What is it with Hollywood and releasing two very similar movies within close proximity to each other? “The Prestige” and “The Illusionist.” “No Strings Attached” and “Friends With Benefits.” “Antz” and “A Bug’s Life.” “Deep Impact” and “Armageddon.” The list goes on and on.
It’s been a trend I’ve noticed for a while now, but few instances are as bizarrely coincidental as the war of the two Snow Whites. I heard about both movies about a year ago, when they were differentiated only by “the one with Julia Roberts” and “the one with Kristen Stewart.” But now that the full-length trailers have been released for both Relativity’s “Mirror Mirror” and Universal’s “Snow White and the Huntsman,” it’s interesting to watch the two side-by-side and wonder how this happened – and what the box office repercussions of this peculiar timing will be.
For an avid moviegoer it’s not that outrageous an idea to go see both films, assuming both trailers draw you in. However, for the average moviegoer, it’s usually a “this or that” sort of a deal. It all comes down to: which looks better? In the case of the two Snow Whites, they look like completely different movies. I’m going to let my heavy bias show when I say that “Huntsman” (starring Charlize Theron, Kristen Stewart, and Chris Hemsworth) looks like a medieval epic, and potentially one of the best movies of summer…while “Mirror” (starring Julia Roberts, Lily Collins, and Armie Hammer) looks startlingly obnoxious (“Snow way!” may be one of the most irritating lines I’ve heard in a trailer in a long, long time.)
Believe it or not, a 3rd Snow White movie is also in the works. Yes, you read that right. Disney’s “Snow and the Seven” is slated for 2013. So why is the idea of a live-action Snow White movie so alluring all of a sudden? Look no further than Tim Burton’s 2010 “Alice in Wonderland,” which grossed over a billion dollars worldwide. And after that kind of mind-blowing success, of course all the studios want a piece of the action. Closely after the release of “Alice,” the fairy-tale stories started popping up in rapid succession: “Red Riding Hood,” “Beastly,” and “Tangled,” along with the TV shows “Once Upon a Time” and “Grimm.” It doesn’t just end there: next year you can look forward to “Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters,” and “Maleficent,” which will star Angelina Jolie in the title role in a re-telling of Sleeping Beauty from the villain’s perspective.
When looking at all this in such blunt terms, it can’t help but perpetuate the whole “is there an original idea left in Hollywood?” question. With so many sequels, remakes, adaptations and spin-offs, it’s easy to see where that comes from. And in defense of Hollywood, it’s easy to see why they do it. These movies already have a built-in appeal. People know the stories, and they like to see them brought to the big screen. Also, there’s the added bonus of the studios not needing to buy the rights to the story – which, as it turns out, is also the negative, because, well, then stuff like this happens.
Is there room for both Snow Whites? I think so. In this case, both movies are appealing to totally different audiences. “Mirror Mirror” is marketing itself as a family-friendly comedy-adventure, whereas “Huntsman,” which looks dark, violent, and action-packed, is aiming for a more mature demographic. What may keep both from achieving the heightened level of success they crave is the fact that they took such drastically different approaches, which will discourage demographic overlapping.
What “Alice” had going for it was that kids, parents, teens and adults all wanted to go see it. You couldn’t pay most of my friends to go see “Mirror Mirror,” and I highly doubt that the violence-packed “Snow White and the Huntsman” is going to be a family affair…though the huge fanbases for “Twilight’s” Kristen Stewart and “Thor’s” Chris Hemsworth certainly give “Snow White and the Huntsman” the edge. Even so, with “Mirror” up first (March 30th) and “Huntsman” galloping into theaters this summer (June 1st) only time will tell which raven-haired beauty will be officially deemed “the fairest of them all.”
Before you write-off “The Hunger Games” as bubblegum tween trash – think again. Based off of the first book in Suzanne Collins’s hugely popular trilogy, “The Hunger Games” has the potential to be the next big hit that attracts everyone – girls, boys, and adults alike. It’s a unique occurrence when a movie like this is able to break through being called “good for the fans” and emerge as just good, in general. And “The Hunger Games” is more than just good. Is it a perfect movie? No. The ending is rushed and the camerawork can’t help but feel a bit obvious as it rattles and shakes in an attempt to show us the violence without actually showing us (it is a PG-13 movie, after all). But when you enlist talent such as Stanley Tucci, Woody Harrelson, and Donald Sutherland, along with Academy Award nominee Jennifer Lawrence as the lead, one thing is for certain: you’re aiming for quality, not for just “good-enough.”
In the future, modern civilization and what we know as North America has been destroyed, leaving in its place the nation of Panem, which is separated into 12 districts and is ruled by a corrupt, totalitarian government called the Capitol. The members of the Capitol treat the citizens of Panem like puppets that exist for their entertainment. After an uprising that happened years ago, the Capitol created something to ensure that the citizens never rebel again: The Hunger Games -- where one male and one female tribute between the ages of 12 and 18 are chosen at random to fight to the death on live TV, with only one able to emerge as the victor. When Katniss Everdeen’s (Lawrence) feeble little sister Prim (Willow Shields) is chosen as one of the tributes, Katniss heroically volunteers to take her place in the kill-or-be-killed battle. Let the games begin!
You would think that once the Games kick off that it would be non-stop, mind-blowing action until the last frame, but the first half is surprisingly more engaging than the second half; It introduces us to the world of Panem, and more impressively, nails each of the small supporting characters that were so memorable in the book. Elizabeth Banks and Stanley Tucci steal every scene they’re in as Effie Trinket and eccentric TV host Caesar Flickerman, respectively. They may not have a heap of screen time, but the energetic creepiness that they exude does exactly what it does in the book: it makes you temporarily forget (and then remember again) that these characters are essentially villains, no matter how much they smile or how garish and candy-colored their appearances are. Haymitch, a former winner of the games, is funny and volatile in the hands of Woody Harrelson.
But if there's one thing that makes this movie soar, it's Jennifer Lawrence’s incredibly captivating performance as Katniss Everdeen. Lawrence’s Katniss is a heroine worth rooting for (finally!); she has real gumption, strength and a certain fire that shines behind that stoic façade that draws us to her. And she certainly looks at home with her dark hair in Katniss’ signature braid and a bow slung over her shoulder.
When the characters finally enter the arena, it’s tension-filled, but also oddly calm. Think “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part One.” There is so much at stake, yet there are still those moments that linger without much action to back it up. Though to counter this, the scenes that do bring the chaos bring it at us full-throttle -- especially one involving the powerful hallucinogen effect brought on by a swarm of bee-type creatures called “Tracker-Jackers.”
With a book as popular as “The Hunger Games,” it’s always going to be a near impossible task to satisfy everyone. Die-hard fans may bemoan the slightly less-pronounced romance between Katniss and Peeta (played with quite charisma by Josh Hutcherson), and will nitpick the necessary changes until their dying days. But all in all, the source-material is spectacularly brought to life in this wonderful and faithful adaptation that is awash with chill-inducing moments and a determination to never sacrifice the emotion of the situation. The odds of you loving "The Hunger Games" will be ever in your favor.
Rating: A-
On March 30th, Lee Hirsh’s documentary on the bullying epidemic in America will be released in theaters. Though whether or not the key demographic that most needs to see the film will be able to is yet to be determined.
With an upsurge in bullying-related suicides in the past few years, it was just a matter of time before a documentary was made on the subject. “Bully,” which is being released by The Weinstein Company, is about how bullying affected the lives of five families. A month ago, the film ran into a problem: it was given an R rating by the MPAA and the rating was upheld on appeal -- meaning no one under the age of 17 will be allowed to go see the film without a parent or guardian present, and that Weinstein’s plan to screen the film for high school students is crushed.
After hearing this news, Michigan high-school student Katy Butler, a victim of bullying herself, started an online petition to have the rating lowered – a petition that has now received wide-spread attention, garnering over 300,000 signatures, and support from nearly 30 members of Congress as well as the likes of Justin Bieber, Johnny Depp and Ellen DeGeneres.
This is something that any filmmaker who wants their movie to have a wide release in theaters has to go through, so why is everyone getting all riled up over this one instance? Because this act is, so to speak, the one that broke the camel's back. The MPAA has a history of playing God in the motion picture industry: either you make the often nonsensical cuts necessary to avoid an R or NC-17 rating, or your film will greatly suffer at the box office. It’s as simple as that. They say that they’re not a censorship organization, but of course, their existence in the first place ends up attributing to just that.
The MPAA is made up of a small group of parents who screen the films and then assign the ratings based on the content. There is no real set of guidelines as to what is and is not permissible for each rating. What one movie can get away with while securing a PG-13 rating, another is slapped with an R for showing the same thing. In the case of “Bully,” the reason it is so “deserving” of an R rating: language. Six uses of the F-word, to be exact.
That’s 5 times more than is allowed for a PG-13 rating. It’s also 36 times less than the amount of F-bombs used in 2005 war documentary “Gunner Palace,” which was given a PG-13 rating on appeal. How’s that for putting things in perspective?
While the situation appears to be as simple as the MPAA getting off their high horse and lowering the rating from an R to a PG-13, to them that action would mean much more: it would mean admitting to an imperfect system, one that doesn’t have a clear, logical set of guidelines.
It would mean forever being viewed as a group that makes exceptions. And that scares the hell out of them. Even with proof that previous members have done so in the past.
We’re talking about an organization that constantly contradicts itself – one that shuns sex and nudity, but lets films with violence have far more wiggle room. Let’s take the upcoming movie “The Hunger Games,” for instance: it’s about 24 teens fighting to the death. Surely there will some blood and violence, no matter how clever the camerawork is. PG-13 rating. Then “Bully” comes along, and because it makes use of the F-word six times, it is immediately deemed inappropriate for teenagers. Really?
Let me ask you something -- what 13 year olds hasn’t heard the F-word before? What difference does it make if the word is said one or six times? It’s not like we’d be exposing children to this deadly, life-altering word that will scar them forever. I think kids need to be freaked out. They need a wake-up call, to show that the things they do and the words they inflict upon others have consequences. Kids who are exposed to the film won’t come out traumatized by the use of the F-word. Hopes are, they’ll come out deeply affected and enlightened on a problem that exists around them on a day-to-day basis, one that many turn a blind eye to. 
In the likely case that the MPAA doesn’t budge, The Weinstein Company has a few options, though none are very desirable. They could cut out some of the scenes in question or bleep out the profanity. But that would diminish the overall impact, something Weinstein and Hirsch refuse to do. Kelby Johnson, one of the bullied teens featured in the film, put it best when he said, “Our reality is not censored.”
The more probable option would be for The Weinstein Company to release the film without a rating – though that brings along its own set of problems. By not accepting the MPAA’s ruling and releasing “Bully” without a rating, the film may be treated in some theaters as an NC-17 movie -- which would make it impossible for teens to see the film in those theaters, guardian or not.
I can’t tell you if “Bully” is going to be a great movie. It may end up being overly emotionally manipulative. It may end up being the best documentary in years. What I do know is that “Bully” digs deep into a horrific and ongoing problem. If there is even a chance that this documentary can make a difference, then the MPAA should find their humanity and admit that people seeing this film is more important than a few curse words.
Everyone loves an underdog story…I just fear that the bullies may emerge victorious in the ongoing war between The Weinstein Company and the MPAA.
To sign the petition, click here
In the new big screen adaptation of the popular ‘80s TV show "21 Jump Street," heartthrob Channing Tatum and funny-man Jonah Hill play inept cops who go undercover as high school students to investigate a drug ring. Ice Cube plays Captain Dickson, the man in charge of the undercover cops in this hilarious action-comedy, which hits theaters on March 16th. I had the opportunity to sit down and speak with all three of them about everything from their high school experiences to embarrassing baby photos.
Channing, you appeared in the comedy "She’s the Man" and this is your second comedy. How does it feel to get into a comedy after doing a long string of action movies and dramas?
Channing Tatum: Man, it was pretty crazy. I couldn’t believe Jonah was calling me for it. I thought he had the wrong number or something.
Jonah Hill: Turns out I did.
C: Yeah. He was actually calling…
J: I felt too awkward so…
C: Who were you trying to call?
J: I was trying to call Whoopi Goldberg
C: Oh, sure, sure.
J: Cuz I thought she’d make the perfect counterpart but then I was too embarrassed so I just kept going and now here we are.
C: Common mistake. Pretty embarrassing.
Ice Cube: When I heard he was doing the movie, I was like, ‘Damn, Jonah, you greedy motherfucker. You trying to steal all the scenes and all the laughs’… [All laugh]
C: But yeah, he just promised me I would be funny and if I wasn’t, I was gonna choke him the fuck out.
J: Yeah he was gonna hurt me.
[To Channing] How often are you asked to dance with someone?
C: All the time. Please don’t do it.
What was it like to host SNL?
C: Nuts, man. I’ve never been through something quite that crazy. You just feel like you’re running downhill and like you’re about to fall, and then it’s over. And you’re just like, ‘Thank God I didn’t fall on my face.’ That’s it, you know. And you can only pray that everyone else felt the same way.
Did Jonah give you any advice?
C: ‘Don’t suck.’
J: Did I give you any advice?
C: I don’t know if you gave me any advice. You told me what to expect. Oh, you told me to have fun.
J: That’s good advice. [Laughs] I’m a wise man.
J: I just kind of broke down how the show works because there’s no kind of advice you can give, just more like ‘here’s what to be prepared for’ because it’s a gnarly work schedule. It’s not like it’s normal.
Craziest thing you guys did to cheat for a test in high school?
C: Sex with a teacher. I’m just kidding, I don’t know.
J: My friend, she’s a really good friend of mine, she has really huge breasts, and she would distract this one teacher with her huge breasts, and then my other friend would go on the computer and change our grades.
I: Damn. That’s pretty elaborate…I didn’t take it serious enough to cheat, like that. I was like, man, fuck it. I didn’t read the book last night.
J: If we put half as much effort into studying as we did into cheating, we probably would have gotten straight A’s anyway. That’s what I always kept thinking. [All laugh] I’m going through a lot of trouble, like hours spent to not learn, when I could be spending hours learning.
This movie looks like it was so much fun to film. What scene was the hardest to get through without laughing?
C: Anything with Rob Riggle in it. Like I don’t know what it is about him but he’s maybe the funniest person that I’ve ever been in a scene with. You’ll never see me in a frame with Rob cuz I just couldn’t keep my shit together.
Like the scene with the tongues?
J: That was improvised…I was like, put your hand in my mouth. I told him, it’s fun, touch my tongue…in the trailer, I’m laughing. They used an actual clip of me laughing…cuz we’re on drugs so it’s okay but I’m supposed to be having a straight face but Rob is too funny, I can’t. Actually the one they used in the movie I’m laughing.
C: You had two different dudes’ hands in your mouth now that I think about it.
J: Yeah I like dudes’ hands in my mouth…I should write a movie where good stuff happens to me, instead of bad stuff. [Laughs]
How is the movie similar to your high school experience, if there are any?
C: Nah. Nothing really.
I: Come on, man. The Eminem thing. Don’t lie.
J- I didn’t lie. Yeah I unfortunately had the Eminem bleached hair and the ball chain thing.
[To Jonah] When you were at the Oscars and Billy Crystal started singing a song about you, your first thought in your head was what?
J- I was just thinking, I can’t believe I’m nominated for an Oscar. A couple of people asked me about it, I guess he was making fun of me or something. But I was just, like, excited to be there. I was just happy to be there with my mom, that Billy Crystal even knew my name…It’s super surreal.
[To Ice Cube] During your scenes as the captain and with funny guys like Channing and Jonah, was there any part of the movie where you couldn’t keep a straight face?
I: Nah
C: We couldn’t crack him, man. He’s like so serious.
I: …It was cool, and the thing is the hardest part of working on these comedies is not laughing, and that’s where the work is. It’s like oh shit, hold your water, cuz you know this dude is gonna come with some adlib you’re not ready for or you’re gonna have a take on it that you’re not expecting. You know pretty much coming off the cuff, every scene he’s gonna give you something different, you know, so you just gotta be ready…all the laughter comes after the take. Everybody puts laughs in their pocket.
[To Jonah] Were those real baby pictures of you in the movie?
J: Unfortunately. [All laugh]
What gave you the idea to use them in the movie?
J: Cuz my friends made fun of me about them for so many years, like every time someone would come over my house.
Were they on display?
J: Yeah.
C- Oh man, they’re lit like the Smithsonian. They’re like the Lourve in his house.
J- They’re like Chagall’s and Warhol’s. And so I was like, ‘you know what? I’ve had to suffer and I’m going to get you guys back and make you look like weirdos for taking these pictures.’ My parents haven’t seen the movie yet so I’m actually kind of excited for them to see it. My mom doesn’t get why they’re funny. That’s what’s crazy. [Channing and Ice laugh] She’s like, ‘why are they funny?’ and I’m like, ‘you’re so weird.’
Would your friends mess with them like they did in the movie?
J- They didn’t draw on them cuz my mom would’ve chopped their hands off but my friends all have pictures next to them, like us drunk, and making faces like some of this stuff. [More laughter]
As producers, how important was it to keep it R-rated? Because right now there are too many PG-13 movies out that are just not funny.
J: Well, you know, I think it’s all dependent on the movie. You know, not all movies have to be R, not all movies have to be PG-13. I think it depends on the story you’re trying to tell. With this movie we wanted to make “Bad Boys” meets a John Hughes movie and for that you need an R rating. So I just put that in my contract and contractually if you wanted me involved it had be to be R-rated…But then there’s a movie idea I just came up with recently that is better as a PG-13 movie. You don’t [always] need to make it an R rated film.
How brutal was it training to be a cop?
J: It was brutal, man. I really put myself through the ringer.
[J and C laugh]
C: I didn’t do shit.
J: I was supposed to be the inept cop, so like…
C: I think that was the point. We didn’t want to go through and look all like, you know, flawless.
Jonah, “21 Jump Street” has always been on your list of films that were getting ready. How does it feel to finally have this movie released?
J: It’s really weird because for five years, from 23 to 28 years old, I’ve been working on this movie. And it’s bizarre because every interview I’ve done since it got announced five years ago, everyone asks me about “21 Jump Street.” And it’s bizarre that after this they won’t ask me that anymore. It’s weird because I always had this thing that I knew I was doing…and now that it’s done it’s a very weird, bittersweet feeling. I was glad that I loved the movie so much, that I didn’t waste five years of my life on a bad movie.
What was it like playing roles within roles, like being high school students and police officers…and Peter Pan? [Laughs]
J: [Laughs] I was Doug, Schmidt, and Peter Pan. Daniel Day Lewis couldn’t do that. [All laugh] I was three characters in one day – do you realize the layers of that? I lost myself. Ask your readers if they understand the dedication that takes. [More laughs]
C: Green tights are hard to pull off.
J: Well I’ll say this, a lot of this stuff comes from preparing for “Superbad,” because I was a guy in his 20’s pretending he was 17, and this film, we’re guys in our 20’s pretending to be 17. So a lot of it was based on that.
[To Channing] What was it like for you to play a guy playing another guy?
C: Uh…I don’t think Jenko even understood that he was playing another guy. I don’t think he’s even that smart. [Laughs] I don’t think he got the joke.
How would you like to see the story progress in the sequel if it gets made?
J: We can’t talk about it.
C: It’s top secret.
I: I would like to see the story progress with me getting more money.
[All laugh]
Twihards, rejoice:
Summit Entertainment has announced that the “Breaking Dawn: Part 2” teaser trailer will play before Lionsgate’s highly anticipated “The Hunger Games,” which hits theaters on March 23rd. In accordance with what has been done with the past “Twilight” trailers, a teaser of the teaser will hit the Internet early on March 20th to get the Twihards’ heart palpitations going and their butts into “The Hunger Games” midnight screenings so they can get the first taste of the end of their beloved franchise.
“The Hunger Games,” which recently broke the record previously held by “The Twilight Saga: Eclipse” for first-day advanced ticket sales, is quickly on it’s way to achieving what can only be referred to as “Twilight-status fanaticism,” which begs the question: which fan base is more fervent?
While Team Edward and Team Jacob have been at it for years already, don’t be surprised if you start seeing Team Peeta and Team Gale shirts everywhere you turn – even with a less pronounced love triangle at its core. What can I say? Fans just love to show where their allegiance lies.
Having attended one of the “Hunger Games” mall tours (see below), I can tell you firsthand: those fans mean business. Whenever the host asked for volunteers from the audience, they were shrieks of: “I VOLUNTEER! I volunteer as tribute!” When Taylor Swift’s “Hunger Games” theme song, “Safe & Sound,” came on, the entire audience raised their three middle fingers in the air, the farewell salute from District 12, and swayed back and forth.
Chances are fans of “The Hunger Games” are more violent, seeing as the premise is centered around a massive fight to the death on live TV. Though Twilight fans are driven purely by hormones, and one should never underestimate pre-teen girls in heat.
The jury’s still out. But one thing is for certain: Shrieks will be heard around the world when both hardcore fanbases collide come the midnight screenings on March 22nd.
“Silent House” is a peculiar experiment in minimalist filmmaking. A remake of the 2010 Uruguayan film, this is a horror movie that sets out to show “real fear captured in real time” – meaning it aims to appear as if the entire movie was done in one long, continuous take.
While the filmmakers have stated that there were a few cuts in the film, it doesn’t change the fact that the camerawork is indeed impressive. Here is a film that called for extremely precise cinematography and choreography, one that goes out of its way to seem as bare as possible, but has a crew giving it their all to make the illusion work.
We aren’t given much of a set up – the idea is that we’re sitting there experiencing the now. The story starts with Sarah (Elizabeth Olsen) helping her dad (Adam Trese) and uncle (Eric Sheffer) fix up the old (translation: creepy) house that they used to vacation at when she was a little girl. It doesn’t take Sarah very long to realize that something ominous is going on with this secluded house.
Olsen, who gave her star-turning performance in last year’s “Martha Marcy May Marlene,” proves that she’s a force to be reckoned with. In a film that’s often uneven, she is the one constant; she has a face that was made to communicate pure terror. I found myself scared more on her behalf than as a result of what was actually happening on screen.
I'll admit, sometimes the lack of obvious pizzazz resulted in a decrease in my attention span. You can only watch someone running through the woods or hiding under a table for so long before you start to think, “Is this what the entire movie is going to be like? Then again, at some points it was that very tactic that had my heart racing. There is often so little noise that any sound whatsoever was comforting, even if was just that of heavy panting from Olsen. Silence is what we fear.
This isn’t the kind of horror movie that’s going to be appealing to the general movie-going audience. Film buffs may be intrigued by the idea and execution, but when you find yourself squinting your eyes looking for cuts more than paying attention to the story, I fear that's a sign that something essential is missing.
The third act predictably throws the horror movie twist at us, but that is one cliché I didn’t much mind. Tension builds and falters too erratically throughout the film, so much so that ending on a point of fear and surprise was the only way to get viewers to come out of “Silent House” feeling a semblance of satisfaction.
Rating: C+
“Project X” opens with a disclaimer from Warner Bros. apologizing to the citizens of Pasadena. Ah, found-footage movies. They’ve become increasingly popular since 1999’s “The Blair Witch Project,” but have pretty much stayed within the horror movie genre…until now. “Project X” marks the first found-footage comedy about a group of three friends that decide to throw a house party to gain popularity -- a party that quickly spirals out of control.
The trio is made up of stock characters (there’s more than a whiff of “Superbad” here), but it doesn’t really make them any less effective. Funniest of the group is Costa; he’s your typical foul-mouthed douche. He drinks from a chalice and doesn’t see anything wrong with advertising for a party at his friend’s house on Craigslist. JB represents “the fat one” (together they make up the Jonah Hill role). Then there’s Thomas, the skinny, awkward one (the Michael Cera role). It’s his birthday. With his parents out of town, there’s only one thing to do, right?
Going into the film, I couldn’t imagine what they could possibly do that would shock me. I’ve seen “Can’t Hardly Wait,” I know what a crazy teen party looks like. However, so much of what makes “Project X” funny and memorable is the fact that it does take it further, further than my vivid imagination was able to initially take me.
There’s no plot here – the movie solely exists to make you feel like you’re a part of the party. There’s loud, pulsing music throughout, many a montage of girls taking their tops off, people taking body shots, jumping of the roof…all that debauchery we’ve come to see in movie parties and so much more.
Small on substance and huge on shock value, this is the kind of movie that will live on through phrases like, “Let’s party it up, Project X style!” While you may not find yourself laughing the whole time, you’ll definitely have your eyes bulging out of your head by the party’s end.
Rating: B