Sounds Like Rocket Has A Major Role In Avengers: Endgame

Sounds Like Rocket Has A Major Role In Avengers: Endgame

There are just two movies left in Phase Three of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and the stakes couldn't be higher. Following the unexpected ending of Avengers: Infinity War, it was clear that the Russo Brothers weren't fooling around, and are willing to kill off any and all characters to service the greater story. Thanos' victory in accruing the Infinity Stones wiped out half the galaxy, with both the surviving heroes and the audience left to watch in horror as countless characters faded to dust.

The Guardians of the Galaxy were hit especially hard from Thanos' assault, with Gamora being killed so her adopted father could get the Soul Stone, and everyone but Rocket wiped out from Thanos' snap (aka The Decimation). Sean Gunn plays Rocket via motion capture on set, and recently teased a major role for the foul mouthed Guardian in Avengers: Endgame, saying:

All I can say is that Rocket gets to meet a lot of interesting new people that he has not met before in Endgame and I think I'll leave it at that.

Bring on the crossovers. Prior to Infinity War, the Guardians of the Galaxy were kept largely separate from the rest of the MCU, due to their cosmic setting and place in the overall timeline of the shared universe. But Rocket is here in the present, and will be among the rest of the survivors once Endgame finally arrives in theaters next month.

Rocket and Groot spent much of Infinity War alongside Chris Hemsworth's Thor, as he went on a journey to get Stormbreaker. It was a great character pairing, and he and Thor will likely continue vibing during Endgame. The trio ultimately made it to the Battle of Wakanda in the nick of time, and took out Thanos' forces in quick succession. But it wasn't enough to stop the snap, and Rocket watched Groot turn to dust before his eyes. And this time, his best friend didn't come back to life.

Rocket was seen among the rest of the survivors in the Avengers: Endgame trailer, although his role and the entire movie's story are a complete mystery to the general public. But Sean Gunn's comments to IGN are sure to excite the fandom, who are hoping that the character shared by Gunn and Bradley Cooper will have plenty of screen time in the upcoming blockbuster. The surviving heroes are going to have to lean on each other if they hope to reverse Thanos' snap, and will need help in the form of Captain Marvel, Ant-Man, and Ronin.

It should be interesting to see who Rocket ends up interacting with in Endgame, especially given the character's signature attitude. He seems like the perfect foil for uptight Avengers like Captain America and Bruce Banner, as well as egos like Iron Man and Captain Marvel. Smart money says he ends up providing some much needed comedic relief to an otherwise somber movie.

Answers will come when Avengers: Endgame arrives in theaters on April 26th. In the meantime, check out our 2019 release list to plan your next trip to the movies.

Read More

Jeremy Renner Keeps Showing Love For The Original Six Before Avengers: Endgame

Jeremy Renner Keeps Showing Love For The Original Six Before Avengers: Endgame

While there were many surprising decisions at the end of Avengers: Infinity War as far as which heroes we lost and which ones survived, there was one very clear pattern that emerged. All five of the characters who made up the original Avengers survived. While the exact fate of Jeremy Renner's Hawkeye was unknown at the time, this pattern (and the fact we knew Renner had filmed scenes for something for the two Avengers movies) led many to believe Hawkeye had lived, something which has since been confirmed. In the lead up to Avengers: Endgame, Renner appears quite focused on his original co-stars, as he has continued to share pictures to Instagram focusing on these six heroes.

A few days ago Jeremy Renner shared the six character posters of the original Avengers team that were released as part of the 'Avenge the Fallen" series. He also gave a shout out to his "A6" on Instagram. While there are several other characters who will certainly play important parts in Avengers: Endgame, one certainly believes these six characters will still be the ones at the center of it all. The Marvel Cinematic Universe really took off with the original Avengers film, and Endgame is expected to be something of a conclusion.

And of course, Jeremy Renner knows some things that we don't. While we expect that Endgame will likely be the final MCU movie for Robert Downey Jr. and Chris Evans, and possibly others, Renner would, one assumes, know for sure if that's the case. He not only knows if they're leaving, but assuming they are, he knows how it will happen in the film. It could be part of the reason he's celebrating his old friends, because this is his last chance to do so in this context.

It's not all super serious, however. Before sharing the picture of all six Avengers looking focused and committed, he shared a very different picture, showing the six Avengers actors being silly and ridiculous. Check it out.

Of course, while most of the focus is on the big names of Downey and Evans, we don't really know what the future holds for the other four actors either. We know a movie based on Black Widow is on the way, but that one is expected to be a prequel, so that doesn't mean that character is any safer. The Avengers will likely move forward, but they will almost certainly look very different when they do. Just which of these six characters will we see again, and which will we be saying goodbye to for a final time?

Is Renner being nostalgic because he's one of the people going away? Who knows. I certainly won't be happy to see any of these six characters go.

Read More

What If Steve Or Bucky Had To Sacrifice For The Soul Stone In Endgame? Here's Sebastian Stan's Take

What If Steve Or Bucky Had To Sacrifice For The Soul Stone In Endgame? Here's Sebastian Stan's Take

Spoilers ahead for Avengers: Endgame.

Captain America and Bucky Barnes are a favorite duo in the MCU, with their friendship being vital for each character's arcs. Seeing as how their friendship is so strong, some fans have been wondering what would happen if Steve and Bucky were the ones to find the Soul Stone. The specific rules of the stone require a sacrifice and, according to Sebastian Stan, it's one both characters would be willing to make.

In the quest for the Infinity Stones, no stone costs as much as the Soul Stone. Found on the planet Vormir, the stone requires an everlasting exchange from the one looking to claim it. As the Red Skull says, it's a soul for a soul. In Avengers: Infinity War, Thanos killed his daughter Gamora, and in Avengers: Endgame, Black Widow makes the sacrifice to save Hawkeye.

Basically, shit goes down when characters go to Vormir, so how would the MCU's biggest bromance handle the cost of the Soul Stone? While in attendance at Italy’s Jus In Bello convention (via ComicBook.com), Sebastian Stan was asked which of the two characters would take the plunge off the cliff to spare the other. Stan sounded fascinated by the question and this was his answer:

Wow. [Steve] would probably be like, ‘I got this.’ And [Bucky] would have been like, ‘No, I should be doing this.' No, I think it would have been a fight, and I probably would have tried to — I should be the one, after everything, to take the leap, so to speak. But knowing him, he probably wouldn’t let me. But I don’t know, that’s a crazy question. Jesus. And then the Red Skull was there.

That sounds about right. Neither Steve or Bucky would be okay with the other killing themselves for the stone and they would definitely fight each other for that "right." It's exactly what happened with Clint and Natasha in Endgame. In fact, you could probably take almost any two heroes in the MCU, put them on Vormir, and they would fight each other to make the sacrifice.

Plus, Sebastian Stan brings up the very good point that Red Skull adds an interesting wrinkle. How would Cap and Bucky react to seeing their arch-nemesis alive as a Ring Wraith on Vormir? Cap definitely had to meet Red Skull to return the Soul Stone at the end of Endgame, so hopefully one day we get to see how that interaction plays out.

Avengers: Endgame is still out there eating up records and you can watch it as much as you like. For everything the summer has to offer for movie fans, be sure to stay up to date with our 2019 movie release guide. For all other movie news, keep it right here at CinemaBlend.

Read More

Universal Studios Orlando Will Let Harry Potter Fans See A Blast-Ended Skrewt For The First Time

Universal Studios Orlando Will Let Harry Potter Fans See A Blast-Ended Skrewt For The First Time

All this week the Universal Orlando Resort has been revealing new details about the upcoming new roller coaster for the Wizarding World of Harry Potter, Hagrid’s Magical Creatures Motorbike Adventure. The ride will include a number of creatures and obstacles that we have seen in the Harry Potter movies before, but the final creature revealed today will be one that nobody has ever laid eyes on. The blast-ended skrewt is a creature fans will be familiar with, but they'll be able to actually see it for the first time on board the attraction. Check it out.

While Blast-ended skrewts are mentioned several times in the Harry Potter novels, and even appear in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, as part of the Tri-Wizard Tournament maze, they weren't used as part of the film version, which means nobody has actually seen what a blast-ended skrewt looks like in the cinematic version of Harry Potter.

That changes in June when Hagrid’s Magical Creatures Motorbike Adventure roller coaster debuts. The attraction is designed around guests taking a Care of Magical Creatures class from Hagrid, one where the blast-ended skrewt is actually the main topic for the session. However, as it usual for Hagrid, things go slightly awry.

Blast-ended skrewts are a sort of magical scorpion. They are surrounded by armor so strong that magical spells can't penetrate it. They have tails that shoot fire and males are capable of stinging, while female have suckers. They also apparently smell like rotting fish. I can't say I'm excited to get the scent of that as I fly past one on the roller coaster.

Other creatures that riders will see include Fluffy, Hagrid's three-headed dog, Cornish pixies, who will be damaging a familiar flying car, centaurs, one of which takes aim at riders with a bow and arrow, and devil's snare. All these things live in the Forbidden Forest where the attraction is set.

It's great to see this new attraction not only bringing to life the things we've seen on film, so that fans can experience them in person, but also expand the mythology of Harry Potter in new ways that we've never seen before. Since J.K. Rowling has played a key role in working with Universal to create the Wizarding World, we can assume this design is as canon as anything else in the films or books.

The Wizarding World of Harry Potter was celebrated when it first opened for being the most immersive theme park experience ever created. It was designed to not just create attractions themed to the franchise, but make you feel like you were truly standing inside it. The newest part of the world opens at Universal Orlando Resort June 13.

Read More

Mark Hamill Had The Best Response To Fake Star Wars Toy

Mark Hamill Had The Best Response To Fake Star Wars Toy

You gotta hand it to Mark Hamill when it comes to bad Star Wars puns. He keeps his dad joke A-game in peak condition -- see the Star Wars: Episode IX "trailer" he posted. But he didn't like that the joke was on Luke Skywalker with a Lego Star Wars toy featuring his missing hand.

Here's what Mark Hamill dubbed the #WorstToyEVER:

Of course he couldn't resist adding another hand pun with #LegoOfMyHand.

Plenty of people told Mark Hamill it wasn't a real toy -- apparently all you had to do was look up the Lego number -- but at least one fan disagreed that it was the worst toy. That fan was treated to a classic Star Wars reply from Luke himself:

See? Luke did listen to Obi-Wan on occasion.

A few fans replied with other fake Star Wars toys out there, and some of them are just so wonderfully wrong you have to wish Lucasfilm really did sell them:

I love this look at George Lucas and all of his money:

Star Wars fans would buy all of that, even just as gag gifts.

Mark Hamill does have a great sense of humor and heart about all things Star Wars. Without Carrie Fisher, and without Harrison Ford's Han Solo after Star Wars: The Force Awakens, Hamill is pretty much carrying the entire old school load himself. He still has Anthony Daniels as C-3PO in Star Wars: Episode IX and he'll get an assist from Billy Dee Williams as Lando in the 2019 movie too. But we're all sad that Luke, Leia, and Han won't really get to be together on screen again.

J.J. Abrams is keeping a tight lock on Star Wars: Episode IX secrets, but that trailer is probably coming very soon. The film's title and trailer may even come our way as soon as this week through Star Wars Celebration 2019, which is being held April 11-15 in Chicago.

Star Wars: Episode IX opens in theaters December 20, 2019 as one of the many films worth keeping an eye on through our 2019 movie release date schedule.

Read More

Keanu Reeves Was Put In ‘Movie Jail’ After Turning Down Speed 2

Keanu Reeves Was Put In ‘Movie Jail’ After Turning Down Speed 2

Keanu Reeves made the leap from Bill and Ted slacker to legitimate action star thanks to his role in 1994's Speed. The movie made over $350 million (in 1994 dollars) and was one of the top 10 movies at the box office that year. The fact that a sequel went into the works is no surprise. However, when it came time to make the movie, Reeves ended up turning the role down, a decision which apparently sent him to "movie jail" for more than a decade. According to the actor...

I didn’t work with [Fox] again until The Day the Earth Stood Still.

Speed 2: Cruise Control was released in 1997 and The Day the Earth Stood Still came out in 2008. It seems that in that time, Fox was none to happy with Keanu Reeves. The actor doesn't go into detail with GQ regarding "movie jail," but it seems Reeves was well aware that it wasn't a coincidence that none of his projects for the next decade or so ended up at the studio. Apparently, Fox was miffed that he turned down the Speed sequel. One certainly wonders what sorts of Fox projects Reeves could have potentially been a part of had it not been for his 10 year sentence to movie jail.

A brief look at the box office results makes it clear why Fox was unhappy. Speed 2 made $168 million, less than half what the original movie did. While it's hard to chalk up all of that difference to the fact Keanu Reeves wasn't in the movie, Reeves was certainly a bigger name than Jason Patric, the guy who took the role of male lead opposite Sandra Bullock in the sequel. Also, the simple fact that Reeves didn't return could have potentially signaled to many moviegoers that the follow-up wasn't worth their time. If Reeves was the reason you saw the first one, why bother with the sequel.

It's unclear here if the reason Reeves didn't reprise his role from Speed was because he had any issues with the movie itself. He chose to play Hamlet on stage in Canada instead, but he may have just really wanted to play Hamlet more than make the movie.

Of course, Reeves would go on to star in the Matrix trilogy which turned him into an even bigger star. Now he's part of another major franchise, the John Wick series, which is produced by Lionsgate, a much smaller studio. In fact, as GQ points out, Reeves hasn't made a movie with any major studio since 2013's 47 Ronin, which was something of a flop, so perhaps the actor is actually back in movie jail, but just doesn't know it.

At the end of the day, business is business, but those businesses are also run by people, and if you upset people, they can react in emotional ways. It seems that's what happened here.

Read More

Why Dumbo Should Have Been A Sequel Instead Of A Remake

Why Dumbo Should Have Been A Sequel Instead Of A Remake

The following contains SPOILERS for the new live action Dumbo.

Dumbo won the box office this past weekend, but it did so with less than impressive numbers. The movie performed similarly with critics. The film has received slightly more negative reviews than positive ones, but critics are split almost in half. Either way, most positive reviews aren't glowing and most negative ones aren't too damning. As one of those who had a slightly positive view of Dumbo, I liked so many aspects of it that I wish it was better, and I think it could have been if it had followed its true calling and just been a straight sequel rather than a remake.

If you've seen Dumbo, then you know that most of the movie is essentially a sequel already. The events that cover the story of the original animated Dumbo get dispensed with in less than 30 minutes. Considering that the original movie did it in only slightly more than double that time, it makes sense not to waste too much time with it. Once Dumbo is discovered to be a flying elephant, the animated film ends, but that's just the end of Act I for the new movie.

The stuff that's worthy of praise in Dumbo almost exclusively comes from the latter two-thirds of the movie. You get the utterly insane "Evil Walt Disney" villain played by Michael Keaton. You get Eva Green, who is awesome because she's Eva Green. You get Tim Burton's take on "Pink Elephants on Parade," which is a thing I didn't even know I cared about. You get Colin Farrell being "adorable dad," which is his perfect position in Disney movies.

The biggest problem that Dumbo has is that it has trouble letting all of these ideas breathe because it has to dedicate a significant portion of its run time to the original story of Dumbo.

This is pretty much unnecessary and could have been overcome quite easily. The fact is that while Dumbo is certainly a story we all know, unless you've seen the film recently, odds are all you really remember about it is, "There's an elephant that can fly." That's actually all you need to know. If you do remember more, you certainly don't need to see it again.

Imagine if the new Dumbo opened exactly as it did, with Colin Farrell's Holt Farrier coming back from war, only this time, instead of Danny DeVito's Max Medici putting him in charge of the elephants before Dumbo is born, Medici tells Farrier that he's really happy Farrier is back, because the circus has a new star that needs to be taken care of, and Farrier is just the man to trust with the job. Dumbo flew for the crowd for the first time last night and word has already begun to spread. That's all we really need to know. Any additional info can be conveyed through dialogue with the other circus performers.

We didn't need to see anything of the original plot in this movie. I have no particular love for the original Dumbo, but there isn't anything I think the new version did better. The "Baby Mine" sequence is an emotional moment in the animated film, but it felt like it was being included in the remake simply because it was the sort of things fan expected. It was tacked on.

Now the movie can jump straight into the new material. The 20 minutes we just saved can be used to dig a little deeper into the rest of the story. We could get to know some of these characters a little better, as that was one of the big things missing from this new version of the story. Farrier's kids are important parts of Dumbo's life, but beyond, "Milly likes science," what do we really know about them?

I had a similar problem back when I first saw Disney's Maleficent. The film surprised the hell out of me by turning the story of the mistress of all evil into a rape revenge story. Needless to say, I did not see that coming. I found both the beginning and end of the movie to be quite good, but in the middle the story of Maleficent took a back seat because we had to tell the story of Sleeping Beauty, because clearly the feeling was it needed to happen. This slowed the movie to a crawl.

The idea behind these remakes is that people love these classic Disney stories, and the live-action versions allow fans to experience them in new ways that honestly weren't possible until recently. While that may be true, what if we looked at it from another angle? Because these stories are so well loved, we don't need to see them again since we know them incredibly well. However, that doesn't mean we don't need to want to see the characters again.

Because we don't need to see these movies again, but we love the characters all the same, sequels are the way to go. Take the animated original as a given, and then come up with a live action sequel that will give us something fresh and new. It won't work with every Disney property, of course. A live-action sequel to Aladdin rather than the remake we're getting would have to include somebody trying to recreate Robin Williams version of that character, and nobody wants that. But if even just a few of these movies went the sequel route, it would at least change things up a bit and let the remakes feel a bit fresher when they did happen.

Of all the live-action fairy tale movies that Disney is releasing this year, I'm actually looking forward to Maleficent: Mistress of Evil above them all. Because the film is a sequel to a movie that never had a Disney animated sequel, the story will almost certainly be entirely original. It's not going to feel like it owes anybody anything and won't need to include scenes that fans want to see new versions of, but will instead just get to tell its own story. i can only hope it's willing to take some of the same risks the previous film did.

Dumbo would have benefited greatly by simply committing to being the sequel it largely was anyway. Trying to be both things in order to make fans happy only prevented the film from being its own thing and flying on its own.

Read More

Jordan Peele Says Us Has Enough Fun For Non-Horror Fans

Jordan Peele Says Us Has Enough Fun For Non-Horror Fans

The horror genre has been in a renaissance the past few years, as filmmakers bring new and exciting concepts to the silver screen, and scare the crap out of moviegoers in the process. Rather than stale franchises and torture porn, the genre is thriving thanks to the unique perspective of its contributors. And there's no one quite on top of the game like Jordan Peele.

Jordan Peele made his directorial debut with 2017's Get Out, which he also wrote and produced. The film was a massive critical and financial success, and Peele even earned an Oscar for Best Original Screenplay. All eyes were on what would be his follow-up, and this weekend Us finally arrives in theaters. Us has been teased to be much scarier than Get Out, but Peele thinks that the movie is still accessible for moviegoers who aren't necessarily horror buffs. As he tells it,

I think this is a scarier movie than Get Out, but I'm being told that people who don't like horror movies still like this movie. I think the fun outweighs the scary.

While Us has been promised to be a terrifying time in the theater, Jordan Peele seems to think that non-horror fans will still enjoy the project. Namely, because there's still moments of fun in the movie that will outweigh the various jump scares and atmospheric tension.

Jordan Peele's comments to E! Online may give some cinephiles a sense of relief. The hype around Us has been significant, and the movie is already a critical darling. The reviews tease just how terrifying the horror movie is, which may scare off moviegoers who don't typically shell out cash to watch a movie while hiding behind their hands.

Smart money says that Jordan Peele includes moments of levity and fun throughout the course of Us (at least before the chaos begins). Get Out certainly let the director use his comedy roots during the film's first two acts, as things around Daniel Kaluuya's Chris began getting gradually more bizarre. It only seems logical that Us would do the same, especially as Peele teases the fun aspect of his sophomore film.

It should also be interesting to see what message Jordan Peele ultimately shares with Us, as his projects usually have deep connections to the real world. Get Out was a social commentary about race in a post-Obama world, while Us' message is still a bit more mysterious ahead of the film's release.

Jordan Peele took the concept of a doppelganger family from his childhood fears, and the movie has been teased to be a parable about self-destruction. But I've got a feeling the director has some more tricks up his sleeve for the highly anticipated horror flick.

Us is in theaters March 22nd. In the meantime, check out our 2019 release list to plan your next trip to the movies.

Read More

The Black Widow Movie Has Added Stranger Things’ David Harbour

The Black Widow Movie Has Added Stranger Things’ David Harbour

To say that the past couple years have been good for David Harbour’s career would be an understatement. Along with being one of the lead actors in the hit Netflix series Stranger Things, Harbour also succeeded Ron Perlman as the next cinematic Hellboy, and we’ll see how he does as Big Red come next week. But just because Harbour is portraying a Dark Horse Comics character doesn’t mean he can’t jump to an adaptation from another comic book company, as word has come in that he’s been cast in the Black Widow movie.

With Black Widow reportedly gearing up to roll cameras in London this June, the Marvel movie is slowly assembling its cast. Naturally Scarlett Johansson will be reprising Natasha Romanoff, the KGB agent-turned-S.H.I.E.L.D. operative-turned-Avenger, and last month it was reported that Fighting with my Family star Florence Pugh was in talks to join the cast. Now THR has dropped the news that David Harbour will be appearing in the movie as well, although no details about his character were provided.

It’s becoming increasingly common for actors to lend their talents to more than one comic book movie franchise, like how Josh Brolin played both Thanos in the Marvel Cinematic Universe and Cable in Deadpool 2. David Harbour already has the spotlight in Hellboy, which could lead to sequels or even a full-blown cinematic universe depending on how its received, but now he can also leave his mark on the MCU as well in Black Widow’s standalone adventure. Plus, the actor has also already lent his talents to the DC universe, as he played Dexter Tolliver in Suicide Squad. Harbour’s other notable credits include Quantum of Solace, Revolutionary Road, The Green Hornet, The Equalizer, The Newsroom and State of Affairs.

While no official plot details for Black Widow have been revealed yet, rumor has it that the movie will be a prequel set before Iron Man 2. That said, there are conflicting claims on the specific time period, with one report saying it will be set only about half a decade or so before Natasha Romanoff met Tony Stark and another saying it will occur during the turn of the millennium and involve the Y2K bug. It’s also possible that rather than explore Natasha’s time working for the KGB or her early years at S.H.I.E.L.D., Black Widow will actually take place after the events of Avengers: Endgame. For now, Marvel is keeping us in the dark, although depending on what happens to Natasha in Endgame, that could foreshadow what’s in store for her in her solo feature. Either way, whether it’s a younger version of her or her current day self, she’ll be crossing paths with David Harbor’s character, be he friend or foe.

Directed by Cate Shortland, Black Widow doesn’t have an assigned release date yet, so stay tuned to CinemaBlend for that information, more casting and other updates on its development. In the meantime, don’t forget to look through our Marvel movies guide to learn what else the MCU has coming up.

Read More

Godzilla: King Of The Monsters Production Designer Really Doesn't Want To F-Up The Monsters

Godzilla: King Of The Monsters Production Designer Really Doesn't Want To F-Up The Monsters

Although it is perhaps for the best, there are sadly no real titans that can be trained to battle for our cinematic enjoyment. That means that a whole lot of people need to put in a lot of work to bring these kaiju to life on the big screen for a movie like Godzilla: King of the Monsters. One of those people is production designer Scott Chambliss, who spoke about his role on the film and the guiding principle to not screw things up, saying:

It’s one of the interesting things for me in my career. It’s, of course, creating the environments for the story of the movie, but also I was hired to be the ringleader of the design team that we brought on to collaborate on the updating of the monsters themselves and, to me, is very exciting ... As part of a design team, none of us wanna fuck it up.

Not wanting to fuck it up is probably a pretty good objective to have in any creative endeavor, but especially one like Godzilla: King of the Monsters, where the potential to do just that is so high. Scott Chambliss wasn’t just in charge of creating the world of the film as production designer, he also had the responsibility of shepherding the design team through the process of updating the look of the monsters.

As Scott Chambliss told Forbes, updating and designing these awesome monsters that are what people pay to see was really exciting-- but it also carries with it a huge degree of responsibility. Neither he nor the rest of the design team wanted to fuck it up and that is not as easy as it sounds, as he explained:

The challenge of trying to remain true at our core to the designs of these original monsters that people really hold dear in their hearts, but also bringing them up to date in a way that honors their past, but feels much more contemporary, not only technologically, but in terms of how monsters function in movies as characters. We focused a lot of design attention on what the environment in terms of how all the monsters are affecting it, whether they’re directly or indirectly affecting it and what, visually, their place is in [the] world and what sort of natural elements they represent.

It’s one thing to design a new character, but another entirely to depict an iconic one that audiences have known for decades in a new way. That’s why things like the casting for the next James Bond or the design of superhero costumes are subject to such scrutiny. People have very high and specific expectations that must be met and that holds true for the monsters of Godzilla 2, some of which have existed since the 1950s.

The creatures in Godzilla: King of the Monsters couldn’t look totally different than their previous iterations, because fans of the property already have basic ideas in their heads of what Mothra, Rodan and Ghidorah look like. So Ghidorah can’t have 1 head or 8 and Mothra can’t have bat wings. They need to stay true to the things that made them iconic in the first place.

But these giant monsters had to be designed to fit within the world and aesthetic of the current iteration of the franchise and also be updated to appeal to modern sensibilities. Scott Chambliss previously spoke to CinemaBlend about this topic and how difficult it was to design Mothra for Godzilla: King of the Monsters. They wanted to make her truly feminine and graceful, but also frightening and powerful and it is quite a challenge to find the design that fits that balance.

Therefore it wasn’t as simple as a technological facelift using current CGI technology. For Scott Chambliss, that was the needle that had to be thread with the monster designs for Godzilla: King of the Monsters.

I also found it interesting that he wanted look at the monsters as characters and having visual representation of how they interact with their environment and what elements they represent. In the trailers, Mothra has this ethereal glow to her and King Ghidorah has this charged electricity around him, so perhaps those traits are a reflection of those efforts.

Godzilla: King of the Monsters is tracking to make between $40 million and $60 million opening weekend and if the early reactions to the film are any indication, they didn’t fuck it up. Godzilla: King of the Monsters opens in theaters on May 31. Check out our 2019 Release Schedule for all of this summers biggest movies.

Read More

Why I'm Excited For Disney+

Why I'm Excited For Disney+

At The Walt Disney Company’s Investor Day presentation last week, the Mouse House finally revealed what it has in store for its upcoming Disney+ streaming service, and it is a lot. Disney is coming out guns blazing with a slew of content and an aggressive price point that make Disney+ a compelling value proposition for consumers in a crowded streaming field.

There’s a lot to be excited about when the service debuts this November, from the first ever live-action Star Wars series The Mandalorian to all the MCU series to the Imagineering documentary series. And I’m hopeful that classic Disney catalog animated series like Adventures of the Gummi Bears, Gargoyles and Recess will finally be available in their entirety on Disney+.

All the TV coming to Disney+ is great, but I’m also really excited for the potential benefits this new platform offers on the movies front. Read on to see why.

The MCU And Star Wars All In One Place

The Marvel Cinematic Universe and Star Wars are the two most successful franchises ever, and eventually they will both be viewable in their entirety on Disney+. These franchises both have a high re-watchability factor, and if you’re a fan of either of them, having guaranteed access to them anytime on Disney+ is an enticing prospect.

Once Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker is out, you’ll be able to binge all nine films in the Skywalker Saga in one place. Consider the current situation with Avengers: Endgame as well. Many Marvel fans want to re-watch some of the previous MCU movies before The Infinity Saga comes to a close, but currently you can’t do that on streaming, even across multiple services. You would have to own physical copies or pay rental fees. Even as an advocate of physical media, I find this appealing, especially since Disney+ will support 4K and HDR, so I won’t need to upgrade nearly two dozen movies to get great quality.

New And Original Movies

Disney has found a lot of success theatrically thanks to its massive brands and recognizable IPs. The studio makes the most successful and popular blockbusters in the industry, but that’s basically all it makes. There is a sameness and safety to Disney’s theatrical strategy of rotating tentpoles from established properties that is wildly lucrative, but predictable. The Disney+ platform provides the company a way to do something different, as Walt Disney Studios Motion Picture Productions President Sean Bailey said at the Investor presentation:

Disney+ affords us the opportunity to tell more stories from a variety of genres. We will always remain true to the values of what a Disney live-action film offers, but we’re able to take some risks, which is really exciting. While theatrical box office right now is being driven by giant blockbuster events, there are amazing stories and characters that are yearning to be enjoyed by the whole family.

For a studio sometimes criticized for only making blockbusters, this is exciting. Already Disney+ has the holiday comedy Noelle starring Anna Kendrick, the coming-of-age novel adaptation Stargirl and the kid caper Timmy Failure, to name a few. It’s awesome to see Disney branching out, taking risks and allowing for more creative freedom by telling different kinds of stories than it does on the big screen. Sean Bailey also indicated that the same love and care will be given to these Disney+ movies as the company’s theatrical titles, and that’s exciting.

Remakes Of Less Popular Disney Animated Movies

There is an argument to be made that Disney is going for cheap nostalgia dollars by remaking its animated classics in live-action, but people love them and they are largely successful. Yet as Dumbo recently showed, not all of the studio’s animated classics are really built to be box office smashes. But that doesn’t mean they don’t deserve a solid live-action remake, and Disney+ provides a place for a smaller-budgeted remake to land.

One of the launch titles for Disney+ is a live-action reimagining of Lady and the Tramp starring the voices of Justin Theroux and Tessa Thompson. There’s also a remake in the works of The Sword in the Stone. Disney may run out of titles popular enough to be big screen blockbusters, but its catalog is extensive and has many films that could find new life in remakes on Disney+. We’d love to see Atlantis: The Lost Empire and Treasure Planet get some love too, but those two might require big screen budgets. The Black Cauldron maybe?

Live-Action Sequels And Reboots Could Have A Chance On Disney+

This isn’t so much a promise of Disney+, but a hope for the nascent streaming service. Disney has a long history full of great and beloved titles beyond its revered animated movies. Disney hasn’t indicated as such, but it seems like an ideal place for reboots and sequels of the studio’s live-action properties that no longer fit within its big-screen strategy. Or more specifically, the long awaited, frequently-asked-for National Treasure 3.

Bob Iger hasn’t doused hopes for National Treasure 3, and if finding a place for it on Disney’s crowded theatrical calendar was a problem, that obstacle could be removed if it releases on Disney+ instead. The hope for National Treasure 3 isn’t the only exciting possibility though. A reboot of The Rocketeer was in the works, and while we haven’t heard much about it recently, that too may be have a better chance to soar on Disney+. And that reported TV movie reboot of Hocus Pocus should really be a proper sequel dropping on Disney+ next Halloween.

No More Vault

Has there ever been a more brilliant and infuriating invention than the Disney Vault? Disney’s strategy of only making its animated movies available on home video for a limited time to create demand and make each re-release an event has long frustrated fans of the studio’s classic films. Disney has even employed this tactic in the streaming and digital realms; with the Aladdin remake on its way, the 1992 original is unavailable for streaming or digital purchase.

Like Robin Hood stealing from Prince John, Disney+ is busting that vault wide open and raiding it for subscribers. The vault program will not apply on the service and Disney+ will be the one-stop shop for fans of Disney’s animated classics. That means no more searching stores or different streaming services in vain when the mood strikes you to watch one of your childhood favorites. That convenience is awesome and as someone who grew up with Disney’s animated movies, it will be nice to know I can watch them all in one place.

It is still early and Disney+ hasn’t even launched yet, but it already has a lot going for it. The potential for Disney+ to reward Disney fans by offering both beloved existing films and unique new movies is immediately evident and exciting.

Disney+ launches in the United States on November 12 with a monthly rate of $6.99 or an upfront yearly price of $69.99. We’ll keep you updated on all the latest news on Disney+ as it arrives.

Read More

Godzilla: King Of The Monsters Director Has A Wild Vision For A Spinoff

Godzilla: King Of The Monsters Director Has A Wild Vision For A Spinoff

Five years after Godzilla was rebooted by Hollywood, the franchise goes into full gear this weekend with the release of Godzilla: King of the Monsters. The movie will see the return of the iconic Kaiju as he faces off with three behemoth titans: Rodan, Mothra and King Ghidorah. Legendary’s MonsterVerse is expanding!

Godzilla: King of the Monsters director and co-writer Mike Dougherty pitched a clever new way to present the rich mythology of these titans during a recent Twitter Q&A. Check it out:

Uhh… yes! This is a genius idea by the Godzilla director that would be great to see! Taking a note from the popular BBC docuseries Planet Earth, Michael Dougherty would like to focus on the monstrous creatures in their daily lives and natural habitats under the narration of the legendary David Attenborough. This documentary idea could be a great way for fans to geek out about the monsters close up and for newcomers to learn more about them.

David Attenborough has been narrating and reporting about nature and natural history since the ‘60s, but he is best known for voicing the Planet Earth series and most recently with Netflix’s Our Planet. It would be fun to see him spoof his other works in a sense with this unique contribution to the Godzilla series. Although these creatures are fictional, they have a rich history that has been legend on the big screen since 1954.

Michael Dougherty has more where that came from too! The filmmaker recently discussed another fun idea about a prequel that delves into Godzilla’s beginnings in ancient times. Check out his words:

I like the idea of going back in time and telling creatures' stories from different eras. Skull Island was set in the '70s, but personally I'd like to do Godzilla B.C., go back to ancient times and really see the Ray Harryhausen-esque world where primitive humans had to try to survive with these creatures. Maybe we'd get to see the first time mankind truly encountered Godzilla, and get to see how that relationship was christened.

Why not both? I can also see the Planet Earth type documentary including some background like this where it explores Godzilla’s interactions with early humans before fast-forwarding to the monster today, who often wanders around skyscrapers.

While we daydream about these potential additions to the franchise, fans already have tons to look forward from Michael Dougherty’s vision. King of the Monsters will follow the secret scientific organization Monarch’s dealings with the titans in this newly released film. The movie debuts this weekend to mixed to positive reviews.

On March 13, 2020, Godzilla vs. Kong will showcase an unlikely battle between the two icons. The movie is also co-written by Michael Dougherty and Zach Shields. The filmmaker could theoretically keep bringing more fresh ideas to the MonsterVerse depending on how King of the Monsters does at the box office this weekend.

Are you interested in these spinoff ideas? Let us know in the comments!

Read More

Looks Like Disney Is Pulling Back On Fox Projects After Merger

Looks Like Disney Is Pulling Back On Fox Projects After Merger

We knew that once Disney took full ownership of Fox, things would change, but until it actually happened, we had no idea what that change would really look like.Yesterday, on the Walt Disney Company's quarterly earning call, CEO Bob Iger spoke a lot about Fox, as this was the first call since the merger was complete.

One of the things Iger said on the call was that he expected Fox to produce five to six films a year once the current slate of inherited movies is complete, which, if true, would be about half the number of movies the studio had been producing in recent years.

20th century Fox released 12 movies in 2018 and 14 in 2017, and that doesn't include Fox Searchlight and the other divisions of the company that Disney now owns. Clearly the new Fox is planned to be a much leaner and meaner company.

This isn't all that surprising. 20th Century Fox was a full production studio like Disney, and now its owned by Disney. For Fox to continue to output 12 movies a year would mean doubling the total output of Disney as a whole.

Disney only released 10 movies in 2018 and released all of 8 films in 2017. However, it led the box office both of those years. The Disney focus has clearly been about making fewer films that bring in more money and this strategy is sure to be used when approaching Fox movies. Maybe they'll only make six movies, but if the studio can bring in the same amount of money with fewer films, so much the better for the bottom line.

There are a couple of potential caveats to this. First off, while Iger says five or six movies is likely, he's leaving the door open for more, saying...

I'm guessing that it'll be somewhere in the neighborhood of 5 or 6 films a year. But we're not locking ourselves into that, from that end.

The other thing to keep in mind is Disney+. Bob Iger also said during the call that projects from the Fox library that would be unlikely to see movies released theatrically would probably end up on the forthcoming streaming service. It seems that some of Fox's resources will be focused on Disney+, so while we might see fewer theatrical films from Fox we could see several online.

Clearly, Fox will not be the studio it once was again. It will be yet another label underneath the Walt Disney Company, and so, like Pixar or Marvel Studios, it will be working on a limited number of projects at any one time.

This isn't unexpected but it is upsetting. One of the unfortunate side effects of the purchase, in addition to there simply being fewer big studios, is that now there will likely be fewer theatrical releases overall. That just not a positive thing if you're a fan of movies or the industry as a whole.

For has seven projects planned for 2019 and nine set for 2020. After that, the only confirmed films are the animated Nimona and the multiple sequels to Avatar.

Read More

It Sounds Like The New Shazam! Trailer Protects A Number Of The Film's Secrets

It Sounds Like The New Shazam! Trailer Protects A Number Of The Film's Secrets

This morning, with approximately a month to go until Shazam!’s release, Warner Bros finally dropped a new full-length trailer for the superhero movie, the first since the debut trailer came out at San Diego Comic-Con last year (though there have been a couple shorter previews released in the interim). The latest look at Shazam! was filled with new footage of Billy Batson showing off his special powers and fighting Dr. Thaddeus Sivana, but according to director David F. Sandberg, it doesn’t spoil any of the movies big secrets, and he wouldn’t have it any other way. As Sandberg responded to a fan who wanted to see more from the trailer:

That Doomsday hashtag calls back to when it was confirmed in one of the later Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice trailers that the beast who killed Superman in the comics was appearing in the movie. This revelation received a lot of backlash online since it spoiled what the climactic conflict would be. It’s one thing for a trailer to give viewers a taste of what’s to come, but to outright spoil major moments that would make for great surprises when actually seeing the movie is generally frowned upon. David F. Sandberg would rather someone wanting more than learning too much, as he stated on Twitter.

If you re-watch today’s Shazam! trailer, you’ll see that the first half of the preview hits most of the same beats that the previous trailer hit, from Billy Batson meeting the mysterious Wizard to testing out his powers with foster brother Freddie Freeman. The latter half gave us plenty of new footage, such as Billy activating an ATM with his magical lightning, catching a falling bus and failing to leap over a tall building in a single bound. With the accompaniment of Eminem’s “The Real Slim Shady,” it was definitely an amusing new look at the seventh DC Extended Universe film, though I can understand why some fans might have been hoping it showed off more material. Nevertheless, I agree with David F. Sandberg about the new Shazam! trailer wisely not revealing too much.

Maybe I’d feel differently if this trailer came out several months before release, but as stated earlier, we’re now only weeks away from seeing Shazam! on the big screen. You can be sure there will be plenty of TV spots to follow, but with the movie so close, Warner Bros and DC might as well keep a few extra secrets close to the proverbial chest. In fact, there are two twists in Shazam! that have already been publicly confirmed, but for the general public, it’s wise for them to be surprised by said twists upon seeing the movie rather than learn about them in a trailer.

Warning: SPOILERS for Shazam! are ahead! If you’re content with what you’ve learned about the movie so far and want to stay in the dark from this point forward, turn back and read another one of our fine articles.

Although Shazam! is pulling from various eras of the eponymous hero’s history, the storyline is heavily inspired by the New 52 origin story that was written by Geoff Johns and illustrated by Gary Frank. That story saw Billy, having only just received his superpowers from The Wizard, being forced to fight Black Adam, who had accidentally been resurrected by Dr. Thaddeus Sivana. But things only got worse from there. Eventually the Seven Deadly Sins (also known in past eras as the Seven Deadly Enemies of Man), demons that had been imprisoned by the Wizard, and that eventually led to Billy sharing his Shazam powers with his foster siblings: Freddie, Mary, Pedro, Eugene and Darla. Through teamwork, Shazam and the gang were able to triumph over the forces of evil.

By all accounts, it looks like the Shazam! movie will unfold similarly to those New 52 events, although obviously without Black Adam’s involvement. Once Billy Batson’s foster siblings were cast in the movie, there were numerous predictions about how they would become superheroes like their comic book counterparts, and now we know for sure that’s going to happen thanks to some toy releases and unofficial castings for the kids in their adult forms, just like how Zachary Levi is playing the adult form of Asher Angel’s Billy.

It was also confirmed last month that the Seven Deadly Sins (Pride, Envy, Greed, Wrath, Sloth, Gluttony and Lust), who can be briefly be seen in their stone forms in the Wizard’s base, the Rock of Eternity, will also end up causing trouble in Shazam! It remains to be seen how they’ll be freed, but one would assume Dr. Thaddeus Sivana is behind it. After being rejected as the Wizard’s champion as a child, the character has somehow managed to use science to unlock the secrets of magic as an adult, hence why he’s a physical match for Shazam in this movie. Sivana may be the main antagonist, but it’s easy enough to imagine a scenario where either accidentally or on purpose, he unleashes the Seven Deadly Sins. Knowing them, they could have promised to give him even more power, leading to them either combining their power was his to make even mightier or just betraying him. I’d lean towards the latter.

If Shazam! ends up being anywhere near as popular as Aquaman was, it’s possible we could see this particularly property also carving out its own special corner of the DCEU. If it’s at least financially successful, Warner Bros will likely give the green light to a sequel, and Dwayne Johnson has also been attached to lead a Black Adam movie for several years. For now, though, the World’s Mightiest Mortal needs to impress in his live action theatrical debut, and if there’s one thing that can be said about the movie, it’s that there are various surprises still in store.

Shazam! will work its magic in theaters April 5, so stay tuned to CinemaBlend for continuing coverage. Don’t forget to also look through our DC movies guide to learn what other projects are in development for the DCEU, as well as our 2019 release schedule for plan your other silver screen visits later this year.

Read More

Rocketman’s Taron Egerton Says There’s ‘Nothing More Intimidating’ Than Filming In Front Of Elton John

Rocketman’s Taron Egerton Says There’s ‘Nothing More Intimidating’ Than Filming In Front Of Elton John

Taron Egerton has done a lot in his years as an actor. He’s done tough, long shoots for action movies like Kingsman and Robin Hood and he even learned to ski for Eddie the Eagle. But nothing was quite like having to perform in front of Elton John for the upcoming flick Rocketman. According to Taron Egerton…

There's really nothing more intimidating than performing in front of Elton. I don't think I could have done it if he was around a lot. But I think he knew that. He's very astute in that way.

Previously, while speaking onstage with director Dexter Fletcher at CinemaCon 2019, Taron Egerton also revealed to the audience that Elton John wasn’t a major presence on the set of Rocketman, preferring the creative team to put together their own version of his life story without him present most of the time on the set.

However, THR also revealed that while Elton John only came and watched Taron Egerton during a day when he was performing “Saturday Night’s Alright For Fighting” at a carnival in front of a group of extras, he did watch the dailies as they came in from the set.

Related: Watch Rocketman's Taron Egerton Sing "Tiny Dancer" With Real Elton John

Paramount’s Rocketman was already preparing for release when Bohemian Rhapsody started winning awards early this year. The second musical biopic to come out in just as many years, Rocketman will follow the life of legendary singer and performer Elton John, who is currently on the road performing his farewell tour.

Paramount is likely hoping it will have a similar trajectory to Bohemian Rhapsody, which went on to gross over $900 million worldwide.

There’s no reason to think it couldn’t, as Elton John is currently on a tour he has dubbed his Farewell Yellow Brick Road aka retirement tour, after a career spanning multiple decades and an absolute ton of record sales, over 300 million in fact. He's popular and the movies early trailers look great.

However, while the Queen biopic softened Freddie Mercury’s story somewhat and kept to a PG-13 rating, the Rocketman team is going a lot harder, telling the full R-rated tale of Elton John’s life story, likely with some embellishments as well. R-rated movies can sell and sell well, but they certainly aren’t as friendly in some markets as others.

Previously, Taron Egerton talked about how he hopes to make Elton John happy with his portrayal when the movie comes out, noting,

He’s so universally loved, and I just want to make him happy really. Just getting over the pressure of it and having a good time.

No matter what ends up happening with this movie (although from the footage I saw at CinemaCon it looks great), Taron Egerton will be able to look back and say. 1. He did all of his own singing playing Elton John in this movie (which Malek did not as Mercury). 2. He cut his hair to create a receding hairline in this movie.

He did quite a lot to give Rocketman his all and we’ll be able to see how it all pans out—and hopefully exactly what Elton John thinks—when the movie hits theaters on May 31. Take a look at what else is coming this summer with our full schedule.

Read More

Why 'Lord Of War' Starring Nicolas Cage Bought 3,000 Real Guns Instead Of Props

Why 'Lord Of War' Starring Nicolas Cage Bought 3,000 Real Guns Instead Of Props

There are a lot of guns in the In the 2005 movie Lord of War. And we mean a lot of guns. The underrated crime drama is loosely based on real events and real-life arms dealers and smugglers, and it follows Yuri Orlov (Nicolas Cage), an illegal arms dealer who amalgamates a great deal of business — and quite a bit of trouble along the way — as he sells high-power rifles, machine guns and other weapons to war-driven countries from the '80s through the early '00s. If you are making a movie about a guy who sells a lot of guns, you're gonna need a whole lot of guns. It's basically a given.

Oftentimes, however, the guns you see in the movies are just props. Fakes. There are exceptions to be found throughout the movie business, obviously, but it's generally known that the guns you see in the movies may not always be the real deal. However, when it comes to Lord of War, those weapons were not the result of movie magic. Instead, writer-director Andrew Niccol went ahead and bought a whopping 3000 Kalashnikov automatic rifles.

But here's the kicker: the movie team didn't purchase these high power rifles simply to make the flick a bit more authentic or realistic. Instead, the filmmakers behind Lord of War discovered that it would ultimately be cheaper to buy real guns instead of fakes. Yes, really.

In an interview with The New York Daily News (via The New Zealand Herald), Andrew Niccol — who is also known as the screenwriter of The Truman Show and the director of In Time, Gattaca, The Host (2013) and, most recently, Netflix's Anon — explained how it was easier to acquire real guns and sell them back after filming. Also, Niccol realized that it wasn't quite as easy to make a profit off of weapons as his lead character made it seem.

In a way, my film is a how-to about becoming an arms dealer. During the making of it, I needed guns in the Czech Republic, and it was cheaper to use real guns than replicas. I bought 3000 Kalashnikovs and then sold them back at a loss. I wouldn't make a very good arms dealer.

Meanwhile, Andrew Niccol was apparently not entirely keen on selling the guns back into circulation. Yet, because the budget of his movie was fairly small, he wasn't able to destroy them. Or, at least, not all of them. As the writer-director explained, there were a few guns that he was able to dispose of.

In South Africa, we did cut some guns in half to stop them from getting into circulation. The fact that it was so easy to buy guns was disturbing. We also got some tanks, and the guy said, 'I need them back by December because I'm selling them to Libya.'

Furthermore, while the movie itself does showcase an array of guns and results in a fun and engaging film about crime and weaponry, Lord of War isn't necessarily a celebration of gun culture. Or, at least, it doesn't sound like Andrew Niccol is a fan of the illegal arms culture, which could be why he destroyed some of what the Lord of War team purchased for the film.

Also starring Ethan Hawke, Bridget Moynahan and Jared Leto, Lord of War was met with modest reviews by critics when it was released in 2005. However, in the time since its release, the crime drama has gone on to receive high praise from audiences — particularly with its 7.6 rating on IMDb. Though the movie isn't perfect, it is a thoughtful and compelling examination of the gun trade, particularly in the years before and after 9/11, and it is certainly worth a watch if you haven't had a chance to see it yet.

Additionally, if you do get a chance to check out Lord of War, you should definitely take note of the guns found on display throughout the film — though it would be hard not to, given the movie's subject matter. Because they are the real deal, folks. Those guns aren't make-believe. And that most certainly adds to the film's heightened realism.

Lord of War is currently available streaming on Netflix or you can pickup your own copy -- in 4K even -- on Amazon.

Read More

Martin Lawrence Talks Making Bad Boys For Life Without Michael Bay

Martin Lawrence Talks Making Bad Boys For Life Without Michael Bay

The stars of the Bad Boys franchise, without question, are Will Smith and Martin Lawrence. Their chemistry and comedic interplay is what makes those movies stand out from the buddy-cop formula pack. But one could argue that the third “star” of those two movies was the director, Michael Bay. The bombastic Transformers director cut his teeth early on with the stripped down and streamlined Bad Boys, then kicked it up several notches to the expected Bay-hem with Bad Boys II.

Michael Bay will not return to helm 2020’s highly anticipated Bad Boys for Life. Those duties will fall to relative newcomers Adil El Arbi and Bilall Fallah. When we got a moment to speak with Martin Lawrence at the South By Southwest premiere of his new movie The Beach Bum, we asked Lawrence if it was strange doing a Bad Boys sequel without Bay, and he told us:

Well, it’s not so strange because Bilall and Adel are doing a great job. It’s just different directors, but we’re still going to bring you that Bad Boys stuff.

That begs the question, is it Bad Boys simply because Will Smith and Martin Lawrence are returning, or does the franchise actually need Michael Bay’s attitude and visual approach? We’re certainly eager to find out! Just last year, Paramount’s Bumblebee proved that a Bay franchise could survive the addition of a different director. But action franchises in the past have shown mixed results when they lose their original voice.

Die Hard, for example, usually floundered when original director John McTiernan wasn’t at the helm for a sequel. The Lethal Weapon franchise stayed steady with Richard Donner. And the best Terminator movies, so far, have had James Cameron in the director’s chair.

That’s not to say that co-directors Adil El Arbi and Bilall Fallah don’t have their own opinion on how to use Martin Lawrence and Will Smith in a Bad Boys movie. Clearly they had a pitch that sold Sony on their ability to get the gig directing Bad Boys For Life. And if Martin Lawrence is giving them the thumbs up for the work that they have done on the sequel so far, then we’re going to take him at his word.

We don’t know a ton about the plot details for Bad Boys For Life, but every once in a while, Will Smith posts an entertaining behind-the-scenes video on his YouTube page. Like this one:

Will Smith and Martin Lawrence will be reteaming for Bad Boys For Life, and the movie is due in theaters on January 17, 2020. Right now, there’s no Michael Bay, but Lawrence tells CinemaBlend that’s no problem. Do you agree with him? Let us know in the comments section below.

Read More

How Marvel Movies Are Affected By The Russo Brothers' Bold Plot Moves

How Marvel Movies Are Affected By The Russo Brothers' Bold Plot Moves

Joe and Anthony Russo have made three films for Marvel Studios prior to Avengers: Endgame, and each time out they have done something to totally upend the Marvel Cinematic Universe as we know it. Working alongside screenwriters Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely, they’ve exposed S.H.I.E.L.D. as a corrupt institution, broke up the Avengers, and killed half of all living things. It’s a pretty shocking legacy to have, but according to the directors, it’s all part of the role they see themselves have as storytellers.

Each time out the Russos have taken some big swings with beloved characters and aspects of the popular franchise, and it all links back to an approach that tries to shake things up and leave the world in a different place than where it was when they started. This was a subject that came up during my recent interview with the filmmakers prior to the release of Avengers: Endgame, and as I learned from Anthony Russo, it’s all about forward progress:

We look at it as our challenge. How do we construct a narrative that actually pushes these characters into those places? How does Captain America travel that road? How do we create circumstances where you're going to believably see him behaving in new ways as the movies go on? Because that's the key to the longevity. We want to see these movies go on forever. We love them. But the only way to really do that is to keep finding new colors to bring to the surface.

Simply put, the Marvel Cinematic Universe doesn’t get to make 22 successful movies unless each one is bringing something new to the table, and one of the best ways to get that done is by having a story introduce a bombshell that totally changes the face of things as we know it.

This is something at which the Russos see themselves as being particularly skilled, and it’s been a part of their work for years – even before they started making Marvel blockbusters. As Joe Russo noted, it’s also something that’s very much present in their television work – specifically the two much-loved and metatextual comedy series that they helped bring to life:

We lined up very well with where we came into the Marvel Universe because we're disruptors, and we like to make disruptive choices and deconstruct. Go look at Arrested Development or Community. They're both deconstruction of shows. And everything we've done with the Marvel universe is deconstruct because we're interested in what happens post-deconstruction. Those are the things that are most compelling to us. And so getting to make each movie after we deconstruct something, we tend to use that next movie to examine the deconstruction.

This approach has led them to tell stories within the continuity that leave the Marvel Universe in precarious positions, but it’s really all part of the plan. According to the directors, writing themselves into a corner is actually something that they do on purpose, as it ultimately allows them to really flex their creative muscles as they try and find the best way for their characters to get out of impossible situations and scenarios.

This has also never been a challenge that they’ve shirked from, as each one of their Marvel movies have had a significant effect on the next. The fall of S.H.I.E.L.D. in Captain America: The Winter Soldier led to its titular character being unable to trust authority, and that eventually fed the central conflict featured in Captain America: Civil War. This led to the members of the Avengers no longer trusting each other, and because they were divided they got their asses kicked by Thanos in Avengers: Infinity War. Now in Avengers: Endgame the heroes have to pick up the pieces and do what they can to right the horrific wrong that has led to trillions of deaths around the universe.

As Joe and Anthony Russo explained, these endings not only carry significant emotional weight, but force the heroes to change in ways that they otherwise wouldn’t:

Anthony Russo: The ending of that movie, it's a difficult ending, the ending of Infinity War, and it's really important for us to double down on that and commit to that, and figure out how does someone move forward from a moment like that? How do these heroes move forward from a moment like that? That's the story that we want to know.

Joe Russo: They lost.

Anthony Russo: Exactly. And that's a real experience. So we wanted to give that its due.

Joe Russo: It was a unique opportunity for us in Infinity War, which is an exceedingly expensive movie, and we had a studio very supportive of us killing half the characters at the end of the movie. That as filmmakers is a really rare opportunity, and we wanted to take advantage of that opportunity.

Of course, the choices that are being made aren’t entirely insular, as the Marvel Cinematic Universe at large is made up of multiple filmmakers telling a wide variety of stories with these shared characters. You’d think that this would make the kind of big swings the Russos are interested in executing a challenge to sell, but as Anthony Russo explains, what plays a significant role is the fact that they have the full support of Marvel Studios President Kevin Feige. And when you have someone in that kind of position backing your creative moves, you can be bold:

I think that's part of the magic of what Kevin Feige can do, is that he understands the importance of giving every movie the freedom to do those things. Because if you don't you're shackling what the narrative can do, or where it can go. And I think why we've done four movies with Marvel is because we've had that freedom; we've had the freedom to go to surprising, shocking, even problematic for the studio places with the storytelling, and Kevin gets fed off of that. He knows that that's part of the vitality of surprising audiences, and for as complicated as it may be on a business level, on a creative level, that's all that matters.

You can hear Joe and Anthony Russo discuss their big moves in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, as well as other subjects, by watching my full interview with the directors below:

All of the work the Russos have done in the last five years has led to Avengers: Endgame, and now audiences worldwide can experience the capstone for themselves – as the film is now playing in theaters worldwide. Be sure to not only check it out this weekend, but also stay tuned here on CinemaBlend for a whole lot more of our Marvel Cinematic Universe coverage.

Read More

Kevin Feige Pushed For More Goose In Captain Marvel

Kevin Feige Pushed For More Goose In Captain Marvel

The Marvel Cinematic Universe has been on a serious roll with Phase Three, as every single blockbuster has been a critical and box office success. Moviegoers are still recovering from the wild events of Avengers: Endgame, but it hasn't been all that long since Captain Marvel arrived in theaters. Carol Danvers made her long-awaited debut in the process, but there was another newcomer that really stole the show: Goose the Cat.

Carol's pet was a welcomed source of comedy in Captain Marvel, especially when it was revealed that Goose was actually an alien species called a Flerken. Moviegoers loved the dynamic between Goose and Samuel L. Jackson's Nick Fury, and it turns out that Marvel Studios boss Kevin Feige pushed for more of the iconic pet in Captain Marvel. As co-director Anna Boden recently revealed:

When we were working on the first outline for this movie and we shared it with Kevin Feige, his first note was, 'We need 200 percent more Goose.'

And that's why they pay Kevin Feige the big bucks. Feige is the overall architect of the MCU, and is intimately involved with each new installment of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. As such, he contributes his ideas to new blockbusters, including Captain Marvel's focus on Goose the Cat.

Anna Boden's comments come from the special features of Captain Marvel's digital release (via Comic Book). Goose was always going to factor into the narrative of the '90s set origin story, but it looks like his presence in the film was beefed up after some feedback from Kevin Feige himself. This was probably the right call, as Goose quickly became a beloved figure in the MCU.

While seemingly a regular cat at first glance, Goose's true origin became clear as Captain Marvel's runtime continued on. It turns out that she was actually the pet of Dr. Wendy Lawson (Anette Bening), and was a Flerken all along. Goose had some deadly tentacles and was even able to swallow the tesseract and keep it in a pocket dimension within his body.

Aside from Goose's temporary possession of the Space Stone, perhaps his most surprising plot point was related to Nick Fury's eye. The MCU fandom was eager to see how Sam Jackson's iconic S.H.I.E.L.D. commander would end up with his iconic eye injury, especially after he teased that it was a major betrayal in Captain America: The Winter Soldier.

Related: Captain Marvel's Nick Fury Almost Lost His Eye In A Fight With The Skrulls

But rather than a conflict with the Kree or Skrulls, Nick Fury ended up getting scratched by Goose, and became the cycloptic Marvel figure we've known throughout the years. That twist likely wouldn't have been possible without Kevin Feige's suggestion to include more Goose in Captain Marvel.

Captain Marvel can currently be seen onscreen in Avengers: Endgame, and her solo movie will be available on Blu-ray and DVD June 11th. In the meantime, check out our 2019 release list to plan your next trip to the movies.

Read More

Captain Marvel Brought Marvel To A Box Office Milestone

Captain Marvel Brought Marvel To A Box Office Milestone

Heading in to its second weekend, Captain Marvel is an unmitigated financial success. Carol Danvers had the biggest March opening ever, the 2nd biggest worldwide opening for any superhero movie and the film has already passed the $500 million milestone. Captain Marvel does not exist in a vacuum though; it is part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and its success has rocketed Marvel higher, further, faster to a new box office milestone.

Captain Marvel is the 21st entry into the MCU canon and combined, those 21 titles have now surpassed $18 billion in worldwide ticket sales, according to Variety. That’s billion with a ‘B’ and the MCU is now a member of the three-comma club 18 times over. I guess a $455 million worldwide opening weekend will do a lot to help you reach box office milestones.

If you do the math on that $18 billion over 21 movies, each Marvel movie is worth 4/5th of a billion dollars, or to be more exact, assuming my math is closer to Bruce Banner’s than the Hulk’s, $857.14 million. Or, to put another way, in roughly 11 years in existence, the Marvel Cinematic Universe has averaged about $1.63 billion a year.

The MCU has been the most successful franchise in movie history for a while now, and the $18 billion milestone just further cements the brand’s unparalleled and unprecedented achievements. There is something cool about the fact that it was Captain Marvel, a hero with Marvel in her name that added this notch to Marvel’s belt.

Captain Marvel was just the first entry in the MCU’s stacked 2019 though and Marvel may add a few more billion-dollar notches before it’s all said and done. Captain Marvel is now at $524 million worldwide and is tracking to add another $70-$85 million in its second weekend domestically.

Beyond Captain Marvel is Avengers: Endgame, which premiered a new trailer this morning. That film, the capstone on Phase 3 and the first 11 years of the MCU may hit an absolutely insane $282 million in its opening weekend just domestically. Avengers: Infinity War hit $2 billion worldwide and it wouldn’t be surprising to see Endgame repeat that feat with another $2 billion to follow up Captain Marvel. It’s a good thing too, Disney has bills to pay.

With Spider-Man: Far From Home on the way in July (a Sony film that is still MCU even if Disney doesn’t get the money from it) the MCU will certainly pass the $20 billion milestone at the worldwide box this year.

It is truly remarkable considering how it was only around the turn of the millennium that comic book movies became good and respected after wallowing in mediocrity for a long time. There was even a time not long ago when loving comic books and superheroes was something you didn’t advertise because it was considered uncool. Now superheroes are literally the biggest thing in the history of the movie business the world over and it’s not even close. That's pretty neat.

Captain Marvel is now playing. Check out our 2019 release schedule to keep track of all the biggest films arriving this year and stay tuned to CinemaBlend for all your movie news.

Read More

Avengers: Endgame Has Officially Beat One Of Avatar's Box Office Records

Avengers: Endgame Has Officially Beat One Of Avatar's Box Office Records

Like Captain Marvel blazing through the sky and cutting through enemy ships, Avengers: Endgame came out fast and furious at the box office, felling many records. But Endgame’s run isn’t done yet and there are still records left to conquer, particularly those belonging to the almighty box office champ, Avatar. Now, after this past weekend, Avengers: Endgame has officially beat one of Avatar’s box office records.

Prior to this past weekend, it looked like the MCU’s massive culmination film would pass Avatar to become the second-biggest film at the domestic box office all-time. All the money has now been counted and we can finally say that officially, The Russo Brothers’ latest film has done just that. According to Box Office Mojo, Avengers: Endgame now stands at $774.5 million on the domestic charts, surpassing Avatar’s $760.5 million.

It’s a remarkable feat considering that Avatar’s domestic record held all the way until 2015 when it was beat out by the return of Star Wars in J.J. Abrams’ Star Wars: The Force Awakens. No film since then has passed Avatar domestically, including box office titans like Black Panther, Star Wars: The Last Jedi and Avengers: Infinity War. But records are made to be broken and Avengers: Endgame has done that in less than a month.

The $774.5 million and counting Avengers: Endgame has made cements it as the second-biggest domestic film ever, now trailing only The Force Awakens. It may have to settle for No. 2 though because the record held by Episode VII will require extraordinary legs to catch. Star Wars: The Force Awakens holds the top spot on the domestic charts with a historic $936.6 million, over $160 million more than where Endgame is currently at.

On the worldwide record front, things are more competitive and interesting. Avengers: Endgame may have passed Avatar’s domestic total and James Cameron’s other box office champ Titanic worldwide, but Avatar’s all-time, worldwide box office record remains intact.

Avatar is the No. 1, biggest movie ever at the box office, with $2.788 million worldwide. Right now, Avengers: Endgame sits at $2.620 million worldwide. Like the domestic record, Endgame will have to make over $160 million more around the world to catch Avatar and stand alone atop the worldwide box office chart.

Whether it can do that remains to be seen, but we may be in for a photo finish with box office aficionados watching Endgame’s every dollar come in like political pundits on election night. As of now, Avengers: Endgame has won a battle against Avatar, but the war is undecided and James Cameron still sits upon the throne.

Avengers: Endgame is now playing while Avatar 2 has been delayed (again) until 2021. Check out our 2019 Release Schedule to see all the movies you can look forward to the rest of this year.

Read More