Technically, the news here is that the charges against W. stars Josh Brolin and Jeffrey Wright -- who were arrested last July at a Shreveport, La., bar for interfering with the arrest of another crew member -- are being dropped. A Shreveport City Court spokesperson told E! News that Brolin, Wright, and five others arrested at the same time are on what's called "district attorney's probation," meaning that as long as they stay out of trouble between now and their next court date, in March, all the charges against them will officially be dropped at that time.
Accounts of what happened at the bar that night vary wildly, but apparently the film's cast and crew were celebrating the end of shooting, things got rowdy, the cops were called, and a W. crew member, Eric Felland, got arrested. Wright and Brolin tried to talk the cops out of it, and they got arrested, too. A round of arrests for everyone! On the house!
But that's not all. In the process, Brolin was pepper-sprayed and Wright was Tasered. Now video footage of this has shown up, hosted at the sleazy-but-occasionally-useful TMZ.com. (We can't embed it, but you can watch it here.) In the video, you can see a post-spraying Brolin, now mellow and subdued, still trying to talk the cops into letting everyone go, and being handcuffed. Meanwhile, out in the street, Wright -- who appears to already be handcuffed -- is on the ground, being Tasered repeatedly for the duration of the video. What possible reason the police could have for Tasering a suspect who's already restrained and behaving calmly, I cannot imagine. No doubt "you weren't there, you don't know what happened" will be cited as justification for it.
So remember that whole Shazam! movie, with John August writing, Peter Segal (Get Smart) directing and Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson starring as the villain, Black Adam? Last year we talked about this project a lot, wondering which actor would eventually play Captain Marvel, as well as teenager Billy Batson. In fact, as recently as November of 2008, Variety had reported that Shazam! was part of Segal's first-look deal with Warner Brothers. (The project was originally set up at New Line, but moved to Warners when they went under.)
However, over on his blog, August says the project is now dead in the water after several re-writes, most of which came about after the studio wanted him to take the film from a lighter action-comedy to something much darker (a la The Dark Knight). And regarding the recent news that Segal would be directing, August notes that "press releases often have little relationship to reality." He does admit, though, that the movie may still happen ... just not with him onboard and not anytime soon. Which is a shame, because this pitch -- "Like Big, but with superpowers ..." -- definitely had potential.
Perhaps all possibly iconic roles should come with a warning: If you get too popular, too much of a heartthrob or superstar, there's a good chance that the spotlight will fade and you'll have to make your "comeback" on a reality show. Oh, how the mighty can fall.
We've had everything from The Surreal Life to The Two Coreys, and now we're getting Confessions of a Teen Idol. Heard of it? The upcoming VH1 show has some completely unsurprising faces, including: Eric Nies (who is now a hippie-looking life coach!?), everyone's favorite No-Match-For-A-Cool-Rider Adrien Zmed, and Jamie Walters, who has morphed from Shout star to head-shorn, tat-covered musician. But the big surprise on the list, at least for me, Christopher Atkins -- also known as the man who led The Pirate Movie and showed off his stuff with Brooke Shields in The Blue Lagoon.
Near the end of the closing credits for Clint Eastwood's new Gran Torino is a disclaimer that caught my attention. It reads as follows: "No person or entity associated with this film received payment or anything of value, or entered into any agreement, in connection with the depiction of tobacco products."
In other words: Some of the characters smoke in this movie, but that was our choice. The tobacco industry didn't pay us off.
According to the site Smoke Free Movies, which makes some excellent points but tends to go overboard (they think any film with smoking should automatically be rated R), the disclaimer is a recent addition to Warner Bros. products. It started appearing on Warner DVDs of movies that contain smoking at the beginning of 2008, and was added to smoky theatrical releases this fall. Gran Torino was the first time I'd noticed it, but I don't always stay for the credits.
The site also reports that Universal Pictures (at the behest of its parent company, General Electric) has started including a somewhat weaker disclaimer on its movies that contain smoking: "The depictions of tobacco smoking contained in this film are based solely on artistic consideration and are not intended to promote tobacco consumption." Note that they don't say they weren't paid off by the tobacco industry, only that they didn't intend for it to encourage people to smoke.
Watchmen is not going to end 2008 on a high note. According to The Hollywood Reporter, a lawyer for 20th Century Fox has said that the studio will seek an order delaying the release of the film. Ever since Fox first filed its suit, Watchmen fans have been panicked that the film's legal woes would delay its March 6 release. Seriously, Fox, don't you just want some money? A nice chunk of money? Don't kick the Watchmen when they're down.
Though the judge ruled in favor of Fox on Christmas, agreeing that Fox retained copyright on the film, he now plans to hold the trial as planned on January 20th. Warner Bros finally spoke out about the messy situation, via their lawyer, and said that he didn't know if the studio would appeal, but that trial was necessary, and a settlement was "unlikely."
So, despite that the scales of justice are tipped in Fox's favor, Warner Bros refuses to blink and agree to a payoff. Considering that Paramount already has the international distribution rights, they don't want to lose any more of the box office pie than they have to. Cue the theme to The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, and we'll keep you updated as this case drags into 2009.
Question: At what point do nerdy fanboys begin bombarding 20th Century Fox with nasty hate mail?
The Motion Picture Association of America does a few other things too, but its most visible impact on movie-going is its ratings system. G, PG, PG-13, R, or NC-17, you gotta have a rating for your movie if you want most theater chains to show it, and the MPAA's secretive clan of breast-counters and violence-ignorers decides which label its gets.
An overwhelming majority of films get the rating they deserve -- or, at the very least, a rating that's consistent with how the MPAA has rated other films with similar content. But some MPAA decisions are baffling, illogical, or just plain outrageous. Here are the ones that perplexed us the most this year. The Worst MPAA Ratings of 2008
1. The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian (rated PG for "epic battle action and violence"). The MPAA says, "The ratings are intended to provide parents with advance information so they can decide for themselves which films are appropriate for viewing by their own children." It's all about parents looking out for their kids. So how in the name of C.S. Lewis did this film -- rife with stabbing, throat-slitting, decapitating, and large-scale slaughter, much of it perpetrated by teenage characters -- get a PG? Does the fact that most of the violence is bloodless (and therefore not realistic) somehow make it family-friendly? Had there been even one sexual reference, it would have gotten a PG-13. Thank goodness Disney only packed the film with killing instead!
Best known as the writer of The Usual Suspects, Christopher McQuarrie has an impressive number of films on his resume (including his criminally overlooked directorial debut, The Way of the Gun), but Valkyrie -- opening nationwide this week -- saw him also serve as a producer alongside director Bryan Singer and star Tom Cruise. A thriller about the 1944 plot inside the German military to try and assassinate Adolph Hitler, Valkyrie turns one of history's nightmares into a taut modern thriller -- a tricky balancing act that the film pulls off: "What we tried to do was to always maintain the focus that this was a movie about an event, that this was a movie about the events of July 20th (1944), and remain focused on that. We weren't making a bio-pic, we weren't making a film about the Holocaust -- all of those things were happening ... (but) this movie is about this incredible event that happened. ... And at the same time, maintaining a sense of responsibility."
McQuarrie spoke with Cinematical from New York about working alongside the German government, how producing a mega-million war film was like "drinking from a firehose," forgoing German accents, his possible future take on superheroic franchise The Champions and much more. You can listen to the podcast here at Cinematical by clicking below:
You can also download the interview in full right here -- and those of you with RSS Podcast readers can find all of Cinematical's podcast content at this link.
Yikes -- Warner Bros. obviously landed on Santa's naughty list this year. The New York Times reports that the judge has ruled in favor of Fox Studios. Sayeth the Honorable Judge Feess "Fox owns a copyright interest consisting of, at the very least, the right to distribute the Watchmen motion picture."
This comes as quite a surprise since last we heard, the judge didn't have enough information to make a ruling, and was moving the trial to January 20th. Judge Feess indicated he would make a more detailed ruling soon.
Warner Bros. has declined to comment, and as of now, has not backed off the film's planned release date of March 6. I can hear you all crying (and I hope it's in your very best Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer voice) "There goes Watchmen, and there goes Christmas!" But it's highly doubtful Watchmen will lose its release date. There's no need to panic. Feess advised Fox and Warner Bros to look towards a settlement or appeal. "The parties may wish to turn their efforts from preparing for trial to negotiating a resolution of this dispute or positioning the case for review." So, expect a major payoff from Warner Bros. (and maybe those rumored Batman television show rights) to Fox in order that we'll still be at that March 6th show. And you thought a lump of coal was bad.
I have the sneaking suspicion that Seth Rogen'sThe Green Hornet remake may go the way of its failed predecessors. Over the weekend, Monika reported that Stephen Chow was no longer directing the film -- now comes the news that Chow may not remain as Kato, either.
Chow told the AP that he had abandoned directing the film in order to make a superhero comedy starring Jack Black. "If I direct The Green Hornet, the superhero comedy will have to be delayed for two years," Chow said. "The timing might not be right for a superhero comedy in two years. And I want to make a movie based on an original idea."
Presumably, directing Black might also interfere with his Kato-playing duties -- something Chow confirms by saying that continuing in the role depends on his schedule. If you're a conspiracy theorist, you can speculate away about whether Chow's really passionate about Black and original superhero comedy, or whether it's those vague "creative differences" reported earlier.
Judging from the comments, Rogen's Hornet isn't too popular anyway. I was unsure about the comedic angle the project was taking, but Chow's casting was something to hang your hopes on, particularly if they reined in his slapstick style. But maybe that's precisely what the "differences" are. Maybe they just need to quit forcing this one, and let the Hornet sit for the unforeseeable future?
If you live in or around the New York City area, you're no doubt well aware of the Lillo Brancato Jr. murder trial. Brancato Jr., who's most known for his six-episode stint on The Sopranos and for starring in Robert De Niro's A Bronx Tale as Calogero (or 'C'), was on trial for murdering an off-duty police officer after breaking into a house to obtain drugs with a friend. The friend, Steven Armento, was found guilty and sentenced to life in prison earlier this month. Brancato Jr. claimed he did not shoot the officer, but only broke a window in the house because he was suffering intense heroin withdrawal. The house, according to Brancato Jr., belonged to a Vietnam veteran who gave the men permission to come over from time to time to get drugs.
But when no one answered the door that night, the two men -- itching for that next high -- decided to break in. That's when Daniel Enchautegui, a neighbor, came to check things out. Upon finding the two men breaking in, Armento shot Enchautegui, who returned fire hitting both Brancato Jr. and Armento several times. Apparently a jury found that Brancato Jr. had nothing to do with the murder and acquitted him of those charges, but did find him guilty of attempted burglary -- a charge that could send him to prison for up to 15 years (he's already served three).
What is it we love so much about big-screen strippers, aside from the obvious? Is it the eyes that reveal a trapped soul? The bruises that reveal a wounded heart? The solitary dances that reveal a lonely spirit? Obviously the stripper makes for a very complex character on screen as she (and he) has appeared in countless films over the years, spanning several different genres. The latest stripper to hit the stage comes in the form of actress Marisa Tomei, who may just nab an Oscar nod for her performance in The Wrestler (in limited release this weekend). And in the past couple of years, we've watched a number of different strippers do their thing -- from the fantastic ensemble cast of Abel Ferrara's Go Go Tales to the somewhat fascinating ensemble cast of Zombie Strippers, our thirst for people who take their clothes off for money has not gone away; it's just become a little more absurd.
Inspired by EW's recent piece on Stars Who Played Strippers, we'd like to know who your favorites are -- and why, exactly, you think the stripper is such a popular character in film. To help you, we've pieced together a gallery full of some of the most popular big-screen strippers. (Note: Bachelor Party's Nick the D*ck was Weinberg's choice -- but, c'mon, watch this clip and tell me he doesn't belong here.)
We know that Terrence Howard was upset and confused about being dropped from Iron Man 2. Robert Downey Jr. admitted he was in the dark about the decision. Guess who else was perplexed by it -- the new Rhodey himself, Don Cheadle.
IGN caught up with Cheadle, who was quick to describe the sudden and surprising offer from Marvel: "I got a phone call from my agent saying they were offering me the part. That was kind of it. It happened very fast, and I had a very short time to answer. Literally, overnight. I was unaware of what was happening with Terrence. And when they called me I asked what was going on with Terrence. I've worked with Terrence, I've known Terrence for a long time. And they said they were moving away from him. So it's not like I was taking Terrence's job, because the job was already gone. Someone else was going to do the part. I don't know who the next person in line was, but that's who they were going to. And I literally had a few hours to accept the job or not. "
(We're reposting our review of The Wrestler form the Toronto International Film Festival to coincide with the film's theatrical release.)
By James Rocchi
After winning top honors at the Venice Film Festival, Darren Aronofsky's The Wrestler rapidly became the must-see of the Toronto International Film Festival, with huge lines at the press and industry screening this afternoon seemingly unaffected by the news that Fox Searchlight had purchased the film. After seeing The Wrestler for myself, I feel the need to extend a note of caution about the film, which sailed into Toronto buoyed by advance raves for Mickey Rourke's performance as Randy "The Ram" Robinson, a low-level professional wrestler -- and we soon see how really, both those words could be in quotation marks -- whose '80s glory days are long over, scraping by at low-level, low-paying matches until a heart attack forces him to leave the ring and look at his life in the shadow of death. Many have already written about the parallels between Mickey Rourke and the swaggering, scarred wrestler he plays -- early success, fame and notoriety, a series of mis-steps and mistakes taking it all away bit by bit as the years advanced -- and the charge Rourke's own rise and fall offers a filmmaker like Aaronofsky looking to explore ruin and redemption.
But don't believe the hype -- or, more importantly, look past it; if a complicated, messy personal life were all it took to deliver a great performance, Paris Hilton and O.J. Simpson would have more Oscars than Katharine Hepburn. Rourke's work as Randy is physical, invested, powerful and sprawling -- but it's also quiet, sad and hauntingly wounded, too. And The Wrestler offers viewers far more than just Rourke's performance -- which, it must be said, is excellent -- if they're willing to not flinch from what it has to say: The Wrestler is a fascinating, rich, unblinking look at the dark, hunched mean streak that lies curled and poisonous inside of so much American popular entertainment and of so much American life. It's early to say this, but The Wrestler is one of the most grimly exciting, magnetically repellent movies we've had in a long time; it's flat-out one of the best American movies of 2008.
Don't panic! You can start to sweat a little if you want to, I'm sure everyone associated with Watchmenmight be. According to Variety, the Watchmen trial has been moved back two weeks to January 20th.
The judge in charge of the case set the new date on Monday in order to settle a criminal matter on January 6th. He has also refused to make a pre-trial summary judgment, as requested by both sides, insisting that the original contracts between Fox and producer Larry Gordon are so open to interpretation that a trial is required.
They just keep upping the drama level of this whole mess. Why is the judge insisting on taking it to trial, ignoring the wishes of both sides to do a summary judgment? Is that a good thing? Are summary judgments too hasty or something? Is he stretching this out because he can? Can they still settle out of court? If there's a legal eagle in the Cinematical house, I'd love it if you weighed in, just for the sake of discussion and clarity. (Without a first hand look at the contracts, maybe that's impossible to do.)
While I still don't believe the film will be delayed, it is worrying to see its legal troubles inching closer and closer to its March 6th date. Neither side seems willing to blink, although Warner Bros might if it threatens all the money they've put into marketing. But think about it this way, readers -- if they do delay it, anything Watchmen that you own that's marked 03/06/09 immediately becomes more valuable!
The Women Film Critics Circle have handed out their 2008 awards (with top honors -- Best Movie About Women -- going to Clint Eastwood's Changeling), and one of the more fascinating categories on their list is Most Offensive Male Characters. And ... who do the women film critics of 2008 find to be the most offensive male characters of the year? Aaron Eckhart (Towelhead), Sam Rockwell (Choke), Larry Bishop (Hell Ride), Paul Rudd, Seann William Scott (Role Models) and Jason Mewes (Zack and Miri Make a Porno). I'm actually surprised that Robert Downey Jr.'s Tony Stark (aka Iron Man) didn't make this list, what with his fairly obnoxious (but comedic) womanizing ways, and I'm sure there are several other offensive male characters spread across the films of 2008 that coulda shoulda been mentioned, but weren't.
This, however, brings up an interesting topic: Who were the most offensive movie characters of 2008? Could be male, female, talking animal (or robot) -- were there any characters that just rubbed you the wrong way? Any characters who deserved to be sent straight to human resources? Furthermore, were there any films in general that were so offensive, you either considered leaving halfway through or did, in fact, bolt out the door before the end credits rolled? Sound off below ...
Technically, the news here is that the charges against W. stars Josh Brolin and Jeffrey Wright -- who were arrested last July at a Shreveport, La., bar for interfering with the arrest of another crew member -- are being dropped. A Shreveport City Court spokesperson told E! News that Brolin, Wright, and five others arrested at the same time are on what's called "district attorney's probation," meaning that as long as they stay out of trouble between now and their next court date, in March, all the charges against them will officially be dropped at that time. 
So remember that whole Shazam! movie, with 
Near the end of the closing credits for Clint Eastwood's new 
Watchmen is not going to end 2008 on a high note. According to 
I have the sneaking suspicion that 
If you live in or around the New York City area, you're no doubt well aware of the 
We know that Terrence Howard was 
.jpg)
