Today's News: Dinosaurs avenge Lego Huntsman

This week's load of news. Some bits felt a little repetitive.



Nieuwe poster Avengers: Age of Ultron

Nieuwe posters Avengers: Age of Ultron

Meer character posters Avengers: Age of Ultron

How many characters can you cram on a poster without it looking too crowded? Marvel put ten Avengers on one poster and added a bunch of homicidal robots too, and the result is a one-sheet that looks a little too busy for its own good. Just look how poorly the new characters are reflected, insultingly pushed into the corners. Heck, Hulk's arm muscles are printed in greater close-up than the much anticipated sibling mutants genetic test subjects. Good thing there's the nigh obligatory character posters available to remedy this injustice. So far, no character posters featuring those new characters have been published though. It likely will still happen, after all there's six more weeks before this film opens (eight in the USA even). So until we get to see the final posters for Vision, Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch, we have to make do with the old line-up of superheroes. Cool characters, but rather conservative and bland posters though. I doubt anybody is getting any more hyped up from these one-sheets than they already were thanks to the trailers. Maybe Downey Jr's upcoming 'big announcement' can get that hype to pick up more momentum perhaps. What could it be? Spider-Man references in this second Avengers flick? Or maybe something a little closer to home, like him stepping down as Iron Man, or that character getting killed off entirely? It's unlikely the last two scenarios would be announced before the film opens, that would be highly spoilerific. I guess we just have to be patient for both this impending news flash and those last few character posters then. Oh, the hype...!

Regisseur gevonden voor Lego Movie 2

I've probably seen a bunch of episodes of Community the new director for Lego Movie 2 helmed, though I can't recall them specifically. However, Community's quirky, whimsical humour is also to be found in the first Lego Movie, so on that note the guy seems well suited. No feature films on his resumé though, but that's not exactly uncommon in directing animation. Besides, he's directed Community's tribute to the classic G.I. Joe cartoon from the Eighties, which means he has both experience in animation and with adapting a toy line into an audiovisual feast. The Lego Movie 2 could have done worse for a director. But how about the Lego Batman spin-off, which is supposed to hit theaters first, but doesn't seem to be as deep in pre-production at this point? Anybody with experience directing toys, animation and superheroes in a humorous fashion? That's a much tougher call, so it's logical to see potential directors have to be screened more thoroughly for that one. How about one of the guys from one of the Toy Story films (Buzz Lightyear sure counts as a superhero in my book)? That would be striking little gold bricks for sure!

Chastain gecast in The Huntsman

Oh Jessica, why would you bother? Snow White and the Huntsman was a decent flick, but not the stuff of sequels. This separate Huntsman movie is just a cash grab that only features a character or two from the first movie and most of the team involved in its production has moved on to more original projects. So why would an Oscar-nominated A-list actress waste time and talent on this flick? The money is probably good. I doubt she'd do it because it'll prove such an acting challenge or because she wants to be closer to Chris Hemsworth's robust manly six-pack. Oh well, the audience only benefits from terrific actors, that means the film is secured of decent performances, even if all else may prove forgettable. So far three damn fine actresses signed on for this flick already, Chastain herself, Charlize Theron and Emily Blunt. So at least Hemsworth flexing his muscles and mumbling his way through the movie will have some actual talent to go up against. Otherwise, this movie, rife with development problems so far, simply doesn't get my hopes up.

Dinosauriërs Jurassic World onthuld

Look at me, spoiling this most anticipated movie of 2015 for myself in the name of duty... Oh well, I've already seen the toys so I know what the dinosaurs will look like. Besides, half the dinosaurs shown here won't make it into the final film, hence the paleoart covering their appearance, rather than the CG rendered models. Sucks that the hand drawn creatures look far more appealing and much more paleontologically accurate. They're putting their movie brothers to shame. Pronated hands, feathery bits and splendidly vibrant colours; quite the opposite of the bald, scientifically incorrect and blandly coloured animals we'll see in the movie. Far more exotic species too, but the audience wants to see T-Rex and Raptors, because that's usually all they know. Forget about the more intriguing, poetically named likes of Metriacanthosaurus or Microceratus, those names don't have the star power or the necessary 'sexy' quality to them needed to entice audiences. Or so the studio thinks. Velociraptor and Dilophosaurus weren't exactly house hold names before JP came around. At least we'll have some new species, like Dimorphodon and that genetically engineered bastard that's going to be the main baddiesaur. It's a Hollywood movie, so we shouldn't expect any realism. As further illustarted by the size chart that shows a huge Sauropod like Apatosaurus to be smaller than T-Rex. At least the kids will know better, they might educate their ignorant parents a bit on the subject. As for me, I refuse to let this bring down my enthusiasm for a new Jurassic film. I've had to wait too long for one and I need my dinosaur fix. It's not like there's such a thing as an accurate portrayal of a dinosaur anyway. We simply can't know.

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 Review: The LEGO Movie

The LEGO Movie: ****/*****, or 7/10

Movies based on pre-existing toys are often the stuff of anxiety for those that grew up playing with them, especially when it concerns brands that have been around for decades and thus have proven to be multigenerational. Will the alliance between movie studios and toy manufacturers, always driven by mutual profit first and foremost, yield a final viewing experience that not only serves to push kids into nagging their parents to go get them some but also to remind the older spectators as to why they themselves enjoyed the toys so much they feel their kids should continue playing with them, too? So far, few toy based films have succeeded on both fronts, as most of them are pretty dreadful: compare films the likes of Transformers and Battleship for example. Fortunately, The LEGO Movie doesn't fall into that same category of failure at all, as it enhances the feeling of joy and excitement experienced by everyone that ever built something from scratch out of the colourful little bricks. That said, from an ideological perspective, the motives behind the film's plot cannot helped but be questioned by mature audiences when the film is over.

Of course, a movie about toys can't feature the toys themselves being played with for two hours, it needs a narrative structure to suck audiences in. The LEGO Movie introduces the character of Emmet (voiced by Chris Pratt), about as generic a LEGO minifigure as they come: typical old fashioned yellow head, not much physical accessories, wearing the same smile almost all day every day. He's got reasons to be smiling, as he believes himself to live in the perfect utopia, courtesy of President Business (Will Ferrell) who provides everyone with instructions to live their full life by, ranging from morning exercises, breakfast, buying overpriced coffee (37 dollars, awesome!) and carrying an eternal sunny disposition. The catchy national anthem 'Everything is awesome' not withstanding, it goes without saying this existence is one big lie and no good will come of its continuation.

Emmet is soon drawn into a wholly different life style altogether when he accidentally touches an unusual item that soon sticks to his back, meets a beautiful girl who looks nothing like all the other minifigures he has known and is promptly declared an enemy of the state, necessitating him and the girl named Wyldstyle (Elizabeth Banks) to go on the run. Basically a little plastic version of The Matrix, Emmet soon learns there's another realm beyond that which he always took for granted, as many dimensions, each with a theme of its own – including Western and 'Middle Zealand' – peacefully coexist alongside each other. Unless President Business destroys them all by gluing everything together permanently, according to his own rigid instructions. Fortunately, Emmet may be the 'Special', a minifigure with extraordinary master builder skills, who is the only one able to stop the shady schemes at hand. And so he teams up with the blind wizard Vitruvius (Morgan Freeman), a pirate composed of various random parts called Metal Beard (Nick Offerman) and of course, Batman (Will Arnett), who is kind of a dick, to save the LEGO worlds from blind, obedient universal conformity, to let creative freedom ring.

Directed by the duo of Phil Lord and Chris Miller, who have proven themselves to be experts in whimsical animation, The LEGO Movie proves a feast for the eyes as we behold just what you can do with the little bricks. Or at least, what you think you can do. Make no mistake, this film is not stop motion animated with little LEGO figures, it's all computer animation designed to look like the stiff toys are moving about. Deception is key here, but we are deceived pretty well by the fabulous look, as we witness smoke made of LEGO, explosions made of LEGO and even oceans made of LEGO. It's an awe-inspiring sight for everyone who has ever tried to make LEGO look the least bit realistic and ended up being several tens of thousands of bricks too short to get anywhere on that front. Any sense of jealousy on what the computer can create with LEGO is smothered in the film's great sense of humour, building jokes as easily as putting bricks on top of each other. Aside from the traditional number of safe but smart popcultural references, the best gags spring from our plastic heroes witty selfreflection as to being just that. Miller's and Lord's infective comedic talent, joined by the voice cast's audible delight, ensures everyone in the audience is quickly wearing a smile all too similar to those featured on the classic minifigures' faces.

That said, it isn't all fun and games, this is business too. The LEGO Movie takes its message of 'everyone should build whatever the heck they like' very seriously, clearly preferring random creativity over slavishly building stuff based on what the printed paper says it ought to look like. Which leads to a rather serious showdown as the actual status quo of the LEGO realms is revealed and a cheerful kid confronts his ruthless father, begging him to just let him run with his imagination. Being played by Ferrell too, clearly the unimaginative adult mind is in the same league as the childish destructive view of business as presented by the film's bad guy. Rather hypocritical, as the LEGO company is itself a major toy corporation that hasn't gotten to where it is now by giving kids their product to play with, but selling it to them instead for hard cash. Sure, kids can build whatever they want, but it's the business of the product and the parents that pay for it that provides that option for them. There's something eerily uneven between the movie's message and the actual state of affairs, as this movie certainly isn't about spreading the gospel of global creativity, but to make everyone involved in its production money (and then only those willing to cooperate: notice the lack of Marvel superhero figures opposed to those of DC, while both brands are available as buildable sets in every toy store). Of course, kids won't realize this and most parents will be too busy enjoying the movie to care, until their offspring start whining for more LEGO to play with and they have to pay the bills. And at that point it's hard to deny The LEGO Movie is something other than an insidiously effective 100 minute advertisement for the great LEGO product.

But while watching the movie, everything is indeed awesome, as our inspiration is fueled by the grandiosely detailed design of the various LEGO worlds and the sheer fun for young and old that inhabits them. And then the credits roll, and that itch to get some bricks to start building yourself is heartily felt...

Today's Double News: rebuilding the Addams Family, with Lego

Two more little bits of news posted by me on MS:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/151330/addams_family_film_in_de_planning

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/151331/nieuwe_trailer_the_lego_movie

So the Addams Family is brought back to life once more? Figures. It proved a success in the past on multiple occasions, so Hollywood is convinced it can do so again. Even though we already had a very similarly themed movie in last year's Dark Shadows, which didn't turn out so well. So at least there is room for a macabre family done right. Animated though? It wouldn't be the first time this creepy family unit has been featured in animation, so it's not necessarily a bad idea, even though most people will still consider a live-action version, whether it's the classic TV-series or the Nineties' films, first and foremost when they hear the (in)famous theme song. At least a writer is involved who knows her way around eerie,Gothic, digitally animated movies (though they're hit and miss in terms of quality in her case, so this could swing either way). Let's wait and see whether MGM actually manages to acquire the rights to this franchise and starts casting before we start judging this project too much in advance. Which also hides the fact that I've hardly ever seen any Addams Family in my lifetime. I guess I either missed it as a kid (it was probably on cable telly), or I just discarded it as 'not my thing' and I can't remember anything else about it.

Speaking of animation and stuff that is my thing, a stop motion Lego movie surely qualifies as such. And so The Lego Movie gets a second trailer, an official one this time as opposed to a mere teaser (see below). I must say, the teaser was able to whet my appettite more thoroughly. I start to wonder whether watching talking, moving Lego minifigures for ninety minutes or more is something that doesn't get dull after a while. YouTube shorts is one thing (or thousands upon thousands, really) but a full length film is quite another. At least there's a decent voice cast (though a bit heavy on the comedy stars maybe): who would ever have thought the likes of Morgan Freeman and Liam Neeson would voice characters like these? And what's up with all the DC superheroes? Getting the Justice League on the big screen sooner than expected it appears, just not the way we were meant to think it would pan out (but hey, no Batfleck here!). Too bad there's no Marvel heroes too to balance things a little neatly, after all there's plenty of Marvel themed Lego sets as well. I guess Marvel is too busy making "real" movies instead of playing with toys and dreaming of bigger things.

Today's News: first Lego Movie trailer assembled

Here's what I had to say about the new Lego Movie trailer at MovieScene:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/148012/eerste_trailer_the_lego_movie

It's a bizarre project, really. It's based on a hugely popular, iconic line of toys, but at the same time it joins together various other franchises that under normal circumstances (i.e., non-plastic) would never have gotten together. There's Batman and Wonder Woman, there's Raphael from the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, there's a historical Raphael, there's mermaids, astronauts and scores of other figures that are solely Lego's invention. You wonder how they pulled this one off in terms of copyright. Successfully it seems, though I wouldn't be surprised if this particular aspect of the film might bite them in the bottom down the road, especially if the movie becomes a smash hit (which is always the right time to start legal battles). After all, this film features so many DC comics characters (but no Marvel, even though Lego makes figures of that company's franchises too!) it might as well render the upcoming Justice League movie useless.

Will it be a success? I think it sure will, in terms of box-office at least. You got toys every kid in the world plays with (or should!) on an almost daily basis, in fact toys kids have been playing with for decades, so it's more easy for the kids to convince their parents to come along. Of course you can argue it's more fun to play with Lego than to watch someone else do it, but the same goes for football and there's a bigger number of people watching that than there is playing it. It's all in the brand name, and Lego is a big brand, well known and commonly appreciated. Much more so than Hasbro's Transformers and G.I. Joe action figures, which are more limited in terms of the demographics they appeal to, yet look at how well their films - unjustifiably - did. I wonder if Lego got the rights to its own movie... it would be odd to see Hasbro making its Lego ripoff KRE-O doing Lego Movie merchandise!

But does the trailer look good? I'm (moderately) pleasantly surprised by it. Yes, the story is derivative to the extreme, almost done to death in fact. Regular guy gets thrown in an epic quest to save the world along with a group of heroic characters that teach him the values in himself. Yawn. But this is done with Lego figures. In stop motion. And even in 3D. Waaaah... Okay, some of the shots in the trailer look a little crude, but hey, that's what Lego is. And it seems the jokes make up for it. In fact, I laughed a few times, which happens less and less in trailers I watch. It's clear the directors of the zany but wonderful animated flick Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs had a hand in building this world (pun intended of course; duh!). Their affinity and talent for odd situations and goofy gags, both visual and in dialogue, appealing to young and old alike, seems omnipresent. Hopefully the trailer for once is an accurate synopsis of the content of the actual film (though I would also like it if it is better than the trailer suggests). We'll have to wait until next year to find out, but hey, for nerds like me there's still various upcoming Lego Lord of the Rings, Hobbit and Star Wars sets to look forward to until then. Lego couldn't resist reminding my wallet of that fact. Shrewd maneuvring, Lego... at least the parents will know what to expect financially if they take their kids to see this film.

Ooh, aah, that's how it always starts...

...then later nothing happens. Unfortunately my PC is still out of order for at least another week (screw you, Microsoft!), so all my noble intentions towards updating this blog (almost) every day have turned to naught so far. However, today big news - or something like it - hit the Internet and I just had to post it on MovieScene since it's right up my alley (and nobody else had done it yet). And if I post something on MovieScene, I just have to post it here too:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/143549/jurassic_park_iv_krijgt_eindelijk_release-datum

So it seems Jurassic Park IV is finally going to happen, after over a decade of fruitless tidbits of news, idle speculation and many a misleading message from Mr. Spielberg or one of his producer lackeys regarding the status of the project, which they claimed was gonna happen, after which nothing happened at all for another year until they claimed the same thing all over again just to keep all the fans' hopes up. However, this time a release date has been set - June 13 of 2014, only 5 days before my birthday - and in Hollywood, a release date is very definitive. If you don't make a date, your career is either just over or you're powerful enough to defy Hollywood itself (Spielberg falls into the latter category, but so far he has adhered to set release dates). Plus, the studio claims the movie will be shot (not just released, but actually made) in 3D, indicating just how much faith the studio has in the project (and in the upcoming 3D re-release of the original Jurassic Park, which is also good to know) and therefore in its new deadline. So for all intents and purposes, it seems JP IV is finally our of pre-production hell and gearing up full steam. It better be, since June 2014 isn't that far off, so time is limited. It seems the script, the one thing that has kept the project from happening for so long, is finally done, courtesy of the duo behind the script of the surprisingly good Rise of the Planet of the Apes, also drenched with scenes of genetic tampering on animals to the detriment of humanity, so at least these people, Rick Jaffa and Amanda Silver, are likely to understand the JP mythos. Let's hope they kept the proposed human/dinosaur hybrids out of the loop, there's still plenty of real dinosaurs waiting for their big-screen break. Micropachycephalosaurus, anyone?


So this exciting bit of news I managed to post at least. However, there's still so much I can't explore on this blog no matter how much I would want to. Saw Amour and Life of Pi this week, as always I have an opinion about the Oscar nominees and I have yet to review The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey in detail. Suffice to say for now it's fucking awesome and the lack of a computer at least allows me ample time to build this plastic gem: