Archive

Minister for Current Affairs

This is the place to stay up to date about the latest developments in the world of film. Do you want to be the Minister for Current Affairs? Head over to the Your Say section to fill out an application.

That's a Wrap NO.34: James Bond's Days of Future Past (28.10.12)

Next Two Bond Films to be Single Story

Following the critical (And assumedly commercial) success of Skyfall, screenwriter John Logan has been hired not just to write the next Bond film, but the next two Bond films. What is more significant however is that the next two films will be based upon a single story arc that he pitched to the producers during the filming of Skyfall. I have nothing against Bond films being connected by a single story in theory, however practice in the past has shown it to be a bad idea (Quantum of Solace...) leading me to have something against it in theory this time around. A major flaw people had with Quantum of Solace was the fact that a recent viewing of Casino Royale was required to understand it, most people don’t want this in a Bond film and I can understand and support that. If this is done right it could be effective, however past examples do not fill me with confidence and I am surprised given the reaction to Quantum of Solace, that the producers would so quickly and willingly support the notion once again. What do you think of this news? Do you want Bond films to be connected by a single story? Did you think it was effective in Quantum of Solace? Give us all your James Bond thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss this story in our forum and vote in the poll below.

Matthew Vaughn WON'T Direct X-Men: Days of Future Past

X-Men: First Class was one of my favourite films of last year and Matthew Vaughn is one of my favourite directors. Therefore my initial reaction to this news was one of disappointment and worry. Attention now turns to who Fox will get to replace Matthew Vaughn and if rumours are to be believed, they are after the man who directed the first two X-Men films, Bryan Singer. Appointing Singer would be the perfect move and really be the final step in getting this cinematic franchise back on two feet. However Fox need to tread carefully, as going down the Brett Ratner route once again would sink the ship that has just begun to sail. Following Rupert Wyatt leaving Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, it appears that the sequels to two of the best blockbusters and films of last year have lost their director. Dawn made a good choice with Matt Reeves (Yet appear to be messing it up with the writers) lets hope that First Class 2, will get a first class director. What do you think of this news? Are you happy that Vaughn won’t be directing X-Men: First Class 2? Would you like Bryan Singer to direct it? Discuss it in our forum, vote in the poll below and give us all your X-Men: First Class 2 thoughts in the Your Say section

Rupert Wyatt Leaving Dawn of the Planet of the Apes?

Rise of the Planet of the Apes was one of the surprise critical and commercial hits of last year. A while ago it was announced that the sequel would be titled, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes. However bad news has hit this week with rumours that Rupert Wyatt (Who directed the first film) will be leaving the sequel due to scheduling concerns and conflicts. If this is true and turns out to be the case, it will be a huge disappointment and dent on my anticipation for this sequel. If this happens, it all depends on who they get to replace him. Given the success of the first film and the potential that now rests in this franchise, hopefully a skilled director will be attracted to the material and/or be approached. I’ll be interested to see what Wyatt gets offered outside of the franchise and both him and the series have a great future ahead of them, whether they share this future remains to be seen. What do you think of this news? Did you like Rise? Would you like Wyatt to direct the sequel? Are you happy that he may be leaving the series? Who would you like to replace him? Give us your in-depth thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

That's a Wrap NO.32: James Cameron's Jurassic Park, 3D Conversions and Comics

What Could Have Been

This week James Cameron went on the record about a number of things (Including his thoughts regarding Prometheus, The Matrix Trilogy and his money driven plans to have Chinese actors in the Avatar sequels) However the most interesting thing he said was shedding light on how he was almost the one who directed Jurassic Park. James Cameron said that he came incredibly close to securing the rights to the Michael Crichton's book, however Steven Spielberg just beat him to the punch. James Cameron said that his version of Jurassic Park would have been in the vein of Aliens and much nastier than Spielberg’s film. He said however that upon seeing Spielberg’s masterpiece (I’ve added the M word) that he saw the (arguable) error in his ways as, “Dinosaurs belong to children” While I love Spielberg’s Jurassic Park, I would love to see an Aliens style take on the material. In fact the best way to bring back the franchise would be to have a filmmaker like James Cameron offer up an entirely different take. What do you think? Would you have liked to have seen Cameron’s Jurassic Park? Or does the thought of an Aliens-esque take on the material not interest you? Were you a fan of Spielberg’s film? Give us all your Jurassic Park thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

Pacific Rim The Latest Victim Of The 3D Conversion

Pacific Rim, the next film from Guillermo Del Toro (Pans Labyrinth and Hellboy) starring Idris Elba, will be converted into 3D. Pacific Rim’s plot is being lazily summed up into the following sentence, giant robots versus giant aliens. A simplification that is understandable in its frequency due to its convenience and awesomeness. News of a film being post converted into 3D is always bad news, however it is even worse when you hear that Guillermo Del Toro is reportedly against the decision. If your filmmaker does not want his film turned into 3D, LISTEN TO HIM! I understand the financial and economic incentives behind post converting films into 3D, however it completely ruins the experience and kills the film. It also seems, considering Guillermo’s supposed opinion, a blatant act of disrespect towards one of the industry’s finest filmmakers. I would say that I will seek out Pacific Rim in cinemas how the director initially intended for me to see it, however as cinemas and studios are now working together to eliminate your right to choose how you watch a film, it is likely that I will have to once again put on these silly glasses in order to watch a film and wonder for the majority of it, why I am wearing them. What do you think of this news? Are you a fan of Guillermo Del Toro? Are you a fan of 3D? Are you glad that Pacific Rim will now have an extra dimension? Give us all your Pacific Rim related thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in ourforum and vote in the poll below.

Django Unchained to Receive a Comic Book Adaptation

Quentin Tarantino’s Django Unchained is one of my most anticipated films for the rest of the year. This week it was announced that his tale of a slave turned bounty hunter will not only be told on the big screen. A Django Unchained comic is reportedly in the early stages of development, with RM Guera announced as the illustrator (His appointment is what shed light on this project’s existence to me) It will be a five-issue miniseries published by DC Comics, due for release in November, a month before the film’s release. No writer has been announced yet and the project is set to be adapted directly from Tarantino’s screenplay. While I would like to see Tarantino write the comic himself, it is based on his screenplay and therefore he indirectly is. It will be interesting to see how closely the comic book and the film relate and where the comic deviates from its source. It also interesting to look at this as another turn in the relationship between the comic and film mediums. Comics are being turned into films and now films are being turned into comics. A graphic novel adaptation of a Quentin Tarantino movie seems like the perfect combination and I eagerly anticipate the result. What do you think? Are you looking forward to Django Unchained? Do you think a comic adaptation is a good idea? Who would you like to write it? What other films would you like to see turned into comics? Give us all your Django Unchained thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the polls below.

That's a Wrap NO.31: Star Trek, Doctor Strange & Roger Ebert

Star Trek Into Darkness

Next year, the sequel to J.J. Abrams’ 2009 Star Trek will be released. Up until now the film has simply been referred to as Star Trek 2. However this week, rumours spread regarding the film’s true title. Paramount have reportedly been buying domain names which have lead to the proclamation, that one of next year’s biggest films will be called, “Star Trek Into Darkness” I’m not sure how I feel about this title. It sounds more like the name of a ride or a game, than the name of a film.There’s also something a little bit cheap about using the title of your franchise as the beginning of a sentence. Also when saying it out loud, it reveals itself to be a rather clunky title, perhaps all its missing is a colon and a the. What do you think of this title? Do you agree that it doesn’t sound like the title to a film and doesn’t sound well when said? Should they add a colon and the word the? (Star Trek: Into the Darkness) Or do you like this title? Give us all your Star Trek related thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

Doctor Strange to Appear in, Thor: The Dark World?

It has been rumoured that the character of Doctor Strange will be introduced into the Marvel cinematic universe in the upcoming Thor sequel, Thor: The Dark World (Not, Thor into Dark World) Joel Edgerton is reportedly being lined up to play the character, who will be introduced as a scientist, aiding the character of Jane Foster (Played by Natalie Portman) in her cosmic research. For those of you who don’t know (Including myself) Doctor Strange is a ‘master magician’ taught the mystic arts after meeting a homeless man who turns out to be an ‘ancient one’ while giving medical procedures in the street for cash after losing all his money trying to fix his hands after a crash. I’m guessing that Thor: the Dark World won’t contain his origin and that he will only serve a tiny role in the film, with certain lines of dialogue and images hopefully hinting as to what is to come. Whether Doctor Strange will ever get his own movie, is another matter. Are you a fan of Doctor Strange? Do you hope this rumour is true? Would Joel Edgerton be a good choice to play him? Would you like to see a Doctor Strange movie? Give us all your Marvel related thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the polls below.

Roger Ebert's Life to be a Documentary

The most famous and respected film critic of all time, will be having a documentary made about him by some of the most famous and respected filmmakers of all time. Steve James and Steven Zaillian have bought the rights to Ebert’s autobiography, “Life Itself” and the film will be executive produced by Martin Scorsese. Roger Ebert has had a very turbulent, interesting and at times inspirational professional and private life. I’m really looking forward to seeing what they do with this documentary, as if done right, it could be the ultimate film about film criticism. Ebert is an individual who I and many other film fans respect and the opportunity to learn more about him and hopefully how he goes about his work, is an opportunity I look forward to taking when this film is released. As a seventeen year old budding film critic, Ebert’s reviews are ones that I constantly seek out and I love watching old reviews from At the Movies. In fact what may be the most interesting aspect of this film and what I most hope they include and address, is how film criticism has changed over time. What do you think of this news? Is Roger Ebert a good topic for a documentary? What would you like the focus of the film to be? His professional or personal life? (A mixture of the two is the likely result) Give us all your Roger Ebert documentary thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

That's a Wrap NO.30: Deleted Scenes, Titles, Directors & Metal Gear Solid

Two Deleted Scenes Released From, The Avengers

This week saw the release of two scenes from this year’s The Avengers which hit the cutting room floor. Deleted scenes have been addressed recently in regards to Prometheus, however this time around we have actual deleted scenes to watch and discuss. The first to be released was an alternate opening. An opening which seemed like the beginning to a completely different, much darker and potentially better film. It was very Nolan-esque and had imagery which evoked 9/11 and I can see why it was ditched for two reasons. One, it is completely different tonally from the final film and the acting by Colbie Smulders isn't great. The second scene we saw was an extended re-introduction to Captain America which I loved and while having much more in common tonally with the alternate opening than the final film, I think they could have got away with keeping it in the finished product. It contains a funny Stan Lee cameo and provides a neat set-up to some of Captain America’s actions in the third act, particularly regarding a waitress. However, what do you think of these deleted scenes? Do you agree that they look like scenes from a different, darker and potentially better film? Do you understand why they were cut and agree with the decision? Give us all your Avengers thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below. Check out the alternate opening in the embed below and the Captain America scene here.

Hobbit 3 Release Date Announced and Hobbit 2 Retitled

More bad news regarding The Hobbit. The second of the now trilogy, was initially titled, The Hobbit: There and Back Again. This week it has been announced not only when the third film will be released (July 18th 2014) but also that the second film has been retitled, The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug. With the unwanted and unneeded third film stealing the original and better title of the second film. For those of you who don’t know, Smaug is the name of the dragon who our team of heroes encounter and must defeat in the third act of The Hobbit. I don’t like this new title and much preferred, There and Back Again. However, what do you think? Do you like this new title? Are you glad it’s no longer called There and Back Again? Give us all your Hobbit related thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

The Wachowskis Lined Up For, The Justice League

A few weeks ago it was reported that Warner Brothers were approaching Ben Affleck to direct The Justice League. This week we learnt what many already suspected, that Ben Affleck will not (Both fortunately and unfortunately in my opinion) be directing it. Therefore the Wachowskis (The Matrix, Speed Racer and one of this year's upcoming films, Cloud Atlas) are now the preffered candidate, hopefully an indicator that Cloud Atlas is a winner. The Wachowskis are superb visually and can handle spectacle and action competently and creatively. Hopefully they will be able to balance all the characters that will be thrown at them and be given a great script to visually realize. Therefore I am cautiously optimistic about the possibility of the Wachowskis directing The Justice League. What do you think? Are you happy or disappointed that Ben Affleck won’t be directing? Would you like the Wachowskis to direct? Give us all your Justice League thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

Avi Arad to Bring Metal Gear Solid to the Big Screen

I have not played the Metal Gear Solid games, however if you have ever dipped your toes into the video game world, it is impossible not to be aware of their success, impact, quality and legacy. This week Avi Arad, who helped bring the likes of Spiderman and The X-Men to the big screen, announced that he would be helping develop a cinematic adaption of this classic video game series. Avi Arad says he wants to do for video game movies what he did for comic book movies as, “Video games are the comic books of today” No details as of yet have been given regarding the who, what, when and where of this project. However with Metal Gear Solid under the guidance of Avi Arad and Michael Fassbender developing and starring in an Assassin’s Creed movie, video game to movie adaptations could finally be about to have their time in the sunlight. What do you think of this news? Have you played the Metal Gear Solid games? Can they work as movies? Is Avi Arad a good choice to help produce it? Who would you want to write it, direct and star in it? Give us all your Metal Gear Solid thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

That's a Wrap NO.29: Apps, Remakes, Women, Warner Brothers & Directors

Full Metal Jacket 25th Anniversary App

To celebrate the 25th anniversary of Stanley Kubrick’s Full Metal Jacket, Matthew Modine (Foley in The Dark Knight Rises) has released an extensive behind the scenes ipad app. He had a role in the film and documented the filming with a camera and personal diary. He got funding for this app through Kickstarter, with the app consisting of hundreds of photos and diary entries. The app is in fact based on a book published by Matthew Modine on this subject, with the app turning it into, “an interactive and audiovisual experience” This app is available to download now, here. Will you be getting this Full Metal Jacket 25th anniversary app? Do you think that apps could be the future of behind the scenes material? Give us your thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

Unforgiven To Receive a Japanese Remake

Normally I would react to news of an Unforgiven remake with the following...

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

However, this is not an American remake of Clint Eastwood’s classic but a Japanese remake. Not only is it refreshing to see the Japanese remake an American film as it is so frequently the other way around, however this remake will also change the genre of the film from the western to the samurai film. The western and samurai genres are well connected thematically and if Unforgiven were to be re-imagined, doing so within the samurai genre appears to be the perfect and perhaps only way to do it. It’s also a good sign that Ken Watanabe (Batman Begins and Inception) will be playing the Clint Eastwood role. I am personally very excited for this film, however what do you think? Is a remake of Unforgiven blasphemous no matter how its being done? What do you think of the change of genre from Western to Samurai? What do you think of Ken Watanabe’s casting? Give us your in-depth thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

Producers Planning a Female Version of The Expendables

Given the success of The Expendables and now The Expendables 2, an all-female version of the series is reportedly in the works. Names being thrown around are Linda Hamilton (Terminator), Sigourney Weaver (Alien), Gina Carano (Haywire), Angelina Jolie (Tomb Raider and Wanted), Michelle Rodriguez (Lost, Machete and S.W.A.T) and Mila Jovovich (Resident Evil)...also may I add, Kate Beckinsale (Underworld and Total Recall) I think this a great idea and another opportunity to bring many famous action stars together. This could also, if given a decent writer and director, be a much better film than the all-male version of The Expendables, given that most of these women are better actors than the likes of Arnie and Sly Stallone. What do you think of this idea? Give us your in-depth thoughts and casting wish list in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

Warner Brothers Pass on The Dark Tower

One of the first news stories I remember reporting on, here at Movie Parliament was Universal ditching the opportunity to finance and distribute Ron Howard’s ambitious plan to adapt Stephen King’s, Dark Tower series. The plan consists of a trilogy of films connected through two T.V. mini-series. Now another high profile studio, Warner Brothers, have passed on the opportunity to facilitate in bringing this to life. Is this ever going to see the light of day? Is any studio going to take the financial risk? What would my advice to Ron Howard be? Turn to Kickstarter...you may not raise all the money you’ll need to bring this to life but it could show these studios that there is enough of an audience out there to finance these films. Have you read the Dark Tower series? What do you think of Ron Howard’s plan that aims to bridge T.V. and film? Can you see any studio financing it? What do you think of my Kickstarter plan/suggestion? Give us your thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in ourforum and vote in the poll below.

Joe Carnahan and James Gunn For Nemesis and Guardians of the Galaxy

Two directing announcements here. Following last week’s news that his chances of directing Daredevil may have gone, Joe Carnahan will now be directing the adaptation of Mark Millar’s, Nemesis. Having briefly read and heard what the plot of Nemesis is, this is a super-villain story and this film could potentially be a darker, grittier and more adult version of Megamind. Following The Grey, I am in for any Joe Carnahan film and I have really enjoyed both film adaptations of Mark Millar’s films so far (Wanted and Kick Ass) and therefore I am looking forward to this film.

James Gunn (Who directed, Super) will reportedly be the man entrusted with bringing Marvel’s Guardians of the Galaxy to the big screen. Guardians of the Galaxy is one of Marvel’s more ambitious projects and James Gunn is a very interesting choice. It will be a big step-up for him to big-budget, effects-laden filmmaking, however if he brings his zany humour and style with him, he could make a movie containing a gun-wielding raccoon, work.

That's a Wrap NO.28: Daredevil, Deleted Scenes, Budgets & Batman

Daredevil Going Back to Marvel

Last week I reported on the negotiations between Fox and Marvel regarding the cinematic rights to the character of Daredevil. This week has seen a development on that front as Fox are reportedly prepared to surrender the rights, returning the character cinematically to his origins. Marvel regaining control of a character they sold off is fantastic news and I cannot wait to see how they integrate the character into their already established cinematic universe. However I am slightly disappointed that we won’t get to see what Marvel had up their sleeves regarding the characters of Galactus and Silver Surfer, who they seemed more eager to get back than Daredevil. However what is potentially more disappointing is that we won’t get to see Joe Carnahan’s take on the material as Fox passed on it and Marvel may wish to take things in their own direction. However this is only potentially disappointing as Marvel could yet give Carnahan the opportunity to fulfill his vision under different guidance. Joe Carnahan directed one of this year’s best films, The Grey, as well as films such as The A Team and Smokin Aces. This week following the news that he would not be given the chance by Fox to direct the film and that the rights were retuning to Marvel, he released a sizzle reel which consists of footage from multiple different sources, with an aim of portraying what his style, tone and take on the character would’ve been. Check it out in the embed below. What do you think of this news? Are you happy that Daredevil is returning to Marvel? Or would you rather they got Galactus and Silver Surfer? What do you think of Carnahan’s demo reel? Would you like Marvel to give him the chance that Fox didn’t/couldn’t? Discuss it in our forum, give us your in-depth thoughts in theYour Say section and vote in the polls below.

35 Minutes Worth of Deleted Scenes for Prometheus Blu-Ray/DVD

Prometheus is one of this year’s most divisive and discussed films, as well as one of my personal favourites. Therefore I was very happy to learn this week that 35 minutes worth of deleted scenes (15 of which come from the third act) will be on the Blu-Ray/DVD release. A list was released of the title’s and length’s of the deleted scenes which you can see here:

00:02:31:16 ARRIVAL OF THE ENGINEERS
00:00:58:05 T’IS THE SEASON
00:00:42:08 OUR FIRST ALIEN
00:00:42:14 SKIN
00:01:22:01 WE’RE NOT ALONE ANYMORE
00:02:57:01 STRANGE BEDFELLOWS
00:01:25:04 HOLLOWAY HUNGOVER
00:00:23:12 DAVID’S OBJECTIVE
00:03:27:07 JANEK FILLS VICKERS IN
00:03:40:12 A KING HAS HIS REIGN
00:02:01:24 FITFIELD ATTACKS
00:04:06:06 THE ENGINEER SPEAKS
00:05:30:04 FINAL BATTLE
00:05:05:19 PARADISE

(List taken from slashfilm)

If you saw Prometheus, whether you liked it or not, this list must intrigue you. Many of those who didn’t like it stated a desire to see an extended cut, believing the theatrical release to have been a compromise cut, rather than the full vision. And if you liked Prometheus, then the opportunity to see even more footage is a very exciting one, in fact I would take more footage from Prometheus over a sequel to Prometheus. However some are annoyed by the fact that this footage is being presented in the form of deleted scenes rather than in the form of an extended cut, a gripe that I can sympathize with. What this story raises however is an interesting question regarding the nature of deleted scenes. Some see them as an interesting and almost necessary addition to DVD releases, whilst others go with the philosophy that if it’s not worthy of being in the final film, why should they see it? I personally can see the logic behind both views and I tend to avoid deleted scenes on a DVD unless they come with commentary explaining why they were cut. However due to the nature of Prometheus and this released list, I will be making an exception with this film. What do you think of this list of deleted scenes? Which one are you looking forward to seeing the most? and where do you stand on deleted scenes in general? Discuss it in our forum, give us your in-depth thoughts in the Your Say section and vote in the polls below.

Abrams and Cronenberg Blast Budgets & Batman

J.J. Abrams VS. Budgets
J.J. Abrams (One of my favourite directors) this week hit out at the size of film budgets. Abrams labelled them, "preposterous" and embarrassing" Something that I completely agree with. Looking at what filmmakers such as Duncan Jones, Neill Blomkamp and Gareth Edwards achieved on such low budgets, it is unforgivable to see films of a similar ilk have budgets that go up to and beyond 200 million U.S. Dollars. I cannot comprehend why, considering how filmmaking technology has become more and more domestic, film budgets are so high. To adapt a quote from Prometheus, the major studios probably spend as much as they do on films because they can. However as Abrams argued and as I also argue, a lack of money breeds creativity and solutions which can make a film iconic and which would not have been made had they been able to buy their way out of a situation. High budgets are the reasons why so many Hollywood films are lazy, cowardly and unoriginal as the risk is higher and therefore the desire to be different lower. Low budgets will improve the films, inspire a generation of filmmakers and they increase profit potential. Do you agree with J.J. Abrams? Do you care about how much films cost? Do you think that a film's budget is closely linked to a film's creativity and originality? Discuss it in our forum, give us your in-depth thoughts in theYour Say section and vote in the poll below.

David Cronenberg VS. Superheroes
David Cronenberg has made an enemy out of geeks everywhere with his ignorant comments regarding Christopher Nolan's Batman films. Not only is he factually wrong when he claims that Nolan has been shooting in IMAX and 3D but it is also a disappointing and surprising display of snobbery...then again the man did make A Dangerous Method and Cosmopolis (I'm now on track to make an enemy out of "art house" fans everywhere) David Cronenberg is a rightfully respected filmmaker and everybody is allowed an opinion. I don't care if Cronenberg likes or dislikes Nolan's Batman films, what I care about and why I'm writing about something I previously would ignore, is due to his comments about the superhero genre in general. Cronenberg said, "A superhero movie, by definition, you know, it's comic book. It's for kids. It's adolescent in its core." wrong, wrong, wrong, WRONG. Cronenberg should really know better considering he made his name through a genre which is frequently and wrongfully looked down upon (horror) and in my opinion his quote here ranks alongside Roger Ebert saying video games will never be art as the out of touch thoughts of a well respected member of the film community. The fact that Cronenberg dismisses superhero movies and belittles a genre in such a way is so disappointing. It's just a very limited view and I wonder what others think about it. Are superhero films a respected genre? Are they art? Will they ever be respected as such? Are they adolescent at their core? Discuss it in our forum,give us your thoughts in the Your Say section and vote in the poll below. Don't get me wrong, this isn't an anti-Cronenberg piece, this is a piece against the snobbish, ignorant, dismissive and limited mentality regarding a genre that Cronenberg has now elected to attach himself to. Also note that this isn't the ranting of a Dark Knight Rises fanboy, I think Cronenberg is wrong here because of what he said about a genre, not what he said about a individual film.

That's a Wrap NO.27: Marvel, Directors & Delays

Marvel Tie Down Whedon and Negotiate With Fox

Two big Marvel stories this week and we shall start with the biggest. Joss Whedon has signed a contract with Marvel that lasts until 2015, meaning that he will return to write and direct the sequel to The Avengers. However what I find more interesting, is that he will also oversee the development of an ABC produced, live-action, TV series, set within the Marvel universe. Joss Whedon returning for The Avengers 2 is wonderful news as I couldn’t envision or comprehend anyone else directing it, however the possibility of a Marvel TV series is one that currently excites me more, as it is something we haven’t seen before. Whedon built his fame on TV series such as Buffy the Vampire Slayer and I can’t wait to see how Marvel intend to transfer their cinematic universe onto the small screen. If they can pull it off, Marvel could become one of the biggest names in entertainment. Details are lacking regarding the specificis of the series, however as soon as we get more information regarding the who, what, when and where of it, we will discuss it here at That’s a Wrap. What do you think of this news? Are you happy that Joss Whedon will be writing and directing The Avengers 2? Does the possibility of a Marvel universe set TV series excite and interest you? What would you like to see from a Marvel TV series? Which announcement do you find more exciting, Whedon writing and directing Avengers 2? Or Whedon overseeing a Marvel TV series? Give us all your Marvel related thoughts in the Your Saysection, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

The second piece of Marvel news this week revolves around rights. Before Marvel became a huge movie studio they sold the cinematic rights to their characters to various companies. Fox currently holds the rights for The Fantastic Four and Daredevil. However if Fox don’t begin production on a Daredevil movie by October they will lose the rights, returning them to Marvel. Therefore reports surfaced this week of the negotiations between Fox and Marvel. Marvel are reportedly willing for Fox to maintain the rights to Daredevil if, in return, they give Marvel the rights for two Fantastic Four characters, Galactus and the Silver Surfer. As Fox have a Fantastic Four movie in development (With Chronicle’s Josh Trank directing) would they want to give up two of the biggest characters in the Fantastic Four and Marvel universe so that they can hold on to Daredevil? Or will they let Daredevil go and deny Marvel the characters they seemingly and interestingly want the most? Either way, Marvel is going to get something back and given what a great job they have done so far with their characters and considering the fact that they have a clear plan under the guidance of Joss Whedon through to 2015, anything returning to Marvel is good news. The most interesting part of this story is speculating why Marvel want these two characters over everything they could get with Daredevil. Marvel clearly have plans for these two characters which is not readily apparent at Fox and while it may be against Fox’s Fantastic Four interests I hope they accept this proposal from Marvel as I want to see what Marvel has up their sleeve regarding these characters. What do you think? What could Marvel want specifically with Galactus and the Silver Surfer? Would you rather they got Daredevil back? What should Fox hold on to? Give us all your Fox/Marvel/Daredevil/Fantastic Four thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

Directors

Two directing announcements, followed by a directing possibility.

George Nolfi and One Minute to Midnight
One Minute to Midnight is a book I have well and truly read as part of my research for a school paper on the Cuban Missile Crisis. While reading it I thought it would make a great movie and even envisioned who I would cast and how I would film certain moments. This week it was announced that George Nolfi (Director of The Adjustment Bureau) will be bringing this book to cinematic life. Nolfi has only made one film so far, which I liked, so he hasn’t exactly given me a reason to doubt his appointment. However he also hasn’t given me too many reasons to be excited about his appointment either. I’ll be interested to see how he handles it and this is definitely something to watch out for. Do you think George Nolfi is a good choice to direct One Minute to Midnight? Give us your thoughts in the Your Saysection, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

Jon Favreau and Jersey Boys

Just as I read One Minute to Midnight, I have also seen the show Jersey Boys, though not for research purposes. Again, just as I thought One Minute to Midnight would make a good movie and I pondered how I would do it myself, the same applies to Jersey Boys. This time however, I am much more excited about who has been chosen to direct, Jon Favreau. Jon Favreau is the director of Zathura, Iron Man & Iron Man 2 and Cowboys and Aliens. Now while all those science fiction/action films don’t exactly scream musical, I am confident that Jon Favreau can faithfully bring this material to cinematic life. He is a skilled director, he’s from New York and he should be working with a great screenplay given that the film will be written by John Logan (Hugo, The Aviator and Gladiator) Have you seen Jersey Boys? Do you think it would make a good movie? Is Jon Favreau a good choice to direct? Give us your thoughts in theYour Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

Ben Affleck and Justice League

So we go from two director appointments to one director possibility. This week it was announced that Warner Brothers are going to approach Ben Affleck to direct the Justice League. While many people’s initial reactions may have been, “What?” for those of us who have seen Gone Baby Gone and The Town the response varied from, “Hmmm, interesting” to “That’s a really good choice” to “Don’t do it Ben!” I don’t expect Affleck to accept however I would be very happy if he did. He has proven himself to be a talented director (With this year’s Argo hopefully taking him three for three) and I like how just as they did with Nolan, they are not picking a standard action director but rather somebody who has done, and is interested in telling, engaging and interesting stories. What do you think? Is Ben Affleck a good choice to direct the Justice League? Who would you rather see direct? Give us your thoughts in the Your Saysection, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

The Great Gatsby Pushed Back to Summer 2013

Baz Luhrmann's The Great Gatsby was supposed to be released this Christmas and with a cast that includes Leonardo Dicaprio, was tipped to be an Oscar contender. However this week Warner Brothers announced that the film will no longer be a Christmas release and instead a summer blockbuster. There are a few theories as to why Warner Brothers made this decision.

One - The film was terrible and Warner Brothers knew it stood no chance at the Oscars. Why not push it into the arena where studios release all their tentpole, money making movies?
Two - There was simply too much competition this Christmas, some of which came from their own studio. With Django Unchained (Another DiCaprio film), The Hobbit (Warner Brothers) and Les Miserables, they may have simply seen Summer as a safer release date, regardless of the film's quality.

In my opinion it's a combination of the two. December is a very big and crowded month for movies in America. However if Warner Brothers really believed in this film (And its Oscar hopes) they needn't have blinked. Either way I still look forward to the film and think that at the end of the day, summer could be a better, more profitable place for it, with less critical expectations and box office competition. Should Warners have delayed Gatsby? The film is ready (They have a very footage heavy trailer already out there) so this wasn't a necessary decision at all. Give us your thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in ourforum and vote in the poll below.

That's a Wrap NO.26: Prequels, Sequels and Polls

Warner Brothers Considering a Prequel to, "The Shining"

News broke early this week that Warner Brothers are planning to make a prequel to Stanley Kubrick’s classic, The Shining. The first question positioning itself in everybody’s minds must have been, why? While the project is supposedly being written by Laeta Kalogridis, who was behind one of my favourite movies of 2010, Shutter Island, this is still an incredibly shaky idea. I say shaky as I feel that if the right director was approached, there is potential here, however the chances of a respectable director wanting to follow in the footsteps of Kubrick are probably slim. The Shining is a classic, iconic film, any film made with a connection to it is only going to look weaker as a result. I hope that this is one of those projects that never leaves development as we really don’t need any more cinematic additions to this story. A T.V. series exploring the past of the Overlook Hotel could be interesting and could work as it would be removed by format from Kubrick’s film and would therefore not consciously and subconsciously be constantly compared to it. However if another Shining film is made, even under the hands of a great director (The only way this can work) it will not be able to live up to, The Shining, at least not on release. What do you think? Is there more potential for a Shining prequel in film than I can foresee? Would you prefer to see a T.V. series? Do you join my hope that this never sees the light of day? Who would you like to direct a Shining prequel? Personally I would go for Christopher Nolan. Now I know that sounds like the current default fanboy response however, consider this...Think about the moments of horror and tension Nolan has created in his prior films through the characters of Bane, the Joker and the Scarecrow. Now think of the architecture of Inception and the way in which he plays with dreams and reality. Nolan and The Shining would be a greater fit than perhaps initially meets the eye, however, after completing a franchise based trilogy, whether Nolan would want to tie himself down with another well-known source is debatable. After completing his Batman trilogy I expect and would be happy with him focusing on his own, original projects. Be sure to give us your Shining prequel thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below. Two final notes I will add are the following. As long as its focus remains the Overlook Hotel (Imagine if it was a T.V. series and each series focused on a different tenant/ownership in a different time period) and it doesn’t stray into the story of Jack Torrance, I can live with its existence as if its awful there is substantial ground for us to pretend, that as it shouldn’t and won’t, it has nothing to do with the original. And finally, at least they’re not remaking it. Give us your thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

Sequel to Prometheus is Coming in 2014 or 2015 and Tentatively Titled, "Paradise"

I am a big fan of Prometheus, however at the end of my review I stated that I would not like to see a sequel. Inevitably, news has broken this week that a sequel is indeed in the works, with the current title, Paradise. Now while I loved the world that Ridley Scott created I am not as excited about a Prometheus sequel as I should be considering my appreciation of it and the franchise it is fortunately and unfortunately a part of. The problem is this, what most people will want out of a Prometheus sequel, is answers and with Damon Lindelof rumored to not be a part of the writing team, that is what we could get. I like ambiguity and mystery, a Prometheus sequel that gives us all the answers would dilute the mystery of Prometheus, eradicating all the theories and discussions that the movie has generated. However, I am of course looking forward to this and am thankful that films such as Prometheus are successful and getting the sequel treatment. I trust Scott in this genre and am perfectly happy and willing to spend another two hours in the wonderful worlds he creates and to see more of Michael Fassbender’s David. However I hope that, Paradise (If that remains its title) won’t be a marathon of answers and something that slavishly attempts to connect to Alien, but rather be an exciting, horrifying, beautiful, mysterious, gripping, unpredictable and thoughtful piece of science-fiction in its own right. What do you think? Does Prometheus need a sequel and do you want one? Do you want it to answer all the questions and have more connections to Alien? Or do you want it to maintain its mystery and strengthen its independence? Where do you think they should take the story and characters? Give us all your thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

X-Men: Days of Future Past

Although rumoured many weeks ago it has now been confirmed that the title for the X-Men: First Class sequel will indeed be, X-Men: Days of Future Past. Days of Future Past is a famous storyline in the X-Men comics which involves Kitty Pryde traveling back into the mind of her younger self, in an attempt to stop Magneto and his brotherhood from assassinating a senator, which will in turn result in an alternate future where Sentinels rule and mutants are hunted down and imprisoned in internment camps. What is most interesting about this concept of time travel and alternate timelines is that the film’s producer (And director of X-Men and X-Men 2) Bryan Singer has hinted that such devices could be used to connect these First Class films and his original films. Singer suggests that the X-Men universe could be explored in a similar way to how Marvel have combined their features and successfully adapted their vast comic universe onto the big screen. If the potential of this concept and idea is successfully realized, then it could be an exciting time for the X-Men cinematically. What do you think? Is Days of Future Past a good storyline to use and a good title? Should they be attempting to more explicitly and closely connect Singer’s originals to these prequels? What would you like to see them do with such a concept? Give us your in-depth thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

Hitchock's, "Vertigo" Is The Greatest Film of All Time

Every decade hundreds of critics and directors are asked by Sight & Sound, to submit their top ten films of all time which are then collated into two separate top ten lists. Since its inception, Citizen Kane has reigned supreme as the critics top movie ever made. However over the years, Alfred Hitchcock’s Vertigo has slowly but surely crept up the list and this year, 2012, it has successfully knocked Citizen Kane off its mantle and is now according to Sight and Sound’s poll, the greatest film ever made. There are a few things to discuss here. First is the notion of how films can improve and opinions on them change overtime. It has taken until 2012 for this to be considered by a large enough majority, the greatest, yet that wasn’t the case ten years ago. This can also be seen as the effect of widening the voting field and allowing more people’s voice to be heard than before. However ultimately, while a fun thing to do and to anticipate, I question this polls importance and validity. For the vast majority of passionate filmgoers like myself, this is something that has been followed with great interest and provides a wonderful guide for us to continue our acquiring of cinematic knowledge. However, we will never deterime what the greatest film of all time is and while hundreds of critics have determined that Vertigo is just that, you can find hundreds of film fans who will disagree. I don’t place much stake into this poll in the sense that I’m going to use it to back-up my arguments, instead I think it is most valuable as a guide and a time capsule and not something that should have too much importance or credence placed onto it, due to the inherent subjectivity of what it is based on. The most fascinating result of the poll is getting to see what everybody's individual top ten lists were, the most memorable list of note currently being Michael Mann's, which included Avatar!

As a seventeen year old still searching for all those “classics” I need to see, I have DVD copies of Vertigo and Citizen Kane I intend to watch very soon. However I don’t expect either of those films to live up to the title they have now both been given, the greatest film of all time. It will be interesting to see whether the granting of this title to Vertigo, will sustain its place as such or damage it in a decades time. I will be honest and state the only film in the top ten I have currently seen is 2001: A Space Odyssey which I reviewed and analyzed here. I will make it a personal mission of mine to hunt down, see and review the rest. However I doubt that after viewing any one of them, I will consider them one of the ten greatest movies I have seen. In part due to age, in part due to taste and in part due to expectations, which have been raised and therefore damaged for each film on that list. However time for the big question, for those of you who have seen it, is Vertigo the greatest film ever made? Below is a poll containing the top ten films of all time according to the critics polled by Sight and Sound. My question is, which is the best film of that list? Give us your thoughts on the poll, the films it contains, its importance and your personal top ten in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

That's a Wrap NO.25: Cuts, Delays, Trilogies & T.V. Adaptations

Gangster Squad Cut and Delayed Until January 2013

Following the tragic events in Colorado, Warner Brothers have announced that their film Gangster Squad will be edited and delayed. If you remember the Gangster Squad trailer, one of the trailers more interesting and exciting visuals, involved a group of gangsters shooting their way through the back of a cinema screen and into the auditorium. When I first saw the trailer months ago, I thought this scene looked awesome, however of course, it now carries with it memories of an immense tragedy. I can understand this reaction from Warner Brothers and while I would prefer to see the film with that scene intact, there is no denying the emotions that those images conjure. As long as we get a great film, for me it is no great loss that we are losing a scene and will have to wait a little longer to see the film. I can understand and empathize with those who oppose this reaction, however I equally understand and empathize with the reaction itself. What do you think? Should this scene be cut from the movie and the release delayed? Or should they have instead just cut the scene or just delayed the release? Or should they have done neither? I can understand arguments from each side, however I personally find it hard to care about Gangster Squad and what will and won’t be in it and when we’ll see it, when people are still recovering from such a horrific event. Give us your thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

The Hobbit to Become a Trilogy?

This week it has been reported that Warner Brothers are deep into discussions about making a third Hobbit film, based on Tolkein’s notes. My response to this was a huge, NO. Having two “Hobbit” films is bad enough for a book that is less than 350 pages long, stretching it out to a trilogy would hugely dent my anticipation for these films. When I read of this possibility, I felt my enthusiasm for The Hobbit drop dramatically. The Hobbit is a simple, adventure story, two films is bad enough...but three? Have they not made enough Lord of the Rings films now? Have they not got enough money and won enough Oscars? A third Hobbit movie would be the start of a never-ending Lord of the Rings franchise that could threaten to become as commercial, tedious and lifeless as where Star Wars is. Now...I have more faith in Peter Jackson than in George Lucas and I am sure all three films (If they even act upon these discussions) could be amazing, however I detest the idea of them as it is unnecessary and purely for profit purposes. Do you think they should make a third Hobbit film? Should they even have made two? Give us all your Hobbit thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

CW Considering a T.V. Adaptation of Battle Royale

Beloved by Quentin Tarantino and the film you saw mentioned in almost every single Hunger Games review, the Japanese film Battle Royale is being eyed up for a TV adaptation by the CW. Following The Exorcist and Scream, this is yet another film title that is going to get the small screen treatment. Having not seen Battle Royale but having read and heard much about it, I cannot imagine this project working. The original property would most likely have its gory excesses watered down, angering fans of the original. If they want to replicate The Hunger Games success on TV then lets have a Hunger Games spin-off series. Most U.S. TV adaptations of other countries properties rarely work and I cannot imagine them striking a balance that will appease fans of the original and win over the demographic they seem to be aiming for in the States. However I could be and hope to be wrong. Have you seen Battle Royale? Could it work as a TV series? Should it be a TV series? Could the CW (Home of One Tree Hill) do it justice? Give us all your thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

That's a Wrap NO.24: Kickstarters, Writers, Reboots, Splits & D.C.

Man of Steel in IMAX 3D

IMAX, yes, 3D, no. However if there is a director whose style could in fact be augmented by a combination of both formats, it is Zack Snyder. In my eyes, Zack Snyder is one of the most underrated filmmakers working today. Say what you will about his arguably excessive use of slow motion, however for me all of his films are visual wonders. Seeing a Zack Snyder film in IMAX 3D could be something pretty spectacular for the eyes. However this of course all rests on how the 3D is done. A post-conversion is not making use of the technology, even filming in 2D with 3D in mind has been shown with The Amazing Spider-Man to not be maximizing the potential of the added dimension. This is news that I am cautiously optimistic about, however I have a feeling that once again, the 3D will be a let down. However if any director/character combination could give us a thrilling 3D experience, it is Zack Snyder and Superman. What do you think? Should it be in IMAX 3D? Give us your thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below. Also check out the newly released poster for The Man of Steel by visiting Poster Palace, in the Future Films section.

D.C. Planning Justice League Movie for 2015

D.C. have announced their intention to release a Justice League movie in 2015. This suggests (If not confirms) that D.C. are not going to, do a Marvel, instead jumping straight to their collaboration movie, without the years of build-up and solo films that Marvel provided. It is for that reason, my anticipation for this film and my expectation for its success, are very low. Also seeing a new version of Batman so soon after the conclusion of Nolan’s trilogy will be jarring without a singular film to develop him. I assume that Zack Snyder’s Superman will be the “leader” of the team and the one through which the story is told, as he will be the only character to have had a preceding individual film. With the right director they could pull it off, however it will be much more of an impossible job than The Avengers, which was arguably one of the more impossible jobs in recent cinematic history. What do you think? Should D.C. be doing a Marvel Masterplan? Or are they right to cut to the chase? Give us your thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

Charlie Kaufman and Dan Harmon Turn to Kickstarter

Charlie Kaufman (Being John Malkovich, Adaptation and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind) and Dan Harmon (Community) are planning to collaborate on a stop-motion animation. This news gets even cooler and more interesting however, when you consider that they are raising money for this project, through Kickstarter. Now Kaufman and Harmon doing a stop-motion is interesting and potentially exciting, however it is the fact they are using Kickstarter to fund it, which really interests and excites me. Kickstarter is an internet method for people to raise money for their projects. People set goals and targets, if those goals or targets are not met, then people get their money back. Or rather, your money is only taken, if they reach their goal. You can see it for yourself by clicking here and Kafuman and Harmon’s Kickstarter by clicking here. Seeing those established in Hollywood use such a public way of financing their project fills me with optimism for the future. If this succeeds, it could open a window to braver, more interesting films. Filmmakers can no longer say, “I had an awesome idea but the studio wouldn’t give me any money” the world is now the movie studio. We can get any film made that we want, flood the market with original ideas, as long as those with the ideas let us. Who knows? this could be the beginning of the end of the “studio system” as we know it today. Do you share my optimism? Give us all your thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

Josh Trank to Direct Fantastic Four Reboot

This is more of a confirmation than an announcement, however Josh Trank will indeed be directing the reboot of the Fantastic Four. As he directed one of my favourite films of this year, Chronicle, I think this is a very good choice. I didn’t hate the original two Fantastic Four films, in fact I rather enjoyed them, however under Trank I think we could get a cinematic interpretation of these characters, that will be on another level. What do you think of this appointment? Did you like the original Fantastic Four films? Did you like Chronicle? Is Josh Trank a good choice? Give us all your thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

Mockingjay Split Into Two Films

Again, another story that seems to be more of a confirmation than an announcement. Mockingjay (The final book in The Hunger Games trilogy) will be two films. After Harry Potter, Twilight has followed suit and now The Hunger Games. As a fan of The Hunger Games I am neither for nor against this decision, as long as we get two great films I’ll be happy. However for all you Hunger Games fans, is this is a good decision? Where should the split point be? Give us your thoughts and suggestions in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

Writing - God of War, Ghostbusters 3 & World War Z

Marcus Dunstan and Patrick Melton Writing, "God of War" Adaptation
Guillermo Del Toro should be writing and directing this, however the fact these guys wrote Pacific Rim (Which Del Toro is directing) fills me with some confidence. Then again, they also wrote Saw 4,5,6 & 7 (Shudders) What do you think? Are these guys good choices to write God of War? Or do you agree with my Del Toro suggestions? Give us your thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

Etan Cohen writing Ghostbusters 3
Etan Cohen did a good job with Men in Black III, therefore I trust him to do a good job with Ghostbusters 3. Whether we see it or not, is another issue. Is Etan Cohen a good choice? Will we ever and should we ever see a Ghostbusters 3? Give us your thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

Drew Goddard the Latest to Re-Write World War Z
I like Drew Goddard, but is World War Z beyond saving? First Lindelof was the saviour and now its Goddard...just chuck the whole thing out and let me re-write the script! I am currently reading the book and am intrigued to see how these teams of emergency writers have adapted this material for the cinema. Having also now read the first draft by J. Michael Straczynski I am shocked how this film got into this state. The first draft was great! Why on earth have they got to this point! This convinces me that it is the studio who are responsible for this mess, that script did not need to be touched. I believe that it is the studio rather than the writers who should take the blame should this film fail, even though jaded Lost "fans" would love to have more ammunition to aim at Lindelof. They hired a director who wasn’t up to it in Marc Forster (Him and Brad Pitt are apparently no longer on speaking terms) and then decided to completely rip up and change the third act. If the film turns out to be good, it will be a miracle. However Brad Pitt doesn’t pick rubbish and if the core of what he saw in the material is maintained, he brings his A Game and Lindelof and Goddard do the business, this film could just yet survive. Is Drew Goddard a good choice? Can anyone save World War Z? Have you read the book? Have you read the first draft? Who do you think is to blame for this situation? Give us all your thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the polls below.

That's a Wrap NO.23: Cuts, Lawsuits, Pictures & Concept Art

The Amazing Spider-Man's Cuts Revealed

Two pieces of Amazing Spider-Man news. Following the film’s record breaking box office opening, it has been announced that as previously planned and presumed, The Amazing Spider-Man will indeed be the first part of a trilogy. This is not surprising considering the film’s ambiguity in certain areas and the fact that work began on the sequel, long before this film had hit the cinema screens. However regarding the film’s ambiguity, here is where we reach our second Amazing Spider-Man story. This week what was cut from The Amazing Spider-Man has been revealed, and...a key, major plot thread was removed. I have attached a video below from the channel Pretty Much It, which in turn provides the link to an in-depth article on this from Badass Digest, however I shall attempt to summarize. First of all it was revealed that the family of Dr. Curt Connors (The Lizard) was cut from the film, as my biggest complaint regarding The Amazing Spider-Man was the underdevelopment of the Lizard, this is footage I would have liked to have seen remain in the final cut.

However it is what else has been cut, which has Spider-Man fans once again, turning negative energy towards Sony. Remember the character of Dr. Ratha (Played by Irrfan Khan)? the one working for Oscorp who pressures Curt Connors into testing the cross-species genetics formula and is last seen on the bridge as the Lizard makes his first appearance? Well it turns out he had a much bigger role in the film originally, although not as Proto-Goblin (The character many people believed he had been originally cast as) Images reveal that there was a scene between him, the Lizard and Spider-Man in the Lizard’s sewer lab. It is in this scene where the spider in Richard Parker’s office at the beginning of the film, is given another layer of meaning. It is suggested that the spider bite did not provide Peter with all these powers, but rather emphasized and brought out something that was already within him, something that his father had been preparing him for. This links to the line in the trailer we never hear in the movie, “Do you think what happened to you Peter, was an accident? Do you have any idea, what you really are?” Peter Parker has special blood, had his genetics meddled with by his parents and has clearly from childhood been a pawn in a much larger game. This thread, completely lost in The Amazing Spider-Man. What I wish I could ask Sony, is why? Why cut something out of your film that would make it stand out and be unique from what has come before? (Especially considering a lack of originality has been the biggest hurdle for this film to overcome since its inception) I love the film with or without this plot thread and that is one of two reasons why I am/was merely frustrated and bemused, rather than angry. It is my belief, that this plot thread will reappear in the sequel. They didn’t want to give too much away in this first film, rather play it safe, get your audience and then reintroduce all those elements further down the line. I would be very surprised (And then angry) if this plot thread didn’t resurface (Or for general audiences, surface) in The Amazing Spider-Man 2. If it has been completely cut for good and will never see the light of day, then it could go down in film history as a lost story in modern film, a what could have been. What do you think about the news that we will be getting a Spider-Man trilogy? Should the Lizard family footage have been left in? And more importantly, what do you think of the missing plot thread? Hearing and reading about it, are you glad its gone? Or would you have loved to have seen it? Do you think we will see it eventually? Or is it lost forever? Give us all your thoughts on The Amazing Spider-Man in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

MGM Taking Legal Action Against Raging Bull 2

A few weeks ago, Movie Parliament brought the production of Raging Bull 2 to your attention. Both myself (The Prime Minister) and our Minister for History, Leonhard Balk, found this to be an unnecessary and most likely forgettable venture. However it appears that this film has had extra publicity and therefore life pumped into through the form of a lawsuit. MGM (Who hold the rights to the original Raging Bull) are taking legal action against the boxer Jake LaMotta and the sequel’s producers, hoping to block the film’s release. They claim that they should have been offered first refusal on the rights to the book and that this film’s association with the original will tarnish its legacy. I’m glad that MGM are attempting to stop this, however I do have sympathy for all the people who have put work and effort into the ongoing production who will now most likely see all that work go to waste. MGM should have really, had this legal case rolling to prevent the film from ever going into production. I’m also happy to see a film studio worried about the legacy of one of their films, if only movie studios always took that attitude, however I have a feeling that their only objection is that they don’t stand to profit from this tarnishing of the legacy. Are you happy with the action MGM are taking? Should they have taken it sooner? And are they being hypocritical with the claim that they are worried about the original’s legacy being tarnished? Give us all your Raging Bull 2 thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

First Photo of Elysium

Would normally put this in the Future Films section however it is not a poster, casting announcement, trailer or release date...maybe time for a new section within that section. Elysium is the next film from Neil Blomkamp (Director of District 9) and is set in a future, where the rich and powerful live in a clean space station named Elysium, while the rest live on a dying earth. Matt Damon is of course the story’s protagonist, who takes on a mission that aims to bridge the class divide. The picture below just continues to certify this as one to watch. Matt Damon, minus hair, plus robotics and machine gun, equals me seeing it. Are you excited for Elysium? What do you think of the picture below? Give us your thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below. Do stills from a film effect your anticipation for a film?

Concept Art for Iron Man 3

Once again, another picture that doesn’t have a section in the Future Films section. This looks pretty cool, once again Iron Man’s armour is getting an upgrade and once again he appears to have been taken prisoner. Not much you can say about these photos other than they look cool and I’m looking forward to the film. Has this concept art increased or decreased your anticipation for Iron Man 3? Give us all your Iron Man 3 thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below. Does concept art change the way you think about a movie?

That's a Wrap NO.22: Avatars, Monsters, Hunters & Guardians

Avatar Sequels Filming Back to Back...to Back

A few years ago a low budget, little seen and original film called Avatar was released. Well apparently that film was so successful that they will not just be making an Avatar 2, but also an Avatar 3 and an Avatar 4. James Cameron (Director of Aliens, The Terminator and...Titanic) has previously said that he will only make Avatar films from now on, with Sigourney Weaver stating this week that the three sequels will film back to back. There a couple of things that depress and anger me about this story. Three sequels to Avatar? For me, the first Avatar was a perfectly rounded story, with a beginning, middle and end. Say what you will about its unoriginality but I think its going to be hard for whichever Avatar film is the final one (Probably Avatar 17) to top the ending of the first one. This also certifies that Cameron may not have been lying when he said he will only make Avatar films from now on. I am aware that at this stage in his career he is surrounded by yes men and women, however can somebody tell him that in constricting himself to Avatar movies he is wasting, rather than maximizing his talent. Also I must say that I do not envy anybody working on this production, Cameron is said to be a tricky and demanding customer at the best of times but, three big, effects heavy movies back to back, good luck. What do you think of this news? Do we need more Avatar? Should James Cameron only be making Avatar films? Should they be filming them back to back? Give us all your thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

Monsters: Dark Continent Gets Synopsis

2010’s Monsters, is one of the most underrated science-fiction films in recent memory. The film was such an inspirational achievement that I gave the film’s director Gareth Edwards, Movie Parliament’s Director of the Year prize, over the likes of Christopher Nolan, Darren Aronofksy and David Fincher. What that film was able to achieve on such a low budget puts even films such as District 9 and Moon, to shame. When I heard that Gareth Edwards would not be returning however (He’s working on Godzilla) and that the film would have the subtitle, Dark Continent, I was worried. Tom Green is directing a screenplay by Jay Basu and this week we got some information regarding what it is they are preparing for us. Here is the synopsis from Vertigo:

"Seven years on from the events of Monsters, and the ‘Infected Zones’ have spread worldwide. Humans have been knocked off the top of the food chain, with disparate communities struggling for survival. American soldiers are being sent abroad to protect US interests from the Monsters, but the war is far from being won.
Noah, a haunted soldier with several tours under his belt, is sent on a mission: an American soldier has gone rogue deep in the Infected Zone, and Noah must reach him and take him out. But when Noah's unit and transport are destroyed, he finds himself with only a young and inexperienced cadet for company - the brother of the man Noah has been sent to kill.
The two soldiers must go on a life-altering journey through the dark heart of monster territory, accompanied by a young local woman to guide them. By the time the three of them reach their goal, they will have been forced to confront the fear that the true monsters on the planet may not be alien after all."

Yes, it’s all very Heart of Darkness, Apocalypse Now and even 28 Weeks Later...which is a very good thing. This synopsis (Like the synopsis for The Woman in Black sequel) has renewed my excitement about a project I previously thought would be missable straight to DVD fodder. While it could yet go straight to DVD, this synopsis suggests that this film could potentially be a greater narrative experience than its predecessor. Let us hope that the filmmakers can maximize this premise, which while not original, seems like a perfect place to take this story and this world. Did you see Monsters? Did you like it? Should there be a sequel? What do you think of this synopsis? Give us your thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

Van Helsing to be Rebooted

When Van Helsing was released back in 2004, starring Hugh Jackman, I was eight years old. The film seemed very dark, gritty and exciting. Of course looking back as a sixteen year old, I can realize that the film was the exact opposite. Therefore unlike most reboots, I actually think rebooting Van Helsing is a good idea. For those of you who don’t know Van Helsing is a monster hunter/killer who hunts and kills famous movie monsters such as Dracula, Frankenstein and the Wolfman. This reboot could either become a Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter-esque Timur Bekmambetov movie or a Sam Raimi Drag Me To Hell-esque fun, knock around horror film. I doubt the likes of Fincher, Aronofsky, Nolan or the Coen Brothers would be interested in this, although of course that is the dream. Whether they decide to go with a more horror route, or a more action route, I am cautiously intrigued by this reboot. In terms of who could play Van Helsing, Hugh Jackman could still pull off the role in my opinion however if they’re going with someone new...brainwave...give it to Nicolas Winding Refn and Ryan Gosling...lets have a Drive-esque Van Helsing. I’ve put forward my suggestions, what are yours? Did you enjoy the 2004 film? Who should direct this reboot? Who should play Van Helsing? Give us your thoughts in theYour Say section, discuss in our forum and vote in the poll below.

Marvel's Guardians of the Galaxy for 2014

Marvel’s until now secret 2014 project has been revealed, and it is Guardians of the Galaxy. Who are they you ask? I know as I went on Wikipedia, just as you would have done had I not offered the following explanation...
“The Guardians” operate within an alternate time-line of the Marvel Universe and consist of numerous astronauts and aliens. Each member of The Guardians is the last of their race and they join forces to fight against the evil Alien forces of the Badoon, who seek to conquer the Earth’s solar system. Eventually The Guardians team up with The Avengers and that is something that I imagine Marvel plans to realize. As I have no prior experience with The Guardians I am basing my thoughts purely on what I have read on the internet, not what I have seen in a film or read in a comic. This particular team seems like an ambitious one for Marvel to tackle and seemingly very special effects heavy. This is a project I find incredibly intriguing and am surprised that Marvel have chosen such a grand and lesser known property, however after the billion dollar success of The Avengers, I suppose they can afford to take a few gambles. Did you know about The Guardians of the Galaxy? Is it a good choice by Marvel? Give us all your thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

That's a Wrap NO.21: Need for Speed, Jurassic Park, Harvey Dent & Maleficent

Is There a Need for, Need for Speed?

I have only played the Need for Speed games briefly, yet even on such little exposure, I never thought of it is as film worthy material. However it appears that Dreamworks wants to challenge the Fast and the Furious films, seemingly planning another car chase based blockbuster franchise. The need for, Need for Speed, seemed nonexistent enough based purely on the narrative merits of the game, however when you consider the film world already has the big screen version of this in Fast and Furious, it does seem like a rather pointless move. However with Fast Five having burnt up the box office last year it appears that studios are taking note and plan to take a piece of that car loving demographic’s money. What do you think of a Need for Speed film? Have you played the game? Are the games more suited to a film adaptation than I think? Who would you like to direct the film? Do you think it is simply an attempt to replicate the profit of the Fast and the Furious movies? Does the existence of the Fast and Furious franchise both act as the reason why this film is being green-lit but also why it is pointless and will fail? Give us all your Need for Speed thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

Rise Scribes Welcomed to Jurassic Park

Rise of the Planet of the Apes was one of the biggest surprises and best films of 2011. The story revolved around questionable scientific meddling gone wrong, resulting in murderous animals...now you understand why the writers of that film (Rick Jaffa and Amanda Silver) have been chosen to bring the Jurassic Park franchise back to cinematic life. Until writing that very sentence, I did not make the connection between the plot of Rise of the Apes and Jurassic Park, upon discovering it however I only find another reason why I am very happy about this appointment. The original Jurassic Park is a classic and as a child I even enjoyed the much criticized third film. While I believe a fourth film to be unnecessary this news has got me more on board. The hiring of these writers who did such a great job bringing the Planet of the Apes franchise back to relevant life, makes me much more confident about and anticipating this project. Do you want a Jurassic Park 4? Do you share my enthusiasm regarding this news? Give us all your Jurassic Park 4 thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

They Still Believe in Harvey Dent

Viral marketing was a huge part of the publicity for The Dark Knight and many have been eagerly awaiting what hidden internet treats the marketing for The Dark Knight Rises would produce. The release of this letter from the mayor of Gotham is without a doubt my favourite part of The Dark Knight Rises viral marketing campaign so far. The letter details the enforcement of the Harvey Dent act, legislation which will give the Gotham police force extended powers. What excites me most about this piece of marketing is how it hints towards the narrative and thematic content of the film. The idea that the Gotham police force has become a potentially repressive force is a very interesting one and given some of the images provided by the trailers, I cannot help but think that Bane exploits these cracks in Gotham’s society, in an incredibly violent and dramatic way. This letter also confirms Harvey Dent’s hero status in Gotham city and seeing the repercussions of Batman and Gordon’s lie at the end of The Dark Knight is slowly but surely becoming my most anticipated aspect of the narrative. Promo stills showed us Bane holding Harvey Dents image and I feel that the destruction of Gotham’s belief in Harvey Dent, could be the powder keg for Bane’s plan, the act that forms the basis of the much used term in the trailers and posters, “A fire rises” Check out the letter below, give us all your Dark Knight Rises theories in the Your Say section and discuss it in our forums.

Angelina Jolie to be a Magnificent Maleficent?

This week gave us our first look at Angelina Jolie as Maleficent. I have high expectations for this film for many reasons. One, I like the idea of looking at the Sleeping Beauty tale from the side of Maleficent. Secondly, Angelina Jolie included, this film has a great cast, with the likes of Sharlto Copley (District 9), Elle Fanning (Super 8) and Juno Temple (The Dark Knight Rises) also starring. This picture has done little to change my expectations, instead confirming that this film has a lot of promise and potential. Ultimately this is a mere image and if it truly showcases anything then it is the make-up and costume work. The film will be the directorial debut of Robert Stromberg, who up until now has worked in the visual effects field. This ensures that the film will most likely be stunning to look at, however we must hope that there is some substance to accompany this style and that Stromberg is equally adept at getting great performances out of actors, as he is at assembling great pieces of CGI. With one of the writers of Alice in Wonderland (Linda Woolverton) and a directing debut, there are signs that this could go the way of Snow White & the Huntsman and Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland and be an absolute bore, however I have faith in the cast (Mainly Angelina Jolie) and feel that with its Wicked-esque approach, this film could be at the high end of the live action fairy tale genre. What do you think of this picture? Are you looking forward to Maleficent? Give us all your Maleficent thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

That's a Wrap NO.20: History In The Making

Sony and Disney May Make History

With this year seeing the release of both, The Avengers and The Amazing Spider – Man, it led those without a deep knowledge of film and comic books (Self proclaimed, “normal” people) to ask, why isn’t Spider-Man in The Avengers? The answer is, despite Spider-Man being a Marvel character; the film rights belong to Sony. However despite this legal and contractual difference, the success of The Avengers and the anticipation of The Amazing Spider-Man, coupled with quotes such as these from Andrew Garfield, has made fans dream of an arachnid addition to The Avengers 2. It appears that this dream may indeed become a reality, as news broke this week that Sony and Disney were indeed planning for a presence from the Amazing Spider-Man universe, in The Avengers. The Oscorp tower from The Amazing Spider-Man was apparently intended to form part of New York’s skyline in The Avengers. While the apparent and/or relative insignificance of this presence coupled with the fact that it unfortunately didn’t happen, may lead many of you, “normal” people to dismiss this story as carrying little weight, this is a hugely significant piece of news. The fact that Sony and Disney are collaborating in such a creative manner, fills me with confidence that legal and financial issues can be overcome and Spider-Man be joining up with The Avengers to face Thanos.

A sign of such cooperation between these studios is all that has been missing to pave the road towards what would be an historic, potentially game-changing and landmark event in modern film, seriously. If the legal and contractual issues of, “film rights” can be overcome in this case, it could open the floodgates, with studios becoming more open to the idea of sharing their characters with others, opening so many new doors and projects. The decisions to have Spider-Man in The Avengers would make sense for both studios, as Disney will need something special in a sequel to The Avengers to convince audiences they haven’t seen it all already and the financial success of The Avengers plus Sony’s desire to create a new Spider-Man franchise points towards their willingness to play ball. If the two studios can move beyond buildings and to people, they may strike a deal, which not only results in gold for their respective properties but also opens up a whole new window in the studio system. As Michael Fassbender says in the trailer for Prometheus, “Big things have small beginnings” Lets hope that this small, nearly deal is the sign of a very big thing indeed.

What do you think of this news? Is this potential deal as significant as I seem to think it is? Would you like to see Spider-Man in The Avengers? Give us all your Avengers/Amazing Spider-Man thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

Woman in Black Sequel Gets Title and Synopsis

The Woman in Black was one of the more enjoyable and memorable cinematic experiences of my year so far. However my appreciation of the film has diminished dramatically after experiencing the stage version. Therefore I was intrigued to see the synopsis for the sequel, a synopsis that has significantly increased my interest and anticipation for this film.

"Seized by the government and converted into a military mental hospital during World War II, the sudden arrival of disturbed soldiers to Eel Marsh House has awoken its darkest inhabitant. Eve, a beautiful young nurse, is sent to the house to care for the patients, but soon realizes she must save them from more than their own demons. Despite Eve's efforts to stop her, one by one they fall victim to the Woman in Black."

Synopsis from digitalspy.co.uk

The title is said to be The Woman in Black: Angels of Death, with a director yet to be announced. If I was a director and saw this synopsis, I would put my name straight into The Woman in Black hat. This on the surface seems to be a true sequel, in the sense that it is not merely repeating what the first film did (Although the final product very well could) and seems to be genuinely taking the environment and concept to a different place. The wartime tension and the transformation of a haunted house into a mental hospital are two superb elements of the narrative from which to extract palpable drama and terror. This synopsis hints towards so many different opportunities and I hope whoever directs this film can make the most out of the new canvas presented to them.

What do you think of this synopsis to The Woman in Black: Angels of Death? Who would you like to direct it? Should they even be making a sequel? Give us all your in-depth Woman in Black thoughts in the Your Say section; discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

A Board Game You Can't Refuse & The Death of Henry Hill

Two stories now, relating to two of the most famous and acclaimed gangster films of all time. Given all the themed Monopoly games that have arisen it was surprising to see the announcement of a Godfather themed spin on the famous board game, as it seems like something that should have been done long ago. Players will reportedly have the opportunity to play as horse’s head and I do sincerely hope that on one of the cards it says, “You have been given an offer you can’t refuse” Despite not being a huge Monopoly fan, I would be very tempted to purchase this brand of the game. What other films do you think are suited to the Monopoly treatment? Is a Godfather Monopoly a good idea? What would you like them to do with a Godfather Monopoly? Give us all your thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

Henry Hill, the man who inspired Martin Scorsese’s Goodfellas, has passed away at the age of 69. Hill’s tale is forever immortalized in that classic film and his natural death led to articles questioning why the mob hadn’t taken their revenge. Hill reached celebrity status due to that film, however due to the basis of his fame (Betraying the mob, becoming an FBI informant and entering the witness protection programme) some saw it as a matter of time until Hill was, “whacked” I don’t feel comfortable speculating why a man wasn’t murdered, however I wanted to bring this story to people’s attention as it demonstrates a real end, to a life that became a Hollywood story.

Also...

Raging Bull II is in production

Movie Parliament Prime Minister, Michael Dalton - Doubt whether this film will get a cinematic release, no Scorsese or De Niro involved, its existence I predict will either be forgotten or a footnote while Raging Bull will continue to be considered a classic.

Movie Parliament Minister for History, Leonhard Balk - Raging Bull 2 is newest in a line of unwanted and uninspired sequel bait. The fact that none of the original cast and crew is involved in the film highlights this even more.

Ninja Turtles Delayed until 2014

Movie Parliament Prime Minister, Michael Dalton - Addressed the, “Alien issue” in a prior, That’s a Wrap. Everything seems to be getting delayed now so my already low expectations for this film are safe and sound.

Movie Parliament Minister for History, Leonhard Balk - Michael Bay's idea for Ninja Turtles from space has only been met with criticism so far. Neither fans of the original tv-series nor Michael Bay fans (if such a thing even exists) seem to be looking forward to his re-imagining. It's therefore not surprising to hear that Paramount Pictures has little faith in the project.

And Finally....

READ - Director Rian Johnson's (Brick, Looper) blog post on 3D, a must read. Thanks to Minister for History, Leonhard Balk, for bringing this to my attention
WATCH - Lego Inception & Red Letter Media on Prometheus (Another find by Leo, contains spoilers which is why I have yet to watch it and why you shouldn't either until you see Prometheus)

That's a Wrap NO.19: Running Times & Screams

"The Dark Knight Rises" Fifteen Minutes Shy of Three Hours

The Dark Knight Rises is easily one of the most anticipated films of all time. I am one of a presumed many who will be traveling to London on the first day of release to see the film how Nolan intends it, in IMAX. One of the many mysteries regarding the release of this film has been just how long the final chapter of, “The Dark Knight Legend” will be. It appears that we now have our answer through U.S. cinema chain AMC, with the running time being a reported two hours and forty-five minutes, fifteen minutes longer than the, in the eyes of many, “overlong” The Dark Knight. While the anticipation and levels of reaction to the mere announcement of a running time is undoubtedly a product of the hype for the film itself, it led me to ponder the importance of running times. Personally I believe a film should be as long as the story requires, I have no qualms with a film being two and a half hours or more if it keeps me entertained and warrants that running time. However I like many find that my body finds much to be thankful for in a film that stays clear of running over two hours, which for me is the benchmark moment, as if your film is going over two hours, you have to have a really good reason for that to be the case.

How important do you think running times are? Have they ever prevented you from seeing a film? Compelled you to see a film? Give us your detailed, written, in-depth thoughts on your personal opinions on running times in the Your Say section, discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

"Scream" The TV Series

Recently I wrote about the news that a TV series of The Exorcist was in development. I expressed support for the idea however seemed to be in a minority. It appears that this news is the start of a new trend however, turning classic and much loved horror films into TV shows. This week news broke that MTV are planning to develop a TV series based on the Scream films. As the original Scream is one of my favourite films of all time and I have seen the output of MTV my initial reaction to this news was a chill down the spine that many horror films would love to illicit. The more I thought about it however the more I got excited about it and the more I wish I was writing it. If entrusted to the right people, a Scream TV series could be amazing and a great way to revitalize the property and make it relevant once more. One of my favourite aspects of the Scream films is the fact that each film is a whodunit, murder-mystery. Imagine the investigation over who the killer is being stretched out over the course of a whole series rather than one ninety minute movie. There is a lot of potential here and I am excited for and dreading this project in equal measure, if it succeeds it would become one of my favourite shows, however if it is a massive, embarrassing, disgraceful failure, it would be another huge dent upon a franchise that was born out of one of the greatest horror films, or just films, of all time.

What do you think of this news? What would you like them to do with a Scream TV series? Give us your detailed, in-depth written thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss it on our forum and vote in the poll below.

That's a Wrap NO.18: Dawn, Drive & Dicaprio

Drive 2?

Drive, was my favourite film of last year. It is one of those rare films, which has an actual beginning, middle and end, with it not being shackled by the concerns of creating a new franchise, from which studio executives can fill their wallets to excessive amounts, caring little about the growing absurdity of the cash cow they continue to mercilessly milk. However it appears that a film which had a perfect, ambiguous yet conclusive ending, could be receiving a sequel. James Sallis, author of the book on which Drive is based, has said that a movie version of his literary sequel (Titled, Driven) is, “In the pipeline”

Now while nothing is confirmed yet, the idea that people are toying with the idea of a cinematic Drive sequel worries me. Even if Nicolas Winding Refn was back to direct, I would still be unsupportive of this project. I do not want to see any more Drive, and I hope that Refn and his star Ryan Gosling agree with me. The thought of a Drive sequel going ahead without the two of them is unthinkable, however not impossible. Ultimately there are a lot of ifs and maybes attached to this story and I hope this is the last we hear of a Drive sequel. I’m not saying that Refn and Gosling couldn’t pull off another Drive film, just that we don’t need another Drive film.

What do you think of this story? Do you want a sequel to Drive? Give us your thoughts on this issue in the Your Say section; discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes

Rise of the Planet of the Apes was one of the biggest surprises of last year. Despite having a title that was among the worst, it was a film among the best, with Andy Serkis robbed of an Oscar nomination. Due to the film’s unexpected critical and commercial success, a sequel is of course on the cards. This sequel has now been given a title and release date. The powers that be have imaginatively decided that the sequel to, Rise, should be...Dawn of the Planet of the Apes. Just as they should have stuck with their original title, Rise of the Apes, first time around, they should have resurrected it this time around with, Dawn of the Apes. However the first film taught me not to use titles as an indicator of quality and I look forward to Dawn greatly when it hits screens in May 2014. However despite being happy with Andy Serkis and Rupert Wyatt being involved, I fear that they have taken the character of Caesar as far as they can, and that the film cannot live up to its newfound anticipation. Rise took us all by surprise, now Dawn will be saddled with expectation, expectation that could mean a film of equal, if not better, quality could be critically and commercially received, as if it was worse.

I have more positive thought towards this definite sequel than the possible one discussed earlier, as I believe there is more story to be told here. My only concerns reside in the character of Caesar and the loss of that surprise factor. What do you think of this news? Do you like the new title? Could the newfound expectation damage it? Is there a satisfying place they can take the character of Caesar? Give us all your thoughts in the Your Say section; discuss it in our forum and vote in the poll below.

Warner Brothers Wanted a Dicaprio Riddler

This summer, there is a little independent, low budget film coming out called, The Dark Knight Rises. It’s only the third and final film in Christopher Nolan’s Batman trilogy, the film’s predecessor only made about a billion dollars worldwide, you should be able to find it at the cinema if you have a local arthouse. This week some interesting news has arisen, with one of the trilogy’s writers, David S. Goyer, revealing that Warner Brothers executives expressed a desire for Leonardo Dicaprio to be cast as The Riddler. Instead Nolan has elected for the film’s villains to be Tom Hardy’s Bane and Anne Hathaway’s Catwoman. This news is interesting for a couple of reasons, one, it confirms what was previously thought to be a rumour and two, it shows how Nolan has all the power now at Warner Brothers. In an interview with the DGA, Nolan noted that that Warner Brothers would have been very happy if he had shot the film in 3D, he has thankfully shot it in 2D and now it has been revealed that he has also ignored their wishes regarding the villain of the film.

I would have loved to see a Dicaprio Riddler, however I love even more that there are still situations wherein the director has power over the studio. Lets just hope that we will still be happy that Nolan ignored Warner Brothers when the film is released July 20th. What do you think of this news? Would you have liked to see a Dicaprio Riddler? Are you happy that Nolan seems to have a level of power over Warner Brothers that most directors don’t? Has he earnt this power? Do you even think he has, “power”? Give us your in-depth written thoughts in the Your Say section; discuss it on our forums and vote in the poll below.

That's a Wrap NO.17: Delays and Exorcism

Tragedy! Audiences Must Wait Until March for a 3D GI Joe Sequel

For those of you who were desperate to see GI Joe: Retaliation this summer you will unfortunately have to wait a little longer until you can view it on the big screen...nine months longer. Paramount Pictures have decided to delay the release until March of 2013, in order to post-convert the film into 3D. This decision is just bizarre for many reasons. While I appreciate them taking time in turning the film into 3D and not doing a rushed Clash of the Titans-esque job, like many I do not believe that turning the film into 3D is their sole reason for such a delay. With the success of The Avengers and the fact that GI Joe would be released in the U.S. one week before The Amazing Spiderman and two weeks before The Dark Knight Rises, I like many believe that the studio lost their nerve and decided to push the film back to a time slot where competition would be slim and profit potential higher.

I had little anticipation for GI Joe before or after this decision, what astounds me is why the decision to have this film be in 3D has come so late, surely this is just the kind of studio conveyor belt product that they would thoughtlessly slap 3D on in attempt to boost revenue. It is for that reason that I subscribe to the lost their nerve theory, however I do not believe they needed to go all the way back to March. It is also surprising to see a studio willingly increase their costs on a film such as GI Joe by pouring money into a 3D conversion and a second run at marketing come March.

If I was head of Paramount (If only) I would have considered moving back the release date, however not so far and would not have converted it into 3D. What do you think of this decision? Are you looking forward to this film? Would you have pushed the release date back to March? Would you have converted it into 3D? Give us all your thoughts on this issue in our forum, the Your Say section and vote in the poll below.

The Power of Television Compels You

The Exorcist is one of those films that everybody knows about, film fan or no film fan, having seen the film or not seen the film; it is a movie that had such a social impact that it will forever be unfairly burdened with the, “Scariest Movie of All Time” tagline. As a sixteen year old, when I first saw The Exorcist there were parts that undoubtedly disturbed me and I found it to be very well performed (Particularly by Linda Blair of course) and well scored (One of the most famous themes of all time) however it just didn’t have the impact I know it had back then. It is also responsible for unleashing one of the worst horror sub-genres, the exorcism movie, which has given 2012 one of its worst films, The Devil Inside.

The Exorcist will now be returning... to our TV screens, as a 10 part mini series overseen by Sean Durkin (Writer and director of Martha Marcy May Marlene) This is news that actually has me more intrigued and excited than most, who are glad to dismiss it as unnecessary (How many projects are truly necessary?) and disrespectful to the original material. However some of the best works of entertainment now are pieces of television and this tv series will not simply be re-telling the story told by the film but will reportedly have a very different focus indeed and one that I am very excited to see. Aside from American Horror Story there is a lack of truly scary shows on television and this series could be a great way of updating The Exorcist to modern audiences and therefore have it impact an entirely new generation.

With the lack of horror on TV, the quality that TV has reached recently (Breaking Bad) the declining quality of exorcist movies at the cinema and a promise to focus on the impact of demonic possession on the victim’s loved ones, I am not ready to completely dismiss this project yet and I look forward to seeing where it goes.

What do you think of this news? Is an Exorcist mini-series a good idea? Give us your thoughts in our forum, the Your Say section and vote in the poll below.

That's a Wrap NO.16: Ian Fleming, Revision and Prediction

The Name's Fleming...Ian Fleming

Apologies for the brevity of this week’s, That’s a Wrap, however given that my end of year exams begin tomorrow, you can perhaps understand why my attentions have been elsewhere this week and especially this weekend.

One piece of news that did catch my attention during one of many (Yet short...ish) revision breaks was that Duncan Jones (Director of Moon and Source Code) will be directing an Ian Fleming biopic. Ian Fleming for those of you, who don’t know, is the man behind James Bond. This news excites me for two reasons. One, is that a film on the life of Ian Fleming seems like something that should have happened many a time already and it should be interesting to learn about the life of the real James Bond. Secondly, Duncan Jones is one of the most exciting up and coming directors, it will be very interesting to see him direct a film outside of the sci-fi genre and his involvement compounds my initial excitement about what the story could consist of.

What do you think of this news? Are you interested in seeing a film about Ian Fleming? Are you a fan of Duncan Jones? How do you think he will fare outside of the science fiction genre? And...who should play Ian Fleming? Discuss all this and more in our forum, give us your in-depth written opinion in the Your Say section and vote in the poll below.

Once again apologies but it has been a slow news week and revision is the reason for any stories missed. I did however take a break from revision to see The Dictator, my review of which you can see here.

Next weekend when the burden of revision has been lifted, you can expect reviews of Men in Black 3D and Wes Anderson’s Moonrise Kingdom.

So just to make things interesting, I am going to add another poll, which film do you think will get a higher rate from me, the Movie Parliament Prime Minister, Men in Black 3 or Moonrise Kingdom? Just to give you some background information, I have yet to love a Wes Anderson film and have never been a HUGE Men in Black fan.

That's a Wrap NO.15: Titles, Sequels, Ratings and World's End

Neighborhood Watch of Mars

Ben Stiller hasn’t had much luck with the releases of his films. Zoolander was released not long after 9/11, people were understandably not in the mind space to appreciate the film which has now gone on to be a deserved cult hit. For those of you who do not know there has been a big story in the U.S. recently regarding the killing of a young man named Trayvon Martin, who was shot by a neighborhood watch type. Now the trailer I have embedded below was filmed and prepared well in advance of this incident (As was the entire film) but you can understand why they pulled such marketing from Florida (Where the Trayvon Martin incident occurred)

Pulling the market was the right and an understandable move. Changing the title of your film from Neighborhood Watch, to, The Watch, unnecessary. This film was in development long before this incident and is an alien invasion comedy, why they felt compelled to go the extra mile and change their title I have no idea. This stinks of the same kind of studio head ridiculous over thinking that killed John Carter. If people tried to connect your film to the Trayvon Martin case and claim that the film was immoral or attempting to cash in on a tragedy, that is their stupidity. All that was needed was a change of the marketing, which emphasized the alien and comedic aspects, and less the neighborhood watch aspect (Which was all the first trailer was about) By the time the film came out it would not have mattered what it was called. This decision angers me as it just shows how idiotic and arguably condescending movie studios can be. I can understand a fear that people could subliminally connect your product to a tragic incident but, being brutally honest, the demographic this film is aiming for and most of the people who see this movie will know and (More cynically) care little of the Trayvon Martin incident.

What do you think of this issue? Were they right to change the title? Do you think, The Watch, is a better title? Give us your thoughts in the Your Say section, our forum and vote in the poll below.

This September...Prepare for...World's End

Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz are two of my favourite films of all time, Edgar Wright and Simon Pegg’s commentary track on Hot Fuzz was instrumental in making me the film fan I am today and Wright is easily one of my favourite directors of all time, after just three films. Therefore I was very happy when I heard that the final part of, The Blood and Ice Cream Trilogy, will begin filming...this September. The project is currently titled, “World’s End” and the plot is said to focus on a man named Gary King, a man refusing to grow up and who wishes to recreate a pub crawl with his friends, their destination being a pub named, World’s End. However as they undergo their journey, they realize that the fate of humanity is at stake.

When writing that I realized just how much this sounds like Shaun of the Dead. A man who doesn’t want to grow up (Shaun) a pub being the final destination (The Winchester) fate of humanity (Zombie apocalypse) However I have faith that Edgar Wright and Simon Pegg are cooking up something that will be drastically different from that effort. As with the previous two entries in this trilogy the assumption is that once again, Wright and Pegg will be lovingly spoofing a genre of film. With Shaun of the Dead it was the zombie film, Hot Fuzz the buddy action cop film, World’s End? That plot synopsis lends itself to a disaster film but a while back I heard they were thinking of science fiction for their next genre and I would much prefer that to the disaster movie.

What do you think of this news? What would you like to see from the final part of the Blood and Ice Cream Trilogy? Give us your thoughts in the Your Say section, forumand vote in the poll below.

Ridley the Businessman Gets R Rated Prometheus

A few weeks ago I commented on the comments of Ridley Scott, comments that suggested that he would compromise Prometheus for profit and a PG-13 rating. However it has now been revealed that Prometheus has been classified as 15, uncut in the U.K. and an R rating in the U.S.

I am very happy with this news. What pleased me the most was not the number 15, or the letter R, but the word, uncut. The Prometheus that we will see on cinema screens will be the Prometheus Ridley Scott created, it will not be watered down or have the life sucked out of it for profit. A PG-13 Prometheus would have existed for all the wrong reasons. As I said a few weeks ago, a film and a story should get the rating the story and film requires and deserves, it seems that we have got that with Prometheus.

Now let’s hope that the film can deliver.

Are you happy with this news? Did you want Prometheus to be PG-13? Give us all your thoughts in the Your Say section, forum and vote in the poll below.

Kick-Ass 2 Is Official!

Some brief thoughts that a sequel to Kick-Ass is coming and that Jeff Wadlow is directing.

One- Kick-Ass does not need a sequel

Two- I tried reading and getting into the Kick-Ass 2 comics and unlike the first, I couldn’t get into it

Three- What I did read of Kick-Ass 2 was very dark, the film will be a Universal project, the first was made outside the studio system (That’s how they got away with a litter girl spouting the C word and cutting off limbs) Kick-Ass 2 will be a much tamer film based on a much more brutal comic book.

Four- No Matthew Vaughn directing. Yes he is producing and had influence in picking director Jeff Wadlow but anybody who listened to the director’s commentary of Kick-Ass (Or watched any interviews with him) knows his attitude and vision was stamped all over that film.

Five- The only film of Jeff Wadlow’s I have seen is Never Back Down, meh. I hear his first film Cry Wolf was good and I have faith in the fact Matthew Vaughn has faith in him, but...

Ultimately I hope my doubts regarding Kick-Ass 2 are proven wrong but right now, I am not as excited for this project as I thought I would and should be.

What are your thoughts? Did you read all of Kick-Ass 2? Does Kick-Ass need a sequel? Are you happy with the choice of Jeff Wadlow? Give us all your thoughts in the Your Say section, forum and vote in the poll below.

That's a Wrap NO.14: Iron Man, Pixar & The Hobbit

The Name's Stark...Tony Stark

First of all apologies for the lack of, “That’s a Wrap” last week, Internet abandoned me for four days. Annoyingly last week was an interesting one for film news, whereas this one has been rather slow meaning that I will this week cover the stories I would have covered last week, as well as the one from this week which caught my eye the most.

Marvel godfather Kevin Feige has already begun planning for the future of Iron Man should Robert Downey Jr. decide to step down from the role. Feige plans to continue the Iron Man series in the vein of James Bond, with new actors stepping in when one has had enough. While it may be difficult to find another actor to play Tony Stark other than Robert Downey Jr. (Downey Jr. IS Stark and Stark IS Robert Downey Jr.) I believe this is the best way to go forward with the Iron Man franchise, which will sadly not end with Robert Downey Jr. calling it a day but rather when profits start to fall. Whether the Iron Man series can replicate the Bond series’ success with this method of keeping their property fresh will remain to be seen, however my doubts over its success does not lie in the method itself but rather in the fact that Iron Man is, not yet anyway, the cultural icon that James Bond is. As far as who could take over from Robert Downey Jr. while most are screaming, NOBODY, I would seriously consider Russell Brand for the role...yes, Russell Brand.

What do you think of this? Do you think the Iron Man films should stop when Downey Jr. hangs up his robotic suit? Do you think it can go on to Bond-esque levels of cultural success? And who would you cast to play Tony Stark/Iron Man? Give us your thoughts in the Your Say section, discuss in our forum and vote in the poll below.

Untitled Pixar Related Story

At the D23 convention (And Cinemacon), Pixar (Arguably the greatest movie studio ever in terms of quality) announced the projects they are lining up for the future. For those of you who don’t know, Pixar is the studio behind masterpieces such as Toy Story, Toy Story 2, Wall-e, Up and Finding Nemo. Slated for summer of 2014 is, Untitled Pixar Movie About Dinosaurs (Now titled, The Good Dinosaur), directed by Bob Peterson (One of the men behind Up) the interesting concept behind this film is imagining a world where dinosaurs were not wiped off the face of the earth by an asteroid. I am excited for any Pixar movie however this one seems to have their most original initial story concept for a while. Whether they can spin that idea of the asteroid missing earth and the dinosaurs avoiding extinction into a functional feature film however, is another thought.

Their second project seems to be the children’s version of Inception. In the summer of 2015, Pixar (Under the direction of Pete Docter) plans to release what they are currently calling, Untitled Pixar Movie That Takes You Inside the Mind. Now while their untitled dinosaur project seems the most interesting in terms of a story concept, this sounds like the most exciting visually. We know that the men and women at Pixar have incredible imaginations and I cannot wait to see what this film will bring to our cinema screens.

Finally, Lee Unkrich (The director of Toy Story 3) will be directing a project based on the Mexican holiday, Dia de los Muertos (Day of the Dead) If anybody can make a superb, animated, family friendly horror film, it is Pixar. They managed to get some moments of genuine horror in films such as Toy Story and personally, if this film does indeed intend to be leaning towards the horror genre, then it will be my most anticipated of these three proposed films.

Vote in the poll below, which of Pixar’s upcoming projects are you most anticipating? Be sure to give us your more in-depth thoughts on the projects in the Your Saysections, discuss it in our forum and let your friends know about this poll, so we can find out which of Pixar’s projects, people are most anticipating.

One Frame Rate...to Ruin It All?

The Hobbit is one of the most anticipated films of this year and the story behind getting the film to the production stage, could form the basis of a thrilling and dramatic film in itself. With production well and truly under way, Peter Jackson and company must have thought that all the bad luck, headaches, studio discussions and controversy was over...then they screened some footage at Cinemacon. It seems as if The Hobbit saga is not over yet as the footage received incredibly mixed to hostile response due to Jackson’s decision to film The Hobbit at 48 frames per second, double the industry standard of 24 frames per second. Some have said it could mark a revolutionary step forward for film, changing the way they are made forever, akin to sound and colour. Others however are saying that it makes one of the most expensive and anticipated films of all time; look like a cheap made for TV BBC movie. The picture quality is said to be so realistic that while the landscape shots supposedly take your breath away, when the camera focuses on those prosthetics and costume laden dwarves on those sets, you can see the fakery and trickery behind it.

I cannot pass any judgment on the footage until I see it however like every film fan I am incredibly curious to see the film in a way that I was not before. The Hobbit when released, could be available in six formats, 24 frames per second 2D, 3D and 3D IMAX, as well as 48 frames per second 2D, 3D and 3D IMAX. There are essentially six different versions and experiences of one film. My feeling is that the studio will not be worried at all about this divisie 48 frames per second leading to a failure to recoup their investment, as now many people who may have only intended to see the film once in theatres (Due to its inevitable butt-numbing length) may feel intrigued and compelled to search it out in both formats and potentially witness, experience and be a part of film history. Vote in the poll below, give us your in-depth thoughts in the Your Say section and discuss in our forum.

That's a Wrap NO.13: Directors, Books and Robots

Francis Lawrence Directing Catching Fire

When it was announced that Gary Ross would not be returning to direct the sequel to The Hunger Games, Catching Fire,I drew up a list of candidates who I thought could realistically get the job, Francis Lawrence was not on that list. The director of I Am Legend and Water for Elephants, will be continuing the now box office phenomenon. To cut straight to the point, I am incredibly disappointed that Bennet Miller (Director of Moneyball) was not given the job, supposedly due to his request for a later start date. I can understand why Lawrence was chosen, dependable, available, willing to work at their pace and schedule, he is trustworthy for the studio. Considering the directors who were linked to the job, this is an underwhelming selection from Lionsgate and I fear it is one they have made for the wrong reasons.

One of the primary reasons Ross dropped out was due to scheduling, now directors such as Bennet Miller are not able to replace him for the same reason, are Lionsgate rushing this film out with little to no concern for its quality? While the likes of Joss Whedon has said that the success of The Hunger Games will have a positive effect on cinema in terms of strong female characters, the success could also have a potentially negative effect on its own franchise. Lionsgate know that they could literally release four hours of somebody reading Catching Fire and that it would make its budget back opening day. Unlike the first outing, from the guys at the top, there is no compelling reason to make it a good movie.

Films and creativity takes time, Lionsgate seem to think that they don’t have any. The second film is the most important in a trilogy and in setting up a franchise. Lionsgate can afford to take their time with The Hunger Games and while my fears over the rushed nature of this production could conspire to be unfounded (Which I hope is the case) rushing a film is never a good idea. Then again one of my favourite films of last year, X-Men: First Class, operated under an incredibly rushed schedule and well, it was one of my favourite films of the year. I wasn’t thrilled with the choice of Gary Ross and he delivered a great film, so Francis Lawrence could yet surprise me. I trust a Simon Beaufoy screenplay, I trust the cast and I trust the technical crew behind the film. It is Lionsgate who will need to regain my trust and Francis Lawrence earn my trust when Catching Fire hits cinemas. Even if Francis Lawrence is a terrible director (which he isn’t) the foundation laid by Ross and co. is so strong that it would take a lot of work to mess it up from here...or maybe just a lot of work in a short time.

Vote in the poll below, discuss it in our forum and give us your in-depth thoughts in the Your Say section. Are you happy to see Francis Lawrence directing? Who did you want to see chosen as director? Do you think the scheduling could ruin the film? Let us know and may the odds be ever in your favour.

The Dark Knight Rises: The Novel

The only movie tie-in novelization I have read, was for Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith. The third in a trilogy, the next book version of a film I may read could also be, the third in a trilogy. Warner Brothers announced over Twitter that The Dark Knight Rises will be released as a book the same day it is released as a film on the 20th of July. It will be written by Greg Cox and is something I am strangely interested in. I say strangely as I have never considered such things that interesting and feel that if a story was written for the cinema then, it should be seen in the cinema. What will be interesting to see is the potential differences between book and film and whether the book can act as a companion piece to the film in the sense that it develops things a little bit further.

I imagine Christopher Nolan himself will have little to nothing to do with this book and will be rightfully focusing on the film itself however perhaps due to my admiration for these Batman films and my anticipation for The Dark Knight Rises, I have been given a reason to once again dabble in a genre which the cynical side of me suggests serves no singular, individual purpose other than to promote the film it shares a story with.

What are your opinions on movie tie-in books? Well-written, fresh perspectives? Or lazy, cash-in pieces of marketing? Will you be buying this book? Vote in the poll, discuss it in our forum and give us your thoughts in the Your Say section.

Happy Birthday David

Finally this superb Prometheus promotional clip is worth a watch if you are anticipating the film or not. Spoils nothing, promises a lot. Michael Fassbender keeps getting cooler.

That's a Wrap NO.12: Scott the Businessman Wants PG-13 Prometheus

PG-13 Prometheus?

Only one story this week on That’s a Wrap for two reasons. One, it has been a slow news week and two, I made the foolish decision of deciding to write this after the FA cup semi-final between Tottenham and Chelsea, expect a cynical and angry perspective on the comments of Ridley Scott.

At a press event for Prometheus in London, Ridley Scott said that he is considering making Prometheus a PG-13 in order for the film to, “make as large a box office as possible” I mean, he’s Ridley Scott, director of Alien, Blade Runner and Gladiator, the guy really needs the cash. Hearing a filmmaker as respected as Ridley Scott make comments such as these is incredibly disheartening. Is the purpose behind Prometheus to tell a good story, or to make a lot of money? While the purpose may differ depending on how you contributed to the film, I expect the director to be the one making it for the story and the executives to be in it for the money, not both in it for the money.

It is ironic that Ridley Scott is behind a current Youtube competition about getting those outside the system involved in filmmaking and giving them their chance, when he says in this interview, “If studios don’t get their money back we don’t have any movies” WRONG, we don’t have any, “studio movies” if the studios all go bankrupt and pack it in we will still have movies Mr. Scott. Whether it turns to the independent filmmakers, many of which have been making superior films for little to no money outside the insular studio system, or whether other big organizations step in to finance films in exchange for excessive product placement (As if that doesn’t happen anyway)

Ridley Scott calls himself a businessman in the interview, as he has been in the industry, “long enough” Businessman don’t make movies Mr. Scott, it was the executives who played a large part in dooming John Carter to box office failure (Although the quality of that film was doomed from the start) and who ruined David Fincher’s directorial debut in the Alien franchise you started and are reviving.

It is possible that this is all talk from Ridley and I am not one of those people who believes a film needs to have a high age rating to be a good movie. I am fine with Prometheus being a PG-13 if that is the rating that fits the story, the story should not have to be changed or altered for an age rating. The days of excessive, unnecessary film censorship in the Western world has gone, so instead film studios are deciding to mess with and cut their own movies for marketing reasons. A film should get the age rating it deserves and earns not the age rating an executive has decided it needs to be, so he can continue to afford his house.

This also leads me onto something that annoyed me about the Bully scenario. With an R rating, Prometheus is accessible to everybody, as long as anybody under 17 is with somebody older than 17. There should be no shame from a studio for getting an R rating and no shame if a parent believes their child under 17 however old they may be (Although I would recommend 15...14 minimum, then again I am 16 and obviously not a parent) is ready to see a particular film but the stuffy cashier disagrees.

Prometheus is one of my most anticipated films of the year and I trust all of those behind it. My only hope is that this businessman approach one of the supposedly greatest directors of all time (A title given to a man who directed 2010’s Robin Hood...) is taking, won’t negatively affect the final product. What do you think of this issue? Do you agree with Ridley’s approach? Are you angered by how marketing and money driven decisions are changing the nature of films on at your cinema? Let us know your thoughts in the Your Say section (as well as in our forum) and vote in the poll, how important are age ratings? At the end of the day, are they worth all the fuss Ridley has given to them with his comments and that I have with mine? Most of you will probably vote depends and I agree but let me know what your parameters are under depends, in the Your Say section.

That's a Wrap NO.11: Bullies and Mummies

Bully Rating Now PG-13

A few weeks ago I reported on the controversy surrounding the documentary Bully. What started as merely reporting on yet another ratings debate concluded with a rambling, rant in which I criticized the importance of age ratings, especially when it comes to commercial consumption of a film. With an R rating the film was accessible to even four year olds, most young kids probably didn’t care there was a film about bullying out, it is older people (As in parents) who are enthusiastic about this cause and rightfully so. There was nothing stopping parents taking their kids to see the film under an R rating, other than the social stigma that is perhaps attached to parents taking their kids to an R rated movie in the U.S. (Something I know exists, as I experienced it with my parents) Drop the social and commercial stigmas around age ratings and they become less important and the wrong decisions of the MPAA more easy to ignore.

Back to the story however, three uses of the F word were cut out to bring the film down to a PG-13. Now the cynic in me is turning my rant energy towards the Weinstein Company. If they were this supposedly enthusiastic for children to see the movie (As I know young children across America were having anticipation induced sleepless nights over Bully and couldn’t care less about The Hunger Games) they could have cut three F words out of the film straight away. Instead they have used this, “controversy” as a publicity stunt. If anything the protesting masses who put pressure on the MPAA to play ball, should turn their disdain to Harvey Weinstein. While there is a legitimate debate to be had about the importance, validity and process behind age ratings, Harvey has used that argument in order to make profit out of other people’s suffering and problems. I don’t think Harvey is naive enough to believe bullying will stop because children will see this movie, perhaps because as many have insinuated, he is said to be one of the biggest bullies in the film industry.

Ultimately in my view, the MPAA need to get it together and put more of an emphasis on the emotion a film instills in a viewer rather than the language it possesses, who cares if children are going to hear a rude word? As long as the rest of the film is suitable and the message worthy and important for younger audiences. Also many people and distributors in the U.S. need to grow up and drop the attitude which has perhaps made parents fearful or unable to take their children to a movie that they believe is aimed for them. If both these things were different, then, it is unlikely Harvey Weinstein would have been able to make as much of a profit making, publicity stunt and very few people would be writing, reading and talking about this movie. So perhaps in one sense, depending on your stance regarding this issue, its all excusable because a film with a worthy cause got some attention it otherwise wouldn’t get.

Vote in the poll below, how important are age ratings? Also be sure to give us your in-depth written thoughts on this news story and topic in the Your Say section and ourforum. Attached below is a review of Bully from the Youtube channel Pretty Much It. I have decided to show this review as I feel it is a very honest, thought-provoking one, which extends the conversation about this film, beyond the saga over its age rating.

The Mummy to be Rebooted

Hollywood as we know has a reboot button that they are keen to press as many times as they can. Most of the time when they take this course of action they are met with disdain, however in this case, while many have predictably criticized the decision, they may be doing something great. I enjoyed the Brendan Fraser Mummy movies for what they were, however I enjoyed the Universal ride more, but given The Mummy’s horror origins, there was always room to tell the story in another way.

What made me excited about this reboot was the writer behind the project. Jon Spaihts, one of the screenwriters on Prometheus, has been hired to, “head the project” If we get a Prometheus-esque approach to The Mummy, as in a claustrophobic horror, I would be incredibly excited for this film. In fact they could even do a similar story to Prometheus. A bunch of archeologists/historians go exploring into some Ancient Egyptian tombs, where they awaken...THE MUMMY! They could literally do Prometheus but substitute the alien planet for a pyramid and the aliens for a mummy. An old-school, stripped down, claustrophobic, Mummy movie if directed and acted well could be fantastic. Of course now I have imagined this it will most likely be rebooted as an Adam Sandler comedy.

Let us know in the Your Say section (As well as our forum) what you would like them to do with a Mummy reboot, your favourite reboots, least favourite reboots and your thought on the trend in general. Be sure to vote in the poll below, do reboots damage originality?

That's a Wrap!

Vote in the polls, discuss each story in the forums and give us your in-depth written thoughts in the Your Say section. Be sure to spread the word on Facebook and Twitter and get your friends involved in the debates. For this week at Movie Parliament...That’s a Wrap!

By Movie Parliament Prime Minister,
Michael Dalton

That's a Wrap NO.10: Anchormen and Directors

Anchorman 2...Is Official!

Since its release, Anchorman has gone on to be one of the cult comedy classics of recent years. It has been endlessly quoted and paved the way for the Hollywood careers of the likes of Will Ferrell, Steve Carrell and Paul Rudd. For years many have been calling for another journey into the world of Ron Burgundy, however for financial reasons it had always been placed in the we want it to happen but it never will, pile. However Ron Burgundy himself went live on Conan, to announce a deal had been reached with Paramount for Anchorman 2. My initial reaction was one of joy, then tentative anticipation and then a desire for Zoolander to receive equal treatment. The more I spin away from the initial news and remember the first film however, the more nervous I am for a sequel. Part of me wishes Anchorman 2 was still where it was, as while I have faith in everybody involved to make a film which is just as good, if not better, than the original, there is still the possibility our anticipation will be met, with a terrible, reputation tainting film. Sequels are rarely so demanded and their announcements met with such joy, evidenced by my sequel news stories in the past, highlighting Anchorman as a real exception. Therefore the poll question for this story is, which comedy sequel would you most like to see? Be sure to give us your in-depth thoughts in the Your Say section and discuss it with others in our forum.

Director Shortlist for Captain America 2...Down to 3

Last year, Captain America was released as part of Marvel's master-plan which will come to its apex THIS MONTH, with The Avengers. With Avengers now (supposedly and hopefully) in the can, attentions have turned to the sequels for all these individual superheroes. It is Captain America 2 which has the latest update, with its choice of director now reportedly down to three, technically four, interesting names. The first, is George Nolfi. Nolfi's work includes The Adjustment Bureau which he wrote and directed, a film I enjoyed despite the missed opportunities with its premise. The second, is F Gary Gray, who made Law Abiding Citizen and The Italian Job remake. So far, two non-auteur, solid, dependable, sci-fi and/or action experienced directors. It is the last name, or two names, which is/are the most interesting. Anthony and Joe Russo, the directors and executive producers behind NBC's hit show, "Community" are reportedly in the running and supposedly had a very good meeting with Kevin Feige (President of Production at Marvel) Therefore the obvious poll for this question is, which of these three would you like to see direct Captain America 2? For me, it has to be the Russo brothers. They're an interesting, different choice and from what I have seen and heard of Community, are genuine film buffs who should approach the film with a really cool attitude and approach. Be sure to give us your more in-depth thoughts in the Your Say section and discuss it in our forum.

That's a Wrap!

That's a Wrap NO.9: Aliens and Educating Disney

Teenage Alien Ninja Turtles?

If you frequent movie message boards, then you may have realized that there are more posts proclaiming Michael Bay as the antichrist than usual. The reason being that he has announced, his version of TMNT (Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles) will be a re-imagining and transform the characters into aliens. One thing this demonstrates is Hollywood’s current obsession with aliens. The upcoming Battleship film adaptation will have its enemies be aliens, the upcoming Ben Stiller comedy project Neighborhood Watch (A Ben Stiller comedy) will have aliens, Men in Black III, The Avengers, Prometheus, John Carter...the Transformers films, last year’s Cowboys and Aliens. It seems as if a new rule has been declared amongst studio executives that aliens in your movie equals box office success (Although the failures of Cowboys and Aliens and John Carter may change that...until The Avengers and Prometheus are massive hits) Besides Hollywood’s alien addiction it also highlights an issue discussed in a previous That’s a Wrap. Michael Bay has told fans they need to, “chill” and has since sought and gained the support of key figures behind TMNT. Similar to the hate George Lucas received and receives for Star Wars, it begs the question, who owns a film? Do those who make the films “own” them, in the case the likes of Michael Bay and George Lucas. Do the financers who make it happen, “own” the film? Or do we, the audience, “own” the film, the ones who continue to finance them and pay their wages, in a sense, consuming their products of creativity. Does anybody own a film?

Give us your in-depth thoughts on Michael Bay, aliens and film ownership in our forum and the Your Say section. Also be sure to vote in the poll below, who “owns” a film?

John Carter of Bankruptcy

This week Disney announced that they are expecting a $200 million LOSS on John Carter. Besides the fact that the film was terrible, Disney have mishandled this every step of the way. They should not have let $250 million be spent on it, they should not have changed the title, they should not have forced a 3D conversion and they should not have approved and released those trailers and posters. Hopefully this catastrophic lesson will teach the executives the right lessons. The lesson is not to not let Andrew Stanton direct a live action film again, or to make sure every film you make has a big star in it.

The lessons should be the following. Make big things out of small beginnings. John Carter did not need to be that expensive, when you see what films such as Chronicle, District 9, Moon, Monsters and even this year’s The Hunger Games have achieved on relatively low budgets, it puts the likes of John Carter to shame. Spend sensibly, it creates greater creativity and turns the story into your favour. No neutral wants to support a Manchester City, something that has spent more than they could ever dream of. John Carter was an “underdog” with $250 million behind it. A lower budget would have resulted in greater results creatively and significantly changed the way people wrote about and viewed the film. Also they would have stood a better chance of going into profit. It is something that makes sense creatively, publicly and financially.

Stick to your guns. John Carter of Mars was a fine title, WHY CHANGE IT TO...John Carter? The fear that Mars would put off audiences is ridiculous, petty and incredibly idiotic. John Carter should have embraced its origins and genre, it should not have tried to reach out to those who wouldn’t give it the time of day no matter what it's called. Please your core fan-base and their joy and satisfaction will ensure it reaches a wider audience. A third lesson and an extension of the second is know your source material. A fan-made trailer for this film blew all the official Disney ones out of the water. The most important however, is spend time on a good script. All the problems with the budget and marketing could have been cured...if the film had been any good.

Give us your in-depth thoughts on John Carter’s flop in the forum and in the Your Say section. Also be sure to vote in the poll below, what was the worst part of Disney’s handling of John Carter?

That's a Wrap!

That's a Wrap NO.8: Delays, Conversion and Censorship

Seven Seconds Cut From Hunger Games in U.K.

The Hunger Games is on its way to become the biggest movie of the year so far. Its box office will be gigantic and currently its reviews are equally grand. Many are tipping it to take the Harry Potter throne as the next hugely successful, young adult, book adaptation. In the U.K. however the film's original content has been altered in order to gain a 12A rating. Seven seconds of blood were sliced in order for the film to be legally accessible at cinemas for children under 12 should they be accompanied by an adult. It is a decision which makes financial sense and the cuts do not sound like they are ones which will ruin the film and therefore I am not crying outrage over this news. However this story relates to the story of Bully, discussed two weeks ago here at That's a Wrap. In that piece I questioned the importance and validity of age ratings and I will again here. This story highlights the financial importance of age ratings, however given the reviews, the hype, the fan base, does anybody think the box office of The Hunger Games would REALLY have suffered had it been rated 15 in the U.K.? Discuss this topic in our forum, give us your in-depth thoughts in theYour Say section and vote in the poll below. Also be sure to check Movie Parliament on Thursday/Friday for my review of The Hunger Games.

The Following Film Will Be In Production From 9AM to NEVER

If any of you watched the tv show 24, then you know that in its heyday (Series 1-5) it was awesome and that a movie would never work. However try telling the latter to Jack Bauer himself, Kiefer Sutherland, who has suffered another setback in his quest to keep his star-making role alive and on the big screen. 20th Century Fox have cancelled their plans to have the film go into production in 2012, with Sutherland saying that it will in 2013. Word is that Fox refused to give the project the green light due to a belief that Sutherland would not have the time due to his current work on the new TV show, Touch. Am I the only one not buying that reason? I think and hope that those in the upper echelons of 20th Century Fox, do not want this film to be made. The core concept of 24 does not work as a film, unless you want to spend a whole day in the cinema and in transforming 24 to a big screen entity, you completely destroy what it is, you strip it of its identity. While a script has been written (By Billy Ray and Mark Bomback) and a director lined up, Antoine Fuqua (Training Day and Shooter) it is looking less likely we will see 24: The Movie. Given the quality drop of 24 in its latter seasons, the identity loss it will suffer moving to the big screen and the fact that once you take away the concept, everything with 24 has already been done on the big screen, makes me hope and think that we won't see this movie. The question this story raises however, is, can TV shows translate to successful cinema? While there are many good examples, such as this year's 21 Jump Street, there are also unsuccessful examples. The best formula seems to be, to go from film to tv, rather than tv to film. Discuss this topic in our forum, give us your in-depth thoughts on this issue and the 24 movie in the Your Say section and vote in the poll below.

Welcome to Jurassic Park...in 3D

Given the "success" of recent 3D conversions, to celebrate its 20th anniversary, rather than a simple re-release, an awesome new limited edition blu-ray with brand new documentaries, we will get a 3D re-release of Jurassic Park. I don't like new 3D movies so you can imagine that I am pretty down on this process of re-releasing old, "event" movies in 3D to generate some easy cash for the studios. I love Jurassic Park but I do not want to see it in 3D. It wasn't made with 3D in mind and therefore in my view, leave it as it was intended. If I want to feel like I'm in Jurassic Park, I will go on the ride at Universal, not wear some tacky glasses, not see any difference and feel thoroughly ripped off and like I just paid for some studio executives dinner, where they will be discussing the next film they can pimp out to fatten their wallets. Of course, it could turn out to be amazing in 3D and if so, I may give it a shot however I am yet to be convinced on the technology at its current state and yet to be convinced by conversions. Discuss 3D conversions in our forum, give us your in-depth thoughts in the Your Say section (Which film would you like to see converted into 3D) and vote in the poll below, Are 3D conversions innovative or exploitative?

That's a Wrap!

That's a Wrap NO.7: Editing and Sequels

Topher Grace Re-edits Star Wars Prequels Into One Film

Most film fans in the world probably believe that they could have done a better job with the Star Wars prequels than George Lucas. Well actor Topher Grace has gone one further, he has taken all three Star Wars prequels and edited them into one, 85 minute long film. The title of the project is reportedly, Star Wars Episode III.5: The Editor Strikes Back. It is a product of Grace’s newfound interest in editing and he invited filmmakers, actors and selected online press to be the first, and perhaps only to view it.

His cut of the film begins with the final lightstaber battle between Obi-Wan, Qui-Gon Jinn and Darth Maul. While Jake Llloyd (Who played young Anakin in Episode I) is missing from Topher’s cut. It is said that he even wrote his own opening crawl for the project, also using audio and footage from the Clone Wars TV series and audio books. It is unlikely this piece will be ever seen publicly, as it was not made with the permission of George Lucas, although I’m sure if enough money was offered, he would allow it.

Personally I would love to see Topher Grace’s edit and I hope it ends up online somewhere, one day. I like to see actors expand beyond mere performances and it will be interesting to see if Topher decides to edit or perhaps even direct, future films that he stars in. The question I want to ask with this story, is what is better, remakes or re-edits? If somebody wants to tell their own version of a story previously told on film, would it better to, rather than film it all again with new actors and essentially put to film what has already filmed, to instead re-edit the existing footage. With remakes such as The Omen and Gus Van Sants, Psycho, being shot for shot recreations of the original films. Why not instead restore, update and re-edit the older film?

Personally I think seeing filmmakers re-edit other filmmakers work would be really interesting. Or perhaps this is a chance for editors to make themselves, household, and marquee names. Editors could come forth, giving their own personal edits of films, building upon each others work, the way scientists built upon other scientists theories.

Could the personal experiments of Topher Grace, start a new trend in Hollywood? Will re-editing films became something that is not only reserved to fanboys? Which films would you like to see re-edited. Give us all your thoughts on this issue in the Your Say section or discuss it in our forum. Be sure to vote in the poll below, what is a better way to retell a story already filmed, remake, or re-edit?

Sequel Story: Part Two

Project X, Step Brothers, Chronicle, Journey 2: The Mysterious Island, Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol...this week, all five of those films had sequels confirmed as being either definite or “In the works” While the writer of Cloverfield, Drew Goddard, expressed his desires to go forward with a sequel for that 2008, masterpiece. This question has been asked many times here at That’s a Wrap but it is one I want to keep on asking throughout the year. Do sequels hinder originality?

Out of all these confirmations, it is the announcement of a Chronicle 2, which saddens yet, excites me the most. In my review of Chronicle, I noted that the scenes which left the story open for a sequel were among the films worst and in my mind the characters and the story were left in a perfectly, satisfying place. However I also think there is a great potential to expand the “world” of Chronicle. Personally I hope they don’t continue the story of a particular character from Chronicle, but instead focus on other characters and have subtle connections to the first film, if not an overt one for a twist at the film’s end. Another question this raises, is, are sequels at their best when they are continuing or renewing? Is it best to continue the story from its previous film, or to instead go on a completely new adventure? No doubt Mission 5 will be drastically different from Mission 4, just as Mission 4 was from 3, 2 and 1. The Project X sequel however has potential to be another Hangover 2 situation which did not continue, nor renew but instead remade.

Give us all your thoughts on these sequel announcements in the Your Say section and in our forum. Which ones are you happy about? Which are you not happy about? Where would you like to see them go with these sequels? Also be sure to vote in the two polls down below, do sequels hinder originality? And are sequels better when they are continuing or renewing?

That's a Wrap!

That's a Wrap NO.6: Titles, Viral Marketing and Bullies

Marvel’s The Avengers Assemble...by the Coward Robert Ford...on the Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind...Extremely Loudly and Incredibly Closely: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire...Part II...in 3D........of Mars

This summer will see the release of a film that has been five years in the making production-wise and decades in the making in the minds of fans. Marvel’s The Avengers will be the true kick-off to the summer movie season and is bound to be one of many, billion dollar films to be released not just this summer but this year. However in the U.K., they won’t be seeing The Avengers, instead U.K. audiences will be seeing Avengers Assemble. The title has been altered due to fears that U.K. audiences would confuse it with a tv show of the same name from the 1960s. I am not alone in thinking that this title change is unnecessary and ridiculous. Funnily enough now that Marvel are another part of the Disney empire, the people behind this decision are probably the same people who thought the title John Carter would get the audience that supposedly would have been lost with the title, John Carter of Mars. The interesting question that this story asks is, how important is a title? How many times, if ever, do you decide whether or not to see a film based on its title? My worry is that with the film industry over thinking the importance of titles, we will be left with either bland or silly titles such as John Carter and Avengers Assemble. Let us know what you think of the title, Avengers Assemble and other in-depth thoughts you have about this issue in the Your Say section and vote in the poll below, have you decided to see or not see a film based purely on its title?

Also, in other brief Avengers news, the new trailer has hit which is embedded for your viewing pleasure below the poll. Should have been covered in the Future Filmssection (Which is due its own reboot) but better late than never. The film looks expectedly awesome and I just hope that they haven’t given away all their money shots in the trailer. That spinning shot of all the avengers standing in a circle, getting their weapons ready, must already be one of the shots of the year.

The Avengers will be released on the 26th of April in the U.K. (And where I live) and on the 4th of May in the U.S. Perhaps changing the title to Avengers Assemble is the price those in the U.K. must pay for getting it before the Americans.

Viral Marketing to Burst Through Chest of Hollywood?

Prometheus is easily one of the most anticipated films of the year. After a superb teaser trailer, the film’s viral marketing has begun and it is probably the most star-studded piece of viral marketing to date. In this brief video clip, Guy Pearce plays Peter Weyland and outlines his bold vision. This clip seems to hint towards the thematic material of the final film, as Weyland proclaims, “We are the gods now” It’s a great little clip, which serves to increase the already high levels of anticipation for this film. With the appearance of Guy Pearce (Which might be replicated in the film itself) it also shows just how significant viral marketing has become and how seriously studios are taking it. J.J. Abrams used to be the king of it with his various tv shows and films, however they were very much separate entities from what they were meant to be promoting. With clips such as these, we may be seeing viral marketing overtake traditional marketing and a shift in the way in which movies are sold to us. With the more traditional (And terrible) John Carter ad campaign leaving studio executives terrified that they have an all-time flop on their hands, it may be time for movie studios to move more enthusiastically towards viral marketing.

Do you think that viral marketing is the future of film advertising? Vote in the poll below and give us your in-depth written thoughts in the Your Say section, or discuss it in the future films section of our forum.

Age Ranting

A documentary film titled, “Bully” has been in the movie news a lot recently due to the age rating it has received from the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA for short) The film which hopes to shed light on bullying in U.S. schools has been given an R rating which means if you are under 17, you must have a parent accompany you. Yes, a five old could get into see Bruno under such a system...although not without dirty looks from the cinema staff I imagine. The film’s makers and its backer (Harvey Weinstein) are protesting that the film be rated PG-13 due to the fact that it is a film which due to its subject matter, needs to be seen by kids. The irony that Harvey Weinstein is behind this movement has not escaped a former employee of his, who in an open letter to the man himself, labeled him a man, addicted to bullying. I will not be discussing whether or not Harvey is a bully or the fact that this film appears to be bringing attention to and attempting to stop something that is seen everyday and can never be eradicated. Instead I ask, similar to my question about titles, what’s in an age rating? Sure it stops a certain group of people from seeing a movie but, what does it REALLY mean? There have been many discussions and even films made about this topic in the past, yet a conclusive answer never found. Ultimately age ratings are hypocritical numbers, assigned to films mostly falsely by a group of people. The question I want to ask though is the following, how important do you think age ratings are? Vote in the poll below and give us your more in-depth written thoughts in the Your Say section.

If you wish to sign the petition to get Bully that oh so important PG-13 rating (A better petition would be one with the intention of telling people to get over themselves, as with an R rating there is nothing stopping a parent taking their child to see the film if they want them to see it. I know the problem is more about access to the film but if Harvey really wanted to support it, it could get a wide release with its R rating, as many films have. The issue is with the system and the perceived importance of age ratings as a whole...this is a long bracket) then you can click the link here. The truth of the matter is though, if somebody really wants to see a film, they will see it, no matter what age rating the film has been given. Every parent has let their child see a film the law says they shouldn’t. Ultimately there needs to be radical reform over age classification of films, it’s a broken, inherently hypocritical system that in this case, if you want to be really cynical about it, is being manipulated as a publicity tool. Seriously, would you have heard of this film if it weren’t for this news story? A whole article could be written about this entire issue and I think I probably will, just to justify the rambling nature of this particular news entry. I must stress however, I support what this film wants to say (Even if I think it has been said and doubt whether it can change and if it can whether we should be relying on films to instigate it) and I fully support challenging organizations such as the MPAA (As this whole news story shows) this is not an anit-Bully (The film) piece, this is a doubting of the importance and effectiveness of the age rating system in general piece.

That's a Wrap!

That's a Wrap NO.5: Dictators, Tickets and IMAX

Will he, won't he...

One of this week’s most ‘controversial’ stories regards tonight’s (Or this morning’s) most uncontroversial awards show, the Oscars. This year the Oscars have gone out of their way to make this sure that this year’s show will be one of the most boring in the institution’s history. Therefore I was not surprised when I heard that Sacha Baron Cohen had been banned from coming to the ceremony if he were to do so, dressed as his latest creation. This is the awards show which last year said Banksy was not welcome and which will not allow The Muppets to perform their Oscar nominated song...how dare Cohen think about doing something which could be remotely enjoyable. However of course the Oscars did a U turn and Baron Cohen will be attending the Oscars as his character, The Dictator. What is perhaps most disappointing about this whole affair is that it has been wasted on nothing more than a publicity stunt. It has briefly highlighted the Oscars as the rather stuck up affair that they are but also sadly the shamelessness of film promotion. You can bet that if Baron Cohen had any antics planned that would transcend his appearance beyond merely a plug for his film, that the Oscars would have stamped it out in exchange for his appearance and his walking advertisement. However I congratulate Baron Cohen on an amusing response video to his initial ban and for getting his way, however cynically I may view it. In fact he need not attend the Oscars at all, as unless he has something else planned, the whole purpose of showing up dressed as the character, to promote his film, has been fulfilled with this entire, media manufactured, piece of theatre.

The question I pose to regarding this topic is the same question I posed to you regarding the novelty Avenger 3D glasses. Is this Sacha Baron Cohen ‘stunt’ cool? Crass? Or both? Vote in the poll below and give us your much more in-depth, written views, in the Your Say section.

The World WILL Be Watching

When The Hunger Games released a poster for its IMAX experience with the tagline, “The world will be watching” I initially scoffed at its pseudo-epicness (Now an official term here at Movie Parliament) despite its credible relation to the film’s story. However it appears that the tagline may extend fiction and into fact, as The Hunger Games sold more first day, pre-release tickets than The Twilight Saga: Eclipse (On ticketing site Fandango). This will be huge news for the producers behind The Hunger Games and perhaps guarantees a sequel already. As a fan of the book trilogy, I cannot wait to see this tale on the big screen, especially given the caliber of the cast. They have marketed the movie perfectly by not attempting in any way through their advertisements, to jump on the back of the Twilight bandwagon (Which would have been the false way to advertise a trilogy which couldn’t be more different) These pre-release ticket sales will probably be broken later this year by The Avengers and then again by The Dark Knight Rises but for now The Hunger Games may be on course to be the first highest grossing movie of the year.

The poll questions for this issue is, are pre-release ticket sales indicative of a film’s financial success? There are films, which have not set records such as this which have gone on to be the biggest films of all time (Avatar, Titanic...) This questions the validity and importance of such pre-release figures. Vote in the poll below and give us all your Huger Games and box office analysis opinions in the Your Say section.

Skyfall: The IMAX Experience

With Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol last year and The Dark Knight Rises this year, the IMAX format is really starting to become the ultimate way to experience a film. Now the next James Bond film will be jumping on this bandwagon with Skyfall set to be shown on the biggest cinema screens in the world. Hopefully, as it did with Mission Impossible, this decision will augment the action scenes in the movie and provide viewers with a cinematic experience like no other. As somebody who hopes to experience The Dark Knight Rises in IMAX this summer, I am fully supportive of this decision to release in IMAX, adding further legitimacy and big names to the format. In the battle for cinema’s technological future, IMAX, in my eyes, is the way forward, not 3D. Modern 3D claims to be about immersing the audience into the world of the film, however wearing tacky glasses does exactly the opposite, a massive screen however fulfills such a goal.

Where do you stand? What is the future of cinema? IMAX? 3D? or both? Vote in the poll below and give us your in-depth written views in the Your Say section. Will you be seeing Skyfall in IMAX? Do you think it is a cynical attempt to cash-in on the groundbreaking work done by Christopher Nolan and Brad Bird? Let us know.

That's a Wrap NO.4: Reception and Reboots

John Carter Sequel Already Being Written

The film, John Carter, has not been released yet however the screenplay for John Carter 2 is already under way. While this may seem like an arrogant, presumptuous and potentially cursing move, it is not the only or first instance of it. The screenplay for the sequel to this year’s Amazing Spider-Man has also been in development, publicly announced last year. Now of course the likelihood of these scripts being produced will depend on commercial factors when the films are released. However it is important to note whether writing screenplays for sequels to yet to be released films, is a sign of confidence from the makers or instead a fast growing trend. If it is the former, then perhaps it is time to get excited about John Carter, however the cynical side of me says it is the latter and instead more insurances for studios so that they can rush potentially profitable sequels into production. The question behind this story is, Should Writers Take Into Account a Film’s Reception Before Writing the Sequel?

Whether written before or after, reception to the film will largely (If not totally) dictate what is and is not in a sequel, however how much should writers take into account the public’s perception of their product before continuing it? How much influence should our opinions have on their creative process? Give us all your thoughts on this issue in the Your Say section and vote in the poll.

Transformers 4- Confirmed and Rebooting

This week two significant Transformers 4 news hit. The first was that it is coming, with a 2014 release and under the direction of Michael Bay. The second came from one of the actors from the first three, Josh Duhamel, stating that none of the original actors would be returning. In the first three weeks of That’s a Wrap a lot of issues in Hollywood have been covered through various, seemingly disposable news stories, however the common practice of a reboot has yet to be touched. Like sequels (Which reboots are basically glorified versions of) do reboots damage originality in Hollywood? Instead of creating new franchises they merely redo old ones, even if they are done inventively, is that originality? I feel the same way as I do about reboots as I do about sequels...I don’t think they directly hurt originality however they certainly give Hollywood executives life jackets, while original ideas drown. Be sure to give us your views on reboots, Transformers and how you would like them to reboot Transformers in the Your Say section. Be sure to vote in the poll, Do Reboots Damage Originality?

If you want to be the Minister for Current Affairs or give your thoughts on any of week four's news, let us know in the Your Say section. If you want to let your friends know about John Carter 2 and/or Transformers 4 be sure to spread the word about Movie Parliament on Twitter and Facebook. For this week...That's a Wrap!

By Movie Parliament Prime Minister,
Michael Dalton

That's a Wrap NO.3: Snobbery, Actors Directing & Science Fiction

Daniel Radcliffe Vs. The Oscars
While this story would perhaps be better placed in The Campaign section. It has been a slow movie news week and That’s a Wrap needs things to wrap. Daniel Radcliffe (Harry Potter) has labeled the Oscar snub of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part Two as snobbery. Radcliffe is right in suggesting the Oscar voters are snobs but in my opinion wrong to believe that Deathly Hallows: Part Two should have received a Best Picture nomination. Radcliffe doesn’t stop at criticizing the Oscars however; he also takes a swipe at possible Best Picture winner, Hugo. Radcliffe points out that the Oscars do not like kids films unless they are directed by Martin Scorsese (A perhaps partially true statement) and said that while watching it, he could not believe that Hugo was nominated and Harry was not. Criticizing Hugo is where I think Radcliffe lets himself down and goes from telling the truth to sounding rather bitter. He is of course allowed his opinion but in the context of the rest of the statement, comes off as rather immature and mean spirited. What is important to note here is whether or not the younger generation care about Awards shows, Daniel Radcliffe clearly does care even though he shouldn’t as the money and universal acclaim is reward enough, but do you? Do you agree with Radcliffe that the Oscars are snobbery? Should Harry be nominated as well as Hugo? Or instead of Hugo? If you want more Oscar related news go to The Campaign and vote on the poll to lets us know, Do you care about Awards shows?

Joseph Gordon-Levitt-Actor...Writer & Director?
Joseph Gordon-Levitt is one of my favourite actors working today and over the past few years has worked with some of my favourite directors (Christopher Nolan, Quentin Tarantino and Steven Spielberg) Therefore I am excited to hear that there will be a film not only starring him but also written and directed by him. The film will also star Scarlett Johansson and supposedly be about a man who learns to be less selfish as the film progresses. People, who follow Levitt outside of his big-budget films, know that with projects such as Hitrecord, that he is a very creative presence. Actors such as Clint Eastwood have been able to do double and triple duty on feature films but can Gordon-Levitt? Vote on the poll below, should Actors also direct their films? Potential conflict of interests, vanity etc. there is positive and negatives to actors, also directing. Give us your more detailed thoughts in the comments below and vote on the poll.

Science-Fiction: A Dying Genre?
Now Prometheus has yet to hit cinemas, yet Ridley Scott already has plans to make a sequel to it. In an interview with Entertainment Weekly he said, “I’m also thinking about what the hell I might do for a Prometheus 2” when asked whether a sequel could happen, he supposedly responded by knocking on the wooden table and smiling. Prometheus is of course the is it, isn’t it Alien prequel that along with Dark Knight Rises, Avengers and Hobbit is one of the year’s most anticipated films. Of course a sequel will depend on how well the film does at the box office but the question behind this story relates to a question we asked last week about sequels and originality. However this week in particular it strikes me as perhaps more of a problem in one particular genre...science fiction. The same week Ridley Scott talks about a possible sequel to a prequel to a science-fiction series. Phantom Menace is re-released in 3D and there is more talk of Star Trek 2. The question to vote on below and discuss in the comments is, is Science-Fiction losing its originality? With Looper, Upside Down and Elysium coming up, I expect and hope that this question will be answered with a big NO but, is Sci-Fi suffering from unoriginality more than other genres?

That's a Wrap!
Be sure to subscribe to this site and get email notifications of all new content by following the instructions at the Your Say section. Also if you want to be the Minister for Current Affairs and make this section of the site your own, let us know in the Your Say section.
For this week, That’s a Wrap!

By Movie Parliament Prime Minister,
Michael Dalton

That's a Wrap NO.2: Sequels, Broadway and 3D

X-Men: First Class and Insidious Sequels Confirmed

X-Men: First Class and Insidious were two of my favourite films from last year. Therefore I am both excited yet also a little tentative about the now confirmed possibility of sequels to these films. What should comfort every fan of these two films is that the original creative forces behind both films will be returning to extend the universe they created. In terms of the X-Men: First Class sequel it is obvious that the characters we saw in the first film will be developed however in regards to the sequel to Insidious, I like many am hoping and expecting that we will get a new cast to journey into the further. Of course in this “That’s a Wrap” section every news topic discussed is linked to a general issue in Hollywood that we ask you to vote on. The poll topic question regarding this story is, Do you think that sequels hinder originality? Personally while I wish Hollywood were more daring with their mainstream products I will never dismiss a sequel until I see it, as for every Hangover: Part Two there is a Godfather: Part Two. Vote on the poll below and let us know what you would like to see in X-Men: First Class and Insidious sequels in the Your Say section.

Back to the Future on Broadway

Back to the Future is one of the most beloved films of all time and is one of this writer’s favourite films. It has inspired numerous film fans and worked its way into popular culture in a way that most films dream of. Rather than squeeze cash out of it through a 3D re-release, a remake or a tv series (Although they may be ominously on the horizon) it appears that they are planning to make a Broadway musical. I am not dismissive of this for two reasons, one, it is not a film recreation and therefore I do not have to consider it as part of the film trilogy and secondly Robert Zemeckis is in negations to write it. If you want anybody to exploit a product you love, then let the person who created it do the exploiting (George Lucas should have done a Star Wars musical instead of adding the word No to Return of the Jedi) There is a lot of potential for a Back to the Future musical, with a certain scene towards the end of the film basically written for the stage. The topic, issue and question behind this story is, Can the stage and the screen work in partnership? Could the Back to the Future musical if it happens and if it’s successful, create a new precedent in Hollywood for them to revitalize their franchises on the stage. Perhaps stage stories and screen stories could overlap? Vote on the poll below and give us your more in-depth written thoughts in the Your Say section.

The Avengers Embrace the Gimmicky Nature of 3D

I am not the biggest fan of 3D technology. For me IMAX is the future of the cinematic experience and I have yet to be truly convinced that 3D is the future of film (Yes even by Avatar where the technological achievement of it is grossly overrated) I like 3D that embraces the silliness of it and while I don’t expect The Avengers to have multiple pieces of debris and bullets flying to our face I am happy to see their latest money making scheme. For The Avengers there will be four specialized 3D glasses based on each avenger. That’s right kids; you can wear glasses, which are modeled on your favourite avenger for just $5! What do you think of this? Is it a crass, McDonalds Happy Meal esque way of squeezing extra cash out of something which is already going to make billions? Or is it a fun way of embracing the technology at hand? Crass or Cool? Vote on the poll below and give us your more in-depth written thoughts in the Your Say section.

That's a Wrap!

Apologies for failing to recap last week’s big movie news and be sure to check the site next week where we will have two weeks in a row of this new feature. Be sure to subscribe to this site and get email notifications of all new content by following the instructions at the Your Say section. Also if you want to be the Minister for Current Affairs and make this section of the site your own, let us know in the Your Say section.
For this week, That’s a Wrap!

By Movie Parliament Prime Minister,
Michael Dalton

That's a Wrap EP. 1: Refunds, Retirement, 9/11 and Chuck Norris

Welcome to the very first Weekly Wrap here at Movie Parliament. If you have been following the site for a while, then you know that the news section has not been the most prosperous. So let us introduce a brand new way in which Movie Parliament will cover movie news. Instead of covering each story as it breaks (Unless it requires it) there will be a weekly summary of the movie news that is found most intriguing and discussion worthy by the Movie Parliament ministers.Each news story will be accompanied with a poll related to the topic, so that you can cast your votes, letting your voices be truly heard. Also don't forget to give us your in-depth written thoughts on each topic in the Your Say section, this is the most democratic movie site on the web and the weekly wrap is as much yours as it is ours. If there is a story from the week you think we have missed or failed to see the potential in, join the creation and the discussion by contributing to the site through the Your Say section. If you want to get the discussion and voting going amongst your friends, then post this page or the video on your Facebook or on your Twitter, so that you can keep your friends and family informed about the latest movie news and argue about it with them!

Silence is Golden

At a cinema in Liverpool, people supposedly asked for and received refunds for not knowing that The Artist was a silent film. Not knowing that The Artist is a silent film, is like not knowing that Avatar was in 3D, you literally would have to be living under a rock. In my view, a refund should only be asked for at the cinema if the cinema, not the film, has given you an unpleasant experience. There is a chance this whole thing is a publicity stunt, however under the assumption this is true, I cannot believe that these people were refunded and I ask, what other good or service could you pay for and then get refunded due to your failure to have knowledge on what you are spending your money on? You couldn't get refunded for a book because you didn't know it was waterproof, the cinema infact stated that they offer refunds for anybody if they raise a concern with a member of staff ten minutes within the film starting. I would be furious with this public recognition of such a refund if I were the manager of that cinema. What do you think of this issue however? Have you ever asked a cinema for a refund? If so why? Do you agree with the refund for these people? I am sure that the powers that be behind The Artist, prefers people asking for money back as they didn't know it was silent, rather than accusing it of having committed an act of rape (Google Kim Novak and The Artist) This whole episode also doesn't reflect very well on Liverpool, it could be worse however, they could have asked for money back due to the fact French people were in it (Google Liverpool and Patrice Evra) and their houses could have been robbed at the same time. Give us your in-depth, written thoughts on this topic and the nature of cinema refunds in the Your Say section.

Chuck Norris Saves Expendables 2 from Indecency

Chuck Norris will be joining the cast of The Expendables 2 and taking all the bad language out as he does. According to Chuck Norris Expendables 2 will be PG-13 because of him and his demands that all the vulgar language will be cut out, so that a younger audience may enjoy the film. The inherent contradiction behind the statements of Norris is that he draws the line at vulgar language and not the (If it is indeed a PG-13) sanitized portrayal of brutal and extreme violence that the film will contain. Films that don't show violence with its true horrific consequences, are arguably more dangerous to children than films filled with words that they can pick up and easily throw out of their vocabulary, it is hard however to get rid of a serious injury sustained while trying to replicate Jason Statham. Don't get me wrong, I like dumb, over the top action films as much as the next action movie fan (Which is why I hated The Expendables) but when one of the stars of the film thinks that it is less damaging to impressionable viewers than vulgar language, I take umbrage. Personally, I am of the Quentin Tarantino and "Scream" school where younger audiences are smarter than you think when consuming screen violence and that films don't create psychos, they give them ideas. My issue with this issue, is what Chuck Norris seemingly perceives as more or less damaging. Chuck Norris may be full of nonsense here but the question this raises is, how should violence be portrayed in film? Is swearing worse for younger audiences than to be exposed to irresponsibly shown violence? Let us know your thoughts on this topic and how certain elements of life should and should not be portrayed in film and to who, in the Your Say section.

Marky Mark Losing His Spark?

Mark Wahlberg also seemed like a level headed actor, so I like many was shocked with his comments this week that he believes, he could have prevented 9/11. You can find the quote by looking it up and I don't really want to give more inches to something that is that idiotic, insensitive and arrogant. Wahlberg has since apologized for the comment and gone on to say that he cried watching The Help...
The issue behind his statement is the way in which movie stars lose their grip on reality and start to believe the image of them that is beamed onto movie screens and projected through their characters. Perhaps like divorce and naming your fifth child from another marriage ridiculously, this could become a trend in Hollywood. Maybe Chuck Norris will come out and say he could have stopped the recent offensive language issues in English football with a roundhouse kick to their faces, accompanied by a quick edit away so that we are not shown or even suggested that the damage it causes (But hey, its alright because nobody swore...and that is much worse) Maybe George Clooney could have stopped that terrible cruise ship incident, maybe Bruce Willis could have travelled back in time and prevented WWII. Back on topic, what do you think on this issue? Do you agree that the way in which the media deifies movie stars leads them to have an inflated sense of themselves, to the point where they can not only think, but say these sort of things? Give us your thoughts in the Your Say section.

George Lucas Confirms Retirement From Filmmaking

That's right, turns out George Lucas hadn't already retired from filmmaking. While promoting the movie he has produced titled, "Red Tails" George Lucas has said that he is out of filmmaking (Despite the fact with the 3D reissues of Star Wars, his bank account remains very much in it) Or at least mainstream filmmaking, he leaves an out clause for a fifth Indiana Jones movie of course. He says instead he will make smaller, personal, arthouse projects, which I am fascinated to see. Perhaps George Lucas is going to go back to the filmmaker he was before he didn't need to be a filmmaker anymore, or perhaps his arthouse dreams will fade away, when the latest opportunity to exploit the Star Wars and/or Indiana Jones franchise presents itself. The interesting issue and topic behind this news story however, is his words behind the changes he has controversially made to the Star Wars films. Lucas says, "My movie, with my name on it, that says I did it, needs to be the way I want it" He adds that he won't do any more Star Wars movies saying. "Why would I make any more, when everybody yells at you all the time and says what a terrible person you are" I have slight sympathy for Lucas here, they are his films and the hate he gets can't be nice (Although I am sure he is in enough luxury to ignore and/or forgot all about it) however when you release a film and it becomes as much of a cultural phenomenon as Star Wars has, made as much money as Star Wars has and changed as many lives as Star Wars has, is it still your film? That is the question behind this story, who truly owns a film? Does anybody truly own a film? Give us your thoughts in the Your Say section.

That's a Wrap!

Until next week, as news goes here at Movie Parliament, that's a wrap!
Be sure to vote in the polls, give us your thoughts in the Your Say section and spread the word.

By Movie Parliament Prime Minister,
Michael Dalton