Today's News: Machines, martial arts and alien invasions

Ordinary week in terms of news, with nothing mindblowing to report. Just a few tidbits like these:

Nieuwe trailer Ex Machina

This film is growing on me in terms of anticipation, though I remain skeptical (just not as strongly as I was initially). The fact it was chosen as the opening film of the upcoming 31st Imagine Film Festival makes it score some points, since those folks don't just pick the first genre film that comes their way for that honour. This second trailer also indicates this is more than just a repeat of last year's The Machine, and that it may actually be a better film as well (hence this receiving a theatrical release in the Netherlands, while The Machine sadly did not). However, any bits of ingenuity seem to be found mostly in execution rather than innovation, since this trailer makes no mistake this is again a movie about a robot gone bad, which has been done countless time since the Fifties got that ball rolling. It's the way in which the artificial intelligence goes awry that makes it more distinct. This AI appears to get under your skin on an emotional and sexual level, rather than by its mental superiority (though the fact it utilizes such basic human instincts against its creators goes to tell something about its intellectual capabilities as well). Of course, that too is an age old theme (Metropolis, for example), just not applied as often. I wonder what this machine's ultimate goal will be. Surely it won't be something as grand as world domination, since we already have Avengers: Age of Ultron to remind us of some other reaons why we should never fully trust our technological innovations.

Nieuwe Trailer Avengers: Age of Ultron

Speak of the devil, that particular anti-robot film got a new trailer this week as well. Promises to be quite the superhero spectacle, but we already knew as much. The particular preview shines a bit more light on the motivations of the main antagonist. Save the world by killing the human race, it appears. That's one way to do it, sure. The easy way out, which makes for twodimensional baddies and clear-cut black versus white conflict. But hey, it worked on the first Avengers movie just fine. If you want an ingenious story, you know better than to look for it in this type of flick. This is all about fun characters and explosive action. First film showed both elements are in ample supply from this creative team and so it continues to work its merry magic for this second installment. There's plenty of Joss Whedon type humour to be found here, especially centred around the characters interacting. They just don't like each other all that much but they're sort of stuck with one another, and it makes for relatable scenes of humanity amidst all the superhero shenanigans. Just how the new characters relate to the old guard remains to be seen. It appears debutantes Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch are somehow involved with Ultron initially, which is not that surprising since they're supposed to start off as bad guys themselves. As for Vision, quickly thrown in at the end of the trailer (and probably the film proper, too), he's no doubt the anti-Ultron AI, reminding us that not all technology is evil. Considering all the technophobia recently running rampant in the movies, there's a positive message for a change. After all, if we're gonna save the world, we'll need some technology to make it happen.

Eerste casting Independence Day 2 onthuld

And if it isn't evil robots, we'll need to save our planet from extraterrestrials with sinister intentions, too. A bunch of all-American heroes did so nearly 20 years ago, and since Hollywood never forgot the financial benefits involved then, they'll have to do so once more. But will audiences pay to see them do just that once more? It's not like we know the story is gonna be anything but repetitive. Everybody knows there's gonna be more aliens out for our planet and some dudes have to get together and kick their asses, the American way. It would be a huge surprise to everybody if there was anything more to it than that, but that's not gonna happen for sure. The suits behind this film obviously want to play it safe, so they're going with the same characters as before, and if they can't get them because the actors don't feel like doing the exact same thing (good for them), they'll want the next best thing. So Jeff Goldblum is back (which I don't mind since I like him) and Bill Pullman likely is as well. Will Smith thought he could make better use of his time (doing After Earth 2 or stuff), so they cast somebody else to play his son, to literally follow in his father's footsteps. Are we glad they didn't opt for Jaden Smith, that would have been a huge turn-off for everybody that still hopes this will be any good. Jaden is probably too involved with the likes of After Earth 2 as well. In case Pullman passes on the project after all, they got Liam Hemsworth ready to go as his character's son-in-law. Apparently the point ID4 2 tries to make is that heroism specifically runs in the family, rather than running in everyone. As for making good movies, we'll find out sooner or later, whether we want to or not. Or we can try and ignore this project altogether and just get our anti-alien fix from watching the first film again.

Biopic Bruce Lee in de maak

I've honestly never seen a Bruce Lee picture. That doesn't mean I'm not interested in watching a picture about the man himself. But don't give me any of that 'only his relatives know what he was all about, so everybody else can't make a good biopic' crap. That's directly stating 'we're cashing in on the memory of our father' to my mind. It's not like there's no books written or documentaries made about the martial arts legend that involved thorough researching of all the documented facts, including earlier testimony from those same relatives. Of course the previous biopics got some facts wrong, that's a simple biopic staple. It's very likely a biopic made by his descendants is bound to turn some actual events around just as easily, if not more so. You think they'll address the negative aspects of the man's life (and there's bound to be some of those, especially taking his early demise into account) in any objective way? Yeah, that's gonna happen... I tend to be much more skeptical about biopics that do involve the direct family because a certain degree of subjectivity is unavoidable. And I figure the same thought applies to many people. I just don't think that many people will bother to concern themselves with the people behind the production of such biopics. To be quite honest: who really cares as long as the movie is good? If it isn't, at least we'll know who to blame for tarnishing Bruce Lee's memory.

Today's Review: Big Hero 6

Told you there was more where that came from?:

Big Hero 6 - recensie

Well, this movie was totally fun! But I cannot say in all honesty it was any bit original. Much of the story and character development felt formulaic, but that never got in the way of the fun to be had. Especially since it was the Marvel formula. Heck, at times the movie nigh made fun of its own narrative make-up - best example: when the nerdy character exclaims 'ooh, it's an origin story!' - but I doubt much of the audience would care they might have seen most of this stuff before. Especially the target audience of kids won't mind, inexperienced with the inspirational material as they likely are. Interestingly enough, despite being a (successfully Disneyfied) Marvel adaptation adhering to a typical plot routine, the characters differ an awful lot from their comic book counterparts. In fact, the excessively cute articial Baymax, the character that singlehandedly raised this film from a three-star flick to a four-star sensation, looks nothing like the dragonlike droid from the original source. Major characters like Sunfire and Silver Samurai are missing, since Disney doesn't own the rights to those (they're presently part of Fox's X-universe). Thankfully, we're getting a new one in their place, namely the fictional city of San Fransokyo, which immediately suggests the uncanny mix of American and Japanese animation styles present throughout and makes for a wonderful looking backdrop for these characters to have their little adventure in.

But above all else, Baymax makes this movie work. The apparently minimalistically but on closer look brilliantly animated character provides the beating heart of the movie, as a healthcare robot created by the protagonist's deceased older brother, who finds himself ever more transformed into a heavily armoured battlebot by the main character out for revenge, until the emotionless but caring robot reminds him there's more to life than abusing your talents for mindless anger. Plus, he makes for 80 percent of the jokes and they all work. And that's even despite his hilarious attempts at catching a football from the trailer didn't make in into the final cut. Don't expect to be surprised by Big Hero 6, but like Baymax and his ball, just roll with the robot for good times' sake.

Today's News: machines in revolt and intellectual theft

The week has picked up some speed in terms of notable news items:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157772/marvel_maakt_inhumans_en_captain_marvel

Yes, there was more news to report on, since Marvel saw fit to wash away al our questions on their projects for the next five years in a deluge of news, and I didn't post it all at once to keep people from getting overdosed on superheroes. So here's a sort of follow-up on what I posted earlier this week, though I will of course refrain from getting repetitive. I'm not gonna drone on about Marvel Studios' first female solo film as others have, since that is beginning to get old news, as both DC and Sony are developing female superheroine flicks of their own. I've known women can make capable superheroes ever since I started reading comics 20 years ago. So I consider Captain Marvel - who I've noticed isn't named Ms. Marvel, as in most of her comic book history, since that would likely be too sexist - in no way to be more worthy of anticipation that the other Marvel properties in development. The only thing that puzzles me is Marvel's apparent decision to have her team up with the Guardians of the Galaxy rather than the Avengers. I guess there's room for only one captain on Marvels primary superhero team, and having two of them, both blond and strong, might confuse audiences needlessly, even though one of them features boobs.

Still, I'm more curious to see what Marvel plans on doing with the Inhumans. Making a movie based on this superpowered human subspecies which has mostly featured as side characters in other franchise's series (and often not as good guys, too) seems like an odd choice. I guess Marvel still feels the need to include a team of misunderstood, villified outsiders the world hates and fears into their line-up, and since they don't own the rights to the X-Men any more, they decided to make do with this eclectic bunch of characters. Ideologically speaking, it's good to know Marvel still embraces the notion of taking a stand for people other than ourselves, teaching us that despite our often explosive differences we are all still only human and we should learn to live together rather than aim to kill those whose otherness scares us. I'm not sure the Inhumans are the best way to tackle said issues though, considering their aggressive history (which will undoubtedly undergo major rewriting to fit the bill more properly). Unlike the X-Men, they opt for selfimposed isolation rather than acceptance. They didn't move their entire civilization to the moon for nothing. Maybe they feel threatened by Richard Branson's attempt at commercializing space, which could end up in rampant, undesirable lunar tourism (though at the current rate his rockets keep exploding, that doesn't seem to be much cause for alarm). And if they get fed up with humanity somehow, will the Inhumans leave the moon and wreak havoc on Earth to preserve their genetic purity? I've already seen that movie, it's called Iron Sky (and I loved it, mind you!). I guess we'll just have to wait and see what Marvel intends to do with these people.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157824/extra_materiaal_avengers_age_of_ultron_online

But wait, there's more Marvel to go around. Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. is still running, remember? And to keep people interested in a show that isn't drawing spectators in such a huge capacity as Marvel would like, they planned to air the first Avengers: Age of Ultron trailer during this week's episode. The Internet hindered those plans though, so the trailer premiered online a week earlier than originally planned. Didn't stop Marvel from keeping their word and air the trailer again on telly this week. It's the same preview, except for a short but highly enjoyable opening scene, which does a grand job reminding us why we like the Avengers as a group so much. They have a great interplay together, a wonderful group dynamic that just screams for Joss Whedon's talents writing for such groups, which is one of his more famous and respected trademarks. This particular segment also pays hommage to the comics though, in which similar scenes of hammerlifting have played out a few times before, and the results in terms of good humour are none the lesser on screen. I could probably watch a whole movie about the Avengers getting together just hanging out and idling their time, rather than getting serious when another interchangeable villain threatens the world or stuff. Particularly when Whedon writes it. Scenes like these suffice of course, as it's an equally great thing to see the Avengers gearing up for action together.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157774/eerste_trailer_netflix_serie_marco_polo

'Game of Thrones in ancient China', is basically what this series keeps being hyped up as. Not a bad comparison, as the situation Polo encountered in the Far East very much was a game of thrones. However, despite the sex and political intrigue, which thanks to the popularity of shows like Game of Thrones is starting to become a staple of television - which I don't mind at all - that's where most comparions between both shows end. Except for the whole medieval background with swordplay, horse riding and such of course. However, you'll find no supernatural creatures plotting the downfall of man in the background. Despite the cultural affinity of the Chinese for dragons, there's none to be seen in this series (which only saves on the undoubtedly already expensive VFX budget). A few attempts at sorcery are probably interspersed throughout here and there, but I bet Netflix won't go so far as to call up creepy demons from their actresses' naughty bits. The show doesn't need all that, as actual history is fantastic enough in this case, and the Chinese are plenty exotic all by themselves. If you want to compare shows, Marco Polo has more in common with the likes of Rome and Deadwood. Both also shows from HBO, it must be noted, since that network simply wrote the book on the subject matter of explicit sex and intrigue cable shows excel at revealing today. But considering Netflix's own repertoire with series á la House of Cards, I bet they have little trouble transporting such a rich narrative atmosphere to a period setting, even though the latter is still mostly unfamiliar terrain to them. And I look forward to seeing the result.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157785/eerste_trailers_ex_machina

I cannot say I'm as impressed by this trailer. It looks like rather standard Sci-Fi, but gives off the vibe of pretending to be more than that. If it is, I'm not seeing it. It appears to question the age-old demarcation between man and machine, the line where the latter becomes the former. That's about as old a science fiction concept as they come, though it still tends to fascinate. Using the guise of a beautiful woman to make it more easily acceptable for the audience to get drawn into the debate is also a hardly novel approach. Crafting a robot into the image of a sexual alluring and desirable female has been done to death ever since Metropolis in 1927. However, naming the robot in question Ava is less of an everyday occurrence. Yet Ex Machina has the dubious honour to share that aspect with The Machine, a movie with a suspiciously similar premise (and title, even), which only was released last year... So as they ask in New Jersey, 'what's up with that?!'. Intellectual theft, divine intervention or just a veeery coincidental coincidence mayhaps? I dunno, but it doesn't help getting me pumped for this movie, nor does the prospect of a writer turning director. In this case it's Alex Garland. Sure, he wrote a few good movies (including some science fiction titles, like Sunshine), but that doesn't mean he's a capable director. I haven't yet forgotten how a fine Director of Photography landed the director's chair for that godawful Transcendence, which also shares more than a few story beats with Ex Machina (though in that case it's 'man becoming an A.I.' rather than 'man building an A.I.'). Nor am I looking forward to the writer of J.J. Abrams' Trek fuck-ups directing what's set to be the third Trek fuck-up in a row, because Abrams is too busy fucking up (?) Star Wars. Just stick to your own trade, let directors direct. And let writers write. But don't let them write the same as other writers and get away with it. If that's indeed what's happening here.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157784/eerste_posters_insurgent

Here's another derivative little thing for you. Divergent is basically the next Hunger Games, except the new Hunger Games movie is actually the next Hunger Games. Nobody can deny there's many similarities between both stories. Doesn't mean Insurgent should also 'be inspired' visually by its rival. These new posters bear a fairly striking resemblance to some of the character posters released a few months back for Mockingjay - Part 1. Except they feature lesser actors, and less guns too (lesser budget, no doubt). Ripping off another movie's marketing campaign doesn't help setting you apart from that film. But my guess is a strong independent identity isn't Insurgent's goal. They're hitching a ride on the Hunger Games' success by enticing the same audience with the same sort of subject matter. The Hunger Games is making huge sums of money, so of course the producers don't feel bad leeching off that franchise by letting the audience know they offer a similar product. They're basically shouting 'if you enjoy the Hunger Games, check out this franchise while waiting for the next installment!'. It worked on Divergent, and it is likely to work for Insurgent as well. Doesn't make either of them better movies though. Or more original ones for that matter. The only thing Insurgent seems to have that Mockingjay - Part 1 does not, is a 3D release. And that doesn't get me more excited in the least. But then, I'm not the target audience. Impatient teenage girls who like The Hunger Games are. And considering Divergent made a lot of money as well, I suppose there's lots of those.

Today's Mini-Review: The Day the Earth Stood Still (remake)

Rating: **/*****, or 4/10

Starring: Keanu Reeves, Jennifer Connelly, Jadem Smith

Directed by Scott Derrickson

USA: 20^th Century-Fox, 2008

The thing about remakes is they need to retell a story of old (or at least apply its general concepts) while giving it meaning that reflects contemporary society, instead of carbon-copying the meaning of their original counterpart to little avail in a changed world. In that regard, the remake of the Sci-Fi classic The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951) is spot-on, replacing a warning against the dangers of nuclear weapons for an ecological message against man's carelessness where the health of the world's environment, and thus his own, is concerned. In most other respects, this new The Day the Earth Stood Still feels like a redundant exercise in how not to redo a well remembered movie.

Like its predecessor from the Fifties, the film revolves around an extraterrestrial visitor, with a giant robot in tow, who is met with hostility and fear on our planet. Darker and grittier than the original, there is good cause to treat the stranger (an aptly emotionless (as always) Keanu Reeves) with aggressive caution, as he's not here delivering an ultimatum telling us to change our ways for the better, but has instead come to eradicate the human infestation from the face of the galaxy in an attempt to save all other life forms spawned by Mother Earth. Life, he says, is rare in the vast limitless of space and therefore a precious thing, but life endangering all other life must be swiftly dealt with: the ends clearly justify the means. Arriving in a sphere (as opposed to a saucer, like before) the alien called Klaatu has come not as a Christ figure like in the original film, but as an Anti-Christ, hellbent on unleashing his own weapon of mass destruction upon our not so innocent world. Said weapon proves to be his artificial companion Gort, who appears to be a metallic giant in humanoid shape, but actually consists of huge numbers of nanites capable of devouring everything they come into contact with. Thankfully humanity has its on secret weapons to combat Klaatu's convictions, namely a smart and strong female scientist (played by Jennifer Connelly) who manages to dissuade the alien from his destructive plans, backed up by the effective reasoning of an aged professor (John Cleese) who morally convinces him humanity must be allowed to make its own choices in the natural process of its evolution. Even though Klaatu's frozen heart is thawed and his role is turned around a full 180 degrees so Keanu can once again play the Messiah (e.g., The Matrix trilogy and Constantine), his original point is amply illustrated as the military tampers with his devices in a botched attempt to destroy them, only unleashing their horrors as nanites swarm the land and the FX department is given the opportunity to go all-out so as to obscure the fact this version of The Day the Earth Stood Still hardly proves as emotionally compelling as its forebear did.

Aside from an update in themes and special effects, this remake offers little improvement over its predecessor. Religious overtones are obviously still to be found: aside from Klaatu's messianistic role, there is the notion of 'space arks' for example, small spheres evacuating all animal species off-world before being engulfed by a sea of nanites. The movie walks a fine line between being too obvious and too subtle, but the representation of religion is the least of its problems. This new The Day the Earth Stood Still has a hard time convincing the spectator that an alien intelligence can so easily be persuaded to alter its agenda, which from the start felt so ruthlessly unalterable thanks to Reeves' emotionless portrayal. What's worse, his turnaround is accomplished through interaction with the scientist and her kid, a terribly obnoxious and ungrateful little brat (Jaden Smith, ofcourse), the latter more often given the audience the impression Klaatu was right from the start and humanity really is a plague better wiped out for the universe's sake, than making it easy for us to accept the otherworldly being is starting to appreciate contact with mankind and suddenly considers humans worth saving after all. The talents of both Connelly and Cleese remain underused in favor of this irritating child character, while it's they who deliver the truly valid arguments as to why humanity is just not so black and white as Klaatu feared. Meanwhile, being a big winter release, the current The Day the Earth Stood Still all too eagerly uses the tools at its disposal thank to the wonders of digital technology by adding many a bombastic scene of computer generated imagery fighting soldiers, reducing the film to the level of the average type of big FX driven action flick, instead of ending up as a smart and sensible science fiction drama like the far superior 1951 incarnation. Nowhere does this film feature either the intellectual impact or the trend setting production design the original was blessed with. Instead, its eco-message is delivered in a bland and forgetful new groove, the impression the film leaves as tiny as the nanites it showcases.

A retooling of the original film where the phrase 'nuclear weapons' would simply have been substituted with 'global pollution' would probably have made for a more agreeable and certainly cheaper way to update that film for today's public, as the 2008 version of The Day the Earth Stood Still adequately illustrates that changing the message to fit the times while throwing huge sums of money at the project to give it that slick blockbuster feel coupled with ignoring the character aspects that ought to make us care doesn't make for a good film, let alone for an effective means to convince the audience of the value of the themes addressed.

And Happy Birthday, Sis!!

Today's Mini-Review: The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951)

 

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

Starring: Michael Rennie, Patricia Neal, Hugh Marlowe

Directed by Robert Wise

USA: 20^th Century-Fox, 1951

Arguably considered one of the greatest classics in the science fiction genre (and therefore already marred by one lousy, needless remake), this movie was an early entry into the canon of Fifties' Sci-Fi flicks (the decade in which this genre finally came into its own, thanks to the contribution of numerous social factors, including the space race, the birth of the Atomic Age and the UFO craze), but remains one of the most wonderfully constructed and emotionally compelling examples of the bunch. It first and foremost serves as a warning against mass anxiety (e.g., the Red Scare), baseless fear of the unknown and prejudice against those that don't conform to the limited dominant social norms, but does so without ever getting overly preachy, despite its fair share of religious overtones, some subtle, others less so (an alien under the guise of a 'Mr. Carpenter' who sacrifices himself for our sins? Right...). A gripping narrative guides the modern viewer through this fabulous tale of Fifties' 'Zeitgeist' notions, delivered in the form of true spaceman suspense.

When a flying saucer lands in the middle of Washington D.C., the population of Earth swiftly shudders to think of the ramifications. Is it foreboding an alien invasion? Does it carry unspeakable weapons to eradicate mankind? Is it a Russian ruse? It soon appears none of these, but simply a benign gesture of goodwill from the interstellar community, as heralded by the sole occupant of the spacecraft, an apparently humanoid figure named Klaatu (a formidable Michael Rennie). Despite his good intentions, he's accidentally gunned down and rushed to a hospital for both his recovery and medical study paired with the expected military scrutiny. Nevertheless, not before he shows a taste of the superhuman strength his technology has achieved, in the form of a hugely intimidating, unfathomable giant robot called Gort, who efficiently deals with the human weaponry and afterwards guards his vessel in his absence (and has death rays coming out of his eyes!), seemingly controlled by simple unintelligible words like 'Klaatu Barada Nikto'. Klaatu, soon fed up with the endless questioning, escapes his captors and soon settles quietly in a boarding house to explore the human society, its hopes and dreams, its fears and folly. Though he enjoys the company of a free-spirited woman and her son, he generally does not like what he finds, as us humans prove mischievous and suspicious, a danger to our own and possibly other worlds as well. The only voice of reason comes from the expansive and accepting mind of the scientific community, but will it be enough to allow mankind to exist further? Or does he need Gort to wreak havoc on this backward little planet driven by petty bickering? As he finds himself increasingly hunted by government agents, it seems only a demonstration of extraterrestrial power will suffice to get humanity in line. And thus he moves to the act of making the Earth stand still (just not as literally as many people would have it from the title), a show of force that will cost him everything.

The Day the Earth Stood Still tells the classic tale of the outsider looking in on ourselves, to investigate the human condition (if there ever was a time to do so, it was the Fifties!). Thanks to his charming British gentleman persona, Rennie proves the perfect choice for portraying the sympathetic alien being who feels both joyful surprise and disgust at the hands of human behavior. Despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, Klaatu wants to believe in the good nature of mankind, as he is ultimately willing to make that greatest of sacrifices to both protect it and remind it there are greater powers than its own out there, thus completing the connotations to the typical Christ figure this movie is laced with, without ever going so far as to alienate spectators beholden to other religious beliefs (or none at all). Rennie is joined by a solid supporting cast to play off against, including Patricia Neal as a caring and understanding young woman who accepts, and even embraces, the unknown for the wonders it brings, as well as Sam Jaffe as the old scientist who shows humanity's capacity to listen to reason instead of only responding to fear and terror. Excellent writing and performances are joined by a fantastic score (courtesy of the legendary Bernard Herrmann) and wonderful production design that nowadays could only be described as thoroughly retro to the ears and eyes of the contemporary viewer, thanks to this movie's own part in setting the trend of sleek flying saucers and shiny robots, accompanied by the spooky, otherworldly humming of theremins, for decades to come. Some question marks can be placed around Klaatu's own government, an interplanetary community guarded by powerful robots like Gort as its inexorable law enforcers, not motivated by personal gain or spoiled by the flaws of emotion. It's ironic that The Day the Earth Stood Still provides this notion as a possible answer to all our problems, while many Sci-Fi classics to follow – the likes of Colossus: The Forbin Project and I, Robot – instead warned us against the cold, relentless rule by technology, in favor of letting our emotions guide us for the greater good. Apparently in this dark decade, every method of dissuading mankind to have at itself with atomic bombs was worth exploring.

The Day the Earth Stood Still still stands strong as one of the finest science fiction films of all time, and inspired many directors to follow to craft equally thoughtful and engaged movies in the same genre. Not to mention many a nerd in naming a blog after the film's ingenious title. 'Klaatu Barada Nikto', the exact meaning of the phrase ever a mystery, naturally became a popular mantra among Sci-Fi aficionados.

 

A.I.: Artificial Intelligence

Rating ***/*****, or 7/10

Overly bombastic and grandiose science fiction drama with an increasingly sentimental plot like only Spielberg can deliver, but still quite intriguing nonetheless, and wonderfully designed. A couple in fear of loosing their son has a child robot custom made, but rejects him when their son's condition improves, forcing the android to survive in a world that proves at times to be hostile to artificial life. In a retelling of the Pinocchio story, the little robot wants to become real so his human “mother” will love him again. With Jude Law in his ultimate role as a robot gigolo. Originally planned as Stanley Kubrick's last project, but when he died, Spielberg took over.

Starring: Haley Joel Osment, Jude Law, Frances O'Connor

Directed by Steven Spielberg

USA: Warner Bros Pictures, 2001