First look at Gemma Artreton in "Clash of the Titans"(2010)

Apparently Chris Nolan's "Inception" is no small flick; budget could run upwards of $200 million

When the project was first announced, most people assumed that Inception would be a smaller film that Christopher Nolan would film before returning to make a third Batman film. But with a budget of over $200 million (or possibly $178 Million if the initial number is Canadian dollars) , the film isn’t looking so small after all.

This according to The Calgary Sun, who also claims that the psychological thriller will be filming in five different countries, including a “significan portion” in Kananaskis, Alberta (a rural district situated to the west of Calgary in the footholls of the Canadian Rockies). Apparently Nolan visited Canada twice scouting locations, looking at nearby foothills and mountainous areas by helicopter before choosing Fortress Mountain as the main Alberta location. The newspaper insists that the location shooting will be significant, employing hundreds, if not thousands, of local film workers beginning this Summer when construction on an “elaborate set” is scheduled to begin.

The plot is being kept under lock and key. MTV recently asked Joseph Gordon-Levittto talk about the movie, and the star reluctantly responded:

Here’s the thing… I cant wait to talk to you about [Inception] but I’ve been very specifically asked not to talk about it. I want to respect [director Chris Nolan's wishes] because I love his movies and I’m so honored and grateful to be working with him. He’s got a really specific idea and way he wants people to be presented with this thing.

All we know about the story so far is that the movie is a contemporary science fictionaction movie “set within the architecture of the mind.” Leonardo DiCaprio plays the lead, a CEO-type, Marion Cotillard (La Vie en rose, Public Enemies) is his wife, Ellen Page (Juno) is a young college grad student and DiCaprio’s sidekick, Joseph Gordon-Levitt plays an associate working for DiCaprio. Ken Watanabe will play the film’s villain, a man who is blackmailing Leonardo DiCaprio’s character. Tom Hardy (Bronson) is a member of DiCaprio’s team. Cillian Murphy (Batman Begins, Sunshine) andMichael Caine are also signed on, but no details are known about their characters.

Inception will begin production this summer, and is scheduled to hit theaters on July 16th 2010.

"The Brothers Bloom" - REVIEW

You know how you have those unfortunate experiences where you watch a film, enjoy it, feel that it's coming to a close, and start getting ready to leave...before it continues on for another 35 minutes? That's exactly the big problem with Rian Johnson's "The Brothers Bloom", a fun ride that seems to become a totally different movie (for the worse) in its last third.

Bloom and Stephen (Adrien Brody and Mark Ruffalo) are the titular brothers who have spent almost their entire lives working as expert conmen. Bloom is always the more reserved, cautious one, and Stephen is wildly ambitious, weaving cons so elaborate that they start to become adventure stories. Eventually, Bloom gets sick of it and goes off to Montenegro, but of course Stephen finds him, and ropes Bloom in for one last epic con, along with their explosives expert Bang Bang (Rinko Kikuchi). The plan involves roping in a shy, goofy heiress who "collects hobbies" (Rachel Weisz), and using her expertise in...everything in order to help the trio obtain an ancient prayer book hidden in the catacombs of Prague, before selling it to a man from Argentina for a cool $2.5 million.

The opening is pleasant, but weighed down by the necessary exposition and "this is the last one...no I mean it this time" conversations, but then the heiress comes into play. Initially a socially awkward hobbyist (who can do everything from breakdancing to play a dozen intruments and speak as many languages), as she comes out of her shell she becomes increasingly delightful. Weisz, who I'm not a huge fan of (never in a million years will I agree with that Oscar win of hers) is totally winning here, easily stealing the show. She's bubbly, funny, and a joy to watch amidst sour Brody, scheming Ruffalo, and near-mute Kikuchi (who, ironically, has the second best character). So, things get underway, including the involvement of a Belgian (Robbie Coltrane) who may or may not be double-crossing the group, and a man simply called Diamond Dog who taught the brothers what they know, but seems to have a bad relatioship with them (for a reason never made clear). A couple of explosions and some good laughs later, everything seems set to wrap up. 'Maybe there will only be about 10 or 15 minutes left, to squeeze in a little more plot and a nice tidy resolution,' I thought, 'what a great time at the movies this has been. It's not amazing, but I'd certainly recommend this to people with a smile!' And then the second movie started. When a pivotal scene in Mexico occurs, things start to slide downhill. The story gets darker and stranger, involving getting mixed up with some Russians who may or may not be working with Stephen to work out a con against Bloom and the heiress (why??). With its travels abroad, sly humor, and increasingly dark story, "The Brothers Bloom" feels like the globetrotting sequel to last year's terrific "In Bruges". But where that film felt seamless in its blend of humor and grim subject matter, "Bloom"'s shift feels bipolar. The darker third sucks the fun out of the fun ride that had been playing out on the screen, and to no purpose. Why writer/director Rian Johnson decided to take this route is puzzling. He had such a fun movie, so why on earth did he feel the need to go and add so much more than was necessary? Many movies are accused of not having enough plot to justify their run-times, but "The Brothers Bloom" has the opposite problem. In fact, one you hit the Mexico segment, you might as well walk out of the theater; you'll feel much more satisfied, instead of left wondering how the last act could have been reworked.

Grade: B-

First reviews of "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen"

It sounds like exactly what I expected it to be: loud, dumb, great action, bloated and plot-hole filled story. Hopefully all of Michael Bay's attempts at "storytelling" don't drag down the fun-factor too much like in the first movie.....

Orlando Parfitt, IGN UK: “The film reaches its pinnacle with one such action set-piece that takes place in a forest - a brilliantly crafted sequence that is kinetic, emotional and genuinely thrilling. Unfortunately however, it is a climax that comes only an hour or so into the movie - the remaining 80 or so minutes just never quite scale the same heights.” … “Bay could have cut 40 minutes from the bowels of Transformers 2, and it would have been a far more effective movie. Unfortunately, the director fell into the same trap with Pearl Harbour and Bad Boys II - each filled with spectacular moments, but both becoming bloated, arduous cinematic experiences that ultimately outstay their welcome.” … “Bay has refined and improved his technique when it comes to directing action since the first Transformers. Bay has - to an extent anyway - cleared this up in ROTF, with more lingering tracking shots, cleaner environments and establishing framing.”


Mark Samuels, Total Film: “Fallen has much to admire.” … “It’s a thrill-ride, plain and simple. And it delivers.” … “The extended metal-on-metal punch-ups are cartoonish but, thanks to the game-raising CGI, utterly convincing.” … “Old folks may find the relentless sensory assault a little draining, but the bangs, ’bots and bombast ensure Fallen has everything Transformers fans will want and expect.”


SciFiNow: “the many, many, many devout fans of the first film will most likely get more than enough out of the sequel, but surely even they will concede there was significantly more to the 2007 box-office behemoth.” … “leaving something mechanical, uninteresting and soulless.” … “an ugly beast of a movie as robotic as its main attractions that could justifiably become the symbol of all that is wrong with modern day summer spectaculars.” … “Unlike the summer’s other big robot movie, Revenge Of The Fallen does have a personality, but it’s a frightfully detestable one. It celebrates all the wrong things with ferocious gusto, marking a new type of low for blockbusters.”

The Mirror: “In terms of explosions, firepower and sheer shrill, all-action, popcorn entertainment it is hard to see how this big’n'bold sequel can be topped this year.” … “for the most part it is also a complex lumbering mess of a movie that is long on turgid backstory and short on tension, laughs and subtle acting.” … “It is a sprawlingly noisy adventure epic that entertains at times, but never really manages to engage. Still, the kids will love it!”

TheShiznit: “…succeeds because it’s ridiculous in all the right ways. Check your brain in with your coat and soak in the most gloriously dumb spectacle of the year.” … “Revenge Of The Fallen doesn’t stray too far from the solid framework built in the first movie. It mixes superb action sequences – directed with panache and almost pornographic glee by a never-better Bay – with frequent scenes of light comic relief, some of which work (squabbling robo-hick siblings Skids and Mudflap provide a few laughs), some of which don’t (Wheelie the RC truck humping Fox’s leg).” … “Yes, you could level the same accusations at Transformers as I and many others lobbed at Terminator Salvation. It’s over-long; it has plot holes you could steer an aircraft carrier through; it’s loud and stupid and relies too much on pyrotechnics. But the difference is, the Terminator franchise was never designed to be consumed and enjoyed as blockbuster entertainment. Transformers, on the other hand, was built from the ground up to be a popcorn-devouring, eye-popping, nostalgia-sparking crowd-pleaser – and Revenge Of The Fallen sees Michael Bay tick all those boxes and more.”

New behind-the-scenes pics from "Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince"

Considering how many trailers and clips have been released for this film, I'm starting to feel like I've seen the whole movie. *Sigh*, if only Warner Brothers had released this in November 2008, and then I wouldn't be dying with anticipation AND "Twilight" might have not made such a killing at the box office.

"The Time Traveler's Wife" trailer

It looks okay, but I think the writer/s may have pushed the story a bit too far into 'chick-flick' territory. While the book was certainly a romance, it didn't really qualify as 'chick-flick' material; it was more like a less epic Benjamin Button.

"Away We Go" - REVIEW

I said in my review of "Revolutionary Road" that director Sam Mendes was on a continually downward streak in terms of quality, and at the time, I was certain it was true. Now, after seeing his latest offering, I can hopefully declare that said streak is over. "Away We Go", by writer Dave Eggers and wife Vendela Vida, is a welcome addition to Mendes' small-but-expanding canon, mostly because it has something that Mendes' other films didn't have at their cores: heart.

Burt and Verona (John Krasinski and Maya Rudolph) are stuck in life; he sells insurance to insurance companies, she's an artist of sorts. They can more than make it by, but are stuck with the question of "are we screw-ups?" After all, their electricity goes out from time to time and as Verona points out, "we have a cardboard window". Then they discover that Verona is pregnant, an unplanned but still exciting surprise. After Burt's goofy parents (Catherine O'Hara and Jeff Daniels) make plans to move to Belgium (3 months before the baby arrives), the couple decides that they need to be somewhere near people that they know, and set off to visit a slew of people and places.

The biggest departure that "Away We Go" has from Mendes' past work is its lack of room for stylizing. Mendes has received praise and criticism for his stories being too stylzed, with some complaining that his stylization renders emotions weaker (I'd certainly agree that this was the case in "Revolutionary Road", a tragedy that was barely moving at all). Forced to dig deeper into characters, Mendes benefits quite a bit; the people feel much more human, even when they're one note. In addition to the subdued performances from Krasinski and Rudolph, there's also the terrific supporting ensemble which includes Allison Janney, Jim Gaffigan, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Chris Messina, and Paul Schneider, each one adding in whatever time they are given, in ways both hilarious and touching. However, some have accused "Away We Go" as being condescending, and this is a criticism that I take issue with. While it's true that Burt and Verona's relationship is shown to be better than some of the couples visited, there are two others (well...one and a half) that simply teach them something about how life works and what a relationship, whether bonded in marriage or not, means. The second criticism is one directed by a small few at Rudolph, claiming that she's too bitter and morose. While her character certainly isn't as lively as Krasinski, this notion that Rudolph takes her character's "bad childhood" trait too far seemed absurd to me while I watched the film. Subdued, and less excitable than most people around her? Yes, but a bitter, overly pessimistic bitch? Not even close. And even if she was, she'd have a hard time keeping "Away We Go" from putting smile on your face, making you laugh, and even moving you a little with its predictable but warmhearted last moments.

Grade: B+