Note: iOS 9 + Facebook users w/ trouble scrolling: #super sorry# we hope to fix it asap. In the meantime Chrome Mobile is a reach around


Wachowskis

How To Do It: The Matrix Rebooted

Mar 16 // Hubert Vigilla
1. Treat the new Matrix as part of continuity When Neo meets The Architect in The Matrix Reloaded, we learn a lot about how the system works and how it sustains itself. The current version of the Matrix is just the sixth version in a line of reality-simulating self-regulating programs, each designed to account for the complexities caused by human free will. The choice Neo makes will determine whether or not the human race survives. Certain programs carry over from each version of the Matrix even if each iteration is a new one--Seraph was apparently a former Agent in an earlier version of the Matrix; The Merovingian harbors obsolete programs; The Oracle, as a guide for The One, is sort of like the Clippy of the Matrix. Choice creates a series of forking paths in every iteration of the Matrix, all headed toward the inevitability of The One and the necessity of a reboot to eliminate The One from the system. Then a new version, and a new One, and so on. This offers a diegetic reason for a new Matrix to exist: it's built into the program, it's part of the way the world works. This also provides an interesting exploration of free will and agency viewed from a human perspective (uncertainty regarding outcomes) versus an analytical/machine perspective (contingent branches on a decision tree). There's another story element this in-continuity Matrix reboot offers, though I'll get to it at the end. 2. Pick the Wachowskis' brains The Wachowskis are the parents of this story, and while they may not have to give their blessing for the project, it would be great for someone to pick their brains about the Matrix. Was there anything they wished they could have done? Are there things they would have done differently in hindsight? What lore had they created for their world that they never talked about? There's probably a lot of unexplored material to consider. Come to think of it, there might even be too much to talk about. When the two Matrix sequels came out, a bunch of supplemental material got released between 2003 and 2005. There was The Animatrix (a collection of animated shorts), Enter the Matrix (a video game), The Matrix Comics, and The Matrix Online (an MMORPG). Some of this may have been crass merchandising--let's milk this cyberpunk, anime, Hong Kong action movie cow until it bleeds--but I also sense that there was a much bigger story the Wachowskis wanted to tell but never finished. Once again, I tie this back into the diegetic idea of the Matrix reboot just being the latest version of Matrix. Going to the architects of the original Matrix might improve the newest version of the program. 3. The Matrix > Zion and the real world Some of the weakest material in the Matrix sequels took place in the real world. Zion was a dingy, rusty place with steam, corridors, walkways, Cornel West, vanilla sex, and boring raves. The war against the machines wasn't all that fun either. Shoot them or use an electromagnetic pulse. Behold--boring, expensive naval combat. I remember the sickly green world of the Matrix better than the state college dorm of Zion. For the new Matrix, there may be a way to engage the real world without it seeming so banal. Perhaps it's a matter of increasing the stakes. Extinction level events are big, sure, but what matters in the abstract and what we form an emotional link to are different matters. The latter requires some concrete connection to people and places. What makes Zion worth caring for really? What makes a place a home? A place is not innately meaningful. And to that, did anyone get attached to the new characters fighting in Zion? They were mostly a bunch of Blandy McBlandersons doing action-things without emotional content. That brings me to the next point... 4. Stick with a core group of characters with well-defined supporting players The cast of supporting characters ballooned in The Matrix Reloaded. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but unfortunately most of the new characters were forgettable. Did Niobe, Link, or Commander Lock add much to the story? Ditto that annoying kid in the giant mechanoid robot suit? Their screen time may have expanded the world of the movie, but they often sucked the air out of film's story since their actions were rarely significant to the plot. (The blunt difference between world building and storytelling.) Rather than putting your setpieces on the shoulders of bland supporting characters (e.g., the annoying kid in the defense of Zion in The Matrix Revolutions), keep the focus on a core group of well-defined characters. Why wasn't Morpheus manning a mech alongside Niobe during Zion's last stand? Come to think of it, what defines Niobe as a character other than the fact she's played by Jada Pinkett Smith? If supporting players are involved, give them personality rather than assign them a plot-based function. I still find it telling that the Nebuchadnezzar crew in the original Matrix has more personality than 95% of the supporting players in the two Matrix sequels. 5. Update the aesthetic to avoid the late 90s/early 2000s Let's come back to the diegetic notion of a new Matrix program rebooted for the umpteenth time. If the old Matrix was defined by the aesthetic of the late 90s and early 2000s, we can chock that up to a quirk of programming. (Obviously this is a paradoxical symptom of the era that birthed the first movie. Nearly every attempt to make something look futuristic winds up looking, in retrospect, like a product of its time. Why is it that conscious attempts to fuse the future with the past a la Blade Runner still look futuristic enough?) The new Matrix should depict a contemporary era's vision of the future rather than recapture the look of the millennial cusp. This goes for the manner of dress, the in-story technology, and the score (imagine how quaintly goofy a techno-classical hybrid soundtrack might sound today). And since the original Matrix drew on a hodgepodge of influences that were so 90s, the new Matrix can draw on things that define the 2010s in some way. Maybe the fighting style changes from the kung fu of 80s Hong Kong action movies to the faster, more functional striking and grappling of MMA. Maybe the G-men-like Agents become Slender Men and more menacing as a result. Are the rebels into post-rock or hip-hop? And how will smartphones and tablets figure into all of this? Ditto apps and the cloud. There's a lot to consider here, and I don't want to just list pop culture detritus for the new film. Those things will be carefully picked by the filmmakers, who will hopefully do more than show us shiny, fight-y, special effects-y things. 6. Find writers and directors with something to say A lot of reboots and remakes suck because they don't say anything. Instead they're selling empty nostalgia using a name you may remember. Yet there are solid remakes (David Cronenberg's The Fly) and reboots (Christopher Nolan's Batman movies) and soft sequels (Ryan Coogler's Creed), each of which does something new with familiar material. There's a sensibility behind the name, a human intelligence behind the IP. There are probably some filmmakers or writers out there who were influenced by The Matrix. Maybe The Matrix was their gateway drug into other aspects of geek culture. They might have a personal story they want to tell, and The Matrix may be the right vessel to tell it. It may be political, too--something about resistance and rebellion feels right these days. A recent report said that Warner Bros. is trying to get a writing room together for the Matrix reboot, sort of like how they write TV. This isn't necessarily a bad thing. A guiding hand can steer the writing room into an interesting direction. Multiple ideas from solid writers can bounce off each other and synthesize and create better ideas. (I'm skeptical--and why shouldn't I be?--that Warner Bros. actually wants to make something that says anything. A writer room assembled by a studio reeks of film-by-committee-by-market-research.) 7. Avoid repeating the story beats of the original Matrix films Most reboots and remakes fail because they slavishly repeat the plot of the original film without offering anything original of their own. Even though I sort of liked the Ghostbusters reboot, the weakest material in the movie was anything that reminded me of the original Ghostbusters. Why would I watch a reboot if it's a pale imitation of the original? (That also applies to Ghostbusters 2.) For another example of this, think of Bryan Singer's Superman Returns, which is a joyless, beat-by-beat recreation of the plot from Richard Donner's Superman. (Superman Returns is the Ghostbusters 2 of superhero movies.) There'll be a temptation to redo the red pill/blue pill scene. The same goes for Neo's first jump and cartoon fall. And the new filmmakers will probably want to do their own rendition of the lobby scene. The occasional nod to the past is okay, but why do the same thing again? Why not do something new? I suppose blank canvases are more intimidating than tracing paper, and the potential of an incomplete line is more stultifying than connect the dots. To put it another way, if you're going to cover a song, do it like Devo did "Satisfaction" or Johnny Cash did "Hurt". Someone has to make this material their own rather than just repeating the mistakes and successes of the past. There the line from Jose Lezama Lima quoted in Julio Cortazar's Hopscotch: "Let us try to invent new passions, or to reproduce the old ones with a like intensity." Yeah, do that. 8. E pluribus unum (Out of many, one) I mentioned there's another story element about keeping the Matrix reboot in continuity with the original trilogy. Here are preliminary thoughts on that, and the point where simple suggestions in approach veer into the realm of Matrix fan fiction. Say there's a new Neo in a new iteration of the Matrix. Neo is the latest in a line of Ones from previous versions of the Matrix, each of them an anomaly eventually accounted for and zeroed out to restart the system. What if the new Neo could access the old versions of the Matrix and see how they played out? Maybe they're archived even though the system has run its course. What if the new Neo could somehow learn from previous Ones? Maybe the Ones are iterations of a monomythic subprogram that eventually results in a prototypical, archetypal, chosen-one hero who follows the mechanical beats of narrative heroism to ensure the Matrix can eventually reboot. The monomythic subprogram comes from an AI's analysis of heroic legends from past human cultures. What if the way to beat this self-perpetuating system is to break the monomythic structure? To crap on the Hero's Journey? To intentionally subvert the heroic narrative and create a new kind of heroism? This is a larger meta narrative that's simultaneously diegetic. The Matrix Rebooted is about the nature of reboots, and also about the nature of narrative repetition, how it's a valuable part of our history and yet how it's essentially mechanical at this point and may require some sort of reinvention to be relevant rather than just comforting. We can choose to be heroes otherwise--we can invent our own heroism and a new morality. Neo is the hero gone rogue artist, the sort of person who comes away from a class on Nietzsche but isn't a total douchebag about it. Maybe the new Neo recruits an army of Ones from the archives to battle in the system like a bunch of cyberpunk Supermen, or perhaps Neo figures out a way to blow up the system through intentional acts of narrative terrorism. Maybe Neo turns everyone into the One by helping people see patterns in their own lives that tap into the monomythic subprogram. (This all sounds a little like a Grant Morrison comic book, sure, but the Wachowskis borrowed heavily from The Invisibles, so screw it.) Maybe Clippy the Oracle can help in all this. "It looks like you're subverting the Hero's Journey. Would you like help?" Yes, Clippy. Let's kung fu the hell out of traditional storytelling.
Matrix Reboot photo
I know reboot fu
The other night we learned that Warner Bros. is developing a reboot of The Matrix, with an interest in Michael B. Jodan as the lead. Zak Penn has been tapped to write the treatment for the reboot, but nothing else is solid at...

Warner Bros. wants to reboot and relaunch The Matrix

Mar 14 // Hubert Vigilla
The film might not need to be a full series reboot. As revealed by The Architect in The Matrix Reloaded, there have been multiple iterations of the reality-simulating program of the Matrix, and the one Neo was experiencing was just the latest version in the series. Perhaps this reboot could be loosely tied to the previous film's continuity, sort of like a newer version of the iPhone or Windows. As long as it's not Vista or Windows 10... Is a Matrix reboot something you'd be interested in? Do you know kung fu? Let us know in the comments. [via THR]
The Matrix: Rebooted photo
The Matrix: Rebooted (Whoa...)
According to The Hollywood Reporter, Warner Bros. wants to reboot The Matrix. Zak Penn (X-Men: The Last Stand, story credits on X2 and The Avengers) is in talks to write the reboot treatment. Warner Bros. reportedly wants to ...

#Truth photo
#Truth

Channing Tatum doesn't know what Jupiter Ascending was either


But seriously, what was it?
Jun 18
// Matthew Razak
Anyone who saw Jupiter Ascending probably had the question, "What the actual f**k?" run through their minds at some point. Evidently Channing Tatum had that exact same thought while making it.  During a Reddit AMA t...

Review: Jupiter Ascending

Feb 06 // Matthew Razak
[embed]218920:42196:0[/embed] Jupiter AscendingDirectors: The WachowskisRated: PG-13Release Date: February 6, 2015  It's not that Jupiter Ascending is bad in concept, it's that it is truly horrible in execution. The plot is layered, deep and complex, but not in the right ways. The Wachowski's clearly had a world they wanted to create and it has some really cool concepts, but unlike their previous films they're unable to establish this new world at all. There's so much to take in and they do a messy job of establishing the universe.  Here's the general gist of Jupiter Ascending's sci-fi world. Humans didn't start on earth and have been around for ages. They've developed a serum that keeps them young, but it's derived from harvesting other humans so in order to get "livestock" the original humans find inhabital worlds and blend their DNA with local inhabitants. They then let that world mature to full population and harvest it. Earth is one of those worlds and it is owned by a company run by three siblings who inherited it from their mother. Like all great space operas there is drama in the family with head son Balem Abrasax (Eddi Redmayne) leading the pack of three. DNA and gene splicing play a big, awkward role in the film -- one that could have been really interesting if it wasn't so mired in the rest of the movie's desperate attempts to feel like a cohesive whole. That's where Jupiter Jones (Mila Kunis) comes in. Once in a while a person's DNA is basically fully duplicated. The space humans know this and in their wills will bequeath things to them. Jones, and earthling, happens to be the Abrasax siblings mother's duplicate and so all her belongings go to her and that includes the earth. This makes her a threat so Balem goes after her, but not before Caine Wise (Channing Tatum), a fallen Legion member who is now a bounty hunter and is also part wolf, catches her for his younger brother. Cue even more complex plotting, stupid decisions and Mila Kunis cowering in a ball or screaming and you've got yourself the makings of a space opera catastrophe. It's possible you've read the above plot description and asked yourself what the hell is going on. That's pretty much what the screenplay seems to be asking itself. The film implodes upon itself with illogical moment on top of illogical moment, often sacrificing the story in order to deliver a stunning visual. The Wachowski's clearly have so much they wanted to do in this world, but not enough time or skill to do it all. If the film had been a TV show with 20 episodes to unfold it's plot and back story then it actually could have worked really well. It's camp, family drama and feel vividly remind one of classic 90s science fiction. Instead it's crammed into a mess of a movie that makes characters jump from emotional stagnation to stupid decisions in the blink of an eye. It also doesn't help that the Wachowski's seem to want to make the film appeal to every popular trend that exists. Tatum is basically a werewolf, the Abrasax's are both vampires and elves, there's an entire fallen angel bit that gets almost completely ignored, space police come in for a bit of cop show stuff and Tatum flies around on weird hover shoes without a shirt for as much of the film as possible. Let's not forget the trope of a young woman thrust into wealth, adventure and power. It's like a teenage girl's check list of what she wants in a movie actually got vomited up onto the screen -- "Dear Diary, Channing Tatum is soooo cute. I wish he'd play a werewolf and fight vampires and wear eyeliner and no shirt." Visually, which is where you'll probably find most defenses for this movie, the film is both impressive and messy. Much like the over-stuffed plot and back story the costumes, design and look of the film is everywhere. Everything does look really cool, but it's often at the sacrifice of the story and logic of the universe. Stunning visuals are great in science fiction when they help to hold the world that is created together, but when they're just there to look pretty and actually create plot holes within themselves then they start to get really annoying. There's no cohesive whole to the worlds we see. Instead it just feels like a bunch of kids sitting down and just creating whatever they thought would look cool. It is a very pretty mess.  It is in fact so messy that the movie may push itself into camp. We'll leave that as a "time will tell" statement as it's hard to judge where it's going to land, but if Redmayne's ridiculous performance has anything to say about it then it's going to land firmly on the camp side of things. It isn't clear who Redmayne is trying to channel here, but his whispy voice and bat shit crazy performance is either the worst thing we'll see all year or the most brilliant bit of fun. Again, on the small screen, stretched out over a season of television, it would be an absolute blast to watch this character slowly unfold, but in this rushed mess it's just ridiculous. Kunis and Tatum by contrast seem like pieces of wood that the Wachowski's drew faces on and held up in front of a green screen. The truly interesting characters are the siblings, but the film doesn't let us play with them enough since it's so caught up in it's redemption story arcs.  You'd think that despite all of this that the action in the movie would be good, but that might be the most disappointing part of the film. The Wachowskis have shown that they can do fights and they can do speed, but neither of these things show up well here. There's only two major action sequences outside of the conclusion and they're both cutting room messes. One makes absolutely no sense at all and the other could be really cool if they'd manage to pull it off, but they don't. Instead we get far too many scenes of Tatum and Kunis pretending to be in love or Kunis coping with becoming royalty in the universe. It's all incredibly forced and means we get less action, which although mediocre would be far more welcome. Jupiter Ascending should have been a TV show. With a full season to actually put together their thoughts, unfold the characters and deliver on their fifty million different story lines the Wachowski's may have created something fun if not great. Instead we get a true mess on the screen. Overblown in every possible way the movie's only remaining value is that it can be entertaining just to watch it fall apart. There's camp hiding somewhere in here simply because it's very clear that the filmmakers are taking their ridiculousness very seriously. The Wachowski's think they created something amazing and fully commit to it. Sadly, they've only made a joke. At least we can get a laugh out of it.
Jupiter Review photo
A descending pun would not even come close to being harsh enough
I am a Wachowski defender. I have enjoyed if not down right liked every film they've made. Yes, even the second two Matrix films. If you insult Speed Racer I'll flip some tables. That movie was a kinetic and frantic mast...


Jupiter Trailer 3 photo
Jupiter Trailer 3

Latest Jupiter Ascending trailer has the plot details


Sep 29
// Nick Valdez
Jupiter Ascending may be the most unique science fantasy coming our way. Too bad the trailers don't really paint it in a good light. As the latest film from the Wachowskis, we should expect all kinds of craziness. The visual...
 photo

Jupiter Ascending gets bumped to February 2015


More like Jupiter Descending. No one else used this pun, right?
Jun 04
// Matthew Razak
This has got to hurt the ol' Wachowski siblings egos. Their big budget, science fiction film crammed full of stars like Channing Tatume and Mila Kunis has been abruptly moved from opening this July to February 2015. That's qu...
Jupiter Trailer 2 photo
Jupiter Trailer 2

Second trailer for the Wachowski's Jupiter Ascending


Mar 27
// Nick Valdez
The first trailer for the Wachowski's Jupiter Ascending left a weird impression on me. It looked good, sounded good, but ultimately seemed hollow. It just felt like something was missing within all of the glitz and glamour o...
Jupiter Ascending Trailer photo
Jupiter Ascending Trailer

International trailer for Jupiter Ascending


Mar 03
// Nick Valdez
The first trailer for the Wachowski's Jupiter Ascending came and went with little fanfare, but it at least showed off some promise. Can you believe this year we'll get a Summer blockbuster that isn't spawned off an existing ...
Jupiter Ascending Trailer photo
Gorgeous mediocrity
We've had very little to go on for Andy and Lana Wachowski's follow up to Cloud Atlas, Jupiter Ascending, for the last few months now as everyone involved has been pretty tight lipped about the situation. But now that we hav...

 photo

Photos give first look of Wachowski's Jupiter Ascending


May 13
// Matthew Razak
The Wachowski Siblings’ newest film Jupiter Ascending is under way as the two shoot a chase scene at London's Natural History Museum that involves a skate ramp that jumps over a giant dinosaur. That's probably...
 photo

Cloud Atlas gets heavily cut by Chinese censors


Jan 23
// Logan Otremba
Apparently Cloud Atlas was not the easiest film to understand depending on who you talk to. Some people in the general masses thought the same thing when Inception came out, talking about a convoluted plot and whatnot. Good n...

Review: Cloud Atlas

Oct 26 // Matthew Razak
Cloud AtlasDirectors: Lana Wachowski, Andy Wachowski, Tom TykwerRated: RRelease Date: October 27, 2012 [embed]213392:39034[/embed] On the surface Cloud Atlas is six different stories that take place in the past present and future. They are at first glance connected only by the characters in each learning through some means (movie, journal, book, myth) about the characters in the past. The six stories in the book are presented in chronological order with the first half of each story told first and then in reverse chronological order for the last half story (1-2-3-4-5-6-5-4-3-2-1). The movie eschews this set up as it would never work and instead interweaves the six stories into one giant study on life, love and the human condition. The six stories are big enough in scope to each be a film on their own, but that would negate the beauty of how they work together and have left us without the sheer awe of how incredibly well the Wachowskis and Tykwer have weaved them all together.  Plot wise the stories are as varied as can be: A period pieces aboard a ship in the 1800s about Adam Ewing (Jim Sturgess) returning home aboard a ship; a pre-WWII British drama involving an eccentric composer and his new muse; a hard nosed 70s detective story with a minority hero in the form of Luisa Rey (Halle Berry); a modern day comedy about a group of elderly escaping from their old folks home; a ystopian science fiction action story in Neo Seoul; a post-apocalyptic love tale replete with a new language. As you can tell there's a lot of genres going on here that one usually doesn't see colliding into another in stark contrast. The film's ability to gorgeously combine a Downtown Abbey-style drama with a futuristic action sequence is unprecedented and thoroughly stunning. Somehow the film makers manage to cut from a sailing ship in the 1800s to an old man racing a Range Rover out of a retirement home in the blink of an eye, but still have it make sense, and even more importantly have the stories actually join together to create a larger meaning for the entire film. This is obviously a massively ambitious project that demands that the film keeps six almost completely different stories flowing seamlessly together while interconnecting them through the film's themes. While the movie drastically plays up the reincarnation idea that is really only hinted at in the book by having each actor play other parts in the other stories it does this because it has too. A film this big must be in your face about some things, but sadly at times it can get a bit too heavy handed and that's when things can fall apart. For the most part the Wachowskis direction weaves multiple stories and genres into an incredible film that flows amazingly easily from one story to the next. College students will be introduced to montage using this film instead of Battleship Potemkin in the future it's that impressive. It often miraculously stitches scenes together in order to create an idea out of disconnected stories. It's just that sometimes the ideas get too big for the film and the story loses its way. Unfortunately when you're telling six separate stories at once (though really no more than three or four are told at a time) losing the audience means you have to work six times as hard to get them back. As a side note relating to my introduction, in situations where things start getting off track having read the book is incredibly helpful. Also helpful is going into the film ready to pay attention. This isn't a movie where you're going to sit down and tune out. If the thoughts, ideas, themes and philosophical meanderings of the film don't make you think then the sheer artistic structure of it will. Head into the theater ready to focus and you'll come out a much happier viewer. Of course there will be stories you like more than others. The action packed science fiction story featuring cloned humans and a hover bike in Neo Seoul is enthralling Patrick Ewings tale of being swindled at sea is a bit duller -- though it does have one of Hank's better roles. The trick that the film pulls off is making the dull parts connect with the overall themes wonderfully. Every story builds upon the themes of overcoming oppression, the human spirit and just how interconnected the universe truly is. When the film works best you can see the intricacies behind it and a seventh complete story, much bigger than the individual ones and far more thought provoking, reveals itself. The actors, aided often by heavy make up, are a mixed bag though never terrible. Tom "I'll Get Another Oscar Nod For This" Hanks is easily the best out of everyone and delivers performances from hilarious (a British gangster) to poignant (a future native dealing with some seriously devilish visions). Halle Berry on the other hand I could take or leave and the casting of Hugo Weaving in nothing but villainous roles make is a bit predictable except when he shows up in drag as a wicked Nurse a la One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest. Jim Broadbent on the other hand is wonderful in all his roles and easily gets to have the most fun while playing Timothy Cavendish in the film's most comedic story. It is impressive as well that despite sitting through the movie trying to pick out who is who when the credits rolled at the end and they showed everyone's roles I was amazed by some of the make up jobs in the film.  The screenplay is a bit less impressive. While the film weaves in and out of stories like a graceful sparrow the screenplay often relies a bit too heavily on passages from the book. While the plots are overall the same as the book's they do vary strongly except for when it comes to key dialog. The dialog is often lifted directly from the book, and sometimes things that work wonderfully in print just weren't made to be read out loud by an actor. Passages I found insightful while reading them came across as cheesy on screen and elicited a few eye roles. It's odd that the film makers were smart enough to realize that they needed to structure the film to focus on what film does well, but still relied so heavily on the words from the book. A bit of rewriting here and there could have saved some of the passages, and since they'd already reworked a ton of the stories it shouldn't have been that big a deal. With that said the film deals with simply massive questions and ideas, and sometimes addressing things like that is sounds cheesy and there's no way around it.  Cloud Atlas is a movie you have to see, kind of like Citizen Kane, for what it does as a film. Much like some people don't like Kane as a story you may not connect as dramatically as I did with this film, but you must see it because of what it does as a film. It is one of the most beautifully shot, brilliantly edited, sumptuously directed, ambitious films you will ever see. For the most part that ambition pays off in spades, but sometimes it reaches too far and you can see it unravel. Thankfully it never unravels enough to not enjoy the show and invalidate the prolific accomplishments of the film. 
 photo
A prolific triumph mired only by its own scope
I tore through Cloud Atlas this past week in preparation for seeing the film, and I want to dedicate this entire introduction to motivating people to read the book before seeing the movie. Cloud Atlas is big and com...

 photo

New Cloud Atlas videos try to explain what it is


Oct 22
// Nick Valdez
These two new behind the scenes videos for Cloud Atlas reveal how demanding the story will be for each of the actors. Each one has to play several different characters in erratic environments (so much so, that several of the...
 photo

Trailer: Cloud Atlas


Sep 06
// Alex Katz
Here's the first trailer for Cloud Atlas that's actually going to be running in theaters, as opposed to the previous one that was a bajillion years long. It's basically just a condensed version of the previous trailer, ...
 photo

Ben Affleck told 24 Hours Vancouver that he will NOT be directing the Justice League movie. You may recall a previous report that Affleck was under consideration for the film. He said the following in the interview: "I'm not...

 photo

New Cloud Atlas images and first reactions


Aug 14
// Thor Latham
Here we have a few new stills from the Wachowski's/Tim Tykwer's upcoming sci-fi epic Cloud Atlas. There's not much to say about them other than they seem to each be from one of the several stories the film will be telling sim...
 photo

Images of the various Cloud Atlas characters


Aug 03
// Hubert Vigilla
David Mitchell's Cloud Atlas doesn't easily lend itself to a screen adaptation, but based on the almost six-minute trailer for the film, it looks like The Wachowskis and Tom Tykwer are giving it their all. Six interconnected/...

Trailer: Cloud Atlas

Jul 26 // Alex Katz
 photo

Note: this is technically a leaked version of the trailer, which isn't "officially" available until 10AM Pacific, so we're going to host this now and keep it up for as long as possible, then we'll put up the official version...

 photo

First Cloud Atlas photos show Halle Berry and Tom Hanks


Jul 25
// Xander Markham
Cloud Atlas is shaping up to be one of the most ambitious and mysterious movies of the year: it's an interconnected story spanning several eras of human history, with the same actors playing different characters in each one. ...
 photo

Cloud Atlas comes out stateside on October 26th


Jun 20
// Hubert Vigilla
For a while it appeared that the ambitious adaptation of Cloud Atlas from Tom Tykwer and the Wachowskis was going to come out December 6th. There's been a bit of change since last month, however. Warner Bros. has officially a...
 photo

Possible plot details for Wachowskis' Jupiter Ascending


May 31
// Jason Savior
With Cloud Atlas, their first writer-director outing since 2008's abysmal Speed Racer, in the can and set for an end-of-the-year release, new details have supposedly emerged regarding the Wachowskis' next project: Jupiter Asc...
 photo

Cloud Atlas by Wachowskis/Tykwer out December 6th


May 18
// Hubert Vigilla
Cloud Atlas is probably the riskiest and most ambitious literary adaptation of the year. Warner Bros. picked up the Wachowskis/Tom Tykwer film at Cannes and have it slated for a December 6th release date. The movie runs 2 hou...
 photo

Wachowskis plan Kunis and Tatum for Jupiter Ascending


Mar 27
// Xander Markham
With their expansive and mysterious adaptation of David Mitchell's novel Cloud Atlas set for release later this year, the Wachowskis are getting ready for the next project, said to be an original sci-fi piece entitled Jupiter...
 photo

Natalie Portman eyed by Wachowkis; planning vegan doc


Jan 05
// Hubert Vigilla
Natalie Portman has taken time off acting since giving birth to her son Aleph last June. This year could mark her return, however. There's Alan Taylor's Thor 2 on the horizon, but there's another possibility as well. While th...
 photo

Pics and concept art for Wachowskis/Tykwer Cloud Atlas


Dec 28
// Hubert Vigilla
Thanks to the people at Collider, we've got a new image and some concept art for the film version of Cloud Atlas. The novel by David Mitchell is being adapted to the big screen by The Wachowskis and Tom Tykwer, and it could b...
 photo

Cloud Atlas obtains Hugh Grant


Sep 13
// Jamie R Stone
The film adaptation of Cloud Atlas, which is set to start filming this week, has just received another acting talent, Hugh Grant. Hugh is just one in a long list of well-known actors joining this film, including Tom Hanks, Ha...
 photo

Rob Cohen set to direct Korea's biggest budget film ever


Jul 29
// Alec Kubas-Meyer
I think I have made it pretty clear that I am a big fan of Korean cinema. Unfortunately, I now have to add a stipulation there: I like Korean cinema directed by Koreans. Why? Because Rob Cohen, director of such masterpie...
 photo

Trailer: Retreat


May 06
// Alex Katz
Now this sounds interesting. Retreat tells the story of a couple (Cillian Murphy and Thanadie Newton) that go to a small cabin on an isolated island for a vacation, and possibly to heal their struggling marriage. As these th...
 photo

Wachowskis and Warner Brothers' next project is Hood


Dec 08
// Tom Fronczak
Looks like Russel Crowe might have something else to Tweet about today. The unnamed project that the Wachowski Brothers -- err, Andy Wachowski and Lana Wachowski, formerly Larry Wachowski -- have been working on is Hood. It ...

Auto-loading more stories ... un momento, corazón ...