RumorMonger »
Brian Grazer Explains the 'Nottingham' Change-Up
Filed under: Action, Drama, Romance, Universal, RumorMonger, Scripts, Newsstand, Remakes and Sequels
When we last heard from Sherwood Forest, there was a bit of confusion as to who exactly Russell Crowe was playing in Nottingham. Was he Robin Hood? Was he the Sheriff of Nottingham? Were they the same guy? Did they change it up, halfway through? Those who had read the initial script reported they were two different characters -- something that was suggested by hints of a "love triangle" between Robin, Nottingham, and Maid Marian.Well, MTV caught up with Brian Grazer, who set the record straight on all the character confusion ... well, kind of. "The two role confusion is that what Robin Hood does is he sees Nottingham in battle very early in the movie and Nottingham dies. And Robin Hood takes over the identity of Nottingham. That's how it plays out." Grazer also described the film as an "origin story" of the characters.
I'm really curious if "origin story" means the film is setting itself up as the "real story" behind the legends, or if this is an origin reinvention / franchise in the vein of Guy Ritchie's Sherlock Holmes? If it's the former (and it probably is), meh. I'm throughly sick of that trend, especially as the "true" stories end up even more inaccurate than the fantasy versions. But if it's the latter, and it meant a few medieval outings with Russell Crowe, well, that's would be pretty exciting. Dreamy, even.
All reports of "endlessly delayed" may also have been exaggerated -- Grazer also reports that they're waiting on a final rewrite from Brian Helgeland, and that he fully expects that the film will start shooting in March 2009. Huzzah!
Will 'Lost' End On The Big Screen?
Filed under: RumorMonger, Fandom, Newsstand
.jpg)
At the beginning of this past summer, I finally caved and decided to check out Lost on DVD. A friend of mine had gone on some crazy Lost binge, watching all four seasons in, like, a week, and afterward the dude was a little dizzy, dirty and distant. So, instead of going the crazy route, I spread the sucker out over five months and just finished up season four last week ... itching for more, of course. With season five debuting in January, and season four arriving on DVD this December 9, series writers Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse sat down for a roundtable discussion and answered questions about the show.
Collider has a great transcript, and I could spend hours chatting it up with you, but this is a movie blog and we're more comfortable sticking with things that may or may not end up on the big screen. Case in point: What about Lost? Sure, they've cut a deal to end the series in 2010, but will they surprise us with a finale in theaters? When asked this, Lindelof said, "No. At least not by us. We've always felt that the show should definitively end the same place it started... on television. To bring our characters to some sort of cliffhanger where the audience gets none of the answers that they really care about and then say, "Now give us ten bucks, buy some popcorn and we'll give you the rest!" would pretty much be the worst thing ever."
What do you think? Should Lost stick to the small screen, or would a theatrical finale be more fitting?
Keanu Reeves to Return for 'Speed 3'?
Filed under: Action, Casting, RumorMonger, Fandom, DIY/Filmmaking, Remakes and Sequels
I really loved the first Speed movie. You had Keanu before he became Keanu, and Bullock before she became Sandra Bullock -- it was simply a nice, refreshing on-screen duo featuring two actors we didn't quite know yet and a villain played by one we already loved. Speed 2: Electric Cruise Ship Boogaloo? Not so much. And even though the sequel wasn't nearly as successful as the first (partly because the story was absurd, and partly because Keanu was replaced by Jason Patric), folks still talked about a third installment in the series -- so much so that The Guardian even announced last year that Dennis Hopper had a role in it. Weird, I know, considering the ending of the first flick, but who knows what these Hollywood types have up their sleeves.
Which brings us to today and yet another Speed 3 rumor. This time, AICN has received a message from one of their sources that says a scriptment for the sequel is floating around and it reintroduces the Jack Traven character, played by Keanu Reeves. And yes, the studio would like to talk Reeves back into starring. No word on whether Bullock would play leading lady (what else does she have to do?), but something tells me folks would rather Keanu if they had a choice between the two, hence Speed 2: Keanu-less Water Park Nightmare.
What say you? Speed 3 with Keanu? You down for it? And did the film Crank already give us the best possible Speed 3 premise?
'Sherlock Holmes' Villain(s) Revealed!
Filed under: Action, Drama, RumorMonger, Fandom, DIY/Filmmaking
.jpg)
When Cinematical visited the set of Sherlock Holmes last month, we certainly wanted to learn a lot more about this much-anticipated film (which we did), but we also wanted to find out once and for all whether the classic Holmes villain Moriarty would make an appearance. Up until this point, Lord Blackwood (Mark Strong) was the only villain on record, and so far folks behind the scenes have managed to successfully dodge the big Moriarty question. That is, until now. Note: Watch for spoilers below ...
While we received a number of shady answers (followed by evil smirks) from the cast and crew regarding Moriarty during our set visit, IGN managed to get someone to talk: Mr. Mark Strong. At the British Independent Film Awards over the weekend, Strong said this about Moriarty's involvement: "Moriarty's in it ... but you don't really see him. I think he's there because if the franchise carries on, there's a possibility that he will appear in a larger guise. But for the purposes of this one and the detective narrative, I'm the guy that Sherlock's after, Lord Blackwood. And he's a cultist/Satanist lord who is the ultimate cad." So he's there, but you don't see him? Hmmm. I guess we'll take that as solid confirmation ... until we find out who's playing him (ahem, Russell Crowe?).
Did You Know 'The Transporter' Was Gay? Well, He Isn't Anymore
Filed under: Action, RumorMonger, Fandom, Comic/Superhero/Geek
Fans of the Transporter films aren't usually looking for a lot of subtlety and nuance, not unless those are codewords for "butt-kicking" and "car crashes." But Louis Leterrier, the whimsical Frenchman who directed the second film and co-directed the first one, said in 2005 that he had a subtext in mind for Jason Statham's title character: He was gay.Chris Lee writes at the Los Angeles Times' fanboy blog that three years ago, when Transporter 2 came out, well, so did Frank Martin. According to Lee, Leterrier pointed to the scene where Frank turns down a romantic advance from Amber Valletta by saying, "It's because of who I am." Leterrier said, "That's him coming out!"
"If you watch the movie and you know he's gay, it becomes so much more fun," Lee quotes Leterrier as saying in 2005. "It's so great -- the first gay action movie hero! ... Action fans in general are pretty homophobic. You see these tough guys who say, 'The Transporter, that's such a great movie!' If they only knew they're really cheering for a new kind of action hero."
Statham didn't pay much attention to his director's comments, telling Lee in 2005, "It's just Lou-Lou trying to be funny. Although he did say, 'In Part 2, you will become the gay icon.'" That part might have come true, as Statham's many shirtless scenes made him popular in certain quarters, even if the character himself wasn't overtly gay.
Stuff and Things: Some Post-Turkey 'Tron' Sequel Hatin'
Filed under: RumorMonger, Celebrities and Controversy, Fandom, Newsstand, Remakes and Sequels
.jpg)
You'd think there wouldn't be a ton of stuff to catch you post-Turkey blokes up with, but it's the exact opposite. So here's some stuff(ing) and things to skim over today:
-- Folks are going bonkers today over news in Production Weekly that the much-anticipated (and kinda secretive) Tron sequel has changed its title to TRZ in order to trick young kids into thinking MTV has adapted their now-retired TRL for the big screen. Okay, that's not the real reason ... but do we really need to know the real reason? TRZ? Here's the snippet of plot synopsis they provided: "After being transported into the surreal landscape of a mainframe computer to destroy an intruder, a programmer finds himself allied with the leader of a rebellion against a corrupt cyber-entity." According to Disney, an official title for the Tron sequel is not set yet.
-- George Miller finally went on the record and told a talk show in Sydney that he's officially off Justice League. He's done. That's it. Over. Dark Horizons says Miller thinks the film will be recast when (and if) it happens because "the studios seem to want bigger stars in their superhero movies now." We wonder why?
-- According to Shock, a source tells them Rob Zombie will indeed return to direct Halloween 2, the follow-up to his successful (at the box office) reboot of the franchise, titled Halloween. Additionally, the site claims Halloween 2 will begin shooting as early as this March.
-- Why do all the Nazi flicks come out during the holidays? And how do you sell them?
-- Jennifer Hudson's estranged brother-in-law has been arrested for the deaths of the actress/singer's mother, brother and nephew, according to CBS News.
After the jump: First looks at Whip It and Youth in Revolt, more on Chef and a very cool short film contest.
A 'Rome' Movie? Hail, Caesar!
Filed under: Action, Drama, Deals, RumorMonger, Scripts, Newsstand, Religious, War
Maybe all roads do lead to Rome. According to The Hollywood Reporter and creator Bruno Heller, there's actually talk of continuing the brilliant HBO series on the big screen to wrap up all the historical loose ends caused by the series' abrupt cancellation. (Something which HBO now thinks was a big mistake. Between that and passing over Preacher, they're rather low in my esteem right now.)Heller admits the talk is, at the moment, just talk. "It's moving along. It's not there until it is there. I would love to round that show off." Heller wouldn't discuss movie plot plans, but the next step for Rome was Augustus Caesar having to deal with a certain carpenter from Judea -- with a twist typical of the series.
Fans of the show will probably weep a little at Heller's unrealized plans -- Lucius Vorenus' off-camera fate wasn't as definite as we might have thought, and we would have gotten a whole season of Egyptian debauchery. "I discovered halfway through writing the second season the show was going to end," Heller said. "The second was going to end with death of Brutus. Third and fourth season would be set in Egypt. Fifth was going to be the rise of the messiah in Palestine. But because we got the heads-up that the second season would be it, I telescoped the third and fourth season into the second one, which accounts for the blazing speed we go through history near the end. There's certainly more than enough history to go around."
A Rome movie is probably nothing but a dream -- anything more than a whisper, and it will vanish, it is so fragile. But cancellation is no longer a death knell, and while they can't give me back the lost season of Antony and Cleopatra, I'm always up for more bread and circuses.
Plot Details Revealed for 'Beverly Hills Cop 4'
Filed under: Comedy, RumorMonger, Fandom, Scripts, Remakes and Sequels
I guess when two out of three films in a franchise are an absolute blast to watch, you kinda try to get behind the odds that a fourth installment will fall somewhere in the middle between awesome and please don't let me see that again ... ever. After watching Beverly Hills Cop 3, I almost filed a police report convinced the filmmakers had committed some sort of crime against humanity. Now, with the next one, you'd think folks would have learned from earlier mistakes. Well, the fact that Brett Ratner is directing hasn't exactly bolstered anticipation -- but maybe the script is good ...Speaking of, Latino Review managed to snag a draft of Beverly Hills Cop 4 (one they claim "the studio loves, but Eddie Murphy is not too keen on"), and they've slapped a C+ grade on it. Based on their description (which includes spoilers, so watch out), the flick looks to be a combination of the original Beverly Hills Cop and Hitch, with Axel Foley (Murphy) trying to figure out who killed one of his friends, all while helping his new, fat partner score with some girl he has a crush on. LR says it's a "pretty standard police corruption story", and it feels "like the writers took an Arnold Schwarzenegger script they had lying around and changed the details to make it a Beverly Hills Cop movie. There's no fun in it."
Good news is the script will probably change before a final product is shoveled into theaters. What do you think a fourth Beverly Hills Cop movie needs in order to be successful with fans of the series?
Is Buffy Slaying Her Way Back to the Big Screen?
Filed under: Sci-Fi & Fantasy, RumorMonger, Scripts, Remakes and Sequels
When Buffy the Vampire Slayer ended its run in 2003, it didn't just fade away. Sunnydale might have been obliterated, but the Joss Whedon universe was buzzing with the possibility of other spinoffs, television films, and big screen appearances. Over the last five years, that has become increasingly less likely, especially in the wake of the popular comic continuation. So I am sharing the following only in the interest of keeping up on rumors, not because I believe it.
According to Moviehole, the Herald-Sun Newspaper had a small blurb on Buffy, which said: "Rumours are circulating in Hollywood that Whedon has a feature-film script based on his hit TV series ready to roll as soon as a studio is prepared to commit." While it's entirely likely that he does have some Buffy scripts floating around, I'd be wonderfully surprised to hear that one is all ready. Besides his busyness with the new television show, there's the comics, and more specifically -- a storyline that has continued beyond the show.
Would Joss somehow pull Angel and LA out of hell and have Buffy round up the Scooby gang? The only scenario I can imagine would be Buffy bringing Angel and LA out of hell. It would be epic enough for the big screen, and be an endeavor that would bring back all of the cast (except Anya... boo hiss!). But that's just a dream, and while this rumor sounds swell and I could go for many more years of live-action Buffy, I ain't buyin' it. Are you?
Discuss: Should They Make an 'Incredible Hulk' Sequel?
Filed under: Action, Sci-Fi & Fantasy, Casting, RumorMonger, Celebrities and Controversy, Newsstand, Comic/Superhero/Geek, Remakes and Sequels
Poor Hulk! Batman, Iron Man, even Wolverine get more sequel press than he does. But late last week, Tim Blake Nelson revealed to MTV that he had signed for Hulk sequels, with every intention of taking the villainous center stage as The Leader. But like the rest of us, he has no idea whether or not they'll come to be, or whether or not Edward Norton will return. "It's all good, and I really do hope [the sequel] happens, for all sorts of reasons. But yeah, we did, we had a great time on Hulk together. I'm eager to do Hulk 2 if they make it ... I'm signed on to do Hulk 2 and 3 whether Edward's there or not, so it's not even up to me ... I certainly hope Edward is on the sequel - but that's up to Marvel and Edward."
Meanwhile, over in Avengers land, Robert Downey Jr. mentioned again that Hulk is going to show up in that crown jewel of superhero flicks. It's a strange place for the green giant to be in, because he's going forward, yet lost in a land of sequel rumor and leading man drama.
It's a question we've thrown out to Cinematical readers before, but with all this additional info, where do you want Hulk to go from here? Do you think that he should get his planned trilogy, then land with a thunderclap in The Avengers? Should they just leave well enough alone with The Incredible Hulk? And how do you feel about yet another Hulk recast?
My personal take is that if Marvel can't make up with Norton, they should just give up franchising Hulk, and just leave him off the big screen until The Avengers. Theoretically, you could have an all-CGI Hulk in that, thereby sidestepping the need to replace Norton. It would be clunky, though, and might "really really suck." Sigh. Why does there have to be so much drama in the world of Marvel? Earth's mightiest heroes should have a much easier time uniting than this.
Meanwhile, over in Avengers land, Robert Downey Jr. mentioned again that Hulk is going to show up in that crown jewel of superhero flicks. It's a strange place for the green giant to be in, because he's going forward, yet lost in a land of sequel rumor and leading man drama.
It's a question we've thrown out to Cinematical readers before, but with all this additional info, where do you want Hulk to go from here? Do you think that he should get his planned trilogy, then land with a thunderclap in The Avengers? Should they just leave well enough alone with The Incredible Hulk? And how do you feel about yet another Hulk recast?
My personal take is that if Marvel can't make up with Norton, they should just give up franchising Hulk, and just leave him off the big screen until The Avengers. Theoretically, you could have an all-CGI Hulk in that, thereby sidestepping the need to replace Norton. It would be clunky, though, and might "really really suck." Sigh. Why does there have to be so much drama in the world of Marvel? Earth's mightiest heroes should have a much easier time uniting than this.
