Today's News: bunch of trailers & bunch of Razzies

So far I have succeeded in my goal to post at least one bit of news on MS every day. Here are the most recent results of that:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/158620/nieuwe_trailer_avengers_age_of_ultron

Age of Ultron definitely promises to be a darker movie than the much more lighthearted and cheerful first Marvel ensemble movie that preceded it. Makes sense, in this universe of ramifications and consequences. The general audience probably hasn't kept close track of events as much as the legions of fans have (myself included), but the current state of affairs in the MCU is no cause for more playful superhero shenanigans. Serious stuff has gone down, you know. S.H.I.E.L.D. is in shambles, HYDRA has its tentacles firmly in place wherever there are power bases of mankind to be found, Loki secretly rules Asgard and Iron Man has lost most of his fortune, respect and technology. And then there's those various Avengers we haven't heard from for the least three years, not to mention several new names in their roster to shake things up. Obviously, these people have a lot on their plate and Joss Whedon has no intention of making things too easy for them. The shit is going to hit the fan and previously mounted tensions will erupt. From the look of things, Iron Man will have to take the blow of most of it, after his plan of creating artificial peacekeepers goes horribly awry and the rest of the team has to clean up his mess. However, as per the comic book lore, it seems the team will have to worry about their unpredictable and uncontrollable comrade the Hulk the most. Whatever the outcome, the team will be shaken up severely and it's conceivable that for every new member introduced, a veteran will step down. And we wouldn't have it any other way, since such dramatic results make the MCU the ever interesting place that is.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/158629/remake_escape_from_new_york_van_start

This project has been in the works for many years, though it can't be said a lot of actual work was done on it. I'm not surprised it still will happen one day though. This movie has a definite high concept but is obscure enough for the general audience not to be aware of its status as a remake. And it has some clear franchise potential, allowing the main character to escape from other places once he's out of New York in any number of follow-ups. I'm glad originator John Carpenter is involved to some extent, though I know full well 'executive producer' and 'creative influence' can mean any number of things, many of which are not as involving as they sound. I'm pretty sure this remake isn't going to be anywhere near as gritty and grimy as its predecessor. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the studio notched the rating down from R to PG-13, so as to reach a wider audience for that franchise they're aiming for. Too bad, but I can live with it. I'm more interested in how this new dystopian future of theirs is going to play out. The bleak future from the original's 1997 has come and gone and it happily proved not to be as bad as advertized. Nevertheless, there's ample social anxieties in the present to capitalize on and I hope Carpenter will utilize his 'creative influence' steadily enough to ensure this new future is gonna be dirty and rotten but still a heck of a lot of over-the-top fun, as it proved in 1981.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/158596/trailers_nieuwe_series_the_messengers_en_izombie

Ignoring the trailer for The Messengers, which looks like typically ludicrous Christian Apocalyptic drivel, I have to ask what's up with the current trend of making the naturally abject notion of a walking cannibal corpse a thing to be romanced and sexualized? I can understand how that works for those other undead in popular fiction, the vampires, since they're normally not in a state of decomposition and generally use their powers of hypnotism to sexually lure their victims in for their blood, which can result in a lot of sultry sex. But a rotting body hellbent on devouring brains simply ought not to be sexy, which clearly doesn't stop folks from fantasizing about it and making TV shows out of it. I gotta say, with the right blend of relative humour the concept can work, as was evidenced in the fairly hilarious Warm Bodies. Can it work over a prolonged period of time rather than a two hour movie though? iZombie will have to prove it can. I gotta say, the female protagonist sure does look cute despite being dead. The zombies in this show clearly aren't as far gone physically as the majority of their cinematic brethren. Then again, the trailer suggests the main zombie is a bit of an anomaly, as she also has kept her ability to reason. That makes the whole zombie element of the show seem a lot less alarming. Her ongoing drive for consuming human flesh apparently isn't as strongly developed, as a job at the coroner suffices to keep that necessary flow of brains coming. Or there are much more people killed in town than ought to be usual, perhaps. I hope the struggle for humanity in the deteriorating zombie brain is gonna be handled as consistently and convincingly as the skeptic would demand, rather than the show quickly devolving into a buddy cop routine or an all-out romantic comedy, as the trailer also indicates could very well be the case.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/158630/michael_bay_films_grote_kanshebber_razzies

Few surprises here. It seems ripping on Michael Bay's movies - though often justified - is simply the socially expected and obligatory rather than the objective thing to do. As usual, the GRAF makes little secret of her disdain for the movies and actors she disses (though most of them deservedly so). When you list a title as 'Age of Ex-stink-tion', you can't be said to refrain from any emotional bias. I guess that just comes with an Award foundation that doesn't treat the movies it nominates, or itself for that matter, any serious. Maybe a more objective and refined sort of Worst Movies award foundation is in order to properly serve as a balance for the Oscar circus. Not that the likes of Michael Bay would care much: this particular object of movie mockery doesn't worry in the least about any damage to his reputation the Razzies may cause, considering his ongoing success at the boxoffice still has made him filthy rich and powerful in Tinsel Town. However, I would like to see some Razzie nominations that don't include Bay, Adam Sandler or Jennifer Aniston for a change. I guess the new category of Razzie Redeemers at least is a step in the right direction of the GRAF preventing making too strongly a mockery of itself.

And I'll also take a shot at predicting the winners:

Worst Movie: Transformers 4: Age of Extinction

Worst Actor: Adam Sandler / Blended

Worst Actress:  Cameron Diaz / The Other Woman en Sex Tape

Worst Supporting Actress: Nicola Peltz / Transformers: Age of Extinction

Worst Supporting Actor:  Kelsey Grammer / Expendables 3, Legends of Oz, Think Like a Man Too en Transformers: Age of Extinction

Worst Director: Michael Bay / Transformers: Age of Extinction

Worst Screen Combo: Transformers: Age of Extinction

Worst Script: Transformers: Age of Extinction / Ehren Kruger

Worst Remake, Rip-Off or Sequel: Annie

RAZZIE REDEEMER AWARD: Ben Affleck (from GIGLI to ARGO and GONE GIRL)

How to build a bitchin' Transformers standee, Quicksilver style

I thought I'd post something else for a change. Something wickedly cool, naturally (though admittedly, the video quality when posted on my blog leaves a lot to be desired). Me and my partner in promotional crime recently built this giant standee for the upcoming movie Transformers: Age of Extinction. It took us just over three hours to complete this daunting task, though you would not guess so from this little 11-second video. This footage gives a decent impression of the activities I usually engage in on Thursday afternoons on the job. Of course, most standees aren't nearly as big or complex as this particular specimen (which is why they don't get spiffy timelapse videos like this one). I can safely say that building this standee was much more fun than watching the actual movie. Considering its running time of 165 minutes, it would take up an equal amount of time too. I doubt many people would have the privilege of building this one though, as it sets the distributor back a whopping 2,500 euros, so not many have been produced. Which is why there's only two of these in the Netherlands, though you can spot its small sized counterpart (only about half as big) in most other commercial theaters. As the climax of the video flashes by in mere milliseconds, below you'll find a picture of the final product so you can experience its splendid detail and admire the craftsmanship that goes into building these huge standees.

It's gonna be a damn shame to tear this one down when the times comes. But hey, it's too big to take home with me by train...

Today's Trailer and Poster: interstellar robots and raccoons galore

More recent news I posted on MovieScene this week:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/155799/nieuwe_trailer_guardians_of_the_galaxy

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/155819/nieuwe_poster_transformers_age_of_extinction

Little to add to these bits of news. I'm getting ever more stoked for Guardians of the Galaxy, due to its increasingly weird and wondrously colourful space opera vibe. It was about time Marvel added something different to its mix, to showcase the diversity inherent in its comics, which really are not all about superheroes (honestly!). Not that there's anything wrong with superheroes, mind you. But there's an awful lot of that going on in theaters these days. So now we get a fun space movie with talking raccoons and trees and saucy green ladies instead. Something else entirely! This sensational trailer reveals a bit more of the personas behind the galaxy's would-be protectors annex fugitive outlaws. An eclectic bunch with a wide array of opposing personalities, just the type of ensemble that characterizes Marvel, and not all that different in make-up from, say, The Avengers. I truly hope this movie will help revitalize the space opera genre, which previously failed to re-win the hearts of the audience when John Carter flopped. The Marvel brand ought to steer people in the right direction, though it may make for misguided expectations at first. If director James Gunn does the source material justice though, there should be little difficulties getting the audience to embrace these characters too. Even that darn talking raccoon.

After all, the general audience had little difficulty accepting the mindless incredulity of giant extraterrestrial robots morphing into Earth vehicles. Nor did the lack of a decent, balanced, intelligible plot, hurt the box office three times in a row. So the financial success of the fourth Transformers flick seems to be secure. Michael Bay unfortunately returns to the director's chair to terrorize our ear drums yet again with his overly loud bombastic scenes of digital action and trademark emphasis on big ass explosions. New characters notwithstanding, the plot doesn't seem to differ much from before. Big bad robots from space mean to wipe out humanity and gentle giant robots help us out. This time the latter group is also hindered by mankind itself, fed up as we are as a species with these Trannies continuing to run amok on our planet. Misunderstood heroes, not exactly a novel motif. Titanic robots from outer space morphing into prehistoric terrestrial creatures, that is a new one though. Nevermind the absence of logic. People have shown not to care too much about logic three times before, and they will undoubtedly do so again. And against better judgment, so will I. That's the price you pay for getting to go to the movies for free I suppose.

Today's Double News: dinosaur robots and neo-noir strip routines

I got some more stuff up on MovieScene yesterday and managed to post it here today, as ought to be the natural routine I have increasingly less time to adhere to, alas.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/154236/nieuwe_fotos_sin_city_a_dame_to_kill_for

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/154235/eerste_trailer_transformers_age_of_extinction

This is so typical. I loathed the previous threesome of Transformers flicks, yet I still keep looking forward to the next installment even though I know it's gonna suck robots balls (and that these robots even have genitals is something unfortunately established in the second movie). I should know better by now. Maybe it's because this time there's dinosaurs involved too? Yeah, like that makes a difference for the overall (lack of) quality as long as Michael Bay is still directing! If I didn't care for supposedly paleontologically correct dinosaurs in the recent Walking with Dinosaurs 3D flick, robot dinosaurs also doesn't exactly sound like stuff right up my alley. I guess I've become too picky as I've grown old and sour. Trading in Shia LaBeouf for Mark Wahlberg is also less than a stellar improvement, but an improvement nonetheless. As was the case with the previous Tranny films, there's some good actors around, but this is not the type of films that revolves around acting. These are eye candy movies for immature audiences, where half the movie consists of overly loud, endless action scenes with explosions every other minute and the rest of the time is filled with hot chicks bending over socially sexualized vehicles while utterly cringe worthy poop jokes are produced. Inbetween there is something of a story line to discern but it makes little sense and is otherwise completely forgotten when the credits end rolling. There are visual FX driven movies that provide a singularly memorable, thoroughly absorbing viewing experience, like Gravity, and there is its exact opposite: Transformers 1 through 3. Fourth time is the charm? I don't think so. Yet I will still end up torturing myself as I go and see it (for free, obviously: torturing yourself and paying for it is just too much pain). It will probably be another bad film, but at the very least robots morphing into dinosaurs can't be worse than robots shapeshifting into cars. It just can't, I refuse to believe it...

And then there's the type of VFX movie where the effects form the setting, dominating the visual style but not driving the story per se, as that is still up to the actors. Like Sin City. And its sequel, A Dame to Kill For. In the case of such films, acting is a quintessential ingredient, and the actors find their capabilities tested to their absolute limits acting against nothing but blue (or green, it varies) all around them. Some actors don't do so well in this scenario, as Rosario Dawson and Jessica Alba showed in the previous adventure taking place in the City of Sins. Hopefully they've grown and prove more up to the task in the sequel, as both of them are back for more. As are characters like Hartigan (Bruce Willis) and Marv (Mickey Rourke), despite both of them kicking the bucket before. As this movie takes place before the events of the first film, that ought not be an issue. In fact, this film will answer questions raised by its predecessor. For one thing, why did Dwight have to change his facial appearance (from Sin 2's Josh Brolin to Sin's Clive Owen)? With exactly the same people both in front and behind of the camera, I have full faith in this project, though I agree it doesn't score points in terms of originality. If the quality of the movie gets anywhere near the level of the first installment - still a much appreciated entry in my personal Top-29 of 10/10 rated movies - you won't hear me complaining. Even if Alba once again takes out her no-nudity clause and keeps her clothes on while playing the stripper, despite the graphic novel the movie so faithfully reproduces for the big screen revealing quite a lot more black&white skin.

Today's News: Transformers go extinct

This was found on MovieScene yesterday thanks to myself:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/149814/transformers_4_krijgt_titel

Transformers: Age of Extinction it is. Derivative title to say the least. Recently we were treated to the revelation that the next Avengers flick will be called Avengers: Age of Ultron. And what's that one about? A robot threatening mankind with extinction! Other sub-titles Paramount reportedly considered for Transformers 4 were Apocalypse, Future Cast and Last Stand. Also all less than original. Remember Resident Evil: Apocalypse, X-Men: Days of Future Past and X-Men: The Last Stand? Paramount must be thinking it can shave a few bucks off this hugely expensive project by copying better movies' titles.

Oh well, there's robots in the shape of dinosaurs in this one - as there are in Power Rangers, by the way, so also not a wholly novel concept - so I may be forgiving for once. Not that I care much about the Transformers franchise under Michael Bay's continuous supervision. I've sat through three shitty movies about alien robots inexplicably changing into Earthly vehicles, so I'm not interested in a fourth. But 'Dinobots' sounds simply so mesozoically cheesy, this film might entice even me. And if it ends up a dud, there's fortunately plenty of other dinosaur related movies in store. Walking with Dinosaurs 3D this year, Pixar's The Good Dinosaur the next, and hopefully (finally!) Jurassic Park IV in 2015. It seems the dinosaurs are back to stay. Again.