Do you smell what The Rock is cookin’? Well, Hollywood did, but it wasn’t for a lack of Dwayne Johnson not only trying but challenging his image to ensure his career turned out exactly how he wanted.
When Dwayne Johnson first tried to make it in Hollywood, he came across criticisms not for his acting but his look, remembering being told, ‘If you wanna be a leading man, you’re too big; you can’t go to the gym, you have to lose weight, you gotta go on a diet.’ And if you don’t know any better, then you buy into it, so I started to question myself then. Some of those films at the time I was making, I think, reflect that. And then a moment came where I said, ‘’Excuse my language but f**k that, I’m not doing this anymore, I’m gonna do myself. And if I fail, then I can fail being me.’”
Dwayne Johnson has a filmography full of clunkers but he has pretty much avoided failure at the box office, with his lead performances taking in more than $5 billion worldwide, according to The Numbers. And he’ll only add to his box office intake this month, as he has two features out in November: holiday action-comedy Red One (November 15th) and Moana 2 (November 27th), which, judging by the original’s ~$700 million worldwide haul, is going to be another smash. And none of it would have happened without his dropping a People’s Elbow on the haters. “A funny thing happened when I said, ‘Ah, f*ck all this’: career [skyrocketed]. I became acutely aware of the power of being authentic and being real.”
As such, at this point, Dwayne Johnson can do pretty much whatever he wants, calling the shots and dictating the stipulations (even if it puts him at odds with his co-stars…). That’s the sort of power that no other pro wrestler-turned-actor has been able to pull off. You think Suburban Commando made people want to see Hulk Hogan anywhere outside of the squared circle?
How do you feel about Dwayne Johnson as an actor? Do you think his onscreen presence matches what he had in the ring?
PLOT: The ultimate account of the Child’s Play film franchise and Chucky, a horror villain for the ages. With contributions from cast, crew, critics, historians, and experts, as well as clips, photographs, archival documents, behind-the-scenes footage, and more, experience the making-of story that proves you can’t keep a good guy down in a series of films that have created an icon.
REVIEW: There are no better horror franchise documentaries than Crystal Lake Memories and Never Sleep Again. The in-depth looks at the Nightmare on Elm Street and Friday the 13th franchises are the definitive looks at their respective franchises. They provide unique interviews and insight into the horror productions we thought we knew everything about. Yet they manage to find new information! So I, like many fans, was ecstatic to see them put Chucky in their crosshairs. Given the series’ very unique history and 36-year run, there is so much information to parse from. And I’m sure that even the most die-hard of Chucky fans will find out something new.
While the other documentaries have given pretty similar time to all of the entries, that’s not the case here. Being the first film in the franchise, Child’s Play gets a lot of time, closing in on closer to 80 minutes. Most of the other segments are around 35 minutes, but it’s not beholden to any specific runtime. It seems as though some entries just require slightly more time to get across all the interesting behind-the-scenes moments. But it mostly feels balanced. If anything, the first film is very deserving of all the extra time as there’s such interesting information regarding its production.
We’ve always heard about Jessica Walters being the original voice of Charles Lee Ray, but here it’s finally addressed head-on. It’s too bad she’s since passed because I would have loved a little insight from Walters herself. It was also great to see the feud between Don Mancini and Tom Holland addressed. The doc is very friendly towards Mancini so it’s hard to say if there’s a bit of bias going on here but Holland certainly doesn’t come across well. From trying to diminish Mancini’s contributions to being a real stickler on set, it’s no surprise he never returned to the series. Though it doesn’t seem like anyone harbors ill will these days.
Considering both Freddy’s Nightmares and Friday the 13th: The TV Series had segments in their docs, I was slightly surprised at the exclusion of the Chucky TV show. It’s not only a massive part of Chucky but it continues the lore and is considered part of the continuity. But it wasn’t concluded by the time this was being made, so I’m sure they wanted the entire story before talking about it. Fingers crossed they will add a segment for the DVD release now that the show is over.
Damn near every actor you can think of is involved here. Whether it’s the homeless bum from the first, the foster dad from two, or even the mean drill sergeant from three. The only major exclusions (outside of the deceased) seem to be Jenny Agutter, Justin Whalin, and Katherine Heigl. And given those three don’t have a positive relationship with the franchise, it’s not a surprise to not see them. It’s too bad though, because everyone has such nice things to say about them. The inclusion of so much of the cast is one of many reasons this feels like the definitive documentary on the series.
One element I didn’t love was the reporter-like voice of the narrator. Her voice really clashed with the tone and didn’t really work for me. Thankfully, she’s not in it very much. I also felt that the doc wasn’t wrapped up in that “summarizing the whole franchise” kind of way, and mostly seems to focus on just Cult. We needed a brief section that went over the impact of the franchise and the many different things that have spawned from it. They didn’t address Chucky’s inclusion in video games, the TV show, or even the remake. Feels like a missed opportunity to not see Mancini bitch about the Hamill film.
Thommy Hutson has been a writer on these docs going back to His Name Is Jason, so it’s awesome to see him take up the directing mantle and knock it out of the park. With its interesting new insight and surprising new information, this is a must for fans. But it’s the attention to detail and sheer impressiveness of the editing that will keep non-fans engaged as well. Sure, it’s going to be hard to get anyone who isn’t at least somewhat interested to watch a 5-hour documentary but those who take the plunge will be rewarded with a phenomenal look at the Chucky film series. After all, he’s our friend till the end.
DOC OF CHUCKY IS STREAMING ON SHUDDER ON NOVEMBER 1ST, 2024.
PLOT: A recovering alcoholic on a jury faces a moral dilemma when he realizes he might be the key to the murder case he’s been selected for.
REVIEW: Juror #2 has recently generated headlines more for its unceremonious dumping by Warner Bros. than for its content. Once seen as a potential awards contender, the film has been dropped in about 50 theaters in the U.S. with the bare minimum of marketing (Warners has even reportedly stated it’s not going to announce the film’s box office take at the end of opening weekend). To be sure, even this New York-based reviewer could only find a handful of theaters showing the Clint Eastwood movie, strange indeed considering the filmmaker’s legacy. Perhaps we’ll learn more about the whys of this case soon, but having seen it for myself the answer could be simple: it’s just not the kind of movie audiences flock to anymore.
Considering the director is 94 years old, it’s fitting that Juror #2 is as old-fashioned as it gets. A courtroom drama without violence, nudity or even foul language, it’s the type of film that was a regular at the cinema decades ago, but is now a unicorn at the multiplex. It’s a movie for people who say, “they just don’t make ‘em like that anymore.” Well, Mr. Eastwood does.
And while it’s heartening to see that A-listers are still making “adult dramas,” the truth of the matter is Juror #2 is indeed more suited for the small screen. It’s an intimate morality tale about a man who must decide the fate of several lives, including his own, but it’s missing anything in the way of fireworks or standout sequences. It’s sturdy, but unremarkable; its biggest transgression is that it’s almost too placid. Juror #2 has a compelling hook and a handful of solid scenes and performances, but a total lack of suspense holds it back.
Nicholas Hoult stars as Justin Kemp, a recovering alcoholic who writes seemingly humdrum features for lifestyle magazines. He leads a simple life that’s about to get a lot more complicated: his wife (Zoey Deutch) is nearing the end of her pregnancy. Unfortunate for Justin, he’s just been picked to be a juror for a high-profile murder case involving ex-drug dealer James Sythe (Gabriel Basso) who allegedly killed his girlfriend (Clint’s daughter Francesca Eastwood) after a violent argument in a bar. As he hears the details of the case, Justin begins to realize he was at the bar that very night – and he might’ve inadvertently been involved with the young woman’s death.
Juror #2 unfolds like a John Grisham paperback drama from the 90s, and to be sure there’s a juicy quandary at the center of the tale: Does Justin simply go along with his fellow jurors who think Sythe is clearly guilty, or does he attempt to sway them into a not guilty verdict – which would alleviate his own guilt without making it necessary to confess to his culpability in the incident. Much of the movie takes place in the jury room and fans of films like 12 Angry Men will enjoy the array of colorful (though stereotypical) characters who gradually reveal their own prejudices. But Eastwood allows himself to coast on the script’s simplicity without adding much tension or mystery. We know the facts of the case (and Justin’s involvement) very early on, so the film rarely dredges up any genuine suspense. And while you root for Justin to do the right thing, he’s not such an interesting character that we’re clinging to his every decision. Juror #2 is intriguing, but never captivating, and it’s begging for a late game twist that simply never comes. (I will give it kudos for a terrific final scene. however.) If nothing else, Eastwood and screenwriter Jonathan Abrams want to put you in the protagonist’s shoes and ask yourself how you’d navigate this very unique dilemma, which is a fine exercise but not something that elevates the movie into something more than an adequate two hour drama.
Helping the movie’s cause is the cast; there are many good actors here to command our attention. Hoult is in fine form as a man trying to keep his anxiety in check for the entirety of the film, his calm demeanor always seemingly on the verge of breaking down completely. Toni Collette (reuniting with Hoult 22 years after About a Boy!) gives a strong performance as the prosecutor who sees the case as a slam dunk… until she doesn’t. Deutch adds a sympathetic touch to a pretty standard housebound wife role. JK Simmons has fun as one of the jurors who thinks something is amiss with the whole thing, and perhaps most strikingly, Cedric Yarbrough, usually known for comedic roles (Reno 911! fans will recognize him as Deputy Jones), is a thoroughly gripping presence as a juror who takes the case quite personally.
While Warner Bros. almost certainly owes it to Clint Eastwood to give his movie a proper release (he’s been making the studio money for decades), Juror #2 just doesn’t have the ingredients it takes to become a theatrical hit, so one grudgingly has to admit that WB is probably making the wise decision with its minuscule release; it may ultimately find its audience when it inevitably winds up on Max. The filmmaker’s fans may appreciate the film’s unrushed pace and simple pleasures, but it’s a minor work in a long, exemplary filmography.
Ten years ago, John Wick went from a low-expectation B-movie starring Keanu Reeves to the start of one of the biggest cinematic franchises ever. Opening with a film about the deadliest assassin in the world, John Wick (Keanu Reeves), the first film showed the retired killer coming back for vengeance after his dog, the last gift from his dead wife, is murdered. It was a simple concept that set up a film with a balletic use of firearms and close combat in stunt-heavy sequences that had never been done this way. That first film, which had a challenging path to the big screen, became a major box office hit that generated three sequels, a prequel television series, and an upcoming spin-off film. With each feature film breaking records, fans and critics have wondered whether Chapter 4 is truly the last time we will see Keanu Reeves don the suit and holster.
To celebrate the tenth anniversary of the film, which is returning to the big screen, I chatted with the directors of the first movie, Chad Stahelski, and David Leitch. Chad, overseeing the overall John Wick cinematic universe of projects, talked about what he thought when the first film was being made and how he viewed cinematic stunts through the eyes of both a stunt performer and a filmmaker. We also discussed what did not make it into the first film or the sequels and what is coming next in the John Wick universe, including the animated prequel and a sequel television series. We also discussed the dropped Chapter 4 subtitle and why it disappeared.
I also talked with David Leitch about how he and Chad split directing duties on the first film and whether he would return to the John Wick universe to direct a sequel or a spin-off. We talked about the potential for an Academy Award for Stunts, where progress stands with making that happen, and his recent reunion with Keanu Reeves on a commercial. Leitch also talked about what working on big franchises did to help make John Wick happen and whether he ever saw this character becoming as huge as it has. Check out the full interviews in the embed above.
John Wick returns to theaters for a limited time on November 3rd and 6th.Get your tickets now.
The nineties was the heyday of the mid-level action hero. Jean Claude Van Damme and Steven Seagal churned out a whole series of increasingly profitable action programmers in the early part of the decade. Seagal’s movies were wildly profitable for Warner Bros, while Van Damme had a home at Universal Pictures. Every studio wanted its own JCVD or Seagal, with Paramount trying to launch Jeff Speakman with The Perfect Weapon (which has a devoted fan in our own writer EJ Tangonan) and Fox even trying with football player Howie Long in Firestorm. One studio that badly wanted their own action guy was New Line Cinema, but before they found their niche in the genre with Rumble in the Bronx and Mortal Kombat, they tried to launch two promising action heroes. One was Thomas Ian Griffith, whose (pretty awesome) action flick Excessive Force was only given a small regional release. The other – believe it or not – was Pierce Brosnan, and his movie, Live Wire, was dumped on cable despite being made for theatres.
Brosnan’s career was in a strange place back in the early nineties. In the eighties, he broke out on TV with the series Remington Steele, and he famously won the role of James Bond back in 1986, with him set to star in The Living Daylights. His run as Bond was aborted when NBC, who was making Remington Steele, opted to revive the show, which was supposed to be cancelled, hoping that Brosnan’s notoriety as 007 would give it a ratings boost. This decision backfired on all involved dramatically, with Albert R. Broccoli, the producer of the Bond films, famously telling NBC, “James Bond will not be Remington Steele and Remington Steele will not be James Bond.” Despite this warning, NBC went ahead with the new episodes, and Brosnan, who was under contract, had to go along with them, paving the way for Timothy Dalton to nab the part. To add insult to injury, NBC axed the show after only seven episodes.
All this left Brosnan in a strange place, as it was common knowledge in the industry that he “almost” played Bond. He got a few starring vehicles in the late eighties, Taffin and The Deceivers. Still, both barely got released in the U.S. Soon, Brosnan, who had a family to support and became a widower when his wife Cassandra Harris passed away, ended up stuck in a slew of cable thrillers. Yet, he had a good supporting role in the New Line Cinema release, The Lawnmower Man, and the studio hired him as the lead in a low-budget action flick they developed called Live Wire in the hopes that its success would help them break into the action genre.
In it, Brosnan is cast way against type as Danny O’Neill, a wisecracking cop in the John McClane mode. Heck, they even give him a sexy ex-wife that he’s trying to win back. In it, he’s a bomb disposal expert who discovers a plot where people are fed an invisible liquid explosive that causes them to spontaneously combust, becoming living bombs. It’s a ridiculous premise, but it gives the director, Christian Duguay (who also directed a slick thriller called The Assignment in 1997) to stage some righteously gory set pieces.
It turns out the bombings are being orchestrated by a mad bomber, played by the late Ben Cross, whose ultimate target is a U.S. senator, played by Ron Silver, who – oh yeah – is also dating O’Neill’s ex-wife. Running a slick eighty-five minutes, this B-level action flick was a favorite of mine as a kid, and it’s cool to see Brosnan as an American-style action hero, with him far removed from the elegant, sophisticated 007 we’d all soon get to know him as.
The only issue with Brosnan’s casting is that he’s almost too handsome for the part. You never – for a second – believe his wife (played by Beverly Hills Cop’s Lisa Eilbacher) would ditch him for Ron Silver. Yet, Brosnan was physically convincing in the role, and the action-packed finale, where he takes on the terrorists with improvised, MacGyver-style weapons, is pretty distinct. Improvised weapons could have become Brosnan’s “thing”, just as kicking was JCVD’s and Aikido was Seagal’s.
Sadly, New Line, for some reason or another, got cold feet about Live Wire. Rather than use it to launch Brosnan as an action star, they sold it to cable TV, where I saw it as a kid in 1993. Given Brosnan’s later notoriety, New Line has reissued the movie a few times, and you can stream it in HD via most digital retailers. Still, it remains a totally obscure little gem in his filmography and one I kick myself about not mentioning back when I interviewed Pierce (who was a nice guy) a few years ago.
As for Pierce, well he turned out just fine. 1993 proved to be a fateful year for the star, with him starring opposite Robin Williams and Sally Field in Mrs. Doubtfire. The movie’s director, Chris Columbus, was one of the most powerful in the business at the time, and rumor has it that after enjoying working with Brosnan, he urged MGM and EON to give him another shot as 007. Whatever the case, Brosnan ended up nabbing the role, and the rest, as they say, is history.
Has anyone seen Live Wire? Let me know in the comments.
Some cliche somewhere said that ‘a picture is worth a thousand words.’ This has proven to be the case for me and especially when it comes to fan art. I have always sought out great fan art and have wanted to share it with as many people as possible. “Awesome Art We’ve Found Around The Net” is the outlet for that passion. In this column, I will showcase the kick-ass artwork of some great artists, with the hopes that these artists get the attention they deserve. That’s the aim. If you have any questions or comments, or even suggestions of art or other great artists, feel free to contact me at any time at theodorebond@joblo.com.
When a filmmaker directs a documentary of a living subject, no doubt they want their stamp of approval. It’s not only good publicity, but shows you did a good job in your work. For R.J. Cutler, both couldn’t be further from his reach with his new doc on Martha Stewart. As it turns out, pissing off Stewart was a bad move.
While Martha Stewart admitted she liked the first half of the documentary, as a whole she has major problems with it, calling out R.J. Cutler for his misuse of resources and leaning too heavy on easy headlines. “R.J. had total access, and he really used very little. It was just shocking.” She added that Cutler constantly removed fun stories that Stewart shared and instead chose to put a major spotlight on her infamous 2004 trial which revolved around her involvement in a stock trading scandal, resulting in her spending five months in prison. As she put it, “It was not that important. The trial and the actual incarceration was less than two years out of an 83-year life. I considered it a vacation, to tell you the truth. he trial itself was extremely boring. Even the judge fell asleep. R.J. didn’t even put that in. The judge was asleep at the bench. I wrote it in my diary every day.”
Martha Stewart also claimed that Cutler misled the audience into suggesting that she is in poor health at age of 83. “Those last scenes with me looking like a lonely old lady walking hunched over in the garden? Boy, I told him to get rid of those. And he refused. I hate those last scenes. Hate them.” He, too, used unflattering camera angles, which he insisted on using despite Stewart’s request. Something like Martha, as with so many of celeb-driven docs, is no doubt going to drum up a ton of viewers based on the subject’s prominence alone. With that, it too could drive undeserved speculation as to Stewart’s condition (she actually had a damaged Achilles’ tendon and isn’t suffering from age-driven frailty). That said, it is ultimately R.J. Cutler’s film and he doesn’t really have to adhere to her requests.
Cutler has gone on to defend Martha (the film, that is), saying, “I am really proud of this film, and I admire Martha’s courage in entrusting me to make it. I’m not surprised that it’s hard for her to see aspects of it…It’s a movie, not a Wikipedia page. It’s the story of an incredibly interesting human being who is complicated and visionary and brilliant.”
But perhaps the most damning move on Cutler’s part came down to the music: Martha Stewart wanted either Dr. Dre or her BFF Snoop Dogg to score the doc, which we must say would have been dope.
Do you think the director should have followed Martha Stewart’s requests? Or does he have the final say?
Going to the movies can be a hit-or-miss experience. In addition to possible visual and audio issues, your good time can also be ruined by unruly patrons, overpriced food and beverages, and filthy seats. Even if everything goes well, one more element has become increasingly overbearing in recent years: commercials. There’s nothing like going to the movies and having to sit through nearly 10-20 minutes worth of commercials (and that’s not counting the previews), and Joker: Folie à Deux director Todd Phillips has had enough.
As more people turn to streaming services instead of the theater, Phillips told Empire that one simple fix could help make the theatrical experience more enjoyable. “Stop showing commercials before the movies,” he said. “We’ve paid for our tickets. We’re excited to be there. The commercials tend to take the air out of the room.” I mean, he’s not wrong. I still remember the days when commercials were rare in my local theaters. There might have been one or even none at all. Now it feels like the actual movie doesn’t start until a good 30 minutes after the advertised showtime. I get that theaters need to make money, but there’s got to be some middle ground.
Phillips’ Joker: Folie à Deux is still playing in theaters, but unlike the first movie, which earned over $1 billion worldwide and scored Joaquin Phoenix an Academy Award for Best Actor, the sequel is bombing. In fact, there have been reports that it could lose the studio at least $150 million to $200 million. The sequel has grossed $201 million worldwide on a budget of $200 million.
Our own Chris Bumbray wasn’t a fan of the sequel, feeling that it only exists because the first movie made so much money. “Perhaps Joker was too big of a hit not to get a sequel, but watching Joker: Folie à Deux, you get the distinct feeling that this was an exercise in style for Phillips rather than a sequel that HAD to be made,” Bumbray wrote. “As it is, though, this Joker sequel spins its wheels and winds up being an often dull courtroom movie livened up by occasional flights of fancy into musical numbers. Those sequences are the best in the film, as without them, this would feel like a wholly unnecessary epilogue to what was originally a pretty powerful film.” You can check out the rest of Bumbray’s review right here, and be sure to let us know what you think of the film as well. Joker: Folie à Deux will be released on 4K Ultra HD/Blu-ray on December 17th.
Would you like to see fewer commercials played in theaters or does it not bother you?
Sasha Calle played Supergirl in The Flash. It was meant to be the first appearance of a character who would go on to play a major role in the DCEU. However, by the time the film was released, the DCEU was in its death throes. This was especially frustrating for Calle, who had signed on for multiple movies and called the whole experience “heartbreaking.“
“I was so deeply in love with that role. I had a conversation about her future many times,” Calle told THR. “When I signed onto that, it was for a multiple picture deal. That’s a common thing when you sign onto a franchise. So it was very heartbreaking for me, and it was very confusing. Ultimately, I know that I did my best, and wherever it ended up going, it wasn’t … (Calle ponders for a few moments.)“
Although Calle obviously wished she would be able to return as Supergirl, she looks back on the experience fondly. “I look back at it as something super beautiful. It’s been said that a queer Latina girl like me couldn’t be Supergirl. But I was, and no one can take that away from me,” Calle said. “That is the most important thing for me; I did something that mattered. And whether you saw yourself represented in me or not, a lot of people really connected with her and loved her.“
Given the controversy surrounding The Flash star Ezra Miller, Calle was the only actor who did press for the film. Considering this was Calle’s very first movie, the experience of being the public face of the project was a little overwhelming. “It was very hard, I have to say. I had bittersweet feelings as I was maneuvering everything. I was very excited, but there were a lot of unanswered questions for me, so it was very bittersweet,” Calle said. “I then got really sick, too. I lost my voice. So I was kind of in robot mode just to make sure that I was even able to speak, but my team was awesome. My makeup artist would knock on my door at 4 in the morning, and she would throw a bucket of ice in a sink to put my face into it. (Laughs.) I know it sounds treacherous, but to be very honest with you, it was really sweet. She would then make sure that I didn’t look sick.“
Resident Evil star Milla Jovovich is preparing to battle the undead once again as Deadline reports that she’s set to star in Twilight of the Dead, which is being billed as the seventh and final installment of George A. Romero’s iconic zombie franchise. Betty Gabriel (Get Out) will also star in the movie, which is set to be directed by Brad Anderson (Session 9).
Twilight of the Dead is set on a tropical island and will “delve into the dark nature of humanity from the perspective of the last humans on earth who are caught between factions of the undead.” Romero had been working on the project before he died in 2017, and his wife, Suzanne Desrocher-Romero, made sure it would live on. Greg Nicotero, who got his star on Romero’s Day of the Dead, will create the makeup effects, so the undead are in very good hands. The George A. Romero estate is teaming up with Roundtable Entertainment on the project.
In a statement, director Brad Anderson said, “I see this film in the same way as successful post-apocalyptic thrillers such as I Am Legend, A Quiet Place, The Road, and The Last of Us — genre stories that are as emotional as they are intense. When I first read Twilight of The Dead I teared up at the end. Which is weird for a film of this type. But it has that kind of pull, that combo of horror and heartbreak that I love.“
Suzanne Desrocher-Romero added: “It is with great pleasure to work with my partners at Roundtable to finally get the last of George A Romero’s the Dead canon out to the fans. It’s what the fans have longed for and with Brad Anderson at the helm it will be sensational!“
Roundtable Entertainment’s Sarah Donnelly said, “We’re thrilled to share Milla Jovovich’s return to the zombie genre in this fresh and original way with Twilight of the Dead. With Brad’s masterful, visionary direction and Milla’s unique ability to command the screen as a Bona fide action star with emotional depth and resiliency, there’s no doubt this film will be a riveting, compelling standout in the genre.“
