Some people have compared "M:I - Fallout" to "Fury Road." It's just a relentless barrage of practical effect thrills that barely has any exposition and backstory. Its goal was to grab your attention and not let go of it. Whereas "M:I - Rogue Nation" was a more elegant, and refined spy movie that had the best action sequences of the series.
Read moreDirector Ben Stiller back with Showtime's "Escape at Dannemora” starring Benicio del Toro, Patricia Arquette and Paul Dano
Ben Stiller, the director, is back with an adaptation of a true-life prison break for the upcoming series “Escape at Dannemora.” The limited event series stars Patricia Arquette as Mitchell, Benicio del Toro and Paul Dano as the prisoners Richard Matt and David Sweat.
Stiller as director and executive producer is an exciting prospect for the potential this mini-series has. The 52 year-old actor-director has never really made a dull movie as a director, even if he's swung and miss a few times. There's a lot of interesting filmmaking going on in “Zoolander” “Reality Bites” “Tropic Thunder,” and "The Cable Guy." Using Andrew Sarris' famous ranking of directors, thanks to Tony Joe Stemme, I'd put Redford in the 'Lightly Likeable' category.
However, the jump from silver screen to television could be quite fruitful for Stiller, there isn't much opportunity for mid-budget studio films these days. That problem is what's gotten a lot of American filmmakers to go for the creative freedoms bestowed upon them by TV execs.
Charles Barfield over at The Playlist has the synopsis for the series:
"The true story of the 2015 Dannemora prison breakout is almost too ridiculous to believe. The drama surrounds a female prison worker, named Tilly Mitchell, who involves herself in a sexual relationship with two separate inmates and uses her access to give them the supplies they need to escape. Of course, if you followed the news, you know that the escape was just part of the story, as the two men and Tilly found themselves at the center of a manhunt."
I wrote earlier last month:
"It is quite thrilling to see all these great directors make the switch to TV. The last few years, legendary directors such as Martin Scorsese, David Lynch, David Fincher, Woody Allen, Steven Soderbergh, Spike Lee, Todd Haynes, Joel Coen and Ridley Scott have made the switch to television."
Of course, filmmakers making the jump to television isn't a new phenomenon, at least as far as European filmmakers are concerned. In the '60s, '70's and '80s the likes of Bergman, Tarkovsky, Bunuel and Godard made films for television, due to lack of funding or studio restraints. The fact that this is now to an American thing is very exciting.
Of course, filmmakers making the jump to television isn't a new phenomenon, at least as far as European filmmakers are concerned. In the '60s, '70's and '80s the likes of Bergman, Tarkovsky, Bunuel and Godard made films for television, due to lack of funding or studio restraints. The fact that this is now to an American thing is very exciting.
“Escape at Dannemora” will debut on Showtime on November 18.
Johnny Depp's New Movie "City of Lies" Pulled a Month Before Release
Johnny Depp's latest endeavor, Globe Road's "City of Lights," did give me a teeny bit of hope. After all, this was Depp in a serious drama with Forest Whitaker and based on the unsolved murder of rapper Biggie Smalls in L.A.
The film was due for theatrical release on September 7th, but now, after a series of awkward public appearances by Depp, it has been indefinitely pulled from release.
No reason has been given for the shelving but it doesn't take much digging to realize Depp's public behavior these last few months has been rather strange.
Last month, a "City of Lies" crewmember sued Depp for allegedly punching twice on set during production of the crime saga.
Depp had the industry talking when Rolling Stone published writer Stephen Rodrick's “The Trouble With Johnny Depp,“ an interview with the troubled 55-year-old actor, which had the sleazy subtitle of “Multimillion-dollar lawsuits, a haze of booze and hash, a marriage gone very wrong and a lifestyle he can’t afford — inside the trials of Johnny Depp.”
Their interview went on for 72 hours, claimed Roderick. A three-day, almost sleepless, binge of drugs, and alcohol in which Depp indulged himself in.
Depp also showed up at the end of the Fantastic Beasts presentation at this year's Comic-Con, in San Diego, and delivered a nonsensical speech to a mostly befuddled crowd.
Sometime around his appearance in "The Rum Diaries," Johnny Depp's behavior changed. He left his partner of 14 years, Vanessa Paradis, and married an opportunistic young actress, Amber Heard, too quickly might I add. Oh, and the really bad financial decisions didn't help either. This all lead to alcoholism. Depp notoriously struggled with drugs and alcohol in the late 1980′s but cleaned up. It seems to be back.
Depp is going through a very apparent mental breakdown. It all started in 2012 with the potent mix of marrying Amber Heard and being very stupid with his money. As it stands, his last good movie was 2009's "Public Enemies.
However, here's the thing, a few of those mediocre movies I mentioned earlier on? Yeah, well, they are successful enough to not have Depp, despite the clearly visible problems, be blacklisted. "Alice in Wonderland," "Alice Through the Looking Glass," "Pirates 4," "Pirates 5," and "Murder on the Orient Express" all made a boatload of money at the box-office. He's also in the upcoming "Fantastic Beasts" sequel, which is connected to the Harry Potter franchise.
"Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald" hits theaters Nov. 16.
Bo Burnham is showing his movie "Eighth Grade" for free in every state to bypass the film's R rating
And so, it is with fantastic glee that I welcome the news that A24 has decided to show the film for free, with no rating barrier, for everyone to see, this coming Wednesday in 50 states.
The R rating for the film was given due to “language and some sexual material.”
IndieWire’s Chris O’Falt reported "the film earned an R rating for featuring the word “fuck” five times. MPAA allows feature films to get away with a PG-13 rating if “fuck” is said once, but any more than that results in a R rating. Numerous film critics and moviegoers took issue with the mature “Eighth Grade” rating because it prevented actual eight graders from seeing the film (and, as the movie honestly shows, eighth graders are no strangers to curse words anyways)."
I wrote last month:
With his raw, tender and heartfelt “Eighth Grade,” comedian-turned-filmmaker Bo Burnham made one of the very best films of the year. Burnham‘s miracle of a movie is all the more impressive by the fact this is the feature-length debut for the 27 year-old YouTube comedian known for small parts in movies from Judd Apatow and most recently, “The Big Sick.”
I spoke to Burnham last month [interview]about the film, his own personal identifying with Kayla and his transition from YouTube video-maker to, now, one of the most celebrated debut filmmakers of the year.
From my January review:
The film follows Kayla (Elsie Fisher), whose constant self-reflectiveness is familiar enough to make you cringe at every stutter. Kayla’s dad (Josh Hamilton) is as good a single dad as you can be, given the fact that he has to contend with his teenage girl entering the most awkward and uncomfortable phase of her life.
The anxiety Kayla has within her, always in a state of questioning, makes the case for a kind of early-adolescent humanism we haven’t seen depicted on-screen so acutely. In “Eighth Grade” Burnham offers a snapshot of history in the making depicting a millennial generation as a zombie-like student body in are slaves to technology, social media, and their phones.
Will Quentin Tarantino's 'Once Upon A Time In Hollywood' be closer to the style of his first three films?
Over at Hollywood Elsewhere, Jeffrey Wells is saying exactly how he wants the new Quentin Tarantino "Once Upon A Time In Hollywood" to end. Loosely based around Sharon Tate's murder, Wells says it should climax with a Django/Inglourious-styled revisionism of history AKA with Pitt and DiCaprio saving Sharon Tate from her inevitable fate and murdering Charles Manson crony Tex Watson:
"We don’t want to see the slaughter in Once Upon A Time in Hollywood. We want Lou and Brad to bust in and bowl Tex Watson away, and maybe one of the Manson girls besides."
My response:
Who knows what'll happen at the end of Tarantino's upcoming movie. The film will either be a) an absurdist revisionist genre film like 'Inglourious' and 'Django' or it'll be b) A film grounded in the dark, realist violence of 'Reservoir,' 'Jackie' and 'Pulp.' Something tells me it's the latter. QT has even mentioned that '‘Once Upon’ is “probably the closest to ‘Pulp Fiction’ that I have done.”
Ever since 1997's "Jackie Brown," Tarantino has purposely made sure not to replicate the stylistic and narrative aspects of his first three films and go a more fantasy-inspired route. "Kill Bill" was inspired by a sort of cartoonish Japanese grindhouse cinema, "Inglourious Basterds," was a war movie that completely revised Hitler's fate, "Django Unchained" made up its own kind of slave rebellion and "The Hateful Eight" felt like a violent version of an Agatha Christie novel.
The fact that QT is saying that he's decided to embrace and revisit 'Pulp' is a cause for excitement and an acknowledgement that we are probably getting a very serious take on this American tragedy.
Dave Bautista says he'll quit "Guardians of the Galaxy" if James Gunn script isn’t used
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/60739503/960447562.jpg.0.jpg)
"Guardians of the Galaxy" star Dave Bautista has been on a tear lately. He's been fuming over the firing of James Gunn from "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3" after controversial, old tweets were uncovered in which Gunn made pedophilia and rape jokes.
Earlier today, Bautista tweeted that working for Disney now feels 'Nauseating'.
Now comes another gut punch to Disney.
Shortlist interviewed Bautista and asked him about the Gunn firing:
“Nobody’s defending his tweets, but this was a smear campaign on a good man,” he said to ShortList’s Tom Ellen. “I spoke to Chris Pratt the day after it happened and he’s a bit religious so he wanted time to pray and figure it out, but I was more like: f*ck this. This is bullshit. James is one of the kindest, most decent people I’ve met.”
Bautista then mentioned the script for "Guardians of the Galaxy: Volume 3," which has already been written by Gunn and was approved by Disney:
“Where I’m at right now is that if [Marvel] don’t use that script, then I’m going to ask them to release me from my contract, cut me out or recast me."
“I’d be doing James a disservice if I didn’t.”
Yikes.
'The Florida Project' Director Sean Baker Planning to Make Two Films Back-to-Back in 2019
In an interview conducted with Screen Daily at the Locarno film festival, where he is part of the competition jury, "Flordia Project' and "Tangerine" maestro Sean Baker said he has two films currently in development and that he's planning on shooting them both in 2019.
“There’s two films that we’re thinking of doing,” he said. “We may do them back-to-back because I’m very bad at jumping into editing. I always need distance. With every film I’ve had producers and financiers who don’t mind me taking six months off before editing. This time we thought ‘maybe let’s make two films back to back and edit them both.’ ”
Just like his first two features, Baker is taking inspiration in the form of countless road trips smack-dab at the heart of rural America.
Baker said: “It’s helping us find the next story. We’re taking road trips, I’m trying to find the next location. We’ve done some of that already. It’s been very productive. It looks like we’re going to settle on a city that I’ve never shot in before.”
Just like "Tangerine" Baker is also hinting at another film shot on an iPhone. “I refuse to use digital,” he said. “There’s no reason to use digital unless you’re going with a phone because most digital is trying to emulate film anyway. So we’re trying to figure out that and write the script. We’re looking to shoot next year.”
And what about that about that second 2019 film?
“It will definitely be contemporary, I don’t know if it will be the US but it will definitely be a statement on the US. I would like to shine a light on something we are aren’t doing right in the US by showing where it is being done right somewhere else. It will definitely be a microcosm.”
Margot Robbie as Sharon Tate in "Once Upon a Time in Hollywood"
Margot Robbie has gone to Instagram and shared an on-set photo of herself as the late Sharon Tate in Quentin Tarantino's upcoming "Once Upon A Time In Hollywood." Of course, like anything involving Robbie, safe the de-glamming of "I, Tonya," she looks absolutely stunning.
Robbie will be joined by an incredible cast for the film, this includes Leonardo DiCaprio, Brad Pitt, Burt Reynolds, Damian Lewis, Luke Perry, Emile Hirsch, Dakota Fanning, Al Pacino, Scoot McNairy, Tim Roth, Kurt Russell, James Marsden, and Timothy Olyphant,
“Once Upon a Time in Hollywood” is set for release July 26, 2019.
Robert Redford says he's retiring from acting
Robert Redford, one of the legends of Hollywood acting has decided that old age has finally caught up to his art.
In an interview with Entertainment Weekly, the 81 year-old actor stated that after this fall's upcoming "The Old Man and the Gun" his acting shoes are being retired.
“Never say never, but I pretty well concluded that this would be it for me in terms of acting, and [I’ll] move towards retirement after this ’cause I’ve been doing it since I was 21. I thought, Well, that’s enough. And why not go out with something that’s very upbeat and positive?” Redford said, referring to "Old Man and the Gun."
“To me, that was a wonderful character to play at this point in my life,” continued the actor. “The thing that really got me about him — which I hope the film shows — is he robbed 17 banks and he got caught 17 times and went to prison 17 times. But he also escaped 17 times. So it made me wonder: I wonder if he was not averse to getting caught so he that could enjoy the real thrill of his life, which is to escape?”
Last year Redford had mentioned to the Walker Art Center that he'd be focusing more on directing instead of acting in his twilight years.
"I’m getting tired of acting. I’m an impatient person, so it’s hard for me to sit around and do take after take after take. At this point in my life, age 80, it’d give me more satisfaction because I’m not dependent on anybody. It’s just me, just the way it used to be, and so going back to sketching—that’s sort of where my head is right now."
"So, I’m thinking of moving in that direction and not acting so much. I’ve got two acting projects in the works: Our Souls at Night, with Jane Fonda, a love story for older people who get a second chance in life, and Old Man with a Gun, a lighter piece with Casey Affleck and Sissy Spacek. Once they’re done then I’m going to say, “Okay, that’s goodbye to all that,” and then just focus on directing."
I'm not the biggest fan of Redford's directing, safe for 1994's indisputably great "Quiz Show," but it's really his acting that has made him the legend that he is today: "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid," "The Sting," "Three Days of Condor," "All The President's Men," "The Candidate," "The Natural" and 2013's "All Is Lost."
However, what he for independent film with The Sundance Institute might be his greatest and most lasting legacy.
"The Old Man and the Gun" is in theaters on September 28th.
Dave Bautista: Working For Disney Is 'Nauseating' After James Gunn Firing
When Disney fired writer-director James Gunn from Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 3, due to some old offensive tweets, dug up by right-wing pundit Mike Cernovich, we figured a backlash might happen. Disney had to protect its family-friendly image, Gunn's tweets were far from innocent, so the decision to oust the writer-director wasn't surprising. What's actually surprising is the way the 'Guardians' cast has reacted to the firing, including the release of a statement in support of Gunn. The statement basically read as "yes, we know his tweets were wrong, but Gunn is a good guy and has grown as an individual since then."
The cast begging Disney to reinstate Gunn seems to have not worked at all, with Disney reportedly shutting down the idea of rehiring Gunn.
However, taking the whole megillah for sheer chutzpah is Dave Bautista. The 49-year-old actor, who plays the scene-stealing Drax in 'Guardians', had originally tweeted that Gunn was set-up by a 'Cyber-Nazi', probably referring to Cernovich, and that the director should be rehired. Today Bautista doubled-down on previous comments and, possibly, just got on Disney's bad side with a Tweet that will no doubt have people talking:
"I will do what Im legally obligated to do but @Guardians without @JamesGunn is not what I signed up for. GOTG w/o @JamesGunn just isn’t GOTG. Its also pretty nauseating to work for someone who’d empower a smear campaign by fascists #cybernazis . That’s just how I feel."
Kurt Russell Joins Guardians Actors In Defending James Gunn : 'I Think We're Getting A Little Too Sensitive'
“It’s sad. But it’s a part of our fabric now, and I get it,” Kurt Russell said to Variety at Netflix’s “Wild, Wild Country” Emmy celebration on Saturday night. “But I do think we’re getting a little too sensitive on maybe some of the wrong people.”
“You have to realize that when you are in that world as a comedian, a writer, whatever you’re always stretching the boundaries and trying to find something which lead him to something that the world loves, which is ‘Guardians of the Galaxy,'” Russell said. “He has a wonderful heart and a wonderful mind. I hope he is forgiven.”
[Variety]
How the "La La Land" vs "Moonlight" rivalry changed American pop culture
Damien Chazelle. Writer-director, supposed cinematic prodigy, only 33, struck gold with the indisputably great "Whiplash," and then, 2 years later, "La La Land" happened. By all accounts the latter, a musical starring Emma Stone and Ryan Gosling was hailed as a triumph in Venice, Telluride and Toronto, on its way to becoming the front-runner for Best Picture at the Oscars .... and then poof. A strange push-back on the film happened. The textbook definition of a successful backlash.
"Moonlight" of course won the Oscar, but not without Chazelle taking a major hit. One of the most dumbfounding things to have happened in mainstream cinema these last few years was the "La La Land" backlash.
So what happened?
The film's 93 Metascore and 95% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes was based on a lot of pre-release, festival reviews which all but heralded the film as the next big thing and Chazelle as the second-coming messiah Hollywood had been waiting for. Hell, even the snobby New York Film Critics Circle gave "La La Land" its Best Picture prize.
Ah yes, the sun was shining bright on the film before Chazelle and his film became major whipping boys of the industry. Accusations of "La La" being "too white," not understanding jazz, its leads not being able to sing and dance, Chazelle's style over substance direction, lead to it losing the Oscar. Simple as that, but how did so much criticism happen at such an alarming pace? Was it a hit-job? Not necessarily.
I am writing this because I am here to tell you that I, as well, have always struggled with La La Land's exquisite qualities in relation to it obvious flaws. "La La Land" is a film that enchants, envelops you with its beautiful frames and infectious cinematic aura but it also, on second viewing, feels rather thin and, pardon my arrogance, fluffy. However, I can't deny the dreamy high it gave me upon initial viewing.
The first time I saw "La La Land" was at the Toronto International Film Festival and this was after the extremely exuberant buzz the film garnered at Telluride and Venice the previous week. I was enchanted by the film, the brightly opening number's conclusion was met with a, very rare, burst of applause from the all-press screening I attended. Yes, those cranky old critics actually applauded a film after only 10 minutes. I had never seen anything like it. What's funny about that particular screening was that I still meet people, to this day, that attended it, who were praising Chazelle's film back then but are now a little more dismissive of Chazelle's intentions.
It's all part of the powerful effect social media could have on a person. The mob mentality ruminating throughout the tangled social media web-sphere is contagious. It's come to the point where even film critics have sacrificed their own integrity-based individuality just for the sake of, you know, hanging out with the cool kids.
Film criticism these days almost feels like high school, it seems to be taking place at the very core of social media's conversations. Imagine a film critic not liking "Moonlight" at the very thick of the 2017 Oscar race and, even worse, actually admitting it on Twitter, daring to say that, quite frankly, Barry Jenkins' supposed 'masterpiece' is actually just a small, well-made, but overpraised film. Yeah, looking back at that time, it really felt like you weren't allowed to say anything negative about "Moonlight." Of course, I did. I still think that Jenkins' film falls apart in its third section, which felt forced instead of effortless. "Moonlight" is, as I said stated back in 2016, "two-thirds of a great movie." Why can't I express that opinion to this day without being branded a 'racist' or 'bigot' online boggles my mind.
My acknowledgments of the positives and the negatives of "Moonlight" weren't enough for many on Twitter. We live in an age when everything must be pure, you must adhere to the rules, a socially-relevant film deemed 'perfect' by the majority must be deemed perfect by the minority as well. And that's where the aforementioned lack of integrity comes in in regards to today's film criticism. The fear-mongering has actually made film critics I used to read and love dearly lose much credibility in my books. You can read the fear in their writing, the lack of authenticity in some reviews.
"Moonlight" was, by all accounts, a film that was released at the right place and at the right time. Back in late 2016 and early 2017 social progressiveness was at an all-time peak, the notion to 'resist' was never higher due to newly elected President Trump, and, of course, the #OscarsSoWhite movement happened. It had created a monster the past few years in the form of a changed voting body within the Academy, one that seemed to be more politically conscious due to the current social media pressures.
Of course, I can't deny that "Moonlight" is, to many, a film that they hold very dear to their hearts. After all, a 99 metascore clearly means I must be wrong in thinking Jenkins' film isn't a masterpiece, right?
But what about poor "La La Land"? Did it deserve a better fate? Well, of course it did, Chazelle's film was a victim of bad timing. Its release coincided with an anger-filled political spectrum that would be unfavorable to La La's shiny aesthetics and free-wheelin' lets-go-where-life-takes-us melancholy. Of course, the film had its darker edges, it didn't even have a happy ending, but the fact that this was a love-letter to old-school Hollywood glamour, which is automatically connected to something very white, very masculine and very backwards, felt wrong to champion for many. After all, America's dark and discriminatory history was at the forefront of many pertinent conversation-starters by the time 'La La Land" and "Moonlight" hit screens nationwide.
Looking back at the political chaos that was happening between October 2016 until Oscar night March 2017 (at the thick of the Hilary vs Trump debate), it is safe to say that America was on the edge. People wanted to do anything to help, a resistance was born, a politically-conscious attitude was instilled, a film like "Moonlight" was the way to go. We needed to know that progress could be made, in any way shape or form. And so, the little movie that could, a film so slight, a film that would probably not even have attention paid to it just 10 yeas ago, did the unthinkable and won a Prized Oscar.
And it's continued on ever since. There has been an unspoken effort among pop culture critics to try and elevate the voices of the marginalized in works of art. However, The Guardian's Noah Gittell has stated that "As necessary as this effort is, it can make it more difficult for a film to transcend racial and gender boundaries because there is always a group that can claim that the film ignores them."
Film criticism is going through a very interesting time right now. Back in the ’90s, the field was such a different spectrum and now that political theory has snuck in, any film you watch now "has" to be judged politically. Take for example the severe backlash I received when I gave 'Black Panther,' a film that perfectly fits as an example for my theory, a rotten review. I was one of only 13 critics, out of close to 400, to give Ryan Coogler's film a failing grade.
By the time the backlash happened, I had this to say:
"I will be accused of not supporting the "cause" of "Black Panther" by writing this mixed review, but that's far from the truth. I am just trying to state an opinion which might be unpopular but is the essence of what a film critic is supposed to do: Be as critically honest as possible."
"The peer pressure that film critics put upon each other to uniformly agree and unite on a film like "Black Panther" because it's the right thing to do is detrimental, hell, self-destructive, for the future of the journalistic field. Will I be ridiculed, attacked, for this review? You bet I will. Twitter and social media have no mercy on contrariness. My job isn't necessarily to steer you away from watching a movie like "Black Panther," but to actually help you make your own judgment."
And so, with all that being said, it is then understandable to note that the mass marketing behind films ever since "Moonlight" have been pushed forward by the media, and continued forward by film critics themselves, for a sort of "betterment of society." A noble cause no doubt. Of course, just criticizing one aspect of a film now means one can be wrongly seen as condemning this supposed "betterment of society" It's a mob mentality that endangers freedom of opinion, something that seems to be more and more at risk these days. The herd mentality is unfortunate but shouldn't deter any critic from his or her own ethical duty.
Oscar Race: 'Black Panther' Crosses $700M in U.S. Becoming Only the Third Film in History to Achieve the Milestone
Ryan Coogler's "Black Panther" has just become only the third film in history to make $700 million domestically at the American box-office.
'Panther' is the highest grossing movie at the North American box-office this year, followed by "Avengers: Infinity War" ($677.7 million), "Incredibles 2" ($575.7 million), "Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom" ($399.8 million) and "Fox's Deadpool 2" ($317.8 million).
It's been six months since it first opened in theaters, but Coogler's superhero movie joins the only two other films to have ever crossed the $700 million mark: "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" ($936.7 million) and "Avatar" ($760.5 million).
Coogler's movie is not just a success at home, 'Panther' has also gossed close to $1.346 globally.
Yes, it does seem rather silly to think about it now, but fall movie season is about to start and 'Panther' is still very likely to receive an Oscar Best Picture nomination. Marvel indeed has its first serious Oscar contender. Disney would really have to royally mess it up for this not happen. At the very least, recognition in the technical categories, especially Best Costume Design, feels like a given but we're going to see much more than just that come next year.
If “Black Panther” is nominated for best picture, then I will surely be in disagreement given that I had a mixed reaction to the film, but most of film critics will likely be doing somersaults, as its 88 Metascore and 97% Rotten Tomatoes rating indicates strong support for an Academy awards push. The film has audiences and critics on its side.
It would, no doubt, be a major accomplishment as no superhero movie has ever been nominated for Best Picture. However, it's not like superhero films weren't buzzed as potential Best Picture contenders in the past, “Wonder Woman,” "Logan," and "The Dark Knight" were all touted, at some point in time, as potential Picture nominees. In fact, the latter not being nominated resulted in such an embarrassment for the academy that they ended up going from 5 nominees to 10 the next year.
Original Star Wars movies blocked from Disney streaming until 2024. Turner broadcasting acquired rights in 2016, does not want to sell them back.
In news that had rocked the industry to its core, Disney announced late last year that it would, eventually, be pulling its movies from Netflix and starting a new streaming service solely composed of the Disney content — past, present, and future — which actually is pretty gigantic and could easily fill any streaming service. The goal was, maybe still is, to launch the branded streaming service in 2019, which will be home for all their feature films and TV shows. It’s a huge move, but one that was inevitable.
However, a roadblock has just been widened for Disney to include its most prized possession in their streaming service: Star Wars.
Bloomberg is reporting that when Disney sold the TV broadcast rights for the original Star Wars films to Turner Broadcasting in 2016, it also sold it the streaming rights ... Until 2024. TBS, which is an AT&T-owned broadcaster, will not be giving up the rights to Disney anytime soon, at least not without the overblown, desired price that they are asking for.
TBS shows the "Star Wars" movies a ton these days. It's their new "Shawshank Redemption."
A major blow for Disney. Star Wars was supposed to feature heavily in their streaming plans [with live action and animated series already in the works.] And so, for the first five years, Disney's streaming company will have to do without the first six installments of the Star Wars franchise.
There are no details yet on price points or plans, but it does seem like for now, Disney’s streaming service will be in the U.S. only (which may mean their partnership with Netflix in other territories, such as Canada, may continue until the various rights issues are untangled). However, we may get some insight into how it all works when Disney launches their separate, ESPN-branded sports streaming service next year.
Nowadays, everyone wants to jump into the future and start their own streaming service, but it’s not the easiest thing to do. However, Disney has the content to back it up. The times are certainly changing, and it looks like the dream of cord cutting to save on cable costs is becoming slightly warped. If people started purchasing multiple streaming subscriptions, those costs add up, and it would be no different than paying for cable. Is it inevitable that we will all soon ditch cable and just subscribe to multiple streaming services? The possibility is there.
"Fargo" Season 4: Chris Rock cast in the lead as 1950's mafia godfather
We all had our doubts when we first heard that Joel and Ethan Coen's masterpiece "Fargo" was going to get adapted for the small screen, courtesy of FX, but after the first episode of creator Noah Hawley's brilliant series adapatation we were converted.
If you've yet to catch up to the FX show that bears the same name and style of dramedy as the Coen's 1996 Minnesota film noir masterpiece, then you are quite possibly missing out on the best show on TV. The first season was a home run, the second season was a near-miracle of multiple moving parts, maybe the best season of television since Season 4 of "Breaking Bad”, and finally the third season might not have satisfied every fan, including myself, with its multitudes of ambiguities and unlikeable characters, but it had its fair share of brilliant moments.
Given the show's popularity, and the rave reviews that have greeted it over the last three seasons, you would think Hawley would be all for a fourth season happening, but his reluctance had been showing more and more ever since the final episode of season three aired more than 2 months ago. It's not like FX wasn't ready for it either, they too wanted more "Fargo," FX CEO John Landgraf even stating that he's waiting for a pitch.
Today we got word that not only is a fourth season happening, but it will star Chris Rock as Godfather of the 1950's Kansas City mafia.
Titled “Year Four,” as creator Noah Hawley prefers to say, this fourth season has Rock's head of the Kansas City mafia going to war with the Italian mafia. “I’m a fan of ‘Fargo’ and I can’t wait to work with Noah,” Rock said in a statement.
Here's the official snyopsis:
In 1950, at the end of two great American migrations — that of Southern Europeans from countries like Italy, who came to the US at the turn of the last century and settled in northern cities like New York, Chicago — and African Americans who left the south in great numbers to escape Jim Crow and moved to those same cities — you saw a collision of outsiders, all fighting for a piece of the American dream. In Kansas City, Missouri, two criminal syndicates have struck an uneasy peace. One Italian, one African American. Together they control an alternate economy — that of exploitation, graft and drugs. This too is the history of America. To cement their peace, the heads of both families have traded their eldest sons.
Chris Rock plays the head of one family, a man who — in order to prosper — has surrendered his oldest boy to his enemy, and who must in turn raise his son’s enemy as his own. It’s an uneasy peace, but profitable. And then the head of the Kansas City mafia goes into the hospital for routine surgery and dies. And everything changes. It’s a story of immigration and assimilation, and the things we do for money. And as always, a story of basically decent people who are probably in over their heads. You know, Fargo.
Hawley stated that he reached out to Rock about the part because he “really wanted to work with Chris.”
The ambition and sheer scope of the series has been nothing short of groundbreaking and, although we still have a few unanswered questions about the last season, and the season before it, answers will likely never come since the beauty of the show is open to the never-ending mysteries of life. Hawley's show casts a dark, almost miraculous spell thanks to its writing, acting, directing, cinematography, music and set design, which are all spot-on and in sync with its creator's artistic vision.
Hawley, like any other genius, doesn't force it, he just waits it out and let's it happen until, boom, an idea strikes in his head and the creative juices start rolling.
In the meantime, the "Fargo" creator's feature directorial debut, “Pale Blue Dot,” with Natalie Portman, is expected to hit theaters in 2019. He has been working on his other series, FX's X-Men universe series "Legion," which just wrapped its first, very successful, season. There's also talk that Hawley will make a "Doctor Doom" movie. Suffice to say, he is turning into one hot commodity and seems to be gunning for Hollywood as well.
Seth Rogen Apologizes For the Use of Blackface on the Set of New Movie ‘Good Boys’
Here's the crux in regards to the whole Seth Rogen controversy that suddenly emerged today.
A complaint was filed to producers on the set of the upcoming comedy “Good Boys," produced by Rogen and Evan Goldberg. This complaint stated that the film used a stand-in for 11-year-old actor Keith L. Williams wearing makeup to darken his face. This sparked outrage on social media.
Both the stand-in and Williams are African-American. Good Universe, the production company behind "Good Boys" told TMZ that the makeup was used to match the stand-in’s lighter skin tone, and that it's “not uncommon for lighting purposes to match actors’ skin tones.” However, IndieWire asked three cinematographers about the incident, and were told that the practice of blackface for the sake of darkening shadow was "unorthodox."
A black stand-in, who is not appearing on camera, shouldn't be counted as blackface. The fact that IndieWire actually went to the lengths they went, by asking pros about the incident, is not actually helpful.
This was just for lighting. It wasn't like they got a white actor and put blackface on them. Welcome to today's world, folks.
Oh, and Seth Rogen has now apologized for the incident:
“I should start by saying this shouldn’t have happened, and I’m terribly sorry it did,” Rogen said. “I won’t give excuses for why it happened. I’ll just say that as soon I was made aware of it, I ensured we put an end to it – and I give my word that on any project my team and I are involved in, we will take every precaution to make sure something similar does not take place again. I’m engaging in conversations to make sure I find the best way to do that. It’s on me to be proactive. Reacting isn’t enough."
“It is important for me to cast a person with similar complexion and physical stature to the actors they are standing in for,” the cinematographer said. “In regards to makeup, I’ve seen wigs used and powder to take down shine, but maybe not as extreme as what is being suggested here. I personally would never ask for someone to be made up in a darker tone. You would just compensate for what you understand to be lighter or darker while lighting.”
“Good Boy” is set for release in 2019.
Has the P.C. Movement Killed Good Comedy? Tim Allen Seems To Think So.
Tim Allen has been around the comedy block for more than 4 decades now, he knows his stuff and if he spots changes and/or differences that have happened throughout the years, well, you should probably believe what he says.
The 65 year-old comedian has, more or less, confirmed my beliefs that we are living in some kind of doomsday for comedy. Comedians have been too scared to "go there" and run the risk of offending with a simple joke.
Allen was part of a panel discussion when he made these comments [Via EW]:
"It’s a very icy time. I’ve been a comedian for 38 years and I’ve never seen it, like Lenny Bruce said at the Purple Onion, ‘We’ve gone backwards.’ There are things you can’t say. There are things you shouldn’t say. Who makes up these rules? And as a stand-up comic, it’s a dangerous position to be in because I like pushing buttons. It’s unfortunate.”
Which artist doesn't like pushing buttons? Isn't the whole point of art to "push buttons," break people out of their comfort zones, make them see the world in a new light etc. Regardless of the situation that we find ourselves in, I do think a major backlash will eventually happen against the P.C. movement, which is primarily being enforced on social media, ESPECIALLY Twitter, where a group of disenfranchised youth and adult-identifying "children" moan and groan about anything they deem too offensive for their timid minds.
if you look at the most successful comedies of the '80s, 90's and 00's you will notice how irreverent, risky and outrageous many of them were. 90% of them wouldn't be made today just by the sheer fear of offending, No, really, just look at my list of the best comedies of the 2000s, would any of these films pass the purity test?
Superbad, Step Brothers, The Hangover, Wedding Crashers, Dodgeball, Anchorman, The 40 Year Old Virgin, Old School, Tropic Thunder, Pineapple Express, Borat, Team America: World Police, Role Models, Bad Santa, Little Miss Sunshine, Mean Girls, School of Rock, Meet the Parents, Zoolander
In these crazy times, it's just amazing thinking how Robert Downey Jr did blackface in "Tropic Thunder" and got away with it unharmed. His career still intact. If "Tropic" were released today, could he get away with that? Makes you think ... pic.twitter.com/qF6L8MqzaS— Jordan Ruimy (@mrRuimy) July 5, 2018
I espoused the death of comedy at the movies earlier this week, in the aptly titled feature "The 2010s: The Worst Decade For Comedies."
Matt Reeves: ‘The Batman’ Will Not Be An Origin Story, Isn't Based On Any Particular Comic
It's been quite some time since we last heard about Matt Reeves' "The Batman." No, really, it's been at least two weeks. Regardless, ever since Reeves' film was announced it resulted in a continuous flow of rumors which always seemed to contradict the last report. The same kind of back and forth pendulum-swinging story.
For example, gossip and hearsay have swirled for months on whether or not Ben Affleck will be staying on as Batman in the DCEU.
At a TCA panel about the upcoming series “The Passage” Reeves (via Slash Film), opened up about the progress he is making, Ben Affleck’s status, and is it an origin story?
“We are working on getting our draft [in] the next couple weeks,” Reeves said. “Right now, my head is totally into the script. Right now, I’m going to be leaving here to go back to work on the script.”
Reeves also stated that he would like for the film to be start production either “spring or early summer”.
As for the elephant in the room: Ben Affleck. “We’re one piece of many pieces so I don’t want to comment on that except to say that I’m focused very specifically on this aspect of the DC world,” the filmmaker said.
Jesus. So that means DC still hasn't decided on whether they are keeping Affleck or not.
As for whether or not this will be an origin movie, Reeves says that his script is not even based on a particular comic. “We’re not doing any particular [comic],” Reeves said. “’Year One’ is one of the many comic books that I love. We are definitely not doing ‘Year One.’ It’s just exciting to be focused very specifically on a tale that is defining for him and very personal to him. Obviously we’re not doing an origin tale or anything like that. We’re doing a story that is definitively Batman though and trying to tell a story that’s emotional and yet is really about him being the world’s greatest detective and all the things that for me, since I was a kid, made me love Batman.”
“I’ve talked about making it a very point of view noir-driven definitive Batman story in which he is investigating a particular case and that takes us out into the world of Gotham,” Reeves said. “I went on a deep dive again revisiting all my favorite comics. Those all inform by osmosis. There’s no continuation of the Nolan films. It’s very much trying to find a way to do this as something that for me is going to be definitively Batman and new and cool.”
Variety: Disney Unlikely to Rehire James Gunn for ‘Guardians of the Galaxy 3’
When Disney fired writer-director James Gunn from Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 3, due to some old offensive tweets which were dug up, we figured a backlash might happen. Disney had to protect its family friendly image, Gunn's tweets were far from innocent, so the decision to oust the writer-director was a no-brainer. Earlier this week, the cast of 'Guardians' had released a statement in support of Gunn. The statement read as "yes, we know his tweets were wrong, but Gunn is a good guy and has grown as an individual since then.
The cast begging Disney to reinstate Gunn seems to have not worked at all, Variety is reporting that Disney is unlikely to rehire Gunn. “I don’t see Disney re-hiring him,” said a person close to the toon company. “Those tweets were so horrible and Disney has a different standard then other studios.” The article also states that “Gunn’s firing was approved by Disney Studios chief Alan Horn, with his boss, company CEO Bob Iger weighing in on the final decision.” the article goes on to add “Disney insiders say the company was not aware of the offensive tweets and was taken aback when they were recirculated.”
Listen, I won't delve into the nitty-gritty of what
Disney qualifies as “standards," but Gunn's tweets were fairly outrageous
and not welcome at all. However, people are allowed to change, better
themselves, progress. After all, politicians that didn't support gay
marriage just a decade ago have done a 180 and support it today (Obama,
Clinton, most of the Democratic Party). Have they been fired for their past? Of
course not. People are allowed to adapt to the times, aren't they? Let us not
forget that the man himself, Walt Disney, had a terrible
past of anti-Semitism and associating himself with Extremist groups. Do we
now have to change Disney's name to forget about the past, of course not and,
anyways, they can't afford to change the name because of how the ridiculous
value of the Disney brand.
Variety also adds that, despite their protests, the 'Guardians' actors cannot exit 'Guardians 3' due to contractual obligations. What will Disney do then to replace Gunn's uniquely irreverent style? Oh, and how about that '70s kitschy soundtrack Guardians is so well known to use? Who knows! But it looks like Disney thrust themselves in lose-lose situation, a controversy that isn't about to be silenced.
‘If Beale Street Could Talk’ Trailer Hints at Another Lushly-told Story from Barry Jenkins
Word is that Barry Jenkins' "If Beale Street Could Talk" is an extremely artsy take on the James Baldwin novel set in 1970's Harlem and having to do with a wrongful prison conviction. The film, Jenkins' follow-up to his 2016 Oscar Best Picture winner "Moonlight," has been test screening in Los Angeles for a few months now, and word of mouth has been decidedly mixed.
Jenkins brought "Moonlight" to Telluride a few years ago, where he was the toast of the town. The director has a long history with the festival, starting there as a volunteer and then, eventually, being in charge of shorts program. It doesn't help that "If Beale Street Could Talk" is set to NOT appear at Telluride later this month. It will premiere at the Toronto International Film Festival instead.
Here’s the synopsis for James Baldwin’s "If Beale Street Could Talk":
"In this honest and stunning novel, James Baldwin has given America a moving story of love in the face of injustice. Told through the eyes of Tish, a nineteen-year-old girl, in love with Fonny, a young sculptor who is the father of her child, Baldwin’s story mixes the sweet and the sad. Tish and Fonny have pledged to get married, but Fonny is falsely accused of a terrible crime and imprisoned. Their families set out to clear his name, and as they face an uncertain future, the young lovers experience a kaleidoscope of emotions–affection, despair, and hope. In a love story that evokes the blues, where passion and sadness are inevitably intertwined, Baldwin has created two characters so alive and profoundly realized that they are unforgettably ingrained in the American psyche."
I mentioned that French audiences have been rating “Ebenezer” highly. It has a 4 on AlloCiné, which is roughly an A/A- CinemaScore. Well, last night's PostTrak for U.S. audiences was just as good, with 4.5 stars.