Moviefone News

Moviefone News Moviefone Copyright 2011, HuffingtonPost.com, Inc. Moviefone Good old fashioned elbow grease. <![CDATA['The Boys,' 'Mortal Instruments' Dropped By Studios]]> Barely one day after Legendary Pictures stopped production plans on "Paradise Lost," Columbia and its sister studio, Screen Gems, have put the brakes on two other risky projects. Per The Hollywood Reporter, both "The Boys" and "Mortal Instruments" have been placed in turnaround by the studios, meaning unless another party comes in to help facilitate production costs, the planned films will be shipped to development hell. Based on the comic by Garth Ennis, with artwork by Darick Robertson, "The Boys" was being developed by "Anchorman" director Adam McKay. "I'm writing completely on my own on that, so it's taking twice as long as it should," McKay told MTV last March. "I am actually in the home stretch. I have about two weeks left on this draft and we're going to try and get it made. It's looking pretty cool. I'm excited about it." "The Boys" is about a group of CIA agents who keep tabs on superheros around the country; McKay described it as a modern-day version of "Watchmen," because of both its subject matter and its incredible violence. As for "Mortal Instruments," Screen Gem's planned adaptation of Cassandra Clare's YA series had a director (Scott Stewart) and cast (Lily Collins, Jamie Campbell Bower), but that wasn't enough to keep it on the right track. According to THR, Constantin Film might try to finance the film itself. About angels and demons, the film has been in development for a couple of years. Is this a new era of Hollywood responsibility, or simply a case of studios realizing when its best to cut losses? Time will tell, but -- for now -- take a moment to celebrate not having to see any of these movies at the multiplex... [via THR] ]]> Fri, 10 Feb 2012 23:48:33 EST http://news.moviefone.com/2012/02/10/the-boys-mortal-instruments_n_1269956.html <![CDATA[Oscar Short Film Nominees 2012: What Are They About?]]> your Academy Award pool. The films arrive in theaters this weekend (check the full listings to see when they will arrive to a theater near you). Then they hit On-Demand and iTunes on Februrary 21. And lastly, they are an exciting and eclectic mix of stories that are absolutely worth checking out. Now that you're up to speed, check out our recap of every short film competing for Oscar glory -- as well as are picks for the night's winners. PHOTOS: ]]> Fri, 10 Feb 2012 18:09:48 EST http://news.moviefone.com/2012/02/10/oscar-short-film-nominees-2012_n_1269557.html <![CDATA[Best Song Oscar Shuffle: Academy May Revamp Nomination Process]]> Alan Menken -- has become too stringent, then you're not alone. Bruce Broughton, who heads the executive committee of the Academy's music branch, shares your concerns. "Some people have said, 'Oh, you blew it this year.'" Broughton told The Wrap. "I don't know. Maybe we blew it. Maybe we didn't. As soon as the Oscars are over, we're going to look at it." In a year when 39 songs were submitted for Academy consideration, only "Man or Muppet" from "The Muppets" and "Real in Rio" from "Rio" earned nominations; that's the fewest number since the category was created 76 years ago. Left out were songs by such top pop, rock, and country songwriters as Elvis Costello, Madonna, Mary J. Blige, Lady Gaga, will.i.am, Pink, Sinead O'Connor, Robbie Williams, Chris Cornell, Brad Paisley and Zac Brown. (Also snubbed: songs by actresses Glenn Close and Zooey Deschanel. And Madonna's Golden Globe-winning "Masterpiece," from her movie "W.E.," was deemed ineligible because Academy rules say a song qualifies only if it's used during the movie or as the first song of the closing credits; "Masterpiece" was used too late in the credits to count.) The reason for the paucity of nominees is a 2009 rule change that requires a song to score at least 8.25 (on a scale from 6 to 10) to earn a nomination, though if only one song gets that score, then the next highest finisher gets nominated as well. (Which means it's possible this year that only one song scored high enough to qualify.) If fewer than five songs meet the threshold, then there will be fewer than five nominees, as has happened in four of the last seven years. (If more than five songs make the cut, then the top five scorers earn nominations.) And if no song scores 8.25 or better, then the category will be eliminated that year. "The intent of the rule, whether or not it worked out this way, is to raise the level of quality in the song nominations," Broughton told The Wrap. "We talked about it last year, and asked, do we want to keep that system, knowing that there could have been no nominations? And we voted to keep it this way." Other Academy branches use a similar scoring system, but even in, say, Best Animated Feature, the eligibility limit is only 7.5. Broughton has suggested that a score of 8 would be high enough, though it's not clear how many more songs, if any, would have been nominated this year under such a standard. "I can promise you that we're going to take a hard look at the point system," he told The Wrap. "We're going to try to see if we can get the rules to do what we hoped they would do: raise the quality of the nominated songs, so we can stand back proudly and look at our nominees." He added, "Maybe we need to overhaul the whole thing, but it hurts to think that we might have to lower our standards to bring more songs in." Frequent nominee Diane Warren, snubbed last year for one of her "Burlesque" tunes during a year when there were only four selections, told The Wrap that the category can be fixed without lowering standards -- just pick the five best-loved songs every year. "I'd like to see it work the way it is for anything else," she said. "I hope they change it, because I'd like to get nominated again, and I don't think I will if they keep this shit up." To add insult to injury, the producers of the Oscar telecast on Feb. 26 aren't scheduling a performance of either nominated song. Barely good enough to get nominated, and not even good enough to showcase before Oscar show viewers. Maybe the Academy would let the Muppets and the "Rio" birds perform if it had more enthusiasm for the category.

]]> Fri, 10 Feb 2012 18:03:34 EST http://news.moviefone.com/2012/02/10/best-song-oscar-nomination-process_n_1269218.html <![CDATA[Awards Show Challenge: Best Supporting Actress]]> the biggest stars in Hollywood gather to bestow Oscars on the best movies of the year. With Billy Crystal hosting the festivities once again, movie fans will be watching how many Academy Awards are racked up by "The Help," "Hugo" and more. And since we won't know who wins the big gold until that 8pm ET start-time on February 26, this is your chance to test your award show expertise. Every weekday between now and February 24, we'll post new questions about what will happen on Hollywood's big night. (Right there on the right side of your screen) Submit your best guesses and you'll automatically be eligible for a daily prize of two free movie tickets. The grand prize -- a YEAR'S worth of free movie tickets -- will be awarded to a user with the most correct predictions. Want to Win Free Movie Tickets For a Year? Keep Playing Awards Show Challenges Click here for rules. ]]> Fri, 10 Feb 2012 15:00:08 EST http://news.moviefone.com/2012/02/10/awards-show-challenge-best-supporting-actress_n_1269097.html <![CDATA['The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 2' Trailer Will Debut Before 'Hunger Games']]> the first trailer for "The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 2" is set to screen before "Hunger Games," when the film opens nationwide March 23. The "Hunger Games"/"Twilight" marriage makes perfect sense from a financial standpoint. Lionsgate has vampire-like expectations for "Games." The film is based on the massively popular book series by author Suzanne Collins, so the studio obviously sees it potentially turning into the next "Twilight" film franchise, which has already made more than $2.5 billion worldwide. "The Hunger Games," starring Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Hutcherson, Liam Hemsworth, Woody Harrelson and Elizabeth Banks, is set to hit theaters on March 23, meaning "Twilight" fans will start lining up outside their local theaters right about ... NOW. [via Variety] ]]> Fri, 10 Feb 2012 14:00:44 EST http://news.moviefone.com/2012/02/10/twilight-breaking-dawn-part-2-trailer-hunger-games_n_1268935.html <![CDATA[Family Film Guide: Do Your Kids Love 'The Phantom Menace'?]]> "Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace 3D" hits theaters this weekend, and it brings up a lot of contradictory feelings in fans of George Lucas' legendary franchise. Most parents (and viewers in general) feel an overpowering allegiance to the original trilogy, but our kids, who have been exposed to the prequel trilogy and its animated "Clone Wars" spin-off, might actually prefer Episodes I-II-III. What is a self-respecting IV-V-VI-loyal parent to do? Moviefone has spoken to "Star Wars" fans to discuss what parents think about their kids' experience with the complete saga. A Balanced Approach "My husband is/was a HUGE 'Star Wars' fan growing up, and our boys of course love it too. But, we made it a point to show them the originals first, and my oldest likes 'Return of the Jedi' best of all. Naturally, he's a big 'Clone Wars' lover (yes, he's already made me DVR the season finale on Cartoon Network), but he knows what's up when it comes to appreciating the classics. And, you should hear my 6-year-old's Yoda voice. So, so awesome." -- Amanda R., mother of three Prequel Schmequel "The fact that my boys do not have the appropriate reverence for Luke, Han Solo and Leia is what I consider one of my parenting failures. Prequel schmequel. Maybe if they had to get up to turn a knob to change the channel on a TV they would appreciate the finer points of the original movies. Harumph!" -- Amie Adams, mother of three Fans All Around "My elementary school aged children prefer the first prequel, 'Star Wars I: Phantom Menance,' because they identify with young Anakin Skywalker and Padme/Queen Amidala. They love Anakin's storyline (eschewing the boring Senate politics) for its 'Harry Potter'-esque discovery that a boy of sad circumstances actually has supernatural powers. My daughter is entranced by Padme's dual roles and costumes. And who wouldn't want to podrace? My kids also adore what my husband and I will always think of as Star Wars number one, 'A New Hope,' for Luke's similar discovery story and Han Solo's hilarious one liners (they frequently tell each other, 'Watch your mouth kid or you're gonna find yourself floating home!'). They are also Team Chewbacca, finding Jar Jar annoying. And if given a chance to watch the 'Clone Wars' animated show or play Lego Star Wars on the Wii, they always choose the latter." -- Jessica McFadden, mother of three It Makes No Difference "The obsession with the rest of my family drives me crazy. My kids don't realize there is a difference in the two trilogies. I was surprised they didn't notice a difference in the effects, but it just escaped them completely. It does make me sad that 'Episode I' is their fave instead of 'Episode V' like me." -- Christi L, mother of four 'Clone Wars' Lover "Emma doesn't even completely like the old trilogy. She LOVES 'Clone Wars,' however. I haven't let her watch episodes 1-3 because she's not ready yet. I suppose 'Phantom Menace' would be okay, but she doesn't really care to see it. But she will simply be crushed and not be able to handle watching Anakin become Vader. *I* couldn't even handle it, but that's because it's a crap movie. Why is Lucas still allowed to make movies?" -- Jamie, mother of two Inheriting the Force "Having grown up with the original 'Star Wars' trilogy, I love sharing the joy of 'Star Wars' with our children. Our kids have so many of the same questions about the series that I had. It throws me off when they refer to the original trilogy as 'movies #4, 5 and 6.' I still think of 'Star Wars: A New Hope,' 'The Empire Strikes Back,' and 'Return of the Jedi' as #1-3!" -- Leticia Barr, mother of two

Star Wars Gamer "My son doesn't watch the movies over and over again. But he is an avid player of Wii Lego Star Wars. He prefers playing the characters from the newer films when he plays his video games. Although I haven't asked him, I wonder if kids like the newer films because the special effects are better. I prefer the old films because I remember then in relation to what I was doing in the 70s. I waited months for the first 'Star Wars' film to make it to my local cinema in England. I saw it at least twice, which was unusual as I saw very few movies during my childhood in the UK." -- Jill Berry, mother of three Repeat Fans "We watch them over and over...and I actually like how the new Trilogy makes the older ones even better and make sense. The acting is equally bad so it matches up! :-) My kids act out Luke and Leia almost as much as Padme and Anakin." -- Linda Kerr, mother of two Original Purists "My kids have yet to see the prequels. I think my husband's attempt to keep them in the dark about Episodes 1, 2, & 3 is about to come to an end, though, since the commercials for Episode 1 in 3D is enticing Cupcake. She's asked to be taken to the theatre to see it!" -- Michelle, mother of three Age-Appropriate Issues "My daughter can't compare because I will not allow her to watch the prequels. She is 7. I feel episodes IV-VI are appropriate for her but episodes I-III are not. The prequels are more graphically violent and dark, she's not emotionally mature enough to handle them. She does have classmates who seem very obsessed with the prequels but when she plays with them she has enough knowledge from the original films to fit right in with no issues." -- Lisa Meeks, mother of one A Dad's Perspective "Jonas views both trilogies equally and does not show a preference for either one, though he likes 'Return of the Jedi' as the best movie. For him, all six movies are just one big story. Personally, like most people who grew up with the original trilogy, I think episodes 1 - 3 are weak. Jonas does not watch many movies with a critical eye, but the newer trilogy has generated discussion on how one becomes evil. And yes, we will probably check out the 3D episode 1." -- Daryl Bish The Horror "The fact that my future children might prefer Episodes 1-3 is the most horrifying thing I've ever heard. You should sell this information as a form of birth control." -- Lauren Goodman ]]> Fri, 10 Feb 2012 13:17:25 EST http://news.moviefone.com/2012/02/10/phantom-menace-3d-kid-reviews_n_1268741.html <![CDATA[My Night at a Midnight Showing of Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace in 3D]]> Early this morning, I attended a midnight showing of Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace in 3D. It was a fairly miserable experience for numerous reasons. As the night progressed, I kept a running diary of the events that transpired and the audience reaction. So, here's how that went down. 11:00 p.m. Honestly, I have no idea how big the crowd will be. The lack of buzz this week makes me think that we don't have to worry too much about getting decent seats, but this is New York City and this is a Star Wars movie. 11:17 p.m. You know, maybe I'm having flashbacks to the release of the Special Editions in 1997, but it's really hard to imagine opening night of a Star Wars movie without a large crowd. 11:23 p.m. A member of my party states, "We're seeing it near NYU. Of course it will be sold out." I'm actually starting to panic about not being in line yet. 11:30 p.m. Five blocks from the Regal Union Square 14, the rest of the group that I'm with decides that they want to stop for coffee. I plead my case that this is a terrible idea because we are already late. I may have been a little too emotional when I emphatically state, "We need to get seats!" 11:34 p.m. I think I may be genuinely excited to see The Phantom Menace. 11:37 p.m. Here is the line for the midnight showing of The Phantom Menace, approximately 20 minutes before it starts.

11:38 p.m. A man uses the kiosk the purchase a ticket. I ask him if I can take a picture of him buying a ticket to The Phantom Menace. He replies, "I'm seeing Safe House." 11:42 p.m. There are 24 people in this theater to see the midnight showing of The Phantom Menace. Then again, this is a rural area and that is to be expected. Oh, wait, no, we're in the heart of New York City. For a second I forgot.

11:46 p.m. Alison Willmore is here writing a review for Movieline. She has a conflicted look on her face that's somewhere in-between, "I'm happy to see you," and, "Oh, God, now there's proof that I was here." 12:00 a.m. As the lights go down, the crowd has swelled to just under 50 audience members. 12:08 a.m. A guy in front of me finds the trailer for Madagascar 3: Europe's Most Wanted absolutely hilarious. Honestly, I don't think I've ever seen someone laugh that hard at a movie trailer. I guarantee that as soon as this movie ends, this guy is writing the words "I have plans" in the June 8 entry of his Google Calendar. 12:15 a.m. "A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away... " flashes on the screen. The audience responds with polite applause. 12:16 a.m. For some reason, I was really looking forward to seeing the title crawl in 3D. Thing I learned: Even in 3D, sentences like, "The taxation of trade routes to outlying star systems is in dispute," are still very boring. 12:26 a.m. A group of about five people, with plenty of seats available, decide at this moment to sit directly behind us and deliver commentary. Yes, this what you're going to have to deal with if you decide to see The Phantom Menace in theaters: hecklers. 12:30 a.m. Jar Jar Binks makes his first appearance on screen. The audience bursts into laughter. Not because of Jar Jar's actions, but it's more of a nervous laughter of, "Good God, this really happened. I forgot how awful this was." 12:45 a.m. The star of the movie (if the posters are to be believed), Darth Maul, makes his first appearance. His scene lasts 15 seconds. 12:54 a.m. Captain Panaka reads off the name, "R2-D2." One lone audience member screams, "Woooooo!" 1:03 a.m. Finally, I ask the group behind me, "Are you going to be talking through this entire movie?" Their leader looks at me and says, "Yes, I am." I have to admit, I wasn't expecting that and it threw me off guard. I had no response. So, well played, asshole. I guess I should appreciate his honesty. Of course, a few moments later I had ten, "That's what I should have said," responses. (Yes, one of them involved a "jerk store.") 1:15 a.m. It dawns on me that this movie is in 3D. Honestly, I really haven't noticed. 1:33 a.m. The first time Anakin yelled, 'Yippie," the audience let it go. The second time, they did not. An outbreak of, "Yippie," floods the theater. 1:45 a.m During the Senate scene, right when the line, "We now introduce the delegation from Naboo," is spoken, Matt Patches from Hollywood.com let's out an overly dramatic snore. Apparently he is not a fan of this scene. 1:45 a.m. Nope, he's actually sleeping. I bet he's dreaming about a better movie. 2:01 a.m. This really is a pretty boring movie. 2:12 a.m. Katey Rich from Cinemablend and Dave Gonzales from Latino Review point out that a man in front of us is recording the movie. I am fascinated by this. Does he not realize that this movie has been out for 13 years and is readily available on home video or on Spike? Is it even possible to bootleg a 3D movie? 2:15 a.m. The lightsaber battle between Qui-Gon Jin, Obi-Wan Kenobi and Darth Maul begins. I must admit, this is fun to see on a big screen again. 2:24 a.m. The lightsaber battle between Qui-Gon Jin, Obi-Wan Kenobi and Darth Maul is a lot shorter than I remember. 2:35 a.m. The Phantom Menace in 3D finally comes to an end. What I learned: There's really no thrill of seeing this particular Star Wars movie on the big screen again. The 3D is barely noticeable -- Lucas stated that he didn't want anything to jump out at the audience, he succeeded. And this movie has such a bad reputation, a good percentage of patrons will be there only to audibly and annoyingly mock the film. 2:37 a.m. As we walk out of the theater, a older gentleman in the last row is still sleeping. We debate waking him, but the general consensus among our group is that, at this point, he's earned that right to sleep. Mike Ryan is the senior writer for Moviefone. He has written for Wired Magazine, VanityFair.com, GQ.com, New York Magazine and Movieline. He likes Star Wars a lot. You can contact Mike Ryan directly on Twitter ]]> Fri, 10 Feb 2012 13:00:29 EST http://news.moviefone.com/mike-ryan/midnight-showing-the-phantom-menace_b_1268745.html <![CDATA['Breaking Dawn Part 2' Trailer Will Debut In Front Of 'The Hunger Games']]> The Hunger Games" was debuting on night, Lionsgate announced on Friday that the trailer for "Breaking Dawn Part 2" will premiere before all "Games" screenings. "'The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 2' trailer will debut exclusively on every 'Hunger Games' print on its opening night for what will be Lions Gate's largest release ever," Lionsgate chief executive Jon Feltheimer said during conference call (via The Los Angeles Times), while every Twi-hard also anticipating "The Hunger Games" presumably dropped dead with delight. Lionsgate recently purchased Summit Entertainment, the studio behind the "Twilight" franchise, putting both YA phenomenons under the same roof. As for "Twilight," despite the fact that "Breaking Dawn Part 2" will be the final go-around for Bella, Edward and Jacob, Lionsgate would be open to another film, should Stephenie Meyer find time to write another book. "The Hunger Games," with its "Breaking Dawn" trailer, arrives in theaters on March 23. [via LAT/Company Town] ]]> Fri, 10 Feb 2012 12:30:57 EST http://news.moviefone.com/2012/02/10/breaking-dawn-part-2-trailer-hunger-games_n_1268801.html <![CDATA['Rebecca' Remake: Alfred Hitchcock's Only Oscar Winner Gets Re-Commissioned By DreamWorks]]> "Psycho" "Rear Window." According to Variety, DreamWorks has begun plans to remake the Alfred Hitchcock classic "Rebecca" with "History of Violence" screenwriter Steven Knight. Knight -- Oscar nominated for writing "Dirty Pretty Things" in 2002, and also responsible for the David Cronenberg film "Eastern Promises" -- will apparently go back to the Daphne DuMaurier source novel for his adaptation, and not work directly off Hitchcock's moody thriller. The original 1940 film followed Mrs. de Winter (Joan Fontaine), a "naive young woman" who marries a rich widower (Laurence Olivier) and moves into his mansion -- which just so happens to be haunted by his previous wife, Rebecca. "Rebecca" was named Best Picture at the Academy Awards ceremony in 1941, and earned nine other nominations, including Best Actor, Best Actress and Best Director. Of course, Hitchcock famously never won the award for Best Director, instead earning an honorary Oscar from the Academy in 1968. "Rebecca" was his first nomination in the category. Hitchcock was a long-time fan of DuMaurier's work, having adapted "Jamaica Inn" for the screen in 1939; he also based "The Birds" on one of her short stories. [via Variety] ]]> Fri, 10 Feb 2012 12:15:14 EST http://news.moviefone.com/2012/02/10/rebecca-remake-alfred-hitchcock_n_1268668.html <![CDATA[Daniel Espinosa, Swedish 'Safe House' Director, Tries For A Classic American Tale]]> This was your first English feature -- how was that experience, was it a big change for you? It wasn't that big of a difference, it's a camera, it's a couple of actors and you have to make due with the time that you get. The only difference is that you have more time with the people involved. But basically, it's filmmaking, the same thing. And you did it in South Africa -- what was the shoot like? That was really cool. It's a country with such strong colors and such strong culture and so if you just put the camera out on the street, the pure vibe of the whole city will start influencing your work and the actors. So you met with the studio and said you wanted to do the film your way, with your more unusual brand of filmmaking -- what are your trademarks as a director? I did a movie called "Snabba Cash" and it has a fairly documentary style, and even though it's a gangster movie, it's based in characters. So I wanted to do an action movie with the people that actually have thoughts and feelings. We find Denzel Washington's Tobin Frost to be a little more human than we'd expect; is it safe to call him an anti-hero? Absolutely. I mean, he's the reluctant hero, he's the character who just wants to be an egotistical bastard, but throughout his journey, he meets this kid and he seems something in this kid that reminds him, of who he used to be before the world destroyed him. And I think that moves him, and I don't think he likes it It isn't the most positive portrayal of the CIA; were you worried about how they'd react? What, like they'd come crashing through my window? Well, maybe that you'd be attacked in the press or people would react negatively. I think in many ways, if you talk about being patriotic, I think it's a very American movie. The tradition in America has always been the cowboy. The cowboy doesn't ally himself with the rest of society or the government, he chooses to see right from wrong as strong as he can and he rides off alone in the end. That is the American hero journey, the lonely man. It's interesting you say that; that's the legacy of American films, the John Wayne character, but do people from abroad still see that as the archetype? John Ford, that's the base of American storytelling, and it's a huge part of your history, and it's also reflected in your politics. It's the self-made man. It's the man that arrives to the country and can create his own future with his own hands. The film also tells a very contemporary story -- you have waterboarding scenes. Was the studio worried at all about showing Americans waterboarding people? No, they were very supportive throughout the process to make a movie that was based in the reality we have today. Why Ryan and Denzel for those roles? You don't pick Denzel Washington, you ask him. With Denzel, he was only the one who should do the part. That's what I told everybody: if Denzel doesn't do it, I won't do it, because I thought this is the part he should have. If he didn't want to, I didn't think there was a movie there, because the character, how I worked with the writer, we designed it for him. With Ryan, it was a meeting, I met with a lot of actors in his age group -- great actors -- and me and Ryan, we sat down and we spoke and we had a very strong connection. And I saw the work that he did in "Buried," I think it was a great piece of acting and directing, and I thought that there was something in Ryan that I wanted to investigate as a director. It's a journey we haven't done before. What was that quality? We just spoke about our lives and where we came from, and I could see in "Buried" that he had a core as a very strong actor and he had something that you almost could call a natural charisma, that, in many ways, Robert Redford had when he was young. But Robert never played into that charisma; he always played grumpy and he always played into the scenes, and I thought there was an opportunity with Ryan there was an opportunity to explore that. "Safe House" is out in theaters now. ]]> Fri, 10 Feb 2012 11:31:12 EST http://news.moviefone.com/2012/02/10/swedish-safe-house-director-daniel-espinosa_n_1268228.html <![CDATA[Awards Show Challenge: Best Supporting Actor]]> the biggest stars in Hollywood gather to bestow Oscars on the best movies of the year. With Billy Crystal hosting the festivities once again, movie fans will be watching how many Academy Awards are racked up by "The Help," "Hugo" and more. And since we won't know who wins the big gold until that 8pm ET start-time on February 26, this is your chance to test your award show expertise. Every weekday between now and February 24, we'll post new questions about what will happen on Hollywood's big night. (Right there on the right side of your screen) Submit your best guesses and you'll automatically be eligible for a daily prize of two free movie tickets. The grand prize -- a YEAR'S worth of free movie tickets -- will be awarded to a user with the most correct predictions. Want to Win Free Movie Tickets For a Year? Keep Playing Awards Show Challenges Click here for rules. ]]> Fri, 10 Feb 2012 11:00:29 EST http://news.moviefone.com/2012/02/10/awards-show-challenge-best-supporting-actor_n_1268366.html <![CDATA['Spider-Man,' 'Breaking Dawn,' 'The Notebook' And More All-Wet Love Scenes (PHOTO)]]> PHOTOS: ]]> Fri, 10 Feb 2012 10:08:24 EST http://news.moviefone.com/2012/02/10/spider-man-breaking-dawn-wet-love-scenes_n_1267393.html <![CDATA[Dustin Hoffman On The Academy Awards: 'It's Boring']]> In a new interview with Maxim, two-time Academy Award winner Dustin Hoffman says what you've been thinking for years. "It's boring!" he said, when asked about attending the ceremony. "It lasts forever, and don't think you're seeing spontaneous behavior. You see couples who are suddenly smooching, and, well, there's a guy sitting on the ground with the camera at their knees." Hoffman claims he once wanted to play with that lack of spontaneity, but was persuaded to play nice. "There was one particular time I knew I wasn't going to win, and when they'd train the camera on me as one of the losers, I wanted to be able to rip open my tuxedo shirt and just have stenciled on my chest, oh, shit," he said. "But my wife wouldn't let me do it." Hoffman has been nominated seven times in the Best Actor category, most recently for "Wag the Dog" in 1997. He previously won for "Kramer Vs. Kramer" (1979) and "Rain Man" (1988). The star's disdain for the Oscars was apparent even when he won for "Kramer Vs. Kramer" at the 1980 ceremony. "He has no genitalia and he's holding a sword," Hoffman quipped upon receiving his Oscar, before adding, "I'd like thank my parents for not practicing birth control." Hoffman can now be seen weekly on the HBO series "Luck." Wonder what he'll say about the Emmy Awards... [Maxim via Page Six] ]]> Fri, 10 Feb 2012 09:59:26 EST http://news.moviefone.com/2012/02/10/dustin-hoffman-academy-awards-boring_n_1267875.html <![CDATA[Movie Ticket Prices: All-Time High Reached In 2011]]> via The Hollywood Reporter), movie ticket prices reached an all-time high last year, rising from $7.89 in 2010 to $7.93 in 2011. Thankfully for consumers, the increase wasn't as bad as the previous year, which saw ticket prices grow $0.39 between 2009 and 2010. What's to blame for the increasing cost of attending the movies -- y'know, besides the increasing cost of everything, ever? Think of it as a trickle-down issue: studios are producing more and more blockbusters, which cost more and more money (see the budgets of "John Carter" and "Battleship" for examples); exhibitors are upgrading to digital projection and, often times, require 3D projectors to screen the blockbusters; and consumers are getting left with at least some of the bill. 3D tickets cost, on average, $3 more than regular tickets. That's not to say all hope is lost: ticket prices dropped to $7.83 in the fourth quarter of 2011, which could mean a leveling off in 2012; after all, ticket prices have grown in every year since 1992. Perhaps that lower national average at the end of the year is helping business: since the ball dropped on 2012, movie attendance has been in an upswing, and many early year releases have done better than anticipated at the box office. [via THR] ]]> Fri, 10 Feb 2012 09:19:54 EST http://news.moviefone.com/2012/02/10/movie-ticket-prices-all-time-high_n_1267821.html <![CDATA[In Defense of Star Wars Episode One: The Phantom Menace]]>

Like so many who read and write about movies, I saw Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace on Wednesday, May 19th, at 12:01am. Like many who read and write about movies, I did not think it was the greatest film of all time. But like the majority of the movie-going public, I also did not think it was the worst film of all time, nor did I find it to be some kind of glorious affront to cinema as an art form. And 13 years later, it is what it always was: a Star Wars movie through-and-through. It has problems unique to itself, unique to the prequel trilogy, and even some problems that have existed in the series right at the start. Taking away the fact that one film was a cinematic breakthrough and launched the fandom of a hundred-million would-be movie lovers and the other was released under the crushing expectations of two generations of film fans, Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace is really no better or worse than Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope.

One is overly revered because it was the first film in the series and had the benefit that comes with discovery. The other was crushed by the weight of impossible expectations. Objectively speaking, they are both fine introductions to their respective trilogies which pave the way for arguably superior sequels (you may prefer Star Wars to Return of the Jedi, I happen to prefer The Phantom Menace to the somewhat pandering but admittedly more entertaining Attack of the Clones). They both suffer from campy acting, stilted dialogue and inconsistent pacing. The Phantom Menace lacks a rogue-ish Han Solo character, even if the film (by virtue of being the fourth entry in a long-running series) doesn't need a cynical 'audience surrogate' this time around. Natalie Portman was always unfairly derided for not playing Queen Amadala as a clone of Carrie Fisher's Princess Lea. Her somewhat cold, Elizabethan portrayal is both her best performance in the prequel trilogy and a prime example of fans objecting primarily because it wasn't identical to the previous Star Wars universe (Lucas's apparent cave in Attack of the Clones, making Padme 'sexier', is one reason Episode II is the weakest of the series). That The Phantom Menace (and by proxy the prequel trilogy) operates differently than the first three Star Wars films does not automatically make them inferior, merely different. Taken as an individual film or the start of a three-film saga, it has eye-popping visuals, at least three terrific performances (Liam Neeson, Ian McDiarmid, and Pernilla August), a fine (if famously compromised) score by John Williams, and a politically wonky story that took hits for being overly complicated while serving was a chilling modern-day parable (a 'good' politician brought down by "baseless accusations of scandal" -- remind you of anyone who was president in 1999?). Yes, the original Star Wars had a simple narrative, basically following the Joseph Campbell heroic journey. But Phantom Menace (and the prequel trilogy overall) compensates for its admittedly inferior characters with a more complicated and morally grey plot. Critics and pundits always complain about the simplicity and spoon-fed narratives of mainstream films. Yet when one comes along that actually requires audience to pay attention (Mission: Impossible, Quantum Of Solace, etc), they all complain that "It's too confusing!" or "It's too complicated and muddled!" You won't get me to admit that Jake Lloyd is cooler (or a better actor) than Mark Hamill, but I have always appreciated the intricate plotting of the more ambitious prequel trilogy. And for a film that's been knocked as 'kid-friendly' (more on that later), it always struck me as darkly ironic that the entire journey in The Phantom Menace is basically a trick in order to pull off a aenatorial coup, replacing the decent Chancellor Valorum (Terence Stamp) with Palpatine (who is, of course, not so decent). Maybe kids didn't realize it at the time, but every single character, be they good or evil, was working for the villain to further his authoritarian goals (this is actually the running subtext behind the fantastic Clone Wars cartoon series that premiered in late 2008). Whether you like the pod-race or not (admission -- I don't), it is a triumph of technical action film-making. Of course, it's also the scene where Lucas's tilt toward 'juvenility', also represented by Jar Jar Binks and Jake Lloyd's performance as Anakin Skywalker, hits hardest, as the use of comedic announcers with cartoon-ish vocals stands out as something that just doesn't fit within the Star Wars universe. Whether or not the god-awful narration is evened-out by darkly comic relief (where Tusken Raiders murder the other pod racers purely for kicks... I always laughed at that) is a judgment call. But one bad scene, which sits awkwardly in tone with the rest of the six film-saga, does not a movie make. And if one centerpiece action scene doesn't quite hold up to repeat viewings, the other one does. Even the most virulent detractors of the picture openly admit that the climactic light-saber fight between Darth Maul and the two Jedi warriors (Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan Kenobi) is exactly what we nerds waited sixteen years to see. It's not as emotionally engaging as the high-water mark duels in The Empire Strikes Back or Return of the Jedi, (my wife and I affectionately call it 'Duel of the Red-Shirts') but it is the most technically perfect light-saber fight in the entire six-film series and it beats the living crap out of the downright pathetic 'old man vs. asthmatic robot' slap-fight in Star Wars. Of course the film does have its issues, some of which were noted above. Perhaps because Lucas knew that he was going to get to make the next two chapters, The Phantom Menace lacks any real character arc for any of its major players. The dialogue is occasionally stilted and delivered in a relatively rigid fashion, as if most of the cast was directed to 'do what Guinness did in A New Hope'. In terms of plot, it is quite self-contained, but as a character piece it is clearly just part one of a three (or six) part story. The four-part action climax, a clear attempt by Lucas to top the three-pronged finale of Return of the Jedi, suffers from a lack of engagement in three of those action sequences. The space dog-fight, the Padme blaster shoot-out, and the large-scale battle of Naboo feel more perfunctory, which is ironic since they are the sequences that resolve the prime conflict, while the light-saber battle is basically two Jedis dealing with unrelated Jedi business. Slight digression, but I love that the two Jedi stumble upon the first Sith warrior seen in centuries and they immediately set out to kill him as quickly as possible. Simple questions like "Who are you? What do you want? Who are you working for?" never come up. Arguably the biggest story problem is that Anakin saves the day completely by accident, while the biggest character issues is that Jake Lloyd is pretty terrible as Anakin Skywalker (if you watch the terrific documentary on the Phantom Menace DVD, titled "The Beginning," you can literally watch Lucas pick the wrong kid to play young Skywalker). That the Jedi are cold, unfeeling bastards basically sets up their downfall in the next two films. That Anakin is such a naive and wide-eyed innocent actually makes his final destiny that much more heartbreaking. Lucas didn't want an obviously troubled and disturbed Anakin turning into Darth Vader. He wanted a completely good young child to slowly morph into a person capable of complete evil. Just as, over the course of the prequel trilogy, the seemingly good Republic allows itself to become a tyrannical dictatorship out of fear, so too does Anakin's fear allow him to be undone. Point being, especially if you know what's coming, this is all pretty heavy stuff for a 'kids' film'. But in the end, Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace *is* a kids' film. It is a sci-fi outer-space fantasy adventure designed to appeal to kids who are about as young as you were when you first saw Star Wars. We may cringe at Jar Jar Binks (even as we ignore that he's barely in the film after his introductory moments), but younger audiences do find him funny and charming. We may wish that Jake Lloyd was a bit darker and introspective as the boy who would be Darth Vader, but younger boys see themselves in him and his wish-fulfillment fantasy adventure. Come what may, warts and all, The Phantom Menace was always intended as a gateway drug, a kid-friendly space opera designed to snag young audiences into the world of Star Wars just as it was being reborn. In the 13 years since it was first released, an entire generation of moviegoers grown up loving or liking The Phantom Menace in the same way we fell for Star Wars all those decades ago. If Lucas had given us the Star Wars prequel that was tailored-made for the now-adult audience that grew up on the franchise, if he had made Anakin quasi-evil right from the start, had he filled the film with unrelentingly graphic violence and characters that lacked any real kid-appeal, there is little chance that kids today would still be playing Star Wars on playgrounds all across America. In all objectivity, I wish The Phantom Menace was a better movie. I wish it was a tighter picture, that the all-important pod race sequence wasn't overlong and relatively suspense-less. I wish Lucas didn't feel the need to make the enemy robot army into chit-chatting clowns and that he had cast a better actor as Anakin. But The Phantom Menace is still a good fantasy adventure picture, arguably better plotted and more visually imaginative than any number of would-be blockbusters that have followed its path over the last decade. And it is absolutely a Star Wars movie that holds its own against pretty much any entry in the series with the arguable exception of The Empire Strikes Back (which, with its scaled-back and character-driven intimacy, is the odd-man out in the six film saga). And as a gateway drug that successfully ensnared an entire generation of young kids and turned them into Star Wars junkies as well, it is an unqualified success. You can still find kids playing Star Wars adventures on the playground this very day. They pretend to be Anakin Skywalker, Padme, Obi-Wan Kenobi and any number of characters from both trilogies. You don't hear them complaining that "Jar Jar sucks!". You don't hear them protesting that "George Lucas raped my childhood!". For a generation of kids who came of age 13 years ago, The Phantom Menace, Attack of the Clones, and Revenge of the Sith ARE their childhood. Scott Mendelson For more Star Wars-related essays, go HERE, and HERE. ]]> Fri, 10 Feb 2012 09:03:57 EST http://news.moviefone.com/scott-mendelson/star-wars-phantom-menace_b_1267497.html <![CDATA[Brad Pitt's 'World War Z' Cleared Of Hungarian Weapons Trafficking Charges: Report]]> stormed a warehouse that contained 85 fully-functioning assault rifles intended for use on Pitt's upcoming zombie film, "World War Z." It's illegal to transport working weapons into the country, and because the guns, which were sent from the UK to Budapest, were easily readjusted to fire live ammunition, they were considered an illicit shipment. Now, according to Hungarian outlets, Pitt's crew has had the charges dropped on a technicality: because the shipment came in to the duty-free area of the country's airport, and there was no one there with ownership rights initially waiting to receive them, it is impossible to hit any specific party with the illegal trafficking charge. If accurate, it's good news for Pitt, who can now enjoy the upcoming Academy Awards -- where he's up for two statues, including Best Actor -- safe in the knowledge that there will be no Hungarian police out to take him down. ]]> Fri, 10 Feb 2012 08:47:38 EST http://news.moviefone.com/2012/02/10/brad-pitts-world-war-z-cleared-weapons_n_1267759.html <![CDATA[Safe House: 25 Questions]]> This weekend, Denzel Washington (Virtuosity) shows a young punk, played by ~~Chris Pine~~ Ryan Reynolds, that an old dog still knows a lot of tricks in the new thriller Safe House. As a service, we answer every question that you could possibly have about Safe House. Q: How many safe houses are in Safe House? A: Three. Q: Why is a safe house needed in Safe House? A: Denzel Washington plays Tobin Frost, a former CIA agent who has been "off the grid" for the last nine or ten years (depending on which character that you get your exposition from). He turns himself in at the American embassy in Cape Town, South Africa. From there, Tobin Frost is taken to a safe house for interrogating. Q: Why would Tobin Frost turn himself in? A: During the opening scenes, Frost is ambushed by gunmen. His only option is to turn himself in because the gunmen cannot follow him into the embassy. Q: Is Tobin Frost a dangerous man? A: When enough characters scream, "This is Tobin Frost!" or surprisingly state, "That's Tobin Frost," there's a general sense that Tobin Frost presents some sort of threat. Q: What threat does Tobin Frost present? A: The first is his knowledge of CIA intelligence that he's been allegedly sharing with terrorists, which includes a mysterious computer chip. Q: Is there a second threat? A: Only the threat of continuing to erase our memories of a time when Denzel Washington appeared in worthwhile movies. Q: Didn't Safe House sing "Don't Dream it's Over"? A: No. You're thinking of Crowded House. Q: Wait, what does Safe House have to do with The Phantom Menace? I thought that was the only movie you were allowed to write about this week. A: (Shhh! They'll hear you!) Q: Who is in charge of the safe house? A: That would be Matt Weston, played by Ryan Reynolds (Blade: Trinity). Q: Is Weston a no-nonsense expert on interrogations? A: Again, Matt Weston is played by Ryan Reynolds. Q: So, then, what is Matt Weston's demeanor? A: Weston is a low-level CIA agent who spends most of his nights throwing a tennis ball against the walls of his safe house. Unfortunately, the team that brings Frost to the safe house is ambushed and killed, leaving Weston solely responsible for Frost. Q: Wait, didn't Safe House sing "Electric Blue?" A: No, you're thinking of Icehouse. Q: How many times so far have you typed "Tobin Bell" instead of "Tobin Frost"? A: Four times. Q: In what year is Ryan Reynolds' Safe House character, Matt Weston, born? A: 1982. Q: In what year is Ryan Reynolds' Green Lantern character, Hal Jordan, born? A: 1982. Q: In what year is Ryan Reynolds born? A: 1976. (Yes, we are still one 1982-born Ryan Reynolds character away from a trend.) Q: What's the best thing about Safe House? A: Joel Kinnaman. Q: What did you find odd about Safe House? A: There are at least five scenes in which characters get shot when you're not expecting it to happen. By the end of the movie, any time there was a quiet moment, I was expecting a gunshot to sound off at any moment. And quite a few times, I was correct. It happened so often that it started to feel like an SNL sketch. [Ed. note: That is a good idea for an SNL sketch.] Q: Did you enjoy Safe House? A: I actually did enjoy Safe House -- though I did so in a "no reasonable person should be enjoying this, yet I am" kind of way. To be honest, between all of the heads exploding from gunfire and Denzel being Denzel, I found it entertaining if absurd. Q: If you're going to be blurbed in this weekend's commercials for Safe House, what quote do you hope is used? A: "No reasonable person should be enjoying this, yet I am." Mike Ryan, Moviefone Q: Did the person sitting next to you during the Safe House screening briefly fall asleep during Safe House? A: Yes. But, to be fair, she was sick. Q: How many times is the term "safe house" used in Safe House? A: I lost count around 13. Q: Is the term "safe housekeeper" used in Safe House? A: Yes. Q: Will the ending of Safe House shock or surprise me? A: If you have yet to reach the 8th grade, it might do both. Q: With every movie, how much closer is Denzel Washington to becoming the Jay Pharoah parody of himself? A: Twenty-six percent closer. Each time. Mike Ryan is the senior writer for Moviefone. He has written for Wired Magazine, VanityFair.com, GQ.com, New York Magazine and Movieline. He likes Star Wars a lot. You can contact Mike Ryan directly on Twitter ]]> Fri, 10 Feb 2012 08:19:30 EST http://news.moviefone.com/mike-ryan/safe-house-25-questions_b_1266686.html <![CDATA['Seeking A Friend For The End Of The World' Trailer: Steve Carell, Keira Knightley, Patton Oswalt (VIDEO)]]> Just one day after the first poster for "Seeking a Friend For the End of the World" debuted with a thud, the first trailer for the apocalypse dramedy with Steve Carell and Keira Knightley has arrived with better results. After all, it's not ~~often~~ ever that you get to see Carell weirded out by Patton Oswalt and Knightley make out with "Community" star Gillian Jacobs. Of course, those are the quirky-funny parts; throw some Tristan und Isolde in over the images instead of Talking Heads, and you've basically got "Melancholia." As a giant asteroid hurtles toward Earth, giving humanity three weeks to get its estate in order, a man (Carell) and his young neighbor (Knightley) head out on a road trip to find their loved ones. What they encounter ranges from riots to promiscuity to by-the-book police officers. It all looks...interesting. Can "Seeking a Friend For the End of the World" balance its warring tones over two hours, as well as it does in the two-minute trailer? As Woody Allen once wrote, "If it bends, it's funny; if it breaks, it's not funny." Starring Carell, Knightley, Oswalt, Jacobs, Connie Britton, Melanie Lynskey, T.J. Miller and many more, "Seeking a Friend For the End of the World" hits theaters in June. ]]> Fri, 10 Feb 2012 08:11:40 EST http://news.moviefone.com/2012/02/10/seeking-a-friend-for-the-end-of-the-world-trailer_n_1267716.html