<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"><channel><title>Cinematical</title><link>http://www.cinematical.com</link><description>Cinematical</description><language>en-us</language><copyright>Copyright 2008 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only.</copyright><generator>Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/</generator><item><title>Ten Things You Should Know About 'Star Trek'</title><link>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/17/ten-things-you-should-know-about-star-trek/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/17/ten-things-you-should-know-about-star-trek/</guid><comments>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/17/ten-things-you-should-know-about-star-trek/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/action-and-adventure/" rel="tag">Action</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/classics/" rel="tag">Classics</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/sci-fi-and-fantasy/" rel="tag">Sci-Fi &amp; Fantasy</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/paramount/" rel="tag">Paramount</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/fandom/" rel="tag">Fandom</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/comic-superhero-geek/" rel="tag">Comic/Superhero/Geek</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/remakes-and-sequels/" rel="tag">Remakes and Sequels</a></p><div align="center"><img hspace="4" vspace="4" border="1" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.cinematical.com/media/2008/11/trekkie3.jpg" alt="" /><br /><br />
<div style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-style: italic;">(Note: This evening, Cinematical screened a whole bunch of footage from J.J. Abrams' Star Trek in New York City. We'll have a breakdown of scenes screened, our thoughts and some words from Abrams himself real soon. In the meantime, here's a little Trek guide for you newbies out there.)</span><br /></div>
<br />
<div align="left">By now, you've probably seen <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/15/full-star-trek-trailer-arrives-online/">the leaked trailer</a> for J.J. Abrams' reinvention of <em>Star Trek</em>. Hopefully, as you're reading this, you will probably have <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/17/discuss-the-new-star-trek-trailer-is-now-online/">seen a shiny official version</a>. This is supposed to be <em>Trek</em> for a new generation, a movie that reintroduces the original characters of Kirk and Spock to people who have only seen Trek through watered down sequels and spin-offs. As impossible as it seems, there <em>are</em> people who find all things Trek a mystery -- and when our beloved editor, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/bloggers/erik-davis/">Erik Davis</a>, asked me to put together a guide, I found myself in a bit of a panic. I began asking my Trekkie friends what they would tell a newbie -- and since we all arrived at roughly these same ten facts, I feel less silly sharing them. If you're new to the final frontier, read on. If you've been wearing your Spock ears since preschool, just go watch the trailer again.<br /><br /><strong>Fact #1:</strong> <em>Star Trek </em>creator Gene Roddenberry modeled the show on <em>Gulliver's Travels</em>, wanting each episode to be both an exciting adventure and a social parable. The show tackled all kinds of 60s social issues -- feminism, racism, ecology, religion, the Cold War, and Vietnam. Perhaps the biggest hurdle facing Abrams' film is whether or not it can attain that same level of social awareness. Will the new Trek film make a commentary on anything, or will it be nothing but empty action in the name of rebooting?<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Continued after the jump...</span><br /><br /><div class="postgallery"><p><strong>Gallery: <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/photos/star-trek/">Star Trek</a></strong></p><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/photos/star-trek/1163958/"><img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.cinematical.com/media/2008/11/treknew5_thumbnail.jpg" alt="" title="" /></a><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/photos/star-trek/1163957/"><img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.cinematical.com/media/2008/11/treknew4_thumbnail.jpg" alt="" title="" /></a><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/photos/star-trek/1163956/"><img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.cinematical.com/media/2008/11/treknew3_thumbnail.jpg" alt="" title="" /></a><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/photos/star-trek/1163955/"><img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.cinematical.com/media/2008/11/treknew13_thumbnail.jpg" alt="" title="" /></a><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/photos/star-trek/1163954/"><img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.cinematical.com/media/2008/11/treknew12_thumbnail.jpg" alt="" title="" /></a></div></div>
</div><p><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/17/ten-things-you-should-know-about-star-trek/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Ten Things You Should Know About 'Star Trek'</em></a></p><p style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"> </p><p><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/17/ten-things-you-should-know-about-star-trek/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/forward/1373893/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/17/ten-things-you-should-know-about-star-trek/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a></p>]]></description><category>featured</category><category>gene roddenberry</category><category>GeneRoddenberry</category><category>jj abrams</category><category>JjAbrams</category><category>Star Trek</category><category>StarTrek</category><dc:creator>Elisabeth Rappe</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 17 Nov 2008 22:02:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title>Cinematical Seven: Outrageous Oscar Disqualifications</title><link>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/15/cinematical-seven-outrageous-oscar-disqualifications/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/15/cinematical-seven-outrageous-oscar-disqualifications/</guid><comments>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/15/cinematical-seven-outrageous-oscar-disqualifications/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/classics/" rel="tag">Classics</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/comedy/" rel="tag">Comedy</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/documentary/" rel="tag">Documentary</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/foreign-language/" rel="tag">Foreign Language</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/independent/" rel="tag">Independent</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/celebrities-and-controversy/" rel="tag">Celebrities and Controversy</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/fandom/" rel="tag">Fandom</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/cinematical-seven/" rel="tag">Cinematical Seven</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/michael-moore/" rel="tag">Michael Moore</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/oscar-watch/" rel="tag">Oscar Watch</a></p><img hspace="4" vspace="4" border="1" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.cinematical.com/media/2008/11/screenshot_01.jpg" /><br /><br />With the news that the musical score from <strong><a href="http://www.moviefone.com/movie/the-dark-knight/27016/main"><em>The Dark Knight</em></a></strong> has been <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/13/dark-knight-score-disqualified-from-academy-awards-considerati/">disqualified</a> from Academy Awards consideration on the grounds that <a href="http://www.incontention.com/?p=2911">too many people</a> were credited with composing it, outrage against the Academy's stringent, complicated rules has erupted afresh. In the interest of fueling this indignation and making the world an angrier place, let's take a belligerent march down memory lane and look at seven other controversial disqualifications. <br /><br /><strong><em>The Jazz Singer</em> disqualified for being a talkie.</strong> When the very first Academy Awards were held in May 1929, honoring films released between August 1927 and July 1928, everyone was talking about <a href="http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0018037/"><em>The Jazz Singer</em></a> -- the first feature-length movie to use recorded sound in some of its talking and singing scenes. So great was the attention that the Academy <a href="http://www.filmsite.org/aa27.html">disqualified</a> the film from the inaugural Best Picture category, reasoning that its use of sound put it on an uneven playing field against the films still stuck in silence. Instead, the Academy gave Warner Bros. a special award "for producing <em>The Jazz Singer</em>, the pioneer outstanding talking picture, which has revolutionized the industry." It's true, too! I don't know if you've noticed, but pretty much all movies nowadays have talking in them. <br /><br /><strong><em>Young Americans</em> disqualified from Best Documentary category ... after it already won. Whoops.</strong> This is a sad case, and a unique one. The <a href="http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0062515/">documentary</a>, about the peppy <a href="http://www.youngamericans.org/">Young Americans</a> show choir, won the Oscar at the 1969 ceremony for being the best feature-length documentary of 1968. But a few weeks later, the Academy discovered that the film had screened at a theater in October <em>1967</em>, making it eligible for <em>that</em> year's awards and not for 1968. The Academy actually <em>took back</em> the Oscar statues from the filmmakers, Alex Grasshoff and Robert Cohn, and gave the award to the film that had been first runner-up. When Grasshoff died earlier this year, his widow <a href="http://articles.latimes.com/2008/apr/20/local/me-grasshoff20">told</a> the <em>Los Angeles Times</em> how heartbroken he'd been. Can you imagine?<p><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/15/cinematical-seven-outrageous-oscar-disqualifications/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Cinematical Seven: Outrageous Oscar Disqualifications</em></a></p><p style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"> </p><p><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/15/cinematical-seven-outrageous-oscar-disqualifications/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/forward/1372484/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/15/cinematical-seven-outrageous-oscar-disqualifications/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a></p>]]></description><category>fahrenheit 911</category><category>Fahrenheit911</category><category>jazz singer</category><category>JazzSinger</category><category>jonny greenwood</category><category>JonnyGreenwood</category><category>michael moore</category><category>MichaelMoore</category><category>there will be blood</category><category>ThereWillBeBlood</category><dc:creator>Eric D. Snider</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 15 Nov 2008 20:32:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title>Watch This: '100 Movie Spoilers in 4 Minutes'</title><link>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/13/watch-this-100-movie-spoilers-in-4-minutes/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/13/watch-this-100-movie-spoilers-in-4-minutes/</guid><comments>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/13/watch-this-100-movie-spoilers-in-4-minutes/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/action-and-adventure/" rel="tag">Action</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/classics/" rel="tag">Classics</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/comedy/" rel="tag">Comedy</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/drama/" rel="tag">Drama</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/sci-fi-and-fantasy/" rel="tag">Sci-Fi &amp; Fantasy</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/thrillers/" rel="tag">Thrillers</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/mystery-and-suspense/" rel="tag">Mystery &amp; Suspense</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/fandom/" rel="tag">Fandom</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/comic-superhero-geek/" rel="tag">Comic/Superhero/Geek</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/remakes-and-sequels/" rel="tag">Remakes and Sequels</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/war/" rel="tag">War</a></p><object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/hN5avIvylDw&amp;hl=en&amp;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/hN5avIvylDw&amp;hl=en&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object><br />"It was all a dream! It was all a dream! It was all probably a coke-induced dream!"<br /><br />My friend pointed me towards this clever YouTube video by <a href="http://ravenstake.com/">the Fine Brothers</a>, in which the duo do exactly what they set out to: reveal one hundred movie endings within four minutes. It's like the logical extension to <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2007/06/01/movie-related-gift-of-the-day-the-spoiler-t-shirt/">that spoiler T-shirt</a> that made the rounds a while back, and while the Meg Ryan streak they demonstrate (you'll see) is telling enough (not to mention the sports movie bits), I could see them pulling pretty much off the same thing with Drew Barrymore -- not that it's their fault, more so the industry's. (Oh, and this video is pretty much exactly what I get for not having seen <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120890/"><em>Wild Things</em></a> by this point in my life.)<br /><br />And for those so inclined as to watch the same thing, only with the brothers naked, <a href="http://www.ravenstake.com/?Show=Sketches&amp;Episode=100-movie-spoilers-in-5-minutes-naked-version">click here</a> and, um, enjoy. (<strong>SPOILER ALERT!</strong> They're not wearing clothes!)<p style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"> </p><p><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/13/watch-this-100-movie-spoilers-in-4-minutes/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/forward/1371267/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/13/watch-this-100-movie-spoilers-in-4-minutes/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a></p>]]></description><category>movie spoiler</category><category>MovieSpoiler</category><category>spoiler</category><category>spoilers</category><category>the fine brothers</category><category>TheFineBrothers</category><dc:creator>William Goss</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 13 Nov 2008 15:45:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title>Leonardo DiCaprio Won't Be 'Akira'</title><link>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/12/leonardo-dicaprio-wont-be-akira/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/12/leonardo-dicaprio-wont-be-akira/</guid><comments>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/12/leonardo-dicaprio-wont-be-akira/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/action-and-adventure/" rel="tag">Action</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/classics/" rel="tag">Classics</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/foreign-language/" rel="tag">Foreign Language</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/sci-fi-and-fantasy/" rel="tag">Sci-Fi &amp; Fantasy</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/thrillers/" rel="tag">Thrillers</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/warner-brothers/" rel="tag">Warner Brothers</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/fandom/" rel="tag">Fandom</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/scripts-and-screenwriting/" rel="tag">Scripts</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/newsstand/" rel="tag">Newsstand</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/comic-superhero-geek/" rel="tag">Comic/Superhero/Geek</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/remakes-and-sequels/" rel="tag">Remakes and Sequels</a></p><img hspace="4" vspace="4" border="1" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.cinematical.com/media/2008/11/leo-di-caprio.jpg" alt="" />It's been two months since we heard anything about the <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000138/">Leonardo DiCaprio</a>-produced <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/02/21/leo-dicaprio-to-bring-akira-to-the-big-screen/"><em>Akira</em></a>. This is a remake that has caused a bit of upset in our comments, as initial reports suggested DiCaprio was <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/02/21/akira-to-star-leo-dicaprio-and-joseph-gordon-levitt/">set to star </a>alongside <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0330687/">Joseph Gordon-Levitt</a>. <br /><br />However, Gordon-Levitt <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/09/11/joseph-gordon-levitt-says-no-to-akira/">denied</a> having any connection to the film, and now DiCaprio has clarified his involvement. In an interview with <a href="http://splashpage.mtv.com/2008/11/10/leonardo-dicaprio-updates-akira-and-ninja-scroll-status-wont-star-in-either-film/">MTV's Splash Page</a>, he denied that he was going to be starring in <em>Akira</em>, nor will he be playing any part in <em>Ninja Scroll</em> (which <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/27/wb-hires-a-writer-for-the-ninja-scroll/">he just optioned</a> a few weeks ago). He made it clear that his only involvement is as producer, via his Appian Way banner.<br /><br />So, where does <em>Akira</em> stand in pre-production? Remember, this was once being fast-tracked for a summer 2009 release, which it's obviously not going to make. But that's because DiCaprio is making sure this is handled right: "We're waiting for the final draft of the script. I'm a big fan of Japanese anime ... I know there a lot of loyal fans out there of the project and die-hard fans, so we're going to try to do the best job we possibly can and we're not going to make the movie until the script is in the right shape." <br /><br />If only big fans could be the producers on <em>every</em> beloved property, no fans would ever lose sleep. Are you slightly reassured, now? And hey, post your Akira dream cast. DiCaprio knows you're out there, and he might just listen.<p style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"> </p><p><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/12/leonardo-dicaprio-wont-be-akira/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/forward/1368257/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/12/leonardo-dicaprio-wont-be-akira/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a></p>]]></description><category>Akira</category><category>Akira remake</category><category>AkiraRemake</category><category>appian way</category><category>AppianWay</category><category>joseph gordon-levitt</category><category>JosephGordon-levitt</category><category>leonardo dicaprio</category><category>LeonardoDicaprio</category><category>ninja scroll</category><category>NinjaScroll</category><dc:creator>Elisabeth Rappe</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 12 Nov 2008 08:02:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title>J. Michael Straczynski Talks 'The Forbidden Planet'</title><link>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/06/j-michael-straczynski-talks-the-forbidden-planet/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/06/j-michael-straczynski-talks-the-forbidden-planet/</guid><comments>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/06/j-michael-straczynski-talks-the-forbidden-planet/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/action-and-adventure/" rel="tag">Action</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/classics/" rel="tag">Classics</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/sci-fi-and-fantasy/" rel="tag">Sci-Fi &amp; Fantasy</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/thrillers/" rel="tag">Thrillers</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/warner-brothers/" rel="tag">Warner Brothers</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/rumormonger/" rel="tag">RumorMonger</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/fandom/" rel="tag">Fandom</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/scripts-and-screenwriting/" rel="tag">Scripts</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/newsstand/" rel="tag">Newsstand</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/remakes-and-sequels/" rel="tag">Remakes and Sequels</a></p><img align="right" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.cinematical.com/media/2008/11/forplandvd.jpg" />The remake of <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/03/commence-incredulity-forbidden-planet-remake-is-coming/#comments"><em>The Forbidden Planet</em></a> has danced around Hollywood for years, with various big names like James Cameron dropping in and out of the project. Now it's finally moving forward at Warner Bros, with determined producer <a href="http://us.imdb.com/name/nm0005428/">Joel Silver</a> at the production helm, and the ever-popular <a href="http://us.imdb.com/name/nm0833089/">J. Michael Straczynski</a> penning the script.  Still, it was news that wasn't welcome to several of our readers, which is understandable. It's a sci-fi classic, and beloved by many.<br /><br />Well, this might ease your fears a little bit. The gang over at <a href="http://www.aintitcool.com/node/38991">Ain't It Cool News</a> snagged some exclusive details. Apparently, Straczynski's script will be more of a continuation, or a companion piece, than an actual remake.  It's possible the new movie retcons the story a bit, and leaves Altair 4 intact and alive.  The beloved Robby the Robot <em>will</em> be in it, and the movie will be "an enormous, giant, retro sci-fi movie ... nothing sleek or 'chromy'" in its visuals.   <br /><br />If you were a <em>Babylon 5</em> fan, you know Straczynski's love for the original film runs as deep as anyone else's. It sounds like he's trying to do right by the story, and yet give fans a little something new. If it's a movie that <em>continues</em> the nightmares of the original, I think that could be pretty darn cool, and a nice break from the reboots and outright remakes that are taking over Hollywood.  But, let's turn it over to you <em>Planet</em> fans in the comments, and see if this softens the blow, or just rubs salt in the wound.<br /><p style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"> </p><p><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/06/j-michael-straczynski-talks-the-forbidden-planet/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/forward/1364801/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/06/j-michael-straczynski-talks-the-forbidden-planet/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a></p>]]></description><category>j. michael straczynski</category><category>J.MichaelStraczynski</category><category>Joel Silver</category><category>JoelSilver</category><category>The Forbidden Planet</category><category>TheForbiddenPlanet</category><category>Warner Bros</category><category>WarnerBros</category><dc:creator>Elisabeth Rappe</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 20:15:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title>The Gods and Titans Are Being Cast</title><link>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/06/the-gods-and-titans-are-being-cast/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/06/the-gods-and-titans-are-being-cast/</guid><comments>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/06/the-gods-and-titans-are-being-cast/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/action-and-adventure/" rel="tag">Action</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/classics/" rel="tag">Classics</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/independent/" rel="tag">Independent</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/sci-fi-and-fantasy/" rel="tag">Sci-Fi &amp; Fantasy</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/casting/" rel="tag">Casting</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/warner-brothers/" rel="tag">Warner Brothers</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/newsstand/" rel="tag">Newsstand</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/remakes-and-sequels/" rel="tag">Remakes and Sequels</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/war/" rel="tag">War</a></p><img hspace="4" border="1" align="right" vspace="4" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.cinematical.com/media/2008/11/henry-cavill.jpg" />There's <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/06/29/warring-tentpoles-gods-vs-titans/">two Greek epics racing to production</a> as we speak -- Relativity Media's <em>War of the Gods</em>, directed by <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0802248/">Tarsem Singh</a>, and<a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0504642/"> Louis Leterrier's</a> <em>Clash of the Titans </em>for Warner Bros. Both are looking to fill the muscle-and-sandal void left by <em>300</em>, and plan to employ the stylish green-screen effects that made <em>300 </em>so darn pretty to look at, and cheap to make.<br /><br />And it looks like they'll be borrowing something else from <em>300</em> -- manly eye candy. According to <a href="http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117995318.html?categoryid=13&amp;cs=1"><em>Variety</em></a>, both films are in negotiations for their lead actors. <em>War of the Gods</em> is looking to cast <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0147147/">Henry Cavill</a> as Theseus, legendary king of Athens. Cavill is best known as the rakish Charles Brandon on Showtime's <em>The Tudors</em>, and as Albert Mondego in <em>The Count of Monte Cristo</em>.  That's him on the right. He's ridiculously handsome, and thus an ideal candidate for a mythic Greek.<br /><br />Meanwhile, the increasingly in-demand <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0941777/">Sam Worthington</a> is in talks to play Perseus in <em>Clash of the Titans</em>. By now, Warner Bros has undoubtedly seen him in action in <em>Terminator: Salvation</em> so they'll know if he's the right man to take on Medusa. Again, he's not a bad looking fellow, and should look good in bronze and leather.  Incidentally, both he and Cavill were once in the running to play James Bond. <br /><br />Both films are expected to start production in late winter or early spring, so this will be the first of many casting announcements.  I wonder if both films are doomed to move in sync, lumped together in the trades until the day they hit theaters.<p style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"> </p><p><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/06/the-gods-and-titans-are-being-cast/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/forward/1363817/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/06/the-gods-and-titans-are-being-cast/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a></p>]]></description><category>Clash of the Titans</category><category>ClashOfTheTitans</category><category>Henry Cavill</category><category>HenryCavill</category><category>louis leterrier</category><category>LouisLeterrier</category><category>Perseus</category><category>relativity media</category><category>RelativityMedia</category><category>Sam Worthington</category><category>SamWorthington</category><category>tarsem singh</category><category>TarsemSingh</category><category>Theseus</category><category>War of the Gods</category><category>Warner Bros</category><category>WarnerBros</category><category>WarOfTheGods</category><dc:creator>Elisabeth Rappe</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 19:32:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title>John Boorman Directing Animated 'Wizard of Oz'... Wait, What?</title><link>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/06/john-boorman-directing-animated-wizard-of-oz-wait-what/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/06/john-boorman-directing-animated-wizard-of-oz-wait-what/</guid><comments>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/06/john-boorman-directing-animated-wizard-of-oz-wait-what/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/Animation/" rel="tag">Animation</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/classics/" rel="tag">Classics</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/new-releases/" rel="tag">New Releases</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/family-films/" rel="tag">Family Films</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/newsstand/" rel="tag">Newsstand</a></p><img hspace="4" border="1" align="right" vspace="4" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.cinematical.com/media/2008/11/wizardofoz.jpg" />This was an is-it-April Fool's-Day moment for me this afternoon. First of all, I thought -- foolishly, I realize -- that we were safe from another straight-up adaptation of <em>The Wizard of Oz</em>. (I was open to the possibility of parodies, modernizations, rock musicals, etc.) This is a story that much of the industrialized world literally knows by heart. Can you really tell it these days to anyone but the littlest kids without some sort of wink or angle?<br /><br />So needless to say I wasn't expecting the announcement that we'd be getting a full-on computer-animated <em>Wizard of Oz</em> in the summer of 2010. And I <em>certainly </em>wasn't expecting the man responsible to be <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000958/">John Boorman</a>, who hasn't made a Hollywood film since the 80s. But, uh... <a href="http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117995323.html?categoryid=13&amp;cs=1&amp;nid=2564">It's coming</a>, pitched not as a remake of the famous film, but as another adaptation of the original novel by L. Frank Baum. It won't be a musical, which might be tough to imagine for people raised on the 1939 movie, but which isn't too surprising: a <em>musical</em> remake would probably be painting itself into a corner.<br /><br />Boorman, for the uninitiated, is the legendary director of <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0068473/"><em>Deliverance</em></a> and <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082348/"><em>Excalibur</em></a>. More recently, <em><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0236784/">The Tailor of Panama</a> </em>was excellent. He's never made an animated film, and I think he must have some sort of specific vision for this one. Otherwise it's a very strange late career move.<p style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"> </p><p><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/06/john-boorman-directing-animated-wizard-of-oz-wait-what/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/forward/1363856/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/06/john-boorman-directing-animated-wizard-of-oz-wait-what/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a></p>]]></description><category>featured</category><category>john boorman</category><category>JohnBoorman</category><category>wizard of oz</category><category>WizardOfOz</category><dc:creator>Eugene Novikov</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 12:03:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title>Discuss: What Film Best Captures the American Spirit?</title><link>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/05/discuss-what-film-best-captures-the-american-spirit/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/05/discuss-what-film-best-captures-the-american-spirit/</guid><comments>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/05/discuss-what-film-best-captures-the-american-spirit/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/classics/" rel="tag">Classics</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/drama/" rel="tag">Drama</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/fandom/" rel="tag">Fandom</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/politics/" rel="tag">Politics</a></p><div align="center"><img hspace="4" border="1" vspace="4" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.cinematical.com/media/2008/11/to-kill-a-mockingbird-full[1].jpg" /><br /><br />
<div align="left">The madness of Election Day is over -- and I certainly hope you have your <em>I Voted!</em> sticker to prove you were there! No matter what your politics, you can't deny that we saw one of the most exciting and historic elections in history. And whether today finds you ecstatic or despondent in our next President, you have to appreciate what we saw happen in 2008, and what a fantastic country we live in. We have the right to vote our conscience! We have the right to speak our minds without fear of repercussions! We live in a country where anyone can become president, where men and women are created equal, and we all pursue happiness with the freedom and means to do so. We can agree on that whether we're Democrat or Republican. And you know what? At the end of the day, whatever way you vote, we're not <em>that</em> different. And what better way to illustrate that than to have a nice chat about movies? Because whoever your candidate and whatever your affiliation and beliefs, you're here on <em>Cinematical</em> because you love movies. <br /><br />With that unifying spirit in mind, I'd like to know what films you think best capture the American spirit. Are they John Wayne westerns? The feel good films of Frank Capra? The sacrifices of <em>Saving Private Ryan</em>? Maybe it's less obvious or more personal -- for you, there's no one more American than John McClane, or nothing that says family values more than <em>E.T.</em> <br /><br />And while <em>I</em> would be quite tempted to pick <em>E.T.</em>, I have to go with the one pictured above: <em>To Kill a Mockingbird. </em>To me, there's no one or nothing that embodies the promise of America more than Atticus Finch. Everything you need to know and want to believe of our country is embodied in his quiet fight for justice, and the deep love he has for his young family. It doesn't get any better than that. But of course, that's my opinion -- and it's time for you to have yours.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /></div>
</div><p style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"> </p><p><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/05/discuss-what-film-best-captures-the-american-spirit/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/forward/1362580/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/05/discuss-what-film-best-captures-the-american-spirit/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a></p>]]></description><category>2008 election</category><category>2008Election</category><category>American films</category><category>American spirit</category><category>AmericanFilms</category><category>AmericanSpirit</category><category>To Kill a Mockingbird</category><category>ToKillAMockingbird</category><dc:creator>Elisabeth Rappe</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 14:03:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title>Commence Incredulity: 'Forbidden Planet' Remake is Coming</title><link>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/03/commence-incredulity-forbidden-planet-remake-is-coming/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/03/commence-incredulity-forbidden-planet-remake-is-coming/</guid><comments>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/03/commence-incredulity-forbidden-planet-remake-is-coming/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/classics/" rel="tag">Classics</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/sci-fi-and-fantasy/" rel="tag">Sci-Fi &amp; Fantasy</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/warner-brothers/" rel="tag">Warner Brothers</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/remakes-and-sequels/" rel="tag">Remakes and Sequels</a></p><img hspace="4" border="1" align="right" vspace="4" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.cinematical.com/media/2008/11/forplandvd.jpg" />OK, get it out of your system right now, before we begin. All together now: "<em>Holy crap I can't believe they're remaking an unquestionable classic like XXXX and I'm completely certain that Hollywood has officially run out of new ideas. Argh!</em>" Feel better? Good, because an unquestionable classic like <a href="http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0049223/"><strong><em>Forbidden Planet</em></strong></a> is officially being remade.<br /><br />According to <a href="http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/film/news/e3ib356467890c70c66f5453b8ea7d5fc00">The Hollywood Reporter</a>, Warner Bros. and producer Joel Silver are moving forward on their new version of the 1956 sci-fi favorite, which itself was (loosely) based on Shakespeare's <em>The Tempest</em>, so that makes it sort of a remake in its own right. From THR: The original "told the tale of an expedition sent from Earth to check on a colony of scientists on a far-off planet. They find two members, a man who has found alien technology that doubled his intellect, Dr. Morbius, and his daughter, both of whom have managed to survive an unseen monster roaming the planet." And yes, this is the one with Robbie the Robot. Classic character to be sure, but dare I say one that is ripe for a "re-imagining"?<br /><br />The new version will spring from the word processor of <a href="http://us.imdb.com/name/nm0833089/">J. Michael Straczynski</a>, a veteran sci-fi creator who recently went in a new direction with his screenplay for Clint Eastwood's <em>Changeling</em>. And while I'd definitely agree that <em>Forbidden Planet</em> is one of the true-blue classics of the sci-fi genre, I'd also admit that I'm pretty interested to see where a new version would go. Obviously a lot depends on who Silver and WB tap to direct the remake.<br /><br />And heck, are there many more science fiction classics that haven't been scheduled for a remake? Between <em>War of the Worlds, The Time Machine, I Am Legend, The Invasion, Planet of the Apes, The Day the Earth Stood Still</em>, and <em>When Worlds Collide</em> ... has anyone optioned <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/25/discuss-stanley-kubricks-2001-a-space-odyssey/">this one</a> for a remake yet?<p style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"> </p><p><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/03/commence-incredulity-forbidden-planet-remake-is-coming/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/forward/1360152/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/03/commence-incredulity-forbidden-planet-remake-is-coming/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a></p>]]></description><category>forbidden planet</category><category>ForbiddenPlanet</category><category>J. Michael Straczynski</category><category>J.MichaelStraczynski</category><category>joel silver</category><category>JoelSilver</category><category>remake</category><category>warner bros</category><category>WarnerBros</category><dc:creator>Scott Weinberg</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 03 Nov 2008 18:46:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title>Not Again, You Damn Dirty Apes!</title><link>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/03/not-again-you-damn-dirty-apes/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/03/not-again-you-damn-dirty-apes/</guid><comments>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/03/not-again-you-damn-dirty-apes/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/action-and-adventure/" rel="tag">Action</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/classics/" rel="tag">Classics</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/sci-fi-and-fantasy/" rel="tag">Sci-Fi &amp; Fantasy</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/rumormonger/" rel="tag">RumorMonger</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/fandom/" rel="tag">Fandom</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/scripts-and-screenwriting/" rel="tag">Scripts</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/20th-century-fox/" rel="tag">20th Century Fox</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/newsstand/" rel="tag">Newsstand</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/remakes-and-sequels/" rel="tag">Remakes and Sequels</a></p><img hspace="4" border="1" align="right" vspace="4" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.cinematical.com/media/2008/11/planet-of-the-apes-6.jpg"  alt="" />In a world where every franchise is getting "rebooted," it should come as no surprise that someone in Hollywood wants to revisit <em>Planet of the Apes</em>.   After all, Tim Burton's attempt was unsatisfying, and what do you do when your remake failed to launch a franchise?  <br /><br />Devin Faraci of <a href="http://chud.com/articles/articles/16881/1/IS-PLANET-OF-THE-APES-GETTING-REBOOTED-AGAIN/Page1.html">CHUD </a>has the scoop on a <em>Apes</em> script that has been kicking around Fox for the last year.  It's not a sequel of Burton's film, and it's not another remake of  the original <em>Planet, </em>but it is a remake all the same: <em>Conquest of the Planet of the Apes</em>.  It will, thankfully, have a smoother title: <em>Genesis: Apes.  </em><br /><br />For those unfamiliar with the original, <em>Conquest </em>is a prequel.  It's the story of Caesar, <br />the first talking ape, who led the revolution that caused apes to be the masters of human savages.   And honestly, the new script is pretty intriguing and edgy.  Set in modern day, Caesar is a genetic experiment gone cuddly.  When the God-playing scientist discovers his intelligence and talent for speech, he takes him home to his wife, and they raise him as their child.  Things go well until Caesar sees his mother attacked, and when he kills her attacker, he lands at an Ape Conservatory, where he's tortured by humans and rejected by his own kind.  But he slowly wins over the latter, and you can guess where it goes from there.   It's worth noting that Faraci really digs the politically-charged script, and argues that it's a perfect way to restart the series. <br /><br />Frankly, <em>Apes</em> is a series I never warmed to -- and there's too many sci-fi stories I'd <em>love</em> to see on the big screen before bringing back an old one. But  I don't want to be answering for the rest of you. Do you want an <em>Apes</em> origin story, and a whole new franchise?<p style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"> </p><p><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/03/not-again-you-damn-dirty-apes/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/forward/1359910/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/03/not-again-you-damn-dirty-apes/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a></p>]]></description><category>20th Century Fox</category><category>20thCenturyFox</category><category>Amanda Silver</category><category>AmandaSilver</category><category>Conquest of the Planet of the Apes</category><category>ConquestOfThePlanetOfTheApes</category><category>Fox Studios</category><category>FoxStudios</category><category>Genesis Ape</category><category>GenesisApe</category><category>Planet of the Apes</category><category>PlanetOfTheApes</category><category>Rick Jaffa</category><category>RickJaffa</category><category>Tim Burton</category><category>TimBurton</category><dc:creator>Elisabeth Rappe</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 03 Nov 2008 14:03:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title>'Tintin' Getting Only Two Films?</title><link>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/01/tintin-getting-only-two-films/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/01/tintin-getting-only-two-films/</guid><comments>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/01/tintin-getting-only-two-films/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/classics/" rel="tag">Classics</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/foreign-language/" rel="tag">Foreign Language</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/sci-fi-and-fantasy/" rel="tag">Sci-Fi &amp; Fantasy</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/deals/" rel="tag">Deals</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/paramount/" rel="tag">Paramount</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/sony/" rel="tag">Sony</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/universal/" rel="tag">Universal</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/celebrities-and-controversy/" rel="tag">Celebrities and Controversy</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/distribution/" rel="tag">Distribution</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/family-films/" rel="tag">Family Films</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/diy-filmmaking/" rel="tag">DIY/Filmmaking</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/newsstand/" rel="tag">Newsstand</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/dreamworks/" rel="tag">Dreamworks</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/steven-spielberg/" rel="tag">Steven Spielberg</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/peter-jackson/" rel="tag">Peter Jackson</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/movie-marketing/" rel="tag">Movie Marketing</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/comic-superhero-geek/" rel="tag">Comic/Superhero/Geek</a></p><div align="left"><img align="right" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.cinematical.com/media/2008/08/tintin1.jpg" />You might remember that at the end of September, word came that <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1032473/">Steven Spielberg </a>was having trouble <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/09/22/geek-daily-the-green-hornet-shapes-up-and-tintin-stumbles/">financing his <em>Tintin</em> trilogy</a>.  Universal Studios had passed on the film, leaving Spielberg and co-director <a href="http://www.moviefone.com/celebrity/peter-jackson/1500653/main">Peter Jackson</a> without a major backer. According to <a href="http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117995106.html?categoryid=13&amp;cs=1"><em>Variety</em></a>, they've found one. Sony and Paramount Studios are in talks to co-finance the franchise, with Sony handling the foreign release, and Paramount overseeing the domestic. DreamWorks will have no association with the film whatsoever.<br /><br />The news that <em>Tintin</em> will still go ahead is good for fans -- but as always, there's a catch. Under the deal currently being negotiated, it looks as though there will only be two <em>Tintin</em> films. Considering that a director was never assigned, or a script written, this may have been decided long before the financing fell through.  Perhaps a third film hinges on the success of the first two installments, and its a project Spielberg and Jackson plan to return to. It's going to be a hard sell here in North America, where Tintin is largely unknown, and I wouldn't be surprised if Sony and Paramount are hedging their bets a little. <br /><br />It's also unclear when this film will ever start shooting. When the deal fell apart with Universal, Spielberg lost the participation of his lead actor, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1032473/">Thomas Sangster</a>.  They're going to need another Tintin -- and fast, as the first film is still expected to make its 2010 release.  <br /><br />This is a passion project for Spielberg and Jackson -- and at this point, it's going to take every ounce of that enthusiasm to ever get a motion-capture <em>Tintin </em>on the big screen. <br /><br /><br /></div><p style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"> </p><p><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/01/tintin-getting-only-two-films/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/forward/1359234/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/11/01/tintin-getting-only-two-films/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a></p>]]></description><category>DreamWorks</category><category>Paramount</category><category>Peter Jackson</category><category>PeterJackson</category><category>Sony</category><category>Steven Spielberg</category><category>StevenSpielberg</category><category>Tintin</category><category>Universal</category><dc:creator>Elisabeth Rappe</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 01 Nov 2008 10:02:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title>Discuss: To Be Continued ... Really?</title><link>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/27/discuss-to-be-continued-really/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/27/discuss-to-be-continued-really/</guid><comments>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/27/discuss-to-be-continued-really/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/action-and-adventure/" rel="tag">Action</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/classics/" rel="tag">Classics</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/horror/" rel="tag">Horror</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/sci-fi-and-fantasy/" rel="tag">Sci-Fi &amp; Fantasy</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/thrillers/" rel="tag">Thrillers</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/deals/" rel="tag">Deals</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/rumormonger/" rel="tag">RumorMonger</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/fandom/" rel="tag">Fandom</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/comic-superhero-geek/" rel="tag">Comic/Superhero/Geek</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/remakes-and-sequels/" rel="tag">Remakes and Sequels</a></p><img hspace="4" vspace="4" border="1" align="right" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.cinematical.com/media/2008/10/cine-gbusters-seq.jpg" />Over on his <em>Times Online</em> pop culture blog, <a href="http://timesonline.typepad.com/blockbuster_buzz/2008/10/the-top-10-sill.html">Michael Moran</a> confronted what he considered to be the ten silliest sequel rumors at the moment. His list runs the gamut from projects we've been hearing about for ages -- <em><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0089218/">The Goonies</a> 2</em> and <em><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0087332/">Ghostbusters</a> 3</em> -- to ones that never crossed my radar in the slightest (dude, they should totally bring back Katherine Heigl if they go through with <em><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0105690/">Under Siege</a> 3</em>).<br /><br />For that matter, what's <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0450345/"><em>The Wicker Man</em></a> without a shouting Nic Cage? Or an <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0480249/"><em>I Am Legend</em></a> prequel in which Will Smith finds himself confronted with hardship after hardship until we end up where the first one began? (In that case, simply remake <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0454921/"><em>The Pursuit of Happyness</em></a>, but with a deadly virus replacing crippling poverty.) Speaking of post-apocalyptic pandemics, I do count myself among those pleasantly surprised by how much <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0463854/"><em>28 Weeks Later</em></a> worked, so I'm more reluctant than ever to write off a third one. (As a bigger fan of <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1060277/"><em>Cloverfield</em></a>, though, I think that they're just pushing their luck with any sort of follow-up.)<br /><br />Thusly, I ask which, if any, of these sequel/prequel prospects are you guys and gals excited for? And which ones seem downright ludicrous to consider *cough*<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083658/"><em>Blade Runner</em></a>*cough*<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0409459/"><em>Watchmen</em></a>*cough*<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0416449/"><em>300</em></a>*cough*? (And while I'm at it, anyone else ready to throw in the towel on <em>Pirates of the Caribbean</em>? Oh, wait, we've already had <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/09/25/captain-jack-officially-returns-and-signs-on-for-tonto-too/">this talk</a>...)<p style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"> </p><p><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/27/discuss-to-be-continued-really/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/forward/1354267/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/27/discuss-to-be-continued-really/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a></p>]]></description><category>blade runner</category><category>blade runner 2</category><category>BladeRunner</category><category>BladeRunner2</category><category>cloverfield</category><category>cloverfield 2</category><category>Cloverfield2</category><category>ghostbusters</category><category>ghostbusters 3</category><category>Ghostbusters3</category><category>goonies</category><category>goonies 2</category><category>goonies sequel</category><category>Goonies2</category><category>GooniesSequel</category><category>watchmen</category><category>wicker man</category><category>WickerMan</category><dc:creator>William Goss</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 27 Oct 2008 16:02:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title>Discuss: Stanley Kubrick's '2001: A Space Odyssey'</title><link>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/25/discuss-stanley-kubricks-2001-a-space-odyssey/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/25/discuss-stanley-kubricks-2001-a-space-odyssey/</guid><comments>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/25/discuss-stanley-kubricks-2001-a-space-odyssey/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/classics/" rel="tag">Classics</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/sci-fi-and-fantasy/" rel="tag">Sci-Fi &amp; Fantasy</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/warner-brothers/" rel="tag">Warner Brothers</a></p><img hspace="4" vspace="4" border="1" align="right" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.cinematical.com/media/2008/10/hal9000pic.jpg" />We studied it in high school, which made it amazingly boring. I tried again a few years later, but just couldn't get into it. Saw it on the big screen about ten years ago and finally got what everyone was raving about ... but still the film didn't really "connect" with me in any powerful way. But then a few nights ago, I sat down with my awesome 2-disc special edition of Stanley Kubrick's <a href="http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0062622/"><strong><em>2001: A Space Odyssey</em></strong></a>, and was blown away as if I'd never even heard of it before. Thousands of writers much cleverer than I have devoted a billion words to this very fine film, but after watching it earlier this week, I was struck by how simple the story actually was. I mean, a film is a work of art, and as such each viewer will have their own interpretation of the experience, but if we're talking about the oh-so-confusing and deliciously ambiguous nature of the plot, um, here's what I saw:<br /><br />A. Early man is little more than an animal before a mysterious object appears on their planet and signifies the next step forward: The creation of tools, which immediately leads to the creation of weapons, and then we (awesomely) jump-cut to millions of years later. Our first weapon has evolved into our ultimate weapon: A nuclear arsenal poised ominously in outer space.<br /><br />B. Then we (slowly but very coolly) discover that another mysterious object has been discovered beneath the surface of the moon. When modern man places his hand on the second "monolith," a signal between the moon and Jupiter is opened. Looks like man is officially "ready" for his next step.<p><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/25/discuss-stanley-kubricks-2001-a-space-odyssey/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Discuss: Stanley Kubrick's '2001: A Space Odyssey'</em></a></p><p style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"> </p><p><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/25/discuss-stanley-kubricks-2001-a-space-odyssey/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/forward/1352139/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/25/discuss-stanley-kubricks-2001-a-space-odyssey/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a></p>]]></description><category>2001 a space odyssey</category><category>2001ASpaceOdyssey</category><category>discuss</category><category>featured</category><dc:creator>Scott Weinberg</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 25 Oct 2008 19:02:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title>Box Office: Musical Saws and Glorious Pride</title><link>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/22/box-office-musical-saws-and-glorious-pride/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/22/box-office-musical-saws-and-glorious-pride/</guid><comments>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/22/box-office-musical-saws-and-glorious-pride/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/classics/" rel="tag">Classics</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/drama/" rel="tag">Drama</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/horror/" rel="tag">Horror</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/thrillers/" rel="tag">Thrillers</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/family-films/" rel="tag">Family Films</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/box-office-predictions-1/" rel="tag">Box Office Predictions</a></p>Of last week's four new releases the video game inspired <em>Max Payne</em> took top honors with <em>The Secret Life of Bees </em>and <em>W.</em> taking third and fourth place respectively. <em>Bees</em>, incidentally, had the highest per screen average of the week. <em>Sex Drive</em> took in only $3.6 million, taking ninth for the weekend.<br /><strong><br />1. <em><a href="http://www.moviefone.com/movie/max-payne/32033/main">Max Payne</a>:</em> $17.6 million<br />2. <a href="http://www.moviefone.com/movie/beverly-hills-chihuahua/29987/main"><em>Beverly Hills Chihuahua</em></a>: $11.4 million<br />3<a href="http://www.moviefone.com/movie/the-secret-life-of-bees/32363/main"><em>. The Secret Life of Bees:</em></a> $10.5 million<br />4. <a href="http://www.moviefone.com/movie/w/32645/main"><em>W.:</em></a> $10.5 million<br />5. <a href="http://www.moviefone.com/movie/eagle-eye/30536/main"><em>Eagle Eye: </em></a>$7 million</strong><br /><br />Three new releases and one re-release this week:<br /><em><br /></em><a href="http://www.moviefone.com/movie/high-school-musical-3-senior-year/30942/main"><img hspace="4" vspace="4" border="1" align="right" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.cinematical.com/media/2008/10/hsmusical_boxoffice.jpg" /></a><strong><a href="http://www.moviefone.com/movie/high-school-musical-3-senior-year/30942/main"><em>High School Musical 3: Senior Year</em></a><br />What's It All About: </strong>This third installment of the popular series brings the clean cut musical shenanigans to the big screen. It's senior year, and a group of friends reflect upon their past and future as they prepare for their last Spring musical together.<br /><strong>Why It Might Do Well: </strong>This one comes with a built in fan base and a huge release. Definitely the number one move next week. <br /><strong>Why It Might Not Do Well: </strong>How can you ask that? Have you no soul?<strong><br />Number of Theaters: </strong>3,400<strong><br />Prediction: </strong>$45 million<em><br /></em><p><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/22/box-office-musical-saws-and-glorious-pride/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Box Office: Musical Saws and Glorious Pride</em></a></p><p style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"> </p><p><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/22/box-office-musical-saws-and-glorious-pride/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/forward/1349056/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/22/box-office-musical-saws-and-glorious-pride/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a></p>]]></description><category>Cinema</category><category>Cinematical</category><category>High School Musical 3 Senior Year</category><category>Movies</category><category>Pride and Glory</category><category>PrideAndGlory</category><category>Saw V</category><category>SawV</category><category>Tim Burtons The Nightmare Before Christmas in 3-D</category><category>TimBurtonsTheNightmareBeforeChristmasIn3-d</category><dc:creator>Matt Bradshaw</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 22 Oct 2008 12:03:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title>Spin-ematical: New on DVD for 10/21</title><link>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/21/spin-ematical-new-on-dvd-for-10-21/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/21/spin-ematical-new-on-dvd-for-10-21/</guid><comments>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/21/spin-ematical-new-on-dvd-for-10-21/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/action-and-adventure/" rel="tag">Action</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/Animation/" rel="tag">Animation</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/classics/" rel="tag">Classics</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/drama/" rel="tag">Drama</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/foreign-language/" rel="tag">Foreign Language</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/horror/" rel="tag">Horror</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/independent/" rel="tag">Independent</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/new-on-dvd/" rel="tag">New on DVD</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/home-entertainment/" rel="tag">Home Entertainment</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/indie/" rel="tag">Cinematical Indie</a></p><p><em><img hspace="4" vspace="4" border="1" align="middle" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.cinematical.com/media/2008/10/spinematical-081021.jpg" alt="Incredible Hulk, Flight of the Red Balloon, The Strangers" /></em></p>
<p><em>Above: Incredible Hulk, Flight of the Red Balloon, The Strangers</em></p>
<p><strong><em><a href="http://www.moviefone.com/movie/the-incredible-hulk/26921/main">Incredible Hulk<br /></a></em></strong>"There once was an angry young man..." sounds like a fairy tale, but the rebooted <em>Hulk</em> got a huge leg up with the casting of the intense Edward Norton as the scientist who turns green with rage. This Hulk has narrative problems, but as a straight-ahead action picture it keeps a pretty good beat as it rocks along, and definitely benefits from Norton and Tim Roth as his nemesis; Liv Tyler and William Hurt also star. <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/10/incredible-hulk-but-hows-the-dvd/">Scott examined all the features</a> of the 3-disk Special Edition on DVD; also available in a single-disk DVD edition and on Blu-ray. <strong>Buy it.</strong></p>
<p><strong><em><a href="http://www.moviefone.com/movie/the-flight-of-the-red-balloon-le-voyage/31377/main">Flight of the Red Balloon</a></em></strong><br />Juliette Binoche hires a Taiwanese film student as nanny for her son, and magical moments begin. <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/04/04/review-flight-of-the-red-balloon/">Jeffrey M. Anderson said</a> Binoche was "simply miraculous" and that the film itself "<span style="font-style: normal;">could be one of those magic moments that people could appreciate if only they would take the time." Now's the time, people! <a href="http://www.moviefone.com/celebrity/hou-hsiao-hsien/1856352/main">Hou Hsiao-Hsien</a> is an amazing filmmaker and this a perfect alternative to <em>Hulk's </em>smash/bang. Available on what looks like a bare-bones DVD. <strong>Rent it.</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-style: normal;"><strong><em><a href="http://www.moviefone.com/movie/the-strangers/26543/main">The Strangers<br /></a></em></strong>It's Liv Tyler week! She and Scott Speedman play a troubled couple besieged by masked strangers in their own home. Writer/director Bryan Bertino takes a commendably low-key approach to their night of terror, but there were far too many cheap scares and telegraphed thrills for me. Eugene Novikov was <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/05/30/review-the-strangers/">much more impressed</a>, however, so decide for yourself. Available on DVD and Blu-ray; both include R-rated and unrated versions. The unrated cut includes about five minutes of additional footage, mostly near the climax. <strong>Rent it.</strong></span></p>
<p><span style="font-style: normal;"><em>After the jump: Indies on DVD (Go-Getter! B-Ballers! Ben Stein!), Blu-ray (James Bond!), and Collector's Corner (Looney Tunes! Gangsters!).<br /></em></span></p><p><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/21/spin-ematical-new-on-dvd-for-10-21/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Spin-ematical: New on DVD for 10/21</em></a></p><p style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"> </p><p><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/21/spin-ematical-new-on-dvd-for-10-21/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/forward/1348345/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/21/spin-ematical-new-on-dvd-for-10-21/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a></p>]]></description><category>featured</category><category>flight of the red balloon</category><category>FlightOfTheRedBalloon</category><category>incredible hulk</category><category>IncredibleHulk</category><category>the strangers</category><category>TheStrangers</category><dc:creator>Peter Martin</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2008 11:02:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title>The Bleak Ending of 'Watchmen' Changed? </title><link>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/20/the-bleak-ending-of-watchmen-changed/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/20/the-bleak-ending-of-watchmen-changed/</guid><comments>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/20/the-bleak-ending-of-watchmen-changed/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/action-and-adventure/" rel="tag">Action</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/classics/" rel="tag">Classics</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/sci-fi-and-fantasy/" rel="tag">Sci-Fi &amp; Fantasy</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/mystery-and-suspense/" rel="tag">Mystery &amp; Suspense</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/warner-brothers/" rel="tag">Warner Brothers</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/rumormonger/" rel="tag">RumorMonger</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/fandom/" rel="tag">Fandom</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/comic-superhero-geek/" rel="tag">Comic/Superhero/Geek</a></p><img hspace="4" vspace="4" border="1" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.cinematical.com/media/2008/10/watchmen-zack-snyder-update-big.jpg" alt="" /><strong>Warning: This post contains heavy spoilers. Really big ones. Those who haven't read <em>Watchmen</em> and want to remain unspoiled, skip this post altogether. </strong><br /><br />Put this firmly into the "might not be true" category of your brains, and then take it with an additional grain of salt. I hesitate to even spread this further because it <em>is</em> unverified, but I think it's worth discussing. And hey, maybe someone who caught the movie might weigh in.<br /><br />There was a test screening of <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0409459/"><em>Watchmen</em></a> last week. And according to the gang at <a href="http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/10/19/watchmen-ending-changed/">/film</a>, the buzz is building that the ending of the graphic novel <em>has </em>been changed in the movie. Devotees of the book remember that Ozymandias engineers a giant alien squid in order to destroy New York, an event so horrifying that it stops the world in its tracks, and deflects a nuclear war with Russia. According to a few members of the test audience, the faux-alien is nowhere to be found. Instead, Ozymandias' plot involves a machine he builds with Dr. Manhattan which mimics Manhattan's powers, and sets off atomic-bomb like attacks all over the world. <br /><br />It's very perplexing, as there have been numerous reports that the ending remained unchanged. Patrick Wilson <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/07/17/patrick-wilson-says-the-ending-of-watchmen-remains-true/">laughed off</a> reports, as have numerous cast members. An <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/05/16/an-amazing-and-unofficial-watchmen-set-report/">unofficial set report</a> confirmed the squid's appearance. <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0811583/">Zack Snyder</a> insisted it was left intact, despite that it was an unorthodox one for a movie. So many reports confirming the squid <em>would</em> tip the balance against the test audiences.<br /><br />However, in the interest of fairness to those movie-going spies, <a href="http://www.collider.com/entertainment/interviews/article.asp?aid=9549&amp;tcid=1">Collider's</a> recent interview with Kevin Smith suggests the whispers might be true after all. "It's a little different. While it is a slight departure, it actually makes sense in the context of the story because it brings the characters back into it. It kind of makes the movie more about them by the end of it because of the switch they made. I would never say that Alan Moore f***ed it up or something. I love the ending of the <em>Watchmen</em> comic book, but I think this ending works just as well."<br /><br /><div class="postgallery"><p><strong>Gallery: <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/photos/watchmen-1/">Watchmen</a></strong></p><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/photos/watchmen-1/1151154/"><img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.cinematical.com/media/2008/11/watchmenror_thumbnail.jpg" alt="" title="" /></a><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/photos/watchmen-1/1151152/"><img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.cinematical.com/media/2008/11/watchmen_manhattan_thumbnail.jpg" alt="" title="" /></a><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/photos/watchmen-1/1151151/"><img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.cinematical.com/media/2008/11/watbn_ozymandias_3_thumbnail.jpg" alt="" title="" /></a><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/photos/watchmen-1/1151150/"><img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.cinematical.com/media/2008/11/watchmenniteowl_thumbnail.jpg" alt="" title="" /></a><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/photos/watchmen-1/1151149/"><img src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.cinematical.com/media/2008/11/watchmen_comedian_thumbnail.jpg" alt="" title="" /></a></div><p><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/20/the-bleak-ending-of-watchmen-changed/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>The Bleak Ending of 'Watchmen' Changed? </em></a></p><p style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"> </p><p><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/20/the-bleak-ending-of-watchmen-changed/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/forward/1347083/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/20/the-bleak-ending-of-watchmen-changed/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a></p>]]></description><category>Kevin Smith</category><category>KevinSmith</category><category>Patrick Wilson</category><category>PatrickWilson</category><category>Watchmen</category><category>Watchmen ending</category><category>WatchmenEnding</category><category>Zack Snyder</category><category>ZackSnyder</category><dc:creator>Elisabeth Rappe</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 20 Oct 2008 11:10:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title>Brad Pitt Takes 'The Odyssey' to Outer Space!</title><link>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/17/brad-pitt-takes-the-odyssey-to-outer-space/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/17/brad-pitt-takes-the-odyssey-to-outer-space/</guid><comments>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/17/brad-pitt-takes-the-odyssey-to-outer-space/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/classics/" rel="tag">Classics</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/sci-fi-and-fantasy/" rel="tag">Sci-Fi &amp; Fantasy</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/casting/" rel="tag">Casting</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/deals/" rel="tag">Deals</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/warner-brothers/" rel="tag">Warner Brothers</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/scripts-and-screenwriting/" rel="tag">Scripts</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/brad-pitt/" rel="tag">Brad Pitt</a></p><img hspace="4" vspace="4" border="1" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.cinematical.com/media/2008/10/pitt101608.jpg"  alt="" />It looks like both Warner Bros. and <a href="http://www.moviefone.com/celebrity/brad-pitt/1822652/main">Brad Pitt</a> can't get enough of Homer.<br /><br />First, we got <em>The Iliad</em> morphed into <em>Troy</em>, with Pitt playing Achilles. Now <a href="http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117994174.html?categoryid=13&amp;cs=1&amp;nid=2562"><em>Variety</em></a> reports that Pitt is teaming up with Warner Bros. once again to make Homer's next epic, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Odyssey"><em>The Odyssey</em></a> -- with <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0004306/">George Miller</a> adapting. Now you might wonder how Pitt can continue on when the story moves over to Sean Bean's Odysseus. First -- Pitt is on-board as producer. Second -- the hope is that Pitt will take over the role. (I guess Boromir isn't a big enough draw.)<br /><br />But that's not all they're doing to jazz the story up -- their "intention is to transfer the tale to a futuristic setting in outer space." Um, <em>2001</em>, anyone? If things work out, the plan is to get Miller to also direct the film, with Pitt journeying through space in whatever fashion Miller dreams up.<br /><br />As someone who was quite disappointed with the first attempt in 2004, this just seems like grasping at straws -- stretching for a better reception while picking up on classic motifs like Kubrick. That being said, I adore Miller's work on <em>Twilight Zone</em> (I still get creeped out looking at plane wings) and would be interested to see what he can bring to the project. Thoughts?<p style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"> </p><p><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/17/brad-pitt-takes-the-odyssey-to-outer-space/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/forward/1344904/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/17/brad-pitt-takes-the-odyssey-to-outer-space/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a></p>]]></description><category>Brad Pitt</category><category>BradPitt</category><category>Cinematical</category><category>George Miller</category><category>GeorgeMiller</category><category>Odysseus</category><category>The Iliad</category><category>The Odyssey</category><category>TheIliad</category><category>TheOdyssey</category><category>Troy</category><dc:creator>Monika Bartyzel</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 17 Oct 2008 09:03:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title>Geek Daily: Goonies DO Say Die, 'Sleeper' Has a Writer, and More</title><link>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/16/geek-daily-goonies-do-say-die-sleeper-has-a-writer-and-more/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/16/geek-daily-goonies-do-say-die-sleeper-has-a-writer-and-more/</guid><comments>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/16/geek-daily-goonies-do-say-die-sleeper-has-a-writer-and-more/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/action-and-adventure/" rel="tag">Action</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/classics/" rel="tag">Classics</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/deals/" rel="tag">Deals</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/lionsgate-films/" rel="tag">Lionsgate Films</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/warner-brothers/" rel="tag">Warner Brothers</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/scripts-and-screenwriting/" rel="tag">Scripts</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/newsstand/" rel="tag">Newsstand</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/comic-superhero-geek/" rel="tag">Comic/Superhero/Geek</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/remakes-and-sequels/" rel="tag">Remakes and Sequels</a></p><div align="center"><img hspace="4" vspace="4" border="1" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.cinematical.com/media/2008/10/goonies.jpg" /><br /><br />
<div align="left">There's not much in the land of geekdom that can successfully follow up <em>Star Trek</em>, but here's a round-up of what is fit to know.<br /><br />
<ul>
    <li>Richard Donner tells <a href="http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117994074.html?categoryid=3280&amp;cs=1&amp;nid=2564"><em>Variety </em></a> that a sequel to <em>The Goonies</em> nearly happened -- but the project is now as dead as a doornail. "We tried really hard, and Steven (Spielberg) said, 'Let's do it.' We had a lot of young writers submit work, but it just didn't seem to call for it." Thank all that is holy. If you're feeling nostalgic, check out the link to the full article, as there's some funny behind-the-scenes stories, particularly about Josh Brolin.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
    <li><a href="http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117994088.html?categoryid=13&amp;cs=1"><em>Variety</em></a> also reports that Brad Ingelsby is writing <a style="" href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/08/19/tom-cruise-wants-to-be-a-sleeper-with-sam-raimi/"><em>Sleeper</em></a>, Sam Raimi's bigscreen adaptation of the DC/Wildstorm comic. I assume for the time being Tom Cruise still wants to star, and get in on this whole comic book thing. </li>
</ul>
<ul>
    <li>Yet another poster for <em>The Spirit</em> has been released, and this time it's popped over at <a href="http://www.badtaste.it/badposter/the_spirit/?picture_id=1200">Bad Taste</a>. </li>
</ul>
<ul>
    <li><a href="http://www.moviehole.net/200816107-world-of-warcraft-movie-update">Moviehole</a> reports that the <em>World of Warcraft</em> movie is still going forward, and a script is being written -- but no one can say anything more for fear of being shot. <br /></li>
</ul>
<ul>
    <li><a href="http://toynewsi.com/index.php?itemid=13567">Playmates </a>drops a few hints on their upcoming <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0438488/"><em>Terminator: Salvation</em></a> figures. The "Terminator T-600 Voice 'n' Vision Skull" sounds rather amusing.</li>
</ul>
</div>
</div><p style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"> </p><p><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/16/geek-daily-goonies-do-say-die-sleeper-has-a-writer-and-more/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/forward/1343927/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/16/geek-daily-goonies-do-say-die-sleeper-has-a-writer-and-more/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a></p>]]></description><category>Lionsgate</category><category>Richard Donner</category><category>RichardDonner</category><category>Sam Raimi</category><category>SamRaimi</category><category>Sleeper</category><category>Terminator Salvation</category><category>TerminatorSalvation</category><category>the goonies 2</category><category>The Spirit</category><category>TheGoonies2</category><category>TheSpirit</category><category>Tom Cruise</category><category>TomCruise</category><category>Warner Bros</category><category>WarnerBros</category><category>World of Warcraft</category><category>WorldOfWarcraft</category><dc:creator>Elisabeth Rappe</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 16 Oct 2008 13:02:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title>A First Look at Dr. Watson, a Second at Sherlock</title><link>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/13/a-first-look-at-dr-watson-a-second-at-sherlock/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/13/a-first-look-at-dr-watson-a-second-at-sherlock/</guid><comments>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/13/a-first-look-at-dr-watson-a-second-at-sherlock/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/action-and-adventure/" rel="tag">Action</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/classics/" rel="tag">Classics</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/mystery-and-suspense/" rel="tag">Mystery &amp; Suspense</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/warner-brothers/" rel="tag">Warner Brothers</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/diy-filmmaking/" rel="tag">DIY/Filmmaking</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/newsstand/" rel="tag">Newsstand</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/remakes-and-sequels/" rel="tag">Remakes and Sequels</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/images/" rel="tag">Images</a></p><div align="center"><img hspace="4" vspace="4" border="1" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.cinematical.com/media/2008/10/judewatson.jpg" /><br /><br />
<div align="left">The <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0988045/"><em>Sherlock Holmes</em></a> photos appearing online are almost disappointingly fast, aren't they? <a href="http://justjared.buzznet.com/2008/10/12/dr-watson-jude-law/">JustJared</a> already has a second set up -- this time, we get a glimpse of <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000179/">Jude Law</a> as Dr. Watson ... and well, he looks like Law in a mustache.  I was hoping for a frock coat, at least!  But what's more interesting is the second look at <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000375/">Robert Downey Jr.</a> in costume as the great detective. He's considerably more polished this time around, which suggests several of our commentors were correct, and we may have glimpsed Holmes disguised as a member of the lower class.  With the rate these photos are pouring in, we may see <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1046097/">Rachel McAdams</a> in full corset soon -- and the costume geek in me can't wait to see what she's wearing as Irene Adler.<br /><br /><br /><br /></div>
</div><p style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"> </p><p><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/13/a-first-look-at-dr-watson-a-second-at-sherlock/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/forward/1340282/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/13/a-first-look-at-dr-watson-a-second-at-sherlock/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a></p>]]></description><category>Dr. Watson</category><category>Dr.Watson</category><category>Guy Ritchie</category><category>GuyRitchie</category><category>Irene Adler</category><category>IreneAdler</category><category>Jude Law</category><category>JudeLaw</category><category>Rachel McAdams</category><category>RachelMcadams</category><category>Robert Downey Jr.</category><category>RobertDowneyJr.</category><category>Sherlock Holmes</category><category>SherlockHolmes</category><dc:creator>Elisabeth Rappe</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 08:41:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title>First Look at Robert Downey Jr. as 'Sherlock Holmes'!</title><link>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/11/first-look-at-robert-downey-jr-as-sherlock-holmes/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/11/first-look-at-robert-downey-jr-as-sherlock-holmes/</guid><comments>http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/11/first-look-at-robert-downey-jr-as-sherlock-holmes/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/action-and-adventure/" rel="tag">Action</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/classics/" rel="tag">Classics</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/mystery-and-suspense/" rel="tag">Mystery &amp; Suspense</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/warner-brothers/" rel="tag">Warner Brothers</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/newsstand/" rel="tag">Newsstand</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/remakes-and-sequels/" rel="tag">Remakes and Sequels</a>, <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/category/images/" rel="tag">Images</a></p><div align="center"><img hspace="4" vspace="4" border="1" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.cinematical.com/media/2008/10/robert-downey-jr-sherlock-holmes-06.jpg" alt="" /><br /><br />
<div align="left">With Guy Ritchie's <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0988045/"><em>Sherlock Holmes</em></a> kicking off in London this week, it wasn't going to be long before we got a glimpse of <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000375/">Robert Downey Jr.</a> in Victorian costume. And a bunch have popped up on <a href="http://justjared.buzznet.com/2008/10/10/robert-downey-jr-as-sherlock-holmes-first-pictures/">JustJared</a>, accompanied by some bedraggled extras. <br /><br />But did we expect him to look like this? Most people see Holmes in securely buttoned down tweed, complete with deerstalker cap and pipe. But that image was invented by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's illustrator, Sidney Paget. His description on the page was a bit different: "<em>His very person and appearance were such as to strike the most casual observer. In height he was rather over six feet,and so excessively lean that he seemed to be considerably taller. His eyes were sharp and piercing, save during those intervals of torpor to which I have alluded; and his thin, hawk-like nose gave his whole expression an air of alertness and decision. His chin, too, had the prominence and squareness which mark the man of determination. His hands were invariable blotted with ink and stained with chemicals, yet he was possessed of extraordinary delicacy of touch, as I frequently had occasion to observe when I watched him manipulating the fragile philosophical instruments</em>." He was also frequently described as "Bohemian" and would slip into a lethargic lifestyle between cases. <br /><br />So there you go -- lethargic, with a carelessness hand hygeine. Ritchie will probably get flak for "reimagining" the character, but Holmes was never a put together fellow. How many cocaine and morphine addicts do you know who are, anyway? (Yeah, I know that's been cut from this PG version, but I wouldn't be surprised if it pops up in the way they're tackling the character in production.)<br /><br /><br /><br /></div>
</div><p style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"> </p><p><a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/11/first-look-at-robert-downey-jr-as-sherlock-holmes/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/forward/1339210/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a> | <a href="http://www.cinematical.com/2008/10/11/first-look-at-robert-downey-jr-as-sherlock-holmes/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a></p>]]></description><category>featured</category><category>Guy Ritchie</category><category>GuyRitchie</category><category>Robert Downey Jr</category><category>RobertDowneyJr</category><category>Sherlock Holmes</category><category>SherlockHolmes</category><category>sir arthur conan doyle</category><category>SirArthurConanDoyle</category><dc:creator>Elisabeth Rappe</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 11 Oct 2008 21:03:00 EST</pubDate></item></channel></rss>