Sometimes the work of film directors just amazes me. Classic films like Orson Welles' Touch of Evil, Francis Ford Coppola's The Godfatheror Steven Spielberg's Shindler's Listserve to remind us just how well films can be made and yes, that "magic" can happen -- at least once in awhile. Another such director is Michel Gondry. His films Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, the upcoming Be Kind Rewind and a fantastic array of music videos and commercials superbly demonstrate his immense talent and show what the "art" in filmmaking is all about. In short, I think he's pretty much a genius.
Apparently, Gondry's genius stretches into other areas besides directing -- like geometry and contortion -- because if you watch this video you'll see the amazing Gondry solving a Rubik's Cube with his feet! Yes, I said his feet. Most people have enough trouble solving the damn things using their hands and this guy uses his feet. Impressive. I don't know about you but watching this sorta makes me feel like less of a man somehow. I really need to do something to feel better about myself. Where's Pauly Shore so I can punch him?
Can you imagine any post-WWII literature being remade and re-imagined as much as the classics of the 19th and early 20th Centuries? Maybe it's just too early. Maybe when I'm an old man, there will be countless adaptations of the Harry Potter books in the way there are presently many versions of Stoker's Dracula, Dickens' A Christmas Carol and Burroughs' Tarzan.
The constant reworking of classics, like Tarzan, likely has something to do with earlier films being too safe or censored. This accounts for remakes being sold as being truer to their source or as being an edgier revisit to something that exists as too innocent and simple in the consciousness of pop culture. The stories of Tarzan have been depicted as everything from childish adventures to mature drama, but Warner Bros. believes there is still another way to tell the tale of the man brought up in the wild.
The average person knows the first Star Wars movie started out on some desert somewhere. A casual fan could probably tell you the desert was a planet called Tatooine, home to Luke Skywalker and his moisture farming aunt and uncle. More dedicated fans would be quick to mention the actual, physical location of Tatooine was in Tunisia. And still is in Tunisia, as a matter of fact. But how many among us can claim to have been there, to have slept in the house of Aunt Beru and Uncle Ben? Aleksandra Moorast, who is admittedly only a casual fan at best, has had the privilege, and found it to be a singularly remarkable experience. Her account was written up in The Express News, and is certainly worth the read to hear a first-hand experience trip to Tatooine.
The set remains largely intact. The strength of the constructions is aided by a group of people resembling squatters, who have taken up residence in the abodes and act as a sort of honor guard, keeping the place tidy and offering tea to the visitors. Naturally, they also collect a handful of coins from any generous visitors who come along. Aunt Beru and Uncle Owen's place has been turned back into a hotel, and the cantina continues to exist as a watering hole for the geeks of the world. If you ever manage to visit, you can add your own signature or notes to the collection of hero fanboys who have left their thoughts over the years.
I'm not exactly sure how I feel about this trend. To what particular trend am I referring you may wonder? Is it rappers-turned actors? Or perhaps re-imaginings of classic films for modern day audiences? Or, maybe its remakes of Asian horror films for the American market? Nope. I'm pretty sure I don't like those things -- with exceptions, of course. I like Will Smith, Peter Jackson's King Kongwas ok even if it was too long and The Grudge was pretty scary. No, what's got me confused today is my feelings about the current crop of films being helmed by visual effects artists instead of directors with any sort of actual directing experience.
According to a recent article in Variety, the hands-on experience that effects supervisors have gotten while working on big films with major directors has helped them move from, as Variety puts it, "behind the computer screen right into the director's chair." Don't get me wrong, I realize supervising visual effects means you're managing a large team of people towards a single vision. And yes, that's a part of directing. But really, one of the most important things about directing is being able to tell a story and work with actors. I don't know about you, but most of the visual effects people I know have a pretty hard time talking about anything that doesn't happen on Battlestar Galactica or South Park so I fear their communication skills may be lacking in some areas.
The film that's been lauded as "This year's Lord of the Rings" (I highly doubt that, but I enjoyed the book and am looking forward to the movie) could be decorating your walls soon if you're lucky. This would be the perfect stocking stuffer for someone who loves fantasy, dragons or John Malkovich. While it's great to see another fantasy film hitting the box office, it makes me nostalgic for movies like Dragonslayer, which defined the genre for me when I was kid.
Eragon's big claim to fame is that it was written by Christopher Paolini when he was 15 years-old. Since being published, it has attracted a lot of attention, and the film stars actors like Jeremy Irons, John Malkovich and Robert Carlyle, which isn't too shabby for a fantasy film. The trailers haven't wowed me yet, and I played a demo of the video game based on the movie -- which was almost enough for me to give up on the film, it was that bad. However, I'm determined to give this one a fair shake. At the very least, they've got themselves a cool poster.
FirstShowing.net will be giving away 20 of these as part of their "Poster Madness Contest," so head over and sign up before midnight, December 16. You have to answer a couple of trivia questions, but with the help of your trusty sidekick 'The Internet,' we have every confidence that you'll come through with flying colors. Good luck!
So it seems like Prince Caspian is nearly set to go, right? As we creep into 2007, the final pieces are falling into place for the Narnian team, and production is soon to begin on the second installment of the very popular fantasy franchise. But ... where, exactly? Many of you have probably heard the film plans on being local to London for most of the shooting. Just as many have probably heard the team will be doing the bulk of their work in New Zealand. So which is it, England or New Zealand? The correct answer for now seems to be "yes." Coming Soon just did a great job of wrapping up the various related news, and as it turns out, both sites are on target for some Narnian action.
The president of Walt Disney International has recently suggested the film will start soon in England. In the meantime, the chief executive of Film New Zealand denied reports that Disney was moving away from their country, instead suggesting the film would use locations in both England and New Zealand. Although this requires a fair amount of movement, it certainly isn't beyond the scope of a big movie like Prince Caspian. As a sideline, reports are also apparently being published suggesting Narnia is headed for Prague to share a studio with Babylon A.D. This one seems a little more silly, but who know what the team has planned. Aslan is on the move!
A few months back we all found it pretty juicy (if perhaps a little unfair) when Richard Kelly'sSouthland Tales was met by cascades of displeasure after it unspooled at the Cannes film festival -- but according to the filmmaker's MySpace blog, the final product has been locked, only he chose to lop 27 minutes off of the flick for Sony's theatrical release. (The new version will run 157 minutes.) Aside from some final voice-over and special effects work, the movie is entirely ready for mass consumption, and Kelly promises a trailer / release date announcement sometime soon.
So what's next for Mr. Kelly once his Southland Tales has been unleashed upon the world? Looks like he's busy on pre-production with The Box, which will be a spooky movie based on a great story by Richard Matheson. Those who are anticipating another five-year waiting period from the filmmaker can rest easy: production on The Box is scheduled to begin in March.
Video game publisher Sega recently closed a deal with 20th Century Fox for a series of games based on the super-popular Alien franchise. According to an article in The Hollywood Reporter, the video game company, best known for its Sonic the Hedgehog games, is going to begin developing next-gen and PC video games set in the Alien universe -- including a first-person shooter and a multi-player role-playing game.
The games, the first of which is expected to ship in 2008, are not going to be a re-make of any of the Alien films or strictly follow any of the storylines already developed. Instead, according to Mike Gallo, senior producer for the franchise at Sega, the games will provide new stories and experiences derived from the franchise history and mythology. "We'll go out of our way to tie the games into the films in unique ways," he said. "We're also looking at all 'Alien' source material for inspiration, in addition to the films. We may incorporate some characters that fans know and love, and we may let gamers find answers to questions that were left unanswered in the movies."
Also, Sega is currently in talks with franchise stars, including Sigourney Weaver and Lance Henricksen, who will hopefully reprise their respective roles from the films in the video games. Which, of course, would be pretty darn cool and add that all-important authenticity that makes these kinds of games work better. As a fan of the movies and having played some of the games -- especially Alien vs. Predator 2 -- I, for one, can't wait to see what comes out of this deal. Hopefully we'll see a kick-ass high-def Alien game for the XBox 360 in the near future. Now that would be cool. I'm also more than happy to be a beta tester -- so Sega, if you're listening, how about a hook-up?
Man, it must be terrible to be a 12-year-old child superstar and realize you can't rest on your laurels, but instead, must think about the future when your looks start to go and you just aren't the cutest thing around anymore. What's a pre-teen actor to do when this kind of problem inevitably arises? Thus is the current issue apparently confronting the precocious Dakota Fanning who was asked, according to a recent AP story, what she might want to do when she grows up. Her answer? Are you sitting down? Good. She wants to direct.
According to the article, Fanning was asked about her future career plans during an interview for Time Magazine promoting her upcoming filmsCharlotte's Weband the indie-drama Hound Dog. "I would love to direct someday," Fanning told the magazine. "I've learned a lot from watching directors I've worked with, like Steven Spielberg and Gary Winick, whom I worked with on Charlotte's Web. I would love to have that relationship with another actor." Well, I guess if you've spent that much time with talented directors like those, something is bound to rub off, right? What a great way to learn.
Besides, there are many directors working today who started out as actors -- the most successful probably being Ron Howard. But there's also, of course, Mel Gibson, Kevin Costner, Danny De Vito and one of my personal heroes Orson Welles. I'm sure I missed a bunch more. To be honest, Dakota Fanning is one of the few child actors who doesn't bug me when I watch her films -- I especially liked her in Man on Fire. Maybe its her or more the directors or actors she works with. Whatever the reason, if I had to bet on someone making a successful transition from actor to director I would have to bet on her. Plus, she's just so darn cute -- and that never hurts either.
First up, Edward Burns will be writing a drama set in the fashion world alongside wife Christy Turlington. (Seeing as Burns' last few indie pics were huge flops, perhaps his eye for relationship-type material will garner more attention on the small screen.) Based on an idea of Spielbergs, we're not sure if this has anything to do with another project Spiel-God was interested in -- that one was supposedly written by Rod Lurie and revolved around the "glitzy New York media world." Did Spielberg change it to the "glitzy New York fashion world" and simply bring on Burns to ruin it for him? If it goes to pilot, Burns will also direct. Fantastic.
The second project is based off a script by Scott Gemmill, and its main characters are two American physicists in WWII who discover a way to travel into the future and subsequently come to 2007 in an attempt to aid the war effort ... as well as get into Paris Hilton's pants. (That last part I made up, though everyone knows how kinky those physicists are ... ) However, the film Back to the Future wasn't around in the forties, and so the men soon realize that traveling back and forth can and will affect the space-time continuum. Sounds wonderful ... now give us Indy 4!
With the holidays fast approaching, your thoughts have surely turned to gifts -- whether for that special someone or for yourself. Hey, why not? You've been good this year, right? And, as you happen to be reading this at a site whose focus is movies, it stands to reason you may want to watch a few of them once in awhile. I'm sure many of you remember the good old days when you went to a theater to watch a movie in all of its wide-screen, THX enhanced splendor. These days, with ticket prices, parking, waiting in line and those jerks on cell phones, actually going to the theater is something people do less and less.
Instead, people are staying home, curling up on the couch and watching their favorite movie on DVD in the comfort of their homes. I have to admit that its getting harder and harder for me to go to the theater too. Even though I can go to screenings and all that, its still, in many cases, much more of an ordeal than it needs to be -- or that it seems to be worth. Consequently, I spend more and more time watching movies at home. And that, friends, is why we're here today.
If you watch movies at home and want to maximize the "cinematic experience" of those movies, following are some essential tools that will help you get there. As its not possible for me to have owned every different kind of equipment out there, this list will focus primarily on the items that make up my personal home theater setup -- which was put together over the last few months after exhaustive research. Plus, these items make great gifts too. So, on with the show!
When I'm not blogging I work with graphics for print and the web, so when I see someone in a movie take a blurry image from a security camera and sharpen it to the point that you can read the embroidered name on the shirt of a man half a mile away, I just roll my eyes. When faced with a situation like this, you'll often hear a character say something like, "let's try that new photo enhancement software," but what it really means is either the writer knows very little about computer graphics, or they're hoping the audience doesn't.
Matthew Inman has a similar view on his area of expertise: computer coding. To those of us who know little to nothing about the subject, computer programming seems almost magical, so I for one am not nearly as likely to spot a film's errors when it comes to coding. Inman has posted a pretty cool essay called "What Code Doesn't Do in Real Life (That it Does in the Movies)" over at Drivl.com. He brings up several interesting points like:
Code is not three-dimensional like it was in Hackers.
Code does not make "blip" noises as it appears on the screen.
Code can not be cracked by an eight-year-old kid in seconds.
Most code is not inherently cross-platform (Even I flinched when the virus Jeff Goldblum wrote on his Mac was compatible with the alien computer in Independence Day.
Frankly I'm surprised there was no mention of Hugh Jackman's big computer hacking scene from Swordfish in which director Dominic Sena tries to make hacking look visually exciting by having Jackman use a multi-monitor work station that would be more at home in the Bat-cave than in the real world. The category could be called "Watching someone write code is as exciting as watching C-Span."
First we got the promo clip. Then came the teaser trailer. And now comes the biggest treat so far: the full-bore theatrical trailer. At this point the only thing that can satisfy me is the actual movie!! I'm talking, of course, about Zack Snyder's300 -- which I once called Sin City meets Gladiator, and after watching the all-new video clip I see no reason to amend that early, glib prediction.
The newest trailer offers a little bit more of everything: more violence, more shrieking women, more dazzling FX and more wild animals / sweaty mutants with swords in their mouths and arrows in their necks. Or something like that. Basically this new trailer just drifted through my eyeballs like so much sugar-coated crack. Needless to say, I can't really wait to see this freakin' flick already -- and if it sucks I'll not only be astonishingly disappointed, but pretty darn surprised.
Starring a ridiculously fit Gerard Butler, as well as Lena Headey, David Wenham and Dominic West, 300 comes from the fan insta-favorite who shocked us all by delivering a really solid Dawn of the Dead remake a few years back. The source material is Frank Miller's, obviously, and Frank's source material was an event handily summarized in this Wikipedia article. March 9 is really shaping up to be a banner day for movie nerds: 300 will open alongside the mega-muchly-anticipated Hot Fuzz AND the certifiably awesome monster movie The Host -- and I say they'd make for one heckuva triple feature!
It was pretty obvious that film geeks weren't going to make good boxers. And they definitely didn't stand a chance against a wealthy filmmaker who could afford to train for the event. In case you aren't aware, notoriously bad movie director Dr. Uwe Bollchallenged his harshest critics to fight him in the ring, and in September he won all five matches. Some of those involved, particularly Something Awful's Rich "Lowtax" Kyanka, claimed that Boll took the event more seriously than they'd expected and that it became less of a fun PR stunt and more of an unfair competition that had nothing to do with movies.
Now a group in New Mexico is calling out Boll for what they consider a more fair contest. Calling themselves the "Boll-Busters," this group is hoping to square off against the filmmaker in a non-physical battle of the brains. The leader of the group, Peter Cook, is a two-time winner of his college Trivia Bowl, and he thinks he can beat Boll in a round of trivia, and even says he'll allow the categories of questions to be limited to, "Moviemaking, and Video Games Made Into Uwe Boll Movies," which would certainly keep things relevant.
What Cook and his friends may not realize, however, is that even though Boll makes some truly horrible movies, he does have a PH.D in literature, he is an amazing businessman and in a context of trivia he probably knows a good deal about both the categories Cook has come up with. I don't like to be a defender of Boll, but I bet he could even beat Cook at his Trivia Bowl. What I would prefer for all Boll's critics to do is make a movie, one that will either gross more money or win more legitimate awards than any of Boll's pictures. I think that would be the most fair contest regarding attacks against his filmmaking ability.
There's been a flurry of activity online today which stems from a Variety article that claims J.J. Abrams is "set to direct" Star Trek XI. So, of course, everyone has jumped at the chance to report the news -- keep in mind, up until this point, J.J. Abrams was only attached as a producer, not director. Awhile back, he claimed to be waiting until a script was finished before making a decision, and so when Variety wrote that one little line, folks took that as confirmation from the Abrams camp that he would indeed be directing. And where did this whole thing come from originally?
Well, Viacom CEO Philippe Dauman was speaking about Paramount, and somewhere in his speech he mentioned that Star Trek would return to the big screen for its 11th installment in either 2008 or 2009. He also added, "We're revitalizing it in a new and interesting way." And so, Variety threw in a little line underneath about Abrams directing, which some folks took as something Dauman stated (which he didn't).
What does it all mean? Absolutely nothing. TrekMovie.com claims to have spoken with someone inside Paramount who claims Abrams still isn't attached to direct and, regarding the blurb in Variety, they (meaning this person inside Paramount, not all of Paramount) claim it's nothing but "lazy journalism". With production set to begin this spring (according to Abrams himself), why hasn't the man made a decision yet? He's obviously working closely with screenwriters Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci, and so he has to be pretty far inside the loop to be able to say yay or nay. Your thoughts?
Can you imagine any post-WWII literature being remade and re-imagined as much as the classics of the 19th and early 20th Centuries? Maybe it's just too early. Maybe when I'm an old man, there will be countless adaptations of the Harry Potter books in the way there are presently many versions of Stoker's Dracula, Dickens' A Christmas Carol and Burroughs' Tarzan. 
The average person knows the first 
I'm not exactly sure how I feel about this trend. To what particular trend am I referring you may wonder? Is it rappers-turned actors? Or perhaps re-imaginings of classic films for modern day audiences? Or, maybe its remakes of Asian horror films for the American market? Nope. I'm pretty sure I don't like those things -- with exceptions, of course. I like 
The film that's been lauded as "This year's Lord of the Rings" (I highly doubt that, but I enjoyed the book and am looking forward to the movie) could be decorating your walls soon if you're lucky. This would be the perfect stocking stuffer for someone who loves fantasy, dragons or John Malkovich. While it's great to see another fantasy film hitting the box office, it makes me nostalgic for movies like 
So it seems like 
A few months back we all found it pretty juicy (if perhaps a little unfair) when 
Video game publisher 
Man, it must be terrible to be a 12-year-old child superstar and realize you can't rest on your laurels, but instead, must think about the future when your looks start to go and you just aren't the cutest thing around anymore. What's a pre-teen actor to do when this kind of problem inevitably arises? Thus is the current issue apparently confronting the precocious 
Hey, we finally know why 
When I'm not blogging I work with graphics for print and the web, so when I see someone in a movie take a blurry image from a security camera and sharpen it to the point that you can read the embroidered name on the shirt of a man half a mile away, I just roll my eyes. When faced with a situation like this, you'll often hear a character say something like, "let's try that new photo enhancement software," but what it really means is either the writer knows very little about computer graphics, or they're hoping the audience doesn't.
First we got 
It was pretty obvious that film geeks weren't going to make good boxers. And they definitely didn't stand a chance against a wealthy filmmaker who could afford to train for the event. In case you aren't aware, notoriously bad movie director 
There's been a flurry of activity online today which 
