Today's News: am I gaining on myself or getting further behind?

With new movie news being posted on nigh a daily basis, I'm gonna be hard-pressed keeping the topics current. Today's news items too admittedly aren't all too fresh, being nearly a week old by now.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157417/nieuwe_trailer_horrible_bosses_2

I gotta admit I still had a few laughs watching this trailer, even though I'm against the whole notion of doing sequels to Hollywood comedies, since they're nothing but blatant cashcows and creativity is usually not their forté. The idea of three nitwits formerly screwed over by their employers starting a business of their own is at least a narratively logical construction, though otherwise all the predictable story ingredients from the sequel are in place: the inaptitude of the protagonists, the rich bastard conning them for his own gain, the crime that is to be their revenge but backfires on them, etc. Many of the supporting characters return, even though not all of them seem genuinely warranted to do so - read: gratuitous appearances galore - to provide a familiar face for people who are off-set by all those newcomers (not that there's that many of those though). Surprises are not likely to be found here, looking at the story. A decent joke or two, most likely. Will this be as good as the predecessor? Let's consider the sequels to similar recent succesful comedies. Can you name one that was anywhere near as good as its forebear? I certainly can't. So I doubt this will prove any different.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157415/dominic_cooper_toegevoegd_aan_marvels_agent_carter

Not exactly a surprising bit of casting, but a welcome one nonetheless. Gotta love the consistency between the TV branch of Marvel Studios' enterprise and its theatrical counterpart. It also provides a good example that television and cinema are getting increasingly intertwined as actors known mostly for their movie roles have no qualms appearing in series, a situation which was once stated to be a signal of their career's demise. These days, the opposite seems through: actors that stick to one medium are old news, it's the ability to switch between media which keeps them hot and interesting. Though the show's star, Hayley Atwell, certainly is no stranger to the small screen (Pillars of the Earth, for example), Dominic Cooper's television career by comparison is still in its infancy. It recently kicked off with his portrayal of 007 creator Ian Fleming in Fleming, so it's off to a good start. And for Agent Carter, Cooper's recent brush with espionage is all the more convenient, as that's exactly what the series deals with (though with the necessary Marvel twists). In temporal regards the latter could almost be considered a follow-up to the former, as Agent Carter takes place shortly after the period in which Fleming is set. No wonder the studio was so eager to get Cooper back to reprising Howard Stark, he seems a perfect fit and for his own benefit, he could use a bit more of the television treatment.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157442/joaquin_phoenix_niet_in_doctor_strange

As a nice segue to the former topic, even the mighty Marvel can't get every actor they would like. Joaquin Phoenix proved too headstrong and too gung-ho for contractual independence for the House of Ideas. Probably for the better, as Phoenix has shown little interest in doing big studio productions over the last decade. Small independent features are his preferred territory, and it seems to work well for him, so why would he succumb to the restrictive studio system? It would likely only have hurt his performance. Though it could still have been a great one. Doctor Strange was probably the character best suited to Phoenix, considering he's in an offbeat niche all his own in the Marvel universe, namely the mystical one. The physical resemblances would only have been a bonus. Strange however has had little issues joining others in bigger ventures, as he's been a member of almost every big super team from Marvel's comics over the years, from the Defenders to the Avengers. Such joint enterprises really aren't Phoenix's cup of tea, and I'm not surprised and only slightly disappointed he didn't bite. I'm still hoping for Viggo Mortensen to take the part, though he's very much of the same mind and is at least as unlikely to accept, if not more so.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157414/zombieland_2_niet_langer_dood

Another Hollywood comedy sequel I'm not eagerly anticipating, though I admit this one offers more diverse story telling possibilities than most. I got the general idea with the first Zombieland though, which I found only moderately funny. I guess I prefer my zombies without comedy (like the far superior The Walking Dead, duh!). The studio seems adamant to make a franchise out of this one though, even though they already failed on telly in that regard, as the series didn't get beyond the pilot stage (I didn't bother to see it). Undoubtedly the studio sees something in this that I don't: money. I think most people however just watched the first film, had a few laughs and simply moved on, largely putting the title out of their mind (which would be hard to do with The Walking Dead, a far more gripping viewing experience). Zombieland simply doesn't seem compeling enough to prove a lasting franchise, but the studio insists on trying regardless. They're welcome to try, but if it doesn't work out again, don't say I didn't warn them.

Today's Triple News: horrible witch terminators

More news posted at MovieScene this here few days:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157120/eerste_foto_vin_diesel_in_the_last_witch_hunter

As has been proven before on several occasions, Vin Diesel likes using social media to reach out to his fanbase (and movie news hungry editors like myself) about his current projects. It's good to see a Hollywood star keeping in touch with his followers himself rather than letting the Hollywood propaganda machine do that for him, though of course, we should not tell ourselves that anything Diesel posts isn't done with permission by the studios' promotional think tanks. This is the first we've seen of The Last Witch Hunter (not surprising, as it's still only half way through production). Doesn't show us much, but assures the Diesel fanatics their hero will play yet another gruff, masculine man of action, this time (partially) in a medieval setting. Whether the movie will be any good is hard to tell from just this single teaser image. The story doesn't seem all that inspired, combining ingredients from recent flicks like The Sorcerer's Apprentice (fantasy warfare in present day New York City) and Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters (witch hunters teaming up with good female witches to stop evil covens: plus the title of the film) without adding much novelty and seemingly swapping the element of humour for a more serious Gothic tone. The supporting cast seems decent enough, with the likes of Elijah Wood, Michael Caine and Rose Leslie. Especially the latter has her work cut out for her, as this is her first major Hollywood role. She had time for it apparently, now that her character didn't survive the last season of Game of Thrones.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157121/nieuwe_trailer_en_poster_horrible_bosses_2

I'm still not convinced of the need for a sequel to Horrible Bosses by watching this trailer. There isn't any really, other than the fact the predecessor made ample money to tell the studio a sequel might do the same. And so we basically get more of the same story, just with situations added and rearranged to some extent to let the audience know they're not looking at exactly the same picture. Again we have the trio of incompetent protagonists screwed over by their employer and plotting a revenge. This time it involves kidnapping rather than murder. Enter Chris Pine as the victim. And re-enter Jennifer Aniston and Kevin Spacey as two of the titular bosses from the original who are somehow woven into the new plot, even though their story lines seemed to have been over and done with at the climax of the first film. How ingenious the ways of Hollywood story telling, just to ensure enough characters return to repeat jokes and make the movie seem repetitive. At least we'll have one new boss, played by Christoph Waltz. There's something new for you, though not enough to make you feel the need to go to theaters to see this film. Seems more like the stuff of illegally downloading on a rainy Sunday afternoon.

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/157130/terminator_sequels_aangekondigd

Another example of a studio getting way ahead of itself by planning multiple sequels based on the hopes the first film, which is what this will be somewhat as it's clear by now we're dealing with a rebooted franchise, will do well with audiences. Reboot or not, it still stars Arnold Schwarzenegger, even though the guy seems way too old to do the stuff he used to do on the first trilogy by now. Rumour has it he will not be a killer cyborg this time though. But as always, it would make much more sense to work off guaranteed success rather than spending millions of dollars pre-producing two sequels that may get scrapped if the box office results of their predecessor disappoint. And isn't this exactly what happened on the last Terminator film, Salvation? That movie, too, was meant to take the franchise into new directions 9without the Austrian Oak, mostly) and spawn a new trilogy, but disappointing financial grossing put a stop to such plans beyond this single project. Down the drain went that second trilogy, leaving a poor standalone film in its wake. It wasn't a total financial failure, but scored last in the list of released Terminator films thus far. The studio (that is, a different one, as the previous owner went bankrupt) appears to feel adamant that by bringing Schwarzenegger back in a prominent role, whatever it may be, that critical element that guaranteed box office success (which it did, in the Eighties) will do so again. It didn't work on The Expendables 3 though, so they ought not get their hopes up too much. But apparently, they do. Hollywood will never learn it seems.

Today's News: turns out there are more horrible bosses out there

Here's some more MS news from mine own hand:

http://www.moviescene.nl/p/150434/horrible_bosses_krijgt_vervolg

Apparently Horrible Bosses was so successful a sequel was warranted. I get why it made money, it was a fun comedy flick. Does it need a sequel, or does the audience want one? Not at all. But that doesn't stop Hollywood from ramming it down our throats, in the hopes of capitalizing on a name that makes us fondly remember one of the few worthwhile comedies in recent years that have come out of the studio system. It's The Hangover all over again. We get a good comedy and we award it by paying to see it. Afterwards the studio suits think we want more of exactly the same and they present us with one or more sequels that follow the precise same formula of the first movie ad nauseam, thus giving that good first film a sour aftertaste. Not every fine film ought to be turned into a franchise, but franchises are what keeps Hollywood alive these days. As for Horrible Bosses 2, though no official plot information has been released, so far it seems to be an exact carbon copy of the predecessor. The three oppressed employees are back (including, unfortunately, that terribly obnoxious Charlie Day, who ruined every attempt at comic relief in Pacific Rim) and so is the incompetent hitman offering them bad advice on how to terminate their employers. But who are the latter in this case? I'm hoping the writers will add some originality and turn the threesome of former wage slaves into bad bosses themselves as a nice little role reversal. But most likely some new employers will be found to terrorize our heroes, and they'll be played by equally surprising bits of casting (so not Colin Farrell again, but like him someone you wouldn't have expected to see in that particular role either). Though that too is to be expected now, as we're in all-familiar territory.

Horrible Bosses 2 is gonna happen, whether we want it to or not. If we're lucky, it turns out to be a pleasant experience after all. But don't count on that. If it is gonna end up a dud, best thing we can do is not spend our money on it in theaters so this would-be trilogy dies a quick death on its second attempt, sending a clear signal to Hollywood that this blatant enfranchisement needs to stop somewhere. And we ought to do the same thing when Bridesmaids 2, We're the Millers 2 or The Hangover Part IV hit theaters in the future.