Rogue Pictures has released the trailer for the new remake of ‘The Last House of the Left’.  The original 1972 film was directed by Wes Craven, and it was so intense that it was banned in the UK.  Something tells me there’s no fear of that in this one.  It does warrant an R-rating, I’m sure, but this envelope has already been pushed to the limit.

Check out the trailer here!

We’ve also pulled some still from the film for your viewing pleasures.

What do you think?  Will it even compare to the original in terms of nastiness?  Is Wes Craven putting his name on just about anything these days?  Isn’t it good to see Tony Goldwyn back on the big screen?  Let us know by commenting below!

Source: Apple

It seems that this year’s Superbowl could be a lot more interesting than watching two teams fight for the prized trophy. Multiple studios will be airing 30-second T.V. spots for their biggest movies.

Such high-profile titles that we will see spots for are Paramount’s ‘Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen,’ ‘Star Trek’ and ‘G.I. Joe’; Sony’s ‘Angels and Demons’; DreamWorks Animation’s ‘Monsters vs. Aliens’, which will run their ad in 3D; and Universal’s ‘Land of the Lost’ and its fourth installment in ” The Fast and the Furious” franchise. Disney is also planning to use the game to raise the profile for Pixar’s next ‘toon, “Up,” while a “Wolverine” spot is likely from Fox.

With these movie spots NBC is sure to get great numbers in their ratings which is pretty much the point these days in television. Superbowl 43 takes place on February 1st so mark it on your calendars.

Source: www.variety.com

The MPAA releases their batch of film ratings weekly, and there was an interesting surprise in this weeks group.  They have given ‘Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince’ a PG-rating.  Now, granted, the first three ‘Harry Potter’ films were rated PG, but, then, the next two went up to a PG-13.  Because of their darker nature, the MPAA felt that ‘Goblet of Fire’ and ‘Order of the Phoenix’ were not appropriate for children of all ages.

This is unusual since most franchises that go up in the ratings tend not to come back down.  Usually, a sequel to a film will be PG-13 when the first one or the first couple were R, but it’s hardly ever been an up and then back down affair as we have here.  It will be even stranger, because, having read the novels, I cannot imagine ‘Deathly Hallows’ getting a PG.

I can’t imagine Warner Bros. was pushing for a PG-rating due to box office.  Four of the last five ‘Harry Potter’ films have grossed over $250 million domestic, and the one, odd man out, ‘Prisoner of Azkaban’ made $249.5.  On a side note, it does suck that the best film of the series also made the least amount of money.

What do you think?  Was Warner Bros. pushing the film to get a PG-rating?  Did it just work out that way?  Will the ‘Deathly Hallows’ take the franchise back up into the PG-13 territory?  Let us know by commenting below!

Source: Film Ratings

Above you see the new poster released for ‘Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen’.  Yahoo Movies! were the ones to get their hands on it first.

I like the feel of it.  It looks creepy, but I am kind of flashing on a robotic version of a Balrog.

What do you think?  Is it a cool enough poster?  Are you excited to see the film?  Let us know by commenting below!

Source: Yahoo Movies!

The film is called ‘Chandni Chowk to China’, and it is getting the widest US release of a Bollywood film to date.  Here is the official press release:

Warner Bros. Pictures will be releasing the film “Chandni Chowk to China” in North America on January 16^th. The film will open on more than 125 screens in over 50 markets, making it the largest ever release of any Bollywood film in the United States and Canada. The film will also be released in 40 international markets. The announcement was made today by Dan Fellman, President of Domestic Distribution, Warner Bros. Pictures.

“Chandni Chowk to China” stars the heartthrob of Indian Cinema and current reigning king of Bollywood, Akshay Kumar. The cast also includes stunning model-turned-actress Deepika Padukone, Bollywood veteran Mithun Chakraborty, Ranvir Shorey, and Chinese martial arts expert and actor Gordon Liu(“Kill Bill: Volumes One and Two”). Nikhil Advani (“Kal Ho Na Ho”) directed the film from a screenplay by Shridhar Raghavan. Ramesh Sippy, Mukesh Talreja and Rohan Sippy are the producers. The film also features stunts choreographed by veteran martial arts stunt coordinator Huen Chiu-Ku, whose credits include “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon,” “Kill Bill: Vols. 1 and 2” and “The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor.”

The first-ever Bollywood kung fu comedy, “Chandni Chowk to China” follows one man’s passage from simple cook to kung fu fighter, on a thrilling, madcap journey from the by-lanes of Chandni Chowk in Delhi, India, to the grandeur of the Great Wall of China and beyond. Akshay Kumar stars as Sidhu, a simple cook from Chandni Chowk who longs to escape his dreary existence. He sees his chance when two strangers from China claim him to be the reincarnation of a war hero from the past and entreat him to come back with them to their village in China. Dreaming of the princely existence that awaits him, Sidhu blissfully sets out for China, never suspecting that he is being set up to take on the vicious smuggler Hojo (Gordon Liu) and help his new friends reclaim their village.

“Chandni Chowk to China” will be distributed in North America by Warner Bros. Pictures, a Warner Bros. Entertainment Company.

What do you think?  Are you interested in a Bollywood kung-fu comedy?  Should more Bollywood films get wide releases in the states?  Let us know by commenting below!

Source: Warner Bros.

Jeremy:

“Cope” is a word that best describes the feelings surrounding ‘Revolutionary Road’. The divorce rate in 1955, when the film takes place, was significantly lower than it is today, and the main reasoning for it has to be that people just coped with their miseries better than they do today. They coped, much like someone would cope with this film. ‘Revolutionary Road’ is beautifully shot. It’s well-acted. It is a finely pieced together film that tells a real, hard-lived story, and it is a film that, after writing this review, I don’t think I ever want to think about again.

Frank and April Wheeler (Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet) are a seemingly happy couple. Under the surface, though, we know there is a storm brewing. Frank is miserable at his job. April has given up her aspirations as an actress, and she is slowly growing contemptuous being stuck at home. After April comes up with the idea that the two, along with their two children, should give up everything and move to Paris, their lives begin a slight upturn. It doesn’t last, and the unraveling begins.

Going into the film, I was nervous that ‘Revolutionary Road’ would be two hours of DiCaprio and Winslet screaming at one another. That’s what we got two years ago with ‘The Breakup’, and that film was about as miserable a movie-going experience as you can expect.

However, the screenplay by Justin Haythe, an adaptation of the 1961 novel by Richard Yates, doesn’t seem to dig itself out of writer’s block-induced ruts by throwing these two characters at one another. There is a genuine sense of hope that plays throughout much of the middle section of the film. If we didn’t know full well that it was all about to go off the deep end, we might actually convince ourselves that this couple is going to move to Paris and live happily ever after. But, we know better, don’t we?

We see all the warning signs that lead up to the film’s second half. Before the film’s title is even given to us, we are exposed to the hatred and awfulness that Frank and April Wheeler can spew at each other. The opening few scenes set them up. They meet. They fall in love. The film jumps to years down the line, but it doesn’t give us any indication as to where it’s at. We start to think that there is no way these two could ever fall in love, but we shortly realize that they already have and they have been married for years.

This is the fault of director Sam Mendes, who doesn’t seem to think he needs to give us any indication where we are in the story. In fact, Mendes never throws us any kind of life vest whatsoever, and once the film begins delving into the couples’ depression, we are left to just sit back and try to deal with it.

Mendes also has a way of slapping us in the face with his imagery. The film looks stunning. Cinematographer Roger Deakins is arguably the best working today and he confidently shoots ‘Revolutionary Road’ from star to finish. Every shot in the film is masterfully put together. Even in the carelessly contrived imagery, such as Frank walking through a train station wearing the exact same suit as all the other working men, it is impossible to deny how striking it looks. Early in the film, Frank and April are walking next to one another down a high school hallway. They are feet apart from each other, and the indication of the divide between them is much more forceful than it needs to be, but Deakin’s camera work almost makes it look subtle in nature.

Winslet is spectacular as April. She can turn her emotions on like a faucet, and it never feels forced or bogus. DiCaprio tries his hardest, but the guy has two speeds that he hops between like a jumping bean. He is either calm and collected, or he’s raging like Bruce Banner in line at the DMV. There is no in-between in his performance.

However, the real star of the film is Michael Shannon. He plays a mentally unstable man who comes into the couple’s lives. It is an exquisitely written character (he’s probably the sanest person in the story), and Shannon plays him with perfectly. Shannon is a very underrated actor, and, hopefully, his performance here will stamp his place on the map of recognized actors.

‘Revolutionary Road’ is a challenging film that borderlines tediousness throughout. The abhorrence that the two main characters have for each other is almost smothered by the abhorrence we feel for each of them. They really aren’t very likeable people, and it is very difficult to care where the story is going from early on. Regardless, it is a stunning film to look at. The acting throughout is decent, and certain performances move into the amazing category. If you think you can deal with the subject matter, it is a worthy film to look into. If there are doubts, don’t worry about it. It’s not amazing enough to be considered a “can’t miss”.

[Overall: 2.75 stars out of 5]

Kevin Strange from HackMovies has given us an EXCLUSIVE clip to their new teaser scene for the upcoming ‘Stiff Jobs’ release. If you aren’t a badass and already know about Hack Movies, then do yourself a favor and go buy all their movies. Here is the synopsis for ‘Stiff Jobs’:

“Stiff Jobs” is the story of two of the most ruthless hitmen in all of Strangeville, Wolfram and Windgate. What was to be a routine hit on a well to do gay pedophile with inclinations toward fat Cuban boys, turns into murder, mayhem and all the perverted sexual nonsense Hack Movies is known for when our heroes get themselves cunt deep in supernatural jizm, and come face to face with the forces of darkness!

Check it out the clip below (Maybe NSFW):

Marvel is showing their support for Barack Obama by putting him on the cover, and even IN the installment of The Amazing Spiderman! Issue #583 is set to be released Jan. 14 and will feature our new President in it. You can see the full size cover and a portion of his involvement below thanks to Marvel.

Ram Man:

Clint Eastwood is back pulling double-duty again in his new film ‘Gran Torino’.  Eastwood directs and stars in a film that is best described as “Dirty Harry retires to the suburbs”.  I can’t think of a better guy to be in charge of the neighborhood watch! Dave Johannson penned the story of a chiseled war veteran who must adapt to the changing world around him.

Eastwood plays Walter Kowalski, a retired auto worker and hard nosed veteran of the Korean war.  Walt is a recent widower and spends his retirement filling his days with home improvement and sucking down beer on the front porch. That is until a family of Hmoung (Loas and Taiwanese mountain people) move in next door. This forces Walt to begin a patrol of the perimeter of his yard to keep the “gooks” off. If you didn’t know any Asian slurs before following ‘Gran Torino’ you will be well versed. Thao and Sue Lor are the lucky kids living next door to grizzly old Walt. They live there with their mother and grandmother who continually gives Walt the evil eye from her porch. I feel a battle brewing.

There is but not between the AARP cast. Thao is being forced to join an Asian gang run by his cousin Spider. Thao, a good kid at heart, caves to the pressure and decides to go through with the initiation…..He has to steal Walt’s mint condition 1972 Gran Torino out of the garage next door. As you could probably guess, Thao gets caught and luckily escapes unhurt with Walt shooting a round into a beer sign instead of Thao. Thao must work off his shame by doing tasks for Walt. Walt soon develops a friendship for the kids and the family. He is closer to them than his own kids. Walt also drives away Spider and his gang of thugs by telling them to stay away from Thao or else. They ask or else what and Walt proceeds to explain how “in Korea they would kill gooks and stack their dead bodies up and use them for sand bags”. Walt explained, “Kid no one would ever miss you”. That would be enough for me, but I’m not a stupid gang-banger.

The battle that is brewing the entire film is set off by a brutal rape of Thao’s sister Sue that sends Walt for his rifle. The end of this film is not what you would expect from a Clint Eastwood picture. When you see how Walt handles the gang and the repercussion for Thao, Sue and Lor family your jaw will hit the floor. Some people aren’t able to look past the slurs and racism. If you can you will find a very good performance by Clint Eastwood in a fine film that will have you cheering. Stick around for the closing credits for The original song “Gran Torino” performed by Clint Eastwood and his son.

[Overall: 4.5 stars out of 5]

Travis:

“Crusty Old Man.” This could have easily been the title of Clint Eastwood’s newest film. He’s back as the hard-nosed, no BS, straight-shooting character that would just as much kick your a** around the block as give you the time of day that we all love and remember from his earlier films as Dirty Harry. However, Clint’s put on a few years since then and it adds a marvelous layer of character depth to ‘Gran Torino’.

Eastwood plays Korean War veteran Walt Kowalski. Walt recently lost his wife and now lives alone in his home, which is smack-dab in the middle of what now might be referred to as a Detroit ghetto. Walt can be described as an angry, belligerent old man that’s stuck in the 1950’s and has about as much faith in humanity as he has nice things to say about just about anyone. When a family of Korean Mungs move in next door to Walt, he finds himself resisting their traditional ways and relatively kind nature as a result of his prejudice. It’s not until he sees an uncommon spark of humanity in the neighbor boy Thao and a series of horrible events take place at the hands of a local gang that he decides to take action for himself, changing his life and the lives of those close to him forever.

At once shockingly humorous and appallingly forward, Eastwood manages to take the clashing of two very different eras and cultures and combine them into and wonderful tale of one man’s ability to find his own redemption for an unforgivable act in the selfless sacrifice for another. Walt has a super-sweet 1972 Gran Torino and makes us laugh with his rough-edged wit and insults, but it takes time for him to wiggle free of racist stereotype we place him into and become the decent human being that is created from the violence and indecency that surrounds him. Eastwood’s performance in this film is singular and well-received, but the remainder of the film unfortunately falls short of anything Oscar-worthy. Nonetheless, ‘Gran Torino’ is well-worth seeing and is more than just a film with humor or nostalgic Eastwood violence.

[Overall: 4 stars out of 5]

Melissa:

Only Clint Eastwood can get away with calling African Americans spooks in a movie… Only Clint Eastwood…

Gran Torino is the story of Walt Kowalski (Clint Eastwood), a Korean War vet with a major chip on his shoulder. His wife just passed on and his neighborhood has become overrun with by Mexican and Asian gangs. He tries aimlessly to protect his home, and more importantly his prize possession, a 1972 Gran Torino that he helped build during his career at the Ford Motor plant.

During a brawl that happened to happen in his lawn, he ends up protecting his Asian neighbors with his shotgun… More importantly, Thao (Bee Vang), the boy next door who is being pressured to join his cousins gang. They will stop at nothing to get him initiated… that is… until Walt steps in. During Thaos punishment, in which he is made by his family and traditions to work of his crime (his cousin forced him into trying to steal Walt’s Gran Torino), Walt, Thao, and his sister Sue begin a friendship. Walt takes the kids under his wing, more so than his son’s, or his family that absolutely hate him.

See… the thing is… Walt is a racist bastard. He will say anything about anyone! He calls people spooks, zipperheads, and every other name in the book. That’s why I say that only Clint Eastwood can pull it off. Almost every line of his has something negative and wildly inappropriate included in it. His delivery left the screening audience, a nicely eclectic crowd roaring with awkward laughter.

This movie was AMAZING. The only thing that was slightly disappointing was Bee Vang’s performance. Vang was a little less than realistic and believable in parts… which is a shame because in other parts he was very respectable. This movie gives you a hard dose of what is happening to once respectable neighborhoods in America. I am not talking about minorities. I am talking about the senseless violence that a lot of us have to deal with on a daily basis. It was a little hard to swallow (in a much needed way) as someone who has been held up at gunpoint more than once. I can honestly say that this movie is a MUST SEE.

[Overall: 4.5 stars out of 5]

It is no secret that everyone involved in this movie feels like they have been betrayed, or have something owed to them. Well it is time for the people involved(the producers) with making the movie speak up about it, and they have.

Larry Gordon and Lloyd Levin have been gone public with statements about this whole thing and you need to read them. Here is what Lloyd Levin is saying:

Who is right? In the Watchmen dispute between Warner Brothers and Fox that question is being discussed, analyzed, argued, tried and ruled on in a court of law. That’s one way to answer the question - It is a fallback position in our society for parties in conflict to resolve disputes. And there are teams of lawyers and a highly regarded Federal Judge trying to do just that, which obviates any contribution I could make towards answering the “who is right” question within a legal context. But after 15 plus years of involvement in the project, and a decade more than that working in the movie business, I have another perspective, a personal perspective that I believe important to have on the public record.

No one is more keenly aware of the irony of this dispute than Larry Gordon and I who have been trying to get this movie made for many years. There’s a list of people who have rejected the viability of a movie based on Alan Moore and Dave Gibbon’s classic graphic novel that reads like a who’s who of Hollywood.

We’ve been told the graphic novel is unfilmable.

After 9/11 some felt the story’s themes were too close to reality ever to be palatable to a mainstream audience.

There were those who considered the project but who wished it were somehow different: Could it be a buddy movie, or a team-up movie or could it focus on one main character; did it have to be so dark; did so many people have to die; could it be stripped of its flashback structure; could storylines be eliminated; could new storylines be invented; did it have to be so long; could the blue guy put clothes on… The list of dissatisfactions for what Watchmen is was as endless as the list of suggestions to make it something it never was.

Also endless are the list of studio rejections we accrued over the years. Larry and I developed screenplays at five different studios. We had two false starts in production on the movie. We were involved with prominent and commercial directors. Big name stars were interested. In one instance hundreds of people were employed, sets were being built - An A-list director and top artists in the industry were given their walking papers when the studio financing the movie lost faith.

After all these years of rejection, this is the same project, the same movie, over which two studios are now spending millions of dollars contesting ownership. Irony indeed, and then some.

and he goes on to say:

From my point of view, the flashpoint of this dispute, came in late spring of 2005. Both Fox and Warner Brothers were offered the chance to make Watchmen. They were submitted the same package, at the same time. It included a cover letter describing the project and its history, budget information, a screenplay, the graphic novel, and it made mention that a top director was involved.

And it’s at this point, where the response from both parties could not have been more radically different.

The response we got from Fox was a flat “pass.” That’s it. An internal Fox email documents that executives there felt the script was one of the most unintelligible pieces of shit they had read in years. Conversely, Warner Brothers called us after having read the script and said they were interested in the movie - yes, they were unsure of the screenplay, and had many questions, but wanted to set a meeting to discuss the project, which they promptly did. Did anyone at Fox ask to meet on the movie? No. Did anyone at Fox express any interest in the movie? No. Express even the slightest interest in the movie? Or the graphic novel? No.

Shouldn’t Warner Brothers be entitled to the spoils - if any — of the risk they took in supporting and making Watchmen? Should Fox have any claim on something they could have had but chose to neither support nor show any interest in?

Look at it another way… One reason the movie was made was because Warner Brothers spent the time, effort and money to engage with and develop the project. If Watchmen was at Fox the decision to make the movie would never have been made because there was no interest in moving forward with the project.

Does a film studio have the right to stand in the way of an artistic endeavor and determine that it shouldn’t exist? If the project had been sequestered at Fox, if Fox had any say in the matter, Watchmen simply wouldn’t exist today, and there would be no film for Fox to lay claim on. It seems beyond cynical for the studio to claim ownership at this point.

This is coming from the source that has been trying to get the movie made for years now and let me be the first to say that it is very eye opening. The fact that WB and Fox were both offered the same things and Fox passed on it says alot about this lawsuit. Now that all the money has been invested, marketing, hype and everything else is built around it they want to swoop in and reap all the benefits. Fox is passing this off as innocence on their part as if they would have moved forward if they were offered it.

To further enlighten everyone, Larry Gordon has begun speaking out about the situation as well. Most of his statements are in the form of letters to the US District Court and arent publicly available, but it really says something that both of these guys have evidence and can prove that Fox wanted nothing to do with this movie. Thanks to HitFlix for the above letter.

Travis:

‘Bride Wars’ is essentially a romantic comedy chick flick that revolves around the rituals of the wedding. Surprisingly, the first half of the film is very entertaining. Anne Hathaway and Kate Hudson actually work well together and the comedy benefits from good-timing and a strong chemistry between the two actresses. It’s not until after the first half, when the more “dramatic” leg of the story kicks in, that I lost interest and found myself yawning and going “ah, geez… how sappy?”

Emma (Hathaway) and Liv (Hudson) are two best friends since childhood who dream of having June weddings at The Plaza. Their whole lives are been molded by this desire and when the ring is finally presented it’s like a dream come true. The problem, however, is that this occurs for both friends and when they try and book the plaza, a mistake is made and both weddings are scheduled for the same day. This is where the comedy really begins and, while it’s not all that original, is entertaining.

Candice Bergen plays Marion St. Claire, the most-famous and highly sought-after wedding planner in New York. Emma and Liv both idolize her and hire her to plan their weddings. It’s also a booking error by Marion’s secretary that causes the entire comedic war of the weddings in the first place. Bergen’s performance is basically textbook typical and just feels like Murphy Brown changed careers. Again, the comedy is enjoyable, but unless you’re into highly-predictable, fairy tale come true endings and sappy stories of romance and friendship, you may want to just wait for this on DVD.

[Overall: 2.75 stars out of 5]

Jeremy:

Sometimes a film takes the best elements out of the conventional Hollywood style of filmmaking and turns out rather entertaining. These films, though completely shaded over by the ridiculous escapism found in the movie industry, make for a fun time even if they are faker than Rolex watch found on a New York street corner. Take ‘Bride Wars’, for example. It’s conventional. It’s nothing we haven’t seen a hundred times before. There’s no deep-seeded message that is to be gained from it. If anything, it probably does more harm than good to the wedding-obsessed culture. However, it’s a fun film that offers up some unpredictable laughs and genuine performances.

Kate Hudson plays Liv. Anne Hathaway plays Emma. Childhood friends, they grow up promising each other that they would always be there for one another and promising themselves that they would have the most perfect wedding ever put on display. Leave it up to film logic and some nicely placed deus ex machina to put their two weddings on the exact same day. Before you know it, these two lifelong gal pals are at each other’s throat, sabotaging one another’s “most perfect day” with ruthless abandon.

‘Bride Wars’ was directed by Gary Winick, who made a name for himself with the 2002, indie film ‘Tadpole’. He’s come a long way. ‘Tadpole’ was a no frills comedy that was filmed on a shoestring budget and looked exactly like it was. Now that he has a budget behind him, Winick is able to put a little style into filmmaking techniques.

‘Bride Wars’ is injected with style. It has to be. Any film that glorifies the act of getting married as much as this has to be chic infused to the brim. Women filmgoers all over the world will swoon over the Vera Wang wedding dress and the Tiffany’s engagement ring. This isn’t the movie to take your wife-to-be to if you’re wanting a quiet, little ceremony.

The screenplay, though it follows most of the trappings of traditional Hollywood films, allows itself just enough variances on the typical comedy to feel somewhat fresh. When you get more than two screenwriters credited on a film, it tends to feel patch worked between all the different drafts the script goes through. ‘Bride Wars’ was written by five, different screenwriters, but it feels cohesive enough to not throw you from one scene to the next.

You understand full well why Liv and Emma are going at each other as hard as they do. There are never character choices that feel forced or wholly unrealistic.

There are some legitimate surprises in the film, as well. Going into it, you may think you know how it is going to end, and there was definitely a sappy, Hollywood ending the film could have fallen into very easily. It doesn’t allow itself to do that, and the way it does end is refreshing.

Hathaway and Hudson work really well together. Hathaway, in particular, does a great job with the character she’s given. She has a way of transforming her appearance drastically and this skill is necessary for her Emma’s alterations throughout the film. Hudson is decent enough in her part, but you clearly see who the real actress is when she’s butting heads with her on-screen counterpart.

The secondary cast is pretty forgettable save for Kristen Johnston who seems to be channeling Kathleen Turner and not in a good way. John Pankow returns from the 80s land of the lost actors, but his hairline has always been a better actor than he is.

‘Bride Wars’ is better than it deserves to be. It will be a riot for those among you who fit into its target demographic. Women are going to eat this film up, but the men they drag along shouldn’t get too discouraged. It is conventional, but it’s also reasonably entertaining. It offers a lot of laughs, most of which are genuine or witty, and, when all is said and done, that’s about as much as you can hope for from a film of this nature.

[Overall: 3.5 stars out of 5]

Ram Man:

I actually like a good “Chick Flick”. My manhood has been previously questioned in previous reviews I have posted on this site (Mama Mia, Sisterhood 2, Sex & the City). So I was curious when i went to check out Gary Winick’s (13 going on 30) new comedy ‘Bride Wars’. Winick produced one of my favorite films ‘Pieces of April’ (2003), so I had high expectations going into this 90 minutes of comedic bridal bliss.

Oh, did I mention, Kate Hudson is in this. She is on a losing streak that would rival the NFL’s Detroit Lions. I’m beginning to wonder if someone switched the kids at birth. Goldie (Hawn) was cute and hilarious….Kate is pretty but not so funny. I can tolerate ‘How to Lose a Guy’ but her last great film was 9 years ago! (Almost Famous) Luckily Ann Hathaway is co-starring and is strong enough as an actress and funny enough to carry the film.

‘Bride Wars’ is another we have to wreck the wedding comedy. Only this time it’s the Brides doing all of the damage. Two best friends, Emma (Hathaway) and Liv (Hudson), joined at the hip for 20 years. These girls do everything together. So their dream……to get married at the Plaza hotel in New York City in June. Emma gets engaged and Liv follows suit less than a week later. So the girls head down to meet with “Oprah” of wedding planners Marion St. Clair (Murphy Brown herself Candice Bergen). She handles all the weddings at the Plaza Hotel. Did I mention she doesn’t handle personally. Following a clerical error by St. Clair’s (former) assistant, Emma and Liv’s weddings are scheduled for the exact same day!

This just won’t do! You see they are also each other’s bridesmaids so unless they can be in two places at once,,,someone has to switch their date. The next June wedding at the plaza is available in 3 years. Hello…Vegas is open 24/7 and there are chapels in every hotel! (Remember I’m a guy!) With this bad news, neither one is about to switch their date.

“DING” DING” Let the battles begin! Liv and Emma begin their mission to wreck the other brides wedding. You have Emma with her spray-on tan resembling a traffic cone (orange) after Liv switch the color in the booth. Emma then changed the hair coloring for Liv, who ended up looking like smurfette. You have many other attacks and counter attack by both brides until you feel sorry for the grooms (Chris Pratt,Steve Howey). There is also an uninspiring performance from normally hilarious Kristen Johnson (3rd Rock) as Deb, Emma’s overbearing teaching buddy who is drafted in to the war as Emma’s bridesmaid. Liv promotes her assistant at the law firm where she works to be her bridesmaid. Oh… by the way, his name is Kevin (Michael Arden). (This was just done with P. Dempsey last year in Maid of Honor)

This film is targeting a female audience between the ages of 15-35. If that is you…you will enjoy this film! If your like me, looking for a good comedy to start off 2009 wait for this to hit the DVD shelves. Guy’s if it is date night…see the movie first and catch a matinee of ‘Bride Wars’ and get dinner after. There are enough laughs from Hathaway and during the war to get you through it. I may be a bit harsh to start off 2009 with ‘Bride Wars’, i did enjoy the first half of the film. But, as in too many comedies put out these days, the writers seem to be going stong in the begining of the film and it’s like a buzzer goes of and they just end it. This causes the film to come to a screeching hault in the end. This is true with ‘Bide Wars’ also. I won’t give up the end but you will know it by the midpoint in the film.

[Overall: 2.5 stars out of 5]

Travis:

‘The Reader’ is a film that’s going to have two camps of viewers… those who love Kate Winslet’s performance fascinating and Oscar-worthy and those who find the film’s story in some way appalling. I’ve already heard several opinions on both sides and must say that, while I am in the camp of Winslet-lovers, I do somewhat understand those who feel the story unfairly utilizes the holocaust as a plot crutch.

Oh, don’t worry. I’m not going to tell you how the holocaust plays into the film, but I do find it’s necessary for me to give fair warning. Personally, I found the story of ‘The Reader’ to be perfectly fine, not perfect, but perfectly acceptable. The film, directed by Stephen Daldry (Billy Elliot, The Hours), begins with a teenage boy named Michael who is of a privileged family. Michael is on his way home from school one day when he suddenly finds himself stricken with sickness. He is helped home by a mysterious woman and spends the next three months on bed rest.

Once recovered, Michael is determined to locate the unknown woman who helped him. When Michael finds her he finds himself uncontrollably allured to her simple and mature beauty. The woman’s name is Hanna (Kate Winslet) and the two begin to carry on a peculiar but romantic affair whereas they offer one another pleasure beyond that of a sexual nature. The two compliment each other despite their social and economic differences, but the plot takes on weight when when begin to realize that Hanna is hiding something. Her secret becomes the ultimate factor is whether or not she will continue the life she knows and when Michael finds out, he must decide whether to honor Hanna by keeping her secret or save her by revealing it.

‘The Reader’ begins as a touching story and slowly morphs into a story of regret and redemption. The acting is fine but Winslet is stellar. While the idea is not entirely original, the film does have some fresh elements to it and it’s easy to get caught up in the first half as we watch these two unlikely characters form a bond so strong it will last their entire lives. The second half of the film becomes increasingly sad, but the ending is bittersweet in a way that leaves the audience feeling that wonderful combination of sadness and satisfaction. There is a point in which the story becomes a bit predictable, but try and look past that and enjoy the heart of it and especially enjoy Kate’s performance.

[Overall: 4.25 stars out of 5]

Ram Man:

Kate Winslett has been one of my favorite actresses ever since she mounted the railing on the Titanic and yelled “I’m the King of the World!”. She is staring in the new film “The Reader” by English director Stephen Daldry (The Hours). The story is about a boy who is befriended by a street car ticket agent and soon finds out she has a secret past.

‘The Reader’ begins with a young Michael Berg (David Kross) on his way home from school collapsing in a doorway from an illness. He is assist and taken home by a woman living in the building Hanna Schmitz (Winslett). We later learn that Berg had contracted scarlett fever, but soon made a full recovery. Once on his feet Michael went back to thank Hanna for her kindness, only to get a revealing look at Hanna changing her clothes. This began Michael Berg’s infatuation with Hanna and what began as friendship between the two  turned into a steamy sexual affair.

During the after school encounters, Michael would read one of the stories he was studing at school to Hanna, and in exchange Hanna would have sex with the boy. Winsett still looking very good at her age. Michael read parts of “The Odyssey by Homer” and “Mark Twain’s Huck Finn”. Hanna’s favorite seemed to be “The Lady with the Little Dog”. We then know that Hanna had lived her life without knowing how to read. This lasted the entire summer until one afternoon, Michael showed up to Hanna’s apartment to find it empty. Hanna Schmitz had moved out and not even left Michael a note.

8 years go by, Michael Berg now attending law school, while on a trip with his class a face from his past comes front and center when he see his former lover, Hanna Schmitz on trial for her life. Michael learns why Hanna left him and the dark secret she had been hiding for so many years. This secret (I’m not telling what it is) shocks Michael, destroys Hanna and tests the strength of the bond they formed years earlier. The repercussions of Hanna’s past and her trial follow Berg into his adult life. (Played by Ralph Fiennes)

The Reader is an intriguing story of sex and deception, with moments of remorse and devotion told through a fabulous performance by Kate Winslett and newcomer David Kross. I was infatuated with this film and list it as one of my favorites of the year (2008). Winslett who is amazing in each film she does, but in ‘The Reader’ she shines as bright as the statue she’ll bring home Oscar night in February.

[Overall: 4.5 stars out of 5]

Melissa:

So… this one is not about the regular Screening PASSholes that go to a lot of the free screenings and talk, bitch, giggle and just overall, are disruptive and annoying. Not all… just some.

This one is about a press member. A person who was reviewing a movie for their job… or should have been anyway. Instead, they just got on my damn nerves.

One of the perks of reviewing movies, besides going to screenings for free, which I more than appreciate, is that we can bring someone with us on occasion. Sometimes it’s a friend, sometimes a relative, but in this case, it was obviously a date!

I was at the screening of, well I won’t say to be nice… I’m sitting at a theater that does not have stadium seating. That’s fine, I happen to love this particular theater for it’s character and charm. Having said that… you don’t have the luxury of sitting way above the people in front of you.

This was a problem this time. Why? You may ask… because a member of the press was making out the entire time!

Not only was this a great movie… one that I really wanted to see… but instead I got to deal with a member of the press giggling, talking, whispering, and overall Making out in my face!

I understand that couples sometimes exchange a little peck in movies, but this was Muah, Muah, Muuuuahhhhhhhhhhhh! The entire film!

Press members… I respect that most of us do not do this in a movie that we are reviewing for our jobs… but this one needs to be called out! Don’t make out in a packed theatre when there are others sitting around you!

Remember… I’m watching you…

Melissa

Apparently, the promotion behind ‘My Bloody Valentine 3D’ wasn’t cool enough.  Today it has been brought to our attention that you, YES YOU, can send someone their very own bloody valentine.

Here’s the one we made especially for you!

Send your special someone a bloody valentine right here.

‘My Bloody Valentine 3D’ comes out January 16th.

That there is the first look at Jim Carrey in Robert Zemeckis’ version of ‘A Christmas Carol’.  He’s doing it motion-capture style like ‘Beowulf’ and ‘The Polar Express’.  The guy can’t seem to shake that type of filmmaking.

Carrey will be playing Scrooge, the Ghost of Christmas Past, the Ghost of Christmas Present and the Ghost of Christmas Yet To Come.  Gary Oldman will be playing iny Tim, Bob Cratchit, and Marley.  Colin Firth also has a part.

The above picture was brought to us by the guys over at The Bad and Ugly.  They’ve also posted a small image of the film’s promo poster.  Here it is all blowed up:

What do you think?  Do we really need another retelling of A Christmas Carol?  Didn’t the Muppets do it just fine the last time?  Will Robert Zemeckis ever shoot another live-action film again?  Let us know by commenting below!

Source: The Bad and Ugly

‘Slumdog Millionare’ director Danny Boyle recently sat down with Empire Online to do a Q&A with the readers of the site.  Here are just a few samples of the more interesting subjects broached:

ON DIRECTING ‘ALIEN 4′:

“Oh my God, that one. Very close actually. In fact I met Sigourney and Winona, which was a great pleasure. Had chips – French fries I should say – with Winona. But I backed out of it. I was terrified of the special effects.”

ON JUMPING FROM ‘SUNSHINE’ TO ‘SLUMDOG’:

“Bits of ‘Slumdog’ are quite dark early on. It’s not quite the feelgood movie of the decade all the way through. But the contrast between the isolation of outer space and the 21+ million inhabitants of Mumbai was welcome.”

ON CHOOSING MUSIC FOR HIS MOVIES:

“It’s critical for me. Music is more important than anything in a way. Music is the final effect you have on the film before it goes out.”

ON FILMING IN MUMBAI:

“Oh my God. A lot of people said it was going to be very difficult and frustrating. And I think if you go there thinking that, it is. But the 21+ million people give you the chance to do something different. And if you think of it like that, it’s a once in a lifetime opportunity.”

ON THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ‘SLUMDOG’ AND Q&A, THE BOOK IT WAS BASED ON:

“It’s very different. Simon Beaufoy (’The Full Monty’) hijacked the central concept – a slum kid goes on the big game show – and ran with it in his own way. So the love story was invented, to become the real spine of the film, rather than the show being the spine, as it is in the novel.”

ON THE NEXT INSTALLMENT IN THE ‘28…LATER…’ FRANCHISE:

“Yeah, we’ve got a good idea for the third one. Very strange. And sadly we’ve run out of time to tell you about it…”

ON DIRECTING A SUPERHERO MOVIE:

“No. Not a great fan of superhero movies. We need those extremes of storytelling, but are reluctant to use them in anything other than fantasy movies. I think that’s a bit sad.”

ON ‘PORNO’, THE SEQUEL TO ‘TRAINSPOTTING’:

“Just waiting for the original actors to age. Help them if you can. Take them out drinking – get them away from the spas and those moisturisers.”

ON ‘LADY VENGEANCE’:

“Seriously, I was just asked to do a remake of Lady Vengeance, the one after Oldboy. My favourite is Audition.”

ON EDITING HIS FILMS:

“If you hire a good editor, you’ve got to let them edit the film, and you come in and assess what they’ve done. Give pointers, you know. It’s a cliché that no-one is proud of, but filmmaking is a collaborative process. As director, you steal other people’s skills and get the credit for it.”

ON WHETHER HE’D RATHER WIN AN OSCAR OR SEE BURY WITH THE F.A. CUP:

“Bury and the FA Cup. Come on, no contest!”

Check out the full interview over at Empire Online.

Source: Empire Online

The Directors Guild of America announced the five nominees for the DGA Award for Outstanding Directorial Achievement in Feature Film for 2008.

David Fincher, “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
Christopher Nolan, “The Dark Knight”
Ron Howard, “Frost/Nixon”
Gus Van Sant, “Milk”
Danny Boyle, “Slumdog Millionaire”

* Well, this pretty much clinches it for the top 5. Will Ron Howard receive the snub again from the Oscars as he did in 1995 when he was glaringly overlooked for ‘Apollo 13′? Howard won the DGA, while the Academy went with Mel Gibson for ‘Braveheart’. The only two movies to receive universal love from ALL the guilds (SAG, PGA, ASC, WGA and DGA) are ‘Slumdog Millionaire’ and ‘The Curious Case of Benjamin Button’. The 61st Annual DGA Awards will be on January 31, 2009.

FYI: The DGA is honoring film critic Roger Ebert with their Honorary Life Member Award.

This is what I like to see, horrible movies getting nominated for the horribleness (is that even a word?)! This movie was absolutely awful, and I am glad that more than just the geeks (Well, the TRUE geeks think so) are recognizing that.

Its pretty amazing that almost EVERY movie I thought was horrible this year, gets nominated for a Razzie. Its like they were reading my mind. Here are the rest:

Worst Movies of 2008:
Speed Racer
Disaster Movie and Meet the Spartans
The Day the Earth Stood Still
High School Musical 3
The Hottie & The Nottie
In the Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale
The Love Guru
Postal
Rambo
The Happening
Meet Dave
Witless Protection

I agree with ALL of those except ‘Rambo’, I enjoyed that. Here are the rest of the nominations thanks to /Film

Worst Actor
Zac Efron
Dane Cook
Larry the Cable Guy
Eddie Murphy
Al Pacino
Keanu Reeves
Sylvester Stallone
Tom Cruise (Valkyrie)
Will Ferrell
Ashton Kutcher
Mike Myers
Adam Sandler
Mark Wahlberg

Worst Actress
Paris Hilton
Jessica Alba
The cast of “The Women”
Camilla Belle
Cameron Diaz
Kate Hudson
Diane Keaton
Jennifer Connelly
Zooey Deschanel
Vanessa Hudgens
Eva Longoria-Parker
Reese Witherspoon

Worst Screen Couple:
Any couple from HSM 3
Cameron Diaz & Ashton Kutcher
Paris Hilton & Joel David Moore
Kate Hudson & Dane Cook
Kate Hudson & Matthew McConaughey
Larry the Cable Guy & Jenny McCarthy
Any couple from Mamma Mia
Eddie Murphy & Eddie Murphy (Meet Dave)
Al Pacino & His Hair
Mark Wahlberg & Zooey Deschanel
Mark Wahlberg & Mila Kunis
Sylvester Stallone & His Ego

Worst Director:
Uwe Boll
Scott Derrickson
Jason Friedberg & Aaron Seltzer
Tom Putnam
Marco Schnabel
Sylvester Stallone
Jon Avnet
Diane English
Roland Emmerich
Brian Robbins
Kenny Ortega
M. Night Shyamalan

Worst Prequel, Sequel, Remake or Rip-Off:
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull
High School Musical 3: Senior Year
Rambo
Star Wars: The Clone Wars
Disaster Movie
Meet the Spartans
An American Carol
The Women
The Day the Earth Stood Still
Prom Night
Speed Racer
The X-Files: I Want To Believe

Worst Career Achievement:
Uwe Boll
Jason Friedberg & Aaron Seltzer
Madonna
Keanu Reeves
Sylvester Stallone

WB (I presume) has launched a new viral site for ‘Watchmen’ called The New Frontiersman (http://thenewfrontiersman.net) which of course for those of you that have read the comic/graphic novel you know this is the magazine that Rorschach gets his dirt from. The site does absolutely nothing, it just loads a flash page with what you see about and is unclickable. (thanks to /Film for the heads up)

Checking out the Who Is registry for the site it was setup by a company named the “Picture Production Company” and is out of the UK. They registered it on 12/12/2008 and surprisingly is only registered for 1 year. Pretty strange, but all of the goings for this flick have been strange as of late.

These are the first two photos to appear for the new movie ‘State of Play’ the newest movie form Universal and Focus Pictures. The movie stars an all-star cast of Russell Crowe, Rachael McAdams, Ben Affleck, and Helen Miren and is directed by acclaimed director Kevin MacDonald. The thriller centers around  a rising congressman and an investigative journalist embroiled in a case of seemingly unrelated, brutal murders.

Crowe plays DC reporter Cal McCaffrey, who’s street smarts lead him to untangle a mystery of murder and collusion among some of the nation’s most promising political and corporate figures. Affleck stars as the dashing yet secretive Congressman Stephen Collins. For some reason when I think of this movie the original  ‘Manchurian Candidate’ with Frank Sinatra comes to mind. This movie hits theaters April 17th, 2009

Source: www.focusfeatures.com