Movies

OK, so in the American version of The Descent, Sarah, the lead character, scrambles up a bone-filled hill, crawls through a hole and escapes the cave where the monsters who killed all her friends dwell. She runs through the forest like a crazy woman, gets in her car and drives away. Once she is far enough away, she pulls over to the side of the road to catch her breath, sees her friend as a “ghost”, and then realizes it is just a hallucination. Ultimately, she survives. End of story.

However, in the original British version, that is not the end of the story. She does not escape the cave. Her escape, her frantic jeep drive and her stopping on the side of the road to catch her breath is just a figment of her imagination. Ultimately, she is still in the cave – miles underground – and the Crawlers are closing in. End of story. Presumably she doesn’t survive.

Now comes the interesting development of the week: The Descent 2 is coming to theaters at some point, presumably in 2009.  Don’t get me wrong – I’m looking forward to this. The Descent is one of the best monster movies I’ve seen in a long time and features some of the coolest, scariest creatures ever, perhaps since Alien. When I first saw this movie (the American version) in theaters, I was huddled up against my friend half the movie – and I don’t scare easily.

Still, how will The Descent 2 work? American audiences who have only seen the theatrical version will be able to shrug it off, but everyone else will be left scratching their heads when Sarah returns. And, according to the synopsis on Comingsoon.net, Sarah does return:

Picking up from where the last movie left off, Sarah (Shauna Macdonald) escapes the cave and seeks refuge at a local gas station, where she collapses and is rushed to a local hospital. Not being able to speak because of the horrific events that have mentally scarred her, a search and rescue team take Sarah back to where the horrible events happened to find any possible answers and survivors. However, whilst down in the cave…things don’t go to plan as the group fight for their lives against the crawlers and find an unexpected survivor from the last film.

Now, I have to presume that most American audiences have seen the British version by now, since most people only saw the movie on DVD. If you haven’t, you should! But regardless, isn’t it a bit weird to have a sequel begin with a main character who was killed in the first one?

And this, folks, is why you don’t change endings for different audiences.

Along with the announcement that Disney was going to release all of their new CGI-animated cartoons in 3D format came the horrifying revelation that for some God-awful reason, Disney and Pixar were going to make Cars 2. It’s sad to think that Pixar is going to devote its time to making a sequel of its worst movie EVER when they could spend time focusing on new and original content, which is their strong selling point among animated producers.

Here are five reasons why the Cars 2 movie will suck:

1. The original Cars was awful. It was boring, slow, unimaginative, not funny and lacked exciting animation.
2. The world of cars is a limited one.  The first one featured some uninteresting racing action and attempted drama, which is about as much as you can get out of a car movie about talking cars. The original Cars used up everything you could possibly imagine in the first ten minutes of the movie.
3. Cars can’t show emotion. As seen in the first one, it’s hard to show emotion, expression and so on and so forth with a bunch of cars. Let’s just say no one wanted to see the love scenes and no one cared.
4. This is a weak reason why the movie will suck, but Brad Lewis is directing the film. He produced Ratatouille, one of Pixar’s best movies, but he has never directed a movie in his life.
5. The original Cars movie sucked. Did I already say that?

Frankly, I’m bummed that I will have to see previews for a sequel. Stupid Disney! Stupid Disney!

Honestly, could Tom Cruise’s week get any worse? In a matter of days, he’s been slammed with two major incidents. No, there aren’t more gay rumors, and no, he isn’t getting bashed for being a Scientologist or for jumping on a couch. He’s had a much worse week than that.

For starters, his wife Katie Holmes restyled her hair, and not in a good way. I mean, if he wanted to marry a middle-aged mom, he would have married… well, some really excited middle-aged mom. I mean, her hair just looks dreadful – the only excuse would be if the new ‘do is for a movie. Either way, Holmes continues to get less and less sexy, which is a real disappointment.

Secondly, MGM basically told the world that Cruise’s upcoming movie Valkyrie basically sucks. Here’s the announcement MGM gave:

“MGM is proud and excited to be presenting Valkyrie, and because of that we want to give it the best launch possible,” said Clark Woods, President of Domestic Distribution of Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios, which is distributing the movie domestically. “When an opening became available for President’s Day Weekend, we seized the opportunity. Having seen a lot of the film and how great it is going to play once it’s finished, moving into a big holiday weekend is the right move.”

Sounds good, right? Wrong. Read between the lines. MGM moved Valkyrie from October 3, 2008, an early but still potentially viable release date for award recognition. Financially, moving Valkyrie from October to President’s Day Weekend is probably a good one, but for a war drama, you have to assume that original intentions were for the movie to be some kind of awards contender. Now releasing in February, the movie has no chance of getting any recognition whatsoever. How do I read that? That Valkyrie is going to suck.

Of course, the trailer makes the movie look pretty good. I’ve been wrong before, but only a few times. Aside from the lack of German accents from the characters, including Tom Cruise who boasts his American accent, Valkyrie looks engaging, exciting and interesting. I had never heard of the story before the big Cruise/Germany fiasco, but it’s definitely an intriguing one: I had never heard of a Nazi plotting to kill Adolf Hitler.

Too bad MGM informed me that Valkyrie is going to suck, and too bad for Tom Cruise and his crappy week.

Can you believe it’s already April? It feels like New Year’s was just last week, but we’re already a quarter of the way through the year. The summer blockbusters are only a month away, and the misery that was March is behind us. April is shaping up to be a decent month theatrically, with a few okay but not stellar releases hitting theaters. If you’re in the mood for horror, The Ruins and Prom Night arrive soon, and there is something for almost every genre, from action (Street Kings) to family film (Nim’s Island) to comedy (Baby Mama). But there are only five movies I really want to see this month, and those movies are:

1. Harold and Kumar Escape From Guantanamo
   Yes, Harold and Kumar is number one my list. Why would I choose such a stupid, idiotic, pot-filled movie like this as my number one film to see? Why, because the original Harold and Kumar is one of the best stupid movies ever made. I don’t even know how to describe it, but it is absolutely hilarious, and I’m not even the kind of person who enjoys idiotic movies. Yes, I know that comedy sequels are rarely as good as the originals, but I’m holding out hope that this one should at least entertain me for an hour and a half.
2. Leatherheads
   Another comedy? Yes! Comedy is my least favorite genre, believe it or not (I prefer depressing, depressing, depressing!), but the George Clooney-directed picture is my second choice for April. Unlike Harold and Kumar, though, this one is a little more of a drama-sports-comedy, as it is set several decades ago before the NFL was around. The movie promises some entertaining sports action, some witty dialogue (the exchange between Renee Zellweger and Clooney that’s shown in the previews is priceless) and John Krasinski (“The Office”) finally in a potentially good movie. Leatherheads isn’t going to blow anyone away, but it looks like it has just the right chemistry to appeal to audiences and critics alike. Too bad I don’t like Zellweger much at all.
3. Forbidden Kingdom, The
   A couple years, I was enamored with Asian kung fu movies such as this. Honestly, the genre couldn’t go wrong. Even before that, I loved Jackie Chan movies and liked Jet Li movies. That is then; this is now. These Asian films are starting to look all the same, and with titles such as “The Forbidden Kingdom”, it’s hard to keep them all straight. The movie itself doesn’t even look all that great, but it does offer one thing that fans have been craving for years: the teaming of Jackie Chan and Jet Li. And no, not just a teaming: while it appears as though they are both good guys, they do get their fair share of fighting each other… this is every fan’s dying wish. For this alone, I will go see The Forbidden Kingdom.
4. 88 Minutes
   Another actor I’ve grown tired of over the years is Al Pacino, who, as many people believe, has grown comfortable playing the same role over and over again in varied plots. That being said, I still respect him as an actor and I never underestimate him. Even when he chooses bad movies, the movies are often not that bad, and when he picks decent movies, they tend to be on the better side of decent. 88 Minutes appears to be a rather formulaic thriller with a countdown gimmick, but that’s enough to get me into theaters. The movie doesn’t look great, but it looks like it could be entertaining, and in the month of April, that’s all I ask for.
5. Pathology
   While I tried to keep this list to wide releases, I had to mention Pathology on here. Who knows if the movie will be any good, but judging from the red band trailer, which offered up lots of gratuitous sex, nudity and gore, I am more than just a little intrigued. My thinking is rather shallow here, but I’m okay with it. Anytime a movie can work lots of nudity into an otherwise adult horror-thriller, I’ll be there checking things out (supervising and chaperoning, you know).
6. Deception
   I just watched a movie trailer for this thriller, and while I can’t say it blew me away, I’m certainly intrigued. At the very least, the movie stars Hugh Jackman and Ewan McGregor, two actors you should never take too lightly, as well as a bunch of beautiful women who all participate in a sex group. Of course, the secrets of the sex group boil over into some kind of murder or betrayal case, and we’re left with a naughty sex thriller. These movies generally end up being really good or really bad, and only time will tell which category this one falls into.

Amanda Righetti… good looking girl, if I’ve ever seen one. In fact, a very good looking girl. Today, April 4th, is her birthday, and just yesterday she received a very nice present: she was cast, presumably in a leading role, in the new Friday the 13th movie, a retelling (read: remake) of the original rise to power of Jason Vorgheese. Did I spell his last name right?

Of course, I have yet to see a good Friday the 13th movie and still have yet to fathom how the franchise has dragged itself to what will soon be 12 films. Twelve films! I understand the appeal of the villain – after all, Jason is one of the coolest horror villains ever – but the movies are just horribly bad. Is this really the track you want to take, Amanda?

Oh yeah, I forgot that so far you’ve been resigned to episodes of “K-Ville” and “The O.C.” Nothing wrong with that, but you need to make your way to the silver screen at some point. And if you’re going to take the horror route, you might as well do it with an established franchise, especially a remake of an established franchise. This new Friday the 13th is going to make a decent amount of money, and Amanda Righetti is going to be riding its coattails. Smart move.

Here are some Amanda Righetti pictures:

It’s Friday, March 28, 2008, and as any good moviegoer should be thinking, you’re wondering what movie you should invest in this weekend. For new wide releases come to theaters today, all aiming for that top spot at the weekend’s box office. Thankfully, three of the four movie are potentially worthwhile films, at least on paper.

21, starring Kevin Spacey, Kate Bosworth and that guy from Across the Universe, is about a group of students (lead by their teacher, Spacey) who decide to rip off some Las Vegas casinos by counting cards. Of course, their greed gets the better of them and things spiral out of control. I’m not always a huge fan of gambling movies, but when done right, they can be very good (Rounders, anyone?). Mainly, I want to see this movie for the fact that Bosworth looks hot in it, but one should not discount the talented cast involved.

Run, Fatboy, Run is the long delayed Simon Pegg comedy. The release date delay is worrisome, and after seeing the trailer over and over again when it was originally slated for the fall, I haven’t seen much promotion, if any, in recent months (though, admittedly, I haven’t been going to see much of the garbage in theaters – and I fast forward through TV commercials). Regardless, Pegg is on a roll (Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz) and Run, Fatboy, Run looks pretty funny.

Stop-Loss is an Iraq war drama about a young man (Ryan Phillippe) who returns home from war only to find that the military has decided to send him right back. Not happy about the fact that he has to leave his girlfriend (wife?), he considers going AWOL to Canada. Some people aren’t big fans of Phillippe, but I think he’s actually a pretty good actor given the right material, and Stop-Loss could be right up his alley. The marketing team has also done a great job with an excellent trailer that strikes upon the themes of the film. Considering that other, bigger Iraq-themed films have flopped over the last year, I wouldn’t expect this one to stick around for too long – but it has the potential to be good.

The last of the movies is Superhero Movie, but, considering this spoof is from the same group of people that have created some of the worst movies in recent memory (Epic Movie and Date Movie), I would not go see this film if my life depended on it. In fact, if you go and see this film, you are supporting the creation of more terrible spoofs in the years to come.

View other recent movie releases.

Check out this rather neat little viral campaign that Justin.tv is doing to promote The Ruins… Click here.

Some of the people on the webcam have a rather disturbing infliction, though you have to see it to believe it. Just don’t spend too much time chatting… you’ll see what I mean.

From a marketing perspective, I wish I had the programming skills (and the time) to develop (oh, and the money) something like this. It’s pretty simple, and at the same time quite impressive.

Based on the Scott Smith novel, “The Ruins” centers on a group of friends whose leisurely Mexican holiday takes a turn for the worse when they accompany a fellow tourist on a remote archaeological dig in the jungle, where something evil lives among the ruins. View The Ruins movie details.

There’s good news and bad news about the upcoming finale to the Harry Potter franchise, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows:

The good news is that the Los Angeles Times is reporting that the movie is being split into two movies, the first to be released in November 2010, the second in May 2011. I truly feel this is not simply to capitalize on an extra $400 million worldwide – the book was massive, and to remove much if any of it to fit into a two-and-a-half hour movie would be a travesty. Now with 4-6 hours to play with, Warner Brothers can create an epic two-part movie series… Of course, the first half of the movie is going to be immensely frustrating, just like Kill Bill: Vol. 1. That is going to be an agonizing six months, let me tell you.

The bad news is that David Yates is signed on to direct these films. Does Warner Brothers really think this guy can handle the epic finale to the Harry Potter franchise? He already did a piss poor job on Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix; why would Warner Brothers hire the crappiest director of all the Harry Potter movies to do the last four, and subsequently most important, films in the franchise?

If Yates ruins Harry Potter, I will be massively upset.

I was forwarded this article from The Huffington Post in hopes that I would use it to promote the Jason Staitham The Bank Job, which is now playing in theaters. That’s fine – I get requests to market movies all the time, and The Bank Job was the best reviewed film of last weekend.

But here’s the catch. This article, which is actually a blog post written by Logan Nakyanzi Pollard, is about Eliot Spitzer, the governor of New York who just resigned today following the accusations (which sound 100% true) that he repeatedly paid upwards of $5,000 at a time to have sex with call girls. The latest report is that Spitzer spent $80,000 over a period of time for these prostitutes, presumably paying that much to maintain confidentiality (why else would you spend $5,000 on a single prostitute?).

How does this relate to The Bank Job, a slick, fast-paced heist film? The plot of The Bank Job is about a group of robbers who break into a bank to steal photos of important people having sex with prostitutes – the intent being that they can blackmail these important people for more money. I haven’t seen the movie, so if that summary isn’t completely true than forgive me, but that’s the gist of the movie.

Now, the fact that those responsible for marketing The Bank Job is using this Huffington Post blog post to market their film is raising some eyebrows. There’s been some negative reaction to this marketing approach, but I have to say I’m rather impressed. As an Internet Marketing person myself, I think it’s only fair that they try to market this film anyway they can, especially if they can play off the biggest story of the week. Those who call this tactic “disgusting” should ask themselves: “Who does this hurt?”

• Does marketing The Bank Job in relations to Eliot Spitzer hurt the movie? How can it?
• Does it hurt Eliot Spitzer? I think he has bigger fish to fry.
• Will it help a movie that has received good reviews but not much audience attention get a few more box office dollars? Yes. I’ve already seen the movie mentioned in a non-marketing way in relation to the Spitzer story.

So, to me, it seems like this marketing tactic helps the movie and doesn’t hurt Spitzer. Is there an ethical element to it, regardless of whether it actually hurts anyone? Perhaps. But is it really unethical to try to capitalize on national headlines to market your product? In fact, I think it would be bad if a marketing person didn’t try to take advantage of headlines. Controversy rarely hurts the movie industry, and so the marketing team should always be looking at ways to get free press.

Whether the tie-in between The Bank Job and the Eliot Spitzer story takes off is any man’s guess, but I’ve started the discussion here; I’d like to see other marketing blogs and movie blogs take it up and provide their opinions.

According to WENN, Sir Ian McKellan is “desperate” to reclaim his role as Gandalf in the upcoming The Hobbit movie(s). This is no real surprise, as the guy got more acclaim and recognition for The Lord of the Rings than any other film he’s ever starred in, and, really, how could they replace him with a new Gandalf?

It’s good to hear actors clambering to return; Elijah Wood has also expressed interest, though I don’t remember Frodo Baggins playing a big part in The Hobbit, if any. New Line (now Warner Brothers) has to be focused on maintaining a consistent look, feel and quality to the new movies, even though Peter Jackson will not be directing. I’m still interested to see how front runner Guillermo del Toro will handle the movies; he’s a great choice, but how much of his unique style and imagination will make its way into the film?

Continuing to prove that there is no God, The Weinstein Co. has announced that they will be distributing a sequel to the animated film Hoodwinked!, failing to realize a lack of demand for low-budget, Shrek rip-offs that are about as entertaining as a sack of potatoes that have been left rotting, petrified, then turned to dust over a million years.

Hoodwinked 2: Hood vs. Evil is the lame title of this sure-to-be lame movie, a clear indication from the beginning that one, especially parents with small children, should avoid this film at all costs and probably restrict your children to only watching late night, adult programming television to lessen the risk of them ever seeing a preview full of bad special effects and pathetic humor and potentially wanting – or even begging! – you to go see it.

I gave the first Hoodwinked! movie a pleasant D+ (read my Hoodwinked movie review) for a variety of reasons, as seen in such comments from my review as “Hoodwinked sucks butt” and “Unfortunately, it pales in comparison [to Shrek] in every possible way”. Let’s not forget these equally Shakespearean quotes: “The graphics in Hoodwinked are terrible” and “The movie isn’t funny.”

Sadly, this is what we get when a studio spends $15 million on a film and they get $50 million back in ticket receipts.

OK, I know the blog title doesn’t make any sense, but I’m tired so leave me alone! Paul Dano, according to The Hollywood Reporter, will star in and executive produce Gigantic, a movie which is describes as “an offbeat romantic comedy being helmed by first-time director Matt Aselton.”

Dano, who is best known for his popular roles in Little Miss Sunshine and There Will Be Blood (both Oscar nominees for Best Picture), will co-star with Zooey Deschanel. Paul Dano will play a mattress salesman and Deschanel a young woman he meets at the store. The screenplay is written by Aselton and Adam Nagata.

One of my favorite action franchises – the Jason Bourne series -  is returning for yet another installment, and the key players, director Paul Greengrass and Matt Damon, are returning. Without them, I would be much more hesitant, but now the film is all but guaranteed to be good.

Following Doug Liman’s The Bourne Identity, which was very good but not great, Greengrass took over and absolutely blew me away with The Bourne Supremacy. Most people liked The Bourne Ultimatum even more, but I slightly favor Supremacy for its more complex plot.

All that I ask, Mr. Greengrass and Mr. Damon, is that you write a plot involving Carlos the Jackal. He was the main villain in the books, and the whole reason for Jason Bourne’s existence. Sure, the movies have veered so far away from the original plot of the books (read The Bourne Supremacy book and tell me it’s not one of the coolest books ever written – even though it’s nothing like the movie) that some elements will be lost (the movies have killed off two of the three main characters from the books), but Ultimatum really set the stage for something about Carlos the Jackal. Sure, Ultimatum tried to explain David Webb’s transformation into Jason Bourne, but it never touched upon why the program was created in the first place. Why? To take down Carlos the Jackal!

The one thing the Bourne movies have lacked is a truly evil villain, and it’s about time Jason Bourne met his match. The Bourne Identity 4, or whatever it’s going to be called, better star Carlos the Jackal, or else I’ll… hmmm. Well, just put the dude in there. What about Javier Bardem as the bad guy? Benicio Del Toro? Paulie Shore?

Update: this fourth Bourne Identity movie is currently slated for a summer 2011 release date.

The Signal is now out in limited theaters, and here are some new film clips for the movie:

Film Clip: Laura

Film Clip: You Have the Crazy

Interview Featurette

The Signal Synopsis

Imagine every cell phone, radio, and television in your city suddenly broadcasting the same mysterious signal over and over. Now imagine these “terminus” transmissions evoking violent, uncontrollable, psychotic chaos from everyone who comes in contact with them. More…

Five movies are being released today, Friday, February 21, 2008, all vying for the top spot at the box office. The movies are:

Be Kind Rewind, a quirky, indie-style comedy starring Jack Black and directed by Michel Gondry, the director of Eternal Sunshine for the Spotless Mind. Fans of that weird film will certainly turn out in storm, but rumor has it that Be Kind Rewind is a much more normal film, which means it will appeal to a larger audience. The movie looks good, but can its concept support an entire film?

Vantage Point, starring a wide range of people from William Hurt to Forest Whitaker, is about a political assassination attempt and a massive conspiracy. The film looks pretty good, but there are some concerns. Nevertheless, action fans, thirsty for something fresh, will flock to this one, and for good reason.

Charlie Bartlett, the highly anticipated comedy starring Anton Yelcin and Robert Downey Jr., finally arrives in theaters after months of delays. Those delays have to be troubling to the faithful; they could spell something disastrous hidden behind the quality trailers. Still, the movie looks pretty good, though don’t expect a lot of box office glory for this one.

Witless Protection is about… oh, who the hell cares? This piece of crap stars Larry the Cable Guy, which means you know it’s going to suck, and Jenny McCarthy doesn’t add much sense of quality, either. Hopefully this one fades quickly.

The Signal opens in limited theaters, and will appeal to horror fans if they are “lucky” enough to get a chance to see it. The limited release is concerning, and the plot screams Japanese horror rip-off, a genre that has all but died (thankfully).

View more movies currently playing in theaters.