How much do you really need to show when following up a massive hit?
Setting aside the issue of whether you liked the first "Hangover" or not, this is pretty much the most in-your-face confident trailer for anything I've seen so far this year.
And why wouldn't it be? When Warner Bros. was gearing up for the release of "The Hangover" in 2009, they screened the film about 11,000 times, wanting to make sure they did everything they could to kickstart word of mouth on a film that they felt deserved to be a hit, but that didn't have a giant A-list cast to help sell it. They worked their asses off selling it, and watching them work was a real education in just how hard a studio can work, and just how much of a reward you can reap when word of mouth kicks in.
There's been some cultural backlash in the wake of the juggernaut success of the first film, and there are certainly people who didn't like the first one, but when you're making a sequel to the highest-grossing R-rated comedy of all time, you have permission to swagger a bit.
I'm seeing people compare this to things like the "Bad Teacher" review that came out this week, and there's no comparison in the type of campaign they're running. "Bad Teacher" is starting from scratch, and they have to sell their premise, their cast, their tone, and just how raunchy it is, all in two minutes. With "The Hangover Part II," you've got massive audience awareness already, and the teaser is more about telling you "This is a new location, and a darker ride, but it's the same cast, and here we go."
Using films in release and upcoming, we ask what keeps the audience hungry for destruction
I'm not allowed to review "Battle: LA" yet.
Instead, let me ask a question that I asked myself as I drove home from the theater last night, through the landscape that I had just spent a couple of hours watching Hollywood destroy with gleeful abandon: why do we enjoy watching the end of the world?
Not every disaster film works, of course. I've seen plenty of terrible ones, and there's little to enjoy when they don't work because they're rarely "good" films. At their best, they are effective movies, movies that convey a visceral group experience to an audience. And when you do it to an audience just right, they will not only tell friends to go see the movie, they'll go back to see it again in the theater with them. That's when you know you've done something that is effective. People respond almost compulsively, and they end up buying the film when it shows up on home video. I am certainly not above my own OCD response to movies that cause me to have a visceral experience in theaters. It's one of the things I hope for when I sit down to certain films, and when I am met even halfway, I tend to enjoy the effort.
I'm not alone, certainly. And it does seem to be a strange thing for us to reward in our entertainment, this wholesale carnage. Just this week, Louis Leterrier announced he's making a film for Universal called "G," and /Film connected the dots to a project Pajiba wrote about last year called "Gravity," in which the world slows down, causing gravity to go haywire, and against this backdrop, a father goes in search of his missing child. "The Day After Tomorrow" meets "Taken," as it was described originally by Borys Kit when he broke the story.
The 'Something About Mary' filmmakers break down the magic trick of making a comedy
My experience with the Farrelly Brothers goes back to ShoWest 1999. That was one of the first press events I attended as Moriarty, and it was hard to get stars and filmmakers to agree to talk to someone who arrived at the event with a pseudonym.
On one press line in particular, I watched a handful of people walk right by me, and a few people even got irritated when they realized I was there representing Ain't It Cool News. Not the Farrelly Brothers, though. As soon as they saw my badge, they both walked over and said, "We love what you do," and they ended up giving me more time than anyone else there that evening.
Over the years, I've had the opportunity to go through the test-screening process with the Brothers, watching several cuts of the same film as they fine-tuned it, and I've sat in on some of their round-table rewrites of their scripts, watching they way they manage a room full of writers. And through it all, what has struck me is that there is no pretense about them at all. They do not believe themselves to be infallible, and I would imagine if you used the word "genius" in a conversation with them, they would laugh harder than anyone. But they work at what they do, and they are tireless when they are in pursuit of a laugh. They believe that the audience is the only arbiter of taste that really matters, and they do whatever they can to make sure that the audience walks out of their films happy.
How do you become best friends on the first day of shooting?
One of the hardest things in playing best friends in a movie is finding a way to create the shorthand that exists between people who have genuinely known each other for years or even decades And as an actor, you're required to create that sort of chemistry out of thin air sometimes, during the time when you're just getting to know this other person.
In the case of "Hall Pass," much of the film hinges on the friendship between Rick (Owen Wilson) and Fred (Jason Sudeikis), and I thought they did a great job of playing off each other. Wilson always seems like he shows up ready to play, but with Sudeikis, this could be a calling card for him as a leading man in movies.
I've always had a hard time trying to figure out what the niche would be for Sudeikis in film, since he's a sort of average guy type, not as outrageous as someone like Will Forte or Bill Hader, his peers on SNL. Seeing him in this film, I get a real Phil Hartman quality, and like Phil, I think Sudeikis could really play to his average-guy looks and be charmingly subversive with the right material. He and Wilson together strike me as very real suburban dads, normal and average, with all their inner weirdo lurking just below the surface.
Zack Snyder's first original film is almost here
Next week, I'll finally be able to talk about my time on the set of "Sucker Punch." Right now, nothing I say is going to sway people one way or another about the film since there's a new trailer for the movie that is going to pretty much seal whether or not you think you're going to go see the film in the theater.
I can't imagine someone who loves genre films and fantasy filmmaking in general who doesn't think this looks like a visual treat. The story to the film is a tough one, and I remember thinking that even when Zack and Deb Snyder both described it to us, it seemed like they were struggling to fully sum it up.
What this trailer really does is establish that Snyder's signature is here in full force, but unleashed to just wander and do anything it wants instead of in service to someone else's vision. I've been reading the gorgeous "Art of" book that Titan is putting out, full of Clay Enos photos from the set, and if nothing else, I am dazzled by the scope of Snyder's unfettered imagination in this one.
When I see someone complain about Snyder's visual work, I honestly don't see the same thing they see. Snyder plays with time during scenes and during action because that's the way time feels during certain moments, thick and slow and then suddenly fast again. It communicates something, and it allows for something akin to a comic book panel, a frozen highlight from a larger series of motions.
Jason Segal, Justin TImberlake, and Lucy Punch also strong in first look
Jake Kasdan should be much bigger than he is.
And, no, I don't mean he's a leprechaun.Â He's not miniature.Â But he is far more talented than his "place" in the industry would indicate.Â His work on "Freaks and Geeks" alone should make him a big name.Â "Zero Effect" is one of those great small movies that seems to be timeless, totally not part of any trend, and with a huge voice.Â "Orange County" is a low-key charmer, and "The TV Set" is an acutely-observed look at the madness of the entertainment industry, revealing and without sentiment.Â I think people dismissed "Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story" without really seeing it, lumping it in with lesser parody work, and it's probably the best comedy about musicians since "Ishtar."
Yes, I meant that as praise.
Maybe the tide has turned for Kasdan.Â Maybe this is his year finally.Â Screen Gems had a fun smart late-summer surprise last year with "Easy A," and I'm hoping "Bad Teacher" is that for them again this year, only with a much fouler mouth.Â Gene Stupnitsky and Lee Eisenberg have a very short track record.Â They wrote "Year One," they write for "The Office," and they're working on "Ghostbuster III."Â
Despite the title, there just might be something to this one
Sony and Platinum Dunes are set to team up in bringing the IDW series "Zombies Vs. Robots" to the bigscreen, and all over the world, aspiring screenwriters commit suicide out of pure existential fear that there is no reason to even try anymore.
I like JT Petty, who evidently turned the IDW comic into a spec script called "Inherit The Earth," and I think he's an underrated screenwriter. And Chris Ryall and Ashley Wood actually did create something pretty cool with the original series. It's lean and mean as a book, focused on a sort of philosophical war between three mad scientists who are responsible for the zombie apocalypse and the creation of sentient robots, and the one baby left, a little girl, is the thing they pitch their struggle over. The artwork in the book was beautiful and strange, and worked as a sort of expressionist take on genre.
Platinum Dunes being involved makes me think this is going to be a whole lot less expressionist and a whole lot more conventional when and if it does make the jump to the bigscreen. That's just the nature of the thing. It wasn't until later, after the initial book, that Ryall and Wood expanded the world and started telling more human-centric stories.
Is the director of 'Disturbia' going to do what the director of 'American Beauty' couldn't?
I will say it clearly and without equivocation: "Preacher" will not work as a movie.
"Preacher" will not work as a series of movies. "Preacher" will not work on TV. "Preacher" will not work anywhere you have a series of people making decisions based on advertisers, sponsors, subscribers, or demographics. "Preacher" exists right now in the one form that can fully handle what "Preacher" is, and any attempts to translate it to another form of media will end in bitter, bitter tears.
On that note, congratulations to DJ Caruso for being the latest person attached to "Preacher," which he will allegedly direct for Sony.
I say "allegedly" because this has been in the works for a while, and it's been through a lot of hands already. I remember reading drafts of the screenplay back with Rachel Talalay (the director of "Tank Girl") was going to direct it, and I still remember seeing the Arseface make-up for the first time. It was hideous, directly out of the documentary "Dream Deceivers," and so dead-on accurate to the character design from the book that I thought, "Wow, I wonder if they might actually pull this off."
Oh, sweet young naive me.
What does his new film have in common with his next film?
Johnny Depp is, if I had to sum him up in one word, elusive.
He does press, but he does it like he's being chased by assassins. No matter how much the publicity teams on his films over the years have been helpful or reached out to me, actually scheduling time to sit down with Depp has never happened.
I'm actually glad that when it did finally happen a little over a week ago, it was for a movie I really liked, and one that is slightly left-of-center for a leading man movie star. I was a Depp fan during the days before "Pirates," when he was just "that guy who appears to be completely allergic to movie stardom," when he made interesting choices that seemed designed to please only him. As a result, the first film I had to ask him about as we were settling in for the interview was "Dead Man," the unconventional western he made with Jim Jarmusch in 1995. I told him that he was the only man with enough clout to get Disney/Miramax to release the film on Blu-ray. I've actually learned since that someone else has picked up the rights and that the Blu-ray mastering is being done right now, so Depp doesn't have to lean on the Mouse anymore.
But still, starting with "Dead Man" felt appropriate in many ways, since "Rango" is absolutely a western. And since Gore Verbinski always described the "Pirates" movies as westerns when we spoke, and since Verbinski and Depp are gearing up to reunite for "The Lone Ranger," that genre was the main point of interest in our conversation.
Plus 'Tree of Life,' Argento's 'Dracula 3D,' and more
Welcome to The Morning Read.
Why am I not friends with David and Megan Ellison? Last week we ran the story about Megan Ellison stepping in to help finance two upcoming Paul Thomas Anderson movies, "The Master" and "Inherent Vice," and now there's news of her brother possibly stepping in to help finance "Star Blazers," with a script by Christopher McQuarrie. Harry at Ain't It Cool says the rights still aren't pinned down, and that Lucasfilm might also be in the race at the moment, which leads me to ask "Why are the rights to 'Star Blazers' a hot commodity all of a sudden?" There's a live-action version of the series that's in theaters now in Japan under its original title, "Space Battleship Yamato," but the property's been bouncing around Hollywood for years. The Ellison kids are both wealthy thanks to their billionaire father, and so far, they've been making very strong choices. Skydance, David Ellison's company, is partnered with Paramount on "MIssion Impossible: Ghost Protocol, the proposed "Top Gun" sequel, and the Jack Ryan reboot, so there's at least a small chance that if Skydance does end up with the rights to "Star Blazers," it could end up with a home at Paramount.