Spike Lee planned to write and direct a film based on the life of Jackie Robinson and had it set up at Turner Pictures under his 40 Acres and a Mule Filmworks in 1995. The studio wanted to release it in 1997 to coincide with the 50th anniversary of Robinson's breaking of the color barrier, and courted Denzel Washington to star, but the project fell apart in 1996 over creative differences. In March 1997, Lee found favor with Columbia Pictures, who signed him to a three-year first-look deal. Columbia President Amy Pascal reflected that it would bring \"enormous potential for Spike to reach audiences that are not traditionally associated with Spike Lee movies.\" The project eventually fell apart, but in 2004 Robert Redford set up a Jackie Robinson biopic as producer with Deep River Productions, as well as his own production company, Wildwood Productions. Redford also intended to co-star as Branch Rickey, and Howard Baldwin joined as producer the following year. In June 2011, it was announced that Legendary Pictures would develop and produce a Jackie Robinson biopic with Brian Helgeland on board to write and direct, under a distribution deal with Warner Bros. Legendary collaborated with Robinson's widow, Rachel Robinson, to ensure the authenticity of her husband's story. She had previously been involved with Redford's project.
Lots to look forward to as we enter a new month on Netflix. In fact, we just got word of over half a dozen new releases scheduled to land throughout the month which is now available on our coming to Netflix in July 2022 list.
Aside from his forays into franchise fare and big-budget tentpoles, Guy Ritchie is known for his trademark talky crime capers, but his latest showcases a different side of the writer-director. Jake Gyllenhaal stars in this serious action thriller about a special ops veteran who returns to Afghanistan to find the interpreter who previously rescued him and carried him to safety.
Not long after the pandemic took hold of the world in 2020, Netflix released an ambitious, adrenaline-fueled action flick starring Chris Hemsworth called Extraction, directed by Sam Hargrave and written by Joe Russo (and based on a graphic novel that Russo co-wrote). All three have returned for this sequel, which promises more ridiculous stunts and set pieces you can enjoy from the comfort of your living room couch.
Wes Anderson has gathered another ridiculously star-studded ensemble cast for his latest film, a period comedy set in 1955 about the students and parents at a Junior Stargazer convention. In other words, this might be the most Wes Anderson-y Wes Anderson movie yet.
Originally conceived as a film specifically for the HBO Max streaming platform, Blue Beetle eventually found its way to being a theatrical release when Warner Bros. changed their minds about the film. The DC superhero flick will be helmed by Angel Manuel Soto (Charm City Kings) and star Xolo Maridueña, who has recently made a name for himself on the Karate Kid-inspired hit Netflix series Cobra Kai.
We came up with our Hollywood hall of shame by culling through The Numbers' rundown of the most expensive movies ever made, focusing on 508 movies with reported budgets of $90 million or more. From this group, we zeroed in on the films that failed to make back their budgets at the worldwide box office. We eliminated titles that had no reported grosses because they debuted on streaming (a la Will Smith's \"Bright\"). We also eliminated films (such as \"Call of the Wild\" and \"Tenet\") that were released in 2020 amid the theater-shuttering coronavirus outbreak.
In the end, we came up with a list that includes movies that have competed at the Oscars and been mocked at the Razzies. Read on for the list, ranked from the smallish-sized bombs to the biggest. (The Numbers stats were current as of September 6, 2020.)
The claws were out for this 2019 musical as soon as it dropped its trailer. Where once \"Cats\" won Tonys and the devotion of theatergoers, now it merely puzzled the Twitterverse, which recoiled at the movie's CGI-enhanced cat outfits. Despite a diverse cast that ranged from newcomer Francesca Hayward to Idris Elba and Judi Dench, the film came and went during its award-season release without much of a meow.
In the summer of 2002, this John Woo-directed World War II drama, starring Nicolas Cage, was supposed to be counter-programming to Sam Raimi's \"Spider-Man.\" Instead, it disappeared down the same hole as \"The Widowmaker,\" which was released in theaters about a month after \"Windtalkers.\"
Two years after \"Green Lantern\" failed to light up the box office as expected, Ryan Reynolds fired even more blanks with another comic-book adaptation. \"R.I.P.D.\" barely made a dent in its first weekend in domestic release - and went downhill from there.
\"I watch the worst of the 'worst' horror movies as a hobby. I actually got through Cannibal Holocaust and all three Human Centipede movies just fine. I can never rewatch this. I almost stopped watching multiple times because of how sick it made me.\"
Americans see many factors as playing a role in gun violence in the country today. Fully 86% say the ease with which people can illegally obtain guns contributes to gun violence a great deal or a fair amount; more than half say the same about family instability (74%), lack of economic opportunities (65%), the amount of gun violence in video games (60%), the ease with which people can legally obtain guns (60%), and the amount of gun violence in movies and television (55%).
Yes. Especially for someone like me. I love movies. I watch movies all the time. They have important meaning to me. For many people, they have a lot of significance. A lot of cultural significance, even. Movies can transcend different cultures and different languages, even. There's so much to be said about how film connects us all together.
I understand that and it even feels sterile or lacking in creativity to talk about data and film but I'm happy to tell you that there are some amazing ways that data science can inform the movies we watch.
It's interesting that this institute took this on because since the beginning of movie making, when characters weren't even played by the same race or the same gender, there was so much misrepresentation in movies. Now, we've come to 2022 and we're hearing that, \"Yes, it is making improvements and those improvements are happening very incrementally.\" We all see it. We all know it. Every TV show that we turn on and especially if you're in the minority, you really feel it because you never see yourself, you don't hear yourself, but you're always consuming this content that is never representative of who you are.
Yes, exactly. Madeline says the ultimate goal the institute has with all of the work that it's doing is to show equal representation on screen that's comparable with real life populations. But if I could play devil's advocate for a second, movies aren't real. Why do we have to see on screen what we see in real life
Exactly, and it's not just conjecture either. A study that the institute conducted in 2015 examined the highest grossing movies of that year. They found that movies with female leads grossed 15.8% more than ones with male and movies with both male and female leads grossed 23.5% more than movies with just one or the other gender in the lead.
Some of the issues with filmmaking do have relationships with translating them into high-def, HD, and then from HD to 4K movies. Especially ones made using an older technology were simply not made to be seen on our very new, very crisp screens that we look at movies with now at home. So in post production, people like James use machine learning to scale up visuals.
The reason is, because the manufacturers don't want people to look at the movies, the great premier pieces of content today, and see all of this judder. When you bring the contrast up and brightness up, you'll begin to see things that you never saw before and will make the DP squirm which is this latent imaging that your brain can't quite get rid of the old image and bring in the new. When you're looking at something really bright and high contrast, it's burned into the back of your ocular system and so you'll begin to see this uncomfortable judder.
All right. What James is saying when he's talking about the compute or he was talking about doing scene by scene calculations: streaming services, Hulu, Netflix, Apple TV, etc., they can present films and TV shows running at too high of a frame rate while the industry standard is much lower and gives that cinematic visual to it that people are used to and that directors and creators want. Machine learning and data science can do scene by scene calculations and help render these films at that industry standard for streaming services without too much human intervention i.e., a lot of post production work. That's how people get to see the movies that we want to see on these devices in a way that we're supposed to see them.
It already does shape a lot of what we see on screen in a lot of ways that are unexpected and are actually really exciting. I feel like the attitude of data being in film or being a part of the creative process makes people hesitate a bit. There's a lot of sources of data, of information for people to use more than ever before especially if you're making movies. It can be generated by other platforms like social media platforms or you can even buy from vendors like Nielsen. It can be captured at the source if you have your own streaming platform like streaming services that we have now that use complex datasets to present their customers with what they want when they want it.
Integrating data science does not have to feel sterile. It can empower independent creators making things for undiscovered audiences. It can help visually present movies in line with the creator's vision. It can also help curb biases of which stories get created and which go untold and it can help address those biases that affect who we see on camera and who is behind the camera as well. Those are all good things. 59ce067264