Archive for the ‘Just so you know…’ Category

Jon Favreau (center) gives direction to Robert Downey Jr. (left) and Don Cheadle (right). *IGN images

For those of you itching to see Iron Man 2, which opens this Friday, we suggest you take a look at a video available at movies.IGN.com that shows multiple snippets from interviews taken with the film’s various stars. Director Jon Favreau, Robert Downey Jr., Mickey Rourke, Gwyneth Paltrow, Scarlet Johansson, and Don Cheadle each share interesting nuggets of information about the film and the direction its story decided to take. For those trying to avoid spoilers, have no fear. No major plot points are given. Instead you learn things like Favreau’s intentions, such as that he tried his hardest to avoid what he called “villainitus,” which he claims is the overabundance of bad guys. After Spider-Man 3 received heavy criticism for this, it’s nice to see that Favreau and Paramount can learn from the past.

In other news…

A release date for the next Batman movie has been announced, which will reportedly be July 20th, 2012. The working title is simply Batman 3, which is expected to change once production begins. Chris Nolan is reportedly not officially signed on to direct the project, but is currently working on writing the film’s script with the help of his brother Jonah and writer David Goyer. Stars Christian Bale, Michael Caine, and Gary Oldman are expected to return.

Source: IGN.com

Hollywood Video already filed for bankruptcy, and all the signs indicate that Blockbuster will be next

In an editorial for IGN.com, writer Cindy White examines the unenviable situation that video stores are in with having to compete with elements like Netflix, Hollywood studios, new customer standards, and age. White pays particular attention to Blockbuster Inc., which at one time was the lone video rental giant but is currently staring down the proverbial barrel of the Chapter 11 gun.

The CEO of Blockbuster, Jim Keyes, recently spoke to the L.A. Times and suggested that what Netflix doesn’t provide his company does, which is the immediate availability of new releases. What perhaps Keyes fails to understand about the renting market is that people who wish to rent movies are more interested in renting what they want from a greater selection than  catching up on what the industry has recently pumped out. Mainstream video stores have never been famous for their wide selections, and charging per-movie viewing fees from their online collection is probably not the way to compete with Netflix’s offering of unlimited online viewings for subscribers.

What White eventually concludes is that Blockbuster is holding on to the past, and that is why they are failing. The company recently signed an agreement with Warner Bros., 20th Century Fox, and Universal which will allow them to show all new DVD releases from these studios without having to wait the 28 day window that Netflix and Redbox must. This gives them a leg up by having the most updated selection, but Netflix in particular agreed to the delay in exchange for a greater selection for online viewing. All of Blockbuster’s moves to fend off bankruptcy indicate that it’s thinking more about the present, while Netflix is clearly thinking about the future.

By the end of her article White comes to the same conclusion that most have, which is that Blockbuster is simply delaying the inevitable. She claims that despite the company’s best efforts so far, it’s quickly heading towards irrelevancy. Mind you not all video rental stores are as doomed as Blockbuster. The business that once nearly had the video rental market cornered is simply proving that without proper management and a sharp eye on the horizon no company is big enough to survive the changing of the times; And you best believe it, the times they are a changin’.

Quick Opinion: Though the article hardly goes into much detail, the point is well made that in the video rental market the tides are changing and Blockbuster is being left behind. What stinks even more for the company is that even though they reportedly signed with the three big studios to make sure they are allowed to rent new DVD releases the possibility still exists that those same studios will eventually forbid rental companies from renting out new releases in order to raise actual DVD sales. In many cases studios get more money from DVD sales than theater grosses, but because DVD sales on the whole have been dipping slightly over the past year they’re trying everything to get them to go back up. If a buy-only period comes to pass, Blockbuster will lose its only redeeming quality with customers. Such a loss would be the final nail in the coffin, assuming Blockbuster stays alive long enough to see the day that happens. The company’s main downfall has been its lack of quality service (it reinstated late fees), higher prices, and limited selection. In other words, it failed to meet the demands of the market. My guess as to why this is the case is probably the same as yours in that the suits who ran the company probably felt so empowered by their success at the height of the rental store era (1999 or so) that it didn’t take competitors like Netflix seriously. Would’a, could’a, should’a.

Nicolas Cage and Jay Baruchel in the upcoming "The Sorcerer's Apprentice," about a wizard training a teenager in magic

There have been a number of films to come out the past few years that incorporate young leading actors, particularly teenagers (or at least roles written to be teenagers), such as Twilight (1 and 2), Percy Jackson and the Olympians, and the Harry Potter series. And what’s more, the trend is continuing with films like Kick-Ass, The Sorcerer’s Apprentice, the ongoing Twilight series, I Am Number Four, and I’m.Mortal. All of these films not only star young actors but appeal to the teenage demographic as well – naturally. I’m.Mortal, for instance, is a story about earth as a place where people never look older than 21, and so teenagers appear identical to their parents and others older than them.

The Hollywood Reporter claims that this is because studios are convinced that movies starring young actors can work in any genre. Plus, it helps support the idea that what are popular right now with audiences are fresh faces. The trick, they claim, is “casting astutely and marketing shrewdly;” finding young actors that can fit the parts – just like with adult roles – as well as prove marketable to whatever the film’s target audience is (teenage girls or teenage boys, say).

What all of this could mean is that, if these films prove profitable, you can expect to see more of them in the future.

Source: Hollywood Reporter

Quick Opinion: I’m not at all surprised to see more movies being made that gear towards teens. The teenage demographic is one of the largest for Hollywood movies (perhaps second only to families), and that was since before the recession. It only makes good business sense that the industry focus on these two primary audience types during a time when they’re trying to make the safest business decisions they can. What’s good about this new attention to teen audiences is that with more teen-geared projects to make, studios can afford to be more daring with which projects they green light. The teen movie genre has opened up to include material that is created for more niche audiences, who would have otherwise probably been ignored.

Add all of this to the following facts:

• some audiences are in fact getting tired of seeing the same faces over and over again and so introducing new talent will potentially raise the interests of a lot of people.
• Young actors are cheap and willing to work, so not only are they cost-effective but you know you’re going to get their best efforts. Less money spent on the cast means more money can be spent on hiring better hands and directors to build the film, increasing the overall quality of the product while also assuring at least decent quality performances (in theory).

The release of Kick-Ass, for example, might spark hope in some of you that niche teenage audiences are finally getting the attention they deserve. However, I wouldn’t be fooled into thinking that this new attention will continue any longer than until the time when they stop acting as a crutch for the studios. Once the recession ends, whenever that may be, I predict that the teen genre will go right back to where it was before – focused on boy-meets-girl high school dramedies. In the end, though, what’s really important is the job market for young Hollywood actors. Congratulations to them!

As Robin Hood, Russell Crowe has some big shoes to fill. However his colleagues say he has the feet to fill them.

In a Variety article published yesterday, a number of people who actor Russell Crowe has worked with over the years offered their descriptions and opinions of the man we have come to know as Maximus, John Nash, Jim Braddock, and Ben Wade.

The ones who offered their words include acclaimed director Ron Howard, who worked with Crowe when directing both A Beautiful Mind and Cinderella Man, and Brian Grazer, producer of Crowe’s newest film Robin Hood.

The biggest compliment that Howard and director Curtis Hanson (L.A. Confidential) afforded was how Crowe is so meticulous regarding the details of his characters, and that in general he is an incredibly hard worker. Hanson even called him a man of “literally 1,000 questions,” a characteristic that he says is indicative of how much he cares about his roles. He went on to say that, “Russell has a reputation of being difficult, and what I speculate is that he’s difficult when he’s not trusting.” The issue of trust is brought because he suspects Crowe trusted him because he could answer most of his 1,000 questions.

It’s not an all too intensive or detailed article but is nevertheless interesting for anyone who is a fan of Russell Crowe or simply intrigued to know more about one of the bigger faces in Hollywood. A biography it is not, but plenty of information can be gotten from tidbits like these.

Robin Hood, directed by Ridley Scott, opens May 14th.

Aaron Johnson (left) and Christopher Mintz-Plasse (right) in the upcoming "Kick-Ass," opening April 16th

SuperHeroHype.com got a chance to talk to two of the stars of the upcoming comic-book movie Kick-Ass, Aaron Johnson and Christopher Mintz-Plasse (Superbad, Role Models).

The discussion talks about the two actors and their characters, Kick Ass and Red Mist, and their experiences from before the principle photography stage to now. Interestingly, when the two had read the finished script and signed on to the project only the first 3 editions of the “Kick-Ass” comic had been published (there are currently 5). Mintz-Plasse’s character the Red Mist wasn’t introduced until the 3rd issue.

The costumes were designed by the same woman (Sammy Sheldon) who worked on Hellboy, Stardust, V for Vendetta, and The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy. However, the two actors did not undergo any sort of physical training for the film in order to look any more like superheros. Rather, another co-star of the film, Chloe Moretz as Hit-Girl, received all the martial arts training from top-notch choreographers and specialists. Johnson and Mintz-Plasse were occasionally brought in to watch her go through her stunts, and were admittedly continually impressed.

The rest of the published discussion goes on to include various other details (including a juicy one at the end), most of which should prove to make an interesting read for those anticipating the film, which opens April 16th in theaters everywhere. For more information about the movie, we suggest visiting SuperHeroHype.com.

Miley Cyrus and Liam Hemsworth in the new Nicholas Sparks adaptation "The Last Song," opening this weekend

A very interesting article in the Village Voice, written by Eric Hynes, examines what he dubs the “Eight Tired Themes of Nicholas Sparks’ Love-Stories.” The topic of the article comes up of course due to this weekend’s release of the Miley Cyrus vehicle The Last Song, which is the last film based from Sparks’ novels. Such themes in Sparks’ work that Hynes identifies include a preference of setting (North Carolina), belief in God (Christian but not too Christian), and penchant for letter-writing (which Hynes claims connects Sparks’ works with the epistolary women’s novels of the 18th century). The entire article, though, is not so much a listing of Sparks’ consistencies in writing (things like the motifs listed above can be chalked up to being elements which help define Sparks as an auteur – to use a film term). Instead it functions to claim for an existence of formula, and that this formula does not coincide greatly with the melodramatic love stories of yesteryear (Douglas Sirk is brought up at one point).

The subject of melodrama is acknowledge by Hynes, but not really focused on. Sparks’ books are clearly melodramatic, and sell themselves for being as such. But, if one of Hynes’ main goals was to argue how Sparks’ developed dramatic formula differs from the famed and well-regarded Douglas Sirk films of yesteryear, then perhaps it would have been better had that subject been explored in greater detail. As it is, the claim is somewhat tucked away.

One major discrepancy that is proposed is that while the characters in Sirk’s films grapple with inner demons or desires, which are problems that are difficult to resolve, the characters in Sparks’ novels only battle with issues outside of their control (hurricanes, cancer, etc.). And perhaps because the conflicts are rooted in circumstance, the characters are “remarkably accepting of the cruelties of fate.” What’s really being pointed out here, I would argue, is that while Sirk’s melodramas sometimes dealt with outside influences like social roles and prejudices (All That Heaven Allows), those concerns were directly related to bigger issues like personal identity. Sparks’ books, and thus the movies based off them, do not delve deeply into overly-personal matters but instead incorporate characters written broadly enough so as to make them as identifiable as possible.

We encourage you to read the entirety of Hynes’ article, as it beyond what is discussed above it includes numerous interesting topics, subjects and tidbits. (We would also like to say that we recognize that Hynes’ wasn’t trying to offer an exhaustive examination, as the format of the article didn’t allow it to become a venue for a laborious argument. Do keep that in mind.)

Disney's "Alice in Wonderland" has made the majority of its profits off 3D ticket sales, but did the technology justify the higher ticket price?

There is a big debate going on about the influx of 3D movies that has been going on the past few years, and continues going on strong. Some claim that the technology has already reduced itself to a gimmick, while others believe wholeheartedly that it is the future of cinema. Who is right? Can anyone be wrong? In order to come to any kind of conclusion, we first have to look at the facts.

Much of this topic comes down to economics. An article in Variety by Pamela McClintock examines this angle in-depth, and answers a lot of questions regarding why the film industry is so keen on this latest and greatest technology. To put it simply, there is a lot of money in it. The unfathomable success of James Cameron’s Avatar has driven a number of studios into a frenzy, spurring them to make some 2D movies into 3D in order to cash in on the popularity. The upcoming Clash of the Titans (April 2^nd) is one such film that was made into 3D at the 11^th hour. For some, these half-baked conversions are one of the major points of contention. The claim is that such last-minute conversions are adding to the thinking that 3D technology is nothing more than a money-grabbing gimmick. This may be true, but consider this: producing a film in 3D from the get-go adds $20 million to its budget almost automatically, while converting a film into 3D during post-production only adds $10 million to the budget (some studios even claim $5 million). The issue over post-production conversions, then, may not entirely be an issue about getting more money from audiences, but also about saving money. So, it is not completely about the first goal of business (making profit) but also the third (reducing cost). But what about the second goal (increasing revenue)? Read the rest of this entry »

The 2010 version of the Kraken

With blockbuster season starting with April 2^nd’s remake of Clash of the Titans, we here at Movie-Thoughts thought it would be interesting to look into the history of one of the film’s most fearsome monsters, the Kraken. In the film it will be one of the final monsters that Perseus (Sam Worthington) must defeat in order to save Princess Andromeda (Alexa Davalos) and mark the largest act of defiance against Zeus and the others atop Mount Olympus, who continually manipulate and take advantage of mankind like pawns on a chessboard.

The reason for Andromeda being offered to the Kraken deals mostly with her mother, Queen Cassiopeia (Polly Walker). The myth goes that Cassiopeia was known throughout the kingdom of Ethiopia as an incredible beauty, and her vanity caused her to boast about her exquisiteness to the point where she claimed to be superior to the Nereids (sea nymphs friendly to the sea God Poseidon). Poseidon grew furious with Cassiopeia’s egotism and thus proceeded to curse the land of Ethiopia. The only way to lift the curse was for the queen to sacrifice her only daughter Andromeda to the Cetus (sea monster), and so the princess was fastened to the rocks on the nearby shore, helpless against her impending doom. Read the rest of this entry »

Zoe Saldana ("Avatar," "Star Trek") in Warner Bros.' "The Losers" - Opens April 23rd

IGN.com published a set visit article yesterday about their trip to Puerto Rico where Warner Bros. is currently filming The Losers, based on the Vertigo graphic novels of the same name. The high-octane action film is being directed by Sylvain White (Stomp the Yard) and stars Jeffrey Dean Morgan (Watchmen), Zoe Saldana (Avatar), and Chris Evans (Sunshine).

The story is about a former CIA black ops team that got double-crossed and tries to get revenge. The part of that story that IGN walked in on is the ending, which according to the article will supposedly entail a plethora of gunfire (naturally). Grasping the tone and style of the film was not easy for some of those involved, apparently because the story mixes moments of sincere drama with one-liners and gags. Chris Evans explains how he first reacted to the script.

“I just knew that Peter Berg wrote it, it was Warner Bros., it was a war-type movie,” Evans recalls. “And by page 20 I was a little confused as to what they were going for. Because there were a lot of jokes. There were times of high drama, shootouts and someone’s cracking a line. And I said, ‘What is this?’ Because I think nowadays we want … Bourne Identity . You want very raw, very real, very authentic stuff. And the days of the Die Hards and Lethal Weapons, those movies where there was room for some humor, you don’t see a lot of them. So I put the script down on page 30 and I called my agent and I said, ‘What is this? What am I missing? I’ve got to go back and start over and get the right tone in my head. I’m not thinking clearly on it.’ And he said, ‘This is Joel Silver. It’s based on a graphic novel. Why don’t you read the graphic novel first, then crack the script?’ So I went back and started over and it made a whole lot more sense. And I really, actually thought, ‘You know what? There’s room for this.’” – movies.IGN.com

The article as a whole provides a number of details, none of which would likely be considered spoiling. Those details, though, are mostly on the level of tidbits, failing to indicate much besides how difficult it is to shoot an action movie. As someone who still has yet to look into the graphic novel series, a rudimentary exploration into any of the characters or discussion with the director about what he’s aiming to accomplish would have helped. Besides these shortcomings it should prove to be an interesting read for those anticipating the release of The Losers, which opens April 23rd.

Director Joseph Kosinski at Comic Con 2009

For those of you who missed it, ComingSoon.net published the first of three articles documenting their visit to the set of Tron Legacy this past week, which is the long anticipated sequel to the sci-fi cult classic Tron (1982). This first piece covers a number of elements about the project but mainly focuses on detailing the circumstances which have led the film to being made at this point in time.

One such detail is Disney’s (who owns the rights to the franchise) decision to hire Joseph Kosinski to direct the movie. For starters, he is a first-time director with a background primarily in commercials and his studies are rooted in architecture (he has a Masters from Columbia University in the field), which make him a peculiar candidate for the job. Nevertheless, everyone seems convinced that he withholds a great vision for the film. Steven Lisberger, the director of the original film, is fulfilling a consultant’s role on set and also is encouraged by the work Kosinski’s doing.

Actor Jeff Bridges, also from the original, is reprising his role as programmer Kevin Flynn. His role here wont be very big because his character’s son is the main protagonist this time around, but it is nevertheless integral to the story and helps bridge the gap between the two stories.

“Joe, our director, was an architect,” says Bridges. “That’s where he’s coming from. It’s interesting, different filmmakers, where they come from and what they bring to the film and he’s an architect and so the film has a very heightened design feel to it. By the way, this is his first film. Can you imagine? I don’t know if it’s the most expensive ever made but it’s right up there. To have a first-time guy… Got to give Disney credit for taking that risk. They were smart because he’s such a calm, can-do guy. He’s gonna pull this off. He’s out of commercials, and I saw some of the technology that he had available to him that he could use. It was basically the same reason that I did the first one.” – ComingSoon.net

For those interested in keeping up with Tron Legacy until its eventual release in mid-December, this set visit article series is definitely something to check out and keep checking up on. This opening article steers clear of spoilers, and because ComingSoon.net is publishing it you can feel pretty safe that you wont run into them later on.