Yesterday Entertainment Weekly posted a new still from the forthcoming Captain America movie featuring Hugo Weaving in full makeup as The Red Skull.

All I can say is “WOW!”
I’ll share that I was somewhat skeptical of Captain America being a success at the box office. Marvel has done a good job of making the character a WWII bad-ass in the last 10 years, but the fact remains that he’s kind of trapped in a hokey, by-gone era with several “Gee whiz!” simplistic trappings. There’s a high probability that this film could turn out very campy if not handled correctly.
This image of Weaving as The Red Skull completely blows that out of the water for me. For a film I was feeling so-so about before, I am now completely on board.
Marvel has been very smart about the publicity materials they’ve let leak out over the last few months. They’re very tuned in to what the fans want to see. First Cap’s shield, then the costume, then the effect of the Super Solider serum and now The Red Skull. Well played, Marvel. Well played.
The more I think about it, the more I think this make up job is absolutely perfect. I didn’t even notice that Weaving’s nose was completely missing until after I poured over the details of the costume. I wonder if they’re using the same guys who removed Ralph Fiennes nose for Voldemort?
And when you get right down to it, Weaving is the perfect choice to play The Red Skull. His villains are the best. Slightly unhinged, thoroughly pissed off and smart as a whip. Always a great combination.
What is your reaction to this new image? Does it have you psyched for Captain America? Leave your comments below!
Related Posts ¬
Dec 21, 2011 | TRAILER – THE HOBBIT |
Feb 8, 2011 | CAPTAIN AMERICA SUPER BOWL AD |
Jan 14, 2011 | COSTUME NEWS |
Jun 24, 2011 | JUST A KID FROM BROOKLYN |
Feb 4, 2011 | CAPTAIN AMERICA TEASER POSTER |
It’s not often that you open up your e-mail to a picture of documentary director Morgan Spurlock nearly naked. But that’s what I received yesterday when Sony Pictures Classics sent out a press release announcing the poster for Spurlock’s The Greatest Movie Ever Sold.
Soak it in, ladies…
Gotta give credit to Spurlock on the premise of his new film. I think it will be very interesting to pull back the curtain a little bit and take a peek at the lucrative business of brand sponsorship. Sponsorships have been going on practically since media was invented. But marketers are getting more savvy and less overt with their product placements.
As a marketer myself, I don’t find their maneuvers particularly sinister but, instead, highly fascinating. Especially when it comes to steering consumers toward their products when they might not be fully aware of the effort.
Spurlock will walk the talk in this film, so to speak. According to the press release, the film was FULLY financed through product placement from various brands, all of which are integrated transparently into the film.
“While using brands in film promotion is not new for Hollywood,” says the release “it certainly is new territory for the documentary format. Spurlock exploits the phenomenon to new heights, with everything from branded pizza boxes and in-flight film promotions to branded-everything in-film.
Should be interesting. The movie hits theaters April 22. What do you think? Leave your comments below.
A couple of days ago, Pixar released the third official trailer for Cars 2 – which seems weird because I feel like I’m already seeing commercials and exclusive clips of it everywhere.
For your benefit, I’ve included it here:
The reaction among most of the online movie blogs was typical. People were licking their chops writing up their best disses.
“If Pixar is the standard by which we inevitably, unfairly measure all other cartoons,” wrote FilmDrunk “Cars is the franchise that proves they’re still human.”
“Eh, it’s Pixar,” opined Pajiba “You’ll see it eventually. What choice do you have?”
Look, I’m not blind. I know that Pixar capped this trailer with a bidet joke. If this were a Dreamworks movie, I’d be worried.
But Pixar just came off their best year ever with the largest-earning, best reviewed Academy Award-winning Toy Story 3. You really think they’re going to take a dump in the punchbowl now?
I get it. People don’t like Cars and they don’t understand why Pixar would line up for a sequel – especially when there are more deserving properties to explore like The Incredibles or Monsters, Inc. I’m with you. BELIEVE ME, I’m with you.
But frankly, this kind of snark is nothing new. People have been predicting Pixar’s downfall ever since they hit their stride. I know I’ve said this before, but I remember people bad-mouthing Finding Nemo when it’s trailers first hit the internet. Where are those critics now. Yeah. Shut up.
I freely admit to being a Pixar fanboy and drinking the Kool-Aid. But that’s only because all of these other critics are so damn intent on asserting themselves as being above-it-all. And should Cars 2 tank critically or financially?… They’ll be the first to say “I told you so!”
It’s really unfortunate because no one ever calls these guys out when they’re proven wrong. “Remember when you said that Wall-E looked like garbage on wheels?” There’s no accountability.
I’m guilty of the same cynicism. I won’t pretend like I’m not. I see a movie like Beastly or Red Riding Hood and my eyes roll so hard they nearly fall out of my head.
But there’s a difference between bargain-basement movie making and a studio with an artistic pedigree. To quote Star Wars (for no reason at all), “I find their lack of faith… disturbing.”
Related Posts ¬
Jul 13, 2009 | BROTHERS OFFICIAL TRAILER AND TEASER POSTER |
Jul 19, 2011 | TRAILER – THE DARK KNIGHT RISES |
Picked up this gem from Noah Garfinkel over at Best Week Ever who (I guess, in turn) picked it up from The High Definite. Hey, credit where credit is due.
Anyway, it’s called “The Art of the Title” – a short montage put together by Ian Albinson for SXSW that is pretty much as-advertised. A series of movie titles displayed chronologically that will (as Garfinkel puts it) “going to make you want to watch movies right now.”
As a graphic designer and a movie buff, I couldn’t agree more. Albinson’s short film lands in the sweet spot where those two spheres of my Venn diagram intersect.
If you’d like to learn more about The Art of the Title, they have a web site where they describe themselves as “A compendium and leading web resource of film and television title design from around the world. We honor the artists who design excellent title sequences.” Check it out!
Related Posts ¬
Mar 9, 2009 | EEEEE-VAAHH |
Sep 17, 2007 | EXPLOSION! |
Mar 6, 2009 | KISS EACH OTHER ON THE MOUTH |
Mar 12, 2007 | CAN YOU TELL ME WHO THIS IS? |

It’s probably been decades since I’ve seen the Disney animated classic Bambi. So, when the opportunity arose to review the film’s Diamond Blu-ray release, I must confess that I merely curious by the prospect and not exactly anticipating it.
By that I mean I wasn’t waiting by the mailbox for the review copy to arrive. I don’t mean to be cruel. I’m thankful for the chance. It’s just that, well… Bambi was never one of those movies that connected with me as a child.
I don’t know if it’s the pro-nature theme, the gender ambiguous names of the characters like Bambi and Flower or if it has something to do with one of animation’s starkest bummer scenes. And if you know the story of Bambi, you know what I’m talking about.
What I discovered rediscovered instead was a very thoughtful, organic and beautifully composed film that rightly deserves its revered status among the Disney classics.
Watching Bambi as an adult, I was struck by its painterly style. Specifically, I’m talking about the lush watercolor backgrounds that allude to nature without ever overpowering the scenes.
They characters, too, remind the audience of the raw power and delicate grace of nature in a way that is practically uncanny. The ability for the animators to infuse human characteristics and personality traits into the mix demonstrates the raw talent in the pool during production of what was only their fifth film.
So why is there such a profound disconnect in my mind? I actually blame Disney for that. To a point.
Having marketed the film to the home video audience on and off for the last 30 years, Disney has reduced the scope of the movie to the cute, stumbling fawn that we are introduced to in the first half of the movie. Slipping on the ice, learning how to say the word “bird,” yelling “FLOWER!” at a skunk so forcefully he rolls back into a bed of daisies. I’m sure you can easily envision these scenes just from reading my brief descriptions.

However, the marketing completely ignores the second half of the movie where Bambi, now mature, takes a mate and confronts the scourge of Man. Incidentally, it never occurred to me how heavily The Lion King borrows from Bambi in this regard.
Now, granted, if I were going to pick a theme to push to unindoctrinated audiences, I’d probably go with the happy, fuzzy, lighter first act. All I’m saying is that the second act is so thematically jarring to me – largely due to my own hazy memory – that Bambi almost feels like two completely different movies.
In fact, the environmentalist theme in the second act is so profound, those who criticized Wall-E for having an agenda would probably explode from outrage watching this film. Disney’s message pulls no punches. “Nature is beautiful and should be preserved. Man ruins everything he touches.”
Wisely, is never shown in the film. But the brilliant musical score tells you exactly when he’s near. But when the swirling, pacing strings of “Man’s Theme” rise from the background, there’s no confusion that danger is present. In fact, it’s so simple, even a 4 year-old could recognize it. Watching the film with my son, nervously he would ask “What does that bad sound mean?”
I can think of no clearer example of how Disney pushed the medium of animation and film to communicate emotion without clubbing you over the head with it. That deft and steady hand is felt throughout the film.
The Diamond Edition Blu-ray is stacked with features that are exceptionally thorough – especially when you consider the film is over 65 years old. Probably the most interesting extra feature included on the disc is “Inside Walt’s Story Meetings-Enhanced Edition.” Reading from notes taken during story meetings, voice-over artists bring life to the words of Walt Disney, his writers and animators as they pitch ideas on how scenes will play out before one frame of animation was ever completed. The care and attention to detail these artists paid to the story is evident in these re-enactments.
In fact, the feature plays almost like an audio commentary. But instead of the actors and directors sitting around the room talking about what they thought worked and what they would have tried differently, Walt and his team talk about what will be and stay alarming true to their vision. Animation junkies and/or historians will be facinated by this opportunity to be a fly on the wall.
The Blu-ray also includes two “deleted scenes,” cobbled together from discarded storyboard drawings as well as a deleted song – “Twitterpaited” – which is basically about springtime and falling in love. Additional features made previously available in the DVD release of the film are also included.
Going back to the point I made previously about Bambi being two films and the softer pallet that has been sold to us by Disney over the years… I guess what brought this into focus for me was a specific bonus included with extras – the original trailer for the film from 1942. View it for yourself.
Now compare it to this advertisement for the Diamond Edition Blu-ray.
I don’t mean to make a mountain out of a molehill, but I find it interesting that audiences in 1942 were tantalized with promises of romance, action and heroism with nary a reference to Bambi as a child. Meanwhile, today’s audience is set up for an entirely different experience.
Bambi IS both films and it is a credit to Disney’s storytelling that the film works for both children and adults alike.
But if you were anything like me and was convinced that Bambi was a Technicolor cliche, you owe it to yourself to watch the film and reintroduce yourself to the splendor and refined artistry of Disney’s Halcyon days. You won’t regret it.

Empire Magazine recently released images for three covers they’re using to help promote X-Men: First Class. This is the cover that caught my eye.
Nicholas Hoult looks a little more convincing as Beast. But Jennifer Lawrence’s Mystique looks drowsy with a receding hairline. I don’t care how much cleavage you show, you’re creeping me out, Jenny. The cover is obviously ‘shopped. They couldn’t have gotten a better picture of her?
If you want to check out the other two covers (including Michael Fassbender as Magneto) swing over to Empire Online and check them out.
What’s your take on these new images? Also, when did Empire Magazine become a total fanboy rag? I used to think they were one of the classier, “high-end” movie publications. Did I miss a memo?
Leave your comments below!
Related Posts ¬
Jan 27, 2011 | THE COMPLETE STORY BEHIND THE HOUSE OF MOUSE |
Jan 20, 2011 | X-MEN: FIRST CLASS IS A MESS |
Feb 18, 2011 | BECOME AN X-PERT |
Jun 4, 2011 | X-MEN: FIRST CLASS – REVIEW |
So Warner Bros. released the first full trailer for The Hangover 2 and… I think it looks terrible. Watch for yourself.
Seriously, it’s like the exact same movie, except it’s in Bangkok. Tattoo = tooth, monkey = baby and there’s another missing person that Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms and Zack Galafinakis have to find.
Hey, I loved Ken Jeong’s Mr. Chow in the first Hangover as much as the next guy. But does it make A LICK of sense that he would be in Bangkok for the sequel?
Incidentally, if I were Justin Bartha, I’d be pissed. He’s not the one missing this time, but he’s still relegated to the sidelines.
Between this trailer and Due Date being pretty much a straight rip-off of Planes, Trains and Automobiles, I am seriously concerned that director Todd Phillips has run out of gas creatively.
What’s your reaction to this trailer? Leave your comments below!
Related Posts ¬
Dec 20, 2011 | TRAILER – THE DARK KNIGHT RISES |
Dec 15, 2011 | TRAILER – THE EXPENDABLES 2 |
Feb 1, 2011 | DEANZIE’S GUIDE TO BUSINESS CONVENTIONS |
The following demo reel from animatronics expert John Nolan demonstrates brilliantly why there is still a need for the artistry and craftsmanship of practical effects.
I like computers. But sometimes I miss the warmth of a puppet.
No. Wait. That sounds gross. Just shut up and watch this, okay?
Warner Bros. released three new stills of Ryan Reynolds dressed up in costume for the forthcoming Green Lantern movie. As I’m sure you’re all aware, he’s not wearing an actual costume, but a CGI suit that is being painted over his body by very lonely computer nerds in post.
Here’s my take… I’ve always felt that this movie version of the Green Lantern costume was needlessly ornamental and vaguely Tron-like. But I’ve gotten used to it. Now that I’m looking at this complete head to toe shot, I’m really creeped out by what looks like shrink-wrapped socks on Reynolds’ feet. Seriously, animators. I don’t need to know what the indentation of Reynolds’ toenail bed looks like. But, my! Those foot tendons are FABULOUS!
I swear, with this movie, it’s one step forward and two steps back.

Do you have an opinion about Green Lantern? I bet you do! You should leave your comments below!

As it’s 50th animated feature film, Tangled is very much the summation of Disney’s previous output. Depending on your opinion of the House of Mouse, that could be either a good or bad thing.
Personally, I think it’s a good thing. Disney has finally figured out a way to align itself with current animation trends and attitudes similar to what Dreamworks and their contemporaries at Pixar are doing without sacrificing the traditional story elements that make a film uniquely Disney. The animations has a snappy feel, a fairy tale princess is front and center and the dialogue is wry without sailing completely over the heads of children.
Most importantly, it’s entertaining. It’s easy for me to say that Tangled is the most fun I’ve had watching a Disney movie since Aladdin. Frankly, its wit and pop makes it one of the few Disney movies I can imagine watching proactively instead of through the filter of nostalgia.

By now you’re probably familiar with the premise behind Tangled. It’s basically a modified take on the German fairy tale of Rapunzel. But, smartly, what directors Nathan Greno and Byron Howard did was expand the mythology and gave us a much more satisfying reason why Rapunzel was locked away in that tower lo’ so many years ago.
While pregnant, Rapunzel’s mother, the Queen becomes very ill. The kingdom sets out in search of a golden flower rumored to have healing properties. The flower has been hidden away by the selfish crone Gothel, who uses the flower to keep her young. But once the magical flower is found, it restores the queen to health – and infuses its healing abilities in the strands of the young princess’s hair. Gothel steals the child away in the night and locks her in a secluded tower, cut off from society, as she continues to use the healing magic to keep her young.

“Why dat hair gotta be so long?” the audience demands. Easy. Cut the hair and it loses its magical power. Well played, Greno and Howard. Well played.
Of course, the problem with writing a movie about an isolated character is that there has to be some drama or change in the status quo for the plot to move forward. Meet Flynn Rider, a thief and a rouge looking for a place to hide after stealing the kingdom’s crown jewels.
Cynically, critics complained that Flynn the Adventurer was introduced as a marketing tool to attract boys (who would be otherwise turned off by a “princess” story) to the film. Considering the disappointing box office on The Princess and The Frog, it’s easy to see why some might jump to that conclusion. Certainly the flim’s marketing and Disney’s decision to name the movie Tangled and not “Rapunzel” would seem to support this theory.

But it actually makes a great deal of sense to have the smarmy and charismatic Flynn as Rapunzel’s guide in the real world. It’s Rapunzel’s dream to investigate the floating lanterns she sees in the distance every year on her birthday. She doesn’t realize that it’s actually a symbolic ceremony from her kingdom longing for the return of the kidnapped princess.
Rapunzel, despite her wonder, is so closed off from the outside world she doesn’t even wear shoes. You need a fast-talking character like Rider to essentially provide both sides of the dialogue. Otherwise you’d be left with a movie where the heroine walks around, clutching a frying pan and looking confused for two acts.
Despite being the Disney movie with the longest running time since Fantasia, Tangled’s 100 minutes never lags or bores. In fact, if anything, it almost feels short. Time flies by as Rapunzel and Flynn explore the soft, rounded, painterly world developed by Disney animators using techniques they were tasked with inventing in order to achieve their look. Typically, whenever Disney sets out to create techniques to develop their films, the results are always memorable.
If I could be critical of Tangled at all, I think they almost made the process too easy. This familiarity with the traditional fluidity of Disney’s style probably made audiences feel as Tangled was something they had seen before. Considering some of the visual cues the film picks up on from Disney’s past (the romantic kiss in the boat from The Little Mermaid or Flynn “surfing” down the trench of a water wheel like Tarzan “surfed” across mossy tree branches) it’s understandable.
As a Disneyphile, I found the references endearing and appropriate for Disney’s 50th animated feature. In fact, these references were very similar to the visual cues producers of the James Bond films did for their 20th franchise film, Die Another Day back in 2002.
In terms of Blu-ray extras, I found them a little light on substance. A short behind-the-scenes feature called “Untangled: The Making of a Fairy Tale” played more like a bunch of bumpers ported from the Disney Channel and were stitched together with narration from the film’s stars, Mandy Moore and Zachary Levi.
There are a handful of “deleted scenes” (or, rather, slightly enhanced animatics), a couple of extended songs and two alternate versions of the film’s opening sequence. They’re interesting, but not substantive.
Most entertaining are the “9 Tangled Teasers” – a collection of parody commercials made for the theatrical release of the films that utilize the film’s characters.
Ultimately, the success of Tangled relies in its unique ability to be respectful of the Disney fairytale tradition while also keeping it pliable enough to have fun with it. The movie keeps things snappy, but never looks down its nose at you for enjoying traditional storytelling. The movie is a fine addition to any animation fan’s library.

Related Posts ¬
Feb 17, 2006 | CONCERT REPORT |
Jun 27, 2005 | IT BE NAP TIME |