Man, I am absolutely loving the posters they're creating for The Dark Knight. Sure, there's been like 9, 10, 357 of them, but each one packs a solid punch. Batman On Film have debuted the latest of the batch, which, obviously, showcases the film's big villain: The Joker. Only thing I don't get about this poster is why they would put the words 'Coming Soon' underneath? Why not show off the film's July 18th release date?
For those who haven't stopped in to hang out here for awhile, The Dark Knight has been a subject of debate lately. First, Elisabeth wrote a Fan Rant on the selling of that Joker toy, and how some folks are cleaning out the supply, jacking up the prices and selling it on eBay -- profiting off Ledger's death and the increased demand for a collectible. Meanwhile, I pondered whether Ledger may get himself an Oscar nod out of this role; how it's about damn time we start recognizing the wonderful performances in these fanboy flicks, instead of focusing solely on special effects and sound editing. So feel free to chime in here or on those other posts. Unlike the poster, we'll tell you The Dark Knight arrives in theaters on July 18.
This comes courtesy of ComingSoon.net, who had the exclusive debut. You can head over there for a super huge version if you like. It's a good looking poster, and a big improvement over the cartoonish promotional artwork from the first film. I dig the simple, to-the-point posters like this, so much classier than cramming the entire cast in. It does seem as if he has wandered into sepia-toned Sparta, though.
Cinematical just received a tasty little scoop from one of our trusty top secret super delegate Hollywood insiders, and it's purty interesting (all you Spidey fans might want to listen up): Apparently, in the last few weeks, James Vanderbilt (Zodiac) has turned in a working draft of Spider-Man 4to the studio. However, according to our source, "his story arc has encompassed two films, making Spider-Man 5 shootable at the same time. The studio saw dollar signs and is in the process of reworking his deal to snatch up the story arc." Don't expect anything immediately, though, since we've been told both sides are still trying to negotiate the deal.
Right now we have no word on what that arc is or where Vanderbilt is taking his script, but it's interesting to know that they're looking to spread the next Spidey storyline across two films, instead of shooting one more and taking it from there. Obviously Sony has wiped away the bad buzz from Spidey 3 and is interested in stretching this franchise as far as they can. After three flicks, I can't see Sam Raimi, Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst returning to shoot two Spider-Man films together (would be a lot to take on), but you never know. In the meantime, here's what we know: Looks like Vanderbilt is writing Spider-Man 4and Spider-Man 5, and the studio might look to shoot both flicks at the same time. As of right now, the studio has no comment. We'll update this post should we hear more ...
Our Erik Davis should get a side job as a casting director after his comment about the upcoming A-Team movie. Back in December, he said: "Like, B.A. Baracas (played by Mr. T on the TV show) is listed as a '22-year-old walking steel with two-percent body fat.' Yup, expect Tyrese Gibson in this role."
Unless scheduling problems put a wrench in the whole thing, it looks like Gibson is, indeed, BA. He told Devin at CHUD the other day that while his participation isn't finalized, he's getting excited about taking on Baracus. But it won't be completely like we remember. There could be a mohawk (there best be!), but not the bling that would bury a baby. And get this -- he plans to work out and bulk up even more for the role.
I just don't know about all of this. The charm of the show, which is one of my '80s favorites, was the humor and the quirk. Not only does the casting have to be spot-on, but it just has to keep some of the strangeness. Yeah, it was the '80s, but it's not like BA was following trends. He had his own style. There best be a mohawk, bling, and a whole lotta foo'.
Attention, Marvel Studios: You forgot to call Jon Favreau about Iron Man 2 when you set the release date and stuff. Please put it on your To Do list. Thanks.
Favreau was on Howard Stern this past Tuesday, and revealed that he has not yet been signed for the sequel. "They haven't offered me anything yet. They're all talking -- they want to do it, they even announced a date."
I want to believe that it means nothing, that things are in such a talky, pat-on-the-back stage that they don't mean anything by it. But still, before you talked to Entertainment Tonight and announced a release date, wouldn't you slap the director on the back and say "I hope you're coming back for the sequel!" Just as a courtesy? A "Good job, Favs!"
After being pressed by Stern, Favreau revealed his director's salary -- $4 million for the first film, with a NET profit deal which will pay a very small percentage once the film begins to turn a profit. But that won't happen for years with the magic of movie bookkeeping. And when a film makes mega bucks, like Iron Man did, all previous contracts are pretty much thrown out the window. That includes those Iron Man actors who have signed on for sequels. "They're all signed for three but it doesn't work that way. That all goes out the window when you make $100 million dollars," said Favreau. "Because people want to have a good relationship with the people they are working with, and if they're making that kind of money, it's an understanding that they're going to negotiate." (Isn't this a fun look into the world of legalities? I thought so.)
Gotta love those fan-friendly filmmakers. Next Saturday the Hobbit-makers (Peter Jackson and Guillermo del Toro) will participate in an online Q&A session -- and you'vewe've been invited to contribute some queries! Got a question about the cast? The second film? SMAUG??!? Then make sure you're signed up in advance, and get your question(s) ready!
ComingSoon.net tipped me off first, but you can see a full invitation from Mr. Jackson right here. Here's a snip: "We ask all fans with an interest in The Hobbit or The Lord of the Rings to send one question to this website. Ask us anything! Guillermo and I will select and answer the 20 most common questions, so we can both attempt to address the key issues as best we can ... In addition to answering your 20 questions -- for the entire hour we'll take additional live questions and chat about the projects with anyone who's interested."
(Dramatic pause)
ANYONE WHO'S INTERESTED? Holy macaroni, my geek-meter just overheated. Hell, I don't even need to ask a question (anything I'd want to know would probably be covered by a smarter geek than me), but I cannot WAIT to read the transcription of this chat session. Ugh, I can't believe we have to wait over two years for this Hobbit movie, but what sweet torture it is.
When Heath Ledger passed away earlier this year, he left the planet as one of this generation's great actors; a guy who battled many personal demons off the screen, for sure, but one who gave everything to the role. And while we won't get to see his latest creation on the big screen until July 18th, early footage shows Ledger's version of Batman's arch-nemesis could go down as the darkest, baddest and craziest we've ever seen. My question to you, then, is: Will it be enough to land Ledger another Oscar nod come next year?
Sure, the Academy isn't all too keen on recognizing superhero movies unless we're talking about special effects or sound editing, but with bigger actors taking on riskier comic-related roles, isn't only a matter of time before one of these guys (or girls) turns out a performance worthy of a gold statue? Are these characters not meaty enough; are they not conflicted, troubled and crying out for a hug? If an Oscar can go to Javier Bardem for playing a sadistic, calculated murderer in No Country for Old Men, and Johnny Depp can be nominated for playing a sadistic, calculated murderer -- both in the same year -- I see no reason why Ledger's Joker can't be taken into consideration.
It's early still, I realize that -- but should this guy turn in the kind of performance we're all expecting, shouldn't he be recognized with an Oscar nomination? What are the chances here, folks?
Like most mega-pathetic movie spazzes, I bought this box set the day it came out. (Actually I bought this version, got home, freaked out, and brought it back to the store to exchange for the correct one.) The first "Adventures of Indiana Jones" package came with a fourth disc that has a two-hour documentary on the whole series, plus a handful of brief featurettes on stunts, sounds, magic, and music. Definitely some good stuff, but the movie discs (NOT sold separately) were entirely bare-bones affairs.
So there are two things that are welcomely different about the second Indiana Jones box set: A) Now you CAN purchase the movies individually, and B) there's no extra disc: This time around the extra features are on the "main feature" discs. This sounded pretty good to me, as I've been hoping for more "flick-specific" supplements on the re-issue ... but here's where I get a little annoyed: Obviously the new goodies are of a very high quality (given that they were overseen by DVD magic-man Laurent Bouzereau), but ... why so skimpy? I'll offer a few nerdy gripes and then offer a theory as to why this stuff happens, followed by a complete list of all the new features found on the latest Indy DVD set...
Get what you can through older clips like the one above, because it looks like Moaning Myrtle is getting more to moan about. Snitch Seeker, a Potter fan site, contacted Shirley Henderson's agency, and they confirmed: "I'm sorry to report that Moaning Myrtle has not made it into the latest film." That's right -- Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince will get none of the moaning cutie. In the realms of the plot, this means that Myrtle won't be able to console Draco Malfoy after Harry performs the Sectumsempra spell on the tow-headed wannabe baddie.
I'm beginning to wonder if the final two-parter announcement is not only to handle all that's packed inside the last installment, but to have enough room to give all the beloved characters their time on screen. At least, with two films, I would hope that they wouldn't have to cut anyone completely out. The only thing that sucks more than a character cut for time, is a character cut when the time is already doubled.
What say you, Potter fans? Is Myrtle an okay exclusion?
A new trailer for The Incredible Hulkhas just arrived online, and I'm definitely diggin' it. This is the trailer currently playing before Speed Racer, and, is it just me, or is that a little tease of the classic TV show's music there at the end. Have we heard any of that yet? Maybe I missed it in another trailer, but I first noticed it just now -- and, man, did it take me back.* This new preview gives us a whole lotta Hulk and no Abomination -- just Hulk running and smashing things, like those two cars he's holding up at the end. (Does insurance cover a monster destroying your automobile?) The Incredible Hulk stars Edward Norton, Liv Tyler, Tim Roth, William Hurt and Tim Blake Nelson. The film marks Marvel's second self-financed flick, following the very successful Iron Man, and it was directed by Louis Leterrier (The Transporter, The Transporter 2). So now that you've gotten a good look at three trailers and tons of images from the film, whaddya think? Worth a shot? As good or better than Iron Man? Check our our pretty massive Incredible Hulk gallery, and sound off below ...
*The music is also featured at the end of the second trailer; thanks to Peter for pointing that out.
We've been hearing about a possible 21 Jump Street movie for awhile now, and if Entertainment Weekly is to be believed, it looks like that film might be happening with Apatow love child Jonah Hill, who's in negotiations to work on the screenplay and executive produce. We assume Hill would also star in one of the lead roles, though that probably depends on whether they go the strict comedic route with this. 21 Jump Street, the TV show, was a pretty big hit during the '80s, and it starred Johnny Depp as one of a group of young cops who went undercover in high schools to help troubled kids.
I dig it. Something like this would only work today if it was done with a sense of humor, I think, and so bringing in Hill to sprinkle on some Superbad-ish jokes might work well for the film ... even though all the raunchy stuff would make it a completely different monster, and when it was all said and done, would probably have nothing whatsoever to do with the original TV show (besides the name and the premise). Could you see 21 Jump Street: The Movie working as an Apatow-esque comedy? Does it work better as a drama? And who would you like to see joining Hill as a fellow undercover officer?
George Roush over at Latino Review grabbed one crazy exclusive. While touring the creature effects shop for Hellboy II: The Golden Army, he spotted a photo of a familiar X-Man: Hank McCoy, aka Beast. (Non comic book nerds may remember him as Kelsey Grammar with blue fur.)
It was not a drawing, but an actual photo, possibly computer generated. (Roush thinks it was an actual person in a Beast getup, though.) It was unmistakably of a young Beast, leaping through the air. And it was tagged Magneto.
Roush casually asked what the heck that was all about, and was told in a "isn't it obvious" way, "This is young Beast from the prequel they're gonna be doing. Magneto."
There's no real explanation as to what McCoy would be doing in a Magneto storyline, or how they would meet up. It is as random a choice of mutant as we're seeing with another X-Men: Origins film. I don't get it. Both Magneto and Wolverine are strong enough to stand on their own two storylines, which is why they were chosen for origin films in the first place. Is there some studio clause stipulating that they must choose a certain number of mutants to accompany the title character? It cannot be coincidence. I am willing to bet it means there will never be an X-Men 4, and that they are using these guest-star appearances to float more spin-offs. I'm probably overthinking that, and it is just a way to make more action figures.
From Cannes comes the news that Jan de Bont, last seen behind the camera of Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life (and currently filming Stopping Power), is going to be filming a sequel to Kathryn Bigelow's 1991 film.
According to The Hollywood Reporter, the sequel will be given the poetic title Point Break: Indo, and will be based somewhere in Asia. It will take place 20 years after the original, which you will remember ended with the disappearance of Bodhi, Patrick Swayze's character.
No word on the plot, or if any of the original characters will appear, though the script is being penned by the same scribe, W. Peter Iliff. (We reported this last year, actually.) I think it's safe to assume it will be the same characters; what sense would a sequel make if it was about another gang of criminal surfers? (Actually, IESB says there is another band of criminal surfers, and they're called -- gulp -- The Bush Administration. Um, yay?) And what of the actors? Will someone manage get Keanu Reeves to reprise his lead role? So many questions, none of them good.
Just when you think there is no film they can resurrect for a sequel. I'm at a loss. Why can't they make more Russian mafia movies instead of resurrecting surfing criminals? Oddly, the lingering question in my mind is how Danny Butterman will react to the news, and how this movie really should have come out before all that nastiness in Sandford. Then I would know if he preferred it to the original and could rest easy.
The last time I saw my awesome amigo Nacho Vigalondo, it was at a Sundance party during which he was A) very thrilled to have his film play the festival, B) mega-elated that writer/producer Steven Zaillian would be involved in the English-language remake of his film (Timecrimes), and C) seriously drunk and hanging out with an overworked karaoke machine. When I pressed him for additional details, he said something to the effect of "I don't know yet, but .... Steve SALE-IAN, man! He wrote Bobby Fischer and Gangs of New York, man..." To which I responded, "Yeah, dude. Damn good writer. Plus Schindler's List, A Civil Action, American Gangster,and the awesome Falcon and the Snowman!"
The drunken Spaniard's eyes went absolutely wide: "Steve SALE-IAN is remaking my movieeeee!" He was like a little kid on Christmas morning, I swear. It was an awesomely sweet thing to see. But since we weren't really sure about Mr. Zaillian's specific attachment to the remake, this fresh news is also pretty exciting. Wouldn't it be cool if the Timecrimes remake had a Steve Zaillian screenplay and a director named ... David Cronenberg?? (I've seen Timecrimes more than once, and I think Mr. Cronenberg would be a perrrrrrrrfect fit for this time-travel / serial killer material.)
The United Artists re-do is still in the very early stages, so we could see a lot of personnel changes before the American version of Timecrimes hits the scene -- but given how positive the reaction has been among festival audiences, flick-buyers, and remake makers, we might just see it a little sooner than later. In the meantime, keep an eye out for the original film, which is a favorite among the Magnolia gang, and should be getting a release some time later this year.
If you're anything like me, you have completely given up on the next installment of Transformers having even a whiff of plot, and instead you are just going to sit back and enjoy the spectacle. Speaking of, it looks like it's going to be quite the show, too. The keen eyes over Comic2Film noticed that in the Dolby News release for ShoWest 2008, Transformers 2 was listed as a 3D film slated for 2009.
There have been plenty of updates for the film lately, but unfortunately most of them turned out to be smoke and mirrors -- just ask Teresa Palmer. But, a 3D release could be the real deal, even though we haven't heard a peep from Michael Bay on the matter. Kind of surprising, too, considering he is not the kind of guy who likes to keep quiet about these sorts of things.
Transformers 2 is scheduled to start filming on location in Pennsylvania this June, but everything is going to hinge on whether or not the SAG strike can be averted. A 3D release does make sense if you think about it, especially since the only way to top the FX of the first film is to have them flying off the screen at the audience this time around. (Yay! A monster truck is flying toward me at 150mph! Ain't this fun!)
Weigh in below and let us know if you think 3D is the way to go for our robotic friends, or will it just be an excuse for Bay to spend even more time on the FX and even less time on the script?
.jpg)
.jpg)
Attention, Marvel Studios: You forgot to call Jon Favreau about Iron Man 2 when you set the release date and stuff. Please put it on your To Do list. Thanks.
Gotta love those fan-friendly filmmakers. Next Saturday the 
_thumbnail.jpg)
We've been hearing about a possible 
George Roush over at 
The last time I saw my awesome amigo 
If you're anything like me, you have completely given up on the next installment of Transformers having even a whiff of plot, and instead you are just going to sit back and enjoy the spectacle. Speaking of, it looks like it's going to be quite the show, too. The keen eyes over Comic2Film noticed that in the Dolby News release for ShoWest 2008, 
