The title pretty much gives it away, but I'll repeat. Russell Crowe may play Jor El, Superman's biological father in The Man of Steel. The movie will of course be directed by Zack Snyder and star Henry Cavill as the caped hero.
The role was originally played by the legendary Marlon Brando in the Richard Donner film, Superman: The Movie. For those who don't know Superman's origin story (living under a rock much?), here's how it goes: Jor El is the father or Kal El, an infant boy. When their home planet of Krypton is threatened, Jor El sends his only son away from harm in a spaceship. The spaceship lands in Smallville, where Jonathan and Martha Kent adopt the infant, name him Clark, and raise him to be Superman. Pretty cool right?
This casting news really surprised me. It's not that I disapprove or anything, I just never really pictured Russell Crowe in a superhero film. But after thinking about it a bit, I really like it. I could see him being the commanding figure needed to lead the people of Krypton as well as a sensible father to the future Man of Steel. Instead of who likes this casting choice, I suppose a better question is, who hates the idea?
Sunday, June 19, 2011
Director of Knight & Day offered The Wolverine
After Darren Aronofsky jumped ship from The Wolverine, every fan boy had a good cry. The film is the sequel to the terrible X-Men Origins: Wolverine, starring Hugh Jackman as the clawed X-Man.
It has actually taken a lot longer for Fox to put an offer to a new director than I thought it would. Well it finally happened and the offer is going to director James Mangold. You might remember him from last years under performing, Tom Cruise starring, Knight & Day.
Mangold is actually a great director with films like Walk the Line and 3:10 to Yuma under his belt. I liked Kight & Day, despite it's bad reviews. 3:10 to Yuma is such a great, and underrated film. I was never really jumping up for joy for Aronofsky directing the film, this will do just fine in my book. What do you guys think?
It has actually taken a lot longer for Fox to put an offer to a new director than I thought it would. Well it finally happened and the offer is going to director James Mangold. You might remember him from last years under performing, Tom Cruise starring, Knight & Day.
Mangold is actually a great director with films like Walk the Line and 3:10 to Yuma under his belt. I liked Kight & Day, despite it's bad reviews. 3:10 to Yuma is such a great, and underrated film. I was never really jumping up for joy for Aronofsky directing the film, this will do just fine in my book. What do you guys think?
Warrior movie poster
Keeping with the sports themed films; Lionsgate has released a poster for Gavin O’Connor‘s, Warrior. The film stars Tom Hardy (Inception), Joel Edgerton (King Arthur) and Nick Nolte. It's about two brothers who enter a mixed martial arts tournament for redemption in their own lives. Nolte plays the boys' father. Check out the trailer here.
Gavin O'Connor is a fitting choice after the great film, Miracle, about the 1980 United States hockey team. Tom Hardy will no doubt steal the show, both physically and emotionally, as he gets better and better with every film. I'm not too familiar with Edgaerton's work, but he looks to go toe to toe with Hardy in this great story packed with a human story. Looking forward to this one!
Labels:
Joel Edgerton,
Nick Nolte,
Poster,
Tom Hardy,
Trailer,
Warrior
Moneyball trailer, next sports film to win Oscar gold?
I love sports films. In 2009 we got The Blind Side. In 2010 we got The Fighter. Both of those films went on to win Oscar gold. Well this year, it's Moneyball vying for Oscar nominations. The movie stars Brad Pitt as the General Manager of the Oaklands Athletics baseball team. He is setting out to change the way players are recruited into a system that has not changed in over a hundred years. Check out Pitt and Jonah Hill in the trailer below, then read my thoughts.
Looks good right? Critics and movie goers alike, enjoy sports themed films. Baseball related films do especially well (remember Field of Dreams). I like the tone and pacing from what I can tell in the trailer. Pitt will be a nice fit for the role. I like Philip Seymour Hoffman as the A's manager, Art Howe too.
Labels:
Brad Pitt,
Jonah Hill,
Moneyball,
Philip Seymour Hoffman,
Trailer
Sunday, June 5, 2011
X-Men: First Class is a first class film! Review...
Matthew Vaughn had a tough, tough task with X-Men: First Class. He was asked to re-invent the franchise that was the catalyst to the superhero movie genre. The film is actually a prequel, which has a completely different cast and a much more complex script than seen before in the franchise. I can't wait to talk about it, so let's go!
What I liked about the film:
The Director
There were so many things working against Matthew Vaughn. Let's start with a one year schedule from pre-production to release date. That is unheard of in this superhero genre. Vaughn quickly put together his cast and was off and running. He did a lot right! The pacing of the movie is intense. Like I said before, the script is complex and has a lot to cover, so it was imperative to get the pacing right. The editing, costume, set design and score were magical and helped create the world of America in the 1960's. The casting is perhaps Vaughn's greatest achievement...
The Cast/Characters
James McAvoy plays Professor Xavier; he does a great job of being the leader of the X-Men. You can see the character is optimistic about the future through McAvoy's eyes. He sees the world with a bright and beautiful future. Kevin Bacon plays the primary villain, Sebastian Shaw and does well. He is a conniving, manipulative character pitting America against Russia during the Cold War.
The support cast of heroes and villains are good. January Jones turns in a mundane performance as the villainous Emma Frost, Shaw's right hand woman. Jennifer Lawrence plays Mystique, the part Rebecca Romijn made famous in the first trilogy. She does well playing the character as tormented and conflicted; she grew up with Professor X. Rose Byrne is the liason between the CIA and the newly formed X-Men, she was great, I'm becoming a big fan of her work. The rest of the heroes really only have minor roles in comparison, but did a good job. Hopefully they will have more to work with in the sequels.
The man who steals the entire picture is Michael Fassbender. This man is hypnotizing on screen. He plays Magneto, a Holocaust survivor who meets Professor X on his journey to kill the people who murdered his mother. Fassbender portrays the character beautifully. And I do mean beautifully. Even though we see the character doing horrible things, we care about him, we see the pain and hurt that has scarred him for life. He also has a swagger and arrogance; Sir Ian Mckellen showed that when playing the older version of the character. Magneto knows he is a very powerful mutant, he knows what he's capable of and we see that in Fassbenders face and mannerisms. I hope Michael Fassbender keeps his momentum going and continues to do great things. Last time I said that, Sam Worthington became Genre Man with 'hits' like Clash of the Titans; hopefully Fassbender wont follow in those footsteps.
The Brotherhood
We know from the later (earlier) pictures, that Magneto is a character that was very close with Charle's X, as close as brothers. Their ideals have always been different, but they have always had a mutual respect for one another. There are a few scenes in the film that show you how that relationship was shaped and how it changed over time. I loved the scenes featuring McAvoy and Fassbender just talking. The actors nailed it! There is just this great chemistry between the two that really helps with the emotional undertone of the film. The scene when they meet gave me chills, excellent!
The Story
This could have been a much different movie in the hands of another director. There is a lot that must happen during the film. The origins of several main characters, the manipulation of Bacon's character on the Americans as well as the Russians, the training of the new recruits, the list goes on and on. That being said, it is very easy to follow. A lot of credit must go to the screen writers and the director. It is a clean story that does a lot with the time he has.
The Fanboy Winks
Even if you haven't seen the original franchise, this film will work for you. BUT! For those of you who have read the comics, know the characters, and have seen the original franchise, you will love the 'easter eggs'. Everything from cameos, to name dropping, to jokes about the obvious future of the character. I really like how they included the hard core fans and made it accessible to non-fans as well. FYI, the cameo in the movie is hilarious and I will not spoil the surprise like other idiots on-line.
What I didn't like about the film:
The Sequel Setup
I have to be very careful here not to give anything away. I believe, by the end of the film, they've given away too much. I wish there would have been a few open doors for future films instead of rushing to the obvious. It's like Star Wars Episodes I-III, we know what is going to happen, but George Lucas was able to stretch it out for three films. Not that I EVER want this franchise to become like that one, but the concept is what I was looking for. Watch it and then email me if you agree, don't want to discuss too much here.
The Verdict:
A beautiful film in so many ways
The movie will rank among the best in the superhero genre. The threat of a nuclear attack was very real in the 1960's. That fear of the unknown worked perfectly for 'First Class'. Mutants were just being discovered and no one knew what to make of it. The relationship between Professor X and Magneto is wonderful. The movie is not perfect, but again, considering the one year turn around, bravo. Thank you Mr. Vaughn and company for continuing my hot streak at the movies this Summer. Please see the movie and let us know what you think.
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
The rest of the Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 posters
Harry and Hermoine both got their own posters for the next and final Harry Potter film. Now check out the remaining posters for the film. They feature Ron Weasly (Rupert Grint) as well as other primary characters like Neville (Matthew Lewis), Malfoy (Tom Felton), Snape (Alan Rickman) and of course, the evil wizard Voldemort played by Ralph Fiennes. Check them out below and let's all count down to the final chapter of an incredible movie franchise!
The Hangover II review, new jokes make up for a repeat formula
It's already been two years? Holy wow, I can't believe how time flies! In 2009, The Hangover became the highest grossing R-rated comedy of all time. Rightfully so. With a blend of unique characters, a funny premise, and shock value to boot; it was a homerun. It catapulted Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms and Zach Galifianakis to stardom. And it proved director Todd Phillips was a someone with longevity in this business.
The first movie followed the three main characters as they tried to find their lost friend after a night they couldn't remember. The movie took place in Las Vegas and the city was a great backdrop to the story being told. This time around, the "Wolfpack" finds themselves in a similar situation, only this time, they've lost a friend in Bangkok, Thailand. Oh no... The Hangover II.
What I liked about the film:
The Wolfpack (including the monkey)
This is an obvious one. Cooper, Helms and Galifianakis have an unbelievable chemistry together. The three actors feed and play off of each other so well, they're totally believable in their roles.
Galifianakis steals most of the scenes again, as he did in the first film. Helms plays the paranoid panic attack very well. And the contrast to Helms is Bradley Cooper, who never seems to get phased by anything. Ken Jeong and Paul Giamatti round out some great supporting characters as well. And don't forget about the much talked about monkey. Baby Carlos has NOTHING on the cigarette smoking, drug dealing monkey in the sequel. It was cleverly worked into the film and actually served a purpose in the plot. Great!
The setting
Vegas was a great place to setup the last film. It just made sense for the guys to wake up in their hotel room, not remembering much. This time, they pushed the envelope. Thailand is so visually busy, the movie will need a second viewing to catch everything. Tying in Jeong's character into the setting was great. Watching the movie, you got a real sense of how difficult it was for the cast and crew to work in such busy conditions. I've read interviews with director, Phillips, where he says it was his most difficult shoot to date.
The one-liners, memorable
I hate when I go to a movie and leave not recalling a thing. That wasn't the case with this film. My wife and I left the theater repeating one-liner after the other. I am well aware of all the criticisms of the film being identical to the first (I'll get to that in a minute), but the movie is very memorable and will hold up against a lot of other comedies out there.
What I didn't like about the film:
Sub-plot
I find myself disliking a lot of film sub-plots. It's because it feels like the movie wouldn't have suffered if they took it out completely. Without giving anything away, the sub-plot involves Jeong and Giamatti's characters. The writers used it as a device to take the main characters from one place to the next, but once the sub-plot is revealed in full, there's no pay off. I didn't like it and wished they would have written it out of the movie.
The Verdict:
Loved it, KNOWING what I was walking into
I think people just wanted to hate the film. "It's exactly like the first one." "They couldn't have thought of anything better?" Interesting how you weren't criticizing the movie while laughing so hard I couldn't hear the dialogue. Look, the first trailer showed us all that it was going to have the EXACT same format as the first film. So I knew what I was getting myself into and was very content with it. To me, it was fresh and funny in ways the first one wasn't; and it was enough to satisfy my hunger for another grown-up comedy after Bridesmaids. Check out The Hangover II, you will not be disappointed!
The first movie followed the three main characters as they tried to find their lost friend after a night they couldn't remember. The movie took place in Las Vegas and the city was a great backdrop to the story being told. This time around, the "Wolfpack" finds themselves in a similar situation, only this time, they've lost a friend in Bangkok, Thailand. Oh no... The Hangover II.
What I liked about the film:
The Wolfpack (including the monkey)
This is an obvious one. Cooper, Helms and Galifianakis have an unbelievable chemistry together. The three actors feed and play off of each other so well, they're totally believable in their roles.
Galifianakis steals most of the scenes again, as he did in the first film. Helms plays the paranoid panic attack very well. And the contrast to Helms is Bradley Cooper, who never seems to get phased by anything. Ken Jeong and Paul Giamatti round out some great supporting characters as well. And don't forget about the much talked about monkey. Baby Carlos has NOTHING on the cigarette smoking, drug dealing monkey in the sequel. It was cleverly worked into the film and actually served a purpose in the plot. Great!
The setting
Vegas was a great place to setup the last film. It just made sense for the guys to wake up in their hotel room, not remembering much. This time, they pushed the envelope. Thailand is so visually busy, the movie will need a second viewing to catch everything. Tying in Jeong's character into the setting was great. Watching the movie, you got a real sense of how difficult it was for the cast and crew to work in such busy conditions. I've read interviews with director, Phillips, where he says it was his most difficult shoot to date.
The one-liners, memorable
I hate when I go to a movie and leave not recalling a thing. That wasn't the case with this film. My wife and I left the theater repeating one-liner after the other. I am well aware of all the criticisms of the film being identical to the first (I'll get to that in a minute), but the movie is very memorable and will hold up against a lot of other comedies out there.
What I didn't like about the film:
Sub-plot
I find myself disliking a lot of film sub-plots. It's because it feels like the movie wouldn't have suffered if they took it out completely. Without giving anything away, the sub-plot involves Jeong and Giamatti's characters. The writers used it as a device to take the main characters from one place to the next, but once the sub-plot is revealed in full, there's no pay off. I didn't like it and wished they would have written it out of the movie.
The Verdict:
Loved it, KNOWING what I was walking into
I think people just wanted to hate the film. "It's exactly like the first one." "They couldn't have thought of anything better?" Interesting how you weren't criticizing the movie while laughing so hard I couldn't hear the dialogue. Look, the first trailer showed us all that it was going to have the EXACT same format as the first film. So I knew what I was getting myself into and was very content with it. To me, it was fresh and funny in ways the first one wasn't; and it was enough to satisfy my hunger for another grown-up comedy after Bridesmaids. Check out The Hangover II, you will not be disappointed!
























