The Power Of The Dark Side...

What I really want to do is direct a Star Wars film...

It's hard to resist what you love...

Especially if it's offered dangling before you like the dream you always wanted, but never thought you'd get. That's what J.J. Abrams came up against over the past couple of months it seems.  When you get offered what you never thought would be available, the temptation to say no fades into the background when you see the possibility of what lies ahead.

He had meetings with Kathleen Kennedy and talked to Michael Ardnt.  He had discussions with them about what they wanted to do, and where they wanted to go.  And he saw the 40-50 page treatment that the new trilogy will follow.  The one that Ardnt wrote and is using as the template for his "Episode VII" script.  He apparently liked the direction they were heading.  So he said yes to the most scrutinized directing effort he will ever have.

He will have fans of both "Star Trek" and "Star Wars" watching his every move, his every decision, and his every word for the next two or three years.  And the fans of Trek will have factions that not only don't like this, but downright believe that this is a betrayal.  I can only imagine the next Comic-Con that Abrams shows up to will look like.  Remember also, the next D23 is this fall.  Can you imagine there won't be a strong Star Wars presence there?  It will, and I happen to believe that there will be a panel, or large section of the main Walt Disney Pictures panel that will focus just on Star Wars.  You better get your tickets now, and stand in line soon because it's going to be mind numbingly busy.

This will be the same type of panel/session as what happened last time with Marvel when Kevin Feige walked out.  With that in mind, expect to see Kathleen Kennedy show up on stage, and I would be surprised if she didn't introduce the director of the new film.  And I expect him to come out and talk how excited he is to be working on a childhood dream, and not reveal ANY information  about the film.  This is J.J. Ambrams, after all.  And we're all going to be living through his dream over the next couple of years.

Hopefully, that won't feel like a long, long time...

Twilighting...

Tweens and twilight is trouble...



Walt Disney Pictures is moving forward with their entry into the young adult fiction arena...

Young Adult (YA) is what "Twilight" is. Now, I hate anything to do with that horribly written, badly acted, shoddily produced series, but I understand the Mouse's desire to capture the young, primarily female audience that rushes into theaters to see it. I just want whatever they make to be good.

A while ago Disney Studios purchased the film rights to a book called "Matched." This book is the first in a trilogy (read: franchise) that includes book two: "Crossed," and book three: "Reached."

They hired the screenwriters Michelle and Kieran Mulroney (Sherlock Holmes:A Game of Shadows) to pen the adaptation. That's not a bad move. And today, HeatVision announced that they've hired David Slade to direct it. Ok, he's made good films like "Hard Candy," but he's also made a horrible Twilight sequel. So, I guess that his experience with that series is why they want him. I pray that he has a better script this time, and a better actress. But I will hold out hope that this turns into a great film.

I can only hope my expectations of Alan Horn's leadership of Warner will be matched at the Mouse...

Warner Riddles In The Dark...

One more ring to rule them all...










You've all seen the news about the expansion of "The Hobbit" from two to three films...

And now they've got names and dates, so we know what they'll be called and when exactly they'll come out. So when it's all said and done there will be six films, two trilogies, or a hexalogy if you count them all as one.

So the Middle-Earth series list would be:

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey
The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug
The Hobbit: There And Back Again
The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring
The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers
The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King

After summer 2014 the series will be done, and the next question would be is this the end? Would Warner Bros. be satisfied with ending it there? No more films or anything else? Not hardly, in the words of John Wayne. In this world where international markets rule the box office and branding matters, this series is a known property and it doesn't take as much to sell it to audiences.

So what would be next? The most obvious choice would be "The Silmarillion." Now, I know that a fan asked Peter Jackson at this year's Comic-Con about that. He mentioned that Warner doesn't own the rights to that book and the Tolkien Estate isn't very happy with his adaptations of the late authors works (I really can't understand why this is). But obstacles can be overcome. Hopefully Warner can get the Estate to license the rights to the books, because the films actually help sales of the books and seeing the film. An agreement would be mutually beneficial for both parties.

But even if it happens, it doesn't mean the book would be an easy film. It is a large tome of epic tales telling the history of Middle-Earth in a sort of lyrical tale that's not set up in the same manner as the LOTR or the Hobbit. But it leaves room for more interpretation and layering of characters. But it would be an epic film if made. Most likely it wouldn't be contained in one film, so there is the possibility of another trilogy, or perhaps, a miniseries on cable? Or even an ongoing series? Something like HBO,A&E or even Netflix could be a venue to transmit/broadcast this new property.

And then there are the other products like video games, books, shirts, toys, etc. that would/could be exploited. If they can't get the rights, or even if they do get it and want to continue other avenues, then they can go other routes. After all, there have been several games that take place in the world of Tolkien that don't involve the characters from the film. Could they not produce a film series, or television series, or even an Internet series that is completely unrelated to events of the book? Something along the lines of "Tales of Middle-Earth" or "War of the Ring" type of thing? The possibilities are endless really. And do you really think that Warner's Suits would want to close the tap on this revenue stream? Think again.

There and back again, and again, and again...

A Tale That Grew In The Telling...

Them Baggin's is multiplying...






We all heard the possibility of Peter Jackson turning his Hobbit duology into a trilogy...

And now it's official. Via "The Hobbit" Facebook page the director made the announcement today:

"So, without further ado and on behalf of New Line Cinema, Warner Bros. Pictures, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Wingnut Films, and the entire cast and crew of “The Hobbit” films, I’d like to announce that two films will become three."

Go check out the entire post to see more of what Jackson had to say. Now we have to wonder what will the third film be called? Or will they just call it "There And Back Again Part 1 & Part 2" maybe? Now when it's all over, fans of "The Lord of the Rings" will have two trilogies to fire up on the Blu-Ray by 2015. But until then, it looks like Warner Bros. will own December for the next three years, which is their intent.

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey - December 2012
The Hobbit: There And Back Again - December 2013
The Hobbit: TBD - December 2014

I know someone asked if Jackson would do The Silmarillion, but I think he'll be tapped out after these. And then he'd have to convince the Tolkien Estate to sell the rights. Which they might not do since they aren't happy with his adaptation of LOTR. Which I don't understand. It's as faithful as a film can be and still be a film, not a book. Each frame is filled with love of the source material, so I don't understand the disappointment. It sounds misplaced.

Perhaps if this is overcome, they can have Jackson/Wingnut Films produce the series and find other directors for that and other works that take place in Middle Earth. Possibly even a television series/mini-series?

The opportunities open up and become endless...

UPDATE:

The guys over at /Film have some info, via Fusible about what it could essentially be called. Warner registered several titles and a couple of them are: http://whois.domaintools.com/desolationofsmaug.com and http://whois.domaintools.com/riddlesindark.com.

So what it might turn out to look like is this:

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012)

The Hobbit: Riddles In The Dark (2013)

The Hobbit: Desolation Of Smaug (2014)

Which means they could technically release the entire trilogy as "The Hobbit: There And Back Again" the following year. Just speculation, but not entirely incomprehensible. Is it?

Last Train To Gotham...

Next stop: new director-ville...





There is a lot of discussion going on now about Christopher Nolan's last Batman film...

Batman is my favorite superhero. I've loved him since I was old enough to walk and play out the adventures in my backyard. From pretending to be Batman with my cousins and forcing my little cousin to play Commissioner Gordon (causing him to cry), to watching the reruns of 60's "Batman" television show I would rush home each day from school to watch. It along with George Reeve's "Superman" series that I would watch on Sundays are the core of how I became a "DC Guy" over Marvel. From the rush of seeing Tim Burton's flawed, but wonderful reinterpretation of Batman, to the travesty of Joel Schumacher's hideous trip back down the wrong path to camp, I've been there.

So when my best friend handed me a script by David S. Goyer, and I flipped through the first few pages realizing it was the new Batman film, I was instantly excited. Upon reading it, I knew that Nolan had gotten the character right. When the second film came out, I didn't want to read the script since I wanted this one to come at me without the knowledge of each and every scene. And it was amazing and numbing all at once. So when Christopher Nolan came back to finish his take on the Caped Crusader, I waited each day on pins and needles for the chance to see how he ties it up.

It's a little bitter realizing that there will never be another Nolan take on the character. But now that it's done, I'm glad that there is an ending for this story. I'm curious to see who Warner Bros. picks to helm the next reboot of the film (after all, the guy that helped choose Nolan is now at Disney: Alan Horn). In all likelihood the person playing the part may be chosen well before the actual film comes out. If the "Justice League" film that they're trying to pull together comes to fruition, then whoever they hire will probably be stuck with the actor he or she will use for their interpretation. Not a bad thing; look how Joss Whedon pulled it off with a story where almost everyone was cast for him? But until then, we have Nolan's latest opus to keep us happy, or to argue over.

I saw "The Dark Knight Rises" a week ago today (midnight Friday, technically), and had immediate impressions about it, but I won't review it. Our own Decadent Dave had the official Blue Sky Review of the film for the site. But I will say that after watching the film, and the two previous ones back to back, I know where this one stands in the trilogy. If "The Dark Knight" is the "Empire Strikes Back" of the three, then this one is "The Return of the Jedi" of the series. That will hopefully give you my thoughts on the film.

But there are interesting thoughts/analysis/critiques all around the net right now and I found some that you might be interested in reading.

The guys over at /Film have a great post about some of the same problems I had with the film entitled "15 Things that bothered us about 'The Dark Knight Rises'." I agree with the majority of what they focus on, and yet there are parts of the film that reach what I expect from a Nolan film. Take a look at it if you've seen the film, but avoid it if haven't because there are major spoilers.

Not many characters in popular literature can evoke such a strong response, both pro and con, but Bruce Wayne's alter ego can and does. If you're a big fan of the Bat then you should take a look at these articles that focus on the fighting style of the character: "The Martial Arts of the Dark Knight - Part 1" and "The Martial Arts of the Dark Knight - Part 2," We even focus on the minute details of how he puts down a bad guy.

All this deep psychological/analytical probing for a character that began as an escape from the dreary existence of the Great Depression? That's why we hold Batman, Superman and the other characters up with such wonder. They offer us dreams of a way out, a different life, or a better tomorrow. And for a dime, it was easy to buy that dream. It may cost more today, but it's still a worthy experience that we strive to attain as we turn each page, or buy each movie ticket. That's what Nolan gave us over the last seven years. He gave us dreams that we'll always have, and always enjoy.

And for that I will forever be grateful to him, and of course Batman...

Why Do We Fall?

Hello Mr. Wayne...







[As always, spoilers apply.]


After the success of The Dark Knight, it was evident that Christopher Nolan was faced with the impossible challenge of concluding his epic Batman trilogy without its most memorable villain, the Joker. Respectfully and wisely he chose not to recast the role and decided to make no mention at all of the Joker in the follow-up However there were still lingering questions that bothered me about the ending of The Dark Knight and the Joker's mysterious absence in Rises becomes prominent during the major events that occur throughout and simply go unacknowledged. Heath Ledger's absence in the film is indeed felt as is also the absence of Aaron Eckhart's Harvey Dent/Two Face whose questionable death at the end of The Dark Knight made Batman a pariah who has disappeared from Gotham for almost a decade.


The Dark Knight Rises is a disappointment for Batman fans, but most audiences who are not stepped deep in the lore of the comic book mythology or character will still probably enjoy the film as mindless summer blockbuster escapism. Never mind that the film is riddled with more plot holes than a block of moldy Swiss cheese that would make even The Riddler green with envy. For example, if Batman has retired, why then did he even bother rebuilding the Batcave when Wayne Manor was restored after its destruction in Begins? How is it that Batman is able to survive having his back broken by Bane and is able to not only heal himself without the use of the Lazarus Pit from the comics but also climb out of a virtually inescapable prison pit somewhere in India to return to physically confront his nemesis is a time frame that defies any logical sense? And how is it that Bane can travel half way around the world to dispose of Batman and return to Gotham all the while in the midst of executing his uninterrupted and strategically coordinated terrorist attacks on the city? Why does Alfred abandon Bruce Wayne after repeatedly assuring him he would never leave his side in the other films? Why does Bruce fall in love with Miranda Tate after being so distraught over Rachel's death that he hangs up Batman's cowl? These and many other lapses of plot logic largely go unaddressed throughout the film leaving the viewer to either scratch their heads in bewilderment or simply accept them with naive suspension of disbelief.


Admittedly Christopher Nolan was not that familiar with the comic book mythology of Batman, instead turning to screenwriter David S. Goyer for story and character ideas to help him bring a decidedly reality-based Batman to the screen. As a result, there are not that many Batman villains from the infamous "Rogues Gallery" who could have convincingly translated well into the "Nolanverse" on the big screen. Certainly the Penguin could have worked in a very crime boss way taking over for Carmine Falcone in Batman Begins, but the inevitable inclusion of Catwoman as alluded to in The Dark Knight would have made The Dark Knight Rises feel more like a redux of Tim Burton's Batman Returns. The Riddler could have potentially worked if he had been realized as a sort of Zodiac killer but ultimately the Riddler would have felt like The Joker-lite.


Enter Bane who represents a significant chapter of Batman's comic book mythology in that he is the villain responsible for breaking, both literally and symbolically, Batman's back and putting him out of commission while Jean Paul Valley a.k.a. Azrael takes up Batman's mantle during the "Knightquest" storyline from which Goyer and Nolan have "lifted" many of their key plot points for Rises from and also from the "No Man's Land" epic storyline in which Gotham City suffers from a catastrophic earthquake which isolates it from the mainland while the inmates of Arkham have taken over the city ala: Escape From New York. The result is a visually stunning epic film that ultimately makes very little sense plot-wise.


Tom Hardy's portrayal of Bane is unique and vastly different from the steroid induced hulking Bane wearing a Mexican wrestler looking mask from the comic books. Hardy is one of the most interesting and versatile method actors to watch onscreen. His performance in Bronson was extraordinary and his physical presence onscreen as Bane is chillingly brutal even when limited by emoting from behind a synthesized face mask that at times makes his dialogue somewhat distorted and unintelligible and come off sounding like Darth Bane. The character's origins have been altered significantly from the comics. Instead of a South American inmate that had been physically transformed by an experimental super-soldier serum Venom, Bane origins initiate from somewhere in the Middle East where he was disfigured in a prison in which he is coincidentally, for the sake of the plot, the protector of Ra's Al Ghul's daughter Talia who has returned to Gotham under the name of Miranda Tate and her reveal as Talia who has returned to avenge her father's death and fulfill the destiny of the League of Shadows to destroy Gotham feels like a forced plot contrivance tacked on at the end of the film.


Perhaps the biggest offense though in TDKR is the fact that Nolan has repeatedly gone on record stating that Robin would never make an appearance in his Batman films but then decides to shoehorn him into the ending of the film in such a way that is not only a slap in the face to Batman fans everywhere but does so in a way that has absolutely nothing to do with the character of Dick Grayson's Robin, or even his protege Jason Todd or even his successor, Tim Drake. Joseph Gordon Levitt's John Drake/Robin has more akin to Terry McGinnis from Batman Beyond, Bruce Wayne's future successor to Batman's mantle from the cartoon and it's literally a "cop out" if you'll pardon the pun. John Drake is an orphaned street cop who just walks up and knocks on the door of Wayne Manor and announces that he knows Batman's secret identity is Bruce Wayne and we are supposed to buy that Bruce then endows Batman's entire legacy and mantle to him, without any of the martial arts training he acquired under the tutelage of Ra's Al Ghul or the League of Shadows, and will allegedly continue on as Gotham's new Batman?


Christopher Nolan is, though, to be commended for bringing a gritty realism back to Batman and keeping the franchise alive after Joel Shumacher's campy farcical films nearly destroyed the franchise completely. However, a director of Nolan's acclaim and talent should be ashamed for the lackadaisical directorial effort demonstrated in TDKR. In short, it feels like Nolan phones it in on this one. Like Indiana Jones, Batman has Nuked the Fridge. Perhaps it was the overwhelming success of The Dark Knight, the daunting task of continuing in the wake of the death of Heath Ledger, and or physical and mental exhaustion of contractually delivering a third installment to the studio that makes TDKR feel so substantially "off" from the pitch-perfect feel of The Dark Knight, a superior film by comparison which felt as though all of the narrative pieces fit together seamlessly along with the strong performances by Heath Ledger and Aaron Eckhart.


TDKR is the Return of the Jedi of Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy. It is a very flawed, tired, but guiltily entertaining film to watch. It will be interesting to see where the Batman franchise goes from here. Will it continue with Joseph Gordon Levitt wearing the cowl or will a new director recast and reboot from scratch and completely disregard the alternate reality continuity of the Nolanverse? Batman is a mythology that has been continuously retold in all media from different interpretations of the character. If The Man Of Steel is successful I can already see Warner Bros handing Zack Snyder the keys to the franchise, turning his vision of a reboot into a hyper-reality, CGI exaggerated 300 meets Watchmen style of Batman. Personally, I would much prefer a big screen adaptation of Arkham City. Probably the best interpretation of Batman I've experienced in any media.


The Dark Knight Lives.

Threequels...

A long, long, long time ahead in the future...


Here we go again...

So the rumors of another Star Wars trilogy are flying again. The guys over at IESB are quoting anonymous sources inside the walls of Fortress Lucas that say it'll happen. It's a long way off, but it'll happen. They say that once George gets done with the 3D versions of the current Prequels/Originals, he'll set his sights on creating a whole new saga. One that takes place in the far future of the Star Wars Universe, perhaps a hundred or a thousand years out.

But then again, Lucas has said things about the prequels before he filmed them that contradicted a bunch of what came later. Plus the fact that they're denying this story. But really, even if it were true, would he talk much about it now? The last of the 3D conversions will be in theaters in 2017. So presuming he announce them a few years earlier, he'd have that first new film out in 2018. That's almost a decade out. And I personally don't think it'll be announced till the last film or darn near the release of it. This means it'll have to be filmed first and being as Lucas takes three years between films, this wouldn't likely see the light of day till 2019/20 at the earliest. That is a decade out. So we've got some ways to go before any of this will be concrete, if it's real at all.

Then there is my hope or dream that you know of. That within this decade, Bob Iger gets the nerve to have a meeting with Lucas and see about bringing all these projects into the Disney family. That way a new series of films would have the Disney logo right before you see the Lucasfilm logo. That would be nice and welcome. If there is any franchises that belong in the Mouse's catalog, it's Star Wars and Indiana Jones. They're identified with and inextricably linked with the parks, they might as well be Disney.

And if this third trilogy is actually made, they belong there...

Press Play...

Well, it seems the Hollywood Reporter has broke that Walt Disney Pictures has already started work on a sequel to "Tron Legacy" even though the film isn't even out yet...

That sounds familiar. Where have I heard that before? Oh, right. Blue Sky Disney reported this over a month ago. Nice that the official trades are finally catching up. Wonder if they're willing to share their salary with us? Hmmm? Guess not. They also mention that in addition to a sequel, the Mouse might be planning on making it a trilogy.

Wait...

That was reported here too. Strange, I thought they reported new news. Truthfully, the only thing new reported is that they don't know who will be the producer, since Sean Bailey is now that he is president of production for Disney. Which is really stating the obvious, like milk is white.

Now let's see if their next breaking report is that Disney is thinking of creating attractions for its parks based on this film cause that would be something new.

It's not like we didn't report it on here over a month ago...

The "T" Word...

Every studio wants franchises...


Franchise are a guarantee of revenue over a period of time and nothing pleases Suits and stockholders better than the ability to know you'll have a reliable source of profits. Although nothing is certain in this world, franchises are perhaps the closest thing to a sure thing in Hollywood.

Disney likes them too, but lately, the Mouse is being more specific on what it wants from franchises. It wants a trilogy. This gives them a franchise with a beginning and and an end in sight when it comes to focusing on the cost of these creations. And even though they are magnets for money, they also cost a lot of money. Now if the trilogy is a success then they'll do more(Pirates 4 anyone?), but these projects are big enough that three are more than enough to keep the film, marketing and merchandise departments busy for the better part of a decade.

The new remake/prequel/revision of 20K is being positioned as such. Don't imagine that this first project that McG wants to do as being a one shot thing. Should it be successful the company has plans to move forward with a trilogy. A second film has already been discussed and story ideas are already in play. This isn't the only project that Iger, Cook and Aviv are intent on exploiting with this strategy. The film division is working to create many projects over the next years that will be "Tent Pole" events that can function as a trilogy should the box office gods shine upon them. Iger has been heard talking about projects that can be spread across the many divisions of the Walt Disney Company. Having two, three or even four properties that can be used as trilogies will be very profitable and very key to the corporate strategy of Disney over the next decade. So when you see Walt Disney Pictures filled with characters and stories that you love and want to see again, you may get your wish.

Again and again and again...