Filed under: Music & Musicals, Romance, Paramount, Celebrities and Controversy, DIY/Filmmaking, Newsstand, Remakes and Sequels

The biggest enemy of the Footloose remake isn't a music-hating preacher, but its own Creative Differences. After it finally recovered from the loss of Zac Efron by recruiting Chace Crawford and Julianne Hough, Variety reports that Footloose has now lost its captain. Director Kenny Oretega has left the project due to "differences over tone and budget."

Reportedly, Ortega's vision included elaborate dance sequences and a budget of $30 million or more. But Paramount's Adam Goodwin had something different in mind. He saw Footloose with a little less dancing, a little less music, and a lot more edge. He was also hoping the budget would come in around $25 million. Who is right? I don't know. If you want something closer to the original, I'd say Goodwin is spot on. Kevin Bacon did his lithe dance moves in barns and car washes. It was on the cheap. It was also pretty edgy (relatively speaking) in its handling of teenage sexuality. Is any remake going to feature its heroine yelling "I'm not even a virgin!" in the middle of a church? Nah. They'll just dress her sexy.

Paramount is now on the hunt for a new director in order to kick off its Sunday shoes and begin filming by 2010. I was going to say "Maybe this'll be the end of this silly remake" but there's no way that'll happen. Instead, I vote that this Footloose be made with two simultaneous storylines. As they tell the story of the repressive Midwest, we'll also learn about the behind the scenes drama that mirrors the onstage action. Will Ortega's lush vision of music and dance win out? Or will the repressive Goodman crush his freedom of expression? It would be like The French Lieutenant's Woman for high schoolers.

Permalink | Email this | Comments

Filed under: Celebrities and Controversy, Fandom, Images

Are you finding it increasingly harder to take the changing physicality of Hollywood actors?

Things change; they grow old, they morph, and sometimes even evolve. It's a fact of life, and usually a good fact of life. But lately, I find myself constantly having to try and ignore certain physical aspects to enjoy a trailer, an image, a film. Rather than absorbing the project, the mood, the plot, I'm trying to blur my eyes so Mr. or Ms. So-and-So doesn't look quite so silly.

On the one hand, of course, it's the plastic surgery. Practically everyone in Tinseltown does something. There's no way everyone has smooth foreheads and bright skin. But when the random nose job or improvement turns into new cheeks, chin, or balloonish lips until the original person is nowhere to be seen, it becomes too much. If this was happening to actors known for morphing into characters, whose performance shines much brighter than their own image or personality, fine. But when the stars whose name and faces are their fame, you can't ignore it. I simply cannot see Mickey Rourke without thinking back to The Pope of Greenwich Village, spot Meg Ryan without trying to recognize the girl from Innerspace, Melanie Griffith, Sylvester Stallone, Nicole Kidman... Can they really think that's better than a few wrinkles and some sagging skin?

Continue reading Discuss: When an Actor's Look Gets in the Way

Permalink | Email this | Comments

Filed under: RumorMonger, Celebrities and Controversy, Fandom, Tom Cruise

Perception is everything, and I don't mean to get all metaphysical on you, but sometimes it's how the world sees us that can define who we are -- but what if the world thinks you're a psycho? In an interview with American Psycho director Mary Harron, she was reminiscing about the black comedy, and as it turns out, her star Christian Bale based his vision of the murdering yuppie on -- wait for it -- Tom Cruise. According to Harron, she and Bale had been collaborating on the character when "...he [Bale] called me and he had been watching Tom Cruise on David Letterman, and he just had this very intense friendliness with nothing behind the eyes, and he was really taken with this energy."

Actors take inspiration from all kinds of places, but you can't help but wonder if Bale saw something that we would all be made painfully aware of: the 'crazy' side of Cruise. And it was that same energy that worked so well in P.T. Anderson's Magnolia when Cruise played motivational speaker Frank T.J. Mackey. But for me, what made this story truly funny, is that who could have predicted that soon enough Bale would be dealing with his own troubled image in Hollywood as a rage-aholic and something of a bully? On the upside, though, maybe Bale's on-set rant will one day inspire another young actor (ahh, the circle of life).

These guys aren't the only ones to battle troubled reputations (whether or not they're deserved), and after the jump: a few more stars who have run their reputations into the ditch...

Continue reading Quick List: Celebrities With The Worst Reputations

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

Filed under: Celebrities and Controversy, Newsstand, Politics, Nicole Kidman, Fan Rant

As you may have seen, Nicole Kidman is the focus of some ridiculous headlines today, with everyone from the AP to The Hollywood Reporter and E! blaring that Kidman "conceded" to Washington that Hollywood contributes to violence against women. It's the kind of headline I hate: Attention grabbing, anti-entertainment, and completely misleading.

Kidman is a Goodwill Ambassador for UNIFEM, and was testifying before a House Foreign Affairs committee. Her goal was funding and resources, and to discuss violence against women overseas. The committee is currently debating whether to pass legislation for humanitarian relief. In true government fashion Rep. Dana Rohrabacher ( R-Calif) decided having A Real Hollywood Star was a chance to shift the discussion into shallow ground, and ask Kidman whether or not the movie industry had played "a bad role." Kidman, who probably came prepared to actually discuss humanitarian efforts, gave a fairly bland answer: "Probably." She hastily added that she didn't feel her own roles had, that she was through with roles that portrayed women as weak or as sex objects. "I can't be responsible for all of Hollywood but I can certainly be responsible for my own career," she added, and argued that Hollywood had also "contributed to solutions."

Undoubtedly, many will blame Kidman for making a shallow statement, and poke fun at her poorer script choices, but surely the blame falls on Rep. Rohrabacher for such an inane question. While Hollywood's portrayal and treatment of women is hardly stellar (if you read Cinematical regularly, you know we complain about it on an obsessive basis), and is certainly harmful socially and culturally, I would hardly blame it for violence. That's just the usual government claptrap that loves blaming the big, bad movie industry for glorifying sex and violence, and would now attempt to dodge humanitarian obligations by blaming Moulin Rouge.

Continue reading Has Hollywood Contributed To Violence Against Women?

Permalink | Email this | Comments

Filed under: Celebrities and Controversy, Harry Potter, Lists

Continue reading The Five Most Moronic Movie Families

Permalink | Email this | Comments

Before the fine year of 2008 draws to a close, it is time for me to do that sad, near traumatic task of composing my annual Lemon List- the worst films of 2008. It should be said that I include, in my list, films that have been released in North America/the U.S.A and not overseas. These are pictures I have seen at one point or another during the past year. Some I have reviewed here on CoP, others…well, my time was robbed enough. (more…)

If you were to believe the buzz on the web and magazines, it is that Danny Boyle has made his ultimate masterpiece with this movie and is expected to do very well at the big movie award shows. Setting his latest movie surprisingly in India, it is difficult not to like the imagery as India is the place on earth that attacks the senses on all levels. When watching the movie, all the intensity and splendour I experienced when I visited this country some eight years ago, comes rushing back in as Boyle succeeds in harnessing the raw energy this place holds. Maybe only Tarsem Singh’s The Fall surpasses this as far as ‘beatification’ of the Indian scenery goes. Then again, that may not be a fair comparison as Tarsem Singh’s sole purpose in life seems to be shooting magnificent imagery for our viewing pleasure. Boyle on the other hands does not shy away to also show us the dirty and gritty reality of India next to its splendour, and it is this juxtaposition of images that gives a more truthful picture and a surprising backdrop for a romantic story.
(more…)

Filed under: Celebrities and Controversy, Fandom, DIY/Filmmaking

Near the end of the closing credits for Clint Eastwood's new Gran Torino is a disclaimer that caught my attention. It reads as follows:

"No person or entity associated with this film received payment or anything of value, or entered into any agreement, in connection with the depiction of tobacco products."

In other words: Some of the characters smoke in this movie, but that was our choice. The tobacco industry didn't pay us off.

According to the site Smoke Free Movies, which makes some excellent points but tends to go overboard (they think any film with smoking should automatically be rated R), the disclaimer is a recent addition to Warner Bros. products. It started appearing on Warner DVDs of movies that contain smoking at the beginning of 2008, and was added to smoky theatrical releases this fall. Gran Torino was the first time I'd noticed it, but I don't always stay for the credits.

The site also reports that Universal Pictures (at the behest of its parent company, General Electric) has started including a somewhat weaker disclaimer on its movies that contain smoking: "The depictions of tobacco smoking contained in this film are based solely on artistic consideration and are not intended to promote tobacco consumption." Note that they don't say they weren't paid off by the tobacco industry, only that they didn't intend for it to encourage people to smoke.

Continue reading Just FYI: The Smoking in 'Gran Torino' Was Done for Free

Permalink | Email this | Comments

Filed under: Action, Sci-Fi & Fantasy, Deals, Warner Brothers, Celebrities and Controversy, 20th Century Fox, Newsstand, Comic/Superhero/Geek

Watchmen is not going to end 2008 on a high note. According to The Hollywood Reporter, a lawyer for 20th Century Fox has said that the studio will seek an order delaying the release of the film. Ever since Fox first filed its suit, Watchmen fans have been panicked that the film's legal woes would delay its March 6 release. Seriously, Fox, don't you just want some money? A nice chunk of money? Don't kick the Watchmen when they're down.

Though the judge ruled in favor of Fox on Christmas, agreeing that Fox retained copyright on the film, he now plans to hold the trial as planned on January 20th. Warner Bros finally spoke out about the messy situation, via their lawyer, and said that he didn't know if the studio would appeal, but that trial was necessary, and a settlement was "unlikely."

So, despite that the scales of justice are tipped in Fox's favor, Warner Bros refuses to blink and agree to a payoff. Considering that Paramount already has the international distribution rights, they don't want to lose any more of the box office pie than they have to. Cue the theme to The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, and we'll keep you updated as this case drags into 2009.

Question: At what point do nerdy fanboys begin bombarding 20th Century Fox with nasty hate mail?

Permalink | Email this | Comments

The BBCs adaptation of the classic Charlotte Bronte novel Jane Eyre was such good television that I just had to purchase the DVD and watch it again and again. I have not been that absorbed in a programme since the BBC’s adaptation of Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice in the mid 90s. Jane Eyre is set in Victorian times and tells the story of a young woman named Jane (Ruth Wilson). Jane has not been treated kindly by life. Her parents died when she was a child and she was sent to live with her cruel aunt, Mrs Reed (Tara Fitzgerald), who possessed no kind feelings for her and sent her to live at Lowood school for girls. (more…)