Channel: Movies
Mark channel Not-Safe-For-Work? cancel confirm NSFW Votes: (0 votes)
Are you the publisher? Claim or contact us about this channel.

The 7 Best And Worst TV Shows Based On Popular Movies


bob odenkirk fargo

More than 15 years after earning the Coen brothers an Oscar, Fargo is getting a reboot, this time on television. 

Early reviews of the pilot, which premieres tonight on FX, point to TV Fargo being an appropriate replacement for the dark, gritty, weirdly comic void left by True Detective and Breaking Bad.

The teasers for the show, along with a uniformly captivating cast that includes Martin Freeman, Billy Bob Thornton, and Saul Goodman Bob Odenkirk, suggest the same. But it's understandable if you find yourself leery about this new incarnation of the Coen classic.

The transition of source material from big-screen one-off to episodic television series has been done before to varying degrees of success, none of which meet the high bars set by the shows mentioned above. To understand where Fargo may exist in the greater TV landscape, let's look back on the good, the bad, and the ugly of film-to-TV adaptations.

Other shows based on your favorite movies >

The Good: "Friday Night Lights"

Movie premiere: 2004 

Show run: 2006-2011

Metacritic Rating: 70 (film), 78 (show)

Why it worked: This wasn't just a sports movie broken into 22 episodes. Friday Night Lights took advantage of the television format, using the stretch run of the season to develop characters and expand the Dillon, Texas universe. The focus was on the relationships, including arguably the most realistic and compelling TV marriage ever. Also, Coach Taylor is a god, a molder of men. You'll wish he was your dad. Clear eyes, full hearts, can't lose with this one.

The Good: "Buffy The Vampire Slayer"

Movie premiere: 1992

Show run: 1997-2003

Metacritic Rating: 48 (film), 80 (show)

Why it worked: To make something as preposterous sounding as "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" successful, it had to be handled with some level of wink-wink self aware humor, but also had to be treated with a care and vision that proved the people involved had totally bought in. No one was prepared to work that balance better than Joss Whedon, who wrote the original film and had even more creative control over the show. He was able to build an entire world that handled itself with just the right about of seriousness.

The Good: "M*A*S*H"

Movie premiere: 1970

Show run: 1972-1983

IMDb Rating: 7.7 (film), 8.5 (show)

Why it worked: For a show about the Korean War to last 11 seasons 20 years after the actual event, it had to have one hell of a cast, and M*A*S*H certainly did. The on-screen chemistry between the actors was so palpable, viewers felt as if they too were part of the military outfit. (It also helped that M*A*S*H existed in a time before cable, but for real, the show still holds up, as does Robert Altman's darkly hilarious film.)

Other "good" considerationsHighlander, The Outsiders, Soul Food

See the rest of the story at Business Insider

9 Big Questions About Summer's Blockbuster Movies


A Million Ways To Die In The West seth macfarlane charlize theron

The summer movie season is getting underway earlier than ever this year with Friday's release of Marvel's “Captain America:Winter Soldier,” and Fox's sequel to “Rio” the week after.

But the real blockbuster pile-up begins in May. Every week for four months, studios will release at least one movie — sometimes two or three — they expect to gross at least $100 million.

Some of them — sequels like “X-Men: Days of Future Past,” “How to Train Your Dragon 2” and “Transformers: Age of Extinction” — are guaranteed to make money. But there are plenty of franchise aspirants that could self-destruct. Think “After Earth” or “Lone Ranger” last summer.

Studios will look to Angelina Jolie, Channing Tatum and Seth MacFarlane to guide them through the sand traps. But none of them are sure bets, which makes this summer all the more interesting. Here are the nine biggest questions for Hollywood over the next few months.

Here's what we need to know before Summer movie season >

Will Michael Bay Deliver For Paramount?

Paramount has adopted a less is more approach for the summer, releasing just three movies. There is a wild card to this risk-averse strategy: Michael Bay.

He produced two of Paramount's three movies, “Transformers: Age of Extinction,” which he also directed, and “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles,” an extravagant reboot of the popular comic book.

Bay is a vital partner for Paramount given his stewardship of the “Transformers” franchise, which has grossed $2.67 billion worldwide at the box office. This latest battle of Decepticons and Autobots, in which Mark Wahlberg replaces Shia LaBeouf, will gross hundreds of millions (if not billions).

Yet for Paramount to escape this summer unscathed, it will need “Turtles” to work as well. With a budget north of $120 million, that is no guarantee.

Also read: Mark Wahlberg Boasts ‘Transformers Age of Extinction’ Will Be 2014's Biggest Hit

Bay, the excitable, talented alchemist of comedy and explosions will need to be something new — consistent.

Which Movie Will China Save?

Overeager journalists, bloggers and social media pontificators prematurely label movies flops all the time. Many buried “Noah” before it opened, just as most of Hollywood gave up on “World War Z” last summer.

Yet a funny thing happens with a lot of those “flops”: God, also known as the foreign market, intervenes.

Also read: China Box Office Hits $3.6 Billion in 2013 – Biggest Foreign Haul Ever

Take last summer's “Pacific Rim.” The movie grossed $101.8 million in the U.S., a paltry sum given its $190 million budget (and many suspect it cost a lot more). People labeled the movie a failure. Yet it saved itself from damnation by grossing $309 million overseas ($111.9 million in China alone). Will Legendary be making the sequel Guillermo Del Toro thought up? No. Was that movie a huge flop? No.

There are several candidates for overseas salvation this summer, in particular “Edge of Tomorrow” — Tom Cruise plays big overseas — and “Jupiter Ascending.” Speaking of “Jupiter Ascending”…

Can Seth MacFarlane Do It Again?

Seth MacFarlane built a television empire worth billions by blending sardonic wit with childish humor. Yet many doubted he could transition successfully into the movie business.

He silenced critics with “Ted,” a comedy about a talking, drinking, womanizing teddy bear that grossed $549 million at the box office in 2012. It simultaneously initiated the resurgence of Universal and established MacFarlane as a filmmaker.

See photos:49 Summer Movies on Our Radar: From ‘Amazing Spider-Man’ to Tina Fey's Next Comedy

Before suiting up for “Ted 2,” MacFarlane returns with “A Million Days to Die in the West,” a Western comedy produced by Media Rights Capital. Once again, he will face doubts.

We know MacFarlane can write and direct, but he also stars in this one, anthropomorphizing a voice viewers have heard for years. He has also selected a genre, the Western, which Hollywood shuns, ostensibly, because those movies don't make money.

Well, except when a singular talent like Quentin Tarantino makes one. MacFarlane is cut from a similar cloth.

Also read: The Brilliance of ‘Cosmos’ – Seth MacFarlane Uses His Power for Good

See the rest of the story at Business Insider

'Transcendence' Is Johnny Depp's Fourth Box-Office Bomb In A Row


johnny depp transcendence speaking

No amount of star power helped out Johnny Depp’s new movie “Transcendence” at the box office this weekend.

The sci-fi flick, about a scientist whose mind gets uploaded into an artificial intelligence as his life hangs in the balance, made just $11.2 million opening weekend.

It cost an estimated $100 million to make.

Analysts had the Warner Bros. film making closer to $20 million — still a weak number for a big-budget film. 

Worldwide, the film has made $28.6 million.

This is Depp’s fourth consecutive movie to tank opening weekend after “The Lone Ranger,” “Dark Shadows,” and “The Rum Diary.”

The problem isn’t Depp’s appeal just so much as the films themselves. 

Each one has been poorly reviewed — not because of Depp — but because of either the film’s script or its overall lackof focus.

If this was another “Pirates of the Caribbean” feature, it would have fared fine. Those films have worldwide appeal. The last one made more than $1 billion at theaters.

Like his previous few films, "Transcendence" was slammed with poor reviews prior to release and is currently sitting at 20% on Rotten Tomatoes.

One of the film’s problems was that it came from first-time director Wally Pfister— Christopher Nolan’s cinematographer in films including “The Dark Knight” trilogy and “Inception.” Though "Transcendence" is a visual marvel, the plot gets muddled with one too many open-ended questions about clones, cell regeneration, artificial intelligence, and anti-technology terrorists. 

If it focused on one or two ideas instead of trying to explore so many, it may have played out better.  

The other main problem with “Transcendence” is its waste of huge talent.

From the way the film was marketed, audiences were under the impression stars Morgan Freeman and Cillian Murphy (from other Christopher Nolan films) would have large roles.morgan freeman cillian murphy transcendenceHowever, that wasn’t the case. Freeman and Murphy’s roles felt more like glorified extended cameos who showed up here and there to offer a line here or there. 

Not even Depp, whose face covered ads for the film, was the real star of the film.transcendence posterInstead Rebecca Hall, who you may recognize from a recent role in “Iron Man 3,” was the real focus of the film as Depp’s scientist wife. Though a fine actress, she’s not as recognizable as the other talent and makes the big-budget film a tough sell to audiences who may not remember her from 2006’s “The Prestige” or 2010’s “The Town.” 

transcendence johnny deppAt the end of the day, no matter how great an actor Depp may be, and how visually stunning the film, if the script and story don’t work then the film’s not going to do well.

That’s what happened here.

SEE ALSO: Johnny Depp's new movie says technology will turn us into X-Men

Join the conversation about this story »

Bryan Singer Drops Out Of All Press For 'X-Men: Days Of Future Past'


Bryan Singer

In light of recent allegations in a widely publicized sexual abuse case against the director, Bryan Singer has dropped out of all press for X-Men: Days of Future Past. He also pulled out of a scheduled appearance at this weekend's WonderCon in Anaheim, where he was excited to promote the latest film in the long-standing Fox franchise.

Bryan Singer was accused this week of using drugs and alcohol to force a teenage boy to have sex with him in a case that stretches back to 1999. The director denies any wrongdoing, as his lawyer Martin Singer (no relation) claims the case is 'completely fabricated'.

Accuser Michael Egan claims the abuse took place in Hawaii during August and October of 1999. Bryan Singer himself claims to have an alibi, saying he was in Toronto at that time working on the first X-Men movie. He will soon file credit card bills and various other documents that prove he was in Canada at the time of the incident.

X-Men: Days of Future Past screenwriter and producer Simon Kinberg will be takingBryan Singer's place at WonderCon this weekend.

20th Century Fox did not comment on the matter, and it is unclear how this will affect Bryan Singer's future career, as he is in the middle of writing and pre-production work on X-Men: Apocalypse. He is reportedly directing the franchise sequel as well, but that could change as Michael Egan prepares to file more lawsuits on this matter in the coming weeks. Bryan Singer could be tied up with the lawsuit for a very longtime.

With a budget of $225 million, X-Men: Days of Future Past is the second biggest movie Fox has ever produced behind Avatar, and it is the biggest film of Bryan Singer's career. For the foreseeable future, everyone feels the best thing Bryan Singer is not talk.

X-Men: Days of Future Past comes to theaters May 23rd, 2014 and stars Jennifer LawrenceMichael FassbenderNicholas HoultPeter DinklageHugh Jackman,Evan PetersJames McAvoyEllen Page. The film is directed by Bryan Singer.

SEE ALSO: Singer Lawsuit Is Tied To Marc Collins-Rector, Infamous Child Abuser Of The Dot-Com Boom

Join the conversation about this story »

How 'Transcendence' Failed To Communicate A Real Possible Future To Mainstream Audiences


transcendence morgan freeman

In a misleading article on CNN.com this week, Americans were said to be “excited” and “upbeat” about the way technology will improve our lives in the future. The headline of the piece, though, claims it’s about Americans being “wary of futuristic science, tech.” The article reports the findings of a telephone survey that surprisingly wasn’t tied to the release of the movie Transcendence, which seems at first meant as a promotion of the real possibilities of artificial intelligence, mind uploading and nanotechnology.

Misleading in its own way, the movie begins with optimism about advances in A.I. research and then by the end has shown us the dangers of a self-aware omniscient computer that can create super soldiers, controlled via wifi and repaired via tiny, quick-acting robots. Audiences don’t seem to be walking away from the movie actually wary of this futuristic science and tech, though, because it plays out so far from believable that at many moments viewers are straight-up laughing at the way both the plot and science progress on screen.

But should the science of Transcendence be believed? And if so, should the movie have been more clear and genuine regarding the plausibility of what all occurs? 

Because the science involved is mostly still at speculative stages, it’s unknown what would in fact happen after a person’s brain was uploaded to a computer and then the Internet. It’s also unknown just how far nanobot capability will go once the technology is achieved on a foundational level. Theoretically, things could move at an astonishing pace once everything is set in motion. The exponential growth of technology so far is the big indicator that this will be the case.

However, even futurist Ray Kurzweil, who focuses on exponential growth for his Law of Accelerating Returns and his ideas on where technology is headed — ideas which clearly inspired much of Jack Paglen‘s script for Transcendence – spaces out over a few decades much of what we see in the movie as happening rather immediately and altogether within the span of only five years.

In his best-selling 2005 book “The Singularity is Near,” Kurzweil’s refined predictions for the future (begun in 1990′s “The Age of Intelligent Machines” and continued with 1999′s “The Age of Spiritual Machines”) estimate that medical-use nanobots will be here in the next decade, true A.I. will be achieved by 2029 and mind uploading will be possible in the 2030s, while what seems to be the sort of god-like A.I./human hybrid Johnny Depp‘s character becomes in Transcendence isn’t anticipated until sometime beyond 2045.

Of course, Transcendence is set sometime in the near future (possibly as far as the 2020s?) and winds up with a different chronological path due to special, imperative circumstances — a path that maybe, in that form, is realistic. Yet perhaps, as Matt Patches writes in a recommended piece at Nerve, it doesn’t and shouldn’t matter if it’s realistic, because it’s science fiction.

Day After Tomorrow

Well, science fiction can be outright fantasy and nightmare, but in some cases it ought to be in service to both the science and how that science affects human behavior and society and, in worst case scenarios, existence. Transcendence reminded me a lot of Roland Emmerich’s disaster movie The Day After Tomorrow, which was based on predictions regarding climate change, had legitimate advisers on the science involved and to a degree was reasonable in its overall projections of what could happen as a result of global warming. The only problem is that the movie depicts the progression way too fast, making it appear more implausible, to the point that it’s laughable.

For years I’ve wondered if The Day After Tomorrow wound up being so much of a joke that it did more damage for the climate change issue than good, even though Emmerich is a huge advocate for awareness about that issue.

Paglen, whose wife is a computer scientist who provided a lot of expertise on the movie’s subject matter, doesn’t seem to be as passionate about the pro or con of technology, even if he winds up painting its progress darkly. He’s more interested in just asking, “What if?” than in making the audience concerned about the science. Yet he makes a case for why we should be concerned anyway, through his plotting, even if he blows that case by similarly going too rapid with the speed of technological advancement.

The problem of speedy science doesn’t just affect movies dealing in important ideas like climate change and the reality of artificial intelligence. Another that comes to mind as being like The Day After Tomorrow and Transcendence is Ivan Reitman’s Evolution. That sci-fi comedy deals with the evolution of creatures and plant life from a single extraterrestrial organism, and this evolution occurs over days rather than millions of years, which makes it seem pretty silly.

But it’s intended to be a humorous story, and even if it weren’t, Evolution is still recognizable as more fantastic than scientific. It has no effect on the audience’s acceptance of evolution as a scientific theory, in part because the scenario is based in a chance accident of a very particular meteor hitting Earth, not something impossible but also not something expected with reasonable prognosis. Audiences may have found it all too ridiculous even for a fantastical comedy, however, due to that fast-paced scenario.

Dawn of the planet of the apesOne movie that works a lot better than the others is Rupert Wyatt’s Rise of the Planet of the Apes. It’s a relatively quick story, time-wise, from the introduction of a drug that increases intelligence to a chimpanzee inheriting that drug’s effects leading a revolution of hominid animals and subsequent viral extermination of the human race. Those are comparatively simple and few steps, though, especially compared to the scientific repercussion pile-ons of The Day After Tomorrow and Transcendence, and Wyatt paces the movie to give the feeling like the progression of those steps is not too quick.

Mainstream audiences aren’t necessarily not smart enough to comprehend sci-fi scenarios that progress more rapidly, but it’s understandable that they might prefer stories that take their time with such ideas. Imagine if the Terminator movies were condensed into one installment and that the time that lapsed over the course of the plot was fairly brief. It wouldn’t work nearly as well. Some stuff needs to just be hinted at or very briefly explained as background and back story.

Most sci-fi movies about technological advancements fortunately avoid following the stages of the advancement. It’s better, and easier on the audience, to jump into a futuristic plot involving robots or time travel instead of watching the genesis of the tech and how its progress unfolds (especially if the real science is only theoretical). If we do see stages, it’s good if there’s a clear indication of time passed, as in how it’s communicated that Doc Brown first got the idea for the flux capacitor in 1955 and then didn’t make it a reality for 30 years.

There’s definitely significant time passing in Transcendence, mainly between the time that Depp’s character’s mind is uploaded and the construction and operation of an enormous facility housing the character’s servers and his scientific research and invention. Maybe a couple years go by. That’s just not enough for something with a broader outline in real life, especially when that something is not as plain and familiar a concept as a spaceship or a time machine or even a robo-cop.

Any concepts intended to be a possible reality, though, still needs to be acceptable in addition to plausible. Technological progress can happen faster and faster, but it can’t really be introduced faster than people are able or willing to embrace. That is true for real life and the movies. CNN.com’s article notes that most people are not currently okay with computer implants or 3D printers that fix body parts, similar to what we see in Transcendence. In the movie, a lot of characters are also not okay with where the tech goes so quickly, and as is to be expected with Hollywood, what’s actually merely debates about tech in real life winds up being a physical, action-packed battle between the two sides.

Gradual progression of science and technology allows people to get used to the ideas, often without realizing they’re even getting used to new ideas. If what happens in Transcendence does come about in the next 30-40 years, we may slowly adapt to steps in that direction along the way. Similarly, if the movie had paced its events more slowly, more people would be buying the plot. Whether then they’d be excited or fearful of what’s to come would be up to them.

SEE ALSO: 'Transcendence' Is Johnny Depp's Fourth Box-Office Bomb In A Row

Join the conversation about this story »

Low-Budget Religious Movie ‘Heaven Is For Real’ Crushed It At The Box Office


heaven is for real

While Johnny Depp's latest movie "Transcendence" bombed this weekend, faith-based film “Heaven is for Real” soared, scoring $21.5 million upon opening. 

Based on the best-selling book of the same name by Todd Burpo and Lynn Vincent, the film follows the son of a pastor who claims to have been to heaven and back during surgery. 

The Tri-Star movie, which cost an estimated $12 million, came in third at the box office this weekend, narrowly losing out to "Captain America 2" ($26.6 million) and "Rio 2" ($22.5 million). The religious picture undoubtedly had a nice bump debuting over Easter weekend.

It’s the latest in a series of bible-based movies to perform exceedingly well at theaters since the end of February.

religious movies at theaters

The next large-scale faith-based movie will be Ridley Scott's "Exodus" this Christmas featuring Christian Bale as Moses.

SEE ALSO: "Transcendence" is Johnny Depp's fourth box-office bomb in a row

Join the conversation about this story »

'Avengers' Director Joss Whedon Releases His New Movie On Venmo For $5


joss whedonJoss Whedon will rent “In Your Eyes,” a movie he wrote and executive produced, directly from the movie's website, joining the growing list of filmmakers who have experimented with self-distribution.

Whedon announced these plans in a video message displayed after the premiere of the movie Sunday night at the Tribeca Film Festival. He was not able to attend since he is in production on the sequel to “The Avengers.”

In the message, Whedon said that the Tribeca premiere was “not just the world premiere, but also its international release date.”

Brin Hill directed “In Your Eyes,” which stars Zoe Kazan and Michael Stahl-David as Rebecca and Dylan, a bored wife and charismatic ex-con who share an inexplicable connection.

It is the second movie produced by Bellwether Pictures, the production company Whedon founded with his wife Kai Cole to support micro-budget movies. Bellwether's first film was “Much Ado About Nothing,” Whedon's adaptation of the Shakespeare play.

Also read: ‘Revolution’ Boss Says Season 2 Influenced by ‘Joss Whedon School of Showrunning’

The movie is available for a 72-hour rental $5 via Vimeo's video player, which is embedded into the movie's site. At the Q&A that followed the Tribeca screening, producer Michael Roiff said it was also available on every site that rents films, and that it had been translated into five languages.

Self-distribution holds promise for filmmakers like Whedon, who has amassed a passionate following with hit TV shows and movies such as “Buffy the Vampire Slayer,” “Firefly,” “Cabin in the Woods” and “The Avengers.”

“Because Joss has such a connection with his fans we figured this was an opportunity to try something we couldn't with other films,” Roiff told TheWrap. “The whole conversation that led tot his was ‘what's the craziest thing we can do? What can we say in the question and answer that would be really different?'”

During that Q&A, Roiff added, “From the get-go, we always wanted to do something different with it. We said, ‘Screw it — we made it for the audience, and we're taking it straight to them.”

Creative types of all kinds have opted to sell movies, TV shows, music and concert specials on their own, taking greater control over the dissemination of their artistic work – and its commercial upside. Technological innovations have made this easier, and the success of comedian Louis C.K. (among others) has inspired others to try it out.

Also read: Vimeo Spending $10M to Convince Filmmakers to Sell Their Movies on Vimeo

Self-distribution has a particular appeal to independent filmmakers, who grow tired of paltry offers from independent distribution companies. Whedon and Cole founded Bellwether in part to make movies outside the studio system.

Vimeo is one of several companies that have stepped in to help filmmakers like Whedon, offering a product called Vimeo On Demand. Filmmakers can either sell the movie from Vimeo's site, or, as in this case, sell it from their own site via Vimeo's player. Vimeo enabled in-player purchases earlier this year.

“Joss has a huge fan base, and empowering filmmakers with fan bases like that to interact directly with audiences is a big part of why we did the embedded transaction player,” Greg Clayman, Vimeo's general manager of audience networks, told TheWrap.

Also read: ‘Avengers: Age of Ultron’ First Look: What Joss Whedon Plans for Quicksilver, Scarlet Witch (Photos)

Vimeo appeals to filmmakers thanks to its high-quality player, which filmmakers already use to share their work. The company has been looking for films with pedigree and profile to help spread the gospel about its service and its embeddable player. Whedon is a valuable partner in that regard.

“I talked with a bunch of other companies, and I didn't realize Vimeo was capable of doing this,” Roiff said. “It was the logical choice; Vimeo is what we use to share between ourselves.”

“In Your Eyes” was well-received by the Tribeca audience. The film is part long-distance love story, part comedy and part supernatural drama in the vein of “The Lake House.” While Kazan is as appealing as ever, and she and Stahl-David have palpable chemistry even though they are almost never onscreen together, the film is more likely a cult item than a strong commercial prospect.

Roiff said at the screening that the $5 rental will be available “for the foreseeable future,” and that the filmmakers were willing to explore additional distribution options if they became available.

Here's the video message from Whedon delivered at Tribeca:

SEE ALSO: Bryan Singer Drops Out Of All Press For 'X-Men: Days Of Future Past'

Join the conversation about this story »

'Dune' Franchise Subverted By David Lynch To Make Sure A Sequel Was Impossible


Dune film

Anyone who knows David Lynch’s work is familiar with his penchant for messing with the audience. One only has to look at how he ended his popular series Twin Peaks, or pretty much any part of the mind-bending Eraserhead, to realize this.

Even though in the early 1980s, Lynch had been courted as a potential director for some major films (including Return of the Jedi… wouldn’t you have liked to see the Ewoks in that version?), he had his big studio break with the adaptation of Frank Herbert’s Dune. While it was a commercial and critical failure, Dune also represents Lynch’s subversive filmmaking nature, more than some people even realize.

At the time, Hollywood was looking for the next Star Wars, much like how they are furiously searching for the next Hunger Games now with films like Divergent and The Maze RunnerDune had been in development since the early 1970s, and it finally got off the ground with Lynch at the helm.

Lynch was a bold choice for the film, considering he was handed a massive potential franchise when he was known for more intimate and often obscure and surreal personal films. Ultimately, Lynch made a film that ensured a sequel was impossible, and that was a brilliant though almost career-ending move.

The easy answer to why there was no Dune sequel is its box office performance. During production, the budget ballooned to $42m, which might not seem like a lot in today’s dollars, but it was unheard of 30 years ago.

To put it in perspective, in 1984 dollars, only 15 movies even made more the $42m domestically, and only five of those (Beverly Hills CopGhostbustersIndiana Jones and the Temple of DoomGremlins, and The Karate Kid) made more than the $85m or so would be needed to just break even at the box office. For further perspective, Ghostbusters had a budget of only $30 m, and Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom had a budget of just $28m.

It wasn’t just the box office. A Dune sequel was doomed before the film was even released, and it hinged on the very ending of the film.

[Please note that several spoilers for both the book Dune and Lynch’s movie follow, so if you want to quickly read the 412-page novel and watch the 137-minute film first, now’s your chance.]

david lynchAt the end of Dune, Paul Atreidis (Kyle MacLachlan) defeats House Harkonnen and ascends to the throne as the Emperor of the Known Universe. Like the book, he plans to transfer power to his adopted home of Arrakis, fulfilling the Fremen prophecy of the Kwisatz Haderach, a superbeing messiah. As proof that he is the Kwisatz Haderach, Paul uses his psychic super powers to cause the skies to open up, and it rains on Arrakis for the first time ever.

This was dramatic, sure, and it certainly seemed a miracle that a Christ-like figure might perform. However, this would be equivalent of the Gospels ending with Jesus walking out of the tomb and laying waste to civilization by setting Jerusalem on fire.

Because the Arrakis was a desert planet on which it never rained, its life forms – in particular the massive sand worms – had evolved in a completely arid environment. Water was poisonous to them. In fact, a sand worm could easily drown in a small amount of water. A deluge like the one we see at the end of the movie would kill all the sand worms on Arrakis.

When those sand worms drown, they would secrete the Water of Life, which has hallucinogenic and mystical powers. Sure, the Water of Life has the ability to transform some women into psychic “witches” known as the Bene Gesserit sisterhood. However, most people (including all the men in this patriarchal society) would die a horrible, horrible death. So, instead of having Arrakis as the hub of all political power in the Known Universe, the Dune sequel would present a soggy desert environment with dead sand worms everywhere covered in hallucinogenic goo that was poisonous to only a chosen few.

With the sand worms gone, the entire political and social system of the Known Universe would collapse. The Spice Melange – which is vital to the Bene Gesserits, the Spacing Guild’s political power, interplanetary commerce, and all forms of space travel – is only produced by the sand worms of Arrakis. With the sand worms gone, the Spice would no longer be made.

Sure, massive Spice reserves would exist throughout the galaxy, but the value of those would skyrocket, and it would no longer be a sustained, renewable resource that could be used in a casual manner.

Space travel would no longer be readily available because the Guild certainly wouldn’t be used to fold space for frivolous missions. So if you were vacationing on planet Caladan (home of House Atreides) or taking a depressing work trip to Giedi Prime (home of House Harkonnen), tough beans. You’d be stuck there. Presumably forever.

In the opening scene of the film, a secret report from the Guild declares, “The Spice must flow.”

At the end of Dune, Paul Atreidis ensures that the Spice does not flow at all. He doesn’t seize control of Spice production or distribution. He, makes sure the Spice flow stops. Permanently.

In the book, Paul ascends to the throne as the leader of Arrakis, allowing him and the Fremen to control the Spice and consequently control the economy and politics of the known universe. In Lynch’s film, Paul uses his Kwisatz Haderach super powers to pretty much destroy the Spice and send the known universe back to the dark ages.

I’m not saying that there couldn’t be a sequel to David Lynch’s Dune at all, but it would look nothing like the world Frank Herbert spent years developing. In the end, it might have resembled The Road Warrior or other post-apocalyptic science fiction film from the 80s. It certainly would not have been a grand continuation to a Star Wars-like saga that Universal was hoping for.

On the plus side, that sequel probably would not have cost $42M to make.

Love it or hate it, Dune is David Lynch’s masterpiece because it didn’t just mess with the audience, it messed with the entire studio system and their newly-found love for sequels in the 80s. Part of me believes that Lynch torpedoed any hope of a sequel on purpose, just to mess with the system.

If he did, it was a work of genius.

SEE ALSO: The Evolution Of Artificial Intelligence In Movies Since The 1920s

Join the conversation about this story »

Glenn Beck Bought A Movie Studio And Is Becoming A Filmmaker


Glenn Beck

Glenn Beck is going Hollywood.

Nearly three years after leaving Fox News, the controversial conservative radio host and media entrepreneur is ramping up a film division at Mercury Radio Arts, the parent company of his popular radio show and digital media operation TheBlaze.

Beck, 50, tells THR he has been refurbishing The Studios at Las Colinas, a 72,000-square-foot facility in Irving, Texas, where such films as JFK and RoboCop and TV shows including Prison Break and Walker, Texas Ranger have been shot. "We're getting it ready for some big plans," he says of the property, which he purchased in June.

Beck says he is developing three original stories as theatrical films -- one set in ancient history, one in modern history and a third he considers "faith-based" -- and has optioned several other ideas, some of which could be adapted into VOD features. He adds that he has purchased rights to his 2008 best-seller The Christmas Sweater back from Sony and will turn the story into a movie for television or theatrical release.

PHOTOS: Movies That Became TV Shows

The Christmas Sweater is a semi-fictionalized recounting of a 12-year-old Beck celebrating his last Christmas with his mother before she died. He says his later real-life problems with drugs and alcohol (he's been sober since 1994) can be traced back to that Christmas.

"The meaning of The Christmas Sweater is that there are second chances," says Beck. "It is based not only on my childhood but a dream that I had as an adult after I sobered up."

Beck notes it's too early to specify budgets or potential financing partnerships, though he probably has leverage to attract interested parties, considering TheBlaze lands an estimated $40 million in revenue annually and he earns $20 million a year hosting the radio show, according to sources familiar with his business. He also declined to identify the Hollywood moviemaking talent he has hired so far.

"I bought a movie studio for a reason," he says. "I have every intent of finding great artists who will tell great stories that aren't typical. Everybody thinks they know who I am because of my stint on Fox -- that was two years of my life. I'm much more into culture than I am into politics, and that's where I intend on making my stand."

STORY: Glenn Beck Watches 'Noah,' Continues to Bash the Movie -- 'It Is Awful'

Beck says he has great respect for "artists who risk big," citing filmmakers Baz Luhrmann and even Darren Aronofsky as examples (despite having called Noah a "Babylonian chainsaw massacre" on his radio show). "Hollywood is missing this moment to reconnect with the American people because they don't speak the language," he says. "Some of it is out of spite -- they might not like people of faith."

Beck, though, says he isn't interested in making movies that preach and cites DivergentLone Survivor,Moulin Rouge!, 2010's True Grit, The Magnificent Seven and The Princess Bride as inspirations, along with The Lego Movie, which he calls "tremendous storytelling and great for the whole family, without the double meanings and adult humor that I just hate. It was truly brilliant. I took everyone on my staff one afternoon to see it."

He also loves Frank Capra's 1941 political dramedy Meet John Doe, calling it a timely story. "The message of that film is: Help each other and just be decent," says Beck. "We're beginning to agree that Republicans and Democrats suck -- they've built this machine to grind people into the ground. I hate this stuff. I hate politics. I hate politicians and I feel like I'm wasting my life. Don't we all know what's happening? George W. Bush was taking us down a road, and Barack Obama is taking us down that same road. What difference does it make? I don't want to waste my life anymore."

SEE ALSO: Low-Budget Religious Movie ‘Heaven Is For Real’ Crushed It At The Box Office

Join the conversation about this story »

Quentin Tarantino Is Completely Changing His New Movie After The Script Leaked Online


Quentin Tarantino

It looks like Quentin Tarantino is moving forward with his next film "The Hateful Eight" after all. 

While performing a "one-night only" live reading of the script in Los Angeles, Tarantino said he was working on a second draft to the film, according to Variety.

The reading, which cost audience members $150-$200 to attend, included Samuel L. Jackson, Kurt Russell, Amber Tamblyn, Tim Roth, and Bruce Dern.

Back in January, Tarantino scrapped production on the film after he found out the script he gave to six people leaked online.

That resulted in a lawsuit with Gawker after the site published an article directing readers to a link to download a PDF of the script.

"The Hateful Eight" was set to be another Western, following the director's work on Oscar-nominated "Django Unchained."

Instead, Tarantino told Deadline he was going to publish the work as a book and then consider revisiting the idea on film in about five years. 

According to Tarantino, the leaked version of the script, which resulted in the entire cast dying at the film's end, will serve as a first draft. The new version of the film, set in Wyoming a few years after the Civil War, will include a different ending that may be "removed or rewritten altogether."

SEE ALSO: "Transcendence" is Johnny Depp's fourth box-office bomb in a row

Join the conversation about this story »

Bill de Blasio's Open Letter Begging Hollywood To Keep Its $7.1 Billion Business In NYC


jon stewart bill de blasio

As acting debuts go, mine went pretty smoothly. It was on The Good Wife, one of my favorite shows, and I was playing an over-the-top version of myself.

In between takes -- and I'm proud to note that I only needed three -- I marveled at the crew as they bustled around me, doing a hundred different things in unison. From the camera crew to the makeup artists to the caterer, so many skilled professionals contributed to my brief moment in the spotlight.

My peek behind the scenes reinforced something I've always believed: The TV and film industry is central not just to New York's cultural vitality, but to our economic strength as well.

The numbers are truly astounding: Every year, an average of 200 films are shot in New York City. For the 2013-14 TV season, 29 series are based here, and that's not counting the late-night shows, talk shows, reality series and news programs. All told, some 130,000 New Yorkers earn their living by working behind the scenes in film and TV production.

This is an especially remarkable achievement given where we were 10 years ago. Since 2004, Hollywood's financial imprint on our city has grown from $5 billion to $7.1 billion. My administration will maintain the policies and practices that spurred this expansion while strategically investing in new projects to grow and diversify the industry. For instance, we will:

Create a Top-Flight Film and Digital Media Education Hub in Brooklyn.
The City is working with Carnegie Mellon University and Brooklyn College to develop cutting-edge education opportunities at the historic Brooklyn Navy Yard. Carnegie Mellon is teaming up with Steiner Studios to create a graduate program that will fuse coursework in the humanities and sciences with the latest digital technology. Brooklyn College is in the process of developing a Graduate School of Cinema that will focus on film, post production and animation.

Train Top-Notch Crew Through the "Made in NY" Production Assistant Training Program.
New York City's famous energy, which has played a lead role in so many of our favorite movies and TV shows, has everything to do with our diversity. The "Made in NY" training program provides unemployed, low-income New Yorkers with training and job opportunities as production assistants -- so the scene behind the camera is just as diverse as the one in front of it.

STORY: L.A. Mayor Urges CBS To Move the 'Late Show' Out West

Showcase the Wide Variety of Locations in All Five Boroughs.
From Do the Right Thing (Brooklyn) to Coming to America (Queens) to The Godfather (Staten Island) to A Bronx Tale (take a guess), so many classic New York movie scenes have been shot throughout the boroughs. We will work with producers and local communities to build on this rich tradition and highlight the locations that make New York City unique.

Our vision is long-range and wide-focus. We're thrilled that The Tonight Show is back where it belongs, in Rockefeller Center, and we want to make sure the next big thing starts here -- and stays here. In New York City, the TV and film industry has a true partner, not to mention a mayor who will always be slightly in awe of the work you do.



Elected with the support of celebrities including Susan SarandonChris NothCynthia Nixon,Lee Daniels and Harry Belafonte, New York City's new Democratic mayor took office Jan. 1 and has slowly begun to engage with the entertainment community.

FEB. 3: Visits Jon Stewart's The Daily Show on Comedy Central and jokes he plans to send a plague of locusts to New York's ritzy Upper East Side, whose residents complained of slow snow removal.

FEB. 24: Drops by the Today show and makes up with weatherman Al Roker, who had slammed him for not closing the schools in advance of one of the winter's biggest storms, then joins the rest of the cast for a ribbon-cutting that opens the show's new plaza at Rockefeller Center.

MARCH 8: Having promised to shut down Central Park's horse-drawn carriage rides, he refuses an offer by Liam Neeson to tour the horses' stables to see that they are treated humanely. "He should have manned up and come," the actor says.

MARCH 22: Appears at New York's annual $750-a-plate Inner City charity dinner, where he joins in skits with Nixon and Steve Buscemi.

APRIL 8: Reveals that, upon learning of David Letterman's planned retirement, he called CBS'Les Moonves to urge him to keep The Late Show in New York.

APRIL 17: de Blasio chooses Cynthia Lopez as New York City's new film commissioner, as The Hollywood Reporter first revealed.

SEE ALSO: Bill de Blasio Set To Make Acting Debut

Join the conversation about this story »

13 Awesome Androids, Cyborgs, And Robots In Film


r2d2 star warsEveryone loves lists and movies. I love mechanical life forms too.

So I’ve rolled all three into one with a little engineering spin.

This list is by no means comprehensive — it’s simply thirteen of my favourite androids, cyborgs, and robots.

Blinky tried to help an unhappy boy.

"BlinkyTM" is a short film about a boy, Alex (Max Records), and his robot.

Blinky doesn’t go on adventures, he’s just a toy meant to placate Alex while his parents fight.

Blinky isn’t what most people would call an interesting character, but what he illustrates in this short film is enough to make feuding parents think twice about how they treat their kids. Alex ultimately resents his robot companion since he doesn’t solve the underlying unhappiness he feels as a result of his parents decaying relationship.

Alex and his parents pay for their mistakes when a combination of robot abuse and a short circuit turn Blinky into… well… you’ll just have to watch the film.

Blinky™ from Ruairi Robinson on Vimeo.

Johnny Five strives for acceptance in "Short Circuit."

"Short Circuit" comes out of the 1980′s golden era of off-the-wall yet watchable science fiction comedies. The technology is laughably campy by today’s standards; Johnny Five’s clumsy arms and binocular eyes remind of us of a time when CDs were a hip new thing and Chrysler’s K Cars were an acceptable form of transportation. From a robotics-engineering standpoint he’s about 30 years too early to even exist. Only now are robots smart enough to avoid trampling small children.

Johnny Five strives for acceptance and acknowledgement. He is largely misunderstood and unable to properly communicate. If not for his funky engineering design and oddball personality, he might have been just another Hollywood character trying to fit in.

Bishop demonstrates that not all androids are the same.

Bishop (Lance Henriksen) isn’t the first android in the "Alien" franchise, but he’s far and away the best.

His large contributions to the film as the level-headed Bishop go a long way towards teaching Ripley (Sigourney Weaver) that not all androids are the same, righting the wrongs of android Science Officer Ash from the first film.

No film in the franchise adequately explains how the androids function, but moviegoers are treated to a hybrid of machine and organic guts whenever they are inevitably maimed or impaled by an alien.

See the rest of the story at Business Insider

'Fast & Furious 7' Is Using New Technology To Replace Paul Walker With His Brothers


paul walker brother

Universal Studios announced last week via Facebook that Paul Walker's brothers, Caleb and Cody, would be filling in missing "Fast & Furious 7" scenes in the late actor's last movie role.

"We have resumed shooting and now welcome Paul’s brothers, Caleb and Cody, into our FAST family," read part of the statement. "Caleb and Cody are helping us complete some remaining action for their brother and fill in small gaps left in production. Having them on set has made us all feel that Paul is with us too."

But how exactly is the film using Walker's brothers to replace him?

'The production team for 'FF7' will try something they have never done before ... merging archival audio of Walker's voice with his brothers' voices to fill in some gaps in the movie," sources close to the the Walker family explained to TMZ. "It will take both brothers, Caleb and Cody, to get everything to match up. Our sources say the production team tested the voice of each brother and learned that certain words sound better coming from one brother, and different ones from the other ... so they will combine them to help make the dialogue work."

And it looks like the brothers are already hard at work. The Fast7Official Instagram account posted a photo today of Caleb and Cody on set with co-star Vin Diesel, writing in the caption that "The resemblance is big!"

Vin Diesel fast and furious 7 instagram paul walker brothers cody caleb

SEE ALSO: 13 Actors Who Were Brought Back To Life With Special Effects In Movies

Join the conversation about this story »

4 Movie Plots That Never Would Have Happened With Modern Technology


Thanks to CGI, we get to watch Sandra Bullock spin frantically in spaceSam Neil roam with dinosaurs and Kate and Leo prove declare their love on a majestically sinking ship. But while technological advances have opened visual doors for directors, it’s also served up a fresh set of narrative challenges. Movie plots can require a good dash of mystery, isolation and/or serendipity to get things rolling, and that's a hard thing to realistically convey in the age of the iPhone.

The horror genre been most affected, which is why scary movies now often include at least one disjointed scene of a characters saying a variation of the phrase "looks like we've lost cell service!" before the slaughtering begins. (Romantic films have also taken a significant blow — nothing kills serendipity or the romance of a missed connections like Facebook.)

In that vein, here's a look at classic films that would have been, if not entirely destroyed, dramatically altered or rendered wildly implausible by modern technology.

Office space larger

1. The movie: "Office Space"

The culprit: The cloud

Mike Judge may be currently satirizing all things Silicon Valley, but back in 1999, he was busy satirizing daily life at a typical 1990's software company with the cult classic Office Space.

Related: Mixed Blessings: 4 Ways Computers Forever Changed How We Work

Peter Gibbons (Ron Livingston) leads a pack of dissatisfied, bored, perpetually mistreated programmers working at the generic software company Initech.

They decide to stick it to the man nerd style by infecting the company's accounting system with a computer virus designed to skim fractions of pennies from the company every time it completes a transaction, with the intention of keeping the slow but steadily growing pot for themselves. (They also beat the shit out of their work printer).

Unfortunately, a misplaced decimal point causes the virus to steal thousands of dollars over a single weekend, a clearly noticeable sum. When Gibbons and co. show up at Initech's offices on Monday to face their fate, however, they find it's helpfully been set on fire by another disgruntled employee (Stephen Root), incinerating all incriminating evidence.

Why this wouldn't work today: All that incriminating evidence? As Judge's current characters on HBO's Silicon Valley could mutter at you, destroying evidence is no longer as simple as burning down a building. Two words: The cloud.

You've Got Mail2. The movie: "You've Got Mail"

The culprit: Online dating (see also: Facebook)

A Nora Ephron-directed romcom classic, You've Got Mail (1998) chronicles two New Yorkers falling in love via email.

Meg Ryan plays Kathleen Kelly (screen name: "Shopgirl"), the owner of The Shop Around the Corner, an independent children's bookstore, and Tom Hanks plays Joe Fox (screen name: "NY152"), owner of a big bad chain bookstore moving into the neighborhood (another reason this movie couldn't exist today) that's putting Kelly's store out of business.

Related: Spinning Viral Stars Into One-Man Empires: The Rise of YouTube's Multi-Channel Networks

The two exchange a series of increasingly personal emails, all without revealing their true identities. Meanwhile, they've unwittingly met in IRL ("in real life") at a publishing party, exchanging insults over caviar. (Is it OK to eat the caviar if it’s meant as a garnish?)

Eventually, via email, the pair decides to go on an actual date; Kathleen will be waiting with a red rose, but when Joe spots her and realizes “Shopgirl” = Kathleen Kennedy, he confronts her as himself (not revealing that he is actually "NY152"), leading to much romantic confusion until the big reveal.

Why this wouldn't work today: This is simply not how people behave on the internet anymore. You don't met strangers on a chat-room, and even if you did, you certainly wouldn't agree to go on a date with him or her without doing some Google-stalking, identity-verifying to ensure you don't get 'Catfish'ed or murdered.

Nowadays, "Shopgirl" and "NY152" could maybe meet on Match.com (book lovers both, they'd have a high compatibility score), but that makes for a far less interesting movie (See: He's Just Not That Into You). And, depending on your persuasion, sadly/happily the AOL "you've got mail" message is a thing of the distant past.

before sunrise

3. The movie: "Before Sunrise" and "Before Sunset"

The culprit: Facebook

In Richard Linklater's 1995 cult classic Before Sunrise, Jesse (Ethan Hawke), a young American and Céline (Julie Delpy), a French student, serendipitously meet on a train and disembark in Vienna, where they spend one night together exploring the city, falling in love and, implicitly, sleeping together before Jesse's plane leaves early the next morning for the States.

The movie ends with the couple saying farewell at a train station, deciding not to exchange numbers, but vowing to meet at the exact spot in six months' time.

Related: 'Her' Got Us Thinking. Can You Love — Like, Really Love — Your Technology?

In Linklater's next film in the trilogy (Before Sunset, 2004) we learn that while Jesse showed up, Céline didn't (she wanted to! It's just that her grandmother died – her funeral was the same day), and so the two don't see each other again until they reconnect nine years later Paris, by which point Jesse is unhappily married and Céline is in a serious relationship.

Although they're still clearly meant for each other, both have grown-up responsibilities now (Jesse has a son!) and are less naïve about connection, romance etc. The movie ends on a brilliantly ambiguous note — will Jesse stay in Paris with Céline or go home to his wife? (For the answer to that question, check out the third installment of the trilogy, Before Midnight).

Why this wouldn't work today: It's a good thing Facebook wasn't around in 1995, because it would have been one giant trilogy-killer. Even though Jesse, as a young man, presents himself as an artsy free-spirit, he would have definitely been on Facebook and he would have found Céline on the site when (if not before) she stood him up. The pair would have exchanged flirty Facebook messages that may or may not have led to an offline meeting, completely eliminating the basis of their sequel.

affair to remember4. The movie: "An Affair to Remember"

The culprit: The internet

One of the most romantic films of all time, according to the American Film Institute, An Affair to Remember (1957) stars Cary Grant as Nickie Ferrante and Deborah Kerr as Terry McKay, two star-crossed lovers aboard a ship traveling from Europe to New York.

Unfortunately, as is the way with romantic movies, when the two initially meet, both are involved with other people.

They become friends, however, and when Terry vacations with Nickie and his grandmother on the Mediterranean coast, they fall in love and agree to meet in six months at the top of the Empire State Building if they still want to be together.

Related: Can You Guess the Movie Based on the Old Technology In It?

Six months later, Terry still wants to be with Nickie, but she’s running late. In her rush to get to the Empire State Building on time, she darts across the street and is hit by a car. Seriously wounded, she is taken to the hospital.

The accident robs her of her ability to walk, and Nickie – wanting to conceal her disability – refuses to contact Terry, who waited for her for hours, and believe she stood him up. Eventually, the lovers are reunited in dramatic fashion when Nickie unexpectedly turns up at Terry’s apartment on Christmas Eve.

Why this wouldn’t work today: It’s very difficult – almost impossible – to remain off the internet. After spending hours waiting for Terry, there’s no way Nickie wouldn’t have Google-stalked her, and most likely, he would have been able to piece together details about her condition.

If An Affair to Remember was set circa now, Carey Grant may have sent Deborah Kerr an unexpected/romantic text, but the age of randomly showing up at people’s apartments is pretty much over.

We now exist in an era of constant communication, we’re the norm is to post a series of pictures, updates and posts chronicling our lives. People are rarely unavailable or unreachable, and that hasn’t just changed the way movies would be made, but how we live more generally.

SEE ALSO: Millennials Are Forcing TV To Grow Up

Join the conversation about this story »

New 'Star Wars' Movies Will Avoid Expanded Universe


boba fett star wars

Shortly after Disney announced in October 2012 that Star Wars: Episode VII is in development, fans have wondered whether or not the Expanded Universe, which consists of numerous novels and other ancillary material set in this world, will be used for this new trilogy, or the two untitled spin-offs. 

Simon Kinberg, who is working on one of the spin-offs, recently spoke to IGN at WonderCon, where he revealed that the Expanded Universe is being avoided, and that while the TV series now in production might go that route, the new trilogy and spin-offs are limited only to the first six movies already released.

"You know, it's not off-limits, and it's certainly inspiring - I'm working on an animated show for [Lucasfilm] as well, Star Wars: Rebels, that will take inspiration from everywhere, but - I know for the movies, the canon is the canon, and the canon is the six films that exist."

Just one day after the Disney/LucasFilm announcement in October 2012, we reported that Star Wars: Episode VII would be an original story. Fans had hoped the story would center on The Thrawn Trilogy, based on the novels written by Timothy Zahn which many believe is a part of the canon.

We have known for quite some time that the spin-offs would center on Han Solo and Boba Fett, the later of which is being written by Lawrence Kasdan. When asked to confirm whether or not these characters will be showcased in either spin-off, Simon Kinberg wouldn't confirm, but he did say that they want to honor the original trilogies while telling a new story.

"I'm definitely not allowed to talk about the content of the Star Wars stuff. I can say that I'm a ridiculously huge fan, I love Boba Fett and I love, obviously, all of the characters in that world. For me - and I know it was true for J.J. Abrams, and Larry Kasdan and Kathleen Kennedy and Michael Arndt - it was all about honoring the original movies, and yet wanting to take a step forward, too, and tell a new story."

Star Wars: Episode VII comes to theaters December 18th, 2015 and stars Harrison FordMark HamillCarrie FisherBilly Dee WilliamsAnthony Daniels. The film is directed by J.J. Abrams.

Untitled Star Wars Han Solo Spin-Off comes to theaters in 2017 and stars Harrison Ford.

Untitled Star Wars Boba Fett Spin-Off comes to theaters in 2017.

SEE ALSO: 'Star Wars: Episode VII' Is Already In Production With Casting Almost Complete

Join the conversation about this story »

New 'Star Wars' Film Will Cost At Least $175 Million To Make


carrie fisher mark hamill star wars

As “Star Wars: Episode 7” production gets underway, fans are eager for any news about the upcoming sequel.  

During Bloomberg’s Business conference at the Tribeca Film Festival Tuesday, Walt Disney Studios Chairman Alan Horn discussed the sequels and confirmed shooting on the new film started this month in Abu Dhabi. 

While Horn didn’t give any hints on the film’s direction or casting, he did say a bit about the film’s cost. 

When asked if Disney is spending the type of money it does on Marvel movies on the next “Star Wars” installment, Horn said while the budget isn't complete yet, it will “be in that range.”

“These large, tentpole kinds of movies, on the expensive side, in the neighborhood of $175-200 million, that kind of a number,” said Horn. “Some are more, some are less. We need to give the audience, essentially, a full meal in return for their affection and devotion and love for these properties." 

That budget would be more on par with Disney and Marvel’s “The Avengers” movie which cost $220 million and made $1.5 billion worldwide. 

“Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith” cost an estimated $113 million to make in 2005. 

According to Bloomberg’s Jon Erlichman, the original plan was to release Episode 7 in May instead of the current December 18, 2015 release date. Previously, every “Star Wars” movie has debuted in May. 

Looking forward, Horn said future “Star Wars” releases could come out in May as well.

“We may revert — the Star Wars dates have been May,” Horn added. “But it depends on the readiness of the screenplays and where we are.” 

Horn also says that casting for the movie should be completed soon. 

Earlier, Carrie Fisher announced she’ll return as Princess Leia. 

More recently, Peter Mayhew confirmed he will return as Chewbacca. It’s rumored Mark Hamill and Harrison Ford will also reprise their roles as Luke Skywalker and Han Solo, respectively.

SEE ALSO: How Steven Spielberg made millions off "Star Wars" after a bet with George Lucas

Join the conversation about this story »

15 Movies You Should See This Summer


lucy scarlett johansson

Summer movies had an early start this year when "Captain America: The Winter Soldier" premiered the first week of April.

Come May, three highly-anticipated movies will make their way into theaters.

Past the web-slinging, transforming, and roaring monsters and superheroes are a few films you may not have heard of with talent ranging from Scarlett Johansson to the late Phillip Seymour Hoffman.

We've gone through more than 100 summer movie releases and picked the top 15 you should check out.

"The Amazing Spider-Man 2"

Release Date:
May 2

Why to see it: Flashbacks to Sam Raimi's jam-packed "Spider-Man 3" came to mind when multiple villains were announced in the sequel; however, director Marc Webb assured fans this wouldn't be an issue. And it doesn't seem like it.

Very positive early reviews— out a month ahead of the film's US release — make us confident Andrew Garfield's return as the web-slinger will be well worth it as the sequel is expected to touch upon an iconic scene from the comics.

Action aside, the on-screen chemistry between real-life couple Garfield and Emma Stone is reason to head out.

Watch the trailer

"The Double"

Release Date:
May 9

Why to see it: The black comedy allows Jesse Eisenberg to play two dynamically opposite characters — Simon, an awkward, shy, introverted worker and then James, a smooth, charismatic new employee who begins to take over Simon's life.

The film first premiered at the 2013 Toronto International Film Festival and has been nominated for several awards. Mia Wasikowska ("Alice in Wonderland") also stars.

Watch the trailer


Release Date:
May 16

Why to see it: We know what you're thinking: It's a reboot, one from a little-known director, Gareth Edwards, who's best known for an alien movie "Monsters." 

Every trailer so far has looked pretty darn impressive — thanks in part to the chilling vocal narratives of "Breaking Bad" star Bryan Cranston. Plus, it appears 'zilla won't be the only monster wreaking havoc in the new film.

At the end of the day, it can't get any worse than the 1998 film featuring Matthew Broderick.

Watch the trailer

Check out behind-the-scenes artwork from the film »

See the rest of the story at Business Insider

Disney May Be Moving 'Captain America 3' Release Date To Avoid Showdown With 'Batman Vs. Superman'


captain america vs batman

There is a great game of chicken being played out between Disney and Marvel Studios and their rival DC Comics and Warner Bros.

Marvel was first to stake a claim in the prime May 6, 2016 release date, though they didn't reveal their title right away. Because of production delays, Warner Bros. and DC were forced to move their epic Man of Steel sequel Batman Vs. Superman out of summer 2015. And they decided to move in on Marvel's turf.

Rightly thinking that pairing two of comics most iconic superheroes would trump anything Marvel had to offer, it seemed like Disney would have to rethink its strategy for 2016. There was no way the untested Doctor Strange could face off against these DC giants. Everyone thought Marvel would surely turn tail and find another open weekend. But no, they announced they weren't moving. And not only that, they revealed that it would be Captain America 3 opening on that prime piece of real estate.

Quite a few fans balked. There was no way Captain America 3 could take on the two-fisted punch of Batman Vs. Superman. But then Captain America: The Winter Soldier opened to rave reviews from critics and fans alike. It was a winner. Not only that, it became a box office success with three #1 weekends in a row domestically. It has now earned $200 million in just three weeks, with a global take of $585 million.

But still, it can't win against Batman Vs. Superman, can it? While Disney was set to stand firm on their May 6, 2016 release date, it sounds like they are the first to start swerving the wheel. While its unclear who would be the winner, opening two huge blockbusters on the same weekend will mean financial loss for both studios. And Marvel wants all the money it can get.

Disney CEO Alan Horn was speaking at the Tribeca Film Festival today in New York, and revealed that the studio is currently struggling with the release date.

This is obviously the first sign of weakness. Will DC and Warner Bros. even consider backing down now? That remains to be seen, but it looks like Marvel may lose this battle. Or, if we look at it a different way, their schedule change for Captain America 3 might make them the bigger winners. What do you think should happen?

Batman Vs. Superman comes to theaters May 6th, 2016 and stars Henry CavillBen AffleckAmy AdamsDiane LaneLaurence FishburneGal GadotJesse Eisenberg,Jeremy Irons. The film is directed by Zack Snyder.

Captain America 3 comes to theaters May 6th, 2016. The film is directed by Anthony RussoJoe Russo.

SEE ALSO: It's A Terrible Idea For Warner Bros. To Release ‘Batman Vs. Superman’ The Same Weekend As ‘Captain America 3'

Join the conversation about this story »

Disneyland Ride 'It's A Small World' Is Being Turned Into A Movie


its a small world ride disneyworld

The Pirates of the Caribbean franchise proved to the Walt Disney Company that there is big money in making film adaptations of their most popular theme park attractions, so they are getting ready to try it again.

The studio has now begun work on It's A Small World, a new movie based on the multi-cultural themed ride found in parks around the world, and they have hired director Jon Turteltaub to helm it. 

Turteltaub has a long history of the studio filled with some big hits - including the National Treasure series - but his last effort for Disney was a bit of a disaster: 

The Sorcerer's Apprentice cost a whopping $150 million, but wound up being a huge flop domestically. The movie was somewhat saved by the foreign grosses, but certainly not enough to make the film considered successful. The filmmaker had some better luck with his most recent film. Last Vegas, which was released in November 2013, didn't really get a positive response from critics, but it did manage to pull in $134 million world wide on a $28 million budget. It helps to keep costs down and hire a cast that includes Michael Douglas, Robert De Niro, Morgan Freeman and Kevin Kline. 

Deadline, which broke the news of the developing It's A Small World project, notes that today is actually the 50th anniversary of the ride's debut. Sadly the article makes no mention of what genre the movie will fit into, but adds that the studio sees the property as a potential franchise. Jared Stern, whose credits include movies like Bolt,The Princess and the FrogMr. Popper's PenguinsThe WatchWreck-It Ralph andThe Internship, is penning the screenplay. 

In case you're like me and have never actually been on the It's A Small World ride, hit play below and take the virtual tour: 

What kind of movie can you make out of that? Knowing Turteltaub, I'm willing to bet it ends up being some kind of globe spanning adventure flick. 

As of now there is no timetable for It's A Small World to come together, as the project is still very much in the earliest stages of development. Even Deadline notes that it "will take awhile to come together." We'll have to wait and see if it actually happens or if it will go the way of Jon Favreau's Magic Kingdom

SEE ALSO: 12 Gorgeous Photos Of Actors Transformed Into Iconic Disney Characters

Join the conversation about this story »

Mark Ruffalo Gets In Trouble With Marvel For Tweeting Photos From 'Avengers 2' Set


Apparently no one is safe from the wrath of Marvel – not even an actual Avenger. Mark Ruffalo found that out when he began Tweeting and Instagramming updates from the set of Joss Whedon’s The Avengers: Age of Ultron… only to get reprimanded on social media. Ruffalo started the conversation innocently, Tweeting

As if to prove said fact – and in response to the thousands of fans asking for photos – Mark Ruffalo continued with this pic of himself and Robert Downey Jr. 

Ruffalo even attempted to snap a quick pic of Avengers: Age of Ultron co-star Scarlett Johansson, but the stealthy superstar hid her face behind a boxer’s robe: 

It was right around that time that Marvel intervened, screaming (on social media, "Maaaarrrrrrkkkkk!!" The actor tried to sway the powers that be, telling them, "I adore you." To which @Marvel replied: 

With his knuckles sufficiently slapped by the comic-book hand that feeds him, Mark Ruffalo sheepishly brought the social-media fun to a close, Tweeting: 

The studios have such an interesting challenge on their hands when it comes to protecting the ins and outs of a major blockbuster like The Avengers: Age Of Ultron. Because everyone basically has a camera in their hands at all times, it’s very difficult to prevent images and footage from leaking out over the Internet almost immediately. But how do you stop your own CAST from sharing information with a rabid fan base? And were Mark Ruffalo’s Tweets and Instagrams that revealing? Not at all.

Pics of the cast shared BY the cast members is a brilliant way to keep the passion on a project high. Marvel didn’t come down too hard. Ruffalo and Downey Jr. should be able to keep sharing. Follow them on Twitter and Instagram, just in case they release more info as The Avengers: Age of Ultron continues to film. 

SEE ALSO: Why 'The Avengers' Was Originally Rated R

Join the conversation about this story »