While I'm on here blogging along the lines of "50 Shades" I thought I just might put it up on here that according to an article TheWrap.com wrote on 28th January Kim Basinger has signed a deal to play Christian Grey's former lover Elena Lincoln in the sequel "50 Shades Darker", and that Jamie Dornan and Dakota Johnson will return as Christian Grey and Anastasia Steele.
This sequel is set to be directed by James Foley for Universal Picture's and Focus Features and will be produced by Michael De Luca, Dana Brunetti, Marcus Viscidi and the author of these books herself E.L James with her husband Niall Leonard adapting both books and writing the screen play for both "50 Shades Darker" and "50 Shades Freed".
Jamie Dornan and Dakota Johnson won't be the only original cast members returning to these films though also according to TheWrap.com Luke Grimes who played Elliott Grey will be reprising this role, Eloise Mumford who played Anastasia's friend Kate who couldn't go to the original interview with Mr. Grey and Max Martini who played Max in the first film will also be reprising their roles.
According to TheWrap.com both "50 Shades Darker" and "50 Shades Freed" will be shot back-to-back and according to TheWrap.com Fifty Shades Darker is scheduled for release on Feb. 10, 2017 and Fifty Shades Freed will be released on Feb. 9, 2018. The release pattern effectively establishes the month of February as a new tentpole corridor for Universal, which has timed the series to the romantic Valentine's Day holiday.
Lets hope with all the news I heard from other movie news websites that E.L James will be happier with these film versions of her books.
But TheWrap.com website does say though that both these sequels are pencilled in to be up against animated movies from Warner Bros. so depending on what these are there could be some serious upsets as to which movie takes in the most money.
Wednesday, 3 February 2016
Well someone had to do it...Marlon Wayans has made a spoof version of "50 Shades Of Grey"
You may or may not have seen this yet but there is finally a spoof version of "50 Shades Of Grey" called "50 Shades Of Black", this for me at least had to be done and thanks to Marlon Wayans who wrote and stars in this film according to IMDb.com and Rick Alvarez who also wrote this movie.
Here is the link to the IMDb.com page where you can watch the trailer for this film in case you haven't seen it yet:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt4667094/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1
This to me looks like it's going to be funny and that it deserves you giving it at least a try as the original film of "50 Shades Of Grey" was in my opinion just begging to have a spoof film of itself made.
I say this because after me and my sisters gave into the mass wave of everyone talking about how they'd seen it and the actual film being marketed as "very steamy" especially with getting singers such as Beyoncé, The Weekend and Ellie Goulding to perform sexy sounding songs for this film which when me and my sisters saw it had more moments where we could imagine seeing something happening that would bring big laughs more than there being moments where you actually thought this is a bit of what it's said on the tin.
One of the big laughs has to be for me the main fact that Beyoncé, The Weekend and Ellie Goulding have written songs or rather in Beyoncé 's case covered her own song "Crazy In Love",- which to me sounds more just like a slowed down heavy breathing cover version of her own song,- and that these were the only sexy bits of the movie as the actual movie is more awkward than trying to be a "steamy film about S&M"... and that these were the only sexy bits of the movie and unlike all radio stations including my local radio station Spire FM saying girls will be dragging their boyfriends to see the movie as well as mothers will be dragging their husbands to see this movie if I was in that position I would definitely give the film a miss all over again and just change the fact I have this now on DVD and every moment just seemed like to me a head scratching moment one scene that springs to mind is the scene in "50 Shades Of Grey" where Anastasia wants to try out being hit with a paddle and afterwards she tells Christian "don't ever do that again".
But according to TheWrap.com this film of Marlon Wayans' has only scored a 14 per cent rating on Rotten Tomatoes and has many more critics including its own film critic Alonso Duraldo writing that:
"But we still wind up with a slapdash movie that's more unbearable than the heavy-breathing best-seller and it's emotionally timid screen adaption, even though the dreadful "50 Shades Of Black" has the audacity to think it's earned the right to mock the slightly-less dreadful "50 Shades Of Grey" phenomenon".
Ouch...that seems a bit harsh to me to say about a spoof film that is all about comedy which another critic has seemed to have forgotten saying:
"And it is prone to too obvious gags, including ones made by everyone, including your mother, who once texted you that she once read the book."
This seems also to me a bit harsh to say as the reason spoofs work as well as comedies is they hit you right in the face with the most obvious jokes to make you laugh out loud...and usually there are some subtler jokes interwoven into them but for the most part it's the obvious jokes that really make you laugh as audiences watching the film can probably see what the joke is for themselves but don't want to say it out loud and these comedy films just say "Hey I'm just saying what we're all thinking".
Anyhew...I get that some people are going to think this is funny and some aren't but these critics when they're writing their critiques of the film even they have to admit that some of the scenes they describe sound just a tad funny like:
"...(there's a 'torture' scene where Christian reads to Hannah from the book)..."
And:
"...Black's mother Claire's (Jane Seymour) mistakenly tasing of Hannah ends with her claiming she's 'standing her ground'
This could just be me that finds this last bit a tad funny, but now that I think about it as I write this I think "why would someone's mother be 'standing their ground' by tasering someone?"...unless this film was trying to suggest that their was more going on between mother and son...but I guess that's a whole other thing.
This film is out on 11th March in the UK and if your in another country and want to know when it's released just go to IMDb.com's website and click on the release date it says underneath the title of the film and it will show you the release date for other countries...so you'll just have to wait until then to see just how this stacks up and just how funny this spoof film really is.
Here is the link to the IMDb.com page where you can watch the trailer for this film in case you haven't seen it yet:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt4667094/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1
This to me looks like it's going to be funny and that it deserves you giving it at least a try as the original film of "50 Shades Of Grey" was in my opinion just begging to have a spoof film of itself made.
I say this because after me and my sisters gave into the mass wave of everyone talking about how they'd seen it and the actual film being marketed as "very steamy" especially with getting singers such as Beyoncé, The Weekend and Ellie Goulding to perform sexy sounding songs for this film which when me and my sisters saw it had more moments where we could imagine seeing something happening that would bring big laughs more than there being moments where you actually thought this is a bit of what it's said on the tin.
One of the big laughs has to be for me the main fact that Beyoncé, The Weekend and Ellie Goulding have written songs or rather in Beyoncé 's case covered her own song "Crazy In Love",- which to me sounds more just like a slowed down heavy breathing cover version of her own song,- and that these were the only sexy bits of the movie as the actual movie is more awkward than trying to be a "steamy film about S&M"... and that these were the only sexy bits of the movie and unlike all radio stations including my local radio station Spire FM saying girls will be dragging their boyfriends to see the movie as well as mothers will be dragging their husbands to see this movie if I was in that position I would definitely give the film a miss all over again and just change the fact I have this now on DVD and every moment just seemed like to me a head scratching moment one scene that springs to mind is the scene in "50 Shades Of Grey" where Anastasia wants to try out being hit with a paddle and afterwards she tells Christian "don't ever do that again".
But according to TheWrap.com this film of Marlon Wayans' has only scored a 14 per cent rating on Rotten Tomatoes and has many more critics including its own film critic Alonso Duraldo writing that:
"But we still wind up with a slapdash movie that's more unbearable than the heavy-breathing best-seller and it's emotionally timid screen adaption, even though the dreadful "50 Shades Of Black" has the audacity to think it's earned the right to mock the slightly-less dreadful "50 Shades Of Grey" phenomenon".
Ouch...that seems a bit harsh to me to say about a spoof film that is all about comedy which another critic has seemed to have forgotten saying:
"And it is prone to too obvious gags, including ones made by everyone, including your mother, who once texted you that she once read the book."
This seems also to me a bit harsh to say as the reason spoofs work as well as comedies is they hit you right in the face with the most obvious jokes to make you laugh out loud...and usually there are some subtler jokes interwoven into them but for the most part it's the obvious jokes that really make you laugh as audiences watching the film can probably see what the joke is for themselves but don't want to say it out loud and these comedy films just say "Hey I'm just saying what we're all thinking".
Anyhew...I get that some people are going to think this is funny and some aren't but these critics when they're writing their critiques of the film even they have to admit that some of the scenes they describe sound just a tad funny like:
"...(there's a 'torture' scene where Christian reads to Hannah from the book)..."
And:
"...Black's mother Claire's (Jane Seymour) mistakenly tasing of Hannah ends with her claiming she's 'standing her ground'
This could just be me that finds this last bit a tad funny, but now that I think about it as I write this I think "why would someone's mother be 'standing their ground' by tasering someone?"...unless this film was trying to suggest that their was more going on between mother and son...but I guess that's a whole other thing.
This film is out on 11th March in the UK and if your in another country and want to know when it's released just go to IMDb.com's website and click on the release date it says underneath the title of the film and it will show you the release date for other countries...so you'll just have to wait until then to see just how this stacks up and just how funny this spoof film really is.
Monday, 1 February 2016
There's going to be another Die Hard film on the film horizon? Han't there been enough already?...
You may or may have not heard already but according to both Collier.com and Empire Magazine's website Len Wiseman has announced that there will be a prequel/sequel to the Die Hard film franchise called Year One, where he told Collider.com that he "...wasn't going to do it without Bruce. I'm also not going to do it with Bruce being a cameo bookend gimmick...".
But reading this article of Collider.com's it does sound like Len Wiseman has had to do a lot to get the Die Hard fans such as myself back on side and that he like myself understands that the more modern releases of the Die Hard films have been shit and not up to the really good action packed, good story of the first three Die Hard films...but I would say though that the more modern Die Hard films are watchable even though they're so bad and they're not so bad to watch of an evening when there's nothing on television.
As he goes on to say that:
"After doing the fourth one, there were so many conversations that Bruce (Willis) and I were having about what he put into the character for Die Hard 1. That character comes in with so much baggage, emotionally, and experience. He's already divorced, he's bitter, his Captain hates him and doesn't want him back. So what created that guy."
And he goes on to say:
"We've never seen the actual love story. We know it's demise, but we've never seen it what it was like when he met Holly, or when he was a beat cop in '78 in New York when there was no chance of him making detective. It's always something I've been thinking about, and now we're doing it. And it ties in."
But thinking about it now, this does sound to me anyway a bit try hardy, like Len Wisemen and Bruce Willis have either seen how bad the more modern release's of Die Hard films are or how bad the reactions have been to the more modern releases and have thought if there were to be another Die Hard film released what would it be about and how or what would it need to have to be better than the other more modern releases of this film franchise...well I have just one thought on that maybe if there was going to be another film maybe don't give it a stupid title like the others such as "Die Hard 4.0" or "A Good Day To Die Hard".
It might be a nice idea now that I think about it to see when Holly and John McClane met but this is suppose to be a more action based film franchise and these films aren't really about the romance between Holly and John McClane it's more about the action of how an off duty policeman keeps getting caught up in terrorist plots when he's off on holiday, and if the movie makers were to simply go off piste and make it a sickly sweet romance or more of a when "Harry Met Sally" film then I think they'd have even more bad reactions from audiences, but I'm sure,-or rather I'm crossing my fingers and hoping that-, the film makers aren't going to turn this next film into a romcom like that film and are probably just like in other films going to have the guy get the girl at the end of the movie after all the action or adventure in the rest of the movie.
But in another attempt to reassure fans by saying that:
" The film will take place on New Years' Eve 1979..."
So this sounds like to me that Len Wiseman is trying to say that this prequel/sequel will have the feel of the first film which took place at Nakatobi Plaza where the company that Holly Gennaro works for in New York is having their Christmas works party but just as John arrives from the airport to join her at the party the Plaza gets taken over by terrorists led by Hans Gruber played by Alan Rickman who ends up falling off the building after he takes Holly hostage and John McClane pushes him out the window but just as the audience thinks Holly's safe he gets stuck to the watch she's wearing nearly taking her with him, but thankfully John McClane manages to take off her watch so Hans falls off the building leaving Holly behind amidst the chaos that was caused.
Making it sound like Len Wiseman may be trying to give hope to the fans like me that he will try to make this new film as good as "Die Hard" was by taking it back to the basics of one off duty policeman having to do his job despite wanting to spend some time with his wife that he's separated from over the holidays and despite not having any idea how to deal with terrorists.
And that:
" It's really working into the plot, with the '70's having ramifications on present day Bruce. It inter-cuts in a very fun, imaginative way with present- day John McClane."
Sounds intriguing to me...but I guess we'll just have to wait and see what this will actually look like when the movie finally comes out.
But another thing that might put this new film on shaky ground is how it has been suggested in this Collider.com article by Len Wiseman that the production an unknown actor as you can't possibly think of the character John McClane without thinking of Bruce Willis.
As Len Wiseman says that:
"It has to be somebody that has the swagger and has the confidence, but also the charm, the wit, the charisma and the toughness. It's asking a lot, especially in somebody that's younger. It has to feel like the guy owns it, rather than is trying to put it on."
So this sounds like to me a bit like the never ending debate that always follows the James Bond films of who will play this part next...so from now until whenever this film finally gets released let the names start being thrown into the hat.
But reading this article of Collider.com's it does sound like Len Wiseman has had to do a lot to get the Die Hard fans such as myself back on side and that he like myself understands that the more modern releases of the Die Hard films have been shit and not up to the really good action packed, good story of the first three Die Hard films...but I would say though that the more modern Die Hard films are watchable even though they're so bad and they're not so bad to watch of an evening when there's nothing on television.
As he goes on to say that:
"After doing the fourth one, there were so many conversations that Bruce (Willis) and I were having about what he put into the character for Die Hard 1. That character comes in with so much baggage, emotionally, and experience. He's already divorced, he's bitter, his Captain hates him and doesn't want him back. So what created that guy."
And he goes on to say:
"We've never seen the actual love story. We know it's demise, but we've never seen it what it was like when he met Holly, or when he was a beat cop in '78 in New York when there was no chance of him making detective. It's always something I've been thinking about, and now we're doing it. And it ties in."
But thinking about it now, this does sound to me anyway a bit try hardy, like Len Wisemen and Bruce Willis have either seen how bad the more modern release's of Die Hard films are or how bad the reactions have been to the more modern releases and have thought if there were to be another Die Hard film released what would it be about and how or what would it need to have to be better than the other more modern releases of this film franchise...well I have just one thought on that maybe if there was going to be another film maybe don't give it a stupid title like the others such as "Die Hard 4.0" or "A Good Day To Die Hard".
It might be a nice idea now that I think about it to see when Holly and John McClane met but this is suppose to be a more action based film franchise and these films aren't really about the romance between Holly and John McClane it's more about the action of how an off duty policeman keeps getting caught up in terrorist plots when he's off on holiday, and if the movie makers were to simply go off piste and make it a sickly sweet romance or more of a when "Harry Met Sally" film then I think they'd have even more bad reactions from audiences, but I'm sure,-or rather I'm crossing my fingers and hoping that-, the film makers aren't going to turn this next film into a romcom like that film and are probably just like in other films going to have the guy get the girl at the end of the movie after all the action or adventure in the rest of the movie.
But in another attempt to reassure fans by saying that:
" The film will take place on New Years' Eve 1979..."
So this sounds like to me that Len Wiseman is trying to say that this prequel/sequel will have the feel of the first film which took place at Nakatobi Plaza where the company that Holly Gennaro works for in New York is having their Christmas works party but just as John arrives from the airport to join her at the party the Plaza gets taken over by terrorists led by Hans Gruber played by Alan Rickman who ends up falling off the building after he takes Holly hostage and John McClane pushes him out the window but just as the audience thinks Holly's safe he gets stuck to the watch she's wearing nearly taking her with him, but thankfully John McClane manages to take off her watch so Hans falls off the building leaving Holly behind amidst the chaos that was caused.
Making it sound like Len Wiseman may be trying to give hope to the fans like me that he will try to make this new film as good as "Die Hard" was by taking it back to the basics of one off duty policeman having to do his job despite wanting to spend some time with his wife that he's separated from over the holidays and despite not having any idea how to deal with terrorists.
And that:
" It's really working into the plot, with the '70's having ramifications on present day Bruce. It inter-cuts in a very fun, imaginative way with present- day John McClane."
Sounds intriguing to me...but I guess we'll just have to wait and see what this will actually look like when the movie finally comes out.
But another thing that might put this new film on shaky ground is how it has been suggested in this Collider.com article by Len Wiseman that the production an unknown actor as you can't possibly think of the character John McClane without thinking of Bruce Willis.
As Len Wiseman says that:
"It has to be somebody that has the swagger and has the confidence, but also the charm, the wit, the charisma and the toughness. It's asking a lot, especially in somebody that's younger. It has to feel like the guy owns it, rather than is trying to put it on."
So this sounds like to me a bit like the never ending debate that always follows the James Bond films of who will play this part next...so from now until whenever this film finally gets released let the names start being thrown into the hat.
Monday, 25 January 2016
A New Labyrinth in the works?
I have always been a big fan of David Bowie and his music...I mean who wouldn't be a fan of David Bowie's music? and I still can't believe such a music legend is dead, not only this but I saw the other day the unbelievable news that a new Labyrinth was going to be made.
I know people say that this film is a cult classic but I think it's just soooo bad it's hilarious...but then again now I think about it according to Entertainment Weekly "...this was the last film that the Muppets master Jim Henson made before his death in 1990..." so obviously this was a man that had had previous with working with puppets and making family fun films for the cinema screen...but this did fail commercially when it was released in 1986 so says Entertainment Weekly....can't think why maybe it had something to do with the dulux dog puppet that looked very much like it ran on wheels at the end of the movie.
Anyhew...for all the movie's faults this is still something I would say you should definitely take a look at if you haven't seen the film, but if you have already seen the film you'll already know that the story to this film sees David Bowie playing the role of King Jaroth the Goblin King who snatches away a teenage girl's (played by a young Jennifer Connelly) baby brother away after she wishes her baby brother away and takes him to his fantastical castle where she has to get him back before the King turns her baby brother into a goblin....with the help of some muppets of course.
I've just read on Rollingstone.com and I didn't even know this but apparently this film was originally written by Monty Python Terry Jones and produced by George Lucas...so I think I'm right in thinking that this film was suppose to be a comedy of sorts.
According to both Empire Magazine's website and Rollingstone.com this film will not be a remake it will a sequel of sorts to the original movie.
And according to Rollingstone.com:
"TriStar ( an arm of Sony's) has inked a deal with the Jim Henson Company to produce a new version of the film, with Guardians of the Galaxy co-writer Nicole Perlman charged with penning the new Labyrinth script."
So apart from this there is nothing else known about what will become of this, whether it'll just be an idea that never sees the light of day or whether it'll actually get the green light as they say and gets made we'll never know.
I know people say that this film is a cult classic but I think it's just soooo bad it's hilarious...but then again now I think about it according to Entertainment Weekly "...this was the last film that the Muppets master Jim Henson made before his death in 1990..." so obviously this was a man that had had previous with working with puppets and making family fun films for the cinema screen...but this did fail commercially when it was released in 1986 so says Entertainment Weekly....can't think why maybe it had something to do with the dulux dog puppet that looked very much like it ran on wheels at the end of the movie.
Anyhew...for all the movie's faults this is still something I would say you should definitely take a look at if you haven't seen the film, but if you have already seen the film you'll already know that the story to this film sees David Bowie playing the role of King Jaroth the Goblin King who snatches away a teenage girl's (played by a young Jennifer Connelly) baby brother away after she wishes her baby brother away and takes him to his fantastical castle where she has to get him back before the King turns her baby brother into a goblin....with the help of some muppets of course.
I've just read on Rollingstone.com and I didn't even know this but apparently this film was originally written by Monty Python Terry Jones and produced by George Lucas...so I think I'm right in thinking that this film was suppose to be a comedy of sorts.
According to both Empire Magazine's website and Rollingstone.com this film will not be a remake it will a sequel of sorts to the original movie.
And according to Rollingstone.com:
"TriStar ( an arm of Sony's) has inked a deal with the Jim Henson Company to produce a new version of the film, with Guardians of the Galaxy co-writer Nicole Perlman charged with penning the new Labyrinth script."
So apart from this there is nothing else known about what will become of this, whether it'll just be an idea that never sees the light of day or whether it'll actually get the green light as they say and gets made we'll never know.
Friday, 8 January 2016
Fast and Furious 8 News Update!
Since news of Fast and Furious 8 broke Vin Diesel's Facebook page and the movie news website's have started revving up their engines-sorry about the pun I just couldn't resist!- for any news regarding this film.
According to a report on Empire.com's website that was posted yesterday director F. Gary Grey has just returned from an investigatory trip to Cuba as well as having eyed up locations to shoot this film in both Iceland and Russia eventhough you may or may not have heard that through the medium of Vin Diesel's Facebook page Fast and Furious 8 would be going for a New York location.
Universal Studios has confirmed that "they're seeking approval" from the USA and Cuban governments and the special licences have been applied for as you may or may not already know that for years American and Cuban relations have been as described by The Guardian Newspaper "cold war hostilities" as for years Cuba has been isolated by America, and as of a report on their website posted on the 17th December 2014 President Barack Obama has said he intends to take steps to relax travel as well as commercial and diplomatic restrictions in exchange for releasing Americans as well as dissidents held in Havana.
And as a step towards this relationship between America and Cuba beginning to be repaired Empire.com reports that last year Bob Yari's independent Ernest Hemingway biopic "Papa" which starred Giovani Ribisi (in case your wondering who this is he played the bad guy in both Ted films) was allowed to be filmed in Cuba as via loopholes this was classed as a documentary.
Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson has already been confirmed as returning for this 8th film in the Fast and Furious film franchise. Also Empire.com says that Kurt Russell and the rest of the cast members are looking like strong contenders to be also coming back for this 8th film that has a pencilled in release date of April 14th next year.
According to a report on Empire.com's website that was posted yesterday director F. Gary Grey has just returned from an investigatory trip to Cuba as well as having eyed up locations to shoot this film in both Iceland and Russia eventhough you may or may not have heard that through the medium of Vin Diesel's Facebook page Fast and Furious 8 would be going for a New York location.
Universal Studios has confirmed that "they're seeking approval" from the USA and Cuban governments and the special licences have been applied for as you may or may not already know that for years American and Cuban relations have been as described by The Guardian Newspaper "cold war hostilities" as for years Cuba has been isolated by America, and as of a report on their website posted on the 17th December 2014 President Barack Obama has said he intends to take steps to relax travel as well as commercial and diplomatic restrictions in exchange for releasing Americans as well as dissidents held in Havana.
And as a step towards this relationship between America and Cuba beginning to be repaired Empire.com reports that last year Bob Yari's independent Ernest Hemingway biopic "Papa" which starred Giovani Ribisi (in case your wondering who this is he played the bad guy in both Ted films) was allowed to be filmed in Cuba as via loopholes this was classed as a documentary.
Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson has already been confirmed as returning for this 8th film in the Fast and Furious film franchise. Also Empire.com says that Kurt Russell and the rest of the cast members are looking like strong contenders to be also coming back for this 8th film that has a pencilled in release date of April 14th next year.
XXX: The Return Of Xander Cage News Update!
I have just seen this bit of exciting news update about the new XXX film "XXX: The Return Of Xander Cage" on ComicBook.com, and I just had to put it up on here for all to see.
According to a post on The Hollywood Reporter's website posted yesterday Nina Dobrev (last seen playing the character Elena Gilbert in "The Vampire Diaries"), Ruby Rose ( from "Orange Is The New Black") and Bollywood actress Deepika Padukone are at various stages of negotiations to join the cast of this new instalment in the XXX film franchise which is already starting to cast as the film is said to be starting production later in January and will shoot in the Philippines and Toronto.
According to The Hollywood Reporter Nina Dobrev will play a sarcastic and witty techie, Deepika Padukone will play a huntress and a former lover of Xander Cage's and Ruby Rose will play a sniper.
Other than this plot details are very sketchy, but all that is known at the moment is also according to The Hollywood Reporter this new "XXX: The Return Of Xander Cage" will focus on Vin Diesel's character Xander Cage but will see him much like the Fast and Furious films surrounded by a core team of sexy badass's and comic relief player's.
But I'm just wondering now I'm writing this that in the last XXX movie "XXX: The Next Level", Scott Speedman's character Agent Kyle Christopher Steele did say that Xander Cage had died and that's why they needed someone who was more aggressive than before...so whatever the story line for this film how are the script writers going to address this and not just use "it was a cover" as this really to me at least doesn't make sense and it would be a really shitty excuse and I think whatever the plot it will just be so annoying as I would probably or other cinema goers would probably just sit watching the film thinking "Why On Earth Say That If It Was A Cover, Why Do That?" and let the whole story for this film down and will probably have cinema goers walking out of the film thinking that they've just wasted their time watching this...but then again if all involved did do this the distraction would have people wanting to go back to the cinema and spending their money again.
Also one thing is for sure Samuel L. Jackson will be returning to this film franchise as the Head Of The National Security Agency reprising his role as Augustus Gibbons.
Also according to The Hollywood Reporter this project is already on the verge of finding a distributor with several sources saying according to The Hollywood Reporter that Paramount will be the home of this film franchise.
Vin Diesel, Vin Diesel's producing partner and sister Samantha Vincent, Joe Roth, Joe Roth's production partner Jeff Kirschenbaum and Neal H. Moritz will produce this new movie, with D.J Caruso directing with F. Scott Frazier, John Brancato and Michael Ferris are on script writing duties.
I've also just seen on Empire Magazine's website that according to a post on the 4th January Jet Li and Tony Jaa are also rumoured to be joining this movie but as yet much like the plot for this movie it's not known yet what their roles are or whether they'll be on the side of the goodies or the badies, but it's also rumoured according to this post on Empire.com that current UFC featherweight champion Conor McGregor will also be taking a role.
There is no release date for this yet but Empire.com that it might be somewhere in between Fast and Furious 8 and Riddick 4.
According to a post on The Hollywood Reporter's website posted yesterday Nina Dobrev (last seen playing the character Elena Gilbert in "The Vampire Diaries"), Ruby Rose ( from "Orange Is The New Black") and Bollywood actress Deepika Padukone are at various stages of negotiations to join the cast of this new instalment in the XXX film franchise which is already starting to cast as the film is said to be starting production later in January and will shoot in the Philippines and Toronto.
According to The Hollywood Reporter Nina Dobrev will play a sarcastic and witty techie, Deepika Padukone will play a huntress and a former lover of Xander Cage's and Ruby Rose will play a sniper.
Other than this plot details are very sketchy, but all that is known at the moment is also according to The Hollywood Reporter this new "XXX: The Return Of Xander Cage" will focus on Vin Diesel's character Xander Cage but will see him much like the Fast and Furious films surrounded by a core team of sexy badass's and comic relief player's.
But I'm just wondering now I'm writing this that in the last XXX movie "XXX: The Next Level", Scott Speedman's character Agent Kyle Christopher Steele did say that Xander Cage had died and that's why they needed someone who was more aggressive than before...so whatever the story line for this film how are the script writers going to address this and not just use "it was a cover" as this really to me at least doesn't make sense and it would be a really shitty excuse and I think whatever the plot it will just be so annoying as I would probably or other cinema goers would probably just sit watching the film thinking "Why On Earth Say That If It Was A Cover, Why Do That?" and let the whole story for this film down and will probably have cinema goers walking out of the film thinking that they've just wasted their time watching this...but then again if all involved did do this the distraction would have people wanting to go back to the cinema and spending their money again.
Also one thing is for sure Samuel L. Jackson will be returning to this film franchise as the Head Of The National Security Agency reprising his role as Augustus Gibbons.
Also according to The Hollywood Reporter this project is already on the verge of finding a distributor with several sources saying according to The Hollywood Reporter that Paramount will be the home of this film franchise.
Vin Diesel, Vin Diesel's producing partner and sister Samantha Vincent, Joe Roth, Joe Roth's production partner Jeff Kirschenbaum and Neal H. Moritz will produce this new movie, with D.J Caruso directing with F. Scott Frazier, John Brancato and Michael Ferris are on script writing duties.
I've also just seen on Empire Magazine's website that according to a post on the 4th January Jet Li and Tony Jaa are also rumoured to be joining this movie but as yet much like the plot for this movie it's not known yet what their roles are or whether they'll be on the side of the goodies or the badies, but it's also rumoured according to this post on Empire.com that current UFC featherweight champion Conor McGregor will also be taking a role.
There is no release date for this yet but Empire.com that it might be somewhere in between Fast and Furious 8 and Riddick 4.
Wednesday, 6 January 2016
Nooooooo!...There's going to be another Indiana Jones 5 film!
I hope you all have had a lovely Christmas and a very merry New Year, I saw this the other day on The Metro Newspsper's website and really couldn't believe what I was reading...there will be ANOTHER Indiana Jones movie.
You may or may not have heard this news but according to Metro.com in an interview with Bloomberg CEO of Disney Bob Iger spoke of "...more great stories with George Lucas' Star Wars-and Indiana Jones, by the way which will be coming..."
Now I'm an avid fan of these films but "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull" was just crap, and to me it seemed like nobody involved with this film knew what they were doing story wise as what the hell was going on with the Russians wanting some crystal alien head to achieve all knowledge and to achieve great power,-now that I think about it this sounds like to me that the writers involved with this film maybe got carried away with how two of these films involved Harrison Ford's character Indiana Jones having to find very powerful historical artefacts before the Nazi's try to obtain them in order to take over the world such as The Ark Of The Covenant or The Holy Grail, and how in "Indiana Jones and The Temple Of Doom" Indiana Jones has to stop an age old dormant cult from rising back to power when they steal three powerful religious stones, one of these stones having been stolen from an Indian village where they have a shrine dedicated to it as well as this cult stealing all this village's children to work in a mine where the leader of this cult hoped to find 2 more of these stones as originally there were 5-.
So I hope with this idea for there to be another Indiana Jones film being supported by both Disney Studios chairman Bob Horn and the director of these films Steven Spielberg still being interested in doing these films with him saying:
" So as long as there's more adventure's out there, I've got a bullwhip, a fedora, a leather jacket and a man on a horse who knows how to get the job done".
that I hope that this film will in the words of Ralph Fiennes from the James Bond film Skyfall "Don't cock it up" and will hopefully be a hell of a lot better than "Indiana Jones and The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull"!
And I have also just seen on metro.com's website that Harrison Ford has reportedly told Entertainment Weekly that:
" Yeah I'd love to do another Indiana Jones. A character that has a history and a potential, kind of a rollicking good movie ride for the audience, Steven Spielberg as a director-what's not to like?"
But this to me sounds very different to after "Indiana Jones and The Kingdom of The Crystal Skull" came out as I remember reading in a newspaper that Harrison Ford hated that movie and thought it was a terrible idea to bring Indiana Jones back...I guess somebody has told him he might get a lot more money if he returned for another film if there ever was another film.
But also according to metro.com Harrison Ford would be turning 79 this year so I'm thinking something has to be done about that, either have a new person in as Indiana Jones and have an idea like a professor has been hired by the museum to get priceless historical artefacts from around the world, and they get thrown into this action adventure world where he's not the only person after the historical artefact that the museum wants and that he has to muddle through and be prepared for people doing anything and everything imaginable to stop him from getting the artefacts and getting hold of these for themselves...and I was thinking that this new film should definitely keep the joke in that the curator of the museum once got lost in his own museum and now that I've just thought about it this could tie in with having the idea that the curator of the museum is completely oblivious to the methods that Indiana Jones a.k.a Dr. Henry Jones employs to getting hold of these priceless historical artefacts.
And it looks like I'm not the only one that has had this idea of replacing Harrison Ford with another actor as according to both metro.com and screendailiy.com there has been rumours going round that Chris Pratt and Bradley Cooper are just some of the names being suggested to play Indiana Jones.
But according to screendaily.com Steven Spielberg has already said in an interview with Screen International that:
"I don't think anyone could replace Harrison as Indy, I don't think that's ever going to happen..."
He goes on to say that:
" It's certainly not my intention to ever have another actor step into his shoes in the way there have been many actors that have played Spider-Man or Batman. There is only going to be one actor playing Indiana Jones and that's Harrison Ford."
As well as this Frank Marshall the producer has also said of these rumours according to an interview with Total Film that:
" There are a lot of rumours. We haven't even sat down to talk about Indy yet...at some point we'll sit down. But there's a bunch of people who could probably take the baton."
He goes on to say that:
" We're not doing the Bond thing where we're going to call somebody else Indiana Jones...we have to figure this out".
So, it sounds like this needs to be figured out quick smartish as I think if the filmmakers get Harrison Ford back to do all the action when he's 79 it'll be really cringey to watch the movie in cinemas and then audiences will just see on the end credits of the film loads of names of different stuntmen that had to do the stunts and it'll probably just look non amazing stunts with CGI poorly cut and pasted into the film like in "Indiana Jones and The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull", which totally in my mind detracts from these films as in "Indiana Jones and The Ark Of The Covenant" there is that legendary stunt where someone goes all the way underneath a moving truck to the back of the truck just get back inside to have a fight with one of the bad guys and is now tried to be replicated in lots of films I've seen nowadays and it'll look like why on earth didn't you retire grandpa and get someone that can do stunts and look like they can pull them off...it'll probably be cheaper for the filmmakers as now I think about it if they don't have to employ so many stuntmen which will probably increase the size of the crew.
You may or may not have heard this news but according to Metro.com in an interview with Bloomberg CEO of Disney Bob Iger spoke of "...more great stories with George Lucas' Star Wars-and Indiana Jones, by the way which will be coming..."
Now I'm an avid fan of these films but "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull" was just crap, and to me it seemed like nobody involved with this film knew what they were doing story wise as what the hell was going on with the Russians wanting some crystal alien head to achieve all knowledge and to achieve great power,-now that I think about it this sounds like to me that the writers involved with this film maybe got carried away with how two of these films involved Harrison Ford's character Indiana Jones having to find very powerful historical artefacts before the Nazi's try to obtain them in order to take over the world such as The Ark Of The Covenant or The Holy Grail, and how in "Indiana Jones and The Temple Of Doom" Indiana Jones has to stop an age old dormant cult from rising back to power when they steal three powerful religious stones, one of these stones having been stolen from an Indian village where they have a shrine dedicated to it as well as this cult stealing all this village's children to work in a mine where the leader of this cult hoped to find 2 more of these stones as originally there were 5-.
So I hope with this idea for there to be another Indiana Jones film being supported by both Disney Studios chairman Bob Horn and the director of these films Steven Spielberg still being interested in doing these films with him saying:
" So as long as there's more adventure's out there, I've got a bullwhip, a fedora, a leather jacket and a man on a horse who knows how to get the job done".
that I hope that this film will in the words of Ralph Fiennes from the James Bond film Skyfall "Don't cock it up" and will hopefully be a hell of a lot better than "Indiana Jones and The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull"!
And I have also just seen on metro.com's website that Harrison Ford has reportedly told Entertainment Weekly that:
" Yeah I'd love to do another Indiana Jones. A character that has a history and a potential, kind of a rollicking good movie ride for the audience, Steven Spielberg as a director-what's not to like?"
But this to me sounds very different to after "Indiana Jones and The Kingdom of The Crystal Skull" came out as I remember reading in a newspaper that Harrison Ford hated that movie and thought it was a terrible idea to bring Indiana Jones back...I guess somebody has told him he might get a lot more money if he returned for another film if there ever was another film.
But also according to metro.com Harrison Ford would be turning 79 this year so I'm thinking something has to be done about that, either have a new person in as Indiana Jones and have an idea like a professor has been hired by the museum to get priceless historical artefacts from around the world, and they get thrown into this action adventure world where he's not the only person after the historical artefact that the museum wants and that he has to muddle through and be prepared for people doing anything and everything imaginable to stop him from getting the artefacts and getting hold of these for themselves...and I was thinking that this new film should definitely keep the joke in that the curator of the museum once got lost in his own museum and now that I've just thought about it this could tie in with having the idea that the curator of the museum is completely oblivious to the methods that Indiana Jones a.k.a Dr. Henry Jones employs to getting hold of these priceless historical artefacts.
And it looks like I'm not the only one that has had this idea of replacing Harrison Ford with another actor as according to both metro.com and screendailiy.com there has been rumours going round that Chris Pratt and Bradley Cooper are just some of the names being suggested to play Indiana Jones.
But according to screendaily.com Steven Spielberg has already said in an interview with Screen International that:
"I don't think anyone could replace Harrison as Indy, I don't think that's ever going to happen..."
He goes on to say that:
" It's certainly not my intention to ever have another actor step into his shoes in the way there have been many actors that have played Spider-Man or Batman. There is only going to be one actor playing Indiana Jones and that's Harrison Ford."
As well as this Frank Marshall the producer has also said of these rumours according to an interview with Total Film that:
" There are a lot of rumours. We haven't even sat down to talk about Indy yet...at some point we'll sit down. But there's a bunch of people who could probably take the baton."
He goes on to say that:
" We're not doing the Bond thing where we're going to call somebody else Indiana Jones...we have to figure this out".
So, it sounds like this needs to be figured out quick smartish as I think if the filmmakers get Harrison Ford back to do all the action when he's 79 it'll be really cringey to watch the movie in cinemas and then audiences will just see on the end credits of the film loads of names of different stuntmen that had to do the stunts and it'll probably just look non amazing stunts with CGI poorly cut and pasted into the film like in "Indiana Jones and The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull", which totally in my mind detracts from these films as in "Indiana Jones and The Ark Of The Covenant" there is that legendary stunt where someone goes all the way underneath a moving truck to the back of the truck just get back inside to have a fight with one of the bad guys and is now tried to be replicated in lots of films I've seen nowadays and it'll look like why on earth didn't you retire grandpa and get someone that can do stunts and look like they can pull them off...it'll probably be cheaper for the filmmakers as now I think about it if they don't have to employ so many stuntmen which will probably increase the size of the crew.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)