This year marks Chris Messina’s fourth participation in the Tribeca Film Festival. The veteran character actor of a million beloved things—from The Mindy Project to Argo—has been here before with Fairhaven, Giant Mechanical Man, and Monogamy.

However, this year is particularly special, because he is debuting the world premiere of his first directorial feature, Alex of Venice. As a smart, sad, and surprisingly honest depiction of a family in crisis when workaholic Alex (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) sees her family life implode after husband George (Messina) steps out, the movie has proven to be one of the festival’s most popular entrees. Still, when we sat own with him the morning after its first well-received screening, Messina remained as humbled and appreciative about this latest opportunity as he has with all of them. Here is our discussion about which filmmakers influence him personally, where he sees the future of independent cinema going, and why he cast Don Johnson in his movie.

Could you talk about [directing] after being a successful actor?

Chris Messina: I wanted to direct for a long time, because I directed plays here in New York, small black box theatre stuff, and I have a certain way that I like to work as an actor, and I try to find people who want to work that way. Sometimes you find them, but often you don’t. So, I wanted to set a playing field where we would work the way that I like to work. A lot of times we’d have two cameras running, and if we had one on you, there’d be one on me. And we’d run the duration [of the digital camera’s card], which is about 27 minutes long. Terrible for an editor, but great to find real moments.

And I don’t like to cut a lot as an actor. What happens is you cut, and then someone comes in and fixes your hair, and the director gives you a note, and then the sound guy adjusts your mic, and before you know it, the headspace that you’re in is gone and you’re out of the scene. Then, you have to ramp back up. So for 27 minutes of not cutting [while] throwing out a few notes here and there, it let them play and create a lot of honest moments.

Is it hard to balance being both an actor and director in this? Did those two perspectives ever clash?

I had the luxury of having my friend, and he’s an actor, Matt Delnegro, he did me the great favor of coming onto the set to direct me. I really trust him. When we did Argo, I loved watching Affleck. He’s amazing, and the movie is terrific. But I would watch him go from shooting to the monitors, the playbook, and then he would adjust himself and us accordingly. We didn’t have that luxury because we were 21 days, and I think Argo was 80-something days. When you’re doing 27-minute takes, you’re not going to make your day. So Matt Delnegro was there to guide me as a director.

As you’re so heavily invested in The Mindy Project is it difficult to sign onto a project and say “I believe in this project, and these are the days out of my schedule to make it?”

It doesn’t—I was lucky this season when I left for three days to play [Al] Pacino’s son in this film, Manglehorn that David Gordon Green directed. I was lucky to get out for that, [because] it was a dream come true. I grew up like maybe any short ethnic actor, or maybe any actor, wanting to be Al Pacino or Robert DeNiro or Dustin Hoffman. So to work with Pacino as his son was awesome. But the dumbest thing I did by far, and I’ve done a lot of dumb things, was that I finished this movie, had two weeks off, and went back to the second season of The Mindy Project, and then cut [Alex of Venice] pretty much in my trailer as I was shooting. It was just a naïve, foolish thing to think when I was done shooting that I’d have time or energy. It was like having two full-time jobs. I would never do that again.

Is there any director that inspired you to compose the atmosphere of Alex of Venice?

Well, there’s tons of directors I tried to, didn’t accomplish, but tried to steal from. When we were making the movie, I had everybody watch Hannah and Her Sisters, All the Real Girls, and Kramer vs. Kramer. I think every shot in the movie is stolen from another movie and then not done properly, but stolen. For this particular film, Hal Ashby or Robert Altman were things that I was watching.

Why Venice Beach?

I love Venice. It’s very eclectic. It’s changed a lot, but it’s like a small town in a way, and it’s got a lot of interesting characters to me. And the place, I love being there. Sometimes it reminds me—it’s very different, so don’t get mad at me for saying this—but it reminds me of Brooklyn by the sea sometimes. Or Coney Island. So, I felt like it was a great character that I wanted to bring into the film. I have a great DP, Doug Emmett, who shot the movie, and I think he really captured it.

Did you know there was another Alex in the festival?

I didn’t! You know that wasn’t the title of the movie when it was given to me, the script. I think we came up with Alex of Venice certainly way after we shot the film. We were untitled.

What big changes to the script did you make when the project was brought to you?

We made big changes. When the project was first brought to me, it was kind of like a collage of all these characters in Venice. At the core of the collage was a family and that was very interesting to me. I recognized myself in them; they reminded me of my loved ones. So, we got rid of the outer-circle of that collage, which was a lot of characters, and we just centered on the family. Then myself and Justin [Shilton] and Katie [Nehra], we came up with a new outline, they went away and wrote a new script, and it was really good and a lot closer to the film. And then we brought in Jessica Goldberg who really cracked the movie open for us. She invented the Don Johnson character and the play, The Cherry Orchard. She wrote a lot of plays, and that’s how I know her. I did three of her plays.

To have such a textured, nuanced woman as the heart of a movie, did that go into your decision at all?

Yeah. At times when we were writing it for a couple of weeks there, I thought it was the kid’s story. I thought it should be through his eyes. Then for a while I thought it was my character’s story, and then I thought it was just about two sisters, and then it was just really clear it was hers. It was about this woman. The writing kind of just dictated that.

You talked about the films that influenced Alex of Venice, but were there specific filmmakers you worked with that you borrowed from or who influenced your directorial debut?

Absolutely. They all, good and bad, taught me what I liked and what I didn’t like. It’s like tattoos, the films and the projects, because they stay with you, and they become a part of your make-up. I would say Woody Allen and Sam Mendes were huge inspirations. You know Woody, as we all know, he casts his movies really well and then he kind of lets you go. When I was in that movie, I never felt like I was making a movie. With Sam Mendes, he said something that I quote constantly. He told me that every actor comes with a gift, and it’s the director’s job to let that gift out.

To me, that really hit home. So many times, I’ve been in things where directors are trying to shove me this way and shove me that way, but I felt like “why am I here? I’m not being used to my advantage. What I do, they don’t want, so why do they want me here?” So, I tried to set up a place where these actors were able to bring their gifts and to let them fly.

Many of the scenes in this film are set-up as a two-shot [a wide or medium framing of two actors]. Why did you make that choice?

I like it. As an actor, I don’t like that, because it feels like when the camera’s on—if I put a camera on the two of you and that’s all it’s going to be, and I know, as an actor, that “I’ve got to get this right. They’re not going to be able to cut. So, if she’s really good and I’m not, I’m going to feel bad.” As a filmmaker, or moreso as an audience member, I like to watch things that don’t have a lot of cutting, because I then get lost in the material and I stop seeing all the filmmaking. So, I felt like this story lends itself to that kind of stuff. And I definitely ripped that stuff off from Woody Allen and Steven Soderbergh. He does it a lot. He’ll have a wide shot for a really long time and then one close-up, and he’s out of the scene.

Katie said Don Johnson was your idea. It was so good to see him be able to really act.

I saw him in Django and he’s on that show on HBO, Eastbound & Down, and I thought he was great on both those things, and of course I watched him as a kid on Miami Vice. I just thought he’d be perfect for the role. He comes with this icon TV status that I thought would be right for Roger, who was on a television show. And I’m so happy that I went with him, because he was incredibly dedicated and he took it very seriously, and came incredibly prepared for the role. I think he was incredible.

You said that you wanted to make a “slice of life” movie, but the inclusion of The Cherry Orchard, it turned the movie into one about change. Could you talk about that?

One of the last plays I did was, I’m embarrassed to say, was about eight or nine years ago, and it was The Cherry Orchard with Jessica Chastain and Michelle Williams at the Williamstown Theatre Festival. The play had a great impact on me. Chekhov is a writer that I’ve always loved working on, and I think he is phenomenal. It was Jessica Goldberg who brought that play into the mix, but yes, I wanted the play to mirror what was going on in the story. These people in this movie are going through changes, some of them are big and some of them are small. Some of them are changes that they want and some are being thrust upon them. As in The Cherry Orchard, there is a lot of change going on. People are saying goodbye to an old life and accepting a new life. That was kind of the idea of melding those two.

Everyone changes for the better in your movie, actually.

Yeah, I think so. I think it’s hopeful. Eventually, I imagine Roger, Don Johnson’s character, will get pretty sick, and that change will be even more devastating to that family. But I think they’ll come to a place of bravery and honesty with themselves and him, and they’ll take care of each other to the best they can. That’s what I imagine.

Is George the cherry orchard in this?

That’s interesting. I never thought of it that way, but he could be. Yeah, he could be. I always thought they were all bits of the cherry orchard, but there’s no doubt George could be the cherry orchard.

So when you worked Al Pacino, what was that like?

It was great. I did Salome with him on Broadway, so I knew him a little bit, but yeah that is one of those—it’s corny, but—“pinch me, how is this happening?” moments. You’re doing the scene with him, and we’re screaming at each other because we’re father and son, and we’re not getting along, but you can’t help to go “that’s the Godfather!” Then you go, “Shut up, shut up. Do the scene. Stay in the moment!” [Laughs]

Can you out-scream Al Pacino?

Nah, nobody can out-scream Al Pacino. [Laughs] He’s scary when he screams.

Would you be okay with this movie getting [a video-on-demand] release?

Yes, very much so. Look, I’d love it to be in a movie theater, because it was shot to be in a movie theater. But I love movies and I have two kids, and I hardly get to the movie theater, I’m sad to say. So, if you can get this movie on Netflix or iTunes, or onDemand, or on your iPad, or on your iPhone, that’s not the way it was supposed to be watched, but I’d rather you see it and experience it. It’s tough. You know it’s Iron Man or what else? This movie is not going to last in the movie theater. Those movies I was talking about in the ‘70s, they could roll out and they could live. This will come out in a short period of time in a movie theater and most people will—the movies [I’ve acted in that previously came to the Tribeca Film Festival like] Giant Mechanical Man, nobody saw it in the theater. It went away. Now, people constantly say, “You know, I was on Netflix, I searched around, and I would hit on Giant Mechanical Man, and I really liked it!” So, if that’s the way it has to go, that would be great.

Does that make you worried?

No, it doesn’t make me worried. It’s just a new day.

Thank you for doing this.

Thank you.

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!

One thing is certain about The Amazing Spider-Man 2...it isn't boring or unambitious. In fact, Sony's rebooted Spider-Man franchise finally takes that much-needed step out of Sam Raimi's long shadow this time around. While the results are uneven, The Amazing Spider-Man 2 is anchored by great performances from Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone, shines in its more lighthearted moments, and does its very best to establish a wider Spider-Man universe for future films.

There's an awful lot of Marvel mythology that The Amazing Spider-Man 2wants to address, and it often feels like the screenplay by Alex Kurtzman, Roberto Orci, Jeff Pinkner, and James Vanderbilt is trying to simply hit as many Spidey beats as possible, for fear that they may not get another chance. On the one hand, this results in what is a more complete Spider-Man/Peter Parker performance from Andrew Garfield (if not the most complete by any actor to wear the webs), and some unabashedly fun action sequences set on the streets of New York City. On the other hand, the movie is often in danger of collapsing under its own weight, and might have done better trying to tell one story rather than approximately four.

Picking up with Peter and Gwen Stacy's high school graduation, the movie follows the expected ups and downs of any Spider-Man screen romance, before introducing not one, not two, but THREE villains (four or more if you count various Oscorp heavies) who serve (or don't serve) the story in assorted capacities. There are issues held over from the previous film, particularly the mysterious fate of Peter Parker's parents, and the film kicks off with a nearly identical flashback that promptly turns into a strangely out of place action sequence on a private jet before launching into villain origins, easter egg hunts for future Spider-Man films, and more.

Through it all, though, whenever Garfield and Stone are on screen together, there are genuine sparks. What seemed like a rather rushed relationship in the first Amazing Spider-Man film now feels quite natural, no doubt aided by their own off-screen romance. Stone's Gwen Stacy is a delight, smart, funny, strong, and by far the most charismatic character in the franchise, and quite possibly the strongest "civilian" character in all of superhero cinema.

The problems, however, manifest early and plague the film right up until the closing credits. A hero is only as good as his villains, and Spider-Man has a rogues' gallery as memorable and grotesque as Batman's. But the presence of three baddies, even when one is a throwaway (the less said about Paul Giamatti's painfully broad Rhino the better), often makes for difficult storytelling. When one of those villains is the single greatest villain in Spider-Man history, one whose entire conflict is based on his and his family's long relationship with the character, it's extraordinarily difficult to make that work in the context of a single film, especially when he has to share screen time.

Electro is particularly difficult to take, and like most of this movie's villains, he feels like a holdover from an earlier era of superhero films. In his civilian identity he's played for creepy comedy, and his character arc (an obsessional hero worship of Spider-Man) owes far too much to Jim Carrey's forgettable, irritating turn as the Riddler in Batman Forever. Let's be honest, it's not like Max Dillon has ever been the most well-rounded character in the Spidey-verse, but here he's saddled with unfortunate supervillain-by-numbers dialogue and is neither menacing nor sympathetic enough to leave much of an impression. I'm not saying that Max Dillon deserves better, but Jamie Foxx certainly does. On the other hand, Electro is an impressive visual, and considering all the superhero movies out there, there's a surprising lack of energy projecting heroes and villains on the scene. 

Dane DeHaan makes for a more than serviceable Harry Osborn, intentionally less likeable than James Franco's interpretation, but he's shortchanged by his introduction midway through the film and obligatory heel turn in the final act. Once again, one of Spider-Man's greatest rivalries is botched by overambitious filmmakers. Harry goes from amicable (if intense) long-lost buddy of Peter's to driven, hard-drinking jerk to full-blown supervillain in about as much time as it takes to read these words. None of these facets of Harry's personality get a chance to shine, making his eventual emergence as a costumed metahuman more confusing than cathartic or scary, and his villainous deeds far less weighty than they need to be. It's hard not to feel like we're getting a little cheated out of seeing Chris Cooper's appropriately icky Norman Osborn in action, as well.

Other than the Peter/Gwen relationship, there is one thing that The Amazing Spider-Man 2 does absolutely right, and given the ever-increasing levels of violence in superhero films, it's refreshing. Throughout the movie, great pains are taken to show Spider-Man's concern for the people in the path of the fights. Spider-Man not only saves civilians, he takes the time to talk to them. While previous Spider-Man films went out of their way to show Spidey as a "hero of the people" it always felt artificial. Less so here. His willingness to talk to and engage with everyone, from a kid on the street to police and firefighters (in one very funny and endearing moment) to the very villains who are trying to kill him is so pure, and so very in keeping with the everyman spirit of the character, that it deserves applause. No live-action incarnation of Spider-Man has quite nailed it the way we see here, and it makes Spidey's later failures hit that much harder.

In fact, this is the most active, vocal, jocular Spider-Man we've ever seen. There's plenty of physical comedy, an appropriate amount of Spider-Man wisecracks and banter, and in those moments when it is almost certainly Garfield in the suit and not a stand-in or CGI model, it's hard not to feel like this is as true an interpretation of the character as we'll ever see in live-action. It's that Woody Allen/Groucho Marx/Bugs Bunny sensibility that makes Spidey unique, and getting these character beats right is something that no special effects budget can buy. When not in the red-and-blue, Peter is aided ably by Sally Field as Aunt May, who (other than a rather exposition-heavy speech) is great fun and seems to be enjoying her scenes with Mr. Garfield.

But ultimately, The Amazing Spider-Man 2 is weighed down by its own need to throw as much at the audience as possible. Whether it's the (rather unnecessary) backstory involving the secret science project of the elder Parkers, the overabundance of villains, or Sony's desire to seed an expanded Spider-Man movie universe to rival Marvel's...it's all just too much. It's a miracle that this movie is as coherent as it is, and Marc Webb deserves praise for keeping as many plates spinning as he does. It's a better film than its predecessor, but I hope future installments in the franchise are less concerned with rushing headlong through iconic moments in Spidey's history and more interested in celebrating what makes these characters endure.

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!

An anecdote, if you will: before the French actioner District B-13 was released stateside, a kiosk at the local mall boasted a fresh bootleg copy of the film, alongside other martial arts/action pictures freshly on disc. There were bigger names on some of these DVDs, but the display television showed two extended sequences, on a loop, from District B-13. And I, the helpless action fan that I am, kept finding new convenient excuses to walk by, stop, and watch free-running expert David Belle elude capture from a sea of thugs in a run-down tenement.

The unfortunate news is that Brick Mansions, the American remake, has no sequences that I would go out of my way to watch on a loop. How could it? That was part of the hot wave of French action, which took director Pierre Morel stateside and made producer Luc Besson his own small cottage industry of low budget, high-concept action. At the very least, however, the central hook of the film translates like gangbusters: criminals in a depleted, low-income, crime-ridden area have a nuke, and the city sends their best cop into the scrum to get it back.

This time it's Detroit 2018, which oddly enough doesn't look much worse than Detroit 2014, so maybe it's an optimistic film? In the original, both heroes were parkour experts, but this time the film's gotten a movie star upgrade by the late Paul Walker. Bless Walker, as one of the actor's greatest talents was his innate gravity. Rarely did you believe this cartoonishly good looking man was the guy he claimed to be, but he always found a way to render everything he touched real, including the ludicrous Fast and Furious stunts. In this film, he's one of those movie cops, one who breaks the rules and causes excessive damage, but always gets his man. The wall in his apartment is littered with glossy 8 x 10's of the city's criminal underworld. You sense he's got binders of crooks to replace the ones he takes down.

Walker teams with Belle, here more or less reprising his role from the original. He's still casually handsome, and still lithe in combat, but he's at the mercy of American filmmaking. The worst sin a director can commit is making an inadequate Xerox, and many of his scenes are copied shot-by-shot from District B-13. Unfortunately, first-timer Camille Delamarre manages to feature additional coverage for every jump and kick, distorting events and robbing Belle of his physical grace. Perhaps this is a way to keep world-class athlete Belle and “regular” athlete Walker on the same level. When the camera cuts away as they complete dueling standing back-flips, it's kind of insulting to the original movie.

Both are on the trail of Tremaine, a kingpin who has holed up inside of Brick Mansions, an area of Detroit completely neglected by the government. Tremaine offers the city a $30 million refund for the nuke – they turn it down, which will no doubt amuse the Detroit Pistons fans who just saw their team sign Josh Smith for $54 million and proceed to have one of the worst statistical seasons in NBA history. Because the film is PG-13, Tremaine is never actually seen dealing drugs, which makes it easier to buy his brush-off, “It's just politics, and I'm a politician.” When he says, “cash rules everything around me,” it's almost like a campaign slogan. The audience also goes wild because Tremaine is played by The RZA. After Ice Cube in Ride Along, this is the second time this year when a ‘90s rapper has co-opted their exact verses, one playing a cop, one playing a criminal. Food for thought.

There's a great action movie to be made of the fact that American politicians criminalize the lower class, which is how Walker begins to suspect he's become the fall guy. This isn't quite that, and Brick Mansions falters when it becomes overly didactic, leaning on naïve sentiments of black hats and white hats. This sledgehammer critique would work if we knew there was a corporate benefit to Brick Mansions disappearing off the face of the Earth, if the PG-13 violence gave way to R-rated cynicism. Brick Mansions, which is also written by Luc Besson, feels compromised, and not just in the cutaways from characters screaming, “Motherf-.” Then again, indictment isn't what the film is about, but rather compromise. This isn't Occupy Wall Street as much as Find Common Ground With Wall Street.

If only that were the same approach towards the female characters. Contemporary films have recently shied away from leering and objectifying female characters, but Brick Mansions brings that back in a hurry. Belle's girlfriend is kidnapped by Tremaine's men while working as a waitress, and her miniskirt is frequently hiked up, exposing and admiring her upper legs when the camera isn't lingering over her bust – Delamarre is an “equal opportunity offender” by giving the same treatment to the villains' head female henchman, who seems to only be wearing an elaborate form of underwear. And we only see Walker's girlfriend from behind, walking into a room. She is literally just an ass. Is it progress because sexism isn't overtly as problematic here as it was in District B-13, or is it a black mark considering there are more female characters this time around, all of whom are ogled?

That odiousness becomes easier to ignore for most audiences because of the wholesomeness of Walker. As he was nearing 40, he was really coming into his own, that magazine cover smile earning appreciative creases from a good life. In Brick Mansions he smiles more than usual, having a great time in spite of the ticking clock narrative. He wasn't unlike a young Burt Reynolds, a good-time guy who could liven up any dim studio film just by grinning: is it snobbery that kept George Clooney and Brad Pitt from calling him up to run with their gang of socially-minded dreamboats? Brick Mansions closes with a clumsy segue to a cheap stock photo of the star, the words “In Loving Memory Of Paul Walker” underneath. It looks homemade, YouTube quality. In capping his career with a film suggesting the 99 percent and the 1 percent could eventually live in harmony, it's a touching moment nonetheless.

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!

It is hard to believe that film has become an art form lasting long enough to support three generations of a burgeoning cinematic dynasty. But here we are with Gia Coppola, granddaughter of Francis and niece to Sofia and Roman, making her directorial debut in this year’s teen collage of suburban angst, Palo Alto. And it’s a relief to say that some of the same filmic finesse is present in this enjoyable if appropriately aimless look at the adolescent wasteland of youth.

Based on a short story collection of the same name by James Franco, who published these musings after his own Silicon Valley childhood in 2010, the movie has an apathetic sincerity about the vices and distractions of youthfulness. Franco himself originally considered directing an adaptation before being impressed by 20-something Coppola’s still photography art. And given the comparison to Franco’s own recent directorial efforts, we are probably all the better for this passage of helming duties. By stringing together Franco’s disparate and bemusing literary yarns about growing up in the Northern California ‘burbs, Coppola makes an engrossing, if somewhat aloof picture with her first talented bow.

Palo Alto centers on four high school kids whose lives all intersect via friendship, romance, or lust, but ultimately inform different perspectives of the American teenager experience. There is Teddy (Jack Kilmer), who is a fresh-faced slacker that passively lets his life be dictated to him by circumstance and his abrasive best friend Fred (Nat Wolff). As a boy who was born on the wrong side of the tracks from an oddball father (an amusing cameo by Chris Messina), Fred is the kind of permanently frustrated young man who at 17 already knows his life is going to end in disappointment. And with a little push, perhaps Teddy’s will too when he is caught in a DUI by his mate instead of staying at the party with his not-so-secret crush, April.

April (Emma Roberts) is also going through her own drama as the star soccer player at her high school and the apple of her coach’s eye. But that eye makes things very confusing, not to mention skeevy, when Mr. B (James Franco), a single dad who April also babysits for, starts making moves on his teacher’s pet with one kiss, and then another. Finally, there is Emily (Zoe Levin), the most fleeting and interesting character in the movie.

Palo Alto is a fractured mosaic of the ritualized anxiety all adolescents face. Indeed, Coppola seems very aware of the familiar territory she has crossed by presenting her characters in a world where Phoebe Cates’ immortalized scene from Fast Times at Ridgemont High is both still adored and knowingly mocked by the more realistically girlish April—an irony, considering that Cates was actually a teenager in that film while Roberts is 23.

On the whole, Coppola strives for an authenticity not often found in the teen subgenre, which is reflected in her mostly juvenile cast. This decision can lead to some mixed results since Jack Kilmer, the 19-year-old son of actor Val Kilmer, believably sells the anguish of Teddy, but stumbles in creating a persona beyond that raw agony of capricious hormones. But conversely, Wolff fairs much better by demonstrating once again that he is a young actor to watch. He was by far the best thing about last year’s Stuck in Love, and the 20-year-old actor (who was 19 during production on Palo Alto), creates a startlingly engrossing portrait of a growing man-child filled with pent up anger at the world. He might be in the closet, but is ultimately too emotionally circuitous to fully read. It is a great realization of that guy everyone knew in school, and one that Coppola and company will likewise try to distance themselves from by the end credits.

One of Fred’s outbursts comes at the repeated expense of Levin’s Emily, a composite character of several personalities in Franco’s book. In the movie, we never spend enough time with her to get a full handle on the character, which may be why she is so intriguing and lingers longer than others. As the (too) easy-going good time girl at her high school, Emily lets herself be used and abused by several boys throughout the film, but is given remarkable empathy and compassion by Coppola who idles on her bedroom set during the one time Fred is invited over for a visit. Still littered with the toys, animals, and sparkling iconographies of childhood, Emily is meant to be a sympathetic ode to the suburban princess that isn’t ready for adult decisions, leading to her making the worst kind. Levin uses her limited screen time well, and one wishes Coppola could explore this obvious interest further.

In the movie’s biggest claim to pop culture awareness at the moment, Franco has an artistic moment that may have gone on to imitate life when his chosen role of Mr. B seduces his 17-year-old student with the creep factor turned up to 11. Obviously, hindsight makes it an interesting choice for the actor (if the social media story is indeed a real one), however it is treated as a chance for Franco to participate in his stories from a very different perspective than the original author of the material. Roberts also gives a more nuanced and layered performance than most of the cast as April, a young woman who is presented to be very bright. However, the movie could have done more to develop April’s consequentially stupid decisions around her sketchy teacher, as all of the character’s actions are left to Roberts’ inversed and expressive eyes.

Palo Alto is a respectable first film with a few notable performances that gives a stimulating, but detached view of a time when everyone felt removed at arm’s length from their peers. The narrative is not entirely coherent or conclusively satisfying, as the short story source material is still evident in the way certain scenes or characters fail to develop upon intriguing foundations. However, it is a forthright and undeniable account of a certain age. Plus, it features the disembodied voice of Grandfather Francis Ford as an omnipotent judge midway through the picture. Like the passionate forces of that age, it is hard to resist that vocal presence or the movie at large.

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!

Blue Ruin, the second feature film written, directed and shot by Jeremy Saulnier, goes about its business with such quiet, methodical confidence and creates such a stunningly oppressive atmosphere of dread that it’s hard to believe the movie is such a small, do-it-yourself affair. Actually, that’s not quite true: while the vision is all Saulnier’s, he was aided by an enthusiastically received Kickstarter campaign as well as the help of friends and family in getting his riveting modern noir to the screen.

Saulnier’s biggest asset, however, has to be the central performance of his childhood friend Macon Blair as Dwight Evans, whom we first meet as a homeless man living in a car (which actually belonged to Saulnier’s parents) near the beaches of Delaware and breaking into someone’s house just to take a bath. But below his grimy surface, Dwight is a much more tortured character: devastated by a violent act that happened to his family years ago, Dwight learns that the man responsible for that act is getting out of prison – and he embarks on a quest for revenge that will lead him deeper and deeper into a web of bloodshed and reprisal that could end up destroying him and the remaining family members he’s sworn to protect.

It’s perhaps best not to get much more specific about the plot, because part of the beauty of Blue Ruin is letting the layers of the story and Dwight’s history reveal themselves as you view the film. But the most refreshing aspect of Blue Ruin is that Dwight – a gentle, almost silent teddy bear of a man, with a perpetual look of wide-eyed resignation on his doughy face – is hardly what you would expect out of an assassin. He doesn’t really know what he’s doing, is not particularly adept with weapons, and does not have the steely demeanor of the experienced killer. He stumbles along, making it up as he goes, but his thirst for revenge seems to give him a core of inner strength that somehow gets him through his punishing, painful quest.

Blair projects all this with quiet, awkward desperation, his minimalist performance making Dwight unquestionably endearing despite the course of action he’s embarked on. You want him to succeed even though you know that means people are going to lose their lives and Dwight himself may lose not just that but his soul. The bleak mood is enhanced and buttressed by Saulnier’s vivid, deeply moody cinematography: the movie is called Blue Ruin not just for the dark emotional journey that Dwight must take, but for the stark visuals and key color scheme that reflect it.

Saulnier and Blair are also supported by a naturalistic cast who seem to have stepped right out of the pages of a Cormac McCarthy novel. Look for Eve Plumb as the malevolent matriarch of the Cleland clan – the family that is the focus of Dwight’s plan – and marvel at how unrecognizable she is (in a good way) from her days as Jan on The Brady Bunch. Kevin Kolack is equally unnerving as another member of the Cleland family who has a crucial encounter with Dwight. Perhaps best of all is Devin Ratray (Home Alone) as Ben Gaffney, Dwight’s high school friend and Army vet who Dwight turns to for help in the film’s second half. Ben is a fascinating character in his own right, living alone in a secluded cabin yet willing to step up for his friend.

As the violence and intensity escalate, you begin to wonder if Dwight or anyone is going to get out of this scenario alive, and as the story spirals toward its inevitable climax, Saulnier’s compact, lean thriller takes on an air of deepening tragedy. Will the war between the Evans and Cleland families finally stop? Or will the hatred and vengeance continue to poison both sides until no one is left to get on with their lives? Blue Ruin leaves those questions unanswered, but we can only hope that by the end, the survivors have had enough. I, on the other hand, couldn’t get enough of Saulnier’s crisp little genre exercise, and poor Dwight Evans is a creation who will stay with me for a long, long time.

Blue Ruin is out now in theaters and on VOD.

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!

Fans have been wondering about the status of the Star Wars Expanded Universe since Star Wars: Episode VII was first announced. With new films set 30 years after Return of the Jedi, how would this affect the countless novels, comic books, video games, and animated series that have sprung up around the six Star Wars movies? Well, now we know the answer, thanks to an official statement from Lucasfilm.

"We have an unprecedented slate of new Star Wars entertainment on the horizon," said Lucasfilm President Kathleen Kennedy. "We're set to bring Star Wars back to the big screen, and continue the adventure through games, books, comics, and new formats that are just emerging. This future of interconnected storytelling will allow fans to explore this galaxy in deeper ways than ever before."

Essentially, all Star Wars films and animated series are the "immovable objects" of the new Star Wars canon. Everything else that has seen print before now is subject to change and interpretation, but all future Expanded Universe installments will be 100% part of the new Star Wars canon. Lucasfilm is quick to point out that elements of the Expanded Universe will still appear in the canon, and will draw on everything, including the West End Games roleplaying games from the '80s and '90s, which were terrific sources of Star Wars material at a time when the Expanded Universe was relatively scarce.

It isn't 100% clear how the pre-Return of the JediEU fits into this plan, as various comics and novels set during the Clone Wars and Old Republic eras seem less likely to immediately come into conflict with upcoming movies. On the other hand, the language in the statement is broad enough to include these, and it's best to not get too attached.

The good news is that all future Star WarsExpanded Universe installments will be considered canon, and will be produced in association with Lucasfilm. The first canon Star Wars novel will be a Star Wars: Rebels book from John Jackson Miller, known for his work on the Knights of the Old Republic comics. Presumably, this integrated approach will also include any comics that Marvel publishes once the Star Wars license reverts to them in 2015. In this respect, the coordinated multimedia approach to continuity, from comics to games to TV to novels is unprecedented.

[related article - First Batch of New Star Wars Expanded Universe Novels Revealed]

All "non-canon" elements of the Star Wars Expanded Universe will remain in print under a new banner known as Star Wars Legends. 

Watch the new Expanded Universe 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!

After the many, many media firestorms that rained down on Darren Aronofsky’s controversial (but very successful) Noah, it would seem wise that Paramount, which just announced a deal to produce a Ben-Hur remake with MGM, would make sure their next Bible film is blessed.

And indeed it may be just so, as news broke Friday afternoon that the studios have conjured up the forces of Mark Burnett and Roma Downey to produce and help guide a movie that will be adapted from a source material with the subtitle A Tale of the Christ.

The deal locks in the stamp and reputation of Burnett and Downey who in addition to producing a series of popular reality television shows have recently earned the air of authenticity with faith-based audiences when they produced last year’s widely popular The Bible miniseries on the History Channel. That series, which premiered to 13.1 million viewers for its first episode, also served as the basis for this past February’s sleeper hit, Son of God, a theatrical re-edit of footage already in the miniseries that went on to make $67 million at the global box office.

While that number pales in comparison to the $300 million Paramount’s own Noah has taken in to date, there is little denying that the Old Testament film suffered an imaging problem that did not get churches and congregation groups to see the movie en masse, such as Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ did in 2004 to the tune of $600 million worldwide—at a time with a less Hollywood-devouring global market.

This attempt to possibly bridge the gap between the devout and the moviegoing faithful could be a savvy business decision in this remake of the 1959 William Wyler epic.

We have conflicted feelings about this. While it continues to vindicate the Resurrection of the Biblical Epic, a predicted feat that is no longer too surprising since this spring’s Noah has gone on to gross $300 million worldwide in only three weeks of release. Nonetheless, Ben-Hur (1959) is a personal favorite of mine and is arguably the best movie ever based around a biblical story.

Granted, the 1959 picture, which was directed by William Wyler and starred cinema’s closest approximation of a marble statue in one Charlton Heston, is also a remake of the iconic 1925 movie of the same name. And both are adaptations of American Civil War Union veteran General Lew Wallace’s 1880 novel, Ben-Hur: A Tale of the Christ. However, Ben-Hur is obviously one of those rare instances where the film adaptation’s cultural impact, at least in the 20^th century-onwards, transcends its literary source. Also, it is hard to imagine CGI or digital video surpassing the stunning use of 70 millimeters and in-camera stunts for the chariot race.

But like the titular Hebrew, perhaps we should stop fighting with our own self-doubts and embrace the future to come?

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!

Steven Spielberg is set to take the reins of a big screen adaptation of Roald Dalh's The BFG. He'll be directing from a screenplay by E.T. writer, Melissa Mathison. Michael Siegel and John Madden are serving as executive producers. This will be the first high profile, big budget adaptation of the children's book, which was the subject of a (pretty good if memory serves me correctly) 1989 animated treatment.

Roald Dahl's The BFG(illustrated by Quentin Blake) which was first published in 1982, is the story of Sophie, a young girl who befriends the titular Big Friendly Giant, a gentleman who exists in opposition to decidedly unfriendly man-eating giants. If this doesn't sound like a perfect match for Steven Spielberg, well, then I don't know what is. 

The BFG should begin production in early 2015 for a 2016 release.

Source: The Hollywood Reporter

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!

In the wake of Lucasfilm's official announcement about the state of the Star Wars Expanded Universe, the first batch of new, canonical Star Warsnovels have been announced. For those who don't know, the entirety of the published Star Warscontinuity, from comics to novels to video games, other than what we've seen in the films and The Clone Wars animated series, has effectively been discarded. The previous Expanded Universe will live on under the banner of Star Wars: Legends, and those characters and concepts may be reintroduced in the future. 

The GOOD news is that all future Star Wars Expanded Universe publications will now be official Star Wars canon. Lucasfilm is wasting no time, releasing the first new Star Wars novel, a prequel to the upcoming Star Wars: Rebelsanimated series, on September 2nd. That would be Star Wars: A New Dawn by John Jackson Miller, familiar to Star Wars fans as the writer of the Knights of the Old Republic comics from Dark Horse.  

"With the establishment of the Lucasfilm Story Group and our even greater focus on unified storytelling, we expect our entire publishing program to be stronger and more meaningful than ever before," said Jeanne Mosure, senior vice president and group publisher, Disney Publishing Worldwide. "We're extremely excited to kick off this new strategy with Del Rey Books."

"We're extremely proud of the hundreds of amazing Star Wars books we've published at Del Rey," said Scott Shannon, SVP, publisher, Del Rey and Digital Content, "And now we're excited to finally be able to call our upcoming novels true canon -- a single, cohesive Star Wars storyline -- all while keeping the amazing backlist of Star Wars Legends content in print."

Star Wars: A New Dawn will be followed by Star Wars: Tarkin by James Luceno on November 4th 2014, Star Wars: Heir to the Jedi by Kevin Hearne in January 2015 and Star Wars: Lords of the Sithby Paul Kemp in March of 2015.

Statements courtesy of Lucasfilm. Images via io9.

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!

While this may be a surprise to nobody, it's nice to hear an official confirmation. Warner Bros. have confirmed that the Justice League movie is going to happen after Batman vs. Superman, and Zack Snyder will direct. Don't get too excited yet...it might be at least 2018 before we see DC's biggest heroes assembled in one place.

 The confirmation came via Greg Silverman, Warner Bros. president of worldwide production, who told The Wall Street Journal. “It will be a further expansion of this universe, Superman vs Batman will lead into Justice League.”

The statements come amid continuing rumors of an ever-expanding cast of characters for Batman vs. Superman, which recently (by all reliable accounts) added DC superhero and current Justice League member, Cyborg, to the film's cast. Speculation has run rampant that Batman vs. Superman (which isn't the film's official title) may actually already be a Justice League movie, with Warner Bros. just waiting for the right moment to reveal that fact. Clearly, this is no longer the case.

With Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, and likely Cyborg introduced in Batman vs. Superman, that's just over half of the characters considered to be "founding members" of the team in current DC Comics continuity. The remaining team members that would need to be introduced in some form either before or during the Justice Leaguemovie (assuming this is the roster they're going with) would be The Flash, Green Lantern, and Aquaman. 

With that in mind, we already have half of the cast of a cinematic Justice League in place, with Henry Cavill, Ben Affleck, Gal Gadot, and Ray Fisher (as Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, and Cyborg, respectively). But where does Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson fit in with all of this? He has been quite vocal about his involvement with a DC Universe superhero movie. Earlier speculation linked his name to Cyborg (clearly no longer the case) and John "Green Lantern" Stewart, although he's been somewhat dismissive of the latter prospect in recent remarks. 

[related article: 7 Potential Storylines for the Justice League Movie]

As for the fate of a potential Wonder Woman solo movie starring Gal Gadot, Sue Kroll, Warner Bros. president of worldwide marketing said that “With the right script, that could be viable. The world is ready for her.” In other words, don't hold your breath. Given the stately, one film at a time approach that Warner seems intent on with their superhero universe it could be 2020 before we see Wonder Woman in her own movie.

The same WSJ piece also names Shazamand Metal Men as two DC superhero movies in development, although fairly recently Shazamwas considered dead in the water at the studio, perhaps because of the character's surface similarities to Superman. Hopefully, someone over there has seen the light...although it's also worth noting just how much recent comic book portrayals of the character have changed both his look and power set to make him as distinct from the Man of Steel as possible.

We will, of course, bring you all developments on this movie as we get them!

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!

We've known it was coming since Man of Steel was announced. We knew it was finally possible once we saw The Avengersassemble on the big screen. But Warner Bros. have now given us the most serious, official confirmation we've ever had that the Justice League movie will, in fact, be a reality in the next few years, with Man of Steeland Batman vs. Superman director Zack Snyder at the helm. So now that Justice Leagueis a cinematic inevitability, we look at six stories that could (or should) inform the first ever live-action version of the premiere superhero team.

While there's no doubt that the Justice League should throw down in as serious a fashion as possible in their first big-screen appearance, the team's best comic book adventures have always been informed by heavier science fiction elements rather than more earthbound concerns. While each of the stories we've suggested here offer plenty of opportunities for action, perhaps the larger plan should be for Justice League to be the Star Trek to the Avengersfranchise's Star Wars. 

Justice League: Origin (2011)

This one is included more out of obligation than anything else, both because it encompasses the easiest, most logical giant alien invasion storyline and because it's the only story on this list that already features the lineup we're most likely to see on film. When DC Comics rebooted their entire universe in 2011, they kicked it off with the first six issues of Justice League by Geoff Johns and Jim Lee, which gave us the first meetings of Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Flash, Green Lantern, and Aquaman...and it managed to tell the origin of Cyborg. The heroes, initially at odds with one another, come together to face a full-scale alien invasion from the planet Apokolips, led by Darkseid, an intergalactic despot with power levels that would require a full team of superheroes to take him down.

The story is long on action and short on characterization, and would likely make Avengerslook like Waiting for Godotby comparison. On the other hand, the Justice Leaguemovie may already have Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman established thanks to Batman vs. Superman, but that would still leave a handful of origins, meetings, and motivations to attend to...in addition to the world-shattering action folks would expect. The story was recently adapted into animated form (as Justice League: War) with mixed results. Luckily, there are other stories in the Justice League canon that might make for more interesting viewing...and this next entry on the list would introduce the same bad guy and his intergalactic minions in a more subtle fashion...

Legends (1987)

The 1987 Legends miniseries was the first major "event" story of the post-Crisis DC Universe, and it was used as a way to bring previously unconnected elements of the newly unified DCU into contact with each other. In the comic, that meant placing characters like Blue Beetle and Captain Marvel (who had previously occupied their own parallel universes within the greater DCU) in firm interaction with one another and the more recognizable heroes of the DCU, a concept could work equally well for a freshly unified DC Cinematic Universe.

Legendsinvolved a stealth invasion of Earth by the forces of Darkseid (who is frequently floated as the most likely antagonist for a Justice League movie). Darkseid's first weapon, though, isn't brute force. He uses Glorious Godfrey (taking the form of a demagogue by the name of G. Gordon Godfrey) to first turn public sentiment against the heroes of Earth. Considering the less than sunny view of superhumans that denizens of Metropolis probably have in the wake of Man of Steel, Legendscould certainly have the right tone and approach and still leave plenty of opportunities for the team to wail on some Parademons and Darkseid himself for half the movie.

New World Order (1997)

Occasionally, the comic book Justice League title will lose its way, falling down a rabbit hole of lesser characters, mediocre plots, and uneven creative teams. When the book was relaunched in 1997 as JLA, written by Grant Morrison with art by Howard Porter, it was heralded as a return to greatness, reuniting the DC Universe's most iconic heroes as the most powerful League assembled in years. In fact, that lineup (with the addition of Cyborg) of Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Flash, Green Lantern and Martian Manhunter might not be that far off from what we see in this film!

When a new group of superhumans (The Hyperclan) arrive on Earth and use their powers to not just fight, but to change the world for the better, folks start to get suspicious of their homegrown heroes (who, in the Man of Steeluniverse, tend to leave a lot of broken buildings in their wake). As  it turns out, the Hyperclan are a shape-shifting race of White Martians, using mind control to get their way and with less than sunny plans for the citizens of Earth. A story like New World Order would not only put the Justice League through their paces (there are some terrific, iconic moments on display), but would be a fine way to introduce J'onn J'onnz, the Martian Manhunter to moviegoers, much the way he was in the loosely adapted version of this story that kicked off the fantastic Justice League animated series.

Panic in the Sky (1992)

Technically, Panic in the Skyisn't a Justice League story, as it actually ran through the Supermantitles in early 1992. Technicalities aside, it's difficult to envision a more perfect reason to gather all of Earth's superheroes together. Not only would Panic in the Sky be an effective Justice League movie, it would make Superman the heart of the film, completing his arc that began in Man of Steelfrom uncertain (but powerful) outsider into the greatest hero of them all as he rallies the combined might of the world's metahumans against a common threat, and leads them into battle.

When Brainiac (for cryin' out loud...can we please finally get Brainiac on the big screen already?) gains control of a planet-sized artificial weapon and sets his sights on Earth, it's up to Superman to get the most powerful beings on the planet together to tell the green fella that this isn't the best idea. Let me just make sure this is perfectly clear to you all: Brainiac (who, in some versions of his story is of Kryptonian origin) drives what is essentially the freakin' Death Star to Earth in order to pick a fight. If there is one thing that would make Loki and his magic staff and his army of disposable Chitauri soldier-helpers look like a troop of boy scouts, this is it.

Doomsday (1993)

Hollywood has been threatening to make the Death of Supermanstory into a film for roughly 20 years. Something about not believing that audiences can relate to an all-powerful character, so the only way to do anything about that is to kill him and zzzzzzzz...Anyway, the original Superman vs. Doomsday slugfest wasn't just unique because it was a major comic book publisher trying to lure non-comic book reading customers back into comic shops with the promise of the first, greatest, and most powerful superhero taking a dirt nap. In fact, Doomsdayis a pretty decent read, even without the promise of a Kryptonian corpse at the end of it, and maybe it's the prospect of a physical threat that's too much even for Superman to handle is what brings the Justice League together.

Supes doesn't have to die in order for Doomsday to be a Justice League movie villain, and the character's look is already a fine fit for the visual aesthetic established in Man of Steel. His Kryptonian origins would help expand the considerable world-building done in Man of Steel, too. The fact that all the Justice League are used for in the comic is cannon fodder to establish just how serious Doomsday is probably isn't the right way to go, as Warner Bros. would want their premiere superhero team to do a little more than have their asses handed to them by what is essentially a grey, spiky Kryptonian Hulk.

Granted, a Doomsday story falls more in line with the expected superhero blockbuster/maximum property damage formula than some of the others on this list (which, admittedly, plays to director Zack Snyder's strengths). So, in order for this one to have any weight, it would have to be all about who unleashes Doomsday on Earth and why...opening the door to much greater DC cosmic menaces like Brainiac, Darkseid, or Mongul, any one of whom could power a superhero franchise for years to come.

Brave and the Bold #28 (1960)

Sometimes, you've just gotta go back to the source material in order to get it right. The original Justice League of America story involved the team taking on Starro the Conqueror. Now, stop laughing for a minute and stick with us. Starro is an alien that looks like a giant starfish (stop laughing) who dispatches spores (that look like smaller starfish...seriously, stop laughing) that eat your face and control your mind (see? Kind of horrifying). While the Justice League's first appearance isn't the story of how they all got together (that wouldn't come until two years later in the rather less interesting Justice League of America#9), and the first Starro story is kinda tame, think about it this way:

You have all these meta-humans together for the first time, and they can't necessarily hit everything that gets in their way, because the soldiers of this alien presence are actually innocent people that have Alienfacehuggers making them do their bidding. Don't worry, there can be plenty of opportunities for solving problems with fists and rings and lassos of truth and whatnot (potentially among the League themselves with the whole mind control aspect), but first they have to figure out what these horrible, disgusting things are. A little sci-fi body horror with your big summer superhero blockbuster would certainly keep the critics from calling Justice League an Avengersclone.

Crisis (any of 'em...and there are plenty)

Bear with me folks, because this is gonna get weird. We've already seen a ridiculous, punch-for-punch superhero slugfest in Man of Steel. By the time a Justice League movie arrives in 2018, we'll have seen two (possibly three) Avengersfilms, so the idea of a team of superheroes punching a bunch of things together isn't exactly going to ring any novelty bells, even if the names are different. But there's one button that they could push that would immediately set the DC Cinematic Universe apart from the competition: The concept of Infinite Earths.

The Marvel Universe is built on cohesive, logical, linear progression. The DC Universe has always had that fun, string theory element to it involving parallel earths with different, sometimes evil versions of their characters. While the idea has been a part of Justice League stories dating back to the Silver Age of comics, it was Grant Morrison and Frank Quitely's Earth-2graphic novel that reintroduced the Crime Syndicate to the modern DCU, which was then loosely adapted into the Crisis on Two Earths animated film. More recently, the Justice League has had to square off against these evil versions of themselves in the pages of Forever Evil. 

Now, we should be clear...we're not suggesting that Warner Bros. do anything so foolhardy as try and adapt Crisis on Infinite Earths, or even to have them face the Crime Syndicate (let's face it, it's hard enough getting fans to approve of casting one version of a character for a movie, let alone TWO). However, anything that this film can do to plant the idea (whether it's via the introduction of a character like The Monitor or concepts like the Weaponers of Qward) that this team isn't just the salvation of our world, but countless parallel dimensions, will help establish a unique identity and an entirely different set of ground rules for this franchise than those that govern Marvel's. And that, perhaps more than anything else, is what a Justice League movie needs to do.

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 voice castings for the first Walt Disney Animation Studios adaptation of a Marvel property keep rolling in. Jamie Chung, who is well known to the geek community for appearing in Sucker Punch, The Hangover: Part 2, and this August’s hotly anticipated Sin City: A Dame to Kill For (in which she will be replacing Devon Aoki for the role of Miho), has been cast in an unspecified role for the Disney event film. While there is no official announcement, it has been included in her bio on NBC.

When Disney acquired Marvel in 2009, Disney CEO Bob Iger encouraged the House of Mouse side to consider other, lesser Marvel properties for animated adaptation, leading to Big Hero 6. As a team of Japanese superheroes, created in 1998, the super-squad was originally led by Silver Samurai (an X-Men villain who appeared in 2013’s The Wolverine). However like all super-teams, the roster has rotated. Set originally in Japan—where the heroes would face Eastern-centric horrors like the astral embodiment of the victims of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuclear bombings—this effort adapted by Walt Disney Animation Studios will be set in the futuristic San Fransokyo, a hybrid between San Francisco and Tokyo. There, Marvel’s child prodigy turned superhero, Hiro Hamada, and his trusty robot Baymax will find themselves in an origin story of criminal malfeasance. Joe Quesada, Marvel Entertainment’s chief creative officer, has said it retains Marvel’s “heroic arcs,” but with a Disney-flavor in the main characters’ relationship.

Big Hero 6 opens November 7, 2014.

Also, special thanks to ComingSoon for alerting us to this casting news!

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 vocals of Godzilla are as legendary as the 40-story behemoth himself. While cute and adorable from a nostalgic standpoint, it might not be so humorous if it is a giant nuclear fire-breathing lizard standing right above your head. And that is exactly the kind of fear sound engineers looked to create when they revisited this timeless sound effect, as seen in the behind-the-scenes video featurette below.

Directed by Gareth Edwards, the new Godzilla stars Bryan Cranston, Aaron Taylor-Johnson Elizabeth Olsen, David Strathaim, Ken Watanabe, Juliette Binoche, and Sally Hawkins. It opens May 16, 2014 in 2D, 3D, and IMAX.

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!

It looks like those perpetually pining for the upcoming Clerks 3 will have to pine at least a little longer, because director and writer Kevin Smith has announced his next project; it is the Anti-Claus.

As announced by XYZ Films, the director will reteam with his Tusk cast that includes Justin Long, Michael Parks, Hayley Joel Osment, and Genesis Rodriguez to realize this holiday slasher.

Anti-Claus will revel in the actions of a centuries-old demonic monster known only as Krampus, the Anti-Claus. This monster eats naughty children during the most festive season of the year.

“When I was a kid, if they wanted to make a Christmas horror movie, they'd stick an axe in Santa's hands,” Smith said in a press release. “In Anti-Claus, we leave Santa alone and creep with the Krampus through twisted tales of holly-jolly murder, desire, desperation and despair. Just in time for the holiday season.” Smith goes on to speak of how this will be a perfectly honest Christmastime movie…in Germany, Austria, Bavaria, and other Alpine countries that tell of what Krampus will do to the naughty children.

Anti-Claus begins principal photography in September.

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!

Could we see a different man under the mask in future Spider-Man films? It's possible, if you ask Andrew Garfield...and this time he isn't talking about another actor taking over the role of Peter Parker. Even Andrew Garfield thinks that Ultimate Spider-Man's Miles Morales should be given a shot at cinematic greatness. After a joke about not wanting "to be a 40 year old Spider-Man" in an interview with Comic Book Resources, Mr. Garfield opened up about the possibility of seeing Miles Morales in a Spider-Man movie.

I think one of the amazing things about Spider-Man is that you don't see skin color when he's in the suit. You don't see any religious beliefs. You don't see any denominations. Everyone can project themselves into that suit. It's incredibly powerful in that way. So of course I think it's important that the openness, the casting, in terms of who could be Spider-Man, could be absolutely anyone. A hero is a hero, whether you're a man, woman, gay, lesbian, straight, black, white or red all over -- it doesn't matter.

Miles Morales was a huge moment in this character's comic book life. And I do believe that we can do that. It's something I'm really interested in figuring out; an eloquent way of coexisting, or passing on the torch. I don't have an answer, but I think it's actually a really important move. I think it's a really beautiful and important move.

There's a certain sameness to Spider-Man movies, even the good ones. There are the expected romantic and personal life struggles, the dangers to Peter's loved ones...all things that make the character great, to be sure. But it would certainly shake expectations to the very core if Sony, instead of simply recasting after Garfield's time in the webs ends, actually were to introduce an entirely new Spider-Man to audiences.

Considering that Mr. Garfield might not return for Amazing Spider-Man 4, his remarks carry some weight.

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!