Search TMT
TMT Founders
Weekly Columns
Contact TMT
  • Questions? Comments? Scoops?
  • Name *
  • Your Email *
  • Subject *
  • Message *

Entries by Eric Sopko (6)

Thursday
Apr222010

Joss Whedon to Rewrite Captain America and The Avengers?

According to this article, Joss Whedon's involvement in bringing Marvel's grand vision of the Avengers to life doesn't just extend to being in the director's chair for the multi-franchise crossover. Joss Whedon is apparently also going to be given the task of rewriting the scripts for both The Avengers (written by Zak Penn) AND The First Avenger: Captain America (written by Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely).

I know some fans are hesitant Whedon writing the scripts is a good idea given the immature nature of the Buffy series and his tendency to use a lot of pop culture references, but I think Whedon getting involved in these 2 productions is a very good thing. Whedon may not have much experience directing major films, but he has plenty of experience in the writing department. He was the head writer of several successful television shows, he was one of the writers on Toy Story, and he was the writer on The Astonishing X-Men for years. Whedon has clearly shown he has passion for the material, he's experience with Marvel properties, and most of his writing has been able to juggle multiple plot lines and spreading out character depth in ways that utilize characters to their potential. This will also give Whedon more creative control on Avengers, which can be debated as a good or bad thing depending on your opinion of Whedon. Regardless, Marvel is not handcuffing Whedon and this shows me they have confidence in him. His involvement in Captain America particularly intrigues me because Captain America has essentially 2 origins that are connected to each other, so I have always felt Captain America's movie will directly impact The Avengers more so than either Thor's or Iron Man's will. The fact they are involving Whedon in the Captain America production shows me they want to maintain consistency between the two films, and my guess that these two films are directly connected might have some merit. This will also give Whedon some experience with the likely number 1 emphasized character in Captain America before he likely tells the second half of his origin story.

Like it or not, Marvel has gone all in with Joss Whedon, and are not holding back any chips from the pot. Whether this ends up working for Marvel remains to be seen, but I don't think Marvel would give Joss Whedon this kind of control without feeling like he will deliver us something amazing when all the fruits of Marvel's labors come to fruition on the opening day of their flagship film, The Avengers.

Monday
Mar222010

Chris Evans is Captain America!!!

After a long and strenous process where it seems everyone and their mother was tapped to potentially weild the mighty shield, Captain America finally has a face, and it is none other than the Human Torch himself Chris Evans according to The Hollywood Reporter, article can be read here.

While this seems like a safe choice, given the outrage that Krasinski got at the prospect of being Captain America, I think Chris Evans will be a great Captain America. Evans has been in some really bad films, but in those bad films, he was always a positive of those films. Imagine what he can do in a good movie! Plus, Evans is young. He has charisma. He looks a lot like Cap. I don't think Evans being the Human Torch really matters in regard to Captain America, since the FOX films will never crossover into the Marvel film universe. The question I think people really have is, does he have the acting ability to lead a group of men consisting of Rovert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark believably. I think Evans will shock us all in his attempt to portray the heart of the Avengers, and do just that.

It was a crazy process and made fans nuts, but all in all, I say job well done once again Marvel!

Monday
Mar012010

Editorial: Oscars Hype, Analysis, and Predictions!

NOTE: The following article is an editorial. It doesn’t reflect the views of TMT, it’s staff, it’s editors, or anyone but the author, Eric Sopko
I don’t know about you, but I love the Oscars! I always look at the nominees announcement the day it is made, I always try and watch all the Best Picture nominees so I can pick who I think should win, and I throw a major party for the event itself, full of any and all snacks you can think of. It’s like having a second Super Bowl for me!
The Oscars get a lot of hate for their snubbing and perceived snootiness on what makes a film Best Picture worthy. Basically, that it is an elitist event. While this is true to a degree, I think the Oscars are a decent gage of quality. Yes, they don’t always get the best film of the year right and fail to recognize certain genres and artists, but they rarely nominate “bad” films. What I like most about the Oscars is not necessarily the award, but the fact it brings films I normally would have no idea exist into my radar.
That said, I have been mad about plenty of Oscar decisions. I was mad The Reader got the nomination for Best Picture over The Dark Knight, Wall E, and Doubt. I threw a fit when Sweeny Todd got snubbed for Best Picture and Tim Burton was once again denied a Best Director nomination. I also hate the make-up Oscars that happen, like with Million Dollar Baby winning in part due to Mystic River losing Best Picture because the academy was busy giving Lord of the Rings all the Oscars in order to make-up for denying the series Oscars past technical awards in the previous years. This is on top of their continued refusal to award Scorsese a Best Director Oscar, making an entire category for animated films in order to justify looking down on animated films as lesser films, and their efforts to not give people proper time to give an acceptance speech. Despite all this, I love the show! But, I recognize the faults with the system, but is this system really any worse than the BCS in college football?
Now let’s focus on the Oscars this year. The biggest change to the format is the change from 5 Best Picture nominees to 10 Best Picture nominees. While this gives more chances for bubble films to get nominated, this is not a change I back. There is a mentality that more is better in the US. While adding more seemingly gives you more of what you love, it also waters down competition. Let me put it this way, the NFL grew from 8 teams way back in the day to the 32 teams they have now. While that means more games, that also means that players that wouldn’t make teams when there is only 8 teams will now make teams. So the competition is now watered down. The same applies to the Oscars. What does a Best Picture nomination mean when you were nominated when there were 10 nominees as opposed to 5? Is it the same accomplishment? Say Iron Man 2 gets nominated for Best Picture at next year’s Oscars. Is that breaking a genre barrier like The Dark Knight getting nominated would have been with only 5 nominees? I don’t think so. I think that makes the nomination less special. Also note how only the Best Picture field got expanded. No other category did. This is completely to cater to those that were mad The Reader got in over Wall E and The Dark Knight. Not to mention 2009 was a weak year for films. Maybe 10 nominees in 2009 would have been a monster list, but this year, a lot of films that wouldn’t normally get nominated (I’m looking at you Blind Side!) got nominated.
Now that I talked about my feelings on the Oscars a bit, let’s get to some of my predictions! I’m going to focus on the major categories, which are Best Actor, Best Actress, Best Director, and Best Picture. I also want to note, I have not seen all of the nominees in these categories, but I have followed the hype leading up to the Oscars, and the Oscars can be predicted by other award shows.
Best Actress Nominees:

Sandra Bullock - The Blind Side
Helen Mirren - The Last Station
Carey Mulligan - An Education
Gabourey Sidibe - Precious
Meryl Streep - Julia & Julia
Helen Mirren and Meryl Streep have already won the award, and repeating is tough unless you had a performance the academy can’t ignore. Of the other 3, Bullock is the woman to beat. Bullock won both the Screen Actor’s Guild Award and the Golden Globe for her performance in The Blind Side. Usually, winning both the SAG and GG means they are a lock for the Oscar.
 
Winner - Sandra Bullock

Best Actor Nominees:

Jeff Bridges - Crazy Heart
George Clooney - Up in the Air
Colin Firth - A Single Man
Morgan Freeman - Invictus
Jeremy Renner - The Hurt Locker
This award is fairly predictable, much like Best Actress this year is. Jeff Bridges, much like Bullock, has won both the SAG and GG for his role in Crazy Heart. The only real dark horse in this award could be Morgan Freeman. He has no Oscars, and the Academy could give him one of those dreaded make-up Oscars and deny Bridges. However, I don’t think this will happen given the SAG and GG results.

Winner - Jeff Bridges

 

Best Director Nominees:


Kathryn Bigelow - The Hurt Locker
James Cameron - Avatar
Lee Daniels - Precious
Jason Reitman - Up in the Air
Quentin Tarantino - Inglorious Basterds
I’m a director guy, so this award is one I pay great attention to. I know fans of Tarantino hate hearing this, but this is a two-horse race between James Cameron and Kathryn Bigelow. Cameron redefined effects once again with Avatar, so it is very possible Cameron will get the award. Especially given the recent love affair Cameron has with Hollywood. However, a woman has never won the Best Director Oscar. Cameron has won the award before. For that reason, I see history being made. Plus, she won the Director’s Guild of America Award. This is normally a good Oscars indicator.

Winner - Kathryn Bigelow

Best Picture Nominees:

Avatar
The Blind Side
District 9
An Education
The Hurt Locker
Inglorious Basterds
Precious
A Serious Man
Up
Up in the Air
To cut the list of potential winners down, look at the Best Director nominees. If your film doesn’t have a Best Director nomination, you are not winning Best Picture. So instantly we can cut The Blind Side, District 9, An Education, A Serious Man, and Up out of the running. They have no chance.
Up in the Air, to me, is this years Michael Clayton. It’s the film you know is good enough to be in the top 5, but has no chance to win. Same goes for Precious. There are 3 films to watch here. Avatar I can see winning cause it has that same fever Titanic had when it ran the table to 11 Oscar wins (unjustly as its Best Picture win was). Plus, Avatar won the Best Dramatic Picture Golden Globe. However, The Hurt Locker has a nominee for Best Actor, a likely winner for Best Director, and the most momentum seemingly heading into the Oscars. But, Inglorious Basterds can be a dark horse. Avatar and The Hurt Locker could split the voting, leading to an upset. Plus, it has Nazis. NAZIS! That is a secret weapon to winning Oscars! Plus, Christoph Waltz gives an outstanding performance that is likely to net him the Best Supporting Actor Oscar. This will be close, but I have to vote momentum.

Winner - The Hurt Locker


As for other awards, Avatar wins all technical awards it is up for, and likely wins the Oscar count. 
So there you have it, mark down my predictions! I recommend you mark down your own Oscars predictions, and tune in this Sunday to the show. I know I will be!
Friday
Feb262010

Captain America Put on Hold?

There is now a rumor, which can be viewed by clicking here, that is claiming that the Box Office failure of Joe Jonhston's The Wolfman has convinced Marvel to put the Captain America film on hold.

Now, take this with a grain of salt until it gets confirmed. This news seems odd to me personally since Marvel hired Jon Favreau despite his previous film before that, Zathura, was a major bomb. Plus, pushing back Captain America another year would surely delay an Avengers film another year. Not to mention Downey isn't getting younger.

I don't see Marvel making a move like this, especially when they have been reportedly looking at actors for Cap. I doubt they would have allowed the search for Cap to begin if they were planning on putting the film on hold. Even if they were casting Cap without Johnston, that means they'd be casting the film without a director, and any director they'd get to replace Johnston would be brought in to point and click. This has not been Marvel's MO as a studio to this point.

For now, take this as just a rumor. But, it is still something worth watching.

Monday
Feb082010

Captain America and the Invaders?

In a report by CHUD, which you can read here, it appears that diretor Joe Johnston has confirmed that not only are Cap's former associates, the Invaders, featured in The First Avenger: Captain America. They are apparently present for most of the 2nd half of the film.

On one hand, this is kind of cool cause it shows just how much of Cap's history is being respected in this film. Who would have thought guys like Union Jack or the original Human Torch would have been featured in a mainstream comic book film? Clearly, they are reading the history of Cap in making this film. That is a promising sign.

But, this news is somewhat worrisome for me. Did we all see what happened in X-Men: Origins: Wolverine? The film got so bogged down in mutant cameos and useless action, that the story suffered greatly and became nothing more than cookie cutter material. Now, I understand that was a FOX production, but the article above mentions the film possibly being 6 to 9 characters deep! With that many characters, Cap can easily get lost in the shuffle. Especially since Cap's powers are not flashy. Also, I kind of take this as Marvel is not confident in Cap's capactity for action, so they have to add more super powered charaacters to compensate.

Whether this is an awesome addition or just adding characters for the sake of adding characters will be determined opening night. While I am confident in the production given Marvel's track record as a film studio, the news on Thor, and how awesome Iron Man 2 looks, I can see this idea backfiring.

Hopefully this turns out to be more genius from the young studio!

Monday
Feb012010

A Look Back at the Spider-Man Franchise

The following article is an editorial. It doesn't reflect the views of TMT, the staff, or anyone else other than it's author, Eric Sopko.

I don’t know if you have heard, but Spider-Man is getting the boot! Reboot that is. Debate is raging across the internet and the Spider-Man fan base about the direction this franchise is currently taking. However, I don’t want to focus on the future right now. I want to take some time and reflect upon this franchise’s past!

In order to fully understand my feelings on this situation, we have to go back many years. Even before I was born. The Salkinds over at Warner Bros. were looking for a new franchise to bring them boat loads of cash. They turned to an untapped resource: comic books. Namely The Man of Steel himself, Superman. Eventually, Richard Donner was brought in to film 2 back to back Superman films. Donner faced many challenges in bringing the Man of Steel to life, the most basic of those being how to make him fly. He spent more money than the studio anticipated, and eventually was not even on talking terms with the Salkinds.But, the end result was a phenomenon known as Superman: The Movie. Superman: The Movie was the beginning of the modern comic book film, and many future comic book films would rinse and repeat the 3 act formula utilized by Donner. The film was a smash hit, and Christopher Reeve became a household name. However, despite Richard Donner’s success in bringing Superman to life, and having a sequel 75% finished, the Salkinds would give him the axe, and replace him with Richard Lester, whom was brought in late as a mediator of sorts between Donner and the Salkinds. As I move forward with my history lesson, keep Donner’s story in mind.

Let’s fast forward to 1985. Outside of Superman, comic book films have yet to be really tested in the film industry. Superman III disappointed at the box office, so major film companies were still weary of the genre. Enter producer Menahem Golan of the notoriously low budget Canon films. Golan bought the rights from Marvel for Spider-Man, and tried desperately to bring Spider-Man to the silver screen. Despite his best efforts, Golan couldn’t get financial backing for the film.

Golan ended up selling the TV rights to Viacom in an effort to get his money back for the unused scripts for the previous Spider-Man film projects. He then sold the film rights to Carolco films, whom had made James Cameron’s hit The Terminator. This was a connection Carolco tried to utilize once again, as they commissioned James Cameron to write the now infamous script which featured things such as Peter cursing and having sex with Mary Jane on a bridge. Despite these story points, all the wheels were in motion to bring Spider-Man to the big screen!

Then came trouble. In 1993, Golan spoke out about his anger at Carolco trying to cut him out of the film’s production the best way businessmen know how: sue! Carolco responded the best way they knew how: counter sue! Pretty soon, Carolco was suing Viacom and Columbia Pictures, Viacom and Columbia Pictures were suing Golan, Carolco, and Marvel, and on and on the circle of paperwork would go. Marvel would file for bankruptcy in the midst of all this bureaucracy.

However, Marvel would rise from the ashes! In 1998, the original deal with Golan was ruled to have expired, so Marvel got the rights back to their most popular hero. They promptly would sell them to Sony, whom still has their grimy hands on the film rights. Director Sam Raimi, most known at the time for the cult classic Evil Dead franchise, would be brought in to adapt our friendly neighborhood wall crawler to the big screen. Tobey Maguire was cast as the beloved Peter Parker, and Kirsten Dunst was cast to play the beautiful Mary Jane Watson, though that bit of casting has been questioned ever since she landed the role.

Production was hard, effects took longer than expected, and the release date was pushed back from Christmas of 2001 to May 2002. This move would turn out to be a good deal for the wall crawler opening weekend.

I still remember May 3rd of 2002. I skipped school that day in order to suck in the moment my childhood hero came to life. I had my tickets a month in advance, my mother took me shopping for Spider-Man action figures in honor of the occasion at the above Toys’ R’ Us, and I got in line a full hour early. The entire city of New York was sold out for the weekend on the first day of the films release, and my anticipation for the film couldn’t have been greater. Watching the 9:00 showing was probably the greatest theater going experience of my young life.

Now, the film wasn’t perfect, by any means. The CGI is dated by today’s standards, it basically recycles the formula of Superman: The Movie, the Green Gobin looks stupid, and after the Green Goblin kills the board members of Oscorp, I still have no idea what he meant by wanting power. What kind of power do you mean? But, the film got the heart of Spider-Man: with great power comes great responsibility. The origin was perfectly done, Maguire and Dafoe were amazing, JK Simmons owned J. Jonah Jameson, and Elfman’s score was haunting at times. Despite some problems, this was a solid Spider-Man film. I couldn’t wait for the sequel!

After the record breaking success of the first film, Spider-Man 2 hit theaters 2 years later. Now, this time, I made it to the theater an hour early, but was at the back of the line and had to sit in the front row! I had to move my head around to see all the things on the screen! Despite my discomfort, the film that I saw that day remains one of my favorite films of all-time, if not my favorite. Where Spider-Man was weak, Spider-Man 2 was strong. Where Spider-Man was strong, Spider-Man 2 was stronger! The effects were groundbreaking, resulting in an Oscar for the visual effects department. Alfred Molina was perfect as Doc Ock, right down to Ock’s dark sense of humor. But, what made this train run above all was the story. Watching Peter Parker grow in this film was a treat. From him losing his powers and letting go of this burden he put upon himself, to the moment he realizes that he can’t sacrifice his responsibilities in order to achieve his main goal, Spider-Man 2 was poetry in motion. The moment where the subway car riders pull an unconscious Peter Parker into the subway car after saving them from certain death is still one of the most haunting moments for me in film. This film was another smash hit, and Spider-Man was once again on top of the world!

Here is where the story starts to go downhill. Naturally, Spider-Man 3 was put into production. Sam Raimi decided to return, but with the Green Goblin and Doc Ock already used, where would they turn to for a villain? Sam Raimi had set up Harry to be a villain at the end of Spider-Man 2, so he was a natural pick. Raimi would also add classic Spider-Man villains Vulture and Sandman into the script with the focus on a storyline about forgiveness.

Sony wasn’t convinced this was a good follow up. The producers wanted Raimi to use the popular Spider-Man villain, Venom. Raimi didn’t want to use Venom due to being a fan of the Stan Lee era on Spider-Man, and not really understanding Venom. Never-the-less, the studio would get its way, and Venom replaced the Vulture in the script. Harry and Sandman were kept. Now, Vulture is a much simpler villain to explain than Venom, so adding Venom was no easy task. You have to cover the black suit before you can even talk about Venom, and that is practically a movie into itself. Then the studio asked for the Stacys to be added to the film to make it even MORE convoluted! The idea of doing this over two films was tossed around, but with no one under contract past Spider-Man 3, that really wasn’t a realistic possibility.

Spider-Man 3 would be one of the most hyped films of all-time. It would also become one of the biggest let down in blockbuster history. While Spider-Man 3 made over $900 million at the box office, the film would be met with mediocre, at best, reception. Spider-Man 3 continues to be the subject of much debate on various internet sites, and much of the fan backlash landed upon the shoulders of Sam Raimi, whom was once a god amongst the fanboy nation.

I personally don’t think Spider-Man 3 was bad. I thought it was very flawed, but still good. The effects are sketchy at points, but it also has great moments like the Birth of the Sandman. Elfman’s score is definitely stronger than Christopher Young’s effort, though I think his score was decent. In fact, I like a lot of the Sandman and Harry stuff. But, the story is definitely the culprit on this movie failing to meet the standards of the first 2 films of the series, and all the story problems stem from one subplot: Venom. The black suit doesn’t mesh in with the story well. The meteor randomly falls into the park Peter and MJ happen to be in? Sandman killed Ben and Peter is now full of hate? Not to mention Brock is in a very small number of scenes, which makes it hard to feel anything for him as he is ruined by Peter. He’s just kind of there. Also, the Butler knew about Norman! But despite all these interlocking plots, the film manages to reach some level of cohesion, and I feel it has enough of Spider-Man and Spider-Man 2 in it to make it a decent movie. I know I am in the minority on this, don’t remind me. I’ve been fighting this battle for nearly 3 years!

Now that Spider-Man 3 was out, Sony still had 3 films to make under the current contract. Which brought about the question: Where do we go from here? Sony decided initially to bring Sam Raimi and co. back for a 4th film. He was also supposed to have been promised more freedom on this film. Now we’ll get a proper ending to his Spider-Man films. Spider-Man 3 won’t be his lasting legacy on the series I have adored and waited to see for many years before that faithful day in 2002!

Unfortunately, fate is not always so kind to us. Raimi and Sony were apparently fighting for control through most of the production on Spider-Man 4. Raimi wanted to use the Vulture, as played by John Malkovich. The studio apparently wanted to turn the character Felicia Hardy into a new villain called the Vulturess, likely to replace the unhappy Dunst and provide more action due to a lack of confidence in Vulture as a prime villain. Many rumors have long since been reported. That there was a kid involved in the film; Vulture was maybe killed by Spider-Man, Peter quits, etc. We don’t know what all happened, but whatever happened we know one thing: it was a mess. After much turmoil with the producers. After 3 successful films that grossed billions of dollars worldwide. After over 10 years of working on the character, Sam Raimi walked away from Spider-Man.

This whole matter brings me back to Donner’s situation once again. Superman: the Movie was a great film, but a personally frustrating one for me as a fan. The film is almost perfect, until the turning back the Earth ending. The film then becomes incredibly confusing on the logic behind it and how it exactly worked, and is a bad lasting effect on a film that had me truly believing a man could fly. Instead of making up for the lame ending, Donner got the boot from a film he almost finished. Sure in 2006, we got a DVD release of Donner’s footage into a new, and if you ask me far superior, cut for Superman II, but it isn’t the same. That film feels incomplete due to not having a new ending made by Donner. I can see his Superman II and only imagine the possibilities had Donner got to finish his work.

I look at Spider-Man 4 in the same way. Raimi had a vision, and just when I felt a proper ending to his Spider-Man series could have finally been made after years of fighting over Spider-Man 3, I am left with that same bitter taste Donner’s Superman II leaves in my mouth. That feeling of unfinished business. That feeling of a story left on the cutting room floor.

Now, before I get accused of condemning the reboot, I don’t want the reboot to fail. I hope Marc Webb brings us something truly incredible. I have been a Spider-Man fan for as long as I can remember, and I always will be. I would never hope for the demise of my favorite character just to vindicate a man I like. I hope Webb brings me that joy I felt in 2002 once again.

That is not the focal point of this piece, however. I just wanted to bring back the good times I had watching this franchise develop over the Raimi’s run, and maybe show all the people who have condemned Raimi post-Spider-Man 3 that there was a time before that when we could look at this series, and be proud of having the best comic book franchise in all of comicdom.

Lastly, I also want to thank Sam Raimi. Mr. Raimi, thank you for all your hardwork these past years. You gave me a theatrical experience I will never forget, and made what will probably be my favorite film for many years to come. No matter what the Raimi haters say, and no matter how this reboot turns out, either good or bad, I will always be able to look at these films, and smile. You at least made one Spider-Man fan happy.