While it does offer 100% more Mr. Title Character than the one seen earlier, this new WOLFMAN poster, courtesy of Ain’t It Cool News, does give us just the right amount of Rick Baker’s new baby boy.  Judging by the usage of shadows and tones we’ve been seeing coming out of this film, I can’t wait to see what Joe Johnston has in store for the finished product.  Let’s just hope all this wait has been worth it.

Check out the full poster right here:

I can’t help but wonder about the backwards marketing that is going on with this film, though.  Our earliest posters from the film features, you know, the ones from May of 2008, showed the hairy Lawrence Talbot in full color.  Now that the film has been pushed back so many times, the marketing is going for more secrecy, showing the Wolfman in shadow and full closeup on the eyes.  By the time the film comes out, who knows what this character will look like.

We’ll all find out, though, when the film finally sees its release on February 12th, 2010.  Unless, of course, it gets pushed back again, which is always a possibility.

Let me just put your mind to ease right now. No, this is not yet another tedious bit of rumor news about an EVIL DEAD remake. Regardless of which side of the debate you are on regarding that hot little number, this is something any self-respecting fan of the EVIL DEAD trilogy will, and should, be very happy about.

Now 28 years after the original release of director Sam Raimi’s breakout film, the little horror film that could is scheduled to make a nostalgic return to big screen’s across the country. The movie that put both Sam Raimi and Bruce Campbell on the map, is being re-released in theaters for a limited run in 2010.

Raimi, Campbell and producer Robert Tapert, in collaboration with Grindhouse Pictures, will be unleashing midnight screenings of the cult classic horror film at Landmark Theatre locations  in select U.S. cities and in Mayfair Cinemas in Canada. Exact dates and cities have not yet been released, but more venues are set to be announced after the first of the year.

Source: Paste

Regardless of Mr. Title Character making nada an appearance in the below poster, courtesy of Cinematical, it is still highly effective.  I can picture people standing in theater lobbies staring at this thing for large amounts of time trying to catch a glimpse, any glimpse of even a shadow of old Wolfie.  Even though the trailers for the film are giving every bit of actual Wolfman action away, it’s still nice to see one aspect of THE WOLFMAN’s marketing campaign taking the subtle route.

Of course, as promised on Cinematical, Ain’t It Cool is likely to get their hands on an exclusive poster later on today, one that, I’m sure, will feature all kinds of Wolfman imagery.

For now, however, feast your eyes on the black and white, subtle glory of Emily Blunt amidst a forest and nothing else:

THE WOLFMAN hits theaters on February 12th, 2010.

The chaps over at Sci-Fi Wire have gotten their hands on a recent statement from actor Ian McKellen regarding the much anticipated THE HOBBIT, directed by the wonderful Guillermo Del Toro. McKellen has read the screenplay to THE HOBBIT and he had very little to say in terms of spoilers, other than that the script was penned just for him (as it should be) by producers (and LOTR aficionados) Peter Jackson, Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens and of course Del Toro himself. Here is the rest of his report as told by Sci-Fi Wire:

“As Peter has said, they loved writing Gandalf [for THE HOBBIT] because they knew who they were writing him for,” McKellen told us exclusively in an interview last week while promoting AMC’s THE PRISONER. “There are a lot of characters in THE HOBBIT, including, crucially, Bilbo, and they don’t know who’s going to play Bilbo. So it’s extremely attractive that this part has been written for me. The other Gandalf was written for, well, just as Gandalf. There’s lots for me to enjoy, in all sorts of ways. And I couldn’t be happier. But I’m sworn to secrecy. I’m not to say anything at all about the script.”

He goes on to talk about the involvement of director Guillermo Del Toro, the newcomer to the LOTR crowd, and his communication with Jackson:

“They are the same person,” he said. “They were separated at birth. They’re twins. They have the same attitude. Neither likes working in Hollywood. They’re both fascinated by fantasy and violence on the screen, and gore, and things that frighten you. They like going into the psyche. They’re both brilliant storytellers in very much the same way. And I think the script, because I have read it, plays very much to Guillermo’s strengths, as I’ve seen them. I have seen his other movies, and people act very well in them. So I think it’s all fine. And Peter will always be there.”

It sounds to me that things are moving very well in the right direction. If Gandalf is on board with the script, I don’t see how anyone can be against this project!

THE HOBBIT is set to hit theaters December of 2011.

Always on the lookout to post a picture of an adorable monkey.  The other guy, the one smiling, is actor Bradley Cooper, and with his slate of upcoming movies, he has quite a lot to smile about.  Add one more to that slate, as, according to Heat Vision, the actor is set to star in Neil Burger’s next film, DARK FIELDS.

The film, written by Leslie Dixon (THE THOMAS CROWN AFFAIR) and based on the book by Alan Glynn, centers on a writer who uncovers a top secret drug that instantly makes one smarter.  Of course, as the writer soon discovers, the drug has strange side effects including “trip-switching”, in which time seems to move at a stop-motion pace.

Not entirely sure how the story plays out, but this sounds like a possibility for the beginning of a pseud-realistic superhero movie, if, in fact, the protagonist learns at some point to use this “trip-switching” as an ability.  In that, the film could be somewhat in the vein of PUSH or JUMPER.  Take that news how you will.

I’ve liked Bradley Cooper since the little-seen but effective thriller MY LITTLE EYE in 2002.  He has that leading man presence, but it doesn’t seem like he’s afraid to take on meatier roles than the norm.  His stock jumped up quite a bit after THE HANGOVER, and expect it to jump up even more after next year’s THE A-TEAM.  He and Burger, who is looking to gain back some of his THE ILLUSIONIST credit after last year’s disappointing THE LUCKY ONES, are sure to make a great team on this one.

No set date has been announced for DARK FIELDS either for its release or for its start of production.

Unnecessary and lifeless.  These two adjectives describe better than any my thoughts behind A CHRISTMAS CAROL, Robert Zemeckis’ latest, motion-capture adaptation of a classic story.  Unnecessary in that this, roughly the 61st time Charles Dickens’ legendary tale, is a story that has been told, verbatim, so many times before by filmmakers who were far more gifted in the art storytelling that even Zemeckis, the man who brought us BACK TO THE FUTURE and FORREST GUMP.  Lifeless in that the film offers very little in the way of newness, and, for the most part, the film plays by a paint-by-numbers version of the story.  Lifeless, also, in that the motion-capture photography that Zemeckis seems keen to never let go of, creates characters who are so nonnatural as to take you interests out of the story at hand entirely.

Normally, here is where I would delve into a synopsis on the film, but this being such a classic, it just wouldn’t feel like justice is being served.  Dickens’ original tale is an inward glance at a troubled soul, one whose only hope is for a handful of spirits to guide him back on the path of righteousness should his own spirit be damned forever.  Zemeckis’ film would have none of that.  Inward glances are the complete antithesis to what this version of A CHRISTMAS CAROL is going for.

By the time we are even fully introduced to the fateful night when Ebenezer Scrooge meets these ghosts, we have already gone on a whirlwind ride through the streets of 19th century London.  To note, these shots are impeccable.  No one has ever blamed Zemeckis for not being able to create interesting or groundbreaking shots.  However, the time of asking “how did he do that” went out with the knowledge that most, creative shots are aided by CG, anyway.  Having fully embraced what he can do with completely realized films using 1s and 0s, Zemeckis has turned from being the magician to being the host of Breaking the Magician’s Code, and he is doing so without the slightest bit of shame.

But, what does this have to do with A CHRISTMAS CAROL, really?  In a word, loads.  The film falls way short in trying to create any level of connection with its audience.  Any time Dickens’ story, which is pretty much shot word-for-word here, so I’m not entirely sure what Zemeckis did in the script-writing department, even teases that it is going to grip the audience, we are whooshed away on some tree-buzzing trek across a snowy field.  The Ghost of Christmas Present makes a house levitate off its foundation just as we are gaining any kind of insight into Scrooge’s psyche.  In a nutshell, what Zemeckis has done here is he has turned the story into an overblown, Hollywood retread.

The mere presence of Jim Carey attests to this.  Here, a digitized Carey plays not only Scrooge, but all three lesson-teaching ghosts, as well.  For the most part, he does a fine job, pulling laughs out of the audience even when the story doesn’t call for it.  His Ghost of Christmas Past is a laid back candle with some sort of strange head bob.  It’s almost hypnotic, and it serves as one of the only character choices the new film makes that hits its mark, odd as it may be.  The Ghost of Christmas Present is, once again, a loud, obnoxious giant who bellows decibel-shattering gasps of laughter.  The Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come is a shadowy version of the Grim Reaper.  Scrooge himself has always been a fascinating character, and, honestly, not even the motion capture elements of the film can completely draw the life from him.  I did say completely, as you realize how grand the performance would have been in live action.  It is almost painful to have to watch Carey perform this well inside of a character this fleshed out and have it all practically for naught under the digitized shroud of banality.

You can tell that Gary Oldman, Bob Hoskins, Colin Firth and Robin Wright Penn all give staggering performances, as well, each one of them playing anywhere from one to four, different characters in the film.  Unfortunately, the level of care given to the realization of their characters is not even on the level of that of Scrooge.  These performances are completely hidden, particularly Oldman’s Bob Cratchit who looks practically inbred he’s so odd shaped.

The story is there in all of its totality.  Tiny Tim, though seemingly a staple in Scrooge’s decisions, seems like an afterthought in the actual film.  Zemeckis even takes the first, few paragraphs of the story to a literal sense and shows us Marley’s funeral, a scene that was only mentioned at in subtext.  With this version of the film, we are given everything and so much more, but the magic and the beauty of the story have been replaced by fast-moving chases through the streets and splashy 3-D graphics.  Speaking of that 3-D, A CHRISTMAS CAROL is the latest in the growing trend of films released in the in-your-face format.  Don’t worry about spending the extra, few dollars to see it this way.  It offers nothing, and, in fact, takes much away from some of the slower, more character-driven scenes.

What we have is a story that, over 160 years ago, began as a character study and ends here a monumental adventure that is as gaudy as it is charmless.  Unnecessary and lifeless in so many ways, the newest version of A CHRISTMAS CAROL looks at the concept that less is more and gives it a terse “Bah, Humbug!”

When one thinks of a powerful film, what comes to mind? An epic saga? A grandiose drama? A hard-hitting film of controversy? For me, the films that have the greatest impact, the films that offer the most honest and realistic portrayal of contemporary concerns, are those that present themselves in their purest form. All the fancy camera work, all the flashy visual style and emotionally-charged music in the world will never take the place of a powerful story. And, that story does not necessarily need to be complex.

As they say, less is more. FIVE MINUTES OF HEAVEN is 90 minutes of raw, unfiltered human emotion. Not the over-done, exaggerated type that makes for good Hollywood drama, but the kind that makes an audience sit up in their seats. The kind of tactile human sensory emotion that makes an audience stare, unflinching, mesmerized into the lives of another human being. Plain and simple. The kind of story any aspiring filmmaker who years to offer the world something significant should admire and embrace, if for no other reason that to appreciate it’s intended impact and utter beauty, through the harsh realities of pain and suffering, loss and regret, guilt and recovery.

FIVE MINUTES OF HEAVEN was written by Guy Hibbert (SAIGON BABY) and directed by Oliver Hirschbiegel (THE INVASION). The film stars Liam Neeson (TAKEN) and James Nesbitt (MATCH POINT) as two men whose lives are connected by the death of another. The fictional story, based upon truth, takes place in Ireland and follows former UVF member Alistair Little (Neeson) as his is invited to meet Joe Griffen (Nesbitt), the brother of the young man whom Little murdered some 33 years ago.

Alistair was 17 at the time he killed Jim Griffen. Joe was younger. Having witnessed the event, followed by the domino-like effect it had on his family beginning with his father’s heart attack. Joe’s mother blamed him for his brother’s death for the rest of her life and Joe couldn’t help being psychologically devastated by this. When offered the chance to finally meet his brother’s killer, face to face, by a television producer hoping to make a powerfully relevant series about truth and reconciliation, Joe and Alistair both agree.

Alistair’s intentions are clear from the beginning. He’s become a wise man after 2 years in prison, but he’s also a remorseful and sad man, despite his outward charm. Joe is a man deeply and disturbingly affected by the events of his life, and more significantly by the residual impact of the event’s aftermath that has progressively intensified over years of mental anguish and fixation. Joe’s intentions for their meeting are not entirely clear, as he waffles between what his emotions and his damaged psyche desire and what he knows to be right but refuses to admit and accept.

FIVE MINUTES OF HEAVEN is not a fancy film. It’s shot in the most straight-forward style, normal lighting, normal staging, natural. The film actually feels a bit like a PBS, or perhaps in this case, a BBC docudrama. The brilliance of the film is not in the technical production, but in the acting. The film is primarily a character study of Alistair and Joe, whittling away at their inner most emotions and allowing us to peer into their individual processes of coming to terms and facing their pasts, present and futures.

Liam Neeson, as is usually the case, is tremendous. Neeson conveys a heart-felt sorrow and a heaviness in his soul, and we feel this and we empathize, despite what he’s done. Nesbitt also delivers a stellar performance as a man afflicted by his hatred for how his mother blamed him for his brother’s death, manifesting itself into a gnarly and frightening image of a man lost in his pain and twisted by his single-minded need for revenge.

What makes FIVE MINUTES OF HEAVEN so engaging is how the two character’s roles are reversed from the traditional arrangement. The audience feels drawn to the man who has done wrong and feels repelled by the victim. Neeson is able to say so much without speaking and Nesbitt is able to speak volumes, not so much through “what” he says, but how he says it. Nesbitt gives Joe equal moments of calculated foresight and frantic hysteria.

The suspense that develops during the long and uncomfortable preparation, leading up to the final meeting is intense and primal. The actual meeting of Alistair and Joe is not as expected. In the end, Alistair gets what he silently hoped for and Joe gets what he truly needed, not what he believed he wanted. FIVE MINUTES OF HEAVEN is a rare film. It’s a film that has a lot to say without saying too much. It’s a film with contemporary value and deserves recognition.

COCO BEFORE CHANEL is a well-made but very slow biopic about the early days of influential French fashion designer Coco Chanel. Though it has an excellent central performance by Audrey Tautou, it’s a flawed way to tell her story if it has any hope of appealing to a broad audience. Aspects of Coco Chanel’s life have been filmed before, notably CHANEL SOLITAIRE in 1981 with Marie France-Pisier as Coco and the 2008 TV movie COCO CHANEL starring Shirley Maclaine as an older Coco (who lived to be 83). This time director/writer Ann Fontaine shows us how Coco becomes Chanel, illustrating key events in the early life of an underprivileged young woman, with no resources other than her own ambition, who became such an important figure in forging contemporary tastes in style. The problem with the film (besides the fact that it’s French) is that, instead of the expected story of a passionate woman who could rip up fabric and turn it into a designer dress, COCO BEFORE CHANEL is about a woman caught in a love triangle between two colorless men. Her early years are the least interesting part of her life and the movie plays as a bland costume romance.

COCO BEFORE CHANEL begins with Chanel’s hardscrabble formative years soon before the first World War. The young and destitute Gabrielle (Audrey Tautou), or Coco as she became known, is seduced as a teen and moves in with the older but wealthy Etienne Balsan (Benoit Poelvoorde), an owner of race horses who doesn’t seem to do much except throw society parties. Leading the life of a kept woman, Coco begins to resent her dependence on Balsan, but keeps her emotions in check and learns class despite her own lack of breeding by observing members of the high society that she has found herself in. She makes friends with another of Balsan’s many mistresses, the actress Emilienne (Emmanuelle Devos), who encourages her to find her own calling. She then falls in love with Arthur “Boy” Capel (Alessandro Nivola), a handsome but stiff Brit who helps start her fashion business. There’s not much more to COCO BEFORE CHANEL, a mostly tedious movie about an interesting woman and her uninteresting friends and it’s unclear what we’re supposed to learn about her other than she could do amazing things with a needle and thread. Students of fashion will be disappointed as there are too few scenes showing how she was inspired to become such an icon in her field. She makes the occasional observation about the discomfort of corsets or the clumsiness of women’s hats, but mostly she’s shown attending parties, riding horses, or gazing longingly at Boy. The romantic passion between Coco and Boy is weak and it’s unclear whether she really loves him or is using him to advance her career.

The best thing about COCO BEFORE CHANEL is the photogenic Audrey Tautou whose character here is much less charming or eccentric than the title role in her 2001 breakthrough performance AMELIE. Bearing a strong resemblance to the real Coco, Tautou channels Chanel’s liberated approach to life and her determination to succeed while letting only hints of emotion get in her way. Tautou brings needed subtlety to a role that other actresses would have overplayed. By contrast, neither Poelvoorde or Nivola make much of an impression as her lovers. COCO BEFORE CHANEL is a good-looking film with great attention paid to elegant sets and period costume detail and I’m sure there’s a certain audience that will eat it up. The film’s final, wordless ten minute sequence shows an older Coco as the cool and successful high priestess of fashion that we all associate her with, smoking cigarettes as her art is paraded before her and it’s here that the film finally came to life for this reviewer. But it was too little too late and while COCO BEFORE CHANEL is a competent portrait of Chanel’s early life, it’s still a highbrow French artist bio and far from riveting viewing.

For decades now, we’ve wrestled with the controversial and frightening mystery of alien abductions. We’ve debated until we’re blue in the face about the concept of life outside of planet Earth. The one facet of this entire scientific, cultural and philosophical circus that remains arguably missing is that of solid, undeniable proof. This “missing link” so to speak, is what THE FOURTH KIND attempts to be in the hearts and minds of it’s viewers. Unfortunately, the film fails on almost every level, leaving the audience potentially more skeptical and cynical than they were upon entering the theater.

THE FOURTH KIND was written and directed by Olatunde Osunsanmi (WithIN) and is presented as a sort of part archival footage, part reenactment presentation of first-hand accounts of the strange and unexplained occurrences that have allegedly plagued the remote, far northern town of Nome, Alaska. The director himself inserts himself into the film in a very unconventional way, appearing in clips of an interview with the “real life” Dr. Abbey Emily Tyler, whom tells her story of uncovering a dark and dangerous secret hiding deep within subconscious minds of the citizens of Nome.

Milla Jovovich (RESIDENT EVIL) plays Dr. Abbey Tyler in the re-enactments. By the way, all of the character names in THE FOURTH KIND are aliases, except for Dr. Abbey Emily Tyler, whom I Googled along with Nome Alaska abductions and found, well… you decide. There’s really not much that can be said about hers or any of the other performances in the film, which are not terrible but certainly not memorable in any way. Elias Koteas (ZODIAC) intrigued me, not because of his performance, but because of his role as fellow psychologist Abel. Koteas recently played a priest whom just happened to be well-versed in the occult in the “based on true events” film THE HAUNTING IN CONNECTICUT. In this film, Koteas plays a psychologist skeptical of alien encounters and UFOs. This trend makes me curious regarding his own stance on the unexplained, just out of pure curiosity.

The majority of THE FOURTH KIND is shot as a reenactment of both recorded psychiatric therapy sessions and first-hand accounts. I am reminded of the popular television series UNSOLVED MYSTERIES when I think about the visual approach to these reenactments. Melodramatic scenes with the visual flair of a daytime soap opera. The films attempts to present itself seriously, but the problem with this is that the current trend is to present a story that appears real, but most likely is not, yet we’re left to wonder. Most of the time, this is done either with the fully found footage approach (i.e. BLAIR WITCH PROJECT, CLOVERFIELD, PARANORMAL ACTIVITY) or as a straight away reenactment, making it’s disclaimer very clear that it is based on a “true” story or “actual” events, such as with THE HAUNTING IN CONNECTICUT or THE EXORCIST.

I do have to applaud Osunsanmi for stepping out of the box and trying something new, but with that said, trying something new does not guarantee it will be successful. The direction, particularly of the performances, falls flat and unbelievable. As far as THE FOURTH KIND being shocking or scary, only one scene moderately succeeds and getting a rise out of the audience, but is done so primarily through jump tactics (i.e. an unexpected and sudden event that catches the audience off guard). The handful of found footage accounts, aside from interview clips with Dr. Tyler, are the only semi-realistic elements in the movie and with today’s imagination and technology, it’s more difficult than ever to differentiate between truth and fiction.

On more than one occasion, the audience is directly addressed and asked to take what they see in THE FOURTH KIND and make their own decisions. This is a tactic that fully and detrimentally pulls the audience out of the story and only re-enforces the the involuntary defense mechanism of the human mind to discount the unknown of which we usually fear. I do not classify myself as a believer or a skeptic, but remain open to the unknown being a question of probability, rather than a question of possibility. One of the clear messages in the film is that these “non-human intelligences” are not very nice.

We often consider how, in a universe so vast and potentially infinite, our planet could be the only celestial rock that houses life. What we rarely consider is what sentient life outside of our planet may be like. In science-fiction, the idea of aliens being overwhelmingly more intelligent than ourselves is common place, but their ethical or moral nature remains a less pertinent subject. Playing the devil’s advocate, I simply ask that you look around at what we have and continue to do to each other and propose the question… If we can do such horrible things to each other and ourselves, are other sentient lifeforms not capable of the same, or worse?”

I am rambling a bit, but I do so to make a point. The only truly engaging element in THE FOURTH KIND the the idea, the concept behind the story. Otherwise, the movie is rather boring and uneventful. The characters are difficult to empathize with, although the Sheriff of Nome (played by Will Patton) is pretty easy to dislike. For a film that is supposedly based on true events and actual archival audio and video recordings, a great deal of the dialogue is a bit hard to swallow. In fact, the whole film is a tough horse pill to swallow as anything more than attempted shock value, but it does raise an interesting subject of debate that hasn’t been tackled in the cinema since FIRE IN THE SKY and COMMUNION, both of which were far more believable and engaging films that truly make a viewer think about the possibilities.

Overall, there’s not much in THE FOURTH KIND to justify spending today’s hard earned dollars at the theater. Those who enjoy films that ask “is this true or not” will likely be disappointed. Fans of conspiracy theory may be slightly less disappointed, but the random selected episode of THE X-FILES will prove far more satisfying. The most unfortunate thing about THE FOURTH KIND is that it’s box office could have been modestly helped if the film had been released prior to PARANORMAL ACTIVITY, which has truly set the bar high in the broader genre of found-footage films of the unexplained.

I’d like to introduce you all to our newest hosts of He Said/She Said. John Cooper and Leah Ducey. Enjoy their review of THE MEN WHO STARE AT GOATS.

It certainly doesn’t bother me that a film gets marketed by way of character posters, if A) those character posters are both sweet-looking and even the slightest bit innovative and B) if those posters meld together like Voltron and create one, massively epic banner.  Thus is the case with KICK-ASS, the latest comic book adaptation from Mark Millar and directed by Matthew Vaughn.  The come to us today, courtesy of IGN.

Check ‘em all out in glorious ginormity:

What do you think?  Which one is your favorite?  Does it hurt to tell you that one of these character is being played by Nicolas Cage?  I’ll give you a hint, it’s not the Red Mist.

KICK-ASS hits theaters on April 16th, 2010.

If you’re hip and have been following the extraordinary HBO programming they have to offer, than you know how Ted Danson is making a big comeback beginning with CURB YOUR ENTHUSIASM and BORED TO DEATH. But, 22 years after a quaint little comedy called THREE MEN AND A BABY hit theaters some of you may be wondering what’s happened to Tom Selleck and Steve Guttenberg. Where ever they’ve been, it looks as though they’ll be back for another go with plans to make THREE MEN AND A BRIDE.

WENN.com got an exclusive scoop from Steve Guttenberg that Disney is developing the film, which would follow the 1990 sequel THREE MEN AND A LITTLE LADY, and that they’re bringing the old boys back together. Yeah, Guttenberg, Danson and Selleck are apparently returning for the project. I can hear the excitement!

Source: WENN

BRUNO hits shelves on November 17th and here is what you can expect on the bonus features. This is a scene that didn’t make it into the movie but it’s ridiculously funny. Remember boys and girls, if you cheat on baseball someone is waiting out there to prank you.

With all the new shows that the networks put out it can be hard to tell which ones will be sure fire hits and which ones just won’t click with anybody, not no way not no how.  So I decided to look at the new shows this season, the ones that are still around anyway, and look at the new stock that are doing surprisingly well and the ones that shouldn’t be too surprising are hits.  And I’d like to give a shout out to Trauma. Sorry Trauma, but it looks like the world doesn’t need yet another medical show, but at least Mercy seems to be hanging in there for the moment.

The Surprising:

1. Cougar Town- I’m sorry but I thought this show had disaster written all over it.  Mostly for the fact that its main focus is to just jumping on a fad that has sprouted up in recent years, a fad of super hot older women.  I guess that shouldn’t be too surprising of a draw but it just seems like the light version of Desperate Housewives with a one joke premise.  Plus after the failure of her show Dirt I’m surprised anyone really wanted to see Courtney Cox helming yet another show.

2. FlashForward-I really thought that this show was going to face an almost expected Heroes like failure, even though Heroes is still on but look at the ratings.  This show on the other hand has ratings to spare.  I guess maybe it’s just it has a Lost style of appeal and a catchy sci-fi plot that people really seem to be digging.  I haven’t really watched it and I’ve heard it’s good so I will at least give it props for that.  But usually good and sci-fi-ish plot don’t mix well with network viewers on a mass scale.

The Not So Surprising:

1.NCIS:Los Angeles-This really has to be at the top of the list because who wouldn’t have seen this being a monster huge hit? It’s become a tired and true formula.take a popular procedural, slap another cities name on the end, and boom you’ve got yourself an all new sure fire ratings hit.  I’m not a huge fan of procedurals or the fact that everyone else seems to love them and watch everyone stupid spin off they shoot down the line.  This one even has the added benefit of Chris O’Donnell and LL Cool Jfor your team up of having two washed up stars being the leads.

2. Glee-Who doesn’t love Glee?  This show had hit written all over it the second it aired on the tube.  You’ve got your basic High School drama that all the teens love these days.  Then you have kids singing harmonized versions of hit songs that I will admit that I even love.  And for added effect you thrown in a little Jane Lynch as one of the best and kookiest villains this side of John Adams High, Boy Meets World reference for all you TV geeks.  So that’s all you really need to have probably the best new show of the season and its future secure for quite awhile.

3. Modern Family-It’s a really a how the whole “modern” family can love.  God I can’t believe I went with that pun.  Anyway, this show is a no surprise hit for a very good reason, it does its humor smart.  It keeps it very family oriented and never going too vulgar but also keeps the jokes fresh and inventive and always with a witty tone.  I watched the pilot and have to say I was convinced enough of the goodness of the show and usually the pilot is the weakest of the episodes you can get.  So it should be no surprise that it keeps chugging along as a hit and one of the better reviewed shows of the season so far.

THE MEN WHO STARE AT GOATS is one of the most unconventionally funny movies I’ve seen this year, but that is the reason WHY you need to see this movie. We have passes to see this movie tonight, 7pm at AMC Creve Coeur. All you need to do to win passes is email us, themoviegeeks(at)gmail.com and we will pick winners at random.

For those of you that don’t know, here is the synopsis:

In this quirky dark comedy inspired by a real life story you will hardly believe is actually true, astonishing revelations about a top-secret wing of the U.S. military come to light when a reporter encounters an enigmatic Special Forces operator on a mind-boggling mission.

Reporter Bob Wilton (Ewan McGregor) is in search of his next big story when he encounters Lyn Cassady (Academy Award® winner George Clooney), a shadowy figure who claims to be part of an experimental U.S. military unit. According to Cassady, the New Earth Army is changing the way wars are fought. A legion of “Warrior Monks” with unparalleled psychic powers can read the enemy’s thoughts, pass through solid walls, and even kill a goat simply by staring at it. Now, the program’s founder, Bill Django (Oscar® nominee Jeff Bridges), has gone missing and Cassady’s mission is to find him.

Intrigued by his new acquaintance’s far-fetched stories, Bob impulsively decides to accompany him on the search. When the pair tracks Django to a clandestine training camp run by renegade psychic Larry Hooper (two-time Oscar® winner Kevin Spacey), the reporter is trapped in the middle of a grudge match between the forces of Django’s New Earth Army and Hooper’s personal militia of super soldiers. In order to survive this wild adventure, Bob will have to outwit an enemy he never thought possible.

The Men Who Stare at Goats was inspired by Jon Ronson’s non-fiction bestseller of the same name, an eye-opening and often hilarious exploration of the government’s attempts to harness paranormal abilities to combat its enemies.

So what are you waiting for? Send us an email so you can go out and see this movie tonight! If you aren’t a lucky winner then you can see THE MEN WHO STARE AT GOATS when it opens in theaters Friday November 6th.

Matt Reeves’ new adaptation of LET ME IN has begun production, and, today, courtesy of the film’s Twitter page, we have this nice teaser poster to offer you for sticking out the winding road the film’s pre-production has taken.  Not sure where or when this poster is going to hit theater lobbies.  It very well could not at all.  With the American Film Market going on right now, this could just be something Overture Films cooked up for the marketers there.  I do, however, like the way they have incorporated a general idea of what the poster for LET THE RIGHT ONE IN gave us:

LET ME IN is set for release sometime in 2010.  Thanks to Arrow in the Head for pointing us in the right direction.

Director Danny Boyle is going to have to trade that Oscar in for a pickax, and, if I had any skills in Photoshop, whatsoever, I would’ve replaced it myself.  Variety is reporting that the now Academy Award winning director has officially signed on to direct 127 HOURS for Fox Searchlight.  With Simon Beaufoy on hand to script and Christian Colson producing, this means a return of the creative team behind SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE.

The film will tell the harrowing story of mountaineer Aron Ralston, who, in 2003, got his right forearm pinned under a boulder.  He spent five days trapped while slowly amputating his arm with a dull knife.  After freeing himself, he climbed a 65-foot wall and was later rescued by helicopters.

I remember hearing about this story, and, if Boyle and crew are to pull it off with any success, they are going to need an actor who can foot the bill.  That bill being a whole lot of screen time alone and the physical and psychological challenge that comes with the story.  Granted, there may be flashbacks throughout, but, if anyone can pull this off without running into signs of  boredom, it’s Boyle.  Also, unless there are a lot of closeups of the actor’s face, I’m guessing this one is getting a pretty solid R rating.

Production is set to begin next year for a release in late 2010.

French director Pierre Morel is getting to be quite the prolific director.  He had a huge hit earlier this year with TAKEN, and his upcoming actioner FROM PARIS WITH LOVE is set to bow in February.  We reported earlier this year in April that he had already signed on to film extreme car chases throughout Tokyo in TOKYO UNDERWORLD, and now, it seems, the director has signed on to helm the thriller SIGNALS for Media Rights Capital.  This news comes from The Hollywood Reporter.

The general plot outline for SIGNALS, written by Richard Potter and Matthew Stravitz, is being kept under wraps, but it is being billed as a contemporary companion to the paranoia thrillers of the ’70s like THREE DAYS OF THE CONDOR.

Says Tory Metzger, MRC Films president, about Morel stepping in to direct the film:

Pierre Morel is one of the most exciting filmmakers to emerge in years.  Audiences have come to expect edge-of-their-seat action from him, and we are confident this next film will deliver just that.

MRC looks to fast-track the project.

As much as I love that Morel is getting this much work, I can’t help but think how much closer we are getting to the other shoe dropping.  Directors this prolific cannot go very long without delivering a few clunkers to their audience.  In this case, with a director whose action films I have thoroughly enjoyed thus far, I hope that time is a long way off.

Thank God!  Liev Schreiber and Chiwetel Ejiofor are starring in a movie together, and we have the trailer for it.  Oh, and there’s this young, upstart named Angeline something-or-other who plays the lead role of rogue CIA agent who must clear her name from accusations of being a traitor.  At one time, it was set to star some other up-and-comer named Tom Cruise, but he dropped out forcing a rewrite.

Anyway, without further ado and courtesy of Yahoo! Movies, here’s the new trailer for SALT, which hits theaters next Summer.  If it were anyone other than Schreiber or Ejiofor, I’m sure they would wait for this thing to hit sometime in the Fall, but they are such massive stars, the film instantly hit “tent-pole” status when they signed on.  Now, that I’m thinking about it, that sentence sounds absolutely wrong.

Check the trailer out:

This looks like it has the potential of being another EAGLE EYE, that of being a completely Hollywood film that is entertaining and engaging enough to make you look past its plasticized version of whatever it’s about.  Director Phillip Noyce is no stranger to action films.  He directed PATRIOT GAMES and CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER, but I love him most for directing BLIND FURY, the Rutger Hauer-starring ’80s take on Zatoichi.  It exists.  Look it up.

Back to SALT.  Angelina is sure to be cracking skulls and jumping off overpasses on July 23rd, 2010.

DJ Hero
Xbox 360, Playstation 3, Playstation 2, & Nintendo Wii
2 Player/ Online Play
Developer: FreeStyleGames
Publisher: Activision
ESRB Rating: T for Teen
Price: $119.99 (Regular Edition) $199.99 (Renegade Edition)

DJ Hero puts you behind the turntable to master some of the most popular mash-ups today. Following the playing logic behind Guitar Hero players have to tap buttons, scratch the turntables, and use the fader to keep the song going.

Pros

The Song Selection – I am not a big fan of mash-ups, but DJ Hero has some of the best mash-ups I have ever heard (”I Want You Back” by The Jackson 5 & “Semi-Charmed Life” by Third Eye Blind is my favorite). Some songs will make you feel like you are the DJ sitting there scratching and fading the songs together, while others you just want to finish and move on to the next song. Also , it doesn’t hurt that some of the most popular DJ’s (Daft Punk, DJ Shadow, Grandmaster Flash, DJ Jazzy Jeff, and DJ AM R.I.P) made exclusive mixes for this game.

Graphics – If you played Guitar Hero 5 then you already know what the graphics look like. The animations of the characters are detailed and coincide with the action needed to play the song. You will be impressed with the elaborate stages you perform on and mixture of turntables and headphones you can give your character. Also, the crowd animations give the stages that much needed club/rave feel.

Turntable & Guitar Mash-Ups – For some songs you can actually have a friend or someone online play with you using a guitar. Being able to really feel like you are working a mash-up gives the game a more realistic feel.

Medium Difficulty Will Challenge You – I love the fact that playing this game on the medium difficulty was a challenge for some songs. Usually you can run through a song on medium with no problems. With DJ Hero the constant fading between tracks can get crazy at times.

Middle Ground

The Controller – Just after a day of playing with the turntable controller some of the buttons were already sticking. Besides that the button placement is pretty perfect. All you need to do is keep your right hand on the turntable and the fader between two fingers on your left hand and you should be fine.

Cons

No DJ Left Behind – Probably the only real con to this game is that it has no fail. You can jump right in on expert and hit a few notes and don’t have to worry about failing. Let alone the fact that it also features a rewind option so say you miss a note or two you just need to spin the turntable backwards and you can re-try. I can understand the rewind option, but no fail I mean come on way to baby us.

Overall, DJ Hero is a fun experience and will keep you entertained for hours. Hell you might even find yourself looking to download some of the mixes and mash-ups featured in this game. However, the $120 price tag is a little steep. Usually Guitar Hero games cost around $90 dollars for the game and a controller. If you know someone who has it then get your ass over their and play it. Other then that the only reason you would want to cough up the $120 bucks is if you love mixing and mash-ups. The no fail factor of the game also takes a little fun out of it because you don’t need to work that hard to finish a song.

4 stars out of 5