You are here: Home // Posts Tagged With anthony hopkins

Today, we have a new batch of movie posters for comic related flicks. The first one up is (another) poster for Marvel Studio’s next release, Thor.

I dig the style they are going for with this particular poster and it falls very much in line with the Ironman 1 and 2 main posters, but there is something off about it. Both of Thor’s arms look off. I’m not sure what it is, it just doesn’t look right. The cast at the top is fine, but nothing really special.

Next up we have the one time Superman Brandon Routh returning to the funny books for an adaption of the Italian horror comics series Dylan Dog.

Routh portrays the title character, a paranormal investigator, who has a zombie sidekick. I enjoyed the trailer and I really like this poster. I think it captures the spirit of the material pretty well.

Finally we have the comic inspired Super from writer/director James Gunn. The movie is about a normal man, Rainn Wilson, who makes himself into a superhero after his wife cheats on him with a drug dealer. The newest poster for the film spotlights Ellen Page’s character’s superhero side kick identity, Boltie.

The super posters have had a cool style, but the word bubble looks really weird here. Has the poster creator ever read an actual comic?  Cool side note, the movie shot scenes at my favorite comic book store, Comic SMASH, in Los Angeles.

Love the posters? Hate them? Let us know what you think in the comments!

Posted on March 18th, 2011 by ThePit | Comments Off on New Posters: Thor, Dylan Dog, Super
Filed Under Entertainment

There have been a lot of rumors about Spider-Man 4; story and character arguments between director Sam Raimi and Sony Pictures and a possible release date change.  None of this has been confirmed by the studio, but shooting has already been delayed and no start date has been confirmed. This would make it very hard for the special effects superhero film to hit its May 6th, 2011 target date. At this point, any summer date would become hard. Which brings us to…

SPIDER-MAN 4 vs THOR

Spiderman vs Thor

Okay, so there is no way Spider-Man 4 and Thor will get released on the same date, but for the moment, they share a target release date. With Spider-Man 4’s release so uncertain, Paramount Pictures have moved Thor from its original end of May release to the 6th. The date has been secured by Marvel for years and is the best way to open the summer. Right when Thor moved its release date, Disney moved the new Pirates of the Caribbean movie (On Stranger Tides) to Thor‘s old date.  So, if Spider-Man 4 gets back on track, will it be able to come out in the summer?

Regardless of the problems with the new Spider-Man flick, I think that this is a great move for Thor.  The film is gearing to start up production, with direction by Kenneth Branagh and starring Chris Hemsworth, Natalie Portman, Anthony Hopkins, Stellan Skarsgård, Idris Elba, Stuart Townsend, Ray Stevenson, and Rene Russo (with an appearance by Samuel L. Jackson as Nick Fury).  Everything about the production has seemed to be going smoothly, from the script which has gotten rave reviews to the all star cast. I’m excited.

We’ve already gotten a few cool posters for The Wolfman, but this one blows them away. This is a poster I’d hang in my office.

Wolfman Poster

We are inching closer to its February release (in time for Valentine’s Day), and I’m starting to get excited for the horror “update”.  The film stars Emily Blunt, Anthony Hopkins, Hugo Weaving, and Benicio Del Toro as the Wolfman.

Thanks to Aint-it-Cool News and Cinematical, we have two new posters for the Universal revival of The Wolfman, which stars Benicio Del Toro and the lovely Emily Blunt. Click the above links for higher resolution versions of the posters, or below to enlarge.

The Wolfman Poster

I’m not blown away by these posters, but they are decently cool. The film finally hits theaters on February 12th, after a long wait.  I wonder how this remake (and how it does) will affect the remake of The Bride of Frankenstein.

Bride of Frankenstein

That’s right, Universal is resurrecting the Bride of Frankenstein. The remake, which has been in and out of development for the past dozen years, is back in development under the writing and direction of Neil Burger. Burger wrote and directed the Ed Norton and Jessica Biel magician period piece The Illusionist, and the Tim Robbins and Rachael McAdams Iraq War drama, The Lucky Ones.

This remake joins the Creature from the Black Lagoon, which is in development, and The Wolfman, which hits theaters in early November. Creature is being helmed by Breck Eisner, who directed the action flick Sahara and is also helming a remake of the cult horror film The Crazies. The film has had just as many stop and go moments as Bride and I would not be surprised to see it go down again. The Wolfman however, has been finished for a while. I saw footage of it at Comic Con ages ago.  Joe Johnston (Jurassic Park III, Jumanji) directed the film with Benicio Del Toro as the Wolfman (perfect casting IMHO), along with a very talented supporting cast that includes Emily Blunt, Hugo Weaving, and Sir Anthony Hopkins. The make-up effects look fantastic and with music by Danny Elfman, I am genuinely excited for the horror remake. Anyone that knows me knows just how much I hate remakes.

I’m not sure how I feel about a Bride of Frankenstein remake. The Illusionist was a good film and Burger has shown that hes an actor’s director.  A similar style that Burger used in Illusionist could work well with Bride.  It just feels wrong to make this remake without remaking Frankenstein first to establish the world. Bride is very much a continuation of the monster’s story. Are they going to merge the two films together? Or will they start from scratch, throwing out everything we know and just using the film’s name? Chances are, it probability will never come to life.

Believe it or not, I somehow managed to rifle through tons of mandatory literature in high school and college without hitting this epic poem. So I picked it up right before I went to see the movie and was surprised at how easily I got through it. To see my thoughts on both the book and film, read below.

The Book:
This story about a hero and his battles and accomplishments was far more straightforward than I expected it to be. Granted, I likely would have benefited from a professor’s detailed notes and discussions to accompany the book, but as a standalone piece I was surprised at how much I grasped up front. It generally takes me at least two reads to really get what’s going on in Homer, or even Shakespeare. This story, however, is very simple. Beowulf is a hero, born and bred. He comes to the aid of King Hrothgar, whose mead hall Heorot is being attacked by the monster Grendel. After a fierce battle with Grendel, Beowulf incurs the wrath of Grendel’s mother, whom he confronts in her lair. Finally, the third act picks up Beowulf’s story fifty years later when his kingdom is threatened by a dragon. Overall, the story depicts the life of a selfless hero, who simply desires to protect and serve for the greater good.

 

The Movie:
There have been many adaptations of this story to film in the past, but this one was not only the largest, most anticipated, and heavily promoted, but by the trailers it appeared to be the truest to the source material. Mostly it is, with the exception of incorporating Wiglaf into the story from the beginning (which I found an inspired way to avoid his sudden appearance that occurs in the third act of the original story), until the end of the second act. The film sticks to the books three-act format, however changes something major in the fight between Beowulf and Grendel’s mother in order to weave an underlying plot that is constant through each part and leads up to a twist ending.

The results are far more detrimental to the film than may have been intended: Beowulf’s character is transformed from a selfless hero to a selfish, corrupt, and pretentious warrior. It also succeeds in changing Hrothgar, Queen Wealthow, and possibly, thanks to an ambiguous ending, Wiglaf into despicable versions of the original characters. Plus the dialogue’s stab at modernizing the ancient poem often makes for unintentionally laughable lines (“There have been many brave men who have come to taste my lord’s mead.”) All in all, the movie is only worth seeing for the stunning visual effects in fantastic 3D.

What’s Missing:
Since the poem is relatively short, there’s not a lot missing, just a lot that has changed. Beowulf no longer returns to his homeland Geatland for the third act, but stays in Hrothgar’s kingdom. Also, instead of introducing Wiglaf in the third act he is introduced from the beginning as Beowulf’s most trusted warrior. In the poem, Beowulf’s most trusted warrior, Eschere, is killed in the second act and Wiglaf is introduced in the third act as the only warrior who stays by Beowulf’s side as he faces the dragon. The introduction of Wiglaf sooner makes for a more relatable, and at times touching, relationship between Beowulf and Wiglaf.

What’s New:
From the moment Beowulf enters Grendel’s mother’s lair, all the way through the end of the film, there are a lot of new elements to the story. Grendel’s mother takes on a much larger role and is not gone after her battle with Beowulf. When Hrothgar learns the true resolution to Beowulf’s battle with Grendel’s mother, he steps down from his post as king (literally, heh) and relinquishes his kingdom (along with his queen) to Beowulf. Thus changing the third act and some very important details that lead to the circumstances surrounding the appearance of the dragon.

Overall Adaptation:
It’s not necessary to update every story (especially the oldest story in our language) to conform to a typical Hollywood movie. Just because it’s old doesn’t mean it’s out of style. same sites . This story would have been better off left alone, and tampering with it discredited the entire film. By weaving the acts together they have succeeded in making it a Hollywood film, complete with unlikeable characters who lack motivation, sex icons, and heroes with questionable morals.