Billy Crystal Talks Monsters University

Funnyman Billy Crystal made a reference to one of his Monsters University co-star John Goodman's earliest and most popular films when discussing their upcoming Pixar prequel.

Crystal told Entertainment Weekly that his and Goodman's characters are just teenagers in the college-set pic. "[Mike and Sully] end up in the same fraternity where they have this scare competition — like Greek Games in college,” said Crystal. “They have to mobilize a group, sort of like Revenge of the Nerds-monsters, and get them ready to be scary.”

Monsters University opens June 21, 2013.

Source : feeds[dot]ign[dot]com

The Hunger Games Blu-ray Review

The Hunger Games was one book I intentionally ignored reading before seeing the film. I'd read all seven Harry Potter books before those films made it to the big screen, and couldn't help but feel the sting of every little moment that got axed. While I adore those films, part of me was ever so slightly disappointed by almost every single one of them. Instead of focusing on what the filmmakers got right, I found myself analyzing what got cut out. Following that series, I made it a habit to read the book after the fact. It allows the book and film to exist separate from one another, with the comparisons being less harsh.

I'm also reminded of a great quote I once read from John Irving, the novelist and screenwriter of The Cider House Rules. Tangled in drafts and conflict with the production team, he finally decided to stop adapting his book to the letter, and started focusing on making the best film he could. I'm paraphrasing, but his quote went something like this: We're not making a book, we're making a film.

Such is the case with The Hunger Games, a divisive motion picture that enraged some fans, but also seemed to capture the attention, and admiration, of many fans and non-fans alike. Adapting The Hunger Games is really a catch-22. After all, the book is a bit of an anti-commercial commentary on the sensationalistic nature of realty TV, while also digging on the domination and destructive nature of the 1%, so to speak. It's hard not to sensationalize aspects of the movie in order to sell it to the mainstream crowd, but with a PG-13 rating, there's a fine line between what is and isn't acceptable. Some have commented that the film feels neutered – such is the case when trying to find that bigger audience.

Also, leading up to the film's release, the buzz among non-fans and movie nuts was that the film was a watered-down, Americanized version of the Japanese cult hit, Battle Royale. While those comparisons are certainly valid on some level, Battle Royale isn't the first story to dive into the reality TV craze, nor is it the first to explore our thirst for violence, mayhem and death. That dates all the way back to the days of the Roman empire, and far beyond. And even novels like Lord of the Flies explore what happens when teens are pitted against one another.

As an outsider, viewing The Hunger Games for the first time, I saw a wholly compelling, well-made, multi-layered teen thriller that was largely a metaphor for the angst-addled trials and tribulations of high school life, and the various social structures that seem designed to tear us down at that age.

The circus of The Hunger Games – the crowds of wildly dressed clowns (a sort of mixture of steam punk and hipster) surrounding the contestants – are the teachers, the parents, the counselors and various relatives – each telling the young students what to do and how to survive. Each are watching with their own motivations – some selfishly or enviously.

Instead of cutthroat tests and GPA contests – where being the best student lands the best scholarship, and one point means the world – are the games themselves. Some students will do anything to win. Some feel forced into competing. Others are angered by the perceived redneck who happens to be naturally better or smarter than the hardworking studious youth who feels entitled to the crown. Others simply succumb to a harsh competitive spirit, and want nothing more than to watch their peers fail. There's even a fleeting romance between two teens simply trying to survive the trenches of high school.

This may not be the point of Suzanne Collins' trilogy, but it's the metaphor that stands out the most in director Gary Ross' film, and it's what made the movie entertaining, alluring and often frightening.

 Hunger Games' Josh Hutcherson on Peeta's Progress

The Hunger Games isn't a film that's trying to glamorize violence, either, as some have suggested. That said, the graphic violence depicted in the film definitely pushes the boundaries of the PG-13 rating, so plan appropriately if you're a parent. On that level, the movie doesn't yell at its audience for enjoying the picture or investing in the characters or the story (like Diary of the Dead did, for example), but instead allows the viewer to come to their own conclusions about the film's metaphors and social commentary. If you walk out of The Hunger Games and you rooted for people to die, you missed the point.

The story was a tragedy, on every level. It's a tragedy for Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence) who must compete in a war of senseless violence. It's a tragedy for Peeta Mellark (Josh Hutcherson), who's unsure whether Katniss actually feels love for him. And it's even a tragedy for the perceived villains of the story, who trained for this day for their entire lives and saw it all erased by Katniss and Peeta.

The film isn't without its share of flaws, of course. The world itself isn't properly set up in the beginning, leaving a questionable string of logic for what follows. The morose setting of the first act doesn't help much, either. Some characters aren't quite fleshed out as nicely as they should have been. And for a world that's allegedly filled with hungry people, pretty much everyone looks fit as a fiddle. Visual effects are often laughably bad, too, even though set design and costumes are downright Oscar worthy. The shaky camerawork can also get a little nauseating at times.

But those are only minor setbacks in an otherwise stunning first chapter in this inevitable trilogy of striking morality plays. The action is compelling, brutal and tragic – balancing the dark nature of the narrative without playing too excessive or exploitative. The Hunger Games may be a flawed beast, to be sure, but there's plenty of subtext to glean from the narrative, and a slew of wonderfully rich characters worth investing in.

The Hunger Games Blu-ray arrives courtesy of Summit and Lionsgate Home Entertainment. The film is presented in 2.40:1 widescreen, encoded in 1080p/AVC and mixed in thunderous 7.1 DTS-HD Master Audio. Considering that this is easily Lionsgate's biggest film this year, there was a lot riding on this presentation, and the disc itself does not disappoint.

The transfer is stunning in almost every way. Colors are bold and vivid, but morose and subdued when they need to be. Textures, shadows and image depth are top notch, with very little bleed or inconsistency. Film grain is a bit on the heavy side (The Hunger Games was shot on Super 35, so that's not surprising), but it's naturalistic and gritty, adding further texture to the story. The encode itself suffers little artifacting, though some noise was detected during darker, nighttime shots. On the whole, this is a reference transfer that brings the dazzling imagery of the picture to life.

Audio is also reference grade. The 7.1 DTS-HD Master Audio track is both nuanced and aggressive, with atmospheric surround usage, perfect balancing, crystal clear dialogue and hefty, moody bass. Never once was there a single high-end crackle or distortion noted. This mix allows for an immersive listening experience that brings you straight into the action.

The Hunger Games Blu-ray includes two discs – one for the film and a disc full of bonus features. There's also a Digital Copy of the film, and an UltraViolet copy. Disc one is relatively free of goodies, other than a few promos and trailers. There's also a nifty DTS-HD calibration feature. It's a shame all discs don't have this feature as a standard goodie.

Moving on to disc two, there's a slew of material to explore, starting with The World is Watching: Making The Hunger Games, an incredible feature-length documentary chronicling the entire production. It's rare to see documentaries like this much anymore, and I whole-heartedly commend Lionsgate for offering up something this cool. Needless to say, if you're a fan of the film or the book series, this documentary is well worth a look.

The remaining bonus features are mostly fluff, albeit interesting and informative fluff, which isn't surprising considering how much ground is covered in the 140-minute documentary. There are five additional featurettes, totaling about 45 minutes. They include a look at the game center, an examination of director Gary Ross and discussions with Suzanne Collins, Gary Ross and Elvis Mitchel, and Donald Sutherland. The second disc concludes with 90-second propaganda film and a marketing archive for The Hunger Games, including trailers, posters and photos from the film.

Even with the odds stacked against it, The Hunger Games turned out to be a pretty fantastic piece of sci-fi cinema that rides a very fine line between compelling and exploitative, and manages to make the morose, fantastical setting and violent themes work. For some, the adaptation is less than perfect. But for others, particularly newcomers, the film will only inspire more to read the original books. As for the Blu-ray – if you dug this film, this disc is worth owning. With a terrific transfer, knockout audio, and an outstanding collection of bonus features, there's little reason to skip this disc. The Hunger Games survives the competition.

Source : feeds[dot]ign[dot]com

First Look: New Toy Story Short

The larger Toy Story tale might be over, but there's no end in sight for the ancillary short films based on the beloved franchise. "Partysaurus Rex" is up next, scheduled to play before Finding Nemo 3-D beginning September 14, and a first look at the film has popped up online today.

EW has the images from the short, which stars Wallace Shawn's Rex in a bath-time adventure which turns into a "sort of bubble-filled rave, complete with glow-in-the-dark toys making disco lights under an overturned colander and dance music by Grammy-nominated electronica musician BT." Rex the party animal, eh?

Check out the images here:

Check out the full shots at EW.com.

Talk to Movies Editor Scott Collura on Twitter at @ScottIGN, on IGN and on Facebook.

Source : feeds[dot]ign[dot]com

The Bourne Legacy Review

How do you continue a franchise that only recently concluded in perfectly satisfying fashion? That was the problem facing the makers of the Bourne trilogy – a hat-trick of films that achieved the twin feats of impressing critics and audiences alike, grossing nearly $1bn at the global box office in the process.

Their solution to further reap those Bourne bucks is a reboot of sorts, but one which runs in parallel to the original story, revealing that Jason wasn’t the only super-spy on the C.I.A.’s books, and that Operation Treadstone was one of many such programs being run by the U.S. government.

The film kicks off with an image familiar to fans of The Bourne Identity – that of a motionless body floating in water. But where first time around it was the injured and amnesiac Jason Bourne cast adrift, this time the man is Aaron Cross, and he has entered the icy Alaskan waters very much by choice.

Proceedings commence with Cross alone in the wilderness, retrieving canisters from the freezing waters, popping a variety of mysterious pills, leaping across treacherous ravines and somewhat ridiculously doing battle with a pack of wolves (which hot-on-the-heels of The Grey, could become the cinematic equivalent of jumping the shark).

Meanwhile back in Washington, the Bourne situation is blowing up, and we are introduced to the guy behind the guy behind the guy in the shape of Edward Norton’s Eric Byer. Director of the National Research Assay Group, Byer has built several of these programs from the ground up, with Cross a member of one of the jewels in his crown: Outcome, wherein agents are trained for use in isolated, high-risk, long-term intelligence assignments.

These men and women are stationed deep undercover all over the world, but with Bourne’s activities in Supremacy and Ultimatum infecting other programs and threatening to expose their illegal methods to the world, Byer takes drastic action. Cross is quickly forced on the run, embarking on a spot of globe-trotting with only his smarts, lightning quick reactions, and expertise with weapons and hand-to-hand combat for comfort.

So far, so Bourne trilogy, but unlike those films, Cross’s memory is fully intact. The mystery is therefore not psychological but rather physical, as Aaron endeavours to discover what Outcome has done to both his mind and body as he flees the program’s clutches.

Trouble is our hero investigating the side effects of green and blue pills is far less interesting than a protagonist trying to unlock his memory and rediscover his humanity.

And good as he is, Jeremy Renner is no Matt Damon. He’s never less-than-convincing as Aaron Cross, nailing the action and delivering intensity in spades. But he doesn’t quite have that movie star charisma that makes Damon so damn watchable and had you rooting for Bourne in spite of the terrible things he had done.

Renner’s best scenes are with Rachael Weisz’s Dr. Marta Shearing, whose work in behavioural design may shed some light on his predicament. This knowledge puts her own life in jeopardy however, and the pair are soon forced to collaborate to save both their skins.

Yet while they make an engaging duo, the twosome also share several somewhat clumsy scenes in which Shearing has to explain some pretty complicated science to Cross, and as a by-product the audience. And The Bourne Legacy is full of such sequences, with shady Agency men regularly popping up to recap what happened in the previous films and indulge in exposition-heavy conversations to explain the complicated political machinations of this one.

It’s a clear case of too much talk and not enough action, as Byers spends scene-after-scene barking orders from his crisis suite when all we want to see is Cross getting stuck into the bad guys.

That may be the result of trilogy screenwriter Tony Gilroy – who has previously helmed the dialogue-heavy Michael Clayton and Duplicity – stepping into the director’s chair for this instalment.

However when the action does rear it’s high-octane head, Gilroy handles it with aplomb, never quite scaling the muscular, shaky-cam highs of predecessor Paul Greengrass, but nevertheless nailing several scenes.

Stand-outs include an impressive sequence in which Cross scales a building in a single, unbroken shot, and a truly jaw-dropping motorcycle chase (which owes more than a passing debt to Terminator 2) in Manila.

And while a pulsating rooftop chase is a little too reminiscent of Supremacy, Gilroy does deliver a truly stunning movie moment in a laboratory that is more horrific than anything that the series has delivered thus far.

But aside from odd moments like this, The Bourne Legacy is very much more of the same, only less compelling and entertaining than what’s come before.

The film does endeavour to expand the mythology of the series, but in building out rather than pushing forward, it fails to fully engage as an absorbing story in its own right.

If this had been the first film in a series – and could therefore be taken entirely on its own terms – The Bourne Legacy is an entertaining if at times uninvolving action picture, featuring sharper dialogue and better performances than most movies of the genre.

But the film constantly reminds us that we are in both Jason Bourne’s universe and his timeline, with Cross following in his footsteps metaphorically and at times quite literally.

It all makes for a frustrating viewing experience when you know that those films are superior to this one in every way, shape and form. The result is the fourth best entry in a series of four, and one that leaves you wishing the filmmakers had simply left Bourne’s legacy alone.

Chris Tilly is the Entertainment Editor for IGN and regrets his time in Operation Treadstone. His idle chat can be found on both Twitter and MyIGN.

Source : feeds[dot]ign[dot]com

Ten Movies People Hate... and Why They're Not That Bad

In ten years, which of 2012’s films will you be defending? Some might argue for Prometheus, claiming Ridley Scott's epic ambition overrules his lapses in logic. Others will sing the merits of The Dark Knight Rises, in the face of those calling it the blight on a near-perfect trilogy. Some might say that 48 frames per second was the best thing to happen to modern cinema - but then, in 2022, maybe it will be, so best not to speculate.

Here’s a set of movies that are generally considered failures in one way or another. Some of them famously suffered from production problems, some were over-hyped, some flopped at the box office, some did OK with the critics yet were maligned by fans. All have been unfairly judged.

Even Waterworld.

This article contains mild spoilers for a bunch of movies you've probably all seen.

Waterworld

It cost too much, wore its influences too obviously on its sleeve, and was, for some ungodly reason, stupendously po-faced; no wonder Waterworld suffered a critical pummeling. But ignore its blatant ambition to be ‘Mad Max on water,’ and you’ve got a film which stands up – admittedly on water-logged legs – as dumb, fun escapism today.

Waterworld is peppered with occasionally brilliant ideas. The journey to the lost underwater utopia, for example, remains eerily beautiful, and the obsession with trinkets and resources from 'The Dryland' is an intriguing touch. Director Kevin Reynolds does the best job he can within the limitations of his hugely ambitious set, eking out some arresting skirmishes amidst the endless H20, well-matched by a nonsensical yet unique aesthetic in prop and costume (shouldn't they wear swimming outfits rather than leather straps and Bowie pants?). Ultimately, if you can embrace Kevin Costner’s uber-serious turn as a half-man/half-guppy and a convoluted narrative punctuated by a giant fish-thing cameo that clearly blew half the budget, you’ll have a great time with this one.

Superman Returns

Despite doing well critically, Superman Returns didn’t soar at the box office, and Warner Bros’ subsequent dismissal of a sequel has tarnished its reputation to the point where people will freely call it the worst thing since, well, Superman IV: The Quest for Peace. We were, perhaps, too cynical for Superman Returns, a sweetly earnest movie that reflects the sweetly earnest character of Supes himself.

“

Superman Returns is a love story first and foremost, driven by emotional conflict rather than the fizzy physical.

More of a spiritual descendent than a reboot, Superman Returns tips its hat to the series’ history in a number of ways, not least the inclusion of John Williams’ majestic score and a touching posthumous appearance from Marlon Brando as Jor-El. Brandon Routh - who shares an uncanny resemblance to Christopher Reeve – injects the film with an ideal blend of charm, bumbling awkwardness and gentle melancholy. It’s the melancholy that stays with us, though, as Superman Returns is a love story first and foremost, driven by emotional conflict rather than the fizzy physical; although there’s plenty of that, too. Perhaps it was this meditative pace that turned those looking for more visceral thrills away, or perhaps Superman was just too wholesome for a modern audience already fattening up on a diet of grizzled antiheroes.

A.I. Artificial Intelligence

Stephen Spielberg’s A.I. Artificial Intelligence is by no means a bad film, but it's settled into the collective consciousness as a ‘mess,’ or the first sci-fi Spielberg ‘screwed up.’ A.I. Artificial Intelligence is a mess, a sprawling meditation on what it is to be human bound in sickly sweet and sticky honey, and a clash between two distinct sensibilities – Spielberg’s and Stanley Kubrick's, the original driver of the project.

Yet it was also Spielberg’s most ambitious sci-fi to date, a maddening mix of huge ideas and missed opportunities. The highlights outweigh the low, though; Haley Joel Osment treads a delicate line between 'synthetic' and 'real' emotion with remarkable nuance, while the whole film is enveloped in a dizzying fairytale mood that's enough to distract viewers from lulls in the narrative. Worth seeing as a curio, a  project built by two great minds that fell short of its extraordinarily lofty ambitions.

Quantum of Solace

Must’ve been a tough gig, making the follow up to Casino Royale. Bond had been rebooted so magnificently with Martin Campbell’s 2006 blockbuster, and we were rabid to see what hijinks 007 would get up to next in Marc Forster’s 2008 sequel. Unfortunately for us, Quantum of Solace turned out to be just like so many other hard-bitten actioners populating our multiplexes – the movie screams "BOURNE!" from the Italian rooftops – and we left disappointed and dejected, ruing the moment ‘gritty’ became the trend du jour.

“

We can look back on Quantum as a brief – yet thrilling - dalliance with Bond's broken psyche.

But is Quantum really all that bad? The movie speeds along at breakneck pace, offering up some of the best action sequences the series has yet seen, while Bond himself is humanized beyond even Casino, his grief for Eva Green’s Vesper Lynd written in every line of his scowling face. He has become a Bond we can relate to, a Bond mourning for a Bond Girl, and god forbid if he’s going to let a labyrinthine narrative involving Bolivian oil stand in his way of delivering justice. Let’s just hope that come Skyfall he has recovered from his melancholy, and we can look back on Quantum as a brief – yet thrilling - dalliance with his own broken psyche.

Ghostbusters II

Ivan Reitman’s follow up to the 1984 smash hit original sits at a mediocre 51% on Rotten Tomatoes, and was deemed at the time by prolific critics Siskel and Ebert as one of the “worst movies of 1989.” Critics disliked Ghostbusters II for a variety of reasons, but nearly all deemed it overstuffed and too similar to its predecessor. Bill Murray remains untouchable.

But Ghostbusters II is a fun, at times hilarious, comedy, self-assured and unapologetically for the fans. The movie doesn’t even announce itself with a title; just its iconic logo, that ubiquitous eighties ghost flipping us two fingers. And while Ghostbusters II’s narrative meanders along, it still delivers a pleasurable mishmash of the original’s weirdest elements, reveling in its own crapness and centered by a well-established repartee between its dry central cast. Indeed, caustic-edged humor is what Ghostbusters II is all about; how else can a movie get away with a final battle between a guy who could pass for an aging Finnish rocker, and what ultimately translates into ‘positively-charged mood slime?’ Peter Venkman, so droll it hurts, saves the day in more ways than one.

Alien 3

The negative response to Alien 3 – both critically and within the Hollywood community – must have felt like a slap in the face to first-time director David Fincher after a lengthy and extremely troubled production period. The combination of notoriety and critical backlash subsequently pegged his threequel as the ‘black sheep’ of the franchise (although Alien: Resurrection and Prometheus have since muddied the canon further).

It wasn’t Fincher’s fault, of course. Alien 3 was a case of ‘too many cooks,' Fincher’s original vision relentlessly compromised by studio execs distrustful of the fledgling director.  But look closer and there are still some sparks of magic in here – particularly if you ignore the theatrical release and focus instead on the 2003 work print version, a ‘spiritual’ addition of sorts which adheres far closer to Fincher’s original vision. Here we are presented with a much tighter production with stripped back ‘cat n’ mouse’ horror, where characters are given room to breathe and a nihilistic mood pervades throughout. It’s a longer cut, but the conclusion is much more satisfying.

The Village

Fantasy/thriller The Village was another in a series of M. Night Shyamalan passion projects where you wonder if anyone, at any point, had stepped in and said to the director – “Really, man? Really?”  Laughable ending notwithstanding, The Village is an elegant thriller, for the most part sustaining integrity thanks to beautiful cinematography, an excellent performance from Bryce Dallas Howard in the central role, and well-executed suspense. Shyamalan should be particularly commended for the latter; The Village’s thrills are delivered gore-free, reliant instead on atmosphere and an escalating sense of dread. Go into this without a snarky attitude, and you’ll have a good time.

Hulk

“

Hulk's a contemplative film, directing its attention to heavy, adult themes and ecological issues.

Has there been a gloomier comic book movie than Ang Lee’s Hulk? This was a movie where the Hulk rarely smashed, and when he did he was really smashing at his crippling internal angst. But Hulk’s more thoughtful than its critics – who understandably went in expecting action bombast - give it credit for. It’s a contemplative film, directing its attention to heavy, adult themes and ecological issues. It’s also a morality tale; look what happens if you try to mess with the natural order by attempting to create regenerating super soldiers!

But above all, Hulk concerns itself with the emotional journey of Bruce Banner, a man whose emotional repression manifests itself in hugely destructive physical release.  Viewed this way, it needn’t have been about a giant green monster at all; so sadly human are its core issues. Gloomy indeed, but meditative. Pity about the crappy CGI.

Indiana Jones & the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

Indy 4 was doomed to fail. It was released to an audience hungry for nostalgic release, an audience who had forgiven or forgotten the plot-holes and questionable characterizations of previous Indiana sequels. Kingdom gave us an older Dr. Jones, a decidedly haggard Harrison Ford lurching round elaborate sets and a plot-hole-laden narrative. Like us, Indy had grown old, and we didn’t like it.

But Kingdom is still an Indiana Jones movie through and through. Silly, stupendous, escapist entertainment, with brilliantly executed action sequences lead by a charismatic and affable central character. Sure, some of Kingdom’s logic is dubious, but the franchise has always concerned itself with flights of fancy; these are family films, after all. And while Ford doesn’t always hit all the right comedic notes, when he gives his trademark smirk and that John Williams theme tune starts up, it’s difficult to deny the magic at work.

Terminator Salvation

Sitting at a woeful 33% on Rotten Tomatoes, Joseph 'McG' Nichol’s Terminator Salvation did just about as badly as it was expected to. Today, the film might be better remembered for star Christian Bale’s notorious rant at its director of photography over any kind of creative merit (although one could argue Bale’s tirade was pretty creative.)

Let’s be honest – Terminator Salvation isn’t a patch on Cameron’s films. It was directed by McG! It is, however, a propulsive action flick that should be commended for moving the series forward with new ideas, refusing to fall back on tired tropes, and being generally better than Terminator 3.This is a darker, grimier Terminator, and while some may find it lacking in charisma, others might find the absence of Cameron’s cuteness – or indeed, poor Kristanna Loken - refreshing.

What would you add to this list? Which inclusion are you outraged about? Let us know in the comments.

Lucy O'Brien is Assistant Editor at IGN AU. You should talk to her about games, horror movies and the TV show Freaks & Geeks on IGN here or find her and the rest of the Australian team by joining the IGN Australia Facebook community.

Source : feeds[dot]ign[dot]com

Hugh Jackman Has Orders to Kill

X-Men star Hugh Jackman is attached to star in Orders to Kill for Millennium Films and director Lee Daniels.

The Los Angeles Times reports that the film is a thriller based on William F. Pepper's book of the same name that explores a conspiracy theory behind the assassination of civil rights leader Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

The paper says Orders to Kill "will tell the story of William Pepper (Jackman), a controversial attorney and activist who for decades has argued that convicted killer James Earl Ray, who recanted his confession and died arguing his innocence, didn't shoot MLK."

Jackman and Daniels previously tried to team for the civil rights drama Selma before that project fell apart. Jackman is currently filming The Wolverine, while Daniels' next project is the star-studded, fact-based White House drama The Butler.

Source : feeds[dot]ign[dot]com