Posts Tagged ‘Spider-man’

Film Reviews!: The Social Network

October 6, 2010

Hello all my shway-keteers!  (wow, that needs work).  I know it’s been a LONG time but I’m back in what I THINK is “the saddle” and I’m ready to start the bloggin’ once again.  I’ve decided to add reviews to the site for a very significant reason:  I think it’s all I have left to offer.  After I made the startling discovery of what the kids are calling “the Twitter,” I realized that anything that I could want to share or distribute over the internet could be done in 140 characters or less.  Film, however, my most lasting love in this life, yearns to be discussed.  Film and television and entertainment, as a whole, cannot be critiqued or evaluated in passing.  It needs elaboration.  So I’m going to start throwing the proverbial hat in the critic’s ring, in the hopes of expressing what I feel is (terribly) wrong with cinema (maybe even some things that are right.  Yay?)  My approach is simple.  I will discuss the piece in general, its flaws, positives, indifferent moments, then I will rate it on a scale of 100.  100 being a perfect movie, 50 being an average movie and 0 being one of the worst movies ever made, a completely inconceivable pile of filth that didn’t deserve the print it was delivered on.  So don’t think of it as a grading scale, think of it as a full, 100 point bell curve.  AAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNDDDDD we’re off!!!

David Fincher has a knack for making mainstream movies both beautiful and relevant.  This is a skill that is absolutely paramount to acquire in the industry as Hollywood generally ends up splitting the bill during the fiscal year, funding a plethora of movies geared solely towards profit margins, as well as a more meager slate of flicks designed to seduce the academy towards the end of the year in order to keep the studio in a ‘respectable’ light. His filmography reads of some of the most successful films (both financially and critically) in the past decade.  Se7en, Fight Club, Zodiac, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, and now, The Social Network.  The through-line in most of his work, is an attention to pace and fluidity.  Fincher is nothing if not masterfully-kinetic.  He can take a dialogue-deluged script and shuttle it along at speeds reminiscent of Michael Bay or Brett Ratner, while STILL maintaining the story’s integrity, imagine that!

A fairly base hypothesis for why the man has such a mastery over his craft would lie in the years of time he spent as a music video director for roughly ten years from the late 80’s to the early 90’s.  Being forced to tell a story in around three minutes with little to no dialogue set to music is a task that will develop a sense of energy in your work.  Just ask any film school grad.  And while these are all simply wild hypotheses, I seem to be able to feel fully validated in them as The Social Network exists entirely almost as one long, beautifully shot music video.  That’s not to take anything away from the movie, necessarily, it just speaks to the overall tone that Fincher has set, and I want to believe that that tone is set from an intentional, psychological place.

My generation, one of the very first to basically grow up with Facebook (To date myself, I first signed on to Facebook my senior year of high school.  I was attending a university during high school so I had a .edu e-mail address, allowing me access), seems to have become defined by our succinct attention spans and constant yearning for diversity and multiplicity in all facets of life.  We work fast, we play fast, we rest fast, and if something isn’t up to our immediately-gratified standards, we have no problem trimming away the fat, throwing away the fluff, and digging in to something else, something more immediate, something more enticing.  The internet, the very overarching topic of discussion in The Social Network, has given us every bit of information and ability to create/interact with the rest of the world.

And this is precisely how Fincher’s latest endeavor feels.  It feels like a 120-minute-long music video hurtling along at a 3-minute video’s pace.  And yet, it never feels sloppy.  It never feels forced.  Fincher is able to fully realize his world, in his time, on his terms within this seemingly expanded frame.  Of course, he also had all the pieces of the puzzle fit perfectly together, as well.  Trent Reznor’s score is a spot-on parallel for the action onscreen.  Every feeling, memory, and discussion caught on film seems to be perfectly buoyed by Reznor’s techno-tronic score.  While they highlight the different moments of each beat perfectly, they also manage to retain a sense of universality and act as a thread throughout the entirety of the production in order to keep the pace marching forward.  The overall emotion and ‘feel’ of the film itself is, ironically, conveyed through one of the most mechanized, digital scores of all time.  And yet, it works.  It perfectly works.

The cast of this film is quite impressive, as well.  Jesse Eisenberg has yet to disappoint me as he plays an emotionally disjointed version of Facebook creator Mark Zuckerberg.  Eisenberg does a perfect job of bringing screenwriter Aaron Sorkin’s interpretation of Zuckerberg to full-form as an emotionally misguided, driven, slightly misogynistic genius who sees the world in less than a three-dimensional sense but, instead, more of a binary code.   Andrew Garfield, our Godsend of a new Peter Parker, plays Eduardo Saverin.  Zuckerberg’s only true friend and the start-up CFO of thefacebook.com.  Garfield handles himself so well in the part of the ironically emotional and turbulent business end of the company, trying to act as a moral compass for Zuckerberg who he worries is simply getting swept up in the tides of the of fame as Facebook begins to become a larger and larger monster of itself.

And the supporting cast really adds so much to this film, as well, Rashida Jones works perfectly as the inevitable angel of reason to Zuckerberg’s beastly temperament.  Justin Timberlake continues to bowl over the competition by playing the greasy, snarky, but strangely-likable Sean Parker, founder of Napster, and one of the original entrepreneurs of the peer-to-peer revolution.  And Max Minghella, Josh Pence, and Armie Hammer respectfully play the suing trio behind Harvard Connection who look to profit off of Zuckerberg’s fortune.

The acting is absolutely spot-on, and is a testament to Fincher’s casting abilities and his artistic prowess as a director of actors.  Eisenberg shines the brightest in his highly nuanced, yet specified portrayal of Zuckerberg, yet this is perfectly acceptable, given the weight which Eisenberg is expected to uphold.  The glaring problem that The Social Network does run into is it’s slight emotional disconnect with audiences.  What is usually a monumental cinematic fault really becomes nothing more than a blemish on Fincher’s otherwise fabulous narrative.  In what may have been an effort, or even an after-effect, of producing a film centering on Generation Facebook’s digital dependency, The Social Network at times feels as though it is moving too fast or glazing over moments too casually that otherwise may desire to be fleshed out in other works.  And yet, that’s exactly what this entire parable of Fincher’s is all about.  In the age of instantaneous ALL things do move faster than we may desire them to, things may get lost in translation.  All we can do is sift through what we have and do the best to make moments of connection happen in an age where people feel much more comfortable giving out a webpage than a phone number.

It should also be noted that Sorkin’s script is not one for accuracy, in multiple facets.  While no one knows PRECISELY how the story went down, it should be noted that glaring inconsistencies have already been brought up with certain key elements of the film.  Zuckerberg has denied any wanted involvement of his own in attending any of the final clubs that the film almost seems to base his creation of Facebook on.  Zuckerberg is still with his Chinese-American girlfriend that was actually with him as Facebook was coming to fruition.  There is no failed relationship debacle with a one, Erica Albright, which caused Zuckerberg to spiral out of contral that one, fateful night.  Further, Sorkin seems to turn his girlfriend into a Facebook groupie, painting her as nothing more than a clinger-on after Facebook’s founder begins to reap the enormous rewards of his work.  While there are considerably others that I have been told of yet I am not adroit enough to have caught, it stands to be noted that Zuckerberg is painted in an increasingly negative light.  He is an anti-hero, at best, and the overall arch of the story is in the hopes that Zuckerberg will ‘see the light’ and realize the error of his ways.  It does an incredible job of making a story more fantastical, it just doesn’t seem fair to base a character off of an actual human figure and then paint in such a light with such distinct colors.

All that aside, The Social Network is an excellent cinematic achievement that manages to bring together all the filmic ingredients that best make a ‘good’ movie.  The flick’s tone, thematic construct, and score are among some of it’s strongest moments and give it an absolute edge over most of the other entries into 2010’s moviescape.

Performances: 88/100

Cinematography: Aesthetics: 84/100

Score: 94/100

Script: 80/100

Final: 84/100

Advertisements

Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you…CAPTAIN AMERICA!

March 19, 2010

…Kind of.  There has been much contention over who would become the mightiest of all Avengers over the last few months.  Rumors have been swirling that run the gamut from John Krasinski (Jim of The Office) all the way to Channing Tatum (G.I. Joe).  Very little headway has been made and it all has felt like a great, big round-robin of sorts with the casting.  Collider was where I first heard the news today, however, that Chris Evans (The Human Torch in the Fantastic Four franchise) has been offered the role as The First Avenger by Marvel Mouse.  Interestingly, Evans has yet to accept the offer, and may even hesitate to do so.  The agreement locks the actor who will portray Cap down to a three picture deal ON TOP OF an Avengers flick, as well as multiple possible appearances in smaller Marvel vehicles, as well.  This is a fairly overwhelming amount of commitment for a role that has been rumored to only be worth $300,000, initially.  And while the argument that $300,000 is a lot for playing a dress-up IS well-heard on this blogsite, allow me to remind you that Marvel looks to make GANGBUSTERS on this franchise.  This flick, if done right, could easily put up Spider-Man numbers and Marvel is fully aware.  So the concept of being locked down for the next five to ten years of your life for a less than standard sum may not be all that glamourous to Mr. Evans.  (Granted, this writer would actually PAY to play one of his super hero childhood heroes, but I digress).  With Hugo Weaving attached as The Red Skull, I can’t say at all that I’m disappointed with this casting news.  As a matter of fact, I have quite a bit of faith in Evans over the other pile of names that have been slung around over the past month.  This, of course, is because I was taught a lesson after bitching incessantly for months about Heath Ledger being cast as The Joker.  And we all saw how that worked out.

The Next Actor to Play Spider-Man

January 14, 2010

I stumbled upon this quick, concise mash-up of ten Hollywood actors who could, and very well may, fill Maguire’s empty shoes as the new Spider-Man.  Something to consider with this list is that the new Spider-Man is said to be a reboot set in Peter Parker’s high school years.  Due to this, 9/10 of this list reads as a who’s-who of young, male Hollywood.  And while I take EXTREME grievance with much of the selections, I think it’s interesting to hear Empire’s take on the whole matter.  Some actors that they SADLY left off this list are the obvious, yet older, Topher Grace, and Andrew Garfield, who was recently quite spot-on in The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus.  Follow the link below!

Empire’s Top 10 Actors to Play Spider-Man

Conan O’Brien Beats NBC With a Weapon They Know Nothing Of: Tact.

January 12, 2010

My, has it been an exciting week in Hollywoodland!  First my dreams come true with the usurping of Raimi’s Spider-man franchise, and now Conan is finally telling NBC to shove it!  Hurray for bold moves!

What has developed over at NBC is the result of piss-poor decision-making and NBC’s acquiescense to Jay Leno, the antiquated comedian who ousted Letterman for the very position in question oh so many years ago.  The Peacock Network had moved Leno up to an unprecedented 10 o’clock time slot from his 11:30 time slot on The Tonight Show in an attempt to replace more expensive, scripted programming with Leno’s much cheaper, theoretcially more popular, late-night show.  The move was absolutely disastrous for NBC’s late-night ratings, and eventually proved to be poisonous to all surrounding programs, even local news sets!  As the show directly following Leno, The Tonight Show (now manned by a promoted Conan O’Brien) began to lose steam in the ratings race, as well.  Things became so bad for NBC that local broadcasting affiliates threatened to drop the network if it did not resolve the late-night fiasco and attempt to salvage their numbers. 

No answer is easily found in this equation.  At least not to the exectutives.  For me, it’s quite simple.  Fire Leno, forever, and leave Conan right where he is.  Replace that God awful attempt of a show that Leno perpetrated with the scripted television that he replaced.  Le sigh.  But this isn’t my world, pretties.  No, this is Earth.  The same place where Paris Hilton is still allowed to exist.  Anyway, the problem is that Leno is financially more bankable than Conan in the numbers game.  Well, he was, at least, when all these prior moves went down.  The other problem is that Conan and Leno both have AMAZING agents and managers who have managed to give NBC a huge headache over this whole debacle.  Conan is contracted to host The Tonight Show, and cannot be removed from that franchise, which means that they can’t merely push Conan back and call Leno’s new failure “The Tonight Show.”  That is Conan’s and Conan’s only.  The loophole is that they CAN simply move the age-old Tonight Show wherever they want it.  Which is precisely what NBC would like to do.  Word broke on Sunday that The Jay Leno Show would be moving to an 11:35 time slot and would promptly push O’Brien’s Tonight Show to 12:05.  This seemed to solve all their problems at once, as it made good on Conan’s contract and it put Leno (who is contracted millions of dollars whether he works or not, so dropping him is simply out of the question) back where he is most poised to make money.  This seemed to solve all of their problems…until Conan did what I absolutely love him for.  He unwaveringly stood his ground.  O’Brien issued a statement on January 12th stating that he would not move the program to the new time slot as it would “damage what I consider to be the greatest franchise in the history of broadcasting.”  O’Brien also sighted that the move would be unfair to his replacement on Late Night, Jimmy Fallon.  With an incredible amount of poise and tact, Conan went on to describe how he had been preparing for years for the opportunity to host The Tonight Show and that he refused to see it eventually go down in flames due to NBC’s negligence. 

Whether or not you believe that Conan is really looking towards the future and actually attempting to salvage everyone’s career who is involved, you have to acknowledge that Conan has managed to come out on top of this situation the least-unscathed.  And while it very well may be that this is all one big ego trip about time slots and who’s playing second fiddle, I honestly don’t think it matters.  Conan’s points about the franchise of The Tonight Show inevitably tanking are all MORE than relevant, and his comment regarding being unfair to Fallon is a double-edged sword which reminds the public just how unfair NBC is being to Conan, himself!  O’Brien was promised the chance to carry on The Tonight Show’s legacy and that chance is being further and further diminished by NBC’s thoughtless business practices. 

Which brings me to my favorite part.  As Conan himself states in his letter, you needn’t be sorry for him. While he doesn’t specifically address this notion, the fact of the matter is that he is far too lucrative a talent to be thrown to the wolves.  If NBC refuses to make good on what they promised him, Conan will EASILY be able to find other, better opportunities elsewhere.  Personally, I think that O’Brien is a gargantuan talent that has not been able to fully grow yet, as a comedian and an artist.  I wish that he would enlist with a low-budget cable network (*ahem* Comedy Central *ahem*) where he would have full creative control and be restricted by absolutely nothing but his own mind.  Regardless of where he ends up, however, there is one thing that I would certainly put my money on: Conan O’Brien WILL have the last laugh.  And that puts an even bigger smile on my face than the one I had yesterday when I heard that Mopey Maguire would no longer be Spider-Man.  At this rate, I can’t wait to see what happens tomorrow!  Maybe Michael Bay will end up in prison for 35 to life!

P.S.  This is the Yahoo article which contains Conan’s public letter.  A great read!

Happy “Tobey Maguire is No Longer Spider-Man Day” Everyone!

January 11, 2010

Today, January 11th, 2010, we learned that talks have fallen through with Raimi and the studios and that the director of the first three Spider-chronicles will not return to direct the fourth.  With him, he is taking the principle cast of at least Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst.  And it looks like 2010 is already shaping up to be the breath of fresh air that we had all been anticipating it to be!  Maguire as a casting choice has always struck me as an irritating and awkward move.  While I obviously understand that I am in the minority on this issue, I have still never fully understood the draw that Maguire brings to the franchise.  Short of physically semi-resembling the character of Peter Parker, and having an impressive resume of The Cider House Rules and Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas at the time of casting, Tobey Maguire plays the character of Peter Parker as everything he was not.  Quiet, one-dimensional, and purely reactionary in his civilian life.  The character of Peter Parker functions as a largely ascerbic, sardonic, loud-mouthed little punk who lucked out BIG TIME in the superhero lottery after being bitten by a radioactive spider.  In his origin story, Spider-Man is actually a bit of a primadonna.  He lets his new-found fame get to him and allows a common criminal to easily slip right by him which (spoiler alert for all of you who have never watched TV/read a comic before) leads to the death of his dear Uncle Ben.  This act alone launches him into a quest for vengeance and justice that spurs the character’s heroic, good-natured tendencies and pushes the super-hero narrative further.

Maguire is none of those things.  He is quiet, brooding, introverted, and almost inept to social conventions.  While he can be a talented actor, it is clear that Maguire had no previous connection to the character before the script and decided to dote more on Parker’s nerdiness than his actual inherent bravado and surrogate machismo.  Rather than portray the wise-cracking, originally anti-heroic Parker of the comics, Maguire crafted his own, dulled-down rendition.  Which simply didn’t work.

This has been my problem with the franchise from the beginning.  Along the way, Kirsten Dunst has always failed to capture the iconic femme fatale that Mary Jane Watson always embodied and the awkward and unsubtle mix-up of the classic storyline, i.e. Gwen Stacy coming in AFTER Mary Jane, Mary Jane marrying Jameson’s son, etc., etc., are all further problems that left me fully disenfranchised by the series.  Then, of course, there’s Venom.  One of Spider-Man’s greates foes and a treat that fan-boys have waited years to see onscreen.  I won’t even go into the shortcomings that were apparent from that endeavor.  However, that does launch me into the short list of praise that I had for the now-defunct franchise.  While it did very little right, Raimi’s three picture chronicle DID manage to produce certain elements of the story perfectly.  Mostly, Alfred Molina was a WONDERFUL Doc Octopus, and his story was quite well-done, also.  Willem Dafoe performed well as the Green Goblin and James Franco nicely assisted in his role of Harry Osbourne.  Also, J.K. Simmons is as close to J. Jonah Jameson as we will ever actually get onscreen, and I ADORE every minute of screen time he received.  And in a moment of wishful thinking, I’d like to acknowledge Topher Grace who was COMPLETELY ERRONEOUSLY cast as Venom.  While totally inappropriate as the muscle-head photographer Eddie Brock, Grace COULD have been the quintessential Peter Parker, and yet EVERYONE seems to have simply breezed over this.  Grace has the perfect dry, sarcastic wit and persona to match Parker’s fluently.  His appearance is even more Parker-esque than Maguire.  With a slightly more kinetic/frenetic dispostition, Grace would have been PERFECT for the role.  But these are all events that never transpired…

I have had an outspoken hatred for this franchise for the longest time, as I do with almost ALL superhero franchises (X-Men, The Punisher, Watchmen, Superman Returns, Daredevil, Elecktra, etc., etc.), which is fueled from my LOVE of each original franchise (did I mention that I’m a nerd?).  So this news marks a new holiday for me!  Yay!  The news that is circling the intranets is that a reboot of the franchise is now slated for 2012 (you didn’t actually think that Sony would just leave this prospect dead in the water, did you?  There’s MONEY to be made!).  So what I thought I would never see in the next ten years (the spidey-saga rebooted) I will see in three!  SOOOOOOOOO EXCITED!  As always, below is a link to /Film’s article on the subject.  And even below that is some shameless self promotion.  Feel free to comment all over about how foolish I am for not seeing the “raw potential” that Tobey Maguire has been “wowing” audiences with for the past 8 years.

/Film

Bears With Sparklers

Hope in Cinema

May 20, 2009

SCA078

While not too long ago I wrote a page about the overwhelming dearth of sequels, prequels, reboots and remakes that are currently cropping up and strangling the grape vine of creativity in Hollywood, there recently has been a mini-revolution forming just under the surface of Hollywood’s cold, icy exterior of titles that have actually inspired hope in the face of a crippling wave of lifeless franchise flicks.

mystery

First off, Derrick Comedy’s Mystery Team.  Described as a mixture of Scooby-Doo and Super Troopers, the ingenious sketch groups first foray into the feature length market premiered at Sundance to rave reviews, yet, failed to inspire enough faith in its marketability to secure a distributor; until now.  Just recently, Lionsgate’s Roadside Attractions monicker picked up the film for distribution, giving the film a second chance at life.

morris

I Love You, Philip Morris was stuck in much the same state.  The comedy which sees Jim Carrey play a homosexual in prison who falls in love with his cell mate and attempts to break out of jail once his cell mate is released.  Being a HUGE Jim Carrey fan, the premise sounds wonderfully original yet distributors had cold feet about the project’s homosexual undertones.  Finally, Consolidated Pictures Group picked up the piece and will be releasing it shortly.

theroad1

Another title that has been mired by release issues but just recently broke through to see the light of day is The Road.  Set in a post-apocalyptic dystopia where cannibalism abounds, The Road follows a boy and his father on their quest to find food while avoiding peril at every junction.  While the Cormac McCarthy novel-inspired film never had a problem securing distribution in the way of the Weinsteins, the film has been sitting in limbo for quite a while as it was supposed to be released to be a contender last Oscar season due to “Visual effects issues.”  Many speculated that this ambiguous heading spelled doubt and a lack in confidense from the Weinsteins themselves, however, sure enough, The Road has been re-slated for an October 2009 release, just in time to play a role in the upcoming Oscar season. 

inceptioncasting8

Out of troubled film news and into films yet to be completed, Christopher Nolan’s Bat-sandwiched Inception looks to be another classic work by the director who can seemingly do no wrong.  Little is known about Nolan’s next work other than it is described as “a contemporary sci-fi actioner set within the architecture of the mind,” and it stars Ken Watanabe, Michael Caine, Leonardo DiCaprio, Ellen Page, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, and Cillian Murphy.  The director alone would bring me to my seat, not to mention the bevy of acting heavy hitters.

nolans dark knigt

And of course, behind Inception, Nolan is expected to follow up with a third Batman that I will see even if he does cast Cher as Catwoman (at one time an ACTUAL rumor).  Rounding out the other superhero themed could-be-goods are Iron Man 2, Thor (Kenneth Branagh is attached to direct), and Spider-Man 4 as Sam Raimi has gone on record to say that he wants to patch up the errors he made in Spidey 3 and produce “the best [“Spider-Man” movie] of the bunch.”

sherlock-holmes-trio

And since it seems that you can never have too much Robert Downey Jr. anymore, I am also immensely excited for the Guy Richie-helmed Sherlock Holmes slated for release in December of ’09. 

Funny-People-1806

Judd Apatow’s Funny People looks to be an immense winner as it will tie the Apatow family and the Happy Madison behemoth together to (hopefully) produce one superstar of a comedic drama.  As much of a Adam Sandler fan as I am, his comedic work as of recent has seemed lackluster at best (while his dramatic work has soared to levels that NO ONE thought him capable of) and gone seem to be the days of his comedic classics such as Happy Gilmore, Billy Madison and The Waterboy.  Perhaps pairing with a certified juggernaut in the form of Apatow’s production team will be enough to kickstart the funnyman’s comedy muscle again and get him back to helming the quality comedy that I know he is capable of. 

Ghostbusters_1024

And finally, in classic comedic muscle news, there’s Ghostbusters 3.  Now, normally I am COMPLETELY against junctures like this one where a classic, beloved franchise is unearthed an inappropriately amount of time after the series has CLEARLY run its course (see: Indiana Jones).  However, I cannot help but become giddy over the prospect of this film.  And here’s why.  ALL the original cast members (sans Rick Moranis) are back to reprise their role.  And while Reitman seems to be too busy to pick up at the director’s chair, Ramis has been rumored to be willing to step up to the plate and assume the role!  Of course, I will be the very first to come out and say how easily this jaunt into nostalgia could turn out awful (it’s been over twenty years, people) but at the same time, for reasons I can only partially explain, I really want to see this title succeed.  Which is proof that I don’t instantly start to froth at the mouth once I hear the word ‘sequel.’  Only when I hear the words, ‘George Lucas.’

And You Thought Indiana Jones 4 Was Egregious…

April 29, 2009

indycred

This is insane. Absolutely insane. I have been bitching about the dearth of creativity in Hollywood for years now, blubbering about the black hole of originality that the studios seem content to simply stew in. Unfortunately, the viewing public doesn’t seem to mind. Box office sales for that trainwreck Indiana Jones 4 hit $700 million worldwide. I got news for ya, people, studios see a number such as 700 million and instinctively go, “WE NEED MORE!”

To prove my point further that there really and truly is a glut of unoriginal, hack writers, producers and directors owning Hollywood right now, take a look at this incredibly long, sad, and pathetic list of upcoming sequels:

Predator sequel entitled: “Predators”
Alien prequel
Drop Dead Fred remake
Wall Street 2 starring Shia LeBeauf
Clueless sequel
Who Framed Roger Rabbit sequel
Adventures in Babysitting remake
Indiana Jones 5
Fast and the Furious sequel
Tron reboot
Robin Hood reboot
Terminator: Salvation
Transformers 2
DaVinci Code prequel: Angels and Demons
Clash of the Titans reboot
Odysseus reboot
Night at the Museum reboot
Twilight sequel
2 Harry Potter sequels
Wanted sequel
The Mechanic remake
Star Trek reboot
S. Darko: the Donnie Darko sequel
H2: Halloween remake
Crank 2
Nightmare on Elm Street remake
Videodrome remake
Tintin sequel
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles reboot
Toy Story 3
G.I. Joe remake
Sin City 2
Spider-Man 4
Sherlock Holmes remake
X-Men: First Class
Batman 3
Iron Man 2
Ghostbusters 3

Now granted, some of these films I am EXTREMELY excited for. Ghostbusters 3, Batman 3, Sherlock Holmes, TMNT, and a few others (most of the bottom of the list), but it only further serves my point that all we have to look forward to are reboots and revamps of previous franchises. Where’s the new material? Other than Humpty Dumpty and Sucker Punch there is absolutely nothing up-and-coming and original that has me excited. How in the world can this many people involved in “the art of film” come up with this mega-list of repackaged material? A good remake or sequel here and there is wonderful. I loved The Dark Knight. But this? Yikes.