Today's News: movies, chappies and junkies

There's been some neat news these past few days, and I got a chance to post my fair share:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157896/nieuwe_trailer_voor_the_hobbit_the_battle_of_the_five_armies

A rather decent little trailer, says I. Seems Middle-Earth will go out with an appopriate bang, as did The Hobbit book to a lesser extent. Moderation surely isn't Peter Jackson's style, particularly if he knows he's not likely to show off like this again. Might as well go all-out one last time. Tolkien purists surely gave up on him right after An Unexpected Journey anyway. This precious trailer looks breathtaking and makes me water my mouth accordingly. However, I'm not the one who needs to be convinced to go see this movie, as I've been planning to do so for a few years now. I guess this trailer doesn't really need to be enticing anyway, as people who want to see the movie will see it anyway and people who don't, won't be pulled in any more by this preview, even if it does look awesome. This trailer definitely is for the fans, who live in the greatest of anticipation for one more month before the cinematic age of Middle-Earth comes crashing down. Unless they do find a way to decently adapt The Silmarillion for the big screen after all.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157867/eerste_trailer_minions

Then there's this trailer. There's a multitude of evil minions in Tolkien's stories, but none are as cute as these. You don't see Orcs getting a movie of their own. (Well, you do, but that's not what I mean.) But it's clear people enjoyed the shenanigans of Gru's little aides more than they did Gru's own sinister schemes, so a spin-off was required by the laws of Hollywood. It's still unclear whether Steve Carell's Gru is in the movie, as some sites claim he is while others deny as much. I think it likely this will serve as an origin story, showing how Gru and the Minions hooked up. Do we need to know that? Not really. I guess people just really like the Minions so much they want to see more of them than their creators originally intended. They're kinda like the Smurfs in that regard: they're small and there's many of them with various personalities, they have their own language, they're monochromatic, etc. If they're indeed a runaway success, will that mean we'll forget about Gru the same way the majority of the Smurfs reader are not aware of Johan and Pirrewiet? That would be a shame, as I think the Minions work best playing off Gru, who himself is an equally delightful character (the voice and nose alone crack me up). It's up to this Minions movie to determine whether the Minions have a staying power of their on, or whether we prefer Gru to be present as well.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157866/junkie_xl_werkt_mee_aan_soundtrack_batman_v_superman

As a fellow Dutchman it's of course expected of me to feel a sense of pride at Junkie XL's accomplishments. Well sure: good job, Mr. XL! Other than that this news doesn't evoke much emotional feelings in me other than gladness we'll be getting a good score for Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (now if only we also got a good title...). Hans Zimmer's status as one of the world's leading movie soundtrack composers has long since been established. His tunes can be heard during my workouts on many an occasion (Gladiator is a particular favourite of mine). Junkie XL is just a bonus. His track record of Hollywood scores is still on the short side, but so far he has done well. I liked his score for 300: Rise of an Empire more than the one from its predecessor. Divergent's soundtrack is not nearly as memorable - can't remember a single accord of it for the life of me, to be honest - but at least it didn't leave as sour a taste as the rest of that film did. I like the notion of two composers sharing duties between superheroes' separate scores. It makes sense someone else trackles Batman for this film, as Zimmer already scored that character for the entire Dark Knight trilogy. Since this is a different Batman, a different theme is in order and so a different composer is a logical conclusion. Since we are talking about the same Superman as the one from Man of Steel however, it's only apt that Zimmer keeps scoring him. Big question now is: who's gonna score the inevitable combined superhero/Justice League theme? Zimmer, XL or somebody else entirely?

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157879/eerste_trailer_chappie

Neill Blomkamp continues to dabble in socially pertinent science fiction flicks. It worked out great in District 9, a little less so with Elysium, but there's still more contemporary injustice to be commented upon. From the looks of the trailer, Chappie seems to deal with a 'nature versus nurture' debate: does an artificial intelligence become a criminal because he was "raised" in such an environment, or were there signs of bad behaviour in his personality from the get-go? Does he acknowledge good from evil to begin with, or are such notions beyond his understanding because of the limits in his programming? Is a life of crime considered a logical and reasonable existence under the situations according to the codes written within him? It'll be interesting to see what Blomkamp has to say on the matter, since things are never so black and white in his work. The gritty, down-to-earth look of his Sci-Fi remains catchy, especially in a story closer to home than one dealing with space stations and exoskeletons. This film definitely is worth keeping an eye on. It'll be fascinating to see a robot attempting a robbery for financial gain, rather than a bunch of them trying to take over the world for a change.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157895/titel_star_wars_episode_vii_onthuld

Meh... Damn silly title. I can understand it's not an Episode proper, considering the new studio, the new director and the new direction the franchise takes (but despite the very old cast members returning). But I still find Star Wars Episode VII to be a catchier title than Star Wars: The Force Awakens. The latter kinda sounds like a video game, a bastard child of Star Wars: The Force Unleashed or something. And is this title suggesting the actual Force was asleep during all the previous movies? Yeah, right! I guess J.J. Abrams is the 'Force' in question and he has awoken to make something new and exciting of the franchise (or so he thinks), rather than the dull generic crap he pushed on us with his dreadful Star Trek reboots, during which he was obviously too much asleep to give a crap. And please tell me that isn't the official logo for the movie. It looks like a cheap fan creation. Not that there aren't any fans who could have come up with better titles, of course. How about Star Wars Episode VII: The Empire Takes Over the Franchise?

Today's News: a tidal wave of old news

The situation remains unchanged. I have time to post news on MovieScene on a (more or less) daily basis, but the same cannot be said for my blog. Of course, you can question the validity of commenting on (old) news on a blog with only six followers to begin with, but my obsessive-compulsive mind won't let me do so. So I continue to struggle on this quest to catch up with myself, seemingly doomed from its inception. Whatever. I ain't the giving-up type.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157521/eerste_teaser_tomorrowland

Yup, that's a teaser alright. It offers only a glimpse into the story of this movie, focusing on the pin as a means of interdimensional(?) travel. We'll have to fill in the rest for ourselves, including the (intellectual) nature of the relationship between the young girl and the middle-aged inventor. It's Disney, so it will be pretty harmless on the surface no doubt. Then again, there already is a theme of juvenile delinquency present here, and I'm curious as to how far this will be taken. It's probably an 'unlikely heroine' case, where the world simply isn't ready for the misunderstood protagonist, while the oddbal inventor, also undoubtedly a social outcast, proves not all grown-ups are like that. And so they bond and have wonderful adventures in a weird and wacky wonderland beyond the reach of us ordinary mortals who pay to witness them. Not much of a 'wow' factor as of yet: as this is a teaser and most of the many expensive and complex VFX shots are still a work in progress, we have to make do with only a shot or two. Unless you consider a field of wheat a spectacular sight.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157539/lea_seydoux_misschien_de_nieuwe_bondgirl

Well, duh! Seydoux, to my mind, is the quintessential type of actress to assume the mantle of the Bondgirl: sultry, sexy, undeniably talented, a hint of sexual danger behind her eyes and a succinctly European attitude. I am not surprised she's up for a part in Bond 24. I considered it only a matter of time. Just remember how well she performed in a similar genre movie like Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol. I do find it interesting that her part was originally intended to be filled by a Scandinavian actress. Of course she is enough of a chameleon to play a Northern-European broad, I even have faith in her ability to pull off the accent convincingly (which is not an attribute I normally credit persons of a French descent with). It just seems a shame for all the Scandinavian actresses who didn't make the cut because Seydoux beat them to it. Could it be another example of Americans generalizing all European nationalities as interchangeable (as us Europeans often tend to do with Americans from different states)? I doubt that, considering the diversity in nationalities from the people behind this picture. The director for example is British, as is most of the main cast. And the director of photography is a Dutchman. There's a little bit of pride in me for that, I'll admit. As I feel for Mademoiselle Seydoux, who happens to be the granddaughter of my highest ranking international boss. So yeah, her intense performance in La Vie d'Adele was quite an eye-opener for me, and if you have seen that film (which you should have) you bloody well know what I'm referring to. That's not gonna happen in Bond 24, I'm sure.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157541/lego_batman_film_aangekondigd

I'm not entirely convinced this is a good idea. The LEGO Batman character seemed to work fine bouncing off of other characters in witty repartees, but could the arrogant superhero toy actually carry his own movie? And would that be a smart move, considering a new version of the Dark Knight in the flesh is currently also developed, played by an actor many consider to be wrongly cast? It appears to be a case of bad timing and it may backfire on Warner/DC. Or maybe the exact opposite will happen, because both takes on the same character are so stupendously different (at least, we assume they will be at this point). However, I'm quite convinced the sequel to The LEGO Movie should take precedence over this spin-off and ought to star the brick version of the Caped Crusader as a side character yet again, to see whether the joke's still funny then. There's something gratuitous to famous characters, real or fictional, being LEGO-ized. It's simply an easy gag, has been for decades (remember this one, from the days LEGO movie tie-ins were still a spanking new phenomenon?). Even now that we learned to get used to LEGO making brick versions of many a major movie franchise, those minifigure versions of the real deals are not supposed to be the stuff of major motion pictures themselves. I guess it's up to LEGO Batman to prove whether that sentiment still holds true, or whether LEGO itself has finally been widely socially accepted as an 'artificial actor' playing different characters itself, even performing roles that have been and still are played many times before.

 
http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157547/eerste_trailer_serie_powers

Hardly a novel subject nor a novel approach. The 'reluctant buddy' team-up could definitely be called a staple this day and age, especially when one is gruff, rude and experienced (and male) and the other is young, rash and ideologically motivated (though not always necessarily female). The black/white motif is age-old as well. As for series based around the premise of superpowered individuals and their place in society, if any, we've also seen our fair share of those (The 4400, Heroes, Alphas). Gritty, grounded in reality, both room for cynicism aimed at and hope for the general human condition, check, check, check. Likely to be cancelled after a season or two, definite check. So what would make us watch this show? I like the casting choice of Sharlto Copley, he's not the most obvious actor for the part. Though he's best known for his comedic touch, he too often dabbles in distressing real-world scenarios mixed with a fantastic element (e.g. District 9). Plus, he has done grimy, dislikable characters before (e.g. Elysium, nevermind his overacting). So his involvement is a big pro. But is it enough to beat all the apparent cons? That remains to be seen.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157562/nieuwe_posters_hobbit_3

Did two reports on the deluge of Hobbit posters in my previous post, don't really feel the need to get repetitive here. Especially since these four new posters are equally dull as their predecessors, and don't do justice to the epicness that is in store for us (supposedly). I like the characters and the actors portraying them, but I don't need their sweat, blood and tears so in-my-face. Unlike the trailers, these posters don't get me pumped for this final Middle-Earth movie.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157561/resident_evil_en_mortal_instruments_series_aa

Sure, considering all the fabulous quality series currently on television, let's explore franchises that failed to find an audience on the big screen for regurgitating on the small screen. Then again, there has proven to be a definite audience for the Resident Evil films, as the sixth is currently in pre-production. None of them are serious blockbuster movies though, they all carry a B-movie stigma. They're totally the stuff of guilty pleasure and everybody knows it; they don't have good FX, good stories or good acting, but the fanbase keeps watching nonetheless. Probably because of all the hot women involved, like star Milla Jovovich. I doubt the series' budget could afford her though, which means there's one less succesful ingredient present in the series. They can find another 'hawt' action babe of course, but the audience needs time to get to appreciate her kicking ass. And poor Mortal Instruments doesn't even have the hot chick element in its favour, but since it's aimed at teenage girls, a few hot guys will suffice. Apparently demon slaying Jamie Campbell Bower didn't fit that bill, since the movie flopped so bad (though there were many other reasons for that, too). I think this franchise has a better chance at finding a new life on telly though, considering there's plenty of source material from the books to mine, plus most people obviously never bothered watching the film, so it might feel more 'new' than it actually is. And the young adult genre is still going strong at the movies, so maybe there's still a chance the failed flicks among them find an audience on television after all. So we can "look forward" to series based on the likes of Beautiful Creatures and The Host as well, possibly. Yay...

Today's News: still behind schedule

It's gonna take me a while longer to get back on track in regard to commenting on the bits of news I posted. As usual, time is against me:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157503/nieuwe_character_posters_hobbit_3

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157522/meer_characters_posters_hobbit_3

Wow, those are some bland posters. Just the faces of some of the protagonists, that's all we have to work with. Rather disappointing, as this is the last Hobbit movie, if not the final Middle-Earth movie (ever?), so you would think they'd go out with as much of a bang as the movie itself (though I may be assuming a little too much here, I doubt this trilogy will end on a boring note). We already know what the characters look like, so we would have liked to have seen a bit more of the environment they inhabit. A grand and elaborate banner (think the Bayeux Tapestry, but its Tolkien equivalent) was released last month that did a far better job of promoting the movie, capturing our imagination and firing our desire to see this film than this dull posters would ever do. The advertising art for both predecessors too looked much more appealing by comparison. Guess the promotional execs think it's all a matter of the little things. Assumptions from the characters' facial expressions are all we are left with, which is a pointless guessing game for those who have read the book. Why does Gandalf look so disheveled? What's up with Galadriel's determined gaze? And is Bilbo finally going to go berserk with that little sword of his? We'll have to watch the movie to find out. But then, we were planning to do so anyway, and these posters at the very least won't discourage us from doing so.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157443/eerste_teaser_pixars_inside_out

Finally, a new Pixar movie that's not a sequel! I'm not entirely sold on the concept though. It's intriguing, but hardly novel. However, Pixar usually tends to make such outlandish premises work just fine, and I'm hoping post-Brave Pixar won't do any different. You won't get any clear indication of the story just from watching this teaser, which only hints at the overall story (not that much info on that has been released so far, anyway). Not to mention it does a solid but sentimental job referencing all the Pixar greats - and some less great, too - we remember oh so fondly. This teaser is playing mostly on the past emotions of pleasure we experienced watching all the company's classics, as well as stimulating a strong emotion not characterized in the film: curiosity. But there's also plenty of room left for doubt, make no mistake. Which begs the issue, how come there's only five emotions in the girl's head? What happened to the rest of them? A philosophical debate about the nature of emotions and the way they rule our mind seems to be in short order. Though it's likely Pixar still has some surprises left on Inside Out's plot and the questions this teaser throws in our path about the logic of it all.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157465/logo_daredevil_serie_onthuld

Well, at least they got the logo right. That's straight off the comic books' covers, that is. Though the usual subtitle 'The Man Without Fear' is absent, but this works equally well. A return to the comics' greatness (on-again/off-again, honestly) is sure in order after the Ben Affleck version, which showed little of that. Currently, New York Comic-Con is in full swing and so far the Daredevil panel was by far the most fascinating occurrence. The concept art looked pretty neat, the first released pictures gave some pretty sweet glimpses, except maybe for the titular character's costume. Though I have a sense it's not the final piece, but more like Daredevil's initial stab at a costume (á la Spider-Man's ludicrous wrestling attire in Sam Raimi's first movie). It would be a bit of a downer if this series' superhero ran around with a black handkerchief for a mask for the whole show. I guess Marvel has to find ways to cut the budget somewhere...

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157499/toch_een_iron_man_4

And one reason the studio has to do just that involves the exorbitant pay cheques demanded by its star performers these days. Robert Downey Jr. is by far the most expensive of the lot of them, as his salary for Iron Man 3 amounted to no less than 50 million (!) dollars, reportedly. So small wonder Marvel is looking for way to dodge such excessive costs on future projects. One way to get rid of Downey Jr. would be to quit making Iron Man films. The man is still contractually obliged to assume the character's mantle for two more Avengers flicks, but they could end it there by using those films to find a narrative way to replace him with another character to fill his iron shoes. It's not like that sort of thing isn't constantly happening in the source material. Remember Thor is currently a female in the comics? Which would only entice audiences more strongly to find out what the heck is going on. Of course, that would mean spectators will have to get used to an Iron Man without Tony Stark (no way they are gonna recast that character, considering how beloved Downey Jr.'s take on him is). I have no qualms with that. The Marvel Universe is so much larger than just one popular guy, and the movies have still barely scratched the surface. I'm all for a new Iron Character if it saves Marvel from bankruptcy so they can keep on making highly enjoyable superhero movies. I doubt we're going to see an Iron Man 4 with Robert Downey Jr. in the starring role again (and he himself apparently doubts it very much as well, considering his conflicted reponses to the 50 million dollar question), and if that be the case, I don't mind. There's various ways to deal with that in compelling storytelling (in fact, the matter has already been explored in both Iron Man 2 and 3), and I have confidence that the House of Ideas will pull it off once more. Iron Woman sounds like a wonderful notion, so bring it on!

It's raining news, hallelujah!

Comic-Con made sure there was plenty of news to post this last week. Here's some of my more recent contributions to MovieScene's ever growing archives:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156694/comic-con_laatste_concept_art_posters_avengers_2_

I already commented on these Avengers: Age of Ultron concept art posters before, so I'll skip that for these latest one-sheet releases, which finally complete the whole picture (see above). There's not much to say about these Hulk and Thor posters, as they add little of novelty value to the project as a whole. Save for the colour of the Hulk's pants maybe, which has finally traded in the dark blue of the previous movie for the iconic pink everybody associates with the character.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156693/comic-con_gunn_terug_voor_regie_guardians_of_the_galaxy_2

This too comes as little of a surprise considering the overwhelmingly positive feedback in prerelease and press showings for the Guardians' first adventure, set to debut worldwide in two weeks. Of course it will remain to be seen whether enough audiences will connect with this oddball intergalactic team of rogues to make Marvel the big bucks as the studio is now preparing for. However, since there's little else of consequence released in theaters this upcoming month, I think it's guaranteed this next entry in Marvel's Phase 2 will do tremendously well at the box office. Which only works in director James Gunn's favour. At this moment, Marvel will stick to directors who have proven their worth and can smoothly work with the studio without creative issues, considering the woes which have befallen Ant-Man's production of late after its director resigned, which continues to have serious ramifications for the project. Stability is now Marvel's prime concern, and when that aspect is paired with profit there's no reason why a capable director shouldn't be rehired to make the second installment turn out as good, if not better, than its predecessor. So go, Gunn!

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156718/comic-con_toekomstige_tegenstanders_godzilla_bekend

It seems Gareth Edwards also aims for stability when it comes to his blockbuster success, the rebooted Godzilla. Fans praised the first film's take on the titular character, but proved less enthusiastic when it came to his antagonists, a pair of mutated prehistoric giant bugs invented solely for this film. They did their job serving as cannon fodder for the King of Monsters though, but now it's time to raise the bar. And what better way to do so than by also rebooting his classic gallery of adversaries? General audiences won't mind whatever creature gets hammered by the Big G (or the occasional vice versa), as long as they get enough bang for their bucks. If there's one thing Edwards showed with his first Godzilla feature, it's that he too is an avid fan of the original Japanese films. So it comes as little surprise that he opts to reintroduce everybody's favorite Godzilla enemies: the mythical giant bug Mothra, the humongous Pterodactyl Rodan (both characters got their own movies too back in the days) and last but not least, Gojira's prima nemesis, the three headed armoured space dragon King Ghidorah. Hopefully Edwards won't play all his cards all at once, but distributes the dose of retro monsters a bit evenly for the already announced pair of sequels, so as to prevent Kaiju overkill in Godzilla 2. As superhero movies have showed of late, there's such a thing as too many cool characters in a single film making a mess of the story. Of course, the Godzilla movies are all about characters making a mess of things while the story is subservient to such rampage, but it can't hurt to save your strongest assets for later.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156717/comic-con_kong_wederom_king

And with the renewed interest in giant monsters comes word that Hollywood doesn't mean to keep that other royal creature dead for long. King Kong too will soon be seen again on the big screen where he belongs, but not in another remake. Which is a good thing, as the last one was produced less than a decade ago and proved to be quite a memorable rehash compared to most of them, so there wouldn't be a need to retell that classic Beauty and the Beast tale just yet. So it seems a prequel is the route the studio chooses, which is also not the most exciting notion to my mind. Do we need to know how Kong became King of Skull Island? It kinda seems a given: it's survival of the fittest and Kong fits that description best, killing every sinister subject that defies his will. There doesn't seem to be much more to it. Of course you can introduce another group of people stumbling on the island and exploring its monster infested interior, getting into conflict with the giant gorilla. Heck, you could even throw another pretty girl into the mix. The result would be predictable though, as we all know how Kong came to his eventual demise, and we never cared as much about the human characters' plight as we did about the ape's. Even though I loved the various incarnations of Skull Island (as I'm a big sucker for monster movies), this project makes me hesitant. That said, it's produced by the same studio - not Peter Jackson's - as the current Godzilla franchise is. Do I smell a potential crossover here?

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156733/comic-con_trailer_the_hobbit_the_battle_of_the_five_armies

Speaking of Peter Jackson, he too has a little franchise in the works, and it is coming to an end. A dramatic and emotionally charged end, the new trailer would seem to indicate. Not to mention epic. Needless to say this trailer got me super stoked for the final Hobbit film, which I already was to begin with (yay, Hollywood hype effectively working its magic for five more months!). Parallells with that other closing chapter of a Middle-Earth movie trilogy were bound to be drawn, and the trailer capitalizes on that sentiment by adding just another link with PJ's Lord of the Rings films in the shape of Pippin's tearjerking Home is Behind song playing over the imagery. It's a nice touch, though it hammers the point home harder than might be wise. Nevertheless, what's to dislike in this trailer? Big battles, a giant dragon (bound to be killed off in the first 20 minutes of the film due to the way the book is adapted, but still), all kinds of intriguing cultures and creatures clashing and a top cast bringing it all to life. As I'm not a Tolkien purist, I won't complain about some of the additions the writers made to the story, like that car chase over ice. Keeps some surprises to the whole if you already read the book. But what do we have to look forward to when it's all over? When Lord of the Rings ended, we had The Hobbit still to come (though that took nine effing years!). But could this truly be the end of our cinematic adventures in Middle-Earth? What do we do with ourselves then?

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156732/comic-con_tarantino_bevestigt_tweede_poging_hateful_eight

I knew it! You don't brisquely cancel a whole movie, pre-production already in progress, just because someone leaks a script. Screenplays get leaked online all the time. When any movie hits theaters, few people lack the chance to get to look the whole story up on the Internet if they so choose. Which most folks don't, because they want to see it in theaters anyway. When Tarantino first scrapped the project, he stated he might publish it in book form. That would have been the true waste, as we already have a downloadable written version of this story online thanks to that leak. But in Tarantino's case, it's the filmed version we want. Why read that book if the alternative is another one of his expertly written motion pictures starring a great cast determined to make it work? So it was a given Tarantino would decide to make that film sooner rather than later after all. Which makes me wonder whether his whole tantrum about the affair, or even the affair itself, wasn't just some big publicity stunt to create public awareness and interest for The Hateful Eight. Maybe it was just a hateful Tarantino getting in the right mood to direct the project.

Today's Triple News: Comic-Con comes but once a year

With Comic-Con currently in progression, there's bits of news to post online almost every minute. Of course, not everything is breaking news, and I can't post it all by myself. But I post whatever I can whenever I can, like these few bits of news:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156653/eerste_fotos_en_poster_derde_hobbit

Now that's a damn spectacular teaser poster! While many teaser posters tend to take a rather minimalist (though often inventive) approach to get audiences aware of the impending arrival of the movie in question, this one goes straight for one of the highlights in the movie. It can afford too, since the scene in question, though of major importance and containing some hefty spoilers for those who haven't read the books, takes place early in the movie, with most of the story, including the titular battle, following in its wake. It doesn't give away the outcome of this particular fight - Bard the Bowman versus the humongous dragon Smaug - but makes the inquisitive viewer, especially those who have seen both previous installments, want to see how it ends. Of course, it would seem unlikely Bard stands a chance, but there's been enough small bits of information feeded to audiences in The Desolation of Smaug to let us know even this giant dragon is not wholly invincible. In the meantime, Lake Town burns, just as Smaug promised. That will have consequences, naturally. And that's when the story of this third Hobbit movie really kicks into gear. So expect another three-hour epic fantasy flick in typical Peter Jackson style, laced with neat-o effects and some lovely acting interspersed throughout. As for the first two stills also released here, they aren't nearly as eye catching, but examination of the characters suggests shifting alliances, which might cause them to contain more story information than this poster. It's just not brought in as exciting a manner.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156651/anthony_hopkins_in_hbos_westworld

Another major A-list actor has been added to HBO's repertoire. I'm not talking about Evan Rachel Wood, though I don't mean to negatively critique her fine abilities to act. But hey, she already was an HBO alum thanks to her role in True Blood as a spoiled and childish vampire queen. But Hopkins, one of the greatest and most distinguished British actors ever, a 'Sir' nonetheless... you can't get much better than that for any role, be it on TV or on the big screen. Ten years ago, nobody would have believed someone of such stature would ever bother doing TV. It signifies just how much television has changed in respect as a medium. TV is where the best writing and the best acting is found nowadays, few people will disagree. Hopkins sure wouldn't, considering the praise he put into a letter to Bryan Cranston, telling him how thoroughly impressed he was by his performance on Breaking Bad and admiring the series high quality overall. It seems Hopkins himself caught the television bug as well afterwards. Good for us, as grand actors are never a bad thing in any medium, plus it might balance J.J. Abrams' input on HBO's Westworld. Hopkins is playing a bad guy, something he does even better than anything else he plays (cannibal or otherwise). Wood however gets to play a sympathetic character, and an abused artificial one at that. I am hesitant about the love plot written in for her, but at least it adds a dynamic not seen in the original Westworld, a good but dated Sci-Fi movie in itself. The stakes just got raised for HBO. Fortunately there's money to spare soon, now that both True Blood and Boardwalk Empire are coming to an end. All good things must be replaced by other good things after all.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156689/comic-con_meer_concept_art_voor_avengers_2

No Comic-Con without a comic book movie, preferably one from Marvel. They call this 'concept art', but from the looks of it, all the concepts found in this poster had already been accepted into the movie as a whole. As we have seen in the various behind-the-scenes stills and official photos for Avengers: Age of Ultron, all the Avengers seen on this eight panel picture look almost exactly as they will in the film. With the possible exception of the Vision, as this is the first glimpse of that character we're offered. They stuck close to his looks in the comics, it would appear, though at this angle it's hard to say for sure. The overall shape and colour scheme sure seem to fit. By comparison, Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch don't look nearly as trite-but-true to their comic book counterparts, though that's done to make them feel a little more realistic. This Quicksilver looks a heck of a lot different from the one seen in X-Men: Days of Future Past so as to minimize confusion between both incarnations. It's gonna be a hard act to outrun the previous take on Quicksilver, though the presence of his sister (and her eventual husband, artificial and all) will surely be helpful in that regard. As is the suggestion this poster gives this Quicksilver will be much more involved into the superhero action, fighting nasty robots and such. The X-Men Quicksilver just bailed out on that one and let his fellow mutants handle those Sentinels all by themselves...

Today's Double News: Flashy new Hobbit name

Here's a double bit of recent movie news for y'all:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/155362/derde_hobbit_krijgt_nieuwe_naam

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/155325/fox_produceert_remake_flash_gordon

You can't keep a legendary Sci-Fi franchise down forever. Interest in it waxes and wanes, and always it comes back, though it may take a few decades. Flash Gordon is about as classic a name in the genre as they come, currently celebrating his 80th birthday no less. Still, most members of the contemporary audience will probably recognize the name only from being (lovingly) made fun of in Seth MacFarlane's recent comedy Ted. Admittedly, I have never seen or read any of the various incarnations myself (for shame!). I guess I should at least check out the 1980 movie, which is arguably the most well remembered version on the character's tale around. From what I know about the adventures of Flash, the most important aspect of a potentially successful remake is not to make it feel corny and kitsch. Though it cannot be denied that the character has had a great impact on popular culture and the Sci-Fi genre in particular - Star Wars owes more than a few of its narrative make-up to the 1930s' space hero - its familiarity also caused the genre to be looked at with disdain for decades. It was just hard to take this space opera seriously - can you blame it with silly names like 'Planet Mongo' and 'Ming the Merciless'? - and it wasn't until the Fifties that science fiction pictures based around intelligent premises instead of the attractive exoticness of special effects and alien locales started to make their mark on (the cinematic front of) the genre. Ever since then, Flash has had a tough time truly connecting with an audience other than avid fanboys. The 1980 movie failed to built a continuing franchise of movies around the concept, and even the 2007 TV-series proved shortlived. Maybe the wondrous sense of adventure of the space opera is just too outdated and old-fashioned by now, as spectators demand more intelligence form their science fiction these days. After all, John Carter is a very similar sort of space hero, and look how poorly he did at the box office only two years ago. Will Flash Gordon do any better? It may take a few new Star Wars movies to get the public interested in space operas again, but it's safe to say Gordon will return in one form or another even if this new project fails to find an audience. He always has. Hopefully the same will ring true for John Carter...

Now fantasy, that still works. In fact, if you say it's more popular a genre than ever, you may not be wrong. It keeps scoring with the audience, as Game of Thrones reaches new heights in terms of audience ratings (and download ratings too). And at the same time, The Hobbit trilogy carries on, slowly but surely nearing its end as Peter Jackson is in the process of finishing that third and final movie. Which just got a new name, like it or not. There and Back Again it is called no more, as it has received the novel subtitle The Battle of the Five Armies. Can't say I'm a big fan of that one. Granted, it covers the movie's contents well enough, as this is what most of the film will deal with. I'd say it's too blunt a title. The Lord of the Rings movies may already have had their subtitles picked out for them by the source material, but The Hobbit is not so fortunate. Can you imagine the second LotR movie being named The Battle of Helm's Deep? Surely not, as The Two Towers has a more ominous and poetic, less direct quality to it. So I thought it was with There and Back Again, as the book did not provide a catchy enough subtitle itself (The Clouds Burst? Nay!). PJ argues it would have fit a two movie adaptation, but not a three part series, as Bilbo was already 'there' in The Desolation of Smaug. True. But he's still 'there', and he is destined to go 'back again'. So in my mind, it's not a relevant argument. The Battle of the Five Armies is simply too direct, though not without merit of mystery for a lay audience. Whose forces make up these five armies? And how does the dragon, which at one point seemed to be what this series was all about, fit in exactly? Predictable questions that would not arise with There and Back Again, but will not entice the audience any more than the last movie already would have. Truth is: The Battle of the Five Armies sounds like a cheap video game title. I would have preferred something with a little more literary charm to it. Even the other suggested new name, Into the Fire, sounded more intriguing. But hey, I'm not making these movies, I'm only paying to watch them (well, not really) so why should I care about the titles as long as the movie proves as entertaining (or more so) than its predecessors? It's not like fanboys revelled in the second movie's name either. Or even the first. I guess it takes an actual fantasy writer slash linguist to come up with something really iconic. It surely would have helped if Tolkien had split up the original novel in three parts himself.