Yeah, so the headline’s pretty self-explanamatory. This is the poster for Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland, opening March 5th in annoying 3D. It stars Mia Wasikowska as Alice (curiously absent from the poster, as is Johnny Depp as the Mad Hatter), Helena Bonham Carter as the Red Queen, Anne Hathaway as the White Queen, the Cheshire Cat (voiced by Stephen Fry), and Matt Lucas as Tweedledee and Tweedledum. Hey, whatever keeps him from doing another season of Little Britain. I can’t tell if that show is terrible, or if it’s just mediocre and the horrendous laugh track is what makes it seem so loathsome. And I can’t make fun of his weird bald look because he has alopecia, but I will say that those horizontal stripes are doing him NO favors. *bitchily sips flirtini*
[via /Film]
I thought the first trailer for Universal’s CGI, 3D animated Despicable Me was interesting because it didn’t give away too much of the plot. Then again, I forgot it almost as soon as I posted it so what do I know. This is the second trailer, which seems to have a completely different plot than the first. This one makes it seem like it’s about Steve Carell’s villain character, Gru (who apparently speaks with a Russian accent the whole time), and his rivalry with a better super villain; the last one seemed to be about Gru’s plan to steal the world’s monuments. Then there’s the synopsis about Gru adopting some orphan girls. But it’s all more or less irrelevant because there’s a nut shot in the trailer, and you know my rule about nut shots in the trailer. Nut shots in the trailer are up there with the presence of Cam Gigandet when it comes to surefire predictors of a movie’s suckitude.
Also familiar with nut shots in a trailer? Your mom. (Because she lives in a trailer, you see.)
RELATED ASYLUM POLL: What’s the best computer animated film for adults?
The people behind the Michael Jackson movie This is It have always maintained that the movie would only have an oh-so-classy limited run of two weeks. And if you believed that, punch yourself in the face for being a dipsh-t. Turns out, before he died they re-recorded videos for “Thriller”, “Man in the Mirror”, and “Earth Song”, and of course you’ll be able to see those. IN 3-D! And possibly… 4-D! That’s a lot of D!
The intention was to use the new videos as transitions into the performed versions of the songs, transitions that are a long way from the original. Choreographer/associate producer Travis Payne promises that the new “Thriller” is nothing like the boy on the date with the girl, while at the same time, “We didn’t touch what we considered the sacred inside of it.”
And while the new version of “Thriller” and the other songs will be screened with This Is It in plain old 3D next week, that’s not how they were intended to be seen, and that might not be the last we see of them either.
Ortega also revealed that there may be a 3D re-release of Michael Jackson’s This Is it later on, including the revamped music videos that were originally to be broadcast during the concerts in 3D. But that’s not nearly as elaborate as how the videos were originally intended to be shown. The plan was to have the audience members don 3D glasses in the middle of the concert, but it was going to be much more than just 3D screens in the corner. As Payne explained it to me, “We had 3D and also frontal elements and overhead elements that actually created a 4D environment that the audience was sitting in.” [CinemaBlend]
That’s right, they were sitting IN A TIME MACHINE! We could watch the extinction of the dinosaurs, the Big Bang, or the Kennedy assassination, BUT F-CK IT, LET’S GO TO A MICHAEL JACKSON CONCERT. Looks like I won’t be needing this anymore! (*lights Intro to Physics book on fire*)
Question marks in the headline can mean only one thing: it’s time to prognosticate! This story has no facts, so we’re free to speculate wildly! Yee haw, now who wants to take a shot in the dark? And remember, address all responses in the form of a question!
This rumor comes from MarketSaw, accompanied by two questions marks and three exclamation points in the headline, which is enough to write it off as the work of a breathless retard in my book. But if you need further evidence, here you go:
I have been hearing rumblings… [probably from Lucas' stomach -- "FEED ME A STRAY CAT," it says. -Ed.] extremely quiet at first, but now heating up significantly and from a trusted source - that George Lucas is preparing to unleash another STAR WARS trilogy upon us, this time in stereoscopic 3D. This is NOT the TV series, these are brand spankin’ new 3D STAR WARS movies. It is coming from a source that SHOULD KNOW. This source is absolutely connected. So odds are it is seriously being talked about at Lucasfilm.
But here is the shocker: Lucas will be producing and NOT directing these new episodes apparently! Could Steven Spielberg be tapped to direct a STAR WARS movie after all? Yes according to a trusted source of mine! Further, Francis Ford Coppola was mentioned too as a possible director for a future film!
Should I murder the president? YES, says my neighbor’s dog! If it wasn’t true, why would the government monitor my thoughts through the television? Riddle me that, batman.
RELATED ASYLUM POLL: When did the Star Wars franchise lose its mojo?
(Biff’s buddy can’t catch a break)
If you’ve been paying any attention to the film industry for the past year, you know 3D is the next big thing. Avatar is supposed to be a “game changer“, Jeffrey Katzenberg says Dreamsworks will be all 3D from now on, and even Iron Man 2 was toying with the idea of 3D. I’ve bitched about 3D being an annoying gimmick a few times, and my opinion is usually enough for me. But it’s nice to see a world-famous film critic agree with me, and now, Roger Ebert has weighed in. (Actually it was two weeks ago, but who’s counting.):
Simply put, has anyone ever attended a 2-D movie and thought, ‘If only it were in 3-D’? I doubt it, because 2-D creates a perfectly effective illusion of depth and dimension. When I see Lawrence growing from a dot far across the desert sands, it never occurs to me that I’m watching a 2-D image. When I watch 3-D, however, I’m constantly reminded that it’s in 3-D. Objects approach and recede alarmingly, drawing you out of the actual film.
Characters seem more concerned to demonstrate their dimensions than their personalities. And, by its nature, the entire 3-D image must be in focus at all times, depriving cinematographers of the use of focal planes. The process is an annoyance and a distraction. [via Spectator UK]
Yeah! What he said! Though, in the interests of being fair and balanced, I should point out that critic Pete Hammond calls 3-D “the funniest innovation of the year!”, while Ben Lyons says it’s “the wave of the future, homey.”
