SPIDER-MAN---sources claim the upcoming reboot movie will not have a white Spider-Man, "This is not set in stone, guys, but I'm telling you right now: Spider-Man's not going to be white. I'm 95% sure. Spider-Man's going to be most likely black. But there's a chance he could also be latino. 95% sure: not white. I don't think it's going to be Peter Parker." Earlier rumors said Logan Lerman and Dylan O'Brien were candidates to play the new Spider-Man.
SUPERGIRL---Calista Flockhart (ALLY McBEAL) will play media magnate Cat Grant in the CBS series.
THE GIRL WHO PLAYED WITH FIRE---Rooney Mara commented on the sequel to David Fincher's THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO, “I don’t think it’s going to happen. I’m sad never to do it again, but it just doesn’t seem like it’s in the cards. I think because [Sony] already has spent millions of dollars on the rights and the script so it will result in something. The script that we now have [has] a huge potential, I can reveal as much as it is extremely different from the book.”
Ms.--Marisa Tomei stars in this HBO miniseries about the founding of Ms. magazine by Gloria Steinem. Kathy Najimy will co-star as Congresswoman Bella Abzug. George Clooney is a co-producer.
ENDGAME---NBC pilot underway starring Philip Winchester and Wesley Snipes in which a Las Vegas security expert is forced to complete challenges in "The Game" to save innocent lives. Snipes will play the mysterious pit boss for "The Game".
ACADEMY AWARDS---director James Gunn (GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY) commented on why superhero movies aren't nominated for Oscars and other awards, "...the truth is, popular fare in any medium has always been snubbed by the self-appointed elite. What bothers me slightly is that many people assume because you make big films that you put less love, care, and thought into them then people do who make independent films or who make what are considered more serious Hollywood films. If you think people who make superhero movies are dumb, come out and say we're dumb. But if you, as an independent filmmaker or a 'serious' filmmaker, think you put more love into your characters than the Russo Brothers do 'Captain America', or Joss Whedon does the Hulk, or I do a talking raccoon, you are simply mistaken."
BROADCHURCH---ITV renewed the David Tennant series for Season 3. Fox canceled the US remake, GRACEPOINT, which also starred Tennant.
PEE-WEE'S BIG HOLIDAY---the Paul Reubens movie will air on Netflix.
SPIDER-MAN---sources claim the upcoming reboot movie will not have a white Spider-Man, "This is not set in stone, guys, but I'm telling you right now: Spider-Man's not going to be white. I'm 95% sure. Spider-Man's going to be most likely black. But there's a chance he could also be latino. 95% sure: not white. I don't think it's going to be Peter Parker." Earlier rumors said Logan Lerman and Dylan O'Brien were candidates to play the new Spider-Man.
Sounds like they're going with Miles Morales, from the Ultimate line rather than stick with the more familiar to the general audience Peter Parker. If this is to be believed, that is. Not the end of the world, as some fanboys will have you think, but I just don;t have an identification at all with Morales. Parker has been Spider-Man for over 50 years. He's still here and he's my go to. But since none of the movies really got Parker right, I'll just hope it doesn't suck.
SPIDER-MAN---sources claim the upcoming reboot movie will not have a white Spider-Man, "This is not set in stone, guys, but I'm telling you right now: Spider-Man's not going to be white. I'm 95% sure. Spider-Man's going to be most likely black. But there's a chance he could also be latino. 95% sure: not white. I don't think it's going to be Peter Parker." Earlier rumors said Logan Lerman and Dylan O'Brien were candidates to play the new Spider-Man.
Sounds like they're going with Miles Morales, from the Ultimate line rather than stick with the more familiar to the general audience Peter Parker. If this is to be believed, that is. Not the end of the world, as some fanboys will have you think, but I just don;t have an identification at all with Morales. Parker has been Spider-Man for over 50 years. He's still here and he's my go to. But since none of the movies really got Parker right, I'll just hope it doesn't suck.
In a million years I can't see this happening. As I understand it, Spidey's next cinematic appearance will be in Captain America: Civil War. Given all the threads left dangling in Winter Soldier, the next movie is going to be complex enough as it is and there is no way they can shoe-horn into that story a brand new origina story for Morales as Spidey nor can they just have him show up and expect audiences to accept that Morales is Spider-Man when the vast majority of audiences wI'll only ever have known Peter Parker as Spidey.
In my view there is simply no screenplay or box office reason to go with anyone other than Parker as Spidey and I suspect this story of an ethnic is simply a bit of studio spin.
SPIDER-MAN---sources claim the upcoming reboot movie will not have a white Spider-Man, "This is not set in stone, guys, but I'm telling you right now: Spider-Man's not going to be white. I'm 95% sure. Spider-Man's going to be most likely black. But there's a chance he could also be latino. 95% sure: not white. I don't think it's going to be Peter Parker." Earlier rumors said Logan Lerman and Dylan O'Brien were candidates to play the new Spider-Man.
Sounds like they're going with Miles Morales, from the Ultimate line rather than stick with the more familiar to the general audience Peter Parker. If this is to be believed, that is. Not the end of the world, as some fanboys will have you think, but I just don;t have an identification at all with Morales. Parker has been Spider-Man for over 50 years. He's still here and he's my go to. But since none of the movies really got Parker right, I'll just hope it doesn't suck.
In a million years I can't see this happening. As I U detest and it, Spidey's next cinematic appearance will be in Captain America: Civil War. Given all the threads left dangling in Winter Soldier, the next movie is going to be complex enough as it is and there is no way they can shoe-horn into that story a brand new origina story for Morales as Spidey nor can they just have him show up and expect audiences to accept that Morales is Spider-Man when the vast majority of audiences wI'll only ever have known Peter Parker as Spidey.
In my view there is simply no screenplay or box office reason to go with anyone other than Parker as Spidey and I suspect this story of an ethnic is simply a bit of studio spin.
I vote this guy as the new black Spider-Man! Pimp him out!
Not that I disagree, but the cinematic Civil War story will no doubt focus more on Captain America. Spider-Man factored heavily in the comics version and Parker was a huge part of Tony Stark's life at that point. Spidey was an Avenger, was married and his Aunt lived with them in Stark Tower. Peter had to reveal his identity, which was one of the most closely guarded identities in the Marvel Universe, putting his Aunt and his wife in deadly danger. Already, none of this will be as effective because:
1. Spider-Man is not a cinematic Avenger.
2. He does not know Tony Stark
3. He's not married
4. He was running around in public without this mask for a huge amount of time in all of the Spider-Man movies. His secret identity wasn't nearly as huge of a deal in the films, something that I understood (you have a top paid actor wanting to show his face), but which always annoyed me (why bother with the masks). Actually, nobody in the Marvel Studios universe has a "secret" identity at this point.
So, really, since they could honestly do Civil War without Spidey, and I'm sure they were before the Sony deal, it really almost doesn't matter who is behind the mask. Origins don't have to take up a huge amount of screen time. A short flashback would do the same thing. Unless they intend to connect the Marvel Studios Avengers with one of the Sony Spider-Man continuities, which I understand they're not. And if they're not, they'd have to "introduce" Spider-Man to the Marvel Studios Universe anyway.
"I'm Peter Parker, I was bitten by a radioactive spider and given these powers and I fight crime to make up for not stopping the guy who killed my uncle."
"I'm Miles Morales and I was injected with a serum that gave me spider powers and now I fight crime to make up for my family history." Or whatever.
I still hope for Parker and since the sales of Ultimate Spider-Man aren't all that great, it really makes more sense to go with the version everyone is familiar. They can introduce Morales later on when the actor they hire to play Parker prices himself out after three movies.
I'm done with Peter Parker. 5 movies of Peter and his family/friends is enough for me, for now. Using Miles in the new run of Spider-movies would avoid the fatigue of yet another reboot of Peter with a potential origin story.
ELFMAN! was my first though, too, when I heard about the new Pee-wee movie. Hopefully they can get him.
SPIDER-MAN---sources claim the upcoming reboot movie will not have a white Spider-Man, "This is not set in stone, guys, but I'm telling you right now: Spider-Man's not going to be white. I'm 95% sure. Spider-Man's going to be most likely black. But there's a chance he could also be latino. 95% sure: not white. I don't think it's going to be Peter Parker." Earlier rumors said Logan Lerman and Dylan O'Brien were candidates to play the new Spider-Man.
Sounds like they're going with Miles Morales, from the Ultimate line rather than stick with the more familiar to the general audience Peter Parker. If this is to be believed, that is. Not the end of the world, as some fanboys will have you think, but I just don;t have an identification at all with Morales. Parker has been Spider-Man for over 50 years. He's still here and he's my go to. But since none of the movies really got Parker right, I'll just hope it doesn't suck.
This is exactly how I feel. I'm not on board but I hope the best for them - they have a tough job ahead of them if you look at the insane and unjustified backlash over simply considering this.
Maybe they'll cast a minority actor as Spider-man. Maybe it'll be Miles from Ultimate Spider-man. Who's to say that they won't cast that actor as Peter Parker? Peter Parker's race plays 0% of a role in who his character is. He's drawn that way on the page, but representations on page and on screen change often.
Also, diversity (even "for diversity's sake" as some people complain about) is a good thing in my opinion, so please Marvel/Sony make every variety of Spider. More kids deserve to see people like them in major roles onscreen.
It's not that they considered it. In fact, it's not like they're really considering it at all, more like making off hand comments and thoughts on a whim.
I want to see a movie that was planned out in advance, that has excitement behind it because the prople making it wanted to do it and have something exciting to tell or some god way to tell an old story, whether it is a white Spider-Man or the established black Spider-Man.
But this is not what we are getting. We are getting spur of the moment comments about high percentage rates of what may be, spewed onto the online world to look for approval and public reriding, with a script that will no doubt not be written by somebody who had great ideas and really wanted to do it, but farmed out to some writer that's a hot shot at the moment of good biddies of certain studio executives.
This isn't a legitimate attempt to bring us a different take on Spider-Man, this is base pandering to race and ethnicity, trying to sell the idea of a movie to people based upon skin color and what ever else that should be completely and totally irrelevant to the making of the movie. This is like the all female Ghostbusters shabaz, in its way.
It must be time for a transgender multi ethnic girl Spidersomething
Yes, they are just pandering and its showing the lowest form of contempt for ones audience. Making Peter Parker black would be like making Axel Foley white. It's just wrong. I have nothing against diversity be it race or sex but create something original and diversify by adding something to our culture.
Ha ha. Now if the movies would have him keep the mask on in public for more than a few seconds, that would shut everyone up for the action scenes.
Honestly, for me, it's not about race, it's about the character. I'm reasonably sure, if they follow the Civil War story closely, Steve Rogers will be "killed," putting someone else in his suit. They could go with a memory restored Bucky or possibly Sam Wilson, who is in the suit now in the comics. Neither one would bother me at all because these characters were set up in the movies previously and the story is leading toward it. It makes sense to introduce another character to take over. Slotting in anyone else other than Parker as Spider-Man without setting it up first would be risky since the general moviegoer has no idea who Miles Morales is. If they just want to cast a non-white actor as Peter Parker in this continuity, I don't really care as long as he's a good actor and is portrayed well.
This is like the all female Ghostbusters shabaz, in its way.
The funny thing about the Ghostbusters reboot is that some are trying to sell an all-female team as "progressive"... but its still three white people and one black person, just like the original iteration. I have no inherent loyalty to Ghostbusters since exiting age eight, so I don't feel I have a horse in this race ... but what something is sold as and what Hollywood produces seems to be at odds more than ever.
A huge factor in this is that there is a gigantic boom of "adolescent adults" (people in their late twenties through thirties) who were so drown in pop culture in the 80s and now have the money and means to drown their children in the same stuff. This is an entirely new market that exploded in the previous decade and why, unfortunately, Hollywood is rebooting all these properties. But where the original stuff was original, this is simply more of the same. And a scary thought is that if art is to be looked at in context with its time, what does that say about our current culture?
Look no further than Star Wars, something that fans refused to allow to fail because so much of their identity and memories from 1980 were part of it ... and when Lucas came along with his prequels (good AND bad, good OR bad), they considered it an attack on their person. And now here comes JJ Abrams, someone who is as generic and untalented as Hollywood gets to not use Lucas's original plot treatments to make a new trilogy, which will be incredibly "safe" moviemaking and will make many people happy - but does anyone else in the world not see that perhaps Star Wars *should* have died in 2005? Its failings became ever more obvious with time... but no, as long as there is a buck to be made, they're going to milk the Harry Potter and Divergent fans in ten years for the same nostalgia cash.
This is like the all female Ghostbusters shabaz, in its way.
The funny thing about the Ghostbusters reboot is that some are trying to sell an all-female team as "progressive"... but its still three white people and one black person, just like the original iteration. I have no inherent loyalty to Ghostbusters since exiting age eight, so I don't feel I have a horse in this race ... but what something is sold as and what Hollywood produces seems to be at odds more than ever.
A huge factor in this is that there is a gigantic boom of "adolescent adults" (people in their late twenties through thirties) who were so drown in pop culture in the 80s and now have the money and means to drown their children in the same stuff. This is an entirely new market that exploded in the previous decade and why, unfortunately, Hollywood is rebooting all these properties. But where the original stuff was original, this is simply more of the same. And a scary thought is that if art is to be looked at in context with its time, what does that say about our current culture?
Look no further than Star Wars, something that fans refused to allow to fail because so much of their identity and memories from 1980 were part of it ... and when Lucas came along with his prequels (good AND bad, good OR bad), they considered it an attack on their person. And now here comes JJ Abrams, someone who is as generic and untalented as Hollywood gets to not use Lucas's original plot treatments to make a new trilogy, which will be incredibly "safe" moviemaking and will make many people happy - but does anyone else in the world not see that perhaps Star Wars *should* have died in 2005? Its failings became ever more obvious with time... but no, as long as there is a buck to be made, they're going to milk the Harry Potter and Divergent fans in ten years for the same nostalgia cash.
Not using Lucas's plot treatments is the best thing Disney could do, Lucas is no longer the story teller he once was and no longer has the ability to collaborate or listen to those around him.
There are plenty of good stories to tell in a universe as vast as Star Wars, and if the rumors are true about this new Star Wars film's storyline (on what little I've read about) it will hardly be 'safe'.
I also would not call Abrams untalented, his biggest flaw is continuing to work with his hack writing buddies Lindelof, Cuse & Orci etc. who have no involvement at all in this film.
Hollywood has always been about making money, & making sequels, re-boots & remakes is hardly new: Frankenstein, Dracula, Creature From the Black Lagoon, Sherlock Holmes etc., etc., etc.
Not using Lucas's plot treatments is the best thing Disney could do, Lucas is no longer the story teller he once was and no longer has the ability to collaborate or listen to those around him.
You're purposely burying the lead: without using ANY artist's or author's original intents, you render the whole moot. By not using Lucas's original ideas to finish the story cycle, there's no fucking point to *any* of the previous Star Wars movies. Now it's a soulless cash grab instead of a concept that can be judged on its strengths and weaknesses.
It is inherently bad, simply by the avenue it's taken.
The funny thing about the Ghostbusters reboot is that some are trying to sell an all-female team as "progressive".
The fact that the leads are four women has apparently been controversial to some, which speaks pretty clearly to the state of film and society - that somehow a movie led by four women is somehow not going to be as good as a movie led by four men. Women are 50+% of the world's population. It's not out of line to have them star in movies.
In that sense, it is progressive, since it's not as regressive as traditional male-heavy casting.
Feig (who is the only person who's really gone on record about the project at the moment) indicates that he prefers working with funny women, and this is consistent with his body of work (although I've got a different opinion of Melissa McCarthy, who IMO delivers every joke like it's the bad final line of an SNL sketch). I don't think he'd call it a "progressive move" just to make the movie he wants to make
You're purposely burying the lead: without using ANY artist's or author's original intents, you render the whole moot. By not using Lucas's original ideas to finish the story cycle, there's no fucking point to *any* of the previous Star Wars movies. Now it's a soulless cash grab instead of a concept that can be judged on its strengths and weaknesses.
I would recommend reading "The Making of Star Wars" by Rinzler. It's a very thorough look, almost half of which is about Lucas's writing process and the various drafts. Lucas's original treatment for that story was a completely different movie than what appeared on screen. Same with Empire, and same with Jedi. Some broadstrokes ideas were the same by the time the movies came out, but really completely different. A treatment is a not even a script - just some paragraphs full of ideas. Sometimes they get retained, and sometimes they get changed. It all depends on what's going to make a good movie. This is what has happened and will happen to Lucas' sequel treatments, and that's how it would have to be anyway. If Lucas's original intents were extremely important to him, he would have proceeded with making the movies himself rather than selling Lucasfilm, or worked himself into the deal.
These are also, like, silly adventure movies. They're fun, they carry some emotion to them, sure, but high art? Making sequels to Lucas' movies about starships and space bears, 1/3 of which weren't even written or directed by the man, isn't exactly like writing a movement to finish off someone else's symphony.
