Remakes and Sequels »

When Disney announced plans to remake The Black Hole, it seemed as though fans came out of the woodwork. A lot of people really, really love the original (it even attracted new fans like our William Goss) which definitely makes it touchy ground for a remake. So, you might be interested to know what Joseph Kosinski has in mind for it. The Tron: Legacy director dished on the super secret plot to MTV and the plans are intriguingly dark.

The film won't be a sequel or a prequel, but it won't be a shot-for-shot remake, either. It will be a "reimagining" that incorporates modern science and knowledge of black holes, but will keep the iconic and nightmarish elements from the first film. "I saw The Black Hole as a little kid," said Kosinski. "What sticks out most is the robot Maximilian. The blades and the vicious killing of Anthony Perkins. That freaked me out and that's definitely going to be an element that will be preserved. The design of the Cygnus ship is one of the most iconic spaceships ever put to film. From a conceptual point of view, we know so much more about black holes now, the crazy things that go on as you approach them due to the intense gravitational pull and the effects on time and space. All that could provide us with some really cool film if we embrace it in a hard science way."

Disney and hard science aren't two ideas that really go together, but then I was surprised by the level of sex and mayhem that went on in Pirates of the Caribbean. Perhaps The Black Hole will really be allowed to question free will, the nature of reality and consciousness. With killer robots. That might be a remake worth watching.

Today's pitch is sort of a last chance grab at any possibility of Warner Bros. not rebooting the Superman franchise yet again and instead letting Bryan Singer, or someone else, simply move forward from the underrated Superman Returns. I'm sure to be in my own boat here, especially since all the geeks are celebrating Christopher Nolan's reported involvement with version 3.0 of the superhero on film (if we're talking theatrical releases, isn't this version 5.0? And if we're talking all adaptations it's like version 10.6.2). Still, I'm going to once again make the case for...

Superman Returns 2

Of course it wouldn't be titled that. What an awkward title. But my point is that I'd like to see Singer's installment get a follow-up rather than another reboot. As I noted in my take on the pseudo Mr. & Mrs. Smith reboot yesterday, and as some commenters agreed, sequels are usually more desirable than reboots. I know, go on about Nolan's Batman franchise reboot. Well, a sequel can go in a new direction, too, without the lame connotations of a reboot. Or, it can be a combo like Singer's movie was. Superman Returns continued the original Superman series while also rebooting it. I'll admit I'm a wee bit torn on the idea, as I'd like to see Brandon Routh return but I could certainly do without Kate Bosworth -- though, if Nolan can switch it up with the female lead in his Batman films, they can do it with this, as well.

When we hear a ridiculous rumor, it's quite easy to become either incensed at the sheer audaciousness of the claim, or laugh it off as too stupid to be true. Take this latest goodie: Cinema Blend reports that a source at Universal Pictures claims that since audiences are expecting more from their movies, the studio wants to tap into the franchise pile for 3D magic, and are "strongly considering" a remake of Jaws "in hopes of dazzling younger audiences with new special effects."

The notion makes sense. If there's one movie that would look downright gorgeous in Real D 3D, it's Jaws. However, folks, that's not all. That same insider claims that Tracy Morgan has been considered for the role of Richard Dreyfus' Matt Hooper, but it's "uncertain" whether he's still in the running. To hedge their gossip bets, Cinema Blend states that this is a new source and could be hooey just as much as it could be truth.

It's easy to shudder when thinking of a comedic Jaws led by Morgan, because the thought sounds downright terrible, but let's back up. See that shark up there with the super-visible robot metal in his mouth? That's the big beast of Jaws 4. After that monstrosity of moviemaking, is it really that ridiculous to imagine Morgan facing off against a 3D shark?

It's either the stupidest, most moronic rumor of the year, or a sad reminder of where Hollywood is heading in the future. You make the call ...

It's a bird, it's a plane ... it's Warner Bros. asking Christopher Nolan to pretty please resurrect their Superman franchise and do something cool with it! According to Deadline Hollywood, Nolan has been asked to come in and sort of "mentor" the next Superman movie, and it won't be a sequel to Superman Returns, but instead the beginning of a brand new franchise. Furthermore, DH says Nolan probably won't direct -- especially since David Goyer, Jonah Nolan and Chris Nolan are all busy planning and writing the next Batman installment as we speak -- so what will he do, exactly, when it comes to the new Superman? That's not clear yet, and DH stresses that the film is still in its real early stages of development (ahem, I think they're bringing him in to lay the groundwork for a Justice League movie, but we'll see ...)

Still, knowing Nolan is somehow involved in the rebirth of Superman should at the very least breathe some excited life into a franchise that a lot of folks have kinda lost faith in because, let's face it, the fans feel Warner Bros. had lost faith in it, too. One insider told DH, "We know what we don't want to do. But we don't know what we want to do. We learned a lot from the last movie, and we want to get it right this time." Obviously Nolan has success in rebooting a DC Comics franchise, as evidenced by the work he's done with Batman. But Superman is a different beast all together, and one imagines they'll start with trying to ground the franchise a bit more with a freakier set of villains and perhaps a more relatable, down-to-earth storyline. Not that we need Clark Kent making MySpace references for 120 minutes, but I could see them focusing more on the burden Superman is carrying -- that "weight of the world" angle -- and less on his little romance with Lois Lane.

What do you think? What would you like to see them do with the new Superman?

Everyone has been mildly interested to see who would win the Terminator franchise rights after Halcyon Holding Corp. went into bankruptcy. (Come on, we all wanted Joss Whedon to get it.) Last we knew, Lionsgate was the leading contender to win the rights to making more chronicles of John Connor. But according to Deadline Hollywood Daily, the bidding has ended, and the winner? Pacificor, the Santa Barbara hedge fund that had loaned Halcyon the money to buy Terminator in the first place. Halcyon failed in their loan payments, forcing Pacificor to come after them, which they tried to head off by filing their own lawsuit. But now the slate has apparently been wiped clean to the tune of $29 million dollars.

Sony and Lionsgate did place bids, and even united to bid together once the first round was over. But both dropped out at $29.5 million when it became clear that Pacificor was willing to pay any amount necessary to win the Terminator rights. Reportedly, Sony's Peter Schlessel was "furious" at how the auction went down and stormed out of the building. Was that because he really, really wanted Sony to have Terminator? Was he just mad that he wasted his evening? Or is everyone as weirded out by the shadowy business practices as we on the outside are?

The sale must be approved by bankruptcy court, so there could still be another chapter to the sad saga. What Pacificor plans to do with the franchise is anyone's guess, but I suspect that Terminator will be something so tied up in legal red tape and rights that we won't see another film for a long, long time.

Just when we started to get used to what could become a really fun Halloween box office to-the-death match-up between the Saw franchise and the up-and-coming Paranormal Activity franchise comes word that in all probability Saw VII will mark the final installment in the franchise. Speaking to a UK radio show, Saw IV, V, VI and VII co-writer Patrick Melton revealed that while the plan was to continue making Saw films until at least part eight, the lackluster box office showing for Saw VI has pretty much put the nail in this franchise's coffin.

Melton says (via Latino Review), "I think it's going to end with Saw VII. I have a very strong feeling its going to end with Saw VII. That's something we're debating now. You saw in previous interviews or discussions where we thought Saw VIII would be the last one where we had the first trilogy and the second trilogy and then sort of a grand finale wrapped up in two films. But frankly because Saw VI hasn't performed as well as we anticipated, the idea is well why make two movies when we can make one really excellent movie that wraps up as best we can? And it's going to be in 3-D which sort of adds to the spectacle. So if you had to ask me, I don't own the franchise, nor do I run the studio, but I have a feeling, a strong feeling that it's going to be Saw VII which will be also known as Endgame. And nothing's official yet, but that's where we're hoping things will go."

I'm sure I'm not the only person who likes Doug Liman's Mr. & Mrs. Smith. But I might be the only person who considers it a masterpiece. The problem is, I don't really know how to defend it without sounding like a bad combo of fanboy and academic. Saying it's the best action movie interpretation of the comedy of remarriage subgenre since Twister surely isn't bringing anyone to my side, even if they are fans of both Twister and classic screwball comedies of the '30s and '40s.

Regardless of my inability to properly convince people of how perfect Mr. & Mrs. Smith is, I'm sure I can get enough people to agree with me that Fox should not dismiss the film by trying again with a sort of remake/reboot. According to Vulture, the production company New Regency, which operates out of the Fox lot and through its distribution, and original producer Akiva Goldsmith are hoping for a new franchise this time around with a prequel/origins movie (now titled Mr. and Mrs. Jones) that recasts the title characters, originally played by Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt.

New Line must be pretty happy with Valentine's Day, the new Garry Marshall rom-com that hits theaters this Friday. It hasn't even been released yet, and the studio is already prepping a follow-up. Variety reports that they're getting ready for a spin-off of the ensemble comedy, and they expect Marshall to come back and direct.

Titled New Year's Eve, the film will deal with a big Fourth of July celebration. No, I kid. Shooting late this year for release at the end of 2011, the film will tackle New Year's Eve celebrations, and it will include "some" of the characters from Valentine's Day. I'm assuming that "some" will be whomever is interested in continuing on the romance train. Katherine Fugate is returning to write the feature, and the producers are back; it's pretty much a repeat of the last film.

Since the first isn't out yet, it would be a wee bit hard to muse over what the follow-up will be like. However, I'm eager to see what happens with Eric Dane and Bradley Cooper. If you caught my post last week, their relationship has been well hidden by the film's marketing department, and as a reader who has seen the film commented, "they're still the only couple in the movie that never touch one another, let alone kiss." Maybe it's all riding on the sequel.

As the writers slave over another draft of the Ghostbusters 3 script -- with production hopefully beginning later this year -- some more news regarding the film's storyline has slipped out across these internets, with one aspect being an exclusive to Cinematical.

Possible spoilers for Ghostbusters 3 to follow ...

First up is the news that Bill Murray has confirmed his other-worldly role in the film. A few months back, Sigourney Weaver had let slip that Murray was going to be playing a ghost in the film -- a rumor that was later squashed by folks who claimed that particular storyline was featured in a very old draft. However, Murray has now gone on record as not only disliking the second Ghostbusters movie (something he's said before) and thinking that Groundhog Day should've been a bigger hit, but also noting that he would only return to the Ghostbusters franchise if they made his character a ghost. He says, "I said to them, 'I'll do it if you kill me off in the first reel.' So now they are going to have me as a ghost in the film." Murray as a ghost? I hope it works. What do you think?

Meanwhile, as most talk revolves around the returning actors and the identity of the new recruits, little has been said about the film's mythology and who (or what) the Ghostbusters will be battling this time around. Well, Cinematical has it on very good authority that as recent as this past summer, the central mythology of the sequel was being based on Zoroastrianism, which is one of the earliest religions on record. Like with most religions, the war between good and evil is at its central core, and in terms of evil there's Ahriman: the god of darkness, the eternal destroyer of good, personification and creator of evil, bringer of death and disease.

Is Ahriman the film's villain?

Since damn near everything that opens in wide release these is either a sequel or a remake, and since I feel some obligation to at least sample anything that qualifies as a "cultural phenomenon," whether or not I like it, I usually find myself hoping for the best from franchises that haven't much impressed me in the past. One reason for optimism – or at least for less existential dread – about the 2010 release schedule is that a number of thus far middling-to-terrible franchises appear to have been taken over by obviously talented filmmakers who stand a chance of making this year's installments of their respective series at least tolerable. Certainly any doubts I had about whether I was going to watch these latest franchise entries disappeared once I found out who was directing them.

The franchise: Twilight. So far, Catherine Hardwicke (Thirteen, Lords of Dogtown) and Chris Weitz (About a Boy, The Golden Compass) have delivered two dull-as-nails installments of this wuss-vampire franchise, though Weitz's New Moon did at least appear to pick up some steam as a teen soap opera, if not (at all) as a thriller or a horror flick.