abacf.eu

Review: The Wolfman

There are two things I appreciate right out of the gate in regards to director Joe Johnston’s remake of The Wolfman. One, I’m a sucker for gothic horror, so I’m open-minded to pretty much any period piece monster movie. Two, it’s been many moons since we’ve seen a mainstream horror film starring actual adults and not the usual central casting assortment of reality TV-quality teenyboppers. For those two things, kudos. Maybe it’s that little bit of goodwill that kept me from hating The Wolfman outright. It’s the kind of relentlessly-paced junk that moves so fast and looks so cool that you barely have any time to process how empty it all is before the end credits roll. It truly is a modern spin on a classic, in almost all of the worst ways.

Benicio Del Toro, as American stage actor Lawrence Talbot, returns to his ancestral estate of Blackmoor upon hearing of the death of his brother, Ben, at the hands of some kind of giant beast. Talbot strikes an almost immediate connection with his late brother’s fiancee, Gwen (Emily Blunt), but clashes with his weirdo father (Anthony Hopkins) in the wake of his brother’s death, re-opening long-buried childhood wounds concerning his mother’s apparent suicide. It’s immediately clear from the moment Hopkins appears on screen that he’s hiding something — something dark and not-so-mysterious — and it’s the most significant new element in screenwriters Andrew Kevin Walker and David Self’s reworking of the 1941 classic Universal film. The Ben Talbot murder also attracts the attention of London’s Inspector Abberline (Hugo Weaving, having more fun than anyone else in the film) who travels to the countryside to find out for himself if there’s a lunatic on the moor or a creature far more sinister.

Lawrence finds a gold pendant with his brother’s murder scene evidence, which leads him to a gypsy caravan where he’s swiftly attacked by a werewolf before he can get any answers. It’s a promising (if completely traditional) set-up, but from there the movie can’t find its narrative footing. It flirts with being romantic, but Johnston seems bored with that. It dallies with larger themes concerning the sins of the father being passed on to the son, but the filmmakers can’t seem to say anything substantial about it at all and give up. It barely scratches the surface of what it must be like for a man to lose himself over to animal instinct; Johnston perhaps fearing that other werewolf films have worn this idea out. They haven’t, and it’s part of what makes werewolves such compelling monsters in the first place.

At the end of the day, it settles for being a roller coaster monster-versus-monster thrill ride (Johnston in his comfort zone), and its wrap-up has more in common with Universal’s recent The Incredible Hulkthan Universal’s not-so-recent, original The Wolf Man. It’s louder than it is scary; more gory than it is creepy. It’s a brainless action movie disguised as a classic horror film, animated in perpetual fast-forward with a room full of computers. Even the clouds in the sky whiz by at super-speed.

There’s a startlingly similar quality between Del Toro and the original wolf man Lon Chaney Jr., the droopy-eyed miserableness of a man made into an instant suicidal by compulsions beyond his control. Which is not to say that Benicio’s performance is particularly good, but, honestly, he’s not given a lot to work with here. Del Toro internalizes so much it looks like he’s cursed not only by lycanthropy, but also by delivering dialogue. Hopkins is probably one glass of bourbon away from phoning it in, but at least he doesn’t seem confused by the overall quality of the material. Emily Blunt inhabits Gwen, an underwritten role, with a realism that’s surprising. Weaving plays the same role Johnny Depp played in From Hell, the Scotland Yard detective made famous for his work on the Jack the Ripper case, but Weaving approaches the part almost imperceptibly winking at the audience, providing a little spark to all the mud and blood and hopeless curses.

I can mostly forgive The Wolfman for being such a hollow experience because I like Rick Baker’s make-up work (though the film is chock full of rubbery, unconvincing CGI at every turn) and I like Rick Heinrichs‘ detailed production design. Both, along with appropriately misty cinematography by Shelly Johnson, supply just enough of a diversion to take your mind off The Wolfman’s crippled script. (Plus, it’s a little-boy thrill to see the wolf man rip apart his victims with such cartoonish ferocity.)

DIY filmmaker Mark Borchardt once said, “No one has ever paid admission to see an excuse.” The Wolfman survived a director change (Mark Romanek), a writer’s strike, conflict between Baker and the CGI artists, a last minute second-guessing of Danny Elfman’s score (which sounds a heck of a lot like his score to Sleepy Hollow), and editing woes. Really, the only thing that matters to the audience is what’s up there on the movie screen. Despite all that production mess, The Wolfman will either be seen as a squandered opportunity to pay homage to the golden years of Hollywood horror or a kick-in-the-pants bit of stupid, noisy fun. Both are true.

by John Gholson

Exclusive Offer Until 30/01! 99% off ALL HOSTING MONTHLY PLANS! Use This Promo Code: 99ALL

Everything You Need to Know About Peter Berg's 'Battleship'

When it comes to films based on board games, folks are immediately inclined to make fun of the idea and trash the project — which is why Universal decided to get out in front of the negative buzz by sending a group of movie writers down to San Diego to meet with Battleship director Peter Berg prior to production to find out exactly what the man (and studio) have planned when it comes to this particular board game adaptation (which is the first of many in the pipeline). So … what, are we looking at a film set in 1987 about two 10-year-old kids trying to sink the other dude’s Battleship before mom calls them inside for dinner? Not quite. Here’s the quickie version:

• Battleship will follow a small fleet of American and international (ie: Japanese) ships (5 in total) that for some reason get separated from the rest of the Navy and must take on an opposing fleet of alien ships that have arrived on earth in order to build some sort of “bridge” that will help their alien race in some way.
• These aliens are called The Regents (which has nothing to do with the High School exam … we think), and they’re not here to destroy earth or humankind — they’re just here to use the planet to help save their own species. However, they will defend themselves if provoked, and, well, what else are we to use our giant massive Naval ships for?
• The aliens will be a mix of human actors and CGI. Berg compared them to Davey Jones from Pirates of the Caribbean.
• The Regents aren’t all that superior to us either, as Berg noted that the fight will be a fair one. The story will be more strategic, like the game, in that it will focus on each party (human and alien) using their skills to locate and destroy the other before they themselves are destroyed.
• And yes, someone will say “You sunk my Battleship!” at some point during the film.

For tons more details, head over to read reports from CHUD and Latino Review.

by Erik Davis

Cheap Web Hosting Plans

Celebs Return to Their Most Iconic Roles for Photo Shoot

To celebrate their 20th birthday, Empire Magazine invited a whole ton of actors and actresses to ever-so-briefly reprise their most iconic roles for a pretty cool photo shoot. Curious to see what Arnold Schwarzenegger would look like now if he donned those famous black sunglasses and threw on his best badass pose for a photo in front of a motorcycle? Or what about wanting to see Anthony Hopkins and Jodie Foster reunited for the first time since the Oscar-winning Silence of the Lambs?

Other cool photo ops include Mel Gibson wearing face paint in honor ofBraveheart, Simon Pegg and Nick Frost looking back at Shaun of the Dead, Christian Bale returning to his American Psycho days, Ben Stiller showing us all that Zoolander totally deserves a sequel, Gerard Butler giving us his best 300 roar, Laurence Fishburne calling back Morpheus and more. It’s a pretty cool idea, even if Tom Cruise’s most iconic role is certainly not Minority Report (20 bucks says Empire couldn’t get him to wear that Top Gun jacket). Check out some of the images below and the rest over at Empire.

by Erik Davis

Cheap Web Hosting Plans

The First Official Images from 'Sex and the City 2'

It’s time for another super-exciting first official images. On the heels of Harry, Ron, and Hermione looking surprised, we’ve gotten the above peek at Sex and the City 2, which premiered over at Omelete. There are no hideous ’80s fashions to recoil at, just more of the same — Carrie sporting saucy fashions and more opulence (see a whole bunch of angles of a solo Carrie at Omelete).

In lieu of the rumors of financial woes, it looks like the powers that be are opting to market this as more of the same. Or, perhaps they just want to start off with a little glitz and glamor before laying down the cold, hard hand of financial turmoil. I’ve got to say, I’m disappointed. As someone who (with reservations) really enjoyed the series, the only thing keeping me semi-interested in this sequel was the hope that they would stop trying to blind with the bling.

Then again, the sarcastic person in me — the one who is ticked that I actually had high hopes for the first and bothered to surround myself with the masses of fashion-obsessed fans on opening day — wishes it’s all just a rouse. No longer holding fan expectations, I’d like to see an utterly condescending “fiscally responsible” sequel where the girls only buy one pair of Manolos a month instead of 5. The hardship that would bring…

by Monika Bartyzel

Cheap Web Hosting Plans

Cinematical Seven: Seven Actors Who Should've Played Scrooge By Now

For many kids this Holiday season, their first exposure to Ebenezer Scrooge will be Jim Carrey’s kinetic, flailing mo-cap performance in Robert Zemeckis’ A Christmas Carol. Carrey has always done the “living cartoon” thing well, but I prefer my Scrooge more Alastair Sim and less Ace Ventura. In fact, Sim’s 1951 portrayal of the character stands as the definitive Scrooge performance to me. Sim is believable at every turn in A Christmas Carol, and he gives Dickens’ oft-repeated dialogue a vitality that set the bar for everyone that proceeded him.

There have been a handful of great Scrooges over the years — Albert Finney, George C. Scott, Patrick Stewart, even Bill Murray — but there are some actors who seem born for the role.

7. Jason Isaacs

Jason Isaacs is the youngest person on this list, but there’s no rule saying Ebenezer Scrooge has to be ancient. I rather like the idea of a middle-aged Scrooge. If Scrooge changes his life at 80, he really only has a couple of good years left in him. If he changes his life at forty-six (Isaacs’ age), then there’s a certain satisfaction in knowing that Scrooge was able to turn things around at an age young enough for him to enjoy the rest of a full life. He’d get to watch the Cratchit children grow up, and he could entertain the idea of reconciling with his ex-fiancee Bella.

Isaacs is best known for his portrayal of villains including Peter Pan’s Captain Hook, The Patriot’s Col. Tavington, and most famously as Harry Potter’s Lucius Malfoy. He’s especially good at self-centered heavies, but Isaacs rarely gets the chance to show his range. The role of Scrooge would be perfect for that.

6. David Warner

It took David Warner a little while, but he now looks exactly like Ebenezer Scrooge. He’s got to be pretty familiar with the material; he played Bob Cratchit in the 1984 Christmas Caroltelevision movie (the one with George C. Scott). I’d actually forgotten about that until I was researching this piece. As a matter of fact, I couldn’t immediately remember any characters that Warner played that I could describe as “warm.”

The ones that kept coming to mind were his sourpuss turns in Tron and Time Bandits. Warner can turn off his emotions as an actor, playing cold in a way that truly feels cold. It’s almost hard to picture Warner selling the gradual change that comes over Scrooge as the story unfolds — not that I doubt his ability as an actor, it’s just that he’d be so picture perfect as the “bah, humbug” Scrooge, I can’t picture him joyously throwing open the windows and celebrating Christmas at the very end of the arc.

5. Ernst Thesiger

Possibly the least known entry on the list, Thesiger is a character actor from Hollywood’s early years, best known for his role as Dr. Pretorius in James Whales’ Bride of Frankenstein. The man is deliciously snide. You’ve never seen anyone say “have a potato” with more contempt than Thesiger does inThe Old Dark House, able to inject those three ordinary words with withering condescension, annoyance, and general disdain.

Thesiger would’ve made a killer Scrooge — probably the scariest one on this list. Could he have dropped his natural scowl when Scrooge has his change of heart? I think so, as he does get downright joyous at times in Bride. It’s too bad we’ll never see Thesiger in the role.

4. Brian Cox

I think more than any other actor listed here, Cox’s Scrooge would feel the most real. He’d wear his miserly lot in life like a heavy burden, so you’d feel that burden lift as the story progressed. There’s a weariness to many of Cox’s best roles, and I think that world-weary approach would add a fresh dimension to Dickens’ character.

A Christmas Carol still has the power to entertain, probably more out of comfortable familiarity than actual emotional investment, but when was the last time it made you empathize and reflect on your own life in any way that it might compare to Scrooge’s? Brian Cox can handle all of the routine character beats, and brings a quality to the table that might actually make you feel sad that this man Scrooge has consciously chosen a life that’s left him all alone.

3. Bill Nighy

Bill Nighy actually reminds me a lot of Thesiger, but with a slightly more winking approach to his haughty character work. Even in things like Underworld, Nighy treads a line just north of camp, and I’d expect his turn at Scrooge to be sarcastic and droll.

Nighy seems born to deliver Dickens’ dialogue in the early scenes where Scrooge turns away the charities or chastises his nephew — the words dripping with archly comedic bile. The drawback to Nighy as Scrooge would be the potential that he would play the character too hilariously awful for the drama to have any sort of impact, but, I’d sacrifice a little bit of that melodrama for the chance to see Nighy run wild with the role.

2. Alan Rickman

I don’t think I need to do much convincing here. It’s Rickman’s big roles — Severus Snape, Hans Gruber, The Sheriff of Nottingham — that make him an obvious choice for Scrooge, but it’s the less-showy roles that really sell me on Rickman as Ebenezer Scrooge. He’s not always the arrogant heavy, and you can see some of that humanity in Rickman in Love Actually and the underseen Truly, Madly, Deeply. Rickman is fantastic at playing villains, but that’s only because Rickman is fantastic.

There’s no actor alive today I’d rather see in the part.

1. Peter Cushing

With the advent of motion-capture filmmaking, there’s the possibility that a deceased actor could “appear” in a film as a computer-generated avatar for some other actor in the ping-pong ball jumpsuit. I’m not necessarily advocating this practice, but if it ever means I get to see Peter Cushing play Ebenezer Scrooge, then I’m all for it (like anyone will ever do a second motion-captured Christmas Carolmovie…).

Cushing is an underrated actor, best known for his portrayal of Grand Moff Tarkin inStar Wars, but most beloved for his numerous roles in British horror films. Cushing is classy and versatile, and he looks the part, and I mean that in a way that when I imagine Scrooge in my head, I see Peter Cushing — all angular features and ice-blue eyes. He would’ve been amazing in the role, and I have no doubts that Cushing’s Scrooge would be the standard bearer for any actor playing the role that came after him.

by John Gholson

Cheap Web Hosting Plans

The Geek Beat: Man of (Impossible) Steel

Now, I’m not a big Superman fan, and I’ve read very few of his comic adventures. But like most kids, I really enjoyed the glory days of Richard Donner and Christopher Reeve, and I feel he’s a character worth bringing back for every generation. Every boy and girl should believe a man could fly — yet I don’t think a reboot is the answer … though I used to. One of my biggest complaints withSuperman Returns was that it catered to the Donner audience, and not to a new one. It went on the assumption that we all remembered the finer points of Gene Hackman and the Fortress of Solitude, and left out everyone else. It was as though Comic Book Guy from The Simpsons had directed it, and you can’t win an audience if you snub half of them.

Yet, I feel like Singer was onto something. He trusted his audience to know who Superman was, and I think that’s what Warner Bros should do again. I don’t think there’s a need to reboot the whole damn franchise, and go back to the Kent farm to discover just how special little Clark is. People know. Superman is a character who is embedded into our pop culture DNA. Why not just start from Metropolis, and launch straight into a rousing Superman story? If you want to get really fancy, you could play catch-up during the credits sequence like Watchmen did, but there’s no need to pander with yet another origin story.

I think there’s a terrible assumption that “Middle America” couldn’t possibly understand a Superman story like that, and that they’d be frantically trying to connect it to Superman Returns. I imagine quite a few would. But something Hollywood (and by extension, our cloistered online community) doesn’t understand is that “ordinary” people can get caught up pretty fast. They’re more likely to get confused if you start something over again. This whole “reboot” thing has absolutely no meaning for your average moviegoer. I’ve dropped that term in conversation quite a few times in my travels, and people just look confused and upset. But if you keep it simple — “There’s going to be a new Superman movie!” — I guarantee they’ll be excited. They will be very unlikely to dwell on Lois Lane’s new husband, or Superman Jr., and if they do, all the studio has to say is “This takes place before that” and people will understand. In fact, now that I write that, that’s a great idea. Just set it in a vague period before Returns, and trust your audience will understand it the way they did The Bourne Ultimatum.

Of course, that doesn’t solve the problem of how to make a really good Superman movie, or how to truly threaten him. My fannish wish would be to see Alan Moore’sSuperman: Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?, but it’s far too complex, with too many appearances by villains and characters unknown to a mainstream audience. However, I think there’s one very dark moment that could be enough to hinge a movie around. Two minor villains, Toyman and Prankster, kidnap Pete Ross, one of Clark’s childhood friends. Pete inadvertantly learned his pal’s super secret, and kept it his entire life. But Toyman and Prankster torture the information out of him, murder him, and expose Superman’s identity on national television.

I think that’s a little moment of horror that could work quite well in a Superman film. It would be relevant in this day and age of all-consuming media, and it exposes one of Superman’s few weaknesses, albeit on a social scale. It allows him to be hurt emotionally, allows him to be horrified at what humans will do to one another, and lets him feel guilt for being the cause of Ross’ death. It would be a good arc, and send our invincible hero into depths of self-doubt and depression. Then have something even worse happen, preferably at the hands of Brainiac. Alex Ross’Justice had a rather nice little plot where “supervillains” became good guys, mind-warping humanity for Braniac’s devious ends. Enslaving humanity always has to be the point of these things, after all, and it’s a threat audiences never get enough of.

But I digress. People are paid more than me to come up with a Superman film, and I certainly wouldn’t want to be the one who has to make it all come together. The point is that I think it’s very possible, and that Superman comics are filled with cliffhanger moments that keep his readers coming back again and again. I believe it’s easy to bring that to the big screen without getting too wrung out, and trying to reboot everything. Trust your audience. In the end, we want to believe a man can fly, and be so selfless that he patrols the skies for us. We don’t need to be told again and again who he is, we just need to know he’s out there.

by Elisabeth Rappe

Cheap Web Hosting Plans