So is Peter Jackson going to direct The Hobbit? Or will it be his protege Neill Bolmkamp, who directed District 9? Who knows — I just hope this mess with MGM gets sorted out soon.  I’m still getting over my enormous disappointment that MGM’s financial situation resulted in Guillermo del Toro’s departure from The Hobbit films.  But boy would it be great to see PJ take the helm once again…

Great new trailer is up for The Social Network, the new film about facebook directed by David Fincher and scripted by Aaron Sorkin.

So, we finally got out first glimpse at The Green Hornet and… I’m still not quite sure what to think.  This film is either going to be awesome or a total catastrophe…

This is a cool poster.

CHUD’s list of the Worst CGI in Film History continues, and it’s well worth your time.

Will we ever get another decent X-Men film?  I loved X-Men and X2, but X3 was a crushing disappointment and the less spoken of the abominable X-Men Origins: Wolverine, the better.  I hate prequels, as a rule, so when word came out last year that the next X-film would be a prequel entitled X-Men: First Class, I thought that was a big mis-step.  So what now gives me hope?  Director Matthew Vaughn (Layer Cake, Stardust, Kick Ass) and stars James McAvoy (Children of Dune, Atonement, Wanter) as Professor X and Michael Fassbender (Inglourious Basterds) as Magneto.  An ember of hope is fanned…

Are we about to finally get another decent Predator film?  The first Predator is awesome — one on my favorite movies ever.  But the second one (set in the future with Danny Glover as the lead) is weak, and the less spoken of the two Alien Vs. Predator films the better.  But Robert Rodriguez and Nimrod Antal’s Predators is set for release in just a few short weeks, and damn if this new trailer isn’t pretty awesome.  An ember of hope is fanned…

It’s hard for me to believe that a new Planet of the Apes film is really happening.  And now I read that John Lithgow and Freida Pinto (Slumdog Millionaire) have joined the cast?  Um, okay… An ember of hope is… well… we’ll see…

Before seeing his latest film, The Lovely Bones, I thought it fitting to seek out a gaping hole in my Peter Jackson viewing filmography: his 1994 film, Heavenly Creatures.  I’ve been hearing/reading about this film since the lengthy pre-release build-up to The Fellowship of the Ring.  (By the way: Wow!  It’s hard to believe it’s been almost a decade since Fellowship, which was released in 2001!!)  Heavenly Creatures seems to be rather well thought-of, and since the Lord of the Rings films have made me a life-long Pater Jackson fan, it seemed crazy that I had never seen this movie.  It’s a situation I was happy to remedy last month.

Heavenly Creatures tells the true-life story of the friendship between two young New Zealand girls in 1953/4.  Melanie Lynskey plays Pauline.  An artistic, shy introvert, she is friendless and miserable at the Catholic school which she attends.  Her world changes, though, when Juliet Hulme, played by Kate Winslet, arrives at her school.  Juliet is from a wealthy family, and her travels with (and without) her parents make her seem extraordinarily worldly to Pauline.  Like Pauline, she is artistic and bucks authority, but Juliet more outgoing and brazen.  The two bond almost instantly.  Deep friendships like these happen between schoolgirls all the time across the globe, with less tragic outcomes.  But here, the increasingly unhappy home lives of each of the girls pushes them to become more dependent upon one another’s company, and they begin to withdraw more and more deeply into their shared fantasies.  Feeding off one another, those escapist fantasies soon take a terrible turn.

Heavenly Creatures is the first screen role of both Melanie Lynskey and Kate Winslet.  It’s no surprise that this proved to be a star-making turn for Ms. Winslet, as she displays terrific abilities and assurance for such a young actress (not to mention great beauty).  As for Ms. Lynskey, I was delighted to realize that this was her first screen role as well.  She’s nowhere near as well-known as Kate Winslet, but if you were an avid movie-goer in 2009 then I’d wager you’ve enjoyed her work.  (She had key roles in Away We Go, The Informant!, and Up in the Air.)

Heavenly Creatures is an interesting film.  I found it to be a bit hard to get into, at first.  There was something about the first 45 minutes that kept me, as a viewer, from being sucked in to the story.  I wasn’t sure if it was the script, the acting, or the directing, but everything seemed a bit “stagey” and over-wrought (filled with dramatic zooms and music that didn’t seem to quite fit the proceedings).  With a based-on-a-true-story like this one, I was expecting a more naturalistic tone.  But as the film progressed, I realized that Heavenly Creatures is not only Pauline & Juliet’s story, in many respects the film is crafted so as to be from their viewpoint.  So of course things seemed overly-dramatic — EVERYTHING is overly dramatic to a pair of 14 year-old girls!

As the film progresses, we see Pauline & Juliet’s fantasy life grow and deepen, and in several inventive sequences we, the audience, are included in their fantasies.  It is here where one can begin to suspect what might have drawn Peter Jackson — the man who would go on to direct The Frighteners, The Lord of the Rings, and King Kong — to this film.  That’s not to say that Heavenly Creatures is a visual effects extravaganza!  Oh no, the effects are very low-key, and confined to a few scenes.  But these effects sequences are handled with great skill, and are an inventive and effective visual way at allowing us to understand Pauline & Juliet’s developing fantasy world.

I found myself most engaged with the film during it’s brutal final 20-or-so minutes.  Once the girls decide on their horrifying course of action, Mr. Jackson takes us step-by-step through their preparations, their anticipation, and finally through the terrible moment itself.  This is an agonizing sequence to watch unfold, and it is finally here where we see Mr. Jackson’s skills as a filmmaker on full display.  The suspense and growing dread at what one knows is coming was positively painful to bear, and I found myself almost begging the movie to cut away!  Powerful stuff.

I can’t say that I was thoroughly taken by Heavenly Creatures.  Perhaps the film had been built up a bit too much in my mind.  There is, without a doubt, a lot to enjoy: Kate Winslet and Melanie Lynskey’s first screen performances, the fantasy sequences, and those tense final 20-or-so minutes.  The film is perhaps most interesting as a peek at several great talents (Winslet, Lynskey, and Mr., Jackson himself) that were about to emerge than it is a fully successful motion picture in its own right.

Still, I’m glad to have finally seen it, and it proved to be an interesting point of comparison with Peter Jackson’s 2009 film, The Lovely Bones.

How many really great sci-fi films have there been in the last decade?  It’s pretty slim, right?  OK, J. J. Abrams’ Star Trek movie was pretty good… but before that?  I can think of Cloverfield (2008), Children of Men (2006), Serenity (2005), The Matrix (1999), Galaxy Quest (1999)… what else?  Signs (2002) and Vanilla Sky (2001) have a sci-fi twist to them so maybe they count.  That’s eight films.  Not a pretty substantial list, huh?

Well, here’s one to add: Neil Blomkamp’s District 9.  

You’re best off entering the film armed only with what little was revealed in the intriguing trailers: twenty years ago an enormous alien craft came to a halt in the sky over Johannesburg.  Almost one million aliens (derogatively called “prawns” by the locals) are rescued from the powerless craft.  These homeless creatures quickly develop into a new underclass in the city, dwelling in an enormous slum designated District 9.

That’s just the set-up.  I went into the film completely clueless about the actual plot of the film (and what a delight that was, by the way, in this age of movie spoilers!) and I won’t spoil it for you either.  I will tell you only that actor Sharlto Copley (a fresh face who I had never seen in a film before) does a tremendous job in the central role of Wikus van der Merwe.  Mr. Copley takes Wikus (and the audience) along on a staggering emotional journey over the course of the film.  When first we meet MNU (Multinational United) agent Wikus, he’s something of an affable buffoon, but his responses to the extraordinary events that follow are the meat and potatoes of the story , and when we leave him at the film’s end it’s hard to believe we’re leaving the same character.  It’s a tremendous performance, and one the success of the film really hangs on.

Well, that and the film’s astounding visual energy.  Mr. Blomkamp demonstrates terrific visual flair at the helm of this film.  District 9 was famously made after the film version of Halo (which would have been produced by Peter Jackson and directed by Mr. Blomkamp, as District 9 wound up being) fell apart.  District 9 was made on a very small budget (reportedly 30 million dollars) and shot in South Africa.  I have no idea how Mr. Blomkamp and his team possibly pulled this film off on that tiny budget, but my hat is off to them.  The film is a visual feast.  I have no idea how they brought all the “prawns” to life — CGI?  Make-up and prosthetics?  Some combination?  – but they are a phenomenal achievement.  The aliens are completely believable — and they’re also, by the way, very well-designed.  I’ve seen a lot of very derivative looking aliens in movies, but these creatures are quite unique and distinct-looking.  Well done.  There’s also some terrific action in the film’s climax — events build and build way past what one might have expected to see realized in such a small film.  Bravo.

Of course, the very best sci-fi is not just a shoot-em-up action-adventure, but a tale with something to say, and District 9 definitely fits into that category.  There are obvious parallels to apartheid in the plight of the “prawns,” but even that is just one layer.  The emotional core of the film, in my mind, has to do with the moral responsibility of the observer, of the bystander, when faced with an enormous wrong.  That is the key issue with which Wikus, and the audience, is forced to grapple, and the answers are not easy.

I’m so happy to have seen a new, great sci-fi movie!  District 9 is a terrific achievement.  Don’t miss it.

Some great new trailers have hit the web in recent days, and they have quite a lot in common with one another in some fascinating ways.

First up, we’ve finally been given our first substantial glimpse into what Terry Gilliam has cooked up in his new film The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus, and, as one might expect, it is spectacularly bizarre.  I cannot wait to see Heath Ledger’s final performance.  Click here for the trailer.

Is that not enough cinematic weirdness for you?  Then check out the trailer for Tim Burton’s version of Alice in Wonderland.  That man was born to make this movie.  I just hope it has a little more life to it than Burton’s version of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory did.

Are we on a roll yet?  Continuing the theme of visionary directors adapting famous books, take a peak at the newly-released second trailer for Spike Jonze’s adaptation of Where the Wild Things Are.  That looks absolutely marvelous, doesn’t it?

Finally, speaking of visionary directors adapting famous books, here’s a long-anticipated (by me, at least) look at Peter Jackson’s adaptation of Alice Sebold’s The Lovely Bones that is absolutely haunting.  Can’t wait.

Big dumb summer movie trailer alert!  It’s the new trailer for Transformers 2, filled with lots of robot smashing action, and the new trailer for G.I. Joe, filled with Ninjas and, um, Eiffel Tower smashing action!  Sigh.  Hard to believe these two iconic and beloved cartoons of my youth are both now big-budget blockbuster movies coming out this summer.  Wouldn’t it be amazing if there were both really awesome?  Isn’t it sort of sad to know that they definitely won’t be?

For a peek at a movie that might actually be good, click here to check out District 9, the new sci-fi flick directed by Neill Blomkamp and executive produced by Peter Jackson (The Lord of The Rings).  Color me intrigued.

Keeping up with the trailers, here’s a glimpse at the new film from Francis Ford Coppola, Tetro.  I never saw his last film, the critically-demolished Youth Without Youth, but this looks really interesting.  It’s a new film from Francis Ford Coppola!  Of course it looks interesting!

Did you know that Robert Rodriguez is working on a new Predator film??  If it happens, it’ll be called Predators (in a clever nod to James Cameron’s sequel to Alien, entitled Aliens).  Check out the tantalizing details here.  I need to see this movie RIGHT NOW.

So it’s been ten years since The Phantom Menace, huh?  Here’s an interesting look back.  I agree with this fellow’s thoughts about the two Phantom Menace trailers (among the finest trailers ever crafted), but I certainly don’t think anywhere nearly as highly of that dreadful turd of a movie as he does.  (You can read my memories of first seeing Episode I in theatres here, and my thoughts on the movie looking back almost a decade later here.)

Did you not have enough Star Trek content here on the site for the past two weeks?  Then check out this great piece from the Onion A.V. Club: “Space Racism is Bad and 17 Other Not-So-Subtle Lessons Learned From Star Trek.”  If you’ve never seen it before, you MUST scroll down to the clip of William Shatner’s Kirk reading the Preamble to U.S. Constitution in selection #12, from the absurd Trek episode The Omega Glory.  ”WE… the… PEOPLE… not written for thekingsorthechiefsortherichorthepowerful but for ALLTHEPEOPLE!”  Classic Shatnerian magnificence. 

Since seeing J.J. Abrams’ Star Trek film, I’ve been enjoying reading all the different reactions on-line and in the press.  I always enjoy Alexandra DuPont’s film reviews when they appear (not often enough to suit me) on aintitcoolnews.com, and her take on the new film is well worth your time.  (I remember well — and agree with entirely — her spot-on evisceration of Star Trek: Nemesis, which she quotes at the start of her review.)  Star Trek author William Leisner (who wrote a terrific novella in Pocket Books’ recent Myriad Universes series, reviewed by yours truly here) has a terrific opposite take, giving a right-on-the-money account of all the problematic plot holes in the film.  Trek author Geoff Trowbridge (who also wrote an installment in Myriad Universes) has a similarly interesting take.  My own views (click here if you missed my full review) are somewhat in the middle.  I share a lot of Ms. DuPont’s love for the film, but my enjoyment was lessened by all the plot holes that Mr. Leisner and Mr. Trowbridge list.  

That’s all for today — See you back here tomorrow!

Among my very favorite DVD sets are Peter Jackson’s extended versions of the Lord of the Rings trilogy.  Being a fanatical LOTR fan, it is a delight to have longer versions of the films that incorporate action, character moments, and lots of other fun details drawn from the books.  The LOTR extended DVDs also boast some of the most comprehensive and enjoyable extras I have ever seen – detailed, feature-length documentaries that cover every aspect of the making of the films, from the casting to the production to the music to the editing to the guys who made the chain mail for all the elvish armor.  Just fantastic stuff, and it gives us a wonderful peek into the experiences of all the talented craftsmen and women who toiled on the LOTR films for over half a decade.

Because of that, and because I enjoyed Peter Jackson’s King Kong more than most, when the extended DVD set of King Kong was released over two years ago (in November, 2006), I of course picked it up right away.  However, for some reason, it subsequently sat unopened on my DVD shelf.  I’m not sure why that is.  Maybe it’s because the thought that a longer version of Kong was rather daunting?  As I wrote above, I really loved Jackson’s remake of Kong, but even I must admit that the film (clocking in at 187 minutes) was longer than it needed to be.  Even from the comfort of my own couch, the idea of pressing play on the 201 minute version was, I suppose, not something I was in a terrible hurry to do.

But I did finally sit down to watch the extended version of King Kong this weekend, and let me say I was delighted.  Unlike the Lord of the Rings extended editions, this is not a complete re-working of the film.  The changes are actually rather minimal, mostly consisting of a couple of additional hideous encounters on Skull Island.  If you didn’t like King Kong in its theatrical form, this new version isn’t going to change your mind.  But for me, watching Kong I right away remembered every reason why I had enjoyed the film so much when I saw it in theatres.

Anyone who knows anything about this Kong remake knows that it was Peter Jackson’s dream since he was 9 years old, and that love pores off of every frame of this film.  The movie is a fantasy, a fairy-tale of the best kind, and the terrific score and the sumptuous visuals right away sucked me in to the world of 1933 New York and the story being told. 

There is no question that it is too long, and I do feel that Jackson’s love for the material blinded him to the necessity to make some tough editing choices to tighten things up.  But, to me, this version of King Kong is spectacle of the best kind.  The visuals of this film are so over-the-top astonishing as to boggle my mind.  The Brontosaurus stampede in the middle of the film would be the show-stopping action set piece of any other film, but here it is just a prelude to such sequences as the incredible extended Kong-versus-three-T-Rexes fight, Kong’s rampage in NYC, and of course the final confrontation atop the Empire State Building.  But forget the action sequences, and consider all the other visual wonders to behold in nearly every scene.  I am hard-pressed to find any shot in this film that isn’t a visual effects shot.  From the wonderful visions of old New York, to all the time spent at sea on the Venture on its ill-fated voyage, to all of the adventures on Skull Island, the film is a glorious assemblage of visual effects eye-candy.  Jackson took the team whose skills had been honed on the LOTR films and pushed them even further here, and the combination of sets, costumes, matte-paintings, miniatures, digital set extensions and CGI character work creates a full-realized world straight from Jackson’s imagination to our eyeballs.

All this talk of visual effects, and I haven’t even mentioned Kong himself!  That is how effortless and incredible the Kong visual effects are – these talented folks have brought to life an incredible creature, and it all works so successfully and feels so real that you hardly think of Kong as a visual effect!  The moment where Kong laughs at Ann, who has been demonstrating her vaudeville routines in a desperate attempt to stay alive, is a true wonder.  Just astounding work.

And the DVD is just as thorough and interesting as the LOTR ones were.  King Kong might be the most well-documented movie of all time.  Between the hours and hours of production diaries that were released on-line during the films’ production and post-production (and collected on DVD by the Peter Jackson’s Production Diaries set and disc two of the theatrical version of King Kong’s DVD release), I had thought there wasn’t anything more to know about the making of this film.  But this extended DVD contains over three hours of additional material, and it is fascinating and terrifically engaging.  The effort extended by so many people to bring this story to life is really something.

How is the extended version?  I had expected that most of the additions would be character-building stuff added on to the first part of the movie.  But that is not the case.  The film is almost unchanged until the Venture arrives at Skull Island.  At which point several sequences are added, most notably an encounter with a whole host of vicious, nasty critters in a swamp.  (Interestingly enough, the character stuff in NYC and on the Venture that I had expected would be what was added to this extended version are, instead, most of what make up the over 40 minutes of deleted scenes included on the disc.  There are a lot of interesting moments to be found, but all of which were cut for good reaspn.)  The additions that were included in the extended cut aren’t bad – they don’t really slow the film down – but nor are they essential or revelatory in any way.  For a film as long as Kong was originally, I have a feeling the theatrical version will be the one I’ll prefer to revisit in the future. 

And I am sure that I will be revisiting it.  Yes, Peter Jackson’s King Kong is an indulgent movie.  But goodness, how great would it be to see some other filmmakers create as indulgent a piece of work as this!! Jackson’s success with the LOTR films, combined with the advances of effects technology, enabled him to create exactly the film he wanted, unbound (or at least, barely bound) by technical or budgetary limitations.  The result is, for me, a true visual epic and a phenomenally enjoyable experience.  I really haven’t seen a lot of movies like this one.  And since, at home, I can pause the flick several times to go to the bathroom, my major complaint is ameliorated.