First Pet Sematary Reviews Are Up, See What Critics Are Saying

First Pet Sematary Reviews Are Up, See What Critics Are Saying

We are in a brilliant time for horror, as the genre is winning new converts thanks to what seems to be an alternating pattern of inventive new original films and fantastic remakes and sequels in hallowed franchises. After Jordan Peele’s Us blew the doors off the box office last month, April has brought the remake/new adaptation of horror master Stephen King’s Pet Sematary.

Considered to be one of Stephen King’s most terrifying novels, Pet Sematary was last adapted for the big screen in 1989, in a film that is well-liked by some fans, but one that probably needed a remake. So how does the new Pet Sematary fare? Pretty well it seems. The reviews are up for the film and CinemaBlend’s own Sean O’Connell gave it 3.5 out of 5 stars, praising it as an adaptation of King’s work. In his review, Sean said:

Pet Sematary, as a story, isn’t for everyone. It’s dark and sad, heartbreaking and complicated. But for fans eager to venture to the hallowed ground of King’s novel, this adaptation is a worthy and unsettling tour guide through the mind caverns of King.

That is encouraging to hear for Stephen King fans who have seen the author’s work run the gamut from unwatchable to masterpiece. That said, the story of Pet Sematary isn’t going to appeal to everyone, and it’s not meant to. Collider’s Perri Nemiroff echoes some of Sean’s points while highlighting how scary Pet Sematary is. She says in her "A-" review of the film:

Pet Sematary isn’t striving to be an easy communal crowdpleaser. Just like the source material, it’s a movie with a real thoughtful mean streak that’ll chill you to the bone, and ensure you remain sufficiently on edge well after it concludes.

It sounds like Pet Sematary is truly scary and will leave you feeling rattled long after the credits roll. Right before the credits, though, is where there seems to be some debate, with some reviewers feeling that this new film, while ultimately being a success, doesn’t quite stick the landing. IndieWire’s Britt Hayes gave Pet Sematary a “B-“ and said:

Succeeds in some areas where the 1989 version failed while ultimately failing to deliver an ending that resonates as deeply as its source material.

Others, like The Wrap’s Monica Castillo seemed to appreciate the new ending to the film how it leaves audiences with a lot to ponder in their post-Pet Sematary trauma. She said:

Its terrifying story about death still leaves audiences with much to think about long after the credits roll, and the twists that lead to a new ending are fun to follow.

Not everyone felt that this new Pet Sematary actually felt new though. In one of the film’s negative reviews, Nikki Baughan of ScreenDaily found the positive elements to be far outweighed by how trite the whole thing felt. She said:

Yet these are buried deep under a mudslide of horror cliches — jump scares, creepy kids, expositional newspaper headlines — that reduce this to just another run-of-the-mill horror remake.

Opinions like that seem to be the minority though, and some, like Slashfilm’s Chris Evangelista, fall on the complete opposite end of the spectrum. He found that this new Pet Sematary made changes that were for the better and allowed the filmmakers to tell a new version of the story that maintains the frightening and emotional impact of the source material. He gave the film extremely high praise in his 9 out of 10 review, and said:

Directors Kevin Kölsch and Dennis Widmyer take the terror that King forged, and mold it into something fresh, and exciting, and downright horrifying. Pet Sematary is one of the best Stephen King adaptations ever.

As of now, with an 79% on Rotten Tomatoes, it seems that Pet Sematary is another winning chapter in the ongoing horror renaissance. The film won't be for everyone and Stephen King die-hards and fans of the original film can probably go either way on the changes. Pet Sematary also isn't a particularly happy film, so if you're doing a double feature with Shazam! it's probably best to end with that delightful superhero film instead of going home on such a heavy note.

Pet Sematary rises from its grave when it opens in theaters on April 5. Check out our 2019 release schedule to see all the horror films and everything else you can look forward to this year.

Song Of The South: The Story Behind The Disney Movie That Disappeared

Song Of The South: The Story Behind The Disney Movie That Disappeared

Last week, Disney CEO Bob Iger told a room full of Disney stockholders that the plan for the upcoming Disney+ streaming service was to have Disney’s entire motion picture library available shortly after launch. Clearly, this is an exciting concept for both Disney fans, as well as movie fans in general, as Disney has a library stretching back decades. However, it seems highly unlikely that literally every Disney movie will ever actually be on the service, as there’s at least one movie that will almost certainly be missing: 1946’s Song of the South.

Whether or not you’ve ever actually seen the movie, you likely know at least something of the controversy that surrounds it. Last released in theaters in 1986, the film hasn’t been shown publicly since then, and has never received a VHS or DVD release in North America. When Bob Iger was asked about the film during the same Disney stockholders’ meeting in 2010, he called the film “fairly offensive” and has said we should not expect to see the movie released any time soon, if ever.

Song of the South focuses on a young boy named Johnny who has traveled with his parents from Atlanta to his grandmother’s plantation in an undisclosed Southern location. Upon arriving there, Johnny learns his father is turning around and going home. It seems Johnny parents will be separating for a while, perhaps something to do with his father’s controversial editorship of a newspaper. It’s all very vague and never explained.

Johnny attempts to run away back to his father, but he’s stopped by the kindly Uncle Remus, an elderly black man (James Baskett), who tells him a story about Br’er Rabbit and a time he tried running away from his problems, and only found greater ones. Johnny decides to stay, if only to hear more stories from Uncle Remus.

Johnny makes a friend in a young girl his age, Jenny, but runs afoul of her bully older brothers. Every time Johnny finds himself in trouble, Uncle Remus is there with a story that relates to the issue and helps Johnny through it.

While the stories of Br’er Rabbit, Br’er Fox, and Br’er Bear are animated, Song of the South is still very much a live action movie. The animated sequences cover no more than about 20 minutes, broken up in three segments, of the 90-minute film. Song of the South has been the subject of controversy since it was released back in 1946, and that controversy has only increased since then.

The first problem with Song of the South is that it never makes it entirely clear what the relationship is between the black and white characters in the film. While the movie is supposed to be set during the era of Reconstruction, it never comes out and simply says this. Many audiences have viewed the relationship between the black and white characters as being that of slaves and masters, and there’s little evidence to discount this view. The closest the movie comes is when, 10 minutes before the film is over, Uncle Remus decides to leave the plantation. The fact he’s allowed to do so is the only indication he’s not a slave.

Regardless, the relationship between black and white characters is portrayed as ideal. Everybody is happy, even though one group here is clearly rich and the other is clearly poor.

Beyond that, Song of the South deals with the use of racist dialects, as well as the use of the trope that would later become known as the “magical negro.” Even the animated sequences aren’t free of controversy. One of Br’er Fox’s plans to capture Br’er Rabbit involves the use of a golem made of black tar which the fox refers to as a ...tar baby. Yeah, this thing can get rough.

On the other side of the controversy, however, is a movie that has a lot going for it. It’s the second feature film in Disney history to see human actors performing with animated characters in the same frame, and it’s done to far greater effect than it was in The Three Caballeros.

The film is a two-time Oscar winner. The song “Zip-A-Dee-Do-Dah” won the award for Best Original Song and James Baskett was given an honorary Oscar for his performance as Uncle Remus.

Since its final theatrical release in 1986, Disney has largely tried to forget that Song of the South exists. While the popular Splash Mountain attraction found at Disneyland and Walt Disney World takes its inspiration and music from the film, the ride focuses exclusively on the exploits of Br’er Rabbit and other animal characters. Uncle Remus does not appear and he is not mentioned.

Today, there are two minds about what to do with Song of the South. Many believe the film should simply stay buried. It’s a product of an era and attitudes about race that we all understand today were wrong. Bringing the film back would only remind people of something we should forget.

Others, however, would like to focus on the film’s positives, such as the popular music and the revolutionary animation. Many do feel there’s value to the film historically and that it should exist. Perhaps Song of the South could be brought back, maybe on a disc that also includes additional material like documentaries and retrospectives that put the film in context and accept the film has elements worthy of criticism, but uses them as a teaching moment.

Of course, if that does happen, then audiences will learn something else that’s important about Song of the South. It’s not very good. I hate to be the one to break it to you, but it isn’t actually a great film. The animated segments really are fun (tar babies notwithstanding), but the live-action sequences just draw on and on and you get really bored waiting for the cartoons to come back on.

I’m not going to pretend like I know what the right decision to make here is. However, I’m also not sure that Disney knows either. Clearly, the studio's plan is to leave Song of the South in the vault for now. Maybe a compelling argument will be made to bring it back one day, but I don’t expect that day will come this year. When Disney+ brings every other Disney movie right to your TV, from Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs to The Cat From Outer Space and more, don’t expect Br’er Rabbit or Uncle Remus to come with them.

Rumor: Marvel's The Eternals Is Trying To Cast Keanu Reeves

Rumor: Marvel's The Eternals Is Trying To Cast Keanu Reeves

I mean, if I ever make a movie I'm going to try to cast Keanu Reeves too. Doesn't mean it's going to happen, and it doesn't mean he'll be cast for the new Marvel Cinematic Universe movie The Eternals. But there's a new rumor on the MCU street saying Keanu is being sought for a role in The Eternals, with negotiations said to already be under way.

If true -- and, personally, I hope it is -- "negotiations" can just mean someone called Keanu Reeves' rep and he's weighing it over. The scoop came from MCU Cosmic, with the site admitting it's all still early and there was no news on what part Keanu would even be considering. He has not signed anything at this point.

It's not out of the question to think Keanu Reeves would join a Marvel movie. We've been here before. Remember when he was almost in Captain Marvel? He reportedly missed that train because of a John Wick 3 conflict, not for lack of interest. Keanu even talked about having interest in the role of Wolverine, another Marvel character. So, on the face of it, I both like and can believe the idea of Keanu in the MCU. But let's see how this plays out.

Most of The Eternals casting intel we've seen so far has come from sites like The Hollywood Reporter and The Wrap, which gave us the news on Angelina Jolie signing on (reportedly as Sersei) with Richard Madden in talks (possibly as Ikaris), and Kumail Nanjiani also said to be in the mix.

Chloe Zhao is directing The Eternals, which will reportedly begin production in Atlanta in August. That's per Production Weekly (via ComicBook) which also listed a general description for The Eternals:

The story of The Eternals is set millions of years ago when the cosmic beings known as the Celestials genetically experimented on humans, creating the super-powered individuals as well as more villainous off-shoots known as the Deviants. The two groups went on to battle each other throughout history to see which would eventually become the ultimate race. The story involves the love story between Ikaris, a man fueled by cosmic energy, and Sersi, who relishes in moving amongst humans.

The MCU's Phase 4 is still pretty mysterious, but after Spider-Man: Far From Home, we know we have the Black Widow movie, Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3, Doctor Strange 2, Black Panther 2, Shang-Chi, and The Eternals. Marvel Studios boss Kevin Feige will update us with more when he's good and ready. Keep up with all things MCU in our handy guide.

Keanu Reeves, though. Man, is he having a good season. John Wick 3 is the biggest hit of the franchise so far, and that franchise is still continuing from here. Reeves is also voicing a major new role in Toy Story 4, and he's currently rocking a fantastic cameo in the Netflix romantic comedy Always Be My Maybe. After this, he'll be seen in the new Bill & Ted movie. He can do anything, so it's very believable that he could also slay in a Marvel movie. What do you think of the idea?

See Mark Hamill's Chucky Terrorize Andy In Child's Play Clip

See Mark Hamill's Chucky Terrorize Andy In Child's Play Clip

June 21 brings two tales of toys to theater screens. In one, Andy’s former toy Woody reunites with an old flame and goes on an adventure to bring a fellow toy back to its kid. In the other, a different Andy discovers that not all toys have such good intentions and childhood games can quickly become nightmares. Take a look below to see Mark Hamill’s Chucky terrorizing Andy in a clip from the new Child’s Play.

Mark Hamill may be best known for playing Luke Skywalker, but here he shows why he is such an accomplished voice actor. Even though we don’t see Chucky in the scene, just through his voice Mark Hamill conveys all of Chucky’s feigned innocence, his true malice and the pleasure he derives from terrorizing poor Andy. This game of Hide-and-Seek is like a cat playing with its terrified food.

Gabriel Bateman’s Andy is super freaked out, frightened and confused by the whole thing, but he puts on a brave face and even picks up a weapon hoping to protect himself. But a wooden bat is a weapon for a more simplistic foe, and Chucky is playing on a different level. This becomes clear to Andy when the TV shows Andy’s feet and the look on his face changes from one of determination in the face of fear to one that says ‘oh shit.’

The whole clip, and the premise of this new Child’s Play, feels like something out of an episode of Black Mirror. Chucky is a toy with smart functionality and he’s able to connect with all the other seemingly innocuous smart household devices that we interact with and allow to listen to us, watch us and control our surroundings. It makes his presence near ubiquitous and gives him a level of omnipotence.

This all makes escaping Chucky far more difficult than simply outrunning a two-foot doll. Maybe older generations really did have it better just using their imaginations and playing with sticks and rocks.

This trailer continues the trend of the marketing so far for Child’s Play by largely focusing on Chucky’s voice versus actually showing the killer doll. CinemaBlend’s own Mike Reyes has wondered about this approach and if we need to see more of Chucky, and although that may be the case, I think less is more works here for this clip.

Mark Hamill’s brilliant voice performance and the premise of the scene put us in Andy’s shoes, where Chucky is more dangerous specifically because we can’t see him. We'll have to wait and see how the film doles out looks at Chucky once he turns evil, but for now, Child's Play is taking a Jaws approach, showing us just enough of the threat to build suspense and tease it out.

Child’s Play opens in theaters on June 21. Check out our 2019 Release Schedule to keep track of all the biggest movies headed to theaters this summer.

The Curse Of La Llorona Box Office: The Conjuring Universe Has Another Overperformer

The Curse Of La Llorona Box Office: The Conjuring Universe Has Another Overperformer

The Conjuring Universe has unquestionably become one of the strongest brands in the Warner Bros. arsenal. Going back to 2013, every release has been an absolutely massive hit, with the $250 million-plus worldwide earnings for each title looking even more impressive when you consider that none of them have been made with a budget larger than $40 million. It's a train that doesn't appear ready to stop any time soon, and Michael Chaves' The Curse Of La Llorona demonstrated that this weekend by earning the franchise yet another box office crown. Check out its opening weekend numbers - as well as the rest of the Top 10 - below, and join me after for analysis!

It should be noted that The Curse Of La Llorona had the weakest opening of any Conjuring Universe movie thus far - with David F. Sandberg's Annabelle: Creation previously holding that title with its $35 million take back in 2017 - but part of the reason why it can still be considered a victory is the fact that it still managed to exceed expectations. Last week prognosticators suggested that the film would struggle to make more than $20 million, with Box Office Mojo suggesting a $17 million start, but those estimates proved to be a bit too conservative. Instead, the horror flick managed to beat that number by nearly $10 million, which is pretty significant when you consider that the feature only cost a reported $9 million to make.

There is no question that it's a step down for the brand, particularly after the record-breaking numbers put up by Corin Hardy's The Nun last fall, but the performance certainly says something about the hunger for stories in this universe. Adding in numbers from foreign territories, the movie has already made $56.5 million worldwide, and it will likely be the sixth feature in the franchise to get a nine figure total by the end of its theatrical run. It might take an extra minute, though, as there are a few things working against it in the coming weeks.

The first and most obvious roadblock is the forthcoming arrival of what is unquestionably one of the most anticipated blockbuster releases of all time. Joe and Anthony Russo's Avengers: Endgame is expected to have the attention of everyone in the world when screenings start on Thursday night, and there is probably little chance that folks are planning on doing a weird double feature that pairs the three-hour superhero epic with The Curse Of La Llorona.

Also, the film doesn't have quite the same level of buzz that the previous Conjuring Universe efforts have received. Not only have professional reviews not been super kind to the release, but audiences don't seem to be falling in love with it either. On CinemaScore, it doesn't look so great when you compare its "B-" grade" to the "A-" earned by both Conjuring titles and the "B" that both of the Annabelle movies received.

All that being said, it's already profitable after just three days, so Warner Bros. can't complain too much.

Speaking of the studio, this weekend was actually a double win for WB, as another one of their big brands - the DC Extended Universe - crossed an important milestone. It took a few weeks, but David F. Sandberg's Shazam! is now the seventh title in the franchise to join the century club. The movie only dropped about 29 percent in its third week, and while its still the slowest performer among recent DC releases (it's still made only half of what Zack Snyder's Justice League did in 2017), it has an ace up its sleeve: the fact that it didn't cost nearly as much to make as your average big comic book adaptation. Put in perspective, it's already made three times its budget worldwide - albeit before the cost of marketing and publicity.

As for the rest of the Top 10 beyond the two biggest releases, it was actually a very strange weekend. First there is the disappointment of Roxann Dawson's Breakthrough, which failed to make the $17-18 million that was expected in its first five days (screenings started mid-week). It was thought that the feature would get a nice boost from the religious crowd, and it actually earned better reviews than most god-centric releases, but apparently it couldn't stir up too much interest.

That's really the least of it, though, as the big theme for this weekend was unexpected ranking flip flops. For starters, Anna Boden and Ryan Fleck's Captain Marvel seemingly got a boost from the aforementioned forthcoming release of Avengers: Endgame, as the blockbuster jumped from its sixth place position last week into fourth place. The $9.1 million it earned over the last few days now puts its domestic total over $400 million, and its only the seventh of 21 Marvel Cinematic Universe releases to hit that benchmark. To date it has made $1.1 billion worldwide, and while it looks like it won't surpass the numbers put up by Joe and Anthony Russo's Captain America: Civil War back in 2016, the performance is still nothing short of astonishing.

Another surprise this weekend was the performance of Chris Butler's Missing Link - albeit the significance is relative. The stop-motion animated film got off to a depressing start last time around, as it started its theatrical run in ninth place, but this week it actually climbed a bit thanks to the fact that it only dropped about 26.5 percent. The movie has still only made about $13 million in North America, which isn't exactly impressive, but it is trying to put up a fight.

The middle of the chart also saw some weird switches, as Tina Gordon Chism's Little went from second place to fifth, and Kevin Kolsch and Dennis Widmyer's Pet Sematary went from fourth to seventh. Those are far less noteworthy than what happened to Neil Marshall's Hellboy, however. The panned Lionsgate release played in the exact same number of theaters this weekend as it did when it opened, but far fewer seats were filled in the last three days. Not only did it drop from third place to 10th, but it suffered a drop of nearly 68 percent. It failed to cross the $20 million mark, and things are looking seriously bad for the feature, which reportedly cost $50 million to make.

It was definitely a weird weekend at the box office, but things should change in a massive way next time around. It's entirely possible that Avengers: Endgame will soon become the new record holder for biggest worldwide opening - and we'll have all of the details for you next Sunday.

Avengers Endgame Box Office: A Strong Opening From Detective Pikachu Isn't Enough

Avengers Endgame Box Office: A Strong Opening From Detective Pikachu Isn't Enough

For the first time since it began its run a few weeks ago, Avengers: Endgame was actually tested at the weekend box office. The latest from the Marvel Cinematic Universe got all it could handle thanks to a strong opening weekend from Detective Pikachu, but in the end, Cap and company are still hanging out on top. They did just enough to keep the first place position though it's hard to imagine anyone involved with the Pokemon Company is too upset about an opening over $50M.

You can check out the full results from this weekend's box office, including those from newcomers Detective Pikachu, The Hustle, Poms and Tolkien below...

This third weekend for Avengers: Endgame is probably a combination of word of mouth and repeat business. Most people who desperately want to see a movie that's heavy on spoilers will find a way to get there the first two weekends. So, the people left can probably be divided into two groups: those who were on the fence about seeing it and got talked into it by the overwhelming positivity and those who enjoyed it so much they felt the need to go back. Anecdotally, we've heard that a lot in our comment section here at CinemaBlend. People keep making comments like, "I noticed X on my second time through" or "I can't wait to see whether my viewpoint on X changes when I see it a second/ third time." So, you can deliver all of that credit to the people involved with the production itself. Disney might have an incredible hype machine to deliver on opening weekend, but that machine isn't delivering these results on the third weekend.

As for Detective Pikachu, $58M is a really solid opening weekend for a movie with an estimated $150M budget. There have been high high hopes for awhile from both the studio and from fans that the film would produce enough of a result to a launch a larger Pokemon-themed cinematic universe. I wouldn't say it's done enough yet, but that possibility is very much in play right now. As such, fans should keep their fingers crossed for a solid second weekend, some strong social media buzz and engagement and eventually good home entertainment sales.

Outside of Detective Pikachu, it's hard to be excited about any of the openings for new films this weekend. The Hustle at least broke eight figures in domestic grosses, but the reviews on it have not been good and it's hard to imagine a scenario in which it put up a good performance next weekend. The same could be said for Poms, though it's 29% score on Rotten Tomatoes makes it look like Toy Story 3 compared to The Hustle which was hammered (including by us) with a miserable 16%.

Things should get very interesting next weekend when John Wick 3 is added to the release schedule. I'd expect a first place finish for the assassin, but as we saw this week, Avengers: Endgame certainly isn't going down without a fight.

How Clark Gregg Originally Found Out He'd Be In More Than Iron Man Movies In The MCU

How Clark Gregg Originally Found Out He'd Be In More Than Iron Man Movies In The MCU

While Clark Gregg's agent Phil Coulson doesn't have superpowers, the character is as loved by fans as any of the Avengers. Between his appearance in several Marvel Cinematic Universe films, and the ongoing Agents of SHIELD TV series, he's become a significant part of the story. However, if it was always the plan for Coulson to become a recurring part of the MCU, somebody forgot to tell Clark Gregg, as he didn't know his role was growing until the middle of filming Iron Man 2. According to Gregg...

During one of those [Iron Man 2] scenes they said, ‘Oh Tony, you’ve got to tell him he’s going to New Mexico.’ Finally, after I did a couple of takes, because I was obedient and happy to be there, I was like, ‘One question: What’s in New Mexico?’ And they said, ‘Oh, Thor! You’re going to be the one to find his hammer. Are you free?’ And I was like, ‘Oh shit, I’m going to get free!’

Clark Gregg made his debut as Agent Phil Coulson in the original Iron Man, back when the only hint that there was ever going to be anything like the MCU came in a post-credits sequence back when people didn't know they needed to stay through the credits. He was Tony Stark's liaison with SHIELD.

He returned for Iron Man 2 and likely just assumed that he'd just be a small part of whatever shenanigans Tony Stark got up to. The Incredible Hulk was the only other Marvel movie at that point and while Robert Downey Jr. did appear in a post credits sequence of his own, connecting the stories, it still wasn't clear just how well the MCU idea would work. Hulk wasn't a hit like Iron Man had been.

It's clear from the way Clark Gregg talks to Polygon that he's as much a fan of the Marvel movies as he is happy to be a part of them. Of course he would get excited about the chance to be in Thor as well as the Iron Man movies. I like how it was just sort of planned to have Clark Gregg appear in the movie and he was asked if he was free after telling him he was going. Based on his response, it was probably assumed he would make himself available if he made it clear how happy he was to be making the movies.

His fate in The Avengers was probably somewhat disappointing to him, though Gregg says he was humbled by the outpouring of support from fans who wanted to find a way to bring him back. One theory was that dead Coulson could have been a Skrull. Now, Gregg is back on the big screen in the MCU in the 90s prequel Captain Marvel which opens on Friday, and so are the Skrulls. Is Coulson actually a Skrull? No spoilers.

New Lion King Video Debuts Beyonce’s Nala

New Lion King Video Debuts Beyonce’s Nala

Of all the voice actors bringing characters to life in the brand new version of The Lion King, no name is bigger than that of Beyonce. She's one of the biggest names on the planet, and getting her to join the cast was a huge get for Disney. Having said that, the character has largely been in the background of the marketing up to this point.

However, a new video allows Beyonce's Nala to take center stage. We get the best look at the character so far and get to finally hear her for the very first time. Check it out in the video below.

While we've seen a couple shots of Nala in the official trailers, this is our best look at the character yet. We even see Nala actually speak the name Simba, something we've seen surprisingly little of in the marketing, as almost all character dialogue has been in the form of off-screen voice over.

Beyond that, the new video doesn't show us a great deal we haven't seen before. The new Lion King still looks like like it is very much going to follow the animated original quite closely. Although, it's possible that there are significant differences that are being kept out of the marketing.

While The Lion King is one of DIsney's most popular animated films, and the new remake seems destined to be a massive hit, one certainly has to wonder if there are some who are most interested in the new movie because Beyonce happens to be in it. Not only will she voice the character, but, one assumes that she'll also do some singing. One doesn't cast Beyonce in a musical and then not get her to do what she's known for.

Most of the Disney remakes of musicals have included brand new music and while we haven't heard much about that with The Lion King, it wouldn't shock me if there was a new Nala song somewhere in the movie, or at the very least, a new Beyonce tune to play over the closing credits.

Disney has been doing quite well with the remakes of the animated classics overall and while Dumbo's debut earlier this year probably wasn't what the studio was hoping for, Aladdin's box office has been much more in line with expectations. Based on its success, one can easily assume that The Lion King, a movie that did a lot better than Aladdin in animated form, is going to improve on the live-action version in roughly the same way.

Disney could very easily have its second billion dollar movie of the year in The Lion King. The original film came up just short of that number back in the 1990s, a remarkable feat for the era, and with the growth of the international box office since then, anything less would honestly be a little surprising.

With just a little over a month to go before release, expect The Lion King hype to get only bigger from here, even from those people who aren't massive Beyonce fans.

Mark Hamill Thinks New Star Wars Movies Are Released Too Quickly

Mark Hamill Thinks New Star Wars Movies Are Released Too Quickly

The past few years have been very exciting for the generations of Star Wars fans out there. With Disney now in charge of the property, there's been a ton of new and exciting content hitting the galaxy far, far away. This includes a new trilogy of movies, in addition to standalone projects like Solo and Rogue One. But according to Mark Hamill, these releases were a bit too close together.

Mark Hamill has been with the Star Wars franchise since A New Hope arrived back in 1977. He recently played a major role as Luke Skywalker in The Last Jedi, and is set to appear in J.J. Abrams' mysterious Episode IX. While Hamill is the biggest Star Wars cheerleader, he recently admitted that the rapid release schedule might have been a misstep for Disney. As he said:

In our day, it was three years apart. Now they’re two years apart, with a [spinoff] movie in between. I say to the executives at Disney, 'Really? Han Solo five months after our movie? Give it a rest!' They say, 'Well, we have to keep the schedule clear for Mary Poppins.'

Luke Skywalker has spoken. And he seems to think the Star Wars franchise could benefit from spacing out its releases. There has been a new installment in the space opera every year since The Force Awakens arrived, with Solo: A Star Wars Story arriving just months after Rian Johnson's The Last Jedi shocked the fandom. And that isn't something that Mark Hamill necessarily agrees with.

Mark Hamill's comments to Den Of Geek do make sense, and might be a factor into the poor box office performance of Solo. Ron Howard's Star Wars movie is the franchise's first box office failure, and the origin story failed to resonate with moviegoers as a whole. While the blockbuster's behind the scenes drama and the recasting of Han Solo may have factored into it, having another Star Wars release so soon after The Last Jedi likely helped sink Solo in theaters.

Solo's release date being so close to The Last Jedi is also significant because Rian Johnson's sequel was so subversive. Johnson went against all expectations and brought arguably the most divisive movie in the franchise to theaters. And as a result, the naysayers and haters might have been unwilling to take another chance with Solo: A Star Wars Story.

While not exactly 3 years, the gap between Solo and Episode IX should please Mark Hamill. Moviegoers have not had to wait over a year for a new installment since before The Force Awakens arrived in theaters, so hopefully time will amp up anticipation for the final installment in the Skywalker Saga.

Episode IX will arrive in theaters on December 20th. In the meantime, check out our 2019 release list to plan your next trip to the movies.

Zachary Levi Says You Don’t Need To Hate Captain Marvel To Love Shazam!

Zachary Levi Says You Don’t Need To Hate Captain Marvel To Love Shazam!

It's no secret that superhero movies are everywhere. The genre is extremely popular, and able to make massive sums of money at the box office. If the fans are behind it, that is. With so many comic book adaptations in theaters, studios are challenged to craft blockbusters unique perspective, that will set it apart from the already bloated genre. Luckily for Warner Bros., DC is breaking new ground with David Sandberg's upcoming origin story Shazam!

Shazam! will bring the titular DC superhero to the big screen for the first time, and will tell a story with plenty of heart and comedy. Zachary Levi is playing one half the title character, as he'll be the heroic persona of 14-year old Billy Batson. There was a time when the character Shazam used to be called Captain Marvel, so the DC and Marvel rivalry has been once again heating up for each heroes' big movie. But Levi doesn't want to hear it, especially when it comes to throwing hate Brie Larson's way. As he tells it:

It came to my attention, what was going on, because I was on Twitter or something. And I was getting added by people that were saying what was very clearly fictitious, defaming things about Brie and about Captain Marvel. I’m not affiliated with anything; I’ve known Brie over the years and I think she’s delightful and talented. By the way she doesn’t need anybody sticking up for her. I was trying to talk to people who thought they were doing me a favor. They were like ‘We’re not gonna see that, we’re gonna see Shazam!’. You can just say you want to see Shazam!. You don’t have to go and speak ill of someone else in order to raise me or this movie up.

And just like that, Shazam has spoken. Because while Marvel and DC may have fought over the title of "Captain Marvel", Zachary Levi doesn't feel that sort of rivalry with Brie Larson's Marvel blockbuster. And he doesn't want his success to be at the cost of another comic book movie.

Zachary Levi's comments come from his recent conversation with The Associated Press ahead of Shazam!'s release. Comic book fans are very passionate, and the rivalry between DC and Marvel has been going on for decades. But Captain Marvel was met with a particular level of hate ahead of its release, and that's not something that Levi wants any part of.

The rivalry between Shazam! and Captain Marvel comes from the comic book origins, where the mantle of "Captain Marvel" was fought for by both DC and Marvel comics. The name was originally held by the character played by Zachary Levi, while Carol Danvers went by Ms. Marvel. Eventually legal issues hampered the original character, and Marvel comics scooped up the name. As such, DC renamed the character Shazam.

The hate for Captain Marvel was due to Brie Larson's comments about diversity in the press. But that didn't stop the movie from getting solid reviews and making a ton of money at the box office. Now we'll just have to see if Shazam! follows suit.

Captain Marvel is in theaters now, and Shazam! will arrive on April 5th. In the meantime, check out our 2019 release list to plan your next trip to the movies.

Post-Avengers: Endgame, The Russos Will Be Working On A Lot Of Remakes

Post-Avengers: Endgame, The Russos Will Be Working On A Lot Of Remakes

Delivering a blockbuster on any level of the MCU’s greatest hits brings a lot of opportunities. And certainly, in the case of Avengers: Endgame directors Joe and Anthony Russo, there’s going to be a lot of parties interested in landing their unique voices. MGM in particular seems eager to work with the brothers, as they’ve recently landed a deal for them to try their hand at some projects under their roof, with a lot of potential for remakes to benefit in the process.

It was announced recently that The Russo Brothers’ production partnership AGBO Films has entered an agreement that consists of “a multi-film non-exclusive creative partnership to co-develop, co-produce and co-finance a slate of projects” with the legendary studio that brought us everything from Gone With The Wind to Legally Blonde, as well as the entire James Bond franchise. While original projects from AGBO Films are still on the table, there’s a focus on revitalizing in house IP from MGM, and there’s two films already waiting on the tarmac.

Diversifying the portfolio of the long ailing studio are remakes of films for both child and adult alike. On the more family friendly side, the already in process remake of The Secret of NIMH entitled The Rats of NIMH is in process, with the visual style aiming for a live-action/CGI hybrid like that of Disney’s The Lion King. Knowing how inventive and frightening the look of the original 1982 film from director Don Bluth was, having The Russo Brothers on board to shepherd this project is one of the best decisions that will come out of this partnership. Save for bringing Bluth back to the fold as a consultant, of course.

The other MGM property that looks to be part of the early phases of this deal is The Thomas Crown Affair, the legendary Steve McQueen heist film that already saw itself remade in 1999 with Pierce Brosnan playing the dashing thief. With Michael B. Jordan already attached to play the man with the plan, and a new rewrite means that Joe and Anthony Russo have come in at just the right time to put that story right, should they see fit.

Now is a good time to mention that, per Deadline's report, this is not only a non-exclusive agreement, allowing The Russos to roam about to other studios while working through this agreement. So should the want to either join a new clubhouse like the DCEU or maintain relationships with old friends like Marvel Studios, it looks like there’s room to breathe for all involved.

Also, this MGM agreement only specifies that The Russo Brothers will “co-develop, co-produce, and co-finance” the films on their slate. One would think that if they really wanted to direct any of the projects on their docket, there’d be little to no objection. But if they want to sit back and guide some fresh talent in the director’s chair, that too could work to their favor.

The world is about to become an oyster for The Russos to harvest at their own will, and all it took was six Infinity Stones and a handful of Marvel cinematic masterworks to get there. If there’s anything more interesting than recounting what they’ve done in the past, it’s what they’re about to do with their future.

Avengers: Endgame heads to theaters on April 26th, and much like destiny, you can’t run from it. But you can prepare for it with our MCU timeline, showcasing the various running orders you can watch the films in, leading up to this momentous occasion.

Will Happy Death Day 3 Happen? Here's What Jason Blum Says

Will Happy Death Day 3 Happen? Here's What Jason Blum Says

The Happy Death Day movies have built a loyal fan base with their quirky, Groundhog Day-as-horror premise. The success of the first film resulted in a quick turn around on a sequel, and that sequel left things open for another entry. However, fans hoping for another Happy Death Day movie happening soon may need to readjust expectations. Blumhouse studio chief Jason Blum says that a Happy Death Day 3 probably won't happen. In response to a fan question on Twitter asking how likely a third entry was, Blum said...

Not very but not impossible

Obviously, this isn't the response that fans of the Happy Death Day movies want to hear, and it's somewhat surprising considering the way the second film was green lit so quickly.

While Jason Blum doesn't go into detail in his Twitter response, you don't have to go too far to figure out why the third film is so unlikely. Happy Death Day 2U completely crashed at the box office, especially when compared to the original. The first film made $55 million in North America and $125 million around the world. The sequel's domestic box office dropped by more than half and the global numbers look even worse.

Having said that, Happy Death Day 2U numbers aren't all bad news. The film only cost a reported $9 million to make so even the less than stellar numbers mean the movie almost certainly made money, Hollywood accounting notwithstanding. With Blumhouse's famously low budgets, the sequel probably made enough money to pay for the budget on a third film at the very least.

Of course, one has to take into account that this could be a trend, and if it is, it would be bad news for a third film. Happy Death Day 2U, cost nearly double what the first movie did and brought in a fraction of the ticket sales. A third film, would, almost be necessity, cost more than the second one, and if the box office on that one dropped compared to part two, then the possibility that it won't make money, even though the first two films did ok, is very real.

Still, fans shouldn't give up hope completely as Jason Blum says a third film is not impossible. If it becomes clear that there really is enough of a fan base interested in part three, and a way to keep the budget down can be found, Blumhouse could still green light the project. If the studio thinks the movie will make money, the movie will happen, this is a business after all.

One thing that does seem for certain, however, is that fans should not expect a Happy Death Day 3 to see the same quick turn around that part two did. The sequel coming out so quickly didn't help ticket sales, so the studio will likely take its time with another entry

The Happy Death Day movies have built a loyal fan base with their quirky, Groundhog Day as horror premise. The success of the first film resulted in a quick turn around on a sequel, and that sequel left things open for another entry. However, fans hoping for another Happy Death Day movie happening soon may need to readjust expectations. Blumhouse studio chief Jason Blum says that a Happy Death Day 3 probably won't happen. In response to a fan question on Twitter asking how likely a third entry was, Blum said...

Not very but not impossible

Obviously, this isn't the response that fans of the Happy Death Day movies want to hear, and it's somewhat surprising considering the way the second film was green lit so quickly.

While Jason Blum doesn't go into detail in his Twitter response, you don't have to go too far to figure out why the third film is so unlikely. Happy Death Day 2U completely crashed at the box office, especially when compared to the original. The first film made $55 million in North America and $125 million around the world. The sequel's domestic box office dropped by more than half and the global numbers look even worse.

Having said that, Happy Death Day 2U numbers aren't all bad news. The film only cost a reported $9 million to make so even the less than stellar numbers mean the movie almost certainly made money, Hollywood accounting notwithstanding. With Blumhouse's famously low budgets, the sequel probably made enough money to pay for the budget on a third film at the very least.

Of course, one has to take into account that this could be a trend, and if it is, it would be bad news for a third film. Happy Death Day 2U, cost nearly double what the first movie did and brought in a fraction of the ticket sales. A third film, would, almost be necessity, cost more than the second one, and if the box office on that one dropped compared to part two, then the possibility that it won't make money, even though the first two films did, is very real.

Still, fans shouldn't give up hope completely as Jason Blum says a third film is not impossible. If it becomes clear that there really is enough of a fan base interested in part three, and a way to keep the budget down can be found, Blumhouse could still green light the project. If the studio thinks the movie will make money, the movie will happen, this is a business after all.

One thing that does seem for certain, however, is that fans should not expect a Happy Death Day 3 to see the same quick turn around that part two did. The seq

Josh Brolin Shares Photo Featuring Thanos’ Butt Ahead Of Avengers: Endgame Release

Josh Brolin Shares Photo Featuring Thanos’ Butt Ahead Of Avengers: Endgame Release

Of all the things I thought I'd be talking about on the eve of the release of Avengers: Endgame, I never would have guessed that Thanos' ass would be on the list. And yet, here we are. The meme brought about by fans on Reddit has made that particular orifice a major topic of conversation, and nobody is enjoying the fact more than Thanos himself, Josh Brolin. As we stand here just days before the release of the big MCU finale, Brolin is treating us all to buck naked Thanos. Check it out.

In an image that Josh Brolin calls an April 26 spoiler on Instagram, we see Thanos wearing nothing but his Gauntlet, with a clear view of his backside. We also get a few other fun hashtags, which imply that Thanos is planning to use his powerful ass muscles to squish Ant-Man if he tries to get up in this business.

Your extra helping of naked Thanos is all due a funny thread on Reddit that first supposed one particularly bizarre and terrible way for Thanos to be defeated. It involved Ant-Man shrinking in size, entering Thanos' body, and then enlarging himself, causing the Mad Titan's body to be torn apart. Why the best point of entry was determined to be the rectum, we can only imagine.

Josh Brolin has been having a bit of fun with this theory. He previously, posted a video of himself on a toilet in reference to the theory, seemingly trying to dislodge a troublesome Avenger.

We're all pretty sure that this won't be the way that the Avengers finally win in Endgame. Of course, the movie has been so good about keeping spoilers mostly locked away, that we really don't know how it happens. I mean, making Thanos explode from the inside would certainly get the job done, and there are a lot of methods that would certainly be less successful.

Ant-Man is also one character who wasn't involved in the fight with Thanos the first time around, and it certainly seems likely that if the fight comes down to the same people that were in it last time, it's going to have much the same sort of result.

Of course, if you were expecting a Thanos takes a shower before he puts on his armor scene in Avengers: Endgame, you can probably write that off. If nothing else, the movie is rated PG-13 and an excessive amount of Thanos nudity would put that rating in jeopardy.

Of course, we all want to see how the Avengers truly do triumph over Thanos, assuming of course that they do. To that end, the wait is almost over. Avengers: Endgame arrives in theaters this weekend.

How Many Dune Movies Could Denis Villeneuve Potentially Make?

How Many Dune Movies Could Denis Villeneuve Potentially Make?

Warning: The following contains some SPOILERS for Frank Herbert’s Dune novels!

With fingers tightly crossed that there won’t be any delays, next year will see the release of Denis Villeneuve’s Dune. The Arrival, Blade Runner 2049 and Sicario filmmaker has become one of the industry’s most exciting directors, telling bold and visually striking stories each time out, and he has put together an incredible cast to bring Frank Herbert’s seminal 1965 sci-fi novel to the big screen for the first time since David Lynch’s 1984 adaptation.

A talented, Oscar-nominated filmmaker working with a talented cast to bring a beloved story to life is exciting in its own right, but there may be a lot more reason to get invested in Dune beyond merely next year’s movie. Dune could be the start of something that extends well past 2020.

That’s because Dune is not intended as just a one-off in the way other modern science fiction movies like Arrival, Interstellar or Looper were. Dune is meant to be the beginning of at least a 2-part series based on the property, which has an abundance of expansive source material. Which raises the question, how many Dune movies could Denis Villeneuve potentially make?

For a while now it has been said that Denis Villeneuve’s Dune is being envisioned as a 2-parter. The first movie will cover approximately the first half of Frank Herbert’s novel with the second movie covering the second half. It's a 2-movie model akin to the cinematic adaptations of other beloved novels like The Hunger Games: Mockingjay, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows and IT.

This approach makes sense so as to not shortchange the story. Dune is an expansive novel, and while David Lynch’s film covers the whole book, it is not an especially faithful adaptation. In contrast, the Dune mini-series on the then-Sci-fi Channel was a 3 episode, 4 hour and 25 minute telling of the story. Frank Herbert’s novel is extremely complex with tons of characters and moving pieces, not unlike Game of Thrones. So it is advantageous from a storytelling perspective to give the novel two films to tell the story of Paul Atreides.

However, unlike something like The Lord of the Rings, Dune parts one and two are not filming back to back. They will shoot individually, and presumably the second one getting made will hinge on the success of the first one. I’ve already written about what a financial gamble Dune might be so it’s not impossible that we only get one Denis Villeneuve Dune movie. But let’s air on the side of optimism and assume that Dune is great and a hit, what then? Denis Villeneuve has said that his goal is to make two films, maybe more.

That ‘maybe more’ coda opens up a whole range of possibilities where two films could give way to an entire series and franchise. Dune can be like Star Wars: Episode IV – A New Hope in terms of franchise potential; only here the story for more films already exists. Frank Herbert wrote six mainline Dune books before his death in 1986: Dune, Dune Messiah, Children of Dune, God Emperor of Dune, Heretics of Dune and Chapterhouse: Dune.

What starts as a hero’s journey to avenge his family, free his people and overthrow an evil empire morphs over time into a metaphysical family saga, rife with political intrigue and religious elements that is interstellar in scope, taking place over literally thousands of years. If Dune is Robert’s Rebellion against the Mad King, the rest of the series is A Song of Ice and Fire, what comes after happily ever after. And things get weird too; we’re talking half-human, half giant sandworm weird.

The series is considered to waver in quality from title to title, and there is a major question of ‘filmability’ with parts of the Dune saga and how well this challenging material will land with mass audiences, but based on the sheer amount of story from Frank Herbert’s six novels alone, Denis Villeneuve could do at least a few more movies after the Dune two-parter.

The most obvious way for this series to be adapted would be to only focus on the first three novels, Dune, Dune Messiah and Children of Dune. Those three novels take place in the same basic time period and follow many of the same characters. After that, there are massive time jumps. If that approach were taken, the series would theoretically require at least four movies, two for the first book and one each for the other two, unless somehow Messiah and Children were combined into one to form a tidy trilogy.

Only after those would it make sense to dig into the other novels. If it's successful, the mythology is dense enough to extend out even beyond Frank Herbert’s books. The author died after Chapterhouse: Dune and that novel ended with a cliffhanger, leaving some of the series’ story arcs unresolved. So years later, his son Brian Herbert and author Kevin J. Anderson used Frank Herbert’s notes to complete the saga with Hunters of Dune and Sandworms of Dune. If Dune became a full-fledged cinematic series going that far into the story, the films would have to incorporate some elements from these later books, if not adapt them outright to complete the story in a satisfying manner.

Brian Herbert and Kevin J. Anderson also wrote several trilogies in the Dune universe with events that take place before Frank Herbert’s work or fit into the timeline of that 6-book narrative. The events of these books could serve as either a prequel series or they could be cherry-picked and elements from them could be added to the main series of films.

Legendary also has the TV rights to Dune, so maybe it could take some of the stories, either by Brian Herbert and Kevin J. Anderson or Frank Herbert himself, and put those into television series, to complement the films, similar to what was supposed to happen with The Dark Tower and what is happening with The Kingkiller Chronicle.

A successful franchise is what every company in Hollywood wants, and Dune could be one for Legendary and Warner Bros. Essentially, if the success is there, Denis Villeneuve could basically live in the Dune universe for as long as he wants, becoming for this property what David Yates is for Harry Potter and Fantastic Beasts.

That said, how many Dune movies there will be and how many Denis Villeneuve will make may be two separate questions. If Denis Villeneuve makes two films and they are successful, maybe he decides to leave it at that, but Legendary keeps the franchise going with a new director or directors.

A lot is riding, on the success of Denis Villeneuve’s Dune, perhaps an entire franchise. So how many Dune movies could Denis Villeneuve potentially make? At least 1, maybe 2 and hopefully a lot more.

Dune opens on November 20, 2020. Check out our 2019 release schedule to keep track of all the movies heading to theaters this year.

Sean Gunn Explains Why Brother James Wasn’t At The Avengers: Endgame Premiere

Sean Gunn Explains Why Brother James Wasn’t At The Avengers: Endgame Premiere

Last night was the premiere of Avengers: Endgame. It was an event over 10 years in the making and nearly everybody who has ever been a part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe was in attendance to see how the story came to an end. However, one person who was conspicuous by his absence was James Gunn. The Guardians of the Galaxy director did not attend the gala event last night, but according to his brother, Sean Gunn, explained that he was there in spirit.

To be fair, James Gunn certainly does have a lot of work on his plate right now. He has not one, but two blockbuster comic book team up movies to write and direct in the coming months. One of those, the sequel to Suicide Squad, is set to go before cameras before too long, so it's very possible that Gunn just couldn't pull himself away. If that script isn't ready, then there is work that needs to be done.

At the same time, for many, James Gunn is a man as directly linked to the Guardians of the Galaxy franchise as any filmmaker is to any part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Sean Gunn isn't just talking when he tells THR that James Gunn's thoughts are at the premiere, that has to be true. The director called the script to Guardians 3 "his heart" when he finished it.

James Gunn has certainly had one of the more interesting career paths of the last 10 months. The writer was fired from his position as director of Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 last July, following the unearthing of some less than flattering statements but was then rehired sometime later, though that fact only came to light recently. In the interim, Gunn had made the deal to write The Suicide Squad, and he will direct that movie before moving on to do Guardians 3 after all.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, James Gunn has kept something of a low profile ever since the events that led to his firing. Gunn used to be incredibly prolific on Twitter, but he left the service after issuing yet another apology for the tweets that got him in trouble. Since then, he's only tweeted three times. Once to thank the people who supported him after the news of his return to Marvel had been announced, and twice to help promote the upcoming film Brightburn which he helped produce.

Whether Gunn is still simply trying to stay out of the limelight, or he's truly buried in work, or some combination of the two, is hard to know, but it likely won't last too much longer. Once The Suicide Squad goes into production it will be hard to keep a low profile. The promotional machine, including social media, will be in full swing and DC likely won't want Gunn to stay quiet at that point.

If anything, it's too bad James Gunn wasn't at the premiere because by all accounts the movie is something special.

How The Aladdin Live Action, Animated And Broadway Versions Compare To Each Other

How The Aladdin Live Action, Animated And Broadway Versions Compare To Each Other

The following contains some minor SPOILERS for the new remake of Aladdin**.**

Aladdin was a smash hit when it was released by Disney in 1992. It contained one of the greatest animated voice performances ever by Robin Williams, it had an incredible collection of memorable songs and it had a story that combined great action, comedy and romance. It's no wonder that Aladdin is now getting the live-action remake treatment from Disney in the same way that other successful Disney films have.

Of course, the new theatrical remake isn't actually the first time the story of Aladdin has been re-told. After Robin Williams, but before Will Smith, Aladdin was adopted for the Broadway stage. How do these three different versions of Aladdin compare to each other, and which is the best version of Aladdin? Let's break them all down and find out.

The Similarities

The Story: First and foremost, the main thing that ties the three versions of Aladdin together is the story. If you've seen one version of Aladdin, then you basically know where the story is going when you sit down to watch another version. Aladdin is a homeless thief. He meets a disguised Jasmine in the marketplace and falls for her. He is tricked by Jafar to go after the magic lamp. Aladdin frees the Genie and becomes a prince... etc... etc...

The characters: The majority of the characters are basically the same. Aladdin is still the dreamer who wishes for more in his life. Jasmine still wants to be free to make her own decisions. The Sultan is mostly clueless, and Jafar is just cartoonishly evil, even in the versions that aren't actually cartoons.

The music: You'll also find that most of the music is the same, while both the stage and live action film version have additional music that has been added, they also contain all of the songs from the original animated film soundtrack, if not every version of those songs.

What makes these iterations of Aladdin stand out, however, is what they do differently.

The Differences

The story: While the general structure of the plot is essentially identical across the three versions, there are a few nuanced differences. The animated film and the new live-action one create a framing device which sets up the idea of a character telling us the story of Aladdin. The Broadway show just gives us a basic introduction by the Genie which is implied to be non-diegetic.

While both the animated film and the Broadway show have two major marketplace scenes, the "One Jump Ahead" song and the meeting with Jasmine, the new live action movie combines these into one. Also, in the new movie, instead of being imprisoned after being discovered with the princess, Aladdin breaks into the palace to see Jasmine again and gets nabbed then.

In the animated film, Jafar convinces Aladdin to help him while in disguise, which means he doesn't know Jafar is dangerous when he meets the real vizier later on. In both the Broadway play and the new film, Aladdin knows he's working for Jafar the whole time, which puts him (somewhat) on guard later.

The live-action film also contains a significant new scene where Aladdin, in his Prince Ali disguise, tries to woo Jasmine at a party, which helps build the relationship of the two.

While both animated and live-action films have Aladdin using his second wish to avoid drowning. On Broadway, Aladdin is simply thrown in prison but he uses his wish to get free.

The finale of the three stories is also significantly different. On Broadway, Jafar never wishes to make himself a powerful sorcerer (probably because it would have made the show really expensive). Instead, he wishes to make Jasmine his prisoner and to become Sultan.

In the animated film, Aladdin ends up doing battle with Jafar, who has magically transformed himself into a giant snake. In the live-action film, our big action finale is a chase scene as Aladdin and Jasmine try to keep the lamp out of Jafar's hands while they're being chased by a magically-enlarged Iago.

The characters: The biggest character changes take place between the animated Aladdin and the Broadway version. While many Disney musicals have used intricate puppets to recreate the parts of animated movies that are difficult to realize on stage, Aladdin avoids this problem by eliminating and changing those characters.

Aladdin's pet monkey Abu doesn't make the jump to the stage. Instead, Aladdin has three friends, named Babkak, Omar and Kassim, that he pals around with who are in similar financial and living situations as he is.

Rajah the tiger also doesn't appear on stage. In his place, Jasmine has three handmaiden characters that she give her somebody to play off of.

Jafar's pet Iago does slightly better. The character exists, but rather than being a parrot, Iago is a man. He's just a basic henchman.

The new live-action film uses the realistic CGI that Disney has had such success with to bring Abu and Rajah back. Iago is also a parrot again, though while he does speak, he sounds more like the way a parrot would naturally speak, rather than speaking fully coherent English as he does in the animated film.

Jasmine does, however, still have a single handmaiden character in the new film. The character of Dahlia is much more involved in the story than any of the similar characters from Broadway.

Jasmine herself sees the most interesting evolution across the three versions. She's mostly a bystander character in the animated movie. Her desire for freedom and to make her own choices are given more time to breathe on Broadway. It's actually the new movie where the character is fully realized as a much more independent woman.

Jafar is largely identical on Broadway and the animated film. The live-action movie gives the character a little bit of backstory and motivation not present in the other two iterations. He only attempts to actually marry Jasmine in the animated version.

The biggest, and likely most important character change, however, is, of course, the Genie. The animated film gave us a manic Robin Williams. The character makes a host of modern pop culture references and breaks into one impression after another. Will Smith's Genie in the new Aladdin is essentially, The Fresh Prince of Agrabah, the actor/rapper's own persona amplified.

While the Robin Williams and Will Smith Genie's are obviously different in execution, they're largely the same in result. On Broadway, however, the Genie is quite different. This one is never blue in color. He actually tends to look a lot like Will Smith's Genie when he's disguised as human, one way the Broadway show likely influenced the new movie.

The Broadway Genie's humor is also less pop culture focused. Of course, what modern jokes there are have the potential to change as the stage show is continuously performed, similarly to the way the Aladdin stage show at Disney's California Adventure was handled, if you've ever seen that. You can get a taste of what the stage Genie is like in the clip below.

The music: Using the animated original as our baseline, all the music from that movie makes the jump to Broadway essentially unchanged. Several new songs are also added. "Proud of Your Boy" is actually a song originally written for the animated film that was cut, which has Aladdin singing to his dead mother about his desire to make her proud, a motivation missing from the other versions. Aladdin's friends have a pair of songs they sing with Aladdin. One precedes Aladdin meeting Jasmine, the other as part of Aladdin getting himself free of the dungeon.

Jafar gets his own full song "Diamond in the Rough" on Broadway. In the live-action film, Jafar's reprise of the "Prince Ali" song gets cut, so the villain never gets a chance to sing at all.

On Broadway, Jasmine sings about her desire to be free with her handmaidens in the song "These Palace Walls." In the new live-action movie Jasmine sings "Speechless" about her desire to be able to speak her mind.

The Quality

Animated Aladdin: It's difficult to say much against the original version of the story. By virtue of being the first, it's the one that is the most creative since it started with nothing. The music is great and Robin Williams just is that great. If there's a downside to the performance, it's that some of the pop culture references probably don't work as well today as they did in 1992. Does anybody remember who Arsenio Hall was?

Broadway Aladdin: The Broadway version is a tough one to judge because the show evolves over time. The show you see in one town isn't necessarily the same you get a year later in another place. Having said that, none of the additional music from Broadway is going to replace anything from the original soundtrack as your favorite song. Some of the show's action, like chase scenes, suffer due to the limited space of the stage, and the finale is incredibly rushed. At the same time, the Genie is having a lot of fun on that stage, and that fun can be incredibly infectious.

Live action Aladdin: Will Smith does a good job making the role of the Genie his own, though the CGI on him isn't perfect. All of the classic music is given a bit of an update, so while they're still songs you know, they're not identical, meaning you may want to actually listen to them now and then. The one new song, "Speechless," is a valiant attempt at a strong anthem for Jasmine, but the song itself feels shoehorned in. Jasmine as a character, however, is at her best in this version.

So Which Is Best?

Each of the three versions have unique things about them which make them each worth seeing, but in the end, both Broadway and the new live-action movie are just trying to reinvent the wheel. Both Broadway and the live-action film basically rely on your love of the original. The nostalgia is a necessary element of both, which the original never needed.

You can judge the live action Aladdin movie for yourself once it hits theaters this Friday, May 24.

Venom 2 May Be Getting A New Director

Venom 2 May Be Getting A New Director

It's no secret that superhero movies are everywhere, as multiple studios duke it out for box office supremacy. As such, there is the fear of superhero fatigue, where the genre becomes to oversaturated that the blockbusters all mold together, essentially cancelling themselves out. If any superhero movie had the potential to fade into the background last year, it was Ruben Fleischer's Venom. Fans weren't sure how the movie would function without Spider-Man's inclusion, but Venom ended up making a surprising amount of money at the box office, allowing a sequel to be green-lit by Sony.

Venom's sequel is currently in active development, and will likely focus on Woody Harrelson's Carnage, who was introduced during the film's credits scene. But now it looks like director Ruben Fleischer won't be involved in the next installment in the burgeoning franchise. While writer Kelly Marcel will reportedly return to work on the screenplay alongside Tom Hardy, Sony is apparently searching for a new director to helm the upcoming sequel.

This news comes to us from Variety, which reports that Ruben Fleischer will be too busy with other directing projects to return for Venom 2. Instead, Sony will find new talent to helm the follow up film, and hopefully capture the same unique tone. Venom had a dark sense of humor and self-awareness that set it apart from the rest of the genre, so the new director will have to find a way to inhabit the same space in order to please all the moviegoers the first film won over.

Prior to its release, the cards were stacked again Venom from being the success it ended up being in theaters. As previously mentioned, it had the lofty goal of making a Spider-Man character movie without the web slinger, as Sony's deal with Marvel has Tom Holland's Peter Parker operating within the Marvel Shared Universe. Venom's first trailer gave the fandom particular pause for concern, as it was completely lacking the titular antihero at all, instead coming off as more of an adventure for Tom Hardy's Eddie Brock. The film got even more flack when Jenny Slate's character mispronounced the word symbiote in the trailer, as audiences grew more concerned.

But Venom ultimately vibrated on its unique frequency, having a closer relation to Fox's Deadpool franchise than the MCU. The visual affects may have left something to be desired, but Venom was delightfully snarky and crude, while also setting up the ground work for a larger franchise. It still remains to be seen whether Spider-Man will ever make an appearance, but some big concepts were introduced that will hopefully take bloom with its mysterious sequel.

Venom is currently available for home purchase. CinemaBlend will keep you updated on the developing sequel as more details become public. In the meantime, be sure to check out our 2019 release list to plan your next trip to the movies.

How To See Rocketman Weeks Before Its Release

How To See Rocketman Weeks Before Its Release

The summer movie season, which started in earnest with Avengers: Endgame, is finally upon us and the month of May is stacked with movies. From franchise sequels and franchise starters, to remakes and buzzy indie flicks, there’s plenty you’re going to want to make time for to see in the theater. Luckily, you can see one of the month’s most anticipated titles, Dexter Fletcher’s Rocketman, weeks before its theatrical release date.

The Elton John biopic technically doesn’t release until May 31 opposite Godzilla: King of the Monsters, but Paramount Pictures and online ticketing service Fandango are teaming up to offer advance screenings of the film on May 18. That’s two weeks prior to its U.S. theatrical release date. So if you’ll be spending your weekend with the Titans or you just want to see Rocketman as soon as you can, these advance screenings are a great opportunity.

The advance screenings will be held at 400 theaters nationwide including the big chains like AMC Theatres, Regal, Cinemark, Arclight Cinemas and others. The advance screenings for Rocketman are Fandango exclusives and are available to its VIP Rewards program members. You can get your tickets for these screenings through Fandango now.

In a statement reported by THR, Fandango’s president Paul Yanover referenced the success of the company’s previous Early Access Screenings for films like How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World and Shazam! and how they helped generate buzz for those titles. These advance screenings may already have some buzz to start with considering that the May 18 advance screening date is a mere two days after Rocketman premieres out of competition at the Cannes Film Festival.

Rocketman certainly has the makings of a movie that could make a splash at Cannes and go on to be a crowd-pleaser at the box office. Last year, two other music films, A Star is Born and Bohemian Rhapsody, both racked up critical acclaim and became huge successes financially. And like Bohemian Rhapsody, this film will benefit from a catalog of recognizable songs audiences will want to hear in theaters.

Dexter Fletcher actually finished Bohemian Rhapsody after Bryan Singer was fired, so it will be interesting to see what he can do with another musical icon when the film is his from start to finish. The musical fantasy element is also very intriguing and the fact that Taron Egerton is actually doing all the singing in the film gives it must-see performance potential.

Rocketman follows Elton John’s personal and professional journey in his breakthrough years as he went from the shy Reginald Dwight into the flamboyant musical superstar Elton John. Starring alongside Taron Egerton in the film are Bryce Dallas Howard, Richard Madden and Jamie Bell.

Fandango's advance screenings of Rocketman are on May 18, followed by its theatrical release on May 31. Check out our 2019 Release Schedule to keep track of all of this summer’s biggest movies.