First Look:  « FirstShowing.net

by Alex Billington

First Look: David Fincher's Animated Version of The Goon

Last year during Comic-Con we announced that Eric Powell’s cult comic The Goon was being adapted into an animated feature film by none other than David Fincher. Although I’ve never personally read the comic, it seems like a pretty damn good cult comic, and I’m very interested in seeing how the movie will turn out. Well thanks to Quint at Ain’t It Cool News, we’ve finally got a first look at the first few shots from The Goon movie and it looks much better than I was expecting. Blur Studios, also behind the upcoming Heavy Metal movie, is developing this, which is one of the first complete features they’re entirely behind creating.

The Goon Movie

The Goon is a comic book series created by Eric Powell in 1999. The story is about the adventures of the Goon, a muscle-bound brawler who claims to be the primary enforcer for the feared mobster Labrazio. The Goon (and his sidekick Franky) often get tied up in other machinations, often in relation to the evil zombie gangs under the command of the Nameless Zombie Priest. The series has a distinctly paranormal slant, with the average story concerning ghosts, ghouls, skunk-apes, extra-dimensional aliens, and mad scientists. I really can’t wait to see more from this soon, because it certainly looks awesome so far! Thoughts?

« FirstShowing.net

by Alex Billington

Tr2n Logo

Ever since Disney snuck in that awesome sneak peek at Comic-Con last year, we’ve been trying to figure out what the heck Tron 2.0 is all about. We know the basic premise, or at least some of the characters, including the original Flynn and original Tron, but what exactly is going on? A few months ago I started to try and piece together some of the plot from an amalgamation of casting news, only to come up with a bit of a crazy idea reminiscent of The Matrix. Well, Ain’t It Cool News is claiming to have some details from a trustworthy source in Vancouver, so if you’re interested in knowing a bit more about the plot, read on!

I’ve paraphrased the e-mail they were sent and took out some of the big spoilers, so here goes. The movie starts in 1989 (the original was set in 1982). Kevin Flynn (Jeff Bridges’ character), who has a five year old son named Sean, has created some of the world’s best selling video games since the events of the first Tron took place. He disappears and Alan Bradley (Bruce Boxleitner’s character, the original Tron) takes over his company. Jump forward roughly 15 years, Flynn’s son Sean is now 20-something, and Alan has info on his dad, which sends Sean back to Flynn’s old arcade where he gets sucked back into the computer world.

Flynn has programmed a CLU character to look like his younger self that goes around and makes the world a better place. However, the CLU is corrupt and is creating his own interpretation of that “perfect world” (hence why you see him kill that guy in the teaser footage). Apparently this CLU is out killing programs called ISOs (anyone catch that reference too?). And these ISOs think Sean Flynn is their savior, but of course, the real Flynn is also still stuck inside the computer world and they eventually catch up with him, too. But will he help? I think there’s a lot more to this story than just that, but it’s a very good start.

While that synopsis is only a tad less vague than what we already know, it’s a good update and introduction to what we’ll see eventually play out in Tron 2.0. The report also claims that we’ll see big disc battles, light cycle fights, and “light jets” (think light cycles that can fly), which should make for some awesome battles. See, the reason I think Tron 2.0 will be incredible, is because they’re taking that classic Tron world and infusing it with some modern energy and excitement (just like J.J. Abrams is doing with Star Trek). And that alone is enough to make me very excited to see what Joseph Kosinski is cooking up for Tron 2.0.

« FirstShowing.net

by Alex Billington

Monopoly

No matter how much I continue to hear about the Monopoly movie, I still feel like it’s all just a big hoax, created by Hollywood for no legitimate reason. I can’t really imagine that Ridley Scott, the man behind Alien and Blade Runner and Gladiator, would want to direct a movie based on a board game?! Oh, but he does, “I have to direct it,” Scott told MTV. In their recent update, Scott and Hasbro’s CEO Brian Goldner revealed some interesting thoughts on the direction of the movie and it’s modern societal connection - the economy. But is that enough to actually make this into a great movie or instead kill it before it even starts?

“The whole world is about the financial markets,” Goldner told MTV. “You can’t turn on the news today without understanding the financial markets and what’s going on out there.” So why not make this movie about that issue as well as the “personal story” contained with the Monopoly experience? Does anyone know what Goldney is talking about besides the status of Hasbro’s stock? “[Ridley has] built these great big worlds of imagination,” Goldner said. “Combine that with Pamela Pettler who’s writing this great script about real people kind of playing a real-life game of Monopoly, not the board game, although they’re icons of the game. And then you really get the idea why this story could make sense right now.”

I get a feeling that this reminds me a lot of The Day the Earth Stood Still, and how they tried to connect that movie to the current concern over our environment. So it sounds like Hasbro and Universal want to capitalize (pun intended) on our recession and make a movie that hits home with audiences because it deals with money. We’ll let Ridley Scott, who seems to have lost his edge over the last few years, explain why it could be good. “We have identified a pretty good story and it is fundamentally a movie, not a game, probably describing in a way the characters in the film, the passion of the game, and how the game came about.”

I don’t know about everyone else, but I’m not sold yet. I think Ridley has a lot of work to do before he can convince me that this isn’t just a big gimmick designed to capitalize on our ailing economy. Thoughts?

| /Film

by: Peter Sciretta

Jon Favreau

It’s no secret: Jon Favreau would love to helm an Avengers movie. He’s has gone on the record multiple times talking about the possibility. But after Marvel announced their overly ambitious release schedule, Favs was forced to admit that the production schedule would likely prevent him from doing so.

I would love to. Clearly I have stated that The Avengers would be fun. But I look at their release schedule and they have announced ‘Iron Man 2? for 2010 and then Avengers for 2011. I know from experience there is no way I could. I don’t know what they have in mind, but there is no way that The Avengers could be done in a year. Either they are thinking about somebody else doing it or they have something up their sleeve that I don’t know.

But as you now know, Marvel decided to push back the release date of The Avengers an entire year to May 4th, 2012. Are you thinking what I’m thinking?

Today a spy over at AICN confirms my suspicions:

“The Avengers is delayed a year because of financing issues but also because the plan is for Favreau to helm it. Everybody here loves the guy and he wants to do it, but it would have been impossible for him to do before the date change given his Iron Man 2 commitments. Also partly the reason why he agreed to do the Stark sequel on such an accelerated schedule was so he could get given first dibs on this. It would still be a punishing schedule for him, so hes not firmly confirmed yet, but he is certainly the presumptive director at this point.”

Clearly Favreau is the best many to helm Marvel’s superhero team-up film. He’s been talking about the idea since he got hired to direct Iron Man, and we all know how that turned out. Can you think of a better filmmaker for the job?

From Development Hell:  | Film School Rejects

Posted by Cole Abaius (cole.abaius@filmschoolrejects.com) on March 3, 2009

Watchmen Banner!!!

When I was fourteen years old, I read a graphic novel called “Watchmen.” At this point, it had already been published for over a decade. I came late to the game purely because I was only two years old when it was published originally - but when I got to it, I was hooked. I’ve read it at least once a year since, and last night I got to see the film version of the story for the first time since turning to the first page all those years ago.

Even though I’m squarely in the fanatic base of the graphic novel’s corner, I recognize that there is a huge population of people out there that either haven’t heard of the novel or simply don’t care. “Watchmen” is an odd cultural icon in that it’s held in high regard by a sizable group of people while being completely unknown by others. It’s not Star Wars or Star Trek - two pieces of culture that benefit from “being heard of” by people that haven’t seen a film or an episode. “Watchmen” isn’t so lucky.

Because of this, I felt it important to take a look at why fans (and film fans in general) have been so unbearable for the past year. It has, mostly, to do with the excruciatingly long wait that had to be endured before finally watching Watchmen in film form. Here’s just a brief look at that frustrating wait:

  • 1986 - DC Comics publishes “Watchmen,” a limited series twelve-issue comic featuring a number of superheroes investigating the murder of one of their own under the dark cloud of the Cold War’s mutually assured destruction.
  • 1987 - The final issue of “Watchmen” is released, and the book is collected into graphic novel form.
  • 20th Century Fox (through Larry Gordon and Joel Silver) options the rights for the book and wants Alan Moore to write the screenplay adaptation. Moore refuses the job, and Fox hires Sam Hamm, a writer who, at the time, had written the script for Disney film Never Cry Wolf and the then-in-production Burton Batman film and would go on to write Batman Begins and Monkeybone.
  • Late 1988 - Hamm completes his draft that changes the ending of the story in a drastic way - opting to send the main “villain” back in time in order to kill one of the main superheroes so that the United States and the world are set back on their rightful course (the one our history is familiar with where Nixon wasn’t President for four terms).
  • 1991 to Mid-90s - Due to several factors, including the massive cost of staging a production, Fox places the project into turnaround where it lingers for a few minutes before Warners picks it up and attaches blockbuster producer Joel Silver and the wonderfully weird Terry Gilliam, who at one point described “Watchmen” as “The ‘War and Peace’ of graphic novels,” in the director’s chair for the feature.
  • Gilliam works with frequent collaborator Charles McKeown to write a script but is never fully satisfied with it.
  • For a film that needs at least $100 million budget, Silver can only raise $25 million, and Gilliam decides the comic book is “unfilmable” based on a conversation he has with co-creator Alan Moore. Later, Gilliam would proclaim that he felt the story would work better as a mini-series.
  • 2001 - Film rights revert to Larry Gordon who goes through Universal to hire David Hayter, who wrote X-Men and would also write X2, to pen a new script.
  • 2002 - Hayter finishes a filmmable draft of the story, but other writing jobs stall further work on Watchmen. Then, after shooting a scene to showcase his directing talent, Universal decides he’s not the right man for the directing job and tosses the production into turnaround.
  • 2003 - A partnership between Gordon and Revolution Studios doesn’t manage even to get off the ground.
  • 2004 - Paramount announces that they will be producing Watchmen using Hayter’s draft and up-and-coming director Darren Aronofsky who made waves after making a little film about a paranoid mathematician and another about the horrors of drug addiction. The young director has been stalled on future projects, but just like how you’re only attractive to women when you have a girlfriend, shortly after signing onto Watchmen, the pieces come together for a long-dormant passion project, and Aronofsky leaves the production in order to make The Fountain.
  • Paramount hires Paul Greengrass to replace Aronofsky and aims for a release in summer of 2006 (which coincidentally is when Superman Returns actually was released).
  • The production moves forward enough to have screen tests, costume designs, and sets, but it’s in danger of not moving beyond that if the budget can’t be reduced. Fate intervenes when Donald De Line steps down from Paramount and his replacement, Brad Grey, puts the project - you guessed it - into turnaround.
  • 2005 - Gordon and producing partner Lloyd Levin sell the project back to Warners (sans Gilliam this time).
  • 2006 - Zack Snyder - whose 300 will hit theaters later in the year officially takes the helm of Watchmen with first-time screenwriter Alex Tse reworking David Hayter’s draft into a new script. Pre-production begins in earnest.
  • 2007 - After several months of designing and testing, production starts in Toronto. Fans and the press are taking major notice, especially because of special teaser advertising.
  • 2008 - Fox brings a lawsuit against Warners for copyright infringement, citing the turnaround clause in their contract with Larry Gordon. Later in the year, a judge grants Fox’s stake and legitimacy in having their day in court. A last minute panic on the goal line.
  • 2009 - However, the case never sees a courtroom because the two studios settle early in the year. Just two months later, and three days from the publishing of this time line, Watchmen is released wide to audiences everywhere.

Hopefully this gives you just a slight appreciation of not only the lengthy amount of time it’s taken to see this thing through, but the hard work that’s been poured into it (mostly all for naught). Remember, all along the way there were press announcements and trades writing stories about the direction this thing was going. When “Watchmen” was published, it was published to wide public and critical acclaim, so it became a hot commodity for the film world immediately. Imagine every few years that something you’d love to see turned into a movie was announced as a new project featuring a new writer and director. Imagine that shortly after that announcement, the project always fell apart.

So at this point, not only will there be a film version of a fantastically rich story, but there’s a host of What Ifs. Real world, real life dreamcasting that ultimately just fell apart. In a way, it’s this mythos that’s made Watchmen even bigger than it was before, created the air around it that fans salivate over and annoy the uninitiated with.

It’s been a long time coming for some fans, still longer for others, and in three days they get to decide whether Alan Moore was right all along for believing the damned thing was unfilmable in the first place. Luckily, even after it’s released, we can all still wonder what a Gilliam version might look like.

For more Watchmen stuff, check out our Watching the Watchmen homepage.

 

For a much more in-depth look at the development nightmare for Watchmen, go out and buy “The Greatest Sci-Fi Movies Never Made” by David Hughes immediately. Immediately.

| /Film

by: Peter Sciretta

t2 robert patrick

It seems to me that all the excitement over both Arnold Schwarzenegger and Linda Hamilton’s potential involvement in Terminator Salvation has gotten McG a little cameo crazy. The director tells FearNet that he has an idea to cast Robert Patrick, who played the T-1000 in Terminator 2: Judgment Day, in the potential sequel to Terminator Salvation.

“I like the idea in a prospective next picture that you meet Robert Patrick the way he looks today, and he’s a scientist that’s working on improving cell replication so we can stay healthier and we can cure juvenile diabetes and all these things that once again sound like good ideas — and once again live as an idealized expression of ourselves. So imagine seeing a sixty-year-old Robert Patrick and knowing, ‘Holy shit! That’s gonna be the T-1000 – who comes back perfect, lean and the whole thing.’ I haven’t concluded that, but Robert and I had dinner the other night and talked about it.”

This would be cool is the T-1000 actually looked like Robert Patrick by default, but anyone who has seen T2 knows that the T-1000 is a more advanced terminator, composed entirely of a mimetic metal alloy, rendering it capable of rapid shapeshifting and near-perfect mimicry.In the beginning of the filme, t he T-1000 ambushes a police officer and takes on his identity. So if I’m correct, the T-1000 does not look like Robert Patrick by default, and thus, McG’s cameo theory just wouldn’t make any sense.

Update: Apparently the T-1000 appears as Robert Patrick before he attacks the police officer, so I’m completely wrong. I’ve just always assumed that the T-1000 wouldn’t have a default human mode, because, what would the point be? The T-1000 can change into anything or anyone, and having a standard look would make him more vulnerable in the war between the humans and machines. On the other hand it would be cool if we eventually seen the moment when the T-1000 is sent back to kill John Conner. Instead of having the T-1000 modeled after the scientist, I would love to see the T-1000 kill the scientist and mimic his look before taking the trip.

via: Cinematical

| Film School Rejects

Posted by Cole Abaius (cole.abaius@filmschoolrejects.com) on March 12, 2009

Anvil continue to rock.

Everyone has a dream. The mail room worker who dreams of being a hot shot agent. The girl playing guitar in her dorm room that dreams of being a Rock Goddess. The cubicle worker that hopes to make it big as an advertising genius. Hell, there’s even an American Dream. A country has its own dream. Unfortunately, most people will never get to achieve theirs. Despite years of toiling, most everyone will eventually give in and succumb to their Plan B. They will look around them, realize they’ve grown too old to do what they longed for in their youth. The members of the band Anvil are not like most people.

Anvil! The Story of Anvil is as simple a story as its title suggests. It examines a critical point in the career of Anvil - a band that made it big without ever making it big. Influential in creating the metal sound of the late 1970s, and acting as the catalyst for bands like Anthrax and Metallica, Anvil are heavy hitters that didn’t reach the level of fame needed to ride the wave of drunken groupies and all-night drug binges. They made it to the middle, and when the ride was over, they ended up middle-aged average joes still striving to become rock stars. The documentary itself picks up on the eve of the first major tour the band has had in years - hitting some major cities and festivals in Europe.

The story may be simple, but the people are complex. Before I go into the worth of the film, you should know one very basic fact: Anvil rocks. They kick ass. They are fantastic musicians who have created some hard rocking music.

That’s what makes watching the film much more difficult.

The documentary - which, I swear, is a real documentary - is like a blend between the pathetic awkwardness of Spinal Tap and the angry frustration of Some Kind of Monster, the Metallica doc that no one ever asked for. It’s a frustrating film because of the subject matter, but ultimately satisfying because of how the subject is treated. There’s zero pretense. Guitarist Steve “Lips” Kudlow and drummer Robb Reiner (as if there weren’t enough Spinal Tap references) are genuine, strikingly un-self-aware people who have no choice but to be exactly who they are. There’s no playing to the camera. There’s no holding back. The audience gets a fantastic view from the passenger’s seat in the last chance hand-basket that’s taking both men down to obscurity hell. We see where they grew up, where they live, where they work. We share in what must be the most frustrating reality for anyone with a dream - achieving it without achieving it.

The one question that haunts the action of the film is - why did they get so far without becoming famous?

Every step of the way, Lips - an odd blend of Geddy Lee (if he played wicked guitar) and Eeyore (if he complained more) - pulls the band kicking and screaming toward the mirage of stardom. They embark on an ill-fated European tour which appears to destroy his endless supply of faith until he sends a demo tape to former production partner and metal guru Chris Tsangarides. CT decides there’s potential, but they’ll have to self-finance a recording session. They fight. They almost break up several times. They meet a promoter who can get them a huge show in Japan. Every attempt is always their last shot at fame. Every last shot always comes with a catch.

As a documentary, the story unfolds near-flawlessly - blending shots of the austere Canadian neighborhood where Lips and Robb are fathers and husbands and part-time workers with the sweaty reality of touring with an unproven manager. The dark world of European clubs and metal show venues accentuates the frustrating elements, the emotions riding on high, and the disappointment of filling a 5,000 capacity arena with a 112-person audience. The bleak “real world” of their home lives was almost enough to bring me to tears as they and the people that love them struggle to deal with a dream that should have died years and years ago. Like modern-day Don Quixotes, Anvil are always tilting at a multi-platinum record deal, and the financial and emotional tolls are severe. It’s enough to make you want to ask your local fast-food establishment employee what he once dreamed of becoming and how close he got.

But the beauty of the documentary is that behind all the struggle is a childlike hope and faith in the value of what they’re doing. In the genius of music. In the revelation of the creative process. It’s only sad if you adhere to what most of society defines as “success.” It’s clear that the members of Anvil believe strongly in that definition, but by all accounts they’ve already achieved some major feats - putting out upwards of a dozen albums, getting the recognition they deserve from members of metal’s elite, and getting to play in front of thousands of screaming fans. There’s a lot of joy in that - and that joy isn’t lost on Lips or the filmmakers. The Story of Anvil may feature more than its fair share of poignant, heartfelt, desperate moments, but it’s ultimately a simple story of two friends who refuse to quit on each other and who refuse to stop doing what they’re passionate about.

Oddly enough, with the success of this documentary, there’s a possibility that Anvil may enter back into the public conscious. I’ll admit to never hearing of them before the film (and to buying their album Metal on Metal because of it), but wouldn’t it be fitting if this film acted as their true last shot at stardom and actually paid off. It would be incredibly meta, but it also couldn’t happen to a more deserving crew of musical talent. Not bad for a documentary about a couple of rockers from Canada.

Grade: A-

blog comments powered by Disqus
1 of 29
« old  

http://ecultureonline.googlepages.com/MAF09.png

http://ecultureonline.googlepages.com/eCo_best_films.png

http://ecultureonline.googlepages.com/eCo_top10alltime.png

THEeCoSTREAM is eCulture ONLINE's frequently updated stream of highly useful information.

The goal of this site is to provide the eCulture ONLINE community (and anyone else) with a single informative, and up-to-date collection of film and technology related news.

If you haven't already, join the eCulture ONLINE community!

Imagined, Created, and Maintained by Josiah Guile