Netflix has just reached a $1 billion deal wi Paramount, Lionsgate, and MGM to stream it’s entire fill library beginning September 1.

Yes yes yes yes yes yes!!!! As Tron’s Bit would say.

I have long wanted Netflix to put all of it’s titles up for streaming. I’d even pay more money for that service (oh dear, did I just say that out loud???).

Netflix is a company that gets it. True, they end up being more profitable, saving money on postage for films we can stream from home rather than be mailed out; but, they’ve long know that streaming content (films, tv shows) is much more user friendly for the movie watching public at large.

For movie connoisseurs like me, this won’t stop me from buying those geekalicious genre films, as I dig the extras nearly as much as the film itself. But for flicks I just want to see and move on from (like 99% of the rest of you), this is GREAT news. Hopefully, the other studios will follow suit soon (though they might have to bring Disney along kicking and screaming).
If you’d like to read the AP news story, click the title link above.

--Tagged under: netflix--

--Tagged under: Movies--

--Tagged under: Paramount--

--Tagged under: on demand--

--Tagged under: Streaming--

--Tagged under: Xbox--

--Tagged under: laptop--

--Tagged under: pc--

--Tagged under: media--

RealBollywood.com is reporting that M. Night Shymalan and Bruce Willis are planning a sequel to “Unbreakable”.
“Unbreakable” is my favorite of M. Night’s movies, and one of my favorite Bruce Willis films.  For a long time, the movie flew under the radar of many movie goers, though attaining a ‘classic’ quality to film and comic geeks.
The movie was originally intended as a trilogy, but Willis and M. Night moved on to other things and the sequels were forgotten.
While I am excited by this news, I’m also VERY nervous.  M. Night has been in a downward spiral as a director for the last 5 years (“The Village”, “Lady in the Water”, and the UNBELIEVABLY BAD “The Happening”).  Hopefully, the movie content will inspire him to his former glory.

RealBollywood.com is reporting that M. Night Shymalan and Bruce Willis are planning a sequel to “Unbreakable”.

“Unbreakable” is my favorite of M. Night’s movies, and one of my favorite Bruce Willis films.  For a long time, the movie flew under the radar of many movie goers, though attaining a ‘classic’ quality to film and comic geeks.

The movie was originally intended as a trilogy, but Willis and M. Night moved on to other things and the sequels were forgotten.

While I am excited by this news, I’m also VERY nervous.  M. Night has been in a downward spiral as a director for the last 5 years (“The Village”, “Lady in the Water”, and the UNBELIEVABLY BAD “The Happening”).  Hopefully, the movie content will inspire him to his former glory.

--Tagged under: Movies--

--Tagged under: News--

--Tagged under: Bruce Willis--

--Tagged under: M. Night--

Warner Brothers is reportedly ramping up for yet another Superman reboot, only 3 1/2 years after Bryan Singer’s attempt.
However, they’ve now turned to genius Christopher Nolan (“Batman Begins”, “Dark Knight”) to serve as something of a script “godfather” to get the Man of Steel back on the reboot track.
Now, count me as one who enjoyed 2006’s “Superman Returns”.  It was a bit light on action and heavy on esoteric atmosphere and pathos, but I thought it was done well.  Kevin Spacey in particular was a great Lex Luthor.  My only major complaints were Bosworth as Lois Lane and the whole Superman’s kid side plot, while Brandon Routh played Superman/Kal-El/Clark a bit too much like a wounded puppy.
That being said, Nolan’s stab will undoubtedly be a stroke much closer to the tone and feel of the original comic, something he nailed with the Batman reboot.  It’s not clear and probably unlikely that he would direct, but his influence would undoubtedly be felt.
I’d love nothing MORE than to start talking about ideas for casting, plot, and such.  But, since we’re probably at least 2 1/2 years to any kind of release, it would only serve to get me jazzed up.
Now, my friend Wolfman (aka Keith aka “Magic Hour”) would probably wax poetic on his distaste for comic book movies, let alone remakes, but I think he would be upfront in saying he has enjoyed Nolan’s Batman films, and I would hope he’d look forward to Supes.

Warner Brothers is reportedly ramping up for yet another Superman reboot, only 3 1/2 years after Bryan Singer’s attempt.

However, they’ve now turned to genius Christopher Nolan (“Batman Begins”, “Dark Knight”) to serve as something of a script “godfather” to get the Man of Steel back on the reboot track.

Now, count me as one who enjoyed 2006’s “Superman Returns”.  It was a bit light on action and heavy on esoteric atmosphere and pathos, but I thought it was done well.  Kevin Spacey in particular was a great Lex Luthor.  My only major complaints were Bosworth as Lois Lane and the whole Superman’s kid side plot, while Brandon Routh played Superman/Kal-El/Clark a bit too much like a wounded puppy.

That being said, Nolan’s stab will undoubtedly be a stroke much closer to the tone and feel of the original comic, something he nailed with the Batman reboot.  It’s not clear and probably unlikely that he would direct, but his influence would undoubtedly be felt.

I’d love nothing MORE than to start talking about ideas for casting, plot, and such.  But, since we’re probably at least 2 1/2 years to any kind of release, it would only serve to get me jazzed up.

Now, my friend Wolfman (aka Keith aka “Magic Hour”) would probably wax poetic on his distaste for comic book movies, let alone remakes, but I think he would be upfront in saying he has enjoyed Nolan’s Batman films, and I would hope he’d look forward to Supes.

--Tagged under: Superman--

--Tagged under: Batman--

--Tagged under: Nolan--

--Tagged under: movies--

--Tagged under: news--

Peter Jackson has been knighted in New Zealand.  SIR PETER!!!

Peter Jackson has been knighted in New Zealand.  SIR PETER!!!

--Tagged under: Movies--

--Tagged under: Lord--

--Tagged under: Peter--

Captain Kirk to play Tom Clancy’s Jack Ryan!!!

Nooo….not William Shatner.  Though it could be fun to watch a geriatric Jack Ryan ambling through a retirement home nailing down a tapioca pudding conspiracy…

No, I’m referring to Chris Pine, star of this summer’s blockbuster Star Trek hit.

Paramount Studios has tapped Pine to star in a re-boot of Tom Clancy’s Jack Ryan novels (e.g. Hunt for Red October, Patriot Games, Sum of All Fears).

They haven’t said what Clancy novel would be the subject of this re-boot.

With Clancy’s Jack Ryan works dealing with the 1980’s and early 90’s, it might be a bit tricky to update those for modern day sensibilities.

So then, why update them?  Why not do authentic period-based films.  If it works for World War II movies, why not the Cold War?  There is so much deep source material.  In fact, most people under 30 have no idea about the Cold War and the Soviet Union and other issues of the 80’s.

Chris Pine is a GREAT choice for Jack Ryan.  I was skeptical when he was named Captain of the Enterprise, but I was glad to be proved wrong. 

--Tagged under: movies--

--Tagged under: star trek--

--Tagged under: news--

To Infinity and Beyond!!! Toy Story 3 unveils its Trailer!

I look back upon Toy Story and Toy Story 2 as two films from my defining years.  That is to say, movies I saw during my 20’s, which is the time when most people sort of settle into the personalities and outlooks they adopt as adults.

It was a time just after college and before kids (for most of us), when you lived on your own and had responsibilities and jobs, but not so many that you couldn’t stay up til 2 in the morning every now and then playing D&D or video games.  You could get together every couple of months for the weekend party.  You were the hip crowd, the trendsetters (God, was I EVER a trendsetter???), the ones teens looked up to because you were on your own, and the ones the older crowd envied because you were “so young”.

It was while I was in that frame of mind that Toy Story hit the cineplexes.  The story of a boy with a room full of toys.  Toys he had enjoyed since he was a toddler, especially Cowboy Woody.  But, toys that perhaps he was growing a bit weary of. 

Buzz Lightyear to the rescue!  New flash and style vs. the comfortable “what you know”.  As it turns out, both can have a place in our lives.

Then, Toy Story 2.  In my opinion, even funnier and better than the first (which is saying something, as the original was an instant classic).  In it, Buzz and Woody confront the notion of “Get what you can, live in the now, don’t need anyone else” vs. loyalty, faith, and patience.

Perhaps my buddy Wolfman would say that I’m looking too deeply into these films (which I admit, I often do).  But, truth be told, these movies spoke to me.  Those movies were about my 20’s.  Leaving the cool stuff about being a kid behind for the cool stuff about being an adult (or somehow finding a balance), and finding a direction and focus for your life.

Well, in 2010, we get what I suspect will be the final chapter in the saga of Woody and Buzz, Toy Story 3.  It’s full length trailer was just unveiled today, and here it is, courtesy of ComingSoon.net:

I love the idea of the Buzz Lightyear reset to Spanish.  Looks like this will be another winner.

I won’t look into this too much, but it looks like it deals with the inevitability of life and finding new adventures (which I can also find interesting parallels with my life of the last 5 years), and I’m sure those of you in your late 30’s or early 40’s may find some as well.

Pixar’s genius has always been finding themes and metaphors for us grown ups to enjoy.  And that’s why they’ll always be special films for me.

--Tagged under: movies--

--Tagged under: Toy Story--

--Tagged under: News--

--Tagged under: Trailer--

Is “The Hobbit” studio about to go on welfare?

Could “The Hobbit” franchise AND James Bond be heading to Warner Brothers or Sony?

Ooooh, what a fascinating story….

First off, full plugs and credit for this story to Nikki Finke over at Deadline Hollywood.

Here’s the link to her story:

MGM Makes Phone Plea to Bondholders

Ok, so what’s the gist?  Here’s your MediaViewer view in a nutshell.

MGM wayyyy overestimated its profits this year, and as it turns out they don’t have enough money to cover their current costs and production calendar (they need about $165 million).

PLUS, they’re already $3.5 BILLION in debt to creditors.

So, MGM decided to have a little conference call with their bondholders and creditors.  And from the rumors, it was a very vocal call, lasting anywhere from 2 1/2 to 6 1/2 hours.  The call was basically to ask creditors to waive interest payments on their debt until February of 2010.  But since the company’s so in debt to begin with, the creditors ain’t so happy to miss out on that dough.  This, in turn, has raised the ire of the bondholders, whose stock is already worth almost half of what is was went it went public.  So, they say, if the creditors won’t forbear payment, then let the company go bankrupt.  That way, they’d get their money first and get a somewhat better return on their investment.

MGM, of course, thinks this is the worst possible outcome.  By going bankrupt, they’d automatically lose control of the James Bond franchise, which has become a huge moneymaker with Daniel Craig.  They’d of course lose out on “The Hobbit” films, which stand to generate $2-3 billion on their own in ticket and DVD sales.

I’m inclined to think that the creditors will eventually relent.  With Bond and “The Hobbit” guaranteed moneymakers, they’d be foolish not to.  Of course, the situation does make MGM ripe for a takeover bid.  But who’d be big enough to assume that much debt?

Enter Warner Brothers (Time Warner) or Sony.  Finke speculates in the article that if MGM went up to auction, it would fetch maybe $1.8 billion.  Either of those two companies would sign that check in a heartbeat to get those two franchises.

Regardless, it’s hard to tell what effect this will have on Bond and Hobbit.  Both are scheduled to start up production next year (which in movie studio terms is like saying tomorrow).

If there’s a delay in getting these films out, I’m fine with that.  What I don’t want is MGM pinching pennies or rushing the process to push out substandard products to make the quick, albeit lucrative buck.

What do YOU think?

--Tagged under: movies--

--Tagged under: The Hobbit--

--Tagged under: James Bond--

--Tagged under: news--

Star Trek Sequel details?

The Los Angeles Times sat down with producers/writers J.J. Abrams and Bob Orci to ask about progress on the Star Trek sequel.

Starfleet goes Guantanamo? ‘Star Trek’ team hints that the next film will reflect contemporary war issues

Here’s a synopsis of what they’ve said, courtesy Ain’t It Cool News:

Abrams says:

“…The first movie was so concerned with just setting up the characters — their meeting each and galvanizing that family — that in many ways a sequel will have a very different mission. it needs to do what [the late ‘Trek’ creator Gene] Roddenberry did so well, which is allegory. It needs to tell a story that has connection to what is familiar and what is relevant. It also needs to tell it in a spectacular way that hides the machinery and in a primarily entertaining and hopefully moving story. There needs to be relevance, yes, and that doesn’t mean it should be pretentious. If there are simple truths — truths connected to what we live — that elevates any story — that’s true with any story.”



And here’s what Boborci had to say:

“We’ve literally had two meetings now. We haven’t decided anything but we’re starting to circle around some ideas. We got a lot of fan response from the first one and a considerable amount of critical response and one of the things we heard was, ‘Make sure the next one deals with modern-day issues.’ We’re trying to keep it as up-to-date and as reflective of what’s going on today as possible. So that’s one thing, to make it reflect the things that we are all dealing with today.

I asked Orci somewhat flippantly if that meant we might see Starfleet grappling with the ethics of torture or dealing with a rising terrorist threat or perhaps a painful, politicized war with the Klingons.

“Well yeah, those are the kind of issues we’re talking about. Wow, you’re good! But seriously that’s the way we’re thinking, that’s an approach. So if you have any ideas … “

I, too, always thought that was one of the better parts of the Star Trek saga, a relevancy to our world and its issues.  “24” is a show that does a good job of bringing those issues to light and shows both sides of its argument.

If they go the torutre as a result of war route, I hope that “Star Trek II” similarly explores both sides of the argument.  It isn’t enough to just say “well torture/’agressive information gathering techniques’ is bad.  Ok, if that’s the line you want to travel on, show the results/consequences of sticking to your ideals.

--Tagged under: Star Trek--

--Tagged under: JJ Abrams--

--Tagged under: movies--

--Tagged under: news--

And the Hobbit News Cometh Nigh….

Word comes out today that the JRR Tolkien estate and New Line Cinemas have settled their lawsuit regarding profits from the hugely successful “Lord of the Rings” trilogy.

Tolkien estate, New Line settle lawsuit over films - AP

The estate of the late author of all things Middle Earth was suing the studio over millions of dollars it claimed was owed from the profits of the franchise.

The settlement details have not yet been made public, but speculation that a large portion of it will go to the Tolkien Trust, a group that sponsors charities around the world.

What does this mean for those of us clamoring for “The Hobbit” to get going?  It most likely portends that we’ll start getting news fast and furious as production leaps into high gear.  (Watch for casting announcements to begin in the next week or so).

--Tagged under: Movies--

--Tagged under: The Hobbit--

--Tagged under: Peter Jackson--

--Tagged under: Guillermo del Toro--

--Tagged under: News--

Disney/Marvel Deal: UPDATE

In looking through some articles on the $4 billion purchase of Marvel Comics by Disney, I found that Marvel will honor all of its pre-existing agreements with other distributors, with Disney having no intention of stepping in on those.

What does that mean?  Well, Sony can continue its plans for Spiderman 4, Paramount can continue on its 5-year deal with Iron Man, The Hulk, Thor, and the rest of the Avengers.

In fact, Fox just announced today it is planning a reboot of the Fantastic Four franchise.  It owns the rights to the FF “in perpetuity”, meaning as long as it continues to make the films, it will continue to hold the rights.

So…let’s see.  Disney is content to let all of the truly popular and famous Marvel franchises just chug along as normal with other distributors?  Hardly makes sense to spend $4 billion for properties you have no intention of working with for the better part of a decade.

Then again, it may just be about more than just movies.  Disney’s golden touch isn’t just in films, no no.  They are the mack daddy GENIUSES at marketing and merchandising.

Disney is likely thinking, “Sure, Sony and Paramount, go ahead and make your blockbusters.  Meanwhile, we’ll rake in the dough from all of toys, games, and knick knacks.”

Will they get proceeds from DVD sales, too?  Hmm, maybe Disney ain’t so dumb after all….

--Tagged under: movies--

--Tagged under: disney--

--Tagged under: Marvel Comics--

Theme created by: Roy David Farber and Hunson. Hacked on by Wolfman-K. Powered By: Tumblr...
1 of 2