Bekmambetov is Russian for "no duh"

If you have yet to see Angelina Jolie's Wanted...I don't really care. It's fun, but nothing too terribly enthralling, and I'm about to ruin the ending for you (in case you care) in order to reveal how they're going to have Jolie bring her kickin' curves (I'm talking about her lips) back for Wanted 2: Want S'more. The movie, about a league of assassins who kill people (because they are trying to restore order) are told who to murder by a giant tapestry and...you know what, I'm going to skip all the crazy and get to the end. Jolie's character gets shot in the cabeza, something that several people have expressed a desire to do based on things not involving her fictional assassin work. So, the question has long been "how do you bring the star that people care about back to make a sequel after you made her brains all gooey (okay, gooey-er)?" Well, MTV considers this an EXCLUSIVE, so prepare yourself to deal with the obvious: In the movie, there are baths that heal you (don't ask, really, don't). The director has confirmed EXCLUSIVELY TO MTV that they are going to say someone put her in the magic tub, a solution that it took literally seconds to create. And there you go...except that the end of the movie seems to take place a little while after the climactic shootout and nobody dragged Jolie's hot carcass to the bath that makes her feel better. You know what, this movie is getting stupider every time I try to describe something from it. I really enjoyed the kinetic energy of it all, the spectacle and adrenaline of it, but good lord is it apparently the dumbest thing I've ever had to synopsize. I'm just going to move on now.

Maybe the villain in Hancock 2 will be someone Will Smith farts on

You know what the lamest part of Hancock was? No, not the costume. No, not that it devolved into the EXACT same comic book origin story the novel it was based on was designed to spoof. No, not the absolutely batshit crazy backstory about Gods who somehow sap each other's powers because people don't believe in them (basically, they are powered by the Tinkerbell theorem). No, not the fact that the love between Charlize Theron and Will Smith's characters that had lasted many centuries was thwarted by Jason Bateman's nerdly charming. No, not the fact that the first half was actually quite fun and fresh and the end was collectively (see above) a total Cleveland steamer. Nope, it was the fact that the bad guys, the villainous foils for the God (literally) that was Hancock...were the guy who got his hand cut off by Hancock in a bank robbery and a guy who had his head shoved up someone's asshole by Hancock in prison. Seriously. There's no reason to have a second Hancock movie...so, they're making a second Hancock movie. Director Peter Berg rambled to Sci-Fi Wire about possible ideas (all of them suck), including another God being out there for Hancock to deal with (ooooh). What we're left with is a run-of-the-mill superhero movie that just happens to star Will Smith, who can make anything passably entertaining. Don't worry, though, they hired Adam Fierro and Glen Mazzara to write it, and between them they've worked on several episodes of television shows, including the beloved "Nash Bridges." So, yeah....

One rumor to rule them all....

Okay nerds, I know I've spent a lot of time opining and discussing the monstrosity that is the Twilight franchise, but daddy loves you, too. Here's some seriously unsupported rumors surrounding a certain beloved film/book trilogy (no, not White Chicks, they're only on the second chapter). Marketsaw, which is a blog dedicated to 3D movies (and a good one...they've scooped on Avatar like champs), has a tiny little rumor that just may be true (again, they have gooooood sources, unlike me who has the power of an Internet connection and imagination): The Hobbit is back to being 3 movies, the first two parts will be in 3D, and Peter Jackson wants to return and make a bridge film to the existing trilogy. Chances are, LOTR fans just made a happiness deposit in their pants. What's more, the site reports that Smaug will be a combination of practical (meaning tangible, physical) effects and CGI, and that the design is dark and foreboding (the image below is on the site but is NOT concept art, but is too kick ass not to include. Marketsaw continues to reiterate that despite public confirmation that The Hobbit will be 2-parts, there are 3 films in the works, and that the author of the report has SEEN things to confirm it. Oh, that's just too awesome to not be true. I believe that if Jackson comes back, that all of the cast will rejoin him. I loved the series, I will hold out hope that this report is all true (and there's a chance that it is). So, go my nerds, go forth in joy and embrace the day!

The movie rumor that launched a friendship

The year was...oh Jesus, let's not do that, it's too depressing. Long ago (very long ago), in the land of Illinois, two young boys discovered...okay, now this sounds like gay porn. Um, howsabout...When I was in middle school, I met my best friend Andrew because we were both nerds. I was talkative, obnoxious nerd (I know, shocker), and he was quiet, introspective nerd. Andrew will tell you that he loathed me when he first met me, a natural reaction that I am told is powered by my potent hate-inducing pheromones. What bridged the gap (besides a crazy kid we both knew), was the rumors of James Cameron directing a Spider-man movie. It mean seem like no biggie now, but consider that at the time, there had been exactly two good superhero installments (Superman 2, and Batman)...EVER. So news that the guy behind Aliens was contemplating making a Spider-man movie wasn't just nerd catnip, it was the sort of thing that could be discussed and analyzed ad nauseum (seriously, we made people vomit). Fast forward a boatload of Oscars and two great Spider-man movies (and please-oh-please at least one more) from Sam Raimi, and it is somewhat intriguing that Cameron still hasn't fully kicked the Spidey bug. In an interview with MTV, Jimmy C noted that "Spider-Man was the only one I ever wanted to do. I wasn't really personally that driven to do a superhero movie per se, but I wanted to do Spider-Man because he was my guy when I was 14," insightfully adding "Spider-Man was the shit and everybody else sucked." Amen, Mr. Cameron. Amen. Now, this isn't "news" per se, as the likelihood of Cameron hopping in line to direct the FIFTH Spider-man movie (especially after Avatar and the long-long-long rumored "Battle Angel Alita" adaptation) is somewhere between "sha-right" and "as if." Still, if Avatar drains the fluid from our bodies like it's supposed to, and if Raimi begs out of the Spidey series (as he likely will because of World of Warcraft) it isn't TOO crazy to think someone would at least gauge his interest. I want to go on record that I am NOT in any way saying this non-story should be labeled "Cameron wants to do next Spider-man movie," so much as I am reminiscing about once discussing such things and noting that I like living in a world where it's still, no matter how improbable, possible.

Jeremy Renner had best practice saying "Sugar Tits"

If it looks like I have a giant thing for Jeremy Renner today...well, don't tell my wife. There was little question after The Hurt Locker that the dude was going to blow up (really, really poor choice of descriptors there). Turns out, he's going to ride his "I'm a crazy" personality from that film into a potential turn as the tit-ular Mad Max (played with relish and zest...making him sound like a pickle...by actor-turned-sugar-tits-caller Mel Gibson). Renner told his hometown newspaper, "The Modesto Bee," that he is screen testing for the role with George Miller. That makes this one half-step above the normal BS rumors of such casting, which are normally based on some chubby dude's marijuana-enhanced "rumor mongering" (as in, "hey, Jessica Alba should totally play that one naked chick in her next movie). I have to say that my interest in a Mel Gibson-free Mad Max movie was at burnt sienna on the color-coded scale of anticipation. Renner's potential involvement cranks it up to fuscia without question. That said...I wonder what justification there is for a new Max movie? I mean, are there really aspects of that character or world we haven't seen yet, or are we just going back there to go back there. If Tina Turner doesn't close out your franchise, I'm not sure who can (anyone who said Cher, shame on you). I will say that Neil Marshall's Doomsday gave me a little big of vigor to see Max back, as his lunatic rip-off of the series fell somewhere between honest homage and Tarantino-ing the source material. Point is, at the end of the day, Jeremy Renner deserves to be crazy famous, so I'm really pulling for him hard on this one. If you just read the first line of this post and the line that proceeds this one, I'm going to need therapy.

Weekend Box Office Results: You love Bruno...just not like that

Nobody reasonable expected Bruno to do Borat money, mainly because of the hierarchy of social satire (xenophobia > homophobia > cheese-prejudice). Whereas the crazy Kazakh made people laugh somewhat uncomfortably (mostly during a few choice nude scenes), Bruno's entire schtick is to create discomfort, and some people apparently don't find that desirable. Me? I live for discomfort. It's why God created brillo-pad underwear. No way Bruno does Borat money, as the hype with that first film was organic and grew like Ryan Seacrest's ego. This one should drop precipitously next week, but I don't care, as I'm waiting to see what Sasha Baron Cohen will do now that he's pretty much exhausted his premade characters (yes, there was an Ali G movie...no, I do not recommend it). Also, it looks like Transformers is finally calming a bit, with Harry Potter sure to take a wizard-sized chunk out of robot ass this weekend. Final gross should be below $400 million, which is gross enough for me, thank you. The only other major note this weekend: America has spoken via decreased ratings for "Heroes" and a tanked first major movie. We hate you Hayden Panitierre. Go back to whatever disinteresting hole birthed you.

Here are the results (haiku style):

1.) Bruno - $30.5 million (Accuracy of prediction - 97%)

Sorry, dear Bruno.
You will not get Borat love.
Is it the umlaut?

2.) Ice Age 3 - $28.5 million (Accuracy of prediction - 93%)

Prehistoric gang
should meet their end this weekend.
Potter crushes all.

3.) Transformers 2 - $24 million (Accuracy of prediction - 92%)

One more time at least,
I'd like to thank Michael Bay,
for my lack of worth.

4.) Public Enemies - $14 million (Accuracy of prediction - 98%)

A forgotten film
that deserved much, much better.
Blame Bay for this too.

5.) The Proposal - $10.5 million (Accuracy of prediction - 93%)

Congrats to Ryan,
on his big Green Lantern role.
Never look back, buddy.

Overall accuracy of prediction - 95%

Perhaps my best week,
not that anybody cares.
I am proud of me!

Happy Monday, movie lovers.

Try as I might, I can't pass up the Hong Kong Phooey news

Can we all admit that the "Hong Kong Phooey" theme song is bangin'? Seriously, even Sublime thought so.



That doesn't mean I'm cool with the news from The Hollywood Reporter that the "number one superguy" is being remade into a live-action, CGI hybrid abomination or that we're going to get some incredibly shitty remix of the song from somebody just abhorrent like Akon or something. For those who have never seen the super groovy 1970s cartoon about a janitor dog who fights crime with kung fu and has a cat sidekick, I'd like to compliment you on choosing to say no to marijuana. The problem with this kind of material is that the people who grew up with the show (whom you're presumably targeting) would like a savvier form of humor than, say the 8-year-olds who like CGI dogs (whom you're also presumably targeting). It's the usual catch-22 that leaves studios making middle-of-the-road fare that is ignored by both youth and adults (ah, the truest cross-generational bridge of them all: crap). I'm also interested to see the cultural tapdance that will have to be performed, as Phooey talks a bit of jive and pretty much steals from Asian culture (I believe that, in China, Hong Kong Phooey translates to "American Mocking Dog"). I just can't see this being good, but if we start worrying about quality before making movies, I'll be out of a job making fun of terrible ideas. So, really, I need this shit.

Wake me when Bradley Cooper, Justin Timberlake, and Ryan Reynolds are wearing the Green Lantern costume at the same time

The big news today (or last night for West Coasters, insomniacs, and whatever assorted jobless ghouls and goblins are up until the late hours of Thursday night...Christ, I just noticed that the stamp on The Hollywood Reporter story is at 10 pm central, so it turns out I adhere to Wilford Brimley's sleep schedule) is that Warner Brothers has narrowed the list of who will wear the Green Lantern costume in their sure-to-be-disappointing-movie to three names: Ryan Reynolds, Bradley Cooper, and (gulp) Justin Timberlake (I'm just going to guess that the odd-man-out was Val Kilmer...see what sausage bloat costs you). All three were signed to holding contracts (which is preferable to a "snuggle contract" or an "awkward one-night-stand contract"), but those expired on Monday, which means we're going to find out very soon who fills the nondescript green costume and pupil-free mask. I would like to point out that keeping all three would be very possible depending on the script (Cooper as Hal Jordan, Timberlake as Kyle Raynor, and Reynolds as Sinsestro), but such things are not an option when your film is budgeted at $200 million already (ah, the price of goofy CGI green boxing gloves). Instead, we're going to see one of them as the jolly green giant and the other two will go back to banging super, insanely hot chicks on their yacht. Let's look at a few pros and cons for each man left standing:

Bradley Cooper

Pros: He definitely has the arrogance/confidence to play the part and is not identified with a major icon-level role yet. Hal Jordan is a typical DC generic figure, a good guy with a great heart and lots of moxy and confidence. Anybody can play that, but Cooper does seem right for it.
Cons: He has a mullet, I don't care what you call it, it's a mullet. Also, I kind of think he's an ass. I don't have proof, we don't hang out or anything, but he reeks of douche. I can tell because he has a mullet.

Ryan Reynolds

Pros: Well, at the risk of making my wife uncomfortable with her choice in mate, dude's got the body for it. Also, he's had a superhero boner longer than most 8-year-old boys in underoos. He HAS to play a superhero or he may die inside.
Cons: He's supposed to play Deadpool. Then again, that's set up at Fox Studios, the worst thing not called cancer. There's no guarantee that someone won't come in and say "let's keep him a mute in this movie, too." Also, even though he's beloved, he's a stupid character. He's basically Ferris Buehler crossed with the Punisher. Still, he's been talking up this movie like his life depended on it.

Justin Timberlake

Pros: Dude actually does have acting ability. Not just Black Snake Moan, but "SNL." As someone who coaches interpretation and acting (yes, for real), it is FAR harder to be funny than to be dramatic (which makes the Oscars' hatred of comedy hilarious). Plus, he's got that "it" factor. I think he would make a better Raynor, but I could see this working.
Cons: He's Justin F**king Timberlake. You're going to sell an N'Sync-er to the comic crowd. Why don't you just go in there and talk to them about relevant socio-political concerns. They will not accept it...then again, WB may not care, as they make bank on the tweens and teens going to see a movie in droves that they may not have before (especially when he performs his tie-in single Supersexy Space Flyin').

Again, I'll repeat because I think it works the best: Keep them all, make Cooper Hal, Justin Kyle, and Ryan Sinestro. We'll all be happy and they won't cry. Everyone seems to be predicting Justin and Bradley, but I'm going to go with Reynolds, he needs to be a superhero and actually has the best box office record of the three (I'm wrong, but I want to be different, so that if it happens I can brag about it on the Internet).

Quick clips for Thursday July 9

Don't you worry, Will Smith's gonna be just fine...

Although he made 7 Pounds, the worst film to feature jellyfish since Jellyfish: The Musical, Will Smith is apparently not done making movies. He is, however, enjoying some time off seeing China while his son ruins your memory of The Karate Kid (seriously, can we just call this Yo, Karate Kid and be done with it). Variety is reporting that the man who made a nation repeat the word "jiggy" just because he wanted to is going to reunite with Francis Lawrence, who somehow wasn't executed for his work on Constatine (I kid, I didn't mind that movie...then again, find me a movie with a wet Rachel Weisz I don't like and I'll buy you a life-size Rachel Weisz Pez dispenser...I don't know, I'm probably legally drunk right now). The two will reunite (whether you like it or not) for City That Sailed for 20th Century Fox (the studio who would actually physically eat you for money if they could). The film is about a father who lives across the ocean from his daughter...and somehow his bond with her is so strong Manhattan splits off. Yes, I'm effing serious. Now, if I switch some names (like say, Will Smith for Ryan Gosling and Michael Gondry for Francis Lawrence), this concept sounds almost interesting (seriously, if they don't use Death Cab for Cutie's "Transatlantacism" in the movie, it's only because they are really dedicated to making a crappy movie). As it stands, I'd put it just ahead of Oldboy in my list of rumored Smith projects. I would actually rather see him as Captain America than see him in a movie this hokey. See, it's from F**ks Studios, so they instantly hired the guys behind Ocean's 13 to rewrite the original draft by Andrew Niccol (The Truman Show), because by the transitive property of bad management, making a mediocre third installment is more valuable than making something good. It's the same logic that produced X-Men Origins: Wolverine, so don't question it or you'll have your mouth sewn shut.

Let's talk about Moore, baby

Officially, the reason for this post is because Michael Moore has confirmed that the title of his next movie will be Capitalism: A Love Story (a clever title, if I do say so at great personal risk). Unofficially, let's talk about why everybody hates the shit out of Michael Moore. Oh, don't get me wrong, he's as obnoxious as an opinionated family member you can't talk trash on because you want to inherit money from, but he's also (A) pretty smart and (B) a pretty entertaining filmmaker. Plus, he's kind of right...on a lot of things. Somehow, Moore has become a human pinata (nobody start with the fat jokes...actually, please do, I swear to God I'm going to light this comment section on fire if somebody doesn't start using it) despite being, you know, pretty right about Bush being a giant flaming douchehammer, pretty right about the unnecessary reactions to Columbine, more-than-pretty-right about the douche-itude of GM, and totally right about the effed up nature of the health care system. See, most people don't like MICHAEL MOORE, not what Michael Moore actually focuses on. This is a crazy distinction that has been the backdrop of the media's slobbery wet kiss to Michael Jackson that I just don't understand, as people seem physically incapable of separating the artist from the art, the medium from the message. Fact is, capitalism as constructed by the US has a lot of problems...how do I know that? Because the system pretty much collapsed. Yet, the first thing I see is a tweet from Screen Rant, a guy who gets more free crap than me for his repeating of stuff I repeat way sooner and funnier than him by the way, who basically intimates that Moore should be exploded from the inside out. Is Moore controversial? Yep. Is he biased? You betcha. Is every single director of a documentary biased in some way or another? I'd say about 99% of the time. See, if you hate Moore, you really just hate the liberal point of view, or at least the extreme liberal point of view, which is your right. However, if you're being honest, his documentaries aren't just among the most watchable of recent years, they're downright brilliant. I don't particularly care for Michael Moore (or Bill Maher, but that's a different story) despite my obvious liberal bent. That said, I sure do love the crap out of his movies and I sure do appreciate the intelligent conversations I have afterwards (presumably because I don't talk to people like the guy from Screen Rant). Anyway, this long and rambling post should have been condensed into one sentence "Moore names his new movie Capitalism: A Love Story" but I wanted to stretch it into something more, so I did. Do you hate Mr. Moore? If yes and Democrat, I'd love to hear why, just so I can explain it to those who violently wretch at mention of his name, like I do at the mere thought of Miley Cyr......BLEEECCCH.

Ryan's junk drawer

First and foremost, I'm going to question my own decision to put this first bit into the junk drawer...but seeing as how I've already stretched a one-word post into an entire blurb, I'm going to let myself off the hook here. Don't be mad, okay, it's Thursday (the worst day of the week...oh, sure, some of you will say Monday, but that's not true. On Monday, you're coming off the weekend and haven't been ground down by "the man" yet. Tuesday is okay because you're still not as jaded as you will be. Wednesday is comic book day and, during the winter, "Lost" is on. Thursday, on the other hand, is three full days of work into the week and is standing between you and Friday. It's an asshole day, and it's okay to admit it). Was that a long tirade? I can barely tell anymore.

Anyway, let's see what's the top 5 in the junk drawer this week:

1. The Hollywood Reporter is...reporting that Gary Ross is being brought in to rewrite Spiderman 4. Do I get nervous because this is the guy who wrote both Mr. Baseball and Lassie or rejoice because he did Dave and Pleasantville? More importantly, does this mean that Tom Selleck and/or Kevin Kline may climb out of the whole their in to play Kraven and/or The Chameleon, respectively?
2. Another Hollywood Reporter gem: Julianne Moore dropped out of the HBO movie "Special Relationship" (which is not a movie about nerds and their "delete history" buttons). She was set to play Hillary Clinton in the film about the relationship between Britain and the UK under Bill Clinton, but will be replaced by Hope Davis. This is good because I respect Hope Davis like I respect Hillary Clinton but don't find myself aroused at Hillary Clinton like I do at Julianne Moore. Sorry for that.
3. On his twitter feed, producer Frank Marshall confirms that the story about Indy 5 being a "go" is the bullshit we all thought it was. He said basically that the project is in the idea phase...meaning George Lucas hasn't had an idea bad enough yet. That may not be entirely fair but captures the cultural zeitgeist of the time. If I tell people I didn't mind the last movie, they tend to dismiss everything else I say (including "hey, run! There's a fire!).
4. Proof that I'm not the only loser out there, Slashfilm.com tries to mathematically prove Transformers 2 is the worst movie to make the most money. Such things are considered truisms in some circles, but not in the film community. Here, we rely on cold hard facts...I'm kidding, we smear and insult without reason.
5. Devin at Chud.com (whom I like for no good reason) has posted his first list of 5 Perfect Movies. For those afraid to ride the hyperlinks, I'll mention that he ingratiates himself with his Starship Troopers pick and sullies his argument with Grease. Obviously, perfection is subjective...jeez, it's like the guy is using hyperbole to get attention or something....wait a minute...