Yesterday's News continues Today

Having binged GoT (hell yeah!), I'll pick up where I so shamefully left off:

Wilde terug voor Tron 3

Neither good nor bad news to me. Olivia Wilde is a gorgeous gal and her acting was okay (though not mindboggingly compelling or anything), but it's not what I watch TRON movies for. Unlike most movies (though less so for summer blockbusters), TRON is all about the visuals. Of course those from the first movie were a lot more revolutionary than the effects of its late sequel, but Legacy too definitely delivered some cutting edge vistas. However, this time the question of the plot is more important, considering visual effects won't have developed so intensely since the last film (from 2010), compared to the gap between the first and second film. Not to mention where the story of Legacy left us. And then there's more room to consider Wilde's character. She's the first character from TRON's digital world to have made it to our everyday reality, as opposed to vice versa. The bad guy apparently has been destroyed and the good guy returned home after an arduous ordeal. So why would the good guy and his girl return to TRON's world of pixels? Aside from offering us more visual goodies, of course.

Johansson gewild voor Black Lagoon

Naturally Universal wants Scarlett, everybody wants her. She has grown to be one of Hollywood's most bankable and popular actresses. With that status of course comes the freedom to pick any project she likes, and I doubt a remake of a Fifties' horror classic counts among those. Especially one that already is a soft retreat of similar fare, repackaging a familiar Beauty and the Beast tale in an only moderately different guise. Plus, considering all the 'shared universe' business Universal is proposing for the various remakes of their horror flicks - which is not necessarily a rip-off of Marvels cinematic universe, considering Universal pulled off the same scheme to attract audiences 70 years ago -  it's not unlikely Johansson would have to sign for multiple pictures, repeating her Marvel contract. I doubt she's be willing to do that, now that she's a mom. That is, assuming the studio wants her in the role of the blond babe chased by the horny, oh so misunderstood prehistoric creature. It's not a given that is what the studio wants her for. Maybe it's just what our conservative mind suggests in case of this casting. Considering Johansson isn't only hot but quite talented as well, maybe we got it all wrong. This is the 21st Century after all. Could it be she'll play the creature itself? A female creature falling for a handsome human male, perhaps, in a wonderful reversal of roles? Or a female creature with the hots for a female human, to deliver some sizzling sexual situations to entice bi-curious audiences? Yeah, that's so not gonna happen. But hey, Joss Whedon just accused Universal's Jurassic World of sexism in traditional gender roles (based on a single clip, which may not be the smartest idea), so maybe someone at the studio was listening and decided the time was right to switch sexes around for a change and surprise us all. I'm sure that would attract Johansson a lot more than following age-old movie routines.

Redmayne in Fantastic Beasts?

Notice the question mark there. Only a few weeks ago I posted the news that Matt Smith likely nabbed the lead role in this Harry Potter spin-off. Now it turns out Eddie Redmayne is the new favourite, and Smith's name is nowhere to be found. Other names also keep floating around, which suggests the deal with Smith fell through after all, despite both parties seeming eager to start filming. So yeah, I need to post more question marks in the case of casting rumours like these, since unless contracts are signed, they're always just rumours. So now I may have falsely gotten people's hopes up and those that yearned for a cult series actor playing Newt Scamander might face the harsh reality that's not gonna happen, as he has likely been replaced by a recent Academy Award winner. Sorry, folks. But hey, Eddie Redmayne is a good actor at least, so he, too, is a decent choice for this new lead character we know next to nothing about. As for the actor, he's very British, that's as good a sign as any. Only Englishmen have a shot at playing in a J.K. Rowling based flick, after all. But even among British actors, some Brits are better than others. And personally I think Redmayne is a safer bet than Smith. But then, I've never seen Smith in Dr. Who.

Today's News: we interrupt this program to bring you something far more interesting

I've been real busy this past week, so posting news took a bit of a hit. There was plenty going round, but all I got was this:

Teaser True Detective Seizoen 2 online

Thankfully HBO provided a plot synopsis, since there isn't much of a story to discern in this teaser. It's basically a rapid succession of shots of faces. But some very intriguing faces, I'll admit. Colin Farrell certainly looks every bit as corrupt a cop as you can imagine, though that may be saying more about the sterotypical look of corrupt law enforcers in television. Can Vince Vaughn finally rid himself of the B-comedy stigma he has gained over the last decades? Taylor Kitsch still needs to make most audiences forget about his flop John Carter, which I personally liked a lot, but in that regard I place myself into a distinct minority. This cast is less of a safe bet than the likes of Season 1's ensemble, which proved spot on in every regard. But then, this show isn't playing it safe on most other levels. A totally different story line each year, with a whole new cast and new directors? That's not the usual way television gets produced, nor how audience loyalty is instilled. It worked well enough on the acclaimed first season, but making viewers wait twice as long for the second season and hope they'll accept the sweeping changes is quite a risk. In most regards, this isn't one show at all, it's a steady collection of mini-series in the same narrative style and genre under the same titular umbrella. For as the released synopsis makes all too clear, the more things change, the more they stay the same. A fixed number of protagonists stars in a story about the wheelings and dealings in the ever ongoing conflict between the underworld and the justice department, where the latter isn't portrayed in too flattering a light. No serial killers this time, but mobster battles instead. Other than that, the formula persists. And hopefully so will the quality, since the first season left some pretty big boots to fill.

Damon en Affleck produceren Incorporated

A movie about the ever more deeply embedded evils of multinational corporations, produced by two acting big shots in the giant corporate Hollywood machine? That's ironic to say the least. But then, there's a lot of messages depicted in the movies that from any executive's viewpoint are only relayed with the goal of making money. Just look at Avatar and its promotion of environmental awareness and techno-skepticism, made with the very latest technology available. This is commonplace in Hollywood. Left and liberal on the outside, the executives running Hollywood are nothing like the words their factory of dreams opts to spread. But if you want your message to reach a global audience, you have to sell some pieces of your soul to the devil. And so the story about a world run by corporations and the struggle of the individual to free himself of their grasp is presented by an industry of Big Money. Will that affect the message hitting the right chords? Not neccessarily. Stronger j'accuses than this have come out of Hollywood over the years. Will it affect the quality? It's Hollywood, when is the last time you saw a decent movie with an urgent message on the disturbing state of the world and the ever increasing loss of self? It's opium for the masses, it is! It's keeping us dumb and contented and without the desire of expression by delivering mindnumbing dreck that suggests an intelligent message but designed to keep us from rising up against the system, and...

...the first four episodes Game of Thrones Season 5 have leaked...

Excuse me for a few hours. Hold that thought, I'll post the rest of last week's news when I've had my fix of Thrones. I need my fix, I can't live without it. And now my watch begins...

At least television keeps hoi polloi from rebellion by delivering quality goods. Dragons and titties and incest and such, you know. The fun bits of life.

Creature Walks Among Us, The

Rating: ***/*****, or 5/10

Second sequel to the original Creature from the Black Lagoon (1954), set closely after the events of its predecessor Revenge of the Creature (1955). Previous director Jack Arnold, so talented in making Fifties' science fiction films work effectively instead of making them cheesy, has left the director's chair and delivered it to John Sherwood, who unfortunately lacks his finesse and understanding of the genre (his only other noteworthy directorial credit is the fun but campy The Monolith Monsters (1957)). After busting out of its marine park prison, the creature is tracked down in the Everglades and again captured, but horribly burned in the process. Surgery saves his life but also necessitates the removal of his lungs for his survival, so scientists turn him into an air breather with an overall more human appearance, but still undeniably not human. Used as a scapegoat in a melodramatic love triangle and the resulting murder plot between his new owner, his wife and her lover, the creature again breaks free and goes on a rampage, after which he is again subjected to man's violent nature. It's clear who is the monster this time. Though opening on an eerie note with the Florida swamp scene, the movie quickly loses steam and takes the franchise in a dull new direction, largely removing everything that made the monster so intriguing in the previous films. Though the movie contains some moderately thrilling action scenes and excellent alternative creature make-up, it's definitely the worst of the trilogy, and the only one not released in 3-D.

Starring: Jeff Morrow, Rex Reason, Leigh Snowden

Directed by John Sherwood

USA: Universal Pictures, 1956

Creature from the Black Lagoon

Rating: ****/*****, or 8/10

Classic monster movie from the 'House of Horror', Universal Pictures: the last monster to be added to the staple of 'Universal's original monsters', as well as the only monster from the Fifties in the bunch, since the rest of them were all released in the early Thirties and Forties. As a dessert to the creature cake, it turns out a damn tasty course, even though in many respects it's a poor man's King Kong. It's also an interesting transitional movie between Universal's classic studio monster movies of old and the typical creature feature science fiction films of the Fifties, courtesy of Jack Arnold, one of the most prolific directors of the genre in this decade (his other works include It Came from Outer Space (1953), Tarantula (1955) and The Incredible Shrinking Man (1957)). A band of scientists stumbles on the remains of an 'amphibian missing link', a Gill Man (never mind actual science here). However, the animal was not the only one of its kind, since a live specimen starts stalking the group, in particular the beautiful girl (Julie Adams) among them, resulting in an (in)famous underwater swimming duet between the pair. Sadly, the romance is one-sided as the creature finds out when he tries to get a little closer to the object of his fascination but is instead met with fear, violence and eventually greed as the explorers mean to capture the beast and take it back to civilization. However, the monster has some thoughts of his own on that subject and doesn't surrender so easily, with deadly consequences. Beautiful – and for that time, spectacular – underwater photography, a solid cast (including fan favorite Richard Denning, who starred in a number of Fifties' Sci-Fi flicks, not all of them as good as this one) and an excellent balance between drama, action and romance. One of the first movies to be released in 3-D during the short lived 3-D craze in the Fifties with which Hollywood studios hoped to lure audiences away from the new medium of television (unsuccessfully it must be said).

Starring: Richard Carlson, Richard Denning, Julie Adams

Directed by Jack Arnold

USA: Universal Pictures, 1954