Yesterday Variety reported that Godzilla will returning to theaters in 2012 in a film produced by Legendary Pictures and Warner Brothers.
As you may recall, even if you don't want to, this is not the first time that an American Godzilla has been attempted. Mathew Broderick went up against the monster in Sony's 1998 flop attempt at a Godzilla movie.
According to the Variety, Legendary has stated that they will stay true to the original monster and distance themselves from the 1998 film.
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Monday, March 29, 2010
Sit right back…
It is one of those things we all knew had to happen eventually.
Perhaps sparked by the success of its clear spiritual successor,
“Lost,” the original group of castaways is coming back to the big
screen. By this I am obviously referring to the “Gilligan’s Island”
film expected to hit theaters in July 2011. This potential shipwreck
was announced earlier this month.
Producer Sherwood Schwartz, producer on the new film and creator of the original series (who is still kicking around at age 93. 93!), has hand picked his top choice for Gilligan. Michale Cera. Ugh... I'm looking forward to "Scott Pilgrim vs The World" but I think that I've watched Michale Cera play the bumbling idiot more then enough times. Getting old. I would use Martin Starr as the title character. Schwartz has his eye on Beyoncé Knowles as Ginger. No complaints on that one. Skipper in my mind would be Patrick Warburton.
This is not the first time we have seen the castaways since the series ended in 1967. The series was followed by two animated series and three made for tv movies.
In one of the animated series the castaways ended up stranded on an alien planet! Yep, interstellar travel is no problem, but fix a hole in a boat? You're crazy!
I want to see that movie!
The made for TV films tell the story of the castaways after being rescued an starting a resort on the island.
I think the only way to make this movie work is to make it campy as possible. Like the "Brady Bunch" movies, or "Starsky and Hutch." It needs that pure silliness to keep the audience from wondering how it is they never manage to get off the island, much like in the original show.
Most of the episodes revolved around getting off the island, which would need to be a major part of the film, but there would also need to be a villain. The original show didn't have too many antagonists. The occasional island native, and the rotating cast of characters that would periodically pop on the island and then leave. In a film... maybe pirates, or an evil land developer. Eh... that needs a little more thought...
Perhaps sparked by the success of its clear spiritual successor,
“Lost,” the original group of castaways is coming back to the big
screen. By this I am obviously referring to the “Gilligan’s Island”
film expected to hit theaters in July 2011. This potential shipwreck
was announced earlier this month.
Producer Sherwood Schwartz, producer on the new film and creator of the original series (who is still kicking around at age 93. 93!), has hand picked his top choice for Gilligan. Michale Cera. Ugh... I'm looking forward to "Scott Pilgrim vs The World" but I think that I've watched Michale Cera play the bumbling idiot more then enough times. Getting old. I would use Martin Starr as the title character. Schwartz has his eye on Beyoncé Knowles as Ginger. No complaints on that one. Skipper in my mind would be Patrick Warburton.
This is not the first time we have seen the castaways since the series ended in 1967. The series was followed by two animated series and three made for tv movies.
In one of the animated series the castaways ended up stranded on an alien planet! Yep, interstellar travel is no problem, but fix a hole in a boat? You're crazy!
I want to see that movie!
The made for TV films tell the story of the castaways after being rescued an starting a resort on the island.
I think the only way to make this movie work is to make it campy as possible. Like the "Brady Bunch" movies, or "Starsky and Hutch." It needs that pure silliness to keep the audience from wondering how it is they never manage to get off the island, much like in the original show.
Most of the episodes revolved around getting off the island, which would need to be a major part of the film, but there would also need to be a villain. The original show didn't have too many antagonists. The occasional island native, and the rotating cast of characters that would periodically pop on the island and then leave. In a film... maybe pirates, or an evil land developer. Eh... that needs a little more thought...
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Does anyone else distinctly remember Marmaduke NOT talking?
I know Mazur does.
The new trailer for the big screen adaptation of "Marmaduke," starring Own Wilson as the main dog, was released with "How to Train Your Dragon" over the weekend. Take a look at the trailer:
"Marmaduke" is based on the long running newspaper comic strip about a Great Dane and the havoc he causes for his owners. The Marmaduke comic strip is mostly written as one panel jokes, with no real story ever being told.
http://comics.com/marmaduke/
Looks like the Marmaduke film will largely revolve around sight gags. In the trailer we see things like “Mamrmaduke rides a surf board,” “Marmaduke hurts the cat (Geroge Lopez),” and “Marmaduke knocks down the owner’s new boss (William H. Macy).” Pretty standard “big dog” type of jokes, like what you would see in the Scooby Doo movies.
Despite the fact the fact that Marmaduke never talks in the comics, this film uses the “Animals-Can-Talk-to-Each-Other” convention. The script is reported to revolve around the tension between the mutts and purebred dogs. It looks like the main villain will be a purebred dog played by "24" star Kiefer Sutherland. That being said, it is fairly clear that this film is a commentary on the constant turf war that goes on between the gangs in Southern California.
Or, not.
This movie is a way for Mom and Dad to keep the kids distracted for an hour an a half. As far as that standard is concerned (a particularly low bar), this movie should be fine.
Slapping a familiar name onto a project is an easy way to get butts into seats. Mom and dad take the brood out to the movies to keep them happy for a night, they are much more likely to go for a name they recognize than something where they won’t know what to expect. So the studios slaps together a family friendly project about a big dog, puts Marmaduke’s name on it and BAM! Moderate success is achieved. Things like this will remain money makers for studios as long as there are parents who need to something to keep the kids distracted for any length of time.
Also, since they are catering to such a young audience, who only understands the very basics of story structure, the studio can pass off old standard plot lines with out much need to try jazzing it up. In this case we are seeing the underdog type story in the fight with the purebreds, and I suspect a story line that will play out as “By virtue of being a big dumb dog I, Marmaduke, have made some situation very difficult for my owners. All seems lost, but at the last moment I will do something unexpected and it saves the day!”
This one looks pretty bad, and I for one am not going to go see this it. But as I am pretty far removed from the target audience I am not fit judge its quality. I think the best people to pass judgment on this piece of cinema will be the seven year olds who end up sitting through it. I bet they will love it, and I’m not going to ruin it be telling them what I really think. Not that they would care. Also, I don’t know any seven year olds.
The new trailer for the big screen adaptation of "Marmaduke," starring Own Wilson as the main dog, was released with "How to Train Your Dragon" over the weekend. Take a look at the trailer:
"Marmaduke" is based on the long running newspaper comic strip about a Great Dane and the havoc he causes for his owners. The Marmaduke comic strip is mostly written as one panel jokes, with no real story ever being told.
http://comics.com/marmaduke/
Looks like the Marmaduke film will largely revolve around sight gags. In the trailer we see things like “Mamrmaduke rides a surf board,” “Marmaduke hurts the cat (Geroge Lopez),” and “Marmaduke knocks down the owner’s new boss (William H. Macy).” Pretty standard “big dog” type of jokes, like what you would see in the Scooby Doo movies.
Despite the fact the fact that Marmaduke never talks in the comics, this film uses the “Animals-Can-Talk-to-Each-Other” convention. The script is reported to revolve around the tension between the mutts and purebred dogs. It looks like the main villain will be a purebred dog played by "24" star Kiefer Sutherland. That being said, it is fairly clear that this film is a commentary on the constant turf war that goes on between the gangs in Southern California.
Or, not.
This movie is a way for Mom and Dad to keep the kids distracted for an hour an a half. As far as that standard is concerned (a particularly low bar), this movie should be fine.
Slapping a familiar name onto a project is an easy way to get butts into seats. Mom and dad take the brood out to the movies to keep them happy for a night, they are much more likely to go for a name they recognize than something where they won’t know what to expect. So the studios slaps together a family friendly project about a big dog, puts Marmaduke’s name on it and BAM! Moderate success is achieved. Things like this will remain money makers for studios as long as there are parents who need to something to keep the kids distracted for any length of time.
Also, since they are catering to such a young audience, who only understands the very basics of story structure, the studio can pass off old standard plot lines with out much need to try jazzing it up. In this case we are seeing the underdog type story in the fight with the purebreds, and I suspect a story line that will play out as “By virtue of being a big dumb dog I, Marmaduke, have made some situation very difficult for my owners. All seems lost, but at the last moment I will do something unexpected and it saves the day!”
This one looks pretty bad, and I for one am not going to go see this it. But as I am pretty far removed from the target audience I am not fit judge its quality. I think the best people to pass judgment on this piece of cinema will be the seven year olds who end up sitting through it. I bet they will love it, and I’m not going to ruin it be telling them what I really think. Not that they would care. Also, I don’t know any seven year olds.
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Jamie Foxx's Lavern and Shirley?
According to a TV Guide interview with Lavern and Shirley creator Gary Marshall, actor Jamie Foxx is slated to write a film adaptation of the 1970s/80s TV series. The film will feature Jennifer Garner and Jessica Biel in the title roles. The film would update the characters to have a more urban feel. Lavern would have a big "L" tattoo to replace her set of monogrammed sweaters.
Nope. I'm not buying it.
Although so far the article I have been able to find denouncing the film as a fake is this one over at Gossip Cop: http://www.gossipcop.com/jamie-foxx-laverne-shirley-movie-jessica-biel-jennifer-garner-garry-marshall/
Personaly I think this is an April Fools joke, possibly created to stir interest in the film Valentine's Day (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0817230/) which starred Foxx, Beil, and Garner and was written by Marshall. It was out of theaters pretty fast and I suspect that the studio wants to make up for its losses on the back end.
If this makes it to the screen... I'll be very surprised.
Nope. I'm not buying it.
Although so far the article I have been able to find denouncing the film as a fake is this one over at Gossip Cop: http://www.gossipcop.com/jamie-foxx-laverne-shirley-movie-jessica-biel-jennifer-garner-garry-marshall/
Personaly I think this is an April Fools joke, possibly created to stir interest in the film Valentine's Day (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0817230/) which starred Foxx, Beil, and Garner and was written by Marshall. It was out of theaters pretty fast and I suspect that the studio wants to make up for its losses on the back end.
If this makes it to the screen... I'll be very surprised.
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Honestly I didn't expect this much material this quickly...
Popeye is getting a revamp as a 3D animated feature.
Jamie Foxx is writing a feature film based on... wait for it... Laverne and Shirley.
A release date has been set for Scream 4, 4/15/2011.
And Will Smith (dad of the star of the upcoming Karate Kid remake) is set to give us an update to 80's classic Overboard.
I'm honestly not sure where to start. Man I'm glad I checked Ain't It Cool before Lost came on.
More on all this soon...
Jamie Foxx is writing a feature film based on... wait for it... Laverne and Shirley.
A release date has been set for Scream 4, 4/15/2011.
And Will Smith (dad of the star of the upcoming Karate Kid remake) is set to give us an update to 80's classic Overboard.
I'm honestly not sure where to start. Man I'm glad I checked Ain't It Cool before Lost came on.
More on all this soon...
Monday, March 22, 2010
Addams Family + Tim Burton = Good Idea?
Tim Burton, fresh off of his update to Alice in Wonderland, is now reportedly setting his sights on an revamp of The Addams Family. I tried to find solid information on Burton’s webpage ( http://www.timburton.com/ ) , but it seems to only contain information about his upcoming book of illustrations and art for his past projects. Looks like a solid edition to the coffee table of any home, yet not what I was looking for. So this report comes from a lot of internet speculation.
The buzz is that the new film will be a stop motion production and in 3D. The main source material is expected to be the original New Yorker one panel cartoons produced by Charles Addams. Although, I suspect that it will still draw heavily from the original television series from the 1960s and the films released in the 1990s, as the original cartoons provided very little context or characterization. There were also several animated series, and a second live action series dubbed “The New Addams Family.” I somehow doubt that these adaptations will have anything to do with the proposed new film.
The Addams Family has also been adapted as a Broadway musical which opened this year ( http://www.theaddamsfamilymusical.com ), currently staring Nathan Lane and Bebe Neuwirth (I love Bebe Neuwirth, just wanted to say). There is no indication that I could find as of now if this adaptation will have anything to do with the film. I think probably not.
Stop motion animation is seen fairly infrequently now a days. Burton has had his hand in two creepy stop motion films before, holiday classic The Nightmare Before Christmas, and the less acclaimed but still well reviewed Corpse Bride.
I’m honestly not a huge fan of Tim Burton’s lately. The last film of his that I really enjoyed was Big Fish. I liked 9 and Sweeny Todd well enough but they did not stick with me like Nightmare Before Christmas or Beetlejuice. But, if someone is going to update the Addams Family I think he is the right person for it. He has the right sense of creepiness and silliness that I think the film will need. Also, the overall style and tone of the series lends it self to his aesthetic choices.
I think he would do well to choose a leading man that is not Johnny Depp and leading woman that is not Helena Bonham Carter, otherwise the film could just be a reprise of Corpse Bride.
With all adaptations I am apprehensive, but I think this has potential. And clearly, The Addams Family has been adapted for film successfully in the past, so I can not say that it won’t work. I am interested to see where this project goes.
The buzz is that the new film will be a stop motion production and in 3D. The main source material is expected to be the original New Yorker one panel cartoons produced by Charles Addams. Although, I suspect that it will still draw heavily from the original television series from the 1960s and the films released in the 1990s, as the original cartoons provided very little context or characterization. There were also several animated series, and a second live action series dubbed “The New Addams Family.” I somehow doubt that these adaptations will have anything to do with the proposed new film.
The Addams Family has also been adapted as a Broadway musical which opened this year ( http://www.theaddamsfamilymusical.com ), currently staring Nathan Lane and Bebe Neuwirth (I love Bebe Neuwirth, just wanted to say). There is no indication that I could find as of now if this adaptation will have anything to do with the film. I think probably not.
Stop motion animation is seen fairly infrequently now a days. Burton has had his hand in two creepy stop motion films before, holiday classic The Nightmare Before Christmas, and the less acclaimed but still well reviewed Corpse Bride.
I’m honestly not a huge fan of Tim Burton’s lately. The last film of his that I really enjoyed was Big Fish. I liked 9 and Sweeny Todd well enough but they did not stick with me like Nightmare Before Christmas or Beetlejuice. But, if someone is going to update the Addams Family I think he is the right person for it. He has the right sense of creepiness and silliness that I think the film will need. Also, the overall style and tone of the series lends it self to his aesthetic choices.
I think he would do well to choose a leading man that is not Johnny Depp and leading woman that is not Helena Bonham Carter, otherwise the film could just be a reprise of Corpse Bride.
With all adaptations I am apprehensive, but I think this has potential. And clearly, The Addams Family has been adapted for film successfully in the past, so I can not say that it won’t work. I am interested to see where this project goes.
Friday, March 19, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)