Disney Reveals New Images from 'The Good Dinosaur' and 'Inside Out'

Last night Disney began the promo rollout for what's shaping up to be a huge 2015 campaign. They dropped a brand new Avengers: Age of Ultron image, but as we all know that was really just the tip of the iceberg for what the Mouse House has in store. A couple of brand new animated films from Pixar are on the way in The Good Dinosaur and Inside Out, and now there's some pics to feast your eyes on.

Arriving on June 19th 2015 will be the ambitious Inside Out, which takes us into the mind of a young girl and creates characters out of her emotions. Peter Docter is directing this one with Mindy Kaling, Bill Hader, Diane Lane, Amy Poehler, and Lewis Black part of the voice cast. And then there's The Good Dinosaur, which has undergone some pretty significant changes beginning with the firing of original director, Bob Peterson. The project has since been taken over by Peter Sohn, and how much he's changed the plot is still a mystery. What we know is that it presents a world where dinosaurs never became extinct and now live side-by-side with humans. That film arrives on November 25th.

Read More

Review: 'Saving Mr. Banks' Starring Emma Thompson and Tom Hanks

This time of year Hollywood should just take out a giant full page ad that reads: "Make a movie about us and we will love you forever!” Hollywood loves movies about making movies, and from the moment Disney revealed the plot of Saving Mr. Banks, which follows the contentious battle to complete 1964's beloved classic Mary Poppins, it's been pegged as a future Oscar contender. Maybe that will still be the case, maybe not, but for all the talent and Disney cozying up for some Oscar gold, the film simply isn't very good and won't make you care a whit about Mary Poppins or its author, P.L. Travers

Unfortunately the entire point of the film is to make us care about Travers (Emma Thompson), the Australian author who famously fought Walt Disney (Tom Hanks) for years before she'd allow him to adapt the first of her Mary Poppins novels. When the movie begins she's in dire financial straits and has started to listen to Disney's offers, albeit reluctantly. She has no desire of selling the rights to Mary Poppins, and at first we're expected to believe it's just another case of a creator protecting the integrity of their work. When she arrives in Los Angeles to negotiate, it might as well be a hostage negotiation for all the enthusiasm she displays. Not only is she snotty and rude to Disney, who is merely hoping to fulfill a promise he made to his daughter, but she's a complete snot to the screen and song writers (Bradley Whitford, Jason Schwartzman, B.J. Novak). She's even dismissive of her well-meaning driver (Paul Giamatti), an everyman always "keeping on the sunny side of life" so to speak.

Disney does what nobody else can understand, allowing her to take part in the movie's production even though she hasn't signed a deal. She takes every opportunity to point out how repulsive she finds the entire ordeal, and arguments over every bit of minutiae she can find play out ad nauseum. She doesn't want any songs...or any animation...and she has a problem with the color red so there can't be any of that. The entire purpose of the film up to this point seems to be showing just how ugly Travers was, and well, they succeeded because she's absolutely awful.

The trouble is that the ultimate goal is to make us sympathize with her, and to uncover the reasons she's holding on to Mary Poppins so tightly. Thus a parallel narrative unfolds through flashback, chronicling her childhood in Australia where she worships her fun-loving, frolicking drunk of a father (Colin Farrell, never been better really). Directed lovingly by John Lee Hancock, these scenes are at first a welcome, very Disney-esque look at the influence Travers' imaginative father had on the surreal world she created around Mary Poppins, and explains in some way why she considers the work so sacred. However, they quickly become a distraction as her father's personal demons begin to take over, dampening the film's jovial spirit without shedding much light on Travers' unforgivable attitude as an adult. The script by Kelly Marcel and Sue Smith heaps on one mawkish beat after another before but never quite makes the connection between the hopeful young Travers and the older one who is busy scolding everybody.

Since this is a Disney movie and Hanks is playing Walt Disney, one can be forgiven for assuming his portrayal would be a little thin. But Hanks is too good for that, and with a script that treats Disney far better than it does Travers, we're allowed to see him as both kind-hearted and a shrewd businessman. His outgoing, wizened Jiminy Cricket personality makes for a soothing, calming presence and, although he's very much a supporting character, the film loses much of its warmth when he's away. That's because the film gets mighty chilly every time Thompson is on screen. They're much better together when they can bicker and quarrel like an old married couple from two vastly different worlds. Thompson, whose Nanny McPhee movies were clearly inspired by Travers, gives the role everything she's got but is consistently let down by the script. She's been a hater the entire movie and her transformation into a kinder, gentler Travers never feels earned.

The film bends over backwards for a happy-ish ending; giving the impression Travers was mostly pleased with Disney's completed work. She really wasn't, but to say otherwise would be to throw a wet blanket over everything. Better a happy ending than the truth, right? While Saving Mr. Banks may be must-see viewing for Mary Poppins fans, others won't find anything magical about it.

Read More

First Look at Tom Hanks and Emma Thompson in 'Saving Mr. Banks'

It used to be that any time Tom Hanks had a movie coming up in the fall, you could probably count on it being part of the Oscar race. That's been less of a guarantee of late, but this year he's got two legitimate shots at scoring some gold. He'll star in Paul Greengrass' Somali pirates film Captain Phillips this October, but his best shot may come after that when he plays Walt Disney in Saving Mr. Banks.

We've seen a couple of set photos but now we have the first official still showing Hanks as the Mouse House visionary, along with Emma Thompson as Mary Poppins creator, P.L. Travers. The story, written by Kelly Marcel and directed by John Lee Hancock (The Blind Side), tells of Disney's attempts to get Travers on board for his adaptation of her book. After finally convincing her, she hated the result, in particular the animated sequences, and vowed never to let Disney near her work again. It'll also deal with Travers' relationship with her father (Colin Farrell), who served as the inspiration for the story's patriarch, Mr. Banks.

Also starring Ruth Wilson, Paul Giamatti, and Jason Schwartzman, Saving Mr. Banks hits the Oscar race on December 13th.

Read More

1st look at Tom Hanks as Walt Disney in 'Saving Mr. Banks'

It's always fun to see how actors' looks will evolve when they're gearing up for a major role. If you've been following Tom Hanks(not literally I hope) over the last few weeks you may have noticed some curious facial hair. In pro wrestling this usually means someone is about to turn heel, and it's sorta the same thing for Hanks as he was growing his mustache to play Walt Disney in Saving Mr. Banks.

The first set photos have emerged of Hanks in the role, and also of Emma Thompson as Mary Poppins author P.L. Travers. The story follows Disney's pursuit of the film rights to Travers' Mary Poppins novel, and after she finally gave in their relationship soured over the changes he made. Travers was particular peeved over the animated sequences, and swore never to work with Disney again.

The Blind Side's John Lee Hancock is directing, with Paul Giamatti, Ruth Wilson, Bradley Whitford, Colin Farrell, Rachel Griffiths, and Jason Schwartzman co-starring. Saving Mr. Banks opens on December 20th 2013, check out all of the images below....[Inside the Magic via Slashfilm]

Read More

Details emerge on Brad Bird and Damon Lindelof's '1952'

It was a pretty big deal back in May when we learned that Disney had set up a mystery project for Brad Bird(The Incredibles) to direct from a script by Damon Lindelof(Lost). Little was revealed about it, but speculation was that it was meant to be a major sci-fi film, working under the title of 1952. One of the most active years in NASA's history, it was a time when they were experimenting heavily with rocket technology. Or it could deal with the 1952 incident in which a number of UFO sightings were reported in Washington, DC over the course of a few weeks. Could that play a part? I think the clues are starting to point to that being the case.

Sources tell Vulture that the film is being developed along the lines of Close Encounters of the Third Kind, and will follow a man in his 40s. Set in the modern day, it will largely deal with aliens making contact on Earth. As for the title? Apparently it's in reference to a box of files Lindelof found in Walt Disney's personal development lab. They had been marked 'That Darn Cat!' in reference to the 1965 film, but it was crossed out and '1952' written in its place. Inside, Lindelof found a bunch of documents regarding a potential film on alien contact.

So this is sounding even better than before, especially if Lindelof and Bird are reviving some long-thought dead project of Walt Disney's. A heavy J.J. Abrams-esque viral campaign is being planned, and with Bird and Lindelof expected to hold a Q&A later today in Hollywood, I'm guessing more details on all of it will be revealed.

Read More

No sh*t! 'The Avengers 2' confirmed by Disney

Pfft! What kind of day and age are we living in when a movie can make $207M over a single weekend and expect to automatically get a sequel? That's crazy talk. Disney is apparently living in this fantasy world because CEO Bob Iger has confirmed that The Avengers 2 is already in development. If this were the DC universe I'd think he'd somehow slipped into Bizarro World.

Obviously, this is a no-brainer move for Marvel, Disney, and Paramount. Iger, who was probably lighting his cigar rolled with crisp $100 bills as he said this, called The Avengers "a great illustration of why we like Marvel so much". No sh*t, Sherlock. It made money. Money make empty suit happy.

Marvel's got a long way to go to get there, though. Iron Man 3 is next up on the list, and sequels to Captain America: The First Avenger and Thor are set for next year and 2014. So we're at least three years away, and I suspect maybe four years due to some additional heroes that may get thrown into the mix. I did an entire piece on this very subject yesterday, which you can find here. [Deadline]

Read More

Disney axes Johnny Depp's The Lone Ranger due to budget concerns

In a move that proves even the mightiest of celebrities can fall by the wayside when money becomes an issue, Disney has pulled the plug on The Lone Ranger, a film which was looking to be one of their major tentpoles for 2012. Johnny Depp was set to headline as Tonto, pairing back up with the ultra successful director of Pirates of the Caribbean, Gore Verbinski. Deadline says what got the film killed was the massive budget, which was looking at over $250M+(!!!), and Disney was like "Oh hell naw!!!". Attempts to trim it down to $232M simply weren't enough, as Disney was looking for something in the ballpark of $200M. 
Seriously, how does a friggin' Western cost $200M? Is this Wild Wild West with giant robot spiders all over the place? It's not the casting, that's for sure. Armie Hammer(The Social Network) may be more in demand now than ever, but he can't cost all that much. The rest of the cast consists of Tom Wilkinson, Helena Bonham Carter, and James Badge Dale, not exactly bank busting stars.  What this boils down to is that studios aren't going to keep spending money like water hoping for a hit. There have been way too many big budget flops lately(hi Green Lantern. You too Cowboys & Aliens) to justify it. Look at what happened to At the Mountains of Madness with Guillermo Del Toro. Or a more recent example is Ron Howard's adaptation of The Dark Tower. Too much risk to justify the costs.

But there has to more to it than just that. The Depp/Verbinski pairing all but promises a $500M global haul. My personal opinion is that Disney got cold feet at the crowded December 2012 month, which promised to blunt The Lone Ranger's numbers. The Hobbit, Django Unchained, Life of Pi, and Judd Apatow's Knocked Up spinoff are all set up for the same month.

There's still some hope that the film will be picked up by another studio, and frankly I'd be surprised if it isn't. It's going to have to come at a much lower price, though.

Read More

Tom Hanks says there will be a Toy Story 4. Is he pullin' our leg?

What is this, 12 #1 movies in a row for Pixar with Cars 2? Whether you think the film was good or not doesn't really matter, the fact remains that sequels have been very profitable for the company. All one has to do is look at last year's Toy Story 3, which earned over $1B(!!!!) and very nearly won an Academy Award for Best Picture.  That was supposed to be the last we'd ever see of Buzz, Woody, and the rest of the gang, except for in short films and such. If you go to Cars 2 you'll be treated to the first one, Hawaiian Vacation, and it's probably the best part of the experience. Rumors of a Toy Story 4 never really went away, though, and now Tom Hanks has thrown some fuel on the fire with this statement made to the BBC(via our homies at BleedingCool) when asked about the possibility...

Hanks:  “I think there will be, yeah. I think they’re working on it now.”

Is he serious? Or is he just pulling the wool over people's eyes? Hanks was out promoting his new film, Larry Crowne, and maybe he wasn't in the mood to field a bunch of Toy Story questions. They'll never end, dude. Seriously.  Toy Story is probably the most popular animated series ever, and people are always going to want to revisit those characters. Personally I thought Toy Story 3 was the absolute perfect conclusion and shouldn't be screwed with. But I also realize the ever present calling of the almighty dollar, and so does Pixar. Or should I say, so does Disney. I won't be surprised in the least if we see Toy Story 4 some time in 2013.

Read More

Tom Mccarthy to write 'Million Dollar Arm' for Walt Disney Pictures

The types of movies Tom McCarthy makes are the ones that tend to stick with me the most. They're perfect little slices of life, emphasizing character relationships and emotion over wild theatrics and big set pieces.  We recently put up the trailer for his latest film, Win Win, which looks like another surefire critical hit. Now it looks like McCarthy may be broadening his horizons just a little bit to something with a bit more mainstream appeal, as he'll be writing Million Dollar Arm, a sports drama from Walt Disney Pictures.

Million Dollar Arm is the title of an Indian reality show, created by sports agent J.B. Bernstein to find the best pitching talents. The two finalists, Rinku Singh and Dinesh Kumar Patel, became the first Indian born athletes to sign Major League Baseball contracts.  So this film could be a combination of Slumdog Millionaire and Sugar, depending on how McCarthy decides to play it. 

After The Station Agent and The Visitor(not to mention co-writing Pixar's Up), I'm convinced McCarthy can do no wrong. I haven't seen Win Win yet but I will in the next few days, so after that I'll have a better idea how he handles sports dramas.

Thanks to THR for info on this story.

Read More

50 Disney Spoilers in 3 Minutes (Video)

With Walt Disney celebrating it's 50th animted feature with the release of Tangled today, somebody figured the best way to join in was to spoil the big reveals of all their other flicks. Apparently not everybody lived happily ever after. What a jip.  The below video is a lot of fun, though, even if I find the two dudes sorta aggravating.

Read More

Iron Man 3 release date revealed; Disney to distribute it and The Avengers

With all the Marvel movies coming up in the next year I hadn't even begun to start thinking about Iron Man 3, but now it looks like I'll have no choice as Disney has already cemented a release date: May 3rd, 2013.All of the Iron Man flicks have dropped during the first week of May, so this isn't totally unexpected.

If you're wondering why in the hey Disney is making this announcement, it's because the Mouse House has paid a hefty $115M sum to be the global marketing and distributor for both Iron Man and The Avengers. Both were previously to be distrubed by Paramount, who retains the rights to Captain America: The First Avenger and Thor, both due out next year.

So...how long before we start hearing casting rumors?

Read More