Links for you: Blue Smurfs and Red Sonja

Get your first look at what CGI Smurfs will look like. (Hint: awful) [The Movie Blog]

ABC releases a 2 minute sneak peek of FlashForward. [ComingSoon]

New photos of the Volturi from The Twilight Saga: New Moon are online. The photos include Michael Sheen as Aro and Dakota Fanning as Jane. [Empire]

The Fantastic Four franchise gets a reboot. [Film Junk]

How would Marvel reimagine Disney heroines? [Jeffrey Thomas's Portfolio via In Contention]

A handy user's guide to the Academy's new best picture voting rules. [Film School Rejects]

Get your first look at Amanda Seyfried in Chloe. Seyfried plays Chloe, an escort hired to seduce Julianne Moore's husband (Liam Neeson). The film is on the Toronto Film Festival lineup. [FirstShowing]

Rose McGowan says Red Sonja begins shooting in 2010. Don't hold your breath. [Get The Big Picture]

Who's ready for a Rounders sequel?

According to PokerListings.com (apparently we're getting movie news from them now - who knew?) via Get the Big Picture a sequel to 1998's Rounders is a "realistic possibility" and according to writer David Levien, "ideas are percolating."

Dream on dude, you say? None of the now successful, original actors, could possibly be interested in a pointless sequel? Not according to Matt Damon. Damon, tells the site that "everybody would probably come back." And by everybody he means Edward Norton and director John Dahl.

Okay, I'm starting to sound like an asshole here, but can they just NOT? Since when was Rounders begging for a sequel? I liked Rounders mainly because Norton and Damon have good chemistry. But, that's about it. I mean, I get that Damon wants an excuse to bond with his friends and stuff, but we don't we have the Ocean's movies for that process?

Are we getting a Batman movie in 2011?

Well if you believe Gary Oldman and I guess, the people at Warner Bros., then this is likely.

They (Gary Oldman and the fine folks at Warner Bros.) just announced at Comic Con that Batman 3 will begin shooting in 2010. We don't know who will be behind the lens (Nolan's looking pretty booked), who the villain will be, what the title will be. or if it'll be the further evolution of a smarter look at Batman or if dollar signs rule the day.

"I think the next Batman is next year," he told a fan who asked when the long-awaited "Dark Knight" follow-up would hit, "We start shooting next year for a release in two years. You didn't hear that from me." [Chud]

Okay, so nothing concrete except for the fact that we're getting a Dark Knight sequel (no shit, we've seen the box office numbers), and Nolan's involvement is up in the air. I'm wondering how the folks over at Chud are so sure Christopher Nolan is booked. Inception should be wrapping either in December of this year, or by the latest January of 2010. And his stats over at IMDb show that he has The Prisoner and a Batman movie in development, so I'm not sure what he could be booked with in 2010 other than The Prisoner or a Dark Knight sequel.

Personally, I don't totally buy the 2010 shooting schedule not because Nolan is booked, but because there has been no word on a script. I can't imagine Nolan coming off Inception, going into the film's post-production, finalizing a direction for the script with the higher ups, cranking out a script, getting the script approved, casting the villain, and then shooting the thing within a year.

And this is considering that Nolan is even back on, because some people seem to think that he isn't. Which is even worse. Who wants to watch a Dark Knight sequel directed by someone else?

Could Russell Crowe star in another Master and Commander movie?

This might be the best news I've heard all day. The Associated Press announced that Russell Crowe is in the early stages of negotiations to play sea captain Jack Aubrey in a new Master and Commander film.

According to Crowe there are still negotiations taking place over the rights of the novels and the script will be based mainly on the eleventh book of the late Patrick O'Brian's 20 novel series - The Reverse of the Medal. All 20 books are set during the Napoleonic Wars. Apparently, the script has already been penned, but discussions are still at an early stage. The Reverse of the Medal, which was published in 1986, is partially set in the Caribbean (fingers crossed that they shoot somewhere near where I live).

I really loved the original Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World, and I've sort of been expecting (or maybe hoping for) another film. I admittedly didn't love it the first time I saw it in theaters, but I fell in love with it after I got to see it again. I've probably seen it six times by now, and hopefully Paul Bettany is cast because he was the best thing about the film. It has become one of my favorite films of 2003, and I think it's about time they made another one.

There is no word on when shooting begins.

Is 'Transformers 2' shamelessly sexist and racist?

To be fair, I haven't seen Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen. I've just been reading up on what people who have watched it think. Admittedly I didn't mind the first one, but I only watched it for Shia LaBeouf and I didn't think a sequel was needed, even though, I'd be a fool not to have expected one. Anyway, back to the topic at hand. A couple of movie blogs have pointed out that the new Transformers could possibly be racist and sexist:

From Movieline via The Playlist:

2. There are two robots in the film called Mudflap and Skids, and despite being red and green, respectively, they are voiced in a way that clearly designates them to be the “black” robots. Also, Skids has a gold front tooth (no, I’m serious) and both cannot read.

3. Every single woman in this film is sexually objectified, save for John Turturro’s mother. Every single one — even Shia’s mom! Whenever there is a scene set in a combat unit or government office, there are no women featured or even glimpsed because then they’d have to be wearing pants, presumably.

From The Movie Blog:

Saw Transformers 2 last night. There is an embargo on reviews until opening day (which is stupid since the European guys all have their reviews up already. So all I’ll say right now is this: Lots of things to love, lots of things to hate… but the “Twins” are the new Jar Jar Binks in all the worst ways you can imagine.

Now John over at The Movie Blog doesn't say outright that the two robot characters are racist in his post. But he does say that they are racist caricatures in the comments section. So, I can't judge until I see the film in its entirety. But when movie blogs not known for heavily discussing things like racism in movies start saying something is racist, I pay attention. I'm going to have to do a follow up post when I see the movie.

That Michael Sheen-as-Bond-villain story is bogus

Earlier this week there were rumors flying around that Michael Sheen might be cast as Blofeld in the upcoming Bond movie. I, for one, was pretty darn excited. I wouldn't have to keep mentioning that damn vampire movie every time I brought up Michael Sheen this year.


Turns out, all this stuff is total BS not only because it comes from The Daily Mail, but because it's illegal for Blofeld to even appear in any of the Bond films. It was the folks over at CHUD (via The Playlist) who pointed out the legal stuff. We don't even know who the Bond 23 villain will be. So, does no Blofeld, rule out Michael Sheen entirely? Well, I hope not, but as of now, this is a rumor of the badly crafted variety. Alas, we'll have to keep talking about that damn vampire movie after all. Nothing to see here. As you were.

Shia LaBeouf says 'Indiana Jones' sequel is happening and I ask WHY?!

Okay, so most of us saw this coming because Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull made a gazillion dollars, and was the second highest grossing film of 2008 (it was beaten only by The Dark Knight). Shia LaBeouf did an interview with the BBC to promote Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, but also got around to some Indy news as well:

"Steven [Spielberg] just said that he cracked a story on it before I left and I think they're gearing that up." He doesn't say much else, except that there are "definitely no special effects in that movie," but it's enough of an update to remind us that this is indeed coming soon, whether you like it or not. [FirstShowing]

I actually kind of liked Crystal Skull (vine swinging with monkeys and all), but even the most die-hard fan of that film will admit the film was heavily flawed. It's the sort of film you love in spite of the flaws. I liked Crystal Skull, I liked the actors, I have a thing for Shia LaBeouf, but as of now, I am not excited about this. If Crystal Skull is the best we are going to get (and I suspect it is), then the true greatness of Indiana Jones will be a thing of the past and we'll have to settle for a fun, but slightly above mediocre spectacle of a film. Why can't they just let it die?

Could Michael Sheen sign on to play a 'Bond' villain?

Back in April, Michael Sheen was cast in New Moon. Which was sad, because I now, occasionally have to talk about a Twilight movie. The good news is, according to anonymous sources (via MTV) he's now reportedly in talks to play Blofeld in the upcoming 23rd Bond movie - which is now being co-written by Oscar nominated screenwriter, Peter Morgan.

Peter Morgan and Michael Sheen have worked together before on films like Frost/Nixon and The Queen, so hopefully their previous collaborations result in Sheen being cast.



Blofeld has been played previously by several actors - Donald Pleasance (You Only Live Twice), Telly Savalas (On Her Majesty's Secret Service), Charles Gray (Diamonds are Forever), and Max von Sydow (the unofficial Bond film Never Say Never Again) - so I think Sheen could fit in pretty well, and make the character his own. I have a feeling he'll have the trademark white Persian cat, no matter how cartoonish it might seem in our current serious Jason Bourne influenced Bond world, I can't imagine Blofeld without the cat.

Jerry Bruckheimer talks 'Pirates' and 'The Lone Ranger'

Johnny Depp has a helluva lot of projects in the works, including The Lone Ranger (he's signed on for Jay Silverheels' original role as Tonto) and the fourth of the Pirates of the Caribbean movies. Both projects will be distributed by Disney, and though neither film has a director (those Mike Newell directing The Lone Ranger rumors are apparently false), producer Jerry Bruckheimer tells ComingSoon (via MTV) that Pirates of the Caribbean is Disney's first priority:

"['Pirates' is] a great franchise for them and for us, too,” Bruckheimer said. “A beloved character and Johnny’s really excited about coming back to Captain Jack. He certainly is interested in Tonto, but Disney’s priority is to get ‘Pirates’ made first. You never know what’s going to happen, but they would like it."

Bruckheimer also revealed that the original writers of the Pirates franchise Terry Rossio and Ted Elliot are working on the fourth script.

It's a shame that The Lone Ranger is farther behind. I'm looking forward to seeing how Depp tackles a new role (yes, it's a remake of sorts, but Depp has a way of making things fresh), even though I'm one of the few people who actually liked all of the Pirates movies. As for a director for the fourth Pirates film, Bruckheimer would be interested in having Gore Verbinski return to direct, though the decision would ultimatly be Verbinski's.

Javier Bardem cast as villain in 'Wall Street 2'

Javier Bardem has joined the cast of the upcoming Wall Street 2 as hedge fund manager Bretton Woods. Oliver Stone will be back to direct the sequel, along with Michael Douglas as Gordon Gekko, and Shia LaBeouf has a new role in the film. Fox has scheduled a release for February 2010 to capitalize on the current clusterfuck of doom global financial crisis. Apparently it only took Gordon Gekko nearly two decades to learn that greed probably isn't good:

The story in Wall Street 2 will span from June 2008 to the federal bailout in September. "We wanted to see some perspective in the same way that the original dealt with insider trading." This is certainly moving along swiftly and I think Bardem is a great choice, especially given how worldly Wall Street has become. The only other tidbit is that in the beginning when Gekko gets out of prison, he believes that the "end is coming." [FirstShowing]

This week in superhero news: (More) 'Thor' casting news and a 'Spider-Man 4' update

Actor Tom Hiddleston has been cast as villain Loki (sorry Josh Hartnett) in Marvel Studio's adaptation of Thor. Director Kenneth Branagh worked with Hiddleston on the London production of Chekhov's Ivanov and both starred in the BBC miniseries Wallander.

I've never actually seen anything Hiddleston has starred in, but his previous work with Kenneth Branagh will obviously help with the project. Thor opens May 20, 2011.

Now on to the Spider-Man 4 news. Director Sam Raimi has revealed that Spider-Man 4 will start shooting in February of 2009. Raimi explains why he has to force this upon us why he loves the character so much:

"I love Peter Parker. I've always loved the Spider-Man comics, and I fell like I still know more about the character that I think can bring to the screen - and perhaps make it great if I do it right. It's the same reason I keep reading the Spider-Man comic books. I'm really enamored with the character and now I feel like I have a history with him. I'd like to really make a great picture with him and bring the character to life at a level of detail that I've never realized before. It's almost like I have a desire to do something I've been trying to do right and haven't yet been able to. Not exactly." [LA Times via The Playlist]

That's about enough of that Mr. Raimi. Somewhere between Spider-Man 3 and just now, I had forgotten how much I really loved the first two Spider-Man films. I'm beginning to wonder if Raimi is morphing into George Lucas or something - like the guy needs to be saved from destroying his own work.

Michael Sheen signs on to 'New Moon'

Michael Sheen will play a vampire in Twilight sequel New Moon. After playing a werewolf in the Underworld movies, it's safe to say that Sheen has an affinity for playing monsters. Sheen will play Aro, leader of the Volturi vampire coven. If you want to know more about Aro, ask your little sister, or girlfriend, or whoever. Just don't come to me, because I have no intention of getting wrapped up in the Twilight universe, Michael Sheen crush be damned.

Director Chris Weitz "aggressively" went after Sheen for the part and considering some of Sheen's recent work like The Queen and Frost/Nixon (admittedly I hated both films, but he was fantastic in them) it isn't hard to understand why Weitz would want him. I'm just wondering why Michael Sheen would sign on to this.

Sex and the City sequel set for May 2010

Sex and the City 2 will open on May 28, 2010 - the same date that it opened in 2008. Of course there are good reasons to not see this film - the show was good enough and they should leave well enough along, Big is an asshole and Carrie should leave him, blah, blah, blah, and blah.

I'm one of the few people who will openly admit to liking the movie and I'll be watching its sequel because I love seeing Carrie, Miranda, Samantha, and Charlotte together again, and because damn it, I love their pretty clothes. And also because I want to piss off every sexist critic who slammed the film because it was a cast of hot women who weren't 19 years old. I welcome the release of the movie mostly because I have a sadistic wish of seeing every hetero, sexist, ageist asshole run for the hills.

And speaking of sequels...

Paramount Pictures has re-hired writers Robert Orci and Alex Kurtzman to work on a sequel to J.J. Abrams' unreleased Star Trek. Abrams will be back to produce the sequel along with his partner Bryan Burk, though it hasn't been confirmed if Abrams will be back to direct. The script should be ready by December of this year with a summer 2011 release in mind.

This looks like Paramount believes in Star Trek's ability to be a franchise. They're a hell of a lot more confident than I am. I know I'll watch, because I end up watching everything. But most of the people I know (everything from die hard Trek fans to action movie buffs) could literally care less about an upcoming Star Trek movie, much less a sequel to a film they barely give a damn about. I'm not saying Paramount shouldn't get ready in case the train heads out of the station, but I don't share the studio's confidence just yet. However, in the event that Star Trek does well, then they can get ready with a script, and if it crashes and burns they can always just scrap it. Variety reveals Kurtzman will listen to fans before the writers start a new script:

"Obviously we discussed ideas, but we are waiting to see how audiences respond next month," he said. "With a franchise rebirth, the first movie has to be about origin. But with a second, you have the opportunity to explore incredibly exciting things. We'll be ambitious about what we'll do."

Cronenberg talks 'Eastern Promises' sequel

Pinch me, I must be dreaming. 2007's Eastern Promises was one of my favorite films of that year, and now, there's a sequel announcement that doesn't piss me off. Actually, I'm pretty damn excited. Eastern Promises left things open ended with Mortensen's Russian gangster, Nikolai. I'm not going to spoil you, but if you haven't seen Eastern Promises (a very nude Viggo Mortensen included) go watch it right now. Don't worry...I'll wait. Anyway MTV Movies Blog shares a few of David Cronenberg's thoughts:

“We are moving forward with it,” Cronenberg told MTV News in an exclusive chat. “We all are excited about the idea of doing a sequel.”

The “we” includes Mortensen, who was nominated for a Best Actor Oscar for his role as Nikolai; the film’s screenwriter, Steven Knight; original producer Paul Webster; and original studio, Focus Features.

“We are going to have a meeting very soon between me, Steve Knight and Paul Webster to discuss what the script would be,” Cronenberg said. “I have some very strong ideas about what I would like to see, but I would like to hear what they have to say as well. And then after that, if all goes well, Steve goes away and writes a great script. If we all like it, we make it.”

At this juncture, Cronenberg is simply intrigued by the opportunity to reunite with Mortensen for a third film. “Viggo is a very special guy,” said Cronenberg. “I consider him a personal friend and we communicate all the time. That doesn’t always happen with actors. He’s very serious about his acting. But he’s really a funny guy. We laugh a lot. We giggle a lot.”

Go here to read more.

Two new reviews: 'Wolverine' and 'Young Vic'

First off:

IESB points us to a spoilerific review by someone who claims to have been to an early screening of X-Men Origins: Wolverine. This anonymous person sent an e-mail to wearemoviegeeks.com, and needless to say, the thing is one giant nerdgasm of a review. A few commenters over at wearemovigeeks.com swear the person is for real and that they really saw the thing. Others (me included) are skeptical. I skimmed parts of it, but since I don't want to be spoiled I'll leave you an excerpt and you can head on down to the site to be spoiled shitless. I am warning you. There are spoilers. Don't send me your hate mail about the spoilers. I warned you. Anyhoo:

OK, so I’m not a movie reviewer, so forgive me if this is not as concise as a professional review might be. Having said that, I also don’t know how much of the plot and “ohhhh, holy shit!!!” moments you want to know, possibly spoiling it. But feel free to edit and take out anything you don’t want to have spoiled.

The movie itself looks amazing. Lots of cool sets and special effects, it’s edited very well, the pacing is perfect and the running time is right on. It actually leaves you wanting more, and really, isn’t that the “nirvana” that most action movies hope to arrive at for the audience?

And now:


I've been waiting for The Young Victoria for over a year partially because I adore historic epics about British monarchs (particularly their queens), and because of Emily Blunt, and because there is still no North American release date. But, Guy Lodge over at In Contention crushes my hopes for the period piece with his review:

Meanwhile, in depicting its subject as a modern woman suffocated by her surroundings and dated gender trappings, complete with adorable lapdog and an accent that is decidedly more Sloane Square circa 2009 than House of Hanover circa 1837, the film pulls a similar trick of characterization to last year’s “The Duchess.” Working, however, in an even softer register than that already lightweight film, “The Young Victoria” plays down court intrigue in favor of dewy-eyed first love; if “Elizabeth’s” populist coup was restyling royal history as political thriller, this lands squarely in rom-com territory, with Rupert Friend’s Prince Albert the dreamy yet ever-deferred suitor.

He does however give a lot of credit to the film's leading man, Rupert Friend. There has been an awful lot of chatter about him over the last few months and Guy Lodge explains why:

The real revelation, rather, is Rupert Friend, who is given even less to work with than his co-star and emerges with leading man gravitas that I think few suspected he had. Delicately negotiating Albert’s gangly shyness without descending into hapless-fop cliché, Friend quietly keeps the love story afloat by downplaying the character’s heroism in favor of his boyishness, aided visually by the wispiest of mustaches.

Whether nervously pausing as he deliberates over his next sentence, holding his breath as he concentrates on his dance steps, or goofily running down a corridor in expectation of a letter, he never loses sight of the fact that this Prince is still very much a besotted kid. Radiating warmth and humility, Friend’s superb performance is the only element that moves with Victoria in this otherwise petrified, disinterested film — and by far the youngest thing about it.

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince trailer

There's obviously no real sign of Ralph Fiennes as Lord Voldemort, but it's obviously going to be a much darker Potter movie:

It's official: Emily Blunt will not star in Iron Man 2

Jon Favreau has confirmed what we already knew. Emily Blunt will not be in Iron Man 2, and has instead been optioned by Fox to star in Gulliver's Travels. There, I said it with a straight face.
Luckily Blunt has The Young Victoria and blockbuster The Wolf Man to keep us from weeping entertained.

So before the Iron Man 2 trainwreck completly heads out of the the station without Ms. Blunt, we're left wondering who Favreau will choose to play Black Widow.


My casting choices are always a little out there, but I'll throw my hat in the ring and suggest Marion Cotillard, Natalie Portman, Rebecca Hall, or Eva Green. I would suggest Malin Ackerman, but she's already doing her Watchmen thing, and Scarlett Johansson is trying my patience. So, who would you suggest to play Black Widow?