Not as good as the first time, still good, might as well go see it.
Also some WOLF OF WALL STREET (not a review) because why not?
The “EXPENDABLES” movies are, objectively, awful – even by the incredibly low standards of the “Hey, remember when action movies sucked but sucked in a different way than they do now?” genre. The sole (and evidently sufficient) reason they have for existing are the handful of shots where a bunch of actors you remember from the 80s are standing together in the same shot and you can get 1/400th of the charge you might have gotten if someone had actually made “RAMBO VS. TERMINATOR” in the early-90s.
Outside of that, there’s no reason to watch either of them. And now here’s the trailer for Part The Third, which helpfully eliminates any further need to do so by simply having everybody stand a line and acknowledge that yes, they’re in this. The “new” blood includes Antonio Banderas, Harrison Ford, Mel Gibson, Wesley Snipes and Ronda Rousey as We Couldn’t Get Gina Carano:
At approximately 1:12, this red-band trailer for “BATTLE OF THE DAMNED” – initially framed as “Dolph Lundgren Versus The 28 Days Later Monsters,” which would be entertaining enough as it its – becomes the Greatest Trailer EVER:
So, uh… Yeah. Variety says Paul Rudd is Marvel’s “ANT-MAN.” He has the power to change his size, talk to ants and be considered an integral part of “Avengers” history mainly because he was there that day. No confirmation of whether Rudd will be playing either the Hank Pym or Scott Lang version of the character.
Here’s a trailer for “GRAND PIANO,” in which Elijah Wood is a concert pianist who is informed mid-performance that a mysterious sniper is planning to shoot him if he misses a note. Really.
Whoa. When was the last time the first 20 seconds of a trailer (for an original movie) immediately made you decide the movie had to be seen? Here’s “WELCOME TO YESTERDAY,” a Michael Bay produced scifi movie (which clearly owes more than a little to “CHRONICLE”) which opens thusly: A teenager is watching a home movie of his seventh birthday and catches a glimpse of himself – as in his present-day teenage self – standing in the background.
UPDATE III: Un. Real. LaBeouf has taken to his official Twitter to apologize for not giving proper credit for having been “inspired” by Clowes’ comic. One small problem with that: The film is effectively a shot-for-shot, word-for-word, panels-as-storyboards adaptation without credit. That’s not inspiration, or even homage – it’s straight-up plagiarism. LaBeouf is being more or less pilloried for this as we speak – which, since he’s been wealthy and famous since his mid-teens will have no real career impact, but for now it’s kind of amusing. I wonder if he actually does that “NoNONoNoNononononononoNoNONONOnoNo!” thing in real life?
UPDATE II: The video has been password-locked, in the wake of nobody being able to figure out if LaBeouf asked permission to film Clowes’ comic (the author claims he doesn’t know what’s going on) and no one being able to answer if this is A.) a not-terribly-talented actor doing something idiotic or B.) a not terribly talented actor trying and failing at some kind of elaborate James Franco-style “life as comedy sketch” bit.
UPDATE I: The piece weirdly makes no mention of this, but it appears to be based on this Daniel Clowes comic:
I’ll give the kid this: Making your “directoring debut” a short about how miserable, deluded and meaningless movie critics – online critics especially – are when you’re best (exclusively?) known for “TRANSFORMERS” and “KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL” displays some serious “I don’t care how I’m percieved” swagger. I mean… sure, that sort of thing is generally better reserved for when you’ve actually done something, but points for brass all the same.
Some of this is actually painfully well-observed in an “Okay, who blabbed?” sort of way – “roundtable” junket interviews really are singularly miserable, bizarre little pageants of feigned mutual non-resentment – which is why it’s sort of dissapointing that it doesn’t build to anything more interesting than “critics nitpick their betters because they’re sad about their lives sucking.”
It’s been easy to forget – after the (legitimate) down-marks handed him by “THE DARK KNIGHT RISES” and “MAN OF STEEL” plus the (murkier) transformation of his name into a synonym for inappropriately-grim movie adaptations of… anything, really – why everybody got so excited about Christopher Nolan in the first place. Once upon a time, the “big deal” about “BATMAN BEGINS” was that a legitimately great, exciting new(ish) filmmaker was going to make a Batman movie.
This teaser for “INTERSTELLAR,” though, serves as a big reminder of the other reason to be glad the Nolan Bros. are mostly getting out of the superhero business:
Of note: The screenplay for this, by Johnathan Nolan, was originally developed with input/collaboration from Steven Spielberg for him (Spielberg) to direct. He bowed out, Christopher Nolan stepped in. So this is potentially sort of a reverse-“A.I.” in as much as we’ve got a brilliant, anti-emotional, aesthetically-clinical grump taking over a Spielberg project as opposed to the reverse. That should be interesting…