Well, Cinematical has an article here, but this is the 10 they came up with for the purposes of saving the world:
Well, according to Cinematical, it's a possibility:Tom Cruise as Les Grossman
So, is the world ready for even more Les Grossman? Tom Cruise may be working on bringing everyone’s favorite foul-mouthed studio honcho back to the big screen in his very own movie. Fresh off the high from his performance with Jennifer Lopez at the MTV Movie Awards
Whether he was being completely serious or not has yet to be determined, but we’ll keep you posted if we hear any more news in regards to the project.
-I'm not convinced it'd be a good movie, but I'd love to see it for the lunacy that would no doubt occur...thoughts?
Well, for one thing you get articles like this one (courtesy of IFC and The Independent Eye) written about you and your potentially bad upcoming film:The press kits given to critics to accompany the movie they're reviewing are, for obvious reasons, not given to hard truths. They tell us how much everyone enjoyed working with each other, how proud they are of the final film, and generally how well everything's worked out -- predictable, harmless stuff.
But once in a while one will go out of their way to make an extra-foolish statement that seriously shatters credulity, like last year's "My Sister's Keeper" (the Cameron Diaz weepy about a terminally ill little girl) kit, which testified that "In films as disparate as 'John Q,' 'Alpha Dog' and 'The Notebook,'" director Nick Cassavetes "has investigated the nuances of the human condition, the nature of love and free will and human dignity." This is not how most people think about "The Notebook."
Generally, though, such statements are avoided for films that aren't screened in advance for critics -- it's tacitly understood that the film in question is, most of the time, no good whatsoever, and that it's only hope is to make as much money as possible before people catch on.
Lionsgate may have well made history in explaining why "Killers" -- next Friday's Ashton Kutcher-Katherine Heigl action-comedy-romance thing -- isn't going to screen for critics (except the day of, in the almost-standard "courtesy screening" that at least saves writers the trouble of invoicing their employees).
It's not, the studio assures, because the film's a stinker: it's because they "want to give the opportunity to moviegoing audiences and critics alike to see `Killers' simultaneously, and share their thoughts in the medium of their choosing. We felt that this sense of immediacy could be a real asset in the marketing of `Killers.'"Here's assuming they hope that the kind of people most prone to "sharing their thoughts" online about a movie like "Killers" are also the kind of people that go on message boards and call critics they don't like out-of-touch-elitists. The whole scenario is nonsense (and would be no matter what the caliber of the movie; 99% of the time, people write in to hector, not to discuss).
The real issue here, as noted by Screen Daily critic Brent Simon, is that studios "don't really have their finger on the pulse of the fan community":
For people who are really into films, what the Internet has done - through message boards and a plethora of other sites that report on film - is it's opened up this world whereby they're able to see not only the goings-on of production but also of marketing. So when there are no reviews of a film the week of release, that message gets out there. It doesn't really matter what their interests or predilections are as far the types of films they're interested in, but people smell a stinker.They seem to have equal problems figuring out which ones are good, which ones are marketable. The "Crank" films were unscreened, despite being cult classics in the making, and excitably received by some critics. (The same goes for the Neveldine/Taylor team's "Gamer," which is actually good fun.)Nor do bad reviews make much of a quantifiable difference in the first place: people still showed up for "Transformers 2" and "G.I. Joe." The former screened, the latter didn't; "Transformers"' average Metacritic score is a statistically insignificant three points higher than "G.I. Joe"'s. There is no real way to explain, based on that evidence, why "Transformers" made nearly $500 million more worldwide and $350 million more domestically. It just doesn't matter.
This is a backhanded way of advocating something I think should go without saying, but perhaps studios should rethink this policy because there's no evidence reviews affect box-office revenue. The critic-proof film is now a matter of fact (cf. "Norbit," "Wild Hogs"); let the coverage be done on time. Everyone's lives will improve, and no one's will be harmed.
-Thoughts?
The first "Sherlock" was released this past December.
Meyer said the 2011 film slate will have roughly 25 movies.
As other big releases already set, he mentioned:
-- Red Riding Hood: April 22, 2011
-- The Hangover 2: May 26
-- Green Lantern (3D): June 17
-- Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part II (3D): July 15
-- Journey to the Center of the Earth 2 (3D): Sept. 23
-- Happy Feet 2 (3D): Nov. 18
-- New Year's Eve: Dec. 9
Given that 2011 will be the last year with a "Potter" release, Meyer said he guesses that the most successful franchise in motion picture history will have exceeded $7.5 billion in worldwide boxoffice once the final installment ends its theatrical run.
And he said his team has been preparing for the franchise's end.
Meyer particularly highlighted that DC Comics characters are key parts of Warner's future, mentioning a July 20, 2012 release date for the latest "Batman" film by Christopher Nolan and a holiday season 2012 "Superman" film.
He added that the studio is also "nearing" a greenlight for a "Flash" movie, with films featuring Wonder Woman, Aquaman and Mad magazine characters also in development.
-Mark them down!
That seems to be the plan, according to Collider:Every once in awhile you hear news that in your wildest dreams you would have never predicted. Today is one of those days.
According to Deadline’s story, the producers are meeting with writers in the near future. Which means the project is still in the very early stages.
What is not in the story is what kind of tone they’re going for. Since TMNT is clearly aimed at kids and selling toys
When we last reported on Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, the plan was for Paramount to release the movie in 2011 and they were planning on using men in suits like the previous films. Also, the production was thinking about using the same face replacement technology that helped make that Where the Wild Things Are look so damned fabulous. Perhaps they still will.
The other thing to know is Viacom (which owns Paramount and Nickelodeon
So what do you all think about the news? Can you imagine Michael Bay’s name in front of TMNT!?
-I'm not sure if I like this, but it could be worse, I guess...thoughts?
...two auteurs with very different methods. Here's the article from indieWire:At this stage of the game, there’s no point in interviewing Woody Allen (age 74) or Mike Leigh (age 67) about their movies, because we know exactly what they’re doing.
Woody Allen writes a screenplay, and because he’s Woody Allen, he casts it with the best actors available, who make it possible for him to raise foreign coin—and to shoot in exotic locations like London, Paris and Barcelona. Allen was one of many filmmakers showing films at Cannes (You Will Meet a Tall Dark Stranger stars Antonio Banderas, Josh Brolin, Anthony Hopkins and Naomi Watts) who is in his declining years as a major auteur. During the press festival press conference—Allen was on and funny, despite looking droopy—he talked about how he wrote his characters and then cast them with the best actors he could find.
It hit me that especially these days, his ability to do that is what makes the movies work. Check out the final ensemble for Allen’s latest romantic comedy Midnight in Paris, about a family traveling on business: Kathy Bates, Carla Bruni, Marion Cotillard, Rachel McAdams and Alison Pill. Put Javier Bardem and Penelope Cruz in Vicky Cristina Barcelona and sparks will fly. Imagine that movie without them, or Match Point without Scarlett Johansson, and what have you got? What keeps these films fresh and watchable? The actors bring fresh life to Allen’s worn ideas.
Leigh, on the other hand, is neither in decline nor reworking anything: with Another Year (picked up by Sony Pictures Classics) he is at the height of his powers. That’s because his process remains the same. And it works every time. He’s like Pixar. Each new movie is original, entertaining, masterful and emotionally moving. That’s really hard to do consistently, every time. It means that Pixar and Leigh have their process down: they know how to make their films really good.
Leigh starts with no script but a story idea. He works with his actors individually and in different groups for improvisatory workshops where they explore his basic premise and research and define their characters until they become them. They work out the story, often not knowing key plot elements that come as a surprise on set, and Leigh eventually writes it up and they shoot it. It’s so organic that the resulting movie rings true. And the extraordinary performances of Lesley Manville in Another Year, Sally Hawkins in Happy-Go-Lucky, Brenda Blethyn in Secrets & Lies, Imelda Staunton in Vera Drake, David Thewlis in Naked, or Jim Broadbent in Topsy Turvy are the inevitable end result.
-I'm probably in the minority of preferring Woody still, but it's a really interesting article...thoughts?
Cinematical has an interesting article on the subject here, but I figured I'd throw it out there for all of you. Personally, I don't mind, though it depends on the film.
...according to this in Cinematical:
...and I'm about to cry (or at least my wallet is). The story from Collider is here, but feel free to rant on the cost in the comments.
Well, Cinematic has a very interesting article here, and they mention movies like Dreamcatcher and the remakes of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Godzilla, but I thought I'd let you all do the honors and tell me what films would qualify as this for you. In my case, two examples I would go with from last year would be Sherlock Holmes and A Serious Man (though I know I'm in the vast minority there).
He sure did, according to The Hollywood Reporter:Charlie Kaufman, the Oscar-winning writer behind “Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind” and films such as “Adaptation” and “Being John Malkovich,” has headed off into an unexpected direction: animation.
The scribe is coming off of less than two weeks worth of work on DreamWorks Animation’s “Kung Fu Panda: The Kaboom of Doom,” the sequel to the fun 2008 movie that had the voice talent of Jack Black, Angelina Jolie and Dustin Hoffman.
His work on “Kaboom” falls under the polish category, and animated movies tend to be worked on by multiple writers, so it’s not fair to say this will be a Kaufman cartoon. But it will be interesting to see, when the movie is released in 2011, how much of the Kaufman stamp it will bear.
And it’s also interesting to think about the potentially other secret assignments the UTA-repped Kaufman may have taken over the years in order to be keep working on his unique projects. (There was a four-year gap in between “Spotless Mind” and “Synecdoche, New York,” which he also directed.”)
-I'd love to know what other projects he may have had a hand in...thoughts?
While not the final word, obviously...this is a decent guide to how things have gone so far. Thoughts?
Perhaps, since it's being shopped, according to Deadline:
Well, I won't be telling you, but if you don't want to be surprised, go here for Slashfilm's plot synopsis. There's no real spoilers, but it may be more than some want to know.
From Cinemablend:
...this record breaking evidence from the Los Angeles Times proves it without a shadow of a doubt:Just four days after debuting on store shelves, "Avatar" has sold 2.7 million Blu-ray discs to consumers in the U.S. and Canada, according to 20th Century Fox -- more Blu-rays than any previous movie has sold. The previous record holder, "The Dark Knight," has sold 2.5 million Blu-rays since its debut 16 months ago.
Fox also sold 4 million standard definition DVDs. The combined total makes "Avatar" the biggest DVD launch of the year, breaking a previous mark of 4 million Blu-ray and DVDs combined set by "The Twilight Saga: New Moon" on its first weekend in March.
"Avatar" also debuted Thursday in France, where it sold a combined 400,000 units on DVD and Blu-ray, the biggest-ever launch in the country. It is at the top of the charts in Germany as well, although specific sales figures weren't immediately available. It goes on sale in Great Britain on Monday.
The huge debut for "Avatar" on home video dispels concerns that consumers wouldn't want to see it on a 2-D home television after most watched it in theaters in 3-D. Eighty-three percent of "Avatar's" $746.4-million domestic gross has come from theaters with 3-D screens. More than 70% of its $1.975-billion international gross has come from 3-D.
The news comes as Fox recently signed deals with kiosk renter Redbox and DVD-by-mail firm Netflix that keep "Avatar" and all of the studio's future releases off the services until 28 days after they go on sale.
"Avatar" provides a much needed shot in the arm to Hollywood's home entertainment business, which saw its revenue fall 8% in the first three months of the year and 5% last year.
-I had no doubt it would be popular on home video, but this is impressive...thoughts?
Well, Yahoo Movies has compiled a list here for you to take a peek at (and believe it or not, I've seen all 100...and I'm not sure whether to be ashamed for proud of that fact), but I'd like to submit ten more films (in year order) that didn't make the list, just for fun:
Posts
All Comments
