The war of words between Ray Fisher and DC doesn’t show any signs of quieting down. The controversy made headlines ever since Fisher accused director Joss Whedon and producers Geoff Johns and Jon Berg of misconduct on the Justice League set. In the meantime, WarnerMedia launched an investigation about what really happened during the filming of the 2017 superhero film. And now, the actor has again to Twitter to wage war on Warner Bros., with heated words for Walter Hamada. Reacting to a recent New York Times profile of the DC Films president, Fisher called him “the most dangerous kind of enabler,” who attempted to “undermine the very real issues of the Justice League investigation.” Fisher then stated that he wouldn’t take part in any future production involving Hamada.
Walter Hamada is the most dangerous kind of enabler.
His lies, and WB PR’s failed Sept 4th hit-piece, sought to undermine the very real issues of the Justice League investigation.
I will not participate in any production associated with him.
— Ray Fisher (@ray8fisher) December 30, 2020
Fisher seems to be referencing his recent claim that Hamada asked him to back off his criticism of producer Johns. The above-mentioned investigations ended up with WarnerMedia’s claim that they took some remedial action, and those responsible received some sort of punishment. Warner Bros. never made the specifics public. However, many commentators noticed that the news came after Whedon’s recent departure from his HBO series, The Nevers.
Fisher’s Cyborg was at one point rumored to appear in the upcoming Flash movie. However, if he refuses to appear in any movie associated with Hamada, that would rule out any upcoming DC feature films.
Recommended Reading: Justice League Odyssey Vol. 1: The Ghost Sector
What do you think about Ray Fisher’s latest accusation? Let us know in the comment section below!
The post Ray Fisher Says He Won’t Work With DC Films President Walter Hamada appeared first on ComingSoon.net.
Andrew Cohn’s The Last Shift is now available on digital and Blu-ray and to commemorate the event we spoke with the film’s stars, Richard Jenkins and Shane Paul McGhie, who discussed the film in detail and even offered some insight into their own fast food experiences.
The Last Shift is an American story about two men struggling in the same town, while worlds apart. Stanley (Richard Jenkins), an aging fast-food worker, plans to call it quits after 38 years on the graveyard shift at Oscar’s Chicken and Fish. His last weekend takes a turn while training his replacement, Jevon (Shane Paul McGhie), a talented but stalled young writer whose provocative politics keep landing him in trouble. These two who share little in common are brought together through circumstance. Stanley, a high school dropout who has watched life pass by his drive-through window, proudly details the nuances of the job. While Jevon, a columnist who’s too smart to be flipping patties, contends their labor is being exploited. A flicker of camaraderie sparks during the long overnight hours in a quiet kitchen.
The movie also stars Shane Paul McGhie (Deputy), Da’Vine Joy Randolph (Dolemite Is My Name), and Golden Globe nominee Ed O’Neil (Married with Children, Modern Family). The Last Shift was written and directed by Andrew Cohn (Medora, Night School). The movie was executive produced by Alexander Payne and Lance Acord. Producers include Albert Berger, Ron Yerxa, Sam Bisbee, Alex Lipschultz, and Bert Kern.
The Last Shift will release in theaters on September 25.
ComingSoon.net: First of all, guys, I want to say congratulations on the film. I thought it was an excellent and timely motion picture with terrific performances by both of you and I really, really, really enjoyed it. I’ll start off by asking what attracted each of you to the project?
Richard Jenkins: Well, the script. I mean, the writing, the part. I read it and it’s one of those things where you read something you just say, you think I can bring something to this, or no, I don’t think I know what to do. Somebody else should do this. But I loved the character and I loved the writing. And that’s always the first thing that – and we got to shoot in Chicago, which is something that I always wanted to do and had never really done it.
Shane Paul McGhie: Yeah, for me as well, I would say that it was definitely the script. I just, I had never really seen anything or been a part of anything like it, that type of slice of life movie. And then also, of course, just seeing that Richard was attached to the project, I just really wanted to work with him.
CS: Shane, your character is angered by a lot of pressing social issues to the point where he’s almost given up on life. Would you say that that’s a correct assessment? And how did you approach this character and these specific political overviews?
McGhie: Yeah, I think that that would be a correct assessment, but I also think he just felt stuck, you know? He felt stuck with the cards that had been dealt for him. And yeah, I approached it just by, I mean, just any way that I would approach any character. It wasn’t so much very different for this character. It was just being able to rehearse in the space of the fast food restaurant. But other than that, it wasn’t very different.
CS: Richard, I’ve worked in a number of fast food restaurants over the years and met my fair share of Stanley’s. How did you go about crafting this particular character?
Jenkins: Well, I too worked in fast food restaurants and pizza places and went to high school with a lot of Stanley’s, not a lot, but I went to high school with them. Good guys, good guys, you know, just limited in their understanding and their availability and their experience. And you know, and Andrew Cohn, who wrote the script and directed it had been making documentaries about folks like this for years. And he understands these people. And that’s when I read it and I thought, gosh, I know this guy. I remember this guy. So it was, yeah, it brought back memories.
CS: Were there any particular details that you added to the film based off of people that you knew?
Jenkins: Yeah, after you’re closed down at night, we used to play cards forever until three in the morning, you know? And something’s always going on. But you know, I added the fact that he didn’t graduate from high school and I had a class ring because I knew a guy in high school that didn’t graduate that had a class ring. And because we ordered them our junior year. And I don’t think people even do that. Shane, did you do class rings?
McGhie: No, we didn’t do – I don’t think we did that, no. I didn’t get one.
Jenkins: It’s old guys like us. Everybody had a class ring. And so, you paid for it at the end of your junior year. So and this guy used to wear it and he said, well, I paid for it. So I added that. Yeah, there’s a lot of things. You know, the thing is we kind of didn’t know who these people were until we finished filming the movie. Hopefully we surprised each other, and kind of let the relationship grow and shrink and grow and shrink. So it was really a fun process.
CS: Shane, how much freedom did you guys have on the set to improvise with your characters? The dialogue and chemistry between the two of you feels so natural. It feels like you’re making it up as you’re moving along.
McGhie: Thank you. You know, Andrew gave us the reigns to play and to figure out these characters like Richard was saying. But we didn’t really need to improvise a whole lot. You know, it was on the page. But we had, like I was saying before, we had space, we had time in the space to just rehearse and block out some of the scenes and that really helped. And we kind of just played with these guys and tried different ways and I know I tried different ways of delivery and it was fun. It felt like we had the space to just play.
Jenkins: And you know, we had no time to make this. And it never felt rushed, which is really weird. But did you feel? I never felt like we were up against the clock.
McGhie: No. I was going to say they never made us feel like we didn’t have that time to do this kind of, feel it out, which I think is so important just for the sake of the art.
CS: These two characters from opposite ends of the spectrum, but they are also similar in their inability to break free from their current plight. Are they friends in your eyes?
Jenkins: I guess watching it, you have a feel. I just know that they liked each other, and I mean, there was a lot of the movie that we really liked each other. I know Stanley really liked Jevon. And it just is a shame that he wasn’t equipped to take that next step, you know? I think that’s part of the tragedy of the film, the relationship.
CS: Would you consider Stanley as a man who in a lot of ways has his head stuck in the sand and has put his faith in a system that no longer works, but he just doesn’t quite recognize that?
Jenkins: Absolutely. And Jevon teaches him that, and he’s like, oh really? And who learns what from whom, you know? And Stanley learns from Jevon, because Stanley doesn’t really have anything to teach Jevon. But Jevon just kind of opens his eyes to his own life. And it’s kind of cool. But Stanley’s just not emotionally equipped to take that friendship and make it something lasting.
CS: I think Jevon as well is a very complex, interesting character. What makes him so relatable?
McGhie: I mean, I think we can all kind of identify a time in life where we felt stuck, you know? I think for many of us, it might be right now. But I think it was just kind of bringing that feeling of what do I do next to the character. But I’m sure I’ve gone to school with guys who reminded me of Jevon. But to kind of harp on what we were just talking about, is there’s the hope that even though these guys come from vastly different worlds in the same town, there’s the hope that they connect. There’s the hope and there’s a realization we have as the audience that these guys are a little bit more similar than they think. So we kind of root for them in that way. But yeah.
Jenkins: And Andrew does not go for the easy. He’s not there to make you comfortable as an audience. He has something he wants to say about America, you know? And I think it’s beautiful, the way he chooses to do it.
CS: Richard, you’ve done so many memorable characters over the years. In fact, I actually just watched Bone Tomahawk for the first time a couple of months ago and I thought your character was terrific. How do you continue to find inspiration for these people that you play?
Jenkins: Well, oh God, Bone Tomahawk. I’ve been waiting my whole life to play that guy. I was attached to that movie for almost maybe – I think Kurt [Russell] was attached to it first, and then I was right after that. And it was like a year and a half in the making to get it done. But you know, I’ve said this a million times and it was true. It’s luck. You know, it’s luck. You wait for a part like that and it comes along. Sometimes they don’t. But you know, the answer to your question is I don’t know. I don’t know. But I just am grateful that I’ve had a chance to play a lot of different, interesting people.
CS: And this is for both of you as well, are there things you guys learned from one another as you we making this film that helped your performances a little bit more?
Jenkins: Yeah, I mean, Shane, he’s just there. He’s just there. And when you’re with an actor who’s just there with you, you don’t feel pressured to do anything, to take the scene a certain way. I mean, you don’t put anything artificial on it. And you can change it up and he’ll go with you. I trusted him. And when you trust someone, it makes it a lot easier.
McGhie: Thanks, man. I learned a ton from Richard. First of all, just the humility and sincerity that he has after being just as a person and then add that he’s been in this business for so long, he’s worked the caliber of projects he’s been involved with and still is willing to just come up and say, hey, how’s it going, and play and allow me to make mistakes and find the character. He was a part of creating that space of just, like you said, trust. And I thought that was really awesome. And I don’t know. I feel like with this character, I just was able to just try so many different things. And he encouraged me to. He said, “Don’t necessarily say what your character will or won’t do because then you close off yourself for inspiration and just seeing where that takes you.” I just picked his brain so much, even off the set, when we were eating portillos and hot dogs, which by the way was research. That was for the character. We’re very committed. But yeah, I hope to be like that. Hopefully my career goes the way that his has gone, and to be able to reach a hand back like he has done would be great.
[WARNING: Spoilers ahead!]
CS: So, and this is obviously spoiler-y, but that last scene on the bus, which to me was just an absolutely powerful moment, if it works out in a different way and they do have the opportunity to actually speak to each other, Shane, what do you think your character would tell Stanley in that moment, and vice versa?
McGhie: That’s a really good question. I think he would say, “You mother —!” No, I’m just kidding. I think at that point I think he would probably say – I want to believe that he would say, “It’s okay. It’s okay.” And not to give it away, but you see where his life goes after what happens. And he decides to get back to what he’s good at. And I don’t know that it would’ve happened the same. I think maybe that incident caused him to kind of hit rock bottom and reevaluate. So I would hope he would say, you know, it’s all right. It’s okay. It’s all good. Something like that. Yeah.
Jenkins: That’s the important thing, is you connect with both. I remembered doing that and feeling incredibly embarrassed, seeing him. Because I know what I did. And I know what I didn’t do and what I didn’t say. And you know, I felt embarrassed and humiliated. And of course, it was up to me to either go up to him or not. I mean, he didn’t owe me anything. I owed him everything and I just wasn’t able to do it. And that’s the tragedy of this, you know? That’s the tragedy, that emotionally and intellectually maybe he just wasn’t able to take that next step. And you know, Andrew, which he’s talking about America here. He’s talking about America. And I think it’s beautiful and subtle and true. I think it’s true. I think we talk past each other. There is a connection. These guys really like each other. Stanley really likes Jevon and learns from him, but just is not able to overcome 50, 60 years of beliefs and indoctrinations. So when we played the scene, that’s what he felt. When he wasn’t looking at me, I felt embarrassed, embarrassed.
CS: On a lighter note, can you expound upon your personal fast food experiences?
Jenkins: Well, the place I worked at, I mean, it was privately owned. It was the Pizza Villa in DeKalb, Illinois, which was in 1964, I think I started working there, one of the few pizza places. And it’s still there. The pizza still is great, a thin crust, midwestern Chicago style pizza. A tavern style, they call it. And we did mostly high school kids working there. All of us were in school together and had like six booths. Everything was takeout, delivery, most everything. And I loved working there. You know, it was great. We’d close around one o’clock on a weekend and everyone would play cards in the back until three in the morning. I mean, it was a great place to work, you know?
McGhie: I actually haven’t worked in a fast food restaurant, but I worked at a restaurant and I don’t know if I have a specific story, but I was a host. And you just see what a lack of food really does to people’s demeanor. You know, really needing food, it changes a person. You know, everything kind of goes out the window. Being polite, things of that nature. And yeah, true colors come out. So it was very interesting.
CS: What do you guys want audiences to take away from this film?
McGhie: I’m hoping that they take away, the ones that need to have – well, everybody, I’m hoping that everybody takes away a new perspective from the film. The commentary on race is subtle and I want to kind of think the movie is like the medicine with a spoonful of sugar. It doesn’t hit you over the head, but I don’t know. I just want them to take away a different perspective. And I think that these people are very often overlooked in society. And you know, it’s a slice of life movie, but for these people, these circumstances are so big in their lives. And so, yeah, I hope it gives the audience a new perspective and they go home and have a conversation and, or will not go home, it’ll be on DVD. But they have a conversation with their loved ones during dinner and bring up some things. Maybe it’ll change some minds, hopefully.
Jenkins: I hope they like me. And I don’t care if they like Shane. I can’t take it with this guy. No, I actually, I think that’s pretty good, Shane. That’s kind of it. You know, I hate to tell people what to think about something. But you know, watch it and hopefully it’ll creep up on you because I think it’s a beautiful piece. I think Andrew just did a great job with it. I know both Shane and I are really proud of it.
The post CS Interviews The Last Shift’s Richard Jenkins & Shane Paul McGhie appeared first on ComingSoon.net.
In a recent interview with Forbes, director Robert Rodriguez revealed he thinks Alita: Battle Angel 2 could happen at Disney+, which is clearly good news for fans of the under-appreciated James Cameron produced sci-fi action film.
“I think anything is possible,” Rodriguez said. “Disney bought Fox, and they have Disney+, so that is worth the conversation. I know other people would love to see another, and I would love to do another one. As far as where it would go or how it would be made, I think streaming has opened up many opportunities such as sequels. It’s already a pre-sold concept, it’s already got a built-in audience that wants to see it, and then it’s delivered to them in a way that’s the easiest for them to consume. So, it’s not a bad idea.”
Alita might actually work better as a limited TV series that could further delve into its bizarre futuristic world without limitations. Hopefully, this happens because the original was actually pretty great.
Visionary filmmakers James Cameron (Avatar) and Robert Rodriguez (Sin City) create a groundbreaking new heroine in Alita: Battle Angel, an action-packed story of hope, love and empowerment. Set several centuries in the future, the abandoned Alita (Rosa Salazar) is found in the scrapyard of Iron City by Ido (Christoph Waltz), a compassionate cyber-doctor who takes the unconscious cyborg Alita to his clinic. When Alita awakens she has no memory of who she is, nor does she have any recognition of the world she finds herself in.
Everything is new to Alita, every experience a first. As she learns to navigate her new life and the treacherous streets of Iron City, Ido tries to shield Alita from her mysterious past while her street-smart new friend, Hugo (Keean Johnson), offers instead to help trigger her memories. A growing affection develops between the two until deadly forces come after Alita and threaten her newfound relationships. It is then that Alita discovers she has extraordinary fighting abilities that could be used to save the friends and family she’s grown to love. Determined to uncover the truth behind her origin, Alita sets out on a journey that will lead her to take on the injustices of this dark, corrupt world, and discover that one young woman can change the world in which she lives.
Alita: Battle Angel also stars Jennifer Connelly (Top Gun: Maverick), Academy Award winner Mahershala Ali (Moonlight, Green Book), Ed Skrein (Deadpool), and Jackie Earle Haley.
Directed by Robert Rodriguez, the film features a screenplay written by James Cameron and Laeta Kalogridis and Rodriguez. Based on the graphic novel series Gunnm by Yukito Kishiro, Alita: Battle Angel is produced by Cameron and Jon Landau.
The post Robert Rodriguez Says Alita: Battle Angel 2 Could Happen On Disney+ appeared first on ComingSoon.net.
Universal Pictures and DreamWorks Animation’s The Boss Baby: Family Business will move from March 26, 2021, to Friday, September 17, 2021, taking the place of the previously announced The Bad Guys. On that date it will compete with 20th Century Studios’ Death on the Nile starring Kenneth Branagh and Sony’s The Man from Toronto starring Kevin Hart.
Universal Pictures and DreamWorks Animation’s The Bad Guys, originally set for release on September 17, 2021, is now UNSET. A new 2022 release date will be announced in the coming weeks.
In the sequel to DreamWorks Animation’s Oscar-nominated blockbuster comedy, the Templeton brothers—Tim (James Marsden, X-Men franchise) and his Boss Baby little bro Ted (Alec Baldwin)—have become adults and drifted away from each other. Tim is now a married stay-at-home dad. Ted is a hedge fund CEO. But a new boss baby with a cutting-edge approach and a can-do attitude is about to bring them together again … and inspire a new family business.
Tim and his wife, Carol (Eva Longoria), the breadwinner of the family, live in the suburbs with their super-smart 7-year-old daughter Tabitha (Ariana Greenblatt, Avengers: Infinity War), and adorable new infant Tina (Amy Sedaris, Netflix’s BoJack Horseman). Tabitha, who’s at the top her class at the prestigious Acorn Center for Advanced Childhood, idolizes her Uncle Ted and wants to become like him, but Tim, still in touch with his overactive youthful imagination, worries that she’s working too hard and is missing out on a normal childhood.
When baby Tina reveals that she’s—ta-da!—a top secret agent for BabyCorp on a mission to uncover the dark secrets behind Tabitha’s school and its mysterious founder, Dr. Erwin Armstrong (Jeff Goldblum), it will reunite the Templeton brothers in unexpected ways, lead them to re-evaluate the meaning of family and discover what truly matters.
Lisa Kudrow and Jimmy Kimmel also reprise their roles as Ted and Tim’s parents. Building on the success of the first film, which earned more than $500 million worldwide, The Boss Baby: Family Business is directed by returning filmmaker Tom McGrath and is produced by Jeff Hermann (Kung Fu Panda 3).
In The Bad Guys, after a lifetime of pulling legendary heists, five notorious bad guys—Mr. Wolf, Mr. Snake, Mr. Piranha, Mr. Shark and Ms. Tarantula—attempt their most challenging job yet…going good. Nobody has ever failed so hard at trying to be good as The Bad Guys, an all-new animated feature film from DreamWorks Animation.
Based on the bestselling Scholastic blockbuster book series by Aaron Blabey, which has more than 8.2 million copies in print worldwide, The Bad Guys is directed by Pierre Perifel (director, DWA award-winning short Bilby; animator, the Kung Fu Panda films), making his feature-directing debut, from a script by Etan Cohen (Tropic Thunder, Get Hard) and Hilary Winston (NBC’s Community and ABC’s Happy Endings). The film is produced by Damon Ross (co-producer, Nacho Libre) and Rebecca Huntley (co-producer Abominable, associate producer, The Boss Baby). The executive producers are Blabey, Cohen, Patrick Hughes and Jeff Berg.
The post The Boss Baby: Family Business Delayed by Universal & Dreamworks appeared first on ComingSoon.net.
Let’s stress one particular thing off the bat: some of these movies did not come out this year due to do to COVID-19 but their ad campaigns were already in motion before cinemas closed. This list does not compile the biggest hits or most acclaimed films of the year. This is the artwork we have chosen to be The 25 Best Movies Poster of 2020 regardless of quality or if the movie was even released (in theaters or otherwise).
Check out 2020’s visceral color schemes and overall striking imagery crafted by hungry artists in the gallery below!
We rummaged through hundreds of posters, astutely aware of the fact crafting a good movie poster is an art form in and of itself. A good movie poster not only sells tickets (or rentals) but becomes associated with its story in perpetuity. Think the pulpy style of the Star Wars franchise, the boyish whimsy of Raiders of the Lost Ark, or Uma Thurman smoking cigarettes on the poster for Pulp Fiction—imagery that has become associated with those properties all thanks to a good poster.
What do you think were the best movie posters of 2020? Let us know in the comments below.
Ahoy, fellow couch potatoes! You guys sure brought the Yuletide spirit this week with 10 of DEG’s Watched at Home Top 20 entries featuring holiday classics, namely Elf (No. 2), Dr. Seuss’ The Grinch (No. 3), National Lampoon’s Christmas Vacation (No. 4), The Polar Express (No. 5), Home Alone (No. 9), A Christmas Story (No. 10), Fatman (No. 11), Love Actually (No. 12), How the Grinch Stole Christmas! (No. 15) and Home Alone 2: Lost in New York (No. 19).
However, despite the festive streaming, it was Christopher Nolan’s Tenet that topped the list with its Dec. 15 release. Not too shabby for the time-bending action pic. Though, undoubtedly, audiences were likely left reaching for the egg nog and Advil in order to escape the pic’s mind-numbing plot.
Otherwise, holdovers Yellowstone: S3 (No. 6), Harry Potter: Complete 8-film Collection (No. 7), Friends: S1-10 (No. 13), Unhinged (No. 14), Yellowstone: S2 (No. 16), The New Mutants (No. 17), The Lord of the Rings Trilogy (No. 18) and Buddy Games (No. 20) rounded out the list.
It’ll be interesting to see what you guys watch this week to ring in the New Year!
1 Tenet (Warner Bros.)
2 Elf (Warner Bros.)
3 Dr. Seuss’ The Grinch (2018, Universal)
4 National Lampoon’s Christmas Vacation (Warner Bros.)
5 The Polar Express (Warner Bros.)
6 Yellowstone: S3 (Paramount)
7 Harry Potter: Complete 8-film Collection (Warner Bros.)
8 Yellowstone: S1 (Paramount)
9 Home Alone (Disney)
10 A Christmas Story (Warner Bros.)
11 Fatman (Paramount)
12 Love Actually (Universal)
13 Friends: S1-10 (Warner Bros.)
14 Unhinged (Lionsgate)
15 How the Grinch Stole Christmas! (1966, Warner Bros.)
16 Yellowstone: S2 (Paramount)
17 The New Mutants (Fox)
18 The Lord Of The Rings Trilogy (Warner Bros.)
19 Home Alone 2: Lost in New York (Disney)
20 Buddy Games (Paramount)
The post Watched at Home: Top Streaming Films for the Week of Christmas appeared first on ComingSoon.net.
Wonder Woman 1984 is a strange movie. Not a bad movie, mind you, just a strange one. Of all the directions Patty Jenkins and Co. could have taken Diana, the most badass of badass Amazonians, they decided to throw her in the middle of a wacky wishing stone plot ripped straight from that Hawaiian episode of The Brady Bunch. No matter. The film is destined to make lots of money with over 50% of HBO Max users having already watched the film on Christmas Day. Regardless of audience reaction -which as it stands appears quite polarizing- Warner Bros. saw fit to immediately fast track a third film to be written and directed by Jenkins.
Clearly, Jenkins (in Joker voice) has plans for Diana, particularly considering that post-credit cameo that saw the OG Wonder Woman, Lynda Carter (who played Diana in the Wonder Woman TV series that ran from 1975-79) emerge as the mysterious Asteria.
Will WW3 see Diana square off against Lynda Carter? Will it be set in the 90s? Will Steve Trevor return, again? We’re here to run through what we know about the film so far and offer our oh-so-important insight as to what we think might happen. Read!
Midway through WW84, a quasi-reincarnated Steve Trevor bumps into some golden armor Diana has stowed in the corner of her apartment. The scene raises several questions, the least of which is: why the hell does Diana have legendary golden armor stashed in the corner of her apartment? (Answer: because she needs it for the finale – duh!) And, where did this armor come from?
As it turns out, the armor once belonged to the powerful Amazonian Asteria, who used it to hold off a bunch of no good rotten men so that her sisters could escape endless cat calls and flee to Themyscira. Diana explains that Asteria was presumed dead after her momentous stand — and possibly left naked somewhere since her armor was found sans body — which led the Amazonians with one… nay, two tall tasks: build a statue and hold a bunch of Olympic-style games in her honor.
Here’s the twist: Asteria isn’t dead at all — so, f**k that statue! In fact, she’s very much alive and perfectly content wandering the world adorned in a blue poncho discreetly saving people at random. Asteria clearly knows she’s the sh*t as evidenced by her overtly theatrical turn-and-pose-for-the-camera, but questions remain: How is Asteria alive? Is she good or bad? And why is she 70?
Note: Asteria only appears twice in the Wonder Woman comics and has a complicated relationship with Zeus in Greek mythology. Though, none of these sources will do much to help us understand the character Lynda Carter is portraying.
Word on the street is Patty Jenkins has two more Wonder Woman stories already mapped out in her brain. “The story continues after this in movies that I may or may not direct,” the director told EW, “but I have two more stories that become the completion of this story and it’s all about women stepping in as women, in the most loving, kind, pure and natural way. And making a difference in the world without having to change who they are to do it.”
So, since she included Carter’s cameo at the end of WW84, and seeing how the new movie is basically one giant homage to the original TV series right down to Pedro Pascal’s decidedly, ah, campy villain, one might surmise that Jenkins’ plans include Asteria/Carter in some way shape or form in future installments.
In all likelihood it will probably be an extended cameo. You know, one of those moments where the writers are stuck the heroes are stuck and need some answers? Diana will turn to the camera and say, “I know someone who can help.” Then we cut to a no good rotten man stealing a purse from a woman, after which a mysterious figure steps forward, knocks him down with ease and says, “(Something witty)” before tossing the purse back to the woman and winking at a suddenly inspired young girl sitting nearby. Diana will say “(Something witty)” off camera, Asteria will turn to see Diana, smile and embrace her friend while Steve Trevor (who is somehow brought back from the dead again) stands idly by looking completely dumbfounded. “I thought she was dead,” he will proclaim like an idiot. Then, we’ll get an expository dump revealing how Asteria escaped her fate and blah, blah, blah … End scene.
Or, maybe Jenkins will take a different angle and make Asteria the villain, which could set up a unique story in which Diana learns some hard truths about the Amazonians, her mother and her place in the universe — a story that could tie into Jenkins’ planned Amazonians spinoff! Nah. It’ll be a cameo.
What we do know about Wonder Woman Trois is that WB is perfectly comfortable with the tone established in WW84. Which means we’re likely to get something more on par with that horrible mall sequence in which Diana fights off a trio of bumbling, Home Alone-esque villains than any of the badass bits of Diana going toe-to-toe against beings from other planets as seen in Batman v Superman or the upcoming Zack Snyder’s Justice League Cut of Joss Whedon’s Justice League Snyder. To each their own.
The film could also further explore Cat-ra Cheetah, who was last seen seemingly bereft of her powers sulking into the camera at the end of WW84. In the comics Cheetah basically serves as Diana’s Joker, and since WW84 basically eschewed any and all comic book-inspired versions of the character, there are more than enough unique stories the threequel could tackle.
Or — and this is a bit of a stretch — since rumors abound that Chris Pine may return for the all-star Flash movie, it’s possible Steve Trevor is actually brought into the modern world for good this time so we can have funny montages of him figuring out cell phones — whilst avoiding any conversations revolving around what it was like to be dead, what it feels like to walk in someone else’s skin, etc. What would a Wonder Woman movie be without Steve Trevor, amirite?
Of course, if Jenkins wants to remain faithful to the TV show, she could always adapt one of the series’ many outlandish plotlines. There’s one in which Diana must take down a crazed Disco psychic, another where she battles a businessman looking to take control of the skateboarding industry, and yet another where she fights a giant gorilla. Sure, the plotlines sound ridiculous, but if I wrote “Diana takes on an oil tycoon corrupted by a powerful wishing stone,” you’d probably think that sounded stupid too.
In all seriousness, WW84’s characterization of Diana veers much closer to Lynda Carter’s portrayal of the heroine than Zack Snyder’s. That’s not a criticism, just an observation. In the TV series, Diana was a plucky superheroine who looked out for the little guy and used her powers to do more than just pummel bad guys to death – mainly due to budget limitations, but still, you get the gist.
In WW84, Jenkins has pushed Diana further away from Snyder’s initial depiction of the character, and Carter’s involvement likely cements this current direction moving forward, regardless of where Snyder’s Justice League takes her. Couple that with WB’s upcoming slate of films, namely Shazam 2 (featuring Sinbad!), Black Adam (featuring the Rock!), Aquaman 2 (featuring, uh, Amber Heard!) and James Gunn’s The Suicide Squad (featuring King Shark!) and it seems WB is keen to replicate Marvel’s lighthearted tone over Snyder’s apocalyptic, metal-heavy style — at least in terms of its shared universe.
Whether you believe this is the right course for the studio depends on just how excited you were to see Lynda Carter in that blue poncho.
The post CS Soapbox: THAT WW84 Cameo and What it Might Mean for WW3 appeared first on ComingSoon.net.
Christopher Nolan’s Tenet is an ambitious motion picture with a lot of big ideas, impressive set pieces and cool characters. It might also be described as a film brimming with too many ideas, many of which are thrown at the audience fast enough to induce whiplash. Still, Tenet remains an extraordinary accomplishment any way you slice it and stands as a truly unique blockbuster experience.
The film arrived on Blu-ray and digital platforms last week and so we thought we’d give it another whirl to see if we could catch a few tidbits we missed on the first go. Either we were too tired, dumbfounded or drunk to catch all the crazy details Nolan packs into the picture, or the damned soundtrack obstructed our viewing experience. At any rate, our second viewing was a lot easier to understand than the first — mostly because we used subtitles — even if it still left us scratching out heads.
[NOTE: Spoilers ahead, mateys. Don’t be traversing down this here path, lest you want the film ruined!]
INITIAL VIEWING: The prologue to Tenet is exquisitely shot but also quite difficult to understand. Faceless characters adorned in masks and body armor run amok in an opera before someone detonates a series of bombs and our hero, the Protagonist (John David Washington), gets taken away by his own team … or something.
LATEST VIEWING: Thanks to subtitles, we were able to grasp who was speaking and what they were speaking about. Yet, the whole scene is still quite confusing and isn’t fully explained until later in the film — and then, mostly in passing.
From what we gather, Tenet’s chief villains, Sator (Kenneth Branagh), discovered that a piece of a time-travel device would be at the opera. So, he staged a phony terrorist attack (and planted some of his men inside a SWAT unit to locate the device. These men then planted explosives in the hopes of blowing up the event to cover their tracks.
The Protagonist, working with the CIA, caught wind of Sator’s plan and went in to rescue an American VIP. Except, the Protagonist didn’t know the device had anything to do with time travel. He thought it was plutonium or had something to do with a nuclear bomb. He manages to save the informant, who then switches clothes with another guy and escapes offscreen. The Protagonist then sees the explosive charges, gathers them and throws them away in order to save the audience. At one point, one of Sator’s men discovers the Protagonist is not on his team and tries to kill him and is instead killed by a mysterious man brandishing a red string on his backpack — this turns out to be Neal (played by Batman).
Is … that right? Or did we miss something?
INITIAL VIEWING: This is quite a minor detail but during the big climax of the film, Kat (Elizabeth Debicki) attempts to seduce Sator on a yacht in the hopes of keeping him alive long enough for the Protagonist to accomplish his mission. In an unintentional bit of hilarity, she unloads a gallon of suntan lotion on the man’s back; a moment rendered all the more hilarious when she pulls a gun on Sator and dives into a dramatic monologue while he listens with goo dripping from his back.
LATEST VIEWING: The reason for this exercise in extreme suntan lotion-ing is so that Kat can more easily slide the poor bastard’s body off the yacht once she blows shoots him. Kat even makes a point of saying, “Suntan lotion is quite slippery,” which might be a case of Nolan explaining too much, but also kind of a neat tidbit to keep in mind should you ever find yourself needing to slide a body off a boat.
INITIAL VIEWING: As stated, there’s a lot happening in Tenet, especially in the action-packed finale which features helicopters, bombs, lots of shooting, and people running forwards through time and backwards through time — it’s also unlike anything ever put on screen. Except, everyone, including the Protagonist, Neal and Ives (Aaron Taylor-Johnson, randomly) are wearing masks that make it difficult to discern one character from the other.
After the first viewing, we were shocked to discover that Neal had in fact died during the big battle. Again, it was late, and alcohol may have hindered our ability to process so much info.
LATEST VIEWING: Watching it a second time, it’s clear that Neal operates in several different timelines during the film’s climax. We see him chase down the Protagonist and Ives in a truck in the hopes of preventing them from going into the giant tunnel that leads to the thingy; and later learn that he not only helped the Protagonist and Ives open a locked door, but also saved the former’s life – explained by the red string hanging out the back of his backpack. That makes Neal’s scene at the end of the film all the more heartbreaking as he knows he’s got to go back into battle to die in order to accomplish the mission.
INITIAL VIEWING: The first act of Tenet features a lot of talk about a Goya painting. In fact, one might surmise the film holds the world record for the number of minutes spent discussing a Goya painting … which is far too long.
LATEST VIEWING: So, here’s what we gathered on our second go … Kat works as an art specialist at a fancy gallery place and was given a Goya painting by a close friend. She identified the painting as legit and that led to Sator bidding $9 million on the piece. As it turns out, the Goya was a fake — either designed by Kat’s friend or something. Sator learned the truth and hung Kat’s blunder over her head like a weapon, forcing her to stay with him. If Sator turned her in, Kat would likely lose her son and have her reputation ruined.
The Protagonist uses the Goya as a way to strong arm Kat into setting up a meeting with Sator, and even promises to destroy the blasted painting when he and Neal smash a giant plane into a secured art thingy at an airport. Except, perhaps due to his abilities to travel through time, Sator gets weird feeling and takes the painting out of storage. He then gives it back to Kat (quite literally on a silver platter) as a f**k you for her daring attempt to break free from his grasp.
INITIAL VIEWING: Tenet has a plot that is explained via short conversations, garbled radios, people with thick accents and Nolan’s signature quick-cutting style. There’s a lot of talk about physics and more than enough exposition to understand why, for example, the Protagonist needs a fire engine during the big heist scene. But, the actual point of the movie is hard to understand on first viewing since the audience is mostly playing catch up throughout the epic 2-and-a-half-hour runtime. Something about an angry Russian who may or may not be dying who decides to destroy the world because his wife doesn’t love him?
LATEST VIEWING: After this re-watch, we think the plot goes like this: Sator is dying and, because he’s an asshole, decides if he can’t have the world than no one can. He is working with a future agency to destroy the world by reversing the entropy of the Earth. The reason being, in the future, the world has been destroyed. So, future people decide to risk the grandfather paradox by destroying their past selves to prevent climate change. Sator is recruited when he is very young to find pieces of something called the Algorithm which have been hidden in nuclear plants across the country. He is paid in future gold to find the materials, which he is then expected to hide in the dead drop in his old hometown. The future people will find the Algorithm so they can mess with time as well, right?
Ultimately, the Protagonist is behind the entire pincer movement and is essentially working for himself – a fact he learns only at the end of the movie. So, his future self inverted back before everything happened and planned this entire thing, even right down to his own recruitment. There’s even a theory that Neil is actually Max, Kat’s son, in the future. Meaning, the Protagonist recruited him and then inverted him back to the events of the film (or much earlier) in order to help him stop Sator.
Questions remain: Why does Sator go back in time to destroy the world knowing full well he didn’t succeed because the future still exists? As stated by Neil, “What’s happened, happened.” The future is connected to the past, right? Or is this an alternate version of reality where, if Sator succeeded, a different future may form? The whole grandfather paradox, or the notion that going back in time and killing your grandpa would destroy your timeline, is speculated on quite a bit in Tenet, though the conclusion they arrive at is, “We’re not sure.”
Who the hell is Priya? Early in the film, the Protagonist goes to talk with a mysterious individual named Priya who reveals a bunch of info to him regarding the film’s plot. Except, as it turns out, most of what she says is wrong or misinformation. So, was she simply another cog in the plan to keep the Protagonist moving, or something else entirely? And why did he kill her? There seems to be two factions of peoples in the film: those who want the Algorithm pieces joined together and those who want to keep it apart. She fits in the former, we think … So, is she trying to destroy the world as well?
Why did Sator try to blow up the car with the Protagonist inside? Surely, he had to know that doing so wouldn’t actually ignite the car since everything operates in reverse when a person is inverted. You would think he would just shoot the man to ensure his death actually occurs — but that’s an argument one could make about any maniacal villain.
What happens to Kat? At the end of the film, Kat kills Sator and leaps of the yacht in full view of her past self. Does she end up going back to the future to continue her life with her son? Does she remain in the past? Does she marry the Protagonist?
How far back is the Protagonist operating? Can the future try to destroy the past via other means? Have they tried it before? Is Sator only one of several people they’ve contacted? Why is the sky blue? Why do we call them buildings when they’ve already been built? Why do we say TV sets when you only get one?
God damn you Christopher Nolan.
The post 5 Things We Learned from Watching Tenet on Blu-Ray appeared first on ComingSoon.net.
On Christmas, Wonder Woman 1984 became the first DC superhero film to simultaneously hit theaters and HBO Max. Regardless of when the pandemic ends, HBO Max may still get new DC movies of its own. During an interview with DC Films’ Walter Hamada, The New York Times reports that up to four expensive DC movies a year will be released in theaters starting in 2022. However, other films, “perhaps focused on riskier characters like Batgirl and Static Shock will arrive exclusively on HBO Max.”
Director Joss Whedon stepped down from the Batgirl movie in 2018. Christina Hodson (Birds of Prey) is attached to write the script. Warner Bros. is also looking for a female director to replace Whedon.
Back in October, Michael B. Jordan signed on to produce the Static Shock film. Jordan and Reginald Hudlin are overseeing the Milestone Media/DC adaptation. A screenwriter and a director have yet to be hired.
Additionally, Hamada told The New York Times that HBO Max TV spinoffs will be considered for every upcoming DC film.
“With every movie that we’re looking at now, we are thinking, ‘What’s the potential Max spinoff?’” related Hamada.
Hamada also expressed confidence that audiences won’t be confused by the introduction of the DC multiverse, which is being used to explain films that don’t share any continuity with each other.
“I don’t think anyone else has ever attempted this,” said Hamada. “But audiences are sophisticated enough to understand it. If we make good movies, they will go with it.”
Recommended Reading: Static Shock Vol. 1: Supercharged
What do you think about the possibility that Batgirl and Static Shock films will go direct-to-HBO Max? Let us know in the comment section below!
The post Batgirl and Static Shock Films May Go Directly To HBO Max appeared first on ComingSoon.net.
As expected, the superhero epic Wonder Woman 1984 took the top spot at the domestic box office with an estimated $16.7M from 2,151 theaters. That total tops Tenet’s $9.3M 3-day Labor Day weekend and The Croods: A New Age’s $9.7M 3-day haul over the Black Friday weekend. Internationally, Patty Jenkins’ sequel added an additional $19.4M, raising its worldwide running total to $85M. The pic earned $2.2M from 460 IMAX screens around the world, including $1.2M from 180 domestic screens.
It’s a good — not great — start for Wonder Woman, which opened simultaneously on HBO Max. China continues to offer disappointing returns, but the pic played well during its opening weekend in Australia with $4.5M on 650 screens, $2.5M in Korea and India where it hauled in the biggest Hollywood opening of the year, according to Deadline.
Warner Bros. just announced it will fast track WW3 to be written and directed by Jenkins.
Back on the domestic front, the Tom Hanks drama News of the World collected $2.4M from 1,900 theaters for the No. 2 spot, bumping Croods: A New Age down to No. 3 with $1.7M ($30.3M in its fifth week of release). The only other new releases didn’t make too much noise, namely Promising Young Woman ($680K) and Pinocchio ($275K).
Elsewhere, Pixar’s Soul had a nice start in 10 overseas markets where the animated pic collected $7.6M including $5.5M in China. Per Deadline, the opening in the Middle Kingdom is double what Onward did way back in March.
Meanwhile, Demon Slayer The Movie: Mugen Train has now become the highest-grossing movie in Japan’s history with an astonishing $313M total, trumping the previous tally set by 2001’s Spirited Away.
Finally, Croods snagged another $9.2M worldwide to bring its global cume to $98.3M.
The post Wonder Woman Scores Record for Pandemic at the Domestic Box Office appeared first on ComingSoon.net.