http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156944/pixars_good_dinosaur_opnieuw_aangepast
I have a bad feeling about this one. And not just because there's talking dinosaurs present, though that's never a good sign (eh, WWD3D?). The Good Dinosaur has been reported to feature its fair share of production difficulties, and now it appears the whole thing needed to be started largely from scratch, even though the majority of the voice acting had already been recorded. Of course, major restructuring of Pixar films is part of their routine by now. Toy Story, too, had to be started all over again, and few will argue that final result didn't work out as well as the first concept would have done. Then again, the last Pixar movie to experience severe production diffulcties was Brave, and that finished film wasn't among Pixar's best efforts. It really can go both ways. Of course Lithgow says it's gonna be even better than before, but that's not a very reliable statement; he's not likely to say the opposite before the movie has hit theaters. Actors and other assorted crewmen always come clean about disappointing work after the audience has had to experience their failures for themselves. Replacing the original director, who did the wonderful Up, by someone who thus far has only directed a single Pixar short by comparison, doesn't bode well. But then, there's talking dinosaurs in here, so for me the project was going awry from the get-go.
http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156960/blanchett_en_bale_in_jungle_book_origins
The Jungle Book war is on! You'd think Disney's The Jungle Book would have an edge, with a grand cast including the likes of Scarlett Johansson, Ben Kingsley and Bill Murray, but Warner's Jungle Book: Origins, too, has assembled a stellar cast to stay in the competition. Cate Blanchett, Christian Bale, Benedict Cumberbatch?! Suck on that, Disney! Considering both movies deal with the same subject matter in a very similar way, combining live-action with digital animals, and now both include a top-notch cast of seasoned and popular voice actors, the question is which of the pair has the edge. I think I'll have to say it's Warner's Origins, based on their choice of director. Andy Serkis just has much more experience with both animals and motion capture, and that's key. He understands the technology, plus he understands the biology. Jon Favreau, who directs Disney's take on the story, doesn't have the amount of experience with the natural world Serkis does. Also, Serkis has a whole extra year getting things right and working out the technical aspects. Not to mention he gets to see the competitor beat him to theaters so he can witness its pitfalls and carefully avoid them to make for a superior film. Time is not on Favreau's side. However, he has the directing experience, as this is Serkis' true feature film directing debut (not counting his job as Second Unit Director on the Hobbit movies). I guess both movies are relatively even matched. It sure as heck won't be a matter of casting in both cases.
http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156923/eerste_posters_dumb_and_dumber_to
Oh wow, a mindless Hollywood comedy making fun of another film in its promotional campaign. Like that's never been done. I gotta say, this choice of poster post-modernism is a no-brainer (pun, duh!). And considering the general reception of Lucy (despite its financial success) by both critics and audience - both parties agreed it made little sense and was utterly devoid of logic - I think the similarities won't end there. But maybe that's just because I care naught for Dumb and Dumber To and don't have any particularly positive hopes for this one. I didn't see the original, which by now is twenty fucking years old, so I won't bother with this excessively late and therefore unwarranted sequel. At least it's safe to say only the marketing campaign will rip off other Hollywood films, unlike most brainless Hollywood comedies whose sole plot seems to be based around that single notion.
http://www.moviescene.nl/p/156959/eerste_trailer_automata
I think it's safe to say everybody's first reaction to this trailer will be 'I, Robot much?' Both from a plot perspective and from a design point of view the similarities between both pictures are remarkable. Even though Asimov's 'Three Laws of Robotics' are standard fare in many Sci-Fi works in film and literature these days, this movie seems to take more than a few pages from Asimov. The trailer also hints there's many a character trait Will Smith's and Antonio Banderas' characters from both movies share. Can't say Banderas looks much like an insurance fraud investigator, though in the future, who knows what changes to their image they made? Still, I'm intrigued. It's a Spanish/American co-production starring an international cast and helmed by a relatively rookie Spanish director, so it's bound to be something other than your average Hollywood action flick, which is basically what I, Robot was, though it was a good one at that. The trailer suggests these robots are evolving more or less on their own accord rather than because of outside interference in their programming, which is also an appealing notion bound to raise some juicy existential questions if adequately explored. Other than that I remain on the fence for this one. You just can't judge a film like this based on a single trailer, they're too deceiving. I won't be programmed by a trailer to believe a movie is something when there's a good chance the final product will prove to turn out to be something else entirely.
