Well, no, I’m quite obviously lying through my teeth, but you can’t blame a guy for pulling a bait ‘n’ switch now and then. Seriously folks, if the internet has taught us anything it’s that we should know better than to allow ourselves to get hooked by a cheap headline. Let this be a lesson to you all.
Onto the subject at hand, I share some of the reservations fans have over classic properties getting modern overhauls, especially when an abrupt jump beyond the original media or genre is involved. That said, I doubt Warner Brothers and DiCaprio will reach quite this comical height of Hollywood adaption bullshit. It’s not that I expect anything beyond total mediocrity in cases like these, which is pretty damned instinctual at this point, more that I’d prefer to take the high road for once and allow myself the luxury of a pleasant surprise.
A question: why is it always the sci-fi/fantasy anime which gets optioned for live action remakes? Why not mine source material which could be molded into solid critical successes, such as Grave of the Fireflies?
I think we all knew that when Lost mastermind J.J. Abrams was announced as our new Star Trek overlord (who I, for one, welcome), some pretty serious changes would follow not long after. New writers from his own stable in the place of anyone else connected to the first ten films: check. No major familiar faces on production: check. A completely new cast: check.
Thankfully, as these first glimpses at next May’s kinda-sorta-reboot show, what actually ends up on-screen might not necessarily reflect the fire sale which occurred off-stage. There are some good, solid throwbacks going on to keep this thing grounded. Take those costumes for example: reworked, but retro, well on the positive side of nostalgia which makes old-school Cylons in new-school Battlestar Galactica a welcome sight, or keeps the Daleks from getting too tired.
The Movie Blog has gathered the rest of the stills for our surfing convenience. While I probably won’t be completely sold on the new bridge set until I actually get to see more than one crowded angle, everything else is looking fine, especially the cast. Simon Pegg easily passes for James Doohan circa 1966 (who like Shatner didn’t gain the extra weight until at least 1976) and Zachary Quinto as Spock could be one of the most natural choices I’ve seen in years.
The first not-a-teaser trailer hits sometime next month.
Perhaps who isn’t the pertinent question in this case, but rather why. Unfortunately, nothing short of a Vulcan mind-meld is ever likely to produce a satisfactory answer to that question, so we’re left with the original: who? Who among us would willingly step into the shoes of Ed Wood? Who really has the balls?io9 has the answer.
The remake of Ed Wood’s cult classic Plan 9 From Outer Space, directed by John Johnon, is finally coming to fruition. The starting line up for the remake is Conrad Brooks (Lieutenant Harper), Caitlin Hill (Lucy Grimm), Eric Lobo (Criswell), Monique Dupree (unknown) and John R. Price II (Inspector Clay) and the director himself will be playing Patrolman Kelton.
Here’s an even better question since we’re all just full of them today: how? Plan 9 From Outer Space is widely considered to be one of the worst movies of all time. That’s not an easy act to follow. Not only do you have the original film’s “so bad it’s good” cult status to contend with but also the very real possibility of turning a kitchsy old movie people watch for laughs into something serious which everyone will immediately forget upon leaving the theatre. There is no better recipe for mediocrity.
Ten bucks says that “John Johnon” is merely a rather-obvious pseudonym put into place so the director can avoid having his real name permanently attached to this project.
Welcome to the first installment of Subversive Theatre, a column that will explore the most censored, reviled, or just plain revolutionary films ever made. Not all the films will necessarily be works by underground filmmakers, however, as the two movies being reviewed in this piece show.
The Devils was filmed by famed director Ken Russell, stars Oliver Reed and Vanessa Redgrave, with distribution by Warner Bros. Hardly an indie film, but that hasn’t kept it from being heavily censored, banned and nearly forgotten. Warner Bros, for instance, has long been promising to release an uncut version on DVD, but still hasn’t. This is in contrast to the treatment Salo has received, having recently been released in a deluxe two-disc set.
The discrepancy likely has to do with subject matter. The Devils is a damning indictment against Christianity whereas Salo condemns, of all things, Italian fascism. Not that Salo hasn’t faced plenty of censorship since it was first released in 1976: it has been banned in numerous countries, and its director, Pier Paolo Pasolini, was murdered (whether because of the film or not is a matter of debate).
It would be a shame if Salo was the reason for Pasolini’s death because, while it’s a fairly good film, it’s not really worth killing anyone over. [Read more]
My interest in Family Guy has waned considerably in the years since its return from television purgatory. The original run had a certain edge to it which I found refreshing, so I suppose it can be said that I was a fan at the time. Of course, this was back when The Simpsons had started to decline, South Park hadn’t yet hit its stride, and Futurama had either been axed already or was on the chopping block, so maybe I remember the first few seasons more favourably than is truly deserved.
One major criticsm towards the show is its strong reliance on cutaway gags, which South Park famously lampooned to great effect a couple years ago in their Cartoon Wars two-parter. Since then I’ve really had a hard time watching Family Guy without Matt & Trey’s version immediately popping into my mind. This, among other concerns, keep me from taking the idea of a Family Guy movie seriously.
Remember all those awful comedies in the 90s based on two-minute long SNL skits? In my opinion, this has the potential to be even worse. While Family Guy has always had some considerable strengths in its storytelling with most of its best humour being conversational and/or plot-based, this unfortunately accounts for only a fraction of what actually ends up on the screen. The rest is utterly interchangeable.
Maybe that works for a 22-minute animated FOX sitcom or the occassional long-form special like Blue Harvest, but with a running time of the average feature I have a hard time seeing this being very successful.
What do you think, readers? Potential sleeper hit, or miserable flop?
