Nightwing and Sidekicks in Movies

One of the recent rumors that has come through the grapevine this past week is that Nightwing will appear in the Batman vs. Superman.  I'm not a huge fan of this news and I'll state why in a little bit.  I'd like to first address why most sidekicks wouldn't work in movies as they do in the comics and a possible way that they could work.

I watch/listen to AMC Movie Talk and this was a hot question over the weekend on their mail bag over the weekend.  I would agree with John Campea, the host, on his stance that sidekicks are tough to have in movies.  The idea of a kid tagging along with a grown man doesn't really work in a movie outside of comedy.  Even the movies with sidekicks, Batman Forever and Captain America: The First Avenger, introduce the sidekicks, Robin and Bucky, as grown men (at least 18).  Kick Ass manages to introduce a kid as a sidekick, but it's in a humorous way.  They even state in the movie how it's not the right thing to do.

So, can we never see a sidekick in a movie?  Absolutely not.  I'll pose an example of how we could see a Robin in a movie, or at least my ideal story.  Dick Grayson is introduced as a 16 year-old who is part of the circus with his parents.  Despite his acrobatic background, he's not ready to enter street fights with thugs.  Bruce Wayne would probably feel much better about training him and then letting him make his choice at the age of 18.  So, Dick Grayson trains for two years and joins Batman's fight when it wouldn't be endangering a minor.  The name "Robin" could even be used as a term like "grasshopper" during Dick's lessons with either Bruce or Lady Shiva or another trainer.  Using this methodology, Robin is taking a path closer to Batman's, and it removes some of the morality issues that may be encountered with a younger sidekick.

Based on the idea of the older Batman in Batman vs. Superman, Nightwing makes sense in that world. Dick would be a few years older and had time to disagree with Bruce and step out on his own, no longer taking on the title of "Robin", the apprentice.  But, I think that is way too much back story to include in this movie.  Remember, this is a sequel to Man of Steel.  If they would like to go into that backstory in a standalone Batman movie, that's one thing.  There have been rumors of Nightwing and Wonder Woman, even some others of the Justice League.  I'm fine if there are minor cameos, but let's hope this movie is what it really is about: Batman and Superman.

Perks of Being a Wallflower

I know that this movie came out a while ago, but I saw it on TV a couple of weeks ago and thought it was amazing.  Perks of Being a Wallflower is definitely a must-see.

The movie takes place in the early 1990s and you get some nostalgia (i.e. mix tapes) from seeing it.  This is just one of the things that makes this movie amazing.  The movie touches many different issues that might affect teenagers in different eras.  But, the main story revolves around a kid that struggles with finding his place in high school.  He narrates his thoughts throughout the movie in letters to his friend.

Every young actor in this movie delivers great performances, especially Emma Watson and Logan Lerman.  Logan Lerman was so much better in this movie than his performances in either of the Percy Jackson movies.

The movie does get a little dark and sad, so I would suggest not watching this if you are a little down in the dumps.

+ Logan Lerman and Emma Watson are amazing
+ Nostalgia
+ Good drama with good issues
+/- Not really a good or bad thing, but some parts of the movie are a little depressing and hard to watch

Overall score:  90

Thor: The Dark World

So far, there haven't been too many sequels in the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU). We've had Iron Man 2 and Iron Man 3, but that's about it. You could maybe count Avengers as a sequel, but that's a stretch. So, it was hard to say how the universe would fare in the sequel category outside of movies starring RDJ. Thor: The Dark World is very well done. 

I can't say that I enjoyed it as much as the first (one of my favorite of the MCU movies), but I enjoyed it almost as much. The movie has everything. Love story, humor, a good plot, and characters that are easy to love. The characters are may be why I have enjoyed both Thor movies so much. Thor's fellow Asgardians, Darcy, and Erik Selvig are all very rich supporting characters. Along with Thor, Loki, and Jane, you get to experience these characters perhaps more than the first movie. 

The one downside I saw to this movie was the villains. I honestly didn't care about the dark elves as much. I didn't understand them at all. It was a little disappointing as I felt Christopher Eccleston could do more, and the Marvel movies have had pretty good villains so far. 

This is definitely a movie to go see in theaters. I will likely return to see it again if possible. Make sure you stick around through the credits as there are two post-credits scenes. One is about 5 minutes in and might possibly tease a future movie. The other is both funny and a nice conclusion to the movie. 

+ Action

+ Best supporting cast of any superhero movie

- Lack of intriguing villains

+ Lots of fun

Overall score: 89

Carrie

I don't know that I've ever seen the full movie of the original Carrie. The remake was a good movie to see around Halloween (or any time of year) though. 

The story isn't the best and some of the scenes of gore and self-mutilation bothered me a bit. I had to look away a few times. But, the movie does have it's bright spots. Julianne Moore's acting is superb as always. The message about bullying is pretty good and fits well into present day. 

This is definitely a movie to watch even if you don't see it in theaters. In fact, I would say this is one probably better for a rental. 

+ Julianne Moore

- too much gore (personal preference)

+ good modern day remake

Score: 74

Trailer Park 10/31/2013

It's Halloween!  So, while you snack on all of your goodies or recover from a party, check out these trailers.

The first trailer for X-Men: Days of Future Past came out this week.  I have never read this story in the comic books, so I don't know much about it.  I think the trailer looks interesting and there are lots of mutants that look familiar, so comic book geeks are definitely going to be excited about seeing favorite characters they may recognize.  From a general movie-goer point of view, the trailer seems a little confusing.  This is just a teaser trailer, so I'm sure further trailers will detail more of the movie.  It is exciting to see all of the old X-Men cast back alongside the new X-Men: First Class cast.  I look forward to seeing more about this movie.

I saw the trailer for Pompeii last night while watching Carrie.  I don't have high hopes for the movie, but the idea interests me.  Based on the trailer, it more looks like a Showtime television show than a feature length movie.

I cannot wait to see The Wolf of Wall Street.  The second trailer looks as great as the first...if not better.  I can sense multiple awards and nominations for this movie.

Movie Boycotts

Occassionally, you'll hear about a boycott of a movie for one reason or another.  The latest boycott is for a movie that is being released this week, Ender's Game.  It is a sci-fi story that is like Starship Troopers meets Hunger Games and Harry Potter.  Sounds good, right? 

The story comes from a book by Orson Scott Card written in 1985.  Since Card wrote the books, he has expressed his own views on politics, homosexuality and other issues and caused a good amount of controversy.  He recently was taken off a Superman comic book project due to the amount of backlash received from Superman fans and comic book store owners.  The boycott of the Ender's Game movie is also due to his views on these issues.

It is worth noting that Card is a member of the LDS Church and that most of his views are likely based on his religious upbringing.  I will also note that I do not agree with Card on any of his views.

While DC Comics eventually caved to public pressure I will agree with DC Comics' original statement regarding Card:

As content creators we steadfastly support freedom of expression, however the personal views of individuals associated with DC Comics are just that — personal views — and not those of the company itself.

Fiction has always been about freedom of expression.  I have never agreed with the boycotting of books or movies due to their content or even the artists involved with those projects.  If I don't agree with the content and views within, I will likely not enjoy the movie; however, I will likely challenge myself and my personal views.

That being said, I have read Ender's Game.  The book was great.  I read the book prior to hearing about Orson Scott Card's personal views.  His views are not revealed in the book.  In fact, there are emotionally intimate relationships between Ender and his schoolmates.  I wonder if any of the boycotters have read the book.

Tom Cruise is a great actor.  I disagree with a lot of his views over the past several years.  Have I stopped viewing his movies because of this?  No.  Like I said, he is a great actor and I am able to separate his personal views from his work.

By supporting a movie, you may be financially supporting that person's views.  This is true, but how many things do you purchase in a day?  It would become exhausting to research the personal views of everything that you support.  Does every actor in a movie have your same views?  Do the writers?  Do the producers?  What about the editors?  All performers from the soundtrack?  Key grip?  Stunt men and women?  They receive money from their job the same as you do.  They can spend this money to support whatever programs they deem important to them, whether you agree with them or not.

Ultimately, the choice is yours to see a movie or not.  Let's face it, we all set priorities with movies and the personal views of actors, directors, writers or even the original work's creator may affect that priority.  Thor: The Dark World comes out the week after Ender's Game.  If given the choice, I would rather see Thor.  I want to see Ender's Game, but I'll be out of town this weekend and I'm not sure when I'll get a chance to see it.  If it doesn't last long in theatres, there is a likelihood that I will not be supporting it's box office numbers.  That's just the choice I'm making and it is not based on any reasons other than priorities and time.

Captain Phillips

I've heard a lot of great things about Captain Phillips and I had to see it for myself.  You would have a hard time going wrong by seeing a Tom Hanks movie anyways.  He's an amazing actor and this movie gives him a lot of room to show his talent.

If you don't know much about the true story upon which this movie is based, that's fine.  Honestly, I didn't know much about this story beforehand.  Outside of the movie being about Somali pirates, I had very little knowledge of the story.  Did all of the crew survive?  Did they catch the pirates?  I had no clue.

Every minute of this movie had me guessing what was going to happen next.  It was like living the situation in real time.  If you're looking for action though, this movie isn't for you.  This is more about the drama of the moments.

One thing that I found odd is that you don't necessarily feel bad for the pirates, but the movie does a good job of humanizing them.  You can see their pain and their struggle in the situation.  Their acting made me very surprised that this was their first movie (first acting job for all per IMDB).

Tom Hanks' performance is the one that took the cake.  The last ten minutes of the movie deserve a best actor nomination for Tom Hanks.  I won't spoil the movie for you, but the entire movie is worth it for those last ten minutes.

The movie won't win a Best Picture award, nor will it likely deserve it.  However, this is a must-see movie.  You will probably be okay waiting until video for this one, but it's definitely worth seeing.

+ Tom Hanks acting
+ Suspense
+ Unknown actors performing well

Overall score: 90

Trailer Park 10/24/2013

It's time for a round-up of some of the movies I'm looking forward to based on trailers I've seen.

First of all, Captain America: The Winter Soldier is coming out next Spring.  The trailer just hit earlier today and I have to say it looks AWESOME!  I love a good comic book movie.  Iron Man 3 was good, but nowhere near Avengers.  I'm looking forward to Thor: The Dark World in a few weeks, but the trailer for the next Captain America movie gives me some goosebumps.  It gives you just enough to give the basic direction of where they are taking the movie, but not enough to spoil it.  The action in it looks amazing.

Next, another trailer for Anchorman 2 came out this week.  The first trailer made me think that this would be a great sequel.  The second trailer keeps me thinking that.  It gives us a few more plot points than the first trailer and a few funny moments including Brick with a green screen.  Love it!  My biggest fear is that all of the funny parts are going to be in the trailers.  "Say whaaaat?"

Lastly, the trailers for That Awkward Moment took me by surprise.  Zac Efron, Miles Teller and Michael B. Jordan combine for what looks like a great "guy" movie that the girls may enjoy as well.  It looks like it has some of that Old School and Wedding Crashers type of humor, but it might hide some "chick flick" tendencies under it all.  I heard this movie mentioned last week, but the trailer sold me.  This might have to be a date night movie with the wife.  Here's a couple of different versions for you.
The Safer-for-Work Version:

Red Band (NSFW):

DC Universe Movies vs. TV

If you haven't heard, Fox has picked up a new show based on the Gotham City police department. The show will likely take place in a Gotham pre-Batman.  This show joins a growing list of television properties of DC Comics characters on the small-screen.  Last week, Constantine was announced as a developing project for NBC.  You may remember John Constantine from the Keanu Reeves movie.  Arrow is a wonderful show on the CW.  While it doesn't hit the viewership levels of shows on the major networks, it is still widely popular.  This year, they are introducing new characters to the show including Barry Allen, a.k.a. Flash.  The hope is for a Flash spin-off series.  That's currently four small-screen shows possible in the next year.  I could probably talk about all of these shows in length in a blog of it's own, but this is movie talk, not television talk.

What does this growth of small-screen franchises mean for the big-screen franchises?  Will we see the Green Arrow and Flash of Arrow in a Justice League movie?  Will the Gotham City police show tie into the Batman of Man of Steel 2?

We're starting to see the crossover potential of the comic book movies as Marvel's Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. debuted last week, taking key elements of Avengers and Iron Man 3.  Will Marvel's crossover test be successful?  Or will it ultimately muddy the waters of the Marvel Cinematic Universe?

I've already shared my thoughts that the Marvel Cinematic Universe waters may be a little muddy.  Honestly, I'm not fully on board for Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.  The show is decent, but so far I haven't seen consistency to the S.H.I.E.L.D. that we've seen in the movies.  It bothers me a little bit that the characters are supposed to be on the same level as Black Widow or Hawkeye, yet so far we haven't seen those characters on the same level as them (although the second episode improved a lot over the pilot).  It makes it hard to see S.H.I.E.L.D. in the Avengers movie and believe the organization is the same.  Either it's going to make the show fail or begin a collapse in the movies.  I hope I'm wrong, but that's just my thoughts on a shared universe there.

This brings me to the DC Cinematic Universe and television.  Will we see Stephen Amell playing Green Arrow in a Justice League movie?  Will we see the Barry Allen from television as Flash in a Justice League movie?  Is the back story from the Gotham City Police Department show going to lead into the next Batman movie?  I HOPE NOT.  These shows do, however, pave the way for these characters to gain a bigger following.  This increases the chances for each character to have successful films and a Justice League movie to be more successful.  Let's look at a possible timeline (not including all TV shows):

2012 - Arrow television premiere (Green Arrow - less popular character introduced)
2013 - Man of Steel released in theatres (Superman rebooted)
2014 - The Flash, after being introduced in Arrow, stars in his own show (introducing another character outside the big three)
2015 - Man of Steel 2 (Batman introduced to the DC Cinematic universe)

If we have a Justice League movie in 2016 or 2017, you don't have to waste time introducing a back story for Flash (because of the TV show), Green Lantern (because of the Ryan Reynolds movie...even as failed as that was), or Green Arrow (if he's included).  This means that the only back story that you have to build is one for Wonder Woman.  The other characters may have different back stories than their other incarnations in television or movies, but you don't have to re-hash that in a movie.

Television is a great way to establish a fan base for the characters outside of the comics.  You don't have to spend a couple of years of development and marketing for a movie that may or may not succeed.  If a television show is cancelled, it's not a big deal.  If a movie does badly, you've lost millions of dollars and it could take years to re-establish that character.  We may get the characters we love on the big screen much sooner than expected.

In theory, a shared universe between television and movies is a great idea.  It will be interesting to see if Marvel can succeed with it.  I hope that someday we have television shows that flow into the movies seamlessly.  For now, let's just view the DC Universe properties (outside the movies) as all separate entities on Infinite Earth's.

Kick Ass 2

I really enjoyed Kick Ass, the first movie.  So, I really looked forward to the sequel.  It had Jim Carrey and most of the original cast.  However, the more I found out about the movie, the less interested I was.  I found out that Matthew Vaughn, the director of the first one, was not directing the second one.  Jim Carrey refused to promote it.  Every now and then, there would be something that would make me less excited for the movie.  So, by the time I saw this movie, I had low expectations.

I would say it met those expectations.  I enjoyed the movie, but it was not nearly as fun as the first.  I hate when movies tend to up the violence when doing a sequel.  It usually means that the story is not that good.  I'll admit the first movie was very violent, but I didn't enjoy the violence in this one as much.  I think it was because it lacked the story behind the violence.

There is an extra scene after the credits, so if you see this, make sure you stick around (maybe).  It leaves it open for a possible sequel; however, I don't think I would want to see another sequel.

+ Hit Girl
- No story
+ Jim Carrey
- would have liked to see more Jim Carrey

Total Score: 62

Is There a Need for a Batman Reboot?

I had a friend ask me the other day about Affleck being announced as Batman. He said, "I feel like they should be waiting a few years before rebooting Batman again." I think that's a fair comment, but let's consider it.  We've actually known there was going to be a Batman reboot for a month or more now, but now that there is an actor cast, it's become real.

While Batman is being rebooted, we're not really seeing him in a Batman movie. Let's remember, this is Man of Steel 2. It probably won't be called that, but that's what it is. Batman is the antagonist in the next Superman movie. We also still aren't sure how big of a role Batman will have in the movie.

Still, it is a Batman reboot, however you put it in perspective. Let's look at the quickest superhero reboot. Spider-man 3 opened in 2007. I didn't like that movie for so many reasons, so I was glad they rebooted it in 2012 (five years difference). Still, it was a very quick turnaround. Dark Knight Rises closed out an amazing trilogy in 2012. While it wasn't as strong as the first two movies, it still was so much better than Spider-man 3. Man of Steel 2 is expected to release in 2015 (three years difference). The Amazing Spider-man was mainly a reaction to Sony about to lose the rights to a profitable movie franchise. If they could have had a fourth Tobey Maguire movie, they may have gone that way.  The reboot of Batman is a reaction to WB needing a competition to Avengers. 

The Christopher Nolan Batman trilogy is one of the only superhero movie series to end on a popular note. I think that's the reason there is backlash against Ben Affleck as Batman. There would be backlash against anybody other than Christian Bale. But, ending on a high note and having a director and actors that are done with the series is exactly the reason for a reboot. Movie companies want to capitalize on popularity. How can they do that with nothing to continue with? Reboot!

Additionally, Nolan's Batman wouldn't work in the Man of Steel world. In order to have it work, reboot! Why do you need Batman though? WB wants something to compete with Avengers 2 in 2015. Man of Steel 2 alone will not do that. There is absolutely no way to do a Justice League movie in that short of a time. However, they can continue the success of Man of Steel and then boost it more with the success of the previous Batman franchise. 

I think the reboot and announcements of Batman are coming at a perfect time. They have stolen any thunder from Marvel character movies. Very few people are talking about Amazing Spider-man 2 (opening in 2014) or even Avengers 2 (opening in the same summer in 2015). Both have teased big things (casting and future movie plot lines) the past couple of weeks. Now all we can do is talk about the movie possibilities for 2 years, waiting for more news (can't wait to find out who Lex is).

Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters

Several years ago, I went to see Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief.  While it wasn't a great movie, it was fun and I enjoyed it enough to start reading the book series from which it was based.  The first book was different than the movie, but I was willing to forgive the movie because movies are rarely like the books.  If you are interested in the books, they are like Harry Potter based on Greek & Roman mythology.  I love mythology.

I thought, due to the differences between book and movie, it would be hard to continue the series based on the books.  Then, they announced a sequel.  I even heard that it stayed true to the books.  It did right the course of where the first movie strayed from the books.  Unfortunately, it just wasn't fun.

About halfway through the movie, I wondered how much of the movie was left.  That's a bad sign.  Luckily and unluckily, they left out some of my favorite parts of the book.  Luckily because it made the movie shorter.  Unluckily, it may have made the movie more enjoyable.

Don't get me wrong.  I enjoyed some parts of the movie.  Nathan Fillion's role as Hermes was enjoyable, but not enough to save the movie.

I would recommend this more for children, but it's one you may want to wait until DVD to rent.  Don't worry about waiting through the credits; there isn't anything at the end.

+ Nathan Fillion
- Lack of the star power from the first movie (Pierce Brosnan, Uma Thurman and more)
- Lack of the fun from the first movie
- I got a little bored.

Grade: 52 (Not terrible, but I'm not interested in seeing it again)

The New Batman

Ben Affleck has been named as the new Batman to appear in the Man of Steel sequel.  After delivering hits for Warner Bros. like The Town and Argo, I thought that it was likely Ben Affleck would be one of the members of the Justice League.  I expected it to be Green Lantern, but Batman would be the only other character he could really play.

I think that some people may instantly think of Ben Affleck as Daredevil in that failure of a movie.  The director's cut is actually a little bit better, and honestly, I don't think the acting was the issue in that movie.  Let us also not forget that before Chris Evans was Captain America, he was the Human Torch in lackluster Fantastic Four films.  You can't judge an actor only by the movies that they work.  There are great actors that perform in bad movies and terrible actors that perform in good movies.

Zack Snyder believes in him (as he should), stating,

Ben provides an interesting counter-balance to Henry’s Superman.  He has the acting chops to create a layered portrayal of a man who is older and wiser than Clark Kent and bears the scars of a seasoned crime fighter, but retain the charm that the world sees in billionaire Bruce Wayne.  I can’t wait to work with him.

While Affleck wasn't my first choice for the role, he also wouldn't be my last.  It may all come down to the writing.  The character has to be written and directed a certain way.

There have been many times in the past that Warner Bros. have put somebody in a role that most said was a bad choice at the time of the announcement.  This includes the casting of Heath Ledger as the Joker.  Since his performance, people will unlikely support anybody else playing the Joker (until the next one turns out great too).  There have also been times that WB has picked somebody for a role and people loved the idea.  I think people really liked the idea of Jonah Hex being played by Josh Brolin.  Anybody that saw that movie would gladly take anybody else for that role.

Honestly, I'm excited.  Casting Ben Affleck helps the star power of this film.  It also means that we will soon start to see other announcements (like Lex Luthor) and then production will begin shortly.  I'm looking forward to hearing more about Man of Steel 2.

X-Men & Fantastic Four Team Up

SFX Magazine had an interview with Mark Millar, comic book writer and the overseer of Fox's comic book movie properties.  Joe Steiner asked, "Will the upcoming reboot of the Fantastic Four share a universe with the future X-Men films?"  The following is Millar's response:

Without question I think you have to see some of these guys showing up in each other’s movies. I think the most exciting thing in superhero movies, until The Avengers came along, was when Nick Fury showed up in Iron Man. Even though it was a guy with an eye patch it was really cool – and I expect we will see more of that.

Mark Millar (@mrmarkmillar, unverified) then followed with two tweets stating,

I keep seeing 'news' that X-men & FF movies are crossing over.  No, they're not.  They exist in same universe but movies stand alone.

Note to the web journos: FF & X-men are NOT crossing over.  Existing in a shared universe does NOT mean a crossover movie, excitable ones...

What can we discern from all of Mr. Millar's comments?  The Fantastic Four reboot will be a stand-alone movie.  X-men: Days of Future Past will be a stand-alone movie.  So, how is it a shared universe?

Fox will no doubt want to capitalize on the success that Marvel has had with The Avengers.  I see both movies having stand-alone films and then the movies will start bleeding into eachother.  We may even see a teaser scene for Fantastic Four in the X-men: Days of Future Past credits.  Or we may see a teaser for the next X-men movie in the Fantastic Four reboot. 

I don't think that you can have a "shared universe" without having some crossover at some point.  It would take away from the story if you included X-men characters in the Fantastic Four reboot.  You have to introduce the characters first.  You can't just say that it is a shared universe without showing that somehow.

I think that we may see these characters showing up in the other's movies someday.  It would be in Fox's best interest to make the most with what they have, especially as we see changes in actors for some of the main X-men characters.  Plus, I just want to see a Fastball Special with Thing and Wolverine.

Jennifer Lawrence Gets it...

Understanding Katniss in the book is the key to portraying Katniss in the movie

During the 2013 Comic Con convention, the stars and director of Hunger Games: Catching Fire held a panel to discuss their upcoming movie. There were some interesting answers to some of the questions asked, but a few responses gave me a good feeling about how I can expect Jennifer Lawrence to portray Katniss Everdeen in this installment of the Hunger Games trilogy. 

Responses from the questions from the Comic con convention

Here is Lawrence's response to her view of Katniss in this movie.

"She's struggling with post-traumatic stress from the Games," Lawrence said, "and she has this new life now where she never has to worry about food. She's living in the Victors Village, and that kind of leaves her feeling useless."

Absolutely! 

In the first third of the book, Katniss is trying to find her place in District 12. She's different, everything is different. While she desperately trys to live her past life hunting the woods with Gale. She knows deep down that everything is different. Gale is now in the mines. Peeta hasn't spoken to her in six months. Now that she is a Victor, Katniss will never have to worry about food and now lives in the Victor's Village. 

As for the post-traumatic stress, we can see this too. Katniss can't sleep. Her only joy in winning the Hunger Games is the once a month shipment of food for the rest of District 12. Who can blame her. This hits upon one of the main overall themes of the entire trilogy and that is the concept that war changes people. Often times on the most basic, emotional, and psychological level. The book is more graphic and bloody than the stylized vision of past director Gary Ross.

  
Discussing Katniss's love triangle with Peeta (Josh Hutcherson) and Gale (Liam Hemsworth), she continued: "She has to adapt to this new life. She's now experienced something with Peeta that only the two of them can understand.

"So with Gale, who she's known most of her life and who she always felt understood certain parts of her, now really Peeta understands a part of her that Gale never will."

Exactly!

While I scoff at the notion that this love triangle storyline is just a Twilight knockoff, the relationship Katniss has with Gale and Peeta becomes clearer in that there is a better focus at juxtaposing their relationships. Since Peeta is also a Victor, he is the only person who understands Katniss' emotions and experiences. For anyone who has read the book, the only time Katniss can ever get a good night sleep is in the arms of Peeta. On the Victory Tour, Katniss and Peeta sleep together a lot. No, literally sleep together a lot. Both finding comfort in each other. 

I'll be curious to see if the movie will address this facet. Only because it succinctly portrays Katniss' post-tramatic stress and her very rational response to want to be close to Peeta because only he knows what she went through. As for Peeta, well, he's always been in love with Katniss,  their relationship grows deeper throughout the entire book.

What I find interesting is seeing the difference in the relationship between Katniss and Peeta as it relates to the Hunger Games. Outside the Hunger Games and Capitol, Peeta and Katniss are distant. They didn't talk during the six months after the Hunger Games. It's weird, but on purpose. I can't think everything is wonderful and perfect after going through the trauma of the Hunger Games. At their core, both Katniss and Peeta are different people. He has blond hair and blue eyes, she has olive skin and gray eyes. He is part of the better off merchant class of District 12, she is a part of the working class, poor Seam. She is an outdoor hunter, he is NOT and outdoorsy type of guy. However, in the context of the Hunger Games and Capitol, both Katniss and Peeta grow closer. I look forward to seeing how this relates and is portrayed in the movie.  

As for Gale, he is now 18 and working in the mines. Their only interactions is on Sunday when they both go into the woods to hunt. It is clear that Gale is also in love with Katniss. (Remember at the beginning of the Hunger Games, when Gale asks Katniss to just run away with him) Game even sneaks in a kiss one day while he and Katniss were done with hunting. Katniss spends some time trying to internalize the kiss. It's meaning. Her reactions. This relationship comes to a head when Katniss attempts to ask Gale to run away with her. Her reactions, when Gale tells her he loves her, is not what Gale expected.

As a fan, its good to know that the main actor, Jennifer Lawrence, understands her character. It shows that she respects the book and story. Having won an Oscar, I have no doubt Ms. Lawrence will be able to handle the emotional heavy lifting the role of Katniss Everdeen comes with. 

And thats not even addressing the craziness of Mockingjay...

The Hunger Games: Catching Fire will be released on November 21 in the UK, and November 22 in the US. 

Hello Flick Nerd Universe

A couple of weeks ago I was sitting on my couch watching Tron:Legacy when my phone rang. It was the Flick Nerd Home Office asking if I could give my insight into the world of movies. I said, "My opinions are not free." Bossman Bob, then said "I will pay you $0". I said "I'll take it." I'm doing this for the love of the Movies.

The Bossman Bob gave me instructions as a new contributor to the Flick Nerd Universe:
1. Continue to be awesome
2. Write insightful commentary
3. I look forward to hearing EVERYTHING you know about the Hunger Games trilogy
4. Don't screw it up

So with my newly given instructions, I will proudly take the opportunity to give you in the Flick Nerd Universe the highest quality reviews/insights/opinions I can muster. Sci/fi, Hunger Games, Comic book movies, Hunger Games:Catching Fire, Action will be my main focus. However, I do love the comedies so you might hear from me on that.

I'm glad to now be a part in the Flick Nerd Universe.

We're the Millers

This was definitely a movie I was looking forward to this summer, one of the few comedies that I was excited to see this summer.

I'm very happy I went to see it. I laughed a lot. Jason Sudekis is becoming one of my favorite comedic actors. I was glad that it was a solid performance in his first lead. I enjoyed seeing Emma Roberts in a slightly different role than she's played. Jennifer Aniston has found her niche in these comedies. Like Horrible Bosses, she delivers. In fact, if you enjoyed Horrible Bosses, this is right up the same alley. 

This isn't a movie that I'm going to run out and buy, but it is definitely one I'll watch over and over on TV. If you're looking for a funny movie to see in the theatre, this is it. But if you're just looking for a good summer movie, I might wait until video and see one of the blockbusters instead. 

+ Jason Sudekis

+ Jennifer Aniston

- the plot seemed a bit off from what I was expecting after they crossed the border

- they crossed the border too soon

Score: 82

Older Batman?

Some of the recent rumors regarding the Batman vs. Superman movie suggest we might be seeing an older Batman in the movie. If true, is this a wise move?

We haven't seen much of Batman's preparation for becoming Batman in movies. There was Batman Begins which shows Bruce training with the League of Shadows. In the comic books, Batman trained in martial arts, escapism (I think that's the right word), and various other skills that make Batman such a threat. Assuming that Bruce begins his training at 18 when he graduates from college, it could take him years to master these skills. I think the youngest Batman could possibly be is around 30. 

I like the idea that Batman has operated in Gotham for a few years. He may still be just an urban legend. This would lead to Superman truly being the first public superhero even if Batman has been operating for years. 

For Batman to be believable in the Man of Steel universe, he has to be able to do amazing things. You can't have the Batman that we've seen in most movies so far. He has to be able to turn his neck and move fluidly. 

Jackie Chan has performed amazing moves well into his 50s. I honestly don't think most actors could do this though. I don't want to see Bruce Willis or Sly Stallone as Batman. Heaven forbid we see George Clooney back in the role. It gives me nightmares just thinking about it. Could I see a 40 year-old like Ben Affleck in the role? Absolutely. Would somebody like that be my first choice? Absolutely not. 

Honestly, my ideal Batman has always been around 35 or maybe a little older. If this is what they mean by an "older Batman," I'm all for it. I don't want to see some 20-something don the cape and cowl. I also don't want to see the Batman of The Dark Knight Returns, gray hair and old enough to be a grandpa. These are all just rumors though. I won't believe anything until I see it. 

The Wolverine

Pleasantly surprised. Since X-men 2, I've waited for a good showing of Hugh Jackman as Wolverine. I should rephrase that. I've been waiting for Wolverine to be in a good movie. X-men 3: The Last Stand was not very good. It had a few bright spots, but overall was a bit of a letdown. I then had hopes for X-men Origins: Wolverine. It was better than X-men 3, but I still felt like it was missing something. 

The Wolverine is what comic fans and movie fans alike have been hoping for. It had a great story and lots of great action. My favorite scene was the train fight scene. Seriously, it was something straight out of a Bond movie. The story had a love story, humor, action and everything you could really want in a good movie. They even create a good challenge for a man that can heal every wound, making it near impossible to kill him. 

It was a big surprise to me, but even more surprising was how much my wife enjoyed it. It was a good balance of story and action, unlike most of the movies this summer which have gone a little heavy on the action, especially in the last 30 minutes. You still get your climactic final scene, but you don't have to worry about it dragging on for what may seem like forever. 

One of the best parts of the movie comes after the first two minutes of credits, so stick around for a bit after the credits start. You don't need to stick around long after that though. Nothing happens at the very end of the credits. 

+ the bad-a$$ness that we've been waiting to see from Logan

+ cool train fight scene

+ a good story with good conflict

Score: 88

SDCC News 2013

Well, I already talked about the news of Batman vs. Superman that was announced at Comic Con. It was pretty hard to top that news. But, there were a few surprises outside of that too. 

The funny thing about San Diego is that so many film companies try to surprise their fans that the unexpected has become the expected. While there, it doesn't matter that much because you still get caught up in the excitement. 

I've watched what I could of most of the panels online (I wish I could see the clips shown...oh well). 

I would say one of the disappointments was The Amazing Spider-man 2 panel. A couple of years ago, Andrew Garfield (a.k.a. Peter Parker, a.k.a. Spider-man) surprised the panel dressed in Spider-man cosplay. This year it was similar, but it didn't seem to go as planned. He was introduced on stage as Spider-man. Then he ran off and Andrew Garfield "showed up late." The Amazing Spider-man 2 did introduce the first images of Jamie Foxx as Electro in several of the Comic Con magazines leading up to the big event.

As we continued over to Fox, they had a quick panel with Hugh Jackman and the director of The Wolverine. We knew this wasn't going to be all they showed us. Hugh Jackman did try to surprise us with a "little indie movie" he's been making. At that point the entire cast of X-men: Days of Future Past came out. It was very cool to see all of the old cast of the first three X-men movies and the cast of X-men: First Class on one stage. 

Since Marvel had three movies yet to be named, I expected to hear Black Panther, Doctor Strange or some other movies to be announced during the panel. They didn't announce anything new except for Avengers 2 will be called Age of Ultron. That is pretty big news for comic book fans, but it means very little to those that don't follow the comics. The panel opened with Tom Hiddleston taking over the panel as Loki, Thor's mischievous brother. It was a very fun opening and they showed some footage to tease fans for the Thor movie opening in November. The Guardians of the Galaxy panel featured most of the cast, but it still didn't make me any more excited for that movie. 

That was all of the major movie news that came out of Comic Con this year. I would have loved to hear a little more about Robocop and Godzilla, but I'll have to wait for the trailers.

World's Finest

I went to the San Diego Comic Con last year, 2012.  It was my first time and it was great.  I would definitely recommend going whether you like comic books or not.  If you love movies, it is a great place to go too.  I love it all, so it was Nerd-vana for me.

Last year, I saw Zack Snyder and Henry Cavill talk about Man of Steel.  This year Zack Snyder made a return to Hall H (the place where all the majority of movie panels take place).  I think a lot of people were wondering if we would see him or any of the Man of Steel cast during the Warner Bros. panel.  There was an announcement not too long ago that we would be seeing a sequel and a team movie within the next two years.  I, along with others, questioned whether it was really possible.

While we are not seeing a Justice League movie in 2015, we are going to see both a Superman sequel and a "team" movie.  On Saturday, Zack Snyder made the biggest announcement of Comic Con 2013 weekend.  The other panels were loaded with movie stars and made some interesting announcements, but Snyder's announcement trumped them all.  In 2015, we will see a Superman/Batman movie.  My hope is that they title it World's Finest in honor of the comic book that hosted the pairing of these two characters for years.

The announcement (see it at the bottom of this article) was made by quoting a panel of Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns where Batman defeats Superman.  Harry Lennix, who played General Swanwick in Man of Steel, read this line to the crowd:

I want you to remember, Clark, in all the years to come, in your most private moments.  I want you to remember my hand at your throat.  I want you to remember the man who beat you.

The official press release announces that it will be a Batman vs. Superman movie (not sure which character is taking the top billing).  This is a very difficult proposition.  You can debate who would win a match for days on end.  Batman would carry Kryptonite.  Superman could use his heat vision.  Blah, blah, blah.  The truth is that the general movie-going audience is going to have a hard time believing that Superman couldn't take down a human being, even one of extraordinary skills, in seconds. Kryptonite hasn't even been announced to this movie world yet.  You have to create a Batman that can perform superhuman feats while still being only human.  Is this possible?  I believe so, but it's still shaky ground.

The other question that arises with a "versus" movie is what brings this two icons to be at odds.  Does the government manipulate Superman to take down a relatively unknown "menace" in Gotham City?  I doubt it.  Does Lex Luthor manipulate Batman into taking down Superman?  Again, doubtful.  However, I do believe that this is likely closer to the path they'll take.  Lex Luthor and Bruce Wayne team to rebuild Metropolis.  Bruce Wayne, having already operated quietly as Batman in Gotham for years, believes Superman to be a threat to the whole world.  While investigating ways to take Superman, the two have to face one another.

Will there be villains?  Maybe.  I think Lex Luthor is introduced in this movie; however, like I originally thought when it was just a Superman movie, he's mainly behind the scenes.  I still think there will be a Metallo or some other threat.  It is entirely likely though that Superman and Batman are their own adversaries and nobody else is there to interfere.

The biggest question is "Who will play Batman?"  As I stated before, I think Callum Blue would be a good choice.  I've only seen him in The Tudors and as Zod in Smallville; however, I think he may be a good choice.  I also like Matt Bomer.  If you've ever seen the pilot episode of Chuck, he can definitely do the physical aspect of Batman.  He still may need to add some bulk. I'm sure they'll find some relative newcomer that is perfect for the part.

No matter the choice of actors, villains or even storyline, I'm expecting this to be the biggest box office hit of 2015.  That's pretty big considering the movies coming out in 2015.  This is also the most risky movie for Warner Bros.  If they don't succeed with this movie, the success of Man of Steel doesn't matter.  They won't be continue their major comic properties for years.  High risk, high reward.

Red 2

I loved the first Red. It was a fun movie. So, I was really looking forward to this one. While I didn't enjoy it as much as the first, it was still a fun movie to see. 

We see a lot of the same characters, as well as some new ones. They still make jokes about their age compared to younger spies.

The plot left a little to be desired compared to the first, but if you don't focus on it to much, you'll enjoy the movie nearly as much. 

+ a similar stunt to the Bruce Willis getting out of the car stunt in the first movie, my favorite part

- I love Anthony Hopkins and Catherine Zeta Jones, but I liked Morgan Freeman more

+ Mary Louise Parker = funny

+ Byung-hun Lee = awesome action

Grade: 80 (a sequel is rarely as good as the original, but this one makes a good attempt)

Pacific Rim

Monsters versus giant robots...'nuff said! But is it? 

This movie was everything I expected and more. Guillermo del Toro, the director, makes very visually stimulating movies. This was no exception. While you have to suspend belief for the concept of this movie, you may actually believe that giant robots manned by two pilots is actually in our future. 

The only thing this movie lacks is more of a story. There is some story, but not much of one. It actually took me too long to figure out that two characters were father and son. 

I saw this movie in IMAX 3D and I think it was worth it. You should also stick around through the credits as there is an additional scene after the initial credits. 

+ Giant robots

+ Giant monsters

+ Giant robots fighting giant monsters

- Lack of narrative

Regular score: 84

Guy score: 93

Back to the Future

The Back to the Future trilogy is one of my favorite trilogies. Not even as a trilogy,  each of the movies is fun in their own right. 

I know that people complain about reboots and remakes because "Hollywood has no original ideas anymore." In some sense I understand this. On the other hand, I think that has been the case for years (going back to when movies first started using books and plays as a basis) and nothing is hurt if you remake a movie. There is always the original. 

I think that Back to the Future is one of those movies that could benefit from a remake. It's been almost 30 years since the first movie came out and we're nearing the "future" date of October 21, 2015 that is featured in the second movie. 

I think there are a couple of cool ways you could handle this movie remake. The first would be to go with the original formula. Have the movie set in 2015 (or whenever the movie comes out). Marty travels back to 1985 where he encounters his parents. Then he travels to 2045 in the second movie where you can still have the flying cars and hover boards and whatever other futuristic things there might be. 

The second way to handle the movie is to not just go with the original formula, but go with the original years too. You have Marty travel from 1985 to 1955 and then to 2015. It would be fun to see how a 1980s kid would react to our age of cell phones and technology. 

No matter how you remake the movies, part of what made those movies great was Marty and Doc Brown. He may be getting too old, but I think Zac Efron might play Marty perfectly. Watch 17 Again and see if you agree. For the Doc, I have no clue. It's hard to capture Christopher Lloyd's zaniness.  Then, you have the car. It's as much a character as anybody else. I'll be honest with you, it'd be hard to not see the Delorean. But, if you set the movie in present day, nobody is going to use a Delorean for a time machine (unless the writers can give good reason for using a Delorean). Maybe a McLaren?

Despicable Me 2

I love the first Despicable Me. It was clever and funny. The sequel wasn't nearly as good as the original, but still one of my favorite movies this year. 

The movie focused a lot on its prime marketing creations: the Minions. Those scenes were hilarious even if not always needed. But, the kids stay interested that way. There are plenty of laughs to be had  by the adult audience as well. There are things that that kids won't even understand that we (adults) will think are hilarious. All-4-One, YMCA, and more...

There is plenty of good stuff during the credits and it's actually one of the only reasons to see the 3-D version. 

+ Funny movie for kids and adults

- Not as good of wit and story as the first movie

+ Minions

+ Minions

Overall score: 83 (setting the curve)

The Lone Ranger

The Lone Ranger was one of my most anticipated movies this year. Did it live up to the hype? Sort of...

This was a fun movie that had some really good parts. If you like Pirates of the Carribean, this movie is along the same lines. It's the same kind of humorous action we see in those movies. 

I loved the memories of my childhood watching Tonto, the Lone Ranger, and of course Silver. The movie even uses the William Tell Overture in the final action sequence. It's sad that listening to the music now makes the movie seem campy, but I loved the faithfulness to the original. I also enjoyed the Princess Bride style of storytelling. 

The movie isn't great, but it's fun. I laughed and enjoyed the action. It was everything I wanted from it. There is some after credits stuff, but you can leave when you see Tonto start wandering through the desert. 

+ Memories of my childhood 

- A bit corny

+ Fun action

- I stayed the entire time watching Johnny Depp walk through the desert

Overall score: 79 (Passing)

The Heat

Honestly, I wasn't that interested in this movie. Like Identity Thief, I didn't think this movie looked very good from the previews. Like Identity Thief, I was wrong and actually liked it. 

This is a fun, mindless movie. If you look at it closely, the story isn't that great. It is fun though and that's why we go to the movies.  The story is your basic mismatched "buddy cop" movie like 48 Hours, Beverly Hills Cop, Rush Hour or Lethal Weapon. Melissa McCarthy and Sandra Bullock play their pretty standard roles. I laughed out loud and that's really the biggest thing you need with a comedy. 

If you're looking for a good comedy for a date or eventually a night at home (when on DVD), this will fit the bill. I look forward to seeing the sequel soon. 

+ Fun

- Story not the best

+ Good team up

- Having the same name as the unspeakable NBA team in Miami

Overall Score: 74 (Passing)

Villains!

We've covered who should play heroes.  But what is a good hero without a good villain?  Gene Hackman's Lex Luthor, Heath Ledger or Jack Nicholson's Joker, Tom Hiddleston's Loki...all great villains.  So, who should play these future antagonists?  As with the heroes, if you think there's somebody better for the role or want to hear my thoughts on any other villains, let me know.

Lex Luthor

With the success of Man of Steel and the special shots of the LexCorp within the movie, it's clear that Lex Luthor is going to at least appear in the next movie.  He may not be the main villain, but he'll probably have his hand in a few things at least.  My choice for this charismatic, sly villain is Michael C. Hall.  He's ready to move from television to the movies and I think this is the perfect part.  He has the reddish hair and I think he can probably pull off the bald look in a cool manner.

Metallo

I would love to see this character played on the big screen.  I feel like his origin story has varied depending on where you see him in the comics and TV; however, as a pawn of Lex Luthor preceding Lex's battle suit, he would be great.  I say bring in Jonathan Rhys Meyers (the star of The Tudors alongside Cavill) as Corben.  He doesn't really act like a pawn, but then neither does Metallo.

Doctor Doom

There is a Fantastic Four movie in the works again.  Let's have a Doom that is actually menacing.  This character should almost be Vader-like.  You never see his face, but you fear his voice and presence.  Honestly, I picture the voice of Christoph Waltz.  This guy can act and brings a presence that is needed by Victor Von Doom.  Would he be willing to not show his face?  I believe so.  I think the character wins out in roles that he plays.

Cheetah

This is an interesting one.  I'd love to see a Wonder Woman movie and you've either got a choice of Cheetah or Circe as two of her big baddies.  I'd like to see Cheetah played by Paz Vega.  Whether she could perform the action sequences, I doubt.  So, in that case, perhaps a relative unknown.

Joker

Some of the best villains are Batman villains.  Since there will be a reboot, it's no doubt that we'll see another Joker.  I know that most people don't want to think of anybody besides Heath Ledger as the Joker, but it's going to happen.  Personally, I'd like to see one of the guys that people rumored would play the Joker in the Dark Knight trilogy.  Paul Bettany would play the perfect maniac.  It's always made me sad that we don't see him getting to act (outside of his voice) in Iron Man.

Poison Ivy

I'd love to see a good interpretation of this character.  I think it could be done too.  Christina Hendricks could bring a realistic portrayal of this character to life.  She could also play a good Batgirl though.

Penguin

Bob Hoskins is a name I've always liked for this role, but at 71 years old, I'm not sure that he'll be around whenever they finally cast this character again.  In a completely different take on the character, I wouldn't mind seeing John C. Reilly take on the role.  He's got the acting chops and I'd love to see him play a villain.

The Ventriloquist

This is a rather minor Batman villain, but he's definitely been one of my favorite.  In the comics, this character is now female; however, I still imagine Paul Giamatti playing the role of Arnold Wesker.

The Riddler

I know that he's already been in a Batman movie, but I would love to see Joseph Gordon-Levitt take on this role.  It may not work, but then again, it totally could.

Bane

Javier Bardem.  Again, we're going to see this one recast eventually.  I would love to see a take on a true venom story.

Venom

With Amazing Spider-man already planning until number four, I think there's a strong chance we'll see Venom.  As far as I know, this part has not been cast yet.  Sam Worthington may be a good choice for this role.  He already has experience with planning CGI (Avatar).

That's all I've got for now.  There are a ton of villains out there.  I'd love to look at the Flash's Rogues.  There are quite a few Marvel villains that I'd like to consider, but I really know the DC villains well.  I'd also love to look at some of the anti-heros (i.e. Catwoman).  Perhaps, I'll cover all of these in a part 2.

2015

Are you ready for 2015? I know it is about a year and half away, but it is possibly going to be one of the biggest movie years ever.

Here's an idea of some of the movies coming out:

Alvin & the Chipmunks 4

Ant-Man

Assassin's Creed

Avatar 2

Avengers 2

Cinderella

Fantastic Four

Finding Dory (a.k.a. Finding Nemo 2)

Hotel Transylvania 2

Hunger Games 4 (Mockingjay part 2)

Independence Day 2

Jurassic Park 4

Justice League (still expect 2016 on this one)

Kung Fu Panda 3

Mission: Impossible 5

Peanuts 3D

Penguins of Madagascar

Pirates of the Caribbean 5

Pitch Perfect 2

Prometheus 2

Smurfs 3

Snow White and the Huntsman 2

Star Wars: Episode VII

Warcraft

That's just what is slated so far! It will be very interesting to see how things occur. There are quite a few kids movies planned, but a lot of blockbusters too. This could make for a really explosive year or a year of very few true blockbusters. Before a movie will have time to gain momentum, five other movies will have been released. Movies that may do well in other years will be fighting for box office numbers. 

I expect many movies to move their opening dates as I've already expected with short timeline. But it's the double edge sword. If they move a movie another studio has sole possession of that weekend. Even if they do advertise, they may end up 2nd or 3rd that week

It's sad. There are some movies that may do well, but I think the most will underperform. Either way, it will be a fun summer for going to the movies

Marvel vs. DC

Alright, first things first...let me define things for you to make my points in this article easier to understand.

Marvel Cinematic Multiverse (MCM) - This is not just the main Marvel Cinematic Universe (Avengers, Iron Man, Thor, etc.), but also the ones owned by Sony (The Amazing Spider-man) and Fox (X-men & The Fantastic Four).

DC Cinematic Universe (DCCU) - Since all properties are owned by Warner Brothers, this includes all of their future movies.  The "Nolan-verse" (Batman Begins, Dark Knight, Dark Knight Rises) has concluded it's cinematic run.  This leaves this universe mostly hypothetical as Man of Steel is the supposed start of this universe.  Currently the plan is Man of Steel 2 in 2014 and Justice League in 2015.

Now that we've defined these universes, which of these universes is better poised for the future?  The question isn't which of these universes is better.  As a universe, the MCM is considerably better.  They have established, over the last 15 years, a successful line of movies with sequels and, in the Marvel Studios films, interact with the other films.  However, the question I'm asking relates to who is better geared for the future.

The MCM's biggest issue is that it involves different studios.  Some characters can be in two universes as we've seen with the recent news of Quicksilver being included in both X-men: Days of Future Past and Avengers 2.  The average movie-goer isn't going to understand the same character being in both universes.  It will be interesting to see how it plays in the future, but I think with one version or another, you are either going to confuse movie-goers or upset your hardcore fans.  Possibly both.  As the multiverse grows within each studio, these issues may occur again and again.
 
You also have issues as a universe grows with fans asking where certain characters are in each of the movies.  For instance, why wasn't War Machine (Rhodey) helping the Avengers save the world?  Why did S.H.I.E.L.D. not help Tony save the day in Iron Man 3?  It's easy for me to look past these things, because I feel like it happens just as much in the comics.  Will the average movie-goer or the "plot hole detectives" be able to look past this as we move forward?  Again, it may depend on how they answer these questions.  Right now, they haven't tried to answer these questions.

The MCM is moving forward with their established characters, but also with new ones.  There are plans for Guardians of the Galaxy and Ant Man.  The characters are getting a little more obscure.  As contracts end, we may not see the same actors that have garnered the support of fans.  Hugh Jackman as Wolverine may be at an end soon.  Robert Downey, Jr. has signed for the next two Avengers movies, but as far as we know, he's done with additional Iron Man movies.  The MCM can either recast these characters or keep introducing different characters.  Both are entirely possible, but there is the possibility of no new Iron Man movie for the next 5+ years.  Casting someone else as Iron Man won't work if your try to produce them in between the next two Avengers movies.  Will audiences continue to pay money for characters they don't recognize?

There is something to be said for the MCM's history though.  The reason these movies have made so much money is because the previous movies have been successful.  As long as each of the studios continues to produce good movies, they will have continued success.

The DCCU is very unknown at this point; however, if they follow the lead of Man of Steel, we can make some assumptions.  The movies will be much more dramatic.  Movies in the MCM have been fun.  I think the DCCU movies will be fun in their own way, but they will likely take a more serious tone.

How big of a cast will we have in the DCCU?  I think you'll see the major players and that's about it for a while.  That is plenty and they are characters that most will recognize.  You don't have to worry about other studios owning the characters.  Here's how I picture the DCCU playing out ideally:

• Late 2014 - Man of Steel 2
• 2015 (more likely summer 2016) - Justice League
• Christmas 2016 - Flash
• Spring 2017 - Wonder Woman
• Summer 2017 - Batman
• Christmas 2017 - Green Lantern
• Summer 2018 - Man of Steel 3
• Christmas 2018 - Justice League 2
• Spring 2019 - Aquaman
• Summer 2019 - Batman 2
• Christmas 2019 - Wonder Woman 2
• Summer 2020 - Brave & the Bold (Green Lantern & Flash combo - that's just my wish) 

You keep it tight with your main characters and you've got a movie with one of your main characters or multiple characters every season.  Other characters can be developed, but you don't need to make them on the scale of the big ones.  I'd love to see a new Jonah Hex movie in there or Guillermo del Toro's Justice League Dark.  These characters can exist in either the same universe or a different one and it wouldn't matter.

Honestly, if the following DCCU films continue in Man of Steel's footsteps, I think the DCCU is more sustainable over the next 10+ years than the MCM.  As long as superhero films remain a genre that interests people, we may see the DCCU finally overtake the MCM.

Trailer Park 6/19

A few of trailers came out this week. Trailers are your first chance to have any feelings whatsoever about a movie. They can encourage you to see a movie or make you wait to see it on video.

The Wolf of Wall Street

 

I liked this trailer. I honestly have very little idea about what the movie is about. I know it's about Wall Street, but that's almost it. I'm glad. I don't want to know much more. The cast is pretty awesome...Leonardo DiCaprio, Matthew Mcconaughey and Jonah Hill being directed by Martin Scorsese. It looks great!

Anchorman 2

 

This trailer is on the opposite end for me. It seems like a they may be missing something. I loved Anchorman, but this doesn't seem like it has many good funny parts. I'm really hoping they haven't lost the spirit of the first movie. 

LEGO Movie

 

As stupid as this looks, I think it might be good. It looks like it might be good for kids and adults at the same time. Plus, you get to see Batman, Superman and Wonder Woman in a movie together before a Justice League movie. 

This is the End

Maybe, after seeing the greatness of Man of Steel, it was a bad idea to go see this movie.  This was the worst movie I've seen in the theatres in a long time.  It's really too bad because I was looking forward to seeing this movie.

The movie begins with a very long unfunny intro about Seth Rogen picking up his buddy Jay Baruchel from the airport to hang out for the weekend.  It continues with them getting high and watching 3D television (maybe if the movie was in 3D, it would have been fun).  They then head to James Franco's house for a party.  There are lots of cameos and I'm sure some inside jokes along with actors not really acting the way they act in real life.  I'm sure this is all very funny to some people.  Not me.

The movie continues with Seth and Jay going to the convenient store to pick up cigarettes and that's when the apocalypse begins.  They hurry back to James Franco's house where almost everybody that would have helped make the movie funny dies.  They quote a few passages from Revelation to explain that it's the end of the world and what is supposed to happen.  Since they quote specifically the dragon portion, I expected at least a How to Train Your Dragon joke at Jay's expense. 

Overall, a pretty dumb movie that I'm glad I only spent matinee price to attend. I would recommend waiting for the cheapest at home version if you are even interested in this movie. In my mind it's not worth the time. Also, nothing in the credits either. 

Man of Steel

I had really high hopes for this movie. That left a lot of room to be disappointed. I'm happy to say I was not disappointed. This was possibly one of the best origin story superhero movies I've seen. 

The movie tells the origin of Superman in a way that has never been done before now. It makes sense and feels like we get THE Superman for a modern age. The movie gives us a foe that Superman can truly fight. It also gives the "Ultimate Boy Scout" true moral dilemmas that give the character growth like we've hardly seen in a superhero movie. 

I will say that I wish we would have connected more with some of the other characters besides the Kryptonians and Lois; however, there is plenty to explore there in future movies. 

The movie is long, almost 2 1/2 hours, but you don't notice it. You also can save yourself the time of sitting through the credits unless you're dying to see who the second editor is (his or her name is in the credits for a reason); there is no scene post-credits. Go see this one on the big screen, although outside of the first 15 minutes on Krypton, it may not be worth the 3D. Really, it's your call on that one. 

My wife said every time she looked over at me, I was smiling. You can not ask for much more when you go to the movies. 

Will the Movie Industry Implode?

Steven Spielberg and George Lucas think that the movie industry is going to implode.  Hollywood Reporter reported this tidbit here:

Steven Spielberg on Wednesday predicted an "implosion" in the film industry is inevitable, whereby a half dozen or so $250 million movies flop at the box office and alter the industry forever. What comes next -- or even before then -- will be price variances at movie theaters, where "you're gonna have to pay $25 for the next Iron Man, you're probably only going to have to pay $7 to see Lincoln."

Now what do I think?  I think this is silly.  Will there be changes in the experience at the movies?  There may be.

I think that movie studios, for the most part, realize what movies are going to make them money.  Occasionally, you'll have a movie that will lose money.  This happens as it might happen in any business.  Studios have a pretty good feel for the direction of the movie industry though.  Warner Brothers recently dropped a Dumb & Dumber sequel.  This was right after a Vince Vaughn and Owen Wilson movie completely flopped at the theaters.  It's a smart move based on solid data.  It's been almost 20 years since the first Dumb & Dumber debuted.  There was a poorly done, poorly received prequel.  The only thing that this movie had going for it was seeing the two main actors back together again.  The Internship was hoping for the same thing.  It wasn't a sequel to anything, but it was trying to reunite two actors that people loved seeing together.  Warner Brothers probably saw how this movie performed and decided that a reunion is no reason to produce a movie.

The studios have a pretty good feel for the pulse of their audience.  Who doesn't have a good feel for the pulse of their audience?  Steven Spielberg and George Lucas.  I know.  This is probably blasphemous for a movie fan to say.  But, it's true.  Were the Star Wars prequels even half as good as the originals?  How was Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull?  Steven Spielberg is still making good movies, but I don't think they are enjoyed by the general movie-going audience.

There won't be varying prices at theaters.  That's ridiculous.  People have a hard enough time with the fact that they can get certain discounts or not get certain discounts.  If you vary the price, you confuse your audience.  Will actors and directors start seeing less money?  Will we stop seeing as many big-time movie stars that carry a movie?  Yes.  Big-time movie stars don't carry a movie like they used to.  Look at Will Smith's After Earth.  It's performed dreadfully.  Meanwhile you have movies that cost very little, like The Purge, and make it to the top of the box office.

More so than ever before, the movie-going audience is deciding the direction of the movie world.  We are provided more options with home theaters, Netflix, and other entertainment options.  This keeps the cost relatively fixed.  I do have this to say though: if you want to continue seeing a certain type of a movie, go see it in the theater.  This is how we shape the future of movies.