via popculturebrain:
And it will have a story! That Cameron wrote! Joy!
Well, its still a joke but a direct to DVD, actually exists way:
On the 100th anniversary of the original voyage, a modern luxury liner christened “Titanic 2,” follows the path of its namesake. But when a tsunami hurls an ice berg into the new ship’s path, the passengers and crew must fight to avoid a similar fate.
on August 24, 2010 — you can sink again…
synecdoche: best. rumor. ever.
—
I’ll just keep my mouth shut until this gets confirmed. Until then, I hope it’s a realllly early April Fools joke.
____
Andrew Richards
This post is brought to you by not one but two news stories:
SAM MENDES TO DIRECT NEXT JAMES BOND FILM and…
RON HOWARD TO DIRECT VINCE VAUGHN COMEDY
Neither of these are rumors. Rumors I could deal with. But in fact both of these men have signed to direct these films.
It’s selfish of me to ask an acclaimed director not to direct a big commercial film. I understand they have families and houses to pay for, they can only make so many zero budget art house films before it comes time to make and spend some money. I get that.
I also understand that bringing in high profile, Oscar winning directors will make the mainstream films better (such as Alfonso Cuaron directing Harry Potter.) There’s a reason they were brought in. The movies will probably be if not good, at least better than average.
But we need to look at the big picture, small movies are dying. Almost all of the art house arms of the major studios are gone. These directors are directing these movies because studios aren’t taking chances on smaller films. Unless it’s going to be a big tent pole and bring in definite money, it won’t get made. So then the Sam Mendeses and Ron Howards of Hollywood have to turn to this. It’s a downward spiral of mass produced screen fillers.
—-
Take this rumor with a grain of salt, but WorstPreviews is reporting that producer Jonathan Shestack (Disturbing Behavior, Ghosts of Girlfriends Past) has secured the film rights to Saved By The Bell.
Apparently, it will be an update, think Miami Vice or Charlie’s Angels, with a new cast and hopefully featuring cameos from the originals.
I’m always skeptical of how a multi-camera sitcom becomes a one camera film. It’s a gigantic tonal shift - are there any good examples of this transition? The Brady Bunch movie, maybe.
Normally in situations like this I’d say something along the lines of “don’t fuck this up,” but considering the amount of camp in the original I’d say that would be pretty hard to do.
It can go one of two ways. They take a Brady Bunch approach and not change a thing, maintaining the original’s tone and 90s style. Or they update (a la the aforementioned Miami Vice) and thus ruin the memory of the show.
For a show that only ran in it’s original incarnation for four years, it sure has found its place in the cultural lexicon.
-
I’ll admit it I enjoy the occasional Family Guy episode. It’s silly, broad, referential gag comedy but it’s aware of this fact and is good at being itself. The Star Wars special was alright, I wouldn’t say anything miraculous. I still don’t understand how Lucas let them do it, but he did. When they announced a Star Wars parody sequel (to Empire Strikes Back) I thought, “Fine, it’s a major part of the cultural lexicon, understandable.”
But this has gone too far. I can stomach Peter as Indy in a 30 second clip but for a 30 minute episode, that’s just too much. Chris as Marty McFly being seduced by Lois? Does any of that sound appealing? Stop doing full length parody episodes Seth Macfarlane, I know you don’t understand the word “overkill” but you should really look it up.
(news via Worst Previews)
_
Ever thought to yourself, “Gee, I wish Harry Potter took place in a modern day NYC and Nic Cage played Dumbledore.” No? Well too bad, Disney is fulfilling your wish anyway. Above is the trailer for the Jon Turtletaub directed, Jerry Bruckheimer produced actioner The Sorcerer’s Apprentice.
Wait didn’t we just see a film about a vampire’s assistant? We sure did. But that’s not the crime against creativity here. That crime would be that this film is based on Paul Dukas’s musical poem “Fantasia.” Which you all would know from the classic Disney animation of the same name.
Not technically a remake, though you could call it one. I’d say more along the lines of a reimagining. Albeit, a reimagining with fake New York sets and too much CGI. Oh Disney.
Side note: Between this and National Treasure Nicolas Cage loves to suckle at the teet of Mickey Mouse.
_
Hollywood in recent years has raced to mine the Internet for raw talent capable of crossing over to traditional platforms like movies and television, the places where the real money is still made. Those efforts have largely failed. Another pair of YouTube sensations, Ryan Higa and Sean Fujiyoshi, tried with “Ryan and Sean’s Not So Excellent Adventure” last year, for instance, but it never took off. What works on the Web — rough-edged intimacy, quick bites — just doesn’t seem to translate onto bigger screens.
But the director-producer Brian Robbins (“Norbit,” “Varsity Blues”), United Talent Agency and a management company called the Collective are giving it a go with Mr. Cruikshank. “Fred: The Movie,” written by David A. Goodman, an executive producer of “Family Guy,” started filming in November for a 2010 release. Pixie Lott, a budding British singer and actress, is the co-star.
What in the flying fuck is going on here? Are we really about to turn this very annoying web video character into a feature length star? While the production team of “the guy behind Norbit” and “a producer of Family Guy” seems like it would be a guaranteed smash hit for any film, I have what some would call “MY MOTHER FUCKING DOUBTS”. Maybe I’m just caught up being a cynic and not seeing all the possibilities this crossover will create.
I take that back, it was logic I was choked up on. Silly logic…
___
by Mike Davis
(photo and source - NY Times , hat tip to Dan Hacker)
(via acewepeel)
This is a personal invitation asking me not to tune in. While I seem to be in the minority in not finding Wiig’s characters on SNL all that funny, I’m not sure Gilly is one that gets a lot of applause…
I don’t want to watch Gilly in a 2 minute sketch, so I certainly won’t want to be subjected to her constantly. Bah humbug.
___
by Andrew Richards
