Support the LEGO Eagle Transporter

Support LEGO potentially creating a LEGO-ized version of the Eagle Transporter from Space: 1999, one of the most awesome and iconic spaceships in television history.

space-1999-year-one-1No matter if your preference is for the more cerebral Year One…

 

 

 

space-1999-year-two

Or more dynamic Year Two, you can’t go wrong.

 

 

 

Though most fans of Gerry Anderson’s (arguably) best life action series would want most is a Year Three, but that’s unlikely to happen anytime soon because ITV (the current rights holder) are apparently doing everything they can to ensure that it doesn’t.

(To be fair in 2012 there was talk of a reboot, Space: 2099, but that fell by the wayside).

As I implied, I wouldn’t hold my breath for a new series, so one way to0 show your love is to create create an account at LEGO Ideas and answer a few questions (all relevant to the potential project).

screenshot-2016-09-08-17-28-23

Besides, if LEGO does an Eagle, can a Hawk be far behind?

And if there’s enough interest to create a LEGO-ized Hawk, who knows what can happen?

Screenshot 2016-09-08 17.55.24.png

Trailer into Reaction – Max Steel

Mattel hasn’t had a lot of luck expanding their IP into live action movies–unlike Hasbro, despite having success with their Transformers movies, which aren’t very good–which probably has a lot to do with their characters not being very good.

Barbie? There’s an audience, but I am not sure how large it would be.

Screenshot 2016-09-06 00.28.29.pngMasters of the Universe? There was already an attempt to produce a movie based on Mattel’s toy line in 1987.

It wasn’t terribly good–though had potential before they made their way earthside–but enjoyable in its own way (despite special effects by Richard Edlund and Frank Langella as Skeletor)

So enter Max Steel, based on another toy line from Mattel.

 

 

 

Ouija 2 : Origin of Evil – Trailer 2

Ouija.png

 

I think Mike Flanagan (Oculus, Hush) is quite a talented director.  That being said, I find the latest trailer from his upcoming Ouija 2: Origin of Evil in some ways a bit disturbing (and not in the good, creepy, what’s that shadow doing there kind of way).

It’s not that I think that it’s going to be as bad–keep in mind I paid to see the original Ouija,  so knowing Flanagan’s bona fides I can’t see it being as horribly ‘meh’ as that– as the movie that it’s a sequel to.

Though what it feels like is that Flanagan is playing in James Wan’s (Saw, Insidious, Dead Silence, The Conjuring, etc) sandbox rather than creating something all his own.

And on some levels that’s not quite fair.  Wan doesn’t own period pieces–as Ouija 2: Origin of Evil appears to be–but he has partially built a career on period supernatural movies like The Conjuring, Insidious and their sequels, which are very much products of their times (the 80’s).

Then there’s that most of James Wan’s horror movies are slicker than they have any right to be, and if there’s anything that I hope Mike Flanagan doesn’t learn, it’s that.

The Fog (2005) – Postmortem

Screenshot 2016-08-23 23.05.50.pngAs I have said time and again, I am not fond of remakes.

More often than not they don’t add anything to the original–did we really need to know about Michael Myers difficult upbringing in Rob Zombie’s Halloween reboot?–or they add details that seemingly are there just to differentiate them from the original.

The thing is, as far as remarks go, Rupert Wainwright’s remake of The Fog (it doesn’t help that  John Carpenter directed the original) isn’t terrible.

It’s not particularly good, but it’s different enough that you don’t at least hate yourself for wasting an hour and a half that you will never get back.

What works is the whole leprosy subplot–in the original I don’t recall the movie going into huge detail about what William Blake was doing with the gold–but in the reboot the point was to get his people to a place where they could live in peace because they were suffering from leprosy.

He was building a leper colony!  It’s a pretty clever idea that the movie unfortunately doesn’t take advantage of (there’s a scene where one of the ghosts comes in physical contact with a person, and she’s decays like she’s caught leprosy on steroids).

Unfortunately it’s an angle that they don’t deal with again.

They could have also done more innovative things with the fog itself, especially when you take into account that the bulk of it is CGI, but unfortunately they don’t.

It’s a movie full of wasted opportunities–especially compared to the original–but at least you don’t feel your time slipping away like digital fog.

 

Thor: Ragnarok’s Resident Wild Card

Marvel Studios’ upcoming Thor: Ragnarok looks to be the most intriguing release thus far, and most of the reason for it are due to idiosyncratic director Taiki Waititi.

He’s the director of quirky dramedies like Eagle vs Shark and What We Do In The Shadows and if the trailer he released at ComicCon is any indicator he intends to bring his unique sensibilities and extremely skewed sensibilities to the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

And that’s a little scary because its hard to predict where he will take things.

He’s either going to create something that’s off the charts brilliant, or that’s so odd that it might not connect with a wider audience easily.

Either way, it’s going to be fascinating.

And if that weren’t enough, Mark Mothersbaugh is doing the music. He’s done soundtracks for everything from television shows to movies, but I’ll always remember him for the Rugrats theme song.

And there’s always this…

Rings – Trailer 1

Screenshot 2016-08-25 18.02.56.png

The trailer for Rings dropped yesterday, and having just rewatched it a moment ago leaves me with a few questions:

First, wasn’t the whole mystery of Samara solved in The Ring 2 (it’s been awhile since I’ve seen it, but I recall her being set free or something along those lines)?

Now, I understand that I would need to see the new movie to understand how they’re continuing the curse, but on the face it it it doesn’t seem to make sense.

And Second, speaking of the curse, the nature of it seems mighty conditional in that suppose you need to own both a television and a phone.

Which most people do, though I imagine that that would change remarkably fast if you suspected that a ghost were after you that seems to appear via television.

What I hope the movie does is tackle what happens if Samara’s curse goes primetime, and speeds like a virus among a whole bunch of people.

 

What The Heck Is Going On With Justice League Dark?

Screenshot 2016-08-24 17.24.35.pngWarner Bros/DC Films’ Justice League Dark has had one of the most confusing journeys in to theaters in recent memory.

Originally intended as a project for Guillermo del Toro to direct, for unknown reasons those plans were abandoned, and it morphed into a cartoon (It’s worth mentioning that how the situation unfolded–minus the animation–is vaguely similar to how he was treated by Legendary Pictures, where he was set to direct the sequel to Pacific Rim before that project passed to Steven DeKnight–Spartacus, Marvel’s Daredevil–with Del Toro remaining as a producer, which is the case with Justice League Dark as well).

At the time that made no sense to me, and how the situation has evolved hasn’t made things any clearer, especially when you consider that Del Toro is indisputably one of the best directors of the weird and fantastic, so why he would move on from a project he originally seem very intent on helming feels a bit odd.

And things only get weirder because today  Comic Book Resources reported that Doug Liman, who was originally in line to direct Gambit for 20th Century Fox (a troubled production that won’t see the light of day any time soon) has turned up at the helm of Justice League Dark.

Yeah, I’m confused too because this latest turn of event literally makes no sense that I can see.

First off, why did Del Toro leave the production in the first place.  Then, why was the live action movie seemingly abandoned for an animated one.

And if things weren’t messy enough, how has the project returned, in a feat worthy of John Constantine himself, under Doug Liman?

And that’s not to imply criticism of Liman because he’s a really talented director but it feels to me that Guillermo del Toro is being treated a bit shabbily.