In the ABC drama series REVENGE, even the best laid plans of Emily Thorne (Emily VanCamp) are sure to go haywire once in a while and, unfortunately, for all her careful planning, something went very wrong on her honeymoon. Lydia (Amber Valletta)cornered Victoria (Madeleine Stowe) on the yacht, making Aiden (Barry Sloane) unable to secure Victoria while Emily was on deck setting the stage, and then Victoria took it upon herself to accost Emily on deck and heated incriminating words were exchanged — all to the horror of Daniel (Josh Bowman) who stood in the shadows hearing everything. He learned that the woman he had just married had been using him all along, and in his drunken, angry stupor, he shot Emily with the gun she had brought to stage her fake death incriminating Victoria.
That’s right folks, Daniel was the shooter. Having just found out about Sara’s (Annabelle Stephenson) suicide attempt, and that Emily had been using him to get back at his mother, he just shot her. The look on Emily’s face was equal parts guilt and horror. It was her own fault that this had come about. The stage had been set perfectly, but it fell apart because Daniel heard what he was never supposed to hear. That gun that was supposed to be just a prop was just too easy to use for real — and Emily was shot point blank in the chest and thrown back into the water.
With Aiden and Jack (Nick Wechsler) worriedly searching for her on the beach when she failed to make her prearranged rendezvous, the fate of Emily Thorne is not yet known. Does she survive the gunshot wounds? Does she eventually make it back to the buoy and the beach? Will Daniel remember his deadly actions after he finally sobers up? And what about Victoria? Does she have a clue what really happened on the deck after she left?
For those who saw the previews of REVENGE when it returns on January 5th, a few of those questions are answered. Emily does survive. But does she remember who she is? Is the amnesia real or faked?
In a recent press interview, executive producer Sunil Nayar gave the inside scoop on what’s next in the increasingly complicated world of REVENGE.
Emily’s Amnesia: Partial, Complete or Faked - “You’ll have to see.”
Daniel’s Mindset - “He’s tormented by the nature of what he’s done. You even get a sense right after he shot her that there’s flicker of regret that he did a rash act. But he’s been completely betrayed. It’s not like you don’t understand the impulse, but carrying through with the act, that’s a big moment for Daniel. He will have to kind of wrestle with what that means and wrestle with the fact that now he’s learned the truth about the woman that he’s given his heart over to back and forth over the last couple of years. So you’re going to see a real transformation in him. There’s a regret that will come from it initially, but then it will grow into a kind of strength — a hardening in Daniel Grayson because the person he trusted the most has really up ended the nature of that trust. It’s going to be a great journey that we’re going to put him on.”
Suspects - “There’s a couple people who become primary suspects. Emily obviously is not a benefit to them in the investigation, but there will be evidence on the boat that [the police] are pursuing and they will have photo evidence from what Margaux (Karine Vanesse) is doing, so the Voulez part becomes primary in the investigation. And in classic REVENGE style, you’ll see how one person becomes the suspect and then it sort of shifts over to someone else.”
On Lydia’s Resurrection - “We wanted to bring Lydia back right at the beginning of this season because she is great. We thought since Victoria got off the plane, it doesn’t require a whole lot of explanation and people don’t require a lot of backstory on how is Lydia still alive. And we love Amber and what she brings to the show. So we thought the best time to do it was as we got up to the shooting and in the aftermath that she would bring such a great element of chaos with her and she would become such a great suspect for what’s going to happen. She also brings Conrad into the story in a way which we haven’t seen before either. So she seemed like a no-brainer and we were very fortunate that she was available to come back.”
Nolan & Patrick - “We always knew that we were going to bring back Victoria’s son just for Nolan (Gabriel Mann). I think the two of them are so great together. What we’re doing to do is put them through their paces. Happy relationships are all fine and dandy, but that is not where this show thrives. So Patrick (Justin Hartley) kind of seeing that there’s this space between this painting that Nolan obviously bought from his mother will have him call into question with whom his fidelities lie. I think that the answers are going to cause a lot of great conflict in the Victoria/Nolan/Patrick triangle.”
Sara’s Future - “You’re going to see her. She could be in the same hospital as Emily. But Sara’s not gone yet. . . We’ll find out in the episode back what actually happened to Sara.”
Charlotte’s Journey - “She will slowly start to see Emily in a different way, which is going to cause that rift with the sister that [Emily's] always tried to get closer to. We want to give Charlotte a love interest in the second half of the season ’cause now that she’s more of a woman, it’s time time to acknowledge her as such — and we have a way to do that will create more conflict in the world of Emily and Nolan also. But we want to keep her going ’cause she has been fantastic this year.”
Jack & Emily’s Relationship - “In the first half of the season, we’ve had Jack really scrutinize who Emily is and what she’s doing. But he will come to see in the aftermath of the shooting that it’s really his ultimatum that put Emily in this position and there’s a bit of culpability that he has. So you’re going to start seeing the thaw between Emily and Jack. He has now taken things from her too and it is more of an equivalent relationship as a result.”
Aiden’s Place - “There’s definitely still the triangle between Emily-Aiden-Jack and Aiden’s still in the picture. His plans have obviously gone awry. His future has just been up-ended and he’s going to have to stay in the Hamptons for a little longer and that is confusing to him. So we’ll sort of see that there’s another great introduction of the Aiden backstory that continues into the future that shakes things up between him and Emily too.”
Is it true love for Emily and Aiden? - “Absolutely. She’s in love with him. . . . [But is he Emily's true love?] Obviously, it’s not Daniel. But then with Aiden, it’s so conflicted because he reminds her so much who she was and they share that pain. Like in the proposal, that was about the nature of who they are to each other, which is they have been through hell and that’s what connects them. So there’s an element to that love that is based on damage. Whereas Jack, that’s love based that is based on an idealism of what the childhood was and in the present that is also really damaged. So that’s what makes love complicated on REVENGE. It’s a question we want to try to answer as each episode goes by.”
Aiden and Jack’s Newfound Alliance - “Their relationship is going to be maturing a little bit. They both understand that while previously they were fighting over this woman, and now that she’s vulnerable, that same passion for her is going to bring them more together. And they so great together, so we want to see more of that.”
What does Victoria know? - “The photograph is the catalyst that starts her on a journey to really have something on Emily. She was looking for just one piece of information. So she doesn’t have any idea that Emily is Amanda Clark at this point in time. But she definitely knows that this woman is not on the level and that some of her suspicions are completely correct, which gives Victoria a great engine going into the second half of the season where she now has the power in the relationship, which she hasn’t had.”
Is the marriage real since Emily used a fake name? - “[Emily's] done her research so that anything she does is on the legal level. So technically she’s Emily Grayson — finally.”
Annulment prospects? - “It’s tricky. We looked into rules of annulments in New York state, and it requires interestingly a degree of fraud that has to be committed. Daniel actually has the grounds for annulment much stronger than Emily would at this point in time. But you’ll see coming into the next episode why that is actually not the best option for him.”
Emily’s Revenge Plan - “She definitely wants to take the Graysons down. That will never be a mission that leaves her. But with Victoria knowing who she is [or rather who she isn't] and as we play things out coming back, [Emily] understands that the way she has to go about it is going to be completely different than the way that she has done it in the past.”
Skyfall managed to do more than commemorate the James Bond franchise’s 50th anniversary in $TYLE, between it grossing $1 billion worldwide and securing two Oscars for its efforts. The film also introduced the 21st century versions of 007′s famous helping hands – MI6 head secretary Moneypenny (Naomie Harris) and techno-invention wizard ‘Q’ (Ben Whishaw) – in addition to (SPOILER?) introducing Ralph Fiennes as the new ‘M’, who will serve as the boss for Daniel Craig’s Bond on future missions.
Craig will be returning to star in the upcoming 24th James Bond movie installment (his Skyfall costars are expected to join him), as will Skyfall director Sam Mendes – who, after much deliberation while he took a break from moviemaking to work in the world of theater stage production, decided to accept the Bond series producers’ offers for him to call the shots on the 24th Bond flick.
It’s a bit early to to expect any concrete details on the story and new characters that will be featured in Bond 24, as Skyfall co-screenwriter John Logan is still plugging away at the film’s script right now. However, Craig did offer the following tease to Vulture, with regard to what he’s planning (or, rather, hoping) for in the movie, tone-wise:
“Hopefully we’ll reclaim some of the old irony, and make sure it doesn’t become pastiche. I can’t do shtick, I’m not very good at it. Unless it kind of suddenly makes sense. Does that make sense? I sometimes wish I hammed it up more, but I just can’t do it very well, so I don’t do it.”
Filming on Bond 24 will be underway by the beginning of next year, after Craig and his significant other – Academy Award-winning actress Rachel Weisz – finish a fourteen-week run of performing in a fresh Broadway revival of Harold Pinter’s play Betrayal (with Mike Nichols directing). At that point, we’ll know for certain whether or not there’s any truth to those rumors about Penelope Cruz portraying 007′s latest female partner in the film; not to mention, who’s playing the dastardly villain, this time around.
By the sound of it, Craig is hoping that Bond 24 strikes a tone that’s more similar to Casino Royale than his prior two outings as the Bond character. Quantum of Solace, for example, shows us a vengeful 007 seeking personal payback in a story with darker (read: post-9/11) political overtones, whereas Skyfall is more about establishing Bond’s enduring relevancy – both literally (in the context of the film’s setting) and metaphorically, as a pop cultural icon.
By comparison, Casino Royale is the sole Craig-starring Bond flick so far to have incorporated just enough of the old-school Bond playfulness (read: “irony”) without going overboard; while, at the same time, successfully updating the character for the new century (unlike the final Pierce Brosnan/007 installment, Die Another Day). Following that train of logic, Craig’s suggestion doesn’t sound like a bad idea, in part because that approach would help to give Bond 24 a more unique identity – and distinguish the movie from Mendes’ Dark Knight-inspired take on the Bond franchise with Skyfall.
Sandy Schaefer blogs at Screen Rant.
Because of certain storylines in the past, Sons of Anarchy has developed something of a reputation for building up to a big inevitable moment, only to turn away from it, as if delaying the action would somehow enhance the drama of it all. But season 6 has been different, largely because, over the course of several gratuitously overlong episodes, the trend in the series seems to have shifted toward a desire to hit as many big moments as possible, without really developing a deep sense of why they were inevitable. The result of that has been a season padded with great deal of filler, without enough of it connecting to the climactic character moments for them to carry much weight or purpose beyond the initial rush of shocking violence being perpetrated on a familiar character.
Unlike the sudden death of Clay in ‘Aon Rud Persanata,’ there was a hint that something unpleasant was going to happen to Tara for much of the season. And while the event was handled in a way that was indeed shocking, and brought Tara’s lengthy, quarrelsome, and frequently-aggressive relationship with Gemma to a bloody and gruesome end, it was accompanied by the overwhelming feeling that any sense of tragedy stemming from the event was entirely superficial. That’s not to say Tara’s murder wasn’t tragic; it was, but it was tragic for all the wrong reasons. Rather than have her death really mean something powerful beyond adding to the misery and suffering Jax and the other characters of Sons of Anarchy must seemingly endure, it just wound up being a bit of dramatic irony that highlighted Gemma’s too frequent bouts of violence and jumping to conclusions that simply weren’t true. Carrying out the death sentence of a major character on the foundation of something as flimsy as that makes the whole thing reek of insincerity, which was only compounded by the feeling that most of the characters had to suddenly drop a few precious IQ points to allow the complicated series of events to play out as they did.
It’s difficult to understand why, after treating Juice like Fredo and proclaiming, “You betrayed me,” Jax would then let him go out in search of Gemma, who, according to a rather placid Unser, was behaving erratically and had stolen his truck – which was discovered parked outside Jax and Tara’s house. But things get even murkier when Roosevelt conveniently leaves Tara in her home, and only reenters after she’d already been murdered, because it didn’t occur to her to, you know, scream for help from the local sheriff standing just outside her front door. On the plus side, there was a brief moment when it appeared that, having been given the correct information, Gemma was going to accept responsibility for what she’d done, but all of that was wiped away when Juice decided to kill one of the few remaining likable characters the show had left.
For the most part, much of ‘A Mother’s Work’ hinged on the question of whether or not Tara was going to turn herself in to Tyne Patterson, and rat out her husband and the rest of the MC, in exchange for immunity from a crime she didn’t commit. There was some tension in this storyline, but for a series that lives and breathes on twists and explicit acts of violence, there was no way things would go down in such a manner. Tara’s death certainly checked the Explicit Acts of Violence box, but the abrupt twist of having Jax suddenly surrender himself – after a season of killing and bartering his way out of trouble with things like the school shooting that started this whole chain of events – lacked the kind of context that would have made his decision feel reasonable or even heroic. Instead, after spending much of his time this season cheating on Tara, having member of SAMCRO follow her around town, or otherwise ignoring her plight, it felt as though Jax suddenly flipped a switch and decided it would be better for everyone that he play the martyr. The trouble is, aside from a few lectures about responsibility from Tyne and Nero, there was nothing in his arc this season that would suggest the transition from killer to willing sacrifice was even remotely in the cards. And considering how much time was spent on introducing plotlines, incidents, and characters that ultimately went nowhere, or had no great meaning, it makes the lack of work done on behalf of Jax’s conversion all the more noticeable.
The question at the beginning of the season was: how is Sons of Anarchy going to use the school shooting to make it relevant not only to the season’s overall narrative, but also to the welfare of the characters involved? The answer, apparently, is: it isn’t. All season long, the show pulled surface-deep discussions out of the school shooting, and that’s better than no discussion at all, the incident wound up being a simple plot point designed to get the Sons into a suddenly exigent move away from guns. From a purely plot-driven perspective, the club’s desire to pull away from guns made sense, but season 6 never showed much interest in the way of earnestly engaging in a discussion about gun violence outside the rather limited perspective of Jax and the rest of SAMCRO.
Ultimately, the same can be said for a number of plot points and storylines this season. Lee Toric proved to be not only an irritating character, but also one that was quickly abandoned and used primarily to open the door to Otto’s exit. Meanwhile, how many are still scratching their heads over what exactly Kim Dickens and Peter Weller’s characters were intended to bring to the table? Aside from helping move a few pieces around the board, they ostensibly did nothing. And then there’s was the dramatically inert execution of Clay Morrow that only briefly showed a glimmer of meaning something beyond simply saying goodbye to Ron Perlman.
In the end, season 6 wound up being a frustratingly indistinct season that seemed to invite a discussion into the morality of the show’s themes and its characters, only to demonstrate a greater preference for heaping sorrow on its protagonist in a search for something profound. Perhaps in its seventh, and potentially final season, all of this death and pain will amount to something carrying great weight, but right now it just feels like despair for the sake of despair.
Kevin Yeoman blogs at Screen Rant.
Fans who have long clamored for a big-screen version of DC’s Justice League may be on the verge of getting their wish. While no official announcements about the long-awaited project have been released, the upcoming Man of Steel sequel – or Batman vs. Superman, if you prefer – promises to flesh out the DC Cinematic Universe in more ways than many previously expected it to.
First came the news that Oscar winner Ben Affleck will don the cowl as the Dark Knight himself, and then – amidst rumors that a variety of heroes may appear – director Zack Snyder and Warner Bros. announced that Fast & Furious star Gal Gadot will appear in the 2015 release as Wonder Woman. There’s no indication yet exactly how much Gadot will have to do in the film (or if her role is merely a setup for the inevitable big-screen Justice League).
“Oh, did they [announce Wonder Woman]? I don’t even know, see? So clearly I’m not the person to talk to… Now I know. But that’s awesome. I hope I get a scene with her… I think we start in February.”
A February 2014 start date makes perfect sense for a film of this scale (and may mean more casting announcements are imminent). After all, with all those heroes involved, Batman vs. Superman will surely need a lengthy post-production window to perfect all its effects shots.
As for Adams’ response to the Wonder Woman news, there are two ways to look at it. On the one hand, Adams could be playing coy with her knowledge (or lack thereof) regarding the project. At this point, it’s fairly commonplace for the cast and crew of a much-anticipated project to do their part to perpetuate the mysteries of its production (see: Star Trek Into Darkness). However, the other (perhaps more likely?) possibility is that the character of Wonder Woman was a fairly late addition to the script and/or amounts to little more than a cameo.
Given the amount of story the Man of Steel follow-up promises to cover (including the burgeoning romance between Superman and Lois Lane), it makes sense that Wonder Woman (and perhaps other Justice League members) are featured in very minor appearances or even during a mid-credits or post-credits teaser for their team-up film.
Still, there’s every possibility that Batman vs. Superman will find a way to perfectly balance a number of superhero characters. In that case, is there any chance for sparks to fly between Superman and Wonder Woman, as they do in the comic books?
Superhero Hype ran the possibility of such a love triangle by Adams:
“Am I interested [in a Lois-Superman-Wonder Woman love triangle]? I don’t know. I mean, we’ll see. I hope that I can be involved with a woman on screen where we’re not in a love triangle. That would be fun. Maybe where we team up together and we work as teammates instead of adversaries.”
Adams makes an excellent point here. Not only would a love triangle this early in Superman and Lois’s relationship seem premature, but it undermines all the effort Man of Steel put into modernizing Lois Lane from her traditional love interest/damsel in distress role. The first film portrayed her as a savvy journalist who ultimately proves herself a valuable ally to Superman, even keeping his identity secret. To follow that development by using the character primarily as part of a love triangle could be seen as a step backwards and undermine the strength the character showed in the first film.
Robert Yaniz Jr. blogs at Screen Rant.
Zack Snyder’s upcoming Man of Steel sequel Batman vs. Superman might be introducing a brand new Bruce Wayne in Ben Affleck and setting him up against Henry Cavill’s Superman, but with the main cast sorted out interest soon moved on to the supporting players.
Of these the most prominent is Wonder Woman, who may not have been in her own big-screen adventure yet but could be launched as part of Warner Bros. cinematic DC universe in preparation for a standalone film. Multiple actresses have auditioned for the role, and it seems like everyone has their ideal fan casting.
The time for rumors (these ones, at least) has now come to an end as Deadline reports that newcomer Gal Gadot has been cast in the iconic role. Gadot is best known for her appearances as Gisele in the Fast and Furious franchise, and also starred in James Mangold’s action comedy Knight and Day. Director Zack Snyder made the following statement about the casting choice:
“Wonder Woman is arguably one of the most powerful female characters of all time and a fan favorite in the DC Universe. Not only is Gal an amazing actress, but she also has that magical quality that makes her perfect for the role. We look forward to audiences discovering Gal in the first feature film incarnation of this beloved character.”
Other actresses who have previously been in talks to play Wonder Woman include Olga Kurylenko (Quantum of Solace) and Jaimie Alexander (Thor), but casting a relatively unknown actor is in line with what Warner Bros. has done before; Cavill himself wasn’t particularly well-known until he became Superman.
Gadot was born and raised in Israel and began her career as a model, serving two years in the Israeli army and even competing in the Miss Universe pageant before eventually moving to Hollywood to become an actress. Speaking in an interview about playing a tough female character like Gisele, Gadot said:
“In real life women are strong, and it should be the same on film. I think that because the men we have in this movie are so strong, tough, clever, intelligent, big – physically really big – I think that it’s a good balance to have us girls in the movie. Girls have a different flavor.”
Andrew Dyce blogs at Screen Rant.
Benedict Cumberbatch is out, Tom Hiddleston is reportedly in for Guillermo Del Toro's Gothic romance
Director Guillermo del Toro has described the script for his upcoming film Crimson Peak, his first ghost-themed horror film since The Devil’s Backbone, as a classic Gothic romance with a mix of kinky and scary moments, set in a haunted house in England. It definitely sounds like an interesting project from a director with a lot of great vision, which was why it was both surprising and disappointing to hear that Benedict Cumberbatch, who was signed on for a major role, had walked away from Crimson Peak entirely.
At the time we speculated that Thor: The Dark World star Tom Hiddleston – who is Cumberbatch’s unofficial twin in terms of the roles the two of them tend to get, their physical appearances and their general public personas – seemed like the best fit to step into the place recently vacated by Cumberbatch, and it looks like Del Toro was thinking along similar lines. We’ve just learned Hiddleston has been cast in Crimson Peak, which is set to begin shooting in January 2014.
The reasons behind Cumberbatch’s decision to drop out of Crimson Peak remains a mystery. Considering how in-demand he is, scheduling conflicts would seem like an obvious explanation, but sources at THR claim that his departure was not due to another project. Perhaps it’s due to creative differences, personal reasons, or a secret deal to star in another film – or perhaps Cumberbatch just needs a vacation.
The cast that Hiddleston is joining also includes Charlie Hunnam, who recently appeared in del Toro’s monsters vs. mechs movie Pacific Rim, Jessica Chastain (Mama), Supernatural‘s Jim Beaver and another Pacific Rim star, Burn Gorman. Emma Stone was also attached to star for a while before dropping out due to a scheduling conflict, and seems to have been replaced by Stoker star Mia Wasikowska.
The production start date has actually jumped forward by about six months from its original summer 2014 schedule, so expect to see casting firm up before then. Based on what we know so far, however, Crimson Peak could end up being a very self-contained movie with quite a small cast.
Hiddleston’s followers will no doubt fill any loss of interest due to Cumberbatch’s departure (though, as mentioned before, the two actors seem to share a collective fanbase), but even without either actor this return to straight horror will definitely be worth watching to find out if del Toro still has the talent for the genre that he displayed in his early years.
H. Shaw-Williams blogs at Screen Rant.
From the story of a reindeer who uses his special strengths to lead Santa's team to the tale of a man who learns that "no man is a failure who has friends" to the story of a child who rides a magical train to go see Santa Claus, everyone has their favorite holiday film to watch year after year.
We've assembled a list of contenders that covers everything from legends of Santa Claus to overcoming the commercialism of Christmas. The oldest is the 1946 film "It's a Wonderful Life," while the newest movie to make the cut is 2006's "The Nativity Story."
Many styles of film are represented as well, from the stop-motion animation of Rankin/Bass films like "Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer" to the traditional animation of "How the Grinch Stole Christmas!" and the performance capture computer animation of "The Polar Express."
RECOMMENDED: Christmas movie trivia: Take the quiz
And after the results came in for our poll on which "Christmas Carol" movie adaptation is the best ever, the only "Carol" version that made the cut is the 1951 film version starring Alastair Sim. (Sorry, George C. Scott and Muppet fans.)
So which movie is your favorite? Vote in our poll and we'll gather the results to share with all of you.
Make sure your top holiday movie doesn't get left behind. Have fun!
Along with tides of joy of givings of thanks, this holiday weekend brought with it the tragic death of Fast & Furious franchise star Paul Walker. The 40-year-old actor was in a fatal car crash during a charity event in Santa Clarita, California – and along with an outpouring of shock, horror, and grief from fans all across the world, the big question looming on everyone’s mind was, “How is this going to affect Fast & Furious 7 ?“
The seventh installment of the franchise has been in production since earlier this fall, with director James Wan (The Conjuring) taking over the helm from franchise staple, Justin Lin. Part 7 has been touted as a “’70s-style revenge thriller” story featuring Jason Statham as the vengeance-seeking brother of Fast & Furious 6 villain, Owen Shaw (Luke Evans) – meaning that some hard hits are coming to the Dom Terreto (Vin Diesel) and his F&F familia.
Of course, that was before those hard hits became all too real with the death of Walker; in an update from THR, we now learn that Universal has held a meeting determining the fate of Fast & Furious 7. The official company line is that as of now, the film will see a delay in production in order to allow for a proper, respectful, grieving period. That delay could subsequently cause the film’s July 2014 release date to be bumped, but F&F7 will NOT be abandoned.
RECOMMENDED: The 50 best movies of all time
However, even though the film is still on, there is a question of logistics; namely, HOW to wrap the film in a way that makes sense in the narrative of the film, while remaining respectful to Walker and his legacy.
…And that is quite a tough nut to crack. On the surface, it would seem an easy fix: rewrite the revenge story so that Walker’s character, Brian O’Connor, meets a noble end somewhere in Ian Shaw’s (Statham) campaign of vengeance. However, the suddenness of Walker’s death (and his position as a franchise lead) means his character’s death was likely NOT in the cards; trying to make it happen onscreen, the easiest fix would be to use some kind of stunt racing sequence that doesn’t require actual shots of the actor’s face – except that any such fix would also be uncomfortably close to depicting the way in which Walker actually died. Audiences are likely not going to be supportive of that – let alone Walker’s family, and his friends amongst the F&F cast and crew.
That leaves us with the possible work-around of an off-screen demise for Brian O’Connor, which – while more tasteful and practical – will seem like an unceremonious end for such an important character in a mega-popular franchise. But then, none of this is easy (tragedy tends to be – well, tragic), and if the film is committed to reaching the finish line, a scenario like the one posited above is probably the best option.
But who knows: Maybe things don’t have to be so dark. Maybe Brian and Mia (Jordana Brewster) and their child are all sent off into the sunset to live free and happy while Dom and the rest of the crew continue to deal with threats at their car doors. Maybe the land of movie fantasy offers fans something better than the harsh reality of life did. Maybe we all could use something a little more uplifting as we say goodbye to an actor whose character was an icon for a generation of moviegoers. One can only hope…
Looking beyond the now, the second biggest question on my mind is whether Vin Diesel and Co. are still committed to making Fast Furious installments beyond part 7 (parts 8 & 9 are already planned). Will it still be fun for the cast and crew (and the fans) to take this ride, now short one passenger? I think we could all understand if the answer to that question was “no.”
Kofi Outlaw blogs at Screen Rant.
RECOMMENDED: The 50 best movies of all time
But director Adam McKay will say this: there’s a dolphin involved. Namely, Ferrell yelling at one.
McKay told Moviefone the movie kicks off with a prologue which shows what happened to San Diego’s TV newsman Ron Burgundy (Ferrell) and his girlfriend and co-anchor Veronica Corningstone (Christina Applegate) since the last film and that the prologue includes said incident. (According to Los Angeles Times writer Chris Lee, Ron is struggling with his career and is an announcer at Sea World when he yells at the dolphin.)
“We tried to think of some lowest of the lows,” McKay said of the incident.
“Anchorman” didn’t become a breakout hit when it was first released – it was only after it came out on DVD that fans began rewatching it and the movie’s lines started being endlessly quoted. “The first movie did great on cable and DVD,” McKay told the Los Angeles Times. “And that's where it really took off — much like 'Austin Powers.’”
So now a sequel is arriving nine years later, and the movie finds Ron and his news team – reporter Brian Fantana (Paul Rudd), sports reporter Champ Kind (David Koechner), and weatherman Brick Tamland (Steve Carell) – going from their beloved San Diego to New York, where they’ve been taken on at a 24-hour news network, GNN.
But Ferrell says they aren’t exactly the stars of the network at first.
“[The network] literally just needed more bodies,” he told Moviefone. “They had to hire so many people, a massive group of people, at one time, to be on around the clock; that's why he and his news team are on at two in the morning. And, of course, they are horribly upset by that.”
In addition to the main cast returning as well as other holdovers from the first film like rival newsman Vince Vaughn, new faces have come aboard for the sequel, including Kristen Wiig, Liam Neeson, Harrison Ford, and Meagan Good, who portrays the team’s new station manager.
McKay said Ford was taken aback at first by his directorial style, in which he’ll give the actors new lines to try between takes.
“He was like, 'What?' when I would yell them out,” McKay said of the new lines in an interview with Moviefone. “Then he was like, 'This is crazy,' and he kind of had fun with it. And then he started liking it and adding his own.”
“Anchorman 2” is set to hit theaters Dec. 20.
Does watching a less-than-stellar film with snarky commentary from a man and two robots say Thanksgiving to you?
For some, between the years of 1991 and 1997, the Pilgrim holiday meant cutting a slice of pumpkin pie and settling down to watch the “Mystery Science Theater 3000” Turkey Day marathon, which aired on Comedy Central. The channel aired a marathon of episodes of the show, which consists of a man named Joel (or later, Mike) and robots Crow and Tom Servo watching a film of dubious quality and making jokes about it. Joel was put aboard a spaceship by scientists and forced to watch terrible movies as part of a scientific study.
“Mystery Science Theater 3000” debuted in 1988 and hopped around to a couple of different channels before its cancellation in 1999, but it gained a cult following and many episodes live on via DVD and the Internet.
The show starred “MST3K” creator Joel Hodgson from 1988 to 1993 (head writer Michael J. Nelson would replace him for the rest of the series’ run) and Hodgson will be hosting the event which will stream from the website MST3KTurkeyDay.com this year. Six episodes of “MST3K” chosen by Hodgson will air on the site beginning at 12 p.m. Eastern time on Thanksgiving Day.
Hodgson took suggestions from fans via Twitter as to what films would be best to include in the new marathon.
He told Entertainment Weekly he was amazed to hear what an important part of Thanksgiving the “MST3K” marathon had become for some fans.
“I’d hear all these stories about Turkey Day,” Hodgson said. “People would say, ‘Yeah, we still watch Mystery Science Theater on Thanksgiving. It’s a tradition, like the Lions playing.’ I was kind of amazed that it was in people’s lives like that.”
What will be included in the first “MST3K” marathon in 16 years? Check out the website for the streaming event if you’re in the mood for some sci-fi B-movies and deadpan humor.