/Film

‘Anchorman: The Legend Continues’ Teaser: Just Saying Hello

Angie Han — Sat, 18 May 2013 18:57:55 +0000

Director Adam McKay promised “a murderers’ row of day players” for Anchorman: The Legend Continues, and based on the casting so far it definitely looks like he’s gonna deliver. But the faces we’re really excited to see are those of the core Channel 4 news team, and the new trailer offers a peek at just that.

There’s no new footage to be found here, but there are enough laughs to whet your appetite for comedy. Against a flashy backdrop just like the one from the last trailer, Ron Burgundy (Will Ferrell), Brian Fantana (Paul Rudd), Champ Kind (David Koechner), and Brick Tamland (Steve Carell) step up to say hello. And stay classy. And, uh, happy Easter. Check it out after the jump.

Oddly, these guys still seem to have only six feet between the four of them. Perhaps they’ve been tangling with the other news networks again.

It’s been almost a decade since the last film, but you wouldn’t know it from this trailer. Partly because Rudd somehow never, ever ages, but also because these manly men don’t seem to have changed one bit. Which isn’t a complaint, mind you. Comedy sequels tend to be pretty hit or miss, but these four look as hilarious as ever. Fingers crossed that impression will bear out when a full-length trailer finally hits.

Previous quotes from the cast and crew have indicated that the sequel will follow Ron and his team, including the incomparable Miss Corningstone (Christina Applegate), to New York City, where they’ll deal with diversity and the 24-hour news cycle in their typically oblivious way. Their adventure will involve new characters played by Harrison Ford, James Marsden, Dylan Good, and Meagan Baker, plus more cameos than you can shake a stick at.

Anchorman: The Legend Continues is shooting now in Atlanta for a December 20 release.

5 Things That Bothered Me About ‘Star Trek Into Darkness’

David Chen — Sat, 18 May 2013 17:52:03 +0000

After much anticipation, Star Trek Into Darkness is finally out this weekend. Peter and Germain have weighed in with their mostly-positive takes, and you guys have also chimed in with your thoughts. I personally enjoyed watching the movie from beginning to end, and got a kick out of seeing these characters come to life once more, as played by the immensely talented cast. It’s a non-stop thrill-ride, a riveting experience that may leave you scratching your head at certain points, but never leaves you bored.

About those head-scratchers: yeah, this movie definitely made pretty bizarre decisions, several of which continued to nag at me days after I’d seen it, even though my overall memories of the film were ones of fondness. So, in the grand tradition, you’ll find some of my issues after the jump. As always, feel free to respond with your own and/or correct me in the comments.

MASSIVE SPOILERS FOR STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS FOLLOW.

Khan – I will admit the following: Benedict Cumberbatch cuts a fine villain that just oozes with badassery, and there’s nothing quite like watching a single dude take out a whole squad of Klingons (including their ships!). But pretty much nothing else about this character makes sense. Why would the Federation unfreeze one of the most skilled hand-to-hand killers in the history of mankind…to have him design futuristic weapons/technology? Why did he feel the need to rename himself John Harrison? How was his cryogenically frozen crew able to squeeze into those relatively small torpedoes? How effective of a reveal is it that he’s Khan if he looks nothing like the Khan we’ve seen in the past, and his true mission is only referenced in passing at the end by Spock Prime?

Abrams’ Star Trek franchise has thus far been about reinvention. But where the first film stood on its own and incorporated references to previous incarnations brilliantly and organically, this film banks on our knowledge and appreciation of Khan from years past to lend weight to his motivations and actions. What’s a shame is that there probably was a great film in here about a rogue agent determined to stop an out-of-control war-mongering Federation in the wake of Vulcan’s destruction. The filmmakers could have struck out on their own into untrodden territory. But by invoking the Khan name, they automatically invites comparisons to The Wrath of Khan, and end up muddling the appreciation we had for that character.

KHAAAAAAAAN! - There’s an undeniable cleverness in the reversal of roles that takes place at the end of this film: where in Wrath of Khan, it was Spock who invoked the “needs of the many” idea, in this film, it is Kirk makes the ultimate sacrifice for his crew. It somewhat fits Kirk’s arc better in this film, who begins this film as an arrogant, cocky bastard that needs to be brought back down to Earth (literally).

But while I love Quinto’s incarnation of Spock, his “Khaaaan!” scream just felt kind of…silly? For a variety of reasons? Firstly, no one can do over-exaggerated screaming like William Shatner (whose scream in Wrath of Khan, if you think about it, was perhaps purposefully over-exaggerated to fool Khan. See this interview that Jordan Hoffman did with Nicholas Meyer for more details). Secondly, the reason that Spock’s death was so gut-wrenching was because we’d gotten to know these characters, and their friendship, over the course of several seasons of television. Hell, we even survived Star Trek: The Motion Picture with them. In the universe of this franchise, their friendship has just begun making his angry reaction a bit less explicable.

I get that Spock’s zen attitude towards death early on the film is meant to serve as a stark contrast to his freakout at the end. I just don’t think it lands like it’s supposed to.

They cured death - What was so genius about the death of Spock in Wrath of Khan was the seeming finality of it. They killed off a major character an incredibly emotional way! It would be a couple years until The Search for Spock arrived and totally undid all of that interesting work. But in this film, Kirk was barely dead for 20 minutes before he was brought back to life by Khan’s Lazarus blood.

Put aside the fact that Bones had access to dozens of other superhumans in torpedoes all around him, who presumably each had their own version of life-giving blood, thus rendering the final chase sequence totally unnecessary. They were able to revive Kirk by injecting a Khan’s blood into him! It’s not taking chances if you kill a major character only to bring him back to life before the end of the film. It’s the illusion of boldness. Furthermore, how can we trust that anything that takes place in this universe will continue to have stakes if a quick blood injection can potentially solve a character’s brutal death?

Carol Marcus - Okay, so Star Trek Into Darkness doesn’t exactly pass the Bechedel Test. That’s a bummer, but most movies don’t these days. More bothersome is the fact that Carol Marcus is such a cypher of a character who has maybe a dozen lines during the course of the film, and who apparently exists only so a shot of her in her undies could be included in several ads for the film. Sure, she helps save the Enterprise at a critical juncture. But that’s all she is – a plot point and a pretty face. Pretty shameless, and a wasted opportunity to shed more light on a character who was part of some critical plot points in the original series.

Earth has no missile defense system - It’s well known that in the event that anyone should attempt an air-based attack on our capital in D.C., we have missile defenses and fighter jets that can scramble within minutes to meet the threat. Apparently the Federation of the future doesn’t have anything comparable. In one of the climactic scenes of the film, Khan crashes his warship straight into San Francisco. It’s a spectacular, breathtaking set piece, chock-full of pornographic futuristic destruction. It’s also totally baffling that in the future, there’s nothing in place to stop an enormous, hurtling object you can literally see from hundreds of miles away from wreaking untold amounts of destruction on a major city (Also strange: that such a cataclysmic attack is barely even acknowledged in the film’s epilogue. If the Federation was freaking out and instigating war under false pretenses in the aftermath of Vulcan’s demise, wouldn’t a major attack on planet Earth that apparently killed thousands have an even more drastic effect?).

‘Assassin’s Creed’ Starring Michael Fassbender Will Be Unleashed Summer 2015

Germain Lussier — Sat, 18 May 2013 02:14:58 +0000

Briefly: There’s been a killer addition to the Summer of 2015. Assassin’s Creed, based on the popular Ubisoft video game series, will hit theaters on May 22, 2015. 20th Century Fox is now on board the project which, at this point, only has Michael Fassbender attached to play Desmond Miles, the descendant of a long line of assassins who can relive the memories of his ancestors.

At this point, no other film is schedule on that date but, if Star Wars Episode VII comes out on its traditional Summer weekend, it’ll be going up against this film.

Michael Lesslie is writing the screenplay. No director is attached but with a release date two years away from next weekend, you can expect that to change soon. [Coming Soon]

‘Star Trek Into Darkness’ – What Did You Think?

Russ Fischer — Sat, 18 May 2013 00:25:45 +0000

It’s in theaters now, and all the secrets are out in the open. Star Trek Into Darkness, the second Trek film from J.J. Abrams, has been locked (mostly) in the producer/director’s “mystery box” for over a year. For hardcore fans, at least, the secrecy around the precise nature of the character played by Benedict Cumberbatch has been a big part of the marketing allure, but the energy Abrams and his cast brought to their first outing on the Enterprise has been enough to make a huge audience curious about their encore.

And in the end, the irony is that, while there was a type of secret to preserve with respect to the character, in the end he plays a weird role in the plot. (There’s a certain kinship to Iron Man 3 in that respect.)

Abrams has said that he wanted to make Star Trek for people who aren’t Star Trek fans, and in that respect he might have succeeded. Into Darkness has a few well-executed setpieces, and loads of the same winning cast presence that made the first Abrams Trek a success. But does it work? Does the film’s wide divergence from many well-established Trek characteristics fly, and does it even really matter who Cumberbatch is playing? Weigh in below, where full spoilers are in force.

Germain liked the film a lot more than I did. For him the energy and broad entertainment value was enough, while I saw the film trying to persuade me to care about things that don’t seem to matter. Cumberbatch is, frankly, more interesting as John Harrison than as Khan; there’s not much about him that screams “Khan” in any old sense, and his actions this time out don’t establish him as a very compelling new version. (Which, I suppose, is one reason Spock has to do the “Khaaaannn!” scream himself.)

Abrams and his writers (Alex Kurtzman, Damon Lindelof, and Roberto Orci) have license to do whatever they want with the characters thanks to the parallel universe setting established in the ’09 Trek. That’s not a bad thing. But were you convinced that this version of Kirk and Spock are interesting enough in their own right to command this sequel? There’s a lot of treading water here between going full-on into a new version of Star Trek, and calling back to well-established ideas from the original. (That’s another reason Spock gets to/has to scream the enemy’s name.)

So what worked for you, and what didn’t? There’s plenty to talk about, starting with the title and going down the list through the dual villains, the revisions of characters and scenes, the new setpieces, and the way each actor inhabits their character.

‘Star Trek Into Darkness’ Review And Video Blog: Read and Watch Two Opinions on J.J. Abrams’ Sequel

Germain Lussier — Fri, 17 May 2013 23:45:51 +0000

Sequels are a tricky thing. In the best cases, they transcend the original work by adding emotional depth and context, elevating the entire story arc. In the worst cases, they’re a carbon copy of the original with perhaps a bigger “wow” factor. Star Trek Into Darkness, like many sequels, falls into the middle ground. It expands and broadens the scope of the original while duplicating most of the elements that were already in place from the 2009 film.

To follow his first Trek revival, director J.J. Abrams has made a much more visually impressive and exciting action film, and one worthy of the Star Trek franchise. It simply lacks the inspiration that made his first film so special.

After the jump, read the rest of this review and see a video blog with some differing opinions.

The biggest addition to Star Trek Into Darkness is the introduction of a new villain named John Harrison, played by Benedict Cumberbatch. In this character screenwriters Damon Lindelof, Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman create a much more engaging, formidable and ambiguous villain than Nero of the ’09 Trek. Into Darkness fires on all cylinders when Harrison is playing both sides of the moral line. We aren’t quite sure where his head is at, and neither is Captain Kirk. This eventually changes but we’ll leave that substantial reveal for the cinema.

A great villain is nothing without great heroes, and the best part of Into Darkness bar none is the expansion use of an incredible cast. Everyone, from stars Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto and Zoe Saldana, down to more secondary crew members played by Simon Pegg, John Cho and Karl Urban, is really allowed to spread their wings. Instead of just the one or two prerequisite catch phrases, each character’s position is molded and suited to the story at hand, giving them all a few moments in the sun. The standouts are Urban, who has the best lines out of the bunch, and Quinto, who takes Spock on the film’s most complete journey. If you go into the film simply to see these characters again, you’d be happy.

The film’s pace is also quite good, largely in part to the near perfect distribution and variety of large action set pieces and visual effects. Everything looks beautiful (especially in IMAX 3D), and sounds wonderful (composer Michael Giacchino‘s work is solid as usual). Yet there’s always the knowledge we’re watching a franchise film, and truly putting the characters in peril is challenging. Attempts are made, with varying degrees of success, to convincingly threaten the heroes. But therein lies the emotional disconnect between the sequel and the original film. In the first movie we weren’t quite sure where everyone stood. Now that we do, it’s a bit harder to pull the heart strings.

Explaining more of why Star Trek Into Darkness never quite reaches the heights of its predecessor would require giving examples you don’t want to read yet. In broad terms, the surprises (of which there are many) never resonate as much as they’re meant to. At times they work, but they’re not the highlights of the film they should be. Those highlights come in the form of small character moments as portrayed by the fine cast, and the jaw-dropping visual effects sequences.

In the first set of Star Trek movies, the second film exceeded the first in every way imaginable. Star Trek Into Darkness is not Wrath of Khan. It’s more like The Voyage Home; a fun but frivolous sequel. Even if that comparison means nothing to you, there’s a good chance you’ll enjoy Star Trek Into Darkness a ton. The goods are there; unfortunately they don’t have more impact.

/Film rating: 7 out of 10

And here is a video blog featuring Peter and Steve from Collider discussing the movie. They each liked it a bit more than I did.

Early Reaction: Star Trek Into Darkness from /Film on Vimeo.

Spike Lee Takes Over Former Michael Mann Project ‘Gold’

Russ Fischer — Fri, 17 May 2013 23:37:16 +0000

Like many directors, Michael Mann mulls over many projects before settling on the one that will be his “next” film at any given time. In this case his next picture is a currently untitled “cyber-crime” thriller, which leaves quite a few other possible films in the lurch.

One of those other potential efforts was Gold, a film that follows a 1993 mining scandal, featuring a prospector who found “one of the largest gold mines in the world in the Indonesian jungle.” It has been likened to The Treasure of the Sierra Madre, but in what respects beyond the simple prospector angle, we don’t know for certain.

Mann may have moved on, but Gold still lives. Spike Lee is now attached to direct the film, based on the script by Patrick Massett and John Zinman.

The Wrap reports that the film might be Lee’s next, after the completion and release of Oldboy. But there’s the question of scheduling for whatever actor is cast as the main character. Paul Haggis, who once considered directing and originally brought the project to Mann, is still producing.

As far as the story goes, the background for Gold is interesting. It’s a story that almost has more to do with what happened on the stock market than what took place in Indonesia.

The short form is that, in 1988 Bre-X Minerals was formed in Canada. In ’92 it began exploring in Busan, Indonesia, and geologist Michael de Guzman was hired to oversee efforts there. In late ’95 Bre-X started to announce that Busan may have at least 10m ounces of gold, and possibly as much as 30m. By early ’97 the company is saying there might be up to 200m ounces in the reserve. With gold prices hitting $300-400 USD per ounce at the time, that was a lot of money. The Bre-X stock price rocketed from about $14 CDN to over $200 CDN, after which it split 10-for-1. Short version, the company was valued at about $6 BILLION.

Then independent reports said there was actually no gold in Busan. Cue the crash. There was a mysterious death, and a massive investor fallout. You can almost hear the papers and shareholders screaming more than fifteen years later.

So the conflict is pretty obvious, but precisely how it will be presented as a film script is open to question. Will it take place mostly on the ground in Indonesia, or between there, the board room, and the stock market?

Oldboy opens on October 11, and we may know more about Gold before that.

Behind the Scenes B-Roll Footage From ‘Fast and Furious 6 and ‘The Hangover Part III’

Germain Lussier — Fri, 17 May 2013 22:57:37 +0000

In one week, Vin Diesel’s fast cars and Bradley Cooper’s frequent carnage are going head to head at the box office. The Hangover Part III and Fast and Furious 6 each open over Memorial Day weekend, in what’s poised to be the biggest showdown of the summer. They’re both films with built-in fanbases aimed at the same demographic. The potential battle is so intense (as far as box-office goes) that The Hangover pushed its opening up a day.

We’ll have to wait until next weekend to see who comes out on top but, before that, we have a battle of behind the scenes B-roll. Footage from both the Justin Lin action extravaganza and Todd Phillips comedy has come online. Does it shine a light on who’ll be victorious?

Thanks to Trailer Addict for all these links. The first two are from The Hangover Part III

And then there are five (why not six?) from Fast and Furious 6.

Five versus two? Fast and Furious 6 wins this round. Which film are you more excited for?

Summit Re-ups Writers for ‘Red 3′

Russ Fischer — Fri, 17 May 2013 22:26:20 +0000

Briefly: We haven’t even seen Red 2, but Summit is confident enough in the film that writers Jon and Erich Hoeber have been signed to write a third. The brothers wrote the first two films, so they’re as familiar as it is possible to be with the material. Not a bad outcome for the original film based on the comic by Warren Ellis and Cully Hamner that focused on aging black ops characters being drawn back into action.

Red 2, directed by Dean Parisot (Galaxy Quest), opens on July 19, at which point we’ll see if augmenting the original cast (Bruce Willis, Helen Mirren, John Malkovich and Mary-Louise Parker) with Anthony Hopkins and Catherine Zeta-Jones worked out. Based on the fact that test screenings have led to Summit hiring writers for a third, perhaps it’s all coming together a bit better than the first film did.

There’s no cast in place for a third Red film at this point, but if things turn out well for the second film when it hits this summer, production on the third could kick off as early as January 2014. [THR]

Superhero Bits: Man of Steel, Marvel’s Phase Three, Dwayne Johnson, Iron Man 3, She-Hulk

Germain Lussier — Fri, 17 May 2013 21:30:32 +0000

When do Man of Steel tickets go on sale to the general public? What did Kevin Feige have to say about possible Phase Three films Doctor Strange, Inhumans, Runaways and more? Which character does Dwayne Johnson want to play in the Marvel Universe? Where can you see a live Iron Man 3 art discussion? What are the best superhero board games? Are S.H.I.E.L.D. and Pulp Fiction related in anyway? Read about all this and more in today’s Superhero Bits.

Man of Steel tickets go on sale next week. And don’t forget about the Wal-Mart tickets Saturday.

Kevin Feige spoke to Entertainment Weekly all about possible Phase Three movies. Nothing super major, but LOTS of good tidbits on Hulk, Doctor Strange, Runaways, Iron Man 4 and here’s an example about Inhumans:

Inhumans is cool, they’re really great characters. The most powerful guy is the king who doesn’t say a word and if he does — lookout. That’s awesome. And the notion of the Terrigen Mists, this notion that you go through and don’t know what you’re going to be on the other side, is incredibly compelling dramatically. In other words, all the craziness that comes with Inhumans, we’ve done in the other movies already. But this would have some of the social drama that we haven’t really done yet. [Fox’s] X-Men, obviously, has been touching on that stuff for a while.

Film Sketchr (via CBM) posted some more concept work from Iron Man 3, including Tony’s headset.

James Gunn said that image of Dave Bautista putting something on his face was not a Guardians of the Galaxy makeup test.

Thank U @marvel President Kevin Feige for the nod. I’ll be ready. #RockAsCage #HeroForHire bit.ly/11EJTft twitter.com/TheRock/status…

— Dwayne Johnson (@TheRock) May 17, 2013

Feige wants The Rock. The Rock wants Luke Cake.

Iron Man 3 has officially made $1 billion internationally and $300 million domestic.

/Film reader Alex sent us this Man of Steel music video.

Gallery Nucleus in California is hostin an Art of Iron Man 3 event.

Here’s comic artist Jock holding a Thor movie prop at Olly Moss’s house.

Film School Rejects thinks Michael B. Jordan will be a great Human Torch.

Continue Reading Superhero Bits >>

Due to the amount of graphics and images included in Superhero Bits, we have to split this post over TWO pages. Click the link above to continue to the second page of Superhero Bits.

‘Dexter’ TV Trailer: The Beginning of the End

Angie Han — Fri, 17 May 2013 21:18:17 +0000

Early in the first full-length trailer for Dexter Season 8, our favorite serial killer (Michael C. Hall) notes with pleasure that the events of the Season 7 finale solved all of his problems. But as the rest of the promo shows, he’s won’t be sitting pretty for long.

In fact, with Deb (Jennifer Carpenter) spiraling downward and a formidable new foe coming up on the horizon, he may be in hotter water than ever before. And this being the final season, there’s no guarantee he’ll make it out alive this time. Check out the trailer plus a new poster after the jump.

Be warned that the video contains massive spoilers for the end of last season, and possibly even some for the next one. If you’d rather not know too much about what’s coming for dear ol’ Dex, you’re probably better off skipping this.

It’s tough to say who poses the bigger threat to Dexter right now. Charlotte Rampling‘s character, neuropsychiatrist Evelyn Vogel, seems too sharp not to notice that there’s something off about Dexter — and since she specializes in sociopaths like him, she may be able to outsmart him.

Deb, meanwhile, looks pretty intent on destroying herself with sex and drugs at the moment. But if she manages to scrape herself together long enough to do something about her evil brother, she could deal him some serious damage. And the poster suggests it may just come to that.

Or, who knows, it could be someone else entirely who brings about his demise. Lord knows there are plenty of potential threats. In addition to the returning regulars from seasons past, Sean Patrick Flanery, Nick Gomez, Rhys Coiro, Julian Sands, Kenny Johnson, Bethany Joy Lenz, and Darri Ingolfsson will also appear on the series this year.

Whatever the case, I’m sure there’ll be tons of blood and tears and drama before it’s all over. Dexter Season 8 premieres Sunday, June 30 at 9 PM on Showtime.

Michael B. Jordan on the Possibility of a Black Human Torch: “It’s 2013″

Angie Han — Fri, 17 May 2013 20:30:31 +0000

Josh Trank‘s Fantastic Four hasn’t announced any stars just yet, but we got some tantalizing hints a couple weeks back when Michael B. Jordan and Allison Williams were rumored for major roles. The reports got a lot of buzz, most of it good — but predictably, there were a few folks unhappy with the fact that Jordan is black, whereas Johnny Storm has traditionally been portrayed as white.

While Jordan won’t confirm his casting right now, he was happy to address some of the negative feedback he’s gotten. Put simply, he doesn’t see why his race should be a problem: “It’s 2013.” Hit the jump to read the rest of his comments.

Jordan was quick to clarify to USA Today that “nothing is real” yet regarding his involvement in Fantastic Four. “[Trank and I] are good friends. It’s something that if it happened I would be ecstatic,” Jordan said with an “off the record” wink. “I’d love to be a part of it.”

The actor enthused about the warm reaction he’d received from fans so far. “I get a lot of support and a lot of love from comic-book geeks. I love it,” he said. And although he acknowledged that he’d heard some criticism about the possible casting, he shrugged off any suggestion that his race could be an issue for the movie.

Things change and time goes on, it’s 2013 right now. The characteristics of the Human Torch are his name is Johnny Storm, he’s charismatic, and he’s a playboy. That’s it. You know what I’m saying? That’s all there is.

Non-white superheroes have been difficult to find onscreen, even during this current glut of comic book movies. Jordan playing the Human Torch would be an welcome change of pace. Not to mention the fact that Jordan would be a great pick regardless of his or the character’s race — he’s exactly the kind of handsome, charming, and talented actor who’d be ideal for the part.

Whoever lands the part, we can expect to get some firmer details soon. Fantastic Four is coming together now for a March 6, 2015 release.

/Film Interview: Sarah Polley Explains Secrets of Her Brilliant Documentary ‘Stories We Tell’

Germain Lussier — Fri, 17 May 2013 20:00:23 +0000

When I first saw Stories We Tell I was stunned. When I saw it again, I knew that reaction was warranted. And when I talked to the film’s director, everything was further illuminated. That director is Sarah Polley, who is probably best known for roles in films like Go and Dawn of the Dead. Polley is undeniably great in those movies, but after seeing her third feature film Stories We Tell, there’s no doubt she’s an even better director.

Polley approaches Stories We Tell with brilliantly layered execution. On the surface, it’s a personal documentary about her family history, featuring accounts from her brothers, sisters, parents, and friends. The basic story follows how her mother and father met, and started a family. From there, Polley questions the construction of story and truth. She breaks down the structure, turning the camera on herself. Finally, Polley uses this pleasant, thought-provoking documentary to pose surprising questions regarding the essence of cinema. Stories We Tell is now playing in select cities nationwide, so you can finally see what I mean for yourself.

Which brings us to a warm May morning poolside at a Beverly Hills hotel. I was lucky enough to sit down with Polley to discuss her wonderful film and ask all the burning questions I had after seeing it. You can read the conversation below.

Note: While this is the full transcript of the conversation, at certain points we discuss reveals that should be considered major spoilers. I will make a nice big, bold, declaration when that happens. But really, the interview is best once you’ve seen the movie. (Here’s a link to the theater list)

/Film: What made you want to make a movie that explores the function of storytelling?

Sarah Polley: I think what kind of captivated me about what was happening in the aftermath of this story in my own life was the way we were all telling the stories about it, and the way those stories were different from each other. There are these huge gaps between these stories we were telling, both in terms of the fact of them, but also in terms of the perspective and what we decided were the most important elements of it. I got really transfixed by this idea that it was so necessary for us to be able to tell this story to make sense of some kind of basic confusion we had in our life. I just started thinking of storytelling as a really basic human need and wanted to make a film about that, I think.

In doing that, did you have to un-learn anything? You are used to directing narratives with pre-determined characters and arcs, and this is so different.

Yeah, I think what I found really difficult was I felt like I didn’t have a model for it, so I felt like there were a lot of films that really inspired me. It’s not like I was breaking new ground. Films like The Five Obstructions by Lars Von Trier or F for Fake by Orson Welles… people have been experimenting with this form for a really long time, but I did feel like I didn’t have… Usually when you make a film, you don’t have films in your mind that you’re emulating hopefully, but you know that you have something to think about in terms of what you’re aspiring to and this really felt like grappling in the dark. Like I really felt like I had no idea what this was going to be and what it was going to look like. I had a basic sense of the feel of it and the ideas I wanted to explore and a tone, but it was very hard to imagine it before it was completely done.

You open yourself up in this. Were you ever self-conscious about that, or a little nervous about the idea of everyone seeing your journey, and meeting your family?

Yeah, I mean I was really nervous about exposing myself, but I think more so nervous about exposing my family. I was just worried too, like if you haven’t been in the public eye and you put yourself out there and you say things and they are interpreted in another way that you mean or you don’t say things as clearly as you’d like or they are misinterpreted. I got really worried about putting people in that position who weren’t used to it. So that was a really terrifying aspect of the film.

Are you fine with it now? Are you happy with people asking you these sorts of questions?

Totally. Actually this is my favorite part of the whole filmmaking process. Usually it’s not like that. I feel like the filmmaking process itself was really, really hard and full of uncertainty and terrifying and kind of claustrophobic and I feel like this part of it, showing the film and getting to talk to people about it, feels like an extension of what the project of the film was in the first place. It’s about impressions and storytelling and different perspectives and so this feels like a natural progression and definitely the most joyful part of the process for me.

I know you shot the movie over the span of five years. Can you talk to me a little bit about the structure of how you put it together? For example, what interviews did you do first? When did you decide to turn the camera on yourself?

[POTENTIAL SPOILERS FROM HERE ON OUT]

So we started with the interview with my dad, and that was about four days, and then I spent weeks just watching that material and pulling threads out of it that lead me to figure out what stories I wanted to focus on in the film. Then I interviewed my biological father and then from there sort of decided what the rest of the interviews were going to be and I don’t know if I ever actually decided to turn the camera on myself. I think it just sort of happened. We were recording my dad in the recording studio reading his writing and we decided just last minute to film it as well and then we decided more or less to put a camera on me at the same time. I didn’t think I was ever going to use that footage, so the fact that I included myself, I think what happened was I decided that I did need to be in the film in some way. I wasn’t comfortable with doing a “voice of god” from my perspective. I actually thought that that was besides the point, but I did want to include myself as the character of the filmmaker, the investigator, the person who was trying to get to the bottom of things.

Once you shot the two interviews with your dad and your biological father, did you go away from it for a while?

I took a lot of long breaks, so I don’t know the exact time line, but it was probably like at least seven or eight months before I filmed anything else.

You said the film came about while discovering about your biological father, which is one of the main stories, but it’s also about questioning “story” itself. So as you were making the movie, did your memory of how this actually happened intersect with how you were going to tell it in this movie?

Totally. So now when I watch it, I find that my own memories of what happened from my point of view become murky and murkier all the time. So many things I will think back on and I’ll remember the version in the film, that’s somebody else’s version, not necessarily mine and it becomes really hard to pick that apart to a certain point.

[NOW COME THE REALLY BIG SPOILERS]

I’d like to talk to you about a couple of things that are a little bit more spoilery and I’ll make sure people know. First, how many authentic home movies are there in the film? Percentage-wise, how much of what we see is real?

It’s about forty or fifty percent real. So there’s a lot of real footage in it.

When you’re casting people to play your family, do you cast for looks? They don’t really have to talk, but they have to blend with this footage.

Well Rebecca Jenkins is probably my favorite actor in Canada and one of my favorite actors in the world and she was who we, in our pipe dream, wanted to cast. We didn’t think she’d do it though, because she does leading roles and the idea of doing this silent on camera role where you’re blending in and pretending to be someone else and you might not ever really get acknowledged seemed unlikely to us that she would do it and she did, which was great. So it was kind of a combination, like it wouldn’t have worked if they hadn’t been great actors and Peter Evans and Alex Hatz also, they’re really… All the people who play the family are really, really strong actors and all of those scenes were improvised and that scene just wouldn’t have worked if it was just a bunch of people who look like my family, but couldn’t act. Obviously physicality was important, but we also had amazing makeup, wardrobe, and hair to actually make that work.

That’s the big ‘Oh wow, what we have been watching hasn’t been real’ moment. How did you come up with the idea in your process of making this film?

I think I was always aware from the beginning that I wanted to include the construction of the film in the film, because that was an important part of what we were talking about. This idea of wanting to tell stories and how we are telling the stories. I thought to leave my own process of making this story out of it would have been dishonest in some ways, so I think in its inception it was really important to include that and for that to take the form of recreations and then showing the mechanics and those recreations.

You could have been very up front about it, but now it comes in as a reveal at the beginning of the third act. How did you come to the decision when to reveal that and how exactly to reveal it?

Well it’s strange, because it’s so subjective when people know that they are recreations. To be honest, I didn’t have the specific idea about when I wanted it to be revealed, because I actually thought that there was no way we would get away with it. Throughout, I hoped, if we did a good job people would at times wonder if what they were seeing was real or not. At no point did I think people wouldn’t know until we revealed it. So that was a shock to me in the first few screenings when people were like, “It was so amazing when we saw you in the same frame as your mother” and I was like “Why?” Like I literally didn’t know what they were talking about and it took me a few screenings before I realized like “Oh, people think this footage is real.”

Certainly we worked our asses off to match it as much as possible, but I could have never believed people were actually going to believe it. So that was an amazing surprise for us, that it worked. We were like “Whoa.” Like we couldn’t believe that it had that twist, so in a way I mean I think there are millions of reveals along the way, but people don’t catch them. Seeing Harry at the funeral… I always assume people will know at that moment. Some people do, but most people don’t… Like a lot of people don’t know until the credits and I keep going “But you see me directing it! What do you think those shots in there are like?” “I don’t remember those shots.” I’m like “There’s ten of them!”

But it’s quick and if you’re just running with it… seeing the first one you just start removing yourself from the movie, not in a bad way, but in a good way. And I remember at the Sundance screening some lady asked “So were those recreations?” and I was like “Oh my god…”

But that question comes up a lot and I think it’s not unusual. That took me a long time to figure out what was going on. I remember in a rough cut screening this really brilliant novelist who is a friend of mine, really one of the smartest people I have ever known and has written books about film. I remember at the end of the first screening everybody was talking about Rebecca Jenkins and how great she was and he went “Why is everybody talking about Rebecca Jenkins?” Like, “Oh, because she played my mom.” “What do you mean, she played your mom?” Because we didn’t have credits at that point, he never… So that’s been the thrill of putting the film up. It has this twist. It’s not like we didn’t work really hard to make that happen, but we never would suspect in a million years that that could possibly work. One or two people have said to me they felt really deceived and mislead and bad and I really relate to that feeling, because I feel that often in documentaries or in any kind of film. When I feel actively manipulated, I really don’t like it. I feel quite resentful of it, but it’s a strange thing to have kind of done that without intending it. Do you know what I mean?

Are there any other little things in there? Secrets that the movie holds that people haven’t really thought about yet? It is your real family, right?

It is my real family, but I’ve heard that a couple of times and I really love it. Like I love people think that maybe the whole thing is fake. (Laughs) It’s strange, because what I intended was, I guess it’s the same result. My intention was I wanted people to constantly question what they were seeing and if it was real or if it wasn’t, because that was my experience. My experience going through the story was “Is what I’m hearing fact? Is it nostalgia? Is it subjective? Is it objective?” So I wanted the audience to have a paralleled experience to that and that’s why we worked so hard to make the recreations as accurate as we possibly could. I just think that I under estimated my makeup, hair, wardrobe, actors and art department, because we were working on like no budget. The wig budget was like a hundred bucks and she had to do like five wigs, so obviously it’s not going to be okay, right? But these people are really an amazing group of people, so they ended up taking the film in a different direction, which is really cool to see when your collaborators are at the top of their game and how they could completely change the direction of the film and what it does.

Has the question of this being eligible for a Best Documentary Oscar come up?

I haven’t thought about that and I don’t know anything about how those rules or anything work. I’m blissfully naive having no idea, but my gut is so many documentaries I’ve seen have recreations that I can’t imagine how that would be… It’s real people telling the real story of their lives. We tip our hand. We show that they are recreations. We are not trying to pretend they aren’t. Errol Morris uses recreations all of the time, so I can’t imagine it wouldn’t be, but I don’t know how the rules work and I’m doing my absolute best to not think about that.

We are months and months from that, but honestly it deserves it and is so fantastic.

Thank you. I really appreciate it. That’s awesome. Thanks so much.

Sarah Polley’s Stories We Tell is now playing in select cities. Click here for the full theater listing.

[NOTE: After the interview was over, I asked Polley if Robert Duvall was actually at her mother's funeral. She was confused and then laughed very hard. No, the man in the film who looks just like Robert Duvall is not Robert Duvall. Just a funny coincidence.]

‘Europa Report’ Trailer: Trying to Do Something Great for Mankind

Russ Fischer — Fri, 17 May 2013 19:42:53 +0000

The indie Europa Report features Sharlto Copley (District 9, Elysium) and Michael Nyqvist (The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol) as members of a crew in space. The film has been fairly under the radar until now, with only a couple images, a poster, and some teaser footage to give us an idea of what to expect.

Now a trailer introduces the crew that is making a voyage to Jupiter’s moon Europa, and starts to give away glimpses of just how things go wrong as the crew is millions of miles from Earth. The found-footage aesthetic appears to be used to good effect, and there’s a final shot in this trailer that is just chilling — just as much so as anything in the trailer for Gravity. Europa Report has also been said to be very quiet and low-key, and I wouldn’t be surprised to find that this trailer makes the film look like a more conventional bit of found-footage horror in order to get audiences into the theaters.

Europa Report opens on August 2. Apple has the trailer.

EUROPA REPORT follows a contemporary mission to Jupiter’s moon Europa to investigate the possible existence of alien life within our solar system. When unmanned probes suggest that a hidden ocean could exist underneath Europa’s icy surface and may contain single-celled life, Europa Ventures, a privately funded space exploration company, sends six of the best astronauts from around the world to confirm the data and explore the revolutionary discoveries that may lie in the Europan ocean. After a near-catastrophic technical failure that leads to loss of communication with Earth and the tragic death of a crewmember, the surviving astronauts must overcome the psychological and physical toll of deep space travel, and survive a discovery on Europa more profound than they had ever imagined.

Vin Diesel Reveals ‘Fast and Furious 7′ Locations

Russ Fischer — Fri, 17 May 2013 19:22:13 +0000

Fast and the Furious 6 (or just Furious 6) opens today outside the US, and next week in the States. There’s already plenty of talk about the seventh movie in the series, which will bring back most of the major cast from the last few films, and will feature a new villain. James Wan (Saw, Insidious) will take over as director, as Justin Lin finally moves on.

Vin Diesel has been the source of quite a bit of news about the series over the past year or two, and now he throws out two locations for the seventh chapter. One won’t be much of a surprise, while the other is something new. We’ll keep all the main info after the break, so as not to spoil any secrets of Furious 6 for those who haven’t been tipped to the details of the current film’s ending.

Diesel told Digital Spy, “We have a stint in Tokyo and there is the Middle East next, that could be interesting.”

The third film in the series, Tokyo Drift, took place (obviously) in Japan’s massive capital. Without giving too much away, we’ll just say that Tokyo Drift takes place after the events of the films that followed it. Vin Diesel’s cameo at the end of Tokyo Drift brought the actor back into the series, but that will also possibly be the kickoff for the seventh film.

As for the detour to the Middle East, arms dealers and military operations play an increasing role in the films, so that could be a clue to the reason. I won’t make assumptions about the villain, but when audiences see the sixth film, the new baddie’s place in things — and the way in which it ties up a lingering plot point in the series while also opening up a new avenue — will be made more clear.

Fast and the Furious 7 will shoot soon, and has a release date set for July 11th 2014.

David O. Russell Could Direct Leonardo DiCaprio in JFK Pic ‘Legacy of Secrecy’

Angie Han — Fri, 17 May 2013 18:45:33 +0000

David O. Russell‘s got a knack for attracting great actors, but his next project could come with prominent A-listers already attached. Russell will reportedly write and direct the JFK assassination pic Legacy of Secrecy, featuring Leonardo DiCaprio and Russell’s Silver Linings Playbook star Robert De Niro. The conspiracy drama posits that mafioso Carlos Marcello was behind the murder. Hit the jump for more details.

DiCaprio has been set to produce and star in the pic since 2010, while De Niro is a more recent addition. Based on the book of the same title by Lamar Waldron and Thom Hartmann, Legacy of Secrets hinges on mob kingpin Marcello’s confession to FBI informant Jack van Laningham that he was the one to order the killing.

It’s a theory popular with conspiracy junkies, but not one that’s gained much widestream acceptance. Nevertheless, it sounds like the kind of stuff juicy dramas are made of. In the movie version, van Laningham would be played by DiCaprio and Marcello by De Niro.

Showbiz 411 learned of Russell’s involvement while speaking to Craig van Laningham, son of Jack. It doesn’t seem like anything’s confirmed yet, so it’s probably best to take the report with a grain of salt for now.

Besides, even if it is true that Russell is on board there’s no guarantee he’ll make it; the director forever seems to be attaching himself to projects that either never get made or wind up elsewhere. At the moment, Russell is shooting American Hustle with two of his other Silver Linings Playbook stars, Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence.

Legacy of Secrecy is one of three films about the assassination of JFK currently in the works. Tom Hanks and Gary Goetzman have been working on the indie drama Parkland, named after the hospital that prounced the president dead, while Cate Blanchett recently joined David Mamet’s contemporary thriller Blackbird, about a woman who comes to suspect her grandfather was involved in the horrific incident.

‘Zombieland’ TV Pilot Dropped By Amazon; Creator Cites Fan Hate

Germain Lussier — Fri, 17 May 2013 18:30:05 +0000

Zombieland started as a TV pitch, became a movie, went back to a TV format and is now dead. The TV pilot, which premiered on Amazon last month, has been officially axed by the streaming service, ending a rollercoaster ride for the creators and fans of the franchise who’d been clamoring for a follow-up. Franchise creators Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick wrote and directed the pilot which featured the same humor, violence and characters and as the movie, but with less recognizable actors.

Reese took to Twitter to voice his displeasure with the show’s dismissal, suggesting Zombieland fans “hated it out of existence.” Read more below.

The news of the show’s end broke Thursday night, hat tip to Bloody Disgusting, then Reese took to Twitter:

Our Zombieland series will not be moving forward on Amazon.Sad for everyone involved.

— Rhett Reese (@RhettReese) May 17, 2013

I’ll never understand the vehement hate the pilot received from die-hard Zombieland fans.You guys successfully hated it out of existence.

— Rhett Reese (@RhettReese) May 17, 2013

Anyway, we did our best, and we’re very proud of our team.

— Rhett Reese (@RhettReese) May 17, 2013

To be honest, I didn’t follow any of the aforementioned Zombieland fan hate. I kind of blindly assumed the show had a fan base, a great familiar premise, a new, less demanding outlet, and would get picked up. Obviously, that was all way off base. For those who watched the show, is Reese warranted here? Was it so different from the movie we all know and love that fans crushed it? Or was the quality simply not up to par?

Another question that must now be discussed is if this officially kills a Zombieland 2? The project has always had the support of everyone involved, but it also launched Reese/Wernick and director Ruben Fleisher to such heights their returns have never been certain. The fall back was always, “Oh, we’ll just continue this with a TV show.” Now, with the pilot bombing so bad, one would think Sony would be very wary of picking up the franchise. Do you agree?

Joss Whedon Won’t Add Characters That Makes Things Easier in ‘The Avengers 2,’ Says Iron Man Will Return

Germain Lussier — Fri, 17 May 2013 18:14:18 +0000

Joss Whedon is creating some real problems for his heroes in The Avengers 2. The writer/director recently said, yes, Quicksilver and Scarlett Witch will be in the film, but they won’t be there to help the team. “I’m not putting any characters in the movie that will make things easier,” the director said.

He also said, despite rumors to the contrary, Iron Man will be back for the 2015 sequel and that Marvel’s Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. will “throw something in that foreshadows [or] echoes” events in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Lots of Joss quotes today. Read them all below.

Whedon spoke to IGN about The Avengers 2, which is where he confirmed Quicksilver and Scarlett Witch but also twisted their purpose:

You know, they had a rough beginning. They’re interesting to me because they sort of represent the part of the world that wouldn’t necessarily agree with The Avengers. So they’re not there to make things easier. I’m not putting any characters in the movie that will make things easier.

So they may well oppose The Avengers in the film, and any other new characters could do that, too. Will The Avengers 2 be a superhero team vs. superhero team affair? Could it feature a major backlash again the team?

SPOILERS FOR IRON MAN 3 FOLLOW

Whedon also said, despite events at the end of Iron Man 3, Tony Stark would be back for the film:

Well, I feel like in Iron Man 3, even though he said, ‘I’ve changed’ — he blew up his remote suits, but I don’t think anybody thinks he doesn’t have one anymore. The question is, if The Avengers are called, does he show up? And the answer is, ‘Yes!’

Finally, talking about the soon-to-air Tuesday night ABC show he’s producing, Marvel’s Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., Whedon told TV Fanatic (via Comic Book Movie) that it would most certainly tie into the Marvel Cinematic Universe:

We’re absolutely on top of all the movies. We never contradict, replicate – we will be flowing in between them, maybe occasionally we’ll throw something in that foreshadows [or] echoes but we’re very much beholden to the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

Any hint of what that could be? What do you draw from his comments on Iron Man, Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch?

Marvel Rumors: Black Panther in ‘The Avengers 2,’ Jeremy Renner’s Hawkeye to Be Recast

Germain Lussier — Fri, 17 May 2013 17:30:41 +0000

Two pretty big rumors regarding The Avengers 2 are whipping around the Web today, so we figured they were worth a look. The first one seems most plausible. It concerns the possible inclusion of the Black Panther in the sequel and the hint comes from the chairman of South Africa’s Cape Town Film Studios. He said Marvel has been in contact about filming the Joss Whedon sequel there.

The second rumor is that Hawkeye could be recast. Jeremy Renner played the character in Thor as well as The Avengers, but citing a lack of activity in Phase Two and his negative comments about his role in The Avengers, one source believes the character could become the next War Machine or Hulk.

Bleeding Cool reported the Black Panther rumor:

Anant Singh, the chairman of Cape Town’s film studios, was featured in a bulletin on the Cape Town radio station 5FM yesterday. His big reveal was that Marvel Studios have been in touch and are interested in filming some of the next Avengers film in the area.

Let’s connect the dots. Marvel has so far shot all their films either in the US or the UK. Why would there be a need to film in South Africa? Well, the Black Panther character is from Africa (from a fictional country, but close enough) and South Africa plays a big part in lots of his stories. Could The Avengers go on some kind of recruiting mission?

Also of note, there have been rumors of Black Panther being introduced into the Marvel Cinematic Universe for years so it’s a safe bet the character has been discussed. Remember though, this is all speculation. The only fact is the head of the studio said Marvel had inquired. They might not even film there. But it’s curious.

Another Marvel curiosity is the whereabouts of Hawkeye in Phase 2. We know exactly where every single other Avenger is during this time…except the expert S.H.I.E.L.D. archer played by Jeremy Renner. There’s no confirmation that he won’t appear in Thor: The Dark World, Captain America: The Winter Soldier or Guardians of the Galaxy, but there’s no suggestion that he will either. His employers at S.H.I.E.L.D. seem to be at the center of the Cap sequel, and his good friend Black Widow plays a role, so where the heck is Hawkeye? There’s no mention of Renner anywhere.

Enter the rumor, which surfaces from Comic Book Movie. They cite an anonymous source (is there any other kind lately?) who says Marvel was unhappy with the actor’s comments after The Avengers (complaining it was not the character arc he signed up for; read them here) and that they’re looking to recast the character, as they did with War Machine and Hulk. One possibility would be to hold him out of the movies and assign the new actor to Marvel’s Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., giving the show a weekly Avengers presence without the Avengers paycheck.

It’s important to remember that where the Black Panther rumor at least had some factual basis, this one does not. We don’t know how good CBM’s source is. All we know is when you line the evidence up, it seems incredibly plausible.

Which of these two rumors do you believe more? Do you think just bringing Hawkeye back for The Avengers 2 is sufficient?

Geek Deal: Up to 55% Off Studio Ghibli Films on DVD and Blu-ray

Peter Sciretta — Fri, 17 May 2013 17:04:53 +0000

Amazon’s Gold Box Deal of the Day is up to 55% Off the amazing Studio Ghibli Films on DVD and Blu-ray. Today only, May 17, 2013, save up to 55% on select Studio Ghibli favorites, including Kiki’s Delivery Service, Ponyo, Spirited Away, Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind, and more on DVD and Blu-ray. The prices are only good until Midnight, so act fast!

No Related Post

Rumor: Christopher Nolan in Informal Talks for Next James Bond Movie

Angie Han — Fri, 17 May 2013 16:13:07 +0000

Self-professed Bond fanboy Christopher Nolan has confessed his desire to direct a 007 film a number of times over the years, and even gone so far as meeting with the producers. So far, it hasn’t quite worked out. Now that Sam Mendes has officially turned down Bond 24, though, it seems Nolan may finally get his shot.

A new report indicates that the Dark Knight director is in informal talks to helm the next Bond film, and possibly even the one after that if all goes well. Given that Skyfall bore more than a few marks of Nolan’s influence, Nolan seems like an obvious but excellent pick. More details after the jump.

According to The Daily Mail’s Baz Bamigboye, Nolan has been approached and is now in early conversations with producers Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson. Nolan’s hiring is far from a done deal at this point, but Bamigboye’s source remarks, “It does no harm for Broccoli and Wilson to talk with Nolan, even if nothing happens this time round.”

There are a few potential roadblocks, however. While Nolan reiterated his interest in the franchise last year, he also said he’d only take the gig if it was “the right situation and the right time in their cycle of things.” Whether now counts as “the right time” is debatable.

Although Bond 24 is no longer aiming for a 2014 release, the studio still wants to get it out within the next three years. So assuming Bond 24 is due in 2016, that makes the scheduling tight squeeze for Nolan, who’s currently gearing up to shoot Interstellar for a fall 2014 release.

And Bond could be a huge undertaking. Although the original plan to link Bond 24 and Bond 25 has been scrapped, last we heard, this latest dispatch suggests the idea may be in play again. Bamigboye references Mendes in outlining the schedule, which he says will include 12-18 months of pre-production, six months of production, and a follow-up planned for “soon after.”

On the other hand, it’s possible that Eon Productions would be willing to wait for Nolan, given that he’s practically guaranteed to earn buzz and, more importantly, make them tons of money. It’s also conceivable that they could keep him in mind for a future installment. In any case, we should be able to expect more news soon as the Bond director search continues to heat up.