One of these days Marvel will get the whole synergy thing right. On my way to catch a screening of the comic book giant?s ?The Incredible Hulk? the other evening, I stopped off at a comics shop to pick up some regular reading. A couple of clerks were struggling to bring a casual customer up to speed on one of the big new developments in the Hulk comics: the intro of a Red Hulk, glaring up at the three of them from a series of ostensibly collectible covers, rendered in all his teeth-gnashing, vein-popping, constipated rage-aholic glory. Trouble is, any mainstream moviegoer obviously thinks of the Hulk as being green. His look is iconic, right? So if those same mainstream moviegoers happen across a comics shop, or even the graphic novel section at Barnes & Noble, are they going to know what the heck to make of a Red Hulk? Or have the patience to sit through a fanboy tutorial? Seems unlikely. The storyline has gotten some play in USA Today and elsewhere, and the core readership has been responding, but sheesh, talk about counterintuitive. (Better still: Red Hulk and Hulk Classic do battle in an issue coming out in a couple of weeks. Try not to let your head explode.)
The comics industry for years has wrestled with how to attract new, younger readers when PlayStations and such always seem to grab their attention first. But the difficulty is invariably compounded by superhero comics? decades of mind-boggling (sometimes mind-numbing) serialization and continuity ? the sort of twisty mythology that sooner or later produces a Red Hulk, or a reincarnated Superman, or a replacement Batman. Back in 2000, Marvel Comics infamously canned its then editor-in-chief because the company?s first X-Men movie had just turned into a surprise hit ? and the X-Men comics were so convoluted and inaccessible, there was barely a sales spike. Several years on, onetime Hollywood doormat Marvel has turned into such a force in the industry, it?s now financing its own movies, and even had the juice to do a ?Hulk? reboot just five years after Ang Lee?s out-of-touch version. But if it was so crucial to get the Hulk right, and depict the character as the icon people know ? again we?ve got to ask how Marvel isn?t just Hulk-red with embarrassment that they seem to be letting business history repeat itself. Or could they be trying to grab the Hellboy audience, too?
It's hard to say which event in midtown Manhattan on Thursday night was cooler: New German Cinema legend Werner Herzog in conversation with director Jonathan Demme at the Times Center, or the two crazed climbers who attempted to scale the New York Times building right next door just a few hours earlier. In some ways, the two occurrences worked together: It was later announced that one of the climbers did it in order to raise awareness about global warming, a relevant issue for anyone interested in Herzog's latest film, the remarkable Antarctica odyssey Encounters at the End of the World. Like most of Herzog's documentary work, it's a brilliant amalgam of gorgeous imagery and Herzog's personal philosophies. Not a scientist himself, he spends time in their company down south, seeking to understand their behavior ("Is this a big moment?" he asks when they nonchalantly announce the discovery of a new bacterium).
Demme, admitting that he and Herzog had just met earlier in the evening, opened the conversation by reading an effusive letter to Herzog written by Roger Ebert after the critic discovered that the director dedicated Encounters to him. Herzog seemed displeased that Ebert printed the letter ("Those things should stay between two men") but had only praise for his friend. "I salute him, a good soldier of cinema," he said. "We have very few left."
Growing up in suburban Los Angeles, I knew Roman Polanski as a celebrity long before I knew his work as a film director. The murder of his wife by the Manson Family in 1969 and his controversial rape case in 1977 were well covered in the media, and I formed strong negative opinions about him, especially after he fled the US in 1978.
Before the broadcast, Slate reported that HBO changed the ending after Los Angeles Superior Courts officials complained. The Los Angeles Times published a similar story on Tuesday. Erik described what he saw at Sundance: "Perhaps the most fascinating fact (and this was something I did not know) came in the reveal that, when a new judge was assigned to the case in 1997, he agreed to throw out the charges if Polanski were to return to the States -- on one condition: that the hearing be televised. Because of that, Polanski decided against coming back."
This morning I was happy to read a post at the Orlando Sentinel, which said that they spoke to Paul Newman's agent, Toni Howard, and she says the reports that he is terminally ill with lung cancer are "not true."
For a while, official confirmation had seemed inevitable. Paul Newman had pulled out of production of John Steinbeck's Of Mice and Men, which he was slated to direct for Connecticut's Westport Country Playhouse. He looked frail during a Polo for Children benefit with Martha Stewart. And the most brow-raising of them all -- he handed over his ownership of Newman's Own to charity.
So, the rumors started to bubble up -- he was diagnosed at a center in New York, was getting treatment, was terminally ill ... so on and so forth. But then I started finding reports that were much more cryptic, saying that he is"doing nicely." Now, Jam Showbiz!/AP reports that friend and writer A.E. Hotchner (who helped start the salad dressing company) says that he is, indeed battling cancer. "I know that it's a form of cancer," Hotchner told The Associated Press. "It's a form of cancer and he's dealing with it." He went on to say: "He's battling. He's doing all the right stuff. Paul is a fighter. He seems to be going through a good period right now. Everybody is hopeful. That's all we know." Mr. Newman, our thoughts are with you.
Let’s start this review the pretentious, profound way. With a quote:
“Hulk…. Smash!” - The Incredible Hulk
Wise words there. And words that nicely sum up the intentions of Louis Letterier and co. when they decided to have their own go at bringing Marvel’s Green Giant to the big screen. “More action!” they told us, “More smashing!” they said. The fans crossed their fingers, the pessimists said ‘why bother’, but most people agreed that with safe-bet Edward Norton penning and starring in Marvel’s second solo gambit, this would be a cleaner, smarter flick than Ang Lee’s 2003 let-down. And, of course, with more action.
Don't worry, this story isn't about a former television star battling food issues. Gary Coleman, still best known for TV's Diff'rent Strokes, but beloved by some of us for his immortal film work (On the Right Track, Jimmy the Kid), was spotted in downtown Dallas this week fighting a taco.
Dallas Morning News reporters on their lunch break stumbled onto the odd scene. "We noticed a couple of people engaged in a struggle for money, and not far from them, a short black guy tumbled around on the ground with a person in a taco costume," Tawnell Hobbs said. "When the little guy emerged from the brawl, I was shocked to see that it was Gary Coleman ... I whispered to my colleagues that they were likely making a commercial -- but another guy next to me whispered that it was a movie and not to laugh." Please, please, somebody tell me you have this on video!
The movie in question is a mockumentary entitled A Tribute to Big Red. A DMN reader found a casting call for extras that included a synopsis: "This is the hilarious story and behind-the-scenes look of an epic competition with surprising twists and turns, as well as personal trials, tribulations, and triumphs of those involved." I've searched but not found anything else on the movie, but now I can't wait to see it!
The film's been a long time in the making; as this pungent New York Observer article from 2005 notes, Paul Giamatti was at one time considering playing Cianci. Guess John Adams felt like a better fit. A recent blog entry from the Providence Journal, where Stanton has won a Pulitzer for his investigative journalism, mentions that Nic Cage and Russell Crowe were in consideration too. I don't know -- looking at those pics above proves that no one may wear Buddy's hair as well as Platt.
Also, director Brian DePalma has signed on to direct "The Boston Stranglers," based on Susan Kelly's 1996 non-fiction book that claimed that Albert DeSalvo was not the man who murdered 13 Boston-area women between 1962 and 1964 -- or at least not the only man (thus the title). No cast or start date has been set. Think DePalma will be able to replicate the terse Joe Friday-meets-the Hub vibe of Richard Fleischer's 1968 "The Boston Strangler," starring Tony Curtis (see below)? He can't do any worse than "The Black Dahlia" or "Redacted."
He goes by "Night," but it's hard to dispute his sunny disposition. Just a few minutes into a conversation with M. Night Shyamalan in a New York City hotel room yesterday, it was obvious to me that the director has managed to occupy such a unique niche in the Hollywood landscape because he's immediately likable. Of course, a little movie released in 1999 called The Sixth Sense didn't hurt, either.
After landing two Oscar nominations and international acclaim for his masterful ghost story, Shyamalan continued to market himself as a brand. Since then, the results have been mixed. Signs was an indisputable hit. Unbreakable has its supporters. Lady in the Water? Not so much. But that failure hasn't prevented the filmmaker from dealing with audacious material: His latest movie, The Happening, finds a married couple (Mark Wahlberg and Zooey Deschanel) thrust into a world where people inexplicably become suicidal after getting struck by an ominous, unseen toxin. Forces of evil usually remain unseen in Shyamalan's films, and The Happening is no exception to that rule. I spoke to the 37-year-old Philadelphia resident about the personal philosophies guiding his career choices, the polarized reactions to his work, and what the future will bring.
As you Iron Man fans know, the number one question everyone's been throwing at Favreau and Robert Downey Jr. has centered on which storyline we might see in Iron Man 2. The popular consensus was the famous Demon in a Bottle storyline, where poor Tony Stark hits rock bottom in his battle with alcoholism.
But that storyline might actually be in jeopardy due to another summer superhero movie: Hancock. Favreau told Collider, "The comic book fans might see Demon in a Bottle as a fresh story line but I haven't seen Hancock yet. From what I've seen it seems there is a lot of imagery that seems to be shared. Him flying through billboards and things. The idea of the hero whose biggest enemy is himself, and him fighting through his demons, you want to come at the audience with something fresh. You don't want to feel like you are echoing something that somebody else is doing." Hopefully, Hancock will keep clear of Stark's territory, and we might end up with that fresh storyline after all. Pop on over to Collider to read the rest of the interview.
Oh, but we're not done! Earlier today, Erik shared the news that Favreau was being very vocal on MySpace regarding the Iron Man 2 release date and how there needed to be more time to create a successful sequel. He mentioned that perhaps Iron Man should take the three-year route, like Nolan's Batman films. Then, IESB dropped the bomb that the reason Marvel hadn't signed Favreau yet was because he wanted more money and they didn't feel he deserved it. Apparently, Marvel's David Maisel thinks an Iron Man sequel would kill with or without Favreau. Read more about that here.
In a surprise undercard to McCain-Obama, the flap started last month at Cannes when Spike Lee pointed out that neither of Clint Eastwood's two Iwo Jima movies -- "The Flags of Our Fathers" and "Letters from Iwo Jima" -- featured black actors. Lee made his comments while promoting "Miracle at St. Anna," (pictured above) his own upcoming WWII drama about the all-black 92nd "Buffalo" Infantry Division and the four of its soldiers who save a boy in a Tuscan village. Lee's observation set off a firestorm that's still burning. Eastwood himself responded in a very interesting interview published Friday in the British newspaper The Guardian. ?The story is ?Flags of Our Fathers,? the famous flag-raising picture, and they didn?t do that,? Eastwood said. ?If I go ahead and put an African-American actor in there, they?d say, ?This guy?s lost his mind.??
Now the controversy's focal point is Eastwood's insistence that "a guy like him should shut his face." Lee, in turn, responded with a comment published on ABCNEWS.com. "First of all, the man is not my father and we're not on a plantation either," he said. "He's a great director. He makes his films, I make my films. The thing about it though, I didn't personally attack him. And a comment like 'a guy like that should shut his face' -- come on Clint, come on. He sounds like an angry old man right there."
The argument between these two is a lot less ridiculous than it seems. Some observers want to frame the disagreement, unfairly, as a matter of Lee's envy with Eastwood's Oscar success. What's being debated is the factual record as refracted through the movies. Where's the line separating historical accuracy from artistic license? Eastwood's defense of his casting makes sense: Where in his films would these omitted black soldiers go? In bit parts, most likely. But Lee's greater issue, while aimed at Eastwood's movies, is really about the movies themselves: Why haven't black soldiers figured into more WWII films. "St. Anna" could work as both a rebuke and the beginning of some larger, necessary expansion.
What's really incredible to me in that Guardian interview is how animatedly aggravated Eastwood sounds. It's been a while since we've seen that Clint in a movie. He's miffed about Lee in a way that underscores an interesting difference in perception.
In 1999's "True Crime" Eastwood directed himself as a disgraced reporter redeemed by his efforts to get a black guy (Isaiah Washington) off death row. The movie is about Eastwood's character more than it is Washington's and at some point he tells one character that none of this business has anything to do with race. Eastwood's stance in that film sounds defensively full of hubris. He could hear what the black characters were saying to him. He just didn't buy it.
It'd be terrific if some of this fight about race made into Eastwood's planned next movie about how Nelson Mandela parlayed South Africa's victory in the 1995 Rugby World Cup to promote national unity.
Growing up in suburban Los Angeles, I knew Roman Polanski as a celebrity long before I knew his work as a film director. The murder of his wife by the Manson Family in 1969 and his controversial rape case in 1977 were well covered in the media, and I formed strong negative opinions about him, especially after he fled the US in 1978. 
This morning I was happy to read a post at the 
Don't worry, this story isn't about a former television star battling food issues. 
As you Iron Man fans know, the number one question everyone's been throwing at Favreau and Robert Downey Jr. has centered on which storyline we might see in Iron Man 2. The popular consensus was the famous Demon in a Bottle storyline, where poor Tony Stark hits rock bottom in his battle with alcoholism. 
