Arnold Schwarzenegger To Play The Villain in 'Avatar 2'?

Well ain't this just great news if it turns out to be true?

El Mayimbe over at Latino Review (the guy who gloats like no other about all the scoops he breaks around Hollywood) is reporting that none other than Arnold Schwarzenegger will play the villain in Avatar 2!

He states Arnold will be playing the lead human general (much likes Stephen Lang's character in the first one) who will arrive on Pandora to take down Jake Sully (Sam Worthington) and Neytiri (Zoe Saldana) along with the rest of the Na'vi clan.

This would mark Arnold and James Cameron's first film together in well over 20 years following, of course, The Terminator, Terminator 2: Judgment Day, and True Lies.

It's pretty hard not to get excited about this - and considering the awesome shape Arnold looks to be back in (check out the cover story he did for October's Muscle & Fitness) - I can definitely see it happening.

We'll be sure to keep you posted as more news becomes available.

Source:  Latino Review

Lucas Black Back for 'Fast & Furious 7' And Beyond

I'll be damn.

The star of The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift, Lucas Black, has signed on to reprise his role of Sean Boswell in not only Fast & Furious 7 but also the 8th and 9th installments as well.  His deal apparently calls for his character to become a series regular.

If you've seen the post-credits scene in Fast & Furious 6, you kind of figured this was going to happen, but it still doesn't change the fact that Black starred in the series almost a decade ago when he was playing a teenage character and will now return at near 31 years-old (but I guess that's what movie magic is for).

The 7th installment in the franchise just began filming last week under the helm of James Wan (Insidious films, The Conjouring, Saw) and will star series regulars Vin Diesel, Paul Walker, Dwayne Johnson, Michelle Rodriguez, Jordana Brewster, Tyrese Gibson, and Chris Bridges, as well as newcomers Jason Statham, Tony Jaa, Rhona Rousey, Djimon Honsou, and Kurt Russell.

Fast & Furious 7 opens July 11th, 2014.

Source:  Deadline

'Fast & Furious 7' Has Begun Filming

Vin Diesel took the liberty this past Friday to inform everyone that filming has begun on the 7th installment of the Fast & Furious franchise, via his Facebook page.

Posting the first photo show above, Diesel wrote:  'Seven... Has begun...'

Along with this, he posted another pic yesterday from the set of both himself and Paul Walker (also shown above) with the caption:  'The unknown road ahead...'

With a July 11th, 2014 release date looming, it's certainly about time the flick got underway into production.

Just last week it was announced that Djimon Hounsou had been added to the cast that already includes newcomers Rhonda Rousey, Tony Jaa, Kurt Russell (in a small role that will apparently be a bigger part in the 8th installment), and of course, Jason Statham.

In a changing of the guard, James Wan (The Conjouring, Insidious) will take over directorial duties from Justin Lin who helmed the past four installments in the franchise.

Besides Diesel and Walker, those officially returning from the previous films include Michelle Rodriguez, Jordana Brewster, Tyrese Gibson, and Chris 'Ludacris' Bridges.  Dwayne Johnson hasn't been confirmed yet but it's pretty safe to say he'll be back though assumingly in a smaller role due to scheduling conflicts with Hercules (which he's currently filming).

Not much is known about the specific plot of the new film but judging by the post-credits scene in Fast & Furious 6, it's going to be a tale of revenge.

Source:  Vin Diesel Facebook

First Images from Aaron Paul's 'Need for Speed'

In his first post-Breaking Bad gig, Aaron Paul stars in the long-running video game adaptation of Need for Speed, playing a street racer whose out for revenge after being framed in the killing of a friend.

I know nothing about this game nor have I ever heard of it so I'm not sure if the synopsis of the film correlates to what the game's about (video game movies tend to stray a bit from the actual source material).

In speaking with Entertainment Weekly, Paul had this to say regarding the film:

"This set was different than anything I've been on, you're walking through a very thick cloud of testosterone.  It's really a throwback to the Steve McQueen era of car movies. I think people are going to be pleasantly surprised."

The film, also starring Michael Keaton, Dakota Johnson, Imogen Poots, and Dominic Cooper, hits theaters March 14th, 2014.

Source: EW

Opinion: Alan Taylor's a Solid Choice to Helm the New 'Terminator'

If you caught the news yesterday, it was reported that Game of Thrones alum and Thor: The Dark World director, Alan Taylor, is in-talks to direct the 5th entry in the Terminator series.  This new film - being distributed by Paramount and produced by the Ellison sibilings' production companies (Megan's Annapurna Pictures and David's Skydance Productions, respectively) - is said to be a reboot of sorts that will start a new trilogy, though franchise star Arnold Schwarzenegger has said he'll be back in his signature role.

What made me scratch my head a bit though was the majority of fans' lack of enthusiasm towards Taylor's hiring, seemingly citing him as a bad choice to helm the new flick.

In just looking at this guy's resume, I for one think it's a very solid choice and also have reason to believe the quality of the script is in damn good shape judging by the talent they went after prior to Taylor's hiring.

In regards to the new director and browsing through his filmmography, the man has mainly stuck to television (his only other feature-film being 2001's The Emperor's New Clothes), but man has he worked on some great TV.  From The Sopranos, to Mad Men, to Six Feet Under, to Lost, to Deadwood, to Law & Order, to Boardwalk Empire, and of course, Game of Thrones (which he also executive produced); those are all either Emmy winning or nominated dramas.  And please, don't even remark, "It's only TV."  Last I checked, there's a hell of a lot more high quality talent and work going on in television then the crap Hollywood dishes out year-to-year, so just stop.

As far as the quality of the script - which many have worried about based on the screenwriters being Patrick Lussier (Drive Angry) and Laeta Kalogridis (Avatar) - I actually perceive its in good condition.  If you read the original story from Variety reporting Taylor's involvement, they state producers behind the new film reached out to names such as Ang Lee, Rian Johnson (Looper), and Prisoners director Denis Villenueve.  Not for nothing, but you don't go after names like that unless you're confident in what you have.  And for those who say, "Well, they all turned it down so it can't be good," look at the facts.  Ang Lee's coming off his 2nd Academy Award win and can pretty much do whatever he wants.  I don't blame him for not wanting to do a Terminator movie.  Rian Johnson has always been about doing his own original projects so it doesn't surprise me neither that he didn't want the job.  And Denis Villenueve?  Who knows, maybe he just didn't connect with the material.

Look, all I'm saying is don't be so quick to be negative and jump ship on this new Terminator when still so little is known at this point.  We don't know what the film's about nor do we know what characters are officially coming back (contrary to what Arnold has said).

Just relax and be positive.  I actually think the franchise is in good hands now with this guy Alan Taylor.  I mean common, how did you all feel when you learned the director of Charlie's Angels was going to helm a new Terminator movie?

Thank you very much.

Jared Harris Lands Lead in 'Poltergeist' Remake

Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows and Mad Men star Jared Harris has joined the cast of MGM and Fox 2000's Poltergeist remake. 

Harris will play the character of Carrigan, a TV personality who left behind his life of academia to pursue the hosting job of a basic cable series, Haunted House Cleaners.

The English actor is coming off a supporting role in last year's Lincoln as well as recently re-joining his Sherlock Holmes director, Guy Ritchie, for Warner Bros. The Man from U.N.C.L.E.

Promised Land actress, Rosemarie DeWitt, joined the cast back in July to play the female lead (though it's not clear who her character is).

Gil Kenan - whose only directorial credits include 2006's Monster House and 2008's City of Ember - will direct from a script by David Lindsay-Abaire (Oz the Great and Powerful).

I never saw the original Poltergeist - or any of its subsequent sequels - but I'm well aware of the supposed 'curse' surrounding these films including actors and actresses mysteriously dying as well as on-going set problems.

Hopefully nothing 'supernatural' occurs with this new film.

Source: Deadline

Why Ben Affleck as Batman is a Great Thing

Unless you've been living under a rock since last week, you might have heard Warner Bros. surprise announcement that Ben Affleck has been cast as Bruce Wayne/Batman in the tentatively titled Man of Steel follow-up, Batman vs. Superman.

This news was met with online outrage from both fanboys and fangirls, insisting Ben Affleck is an awful choice for the new Batman and started numerous petitions to have him replaced (one such petition even made it to the homepage of the White House).  Those involved, cited Affleck's 'no talent' as an actor, his 'wrong' look for the role, and even his own personality as not being fit to handle the role of the Dark Knight.

I for one (and I'm sure I'm not the only) found these criticisms to be absolutely ridiculous.

Ben Affleck may not be Daniel Day-Lewis when it comes to acting but the man is for sure a 'good' actor, having been nominated by many prestigious film organizations, including but not limited to:  BAFTA, Broadcast Film Critics Association, Chicago Film Critics Association, Golden Globes, Hollywood Film Festival, and Venice Film Festival.  To say Ben Affleck is a 'bad' actor is and of itself, incorrect, as many informed and educated professionals of the film industry think otherwise, individuals who know a thing or two about judging someone's talent as an actor.

As for his supposed 'wrong' look to play both Bruce Wayne/Batman, last I checked, Ben Affleck fits exactly the bill of what the character has always been described and illustrated as in both the comic books and graphic novels:  tall, dark, handsome, physically imposing, and of course, a square jaw.  In terms of physical characteristics, what is the difference again between himself and such fan favorites as Jim Caviezel and Jon Hamm?

Finally, the notion that Affleck's own personality doesn't possess that 'edginess' or 'toughness' to portray such a dark character as Batman.  Really?  Have these people not seen The Town?  Take away the Boston accent and short hairstyle, and that for damn sure seems a lot like how a badass, conflicted Bruce Wayne/Batman would be.

I think what many are not seeing though is the overall 'bigger picture' involved.

Look, ten years ago, Ben Affleck as Batman would be an absolute joke.  The man was making some awful films (Gigli, Paycheck, Surviving Christmas) and looked like just another young, fizzled out star in Hollywood.

However, this is where Affleck proved to be the exception.

He started directing, beginning with 2007's Gone Baby Gone (which he also wrote), continuing with 2010's The Town (which he also wrote and starred in), and just recently, last year's Academy Award winner for Best Picture, Argo (which he also helped write, produce, and of course, starred in too).

Affleck has now become a respected, multi-talented force in Hollywood.  And also, it should be no surprise that his acting abilities have much improved since he stepped behind the camera, attaining a better understanding of the film making process.

The fact that a talent such as Affleck will not only be playing Batman for at least the next 5-7 years, but also contributing creatively in terms of writing and directing his own 'solo' films, is a great thing for the Batman franchise.  It shows the character will continually be treated with both the respect and admiration it deserves by a quality film maker.

So for those people out there who are implying Ben Affleck being cast as Batman is somehow the worst thing that's ever happened in the history of mankind...common.  Stop being so ridiculous, take a step back, and actually look at how great a thing like this actually is.

July 2015 can't come soon enough.

The Math Doesn't Lie: Why Warner Bros. Wants Bale Back for Batman

It's a story that just won't die.

Since it was announced that Batman would be showing up in Man of Steel 2 - and even long before that - rumors swirled that Warner Bros. would be backing up a BRINKS truck to Christian Bale's house in hopes he'll agree to appear in their superhero team-up film.

Many credible and respectable movie websites (specifically Batman-On-Film), have stated Bale rejected their offer many months ago and that he has no interest in coming back as the Dark Knight unless Christopher Nolan is the man behind the camera.  Basically, he won't return because Chris Nolan said their story is finished.

Numbers have ranged anywhere from $50-60 million flat that WB is offering Bale to come back, and many might think, "Well why?  The film will sell regardless if Bale is Batman."  True, but here's the reality of the situation:

Let's say Bale doesn't come back - which for all intensive purposes is pretty likely to happen - how much is this Batman vs. Superman film looking to make worldwide if a guy like Josh Brolin plays the Caped Crusader?  I'd be willing to bet at the minimum, $800 million.  Not bad, not at all, but for a film teaming up two of the most famous superheros of all-time, that's pretty disappointing.  At most - and this obviously depends on the quality of the film and how much audiences like it - I'd say a cool $1.5 billion, tops.  That's a lot of cash, enough for Warner Bros. to think, "Job well done."

Here though, is where the pink elephant in the room shows his face.

Hypothetically speaking, WB offers Bale an even $100 million for this film and he just can't say no, especially when it guarantees the financial security of his family for generations to come.  You might think, "That's ridiculous.  Why give one guy that much money for one damn movie?"

At face value, Christian Bale returning as Batman for a team-up film with Henry Cavill's Superman, guarantees at the minimum - the minimum - a worldwide box office guesstimate of likely $1.25 billion.

Yes, that's roughly $400 million more than if Josh Brolin puts on the cape and cowl.

Oh, and you ask if the film is actually good, if not great, and is embraced by audiences?

$2 billion, if not more.

Suddenly, that $100 million check to Bale looks like chump change compared to a revenue of about 20x that.

I'm not saying Bale is coming back - because again, I don't think he is - but when you do the math, it becomes pretty damn clear why Warner Bros. is not taking NO for an answer.

Christian Bale Offered $50 Million to Reprise Batman for 'Man of Steel 2'?

Could Warner Bros. still be trying to get Christian Bale to come back as Batman?

Possibly, and if proven to be true, it's one HELL of a offer to turn down.

According to a new eBook, Beyond Batman: The Unauthorized True Story of Christian Bale and His Dark Knight Dilemma by Vince Russel, Bale currently has a $50 million offer on the table to reprise his role as Bruce Wayne/Batman for the still untitled, Man of Steel 2, which would team him with Henry Cavill's Kal-El/Clark Kent/Superman.

The author, Russel, states sources close to Legendary Pictures (the production company behind The Dark Knight Trilogy) tell him Bale may have 'no choice' but to accept the near $50 million payday as his status as this generation's Batman might be too difficult to walk away from.

The arguement is also made that Bale possibly see's the role much like Robert Downey Jr. has handled Iron Man as the actor has been able to play the character multiple times while being given the freedom to explore other film projects.  Downey Jr. recently wrapped up a hefty deal himself to reprise his role as Tony Stark/Iron Man in both The Avengers 2 & 3.

My take:  As much money as that is, I still don't think Bale takes it.  He's loyal to Christopher Nolan and the director has been adamant that HIS Batman story is finished and will have no connection to the new DC Cinematic Universe started in Man of Steel.

However, if Nolan (for whatever reason in his right mind) would give the OK to Bale, he'd do it in a heartbeat.

Source: Digital Journal

Where Have All The Good Movies Gone?

"Where have all the good movies gone?"

It's a question that's asked more every year as the moviegoing public is presented with a surplus of sequels, prequels, remakes, reboots and pretty much every word you can associate with the term 'recycled idea'.

The funny thing is though, these so-called 'good movies' are actually right in front of us, just not on the same screen size we're use to.

I'm of course talking about the booming industry of television, or as many have coined the past decade or so, 'The Golden Age of TV'.

You see, good movies are being made nowadays, just not as actual films.

Great TV shows like Breaking Bad, Mad Men, Homeland, Game of Thrones, House of Cards and Downton Abbey are projects that - 30-40 years ago - all likely would have been made into films instead.

All the great talent in the entertainment business - talent that use to be all over Hollywood - has retreated to the television industry because they are given both the opportunity and creative freedom that movies studios just aren't allowing anymore.

I say all the time that if The Godfather were to be made today, it'd be a 12 episode-a-season drama on HBO.  No film studio would even touch a concept like that because there just isn't money to be made with great films anymore.

The reason for that?  Simple: the digital age of bootlegging films.

There's a new book out right now entitled, Sleepless in Hollywood: Tales from the New Abnormal in the Movie Busiess, where the author Lynda Obst (a Hollywood film producer) discusses the new age of filmmaking and why studios don't make original films any longer.

Twenty years ago, when bootlegging films onto the internet first started, the film industry fought tooth and nail to stop this fearing it would kill the home video/DVD market.  This market is where modestly budgeted dramas made back at least 50% of their profits so studios didn't mind taking risks.  Even if a film didn't do well at the box office, there was always the safety net of home video.

However, because bootlegging films obviously won out, the home video/DVD market is now a tenth of what it use to be.  That put more pressure on film studios to make their money solely at the box office, which is why we are constantly getting recognizable brands and franchises; they sell.

As far as TV goes, they are welcoming great, young talent with open arms as what use to be thought of as 'just TV' is now where quality entertainment projects are being made.

What does this all say about the future of both the film and television industries?  Well unfortunately, it's good news for former and bad news for the latter.

The film industry in the next twenty years is likely to become a luxury where studios crank out movies for pure entertainment.  Television though will be where one will get their great, dramatic fix from.  Why do a drama in two hours when you can get it for close to an hour a week for three months, and then again the following year?

With that said, it's not like the moviegoing public has helped.  When Hollywood has tried to do something original (Cloud Atlas for example) people don't bother going to see it because they want their $10-20 worth of entertainment they paid for a movie ticket.

It is a sad state of affairs for the film indstury, but as what's become the status quo nowadays, 'It is what it is.'