willow Tagged Articles at Cinematical

Sean Connery did it, Joaquin Phoenix apparently did it, and countless other actors, actresses and filmmakers have talked about it at one point or another -- leaving us, along with the pages of People Magazine, to wonder when, how or what if. It's funny, too, because you don't find many people who want to retire from the entertainment business, simply because most either never make it, fall out of the spotlight or wind up overdosing on drugs, their own ego or something along those lines wayyy before they'd ever reach an age to retire at. But here's a good question: Could the fans at home ever force someone into retirement?

Our good friend Jenna Busch wrote a little thing for Sci Fi Wire on nine reasons why George Lucas should retire ... like, now. Say what you want about Lucas and his career choices, but the man definitely still has his fans -- as poor Jenna is feeling the fanboy wrath in the comments section of her post. Her reasons, of course, mention Lucas' "additions" to the original Star Wars films, the fact that he refuses to release any of his flicks in hi-def, his work on both Willow and Howard the Duck (two awesome guilty pleasures, in my opinion), etc ...

While I've thrown more than a few internet punches at Lucas over the years, I have to say I'm really enjoying the Clone Wars animated show on Cartoon Network (seriously, watch it), I didn't loathe Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull as much as the rest of you did, and I feel Lucas still has a few good chunks of awesomeness left in him. That said, you all (including the lovely Jenna) may feel differently. So have at it below: Should Lucas retire?

As much as I complain about CGI in movies, I do recognize and respect the few films that have used computer effects well. The truth is, some bad movies have great digital effects that go under-appreciated, which is far more tragic than the so-so movies that are ruined by weak CGI. Sure, Tron is a guilty pleasure for me and many others, but its only real worth is in its place in film history. Other movies that are important for their advancement of digital effects include Forrest Gump, Cliffhanger and The Perfect Storm -- none of which needs to be thought of for any other reason.

Popular Mechanics has listed these four films with six other (better) milestones. Many of them are not surprises; everybody thinks of Terminator 2: Judgment Day when thinking of significant digital effects, even though it wasn't even the first movie to feature morphing (Willow is not included in the ten, but it is referenced). Jurassic Park is also obvious, but then, this isn't really an opinion-based list. It is a chronological top ten based on real, monumental breakthroughs. There are a few on the list, such as Cliffhanger, that I didn't even know were of importance. Did you know it was the first film to use digital effects as an eraser?

So, I may have to take a look at this list whenever I'm about to curse the existence of computer effects. A lot of the worst effects are appropriately featured in movies that are already terrible, anyway (personally, I think The Lord of the Rings and its CGI fall into this worst/terrible category, but I probably shouldn't be admitting this, especially since it is on the list).

What do you think was the most important advancement in special effects history (pre-digital era included)?

Related stories:

Visual Effects Oscar Down to 7 Contenders

Ray Harryhausen's Greatest Hits

With the release of Little Man, I was shocked to find no protests from little people. Is this movie not the worst representation of dwarfs in decades? Though I'm not sure if the actors playing Marlon Wayans' body are actual little people, it must be insulting that a real little person isn't playing the "vertically-challenged" character. Wasn't it bad enough that The Lord of the Rings trilogy didn't use dwarfs as hobbits? Basically Little Man backtracks the portrayal of little people and makes them out to be freaks once again.

So, I'd like to take this opportunity to salute the little people in movies. They are in fact all over the big screen, mostly as stand-ins and stunt-doubles for children, but once in awhile they are really celebrated with prominent roles. These roles have decreased, though, since CGI replaced many creature characters so we have fewer little people dressed as Ewoks, robots and other sci-fi/fantasy inventions. I chose seven films I think are quite significant in the showcasing of individual little people. I've deliberately left out Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs on account it obviously doesn't use actual little people, and I've also omitted The Wizard of Oz since there are no real standouts, only a lot of dressed-up extras.

Joss Whedon's Buffy fans have been teased and tantalized lately with persistent rumors of a return to the Buffyverse, most likely in the form of spin-off movies. Such movies would either be made for TV or direct-to-DVD, and would focus around "supporting" characters from the original series. Among the most popular characters for a rumored starring movie role (probably the second most desired after Spike) is Alyson Hannigan's Willow. Her name has been mentioned several times in connection with these rumors, but Alyson has said recently that she doesn't expect any action on this front. She says he has heard the rumors like everyone else, but seriously doubts that Joss would have the time to work on such a project - and she would not want to be involved if Joss wasn't in control, saying "I'm sure he would get great people, but there's nothing like the Joss touch." According to Alyson, if a movie would ever happen, a Spike title film would be the natural first step anyway, not Willow.

Hey, look at that...Joss Whedon is mortal after all, and is apparently bound by some form of time constraints, even if they are thrice the capacity of a normal human. I think Alyson is very wise in suggesting that a movie without Joss in control would lack whatever magic the series contained; and she's probably also right in suggesting that a Spike film would come first anyway. Thoughts, Whedonites?

Just two days before it hits international screens, Ron Howard's The Da Vinci Code will have its world premiere at the Cannes Film Festival. The film - which will be screening out of competition - is set to open the Festival on May 17, thus giving the film a final media push (because, you know, it will desperately need more publicity) as it kicks off what is expected to be a massive box office bonanza. For the huddled French masses who can't get tickets to Cannes' opening night, the movie will open in cinemas nation-wide on the same day, thus giving the French a leg up on the rest of us. Damn them!

An interesting tidbit regarding Howard's Cannes history: his first visiting to the festival was in 1988 when he appeared with, of all things, Willow. (Don't get me wrong here - Willow rocks. But at Cannes? It's hard for me to imagine "Willow! Use the stick!" reverberated over the heads of critics and Hollywood royalty.)

[via Dark Horizons]