TomHanks Tagged Articles at Cinematical

A new adaptation (I refuse to use the word remake here) of Fahrenheit 451 has been in the works for ten years now. I was very excited by the news that Mel Gibson was planning it as a Braveheart follow-up, as it seemed like that would mark a new and serious phase of his directing career. I wish that was something I could have been right about.

Frank Darabont was the next one to take it on, and he's been attached to it since 2001, rewriting Terry Hayes' script and being delayed by everything from Indiana Jones IV, Mission Impossible III, The Mist, and Law Abiding Citizen. SciFi Wire caught up with Darabont at the Saturn Awards, and the director / writer declared that it was really time to get on with it already ... and that it might actually get underway this time, depending on whether or not the Big Name Actor he wants signs on.

"Fahrenheit is the thing I'm trying to get up next, which is casting-dependent, so it's one of those. I'm out to somebody at the moment, fingers crossed, because, boy, do I want to make that movie. I'm not giving up. I'll die in the traces before I don't make that movie ... It's not one of those movies that are vastly expensive by any contemporary standard, but money is still money, and it's of a price that requires somebody that will justify that investment. This is definitely going to be more than The Mist, so those other considerations do come into play."

You can go crazy wondering just who that Big Actor who can pull in the money and box office might be. Could it be someone that rumors have long attached, like Tom Hanks (Darabont's pick for years), Brad Pitt, or Tom Cruise? Or could we be looking at someone newly bankable, like Johnny Depp?

Let me make this clear: when I say that I'm compiling a list of the most contrived rom-com scenarios, I'm not saying that they're automatically the worst -- although a glance at the titles doesn't exactly stray far from that correlation. Tomorrow's The Proposal finds Sandra Bullock forcing Ryan Reynolds into marriage for the sake of holding off immigration authorities and keeping her/their jobs (I guess it's not too soon to remake Green Card and Picture Perfect after all), so we're talking about seven plot points along those lines of high-concept, close-quarters thinking, with some (dis)honorable mentions along the way...

With never-ending zeal, Hollywood looks back to the good ol' days with remakes and re-imaginings. But it's always the plots; always the stories. What about the actors? If there was any way that looking to the past would be beneficial, it would be grabbing those actors of today and getting them to dip back into the roles of yesterday -- the gigs that made us love them, but were so soon forgotten or cast aside.

Between casting ruts and earnest attempts to foster specific career paths, actors all too often leave their well-loved roots in the past, becoming an entirely different sort of performer. Very rarely do we get glimpses of those early years, and as nice as it is to see glimpses of former glory in a skit that pops up on SNL or Funny or Die, it's not the same as a feature-length, starring gig.

What follows are seven actors and actresses who are ripe for a return to the past. Naturally, this is only the start of a very long list, so be sure to add your picks in the comments.

Could Jennifer Love Hewitt and Jamie Kennedy be the next IT couple? Probably not, but that's not stopping them from bringing their romance to the big screen. The Hollywood Reporter posts that Hewitt and Kennedy are going to star in a new indie drama called Cafe from writer/director Marc Erlbaum. Hewitt will play an employee at the local West Philly Grounds coffee shop where Alexa Vega and other ensemble members stop by for a cup.

Already, "indie drama" separates this project from the likes of Kennedy's supremely cringe-worthy feature work, so I can't help but wonder: Is Jennifer the muse that will wipe away our reservations and give Jamie work more worthy of his post-Randy Meeks life?

Meanwhile, Rita Wilson is gearing up to write a new college comedy, according to Variety. Not only that -- she's going to star. Look out Rodney Dangerfield, Rita's going back to school. Titled Terms of Embarrassment, the film will focus on a middle-aged couple who end up attending the same college as their son.

Maybe I'm just being influenced by the other news bite here, but could this possibly be a film that will reunite her with hubbie Tom Hanks on the big screen? The pair haven't appeared together in a film since the '90s, and never one where they were the focus.

Over 4,000 Cinematical readers chimed in last week on our Star Trek 1-10 poll (um, wow), and though it's extremely close, as of now Trek is hanging in at the number 9 spot -- which, I believe, beats both X-Men Origins: Wolverine and Watchmen. That's a pretty tough number to top for any film, but Angels & Demons might be able to summon a whole bunch of good vibes from the gal upstairs and inch away with a perfect 10. Perhaps director Ron Howard and Tom Hanks combined to make a stellar sequel that takes the addictiveness of Dan Brown's novel and times it by twelve. Or not. All that's entirely up to you.

From Eric D. Snider's review: "Well, say what you will about Ron Howard as a director, but at least he's consistent. Angels & Demons, the Da Vinci Code sequel, is as overly serious as its predecessor, and poor Mr. Hanks -- the world's most likable man, for crying out loud! -- is still dour and intense. I get that saving the world from disaster is important business, and the characters may not have time to smile and joke and enjoy themselves. But is it too much to ask for it to be fun for the audience?"

But that's just one dude's opinion ... now tell us yours.

Part of the problem with the movie version of The Da Vinci Code was that it took itself too seriously. You had these people dashing around Europe, investigating obscure clues and uncovering outrageous conspiracies, but the only person who seemed to be having any fun with it was Ian McKellen. "Tom Hanks has never seemed so dull," I wrote in my review.

Well, say what you will about Ron Howard as a director, but at least he's consistent. Angels & Demons, the Da Vinci Code sequel, is as overly serious as its predecessor, and poor Mr. Hanks -- the world's most likable man, for crying out loud! -- is still dour and intense. I get that saving the world from disaster is important business, and the characters may not have time to smile and joke and enjoy themselves. But is it too much to ask for it to be fun for the audience?

Not having read Dan Brown's Angels & Demons novel (which actually came before Da Vinci, not after), I was able to find some entertainment in the mechanics of the plot -- not knowing how the mystery would be unraveled, curious to see what the clues would mean. The screenplay, by veteran action writer David Koepp (Panic Room) and Ron Howard regular Akiva Goldsman (A Beautiful Mind), basically adheres to a limited point of view -- we don't know any more than the Hanks character, Robert Langdon, does. For viewers who already know where things are going, there may not be much pleasure in watching Langdon figure it out, unless the movie has deviated significantly from the book.

Is there really much enthusiasm for a religious thriller this weekend? I realize that The Da Vinci Code made eleventy billion dollars worldwide despite widespread critical negativity, and that legions of fans support Dan Brown, Tom Hanks, and Ron Howard, but I'm not feeling the love for Angels & Demons, which opens on Friday.

I admit I'm biased. I managed to finish The Da Vinci Code, which was one of the most turgid, tortured, self-important works of fiction I've ever read, and don't have much regard for the movie version. I can understand why so many people went to see it, with the unbeatable combination of sensational subject matter, the promise of a thriller, and Tom Hanks' mullet. Yet how many came away satisfied, and demanding a sequel?

Early critical reaction to Angels & Demons has been tepid (54% at Rotten Tomatoes), but that didn't dissuade people before, so that probably won't be a factor. Our ace prognosticator Matt Bradshaw predicted that Angels & Demons would top the box office this weekend with $60 million, with J.J. Abrams' Star Trek dropping to the #2 spot after last weekend's $79.2 million haul. But could Star Trek retain its #1 position? The Movie Blog agrees with me on two points -- disappointment with The Da Vinci Code and lack of buzz for the sequel -- and also suggests that Star Trek's quality, excellent word of mouth, and expected repeat business could make the difference.

What do you think?

(Clockwise, from upper left: Splash, Philadelphia, Forrest Gump, Castaway, The Ladykillers, The Da Vinci Code.)

Our last two polls covered Star Trek : anticipated box office returns (most folks guessed too high) and 1-10 rating (most folks were very impressed). Those polls are still open, but we thought it was time to let our hair down and move on to this week's big opener: Tom Hanks in Ron Howard's dramatic thriller Angels & Demons.

Based on the novel by Dan Brown, Angels & Demons follows Professor Robert Langdon as he again uses his expert knowledge of symbology to uncover an international conspiracy involving the Catholic Church. Though the book was written before The Da Vinci Code, the events take place afterward. When Hanks and Howard previously teamed on the film adaptation in 2006, Hanks' hair got plenty of attention. As Eric D. Snider noted, "If you recall nothing else about The Da Vinci Code, surely you remember that Tom Hanks sported a ghastly mullet in it. So the important thing to know about Angels & Demons ... is that Hanks' hairstyle has been corrected. So that's a relief."

But did you love Hanks' "ghastly mullet" in The Da Vinci Code? Or are you a bigger fan of his earlier, funnier hairstyles in movies like Splash, his first collaboration with Howard? How about the Forrest Gump flat top? The Castaway outgrowth? Or the Colonel Sanders hair from The Ladykillers? Inspired by a classic post at TheJay.com, please take our silly little poll and tell us: What's your favorite Tom Hanks hairstyle?

When you're finished with that poll, head on over to Moviefone and vote for your favorite Tom Hanks performance.

I actually think this is sort of clever, in a "we can afford to do this" kind of way (which is more than I can say for The Da Vinci Code, am I right?!). Apparently, when the production of Angels & Demons had been refused permission to shoot key scenes in the Vatican, special effects director Ryan Cook had a team of people blend in with tourists and take about 250,000 pictures and shoot hours of video to use as reference back in Los Angeles.

Said Cook in an interview with an Italian movie magazine (then excerpted by The Scotsman, and further excerpted here): "The ban really put us in a lot of trouble because we could not use the precision instruments which are used to take photographs and make reconstructions in the computer."

On a mild tangent, I have to ask whether or not our readers are getting excited for the film itself. Of all the anticipation for summer blockbusters, and especially out of the May offerings, this seems to be the quietest title of the bunch (though twice-baked, half-volume controversy and the lack of a Cannes bow will do that to a film). I've only been assured that this book was better than its predecessor (I know, this one's a prequel), so did anyone here like Da Vinci? And whether you did or didn't care for that film, are any of you specifically psyched for round two?

[via MCN]

Dan Brown will finally get his Robert "he looks like Harrison Ford" Langdon film franchise as according to Variety, Columbia is already prepping to buy Brown's latest symbolist installment, The Lost Symbol. They have first rights to the book, as Sony already owns the rights to the character of Robert Langdon. (Were they able to actually buy Tom Hanks for all eternity, I wonder?)

Symbol was originally supposed to be published in 2006, but has been delayed repeatedly. Now Doubleday has the manuscript in hand, swears its thrilling, and has set a publication date of September 15. It already has a first print run of five million copies, which is actually small fry compared to the 81 million copies The DaVinci Code has sold.

No one knows what Symbol will be about other than it will feature the Freemasons, Washington D.C., and the Kryptos sculpture at the CIA . But where there's a secret organization, I think we can hazard a guess that we'll also find a religious coverup and the Catholic Church! I can't imagine that Brown will ever disappoint fans in that regard. I hope that Langdon runs around Washington D.C. with a copy of the Declaration of Independence which, when rubbed with lemon juice, tells where to find the True Cross, the Ark of the Covenant, and the Spear of Destiny. Throw in a beautiful brunette and an evil monk, and no one will remember Nicolas Cage.

Angels & Demons, Brown's latest Langdon film adaptation, will hit theaters on May 15.