Thursday, September 25, 2008

Quick clips for Thursday September 25

They love him so much that, if they could, I'm sure Disney would marry Johnny Depp

You know what I love, when other people do such good work that all I have to do is point and say "hey, check out that good work." You know why? Because I'm tired, it's been a long week and, despite being tempted to suspend my blogging until this economic crisis is over with, I know that now more than ever people need to hear my strong voice of leadership. This is what happens when I fall asleep to CNN. Anyway, Chud.com, who always put the "bang" in "bang-up job," have given me (okay, all of us, I'll share) a wonderfully bullet-pointed list of Disney news and notes from their Media Preview Day, which is like Christmas for movie rumor bloggers (only half the presents you open up are plaid sweaters and almonds-and-Vaseline fruitcakes). Here's the highlights: Johnny Depp will star in everything Disney does. Thanks for coming! Okay, he'll just be in Pirates of the Caribbean 4: Thank God We Ditched Knightley and Bloom, Alice in Wonderland (directed by Tim Burton...so, sadly, this is almost self-parody at this point), and The Lone Ranger...as Tonto. No, I'm not kidding. I looked it up and everything. Now, Pirates 4 is actually good news, as the series still hasn't explored Cap'n Jack enough (seriously, who watched the first one and thought, we need to give Orlando his own storyline) and Alice is happening whether it's exciting or not but...Tonto? Really? You can't find any ACTUAL Native Americans to play that part? I mean, sidekick to a horse-riding masked white dude isn't exactly the dreamiest of parts but it sure beats, I don't know, NOT HAVING ANY NATIVE AMERICAN CHARACTERS IN ANYTHING EVER. Seriously, my wife can list like 10 people who would be better for that part, including Rodney Grant from Dances with Wolves (who I met at a Jiffy Lube, seriously). Tell you what, he can play Tonto if Graham Greene is the Lone Ranger. The Mouse House also announced that Cars 2 will appear in 2011 instead of 2012 (whatever, you sequelize the one Pixar movie I'm lukewarm on) and will follow Mater and Lightning McQueen overseas. Also, National Treasure 3 is going to come out eventually and people will see it despite the last film having been more damaging to my brain than my new breakfast cereal, "Encephalitis Flakes."

You know what we haven't talked about in, like, a day or two? The new Sherlock Holmes movie

You know how you know an actress has transcended normal "she's an actress so she's hot" attractiveness? When girls get crushes on them too. I know several women who love Rachel McAdams almost as much as every heterosexual male (hell, some homosexual males probably love her too). Thus, it is for the good of all genders that I repeat The Hollywood Reporter's news that the lovely Miss McAdams is going to star opposite Robert Downey Jr in Guy Ritchie's Sherlock Holmes, which is fast on it's way to being (A) really good and (B) the only thing I cover. McAdams will play Irene Adler, a character who only appeared in one of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (who never gets referred to without using all 4 names...seriously, I'm going start referring to him as Artie Doyle, which sounds like a sitcom character name...it just seems like the American thing to do). The take on the detective is supposed to be more action and adventure driven, but I hope they don't forget he's really smart or this will turn into a British Indiana Jones, which sounds ridiculous. I wonder how the Brits feel about so many Yanks taking parts in a movie about a hero from their country? I mean, it isn't like Britain has a TON of adventuresome heroes; it goes James Bond, Sherlock Holmes, and, um, Margaret Thatcher? For the record, if someone makes a movie that combines all three characters, I'm sooooo there.

Will it be called Legend I am?

I Am Legend, a movie I enjoyed immensely right up until it hopped off the cool train while in stupidville, is going to have a prequel (my least favorite word next to cartilage...seriously, just say cartilage...doesn't that sound gross). I hate the concept of prequels because you already know who survives and how it ends. I hate to spoil it but, even though this new film may take place in the final days of humanity in New York City before the plague kills everybody, I'm pretty sure Will Smith's character gets out alive. How do I know (beyond the fact that Will Smith plays the character)? BECAUSE WE SAW WHAT HAPPENS NEXT! Besides, I though that's what all the grabassery was about in the end of the last movie: The studio wanted a sequel so the director and writers neutered the ending so that we could get the further adventures of what's his name and the badly computer generated zombie things. Why not make a sequel? This makes far less sense and limits the potential for a third film. Seriously, this is the kind of stuff I don't get. Nobody in the room says, "Hey guys, won't audiences be bored because they know how it turns out? Shouldn't we follow the end of the last film and explore how they try to make a life in the apocalypse?" That or the response is "Na'ah, let's just do a prequel, that's more fun to say. Oooh, look a shiny quarter."
Custom Search

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home