subplot of Mulan was that at the beginning of the film, she was “unfit for marriage” and is “fit” come the end of the movie. The same goes for Pocahontas, who—despite her importance as a middle ground between the settlers and Native Americans—was still reduced to longing for a happily-ever-after with John Smith by the film’s conclusion.

This message, the idea of a woman being “saved” by a man, is outdated and ludicrous. Not that the message wasn’t stale long ago, but as Disney is one of the most guilty parties in terms of poor female role models, it’s nice to see that they’re changing.

Given the success, culturally and monetarily, of the next two films I’m about to address, it would be interesting to see what would happen if Pocahontas and Mulan had been made in 2014.

In the last few years, notably with 2009’s Princess and the Frog and with Pixar’s Brave in 2012, Walt Disney Pictures has tried to break away from their own princess conventions. Tiana in Princess and the Frog became the first African-American princess, seventy-two years after the first Disney movie was released. Admittedly, Tiana does get married to a prince in the end, but the film was still progressive. In Pixar’s Brave, tomboy princess/archer Merida learns, thanks to a witch’s spell, that nothing is more important than family. However, the most shocking part of Bravewas when her father tries to organize a competition where the winning suitor would marry Merida; Merida reacts by dressing in disguise and winning her own hand, claiming that she wants to change her own fate.

It seems fitting that Disney did just that: change with Brave.

Merida has since become featured as a Disney Princess, despite Brave being a Pixar film, which makes her the first Disney Princess not created by Walt Disney Animation Studios. More importantly, she is the first Disney Princess to not have a love interest in her film. Audiences loved the revolutionary Merida and one can only speculate that the success of Brave contributed to the making of Frozen. It’s also possible that Brave could have yielded the outlandish success of Frozen. Disney might have gauged society’s readiness for a progressive Disney Princess on the embracing—or rejection—of Brave and Merida.

Frozen happens to be the first full-length animated motion picture produced by Walt Disney Animation Studios co-directed by a woman, Jennifer Lee.

Undoubtedly, Lee, fellow director Chris Buck, and the rest of their team wanted to make a new type of Disney movie. Their feelings on old Disney, and what 2014 Disney Princesses should be, are apparent all throughout Frozen.

When Frozen’s adorable sisters, Anna and Elsa, get out of bed to play one night, we see that Elsa has magical abilities, able to conjure up frost, snow, and ice at her choosing.

During their playing, Elsa accidentally injures Anna, and the king and queen rush in to save her. Anna survives, but she has no memory of Elsa’s magic. What follows is extremely intriguing to me: the king and queen lock Elsa away, closing the castle’s doors to visitors, and even fire staff members to accommodate the secret. They condition Elsa to not feel anything, so as to not lose control of her powers.

In true Disney fashion, the parents are soon dead. In un-Disney fashion—the interesting part—the emotionally and psychologically abusive parents aren’t really missed. In our current society, where bullying is finally being realized as not just a physical influence, the king and queen of Frozen make an interesting study. They never lay a hand on Elsa, never scream at her or verbally demean her, nor ever intentionally harm her in any way. In their desperate attempt to protect her, they cripple her, holding her back from progressing into adulthood. While it was subtle, I found Frozen’saddressing of this sort of accidental abuse to be endlessly intriguing.

I flashed back to some tragic Disney parent deaths of my youth: Mufasa being trampled, Bambi’s mom being shot, the mother fox being gunned down (essentially sacrificing herself) in The Fox and the Hound. These were traumatic, gut-wrenching deaths. Yet in Frozen, Elsa and Anna only blossom once the shackling parents are no more.

Elsa is soon to be coroneted as queen. If you’re keeping track, I didn’t mention who Elsa’s king is.

That’s because there isn’t one, yet another revelation for Disney. Elsa is a queen without a king, and the people of her kingdom don’t seem to mind at all.

When the gates of the castle are finally reopened to guests, we see another revelation. The citizens of the kingdom (Arendelle) are excited to see the princesses and how beautiful they are. However, as soon as the word “beautiful” is spoken, the scene cuts to a disheveled and drooling Anna, snoring in bed, her hair a rat’s nest. Not only that, but this Disney Princess has noticeable freckles riddling her shoulders. When she rises, she launches into song (an extremely impressive performance by Kristen Bell throughout) and sings the wrenching “For The First Time in Forever.”

Did I mention a Broadway musical adaptation is in the works?

While singing “For The First Time in Forever,” and running about, Anna admits that she’s either “elated or gassy” while suppressing a burp, wants to (and does) shove some chocolate in her face at the thought of meeting “The One,” destroys a cake with a bust of a dashing gentleman, and is launched into a rowboat by a prince passing by on a horse with seaweed stuck to her forehead and all—and she subsequently displays her awkwardness by calling him gorgeous and zoning out while ogling him seconds later.

This is not the Disney Princess we know.

This brings us to the leading men of Frozen: Hans of the Southern Isles and Kristoff, a nomadic ice salesman.

Anna falls for Hans in Disney fashion: within a few hours of meeting him. He proposes that night, she says yes, and they frolic around the castle singing “Love Is an Open Door.” I thought to myself: Here we go again. Just when I was getting excited. Up until then, I thought that the old Disney had been buried. Don’t get me wrong, I love Disney as much as the next person, but I started to groan (out loud I think), sad that Anna had gone the way of so many promising princesses before her.

Yet this is where Lee and her creative team fool us. They satirically play on that old Disney mentality, of the man saving the day. Hans has the look of a Disney prince: the flowing hair, the chiseled jaw line, the perfect posture. Anna even tells Kristoff later on that the color of Hans’ eyes is “dreamy.” However, come the end of the movie, Hans is a conniving, malicious, pathological liar hell bent on claiming Arendelle’s throne. From the get-go, we know Elsa isn’t the villain—just a lovely girl dealt a cruel hand—and that someone has to be evil, yet Hans’ revelation is still a shock when it comes.

[related article: Frozen Review]

When Anna tells Elsa (seeing her for the first time in years it seems) that she and Hans plan to marry, Elsa loses it, as she should. Elsa laughs at the notion of it being “true love.”

Marrying someone you just met?! That’s crazy! Disney, who would do a silly thing like that?

When Elsa’s powers are exposed, she runs off into the wilderness, her fright casting a blizzard over Arendelle’s summer. Fortunately for the audience, this leads to Idina Menzel’s shivers-down-your-spine “Let It Go,” which should win the Oscar for Best Original Song this weekend.

“Let it Go” is one of Frozen’s finest moments and it is a timeless homage to self-empowerment. It’s not a romantic aria, pledging endless devotion to he-of-perfectly-coiffed-hair, but a tear-jerking masterpiece about Elsa’s acceptance of self. Elsa is happy, without a love interest of any kind—the iron cuffs her parents jailed her with thrown off—free to feel, free to be the person she was born to be.

An instant classic Disney song, fated to be sung and covered for years to come, and it’s not about love or a “happy ever after.”

This is why Frozenis so good.

Anna, despite her status as princess, decides to chase after her sister. Yes…a Disney Princess starting a rescue team with the help of now down-on-his-luck ice salesman, Kristoff, and his trusty reindeer, Sven.

A little after Anna tells a flabbergasted Kristoff about her engagement, she saves Kristoff’s life, pulling him off a cliff edge—one of the many times in Frozen that a woman saves the day.

Elsa accidentally freezes Anna’s heart and it becomes clear that “only an act of true love can thaw a frozen heart.” Anna needs her act of true love to happen before she freezes solid.

Anna, Kristoff, and Sven rush back to Arendelle, hoping that Hans can cure her. Again, cue the groans: a man, the prince after all, has to save the day.

As mentioned, Hans has other plans.

Only when Olaf the snowman (awesomely played by Josh Gad) explains to Anna what love really is, does Anna realize that she’s had those feelings for Kristoff all along.

So Kristoff is going to kiss her and save the day, right? The audience is rooting for it, but when Kristoff nears Anna, already having begun to die, Anna sees that Hans is about to kill Elsa and she throws herself in front of the blade.

Anna diving in front of the blade—defending her sister as she turns to ice—is the act of true love that reverses the spell.

No “true love’s kiss” here to be found. Only the unparalleled love between two siblings, kept apart by circumstance. It turns out that what Elsa needed all along to manage her gift was love, not the isolation that her parents bound her with.

Let's take a second to realize just how much of a divergence this is—choosing a sister over a man—from the Disney of yore. Of the Disney Princesses, Snow White, Cinderella, Princess Aurora, Ariel, Jasmine, and Tiana are all saved by the love interest at the end of their respective movies. In Beauty and the Beast, Belle saves the Beast so they can live happily ever after. In Tangled, Flynn Rider saves Rapunzel, who in turn saves him so they too can live happily ever after. And in Pocahontas, Pocahontas—despite her headstrong, individualistic mentality—falls in gooey love, allowing her to save John Smith from certain death. While Pocahontas was undoubtedly ahead of its time with the strong female lead ending up on her own while the credits rolled, she is still ultimately pining for a man as his ship vanishes into the horizon. Conversely, Anna ending up with Kristoff is such a minor detail of the film (them only truly being in one scene together as an out-and-out couple) that it almost feels like its for aesthetic’s sake, because it wouldn't be right to leave such a good guy all alone. Both Elsa and Anna have been confirmed as the newest Disney Princesses. So bearing in mind that two of the three most recent Disney Princesses have no love interest when one includes Merida, and that they choose the closeness of family over romance...could this new Disney be the answer to the long awaited call for feminist fairy tales? After all, it’s refreshingly honest that even easily infatuated Anna chooses the love of a sister over the potential romance of a handsome man in her life, proving that true love is not just at the touch of a fantasy kiss.

In the end, when Hans is roused from an unconscious state, Kristoff steps forward to deal a punch. Anna stops him, and Kristoff relents, letting Anna throw the punch herself. Kristoff is not only okay with notsaving the day, but he lets the woman he loves fight her own battles—something that Anna not only wants, but relishes, throughout Frozen. Only after all of that, after the dust has settled, do Kristoff and Anna have their first kiss…and only after Kristoff has admitted that he wants to kiss her, and asks to.

He asks! I love it. Kristoff, a dirt-poor ice salesman and not a prince of anything turns out to be the love interest, while the original “true love” turns out to be the movie’s villain.

It is in this final sequence, from when Anna fights her own battle to the end of the movie, that the fire-breathing dragon of old Disney is vanquished by the chivalrous knight that is new Disney.

Famed critic Roger Ebert, in November of 1989, said the following of The Little Mermaid: “Ariel is a fully realized female character who thinks and acts independently, even rebelliously, instead of hanging around passively while the fates decide her destiny […] she's smart and thinks for herself, [and] we have sympathy for her.” Ebert praised The Little Mermaid as progressive.

Bearing in mind the plots of The Little Mermaidand Frozen, both individually praised as progressive for their times, I can only wonder what Ebert would have said about Frozen. And like Mermaid, has Frozen revealed a new glimmering path forward as the Disney standard for a renaissance of creativity to come?

Usually, with Disney Princesses, the audience has the ability to see both how they act when they're alone, how they act when there are people around, and how they act when someone they're romantically intrigued by is in the room. Generally, at least in my mind, with the older Disney Princesses, their behavior is different in all three situations. This is why Anna and Elsa are so refreshing; the audience is seeing their true self at all times, even (as in Elsa's case) when they're hiding that same true self. We feel an ethereal closeness to these characters because we not only see all sides of them, but they are very consistently their same self with everyone. Aside from how that makes us feel, it's a wonderful message to get across to young viewers of all genders and ages: be yourself at all times, and if romance happens, it happens, but make sure you're falling in love with someone's equally accessible true self. To have such magnificent characters not be defined by the romance (or lack thereof) in their lives is a message I wish happened more often.

And yet, what I find compelling about Frozen’s conclusion is Kristoff. Kristoff is just a run-of-the-mill guy with a sensitive heart who gives every bit of effort to make Anna happy. He doesn’t feel emasculated when surrounded by strong women like Elsa and Anna. He’s nothing but honest at all times. His wanting to help Anna and Elsa comes from true empathy, and he does not have an overwhelming compulsion to “save” the day. And after everything is said and done—after numerous life-threatening situations, with a traveled distance seemingly spanning the country—he still has enough respect for Anna that he only kisses her when she says it’s okay.

That’s certainly a Disney movie message I can get behind.

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!

Non-Stop re-teams Liam Neeson with Unknowndirector Jaume Collet-Serra for an movie that aspires to provide the audience with some vaguely Hitchcockian mind games, but ultimately ends up as just another airborn action flick. While Non-Stopdoes deliver a legitimate twist or two, the claustrophobic airplane setting and the constant attempts at misdirection end up more grating than exhilarating. While there are worse ways to spend your time, Non-Stop never quite manages to distinguish itself from the pack.

Liam Neeson stars as Bill Marks, an alcoholic air marshal who doesn't like to fly. While working a transatlantic flight, Marks receives mysterious text messages, with the sender threatening to kill a passenger (or crew member) every twenty minutes unless $150 million is transferred into a bank account...an account which just happens to be in Marks' name. The jittery, hungover air marshal finds himself manipulated into all manner of compromising situations, increasingly frequent violent outbursts, and some treatment of passengers that would make any civil libertarian very nervous. His inability to locate or prove the existence of the voiceless killer leaves the passengers (and maybe the odd audience member) doubting his sanity, and wondering if they've been hijacked. 

Does this sound a little convoluted? It is. But when Non-Stopcomes together (and it does have its moments sprinkled throughout) it's certainly different. The thing is, it never really manages gets the heart pounding, and the film often fall back on the usual post-Die Hard/Speedcliches. Nevertheless, there are still a few standout bits. A rather brutal fight to the death in an airplane lavatory (with a bespectacled Anson Mount, no less) is surprisingly effective, and I was surprised at just how much damage they managed to inflict on each other in such close quarters. The film never really comes up with anything remotely that original again, sadly, but at least it keeps you guessing for awhile. On an unrelated note, why is nearly everyone on this plane still using flip phones? Is Non-Stop a period piece?

Neeson brings a convincingly hungover and haggard performance to the table in addition to his usual presence, although he never approaches the intensity we've come to expect from his other action roles. His more paranoid moments recall the unhinged Peyton Westlake of Darkmanmore than anything else, while his fellow passengers (and/or prisoners) who include Julianne Moore, Nate Parker, and Downton Abbey's Michelle Dockery, are little more than in-flight snacks, there to play off Mr. Neeson's increasingly frustrated and desperate performance, or to have the camera cast accusatory glances at them.

Non-Stop does try, though...at least in its first half. It almost succeeds in making you doubt Neeson's embattled air marshal for a minute or two. If you (like this writer) don't particularly love to fly, that may help the generally unsettled, paranoid atmosphere take effect and make some of the film's more difficult to swallow conceits go down easier. But there are only so many times you can let the camera linger ominously on different passengers and crew in order to cast suspicion before you start shaming the director for crying wolf. And no, readers, that wasn't a joke about The Grey.

So where is the bad guy (or bad guys) in this movie? Oh, don't worry, he (they?) does finally appear. And when he does, while it was after at least one or two marginally effective pieces of misdirection, it still makes for a rather talky, over-explainy climax that would have been more at home on your average police procedural than here. I suppose there's a reasonable motivation in there somewhere, but after spending the majority of the previous 70-something minutes on everything other than this individual, the big reveal was stripped of any real impact. What is it about action movies and their lack of really threatening villains these days? 

And speaking of impact, I don't think it's too much of a spoiler to let you all in on the fact that what goes up must, indeed, come down at some point, so that plane is going to have to land...and I'm sure you can guess it isn't an easy landing. Unfortunately, this is accomplished via some not entirely convincing special effects, and the quick bit of spectacle actually ends up marring Non-Stop's (few) effective moments. Despite its best efforts to give us something new, Non-Stop never really gets above the clouds.

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!

Will Jack Burton and the Pork Chop Express finally come to comics? It sure looks that way! In a teaser image released on Twitter today, BOOM! Studios revealed plans for what appears to be a comic based on Big Trouble in Little China! And...is that Eric Powell's signature we see in the corner? Yes it is! 

John Carpenter's classic martial arts/comedy never got a sequel, but certainly found a huge cult following in the years after its 1986 release. If Eric Powell is at the wheel for a continuation of Jack Burton's adventures, there's a good chance that Boom's Big Trouble in Little China can rise above the usual licensed comic fare. There are no other details available yet, but you'd better believe we'll be on this like white on rice.

And really, if you haven't seen this movie, handily Kurt Russell's finest hour, do yourself a favor and watch it. Today.

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!

Jack Thorne (BBC's The Fades) will write The Sandman movie. Sandman, which currently has Joseph Gordon-Levitt attached as producer (and possibly director and star), with a treatment from David S. Goyer, has been in various stages of development at Warner Bros. for years, but it's looking increasingly likely that we'll finally see it happen. Sandmancreator, Neil Gaiman, is executive producing.

The film will almost certainly be based on the first volume of Sandman, "Preludes and Nocturnes" which tells the story of how Morpheus is captured, escapes, and has to find his way back to his realm, known as "The Dreaming." Hopefully this version of the project fails better than previous attempts, none of which made it far beyond a draft or two of a screenplay! We'll let you know what we hear...

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!

Here's your daily Star Wars: Episode 7 rumor: Adam Driver is days away from becoming the first official member of the Star Wars: Episode 7cast. The Girlsstar, recently seen in Inside Llewyn Davis, has supposedly been cast in an undisclosed role in the upcoming Star Wars film, With Variety reporting that he'll play a villain in the film. Given the increasing frequency of Star Wars casting rumors, not to mention Mr. Driver's status as a fan choice of the moment (he was incorrectly linked to the role of Nightwing in the upcoming Batman vs. Superman film), it was only a matter of time before his name was connected with a Star Wars role again.

The level of secrecy surrounding the new Star Wars movie is almost unprecedented, with new rumors springing up and getting debunked on a daily basis. Considering how close we must be to the start of filming, it's likely that the revelation of Driver in a role should set off a chain reaction of casting announcements over the coming weeks, as Star Wars: Episode 7 begins to ramp up production in order to meet its December 18, 2015 release target. Aside from Driver's commitments to HBO's Girls(a scheduling conflict which has supposedly, according to Variety, been resolved), there's still the issue of his involvement with Martin Scorsese's Silence, currently in pre-production for its own 2015 release, and which would certainly overlap with Star Wars.

There is some confusion over the finer points of this story, with THR stating Mr. Driver is in "final negotiations" for the role, and Variety saying that these negotiations "should be finalized in the coming days," while Deadline believes that "nothing is imminent." 

We put in a call to representatives for Mr. Driver, but have not received a confirmation yet. However, these tweets from Lena Dunham may or may not be suspicious. Does she know something, or is this just her usual irreverent sense of humor at work?

We're VERY proud of Adam Driver re: Star Wars. He's about to rip a hole in da force. Is that a thing? I guess I should see those movies?

— Lena Dunham (@lenadunham) February 26, 2014

I confirm nothing bc I know nothing bc I'm on a plane with my dad! I just like Adam more than almost anyone, and JJ Abrams a whole lot too.

— Lena Dunham (@lenadunham) February 26, 2014

Arm Rest Wars: a trilogy about my father and me on this plane that also stars Lamby and a bag of nuts. I'm dumb.

— Lena Dunham (@lenadunham) February 26, 2014

Den of Geek recently learned that model-makers involved with Star Wars: Episode 7 are being locked up for as long as seven years, a period which is intended to cover the three "main" Star Wars flicks and three potential spin-offs. All in all, it's another day, so it's another Star Wars: Episode 7 rumor. Business as usual, then.

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!

Tom Hardy is going to have twice the fun. The Dark Knight Rises actor is on the short list to play both twins, the Krays, in the film Legend. He should get paid twice as much because for a role, I mean, roles like this, he’s gotta be kicking up to somebody.

Ronnie and Reggie Kray were crazy motherfuckers. Really the stuff of Legend. When they were barely nine years old Reggie almost killed his brother in a fight. These kids were tough. They got tired of beating each other up and started boxing everyone else in London. Neither one of them ever lost a match. They got drafted. Stayed for a little bit and walked out. When the C.O. tried to stop them, the Kray twins beat the shit out of him. When the bobbies tried to nab them on AWOL charges the next morning, they beat the shit out of them. Ron and Reg’s crew, The Firm, organized crime in England in the 50s and 60s.

Legend will be directed by Brian Helgeland, who won an Oscar for co-writing L.A. Confidential. The movie will be produced by Working Title. Helgeland previously said Legend "would be concentrating on the life of Reggie Kray (older by 10 minutes) as he sought to control the psychotic tendencies of his younger twin."

Hardy still in talks star as the two brothers, but if he says yes, Legend could start filming this year.

Ron and Reggie Kray’s story was put on screen before in the 1990 film The Krays, starring Martin and Gary Kemp, the twins of Spandau Ballet.

SOURCE: IGN

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.

After all these years, there is no denying that Leonardo DiCaprio is one of the best leading actors of his generation—or any other for that matter. As a performer who has been in the industry since he was five-years-old, he has had his ups-and-downs, yet most of those came before he landed his breakthrough role opposite Robert De Niro in This Boy’s Life, a part for which he was handpicked by De Niro amongst 400 other young actors; DiCaprio was 18-years-old. From that point on, it was a meteoric rise that took him from the heights of teenage heartthrob celebrity to slowly, but surely, a self-made dramatic thespian who has rejected that earlier image. Today, he enjoys the reputation of being one of the best (and choosiest) movie stars in Hollywood.

And yet, there is still a strange, quiet backlash against the former heartthrob. Whether it is his matinee idol good looks, which only recently age (and plenty of roles requiring facial hair) could downplay, or simple envy for his unmitigated early success, DiCaprio has developed a reputation for always being the nominee and never the winner when it comes to Hollywood’s golden night. On Sunday, he will enjoy his fourth nomination for a performance at the Academy Awards, but despite the hopefulness of others, will still likely be applauding McConaughey’s inevitable win for Dallas Buyers Club, not least of all because McConaughey is enjoying his much deserved McConaissance. Nonetheless, DiCaprio has not needed a renaissance, because he has remained reliably fantastic for 20 years. Oscar can continue to turn a blind eye like the male population of 1997 to his talent, but we won’t.

For those counting, here are 17 terrific performances from Leonardo DiCaprio.

17. Gangs of New York (2002)

Kicking off our list is the role that first introduced the partnership of DiCaprio and legendary filmmaker Martin Scorsese. When it was announced in 2000, it made sense on a business acumen level: Scorsese could make the movie he wanted provided that he cast a bankable star, and this was only several years past DiCaprio headlining the most successful film of all time. Yet, the financial sense of the decision would soon give way to the artistic one, as DiCaprio proved every bit the quality actor described by De Niro in a recommendation to Marty. For Gangs, it was an ultimately secondary role of adolescence; the angry young man who has come home to avenge the death of his father by cozying up like a surrogate son to the murderer. It is all very operatic, but DiCaprio was forced to surrender the screen as merely another orbiting figure around the bigoted brilliance emanating from Daniel Day-Lewis’ iconic big screen Nativist, Bill the Butcher. Gangs of New York is a movie that works chaotically on many levels about the American dream and the bloody, violent collision of it with tribe mentality in 19^th century New York (though it is still ever present throughout parts of the country). As messy as the city herself, the movie relies on DiCaprio’s vengeful Amsterdam as its through line. He does not necessarily gain the spotlight that he should on paper, but DiCaprio never loses the character or the audience’s attention since he brings palpable rage to the chiseled face of American immigration.

16. The Beach (2000)

DiCaprio’s third film after Titanic, The Beach was his first serious attempt to break free from the celebrity face plastered on every tabloid in the country. By working with English auteur Danny Boyle (Shallow Grave, Trainspotting), DiCaprio sought to earn back some of his indie cred from earlier projects by starring in this genre-defying pitch black dramedy about an American who gets in over his head, quite literally, when he discovers a hidden, cult-like island community secretly thriving on a marijuana plantation in the South Pacific. DiCaprio is the typical bundle of exposed nerves associated with Boyle protagonists, but he also brings a certain desperation and intentional callowness to his collegiate tourist. Simply being an American in a foreign land causes DiCaprio’s Richard to emit more than a whiff of entitlement that is broken down in a tight-knit group of free love and fresh fish…at least until more strangers drift ashore and the landlords discover their beach bliss existing in its own parallel universe.

15. Body of Lies (2008)

Marketed as a meeting of the minds, and incredibly strained screaming volumes, between DiCaprio and co-star Russell Crowe, Ridley Scott’s Body of Lies turned out to be something far more obtuse and disorienting than expected. Based on a screenplay by Kingdom of Heaven and The Departed scribe William Monahan, Lies is a slick, stylish funhouse mirror that attempts to reflect the inanity of American foreign policy in the Middle East through its labyrinthine 128 minutes. However, the performances are uniformly excellent, with DiCaprio eliciting an unpredictable weariness as a CIA operative who has seen it all and only maintains disgust for the stupidity of his bosses. A slick star role that allowed DiCaprio to play a secret agent, it’s a nice part with a showy payoff whenever he and Crowe either share the screen or even mere verbal communication.

14. The Basketball Diaries (1995)

Controversial upon its release for focusing on a simple dreamer…of school shootings—an uncomfortable premise, which has only grown more wearying over time—The Basketball Diaries still features an early strong performance from DiCaprio, who lives and breathes impotent teenage anguish and confusion so well that we can forgive the fact that he does not look like a basketball star. DiCaprio’s Jim Carroll is a piece of work from a bad home that he evades first through basketball and then later street heroin in exchange for different kinds of back alley one-on-ones. Arguably a victim of an ambivalent school system, Carroll falls hard into drug addiction and misanthropy. Still a few years out from his heartthrob days, Basketball Diaries continued DiCaprio’s brief stint as the go-to troubled youth, as there was always something a little caged and menacing behind those piercing blue peepers. Whatever you think of the movie’s subject matter or execution, even at the age of 20, DiCaprio was leaving one hell of an impression.

13. Inception (2010)

As the second biggest hit in DiCaprio’s career, there is still plenty of love for this Christopher Nolan original, and for good reason. Inception is still the most beautifully executed and intelligent big budget effort produced by Hollywood during the last half decade. A mission statement by blockbuster magician Nolan, the film is slyly mischievous in its intent to explain how an artist must insert their wildest cinematic dreams into the heads of happily oblivious moviegoers. Often times as loud as Hans Zimmer’s blaring riff on Piaf, DiCaprio’s muted central performance allows the celluloid Rubik’s cube its vital pulse underneath. With this fairly cool and cerebral film (at least for a blockbuster), DiCaprio is left to ground the entire movie’s premise on his need to overcome the guilt of a dead wife. It is a potentially ludicrous scenario that the star pulls off with genuine empathy and grace, allowing all the exposition and mythological world-building to rest easily on his widower’s grieving shoulders. The movie works because of this surprisingly restrained turn by the frequently vociferous DiCaprio, allowing all the fun and intrigue of a heist movie inside a mind to be executed with the deftest sleight of hands.

12. Romeo + Juliet (1996)

As the real beginning of Leonardo DiCaprio The Movie Star, Romeo + Juliet slowly became a launching pad for the 21-year-old talent. Director Baz Luhrmann wanted to follow up his well-received Strictly Ballroom with an ambitious “modernized” vision of William Shakespeare’s classic ode to young love, or at least the infatuation that spurs it, for the MTV generation. DiCaprio believed in the project so much that he paid his own expenses to appear in its workshop and ultimately became the guiding star that much of the rest of the cast was built around (thus out Natalie Portman and in, the slightly older, Claire Danes at 16). Indeed, DiCaprio and Danes’ chemistry is electrifying enough to light the famed swimming pool they glide through like the cinematic equivalent of a Rodin sculpture. Even today, when the movie’s initial up-to-the-minute pop soundtrack and excessive editing creates a piece of 1990s nostalgia kitsch, Romeo + Juliet still glows from their aggressive euphoria, as well as an underrated turn of brilliance from John Leguizamo as Tybalt. Bawdy, operatic, crass, and romantic, like all of Luhrmann’s best movies, Romeo + Juliet is a kaleidoscope of energies, brought out by a young cast whose hunger more than makes up for their lack of fluidity with iambic pentameter.

11. Revolutionary Road (2008)

After the success of Titanic, Kate and Leo simply had to work together again; they simply had to! Thus, the announcement of a reunion is unsurprising, but the underwhelming quality of this heavy-handed film turned out to be just so. Directed by Sam Mendes at a time when he was still chasing another American Beauty, this cautionary tale of 1950s horrors leaves something to be desired, but it is not from the acting. Both DiCaprio and Winslet turn in memorable work as a couple that dreams of gender equality in Paris during the honeymoon phase, but ultimately settles for complacency in the suburbs. However, their lifestyle is anything but simple with warring words turning into desperate actions executed for sheer escape from their happy homebody hells. As the “artist” who finds his inner-Ward Cleaver at the expense of his marriage, DiCaprio is both empathetic and ultimately repellent in a performance that threads the needle just right. Still, the highlight of the actual movie likely remains Michael Shannon’s brief but stunning moment as the judging eyes on both spouses’ failures.

[related article: The Enigma of Leonardo DiCaprio]

10. Titanic (1997)

There is simply no way of ignoring this movie. The second most successful film of all time nearly 20 years on (and still more successful than Avatar if one factors in inflation), this is a juggernaut of a film that rocketed the careers of its young stars into the stratosphere and remains to this day—despite all the protesting, kicking, and screaming from any number of detractors—one of the most beloved romances in movie history. This is in large part because James Cameron hit the jackpot when he combined the old school Hollywood formula of a big, broad, soapy love story in the context of a “historical” epic tragedy. And nothing was more on the nose of that jackpot than whom he cast as Jack. In one of the few performances where DiCaprio embraced his matinee idol features, his Jack Dawson oozes American “aw shucks,” underdog charm, street rat wit, and iconoclast artistic sensibilities. Cameron was firing his own Cupid’s arrows into every teenage girl’s heart circa 1997 with perfect accuracy. Yet, it didn’t just win 11 Academy Awards and $2 billion of moviegoers’ hard earned money based on shrewd demographic appeal. The truth is this film had a four-quadrant enticement with its stunning visuals of Edwardian Armageddon and genuinely likable leads in DiCaprio and Winslet who brought the right kind of touch to this material, making their scenes as seared into the mind as James Horner’s unapologetically weepy score that you can still hum along to. Admit it.

9. The Great Gatsby (2013)

When adapting one of the great American novels, particularly F. Scott Fitzgerald’s shimmering and succinct The Great Gatsby, there is going to be some blow back about any cinematic infidelity. This is likely the reason that Baz Luhrmann made such a baroque spectacle of the whole affair, calling attention to the fact that this is as much, if not more, his Gatsby as it is the one in every high school across the country. For such an introspective text, a sumptuous piece of literature that lives best on the page and in the deep recesses of Nick Carraway’s acquiescent mind, Luhrmann audaciously makes the most faithful adaptation yet by ignoring the impulse for stilted, museum-ready wax portraits of the 1920s and instead opts for an opulent decadence so grotesque that it captures the banned booze fury of the Jazz Age, if not its actual sound and look. But one figure cuts the image exactly perfect, and that is Leonardo DiCaprio in the finely cast role of Jay Gatsby. At the point where his good looks have aged into All-American swagger, DiCaprio seems born to play Fitzgerald’s tragic dope; a man who could have been truly great if not for Daisy’s dock, or rather a potentially great man who willingly feeds himself to the wolves and other idle beasts of New York high society. Infinitely charismatic and charming, DiCaprio pulls off both the seduction and ridiculousness of the fellow in a cool, pink suit, with the words “old sport” perpetually curled on his lips. A figure of tragedy and foolishness, DiCaprio realizes Jay Gatsby in a way that should please any Fitzgerald scholar, even if the rest of the movie will not.

8. Catch Me If You Can (2002)

In DiCaprio’s final “young man” role, the actor continued his trend of teaming with the biggest names in Hollywood by partnering with Steven Spielberg and Tom Hanks for this light-hearted romp into 1960s confidence. As Frank Abagnale Jr., DiCaprio briefly returns to his earliest roles as a troubled kid who couldn’t come to terms with his mother (Nathalie Bay) divorcing his father (Christopher Walken). However, unlike other misguided protagonists, Frank flourishes, at least for the audience, when he becomes a Blake Edwards-styled conman that talks his way into working as a permanent rookie pilot for Pan Am airlines, playing the role of lawyer in courtrooms, and even trying his hand at being a doctor. This is all supposedly based on a true story, but besides coming from the words of the real Frank Abagnale himself after he made a deal with the FBI, it also has more than a touch of Spielberg’s fantasy by way of Bondmania. There is a very tender moment where after years abroad, Frank returns home on Christmas Eve to find himself replaced by his estranged mother with a new family, happily oblivious when he peaks through their frosted window. The anguish, in the otherwise smiling eyes of DiCaprio, sells this pain better than any Peter Pan adaptation before or since. Deceptively endearing in his manipulation, DiCaprio and Frank won over every person they met, both on the big screen and off it.

7. Blood Diamond (2006)

Usually overlooked due to its proximity with the Scorsese and DiCaprio powerhouse that is The Departed (which opened during the same autumn), Blood Diamond can be ignored by fans, despite strangely being the performance the Academy chose to recognize that year. However, there is still good reason for that, because DiCaprio continues his trend of tackling local dialects far outside of most actors’ comfort zones. And his South African brogue in this Edward Zwick actioner twists around the Serra Leone landscape with perfect ease. Somewhat of a cliché and formulaic drama about the menace of conflict diamonds, complete with selfish bad boy, Danny Archer, earning a last minute redemption by sacrificing himself for noble Solomon’s (Djimon Hounsou) family, the flick is still undeniably effective. And the chemistry shared by DiCarpio and Hounsou elevates the action tropes into a memorable pair of traumatic turns for both actors.

6. Django Unchained (2012)

Before Django Unchained, DiCaprio may have had grindhouse aficionados’ curiosity, but now he has their attention. In a deliciously ham-fisted role as Calvin Candie, the wealthy planter of a Mississippian plantation nicknamed Candie Land, DiCaprio camps it up in classic Tarantino fashion as the nastiest host of Southern hospitality this side of Deliverance. As a slave owner who obliviously quotes Alexander Dumas and feeds his runaways to dogs, DiCaprio more or less plays a comic book villain who has wandered into a Spaghetti Western and then took a wrong turn toward Dixie. The only thing arguably more uneasing than DiCaprio’s literally skull splitting antics is his all too willing sidekick, Stephen, played with sickening deference to Calvin by Samuel L. Jackson. Not to be mistaken as a serious or historical rendering of the institution of slavery that forever leaves its scar on the American psyche, DiCaprio and Jackson’s demented duo are still two of the vilest and most repulsively entertaining baddies in recent memory.

5. What’s Eating Gilbert Grape (1993)

In the role that garnered DiCaprio his earliest mainstream attention as a young force to be reckoned with, he wowed critics and moviegoers alike by playing Arnie Grape, the handicapped brother of Gilbert (Johnny Depp). It is meant to be a touching and tender story about simple yokels in the heartland, which might seem ever more slightly offensive to said yokels in the context of director Lasse Hallstrom’s other tear-jerkers, including Chocolat and Dear John. Yet, there is something genuinely touching in Gilbert Grape’s earnestness, whether through the very low-key but magnetic lead performance by Depp or in the 1990s quirk ingénue Juliette Lewis. Yet, the real memorable turns lie in Darlene Cates’ larger-than-life performance as mama and in DiCaprio’s announcement to the world as being a great actor by playing a mentally challenged kid with real pathos, as opposed to the typical crocodile tears, allowing him to cut through the film’s bountiful fountains of syrup and into something still surprisingly extraordinary. It earned DiCaprio his first of many Oscar nominations and remains a highlight in his career.

[related article: The 9 Stages of Matthew McConaughey's McConaissance]

4. The Wolf of Wall Street (2013)

The movie of the moment has proven to be very close to DiCaprio’s heart, as demonstrated by his increased visibility during this Oscar campaign season. On the one hand, it is probably due to the fact that he’s a producer on the project. However, it is also quite evident that DiCaprio has reason to be proud of this one. It’s the kind of relatively big budgeted, big studio uninhibited passion project that went out of fashion decades ago. Indeed, Scorsese hasn’t been this unconstrained and unapologetic since Goodfellas, while the moral majority’s outrage hasn’t been stroked in almost as long. The Wolf of Wall Street is a lurid tale of excess that’s even excessively long by about half an hour. It is the kind of go-for-the-throat moviemaking that Hollywood bean counting has steered away from in favor of capes and cowls, and it is more than welcome here with a picture that is unafraid to frame Wall Streeters as the masters of a hedonistically dead universe. I’d dare even say that Scorsese chooses to paint this image of disdain a shade darker than he reserves for his usual wiseguys. They may kill you, but at least they’ll smile right up until then! On Wall Street, everyone’s a rat waiting to squeal as the all-mighty dollar isn’t only their God, it is their love, their dreams, and even their sexual fantasy of choice for the most talented of brokers (as relayed in a scene-stealing Matthew McConaughey cameo).

And none are more talented than the exceptionally soulless Jordan Belfort played with a ravenous hunger for cash by DiCaprio that can only be eclipsed by his character’s love for cocaine. Well coke, Quaaludes, crack, and whatever is rolling around on his Lamborghini’s floor as he is tearing up country clubs. It is a fearless performance that is constantly hilarious and terrifying in equal measures, never once asking for audience sympathy or understanding. He is a smiling bastard through and through and if you are still seduced after 180 minutes, you’re just as gullible as the rest of the saps in the final shot. It is the kind of lead role that is meant to entertain but never once pleads for pity, which is likely why the Academy will have none on Sunday.

3. The Aviator (2004)

The passion project that DiCaprio never thought he could equal again, The Aviator is a beautiful love letter to the creator’s spirit, limitless ambition, and the golden age of Hollywood, all subjects of adoration for Marty too. The director’s first collaboration with DiCaprio offered a good vehicle for the capable leading man, but The Aviator is the film that announced a true artistic union between the two and also DiCaprio’s full emergence as one of his generation’s best. Despite being handicapped by playing over 40 at the film’s end, the youthful DiCaprio transforms himself competently from the “kid” who made Hell’s Angels to the middle-aged titan of industry who will spend the second half of his life locked up in dark rooms, peeing into jars. And he pulled off that magic trick in only 170 minutes. Surrounded by great supporting talent to help with the picture’s prestige boanfides, The Aviator still rests squarely on DiCaprio’s shoulders as he impressively realizes the candor and brashness of the aviation enthusiast and engineer who openly mocked the U.S. Senate on camera, as well as imagines what the pits of OCD Hell might have been like for Hughes behind closed doors. This is the story of a man who made the 1920s’ most expensive blockbuster, pushed the buttons of the Breen Office’s good taste in the 1940s (an accomplishment Scorsese undoubtedly admires), and elevated American aviation in historic ways. Plus, that is only the first 30-some years of his life. Flying to such heights came at an Icarus-sized cost—literally, when Hughes crashed the XF-11 into Beverly Hills—that resulted in increased alienation and mentally ill self-destruction. However, DiCaprio’s tour de force posits that it was all worth it. At least for this movie, it might have been.

2. Shutter Island (2010)

Based on mercurial Dennis Lehane’s most sensational novel, Shutter Island’s a locked room mystery that deceptively gives in to thriller tropes with its storm swept setting of a 1950s Asylum for the Criminally Insane. And we are clued into that fact almost immediately thanks DiCaprio’s newly extra-thick townie accent.  However, despite providing a wonderful opportunity for Scorsese to play with his most gleeful Hitchcockian and Kubrickian influences for whenever he lights the dark corners of this post-WWII New England hellscape, it all serves a much more meaningful story that Paramount Pictures clearly missed when they delayed the movie to a barren February release date.

Ultimately, Shutter Island is the most unlikely of proponents for mental health reform, especially underscoring our inhumane treatment of those suffering. And none suffer more than DiCaprio’s remarkably haunting performance as “Teddy Daniels,” the supposed U.S. marshal invited to Shutter Island to investigate the disappearance of a patient. However, the twist is not that Teddy is really a patient himself, but how he has been victimized by a society ready to erase him from existence via lobotomy if this elaborate LARP game fails to end with anything short of a talking cure. In the movie’s final half hour, the thriller elements are completely supplanted by a great character study into a man who has lost all in whole, a tragedy crystallized in the finest scene of DiCaprio’s career: Andrew Laeddis (Teddy’s real name) comes home one afternoon to find that his wife (Michelle Williams), a victim of mental disease herself whose symptoms he ignored, has drowned their three small children in the backyard pond. Other filmmakers would have settled for the shot of floating bodies and tastefully cut or faded away from the horror, but Scorsese allows DiCaprio to be fully enveloped in the dark emotion that is deeper than any lake he could wade through; DiCaprio wallows in a soul-shattering grief as his character is forced to swim from one young corpse to the next, collecting them like daisies drifting in the ripples, and crying impotently at his own failure as a father, a husband, and finally as a human being with the complete waste of life in his arms. It is a harrowing scene that reaches for a crescendo of despair rarely glimpsed at in celluloid, and all but condones the equally horrific murder Andrew/Teddy immediately inflicts on his psychologically disturbed wife. It is the epicenter of sorrow, and a moment that transcends its own film to become truly haunting.

1. The Departed (2006)

Nonetheless, DiCaprio’s best performance to date is fortuitously the best effort his teaming with Scorsese has yet produced: The Departed is a real sucker punch of a movie that even if you have seen Infernal Affairs (its Hong Kong basis), will still take you outback, bust a beer bottle over your head, and have you whimpering in a pool of your own blood before it’s all done. The movie equivalent of a good old-fahsioned Southie donnybrook, The Departed is not so much Scorsese’s ode to the Irish mob, as much as it is his version of classic cops and robbers movies. These neighborhood feuds are more Angels with Dirty Faces than Goodfellas. And at the center is the symbiotic story of two rats who make the mistake that all rats make: they think there is a pot of gold and happiness at the end of this story. Sure, Colin Sullivan (Matt Damon) gets to taste the good life for a little while as Frank Costello’s (Jack Nichoslon) mole in the Massachusetts State Police force—he got bought off during childhood for all of a bag of groceries and a couple of comic books—but like the rest who squeal for a living, he ends up with a bullet or two in his head.

Yet, the real tragedy of this is Billy Costigan Jr., DiCaprio’s guilt-ridden hero who regrets getting out of Southie before it destroyed him as a child. So, he lets a couple of cops trick him into signing his life away to break into Costello’s crew and rat them all out. Luckily, it all works out for him in the end. And if you believe that, maybe you’ll buy the Titanic safely makes port in New York City too. Like the title says, Billy is done before the first chords of “I’m Shipping Up to Boston” are over, and we hate to see him go. Because despite a somewhat exaggerated Boston accent, Billy is another tour de force for DiCaprio. The definition of bundled nerves, Billy’s anxiety casts a jittery shadow over the picture like a bulbous zit that’s ready to pop and spray blood everywhere (and it really does). A good guy who is in way over his head, the whole movie appears to be DiCaprio working himself up to having a heart attack on camera in hopes of going truly method. The desperation with which Billy tries to bring Frank down, but ends up going with him, carries this drama’s genre trappings all the way to a true art. Sadly, it’s one painted in a nice, deep crimson.

So there are the 17 best performances in Leonardo DiCaprio’s career, right? Agree? Disagree? Want to passionately plea why he’ll still win the Oscar? Let us know in the comments section below!

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!

Bill Watterson is often compared to other reclusive creators like J.D. Salinger. The creator of the beloved Calvin & Hobbes, arguably the most important comic strip of a particular generation, has historically shunned the spotlight, even refusing lucrative merchandising and animation deals for his creations during the peak of their popularity. Now, a new documentary about cartoonists, Stripped, has not only scored an interview with Mr. Watterson, but he even provided the film's poster, a rare piece of new art since Calvin & Hobbes ended in 1995.

Stripped comes from co-directors Dave Kellett and Fred Schroeder, who interviewed dozens of cartoonists for the project, but it's Mr. Watterson who may very well put Stripped on the map. “It seemed like he really wanted to express some thoughts about comics and cartooning, where they had been and where they are going," Mr. Schroeder told the New York Times of Watterson's participation.

You can pre-order Strippedon iTunes at this link. Watch the trailer here!

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!

300: Rise of an Empire may promise a tidal wave of heroes’ blood, but it is all about the villains in the latest bit of marketing. With the new behind-the-scenes featurette, filmmakers cast a spotlight on the 300 sequel’s villains, both old and new. Of course, there is the return of Xerxes (Rodrigo Santoro) whose story both continues past the death of 300 Spartans and is expanded prior to that, as we see his origin in becoming the God King.

Yet, the biggest addition of all for 300: Rise of an Empireis very easily the introduction of Eva Green as the villainous Artemisia. A Greek woman who was wronged by her countrymen, she returns in the sequel with a fleet of Persian ships and enough charisma to drown the homeland.

300: Rise of an Empire opens on March 7, 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!

Marvel will premiere Marvel Studios: Assembling a Universe on Tuesday, March 18th, at 8 PM on ABC. The special promises to take viewers "further into the Marvel Cinematic Universe than ever before, offering viewers a front row seat to the inception of Marvel Studios, the record-breaking films, the cultural phenomenon, and further expansion of the universe by Marvel Television." Here's what they have to say, including the promise of new footage from Captain America: The Winter Soldier, Guardians of the Galaxy, and Avengers: Age of Ultron:

Marvel’s first television special documents the exciting story behind Marvel Studios and the Marvel Cinematic Universe, featuring exclusive interviews and behind-the-scenes footage from all of the Marvel films, the Marvel One-Shots and “Marvel's Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.” Viewers will walk a clear path through this amazing and nuanced universe, featuring sneak peeks at the future of Marvel's Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. on ABC, new footage from Marvel Studios upcoming theatrical releases, Captain America: The Winter Soldier, and Guardians of The Galaxy, and a sneak peek at the upcoming Marvel’s The Avengers: Age of Ultron.

It's interesting that after a month long hiatus, Agents of SHIELD will only air two episodes before getting pre-empted for another Marvel-related piece of programming. Doesn't it seem like this would do better as a lead-in or follow up to another episode of the embattled Marvel TV show? 

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!

Jeff Goldblum had the fortune of starring in two of the biggest summer blockbusters of the 1990s: Jurassic Park and Independence Day. Both of which, not-so-coincidentally, featured him saying, “Must go faster.” However, things are not moving so fast for him with Jurassic World.

While promoting the new terrific Wes Anderson movie The Grand Budapest Hotel, which had its premiere last night in New York City, Goldblum spoke with Huffington Post about appearing in another Jurassic Park film. However, Goldblum revealed that nobody has called him about it, and he is still ultimately fine with the first two adventures he filmed with Steven Spielberg during the 1990s.

“Yeah, they haven’t called me for ‘4,’” Goldblum said. “…But I was perfectly satisfied with the two that I did. I'm still satisfied with that and I'll be the first in line to see anything else, so, you know. But, Independence Day…”

Thus the topic invariably became about the Independence Day sequel, which Goldblum confirmed he has had talks about and was very keen on pursuing down the line.

“Yeah, they've talked to me about it, and I've talked to them about it, and they're excited, and I'm anxious and eager to see -- I haven't read anything -- what they cook up,” Goldblum said. “You know, I think they're trying to put it together.”

Goldblum’s The Grand Budapest Hotel opens on March 7, 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!

Sometimes, a movie is just too good (and too financially successful) to not have a sequel. However, if the studio is going to pull the trigger on one like The Muppets, they should be prepared for some good-natured ribbing of their own.

In the newest sing-a-long music video for Muppets: Most Wanted, Kermit, Miss Piggy, Gonzo, Fozzy Bear, and the rest of the gang come clean in this charmingly self-deprecating song-and-dance number about the basic studio arithmetic that makes something like a Muppets sequel possible (psst: even if it may not be quite as good!). Plus, a few cameos can be gleamed here, including what looks like Danny Trejo, Christoph Waltz, P. Diddy, and Chloe Moretz. See if we missed any in the meta-cute video below!

Disney’s Muppets Most Wanted takes the entire Muppets gang on a global tour, selling out grand theaters in some of Europe’s most exciting destinations, including Berlin, Madrid, Dublin and London. But mayhem follows the Muppets overseas, as they find themselves unwittingly entangled in an international crime caper headed by Constantine—the World’s Number One Criminal and a dead ringer for Kermit the Frog—and his dastardly sidekick Dominic, aka Number Two, portrayed by Ricky Gervais. The film stars Tina Fey as Nadya, a feisty prison guard, and Ty Burrell as Interpol agent Jean Pierre Napoleon.

Muppets Most Wanted hits the big screen March 21, 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!