If this is indeed true, the I'll be one happy happy geek. It appears (Agent Smith from the Matrix series, Lord Elrond from the Lord of the Rings trilogy and most recently "V") has been cast to be the voice of Megatron in the upcoming Transformers movie. I've been saying on The Movie Blog for months now that THIS is the guy I've wanted for the voice of the head Decepticon.
Don't get me wrong, as a kid I loved the voice of Frank Welker, but I've said repeatedly that his voice would sound way too out of place in a live action film. His voice was perfect for the cartoon..
. but really..
. on the big screen in a love action environment it would have sounded silly. Sorry 80's cartoon purists.
.. but it's 100% true.
Weaving has a terrific voice, and KNOWS how to use it. The passion and intensity he's able to bring to a voice character is amazing and he's also experienced in doing voice work. This makes him perfect for Megatron (in my opinion).
being brought back as Optimus Prime works. I think his is a voice that translates well in both animated and live environments, and it should be enough to satisfy our desire for nostalgia of the 80's. This is a good day.
I can't wait to hear Transformers detractors come up with reasons to cry about this. :P Hey there guys, just a quick update. Sorry for the lack of posts so far today.
.. but I'm going to be in the theaters most of the afternoon.
. I'll do most of my posting in the early evening I think. WOW!
!! I can't believe how much feedback that post on Studios editing a Director's movie got!
Almost 80 comments and just over 50 emails. It was a GREAT discussion..
. fantastic points brought up by many. So let's carry the debate on.
.. TONIGHT, on the live " " show (3pm PST, 6pm EST, 10pm GMT) the main topic will be this one.
I invite all you guy to listen to the show and call in to make your thoughts known! Don't just throw your comments up on the chat board..
. because they go by way too fast for a topic like this one. Make sure to call in and we'll get you on air.
Talk to you later!
While its very in to bash on Eddie Murphy's lack of class at the Oscars - something I have dubbbed "Eddie-quette" (etiquette) and plan to use to describe Diva behaviour in celebrities - I actually like this idea for Eddie's next movie. Gabrielle Union, Ed Helms and Elizabeth Banks are joining Eddie Murphy's crew in the fish-out-of-water comedy "Starship Dave.This screams of a combination of Men in Black, Inner Space, Osmosis Jones, combined with that sitcom that showed a bunch of people in the thought process of the main character's head."
"Starship" centers on a spaceship that takes the form of a human (Murphy). It's operated by 100 human-looking, quarter-inch-tall aliens seeking a way to save their planet. Complications ensue when their captain (also played by Murphy) falls in love with an Earth woman (Banks) who dates losers.
And I like it.
I am a bit disturbed with the fact that "Norbit" director, Brian Robbins is directing this.
Norbit was not acclaimed as a good career move for Murphy. I am so tired of the multiple character routine. I know he is playing "Dave" as well as the avatar captain of the "crew" inside him, but that makes sense.
Its the seven exaggerated characters in one movie that just bored me. It was funny once. Maybe twice.
But I have to hand it to Murphy. Sure he lacked some class at the Oscars, and we had our fun poking at him for it. But really, this guy is LIVING IT.
Honestly, with the goofy fun personality Murphy likes to play, if I was in his shoes I would probably want to do light comedy goofy stuff for the rest of my career too.
Screw the Oscars. This is your JOB to have fun, make jokes and get paid MILLIONS to do it.
I didn't say that everyone had to like his movies, but if Murphy didn't have fun doing them I am sure he would seek out other dramatic roles and make another run at the Oscar. People would kill for his lifestyle. He gets paid to goof around.
And really, his movies sell. Norbit was a creepy bad movie, but it made money. It may have changed people's opinion of him and theoretically cost him an Oscar, but we all know in Hollywood, if it sells they will make it.
Even if it sucks. At least this idea for his next movie actually sounds like it might be fun and we can see Murphy doing the comedic roles he is best at.
28 Weeks later has an interesting twist on a sequel, but it is still a sequel.
I am not typically a fan of sequels but this is news I don't mind hearing.
HorrorMovies.ca has posted a crazy early review of 28 weeks later.I really liked 28 days later.They were let into an early screening of the first portion of the film and the word is it rocks your socks. The movie is set six months after the rage virus has annihilated the British Isles. The US Army declares that the war against infection has been won, and that the reconstruction of the country can begin.
In the first wave of returning refugees, a family is reunited -- but one of them unwittingly carries a terrible secret. The virus is not yet dead, and this time, it is more dangerous than ever.
It was a great take on the Zombie genre. But at the same time I hesitate to throw my excitement at a sequel.
I could be proven wrong, and it has happened before, but it doesn't change my hesitation.
I often HOPE that I am wrong about these things so that we can see more of a good movie.
I hope I am wrong about this too. If the early review is any indication, I might be pleasantly treated to a solid sequel.
After directing a couple documentaries, Russell Crowe is about to take the big step up to feature films. His first effort to direct will be a movie based on a documentary Crowe narrated.
The fact-based film is about a counterculture movement in a surf community in Australia, which Stuart Beattie will write.Surfers huh?Variety reports the studio will base the film on the documentary, of the same name, that focuses on Sunny, Koby and Jai Abberton, three brothers who began the underground surfer movement in the inner-Sydney seaside suburb of Maroubra. It addresses the triumphs of the large, rough-and-tumble group, as well as their social struggles.
With a title like that I would figure most would assume it was about lingerie. But no, its about these brothers.
For those not in the know (or not Beatles fans - Obla-di obla-da life goes on bra!
) Bra is a slang for brother in most places in the world. I know this isn't shocking news, but someone might not know and think that this touching movie about surfer brothers is actually some expose on cross dressers.
Good on Russell Crowe.
Climbing the ladder just like any celebrity should. I have no problems with actors learning to direct, and there has been a number of success stories. But there is a process.
It looks like Crowe is earning his stripes as he goes along and that I find very respectable.
There was a story that surfaced that other day surrounding the new film " " directed by Julie Taymor (who also directed Frida). You see, apparently the studio didn't like her cut of the film, so... without her permission (not that they required it) they went and re-cut it themselves.
A lot of people around the web thought that was terrible for the studio to do (me included). But now more details are coming out about it that has me re-thinking my position a bit. gives us this: After director Julie Taymor's cut of Across the Universe, featuring music of the Beatles, was greeted with derision by preview audiences, it was recut by Revolution Studios chief Joe Roth and shown last week to a receptive audience in Phoenix, AZ that gave it a score of 86 percent, L.
A. Weekly columnist Nikki Finke reported Tuesday, citing unnamed sources. But when Taymor learned of the screening, insiders told Finke, she had an angry "meltdown.
" One studio insider told Finke: "We were dealing with a woman who has absolutely no sense of commercial potential. At one point, [Sony Pictures Co-chairman] Amy Pascal took her to dinner and diplomatically told her 'how good it could be' if only she'd cut the movie. But Julie still refused.
Indeed, that's the refrain of everyone: there's a great movie in there, somewhere. But, as [Taymor's cut] stands now, it's so complicated it's just a bad movie." Ok, so if I'm understanding this correctly.
.. Look, I'm all for maintaining the artistic vision of the director.
I really am. HOWEVER..
. the director isn't the one who stands to lose millions of dollars if the movie they made sucks. The Studios pay for it.
.. and as the people who pay for everything.
.. they have (and rightly so) the final word.
If they are wise, they'll only use that power rarely. To me, this is one of those situations where the studio was probably justified in stepping in. If they thought it was a bad film as it was currently edited, and audiences didn't like it.
.. and everyone else they showed it to thought it was bad.
...
then the studio needs to protect their investment and make changes. Taymor SHOULD have done the changes herself..
. but she refused. So what was the studio supposed to do?
Just let their money fly out the window so Taymor could get her way? No. In my opinion, they did the right thing in this situation.
Taymor should have been more professional and cooperated with the people who paid her to do the job and paid for the movie. Just my two cents worth. What do you think?
To me, Hellboy is one of those really underrated films that just didn't get appreciated enough. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it's the best comic book film in history, but it was a solid solid piece of work and I was really happy when it finally got the green light to move forward with the sequel. So now, the studios have released the official synopsis for the film and announced a release date as well.
The good folks over at give us the following: After an ancient truce existing between humankind and the invisible realm of the fantastic is broken, hell on Earth is ready to erupt. A ruthless leader who treads the world above and the one below defies his bloodline and awakens an unstoppable army of creatures. Now, it's up to the planet's toughest, roughest superhero to battle the merciless dictator and his marauders.
He may be red. He may be horned. He may be misunderstood.
But when you need the job done right, it's time to call in Hellboy (Ron Perlman).
Along with his expanding team in the Bureau for Paranormal Research and Development--pyrokinetic girlfriend Liz (Selma Blair), aquatic empath Abe (Doug Jones) and protoplasmic mystic Johann--the BPRD will travel between the surface strata and the unseen magical one, where creatures of fantasy become corporeal. And Hellboy, a creature of two worlds who's accepted by neither, must choose between the life he knows and an unknown destiny that beckons him.
The synopsis doesn't really blow my socks off, but I'll give Del Toro the benefit of the doubt on this one (especially after seeing Pan's Labyrinth). The movie opens in theaters August 1st 2008! 
I'm one of those guys who was stoked beyond belief when I first heard news of Freddy vs.
Jason. In my mind it was too good to be true. As it turns out, it was too good to be true.
.. because the movie sucked.
But still, the novelty factor alone was pretty cool. Ever since, huge amounts of people have been wetting themselves for a Freddy vs. Jason vs.
Ash film. The project came close a couple of time to becoming a reality, but each time it fizzled. Too bad.
But then came word that a Freddy vs. Jason vs. Michael might be a possibility.
Well, according to Freddy himself, it could be VERY close...
and more than that...
it might have John Carpenter in the director's chair. The folks at give us this: Englund tells MTV that John Carpenter, director of “Halloween”, is in talks with New Line to work out a way to do the oft-rumoured “Freddy Vs. Jason Vs.
Michael”. Englund has been keen to bring Myers into the mix for a couple of years now - at one stage even suggesting "Halloween" heroine, Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis), be reincarnated (she was killed off in "Halloween Resurrection") for one more bout with her regular adversary, Michael, as well as the two new rogues. I would have absolutely zero hope that this movie would be any "good", but like I said earlier, just for the sheer novelty factor, it could be fun to see.
But you know what, it doesn't matter who else you put in there with Freddy and Jason...
it won't be as good or as fun as it would have been if they had put Bruce Campbell in there as Ash to do battle with them. Sigh..
. oh well..
. I guess Michael will do. Well this one is just a huge mess waiting to erupt.
I wasn't that big of a fan of United 93. I applauded the film for taking on such a delicate subject and doing it in a very tasteful way, but I still think AS A MOVIE it was over-priased. However, there is something coming on the horizon that could get A LOT OF PEOPLE really upset.
A comedy version of United 93. Our friends over at give us this: After the lukewarm public response to United 93 and World Trade Center last year, it seemed that most people just weren’t ready to relive the dramatic events of 9/11 yet. Well now another year has passed… and British comedian Chris Morris is hoping that this time around, the public will be ready to not only relive 9/11, but also laugh at it as well!
He is reportedly developing a TV film for Channel 4 that is described as “a comedy version of United 93″. Excuse me a moment while I pick my jaw up off the floor. Personally, I don't really think enough time has passed yet to do a satire or comedy on the events of 9/11.
.. after all.
.. a lot of people didn't even think enough time had passed for a tasteful, memory honoring movie of the subject.
I'm often confronted by the words of the guys who do South Park. They once said (and I'm paraphrasing here): "You can either make fun of everything, or you can't make fun of anything". Those are true words.
.. but uncomfortable ones.
It seems to me that we all think it's ok to make fun of (even just in good fun) stuff that doesn't effect us personally. But in one form or another 9/11 effected us all. So the question is.
.. is it ok to do satire when it's about something that effected you?
My bottom line is this. Yes, it's ok for this guy to make a satire. But I'm personally not ready to see it.
Not yet. I'm still a few years away from being comfortable with it. But that's not to say other people can't be ready for it.
.. and maybe that's a good thing.
Pretty much all of us have at least 1 or 2 movies that we watched over and over and over again as kids. For some people it's The Wizard of Oz, or Lion King or some other flick like that. Well one of mine that I couldn't get enough of was .
There is just so much to like about that damn movie. The animation, the characters, the story..
. and yeah, the songs. Now, I'm not much for buying "Special Edition" dvds.
.. but Disney is putting out a special 2 disc DVD of The Jungle Book, and I'm not sure how on earth I'm going to be able to resist getting it.
gives us these details: When Disney releases a two-disc DVD of "The Jungle Book" on the animated classic's 40th anniversary October 2, expect an army of shoppers to invade stores. The studio has pegged just 14 animated feature films for "Platinum Edition" treatment, and "Jungle Book" is No. 10.
As with the other DVDs in the high-end series, the movie has been restored and includes such new features as a suite of games, deleted scenes and songs, as well as a retrospective feature with Bruce Reitherman, the voice of Mowgli.
The DVD release will be accompanied by an array of "Jungle Book"-themed consumer products so that big retailers will be able to create "Jungle Book" sections in their stores. Well, in the process of writing this post I've realized I haven't seen The Jungle Book in almost 10 years.
Think I'm going to have to run over to Blockbuster this afternoon and grab it...
and return my late copy of Mystery Men at the same time (make note).
Tom Cruise might still be Hollywood's resident crazy man, but is he crazy enough to take on Hitler?Tom Cruise is set to star in an untitled thriller based on an attempt to assassinate Adolf Hitler at the height of World War II.I am still a Tom Cruise fan. Tom Cruise the actor, not Tom Cruise the looney messiah.
Cruise had not intended to star in the project, which was acquired last week by his United Artists banner. However, during subsequent meetings, the project's director, Bryan Singer, became intrigued by the notion of Cruise as a central figure in the story and offered him the role. Cruise signed on Tuesday.
Honestly, I can't think of any Cruise movie I didnt like.
Oh wait, there was Vanilla Sky. But other than that he has always put out a good performance.
So do you think this movie will be based within reality with the assassination attempt failing?
Or will it be complete fiction with Hitler surviving. Depending on when during Hitler's reign this attempt was made, if it is successful imagine how it could change history? Will this movie tread on the fantasy to remove a historical figure so hated?
At least we can say things like "Not even Hitler could delay the Superman Sequel" now.
Get a conversation started about what public tax dollars should or shouldn't be spent on, and you'll get a LOT of people joining the conversation. This story that I read over at got me thinking about just that issue again.
First...
here's the story in question: Mexican directors Guillermo del Toro, Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu and Alfonso Cuaron, fresh off a raft of awards season accolades, have met with Mexico's new president to urge more support for the struggling national film industry. The so-called "three amigos" said on a Tuesday news program that they recently met with President Felipe Calderon in a bid to garner more backing for the industry. They added that they plan to meet with lawmakers Wednesday.
The three filmmakers, who also produce movies, are pressuring the federal government to create better distribution and exhibition opportunities for local production companies. Of about 60 films produced here in 2006, only half hit theaters. Ok, first let me say that I have NO PROBLEM with these guys looking to get support for their art and their business.
They have the right to ask, and I think there's nothing wrong with the asking. The question is..
. what should governments and societies do with those requests for public funds to assist a certain industry? According to reports, the movie industry generated almost $30 Billion dollars at the international box office last year.
.. and none of that takes DVD sales into account either.
There is no denying that the movies are a BIG business. A-List actors making upwards of $20 million per movie (really stupid) so much glitter and glamour doesn't really lend itself to being an industry with a poor man's hat out to the government looking for a hand out does it? On the one hand, take Canada for example.
Canada has HUGE tax breaks and benefits for making movies here (one of the reasons so many Hollywood movies are produced up North of the Boarder these days). The benefit is that it increases Canada's image on the international stage, it generates lots of jobs in the industry for people who live here, and those people pay taxes. There is no denying that there are some tangible benefits to the government helping out with the movie industry.
However, on the other hand...
when our education system, health system and just over all financial status is precarious to say the least...
is giving free money to a $30+ BILLION dollar industry really what tax payers dollars should be used for? They want to shoot a Samuel L. Jackson movie up here?
Great! What's that? Jackson alone is getting $8 million, the movie will probably make $50 million at the box office.
.. and they want ME to pay for it?
???
Are they going to share the profits by putting money back into the tax coffers? No? That doesn't seem right, and a LOT of people have a problem with it.
This is one of those rare issues that I don't really have a strong opinion on either way yet. I just thought it was an interesting question and I thought I'd throw it open to you guys to discuss. So what do you think?
Right after I announced that Mark Millar's Wanted is being produced, two members of the Wanted team (Bekmambetov-director and Lemley-producer) are announced to be working on 9, Shane Acker's Oscar nominated animated short turned feature film. And we get a pile of casting news to boot! Its like dominoes kids!
Focus has tapped Elijah Wood to voice the character 9, the lead rag doll in Shane Acker's post-apocalyptic toon of the same name.With news of a voice cast, it sounds like Acker's 9 is going to be expanding a LOT. The otherwise mute characters found in his short will be given more life and personality in this production with voices.
Jennifer Connelly, Crispin Glover, Martin Landau and John C. Reilly also will lend their voices to the production, an expansion of Acker's Academy Award-nominated short.
Scripted by Pamela Pettler, toon is being produced by Tim Burton, Timur Bekmambetov and Jim Lemley.
This looks deliciously dark and say what you will about Tim Burton, but if he is involved in any way, you know its going to be dark. The style is epic and yet simplistic. The fantasy world of tiny little sockpuppet people and animated mechanicals living in this world that is not only post apocalyptic, but that they exist on a much smaller scale lends a LOT of originality.
It is a beautiful film.
Gears of War is one of the biggest releases in XBox 360's recent lineup. This is one of the few games that were released in conjunction with the Playstation3 and Wii consoles to drive people to buy an XBox 360 instead.
And it has been an overwhelming success. But is it a movie? New Line hopes so.
Variety is reporting that New Line Cinema snagged the feature rights to Gears of War and that Stuart Beattie will be writing the script with Marty Bowen and Wyck Godfrey producing.As with most new titles, Gears of War offers a stunning visual game with plenty of impressive and downright scary opposition.
The rights went up for auction with a 21-page treatment by Beattie, best known for his script work on Collateral and Derailed.
And these are all it takes for a video game to make that leap from game to movie. That and a rabid fan base.
I hesitate to even feign interest in this movie since it is based on a video game, but I still hold out hope that one day a video game movie will come along and impress me enough to change my mind on the subject.
If this does get produced, and they stick to the materials in the game it wont just be another movie with the game popularity driving an unrelated story.
No word on a cast or production schedule as of yet.
Remember a while ago when everyone got all excited (me included) because Kevin Smith had signed up to write and direct The Green Hornet.It seemed like a good fit since Kevin Smith is a great storyteller and his well known as a massive comic book geek. But soon afterwards we learned that Smith backed out claiming that he didn't think he could do a good job (For a MUCH better telling of the story, go rent An Evening With Kevin Smith). But it looks like the ball has been picked up and a Green hornet movie is indeed going to be headed our way.
The folks over at give us the following: It is being reported that Columbia Pictures is bringing to the big screen the crime fighting exploits of the comic book hero, The Green Hornet. Columbia reportedly optioned rights from Neal H. Moritz who acquired them from Green Hornet Inc.
Moritz will executive produce.
International Herald Tribune quotes Moritz as saying, "With the radio show, television program, comic books and novels, there is ample source material to bring this classic crime-fighter to life." Ok look, I'm as big of a comic movie geek as they come.
.. but I just don't know about this one.
When you really think about the concept of the character, what he does and doesn't do...
and his fricking name is "The Green Hornet"...
he's really just a dumbed down poor man's version of Batman...
without the coolness. I don't think this is one they should do. But who knows.
Did I miss something???
Was I the only person who saw how horrendously terrible Curtis "50 Cent" Jackson was in Get Rich or Die Trying???
I guess so, because apparently, a studio just can't wait to get him on camera again. But wait..
. it gets even better film fans!!
!! This time it's a fast and furious rip off movie too!
Yay! Universal Pictures has set Mexican filmmaker Alejandro Lozano to direct Live Bet, a drag-racing vehicle for Curtis "50 Cent" Jackson, according to Variety. The heist film script is set in the world of underground clubs and illegal car racing.
The original was set in New York; rewrite adds several locations including Las Vegas and Philadelphia. the studio hopes to be in production by late summer. It's funny.
.. every time a movie gets announced that will have a music star as the lead, i write a post about how musicians shouldn't get leads in films.
Then...
all the comments from people who disagree with me...
to be quickly followed by the movie coming out and proving I was right. Look folks, I'm NOT saying a musician doesn't have a CHANCE at doing a good job. There is a CHANCE they might.
But that doesn't stop it from being a bad idea. But at the same time, if you play reverse Russian Roulette (5 bullets with only 1 empty chamber) there is a CHANCE you might live..
. but it's still a stupid idea to try. 
I've said it on here before.
.. I don't mind the idea of remakes.
It's an opportunity to take a good idea and put a fresh perspective or introduce it to a whole new audience that may have never seen it before, or may never see it since a lot of people don't back date and watch older movies (which is a shame). Most of the time remakes don't work..
. but sometimes they do (just like any movie really). Having said that, I didn't mind the idea of an Escape From New York remake.
The majority of people out there haven't seen the original (and probably never will sadly) and it's a good enough story that I think deserves to be introduced to a new generation. But man a lot of people got up in arms about it. Anyway, this curious bit of news just came out where John Carpenter is suggesting the "remake" may actually be some sort of prequel.
Our good friends over at give us this: The first important detail is that the movie may not actually be a remake at all. Carpenter says that a big part of the movie is about Snake Plissken before he gets to New York. I guess that’s kind of open to interpretation, but it begs the question even more: why not bring back Kurt Russell?
? The other thing mentioned in the interview is that John Carpenter will actually involved in the movie… sort of. As executive producer he will read over the script to make sure the character is consistent with his original vision.
I think my good friend Sean who wrote that article for FilmJunk is off his rocker when he suggests the question is "why not bring Russell back". It's a prequel dude..
. Snake is a character in his 30's. As much as I love Kurt Russell.
.. this role isn't him anymore.
That's like saying if they make a Silver Spoons movie they should bring back to play the little kid again. I think the REAL question is..
. if it's a Prequel..
. why on earth call it "Escape from New York"??
? Any thoughts? 
Is it just me, or over the last few months are we having to talk more about films that get canceled or put "on hold" as much as we do about movies that actually get made?
Anyway, this one doesn't strike me as sad news...
since I'm not really looking forward to the movie anyway...
but according to the good folks over at , the movie " ", which was supposed to start production back in November, is now "On hold". According to an interview with VH1, Zooey Deschanel says that the movie is currently "on hold." Why?
Deschanel says it "seems like it's been hard to get all the money and the rights in place." However, she wasn't specific on which rights are causing the hold -- the life or music rights. Meh.
.. who cares?
i know I'm probably in the minority here...
but I'm pretty full up on musical Biopics right now, and to be very honest, I really don't see any appeal in Janice Joplin whatsoever.
- video conversion experts can transfer your fragile 8mm film and aging videotape to durable, easy-to-use dvd while restoring it to it's original film clarity or better.
- wailing banshee films - corporate video production services in the uk and new york. 3d animation, video editing, streaming media and media communications.
- download movies and then burn them on dvd or cd 100% legal.
- Stage Review: Quantum's 'Red Shoes' adds some flamenco passion to season
Dwayne JenkingsAfter all, what could be a better antidote to this deep freeze of the year than a snappy, brief musical parable about letting go of frigid inhibitions and liberating the emotional dancer within? That's not really the story originally told by Hans Christi...
- More Information About Transforming Nike Shoes! - Transformers News
Andy Joneshas been updated once again with some interesting Transformers products. These sports and music labels can be ordered via their site. TF Sports Label Convoy feat. NIKE Free 7.0: only 10000 will be produced. TF Sports Label Megatron feat...
- Discount Golf Shoes Blog Archive Today in the Times
Franky MicklestoneContra Costa Times, CA - Nov 20, 2006 My first name was Thrif D Discount Center, but I changed it sporting goods, offering a broad range of products, from golf clubs and casual shoes to active The Herald-Times (subscripti...
- JS Online:
EminemThere's something about...Mary Janes For so many occasions, classic shoe is a perfect fit By KATHY FLANIGAN Mary Janes are the little black dress of shoes - indispensable to a woman's wardrobe and irresistible to young girls who can't wait to get their f...
- skateboard shoes: Back to school (Skateboard shoes) fashion
Jill StoneBack to school fashion Asheville Citizen-Times - My favorite kind of shoes are tennis shoes, said Fisher Carlton, 9, a student at Central Elementary in Haywood County. I like to wear jean shorts to school, said Central Elementary student Abygail Clark, 9...
News RSS