Sony Tagged Articles at Cinematical

Back in August, we reported that the Terminator franchise was in some serious legal and financial trouble. The rights are currently owned by the Halcyon Company, who have managed to make more court appearances than they have films. They were in danger of losing the rights to their hedge fund, Pacificor, who was poised to claim them if Halcyon defaulted on their loan.

But according to The Financial Times, Halcyon has now filed for bankruptcy after their lawsuit with Pacificor, and is selling off the rights to Terminator. It would appear that filing for Chapter 11 afforded their precious franchise some protection from the hedge fund, and they can now sell it to bail themselves out. The sale will be conducted by FTI Capital Advisors, and does not cover rights to the earlier Terminator films.

The Times notes that this auction is coming at a particularly tough time for Hollywood, who is feeling the economic crunch just like everyone else. But it notes that Terminator is one of the rare "blockbuster brands" not controlled by a big studio, and that alone has may drooling at the chance to control future properties. Summit is said to be particularly interested (they can probably pay for it just out of Twilight proceeds), as is Sony and Media Rights Capital. But remember, this is America! Everyone has a chance at destroying mankind, and if you have millions (estimates put the sale beyond $60 million, the benchmark set by the sale of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles), you can buy them for yourself. I would have faith in something other than John Connor if a Cinematical reader took the reins of this franchise.

Take THAT Roland Emmerich! The problem with these end-of-the-world movies, like 2012, is that when they come out people sometimes freak because they actually believe the world is coming to an end. The marketing strategy for the upcoming Roland Emmerich film doesn't help either, since it seems the studio wants people to believe the 2012 Mayan prophecy -- so much so that they've gone and created a whole slew of fake websites and Facebook pages tied to the film and tied to the Mayan legend. Of course, this sort of fluff may help the film's box office take when it hits theaters, but it certainly doesn't help the folks at NASA who've been fielding thousands of emails from people who, thanks to the movie and its marketing plan, think the world is ending in 2012.

Says NASA scientist David Morrison, "I don't have anything against the movie. It's the way it's been marketed and the way it exploits people's fears." To dispute some of these claims, Morrison has taken to a new online column where he's been answering questions about 2012 and the mysterious planet Nibiru.

So what does he really think about the Mayan calendar ending on that specific date in 2012? In his column, Morrison says: "Calendars exist for keeping track of the passage of time, not for predicting the future. The Mayan astronomers were clever, and they developed a very complex calendar. Ancient calendars are interesting to historians, but they cannot match the ability we have today to keep track of time, or the precision of the calendars currently in use ...

Read the rest over at SciFi Squad

I can't wait for the day when Spider-Man 4 leaves the world of speculation, and moves before the camera. Until that day, we can enjoy plenty of rumors and hints as to who or what Spidey will be battling in #4.

Sam Raimi recently gave a few more riddles to the MTV Splash Page, revealing that they still don't have a villain for Spider-Man 4. While Raimi "loves" the story of the Lizard, the Spider-Man team isn't exactly looking to tie up those little mentions of Dr. Curt Connors. Instead, look for a baddie who will toy with Peter's internal and external demons a little bit: "What we're trying to do right now is really understand the journey Peter is going to go on this time and have the villain maybe be a counter to that growth, something that he has to overcome. Or maybe he has to grow in a way to overcome the villain, because there always seem to be stories of coming of age, of a young man growing up and learning things about life, so once we are identifying the exact movement that Peter has to grow to, I think the villain-and we're trying this right now; we're trying to choose a villain based on who would be the proper counter to that growth, so we really have dramatic conflict."

With several drafts and screenwriters behind them, and Spider-Man 4 set to go before cameras in March or April, I'm honestly surprised they still don't have a villain in mind. Naturally, Raimi might be exaggerating and they are working with one (there's a coy "I can't say" at the beginning), but I find its sketchiness a bit troubling. What about you, Cinematical readers and Spidey fans?And does Raimi's latest riddle give you any indication of who the villain might be?

I'd like to buy a drink for whoever coined the term disaster porn, which describes the essence of the last half of 2012 director Roland Emmerich's career, and I'd like to buy two drinks for the folks at White Colours Studios, who took the recent five-minute clip from Sony's 2012 "roadblock" promo stunt and edited it down to a lean one minute and twenty-six seconds showcasing precisely what everyone wants to see from a disaster porn movie about the destruction of Earth and everyone on it: the acting. That's right, gone are all those pesky explosions, falling buildings, crashing cars, diving planes, and sinking Californias. All that's left in the clip below are the reaction shots of the film's corporeal stars, in this particular case Amanda Peet and John Cusack.

Not only is the clip the most amusing bit of fan-editing I've seen since Shia LaBeouf's "No-no-no-no" montage, it's actually an interesting little experiment that distills precisely how much substance there is to big-budget disaster films (and by substance I mean yelling). If Sony's 5-minute promo is indicative of the rest of the movie, and I have no reason to believe it isn't, 2012 consists of about 20% acting, 80% disaster porn, which is honestly a higher proportion of things going boom and then falling into the ocean than I expected.

Most of us didn't ask the Studio Powers That Be for a Ghost Rider 2, but it doesn't matter, because we'll be getting one. Back in January, the whispers began at Bloody-Disgusting that Columbia was gearing up another Ghost Rider run, and today it has come true. Variety reports that the studio is talking to none other than David S. Goyer to pen a new installment. Nicolas Cage is expected to return as Johnny Blaze, and former Marvel Studios' head Avi Arad will be producing.

Goyer was quick to say (via a spokesperson) that he wasn't officially signed, but that talks were underway to base Ghost Rider 2 on a script he did many years ago. If you'd like to know a little something about that script, you can read a review IGN did of it in 2000. Nothing ever dies thanks to the Internet and if nothing else, you can laugh at the rumors we once believed a decade ago. (Johnny Depp as Ghost Rider!)

At such early stages of fiery fuel injection, there's not much else to say. Since Mark Steven Johnson penned and directed the last one, it's probably safe to assume that if they want new writers, they'll probably want a new director. Variety hints that Columbia is keeping the property alive in order to retain its rights from Marvel, but it doesn't say whether or not they were up against a deadline. So, I'll quit talking and hand it over to the true Ghost Rider fans. Is there any hope for this one if Goyer gets involved? Anything you want to see from a particular Ghost Rider run? Speak up now, and maybe you can influence its pre-production.

Ever flip through the channels during a commercial break only to find the same commercial on another network? It may seem like a coincidence, but it's actually called roadblock advertising. And I hope you're looking forward to Roland Emmerich's upcoming disaster-porn 2012, because Sony is throwing millions of dollars at all of the major networks in an attempt to be damn sure you see 2 minutes of the film on October 1st.

According to Variety, Sony's diabolical stunt plan is to have "the footage in front of 90% of all households watching ad-supported TV, or nearly 110 million viewers. When combined with online and mobile streams, that could increase to more than 140 million".

If that's not enough of an overdose on the Mayan-predicted-apocalypse loving film before it even opens this November 13th, Variety further explains that Comcast is actually going to be running a hype campaign announcing the roadblock campaign: "Comcast will launch a multi-million dollar promotional campaign on its cable networks and online to hype the roadblock, which will air on ABC, NBC and CBS, 89 cable networks, local stations in the top 70 markets, and Spanish-language networks throughout the U.S. between 10:50 p.m. and 11:00 p.m. on the West and East coasts, with the hours varying across the rest of the country."

I told you that He Man and the Masters of the Universe would find a new home. Mere weeks after being booted out of Warner Bros, Variety reports that the once and future king of Eternia has found a new home at Sony. As you might remember, Joel Silver and Warner Bros were unable to agree on a direction for He-Man, and Mattel promptly took its toys and went elsewhere.

But if you really dug everything to do with Warner Bros' version (which was reportedly titled Greyskull), you'll have some cause for lament. Sony plans on starting with an entirely clean slate, which means John Stevenson will no longer be directing, and that all the script work by Justin Marks and Evan Daugherty will be scrapped. All of those concepts belong to Warner Bros, not Mattel, who was only able to bring Sony the action figure.

One also has to be concerned with just who will be overseeing He-Man's latest incarnation. Escape Artists will be developing the project for Sony, and they've been responsible for The Taking of Pelham 123 remake, Knowing, Seven Pounds, and The Pursuit of Happyness. Without writers, a director, or cast attached, I don't want to predict doom and gloom but is that the kind of resume that screams success for He-Man?

It's as inevitable as the tides. Once something becomes a genuine industry to the tune of a $4 billion dollar marriage, the lawsuits quickly follow. On the heels of the Siegel and Shuster lawsuits that dismantled the world of Clark Kent comes a lawsuit from the estate of Jack Kirby that targets all things Marvel. According to The New York Times, the Kirby heirs have sent 45 notices of copyright infringement to Marvel, Disney, Paramount, Fox, Sony, Universal, Hasbro, and just about everyone else in the world. Kirby created (or co-created alongside Stan Lee) just about all the big Marvel characters so anyone using them must now face the the Kirbys and Toberoff & Associates. (The same law firm that handled the Siegel and Shuster lawsuits, which is no coincidence.)

The Kirbys seek to win the copyrights back to Hulk, Thor, Iron Man, X-Men, Fantastic Four, etc., and claim some (or all) of the profits. If they win back the copyright, it wouldn't kick in until 2014 so presumably they wouldn't be able to claim the "back profits" the characters have made, but anything going forward would be a problem. As Bleeding Cool notes, Disney and Marvel will always own the trademarks, and the movie studios would probably also be safe in their acquisitions, but continuing to publish anything Kirby created would be problematic.

The attorney Marc Toberoff declined to comment on the case, but Disney released an official statement that shrugged off the lawsuit, noting "the notices involved are an attempt to terminate rights 7 to 10 years from now, and involve claims that were fully considered in the acquisition." This will undoubtedly be a case fraught with as many tangles as the Siegel and Shuster suit was. Will Marvel end up owning Iron Man's armor, but the Kirbys will own Tony Stark and Pepper Potts? Will it create problems for Marvel Studios down the line? We shall watch and see.

Charges that Neill Blomkamp's science fiction blockbuster District 9 was racist began popping up almost immediately upon the film's release back in August. Considering the film features an in-over-their-head South African government that allows a mega-corporation to quarantine and exploit an entire alien race, one may assume the obvious core parable for apartheid was at the heart of the racism charges, but aliens-in-a-concentration-camp was not the bullseye of most accusations. The actual problem some people had was with the portrayal of a Nigerian gang that illegally traded alien technology when not mutilating and devouring unsuspecting aliens in crude shaman-led rituals intended to imbue them with extraterrestrial powers, so to speak.

Nothing much came of the hullabaloo until recently, when the film found its way into Nigerian movie theaters. According to a BBC report on the matter, "The information minister said she had ordered the Nigerian film and video censors' board to ask all cinemas to stop showing the film and to confiscate it. "I have also formally written to Sony Pictures Entertainment, the company that produced this film, demanding an unconditional apology for this unwarranted attack on Nigeria's image," she added."

Now you can mark your calenders, and make a note to pre-buy your IMAX tickets for two of the most highly anticipated geek movies of 2010 and 2011. According to The Hollywood Reporter, Tron: Legacy is getting an IMAX release to coincide with its ordinary theatrical print on December 17, 2010. The film was not actually shot for the IMAX format, but Disney will be digitally remastering the film in order to produce a super-sized version for IMAX theaters. Someone with more technical knowledge will have to tell me if that's a good or bad way to release a film in IMAX, because I'm baffled beyond "Wow, look how big the screen is!" I'm honestly surprised Tron: Legacy wasn't shot with IMAX cameras because if there ever was a film begging to use the technology to the fullest extent, it's this one.

Spider-Man 4 also has its IMAX dates booked. It's set to go wide in IMAX and conventional multiplexes on May 6, 2011. This has been standard for Spidey, as all three films have been released onto IMAX screens. The official press release didn't mention whether the fourth will actually be shot using IMAX cameras, but the general belief online is that it won't.

Presumably by 2011, real IMAX screens (as opposed to those faux imitations) will be more readily available so that more moviegoers can benefit from the experience. It would be even better if the price came down a bit. Maybe I'm just a cheapskate (probably) but it's hard to justify an IMAX Experience for every genre movie, and I'm not sure I see that changing for a lot of people by 2011.