UPDATE: According to Twitter, Fox's next X-Men movie is titled X-Men: Apocalypse and is releasing May 27, 2016. No other details have been released at the moment. Original story below.
Are somewhat obscure Tweets a valid news...
When I sat down to watch Out of the Furnace, I had nothing but high hopes for the film. The trailers looked amazing and suspenseful and the premise seemed engaging. Plus, how could I possibly get burned on a film that stars some of my favorite actors?
Before I knew it I was already covered in gasoline, and writer-director Scott Cooper was lighting a match.
After The Amazing Spider-Man provided a serviceable first effort given the fact Sony had only made the film to avoid losing the rights, fans have been waiting anxiously to see what Sony could pull off for the sequel. The hype leading up to this has been slightly unbearable as we were treated to several trailer teases, banners that make the movie seem terrible, news of possible spin-offs, and pictures of Spider-Man in funny hats.
But now that we have the first trailer for The Amazing Spider-Man 2, what does everyone think? I'm game for it because Jamie Foxx, Paul Giamatti, Dane DeHaan are in it (as Electro, Rhino, and Harry Osborn respectively), and they're fine actors. At least it seems like a good webswing in the right direction.
Besides even if no one likes it, two more Spider-Manflicks are happening anyway. The Amazing Spider-Man 2 spins a web, any size, catches theaters like flies May 2nd.
Rumors have swirled. Fans have shouted. People have said things on the Internet in all caps.Wonder Woman appearing in Batman vs. Superman has been a steady rumor since the film got announced and now it is 100 percent confirmed along with the news that Gal Gadot will be playing the heroine.
Not sure who that is? You may recall her as Giselle from the Fast & Furious series and director Zack Snyder says, "Not only is Gal an amazing actress, but she also has that magical quality that makes her perfect for the role. We look forward to audiences discovering Gal in the first feature film incarnation of this beloved character."
Gadot did fine in the Fast & Furious films, but aside from having the body and the face I can't really tell you how good she'll be as Wonder Woman. It's definitely a major step up from a supporting role in an ensemble action franchise, especially if, like Snyder is hinting, there's going to be a Wonder Woman film down the line.
In other news, it seems the villain is closer to being cast with Callan Mulvey (Zero Dark Thirty, 300: Rise of an Empire) reportedly in the lead for tackling the role. No word on what that role is yet, though he could do Luther for sure.
Now that the eating holiday is over (and Hanukkuh is halfway through) and folks have begun narrowly escaping retail stores with their lives and money, it's officially time for the hypest countdown of the year: the 25 days until Christmas Day (or 26 days to Boxing Day if you're so inclined). To celebrate, I'm going to write about a holiday movie a day for 25 days as part of Flixist's December special: Nick's Flixmas!
To start things off, I figured the best film for the job is the quintessential Christmas film CBS decides to show earlier and earlier each year. In fact, CBS decided to re-air the 1964 special, Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer, before Thanksgiving (meaning I totally saw this instead of the Dancing With the Stars finale airing the same night) catapulting us into the holiday season far earlier than ever. Then again, the way things have been going this year, the holiday spirit couldn't come soon enough.
[Nick's Flixmas is a 25 day celebration of films Nick watches every Christmas! Nick will do some analysis, review, and just generally walk down memory lane. Hopefully you'll enjoy the ride. Merry Flixmas!]
While the hustle and bustle of the Internet's quickness to label anything that sounds too impossible to be true as a hoax, it's still hard to accept news of Paul Walker's untimely death. The forty years old Fast & Furious star Paul Walker, leaving a charity event, tragically lost his life in a car accident earlier today.
Say what you will about the man (or the amazing franchise he was a part of), he was hitting his stride with the Fast & Furious films. He was attractive, cool, and drove one of the best ten second cars. Walker stuck it out (second only to Diesel in appearances) and future films will seem weird without Walker as a staple in them.
It's with a heavy heart that we reflect on the sheer potential that's lost today as a heavy burden is placed on the rest of us. We here at Flixist would like to extend our condolences to Walker's and the unfortunate driver's families on this terrible day. You will be missed.
Happy Thanksgiving everybody! To celebrate the carving of the bird, we here at Flixist decided to look into the recent past at box office failures (also called "turkeys") and list off some of our favorites. It's never fun to hear that a film has failed at the box office, but if an objectively terrible movie bombs then there's a glimmer of hope that maybe audiences are wising up and choosing things that are good.
But then you look at this list and see that that's not really the case. All of these movies should have made their budgets back and more, but the unfortunate reality of the box office meant that they will be looked down upon forever. But in the spirit of the holiday, we're thankful that at least these films got made.
What are your favorite box office turkeys? And while we're on the subject: do you prefer white or dark meat? And how do you feel about fried vs. baked turkey?
I had no idea Disney's Frozen would deliver as much as it did. With Disney's latest Princess films (The Princess in the Frog and Tangled) doing well in some areas but fudging others, I did not expect a whole lot given that the brunt of Frozen's advertising was focused around the gag character, Olaf. What I experienced was something akin to a "defrosting." As the film went on I slowly grew more and more in love with it, and after thinking about it for several days, I finally understand why I walked out of Frozen feeling so happy.
Disney's Frozen is the most involving piece of classic Disney Animation (which should spark a nostalgic burst of happiness in anyone who remembers classic 2D Disney films like Beauty and the Beast, The Little Mermaid, and Aladdin) in recent memory. Frozen somehow tows the line between current and classic Disney. The use of new avenues of animation while still invoking the nostalgic musical overtones of 2D Disney definitely help cement Frozen as a film you will remember fondly alongside the likes of Aladdin, Sleeping Beauty, and every other Disney classic you can think of.
The Great Gatsby is undoubtedly one of the finest works of literature. To really sell it short: it's probably the most 'honest' tragedy of human hubris, love and dreams. It's filled to the brim with too much deliciousness and truth to ever truly get to its core and above any other book, including my personal favorite A Tale of Two Cities, it's 'the' book that everyone needs to read in their lifetime. No film, no series, no comic book, no kind of storytelling can truly do Fitzgerald's words justice other than his own novel.
With that in mind let's have a look at the Gatsby films. The films I'll cover will be the Robert Redford (1974) and Dicaprio (2013) versions. Obviously no film can do the novel justice, I will stand by that, but I do believe that each film shows a vastly different interpretation of what occurs in the novel. Today I'll be focused completely on the Redford version with a few remarks of the Dicaprio version, with Wednesday devoted entirely to Dicaprio's face.
Fifty years. I can't imagine what this means to people who tuned in to November 23rd, 1963 and watched The Unearthly Child play out. I can't imagine what this means to people who've followed it for more than a decade. I consider myself a neo-classicalist Whovian, jumping on the bandwagon back in the Eccleston era and then jumping backwards when the time was right. Genesis of the Daleks, The Caves of Androzani and so many other classical stories are now some of my prime favorites. Truthfully, though, Doctor Who means a lot more to other people than it means to me and so, with the 50th Special, I can imagine it being more special and a lot more emotional.
Regardless of all these weird, loose comments, there's still a review to be written. This is my perspective of a near-twenty something who, for all purposes, adores Doctor Who. I've seen it shift and change over the years and whilst I've waggled my finger at some of its fringe-sexism, its blatant diversion into LOST-style structure and 'Mystery Box' plotting, there's always been something to enjoy. These past few series haven't really grabbed hold of me like the Eccleston/Tennant era did but with The Day of the Doctor I can truthfully say that I haven't enjoyed a Doctor Who story like this in more than five years.
It’s somewhat fitting that, early on in Homefront, the platitude ‘Shoot for the moon, because even if you miss, you’ll land among the stars” can be seen on a wall, because it’s a fitting description for the latest Jason Statham vehicle. Homefront brings up ideas and themes, each worthy of deeper exploration than Sylvester Stallone’s (yes, that Sylvester Stallone) limited screenplay allows for. I mean, you could write a whole movie around what this movie uses for padding.
The film definitely improves as it goes on, and the action is satisfying, but there’s always the nagging sensation that what you’re seeing is the product of compromise upon compromise, resulting in an overall lesser product.
I'm a pretty big fan of The Hunger Games series of books. I tore through them in a day and while Catching Fire isn't my favorite in the series, it does have the most intriguing setups in the trilogy. The production for Catching Fire has notably gone through a bit of trouble with its change of directors (now helmed by Francis Lawrence), and most fans (including myself) were worried about the nature of the adaptation given the original Hunger Games film had a fair share of problems.
The trailers for Catching Fire showed a film that seemed to learn from its predecessor's mistakes (less shaky cam footage, more balanced use of color, Phillip Seymour Hoffman joined the cast), so does the final product hold up to the potential of the series? Is The Hunger Games: Catching Fire hotter than a fantasy or is it filled with catastrophe? Read on for the answer!
It's A Wonderful Life is commonly known as a quintessential classic Christmas movie. The black and white 1940s movie has been loved for decades and for many people watching it is an annual Christmas tradition. So when news broke last week that some independent producers wanted to go ahead and make It's A Wonderful Life: The Rest of the Story, the internet kinda lost it.
Nobody however, was more upset than Paramount Pictures, who apparently own the rights to It's A Wonderful Life and were basically like "b!@#*$, please." Read more below for their official statement.
Where there's a whole bunch of names you should be excited to see together. David S. Goyer, who wrote the new Batman trilogy and Man of Steel, is pitching a new adaptation of Neil Gayman's graphic novel series Sandman starring Joseph Gordon Levitt. Warner Bros. is evidently very receptive to his pitch, which is good news for the property, which has up until now languished in development hell.
Goyer obviously has plenty of credibility with the studio after raking them in money on his other comic book flicks, and having Levitt attached to play the lead of Morpheus, the personification of dreams, could only make that more exciting. However, this is very early days and we've been hearing crap about a Sandman movie for years that have never come to fruition. Now is the time, though. With comic book films so huge and someone like Goyer pushing it this could actually happen.
What do you think? Sure it's awesome that it would happen, but for those who weren't a fan of Goyer's Superman this could be very worrisome.
[UPDATE: Paramount currently owns the rights to It's A Wonderful Life and they're like "b!*&$@s please." Read more here.]
"Clarence! Clarence! Help me, Clarence!" is all I'm thinking right now. I've been through at least three different drafts of this post and I have no idea how to properly state what's going on here. You know It's a Wonderful Life, the famous film about Christmas time suicide from the 1940s? A sequel for the film is currently in the works for no reason other to exist, I suppose.
Much like A Christmas Story 2 which exists for reasons, the sequel, officially titled It's a Wonderful Life: The Rest of the Story (whhhhyyyyyyy), will feature Karolyn Grimes (who played George Bailey's daughter in the original) as an angel teaching a new George Bailey (the original's grandson) that the world would a worse place without him. Now if the film were actually a meta-narrative explaining how the world would be a terrible place without It's a Wonderful Life, then I'd be for it. But as it is now, a simple retread that exists because f**k knows why, I'm extremely sad this is a thing I'm reading at what should be the happiest time of the year.
It's a dead week for the movies. The biggest thing coming out is Best Man Holiday, and we didn't see that. Instead, since it's opening wide today, we've got a review for The Book Thief, which has the dubious title of "Movie With the Worst Trailer of the Year." That trailer is easily the most desperate Oscar plea ever. "From the studio that brought Life of Pi"? Really?
So clearly The Book Thief, which is based on the book of the same name, is going for some sort of Oscar grab, but you may have noticed it's not really getting much buzz. The reason for that is pretty obvious: it's callous, predictable and not very good.
I'm not the most religious person. I have my beliefs and other folks have theirs, but there's no reason that I can't enjoy a film depicting one of the more famous stories from the Bible, Noah's Ark. This first trailer for Darren Aronofsky's take on the story (starring Russell Crowe, Jennifer Connelly, Emma Watson, and Anthony Hopkins) looks surprisingly gorgeous.
It's such a refreshing change of pace to get actual landscapes and sets rather than overt CG backgrounds. Sure each piece of animal fur is meticulously crafted and the budget is bloated, but when it looks this good, it's hard to care about that stuff. As for the actual content, I reeeeally like the trailer up until folks starting attacking the ship.
If it stays a story about a man who believes in some unseen force that leaves hints about the apocalypse, Noah could be very interesting. Keep it from becoming a generic action movie. Noah rains action into theaters March 28th next year. You can watch the international trailer for the film after the jump too!
Maleficent's one of Disney's most evil and cool looking villains. In Sleeping Beauty, she curses a baby because she wasn't invited to a party. And when it didn't go well, she turned into a cool looking dragon for no reason other than being super evil. In Disney's Malificent (starring Angelina Jolie in her horniest role yet), the live action version of the story tackles it from the villain's perspective and probably making her the good one.
With the first trailer now out and about (after that cool looking poster helped build the hype), how does it look? Surprisingly great! In what could be the most interesting turn for the character since Maleficent's role in Kingdom Hearts, this live action version could be something worth paying attention to (even if the acting seems a bit off)! At the very least, Angelina Jolie looks great even if the horn head thing looks awkward.
If Maleficent isn't your thing, get used to it. We'll get more films like this in the future with Disney looking to do the same for Cruella de Vil and Cinderella. Maleficent burns green fire into theaters May 30th next year.
Ah. Hello. Terribly sorry to about ninety-percent of people who click on these things. Unfortunately a lot of this will depend on you having watched the film and being clued in to Doctor Who. Usually with these things y'all can just read along and enjoy the analysis with having seeing the film or looking into its tertiary material. With Doctor Who, however, any piece of it, you're pretty much boned unless you're at the very least bit 'involved' in the community. It's less of a fandom and more of a commitment.
Doctor Who, the confusingly-titled 1996 movie, is one of the most overlooked pieces of nineties cinemas and, when you think about it, science-fiction in general. It was a botched attempt at reviving one of the greatest television shows ever made. It was launched under Paul McGann's luscious locks and a production cost that was beyond the 'banana and a string' levels that were usual with Doctor Who. The film changed everything. It injected blockbuster and 'epic' flare into a long-running canon and, quite frankly, might be the only thing that saved Doctor Who from the void of the forgotten. Join me as we take a deeper look into this relic of the nineties.
I'm one of the few folks I know who liked the original Thor. It's not the greatest Marvel film out of the dozen or so available, but I dug its Shakespearean vibe (two brothers fighting for a throne, secret bloodlines, star-crossed lovers, etc.) and hammy nature even if most folks won't think the same. After Thor's character got a bit of fleshing out during the events of The Avengers (turning Thor into the second best thing in Avengers after The Hulk), Thor: The Dark World looks to expand out even further in Thor's second solo effort.
Now with a change of director, change of cast, and change of tone, does Thor: The Dark World bring the hammer down? Or does it have a bad case of hammer toe? Read on for the answer!
If you haven't seen The Raid(aka The Raid: Redemption) yet you're doing everything in your life wrong. Seriously, sit down and consider the choices you've made and realize they're all wrong. Now, go watch The Raid. Then come back and watch the trailer for its sequel The Raid 2: Berendal. Make sure you watch it loud on a big ass screen or director Gareth Evans says he will come and find you. As you can tell from the teaser he's pretty creative in the ways he can think of to hurt people.
As for the teaser. It's amazing. Lots of familiar faces and just some fantastically edited together snippets of action that hint at a few of the more unique fights we're going to get. Can't wait until we get to check out the full fights the movie is going to deliver when it lands next year.
While you're making good life choices you should probably check out Dredd too.
You may have thought that since there hadn't been a Saw movie since 2010 and since the last film was called Saw: The Final chapter and since Paranormal Activity had taken over the yearly-released horror movie spot that the Saw franchise was dead. How silly. Saw 8 is of course in active development over at Lionsgate despite all those signs that the series had died.
It doesn't look like they're rushing it, however. Bloody Disgusting says they want to get it right and are taking their time, unlike with the series' last few installments, which came out every Halloween. It's unclear whether it will be a remake or a reboot at the moment, but a remake seems relatively pointless since they could just as easily reboot while still continuing in the universe thanks to how 7 ended.
The Saw series has always been very hit and miss for me. I love some and hate others, but it's perfect slasher fodder set up to give great kills so I'm always a little excited for more. What about you guys?