Perusing Adam's handy-dandy movie schedule site, I've already made a preliminary listing of the films I'm looking forward to seeing in 2009.  There aren't quite as many prolific ones as past years, but maybe a few surprises will turn up, like how Speed Racer and Tropic Thunder was.

---

Up - I have really high hopes for Pixar's Up, and I'm keeping to my personal declaration that it's going to be incredible.  The talent involved, specifically Monsters Inc. director Pete Docter and composer Michael Giacchino, is already a formula for success in my book, and early impressions (and here) are already glowing positive.

Harry Potter And The Half-Blood Prince - With the delay back from November of 2008 to July of this year, more than ever am I anxious to see the latest Potter movie adaptation.  I still hold to the comments I made last year, that I believe the film should be in reasonable hands with director David Yates, and that I hope Nicholas Hooper turns in a better score than Order of The Phoenix.  The released trailers are looking very good so far.

Terminator Salvation - My review of Terminator 3 made it clear that I wasn't exactly its biggest fan, and honestly, the first teaser trailer of the new movie did nothing to impress me.  However, the most recent theatrical trailer did manage to percolate my interest.  I'm one of the staunch believers that feel they should have never continued on after Cameron's titles, but like T3, I'm willing to give this a shot under the pretense that this more of a 'What If' entry.  The story itself might turn out decent, seeing as how the screenplay was helped along by Paul Haggis (Casino Royale) and Jonathan Nolan (The Dark Knight).  No doubt Salvation will be the one to officially fire off the summer popcorn season.

Sherlock Holmes - This one isn't due until November, but it's by far the most intriguing project of 2009 for me.  For those who haven't heard, this will be one of two planned adaptations planned for release within the span of 2009-2011.  The one coming this year is being directed by Guy Ritchie, produced by Joel Silver (V For Vendetta, Speed Racer), and starring Robert Downey Jr. and Jude Law as Holmes and Watson respectively.  Ritchie's version is described as portraying the harder, more action-packed side of Holmes.  Says FilmSchoolRejects: "Fans of literature will remember that, in addition to tales of his boxing and martial artistry, Holmes was not opposed to striking criminals with his cane, discharging firearms, breaking the law in search of justice, and dabbling in tobacco, morphine, and cocaine. Holmes has been watered down over the years, but the sleuth from the books was a bit of a bastard and it is this version of Sherlock Downey and Ritchie aim to bring to the screen."  I really can't wait to see how this one turns out.

Other films of mild interest include Dreamworks' latest animation Monsters vs. Aliens, the Hugh Jackman driven X-Men Origins: Wolverine, J.J. Abrams' Star Trek (the trailer looks really dynamic), Transformers: Revenge of The Fallen, and Pete Jackson's The Lovely Bones.  It's been a REALLY long time since we've seen a James Cameron directed film (his last one was Solaris back in 2002, wasn't it?), so Avatar might be worth checking out.  Dragonball?  It reeks of disaster, but Stephen Chow's in the producing chair, so who knows.

Actually, Solaris was Steven Soderbergh.  Cameron hasn't done a feature film since Titanic in 1997.  I'm really looking forward to Avatar just because I love all of the Cameron films I've seen and it's been OVER A DECADE since I've gotten to see something new from him.  Crossing my fingers that it will be worth the wait...

Without looking at any release lists, the only 2009 movies I can think of that I want to see are HP6 and Sherlock Holmes, but I'm sure I will see more than just those since I always end up seeing more movies than I intend to at the start of a given year.

I'll have to see these:

1. Unborn (Not a remake.)
2. The Uninvited (Remake of a Korean film - A Tale of Two Sisters.)
3. Terminator 4
4. Transformers 2
5. 2012
6. G.I. Joe (Ray Park is in this. Good enough for me. He played Darth Maul and he's Snake Eyes in G.I. Joe)
7. The Crazies (I've seen the original. It was terrible. Believe me, this can only be better.)
8. X-Men Origins: Wolverine
9. Last House on the Left (The original version is the 2nd most disturbing film I've ever seen, right behind Salo.)

Waiting in line on opening weekend:

X-Men Origins: Wolverine - High hopes for an X-men film of the first two's caliber.
Star Trek - Not a trekkie but in J.J. Abrams I trust.
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen - Yeah, Michael Bay but I just can't help myself.

Curious to see:

Revolutionary Road - Sam Mendes?  I'm there.
Watchmen
Monsters vs. Aliens
Up
Harry Potter and the Half-blood Prince
Amelia - If anyone's story deserves a good biopic it's Amelia Earhart.  Hilary Swank and Ewan McGregor in tow.
Astro Boy - After reading the manga remake "Pluto", color me a fan.  Hopefully they can do the property right.
Avatar - Probably over-hyped but yeah, I'm game.
The Road - Just read this book and Viggo Mortensen is perfect for the part.

Keep me far, far away from Dragon Ball, 2012, and G.I. Joe, and don't be surprised if SF: The Legend of Chun Li kills the series' theatrical hopes for another ten years.

No idea what they're about but it's interesting to see at least three Japan-related titles on the release list: Tokyo, Big Man Japan and Tokyo Sonata.

Nobody cares about the FRIDAY THE 13TH remake??

Oh well.

NOTORIOUS should be decent too, but i guess unless you grew up listening to his music it's not going to be of interest.
The content description of the movie has no mention of gun violence though, which is kind of strange. I'm guessing they didn't want to glorify it at all since he died that way?

I dunno, but these and Revolutionary Road (can't believe it's still not out yet) are the most interesting ones i see so far. Mendes has another movie called FARLANDERS in the werks too but of course it's a ways off.

..Does anyone else think that GRAN TORINO is overrated? Great concept but to me it seemed underdeveloped and shallow, needed more characters and conflicts, and moved pretty slowly.
Anyone else think it needed a little more to it?

Oh yeah i almost fergot, the new Sacha Baron Cohen movie BRUNO should be out sometime this year and is gonna make a mint, can't wait for that one either.

I haven't seen it but there was a story that the guy sold his first draft and no changes were made whatsoever from there. I've read probably hundreds of first draft screenplays and the common factors in every one of them, with not even one measly exception, are the things you describe. So, while I'm still very curious about it myself, I'm not hugely surprised by what you say.

As for me and films, I'm really out of touch right now. No, I won't be seeing the Friday the 13th remake. I'm sure at some point I'll be seeing Saw VI, that I'm sure is an inevitability around Halloween time. I'll end up nervously going to the new Terminator movie. I mean, it couldn't be worse than the made-for-tv version that was 3, could it? Could it?!

I'm mostly curious (yet still very nervous) about the Astro Boy film. I don't like what they did to the designs but I still think there's a chance it could be really good.

Aside from those, I have no idea what's coming out. Does Christopher Guest have no movie coming out this year? Haven't heard anything since that For Your Consideration one.

Why aren't you interested in it? Didn't like The Texas Chainsaw movie or just not a Crystal Lake fan in general?

Ooh, I'm gonna add Coraline to the pile.  A stop-motion (and in 3D!) adaptation of Neil Gaiman's novella that's being directed by Henry Selick of Nightmare Before Christmas and James And The Giant Peach fame.  Trailer looks great:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LO3n67BQvh0

I'll probably check out the Friday the 13th Remake, merely because I was always a big fan of the slasher series to begin with. Despite the well-worn plot, it'll still be interesting to see what innovations are added and what they do with the story which has existed for almost 30 years now.

I saw The Blood Valentine today, it was decent. Somewhat forgettable, but decent.
I give it credit for its dark ambience and quaint little mining-town setting, but then again i said almost the same thing about 'The Strangers' last year. Squeamish will probably want to skip this one, it's pretty graphic..

Looks like some of us may be striking Astro Boy off our lists if the internet rumourmongers turns out to be right  - http://www.cartoonbrew.com/feature-film … o-boy.html

On Friday the 13th, which I didn't answer Shoe on, I'm all remaked out and only one I saw in about the last ten years I enjoyed and that, Dawn of the Dead, bore no resemblance to the original being a remake in name and setting only.

New Coraline trailer.  Good stuff:

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/39923

And high-def versions of the first trailer. (There's a Trailer and Trailer 2, but they both appear to be the same):

http://www.hd-trailers.net/movie/coraline/

Saw Coraline today, and it was absolutely terrific.   The film drips with artistic imagination, and comparatively, it shares a lot more in common with The Nightmare Before Christmas than Corpse Bride.  Coraline definitely has that Selick touch: the same sort of fantastical, off-kilted enchantment and expert direction that he graced Nightmare with.  The set pieces and characters all have their place in the film, so they're not there just for shock value. (Though there's plenty of that to go around.)  The movie's a lot of fun, simply because the stark contrast between Coraline's reality and "other reality" is so enjoyable to watch come alive.  The parents are the kind of "I just don't have time for you right now" douche-bags that any kid would love to substitute in a pinch, and seeing the rest of the supporting cast's colorfully alternate sides is a joy.  There is some strong imagery, as well as an underlying tone of creepiness - things I wouldn't deem suitable for a younger audience, but for the adults, it's all pretty thrilling.  By the time Coraline participates in "the game", the film had me completely under its spell.  A film for brave boys and girls, indeed. 

Character voices are mostly spot-on, with Fanning providing just the right amount of precociousness, sass, and innocence for Coraline.  I was a bit lukewarm on Teri Hatcher as the mother, but she begins to shine as soon as that veneer of affectionate sensitivity begins to crumble.  John Hodgman and Keith David as the father and the black cat impresses the most.  The 3D, like in the Disney Digital presentation of Nightmare, adds a wonderful, tangible feeling of depth to the whole movie; it never panders to obvious, in-your-face effects, so it all looks perfectly natural.  If you can see it in 3D, do - it's a real treat.

There's now a new contender for best stop-motion animated film, aside from Nightmare and W&G: Curse of The Were Rabbit.  I can't wait to see it again..... but not before reading the book, which I just picked up from my local Borders.

Big thumbs up for The Wrestler, not because I like wrestling but because of the very real characters and their situation.

Getting stuck in life and how difficult it is to get "unstuck" is something that resonates with me even at 30, and I assume that feeling is real for a lot of people.

Great capture of what it's like to be the one-trick pony, and how hard it is to make big changes in your life.

The thing that stood out for me about the TV spots for Coraline is why do they always say "from the director of..." instead of the actual director. I know they do this for every movie, but it strikes me as odd when they have to reflect on a 10+ year old movie to boost people's confidence.

They do it because most folks think Tim Burton directed The Nightmare Before Christmas.

The movie's definitely got a Rocky Balboa vibe to it.  Both feature fighters past their primes, looking for redemption and glory rekindled.  Rourke is pretty excellent here. 

Love the credit roll theme that Springsteen contributed to; the lyrics really capture the essence of the movie perfectly.  Oh, and big props for the use of Sweet Child o' Mine before the big fight at the end. :)

While the themes of Redemption and Past Glories Rekindled are certainly there, thankfully it doesn't just stay on the simple surface aspects of those. (they are at opposite ends, he opts for past rather than redemption)

He knows he needs to change (and does make a few attempts to, to the best his limited abilities can muster) but the changes are more painful than to continue on his path to ruin.

His comment before the final match, when the window of opportunity does open and he's finally got the chance of accepting a new life with the woman: "Out there is where I get hurt" is his bare truth shot right to the core.

The real world of relationships pains him the most, and covering it up with superficial success as the coping mechanism was all he knew how to do. 

Sure, it would have made him a better man to struggle towards a new life than to die with is old life, but he fully accepted that he wasn't up to snuff and that he couldn't stand the pain necessary to become that better man.

Just wanted to add the sequel to Night At The Museum, titled Battle of the Smithsonian, on my must-see list.  The first one was a pretty enjoyable flick -- and any excuse to see Dick Van Dyke kickin' more ass is fine by me.  ^_^  New Silvestri score, too!

Also, a new theatrical trailer for Terminator Salvation.  I'm really hoping the story is as excellent as these explosive sequences: 

http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1810025211/trailer

I'm also delighted to hear that Elfman is looking to replicate more of Brad Fiedel's original mechanical, industrial sound for the score.

I kinda wish they'd have left Terminator alone after the second movie. I liked some of the twists in T3 but I don't think these movies will live/live up to their pedigree.

A new X-Men Origins: Wolverine trailer is up.  Not exactly in the most ideal quality, though - as AICN puts it, its size is akin to a damned postage stamp. (Yes, you can Full Screen, but at the cost of resolution.)  Mostly a variation of the first trailer.

Jackman looks to be in top form -- but let's see if he can produce a good film.

I'm certainly no prophet as I'm incapable of predicting my own actions. The first film I watched this year is not one I was looking forward to, but two things got my attention. It's directed by the same guy that did 300 and it's rated R. I loved 300 and R rated movies lessen the chance of having to hear noisy teenagers. Watchmen was a total surprise, since I never saw the trailers for it and my knowledge was vague, having never read the comic (I've never read even one comic). Just be prepared for a long sit, although I doubt you will notice the passage of time. I didn't.

You will hear the word tachyon in this movie. It's a particle that moves faster than light, but not necessarily backwards in time. Light always moves at the same speed, regardless of the medium. It does not slow down in glass or water, as physics teachers incorrectly state. Both glass and water are denser than a vacuum, so the photons have more interactions, and so they take longer to travel between two points. But the photons always travel at the same speed. Anytime a particle transmits through a medium faster than light (has less interactions), then the particle is said to be tachyonic. The backwards in time stuff just sounds impressive (explains its prevalence in science fiction movies like Watchmen) and has never been observed. (There are indeed benefits to reading old lectures by Richard Feynman.)

I saw "Watchmen" tonight and while I was mostly entertained, it left very little of an impression on me. I didn't care for the characters and without that bond, I found myself only looking forward to the gory action scenes (of which there were surprisingly few).

Good post!
Light certainly propagates slower in any medium that's not a vacuum (which is really everything). Light propagates significantly slower in water and denser materials. In fact, there are particles that can travel faster than light propagates in those materials, and they produce Cerenkov radiation. It's fair to say that the group velocity does slow down, but yeah, in general that's the current notion that light is constantly absorbed and re-emitted. Honestly though, it's acceptable to think about light as being slowed down, since for the most part that is equivalent to what's happening at least from our point of view

And yeah, I do want to watch Watchmen, even though it didn't get good reviews. I don't expect anything groundbreaking or deep, just enjoyable.

cheers,

-avatar!

AICN's Moriarty (hah!) has a write-up on his visit to the upcoming Sherlock Holmes set.  Just hearing about how the fight sequence that's linked to this shot plays out has me giddy with excitement:

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/40362

The production values are looking to be on point, too.  As a period piece, it should be interesting to see how they bring it all alive.

Yeah it's very real.

Life gets very stale sometimes, especially for those of us with 'malcontent predispositions' in our brain chemestries.

Which leads to Escapism..

Whether it's alcohol or whatever have you, it's only natural to look for ways to cope with the 'hollow life syndrome'.

But it's not always raining indoors.. Look for the moments of rebirth whenever you can find them and cherish them, they are the fleeting instants sprinkled down the path of life here and there to heal the tired soul every once and again.

Part of the answer is to re-invent yourself every so often, i guess. Leave your old soul behind when it no longer becomes you and start the next day anew.

Look to the dawning morning sky and take it as it comes. Try to find the balance between the Positive and Negative energies. Look at how others experience the same events and try to learn from them, and why they are the way they are.

Then put your own spin on it.

..Sorry for the preaching, i get ahead of myself sometimes. I'm done rambling now.

New trailer for Disney's Up:

http://disney.go.com/disneypictures/up/

My sister's down in Florida right now, and she got to see the trailer in Digital 3D at MGM Studios.  I'm totally jealous. ;)

The BRUNO movie will be released on July 10th.

I didn't find the trailer for it to be all that funny, but i'm still a fan, so i'll be seeing it anyway.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLi7liCC … PL&index=8

I saw Watchmen the other day.  I've never read the comic, so I didn't have any preconceived notions of what it should be.  That said, I thought it was mediocre.  There's very little overarching plot, and most of the time is spent deconstructing a bunch of characters that the audience is never really given much of a reason to care about.  It's visually impressive and goes to great pains to take visual violence to new levels of detail, but I could have done without the insane amount of screen time the blue penis gets.  Why is it now trendy for directors to keep one-upping each other with more and more full frontal male nudity?  At any rate, I'd say it's a rental at best.

Saw Watchmen, as well. I read the comic years and years ago (literally been waiting ten years for the film adaptation), and I was very impressed. Here's the thing. I knew exactly what was going to happen scene for scene before it even happened, so I knew the story inside and out. I was extremely curious to see how character development would pan out given the nature of the storytelling, and I was impressed. Rorschach remains just as compelling of a character in the movie as he was in the book, and they managed to make Night Owl out to be cooler than he was before, too, though I guess that's not saying much. They left a lot of shit out, to be sure, otherwise I'm sure the movie'd be five hours long (cementing my belief that this would've worked better as, say, a 12 episode mini-series on HBO or something), but what is there is great.

I've read that the film works best as a companion to the graphic novel, and I'd have to agree on that sentiment. I've noticed that people I talk to who weren't impressed by the movie haven't read the book, so they lack that as a base. Not that there aren't any good reasons to dislike it on its' own merits, just an observation I've made.

Watchmen was the biggest waste of three hours (preview time included) I've spent at the theater or anywhere else in a long time.

The good: a few cool fight scenes.

The bad: soap-opera acting from several main characters, comic book monologuing and cliche without remorse (especially in the last thirty minutes), ridiculous over-the-top violence, no sense of pacing, and well over an hour of tiresome exposition that rarely serves the story or helps establish any sort of empathy for the characters.

I haven't felt that disgusted at a movie since Beowulf and Fantastic Four 2 (and at least those were short).

On the flip side, Valkyrie and Benjamin Button were both pretty decent.  (2008 releases I know, but they came out this year in Japan and I'm trying to prove I'm not a snob here. )

I find I have a hard time disagreeing with most of this and yet I adored it. I thought I might well hate it. But I didn't. I loved the pacing. Yes, it was completely different to most movie pacing but that's probably what I liked about it. Some of the monologueing exposition didn't work at all but then, for me, a huge amount did. The only one I cringed a little at was the 'joke' about the clown which I didn't like in the book and thought the delivery was pretty poor in the movie.

But, overall, I loved it.

As for it being best as a companion piece to the book, possibly but my wife loved it and she never read the book.

Actually, Watchmen was a very philosophical movie. I still think about it, but only because of Dr. Manhattan. I was talking about him with some other people and we concluded he's probably the strongest superhero imagined so far. I don't know much about X-Men but a guy told me that a character named "Apocalypse" is the most powerful and that this Dr. Manhattan is even more capable, since he can teleport. This makes me wonder if anyone has done a real world analysis of the abilities of superheroes, like has been done with Star Trek, Star Wars, and Independence Day. It would be interesting to read what would happen (based on the laws of physics) if such people did exist. As an example, the analysis of Independence Day was particularly interesting because the aliens were very wasteful. All they had to do was orbit our planet and let the gravitational attraction do all the geological mayhem. Or, if they were a bit playful, they could've orbited in the direction opposite our spin. That would've braked the Earth. I don't have to tell you what would happen if the Earth stopped spinning.

So, we know that Dr. Manhattan could manipulate the electromagnetic force. He was clearly making use of the fields, which explains the "action at a distance", since the fields are invisible to our unaided eyes. But teleportation does not use the electromagnetic force. It's simply a result of an inherent property of many particles - spin. So, Dr. Manhattan had many copies of himself, all over the place, some left-handed, some right-handed (refers to direction of the spin). For example, if he wanted to teleport, then he would orient all of his particles to the right. This would cause him to appear wherever he had left a stash of left-handed particles. Of course, this is based on the current understanding of teleportation, which has nothing to do with streaming matter across space. It's the real version of "spooky action at a distance".

Well, him and Pre-Crisis Superman, I'd say.