As we're all aware, 007 is not drinking martinis in the upcoming 23rd Bond movie. He has instead chosen to slobber down some great tasting Heineken! And based on this new ad, I can only assume that in the 24th Bond movie--tentatively named Skyfall: Part II: No Country for Blonde Men--he's going to be dropping beer for the good ol' soda-pop!
Yes! This franchise just keeps getting better and better.
"Give me a Coke Zero, same great taste, zero calories." -James Bond
So that's why they switched from martinis to beer! The smooth taste of Heineken will make you a better person all around! You want to be suave around the ladies? Drink a Heineken. You want to build a castle out of 104 playing cards (with just shooting them out in front of you)? Drink a Heineken. You want Daniel Craig to think you're cool? You get it now.
I'm assuming that this was 007's secret all along. The martinis were just a cover. He's never really been a good secret agent on his own, but with the help of that green bottle...Well! He's the bee's knees. Pride of England! Now that Anton Chigurh knows his secret it's going to be like Kryptonite and Superman.
I'm still waiting for the, "Chilled, not room temperature" line. Love it! I can't wait!*
This movie comes on November 9, 2012. It is directed by Sam Mendes (American Beauty, Road to Perdition, Jarhead, Revolutionary Road, Away We Go AKA way too good for Bond).
*I actually can wait, considering I've never really liked Bond movies anyway.
It's easy to see that this suit is the worst. Like I've seen other sites reference, its similarities to Batman, Tron, the new Dredd and other cool suits don't really translate to Robocop. It looks like they tried to update the character with a gritty, darker side, but fucked it up so badly. First of all, Robocop is already a gritty and dark character, so putting him in a shitty black plasticty suit isn't going to change any characteristics about him.
We've talked about remakes in the past and one aspect that I don't think I touched on was respecting the original. This suit shits all of Paul Verhoeven's movie. A big pile of steamy turds. Again, look at Rob Zombie's Halloween. They still used the William Shatner mask, but roughed it up a bit. It was clearly the same mask, making it fun for all the fans of the original. What they should have done with Robocop was thrown in a dent or two, maybe some scratches, or even a sticker. Not make a shitty Batsuit! Don't change the color. Don't change the style. Robocop has a very iconic look and they've lost that, which mean they've lost a viewer in me.
I wasn't paying much attention, or cared about the big debacle over the script. I figured they could make anything work if they tried hard enough. I focused on the great cast they assembled: Joel Kinnaman, Gary Oldman, Samuel L. Jackson, Michael Keaton, Clive Owen, and the list goes on. All of that for nothing. They've lost a majority of viewers because of this. Anyone familiar with the 1987 flick is not going to want to waste their ten dollars on this.
The end.
Robocop is directed by Jose Padiha and written by a few guys (always a good sign!).
I talked a few posts back about my
favorite book-to-film adaptations. I threw my two cents regarding
what I think needs to be done to make a good flick based on an
existing source. Today I've picked three books that need to become
movies, and three movies that never ever, ever need to be made into
movies. Come on, Hollywood! Pick your battles. I'm looking at you
Stupid-Lemon-Face-Franco.
Adapt This, Please:
-Beautiful Ruins by Jess Walter
There is such a wide array of
characters in this book that are all fully developed. Imagine a less
depressing P.T. Anderson movie. This is a novel that jumps between
Italy in the sixties and present day in Hollywood. So, basically
you've got the beautiful scenery coupled with the deplorable people.
Sounds like a perfect combo! The movie probably would have to cut out
a subplot or two, but that wouldn't hurt the overall plot of the
movie. Let's just get P.T. Anderson to rally his crew and make it.
It'll be a nice light-hearted change for him. I'm sure there's room
in there for Philip Seymour Hoffman.
-Beat the Reaper
by Josh Bazell
A hit man turned doctor? Done. Why
hasn't this movie already come out. Track down Guy Ritchie and tell
him to stop making Sherlock Holmes movies. Let's get him to come back
to quick cuts of overt violence.
The main character is your typical
action star, so dumping Clive Owen or Jason Statham wouldn't be hard.
And the humor is sharp in the novel and wouldn't be hard to transfer
to film. They wouldn't have to cut anything out of the story, it
unfolds just like a movie should. Hollywood, get on it. Stop making
Transformer movies and get
your ass in gear with Beat the Reaper.
-City of Thieves
by David Benioff
Again, just start shooting this movie.
You don't even need a script. Just continuously look back to the
novel to find the next shot. This book is hilarious, but set in a
very serious setting. Two Russian soldiers get caught deserting
during World War II in Leningrad. A Colonel tells him that normally
they would have been shot on the scene, but his daughter is getting
married and they need a wedding cake. So he sends the two soldiers
out to find a dozen eggs, promising that if they complete the task
they will be set free.
The plot is pretty ridiculous, but you
wouldn't think too far into while you're reading it. Benioff was able
to create the world in such a way that nothing seemed impossible. The
humor coupled with the human emotion would be a perfect film. I'm
looking at the Coen brothers for this one. Please, guys, just do it.
Stay the Fuck Away from These, Please:
-The Catcher in the Rye by
J.D. Salinger
It's not so much
that this novel is unfilmable, as you would fail at putting a
sympathetic character on screen. Holden Caulfield is such a whiny
little shit that if you actually had to watch and listen to someone
portraying him it would be too much. You need that inner monologue to
make the story itself work, and so help me God, if you rely that much
on a voice-over you're dead to me. I'm sure someone would be able to
achieve the goal in making a successful adaptation, but the chances
of someone fucking it up is so much higher. And then there is the
idea that you need to read this book by a certain age.
I've talked to
a lot of people about the theory that if you read Catcher in the
Rye too late in life you won't make that connection to the
anti-hero that affects so many readers. Thus, the demographic for a
flick is almost non-existent. It's a good thing that J.D. was so protective of his writing to begin with. So I say again: stay the fuck away from
Salinger.
-As
I Lay Dying by William Faulkner
This one is kind of
a sore subject. This is one of my top three favorite books of all
time and the fact that James “Stupid-I-Hate-You-So-Much” Franco
is developing it kills me. I'm currently dying and will continue to
do so until someone stops Lemon-Face from ruining this book.
We're
looking at multiple first person accounts of the Bundren family
travels to bury their wife and mother. With the various firsts we see
different perceptions of different characters and that's all part of
the theme of the novel. We don't really know anyone. Snapshots of
different aspects of someone's character can build an image, but
doesn't really tell you anything concrete about someone. So how would
you put that down on film, Franco? Huh? Dumb-shit. Just drop it.
-Hard-Boiled
Wonderland and the End of the World by
Haruki Murakami
You'd
have to take your pick between the two plots. Are you going to weight
heavier on the strange fantasy world, or rather the sci-fi-inspired
present day detective storyline? I could take a guess. Neither story
comes off as complete without the counterpart, but when transferring
it to film I could imagine the filmmakers try to pump up the action
in the flick, thus losing a large part of the themes in this book. So
how about you just don't.
We would all like to see actors come
out of their box and try new things. It's always surprising to get a
glimpse at the range these performers embody, and sometimes we're
blown away by the potential they'd been hiding the whole time. The
best example I can think of is when Heath Ledger was cast as The
Joker. No one was really excited about that. If anything, more people
were pissed and disappointed. The majority of the world sat
indifferent the fact that the cutie from 10 Things I Hate About
You was cast as the iconic
Batman nemesis. But no one was over the moon. Then? Well, how about
an Academy Award for best supporting actor for a role in a fucking
comic book movie. The Dark Knight helped
shape a new Academy Award outlook, and a lot of the credit can go to
Ledger. A movie that deals with good and evil can only be as good at
the villains, and this Joker was very good. He came out of his box
and showed us what he was really made of. So now, my friend Chris and
I take a look at some other actors and the roles we would love to see
them play. (Joe)
Chris's
Picks:
There are so many underrated actors and
actresses out there. It's phenomenal, but not unexpected, given the
glut of media that abounds today. Who has the time to watch
everything? Or even half of one percent of everything? Or the money?
It's a problem.
The example of Heath Ledger is
intriguing because you're right, I would not have expected him to do
a great job as the Joker. He was just this kid that did romcoms and
big blockbusters, both on the power of his awesome jaw line. Or so it
seemed. Then Brokeback Mountain came around, and people
started reexamining his past performances. There was some nuance
there, but not a lot. Paychecks, basically, with a little bit of
sweat equity. Then boom! The first clip of him as the Joker appeared
and it was electric. In that spirit, here are a few actors that are
underappreciated, combined with a few diverse roles I think they
would do well in.
Thandie
Newton: The Next Doctor
Every time an actor leaves Doctor
Who, there's an amazing furor over who should be the next Doctor.
Will the person be able to take on the role and really make it their
own, or will it seem a grisly caricature of what came before? (I'm
looking at you, Paul McGann.) Matt Smith isn't likely going anywhere
anytime soon, but there's been some talk around the Internet water
cooler about who might be tapped. Lately, the debates have taken on a
different flavor, as there's been some call to have the Doctor
regenerate as someone of a different race or as a woman.
I say, why not both? The actress would
have to be capable of both good dramatic bravado and good comedic
timing. Newton has both in spades. Her comedic timing is proven in
the underrated Run Fatboy Run and in every interview she's
ever given. As for drama, her turn as Condoleezza Rice in W
was stunning, as is most of her other dramatic work. She's also
stunning in For Colored Girls and is the best part of the
treacly The Pursuit of Happyness. She's also no stranger to
overblown action and adventure, having been in The Chronicles of
Riddick, 2012, and Mission: Impossible II.
Chances of this happening:
Pretty good, I think, say 40%. I don't necessarily think it'll be
Newton who gets the role (though she would do well in it), but I do
think there's a better than good chance they'll decide to make the
next Doctor a woman.
Sean
Hayes: The Elongated Man
It has always bothered me how little
screen and television work Sean Hayes has done after Will &
Grace ended. (I'm pretending that the Three Stooges movie
never happened. I think it's for the best.) He was always the
solidest actor on the show, willing to make a fool of himself and
take on his character's preposterous positions, while still showing
that the character had a heart and a soul behind him. Far more
interesting than Will's "I'm just like you guys" shtick
that took years to burn away. Hayes is best known for working in
comedy. He's appeared as a guest star on a lot of sitcoms and his
film work has been generally comedies as well. I don't see any reason
to make him take on a purely dramatic role, even in my hypotheticals.
Let me preface my comments on why I
chose Hayes with an explanation of why I chose the Elongated Man.
DC's cinematic universe over the course of the last decade has been
dreary and melancholy. It's like they saw the success of Nolan's
Batman films and decided that was how things should be from now on.
God, is that ever boring. But there's a whole pantheon of characters
that aren't angsty dickheads that DC could make films based on. With
the announcement that they're going to try to do a JLA movie, I hope
they find the space to have some of the lesser JLA members in the
mix, and Ralph Dibny is just perfect for that. He's basically human,
has a stable relationship with his wife, and likes to go on road
trips solving crimes. (I like to pretend that the whole Identity
Crisis nonsense never happened). Plus he's a detective, which
people seem to like, even though the Nolan Batman films featured
almost zero detective work.
Why do I think Hayes can pull this off?
He's got the slapstick chops to get the right timing for any
ridiculous Elongated Man fight scenes that would inevitably occur.
He's got a lot of heart as an actor, which you need with Ralph. More
than anything, Ralph's character is defined by his love of Sue, and I
think Hayes could make that central to the role. And anyone who
thinks Hayes couldn't "play straight" (which is a quagmire
all its own) should go watch his guest spot on Scrubs or his TV movie
take on Jerry Lee Lewis.
Chances of this happening: For
an Elongated Man showing up in *a* movie, I'd say probably 20%. For
it to actually be Sean Hayes, well, I imagine it's wishful thinking.
Juliette
Lewis: Harley Quinn
I've made no bones about my distaste
for the "gritty" aspects all DC properties have seemingly
taken on (I'm waiting for a gritty Plastic Man comic—it's only a
matter of time). This distaste is doubled when I think about the
revamped Harley Quinn in the New 52. To me, Harley is perfect when
she's manic and when she's answering to an equally manic Joker, but
also when there's fun abounding. The two are a pair made for each
other, a villainous take on Nick and Nora Charles. They complete each
other.
Harley Quinn is a role tailor-made for
Juliette Lewis. She's made a career out of being a mess on screen,
though she's really taken on a very diverse set of roles. As Mallory
in Natural Born Killers, she earned a lifetime pass from me,
but she's also done credible work with any number of other
characters. I find she's an actress, like Drew Barrymore, that leaves
very few people without an opinion. They either love her or hate her,
but she's almost never thought of with a shrug of the shoulders. At
almost 40, she's probably too old to play Harley as she's imagined in
most of her appearances (though she still looks stunning), as a kid
who has sort of fallen under the Joker's spell and views him as a
mentor/father figure. But that gives the option for making the
character more of an equal with the Joker, a partner in crime and
frivolity. Harley has time and again proven that she's the equal to
the Joker in terms of menace and (lack of) sanity, and it would be
interesting to see that dynamic shifted a little into a little more
egalitarian relationship. Hell, I wouldn't even need Batman to make
an appearance in the film. Just do a movie with her and whoever as
the Joker, pulling a series of Bonnie and Clyde robberies and such.
Chances of this happening:
Nearly zero. I doubt there'll be another movie with the Joker in it
for at least 5 years, which means no movies with Harley in them
either. Also, I doubt they'd use an older actress anyway, no matter
how perfect for the part, because T&A sells tickets.
Justin
Long: Mr. Kinney from Robocop
We
all know there's a new Robocop movie being made. I'm going to see it.
It's just going to happen. It's got some great people attached to it,
but there seem to be some production issues, and some of the leaks
about the script make it seem like it could be a very bad movie
indeed. Whatever. I think the movie needs some Justin Long in it.
Specifically, he should play the role of Mr. Kinney, the junior
executive who gets riddled by bullets from the malfunctioning ED-209.
That's the kind of role I'd love to see Justin Long in.
Please, casting people. Make this
happen.
Chances
of this happening:
fingers crossed.
Joe's Picks:
Tina
Fey: A Mob Boss
Think
of Albert Brooks from Drive.
There would be no tongue and cheek. No dark humor. This would be Fey
at her most ruthless, killing motherfuckers left and right without an
emotion present. It'd be like Salma Hayek in Savages,
but the difference is that Fey wouldn't suck. She would actually be a
menacing force.
She
hasn't done a serious role yet, but it's my opinion that comedic
actors are some of the best actors around. To do comedy well they
have to have such a sense of timing and balance. If they deliver a
joke too early or too late it'll ruin the whole bit. A lot like
horror. And if Fey is able to bring that talent of timing to a truly
evil character she would own it.
Chances
of this happening:
30%. It's a possibility, but I don't foresee Fey leaving comedy for a
long while.
Michael
Fassbender: A Drag Queen
Let's
think about Fassie-Bear's most memorable movies: 300,
X-Men: First Class, Inglorious Basterds, Shame, Prometheus.
Is there a trend here? Oh yes, they're all masculine characters. He
is the skinniest manly actor around. He's been building himself as
the intelligent manly actor who is really good at his job. He has
been moving around in the field, playing Freud last year in
Cronenberg's movie, but he still hasn't broken to the other side.
He's still just too damn manly.
His
physique is part of the reason I would love to see him play a drag
queen. I mean, he's got a great body for it, and his face would look
dazzling with the glitter peppered on. Another reason I want to see
this is how unexpected it would be (kind of the whole reason we're
doing this post). We've been used to him being this smooth talking
badass motherfucker that shoots Nazi's dicks off, or throws knives
into Nazi's chests, or battles as a Spartan. No one would think he
would be taking the stage in drag. And that surprise would be so much
fun. The main reason for my wanting him to do this? He would kill! He
would be so good at it. We know that he can act. We can see he has
the body for it. All he needs to do is say yes. Just think of him
pulsating to Lady Gaga's “Bad Romance.” I'm in. I hope you're in,
too.
Chances
of this happening:
50/50. I wouldn't count it out, but if it doesn't happen in the next
few years I would doubt of him ever doing it.
Bradley
Cooper: Captain Planet
It's
all in the jawline. Once you find that perfect face-shape you just
need to paint it blue, dye the hair green and we're ready to save the
planet. I had a long debate with people at work about who should take
up the mantel of Captain Planet if they made a movie, and there have
been rumors of the Transformers
producers putting one out. After many possible actors on my list
(Chris Pine coming in a close second), I settled on Bradley Cooper.
We've
seen him do action in The
A-Team,
where he also proves that he can have the body required for a super
hero. He's done comedy, so we know that he would have a good humor
when it came to one-liners. And rumor has it that he is a nerd. He is
adapting a science-fiction series called Hyperion
right now. Which means he would take the campy nature of Captain
Planet and treat it fairly and seriously.
Chances
of this happening:It
really all depends on whether the Captain Planet movie gets made or
not. If it does, I would put this at 70%.
James
Franco: A Corpse
That's
it. He just lays there for two hours like a stupid dumb dead corpse.
And people pee on him.
When you're making a book-to-movie
adaptation there is a blessing and a curse. First, you'll get a fan
base without really doing a whole lot. These are people who loved the
book so much that they'll be chomping hard at the bit just to get a
peek. But on the other hand, you've got this mass group of lit fans
ready to tear your movie apart because you changed the main
character's hat from red to blue. They will pick the entire flick
apart detail by detail until there is just a shitty stump of a corpse
left.
The most important thing to keep in
mind when making a book-to-film adaptation is that they are two
different mediums. Certain tricks and subplots that work wonderfully
in the printed word will not translate to the screen. This sounds
overly simple, but it seems like filmmakers ruin plenty of
potentially good movies by trying to please everyone.
Secondly—and there are exceptions to
every rule (Steve Martin, in this case)—but the author of the novel
should not be the one to pen the screenplay. They are generally too
close to the story, character, plot, etc. to kill their darlings. A
side note: there is a reason the best adaptations come from short
stories. Novels have way too much material to turn into a concise two
hour movie. When the author and screenwriter are the same person
you'll get a movie like Freedomland.
Or, as I like to call it, Scrotumy-shit-pile-of-jizz. It isn't often
that I hate a movie as much as I hated that one. Imagine James Franco
embodied a movie, and then maybe you can see my level of distaste.
The movie meanders scene to scene, not fully developing or
understanding any of the plots it has built. So by the end of the
flick we're left with a big stringy mess. So yeah, thanks Faulkner
for the advice, kill your darlings.
Breaking it all
down to the simplest advice: do what works for the movie.
I have
a list down at the bottom, but first I wanted to throw a few titles
out that are not on the list and why. The reason you won't be seeing
a lot of good movies on my list is likely because I haven't read the
book. That is why I left Lord of the Rings,
Jaws, The Help, Jurassic Park and
The Hunger Games off
the list. The titles could go on and on, but I'm a pretty slow reader
and I don't see much point in reading the book after I saw the movie.
This has worked out for me in the past. The Beach
is one of my favorite books and it is vastly different than the
movie, and I wouldn't have known that if I had stuck to my rule. But
again, there is an exception to every rule.
There
won't be any comic book movies on here. I didn't even consider The
Avengers, The Dark Knight trilogy,any of the Marvel movies. These
aren't true book-to-film adaptations. They're taking characters and
themes and creating new stories. It's the same way that sequels are
adaptations. Nolan did pull from different specific graphic novels
for his Batman movies, but that's still not good enough. The one that
I almost added to my list was Watchmen.
Since the novel is a stand alone story they weren't able to take the
characters and just put them in a new situation. The reason I didn't
put it on here is because it was almost too easy to make a good
adaptation. I mean, you've got the entire thing storyboarded already.
Now for the list,
in no order:
-1408
(2007, Mikael Hafstrom)
If you've ever read the Stephen story you'll know that it is bland
compared to the movie. They took the idea of a man with little faith
in the afterlife, then added on the death of a daughter. The
filmmakers gave Mike Enslin (John Cusack) a reason to continue his
search for the unknown. Building on the skeleton of a story that King
provided we are delivered with a touching movie fueled by the love
and loss of a father.
-In the Bedroom
(2001, Todd Field)
For those that have read Andre Dubas' “Killings,” you know that
it isn't really the money-making narrative that studios seem to be
known for. It is filled with uncomfortable interactions between a
young man's parents and his older girlfriend. She has kids and they
don't think that their son should be allowing himself to be tied down
with the relationship. But then her violent ex comes back into the
picture and the story spirals down into despair and death. The thing
about the movie is they didn't change anything substantial. What I
just described was exactly how it goes down in the movie. Tom
Wilkinson owns this movie (along with getting an Oscar nomination) as
the father. Todd Field took the tone and voice of the short story and
translated the equivalent to film.
-Fight Club
(1999, David Fincher)
This is one of the movies that I watched before I read the book. When
I first watched it I was too young to understand what was happening.
I was one of the people who bought into the “fast-paced action
movie” promotion. Thankfully I went back to it when I was older and
was able to enjoy the movie for what it was. The movie was so good
that I never felt the need to read the book. Instead, I read all of
Chuck Palahniuk's books first, never thinking of buying Fight
Club. Then finally someone shoved the novel in my hands and told
me to give it back when I was done. I read the book in three days.
And I skimmed it. This was a moment when I enjoyed what I was
reading, but I had a hard time making my way through it because all I
could envision was the world David Fincher had already given. My
imagination couldn't create a more suitable image for me to watch
while I read. So in the end, I felt like I could have just gone and
watched the movie again. I wish I could go back in time and read that
book before I watched the movie because it's not often you get to
watch a movie from one of your favorite books and think, “Shit
yeah. They nailed it.”
-Harry Potter
(2001-2011, Christoper Columbus, Alfonso Cuaron, Mike Newell, David
Yates)
This is a sprawling epic story. The characters grow with the audience
and get darker as they go. Say what you will about Chris Columbus'
first two, but they did what they needed to. They got the world
excited about a series of children books. And they showed everyone
that these were possible to translate to another medium. Cuaron
brought the series into a more serious filmmaker forum with the third
movie, showing the darker themes and characteristics present. Newell
did a similar trick as Cuaron with a larger story. Then the no-name
Yates came in and made the last four movies. He was able to combine
everything that was great about the first four movies and show us his
talent with the darkest and most emotionally draining entries.
Getting all the movies completed and in sync was a joy to watch and
will forever be deemed as one of the best adaptations to ever take
place.
-The Graduate
(1967, Mike Nichols)
I'm going to say it: this book kind of sucks. Charles Webb wrote a
smutty book about a recent graduate who fucks his soon-to-be
girlfriend's mom. There isn't anything really interesting in the book
that would set it apart from any other piece of fiction. I'd be
confident in saying that no one would remember this thing if Mike
Nichols didn't cement the story in the history of cinema. He took a lackluster storyline and made a game-changer of a movie. Dustin
Hoffman appears in one of his first movies and soars as Ben Braddock.
He doesn't really know what he wants to do in life, finding
something that will pass the time before learning his lesson. You see
a complete transformation of character while he starts out static and
moves to be passionate about something. A reason to life, so to say.
They didn't change anything from the book, merely made it worthwhile
and better.
