Happy Midweek everyone! Two more days until Friday :D How’s your week so far? It’s kind of a s-l-o-w week for me and there’s been no Instagram updates from my dahling French crush so I’m missing him so much I could barely concentrate on anything today. Yes I live for Stanley Weber these days [sigh]… he is EVERYTHING!!!!
ehm, now that I get that out of the way…
… about those links…
Cindy posted a heartfelt tribute to the late author David Foster Wallace a while back, the subject of the recent film I saw, The End of the Tour
Mark wrote a retrospective piece on Top Gun that got me all nostalgic
In response to the recent box office bomb Fantastic Four, we’ve got a review from Keith that confirmed my dread, whilst Eddie offers up some suggestions on how to fix the franchise.
Two directorial debuts from excellent Aussie actors: Josh wrote about Russell Crowe’s debut The Water Diviner, while Tom wrote about Joel Edgerton’s The Gift
Meanwhile, Natalie reviewed this New Zealand horror comedy Housebound
Last but not least, Chris lists his picks of Best Songs of the Decade so far.
Time for question of the week
The Hateful Eight almost didn’t happen due to a script leak in 2014 by Gawker. If you follow this news, you’d likely know that QT ended up withdrawing the lawsuit against Gawker. At Comic-con last July, Tarantino said that “…it was the first draft that leaked online and he expected to write two more to get to a point where he was ready to shoot” (per THR).
In post-Civil War Wyoming, bounty hunters try to find shelter during a blizzard but get involved in a plot of betrayal and deception. Will they survive?
Check out the brand new trailer:
Image Source: The Playlist’ Tumblr
I’m not a big fan of Westerns, but this one looks intriguing. QT sure knows how to cut a trailer, and the visuals look fantastic, as to be expected. The only thing is, I don’t know if I want to see Wintry scenes right smack dab in the middle of Winter when this movie’s released.
The cast is astounding… We’ve got QT’s perennial favorite Samuel L. Jackson, plus Kurt Russell, Jennifer Jason Leigh, Tim Roth, Demian Bichir, Bruce Dern, Michael Madsen, Amber Tamblyn, Walton Goggins, etc. Channing Tatum gets top billing on IMDb but I barely see him in the trailer (?) I’m bummed that Viggo Mortensen didn’t end up joining the cast because of scheduling conflict.
Fans of 70mm format rejoice! [I’m looking at you Ted ;)] as the film will be shown in its Ultra Panavision 70 presentation. Per IMDb, the film will be released on December 25 of this year as a roadshow presentation in 70mm format theaters only before being released in digital theaters on January 8, 2016.
This Blog Relay idea is really getting around. I did a similar post a while back with the Most Iconic Movie Characters which generally has the same concept. This time around, the 10 Most Influential Directors relay is spearheaded by John at Hitchcock’s World. Here’s the gist in John’s own words:
I have compiled a list of ten directors I consider to be extremely influential. I will name another blogger to take over. That blogger, in their own article, will go through my list and choose one they feel doesn’t belong, make a case for why that director doesn’t fit, and then bring out a replacement. After making a case for why that director is a better choice, they will pass the baton onto another blogger. That third blogger will repeat the process before choosing another one to take over, and so on.
Thanks to Josh at Classicblanca for passing the baton to me! These nine remain on the list as it stands right now, scroll down below which director I have to let go and his replacement:
Clockwise from top left: Jean-Luc Godard, Alfred Hitchcock, Quentin Tarantino, Georges Méliès, Martin Scorsese, Orson Welles, Steven Spielberg, Ingmar Bergman and Stanley Kubrik.
The last addition that Josh added was Ingmar Bergman. Here’s his reasoning: Ingmar Bergman’s films put the human condition in the forefront, combining striking imagery with raw emotion. Where would cinema be without his humanistic approach to storytelling?
Boy, the list as it stands now makes it incredibly tough for me to remove a single one, but hey, rules are rules and so, even with a heavy hart, one has to make a decision.
Francis Ford Coppola
It’s not so much that I’m removing Mr. Coppola, but I’m just moving him down to another spot in the top 15. How about that for diplomacy? ;) In all seriousness though, I do think Mr. Coppola is indeed an influential director. But the point of this list is just how influential? I mean we’re talking about the most influential of ALL TIME here. Looking at the 10 directors, I feel that I can’t remove anyone else given the prominent contributions they’ve made, even if I haven’t seen any of their films [yet]. I feel that Coppola’s resume is pretty spotty after his glory days in the 70s. So sorry Mr. Coppola, but like I said, I do think you deserve to be in the Top 15! …
I’m surprised he wasn’t on the list in the first place, to be honest. Now, even though I haven’t seen all his films, his talent is undeniable and he’s so well-loved by filmmakers and fans alike. He doesn’t just win numerous awards in his illustrious career (27 films, 6 Oscars), but he’s been an inspiration to other great directors. Michel Hazanavicius who won Best Director Oscar for The Artist thanked Wilder three times in his acceptance speech, “… I could thank him like a thousand times because I think he’s the perfect director, the perfect example. He’s the soul of Hollywood and I wanted to thank him and I love him.” [per The Wrap]. Even Ingmar Bergman who’s a legendary director himself has said that Wilder is his favorite Hollywood director [per IMDb]. Cameron Crowe also penned memoir of sort, called Conversations with Wilder, which was the first time Wilder agreed to talk extensively about his life and work. I wish there had been a documentary on him as well.
I’ve recently seen one of Wilder’s best, The Apartment, and I could see why his films are so beloved. He imbued such wit in his films, a dose of cynical humor. He also has a way with actors, having directed no less than 14 actors to Oscar-nominated performances. He’s also a versatile writer/director, as he excelled in numerous genres: drama, noir, comedy as well as war films. He’s one of those directors whose work I still need to see more of, but even from the few that I’ve seen, it’s easy to see how Mr. Wilder belongs in this list.
I’m passing the torch to Mark, one of my favorite bloggers over at Three Rows Back. He’s been doing great work in his Retrospective Series, like this one on A Hard Day’s Night.
Earlier this month, Sight and Sound magazine asked many of the well-known filmmakers today to list their favorite films, you can see the list here.
For this article, I would like to just focus on Quentin Tarantino‘s favorite films. If you read most of my articles on this site (i.e. ranking favorite Tarantino’s films) then you know that I’m a big fan of QT. Sure I thought Django Unchained was quite disappointing but it’s still better than most films I saw in 2012. If not for Tarantino, I may not have seen some of the classics from the 60s and 70s. Because of his recommendation, I discovered the films of the great late director Sam Peckinpah and some of the lesser known spaghetti western and action films from said decades.
If I remember correctly, Tarantino tends to put out his best of list yearly but I think this list is his top favorite films of all time. I was surprised to see a couple of films on his favorite list, but before we get on that, here are twelve of his picks:
Apocalypse Now (1976) – Francis Ford Coppola
The Bad News Bears (1976) – Michael Ritchie
Carrie (1976) – Brian De Palma
Dazed and Confused (1993) – Richard Linklater
The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly (1966) – Sergio Leone
The Great Escape (1963) – John Sturges
His Girl Friday (1939) – Howard Hawks
Jaws (1975) – Steven Spielberg
Pretty Maids All in a Row (1971) – Roger Vadium
Rolling Thunder (1977) – John Flynn
Sorcerer (1977) – William Friedkin
Taxi Driver (1976) – Martin Scorsese
Out of the 12 films on the list there, the one I’ve never seen or heard of before is His Girl Friday. Otherwise I’ve seen all of them and four are on my all favorite list films: Apocalypse Now, Rolling Thunder, Sorcerer and Taxi Driver.
A couple of films that surprised me to see on his list are The Bad News Bears and Dazed and Confused; for the kind of films that he tends to make, I wouldn’t think he’d include a comedies on his list. Over all it’s a good mix of genre and it’s great seeing what kind of films he truly enjoy.
As mentioned earlier, the four films on his list that are also on my list, two of them are well known and highly regarded as some of greatest films ever made, Apocalypse Now and Taxi Driver. No doubt those two were excellent films and deserves all the praises from critics and fans alike. Now other two films were not as well known, Rolling Thunder and Sorcerer, both also came out in the late 70s but they didn’t garner any critical or box office success. I think these two films deserve to be seen by more people and if you’ve never seen it, I highly recommend you seek them out. Particularly Sorcerer which was a remake of a French film from 1953, Wages of Fear. To be honest with you, I prefer Sorcerer over Wages of Fear. It was well directed by the then hot director William Friedkin, who’d just made two very successful films, The Exorcist and The French Connection. I think the film failed because I believe audiences were expecting to see some sort of supernatural thriller not an action thriller about men versus nature.
Rolling Thunder on the other hand, was a gritty shoot’em up revenge action thriller, a genre that was quite popular at the time. For anyone who’ve never seen either of these films, the good news is that both are coming out on Blu-ray real soon. Friedkin has tweeted that he has raised enough money to do a digital restoration on Sorcerer so it can be release on Bluray.
Re: SORCERER. The original negative is in good condition. And it’s now being budgeted to make a new digital master. I’ll keep you updated.
Thanks to Ted for these reviews as I was on vacation when the screenings took place.
Tom Cruise continues his “comeback” on the big screen with another action thriller after the success of last year’s Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol, this time he’s playing another super-spy type in Jack Reacher. It’s based on one of Lee Child’s popular series of novels, One Shot. The film starts out with a mysterious person who randomly shot and killed five people in a public place with a sniper rifle. With the recent tragedies in real life, this opening sequence was a bit eerie, so just a warning if you’re still too upset about what happened in Connecticut, I don’t recommend you go see this movie. Now the scene was well shot and staged and to me it didn’t glamorize the violence but I can definitely understand if someone can get upset when they see it. Later an ex-marine sniper named Barr (Joseph Sikora) was arrested for the crime and during an interrogation he asked the detective on the case Emerson (David Oyelowo) and district attorney Rodin (Richard Jenkins) to get him Jack Reacher (Tom Cruise).
Director Werner Herzog as the Russian mobster known as ‘The Zec’
Emerson and Rodin decided to look up Reacher but couldn’t find anything on him. A few moments later Reacher showed up at their office and asked to see Barr. But Barr is in a coma because he got beat up badly by some other inmates while in custody. So Reacher met with Barr’s lawyer Helen (the gorgeous ex-Bond girl Rosamund Pike). Reacher told her that he’s there just to make sure Barr is behind bars because he believed Barr did the shooting, he and Barr had a history together back when they were in the army. But Helen convinced Reacher to help her investigate what really happened and as both of them dig deeper into the case, they got in trouble with some local thugs, Charlie (Jai Courtney aka John McClane Jr.) and his mysterious boss known as The Zec (the great director Werner Herzog).
Performance wise, I thought everyone did a good job. Especially Cruise who was in the command of the role. I’ve never read any of the books but I know some fans weren’t too thrilled that he was cast as Reacher. But I think many of them will find out that Cruise did well here.
The film is a straightforward procedural thriller; there aren’t any major surprises that will wow you. The humors are well-placed and they didn’t feel forced into each scene. The action sequences were pretty great, I’m so glad that the filmmakers decided to shoot action scenes where we can actually see them. Some directors tends to forget that when we go see action films, we want to SEE the action, not trying to figure what’s going on during a scene or get dizzy from it. Christopher McQuarrie who wrote and directed this film, did a tremendous job with his sharp dialogues and action sequences.
The climatic shoot out was probably one of the most meticulous action scenes I’ve ever seen. The way he laid out each sequence and edited were quite astonishing to me. Then the mano-a-mano showdown between Reacher and Charlie was well staged and looked like a “real” fight between two grown men. Of course this being an action film, it needs a car chase scene and it was well done too. It reminded me of the chase scene from Bullit but I kind of wish it ended similar to that film, if you saw the trailer then you know how the chase ended. I thought it’s too cheesy and didn’t really make sense.
In the end I thought it was a well made action thriller that didn’t take itself too seriously and I like the fact it has that old school 70s thriller feel to it. I would definitely love to see more of Jack Reacher films in the future.
4 out of 5 reels
Having read the script last year and loved it, I was very excited to see this film. (Read my script review here.) Surprisingly the film is very close to the script, only a few scenes didn’t make it to the screen. Quentin Tarantino is obsessed with spaghetti westerns and he tends to pay homage to that genre in some of his films, particularly Kill Bill and Inglourious Basterds. Well now he’s finally made a film that truly pays homage the genre but he also mix in another genre, blax-ploitation, mostly the slave related subject that were popular back in the 70s, the most popular film from the genre was called Mandingo. Anyone who likes 70s films as much as I do will probably have seen some of these films; even though they were considered “trashy” by most critics, I somehow enjoyed them. It also burrowed a lot of elements from Sergio Corbucci’s films, especially Django and The Great Silence; if you’ve seen either of those films, you’ll know what I’m talking about.
The film opens with a “dentist” named Dr. King Schultz (Christoph Waltz) looking for a slave who can identify three fugitives for him. We then meet Django (Jamie Foxx) who said he knows these three fugitives, so Schultz decided to buy Django from his owners but they refused. Well, Schultz being an educated man tried to reason with these clowns but they still won’t budge. So he used his skills with a pistol to convince them. Django is freed and both of them set out to find the three fugitives. After they hunt down the fugitives, Schultz was quite impressed with Django skills so he asked if Django would like to be a bounty hunter like him and join him in the hunt. In return Shultz will help Django with anything he wants. Django agreed and said he wants to find his wife who’s been taken away from him. The first half of the films was about Schultz teaching Django how to become a good bounty hunter and sharp with a pistol.
A few months later, Schultz found out where Django’s wife is being kept. She’s at a plantation known as Candieland which owns by Calvin Candie (Leo DiCaprio). So in order to rescue her, Schultz came up with a plan by pretending to be a rich German who’s interested in purchasing a Mandingo fighter and Django is his Mandingo expert. The rest of film took place at Calvin’s Candieland plantation.
I thought the performances by the lead actors were great, especially Waltz and DiCaprio. Jamie Foxx surprised me, I was skeptical when he was cast in the title role but he did a good job. Apparently QT wrote the part specially for Will Smith but Smith turned him down, I was hoping QT would cast someone like Anthony Mackie or Idris Elba. Also, the cinematography by Robert Richardson was excellent, from the snowy landscape of Montana to the muddy streets of Mississippi, every shots looked spectacular. The action sequences were great, there’s a shootout scene that’s similar to the carnage scene in Kill Bill Vol. 1 where the Bride took down the Crazy 88s.
Now I’m going to talk about why I was very disappointed with this film. As mentioned earlier, I read the script (which I reviewed here) and loved it, but somehow the actual film just didn’t deliver in my opinion. It’s clear that QT really needed his long time editor the late Sally Menke to work on this film with him. I thought the first half of the film was sloppily-edited and just wasn’t coherent. The music selection was kind of odd too. I always love the music QT used in his films but when you hear a Tupac song during a shootout scene in this one, it sort of take you out of the film. Now I understand why QT cast a not so well known actress in the role of Broomhilda, Django’s wife, she hardly spoke in the film. She either screams, cries or look scare in each scene she appeared in.
This was one of the films I most looking forward to see this year and unfortunately it was a major disappointment to me. Now I plan to see it again soon since I saw it almost a month ago, so I might change my mind when I see it again. I’m not saying it’s a bad film, it just didn’t lived up to my expectations. I know that I might be in the minority since after the private screening, many people in the theater thought it was great. If you’re a huge QT fan, you might enjoy it. Just a warning though, the film is violent and very bloody. The N-word were uttered constantly by pretty much everyone in the film, so if you’re easily offended, I don’t recommend you go see this film.
In an interview, QT mentioned that he might release a longer extended cut of the film down the road. At one point his producer Harvey Weinstein tried to convince him to split the film into two parts like they did with Kill Bill but QT vetoed that idea. I assume he shot many scenes that were in the script but decided cut them out. I don’t know if a longer version will improve the movie, I mean most of the scenes left in the cutting room floor were probably just violent and rape scenes. I’m assuming here of course because those sequences were in the script.
Another relay race has been circulating around, similar to the Best Actors and Actress Relay Race I did a few months ago. This time it’s David from Taste of Cinema who started the relay race to share some of our favorite quotes from filmmakers. Thank you John @ John Likes Movies for tagging me!
Here’s David’s explanation of the relay race:
People love wisdom from great minds. As a cinephile, I prefer director quotes more than words from any other group of people in the world. Their thoughts on cinema not only provide insights into a deep understanding of cinema, but also open the window to their own films, their genres, and their filmmaking methods, thus the need to receive more exposure as their films did.
The rules have been altered, but basically the one rule is simple: Replace one director and their respective quote with one of your own.
Here’s who’s participated in the Relay Race so far:
“I steal from every single movie ever made. I love it – if my work has anything it’s that I’m taking this from this and that from that and mixing them together. If people don’t like that, then tough titty, don’t go and see it, all right? I steal from everything. Great artists steal; they don’t do homages.” – Quentin Tarantino …
“Unlike all the other art forms, film is able to seize and render the passage of time, to stop it, almost to possess it in infinity. I’d say that film is the sculpting of time.” –Andrei Tarkovsky
“Why make a movie about something one understands completely? I make movies about things I do not understand, but wish to.” – Seijun Suzuki …
“I don’t like the idea of ‘understanding’ a film. I don’t believe that rational understanding is an essential element in the reception of any work of art. Either a film has something to say to you or it hasn’t. If you are moved by it, you don’t need it explained to you. If not, no explanation can make you moved by it.” – Federico Fellini
“When I make a film, I never stop uncovering mysteries, making discoveries. When I’m writing, filming, editing, even doing promotional work, I discover new things about the film, about myself, and about others. That is what I’m subconsciously looking for when shooting a film: to glimpse the enigmas of life, even if I don’t resolve them, but at least to uncover them. Cinema is curiosity in the most intense meaning of the word.” – Pedro Almodovar …
“All my movies are about strange worlds that you can’t go into unless you build them and film them. That’s what’s so important about film to me. I just like going into strange worlds.” – David Lynch …
“You make films to give people something, to transport them somewhere else, and it doesn’t matter if you transport them to a world of intuition or a world of intellect…The realm of superstitions, fortune-telling, presentiments, intuition, dreams, all this is the inner life of a human being, and all this is the hardest thing to film… I’ve been trying to get there from the beginning. I’m somebody who doesn’t know, somebody who’s searching.” – Krzysztof Kieslowski …
“I wonder whether my bleak-o-meter is set differently from other people’s. I have such passion for what I do that I can’t see it as bleak. When people use that word, or “grim” or “gritty,” I just think, “Oh, come on, look a bit deeper.” My films don’t give you an easy ride. I can see that. The sense I get is that people have quite a physical experience with them. They feel afterwards that they’ve really been through something.” — Andrea Arnold …
“Truth is hard to tell! And you have to be willing to be criticized for it.” – Lee Daniels …
“A story should have a beginning, a middle and an end… but not necessarily in that order.” —Jean-Luc Godard …
There are some directors here I’m not familiar with, but I really like what they had to say so I wouldn’t remove their quotes simply because I haven’t seen any of their films. So I chose the quote that I don’t find as interesting as others, so it’s not a reflection of how I feel about said director. So that said, I bid adieu to…
Francis Ford Coppola
“An essential element of any art is risk. If you don’t take a risk then how are you going to make something really beautiful, that hasn’t been seen before?” …
“Every film should have its own world, a logic and feel to it that expands beyond the exact image that the audience is seeing.”
I choose to go with a contemporary director whose complete feature films I have seen, including his first feature film shot on a shoe-string budget Following. He’s one of my personal favorites and I think the British auteurs is one of the greatest filmmakers working today. I like that quote because he lives up to that concept with his films, they’re cerebral, imaginative and has that sense of wonderment. There’s another quote of his I like where he said that film is first and foremost entertainment, but that it can be both serious and intellectually stimulating. His films definitely has those qualities.
Ok, now the easy part:
I’d like to tag my friend Keith @ Keith and the Movieswhose phenomenal blog is one of my favorites. Take it away, Keith!
Well, what are your thoughts on these quotes and my pick in particular?
So the trailer of one of my most anticipated movies of year has arrived, Django Unchained. In case you didn’t know what it’s about, here’s the basic plot:
With the help of his mentor, a slave-turned-bounty hunter sets out to rescue his wife from a brutal Mississippi plantation owner. …
So what do I think of this trailer? To be honest with you I’m a bit underwhelmed by it. I hate to judge a film base solely on its first trailer but somehow I wasn’t as excited as I thought I would be. Some of you may have already read my script review of the movie. From what they’ve shown so far in the trailer, most if not all of the scenes from the script are there. I love the look of the film, even though it’s referred to as a western, most of the film actually took place in the south. Christoph Waltz looks exactly as I had envisioned him when I read the script, although I’m still not sold yet on Jamie Foxx as the hero Django, maybe because when the script was “leaked” Will Smith was being sought for the title role so I pictured him in that role instead. Leo DiCaprio looks like he’s having a blast playing the villainous Calvin Candie, if he’s as good as the role that was written in the script, I predict he’ll get an Oscar nomination.
Now the reason I was underwhelmed by the trailer is the tone of the film. To me it looked too cheesy, I expected the tone to be more of a serious western like The Outlaw Josey Whales or The Wild Bunch. Now I know Quentin Tarantino is paying a homage to the cheesy spaghetti westerns of the 60s and 70s but I didn’t expect to look this cheesy. It looked more like a comedy/western than a serious action/western. Another reason I wasn’t too excited about the film is that QT is working with a new editor since his long time editor/collaborator, Sally Menke, passed away two years ago. He’s now working with Fred Raskin and I’m not sure if he could translate what QT wanted out of the movie. As some of you know, editing is one of the most important parts in filmmaking and if the editor doesn’t have the same vision as the director then the film could be a disaster.
Even though I was a bit underwhelmed by this trailer, I’m quite sure the actual film will be great, heck they’re still shooting it so hopefully when they’re all done, we’ll get a new great trailer. In the mean time, we can all discussed what they’ve shown us so far.
In anticipation for Bond 23, a.k.a. Skyfall coming on November 9th, 2012, Ted and I are starting a new monthly series called 007 CHATTER… look for it sometime in the first week of each month. … I’ve also added a new category for this, so click on 007 Chatter on the category drop-down menu for all Bond-related posts.
Ok, so last month we’ve singled out seven actors we think might be a good pick to play Bond. Now, we set our sights to the directors who’d do the franchise some good.
Skyfall‘s director Sam Mendes is quite an unlikely choice to direct a Bond film given his theater background and his films often deal with troubled ordinary people, a far cry from the ultimate action hero. But that fact is what makes Skyfall so promising to me. Some have said that this next Bond flick will be lighter on action but with heavier character development and I welcome that. Now I think we can still expect some high-stunts action sequences, car chases, what have you, but there’s nothing wrong with giving this 50-year-old franchise more depth and profundity.
Well, without further ado, these are seven directors Ted and I think could do the franchise some good:
TED’s and RUTH’s PICKS:
Ted: Ah now we are finally talking about a director whom the producers might already be considering to direct the next one. He’s a Brit and he’s just made a big budgeted action film, Thor. Also, he’s already signed on the reboot another espionage franchise, the untitled Jack Ryan film. So not only is he a Brit but he’ll also have the experience of working on a spy flick, so it’s a win-win for the producers. I think Branagh can bring back those classic styles of the Bond flicks from the 60s.
Ruth: The multi-talented Irish thespian maybe known for his Shakespearean work, but he’s far more versatile than than, as proven with the success of the comic-book adaptation of Thor, among others. I’m certainly optimistic about him directing the fifth Jack Ryan spy thriller with Chris Pine. As an accomplished triple threat, actor/writer/director, he’s also got a knack for casting [case in point: then-unknown Tom Hiddleston as Loki in Thor] so perhaps we’d have another star in the making with a yet unknown Bond actor.
Fincher was actually going to direct another spy franchise back in early 2000s (Mission: Impossible 3). But because of the dispute between him and the studio over the film’s tone, he left the project. With Fincher’s style and flare, his Bond flick could be one of the best ever made, heck he already directed James Bond aka Daniel Craig in The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo so maybe Craig will help convince the producer to hire Fincher for the next Bond flick. We know Fincher can handle big-budgeted films so that won’t be a problem. He’s never done an action film before but some of his films has some great action sequences, for example the foot chase scene in Se7en and the shootout sequence in The Game, so he can definitely stage great action set pieces. Also, his schedule is wide open since Disney put an axe on 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, he was set to direct the remake of the 1954 film but Disney new chief wanted save some cash. But because he’s American, I don’t think he’ll ever be consider for the gig.
Another candidate I don’t believe Bond producers will ever consider, but it would be awesome if Park Chan-Wook gets to make a Bond flick. Actually I think the South Korean director should’ve directed Quantum of Solace. Most of his films dealt with vengeance and I think Quantum would’ve been a great film had he directed it. Like Fincher, this man knows how to shoot great looking films, his Vengeance Trilogy are some of the best looking films I’ve ever seen and they’re pretty low budget. So imagine if he has $200mil to shoot a film, it would look spectacular. And with a character like Bond, he could explore the darker side of the character.
Some may remember right before the producers of the Bond films decided to reboot the franchise, Tarantino was on The Tonight Show and started talking about much he wanted to make Casino Royale(per MI-6 HQ.com). He told Jay Leno, “Just give me $50mil and I can make an awesome Bond flick based on Casino Royale novel.” Well a couple of years after QT made his comments, that movie came out but unfortunately QT didn’t get to direct it. For the next Bond flick, I think the producers should consider QT as their next director and I know it’s very unlikely since they have strict rules against hiring non-European directors. QT is a Bond fanatic so I know he can make a great Bond film but again I don’t think it will ever happen.
Kathryn Bigelow – Now here’s a director that I don’t believe the producers will ever consider, she’s an American and well she’s a woman. But look at her resume, she can definitely direct a big action film. Point Break is one of my favorite guilty pleasure action films; she also made another great and very underrated action film, Strange Days. Oh yeah she’s an Oscar winner too. So come on now the Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson, let’s put her on the list of the next Bond director.
I know Nolan has expressed interest in directing a Bond movie. In fact, he even admitted on several occasions of that the intense action sequence in the snowy mountain area in Inception was inspired by growing up watching Bond films. Well, considering how astounding his Batman films and Inception were, I think the 42-year-old Londoner could potentially do something very intriguing with this franchise. On his IMDb profile, it’s said that Nolan’s films often have ‘obsessive protagonists with a troubled past,’ well then Bond would be a perfect character for him to tackle. Plus, given his huge fan-base, it’d certainly be a good move financially for the studios as well.
Surely rising star Tom Hardy would be very keen on this idea. He’s even said that he’d do the role if Nolan is directing. He told Metro UK, “I’d love to play Bond with Chris Nolan (as a) director or something, it would be awesome.” Yes indeed!
Here’s another young, talented Londoner who’s expressed interest in directing a Bond movie. He’s said in many interviews that his X-Men: First Class was partly inspired by the 60s Bond films, describing it as “… part Bond flick and part John Frankenheimer political thriller.” Vaughn quite forthright about his desire to do a Bond movie in this Bleeding Cool article:
I sort of want the Brocollis to regret never hiring me. I was very keen to direct Bond. I don?t know if I am any more, to be blunt, now that I?ve done this. I really love Daniel [Craig], though you know, it might be interesting if they one day decide to cast Fassbender as Bond, then maybe I? ll go ?Hey!?
Fassbender’s Magneto was practically Bondian in his quest for personal vendetta, he even had the strut down pat. It’d be great to see these two team up in a Bond film. Maybe his wife Claudia Schiffer could even have a cameo as a Bond girl :D
This is the off-the-beaten path pick as Bird is American, but it’d be great if the Broccolis make an exception once in a while. Somehow they don’t seem to mind about the Bond actor not being from the UK, so why not the director?
The critical and box office success of Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol proves that Bird could tackle live-action flicks as well as he does animated features. He’s obviously able to take a formidable but stale franchise to new heights with innovative and thrilling action sequences. He’s sort of made an homage to Bond movies with The Incredibles, and given his screenwriting track-record, he’d be able to balance the thrills and gadgets with engaging characters and narrative. Oh, perhaps Michael Giacchino could work on the Bond score? Now, that’d be a winning combo! …
Like this post? Please submit to Reddit. We’ll be eternally grateful! :D
Well, those are our choices, folks. Please vote below and if you pick ‘other’ please let us know who it is and why in the comments. …
[rtm’s note: With the recent casting of Jamie Foxx in Tarantino’s upcoming film Django Unchained, Ted looks back on some of his favorite films from the Tennessee-born director. Also check out Ted’s review of Django Unchained script.]
QT is one of my favorite directors working in Hollywood today and yes I do think he’s a hack but he’s a damn good hack. He’s able to combine his favorite genre films from the 60s and 70s and put in own spin on them. With the news that he’s going to make a western, I thought I should list my favorite films of his. I’ll only list films that he was the sole director, I’m not going to list films or TV shows that he co-directed, co-wrote or starred in. Also, I won’t go into the plot of each film since readers of this site probably know QT’s films pretty well. In order, below are the films:
1. Pulp Fiction
I actually didn’t care for this film the first time I saw it. I thought it was weird and well just plain sucked. So a couple of years later, I decided to give it another shot since it got nominated for so many Oscars. I was surprised how much I enjoyed it the second time around and it’s now one of the few films I’d call a masterpiece. I have seen this film countless times now and I’m still waiting for it to come out on Blu-ray. Highly recommended if you’ve never seen it. …
2. Inglourious Basterds
Tarantino spent over ten years writing the script of this film and I think it was well worth it. I love this movie, all the performances were great, especially Christoph Waltz as the sinister Col. Landa. QT said when he first wrote the script, he wanted to cast big named stars in the movie. He wanted Sly Stallone as the Basterds leader then Jim Carrey, Eddie Murphy, Bruce Willis and Adam Sandler will play the Basterds. He wanted Arnold Schwarzenegger as Landa and the film was going to be more action oriented. Of course around this time, those actors were still making $20mil per movie so he figured there’s no way he can cast them all so he decided to re-write it. When he finally was ready to shoot the movie, he met with Leo DiCaprio and offered him the Landa role but Leo told him to cast an actual German for the role instead. We have to thank Leo for that suggestion. …
3. Kill Bill I know there are two films but I count them as one because originally the film was supposed to be released as one movie. After The Weinstein Bros. saw the film, they told QT to cut it into two so they could make more money from it. Great move since both films earned around $70mil each, had they released it as one, they’d only make $70mil. QT’s take on the kung-fu and spaghetti western was just awesome; he even played homage to Bruce Lee’s Game of Death and Sergio Leone’s For A Few Dollars More. …
I thought Uma Thurman got robbed for not getting an Oscar nomination for her role as The Bride. A little tidbit about the second film’s ending, in the script there’s a big fight scene between The Bride and Bill. The scene would’ve taken place right after their conversation near the end of the film. The fight was going to be on the beach and Bill’s demise was quite brutal, I think that’s a correct word for it. Rumors been going around that QT actually shot the scene but he didn’t like it and decided to not use it. Of course he never confirmed or denied those rumors. So hopefully we’ll get to see it in the near future. … 4. Reservoir Dogs I didn’t see this film until after I saw Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown, by then I was in the QT fan club and wanted to see all of his work. I wasn’t sure what to expect when I started watching this film but was quite surprised of how much I enjoyed it. The film has very intense torture scene, I still having a hard time sitting through it even if I watch it today. But I thought the way the scene ended was quite ingenious; I definitely didn’t see it coming. … 5. Jackie Brown QT’s take on the Blaxploitation genre was very good but it wasn’t well received by the critics or audiences. I think many people were expecting another version of Pulp Fiction even though he kept telling people that isn’t. I remember a guy I used to work with at a video store, he was so excited to see this movie and I kept telling him it won’t be like Pulp Fiction and he said he knew that going in. Well after he saw it, he told me it sucked because it wasn’t anything like Pulp Fiction. I thought it was funny and just laughed at him. I’ve only seen this movie once; it’s definitely one of my least favorite films of QT. I’ll see it again once it comes out on Blu-ray. … 6. Death Proof (part of Grindhouse) I enjoyed this film but can’t say it’s good because the film was pointless and didn’t have any plot whatsoever. Going into this film, I expected to see his version of Halloween or Friday the 13th, but what I got was a movie about pretty girls talking nonsense and they kept talking and talking and talking. Although I thought the chase scene at end was awesome and the little twist was pretty cool too. I can’t recommend the film to anyone unless you’re a huge die-hard fan of QT like I am.
Well those are my ranking of QT’s films, from best to worst. What do you think? If you’re a fan of QT, how would you rank his films?
So I got a hold of Tarantino’s new script Django Unchained and have read it three times, it’s probably one of the most exciting scripts I’ve read in a while. In case you don’t believe me, see the image to the right, it’s the front page of the script, if you go to some other sites to read the review of the script, you‘ll see the exact same page.
I also read the scripts of Kill Bill and Inglorious Basterds way before the films came out and I thought those were great but Django was much better, so let‘s hope QT can turn it into a great film. Since the film hasn’t even been made or cast yet, I won’t go deep into the story, I have too much respect for QT to ruin his great work and spoil it for those who prefer to see the film. I’ll skim through some of the characters and what you can expect from the film. It’s basically a revenge/love story with Tarantino’s touch.
Fans of QT know that he love the cinemas of the 60s and 70s and this film will be his true homage to the spaghetti western genre and also a little bit of blaxpoitation films. Particularly he played a lot of homage to Once Upon a Time in the West and Mandingo. A lot of people assume it will be a remake of Sergio Corbucci’s 1966 Django, but it’s not. Although the star from that film, Franco Nero, will probably have a minor role in Django Unchained, QT wrote a character especially for him. The story took place sometime in the 1800s, he never specify the year and right away we see to our hero Djangoand a couple of pages in we were introduce to our second hero, Dr. King Schultz. Since QT knows how to shoot a great action sequence, this opening scene will no doubt be spectacular once it’s on the screen, again I won’t spoil it for you but let’s just say Dr. Schultz is one bad ass character. Apparently QT wrote the part specifically for Christopher Waltz and if he accepts the role, no doubt he’ll own it like he did with Col. Landa.
Fan-made poster by Federico Mancosu
After we were introduced to our two heroes and a big action scene (trust me you‘re going to love the sequence and it was quite bloody too), just like in other QT’s films, he jump the story to another character with the usual screen fades to black and then title card telling us what we’re about to see now. In this segment we were introduced to Django’s wife Broomhilda and what happened to her after the opening scene. There’s a flashback scene in the beginning of the movie of Django and Broomhilda’s time together but a tragic event happened and they got separated.
Also, here we were introduced to the main villain, the slimy and despicable Calvin Candie. If you think Col. Landa or Bill were great villains, Candie might actually change your mind. I’d compare Calvin Candie to another despicable villain character, Judge Holden from Blood Meridien, a western novel written by Cormac McCarthy. I won’t be surprised at all if QT sort of based Calvin Candie on Holden. Later in this segment, we get to see Candie’s right hand man, a house slave named Stephen; he’s as nasty as Candie. Also there were some minor characters we were introduced to; these include a vicious killer who kills slaves for fun. There’s a scene in the script that’s very similar to a scene from Schindler’s List where Ralph Fienes’ character lined up Jewish prisoners and shot them in the head one by one; in this movie a few slaves were lined up and this character named Ace Woody starts shooting them in the head one by one. Then there was Candie’s lawyer Mr. Moguy, even though he’s in the rest of the film after we met him, he didn’t have a lot of dialog. The rest of the film takes place at Candie’s farm called Candyland, that’s where he pits slave fighters against one another.
As I mentioned before, this is one of the best scripts I’ve ever read and it has QT’s signature unexpected scene in it, you know like the one where Vincent shot Marvin in the face in Pulp Fiction or the shootout scene in the basement bar in Inglourious Basterds. In this one there’s a handshake scene that will make people laugh and jump at the same time, seriously it’s going to be awesome. What’s surprising to me though was how straight forward the plot of the film was, I was expecting something wild and crazy but what QT wrote was a true western with a lot of action and great characters. Now since the story is about slaves in the 1800s, the N-word were uttered by every major characters in the film except Broomhilda, so if you’re offended easily I don’t recommend you go see this film. Also, whichever actress who gets the role of Broomhilda, she’ll have to bear her skin quite a bit. There’s a couple of rape scenes and of course whipping. Just like the other QT’s films, it’s brutal and unflinching; I know for sure some scenes will make people very uncomfortable. One particular scene might not make it to the screen, it involved a runaway slave and huge hunting dogs, and I’ll let you use your imagination as to what happened in that scene.
QT and Christoph at the Governor’s Ball
In the last month or so Will Smith was the front runner to take the role of Django but looks like he’s backing away from it, probably because he doesn’t want to star in such a violent film, which is kind of funny because he was in Bad Boys 2 and that film was quite violent. If Smith won’t take the role then I would like to see maybe Anthony Mackie or Idris Elba. As for Dr. King Shultz, Christopher Waltz have to accept it, I can’t see anyone else in that role but him. If Alan Rickman were a bit younger, I think he’d be great for this role too. Rumors also been going around that Michael Fassbender was offered a role in the film, I assume it’s for Candie’s lawyer role Mr. Moguy, the role is minor and very similar to his character in Inglourious Basterds.
As for the villain Calvin Candie, apparently QT offered the role to Leonardo DiCaprio. This is kind of strange since he wrote the character as someone who’s in his late 40s or early 50s. If Leo accepts it then I’m sure QT can change the script and make the character younger. I actually like this move by QT a lot, cast one of the biggest stars in Hollywood as one of the most despicable villains ever and I think Leo can do it. It will be very interesting to see how people will react when he says the N-word to our hero and to all of the black characters in the film and trust me he uttered that word quite a bit. I think for the role of Broomhilda QT can probably cast some unknown actress since I assume some well-known ones might not want to take it. Like I mentioned before, the role will require the actress to be naked a lot and she got raped in a couple of scenes. For the role of house slave and second main villain Stephen, Samuel L. Jackson has apparently been offered the role and he’s perfect for it. In the script QT described him as a tall, skinny and in his 50s. He and Django do not like each other one bit and the showdown between them was pretty awesome, can’t ruin it for you though.
Now QT love to change his scripts so what I read might not be the final script but I hope he keeps most of it when he finally shoots the film. I remember he changed the script of Kill Bill and Inglourious Basterds, only about 60% to 70% of script made it to the screen. Whatever he decides to do, I’ll be there opening night. Seriously I can’t wait to see this movie but it won’t hit theaters ’til Christmas 2012!
So there you have it, an early review of QT’s new script that sure to be stirred up some controversies once it hits the big screen. What do you think? Will you go see it or are you not a fan of Tarantino? Feel free to leave your comments below.
So late last week, Fox announced that Darren Aronofsky won’t be directing the new Wolverine film. As a fan of Wolverine and the X-Men franchise, this was a huge blow to me. Even though I’ve never read any of the comic books, I was a huge fan of the cartoon show that aired in the 90s. I also enjoyed the first two films quite a bit, not too much with X-Men 3 and the first Wolverine film though. So when Aronofsky said that he’s coming on board to retool the Wolverine movie, I was ecstatic because I think he’s one of the best young filmmakers in Hollywood today and Wolverine is one of my favorite comic book characters right behind Batman.
I thought the first Wolverine film has potentials but the final product was pretty lame. Some of you might even remember that the first film has so much drama behind the scenes too, so maybe Aronofsky didn’t want to deal with Fox executives and decided to just walk away now before he’s knee deep in production and couldn’t get out.
The official statements by Fox and Aronofsky said the shoot was going to be out side of the States and that Aronofsky didn’t want to be away from his family for that long period of time. When I heard that, I didn’t believe it for a second. I will bet anything that Aronofsky left the project because Fox executives won’t let him make the film the way he wants and also they probably gave him a very tight schedule to shoot the picture. I truly believe that Aronofsky wanted to make a very gritty and dark film about Wolverine and Fox executives probably said no, very similar to the first movie.
Fox didn’t like where the movie was going so they ordered the director (Gavin Hood) to make changes so they could market it to younger audiences. Rumor has it that Hood actually walked off the set and veteran director Richard Donner actually was the one who finished directing the movie, Donner’s one of the movie’s producers. I think Aronofsky didn’t want to deal with the stress and just walked away. Now some people will suspect the tragic that’s happening in Japan might have something to do with his decision to leave the movie (the new Wolverine film will take place in Japan), that could be true but I highly doubt it. If they’re so concern about the danger of shooting in Japan, they could go to some other country and shoot it. There are lots of country that can be substitute for Japan, The Last Samurai was in New Zealand.
A few years ago when Singer left X-Men to shoot the new Superman film (Superman Returns), Fox announced that Mathew Vaughn was taking over the franchise. Then a few weeks before shooting begin, both the studio and Vaughn came out saying that he’s leaving the project because he didn’t want to be a way from his family for too long. Sounds similar to last week’s announcement about Aronofsky isn’t it? Here’s the original article where Fox announced Vaughn was leaving X-Men 3. The real reason why Vaughn left the project was because Fox gave him an impossible shooting schedule and they demanded he shoot the film based on the new script, Vaughn wanted to stick with Singer’s original script. Had he or Singer made the film, the main story would’ve been about the Phoenix saga and we’ll finally get to see those giant robots known as The Sentinels, it was seen briefly in beginning of X-Men: Last Stand. Of course we all know what happened, even though Last Stand made a lot of money, I thought the film was quite awful compare to the first two X-Men films.
As of now Fox hasn’t announce who will take over the project yet, I just hope they don’t go and get some of the hacks to finish the job. If they do, you can bet they’ll go after someone like Brett Ratner, Rob Cohen, Stephen Sommers (he was fired from the G.I. Joe sequel so he’s looking for work) and Paul W. Anderson. Since most of my favorite and talented directors are busy with their own projects, I’m afraid Fox might just hired one of those hacks.
But just for fun, these are my ideal candidates to replace Aronofsky: Duncan Jones (Moon), Park Chan-Wook (Oldboy), The Coen Bros. (why not, they haven’t done an action/comic book film yet and this could be very interesting project for them) and Quentin Tarantino.
I know those guys will probably never be on Fox’s list but even if they are, I highly doubt they’ll accept the job. One possible candidate that Fox might actually hire is Bryan Singer, he was in the running to direct the first Wolverine film so maybe he’ll come on board if Fox asks him.
Well, what do you think of Aronofsky’s departure from The Wolverine? Are you as upset as I am and who do you think should fill in the director’s chair for this film?