I know it's been forever since I've updated this thing, but, after seeing a movie this outstanding, I couldn't remain silent.
It was over a year ago I read the entire Hunger Games series, and since then, I had been dying to see the movies.
Looming questions plagued my every thought about the budding movie franchise. Were they going to ruin it? How would Lionsgate pull it off? Why the hell did they cast Lenny Kravitz?
After seeing the film, I can tell this: it's worth the hype.
For those uninitiated with the series, here's what's going on...
It's the future. Picture a post-apocalyptic North America, where the continent has been split into 13 Districts (which is now called Panem), run by The Capital. District 13 rebels and the nation is in a state of civil unrest. The insurgence is crushed by the Capital, and District 13 is laid to waste for its impudence. Since then, every year they hold The Hunger Games, a televised fight to the death where each District (1-12) sends a boy and girl aged between 12-18 to honor the sacrifices made by the Capital. (NOTE: This is all explained in the books, but not exactly told explicitly in the movie...you're welcome.)
We come in 74 years later. Panem is still run by the Capital -- specifically by President Snow (played eerily and brilliantly by Donald Sutherland). Katniss Everdeen (played by Jennifer Lawrence), who clearly has a constant problem with authority, illegally poaches in the outskirts of District 12 (the mining district) with her life-long friend Cale (played by Liam Hemsworth, younger brother of Thor's Chris Hemsworth) Today is the Reaping Day, where we find out who is picked for this year's Hunger Games.
Much to Katniss' surprise, her 12-year-old sister Primrose (played by Willow Shields, who, if they keep her on and stay true to the books, will have a much larger role later) is chosen as a tribute. To ensure her younger sister's life, Katniss does the unthinkable: she volunteers as a tribute. Peeta Mellark (played by Josh Hutcherson) is chosen as the male tribute.
Katniss and Peeta are then whisked off to the Capital to prepare them for the games. Effie Trinket (played brilliantly by Elizabeth Banks) aiding with etiquette and style and Haymitch Abernathy (played by Woody Harrelson) coaching on skills for the games themselves, Katniss and Peeta begin to realize they may be out of their league even before the games begin.
The film has garnered a bad reputation of being the next Twilight. This couldn't be further from the truth. Yes, it centers around a female and a love triangle emerges later in the books (look for Team Peeta and Team Gale shirts and posters soon), but that's it! No more similarities, folks!
Katniss, unlike Bella, is more concerned with her life's purpose and survival, not with whom she wants to have intimate relations with. Katniss is strong and has a personality. Gale doesn't bitch and turn into a giant poochie. And Peeta sure as hell doesn't sparkle.
While the likes of Lawrence, Hutcherson, Sutherland, and Harrelson put in excellent performances, it's hard to ignore the supporting cast. Stanley Tucci puts in a stellar, scene-stealing performance as Caesar Flickerman, the color commentator for the Hunger Games. Wes Bentley is dragged out of obscurity again to play gamesmaster Seneca Crane (who has a MUCH larger role in the movie than he did in the book). And Lenny Kravitz makes his acting debut as Cinna, Katniss' stylist who helps her garner the nickname "The Girl who Was On Fire".
Director/co-writer Gary Ross (Seabiscuit, Pleansantville) obviously wanted to make a reverent adaptation. He brought on series creator Suzanne Collins as a co-writer and producer, and ran every new scene by her to ensure it earned her stamp of approval. This series, unlike the aforementioned popular teen series, took its sweet time coming to the big screen, and the results are electric.
Beautiful cinematography, spot-on acting, and characters you actually care about are all featured in this epic-in-the-making. The action sequences are breath-taking, but it holds back when it needs to be more emotional. It's almost a compact version of everything we loved about The Lord of the Rings without being ostentatious.
I'm usually very guarded when they make my favorite books into movies. But The Hunger Games failed to disappoint. The purists will see subtle differences between the book and the movie, but the differences are so minuscule it's difficult to raise a fuss about with a straight face. The only disappointing thing about this is the knowledge that book 2 Catching Fire does not have a production or release date as of yet.
FINAL VERDICT: Whether you're a fan of the books or simply a fan of good movies, The Hunger Games will leave you thirsting for more.
Thursday, March 29, 2012
Tuesday, January 3, 2012
Soapbox Commentary: "Paranormal Activity" Franchise Goes 4th
In a press release issued earlier today, movie studio Paramount, who topped the studios list in 2011 with an impressive 5.17 billion dollars in revenue, announced, after months of speculation, there will be a "Paranormal Activity 4", and it is slated for an October 2012 release.
Fanboys across the board have already voiced their disdain for this, claiming the original three installments weren't scary at all, and this is an ill-deserved sequel. This is hard for me to swallow.
I still recall seeing the first "Paranormal Activity" back in October of 2009 when no one had heard of the movie and it was released in very limited theaters. Since the film was made (and takes place) in San Diego, it made sense it would screen there, and me, living in El Cajon and the time, was able to see it. This film blew me away. On a budget of less than one million and a reputation built solely by its audience members, "Paranormal Activity" scared up an astonishing 107.9 million for Paramount domestically alone. Perfecting the hand-held camera grittiness and "what the hell is/was that?" feelings of "The Blair Witch Project", "Paranormal Activity" created more scares and outstanding press than any major horror film that year (or in recent memory, for that matter). Writer/director Oren Peli, who has continued to produce the other installments, showed the power of imagination by creating a simple, yet effective, method to scare the hell out of people.
Sure, "Paranormal Activity 2" disappointed a bit at the box office with lower 84.8 million domestic gross, with a budget of 3 million dollars, it's hard to argue the enormous profit margin there.
When "Paranormal Activity 3" came out, box office analysts were expecting a similar decline from the second. Instead, the threequel dominated with 103.8 million domestic gross on a 5 million dollar budget. If looking at worldwide grosses, "Paranormal Activity 3" took in over 202 million dollars, even out-grossing the original "Paranormal Activity" worldwide gross of 193 million dollars.
In the movie industry, it's just simple math. "Paranormal Activity 3" makes over 202 million dollars worldwide on a paltry 5 million dollar budget...that's a profit of 197 million dollars. Granted, advertising and print costs must be considered, but considering there are movies being made that are barely turning a profit, it should come as no surprise why a fourth movie would be in store.
However, there is still one looming question: where can they possibly go with it?
"Paranormal Activity" takes place during a two- to three-week span in September of 2008 with Katie and Micah. The second one, for the most part, is a prequel rather than a sequel, taking place between a similar time span months before the events of the first with Kristi (Katie's sister) and her family in the focus (including appearances of Katie and Micah here and there), until, in the final moments of the film, where it picks up a couple days after the events of the first. (I'm sorry if that was confusing, but I'm trying not to give spoilers here.) With the third installment, we go back to analog with a true prequel, showing Katie and Kristi as little girls in the 80s, where it all began, and we finally get to see what Katie had been talking about in the previous two installments.
Seeing that the last installment took us all the way back to the 80s, when consumer video cameras were available (though barely affordable), where the hell else can they go? Given the knowledge (from "Paranormal Activity 2") the haunting may be caused by a pact with a demon by Katie and Kristi's ancestors back in the early 20th Century, it could be fun to see that. However, this kind of film wouldn't be exactly viable unless it would be a silent film in the vein of "Nosferatu"...and even then, it would be too campy for audiences to truly enjoy.
If this made by a lesser studio by a lesser production team, I would say all bets are off and who knows what the hell will come of this franchise. However, this is Paramount Pictures and the franchise is still in the hands of creator Oren Peli, so I know, wherever this series goes, will more than likely be scary, incredible, and, most importantly for the studio, profitable. We'll just have to wait until October to see if I'm wrong.
Fanboys across the board have already voiced their disdain for this, claiming the original three installments weren't scary at all, and this is an ill-deserved sequel. This is hard for me to swallow.
I still recall seeing the first "Paranormal Activity" back in October of 2009 when no one had heard of the movie and it was released in very limited theaters. Since the film was made (and takes place) in San Diego, it made sense it would screen there, and me, living in El Cajon and the time, was able to see it. This film blew me away. On a budget of less than one million and a reputation built solely by its audience members, "Paranormal Activity" scared up an astonishing 107.9 million for Paramount domestically alone. Perfecting the hand-held camera grittiness and "what the hell is/was that?" feelings of "The Blair Witch Project", "Paranormal Activity" created more scares and outstanding press than any major horror film that year (or in recent memory, for that matter). Writer/director Oren Peli, who has continued to produce the other installments, showed the power of imagination by creating a simple, yet effective, method to scare the hell out of people.
Sure, "Paranormal Activity 2" disappointed a bit at the box office with lower 84.8 million domestic gross, with a budget of 3 million dollars, it's hard to argue the enormous profit margin there.
When "Paranormal Activity 3" came out, box office analysts were expecting a similar decline from the second. Instead, the threequel dominated with 103.8 million domestic gross on a 5 million dollar budget. If looking at worldwide grosses, "Paranormal Activity 3" took in over 202 million dollars, even out-grossing the original "Paranormal Activity" worldwide gross of 193 million dollars.
In the movie industry, it's just simple math. "Paranormal Activity 3" makes over 202 million dollars worldwide on a paltry 5 million dollar budget...that's a profit of 197 million dollars. Granted, advertising and print costs must be considered, but considering there are movies being made that are barely turning a profit, it should come as no surprise why a fourth movie would be in store.
However, there is still one looming question: where can they possibly go with it?
"Paranormal Activity" takes place during a two- to three-week span in September of 2008 with Katie and Micah. The second one, for the most part, is a prequel rather than a sequel, taking place between a similar time span months before the events of the first with Kristi (Katie's sister) and her family in the focus (including appearances of Katie and Micah here and there), until, in the final moments of the film, where it picks up a couple days after the events of the first. (I'm sorry if that was confusing, but I'm trying not to give spoilers here.) With the third installment, we go back to analog with a true prequel, showing Katie and Kristi as little girls in the 80s, where it all began, and we finally get to see what Katie had been talking about in the previous two installments.
Seeing that the last installment took us all the way back to the 80s, when consumer video cameras were available (though barely affordable), where the hell else can they go? Given the knowledge (from "Paranormal Activity 2") the haunting may be caused by a pact with a demon by Katie and Kristi's ancestors back in the early 20th Century, it could be fun to see that. However, this kind of film wouldn't be exactly viable unless it would be a silent film in the vein of "Nosferatu"...and even then, it would be too campy for audiences to truly enjoy.
If this made by a lesser studio by a lesser production team, I would say all bets are off and who knows what the hell will come of this franchise. However, this is Paramount Pictures and the franchise is still in the hands of creator Oren Peli, so I know, wherever this series goes, will more than likely be scary, incredible, and, most importantly for the studio, profitable. We'll just have to wait until October to see if I'm wrong.
Saturday, October 8, 2011
Soapbox Commentary: What Moves and Inspires Me
I know it's been a long time since I've posted on here, and I apologize for that. I'll be posting more frequently now, I assure you. A fellow film buff asked me to write about the movies that have moved and inspired me not only as a film buff, but as a writer as well. I thought this was an interesting assignment, so I took her up on it and this is the end result.
"AMERICAN BEAUTY" (1999)
Even after over 12 years, this movie still moves me. Among many of the films on this list, it's impossible to label this movie. A comedy that moves you. A drama that makes you laugh. A movie that makes you "Look Closer" at your own lives to examine the inner-comedy, the inner-tragedy, and the utter beauty in all of our lives we often miss because we're too distracted by the surface. This movie changed my life forever.
"THE USUAL SUSPECTS" (1996)
1996 was a great year for movies to begin with, like "Fargo" that put a great spotlight on the Coen Brothers. At this time, I was already starting to study film. But it was "The Usual Suspects" that really grabbed my attention. The brilliant dialogue and engaging storyline made me thrilled and surprised. It was this movie that inspired me to become a writer. This movie made me want to make a script that would eventually inspire a future writer in the generations to come.
"INCEPTION" (2010)
Christopher Nolan is an amazing filmmaker. Period. Even from his debut film "Following", Nolan manages to thrill with a minimal effort. "Inception" is a different beast all together. On the surface, it's a beautifully crafted action film that rivals all CGI-laden blockbusters as a dominant beast. Under the action, you have a bizarre and unique exploration of the human mind and what happens when you can no longer tell the difference between dreams and reality. Even after the movie is over, you can't help but ponder over your own existence.
"SUCKER PUNCH" (2011)
This is a prime example critics don't always know what they're talking about. Saying this movie is only about big-breasted girls in tight clothing fighting monsters is like saying "Citizen Kane" is about a guy and a sled. Zack Snyder's period opus combines Tim Burton's "Alice In Wonderland" with "Kill Bill" and delivers not only eye-popping visuals and pulse-pounding action sequences, but heart-wrenching emotion while telling you, the viewer, the tools you need to survive are within you. The message, on most auidences, was lost. What a tragedy.
"10 THINGS I HATE ABOUT YOU" (1999)
Perhaps a strange choice for this list, "10 Things I Hate About You" manages to be relevant even 12 years after its debut. Perhaps it's the performances from Heath Ledger, Joseph Gordan-Leavitt and Julia Stiles. Perhaps it's the brilliant writing. Or perhaps it's Shakespeare's timeless "Taming of the Shrew" that made this movie a masterpiece that spans generations like "The Breakfast Club". More than a decade later, we still have no equal to this film, and we probably never will.
"GET HIM TO THE GREEK" (2010)
Now I can imagine this enrty seems silly, perhaps awkward, to be on this list. All together now! "One of these things is not like the other! One of these things just doesn't belong!" That was fun. First off, I love musicals. Fucked up musicals. And this one fits that bill to a tee. However, like its predecessor "Forgetting Sarah Marhall", "Greek" has a bizarre poignance that it almost had no right to have. While on the surface, it's a tale of sex, drugs, and (most importantly) rock and roll, "Greek", deep down, is about the love of the music dedication to your passion, and being loyal to yourself and those who love you.
"FORGETTING SARAH MARSHALL" (2008)
You can't have a sequel on this list without the original. And "Forgetting Sarah Marshall" definitely deserves to be on this list. Yes, the several cock shots were disconcerting. But the brutal honesty of this film more than makes up for it. When we're with the wrong person, we lose sight of who we are and our passions in life and for life, and sometimes a broken heart is the best remedy for that. Makes this film unforgettable.
"L.A. CONFIDENTIAL" (1997)
It's hard to mention "The Usual Suspects" without mentioning "L.A. Confidential". At least for me. Not only was it a gorgeous neo-noir exposing the gritty underbelly of 1930s Los Angeles, but the intense storyline and nail-biting drama are enough to marvel over. Add in the wonderful combination of Guy Pearce, Kevin Spacey and Russell Crowe, along with Brian Helgaland's wonderfully crafted script and you have a film that is glitz, glamour, and substance. Another film that inspired me to be a writer.
"VANILLA SKY" (2001)
The final movie on this list is no other than the critical and audience flop "Vanilla Sky". Why is this on the list? Because sometimes neither critics nor audience know what is good. Surreal and beautiful, revealing and bleak, this movie explored the fragility of dreams long before "Inception", proved Tom Cruise still has it after all these years, and made Cameron Diaz into a legitimate actress. Also it was the film that led me to write my first screenplay (second if you count my collaborative effort four months prior, so it's my first solo effort), so I still hold this film in high regards. "Open your eyes."
"AMERICAN BEAUTY" (1999)
Even after over 12 years, this movie still moves me. Among many of the films on this list, it's impossible to label this movie. A comedy that moves you. A drama that makes you laugh. A movie that makes you "Look Closer" at your own lives to examine the inner-comedy, the inner-tragedy, and the utter beauty in all of our lives we often miss because we're too distracted by the surface. This movie changed my life forever.
"THE USUAL SUSPECTS" (1996)
1996 was a great year for movies to begin with, like "Fargo" that put a great spotlight on the Coen Brothers. At this time, I was already starting to study film. But it was "The Usual Suspects" that really grabbed my attention. The brilliant dialogue and engaging storyline made me thrilled and surprised. It was this movie that inspired me to become a writer. This movie made me want to make a script that would eventually inspire a future writer in the generations to come.
"INCEPTION" (2010)
Christopher Nolan is an amazing filmmaker. Period. Even from his debut film "Following", Nolan manages to thrill with a minimal effort. "Inception" is a different beast all together. On the surface, it's a beautifully crafted action film that rivals all CGI-laden blockbusters as a dominant beast. Under the action, you have a bizarre and unique exploration of the human mind and what happens when you can no longer tell the difference between dreams and reality. Even after the movie is over, you can't help but ponder over your own existence.
"SUCKER PUNCH" (2011)
This is a prime example critics don't always know what they're talking about. Saying this movie is only about big-breasted girls in tight clothing fighting monsters is like saying "Citizen Kane" is about a guy and a sled. Zack Snyder's period opus combines Tim Burton's "Alice In Wonderland" with "Kill Bill" and delivers not only eye-popping visuals and pulse-pounding action sequences, but heart-wrenching emotion while telling you, the viewer, the tools you need to survive are within you. The message, on most auidences, was lost. What a tragedy.
"10 THINGS I HATE ABOUT YOU" (1999)
Perhaps a strange choice for this list, "10 Things I Hate About You" manages to be relevant even 12 years after its debut. Perhaps it's the performances from Heath Ledger, Joseph Gordan-Leavitt and Julia Stiles. Perhaps it's the brilliant writing. Or perhaps it's Shakespeare's timeless "Taming of the Shrew" that made this movie a masterpiece that spans generations like "The Breakfast Club". More than a decade later, we still have no equal to this film, and we probably never will.
"GET HIM TO THE GREEK" (2010)
Now I can imagine this enrty seems silly, perhaps awkward, to be on this list. All together now! "One of these things is not like the other! One of these things just doesn't belong!" That was fun. First off, I love musicals. Fucked up musicals. And this one fits that bill to a tee. However, like its predecessor "Forgetting Sarah Marhall", "Greek" has a bizarre poignance that it almost had no right to have. While on the surface, it's a tale of sex, drugs, and (most importantly) rock and roll, "Greek", deep down, is about the love of the music dedication to your passion, and being loyal to yourself and those who love you.
"FORGETTING SARAH MARSHALL" (2008)
You can't have a sequel on this list without the original. And "Forgetting Sarah Marshall" definitely deserves to be on this list. Yes, the several cock shots were disconcerting. But the brutal honesty of this film more than makes up for it. When we're with the wrong person, we lose sight of who we are and our passions in life and for life, and sometimes a broken heart is the best remedy for that. Makes this film unforgettable.
"L.A. CONFIDENTIAL" (1997)
It's hard to mention "The Usual Suspects" without mentioning "L.A. Confidential". At least for me. Not only was it a gorgeous neo-noir exposing the gritty underbelly of 1930s Los Angeles, but the intense storyline and nail-biting drama are enough to marvel over. Add in the wonderful combination of Guy Pearce, Kevin Spacey and Russell Crowe, along with Brian Helgaland's wonderfully crafted script and you have a film that is glitz, glamour, and substance. Another film that inspired me to be a writer.
"VANILLA SKY" (2001)
The final movie on this list is no other than the critical and audience flop "Vanilla Sky". Why is this on the list? Because sometimes neither critics nor audience know what is good. Surreal and beautiful, revealing and bleak, this movie explored the fragility of dreams long before "Inception", proved Tom Cruise still has it after all these years, and made Cameron Diaz into a legitimate actress. Also it was the film that led me to write my first screenplay (second if you count my collaborative effort four months prior, so it's my first solo effort), so I still hold this film in high regards. "Open your eyes."
Saturday, August 7, 2010
Soapbox Commentary: "Avatar": The Vast Hype Bender
I know it's been a while since I've posted anything at all (mainly due to constant relocations and never having time to write), but, after the news I just received, I can remain silent no longer.
I was just informed on MovieWeb that James Cameron plans on shooting "Avatar 2" and "Avatar 3" back-to-back.
I need to repeat that.
"Avatar 2"...and "Avatar 3"...
I am now depressed.
How can this have happened my friends? I am deeply saddened that someone somewhere decided that Cameron needed to make not only one but TWO sequels to "Avatar"...and that people are actually "looking forward to them" (quoted by a commenter on the MovieWeb article who will remain nameless).
Look, I know it's no mystery that I hated the movie. I have made it a case to call the movie "Avatard" every time it is brought up in civilized conversation because it's an apt re-titling. No plot. No acting. No coherent storyline. Just awesome special effects. I would rather sit through all 6 "Star Wars" films back-to-back from 1 through 6 twice in a row before seeing this piece of shit again. I would rather sit through "The Last Airbender" AND "Step It Up 3D" in the same sitting that watch this big blue abomination once more.
What the hell is going on folks? How can this happen? I know this is sounding funny at this point, but it's the fucking truth. Future generations will look at these movies and wonder how the hell they made so much money. That "Avatar" and "Titanic" can monetarily trump the likes of "The Dark Knight" and "Inception". There's nothing to these movies other than special effects. We all have to see that, right?
It's not just that "Avatar" was a piece of shit. It's that it was a piece of shit that I consistently get into arguments about because people not only tell me it's good, but that it was the best movie that came out of 2009.
WHAT?!?
You heard me! People tell me that, in 2009, the year that saw movies like "Up in the Air", "9", "Coraline", "Inglorious Bastards", and "Sherlock Holmes", the best movie to come out of it was "Avatar".
Is this what has become of our discerning theater-goers? Has George Lucas and James Cameron done what I have predicted for decades? Have all the intelligent film aficionados been so blinded by state-of-the-art CGI and special effects that they can't tell when the script is hackneyed and the performances are phoned in?
I would say something like "if there was a just and loving God in the heavens, He/She would not allow this to happen", but I think it's best to leave God out of this. In fact, I think that's why it's been raining so much everywhere. God is crying, folks. See, God hates "Avatar" too. He hates it so much, he influenced the Academy to give the Oscar for Best Picture not only to something other than "Avatar", but to the film made by Cameron's ex-wife. You know that had to hurt Cameron a bit.
Let's all take an example from God and hurt James Cameron. Stop seeing "Avatar". Stop your friends from seeing "Avatar". Start calling it "Avatard". And START SEEING GOOD MOVIES!
I was just informed on MovieWeb that James Cameron plans on shooting "Avatar 2" and "Avatar 3" back-to-back.
I need to repeat that.
"Avatar 2"...and "Avatar 3"...
I am now depressed.
How can this have happened my friends? I am deeply saddened that someone somewhere decided that Cameron needed to make not only one but TWO sequels to "Avatar"...and that people are actually "looking forward to them" (quoted by a commenter on the MovieWeb article who will remain nameless).
Look, I know it's no mystery that I hated the movie. I have made it a case to call the movie "Avatard" every time it is brought up in civilized conversation because it's an apt re-titling. No plot. No acting. No coherent storyline. Just awesome special effects. I would rather sit through all 6 "Star Wars" films back-to-back from 1 through 6 twice in a row before seeing this piece of shit again. I would rather sit through "The Last Airbender" AND "Step It Up 3D" in the same sitting that watch this big blue abomination once more.
What the hell is going on folks? How can this happen? I know this is sounding funny at this point, but it's the fucking truth. Future generations will look at these movies and wonder how the hell they made so much money. That "Avatar" and "Titanic" can monetarily trump the likes of "The Dark Knight" and "Inception". There's nothing to these movies other than special effects. We all have to see that, right?
It's not just that "Avatar" was a piece of shit. It's that it was a piece of shit that I consistently get into arguments about because people not only tell me it's good, but that it was the best movie that came out of 2009.
WHAT?!?
You heard me! People tell me that, in 2009, the year that saw movies like "Up in the Air", "9", "Coraline", "Inglorious Bastards", and "Sherlock Holmes", the best movie to come out of it was "Avatar".
Is this what has become of our discerning theater-goers? Has George Lucas and James Cameron done what I have predicted for decades? Have all the intelligent film aficionados been so blinded by state-of-the-art CGI and special effects that they can't tell when the script is hackneyed and the performances are phoned in?
I would say something like "if there was a just and loving God in the heavens, He/She would not allow this to happen", but I think it's best to leave God out of this. In fact, I think that's why it's been raining so much everywhere. God is crying, folks. See, God hates "Avatar" too. He hates it so much, he influenced the Academy to give the Oscar for Best Picture not only to something other than "Avatar", but to the film made by Cameron's ex-wife. You know that had to hurt Cameron a bit.
Let's all take an example from God and hurt James Cameron. Stop seeing "Avatar". Stop your friends from seeing "Avatar". Start calling it "Avatard". And START SEEING GOOD MOVIES!
Friday, July 2, 2010
Soapbox Commentary: Your Friendly Neighborhood Andrew Garfield!
After months of speculation, rumors, and Sony beating around the proverbial bush, Tobey Maguire's replacement as Spider-Man has been announced.
Many names were kicked around. Aaron Johnson ("Kick-Ass"), Jaime Bell ("Billy Elliot") and Josh Hutcherson ("Journey to the Center of the Earth") were the popular choices by Sony, where Logan Lerman ("Percy Jackson and the Olympian: The Lightnigh Thief") was the most popular choice among fans of the series -- though definitely not my first choice...or second for that matter.
And now we have a new confirmed Peter Parker! And it's...Andrew Garfield. And the world all went...who the fuck is Andrew Garfield?!?
I will admit I had to look it up too, though the name seemed vaguely familiar. Upon looking him up (God I love IMDB), I realized that I should have known him already. Why? Because he was in my favorite movie last year, "The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus"! And he was good. Shockingly good. Definitely one of the finer performances that year.
So, do I think Andrew Garfield is the perfect choice? Well, maybe not perfect. I would have loved to see Jaime Bell kick a little ass in the Spidey suit. And he could have brought an angsty side to Peter Parker, seeing that Bell did excellent work in "Dear Wendy" and "The Chumscrubber". However, Garfield has a lot to offer the role of Spider-Man, and so I welcome him. It makes me more curious to see his next film first though -- the Facebook movie "The Social Network", which also stars Jesse Eisenberg and Justin Timberlake.
Does this mean I'm totally going to endorse the new "Spider-Man" reboot? Eh...not entirely. Though they cast a really good actor to fill those red booties and the rumored villain is The LIzard, which would be really cool, the director, Marc Webb, does not have my full endorsement.
Who is Marc Webb? Still not a household name yet, Webb directed last year's indie darling "(500) Days of Summer)". First of all, this movie wasn't that good. It tried to be the perfect blend of "Memento" and "Annie Hall", but failed major at both attempts. Second of all, this is supposed to be a gritty reboot in the vein of "Batman Begins". How gritty can this film be when the reigns of the film are now in the hands of a guy who's real only film credit is a romantic comedy?
But hey, I'm willing to give it a shot. I've been wrong before about directors in the past, so I'm willing to admit I could be wrong here. Only time will tell.
Many names were kicked around. Aaron Johnson ("Kick-Ass"), Jaime Bell ("Billy Elliot") and Josh Hutcherson ("Journey to the Center of the Earth") were the popular choices by Sony, where Logan Lerman ("Percy Jackson and the Olympian: The Lightnigh Thief") was the most popular choice among fans of the series -- though definitely not my first choice...or second for that matter.
And now we have a new confirmed Peter Parker! And it's...Andrew Garfield. And the world all went...who the fuck is Andrew Garfield?!?
I will admit I had to look it up too, though the name seemed vaguely familiar. Upon looking him up (God I love IMDB), I realized that I should have known him already. Why? Because he was in my favorite movie last year, "The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus"! And he was good. Shockingly good. Definitely one of the finer performances that year.
So, do I think Andrew Garfield is the perfect choice? Well, maybe not perfect. I would have loved to see Jaime Bell kick a little ass in the Spidey suit. And he could have brought an angsty side to Peter Parker, seeing that Bell did excellent work in "Dear Wendy" and "The Chumscrubber". However, Garfield has a lot to offer the role of Spider-Man, and so I welcome him. It makes me more curious to see his next film first though -- the Facebook movie "The Social Network", which also stars Jesse Eisenberg and Justin Timberlake.
Does this mean I'm totally going to endorse the new "Spider-Man" reboot? Eh...not entirely. Though they cast a really good actor to fill those red booties and the rumored villain is The LIzard, which would be really cool, the director, Marc Webb, does not have my full endorsement.
Who is Marc Webb? Still not a household name yet, Webb directed last year's indie darling "(500) Days of Summer)". First of all, this movie wasn't that good. It tried to be the perfect blend of "Memento" and "Annie Hall", but failed major at both attempts. Second of all, this is supposed to be a gritty reboot in the vein of "Batman Begins". How gritty can this film be when the reigns of the film are now in the hands of a guy who's real only film credit is a romantic comedy?
But hey, I'm willing to give it a shot. I've been wrong before about directors in the past, so I'm willing to admit I could be wrong here. Only time will tell.
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Soapbox Commentary: July 16th is the "Inception" of Summer
Anyone who hasn't been living under a rock or frozen in a cryogenic chamber to beat death should know about a little movie called "Inception". Let me be frank here. This movie will rock. This movie already DOES rock. Watch the trailers online and the ads on TV and tell me this movie will suck. You can't do it because you know it will rock. Hard.
I decided to be a real geek, and look up the word inception in the dictionary. Here's what I got...
Inception (noun): an act, process, or instance of being; commencement.
How about that. "Commencement". How appropriate that the title of the movie that will more than likely rock the Summer blockbuster season means "to be" and "commencement" at the same time. Because "Inception" is the movie everyone wants to see right now. All the studios knew to get their movies out now before going up against the speeding freight train as "Inception". Box Office Mojo reported on their site the results of a poll conducted recently about what movie goers wanted to see this July. It came as no surprise to me that more than 50% of the poll participants voted for "Inception".
Why do you think that is? Here's why I think it is...
1. It's Christopher Nolan, dammit!
Do you need any other reason? It's Christopher Nolan! He changed the comic book movie and conventional filmmaking with one film for eternity. He could take a cue from Rick James' handbook and go around shouting "I'm Chris Nolan, bitch!" and no one would mind.
Look. He changed the face of the thriller with "Memento". He managed to get Al Pacino, Robin Willians, AND Hilary Swank together on the same film on his first Hollywood outing with "Insomnia". He brought the Caped Crusader back from Critical and Box Office Hell with "Batman Begins". He made audiences do a double take( and buried what seemed to be the copycat movie "The Illusionist") with "The Prestige". And last year, he demolished all that stood in opposition of him with the $500+ million-making "The Dark Knight", giving him many box-office records that have still yet to be broken and the second highest grossing movie of all-time (third highest if you actually consider "Avatar" a movie and not a steaming pile of vomit and melted Smurf).
Warner Brothers doesn't fuck around with amateurs, so, when you do a film for them, you take your orders and don't back talk. When dealing with Christopher Nolan, however, Warner Brothers has given him everything he has asked for, knowing full well he will make them a hit. Looking at the over-the-top elaborate sets used in "Inception" should be an indication that Warner Brothers knows to let Nolan do his thing.
2. A cast that could only be dreamed of...
Anyone who has seen a Nolan film since 2002's "Insomnia" knows he can draw in the best cast possible. But for "Inception"? This is the ensemble to end all ensembles!
The cast list is, as follows (but not limited to)...
Leonardo DiCaprio, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Ellen Page, Tom Hardy, Ken Watanabe, Cillian Murphey, Tom Berenger, Marion Cotillard, Pete Postlethwaite, Michael Caine, and Lukas Haas.
6 Academy Award nominated performers, including 2 winners. Look at this cast, my friends. Anyone who wants to get an early edge on this year's office betting pools should start here and put down some cash on "Inception" winning the Screen Actors Guild Award for Best Ensemble in a Motion Picture. The cast alone has the aroma of Oscar gold, so who knows?
3. Everyone knows about this movie!
Making it's teaser trailer debut back in the Summer of 2009 in front of "Inglorious Basterds" and its full-length trailer debut on Christmas Day 2009 in front of "Sherlock Holmes" (at least that's what my trailer journal says), "Inception" is possibly the most advertised movie this Summer, and the most anticipated movie that's not part of a franchise. In fact, "Inception" marks the first time since his debut movie "Following" in 1998 where Christopher Nolan has written and directed a movie not based on any previous source material, and the first movie since 2002's "Insomnia" that Nolan didn't co-write with his brother Jonathan Nolan or .
Warner Brothers has not skimped out on getting the word out on this movie, mainly because it's their biggest movie lined up until the first part of "Harry Potter and the Deatly Hallows" comes out in November. Until then, there will be consistent advertising on TV, on the pre-screen show in front of movies in certain theaters, and now in NYC, giant surreal posters on buildings.
Check them out at:
http://woodlandcreature.tumblr.com/post/751242864/cool-movie-ad-for-inception-at-23rd-and-park-i
http://a.yfrog.com/img683/3563/s4hq.jpg
What can I say? "Inception" just looks cool. Intriguing, action-packed, visually stunning, and, if anything like Nolan's past work, very emotional. But those are all the things that made "The Dark Knight" a success, so be expecting some great things.
Of course, I am only one man, and this is my opinion.
I decided to be a real geek, and look up the word inception in the dictionary. Here's what I got...
Inception (noun): an act, process, or instance of being; commencement.
How about that. "Commencement". How appropriate that the title of the movie that will more than likely rock the Summer blockbuster season means "to be" and "commencement" at the same time. Because "Inception" is the movie everyone wants to see right now. All the studios knew to get their movies out now before going up against the speeding freight train as "Inception". Box Office Mojo reported on their site the results of a poll conducted recently about what movie goers wanted to see this July. It came as no surprise to me that more than 50% of the poll participants voted for "Inception".
Why do you think that is? Here's why I think it is...
1. It's Christopher Nolan, dammit!
Do you need any other reason? It's Christopher Nolan! He changed the comic book movie and conventional filmmaking with one film for eternity. He could take a cue from Rick James' handbook and go around shouting "I'm Chris Nolan, bitch!" and no one would mind.
Look. He changed the face of the thriller with "Memento". He managed to get Al Pacino, Robin Willians, AND Hilary Swank together on the same film on his first Hollywood outing with "Insomnia". He brought the Caped Crusader back from Critical and Box Office Hell with "Batman Begins". He made audiences do a double take( and buried what seemed to be the copycat movie "The Illusionist") with "The Prestige". And last year, he demolished all that stood in opposition of him with the $500+ million-making "The Dark Knight", giving him many box-office records that have still yet to be broken and the second highest grossing movie of all-time (third highest if you actually consider "Avatar" a movie and not a steaming pile of vomit and melted Smurf).
Warner Brothers doesn't fuck around with amateurs, so, when you do a film for them, you take your orders and don't back talk. When dealing with Christopher Nolan, however, Warner Brothers has given him everything he has asked for, knowing full well he will make them a hit. Looking at the over-the-top elaborate sets used in "Inception" should be an indication that Warner Brothers knows to let Nolan do his thing.
2. A cast that could only be dreamed of...
Anyone who has seen a Nolan film since 2002's "Insomnia" knows he can draw in the best cast possible. But for "Inception"? This is the ensemble to end all ensembles!
The cast list is, as follows (but not limited to)...
Leonardo DiCaprio, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Ellen Page, Tom Hardy, Ken Watanabe, Cillian Murphey, Tom Berenger, Marion Cotillard, Pete Postlethwaite, Michael Caine, and Lukas Haas.
6 Academy Award nominated performers, including 2 winners. Look at this cast, my friends. Anyone who wants to get an early edge on this year's office betting pools should start here and put down some cash on "Inception" winning the Screen Actors Guild Award for Best Ensemble in a Motion Picture. The cast alone has the aroma of Oscar gold, so who knows?
3. Everyone knows about this movie!
Making it's teaser trailer debut back in the Summer of 2009 in front of "Inglorious Basterds" and its full-length trailer debut on Christmas Day 2009 in front of "Sherlock Holmes" (at least that's what my trailer journal says), "Inception" is possibly the most advertised movie this Summer, and the most anticipated movie that's not part of a franchise. In fact, "Inception" marks the first time since his debut movie "Following" in 1998 where Christopher Nolan has written and directed a movie not based on any previous source material, and the first movie since 2002's "Insomnia" that Nolan didn't co-write with his brother Jonathan Nolan or .
Warner Brothers has not skimped out on getting the word out on this movie, mainly because it's their biggest movie lined up until the first part of "Harry Potter and the Deatly Hallows" comes out in November. Until then, there will be consistent advertising on TV, on the pre-screen show in front of movies in certain theaters, and now in NYC, giant surreal posters on buildings.
Check them out at:
http://woodlandcreature.tumblr.com/post/751242864/cool-movie-ad-for-inception-at-23rd-and-park-i
http://a.yfrog.com/img683/3563/s4hq.jpg
What can I say? "Inception" just looks cool. Intriguing, action-packed, visually stunning, and, if anything like Nolan's past work, very emotional. But those are all the things that made "The Dark Knight" a success, so be expecting some great things.
Of course, I am only one man, and this is my opinion.
Movie Review: "The A-Team"
Let's forget about the fact that this is another remake of a show or movie made back in the 80's in attempts to capitalize on the branding. Everyone bitched about. I've bitched about it plenty in conversations and my last blog. It's going to keep happening whether we want it to or not. Let's get over it.
There had to be something to bringing back "The A-Team" now. Shortly after the press release stating that this movie would be made, two other films were green-lit right after, bearing odd similarities and themes -- last April's "The Losers", which was a comic book adaptation, and this August's "The Expendable", Sylvester Stallone's new film which boasts an action all-star team like no other. While "The Losers" was quite entertaining, you have to give it up for the original, though, after hearing many disparaging remarks, my expectations were quite low. Perhaps that's what made this film so great.
The film opens up to Iraq War veterans Col. Hannibal Smith (Liam Neeson), Cpl Bosco "B.A." Baracus (former UFC fighter Quinton "Rampage" Jackson), Lt Templeton "Faceman" Peck (Bradley Cooper), and Captain "Howling Mad" Murdock ("District 9"'s Sharlto Copley) meeting in Mexico during a mission gone horribly wrong. 8 years and 80 missions later, they take the fall after a botched job to take back stolen mint printing plates goes awry, leaving their general dead, the man responsible for the botched mission (Brian Bloom, who co-wrote the script) at large.
In comes a man simply known as Lynch (Patrick Wilson), with a plan to break all four of them out of prison to clear their names once and for all. And who's going to stop them? Why, it's Peck's old flame from the CIA, Captain Charisa Sosa (Jessica Biel)! But finding out the truth about who's really pulling the strings is only leading to more questions as our A-Team plans for the impossible.
Director Joe Carnahan ("Smokin' Aces", "Narc"), who co-wrote the movie with Bloom (screenwriting debut) and writer Skip Woods ("X-Men Origins: Wolverine") swung for the fences with this one. Carnahan clearly has a knack for the ridiculous, and pulls it off with a flair of genius in the vain of "Die Hard 4". But where most films skip out on dialogue, Carnahan, Bloom, and Woods come equipped with snappy, comedic dialgoue to pace with the dark tone of the script.
However, aside from the incredible stunt work and special effects, the real gem of the movie is the cast. Neeson, Jackson, Cooper, and Copley work together so well, often playing off each other naturally, making the dialogue smooth, and never leaving a feeling of anything being ungenuine at all. Though Neeson and Cooper hold their own extremely well, Jackson and Copley steal the show entirely. Jackson gives a stellar debut here, and Copley, fresh off the heals of last year's "District 9", displays a surprising aptitude for comedy.
I'm sure if you dig hard enough, you can find plenty of plot holes in the script, and there really isn't much time spent on character development here. But if you're going to see this movie thinking about things like that, you're missing out on one kick-ass movie. I can't think of too many action films grounded completely in reality, but part of the reason why we go to movies is to escape from reality, isn't it? Sure, it's impossible to fly a tank by firing the cannon in certain directions. But isn't it cool to know someone thought "How cool would it be to try and fly a tank?" and then filmed it? Awesome.
FINAL VERDICT: Perhaps not a candidate for next year's Oscar race, "The A-Team" is still one wild ride that should not be missed. With laughs and thrills aplenty, this is definitely one plan that came together well.
There had to be something to bringing back "The A-Team" now. Shortly after the press release stating that this movie would be made, two other films were green-lit right after, bearing odd similarities and themes -- last April's "The Losers", which was a comic book adaptation, and this August's "The Expendable", Sylvester Stallone's new film which boasts an action all-star team like no other. While "The Losers" was quite entertaining, you have to give it up for the original, though, after hearing many disparaging remarks, my expectations were quite low. Perhaps that's what made this film so great.
The film opens up to Iraq War veterans Col. Hannibal Smith (Liam Neeson), Cpl Bosco "B.A." Baracus (former UFC fighter Quinton "Rampage" Jackson), Lt Templeton "Faceman" Peck (Bradley Cooper), and Captain "Howling Mad" Murdock ("District 9"'s Sharlto Copley) meeting in Mexico during a mission gone horribly wrong. 8 years and 80 missions later, they take the fall after a botched job to take back stolen mint printing plates goes awry, leaving their general dead, the man responsible for the botched mission (Brian Bloom, who co-wrote the script) at large.
In comes a man simply known as Lynch (Patrick Wilson), with a plan to break all four of them out of prison to clear their names once and for all. And who's going to stop them? Why, it's Peck's old flame from the CIA, Captain Charisa Sosa (Jessica Biel)! But finding out the truth about who's really pulling the strings is only leading to more questions as our A-Team plans for the impossible.
Director Joe Carnahan ("Smokin' Aces", "Narc"), who co-wrote the movie with Bloom (screenwriting debut) and writer Skip Woods ("X-Men Origins: Wolverine") swung for the fences with this one. Carnahan clearly has a knack for the ridiculous, and pulls it off with a flair of genius in the vain of "Die Hard 4". But where most films skip out on dialogue, Carnahan, Bloom, and Woods come equipped with snappy, comedic dialgoue to pace with the dark tone of the script.
However, aside from the incredible stunt work and special effects, the real gem of the movie is the cast. Neeson, Jackson, Cooper, and Copley work together so well, often playing off each other naturally, making the dialogue smooth, and never leaving a feeling of anything being ungenuine at all. Though Neeson and Cooper hold their own extremely well, Jackson and Copley steal the show entirely. Jackson gives a stellar debut here, and Copley, fresh off the heals of last year's "District 9", displays a surprising aptitude for comedy.
I'm sure if you dig hard enough, you can find plenty of plot holes in the script, and there really isn't much time spent on character development here. But if you're going to see this movie thinking about things like that, you're missing out on one kick-ass movie. I can't think of too many action films grounded completely in reality, but part of the reason why we go to movies is to escape from reality, isn't it? Sure, it's impossible to fly a tank by firing the cannon in certain directions. But isn't it cool to know someone thought "How cool would it be to try and fly a tank?" and then filmed it? Awesome.
FINAL VERDICT: Perhaps not a candidate for next year's Oscar race, "The A-Team" is still one wild ride that should not be missed. With laughs and thrills aplenty, this is definitely one plan that came together well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)