Bio not provided
Riddick as a film zeroed the clock, while the story didn't expand forwards in a way you probably wanted. I thought the character had to be reset since the events of Chronicles. While it was cool for him to become the Lord Marshall that was never Riddick as a character. Ignore the obvious budget reasons, expanding the universe for Twohy/Diesel has always been about the precise progression and they've been on the record saying that.
The fans aren't going to care anyway, the die-hard fans like myself will pretty much say this; loved: more Riddick, hated: not enough Riddick. The next film (apparently the last, in this planned 'Chronicles' trilogy) is supposed to cover the Underverse, more Elementals, and (I hope) finally bring on Furya. Here's hoping it doesn't take another 9 years to see that happen.
We need more movies like this; Dredd, Pandorum and Riddick deserve sequels. And are all far more interesting properties than what Hollywood spews out yearly. So if anything maybe there is a place for these R-rated, low/modest-budget films - that's what the fans care about.
10 months, 3 weeks ago on Review: Riddick continues the story without much substance
@JamesM Admittedly that was before my time, no disrespect to what you grew up to! I do remember Jonny Quest, Bugs Bunny/Road Runner, Super Friends, and Flash Gordon from that era. In respect to Saturday morning cartoons turned into films Flash Gordon, The Flintstones, and maybe He-Man starring Dolph Lundgren could've made the list.
11 months, 1 week ago on Top Saturday morning cartoons turned into movies
"The Internet is a communication tool used the world over where people
can come together to bitch about movies and share pornography with one
That said, I actually don't mind the casting and will wait until 2015... to you know... actually see how it turns out.
11 months, 1 week ago on Ben Affleck is Batman
@JamesM All the staff on TMB have normal day jobs, so while we'd love to get reviews up on a timely/immediately relevant manner (and sometimes we manage to). We don't. It's not an excuse nor am I saying it's policy. It is however, both a struggle and a balance we continue to work at. The staff is very much like everyone else that visits the site, just movie fans.
For example, I know Ryan missed the screener for Elysium. I caught the film (Elysium) over the weekend. I enjoyed it, probably more my type of film than District 9 was, but still felt disappointed by it. My overall review for it will be up soon.
As per The Heat. I had conversations with Anthony about TMB reviewing it awhile ago or even reviewing it late (which is another thing altogether). It was a definite taste thing as neither of us were McCarthy fans. I was actually sold on the concept originally when I heard about the movie, but the trailer immediately turned me off so I never watched it personally. I know Anthony has seen it however.
Anyway thanks for the comments as always JamesM. We'll so our best to keep trying to fill in all the gaps, especially for stuff you'd like to see written about. I'm sure you're not alone in that amongst the visitors.
11 months, 3 weeks ago on Review: 2GUNS
@Dan_Bam That whole final act involving the ninjas at the end, outside of what we saw in the theatres, a good majority of that fight was completely cut out. Supposedly it's going to be in the home video release. Also I heard how the Silver Samurai was at the end was a push by the studios wanting to market toys for the film. So with what was cut out and potentially altered, the 'grittiness' may have been what was left out.
12 months ago on Review: The Wolverine
I saw this trailer finally in the theatre, I liked what I saw initially with the premise. But then felt I saw too much as Stallone was placed in an almost Tango & Cash/Prison Break moment for the remaining half of the trailer.
1 year ago on Stallone & Schwarzenegger colab in Escape Plan
(Haha! You did post them. Okay, I'll give you a comment at the very least.)
I just wasn't a big fan of them, especially the typography and really didn't want to post them for the sake of posting them. (Otherwise I'd be posting Mondo posters weekly.) Ken Taylor who did Aliens, his artwork is always very clean/tight, but the composition for this particular poster felt like his Hulk poster he did for the Avengers Mondo set. I wasn't a fan of that one either (call it personal preference). Ash Thorp did the Predator poster and he also did a Pacific Rim poster Mondo is putting out this week at SDCC. While I'm not feeling the Predator poster either, I do appreciate his artwork having looked through his portfolio (really cool stuff).
For me both the posters feel unsuccessful, especially considering the licensing opportunity and how established these films are already with collateral. But I don't know the behind the scenes process for Mondo, all I know is I wouldn't buy either. However I will still keep my eye out for both what Taylor and Thorp do in the future.
1 year ago on Mondo’s new posters for Aliens and Predator
I finally was able to catch this movie, I really liked it. Liked it a lot more than the original in fact (I don't know if that's sacrilege to say or what), but it could also be because visually Monsters Inc. feels outdated. Given how University looks so sharp and vibrate. But that's the advantage of Pixar being Pixar in 2013. I was surprised at how thoughtful the film was given the relateable college subplots like you mentioned. And the overall care to the audience both young and old. It was nice. Much like you, definitely not my favorite Pixar film but a welcomed addition.
Thanks for the review Ryan!
1 year ago on Review: Monsters University, a welcomed addition to the Pixar library
@liyo I reviewed Pacific Rim which should be up soon.
It took a bit to finish writing up (watched it Saturday) and also @Ryan Brown TMB is the hero we need, but don't deserve right now, our Grown Ups Knight.
1 year ago on Review: Grown Ups 2
You know these cars are nice and all. But I really hope we don't have scenes with these cars in the background just chilling out. There would be action scenes in the previous Transformers films where things would be happening on-screen and there would be the Autobots, just sitting in park.
1 year, 1 month ago on And the latest Transformers 4 car is…
@JamesM I don't think this poster works anyway but as the 80's homage it is being presented as. Conceptually however it feels more video game-esque to me than movie. The poster does a good job of making this movie look cooler than the trailers do. I personally would've gone way more retro and clean, ala Armed and Dangerous (1986).
1 year, 1 month ago on Check out Mondo’s surprisingly good poster for The Heat
Ryan, what do you think our chances are of getting the Sinister Six as the villains with Amazing Spider-Man 3 and 4 already dated?
1 year, 1 month ago on Shailene Woodley’s role of Mary Jane completely cut from Amazing Spider-Man 2
@JamesM I wasn't a big fan of Iron Man 3 either, felt like an in-between film of nothing really happened. At this point I just want more Avengers movies instead of the side character plots. It's strange, I'm not looking forward to The Wolverine at all, but I'll watch it. The more I see of Despicable Me 2, the more I'm finding myself looking forward to it. I definitely need to see Pacific Rim first hand.
1 year, 1 month ago on How is Summer 2013 film wise stacking up for you so far?
@Jackstin We're presented with opportunities to help revenue for the website. We simply do our best to make sure these sponsored posts work within the quality of the website. Your concerns aren't dismissed though, it's continued progress we keep in mind as we move forward with TMB. Thanks Jackstin.
Thanks for the review Ryan. I haven't read the book and after watching this film, it felt like this could've been a really, really great mini-series instead. But for what it's worth with my matinee trip watching it - I honestly enjoyed it (probably a little more than you did).
The production nightmares for this film have me really curious though with the whole third act rewrite, the ballooned budget, and the obvious marketing push to recoup the costs as a result. So if the studio ever decides to put out a Blu-ray with the theatrical cut and the original director's cut with the Russia zombie war third act. I might just have to pick that up. Also, the weekend box office numbers smell like John Carter all over again.
1 year, 1 month ago on Review: World War Z entertains visually but lacks intimacy with its audience
@Ryan Brown TMB You know I actually liked Superman Returns! The airplane scene when he's back always gets my attention. I still think it's awesome.
Moving forward it'll be interesting how they'll maintain a balance for this universe. Thinking back on the previous films (and pardon me, my comic book knowledge isn't as good as yours, so maybe you can chime in here and tell me if it's the same or not) but I've always found there has been this unnecessary need to humanize Superman physically. It was always a way to get the audience to relate 'oh now he's human, that guy in the bar can beat him up easily now, and so can I probably' or 'oh the Kryptonite is his weakness, now Luthor can hurt him'.
There has always been a need to bring him down to our level, versus where Man of Steel does that in terms of his character and upbringing instead - it's emotional. To me it was more an AHA moment saying "why didn't they do that before?" It was not only smart, but also relatable. But like I was saying, the balance moving forward, the villains they need to be on his level, the danger need to be on his level. In the same stead how do you bring in Lex Luthor and make his threat level credible. It'll be interesting and hopefully we'll get an opportunity to see it all unfold.
1 year, 1 month ago on Why Man of Steel is receiving bad reviews and the public loves this Superman
@JamesM I could be, you're right. A part of me was also thinking given what the movie was, I could just be, being really cynical about it. It wasn't to 'hate' on the film though, it lost my interest midway, because nothing was happening outside of the laughs. For as much hate Your Highness (2011) gets, I felt that movie had more direction story wise. (Or I've been conditioned by so many replays on TV.) I stand by my review score though, I wanted more from this group of guys, I do like them too. So moments when Cera was off'd too easily, I thought more could've been done given 'who' was involved - that to me was the tragedy.
Thanks for your comment JamesM.
1 year, 1 month ago on Review: This is The End
Okay, I'll bite. Thanks for writing this up Ryan, as such I'll add a few more words with you.
I think another thing the audience/critics might've been expecting/wanting is the light humor of Clark Kent and the lovey dovey romance with Lois Lane. Fact is we've been conditioned with five different Superman films in this regard. Going into this movie, I didn't want that. Why even remake/reboot a franchise (not a film) if you're going to trend on the exact same tropes and approach. The Donner films need to be let go, I had nothing but love for them growing up. But for me it's 2013. The last thing I want is Superman constantly erasing Lois' memory by flying around the Earth in reverse or his magical memory wipe kiss. Get out of here with that nostalgia and nonsensical tripe. Also another thing, there is a bigger picture here - Justice League. As long as a consistency is maintained throughout, this could be something great.
Snyder was only a red flag to me after Sucker Punch. But for him that was a vanity project which he wrote, produced and directed. And yeah, while that movie really sucked I knew deep down he'd work well as the director for Man of Steel. I had high hopes of seeing the imagery I'm reminded of when I think of Dawn of Dead (2004), 300 (2007), and/or Watchmen (2009). And now when I think of Man of Steel, I remember imagery like the camera angles where the military is looking up at Superman just hovering above the ground, the draw from a distance and close up with a quick zoom in/out when they're in space, the battle in Smallville. It goes hand-in-hand with the action. If you can't portray Superman as 'big' how do you portray him at all?
Too much action? I heard the reverse complaint when Superman Returns (2006) happened. The guy has super speed, super strength, heat vision, x-ray vision, can fly - I just don't get how you can't not depict that in a manner which is grandiose. And if you're making a movie which at the very definition of what a movie is, especially for a film like this is requiring "movie magic" - why wouldn't you!? There isn't anything lazy about the action in Man of Steel. It is prolonged, because the threat is constant and you've got one guy at his first rodeo trying to clean up, define who he is through the story, and ultimately chose who he wants to become. The whole premise of the film itself.
I'm glad we had Snyder there to give the action an energy, a scope, and a direction. His visual and stylized eye allowed us to be able to follow these 'beyond human' movements. The Michael Bay comparisons are disingenuous as well, if anything that has been a lazy reference. Too much destruction, too much CGI? Bay's Transformers had one problem
and it wasn't either of those and it wasn't even his penchant for
explosions. It was there was too many humans in all three of the films. The only real lazy moment for Transformers was Bay reusing a scene from his film, The Island (2005). Anyway I'm digressing.
The best news coming out this weekend is the fact that this franchise is being fast-tracked and the sequel should hit theatres in 2014. So hopefully the film continues to do well, so yes, moviegoers - watch it! The last thing anyone wants is to wait another almost ten years for another Superman film.
@Ryan Brown TMB Thanks! And I wholeheartedly agree with you. The tomatometer if it meant anything should be the other way around. In some ways it's expected, especially with the popular generation nowadays. That's why despite things, I just try to watch everything and see for myself.
Spot on review Ryan. I thoroughly enjoyed the film myself.
It's strange hearing complaints like "too much action", I thought for once they portrayed Superman the right way. The intensity is exactly what was needed, it genuinely surprised me how the last third or even last 40% of the film was just constant. I loved the cinematography, the quick zoom ins/outs, and really cool angles giving Superman's flight a sense of energy. Snyder works well as the director, I figured this film would make or break him since Sucker Punch. I can see a lot of complaints to the film maybe just being 'darker' in tone, but I'm in the camp that I wanted something different from Superman and that's what I got. If anything Kal-el as a character/his humanity makes him relatable in Man of Steel. One final thing I'd say is the flashback treatments were very interesting, in regards to moving forward we could see certain characters still being brought back.
1 year, 1 month ago on Review: Man of Steel redefines the Superman we know
Fantastic movie! That is all. Thanks for the review Ryan!
1 year, 2 months ago on Review: Star Trek Into Darkness, this year’s First blockbuster
@JamesM From what I've seen, his new Winter Soldier costume looks okay, or maybe just better. I wasn't a fan of the costume he had in The Avengers, I get the comic book styling but it almost bordered cosplay at some points. I think it was the lack of a chin strap too.
I remember reading an interview way back when Evans was first cast and how he was almost regretting the fact he had just signed up for 6 (Marvel) films. I dig him as an actor, maybe more so when he's in a side role ala Sunshine, Losers, etc. and am even looking forward to Snowpiercer, I think they're just simpler roles. As Captain America, I can't tell if he's either bored with the role or stoic. Hemsworth on the hand I don't mind, next to Downey, Jr. I thought he was a correct casting.
1 year, 2 months ago on Avengers 2 cast strongly negotiating salaries?
@BObObobobobo Shhhh. (Although, I thought that was pretty hilarious/dumb as well).
1 year, 2 months ago on Ender’s Game Trailer (and first footage glimpse)
Found the movie entertaining for what it was and out of all the Tony Stark movies, I actually enjoyed how this one had the most light hearted comic relief to it. Him out of the suit, humanized the film, something I thought was lost in the second but made the first movie so good. That being said, these movies, the character of Iron Man in film does not operate without Robert Downey, Jr. He's a crux at this point to the entire Marvel Universe cinema wise. The action overall was pretty standard and walking in, it's what you expect to see. It's Iron Man after all.
I gotta say though, my curiosity for this movie was more so "what happens after The Avengers?" This whole 'Phase Two' approach and Iron Man 3 is the first film representing this. As far as I can see, Tony's character has been established and this movie or his standalone films are/is the side adventures. And that's what I didn't like about this movie overall. It was more so a "What did you do over Christmas?" as the entire setting for this film took place back in December, unless it's eventually revealed through chronology that it's actually December 2013. But it doesn't matter and that's the point. It's a stop-gap to show what he was up to since The Avengers ended, and not even that, the film takes place over a 3-4 day span. While it's simple and another movie, either to showcase all the armors he's made up to this point, or whatever small resolutions they had, eg. removing the shrapnel from his heart. It's what has worried me with these Marvel film adaptations moving forward, because the treatment is more about a comic book side story when you just want the main story arc. And that's The Avengers.
So my question is, why should I care what happens when even Bruce Banner after the credits doesn't care? And believe you me, that's canon to the movie. It's not an after credit joke, the movie started with a narrative from Tony Stark and ends with the reveal he's been talking to Banner the entire time. With a storyline dealing with the President of the United States, why wasn't there more involvement with S.H.I.E.L.D. or any other characters, I guess we had Iron Patriot. Maybe I'm being nit-pitcky, but it's these parts of comic book storylines for me which get nonsensical even in comics.
That being said, it's still early into Phase Two. There is still no precedence for what Marvel is doing with it's characters. I appreciate the creative control they have and it's the one thing I have confidence in for cohesion overall, when all these films are all said and done. For what it's worth, I'd give this movie a 6, leaning towards a generous 7 out of 10. Last thing I gotta add, I enjoyed Guy Pearce's performance, fun stuff.
Thanks for the reviews guys, consider this my add-on commentary.
1 year, 2 months ago on Iron Man 3 Mega Review
I think this movie is probably going to end up being very hit/miss. That being said I'm in the camp that genuinely liked it. Going in I figured it was the 'mystery' of the film that might determine the relative appeal, and I think it's that expectation which sways the audience. I know it had me after watching the first trailer. I was more surprised at the end that Oblivion is actually much more than that. It obviously borrows from other sci-fi films, but really I think these ideas or even 'tropes' as some might call are just reminders. Oblivion is more like a sci-fi remix, or a cover to a familiar song. The problem is not everyone likes covers or remixes. For me though, I found it both refreshing and unique.
I have to say I don't agree with your assessment that the film is a 'mind fuck'. The movie is relatively simple, its just that the exposition actually doesn't stop until the very, very end - right up to the actual credits. So much so that it's rather interesting Oblivion plays out both soft and fast, almost like a space opera. I'd delve way more into spoilers to discuss, but I want to keep this comment spoiler free.
Tom Cruise in his later years is choosing his films wisely and Oblivion is right up there, at least for me. Overall character wise I thought was good. I liked Andrea Riseborough, Olga Kurylenko, Melissa Leo, and Jamie Lannister (Nikolaj Coster-Waldau). I also liked the subtle casting of Zoe Bell, who's more known for stunt work so it was nice to see her in front the screen so-to-speak. Morgan Freeman's fault is he's too recognizable, so you might expect more from him but I felt Oblivion was adequate given he was just a supporting character.
I gotta say I've become a big fan of director Joseph Kosinki, I really
loved the wide shots of this film. I knew going in his visual acuity was
something I would appreciate, but even simple shots of panning the
camera around he does to emphasize narrative. Oblivion ends being an immense artistic set piece, Kosinki has the whole planet to work with, and does a very good job. It's odd for me the translation of it all is like getting a giant map and you're free to zoom in/out at your own discretion. It's not something we could do with Oblivion, but that's what I wanted to do in a personal exploration sense. Much like Cruise does on his routine maintenance job, whilst listening to some vinyl or the M83 soundtrack of the movie.
1 year, 3 months ago on Review: Oblivion
REALLY enjoyed this movie. Much like you, I absolutely loved the cinematography. There was also a nice tangibility to the movie with all the practical effects, if semi-realistic/realistic gore was ever done right. Everything about the movie is academic but hell if it still doesn't make for an enjoyable, horrifying, and gruesome ride.
It's strange, when you talk about 'common sense' I'm totally with you. It's those scenes in the movie, especially in the horror genre where if it was you in that situation you'd simply say "time to go" well beforehand or doing something you should've done already. It's what we got with Cabin in the Woods, in respect to the meta reference of 'signs' - knowing when a situation obviously is going to turn bad. I think with horrors a lot of the fans just try to outsmart the film, maybe it's a way not to be scared or say you could've done it better, if it was you trying to survive. I'm totally guilty of that! Call it being stupidly prepared. I'm not trying to counter your point at all, just commenting like any other movie-goer/TMB surfer out there to comment. Thanks for your review Ryan!
1 year, 3 months ago on Review: ‘Evil Dead’ be warned graphic images within
Man, I gotta say this movie really left me with mixed feelings. The budget for this film was huge and I expected the grandiose visuals we got. Much like you're saying Ryan the camera work felt scattered but thinking back on it, I think Raimi worked to match/mirror the camera work done in the original The Wizard of Oz (1939). Which for me the introduction of black and white made sense. I figured that would be the only *nod* but instead it was just strange to see visually flat cinematography at times. Given the landscape of Oz.
I'm also still a little thrown by assuming the whole movie was a dream and Oscar actually died. Because the film for me works to make The Wizard of Oz (1939) cannon and this movie as the prequel. And there Dorothy at the end was dreaming. In the books, it's heavily alluded that Oz was in fact a real place and that's where this movie supposedly takes its stance from. So further it was odd even more so why so much was done to play up the 1939 film. Especially given Disney has already greenlit a sequel or multiple sequels, with possible intent to remake The Wizard of Oz itself. I mean we got glimpses of the Cowardly Lion, the Scarecrow, etc, a lot of tiny anecdotes to the 1939 film.
So watching Oz The Great and Powerful overall, it just felt more was done to make it feel like it was all a dream movie, rather than make Oz a real place. The acting was definitely hit and miss. I think Kunis had more fun as the Wicked Witch, Franco was never really convincing as a Wizard. By that I mean I never bought his act, he didn't fool me and I felt he should have. He was always just a con-man to me. But I did thoroughly enjoy the final act of his greatest trick ever. That really was fun.
Realistically I feel like I'm in the camp where I didn't like the movie. Too much was askew for me. Finley and China Girl stole it character was for me. Weisz was very consistent, Williams was up/down for me like Kunis and Franco was. And Tony Cox as Knuck, I kept seeing him in his role in Epic Movie every single time the camera panned down to him. It was like the exact same character all over again. Can I actually say that was bad casting?
The film definitely did what it was supposed to, like @JamesM said in his comment. Last thing I want to touch on, I enjoyed the opening credits.
1 year, 4 months ago on Review: Oz the Great and Powerful
@Anthony_TMB Thanks for the fix! @steve Thanks for the heads up. Pretty hilarous in hindsight.
1 year, 5 months ago on Let me tell you about A Good Day to Die Hard
ATTENTION: SPOILER TALK
@Dan_Bam It's based on the 'after credits' spoiler for Fast & Furious 6 that broke on AICN, which is posted within this article. Fast & Furious 4, 5, 6 are all prequels to Tokyo Drift (third film). At the end of that movie we see Dom in a cameo, which is his arrival in Tokyo. If we are to believe the after credits are true for Fast & Furious 6. Then that scene which occurs happens in the middle of Tokyo Drift. And post credits of Tokyo Drift, as per Dom's arrival - hypothetically - marks the arrival of his crew in Tokyo upon hearing of Han's death. As such chronologically, since we know Han is alive in 4, 5 and 6 and dies in Tokyo Drift. The next movie would in fact be Fast & Furious 7.
It is speculation, but its been a wonder for some time where Tokyo Drift fit into the scheme of the entire franchise. Most people ignore it because it doesn't have the original crew. And we simply saw Dom at the end as a 'cameo' and nothing more. The after credits spoiler for Fast & Furious 6 puts credence that that isn't the case. And instead canonizes the Tokyo Drift storyline within the franchise as a whole, to as Diesel put it "servicing all the character relationships."
1 year, 5 months ago on Why Fast & Furious 7 is going to kick ass, MASSIVE SPOILERS within.
@BeHappyAndStupid The title isn't incorrect. It talks about the entire franchise as a whole, enough to spoil a bit of Fast & Furious 6, but goes further into why/how there is a Fast & Furious 7.
Caught this film at a late show. Found myself really, really enjoying it, so much I'd probably score it a 8-9/10, that being my own opinion. Warm Bodies was completely light-hearted and fresh - it was fun to see things from the perspective of a zombie, flipping the script so to speak. I didn't get the 'Twilight' vibe at all and frankly I don't think it's even appropriate to give Warm Bodies that type of comparison. An almost modern day Romeo and Juliet set in a post-apocalyptic world with zombies, that's what it is.
It's smart, well paced, well directed and just enjoyable. I loved the how the flashback sequences were treated, normally films always give us scenes within movies we've seen already as a retelling. Instead we got a real sense of nostalgia to how the flashbacks, memories, dreams were shown. They simply had character and exploration. Suffice to say what we know of zombies in other films plays a bearing in Warm Bodies, but Warm Bodies also says simply - we don't. And that's the angle it works with.
Overall, well worth the admission price. Oh and the soundtrack was kick ass.
1 year, 5 months ago on Review: Warm Bodies
I've floated in the 'hate' category of Twilight since New Moon. 'Hate' being a pretty strong word, I've just never been too particularly fond of the franchise overall. Its taken several viewings on TV to actually catch up and watch all of the films. You know the 'catch 1/4 of the movie here, 1/3 of it another day, 1/5 two weeks later, etc' and eventually you've watched the entire movie. Going into watching the last one in the theatre, suffice to say. Whether it my lowest of expectations or knowing what nausea to already expect, call it 'Twilight conditioning.' This conclusion to the franchise actually made me a fan.
I'm pretty much agree with everything you've said in your review John, in fact the only thing I would've done was probably actually scored this movie dare I say, higher and given it an 8. I came out of the theatre genuinely enjoying Breaking Dawn Part 2. On a whole it rounded out the franchise nicely I thought. I don't know how much fan service it played in respect to how close the adaptation from the books were. I've never read the books, outside of my cheating on Wikipedia. But I'm reminded of the Harry Potter franchise. Comparatively I think Twilight had a bit more cohesion from a vision standpoint of where it started and where it needed to go and end. With Harry Potter, I've read the books, loved them. However my enjoyment of the Potter films ended after Prisoner of Azkaban. It always felt like the films never honed in on the minute details which would've interlocked that franchise more. Where as here in Twilight, from what I've watched and cheat read, it felt like things ended on a more well-rounded note. Call it odd objectivity or retrospect.
The only other two things I want to chime in on was Mackenzie Foy, I too thought she did a remarkable job. And lastly the 'final battle' was unexpected in how it progressed, took me by surprise and I think because of that I left with a more positive feeling about this movie and the franchise overall. I also dug the collective 'end credits' as well. Anyway, continue to hate the series or continue to love it or maybe like me, you find yourself watching TV and these movies will be on over and over and over again. And eventually you can say you've seen it too.Enjoyed the review otherwise John, thanks!
1 year, 8 months ago on Review: Breaking Dawn Part 2
As a follow up to this. It looks like Lucas is going to donate a majority of the 4 bn from the sale to fund education.
Via the Hollywood Reporter:
By the end of the year, the $4.05 billion sale of Lucasfilm to Disney should be finalized. And since George Lucas owns 100 percent of his company - which has little to no debt - all that money goes to him.
After that, Lucas plans to quickly put the bulk of the money into a foundation which will primarily focus on educational issues, a spokesperson for Lucasfilm tells THR.
“George Lucas has expressed his intention, in the event the deal closes, to donate the majority of the proceeds to his philanthropic endeavors.”
It's not yet clear which foundation will get the proceeds. Lucas is currently the chairman of Edutopia, which is part of the George Lucas Educational Foundation. He could put money into that or create a new foundation which would be funded from the sale.
The Foundation was the vehicle Lucas used to make a $175 million donation to his alma mater USC in 2006. He has also given to many other causes over the years including the Film Foundation, Stand Up To Cancer and the Make-A-Wish Foundation.
“For 41 years, the majority of my time and money has been put into the company,” Lucas said in a statement Wednesday. “As I start a new chapter in my life, it is gratifying that I have the opportunity to devote more time and resources to philanthropy.”
The spokesperson noted that this “announcement continues a commitment that Lucas made in 2010 to The Giving Pledge where he stated, “I am dedicating the majority of my wealth to improving education. It is the key to the survival of the human race. We have to plan for our collective future—and the first step begins with social, emotional, and intellectual tools we provide to our children. As humans, our greatest tool for survival is our ability to think and to adapt—as educators, storytellers, and communicators our responsibility is to continue to do so.’”
1 year, 9 months ago on Disney bought Star Wars… SERIOUSLY!!! Star Wars Episode 7 in 2015!!!
No more talk. Just make movies, before we all grow old and die. Also, Battle Angel within our lifetimes please.
1 year, 10 months ago on James Cameron says Avatar 4 would be a prequel
The poster will still sell out, in fact is sold out already.
I didn't mind Richard's Fortress of Solitude rendition and I've had an eye out for this poster since it was announced months ago. Hoping, sincerely, I would really want it. I won't say 'meh' but that's my feeling on it, a three character slight at a feeling of dismay, being less than enthused, relatively unimpressed and woefully disappointed. With how the English language is headed, ‘meh’ will probably be in the dictionary at some point. That’s a potential reality for those never being impressed.
To put it in more detail, this is just a missed opportunity. This was a chance to get really behind the scenes into the bat cave and I just don’t see it here. I see nods at the animated series which are obscure, vagueness with a night skylight, the same scaling issues like in Richard’s Jurassic Park poster. Why wasn’t this in landscape form like his Fortress of Solitude? I want to see into those darkly illuminated caverns in the background. This is a chance to see what’s behind the mask and that’s whole point of concept with the bat cave. And why does Batman have his head down looking all sad? The bat cave is his virtual trophy room. So really, what exactly am I looking at here? An empty envisioning of the bat cave, made from scraps of inspiration from previous samples of what was in the bat cave? It just does not feel any holistic research was done, which could’ve – no, should’ve resulted in something better. And that’s my slight at Mondo with the mass production of posters lately, in a cultural sense it’s nice. But ‘poster design’ as art as a goal to be framed as more than just a poster? A designer and artist should first and foremost know their source material, or hey, at least watch the movie before designing a poster for it, yeah?
So yeah, meh. I think I will actually use that word and have it mean what I said above.
1 year, 11 months ago on Mondo’s Batcave poster
The blatant Chevy product placement ruins what could've/would've/should've been a cool poster.
1 year, 11 months ago on Poster: The Last Stand
I never get tired of Old School. I totally forgot about Accepted, I need to re-watch that one of these days. Good stuff.
1 year, 11 months ago on A TMB Guest Post: 5 CollegeTheme Movies to Get you in the Back-to-School Spirit
I'm still waiting for Frank Langella to come back. He said he'd be back!
1 year, 11 months ago on Dolph Lundgren wants Channing Tatum or Chris Hemsworth for He-Man
You scored this pretty much the same as I did, maybe a little higher in fact. I think Battleship might've had some actual relevancy if it came out during the 90's. Alongside Independence Day and Armageddon perhaps? And by that I mean, skirted the line where a film is so bad it's good. And even today when you re-watch them, you'll enjoy the silly awesomeness. Battleship was just downright silly. The premise and the sheer motive to even making this film still boggles my mind. However that being said I guess I'm part of the problem in seemingly watching these 'popcorn' films.
Battleship definitely takes itself a bit seriously and I think it has to be, especially with how much respect they show towards the military. But take that away, you're still left with an incredibly slow start, a shoehorned love story to start and close the film (yeah, that's a spoiler, but honestly whatever), never explained reasons why the aliens invade or why they discriminate what they see in red and green, with all their advanced technology why did they only have ships that seemingly breast-stroked through the ocean to move, similarly I get it's a plot point but how can you accidentally crash into a satellite sabotaging your own communications array upon entry into Earth, why were some aliens compassionate and others weren't and really this list of anomalies is endless! But I digress in this type of film, sometimes things which should make sense and should be explained just never do or are. Actually scratch that, just don't expect them to be. I think my favourite part of the movie was the explanation of how to play Battleship right before they literally play Battleship on-screen. I know it wasn't supposed to be funny, but that moment had me seriously laughing.
Battleship is beyond forgettable. So much so if you're interested in watching it, you might as well catch The Asylum's 'American Battleship' starring Mario Van Peebles and Carl Weathers. At least it doesn't pretend not to be terrible.
2 years, 2 months ago on Review: Battleship
This. Actually looks.... genuinely interesting. Good metaphor with it possibly being his 8 Mile movie. I thought albeit brief he did a good job in Soderbergh's Haywire, but I saw a more conceited effort towards his acting in that film. With it being his life on screen, it just might be what he needed to showcase something more. I was intent on completely ignoring this film's existence, call it a really well edited trailer but I do kinda sorta maybe want to watch this movie now.
2 years, 3 months ago on Trailer: Magic Mike
2 years, 3 months ago on The Movie Blog's new commenting system