Quantcast
Channel: Flickering Myth
Viewing all 7138 articles
Browse latest View live

Thoughtful Words: A Glimpse Inside the Mind of Roman Coppola

$
0
0
Trevor Hogg chats with Roman Coppola about his Oscar lauded family, Moonrise Kingdom and his latest cinematic offering A Glimpse Inside the Mind of Charles Swan III...


The Coppola Family: Roman, Eleanor, Francis Ford and Sophia
When the 2013 Academy Awards come around Roman Coppola has an opportunity of joining his grandfather Carmine, father Francis Ford, sister Sophia, and cousin Nicolas Cage in making an acceptance speech.  “It’s rare that we’ll talk about movies in the abstract though nowadays what happens is during the holidays all the screeners come from the various guilds and the Academy,” replies Roman Coppola when asked whether films are a topic of conversation during family gatherings.  “Around Christmas time we’ll have a movie marathon and there will be a lot of conversation about the movies that we’re watching; that has become in recent years a little bit of a tradition.”  As for getting some fatherly advice from the man responsible for The Conversation (1974), The Godfather Trilogy (1972, 1974, 1990) and Apocalypse Now (1979), Coppola remarks,  My dad likes to read a lot.  He’s always talking about what’s on his mind; there’s always so much to learn in terms of stuff in life, not so much practical things about movies but that can be part of the conversation.  My dad has a lot of advice and understands movies deeply; he believes that a director should always stand close to the camera and that performers get a special connection with you when you’re right there.  That’s a little bit of advice I put into my film CQ [2001].  My dad understands there’s an obsession on movie sets where something isn’t quite in continuity. ‘He used his left hand not his right hand.’  He’s blasé about adhering to that; he believes that you should match upwards meaning make it better rather than saying, ‘I can’t do that because that’s not the way they did it in the other shot.’ Forget continuity and make it better; he has a lot of little nuggets of things like that.”  Sophia Coppola, who won an Oscar for writing the script for Lost in Translation (2003), helped motivate her brother to pursue an independent and personal approach to filmmaking.  “Sophia is so in touch with who she is through her work that’s inspiring to see her movies.   Sophia does what she thinks is right which is often her own unique take on things.  ‘Hey, I’m going to do it the way I think it should be done.’  With my movie [A Glimpse Inside the Mind of Charles Swan III] when I showed it to her and other friends they all said, ‘This movie is so you.’  I thought, ‘Wow!  I’m doing something right and that was what I was hoping for.’”


Roman Coppola, Jared Gilman, Kara Hayward and Wes Anderson
A creative partnership with Wes Anderson (Fantastic Mr. Fox) has led Roman Coppola to receive a co-nomination for Best Original Screenplay at the Academy Awards for Moonrise Kingdom (2012).  “We’ve gotten to know each other over the years and initially we met through Kit Carson [Paris, Texas] who’s a mentor for a lot of filmmakers. Bobby Yeoman [Bridesmaids] is a mutual colleague that Wes and I share, and of course Jason [Schwartzman] has appeared in Rushmore [1998].  We had become friends and during Life Aquatic [2004] it so happened that I was able to be helpful and do so some second unit.  Slowly over the years we’re finding more rapport and reasons to do things with one another.  Doing Moonrise Kingdom together was an incredible experience; it has been appreciated by so many people and it’s fun to see that happen.”  The story of two young campers (Jared Gilman, Kara Hayward) who run off together stars Bruce Willis (Die Hard), Edward Norton (Fight Club),  Bill Murray (Groundhog Day), Frances McDormand (Fargo), Tilda Swinton (Michael Clayton), and Jason Schwartzman (Scott Pilgrim vs. the World) has resonated with film critics.  “It’s hard to say,” remarks Coppola as he contemplates what has made the movie so appealing.   “I would be speculating but it is made with a lot of sincerity and heart.  It’s a genuine tale.  It’s about young love and that’s sensation of falling in love when you’re an adolescent; people relate to that and obviously it’s a wonderful cast that embodies all of those roles.  It’s mysterious. There are a lot of movies that don’t click that are wonderful movies.  I’m very happy that it has.”


A Glimpse Inside the Mind of Charles Swan III (2012) features Charlie Sheen (Platoon) as a 1970s graphic designer who experiences a mental crisis after his girlfriend (Katheryn Winnick) breaks up with him.  It definitely came out of a personal experience of having broken up with someone and so those feelings that I was feeling and the mindset I was in – very dazzled and your brain gets on a roller coaster.   I thought that would be an interesting starting point for a movie. Working on the film and all the time it took, because it took several years to figure it all out, definitely by the end of it I had certainly evolved past the breakup I had experienced.  All I can say is that it had something to do with it but it’s less about that.  It’s more about being excited about telling an interesting story.”  The story evolved.  “The spirit of it is there,” he observes.   “Frankly I’m delighted with the way I was able to do it.  It was much more homemade and different than what I expected.”  The dream sequences such as being hunted by beautiful native girls led by the ex-girlfriend or being bombed by  the Secret Society of Ball Busters as well as Sheen driving a car which is painted with fried eggs on one side and bacon on the other is not extension of the quirky screenwriting style developed with Wes Anderson.  “It’s hard for me to see that.  On the surface [the casting of] Jason and Bill [Murray] perhaps give a feeling of connection.”  Mary Elizabeth Winstead (The Thing) is also cast in the picture.   “She’s fantastic.  I love her.  There are certain people who you meet and as soon as you meet them you feel like that you’re going to have a long friendship or have a deep connection.  I thought she was so great and loved meeting her.”


With all the publicity surrounding Charlie Sheen and his departure from Two and a Half Men, Roman Coppola was not concerned of it having an adverse effect on the production.  I didn’t think about that at all.  I thought about how talented he is as an actor and how much I thought he could do a great job in the role so to me it was the thrill to think, ‘Wow!  I’ve got such a great and perfect person to portray this role.’  I’m proud of what he did.”  The American moviemaker is proud of a particular cinematic moment.  “There was a sequence in the hospital scene where Bill Murray and Charlie are discussing his shabby finances and it’s all done in one take.  It was fun to block that out and I operated the camera.  I used a particular dolly for my film, an Elimac; it’s Italian made.  Some people would think it archaic but I think it’s a great tool.  I couldn’t have done that shot without that exact tool.  I bought the dolly on eBay and it made the shot happen for me. The intimacy of being in the room with those two actors riding the dolly and seeing it all unfold is a wonderful memory.”  The writer-director admires the talent of Bill Murray.    “It is hard to describe.  Bill is so larger than life.  He’s a tall guy.  When Bill enters a room it glows with his presence.  He is so funny.”  Coppola observes, “For me, my film Charles Swan III is far out and crazy in it’s way and I feel that sometimes when something is a little off it’s rocker, a little weird that people can be guarded at first and feel like, ‘Wait.  Am I interested in this?’  I hope people can go with it and judge it after they have experienced it rather than before; that would be a wonderful lucky break if I had that opportunity.”


Many thanks to Roman Coppola for taking the time for this interview.

To learn more, visit the official Facebook page for A Glimpse Inside the Mind of Charles Swan III.

Trevor Hogg is a freelance video editor and writer who currently resides in Canada.

The Amazing Spider-Man 2 synopsis revealed, Colm Feore joins the cast

$
0
0
Andrew Garfield The Amazing Spider-Man
Columbia Pictures has officially announced that filming is now underway on the Marc Webb-directed superhero sequel The Amazing Spider-Man 2, as well as revealing that Colm Feore (Thor) has joined the cast in an as-yet-unspecified role (Norman Osborn, perhaps?).

Feore will appear alongside the returning Andrew Garfield (Peter Parker / Spider-Man), Emma Stone (Gwen Stacy) and Sally Field (Aunt May), while other newcomers to the cast include Jamie Foxx (Django Unchained) as Electro, Paul Giamatti (Sideways) as Rhino, Dane DeHaan (Chronicle) as Harry Osborn and Shailene Woodley (The Descendants) as Mary Jane Watson.

Here's the official synopsis for The Amazing Spider-Man 2:

"In The Amazing Spider-Man 2, for Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield), life is busy – between taking out the bad guys as Spider-Man and spending time with the person he loves, Gwen (Emma Stone), high school graduation can’t come quickly enough. Peter hasn’t forgotten about the promise he made to Gwen’s father to protect her by staying away – but that’s a promise he just can’t keep. Things will change for Peter when a new villain, Electro (Jamie Foxx), emerges, an old friend, Harry Osborn (Dane DeHaan), returns, and Peter uncovers new clues about his past."

The Amazing Spider-Man 2 is set to swing into cinemas on May 2nd, 2014.

How J.J. Abrams' Star Wars Film Will Look

$
0
0
The very funny folk over at Something Awful have put together a few imaginings of what J.J. Abrams' new Star Wars film might look like. They mostly involve either lens flare or members of the cast of Lost...







That opening text scroll is going to be really difficult to read...

An Honest Trailer for Skyfall

$
0
0
Screen Junkies have posted their latest 'honest trailer', and this time round they've tackled Skyfall, which is, kind of, you know... blasphemy.


It's a tough watch, because they point out a lot of flaws that were glossed over by Bond's awesomeness. Why, for instance, didn't the train driver stop once the back carriage was ripped to shreds? That's a logic hole almost as deep-set as 007's drinking problem.

But overall it's definitely worth it. If only for the Judi Dench 'frown montage' and their billing of her as 'Lindsay Lohan'...

Comic Book Review - Transformers Spotlight: Megatron

$
0
0
Luke Owen reviews Transformers Spotlight: Megatron...

Transformers Spotlight MegatronMEGATRON IS BACK! Writer/artist Nick Roche (Last Stand of the Wreckers) takes us back to the last time MEGATRON returned—when he found his DECEPTICON forces in tatters under the control of STARSCREAM. In this never-before-revealed tale, we learn exactly how Megatron reacted… and how Starscream survived!

Taking place before the events of Transformers Volume 3: Revenge of the Decepticons, Transformers Spotlight: Megatron tells the detailed thoughts and visions of the fearsome Megatron as he returns from the dead once again. Finding the Decepticons in tattered ruins thanks to Starscream’s pathetic rule, Megatron seeks to bring back his team back to their once brilliant dominance – and punish Starscream for his failings.

I’ve said in recent times that IDWs Transformers series tends to pique highly with Transformers: Robots in Disguise before hitting lower levels with Transformers: More Than Meets The Eye. The Spotlight series however has always found a middle ground where some issues are fantastic and some issues feel like a waste of your hard earned money. Transformers Spotlight: Megatron is one of those issues which reinstalls the faith that some of us have lost in the Transformers franchise. To put it bluntly, it’s great.

One thing that every writer has always got right with Transformers series (even in the Michael Bay atrocities) is Megatron. For some reason, he is the easiest character to get right and Nick Roche has here given another example of how great this character can be. From the opening panels we are treated to wonderfully written conscience thoughts of the man himself as he reveals how he once led the Decepticons to their success. He reveals his inner thoughts about the always reliable Soundwave and Shockwave and how he will never give them the recognition they deserve as it will only make them work harder to get it. It’s a wonderful insight into the mind of a crazy genius.

But of course the big draw into this issue is the showdown between the newly revived Megatron and the down-on-his-luck Starscream. While I don’t think it’s a knock-out delivery, it is a fun read. The chase around the Decepticon stronghold does offer up chances for more excellent Megatron thoughts, but Starscream’s acceptance for death is overplayed and becomes overly saturated. I would have liked to have seen Starscream defend some of his choices, bad though they may have been. We do get an explosion of emotion from his towards the end but it doesn’t match up to the verbal torture that Megatron has been giving him all issue.

However at the end of the day this is Megatron’s comic and he has a fantastic run in it. His dialogue is fabulous and his angry jibes at Starscream are fantastic. His belittling of one of his most untrustworthy of foes is a joy to read and it builds to a brilliant climax where he reveals just why he let him survive.

Luke Owen is one of the co-editors of Flickering Myth and the host of the Flickering Myth Podcast. You can follow him on Twitter @CGLuke_o.

Comic Book Review - Transformers: More Than Meets The Eye #13

$
0
0
Luke Owen reviews Transformers: More Than Meets The Eye #13...

SHORE LEAVE! The AUTOBOTS visit the planet Hedonia—and get a chance to put recent events behind them, ingest some energon, and relax. Everyone, that is, except Swerve, who faces the toughest challenge of his life: in just six hours, he has to teach Ultra Magnus how to have fun.

I think it’s fair to say that I was quite harsh on the Issue #12 of Transformers: More Than Meets The Eye. Some comments made about my review claimed that I was “stupid” and that it was a review from “Bizarro World”. I still stand by my comments that James Roberts is not writing the best Transformers series going at the moment and this issue backs up my argument. It’s pretty pointless, badly paced, wacky and all-over lousy. But do you know what, I kind of liked it.

I still take issue with artwork mostly down to the colouring by Josh Burcham and Joana Lafuente. They just seem to choose boring block colour schemes with bland greens, uninviting purples and hideous yellows. Even Ultra Magnus, famed for being a red, white and blue Transformer, is coloured here to be varying degrees of turquoise in what I guess are supposed to be lighting effects. Guido Guidi’s art is a little better than we’ve previously seen but it’s let down by seemingly rushed colouring.

But despite its unappealing look, Transformers: More Than Meets The Eye #13 is a bizarrely fun comic. It’s such an interesting idea to take the Transformers on “shore leave” and see them go to a bar to kick back. The story focuses on the over-enthusiastic Swerve who has been tasked by Rodimus Prime to exert some life back into the rule book focused Ultra Magnus. It plays as a flashback as Swerve relays the story to Blurr (who he plans on opening a bar with) which does give the narrative the pace I felt was missing from the previous issue. It’s quite an enjoyable little tale and does have a great payoff at the end that puts into question the price of fandom, but overall it does feel like a placeholder issue while not a lot else is happening. There is a reveal towards the end between Cyclonus and Tailgate, but it’s nothing that you’d need to buy the comic for in order not to miss out.

I may get more flak for this but I still don’t like the More Than Meets The Eye series, despite quite liking this issue. There is quite a lot wrong with it, but the endearing quality of Swerve coupled with Ultra Magnus’ negativity make for a nice balance that comes with a good ending. It could be one to miss out on, but you won’t regret picking it up if you do.

Luke Owen is one of the co-editors of Flickering Myth and the host of the Flickering Myth Podcast. You can follow him on Twitter @CGLuke_o.

Second Opinion - Flight (2012)

$
0
0
Flight, 2012.

Directed by Robert Zemeckis.
Starring Denzel Washington, Don Cheadle, Melissa Leo, Kelly Reilly, Bruce Greenwood and John Goodman.

Flight movie poster
 
SYNOPSIS:

A pilot comes under scrutiny after his plane malfunctions and he is miraculously able to safely land it.


I went in to Flight knowing very little and certainly got more than I expected.  What I was expecting was a story of a pilot being wrongfully accused of the crash of his passenger jet, but what transpires is a much deeper story about addiction.

Denzel Washington plays Whip Whittaker a passenger pilot, and whilst there is an undeniably likable charisma about him he is a character you will hate for much of the proceedings.  The film opens on the morning of a flight, Whip has been on an epic drinking binge and continues to drink and use drugs.  Even whilst on the flight itself.  From this point, Whip has to do a lot to win back your affection, which begins shortly when his plane malfunctions and plummets in a nose dive to the ground.  Whip shows incredible skills to be able to bring the plane under control and safely direct it out of harms way resulting in 6 deaths of the 102 passengers and crew, leading to an investigation of the crash which reveals Whip's illegal activities and his lawyers attempts to make sure he avoids jail time.

Denzel Washington is absolutely fantastic - and my pick for the Best Actor Oscar - as he portrays the troubled and unwilling to accept he has a problem Whip.  Refusing all offers of help as he can "quit anytime" he wants he tells himself, Whip repeatedly fails to give up drinking.  Eventually Whip is forced to betray someone he cared about with yet another lie, or to finally tell the truth and save his soul.  The journey in between I found fascinating, as the film never tries to make you sympathise with Whip - you do but that is largely down to the charisma Denzel brings to the role.  Throughout my thoughts were on wanting to see Whip get what he deserved and I thought the film created an intriguing juxtaposition between wanting Whip to be able to move forward and quit but also wanting to see him punished for his endangering of peoples lives.

As I've said a large part of feeling for Whip comes from the charm that exudes from Denzel, however despite being intoxicated during the flight, Whip is able to pull off a miracle feat when he is able to take control of the plane during its malfunction.  The effects and camera direction from Zemeckis are incredible.  He makes it feel as though you are right there in the cockpit with them as every bump and turn can be felt from your cinema seat.  It was a real visceral experience as whilst I'm not afraid of flying, I'm certainly not always at ease during even the slightest of turbulence.

The problem with Flight was despite an enigmatic lead there are no supporting characters which are interesting.  Kelly Reilly, as recovering drug addict Nicole, whose story intertwines with Whip's is not all that interesting.  It is nice to see her be able to deal with her problems so well but we aren't really given a reason to care about her enough and she doesn't seem to struggle too much with her addiction to begin with.  Don Cheadle, as Whip's lawyer, is fine, but there's not really too much to the character to be a great addition to the story.  And what is some of the worst acting at times that I've seen in a while, Bruce Greenwood descends in to some over the top, unbelievable irate emotion from time to time.

Going back to Whip, I liked the story that was presented and played out.  It's an interesting take on the guilt and lies that an addict deals with and the demons within.  Rather than getting cliched and 'soppy', Flight doesn't try to make you fall in love with him, it simply shows you what it is like to be an addict, and why lies and deceit cannot go unpunished if people are to to turn themselves around.

Flickering Myth Rating: Film ★ ★ ★  / Movie ★ ★ ★ ★ 

Martin Deer

Game of Thrones creator George R.R. Martin signs new HBO deal

$
0
0
George R.R. Martin
According to Deadline, American author George R.R. Martin has signed a new two-year deal with HBO, which will see him continue to serve as co-executive producer on Game of Thrones, as well as developing and producing new series projects for the cable network.

Martin is of course the creator of the fantasy epic A Song of Ice and Fire, on which the acclaimed television series Game of Thrones is based, while his screen credits include several episodes of HBO's flagship fantasy series, along with episodes of Deadly Nightmares, The Twilight Zone and Beauty and the Beast, along with the 1993 TV movie Doorways. The news that Martin has signed a new TV deal may prove concerning to fans of A Song of Ice and Fire, who now seemingly face an even lengthier wait for the final two instalments in the book series, The Winds of Winter and A Dream of Spring.

Game of Thrones is set to return for its third season on HBO on March 31st, with an enormous ensemble cast that includes Peter Dinklage, Lena Headey, Nikolaj Coster-Waldau, Charles Dance, Emilia Clarke, Jack Gleeson, Kit Harington, Richard Madden, Maisie Wiliams, Michelle Fairley, Sophie Turner, Stephan Dillane, Rose Leslie, Carice van Houten, Ciaran Hinds, Clive Russell, Thomas Brodie Sangster, Mackenzie Crook and Diana Rigg.

Clancy Brown attends World Premiere of LEGO Batman: The Movie

$
0
0
Having already voiced Lex Luther for Superman: The Animated Series, Justice League/Justice League Unlimited and Superman/Batman: Public Enemies (2009), Clancy Brown - better known as the brutal prison guard Captain Hadley in The Shawshank Redemption (1994) - has done so again for LEGO Batman: The Movie – DC Super Heroes Unite.  Brown will be attending the World Premiere of the latest  animated offering involving  The Dark Knight and the Last Son of Krypton on February 11, 2013  at The Paley Center for Media in New York.

Based on the popular video, the synopsis for LEGO Batman: The Movie – DC Super Heroes Unite reads:

Lex Luthor takes jealousy to new heights when fellow billionaire Bruce Wayne wins the Man of the Year Award. To top Wayne’s accomplishment, Lex begins a campaign for President – and to create the atmosphere for his type of fear-based politics, he recruits the Joker to perfect a Black LEGO Destructor Ray. While wreaking havoc on Gotham, Lex successfully destroys Batman's technology – forcing the Caped Crusader to reluctantly turn to Superman for help. 

After the screening Clancy Brown will be part of a discussion panel which includes TT Animation’s award-winning director/producer Jon Burton and director of photography Jeremy Pardon, and videogame/animation actors Troy Baker (Bioshock Infinite, Batman: Arkham City) as Batman and Travis Willingham (Avengers Assemble, The Super Hero Squad Show) as Superman.

For those in the media who want to conduct interviews and attend the premieres they must RSVP via email to WHVRSVP@gmail.com and list the name and email of those covering the event, and the name and/or URL of the media outlet. Still available are a limited number of "first come, first serve" free tickets for fans who can RSVP via email to LegoBatmanTheMovie@gmail.com.

Special Features - At Great Length: Are Movies Getting Needlessly Longer?

$
0
0
Anghus Houvouras asks whether movies are getting needlessly longer...

"No good movie is too long and no bad movie is short enough." - Roger Ebert

A very apt statement, and yet I feel like modern filmmakers are challenging this concept.  I've been in a number of conversations this year over the sheer length of so many films.  And I suppose that begs the question:

Are movies getting needlessly longer?

It's a difficult question to answer.  I have to admit I'm squarely in the camp of people who think there have been a lot of recent releases that feel indulgent to a fault.  Over the next dozen paragraphs or so I will try to examine the ever expanding run times of high profile films hitting the theaters.  First up, the film that started this entire conversation:
Django Unchained (165 Minutes)

Django Unchained is a prime example of a movie that felt longer than necessary.  Be warned.  There be spoilers ahead.

I'm a Tarantino enthusiast.  And there isn't a filmmaker working today who seems so comfortable with excess.  The man is a master of making over indulgent, highly entertaining romps.  And yet, Django Unchained felt 20 minutes too long.  I found myself struggling with the film after the Candieland shootout which saw poor Schultz killed and Django trying to shoot his way out.  After a very satisfying two hours I found myself thinking I was at the end of this journey, and then... he gives himself up. 

What follows is an entertaining little monologue from Samuel L. Jackson, followed by an excruciating scene between Django and some Australian workers, then an underwhelming final scene of Django exacting revenge against the remaining survivors of the earlier massacre.  Those final scenes felt labored.  Kind of like scenes you'd find in a Director's Cut. You can understand their existence but not their inclusion. 

Was the film better served by having Django use his wits to get out of another jam?  Did the death of Samuel L. Jackson's character provide any additional emotional payoff after watching Candie being dispatched?  If Django had shot his way out of Candieland and saved Broomhilda twenty minutes earlier, would it have been any less satisfying? 

These are subjective arguments.  I'm sure there are those who felt Django wasn't longer than necessary.  For me, I found the film almost awkwardly long in its final 20 minutes.  It was like I had already witnessed the moment where the film should have naturally ended and was now into extra innings.

To be fair, Django Unchained was hardly the only extended film that came out in 2012.  The most abusively long film of the year came from a director who is fast becoming synonymous with bloated run times.

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (201 Minutes)
The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (169 Minutes)
King Kong (187 Minutes)

I have to go back to 2003's Return of the King because it's the movie that seems to be brought up the most often when people discuss padding in film.  The multiple and endless endings that drive some people to distraction.  Peter Jackson has mastered the art of making long films.  The Hobbit is an exercise in unnecessary.  Originally two movies now stretched out to three. The nearly three hour running times seem almost expected with Jackson, who has become Hollywood's number one purveyor of long theatrical releases and even longer extended DVD editions. 

Again, you can debate the necessity of these nearly three hour outings.  The Hobbit felt mercilessly long.  And Jackson's King Kong may be the most overly indulgent, needlessly long film to be released, nearly doubling the originals run time of 100 minutes.  There was so much of King Kong that felt labored taking nearly an hour to get to Skull Island where we get our first glimpse of the monster filled jungles.  Was that much time needed to get to the meat of King Kong?  I mean lets be perfectly honest: if you're going to make a movie about a giant gorilla and make the audience wait an hour before introducing the title character, you may have done something terribly wrong.  Even more wrong than casting Jack Black.

I equate the length of Jackson's films to the lens flares employed by J.J. Abrams: if it's been done so often that it becomes a trademark of your filmmaking, perhaps it's time to try something different.  Or at least ease up.

Was anyone surprised when Jackson started pursuing the idea of turning the 300 page Hobbit into three films?  In my review of the Hobbit I said that it felt like Jackson was no longer making movies with an audience in mind.  Much like the endless endings of Return of the King, Jackson has seemingly abandoned the idea of telling these stories in a traditional three act structure and has instead started applying these filmmaking beats to a nine hour opus.  The endings of Return of the King don't seem long if you apply them to a nine hour film.

By no means am I saying we should punish filmmakers for trying something new or messing with the formula.  However, audiences are used to a traditional two hour film.  Some films are expected to be longer.  That conceit is usually availed to award movies or epic blockbusters.  Few directors understand this better than Steven Spielberg.

Lincoln (150 Minutes)
War Horse (146 Minutes)
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (122 Minutes)
Munich (164 Minutes)
War of the Worlds (116 Minutes)
The Terminal (128 Minutes)
Catch Me If You Can (141 Minutes)
Minority Report (145 Minutes)
A.I. (146 Minutes)
Saving Private Ryan (169 Minutes)
Schindler's List (195 Minutes)

It's probably unfair to single out Jackson as the sole proprietor of needlessly long blockbusters.  Spielberg has been putting out films at the plus two hour mark for the vast majority of his career.  Only two films of his have clocked in at under two hours in decades - one being War of the Worlds, the other the animated The Adventures of Tintin: The Secret of the Unicorn (107 Minutes).   

Spielberg used to be brutally adherent to the two hour mark. 

Jaws (124 Minutes)
Jurassic Park (127 Minutes)
Raiders of the Lost Ark (115 Minutes)
E.T. (115 Minutes)

One could make the argument that he was a better filmmaker when he was limiting himself (or in his earlier days, limited to) two hours.  His four best films were either under or just a hair over two hours.  That's not to say "The Beard" hasn't turned in some quality films in recent years, but there is something to be said for his earlier, leaner films that weren't consistently pushing the two and a half to three hour mark.

Maybe the distinction is between traditional movies and award caliber films.  Few people bemoan the length of a film like Schindler's List or Saving Private Ryan at three hour, while people have no trouble complaining at great length about a three hour movie featuring dwarfs running from wolves and doesn't even end in a single sitting.  

Excessive run times aren't just for dramas and blockbusters anymore.  Some directors are applying this trend to comedy.

This Is 40 (134 Minutes)
Funny People (146 Minutes)
Knocked Up (129 Minutes)
The 40 Year Old Virgin (116 Minutes)

Judd Apatow has taken it on the chin in recent years for making needlessly long and indulgent comedies.  It started out innocently enough with the almost two hour 40 Year Old Virgin.  It was kind of a side note to the well received comedy.  Some critics took note of the almost two hour run time, something that was then out of place for most Hollywood comedies.  Now, four films later, it seems like Apatow is incapable of producing a comedy that clocks in under two hours.   Traditionally comedies are hit-and-run style of movie making that rarely push the two hour mark.  Here's a list of popular comedies:

Caddyshack (98 Minutes)
Animal House (109 Minutes)
Ghostbusters (105 Minutes)
Home Alone (103 Minutes)
Meet the Parents (108 Minutes)
When Harry Met Sally (96 Minutes)

Are you noticing a trend?  All of these classic comedies are nestled in the fertile crescent between an hour and a half and two hours.  It's rare to find a successful comedy that pushes beyond the two hour mark. And yet, Apatow seems incapable of delivering a reasonably timed comedy.  Is it because he thinks the material warrants additional consideration?  Or is it more likely because he's also written the script and has a tough time editing down his own script for the sake of the audience?

Personally, I think excess is the enemy of most filmmakers.  Early in their careers, they have restraint courtesy of their financiers and studios, and people willing to tell them "no".  When they are still capable of being challenged by those helping them produce their films.  To wit, may I present George Lucas.

Star Wars (121 Minutes)
The Empire Strikes Back (124 Minutes)
Return of the Jedi (134 Minutes)

You probably know already where I'm going with this...

The Phantom Menace (136 Minutes)
Attack of the Clones (142 Minutes)
Revenge of the Sith (140 Minutes)

Now lets just concede there are more problems with the Star Wars prequels than the running time. However, it's interesting that Empire is considered the best at a hair over two hours.  Did the extra length hurt the Star Wars prequels?  I think I can safely say it didn't help.

At the heart of this observation is the assertion that filmmakers seem prone to excess.  I'll give you a minute. Obviously that statement has no doubt shaken you to your very core and made you question everything you believe in.  As they progress in their careers, they are afforded more leverage and for some reason they seem more prone to make longer, drawn out films that often don't justify their additional run time.  That used to be an observation you could make on occasion.  Now it seems to be becoming commonplace.    

We've entered an age where filmmakers have seemingly abandoned the principle of 'leave them wanting more' in favor of bloated films desperately in need of having some of the fat trimmed.  

And I'll just go ahead and head this off at the pass now: I'm by no means advocating that movies should be any specific length.  Though I will concede that I find myself wishing that filmmakers would employ more restraint in the editing booth and try to cut the fat.  I also feel that there are very few directors capable of carrying an audience beyond a certain length.  Film is a medium of structure.  Most adhere to a defined set of rules and cadence.  Expanding on that takes skill.  Keeping an audience interested beyond their predetermined expectations is not something easily achieved, and yet it is being employed more and more.  Especially in an age where people's attention spans are being whittled down to a number that can only be measured in nanoseconds.

My point, if any, is that many successful filmmakers bankroll their goodwill into movies with expanded run times.  But are the movies really any better for it?  

You could make the argument that movies like The Avengers, The Hobbit and The Dark Knight Rises proved that audiences are more than willing to sit through a nearly three hour experience.  It's hard to argue the economics.  Still, I felt the second act of The Avengers was bloated.  It seemed like Iron Man was fixing that hellicarrier engine for an hour.  And I think you already know my thoughts on the molasses like pacing of The Hobbit.  I think many would agree that there was fat that could have been trimmed in both those films.  Although I loved The Dark Knight Rises, I did hear a lot of complaints from people about the length of the ending and subsequent epilogues.  Fortunately many film fans are evolved enough to acknowledge a movie can still be enjoyable even if it could benefit from trimming some fat.  As moviegoers, we seem to be growing increasingly tolerant of this excess.  Almost as if it's expected. 

I'm curious to see if anyone else thinks movies are getting needlessly longer...  

Anghus Houvouras

Geoffrey Rush and Emily Watson to star in The Book Thief

$
0
0
Geoffrey Rush (The King's Speech) and Emily Watson (War Horse) will star in an adaptation of The Book Thief at Fox 2000. The best-selling novel, written byMarkus Zusak, is set in Germany during World War II.

French-Canadian actress Sophie Nelisse (Monsieur Lahzar) will make her English-language debut as the central character, Liesel Meminger, who witnesses the horrors of Nazi Germany while living with her foster parents, the Hubermanns (Rush and Watson). Shearrives with a stolen book and begins collecting others, learning to read while the Hubermanns harbor a Jewish refugee called Max in their cellar.

The drama, which is being directed by Brian Percival (Downton Abbey), also starsBen Schnetzer (Happy Town) and Nico Liersch. Karen Rosenfelt and Ken Blancato are producing, and the film is set to begin shooting later this month in Berlin.

Rush recently starred in the European drama The Best Offer, directed by Giuseppe Tornatore (Cinema Paradiso). Watson can next be seen in Some Girl(s) with Kristen Bell and Adam Brody, and Little Boy with Kevin James and Sean Astin.

Disney developing Star Wars spin-offs for Han Solo and Boba Fett

$
0
0
Yesterday, Disney CEO Bob Iger confirmed that the studio is busy developing two standalone Star Wars movies, with Lawrence Kasdan (The Empire Strikes Back) and Simon Kinberg (X-Men: Days of Future Past) both writing separate features which will likely be released during the six-year period that Star Wars EpisodesVII, VIII and IX arrives in cinemas. Preceding Iger's announcement was a report from Harry Knowles of AICN, who suggested that Disney's first non-sequel trilogy Star Wars movie would centre on the Jedi Master Yoda, but now Entertainment Weekly are claiming that the spin-offs will instead focus on two other characters from the Original Trilogy, namely Han Solo and Boba Fett.

According to the site, the Han Solo project would take the form of an origin story, occurring in the time period between Revenge of the Sith and A New Hope and featuring a younger actor taking on the role of the wisecracking smuggler, with scope for Harrison Ford to reprise his role in some kind of framing device. Meanwhile the Boba Fett movie would take place during the Original Trilogy and see the bounty hunter "at the center of a rogue's gallery of galactic scum". Given the settings, both films would of course allow for the return of popular character such as Chewbacca and Jabba the Hutt - not to mention the Dark Lord of the Sith himself, which is sure to tick a lot of boxes for Disney and Lucasfilm's licensing departments...

At this point in time, it's unclear which of the two projects Kasdan and Kinberg are working on, and there's also no word on any possible directors for either of the spin-offs. Of course, Joe Johnston (Captain America: The First Avenger) is sure to be the favourite for the Boba Fett project, considering his relationship with Lucasfilm (not to mention the fact that he's previously stated his desire to make a feature based on the fan-favourite bounty hunter), while Robert Rodriguez (Sin City: A Dame to Kill For) has recently expressed an interest in tackling a Han Solo movie.

Either way, between these two spin-off features and J.J. Abrams' Star Wars: Episode VII, we should probably expect to be inundated with Star Wars rumours and speculation over the coming weeks and months...

Kick-Ass 3 comic book launching in May

$
0
0
Before Aaron Taylor-Johnson brings the masked vigilante Kick-Ass back to the screen in June's movie sequel Kick-Ass 2, the final chapter of Dave Lizewski's costumed crime-fighting career will get underway in comic book form, with a new teaser for Mark Millar and John Romita Jr.'s Kick-Ass 3 revealing that the storyline will begin this coming May. Here's the teaser, courtesy of Bloody Disgusting:


While the plot for Kick-Ass 3 has been kept under wraps, writer Mark Millar has recently hinted at what's in store for the characters whilst discussing the planned film adaptation of the comic book: "Kick-Ass 3 is going to be the last one though. I told Universal this and they asked me, ‘What does that mean?’ I said, ‘It means that this is where it all ends.’ They said, ‘Do they all die at the end?’ I said, ‘Maybe’ – because this is a realistic superhero story. And if someone doesn’t have a bullet proof vest like Superman and doesn’t have Batman’s millions then eventually he is going turn around the wrong corner and get his head kicked in or get shot in the face [laughs]. So Kick-Ass needs to reflect that. There has to be something dramatic at the end, he cannot do this for the rest of his life."

Comic Book Review - Transformers: Prime - Rage of the Dinobots #3

$
0
0
Luke Owen reviews the third chapter of Transformers Prime: Rage of the Dinobots...

SPAWNS OF SHOCKWAVE! The mind-blowing introduction of the DINOBOTS into the PRIME universe continues here! The Dinobots enter the belly of the beast in an attempt to save their comrades. But when SHOCKWAVE's minions turn the tables, GRIMLOCK will have to decide whether to beat them...or join them!

The Transformers: Prime series continues to show signs of greatness with the 3rd part of the Rage of the Dinobots story arch. With Swoop now under the control of Ser-Ket, Grimlock and the rest of the Dinobots must fight not only to escape, but rescue their friend. Shockwave’s appearance is ever looming and Grimlock must face his deepest fear to take down Ser-Ket – himself.

I'm relatively new to the Transformers: Prime universe but only a couple of issues in and I am hooked. The superb artwork from Agustin Padilla is coupled beautifully with Mike Johnson and Mairghread Scott’s suspenseful and wonderfully written story to make this one of the best Transformer comic books out at the moment. As I said in my review for Transformers: More Than Meets The Eye #13, I've received a lot of flak for not liking the series but when I read great comics like this I feel more justified in my disappointment of More Than Meets The Eye. This is a fantastic story well told with vibrant colours and explosive art – everything that comic series isn't.

The genius of the comic lies in its suspense. Grimlock has to take down Ser-Ket and the only way he can do that is to give into his primal urges – that of his beast mode. When Grimlock enters that stage, just like Bruce Banner, he cannot control it. Thus we are given the emotional struggle of a man (or machine) that has to find out what lengths he will go to save one of his fellow Dinobots. It’s incredibly gripping and it will have you racing from panel to panel to find out where the story goes. It almost feels like a shame that you don’t get to take in all of the intricate details of Padilla’s work, but the story is so good that it demands a second read just to take it all in. The back and forth dialogue between Grimlock and Ser-ket is phenomenal and emotions from Grimlock to his fellow Dinobots and Ultra Magnus is very powerful. I’ve always liked Grimlock as a character, but this is far and away my favourite interpretation of the character so far.

I cannot recommend Transformers: Prime - Rage of the Dinobots #3 highly enough. Of all the Transformers comics released today, this is the one I would pick up. A superb story well told with fantastic artwork to boot. It may not get as much coverage as More Than Meets The Eye or Robots in Disguise, but it deserves your attention. Plus, there’s a reference to one of Grimlock’s finest moments in The Transformers: The Movie. So what’s not to love?

Luke Owen is one of the co-editors of Flickering Myth and the host of the Flickering Myth Podcast. You can follow him on Twitter @CGLuke_o

Edgar Wright talks Marvel's Ant-Man

$
0
0
Ant-Man movie logo
Between the recent talk about a Doctor Strange movie and rumours of a Planet Hulk feature leading into a World War Hulk-themed Avengers 3, there's been plenty of speculation about the possibilities for Phase Three of the Marvel Cinematic Universe lately. Nevertheless, the only thing set in stone so far for Marvel Studios post-The Avengers 2 is the release of the long-gestating Ant-Man adaptation from British filmmaker Edgar Wright. Having been in development since 2006, Ant-Man is finally set to move into production once Wright finishes up with his latest film The World's End, and the director has been speaking about his plans for the miniature superhero during an interview with IGN:

"It’s a way of doing a superhero film within another genre," states Wright, on how he plans to offer up something different than the traditional comic book movie with Ant-Man. "I wanted to tell an origin tale in a slightly different way. It’s part of the Marvel cinematic universe, but it also feels like its own piece... I’ve been collaborating with Kevin Feige during the whole [development] cycle. I think people have always assumed… ‘Oh why is it taking so long to make?’ Part of it is because I wanted to make two other movies first. I wanted to make World’s End… me and Simon [Pegg] were very keen to make it and it felt like it was unfinished business and we wanted to wrap up the trilogy... But to be honest, the later I do [Ant-Man], it feels like I could learn more, especially about special effects. It’s a big effects movie, so I’m pleased to go into it having done Scott Pilgrim and The World’s End because you’re always learning more about that side."

The Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz director also went on to discuss his own favourite movie from the Marvel Cinematic Universe: "I guess my two favourites would have to be Iron Man and The Avengers. I’ve enjoyed all of them and I think those two are the ones that score highest on the popcorn metre. That totally work as great crowd-pleasers. And I think what they’ve managed to do in terms of The Avengers coming after a five-film cycle, is kind of extraordinary and unprecedented in cinema history. To bring together four other franchises into one. It couldn’t have gone better could it? It’s amazing."

Ant-Man is currently scheduled for November 6th, 2015, while The World's End arrives in the UK this year on August 14th ahead of a North American release on October 25th.

The Following - Episode 3 Review

$
0
0
Matt Smith reviews the third episode of the US TV drama The Following...

So, in my last review I spoke about The Following and its similarities to Heroes. I also bought up the tense bits of the show, as well as the use of flashbacks. There was also that bit where I talked about Ryan Hardy’s (Kevin Bacon) drinking problem and Joe Carroll (James Purefoy) merely having a loving of Edgar Allan Poe as a bit of window dressing as opposed to being any sort of deep allegory.

Then there was that paragraph about TV advertisers and grisly business in the show whenever - hey, wait. Why am I taking a large proportion of my time telling you what I did last time? I don’t know why I’m boring you with such things, I guess it’s just because I’m typing this out while watching the first couple of minutes of The Following, in which they spend said disproportionate amount of time telling me what I already knew.

Now that’s not to say I assume everyone has read my previous ramblings about the show (in fact I think it’s only you who reads them), but you see my point. Anyway, this episode wasn’t at all like the second one except in the bits where it was, so let’s move on.

Whereas last week’s episode was about grisly goings on, this week it’s all about the characters bouncing off one another. Much less tense, but a lot more driven when it came to dialogue as we find out a little more about the why’s of everyone involved. What are the personal lives of the cult’s killers, led by Carroll? What do their loved ones think? But in a link to last week’s episode, once again the themes and ideas bought up aren’t really looked into too deeply.

Like Hardy’s drinking problem (‘yay!’ I thought ‘Kevin Bacon’s drinking again!’), the consequences of these theoretically harsh elements aren’t shown. Hardy’s behaviour isn’t affected in any way beyond what would happen if you got as little sleep as he does. The Edgar Allan Poe angle is still nothing more than a motif, still nothing more than window dressing to draw you in. Are the things you’re seeing mere fluff, pretending to be more than it actually is?

Looking back again to the critique of the second major plot, the trio of killers and their unwitting prisoner Joey, and I’ve been turned around. Instead of bringing the flow down, it’s now of equal importance to Hardy stopping Carroll. Being a third wheel is horrible at the best of times, let alone when you’re hiding out from the FBI with a kidnapped child. Cracks are starting to appear. Tension once again rears its blessed head.

The show’s certainly gotten better since finding its pace. It’s slowly crept up on me and hooked me in. It’s addictive, you’ve gotta give it that. The fact it seems to have things ready up its sleeve, and that it isn’t just making it up as it goes along, is what has me looking forward to next week.

But it’s the turn of the love interest to let the side down the most. In all fairness, Hardy and Claire Matthews (Natalie Zea) aren’t receiving near enough screen time, meaning Matthews’ potential broken down mother/divorced wife of serial killer/lover of main character is relegated to being a bit worried before Hardy goes away to do something else. Could more tension be created here? We’ve seen the loved ones of the cult members; why not show us more of Matthews?

Alas, we have but an hour (minus Kevin Bacon still selling mow-bull phones, which makes me wonder: who’s sending the text messages to the cult members in the show?) to see all the plots play out. And when the complaint is that the show isn’t long enough, I suppose that’s the best kind of complaint there is, right?

Matt Smith - follow me on Twitter.

Bryan Cranston and Elizabeth Olsen for Godzilla reboot?

$
0
0
Production of Gareth Edwards' reboot to the Godzilla franchise starts next month but there has still been no official casting announced. However, Variety is reporting that Bryan Cranston (Breaking Bad) and Elizabeth Olsen (Martha Marcy May Marlene) could be in line to join the cast.

We reported last month that Aaron Johnson (Kick-Ass) could be eyed up for the lead role and sources close to Variety are claiming that he is still in the running. However Legendary Pictures are still waiting on the Frank Darabont (The Mist) script and no deals will be signed until that is finished. His script will be the fifth version since David S. Goyer's (Man of Steel) initial screenplay.

The script and casting will need to be sorted out soon if Legendary and Warner are going to meet their projected March start date.

Godzilla has been tearing up movie screens since his debut in 1954 and has gone on to star in over 28 movies, TV shows, comic books, and video games. Legendary's Godzilla will be the second attempt at an American reboot to the franchise after Roland Emmerich's failed 1998 movie starring Matthew Broderick.

Gareth Edward's Godzilla is set for release in 2014 to mark the 60th anniversary of the franchise.

Pierce Brosnan given new licence to kill in Last Man Out

$
0
0
It's been quite a while since Pierce Brosnan (Goldeneye, The Ghost) coolly dispatched bad guys with a gun. His fun, but often unforgivably ridiculous, tenure as 007 has been overshadowed lately by the tremendous success of the current James Bond, Daniel Craig (Layer Cake, Casino Royale). Yesterday Craig's third film as Bond, Skyfall, the 23rd in the long running franchise, overtook Christopher Nolan's epic blockbuster The Dark Knight Rises to become the seventh biggest film of all time. How can Brosnan compete with such success? A fading action star, many now remember him for murdering ABBA pop classics instead of villains, with his woeful wailing in the film version of the hit musical Mamma Mia.

But there have been intriguing performances since Brosnan passed on his Walther PPK to Craig. In The Matador, Seraphim Falls and The Ghost he delivered solid, sometimes unexpected performances, in generally good films. Now, the former 007 has a chance to regain some cool credentials in a badass, IRA revenge thriller. According to Empire, Brosnan is attached to star in Last Man Out, a film adapted from Stuart Neville's well received novel The Twelve. Apparently the project is being touted for investment in Berlin and the aim is to assemble a cast and begin shooting by the end of the year. Despite Brosnan's recent dim period, the man undoubtedly has star charisma and it seems unlikely that this film will fail to get the required backing.

Written by Ted Mulkerin and multi-talented comedian Craig Ferguson, who has scripted episodes of British comedy drama Doc Martin, amongst other things, Last Man Out follows a former IRA assassin, who leaves prison after 20 years with a conscience. Unable to live with the guilt of his past crimes, the Celtic gunslinger decides to track down his former employers and bring them to justice, in the only way he knows how.

Sounds like the sort of film that will either be great or dreary. It seems like the whole thing will depend on Brosnan putting in a killer performance anyway. That awful pun is justified, because it simply reminds us of the worst lines of dialogue in the Brosnan Bond era. Hopefully, the script for Last Man Out will give the 59 year old much better material to work with.

Do you think Last Man Out will be worth watching? Or just average action fare? Comment below with your thoughts. 

Could Venom be set for Amazing Spider-Man 2?

$
0
0
You'd have thought that Marc Webb's The Amazing Spider-Man 2 was stacked full of characters, but a tweet yesterday from the director could be teasing an appearance of another one...

His tweet simply said "Day 3 #happybirthday" with a photo of a metallic locker. While this may seem like an innocent tweet, the lockers themselves could spark some memories from fans of Brian Michael Bendis' Ultimate Spider-Man series of comics and the origin story of Venom.



In the Ultimate Spider-Man continuity, the Venom came from scientists Richard Parker and Eddie Brock searching for a cure for cancer. The experiment was deemed a failure and it wasn't until after they had both passed that their children Peter Parker and Eddie Brock Jr discovered the protoplasmic dip in an Oscorp locker.

Couple this with Webb's tweet from day 2 of production which showed that the movie was returning to Oscorp and we could be nearing a reveal that Eddie Brock will be joining the ever expanding character list.

However, February marks the 25th anniversary of the Venom character who first appeared in The Amazing Spider-Man #299. So this could just be a clever in-joke from the filmmakers.

Already set for The Amazing Spider-Man 2 is Jamie Foxx (Django Unchained) as Electro, Shailene Woodley (The Descendants) as Mary-Jane Watson, Paul Giamatti (Sideways) as the Rhino and Dane DeHaan (Chronicle) as Harry Osborn. They will join the returning Andrew Garfield (The Social Network), Emma Stone (Easy A), Sally Field (Lincoln) and Martin Sheen (The West Wing) for the movie set for release on 2nd May 2014.

First poster for Bong Joon-ho's Snowpiercer

$
0
0
South Korean filmmaker Bong Joon-ho (The Host, Mother) makes his English language debut this year with Snowpiercer, and The Weinstein Company has released a first poster for the upcoming sci-fi thriller, which you can check out here...

Snowpiercer movie poster

"Snowpiercer is set in a future where, after a failed experiment to stop global warming, an Ice Age kills off all life on the planet except for the inhabitants of the Snowpiercer, a train that travels around the globe and is powered by a sacred perpetual-motion engine. A class system evolves on the train but a revolution brews."

Snowpiercer is based upon the French graphic novel Le Transperceneige by Jacques Lob and Jean-Marc Rochette, and features an all-star cast that includes Chris Evans (The Avengers), John Hurt (Immortals), Ed Harris (Game Change), Jamie Bell (The Adventures of Tintin: The Secret of the Unicorn), Tilda Swinton (We Need to Talk About Kevin) and Octavia Spencer (The Help). The film is due for release later this year.
Viewing all 7138 articles
Browse latest View live