(Newser)
–
Marvel Studios had a big, female-centric day at Comic Con on Saturday, with the biggest head-turner announced being an upcoming Thor movie—starring a woman. That woman is Natalie Portman, who told the crowd that the move "feels pretty good. I've always had a little hammer in me." Fans have a while to wait: Portman will star in Thor Love and Thunder, which is set to debut in November 2021, reports People. Portman was joined on-stage by original-recipe Thor, Chris Hemsworth. Marvel had a couple of other tricks up its sleeve:
Angelina Jolie will be starring in The Eternals, along with Richard Madden, Salma Hayek, Kumail Nanjiani, Brian Tyree Henry.
Elizabeth Olsen will reprise her role as Scarlet Witch in Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness, which is due in May 2021. Disney Plus is also planning to roll out a TV series, called WandaVision, based on the Scarlet Witch and Vision characters.
And yes, Black Widow fans will get a standalone movie, in which Scarlett Johansson says she gets to play the heroine as "a fully realized woman." Due in May 2020.
He also teased the answer to the biggest lingering question since the merger of Disney and Fox. How long until we see some X-Men or other Marvel superheroes join our faves?
Now playing:Watch this:
Marvel's Phase 4 plan explained
3:04
Here is Marvel's Phase 4 schedule:
May 1, 2020: Black Widow
Fall, 2020: Untitled
Nov. 6, 2020: The Eternals movie
Feb. 12, 2021: Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings
Spring, 2021: WandaVision Disney Plus series
May 7, 2021: Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness
Spring, 2021: Loki Disney Plus series
Summer, 2021: Untitled
Fall, 2021: The Falcon and Winter Soldier Disney Plus series
Nov. 5, 2021: Thor 4: Love and Thunder
The long-rumored Black Widow is definitely happening and will star Scarlett Johansson, David Harbour, Florence Pugh, O-T Fagbenle and Rachel Weisz. Cate Shortland will direct the movie, which is set to hit theaters May 1, 2020. The movie will take place shortly after Captain America: Civil War, Harbour told IGN, making it a prequel to the more recent Avengers films.
We even got a bit of footage.
Meanwhile, Thor: Love and Thunder is coming Nov. 5, 2021. It's the fourth in the series, starring Chris Hemsworth, with Taika Waititi on for writing and directing. Perhaps the biggest news: Taika Waititi has announced that Natalie Portman will be Lady Thor in Thor 4.
WandaVision, a Marvel original TV series starring Elizabeth Olsen as Scarlet Witch, became the next big news: Marvel confirmed it will arrive in spring, 2021.
And we have confirmation that Loki, the Marvel TV series starring Tom Hiddleston as the titular antihero, is coming to Disney Plus in spring, 2021.
Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness was also announced. We know very little about that one, although the title does tease the kind of multiverse madness that reared its head in Spider-Man: Far From Home. The Doctor Strange sequel arrives May 7, 2021.
And surprise... You thought that was all? Marvel Studios also announced Blade starring Academy Award winner Mahershala Ali.
Here's what we and others have been tweeting from the panel floor.
Just announced in Hall H at #SDCC, Marvel Studios’ DOCTOR STRANGE IN THE MULTIVERSE OF MADNESS with Benedict Cumberbatch and Elizabeth Olsen. Scott Derrickson returns as director. In theaters May 7, 2021. pic.twitter.com/bVyOYjPLly
And here's news on Falcon and Winter Soldier, set to star Anthony Mackie, Sebastian Stan and Daniel Brühl.
Daniel Brüle is coming to play Barron Zemo! Just appeared to threaten our heroes onstage in a remote appearance 🤭#MarvelSDCC#SDCC2019
— cait petrakovitz 🦹🏽♀️➡️#SDCC (@misscp) July 21, 2019
Just announced in Hall H at #SDCC, Marvel Studios’ THE FALCON AND THE WINTER SOLDIER, an original series with Anthony Mackie, Sebastian Stan and Daniel Brühl. Streaming exclusively on Disney+, Fall 2020. pic.twitter.com/FmFMKWUrhO
The film will star Angelina Jolie, Salma Hayek, Don Lee, Lia McHugh, Kumail Nanjiani, Brian Tyree Henry, Lauren Ridloff and Richard Madden. The cast took the stage soon after Marvel Studios head Kevin Feige confirmed the film.
Eternals is set for release Nov. 6, 2020.
Now playing:Watch this:
Marvel's Phase 4 plan explained
After being scammed by “Lost” and what he did to Ridley Scott with Prometheus, I’ve since softened by hostile stance on Damon Lindelof. His impeccable HBO series “The Leftovers” proved he was capable of learning from past mistakes and actually delivering on his promises. With that, I am insanely excited for his modern take on Alan Moore’s groundbreaking graphic novel “Watchmen”, which will premiere this October on HBO.
Set in an alternate history where “superheroes” are treated as outlaws, the first full trailer that premiered out of the ongoing San Diego Comic-Con is nothing short of spectacular. The series appears to downsize the global scale of the graphic novel, giving it a more realistic approach. It also feels astoundingly relevant, taking on a lot of social issues we are dealing with in today’s society. I’m pretty stoked to see what kind of mystery Lindelof implants into the mythology and look forward to discussing each and every episode with you all on Twitter.
But I digress, here’s the trailer…
The cast includes: Regina King, Jeremy Irons, Don Johnson, Jean Smart, Tim Blake Nelson, Louis Gossett Jr., Yahya Abdul-Mateen II, Hong Chau, Andrew Howard, Tom Mison, Frances Fisher, Jacob Ming-Trent, Sara Vickers, Dylan Schombing, and James Wolk.
“Watchmen” is produced for HBO by White Rabbit in association with Warner Bros. Television, based on characters from DC; executive producer/writer Damon Lindelof; executive producer/director, Nicole Kassell; executive producer, Tom Spezialy; executive producer/director, Stephen Williams; executive producer, Joseph Iberti.
Doesn’t look like Disney’s remake machine is experience any kind of major fatigue just yet. While critics may not be overly fond of “The Lion King” and “Dumbo” may have been a bit of a disappointing performer, Jon Favreau’s CGI-fueled remake of the 1994 animated classic “The Lion King” is raking in the big bucks this weekend.
That’s good for Disney, as “The Lion King” is poised to be yet another massive blockbuster for the Mouse House, one that should continue their domination at the box office in 2019. The original animated film came out 25 years ago in 1994, so the nostalgia factor is ripe for a whole generation of ’90s kids.
Fittingly, Jon Favreau’s new take keeps pretty faithful to the original, even aiming to digitally recreate moments like the “Circle of Life” opening sequence virtually shot for shot. The new “Lion King” film runs about half an hour longer than the original, but the changes and additions are few and far between. Still, Favreau could have decided to slip in a little bonus scene — like, say, a fun extra scene with the brilliant Timon and Pumba — after the credits.
However, “The Lion King” does not have a post-credits scene. When the film’s title card famously booms onto screen at the end just as it does in the original, that’s all folks. You can safely head home without missing anything.
There is however a new song that you didn’t hear in the ’94 version. Elton John and Tim Rice teamed up again as they did in 1994 for a song called “Never Too Late” that leads off the film’s end credits. The Motown-inflected, upbeat number was recorded by John along with an African choir, and it also appears on the film’s official soundtrack.
John had teased back in 2018 that the song might end up being a collaboration with Beyonce, but that didn’t pan out, and she has her own original track called “Spirit” that plays during the film. John and Rice each won an Oscar for “Can You Feel the Love Tonight” on the animated “Lion King,” and it’s likely that both their song and Beyonce’s will be in the hunt for an Oscar nomination come 2020 as well.
All 15 Disney Live-Action Remakes of Animated Classics, Ranked from Worst to Best (Photos)
Over the last decade, Disney has found itself dipping increasingly into its own well of nostalgic favorites. Specifically, they’ve been taking their beloved animated classics, remaking them in live-action (or mostly live-action), and producing one blockbuster smash after another. Let’s take a look at all of the live-action remakes of Disney’s animated classics, going all the way back to the 1990s, to explore which films improved on the original and which ones came up short.
15. "The Jungle Book" (1994)
The first live-action Disney remake of an animated Disney classic is, somehow, still the worst. Stephen Sommers (“The Mummy”) directs this frustratingly inert take on Rudyard Kipling’s stories, which strips the animals of their characterizations and highlights instead the bland experiences of British colonizers, who condescend to Mowgli (Jason Scott Lee) at every turn. Some of the supporting performances, especially by Cary Elwes and Lena Headey, are noteworthy, but the rest of the movie is a sloppy throwback to a mercifully bygone era of adventure filmmaking, full of backwards mentalities and underwhelming action.
14. "Christopher Robin" (2018)
The beloved stories of A.A. Milne have been previously adapted by Disney into several beautifully animated and heartwarming motion pictures. So it’s especially cloying that Marc Forster’s “Christopher Robin” just plops these timeless characters into a tepid and cookie-cutter family flick about a dad who -- gasp! -- spends too much time at work, and rediscovers his inner child thanks to the return of his old, magical friends. Ewan McGregor shines as the adult version of Christopher Robin, but the melancholy cinematography, underdeveloped screenplay and creepy VFX renditions of Pooh and his friends make “Christopher Robin” a rough slog.
13. "Alice Through the Looking Glass" (2016)
James Bobin’s sequel to “Alice in Wonderland” certainly looks like an improvement on the original, with vibrant production design and weird visual effects, and a tone that’s mercifully less grim. But the time-travel storyline, which sends Alice back to the early days of Wonderland (sorry, “Underland”) to become the cause of all its miseries (including a genocide), retroactively injures the original film, which had a boatload of problems in the first place.
12. "Beauty and the Beast" (2017)
Despite the excellent source material and a decent cast, Bill Condon’s remake of “Beauty and the Beast” has the unfortunate distinction of being the only live-action Disney remake that has absolutely no new interpretation of its material. It’s just the exact same story but longer, and only because of unnecessary additions that arbitrarily pad the running time, confuse the characters’ motivations, and shoot holes in the already thin plot. Add in some ugly character designs and an utterly forgettable new song, and you’ve got a film which made Disney a lot of money, but artistically has no particular reason to exist.
11. "Alice in Wonderland" (2010)
Tim Burton’s blockbuster retelling of “Alice in Wonderland” is unnecessarily murky and violent, and -- worst of all -- devoid of Lewis Carroll’s signature wit. Mia Wasikowska stars as Alice, who has forgotten all about Wonderland (sorry, “Underland”) and returns years later, only to find it taken over by darkness, a problem that can be solved only by more war. The film comes across like a cynical attempt to make a classic story edgy and marketable, but at least there’s an interesting attempt to transform Alice into a modern and active heroine, and the film’s ensemble cast boasts some real highlights, including Helena Bonham Carter as the Red Queen, Anne Hathaway as the White Queen, and Stephen Fry as the Cheshire Cat.
10. "102 Dalmatians" (2000)
Kevin Lima’s sequel to the hit “101 Dalmatians” remake is strange and cartoony but, in its defense, completely unapologetic. Glenn Close returns as the despicable Cruella de Vil, now rehabilitated via brainwashing and eager to rescue puppies instead of murdering them. When her programming wears off, she resumes her wicked ways. There’s not much more to it than that, but the film’s astounding costume design and Close’s pitch-perfect performance make “102 Dalmatians” an amiable, if shallow, piece of children’s entertainment.
9. "Maleficent" (2014)
Disney’s “Maleficent” isn’t so much an adaptation of “Sleeping Beauty” as it is quasi-family-friendly riff on Abel Ferrara’s “Ms .45.” Angelina Jolie stars as a fairy who gets betrayed and violated by her human lover and left physically and emotionally scarred, so she plots her revenge against him by cursing his daughter, played by Elle Fanning. The cinematography is hard to make out a lot of the time -- and once you do get a good look at some of the CGI creatures, you’ll wish it stayed that way -- but the bold new interpretation of the source material and Jolie’s exceptional performance elevate “Maleficent” above its shoddy VFX and extremely sloppy storytelling.
8. Aladdin (2019)
Guy Ritchie's remake of "Aladdin" sucks out all the personality the filmmaker could have possibly brought to the project, instead simply rehashing the original in a mediocre but mildly enjoyable way. Mena Massoud and Naomi Scott are wonderful as Aladdin and Jasmine, and Will Smith plays the Genie like he's the ultimate fantasy wingman. It's like watching the original "Aladdin" acted out in the middle of a parade: Cheerful, well-intentioned and fleeting.
7. "The Sorcerer’s Apprentice" (2010)
Except for an obligatory scene with some dancing mops, Jon Turteltaub’s “The Sorcerer’s Apprentice” has very little in common with the classic Mickey Mouse segment from “Fantasia.” Jay Baruchel stars as a young science nerd who is destined to become a sorcerer, and Nicolas Cage has to train him before evil sorcerers can raise an army and take over the world. It’s a perfectly watchable fantasy adventure, but nothing about “The Sorcerer’s Apprentice” makes a lasting impact. It’s practically the textbook definition of “average.”
6. "The Lion King" (2019)
Unlike "The Jungle Book" -- which has at least one human character -- the new "Lion King" couldn't even be considered "live-action" in the most generous use of the term, but for the sake of conversation we'll include it anyway. This is an ambitious visual spectacle, re-creating the African savanna of the original 2D-animated movie in photorealistic CG detail as it tells the story of a lion cub who avenges his father's murder and brings order back to the ecosystem. When Jon Favreau's film works, it's a visual marvel, but when it fails, it's because the film's literalist animation style is directly at odds with the arch, fantastical story and characters. Style may be the selling point but too often, it gets in the way of the substance.
5. "101 Dalmatians" (1996)
Stephen Herek directed a trio of live-action Disney hits in the 1990s -- “The Mighty Ducks,” “The Three Musketeers,” and “101 Dalmatians” -- and they’re all satisfying family-friendly romps. Jeff Daniels and Joely Richardson play humans whose dogs fall in love and have oodles of puppies, and Glenn Close portrays Cruella de Vil like a pitch-perfect 1960s “Batman” villain. The film devolves into brainless, non-stop “Home Alone” slapstick in the second half, but it’s never less than fun, and Close gives such a gloriously unhinged performance that she’s practically Oscar-worthy.
4. "Dumbo" (2019)
Tim Burton’s second live-action remake of a Disney animated classic is more clever, more emotional and significantly more subversive than his “Alice in Wonderland.” It’s still the story of a baby circus elephant with giant ears that help him fly, but this time his circus is purchased by a theme-park entrepreneur played by Michael Keaton, who proceeds to lay off most of the workers after the merger and to exploit his newly acquired IP beyond reason. Disney has often turned heartless capitalists into their villains, but in “Dumbo,” the studio seems to be pointing the finger at itself, giving Burton’s richly realized fantasy an unexpected and impressive sting.
3. "The Jungle Book" (2016)
Jon Favreau’s “The Jungle Book” uses so much CGI that calling it “live-action” is probably a misnomer; there’s only one character who isn’t motion-captured, and even the realistic environments were digitally rendered. But either way it’s an excellent film. Favreau eschews the laidback, episodic structure of the original in favor of a more focused adventure, with Mowgli (Neel Sethi) gradually taking responsibility for rescuing the jungle from the deadly Shere Khan (Idris Elba). An all-star cast of mo-cap animal characters keeps the film lively, although Christopher Walken is a distractingly strange choice for King Louie.
2. "Pete’s Dragon" (2016)
Another nebulously defined “live-action remake,” since the original “Pete’s Dragon” was a mostly live-action musical fantasy with one animated title character. David Lowery’s remake does away with all the classic songs (which ranged from adorable to weirdly violent) and also throws out the wackier storylines. Instead he highlights the emotionally sincere story of a lost boy whose only friend is a giant dragon. When Pete is discovered and brought back to the human world, his dragon, Elliot, comes looking for him. Lowery makes room for comic shenanigans, but he’s mostly interested in exploring our contemporary capacity for wonder. He transforms a formerly eccentric tale into something beautiful and, possibly, timeless.
1. "Cinderella" (2015)
Disney’s original “Cinderella” is a masterpiece of animation, but it’s also a narratively thin piece of wish-fulfillment. Kenneth Branagh’s live-action remake keeps the original, classic storyline in place but amplifies the characters, giving the wicked stepmother (Cate Blanchett) a meaningful motivation for her treatment of Cinderella (Lily James), giving Cinderella a set of clearly-defined principles that justifies her every decision, and giving the prince (John Madden) enough time with Cinderella that they can actually fall believably in love. Romantic, beautiful and -- from a story perspective, at least -- an undeniable improvement on the original, “Cinderella” is the crown jewel of Disney’s live-action remakes. For now.
1 of 16
How does Jon Favreau’s “The Lion King” rank among the studios remakes of its animated hits?
Over the last decade, Disney has found itself dipping increasingly into its own well of nostalgic favorites. Specifically, they’ve been taking their beloved animated classics, remaking them in live-action (or mostly live-action), and producing one blockbuster smash after another. Let’s take a look at all of the live-action remakes of Disney’s animated classics, going all the way back to the 1990s, to explore which films improved on the original and which ones came up short.
Prior the 2009 J.J. Abrams-directed reboot, the biggest opening weekend for a Star Trek movie was the pre-Thanksgiving 1996 launch of Star Trek: First Contact. Buoyed by strong reviews, an usual PG-13 rating that promised a darker and more violent action melodrama and a campaign that successfully sold the flick as a combo of the two most popular Trek flicks (The Wrath of Khan and The Voyage Home), the film opened with a whopping $30 million and legged it to $90 million domestic. Just two months later, a re-release of the first Star Wars movie, celebrating its 20th anniversary, opened with $35 million in January of 1997.
The Star Wars: Special Edition debut was impressive for any number of reasons, not least of which because the old Star Wars snagged a bigger opening weekend than the biggest debut for any "new" Star Trek movie. If there was any doubt that Star Wars was still a viable IP ripe for the plundering, the "Special Edition" reissues of the Star Wars trilogy earned $471 million worldwide in early 1997. George Lucas' long-fabled prequel flicks began dropping two years later. Phantom Menace, Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith eventually earned (sans reissues) $2.425 billion combined on a total production spend of $345 million.
Flash forward to September of 2011, when Walt Disney gave The Lion King a 3-D conversion and re-released it into theaters. Despite the 1994 animated blockbuster having sold 32 million VHS tapes since 1995 and 11.9 million DVDs since 2003, The Lion King 3-D opened with $30 million on its opening weekend. It earned $94 million domestic and $91.3 million overseas and was the third-biggest movie of the season behind Paranormal Activity 3 and Puss in Boots. The Lion King 3-D's successled to a mini-surge in Disney animated theatrical re-releases, but none of them (Beauty and the Beast, Finding Nemo and Monsters, Inc. in 2012) matched The Lion King's success.
Whatever a massive debut for a reanimated remake of The Lion King means in a macro sense, the micro of it is that folks just really like watching The Lion King in theaters. The mixed-negative reviews that argued that this Jon Favreau-directed version was essentially a re-painted and buttoned down version of the same movie you saw in 1994 and then bought in 1995, weren't so much pans as reassurances. This is a slightly new version of The Lion King, with a new cast comprised of the likes of Donald Glover, Beyonce Knowles-Carter and Seth Rogen, complete with James Earl Jones reprising his role as Mufasa. But it was still The Lion King.
Just as the 1997 "Special Edition" reissues of Star Wars underlined the potential value of "new" Star Wars content, so too did the 2011 3-D reissue of The Lion King highlight the potential encased in this specific animated IP. And once Favreau proved with The Jungle Book that you could essentially make an animated movie filled with animals and wildlife that looked "photo real," it was only a matter of time before Simba, Mufasa and Scar got the same treatment. Walt Disney's remake of The Lion King opened yesterday with a boffo $78.5 million Friday gross, including $23 million in Thursday previews. Including overseas grosses, it has already earned $270.5 million worldwide.
That $78.5 million Friday gross is Walt Disney's biggest single-day gross ever, even accounting for inflation, for anything that wasn't an MCU flick or a Star Wars movie. It's the second-biggest single-day July gross behind Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part II, which opened with $92 million in 2011 but then front-loaded to $169 million, which is still (until tomorrow) the biggest opening weekend ever for the month of July. Accounting for inflation, it's fourth behind Harry Potter 7.2 and Chris Nolan's Dark Knight sequels ($67 million in 2008 and $75 million in 2012), all of which opened on this exact weekend. Will The Lion King be less frontloaded this weekend than those three blockbusters?
Legs merely as "long" as The Dark Knight (a mere 2.36x multiplier for a then-record $158 million debut weekend) gets The Lion King to $184 million, which would be (sans inflation) the biggest July launch of all time and (including inflation) Disney's second-biggest non-MCU/non-Star Wars opening weekend ever behind Johnny Depp's Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest ($135 million in July of 2006/$187 million adjusted). If it legs like Pirates 2 (2.42x) or The Simpsons Movie ($74 million from a $30 million Friday in July of 2007), The Lion King will end Sunday night with $190 million. Even Dark Knight Rises/Harry Potter 7.2 legs (over/under 2x) gets it to between $145 million and $171 million.
The optimistic scenario is that this indeed plays like either a genuine animated flick or a general audiences blockbuster. An over/under 2.6x multiplier, think Austin Powers: Goldmember ($76 million from a $30 million Friday in July of 2002) or The Secret Life of Pets ($104 million/$38 million in July of 2016) gets this one over $200 million for the weekend. Conversely, a frontloaded weekend like Ant-Man and the Wasp and Spider-Man: Homecoming (both of which legged out after their debuts, natch), would give it a "mere" $177 million debut weekend. When your $200 million animated remake nabs a $78.5 million domestic Friday gross, there aren't a lot of pessimistic scenarios.
As far as the whole "What does this mean for cinema?" thing, well, I'm less annoyed at folks flocking to The Lion King (it's a new production of an old play) than I am at folks not also flocking to other stuff playing everywhere else. But The Lion King is, for good reason, an incredibly popular animated movie. Audiences seem to like this one more than critics (an A Cinemascore and an average 4.49/5 score in Rotten Tomatoes verified-user ratings). I wish we snobby film critics liked it more, but I just hope all of those families are buying lots of concessions to help subsidize the other movies playing to comparatively empty auditoriums.
It was a shocking scene. An enormously popular Hong Kong actor who has a number of American movie credits -- is in the hospital after a man jumped onstage and stabbed him ... and the dramatic scene plays out on video.
Actor Simon Yam -- who appeared in 'Lara Croft: Tomb Raider' -- was onstage Saturday for the opening of a new store in the southern province of China. He was speaking to the crowd when a man walked onstage, pulled out a knife from his pocket and lunged at Yam with the weapon, stabbing him in the abdomen. The assailant then follows up by slashing Yam and then trying to stab him a second time.
Security intervened and subdued the assailant, who was taken into custody.
64-year-old Yam, who also appeared in 'The Cradle of Life' starring Angelina Jolie, "Election," "Exiled" and many other movies, is recovering from abdomen wounds and wounds on his arm from the slashes.
