Apparently Prometheus has given him a taste for revisiting past successes. Yes, Sir Ridley of Scott has, according to Deadline New York, signed up to "direct and produce" a new film that is in some way related to his 1982 classic, Blade Runner (see FilmVerdict Blu-ray Review). Just like Prometheus is in some way related to Alien - in that case, all the signs point towards a prequel.
Whether Blade Runner's new cinematic offspring will take the form of a prequel, sequel, side-quel or whatever remains completely up in the air. I'd be most interested if Harrison Ford came back to reprise his role from the first film. How cool would it be to see an old, washed up Deckard try to reclaim some past glory? Unfortunately that's unlikely for many reasons. The main one is that Ford has made no secret of loathing the whole filming experience first time round. However, Ford is not the box office draw he once was, Cowboys & Aliens having recently slightly flopped, and he has, of course, proven willing to reprise an old character in the case of Indiana Jones.
The fact is that Blade Runner's world is endlessly fascinating and looks great, so the material is ripe for new exploration. However, I'd be completely against this if it was from anyone other than Scott himself. A small pipe dream that surely won't come to fruition is that he uses the same effects technology as the last one - say no to CGI. And hey, Doug Trumbull has just worked on The Tree of Life, so he's still on his game, right?
So, revisiting Alien, Blade Runner... next, it'll be the long awaited Gladiator sequel.*
Warner Bros aren't dumb. What do you do when you have a dead-cert runaway hit on the cards? Attach a trailer to the front of it for the next one. Yup, the final Harry Potter released this last weekend had the first teaser for The Dark Knight Rises attached to it. Now it's online...
My take? Well, there's not much to have an opinion on, but the very brief glimpses of new footage (most of it's actually from Batman Begins rather than The Dark Knight) are suitably tantalising, and the logo made out of buildings is nifty. The allusions to Begins are hopefully suggesting a stylistic connection - I preferred that one in terms of its visuals and atmosphere. Certainly new big bad Bane (Tom Hardy, from Inception) looks suitably menacing. No hint of Selena Kyle/Catwoman (Anne Hathaway), however.
Really, trailers are almost redundant for this film. You could just put the title on the screen with the release date for two minutes and people would applaud.
On that subject - I don't like the title. It sounds awkward, especially grouped with the other two (it really should have been The Dark Knight Begins, in retrospect). And everything is 'Rising' these days. Including those damn dirty apes.
'Tis the season to release new film trailers at the moment - trailers for the big films set to light up our screens come awards season and early next year. Since there have been a boatload of very tantalising first looks released in the last few days - with more imminent - I thought I'd collate them all here, with a few of my own thoughts. As ever, the relase dates refer to the UK.
The Adventures of Tintin: The Secret of the Unicorn
What is it? Steven Spielberg's collaboration with Peter Jackson (the former directing, the latter producing) of Herge's very popular - outside the US - comic book character. It's the 'Berg's first ever wholly mo-cap effort. When's it out? 26 October in the UK - 2 months before America. TrailerVerdict: They're still evidently nervous about the popularity of the motion capture style, so there are only brief glimpses of faces, and most importantly, eyes. Nevertheless I quite like the look of it - it seems to be Spielberg having the sort of adventurous fun we haven't seen in a while. It seems like Andy Serkis is again going to steal the show - his Captain Haddock looks like easily the most convincing character. Jamie Bell's Tintin sounds a bit dull though.
War Horse
What is it? Spielberg's been a busy boy - this is his film adaptation of Michael Morpurgo's story, currently receiving raves on stage too. Set during World War 2, it's about the relationship between a boy and a horse, but is apparently much better than it sounds. When's it out? 13 January. TrailerVerdict: Looks pretty stunning. Great to see Spielberg filming in Britain again, and giving plenty of exposure to our beautiful countryside. Certain to be a Best Picture contender.
Hugo
What is it? Martin Scorsese's first 3D film, apparently a family fantasy film about a kid who lives in a train station. Originally called the infinitely less bland The Invention of Hugo Cabret. When's it out? 2 December. TrailerVerdict: It'll be fascinating to see what the Maestro does with 3D, and whether he can reinject some excitement into an already fading novelty. The trailer looks interesting, with an impressive scale, although you'd never guess it was from Scorsese.
John Carter
What is it? Pixar's first live action venture, directed by Andrew Stanton (Finding Nemo, Wall-E). It's the adaptation of Edgar Rice Burrough's A Princess of Mars, the first in his John Carter of Mars trilogy, 100 years since its publication. A romantic sci-fi/fantasy epic, by the looks of things. When's it out? 9 March 2012. TrailerVerdict: Ugh, what a boring title - what's wrong with John Carter of Mars? And why the obsession with just putting a name in a title? I was actually more excited about this before seeing the trailer, as it looks a bit... naff, but I'm well prepared to be won over. It certainly has an original design aesthetic and the retention of period setting is a welcome touch. I love me a good sci-fi epic. (Is it just me, though, or should Mars be a bit, well, redder? It just looks like a desert on Earth...)
The Thing
What is it? A prequel to John Carpenter's 1982 masterpiece, in which a shapeshifting alien nasty is dug up in Antarctica, then goes about killing people and impersonating others. Cue lots of paranoia and suspicion. When is it out? 14 October. TrailerVerdict: It's apparently a prequel, but looks a lot like a remake with a woman in the lead (Mary Elizabeth Winstead, trying to be the new Ripley it seems). They seem to have nailed the look, but it concerns me that the phenomenal practical effects of the original - still amazing - will be dumped in favour of generic CGI. I can't help but notice too that despite being set in a Norwegian base, everyone seems to speak American. Nice shout-out to Carpenter's theme music at the end there.
Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows
What is it? Sequel to Sherlock Holmes, again directed by Guy Ritchie, this time with added Moriarty. When is it out? 16 December. TrailerVerdict: I've grown into quite a fan of the first Downey-as-Holmes flick, so I'm looking forward to this one a lot. The trailer sells a much larger, more international scale for this one, but still with the emphasis on humourand that great steampunk look. Anachronisms abound and I'm not expecting high art, but this should be the hit of Christmas - especially with no Avatar to go up against this time.
Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol
What is it? Mission: Impossible 4 in everything but name, directed by Brad Bird. Can Tom Cruise revive his A-list career? And the biggest question of all, where do you put the colon in the title? Jeremy Renner looks like he's about to step into Cruise shoes in this franchise. When's it out? 26 December, the first non-summer M:I movie after the lacklustre showing of the last one. TrailerVerdict: Yep, looks like a Mission: Impossible movie all right, and a pretty impressive one at that. I remain surprised that Brad Bird left Pixar to make a third sequel, but he definitely has the skills to produce a cracking action spectacular. Looks like Cruise's love of scaling tall things continues - this time he's on the world's new tallest building in Dubai.
The Pirates! Band of Misfits
What is it? Aardman's first feature film since Flushed Away ended their DreamWorks deal, The Pirates! is a claymation comedy of piratical proportions. When's it out? TBC Spring 2012. TrailerVerdict: Looks fan-bloody-tastic, and absolutely hilarious! Funny that no-one's tried to cash in on the success of Pirates of the Caribbean, but this looks altogether more loony and delightfully British too. Great to see Aardman back on the big screen, and loving that they're keeping hold of the old-fashioned physical animation - it has a character and artistry all its own.
Phew. That's all for this instalment of Trailerama. Coming soon, The Dark Knight Rises and The Amazing Spider-Man, amongst, no doubt, many others!
The cast of the upcoming, as yet untitled, new James Bond adventure is coming together, and it's looking rather tasty.
CHUD.com reports (via Daily Mail) that now Naomie Harris has been cast, and the speculation is that she's taking the part of Miss Moneypenny. If true, that would make it Moneypenny's first appearance in the Daniel Craig era (the appropriately named Samantha Bond played her during Pierce Brosnan's tenure), and could signal a return to more of the traditional Bond staples. How long till we see a new Q? I would welcome the embrace of classic Bond elements - after Casino Royale's brilliant rebirth, Quantum of Solace failed to even feel like a Bond movie.
Harris has been rumoured for a while - she's interviewed in the latest Empire, and says she'd love to be in a Bond film. I'd be a little surprised though if she does play Moneypenny, rather than this instalment's Bond girl, given the recurring, yet low key, nature of the role.
Anyway, if true, this adds Harris to a cast that includes Voldemort himself Ralph Feinnes and the brilliant Javier Bardem. Behind the camera is Sam Mendes (American Beauty, Road to Perdition), who's joined by almost-peerless director of photography Roger Deakins, and John Logan (Gladiator, The Aviator) has had a hand in the screenplay. That's a set of impressive names. Some have suggested this may be Daniel Craig's last Bond, due to the four years that will have elapsed since Quantum, but his contract has apparently one further film left on it.
The biggest question left now is what the title will be. The only Fleming titles left are Portrait of a Lady (possible) or 007 In New York (er, unlikely). I'd wager on an original name.
Bond 23, whatever it's called, debuts in October 2012 - and will mark the 50th anniversary of Dr. No.
Pixar, one of the world's most reliably brilliant studios, are facing some unfamiliarly bad buzz for this year's output, Cars 2. For the first time, it seems they're making a film purely for the money rather than some sort of artistic ambition. (Cars is their most profitable film in terms of merchandise sales.) I'm in the apparent minority of grown-ups who really liked Cars, but even I can't see much reason for a sequel.
Next year, however, their once-a-year-release schedule brings us the much more intriguing-sounding Brave, formerly titled The Bear and the Bow. Official Disney synopsis: "Set in Scotland in a rugged and mythical time, "Brave" features Merida,
an aspiring archer and impetuous daughter of royalty. Merida makes a
reckless choice that unleashes unintended peril and forces her to spring
into action to set things right."
Sounds great, and a welcome return to original material after (the admittedly brilliant) Toy Story 3 and this year's automobile-flavoured outing.
Entertainment Weekly have just got the scoop on the film's official teaser poster...
Very interesting art design style there. The first trailer will no doubt hit soon and gives us a proper taste of what to expect from this promising beginning.
"The feel bad movie of Christmas" is what the trailer actually sells this movie as. The movie in question? David Fincher's version of The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, the English-language adaptation of Steig Larsson's monumentally best-selling thriller novel.
If you ask me, it's a pretty stunning, very effective teaser. And it definitely is just a teaser - comprising a succession of fast cuts to a cover of Immigrant Song. It's reminiscent of the teaser for Fincher's last outing, the rather well received The Social Network.
Is Fincher "respectable" now? It seems that way, with his last two movies - Network and Benjamin Button, having been in the race for Best Picture. Up to and including Zodiac (which I still insist is one of the best films of the last decade), his work was generally not embraced by the awards crowd. You could say that his more awards-recognised films since then have coincided with a softening of his previously severe styling, which is partly what made his earlier films so good. Could Dragon Tattoo be Fincher's return to dark, amazing thriller territory that he made his name with in Se7en?
Dragon Tattoo, of course, has already been made into a Swedish movie (a trilogy, indeed, encompassing Larsson's whole series), which I've been meaning to see. I haven't read the books either. I might just wait until Christmas, so I can see this new Fincher outing fresh. It certainly has me intrigued.
So now we know what Quentin Tarantino's next film will be, and he's staying in genre territory. Following up his war film Inglourious Basterds, "grindhouse" effort Death Proof,and martial arts/action/exploitation/everything-but-the-kitchen-sink Kill Bill, he's heading to the Old West. Can he give the genre the same sort of shot in the arm that he's done before? Does it even need revitalising, the Coens' True Grit having recently become the most commercially successful Western since Dances With Wolves?
The title of the new opus: Django Unchained. That's a reference to trippy 1966 Spaghetti Western Django, directed by Sergio Corbucci. Tarantino's clearly got a liking for the character - he has himself appeared on screen in a film with Django in the title, the Japanese homage Sukiyaki Western Django. But if Basterds is anything to go by, Quentin's probably just using a name and going in a completely different direction with it than the original film. While it would be nice if he stopped his relentless referencing of other movies, there's no doubt he brings a lot of originality to the plate as well. What he could do with the Western is an exciting prospect.
The synopsis we've been given is this: the titular Django is a freed slave who teams with a German bounty hunter in order to reunite with his wife, and take
down an evil plantation owner, Monsieur Calvin Candie. (Take it with a pinch of salt, bearing in mind that Basterds was not quite the men on a mission movie we were expecting.) According to The Hollywood Reporter, Tarantino wants Will Smith for the role - the Fresh Prince reportedly has the script and just needs to say yes. If he does, it would not only be quite a coup for QT - getting the biggest, and perhaps only, movie star in the world - but also (probably) give Smith an enjoyably complex role to chew on. Hopefully he'll ignore the fact that his only other venture into the west didn't turn out too well. (*Cough* Wild Wild West.)
Other cast names circling are Tarantino chums Christoph Waltz - pretty much certain as the aforementioned German bounty hunter, and who would probably do anything for the director after a certain Hans Landa won him the Oscar - and the ubiquitous Samuel L. Jackson, as another slave.
Basterds had an impressively quick turn around time, so if this does get the go ahead, expect it to reach fruition - and perhaps the Cannes Film Festival - in about a year's time.
After dallying in motion-capture CGI for the last decade, Robert Zemeckis - the genius behind Back to the Future, Who Framed Roger Rabbit?, Forrest Gump and more - is looking like he'll return to real flesh and blood actors for his next flick.
Chud.com reports that he's in talks to direct a movie called Flight, about an airline pilot who becomes a hero after a successful emergency landing, but he's wracked by guilt afterwards because he was (unbeknownst to the general public, it seems) on drink and drugs at the time. Denzel Washington may play the lead, who also has another interesting-sounding thriller on the way at the moment, Safe House.
To me the real news is that Zemeckis is intending to drop the motion capture technology. He's been a technological pioneer since he hit big with the time-travelling DeLorean, but his recent output has left me cold, and his apparent goal of making photo-real CG humans looks no closer to being realised now than it did when he made The Polar Express. His last live action film was Cast Away in 2000 - no classic, perhaps, but certainly a very good film, and far better than anything he's made since then (though I haven't seen his A Christmas Carol). The final straw for Disney, his backers, has been the complete failure of Mars Needs Moms, a recent mocap effort which Zemeckis produced.
Zemeckis, at his best, is a true visionary, and I firmly believe he has shown the talent in the past to forge a career similar in standing to Steven Spielberg's. Now his experimentation in digital toys is (hopefully) out of the way, he can get back to making great movies again.
The announcements and rumours keep on materialising regarding Zack Snyder's still-mysterious forthcoming rebirth of Superman.
2012 is shaping up to be quite a year for the apparently neverendingly popular superhero genre.* Next year may represent the apex of the genre, with The Avengers facing off with The Dark Knight Rises in summer (well, separated by a couple of months) and Superman scheduled to return again in December.
Yesterday the latest element to slot into place in the Superman puzzle is the essential casting of Lois Lane. Amy Adams is going to play the plucky reporter. A brilliant bit of casting, I think - Adams has the cute girl-next-door looks combined with evident acting ability (Oscar nominated three times) and even past experience with comic timing (Talladega Nights) - important in delivering some, hopefully, witty exchanges with Clark Kent. Adams has a great chance to be the first really excellent Lois - no-one, not even Margot Kidder, has really done the part justice, and Kate Bosworth was practically a charisma vacuum in Superman Returns.
So, to prevent this article from ballooning even more than it's already going to, here I'll summarise in handy bullet point form the rest of what we know - or think we know - about Zack Snyder's Superman so far...
Announced a while back, Henry Cavill is playing Supes/Clark. The Jersey native (that's the Channel Island, not the US state New Jersey) is probably best known for playing a lord with a knack with the ladies in TV's The Tudors. Apparently his audition was excellent. I just hope he can pull off an American accent.
Zack Snyder is directing, as mentioned already - the recent poisonous reception of the just-released Sucker Punch may have given Warner Bros. execs some concern - and Christopher Nolan is apparently "overseeing", but with no actual say in creative choices, which he's leaving up to others.
The specific direction of the plot is still unclear, but it does seem to be some sort of origin story. This is a reboot, folks - they are deliberately distancing themselves from the poorly received Superman Returns. Supposedly, writer David S. Goyer (Batman Begins, Blade) pitched an innovative new take on the material. Probably means they're not going to use John Williams' theme music. Shame.
Superman's earthbound foster parents - Jonathan and Martha Kent - are being played by Kevin Costner and Diane Lane. More Smallville than Superman: The Movie in the age department, then, but some surprisingly big names. Wonder if Costner will make it to the end credits alive?
It's heavily rumoured (or assumed) that the main villain is going to be none other than General Zod. Some have grumbled that they should be using a brand new villain from Superman's extensive roster, but I'm not against the idea - Zod's a classic villain, the evil opposite to Boy Blue Kal-El, and the thought of a Superman II-style battle with modern effects has me salivating. Better still, the casting rumours are tantalising: Viggo Mortensen. It seems unlikely to me that he'd say yes to it, but I could think of nobody better, and Viggo has just pulled out of the upcoming Snow White and the Woodsman.
The presence of Zod means, probably, Ursa and Non too. Heresay a while back had Diane Kruger and Rosamund Pike in the frame for the former. Lately, Michael Shannon has emerged as a candidate for a villain and people have guessed it might be the mute Non.
No confirmed title yet, but Superman: Man of Steel seems all but certain.
It's all pretty intriguing if you ask me, and so far I'm optimistic about everything we've heard (especially Adams' casting). I grew up with Superman - the Christopher Reeve era - so it holds a lot of personal meaning to me, though I freely admit we still haven't had a truly great film with the character. It's a big opportunity.
Once the dust has settled on 2012, though, where does the superhero film go from there? Nolan's Batman cycle will be over, the Avengers will have assembled, and, barring anything calamitous, Superman will have flown again. Perhaps it will be time for a change.
*I may have ranted
rather negatively about the genre the other day, specifically the
ubiquitous origin stories, but I don't hold any contempt for it - just
the over-reliance on familiar plot beats.
Elizabeth Taylor, hailed as one of the most beautiful screen actresses of the 20th century, has died of congestive heart failure at the age of 79 in Los Angeles.
Elizabeth Rosemond Taylor was born in 1932 in the wealthy London district of Hampstead, her father an American art dealer and her mother a former actress. The family moved to Los Angeles, California in 1939 to avoid the hostilities of World War II.
Thanks to her mother’s determined efforts she got her first film contract in 1941 after executives at Universal Pictures were wowed by her beauty. Even though Taylor starred in several unremarkable films as a young teen, it was her captivating performance in 1944’s National Velvet that propelled her to world stardom as a girl who trains and rides her horse to victory in the Grand National. Ironically, her role in the film also had a negative legacy - Taylor was plagued by back problems for the rest of her life after falling from a horse during filming.
Taylor enjoyed a string of moderate successes as an adolescent star until 1949, when as a 16-year-old she played a 21-year-old social debutante in the flop Conspirator. She was now earning over $2,000 a week but it was only in 1950 that she enjoyed her first success in an adult role when she starred with Spencer Tracy in the romantic comedy Father of the Bride. A year later Taylor showed the world that she wasn't just a pretty face, starring in the acclaimed A Place In The Sun as a spoiled socialite.
She still found it hard to attract Oscar-worthy roles until a trio of nominations in the late 1950s for Raintree County, Cat on a Hot Tin Roof and Suddenly Last Summer. She failed to win but her enhanced reputation helped her make history in Cleopatra (shot in 1960, released in 1963) when she was the first actor or actress to earn $1 million for a performance. It was also on the Rome set of the infamously expensive Cleopatra that she met and fell in love with Welshman Richard Burton - sparking a huge scandal and a condemnation from the Vatican since both were married at the time.
The high point of her acting career came with her two Oscar wins for Butterfield 8 (1960) and Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? (1966), in which she co-starred with Burton. Their relationship was tumultuous, but of all her seven husbands it was her love for Burton that was the defining romance of her life, as revealed in their love letters.
Their first marriage lasted from 1962 to 1974. They remarried again a year later before breaking up for the second time in July 1976.
Her AIDS work, spurred on by her good friend Rock Hudson's death from the disease, brought her the Legion of Honour, France’s highest civilian award, in 1987 and the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences' Jean Hersholt Humanitarian Award in 1993. In 2000, Queen Elizabeth made her a Dame Commander of the Order of the British Empire - the equivalent of a knighthood.
During a career which spanned six decades, the legendary beauty with lavender eyes won two Oscars and made more than fifty films, performing alongside such fabled leading men as Spencer Tracy, Montgomery Clift, Marlon Brando and, of course, the aforementioned Richard Burton. She took her cues from a dream list of directors, including George Cukor, Joseph L. Mankiewicz, George Stevens, Vincente Minnelli and Mike Nichols.
Long after she faded from the screen, she remained a mesmerizing figure, blessed and cursed by the extraordinary celebrity that moulded her life through its many phases: she was a child star who bloomed gracefully into an ingénue (like her good friend Michael Jackson); a femme fatale on the screen and in life; a canny peddler of high-priced perfume; a pioneering activist in the fight against AIDS.
Some actresses, such as Katharine Hepburn and Ingrid Bergman, won more awards and critical plaudits, but none matched Taylor’s hold on the collective imagination. In the public's mind, she was the dark goddess for whom playing Cleopatra, as she did with such notoriety, required no great leap from reality.
After what seemed like an age of legal wrangling, production delays, a director dropping out (Guillermo del Toro), and a studio going belly up, the day has finally arrived: The Hobbit has started shooting, under the direction of the Middle-earth Maestro himself, Peter Jackson.
The Hobbit was always going to be shot sooner or later, given the success of The Lord of the Rings, but for some time it seemed that all the fans' hopes may not be answered. I covered the early Hobbit rumours waaaaay back in 2006. I'll dredge up what I wrote here (26 November 2006 to be precise):
I've been waiting a little while to report on this news to see how it pans out, but here it is: theonering.net has posted an email that Peter Jackson recently sent them which makes it sound pretty certain that PJ won't be directing The Hobbit. Needless to say, my immediate reaction was something along the lines of "Noooooooooooooooo" (with more expletives). It all hinges on the fact that PJ has an ongoing lawsuit with New Line Cinema about profits owed to him for LOTR. Neither is willing to work with each other until it's sorted, which I can understand, but New Line has a time limit on its Hobbit rights, so they've said they're going to find a new director. I cannot see The Hobbit feeling like anything more than a soulless cash-in unless they get PJ to do it, or a really top-drawer director. Certainly some hack would never do it justice. I'm not saying that PJ is a perfect director, but he OWNS the cinematic Middle-Earth, plus the passion that went into LOTR really showed on screen. Intriguingly, New Line want to make both The Hobbit and a LOTR "prequel" not based on a specific book. The prequel idea is horrible. I don't mind them splitting The Hobbit into two parts, like I'd heard was the intention, but manufacturing a new narrative and tacking it onto the saga is a baaaad idea. Anywho, all is not lost, it seems. MGM, who share the rights to The Hobbit, say they're insistent on Jackson directing. Also, Saul Zaentz, who owns all the Tolkien property, has said that Jackson absolutely will direct it. Here's hoping (and praying).
Seems that all my praying may have paid off! In the intervening time since my diatribe, Guillermo del Toro was brought onboard, a development that I was not unhappy with - I like his Hellboy movies, and Jackson was still set to produce and help write it. The endless delays thrown up by MGM's collapse meant that Guillermo chose to depart, and, as always seemed destined, PJ stepped back into the fold.
My only concern is this: is Peter really invested in this project? He said in interviews when GDT was on board that he felt he had nothing more to contribute to the topic, and fresh eyes were needed. (You can understand how spending 8 years on LOTR was knackering.) I hope his decision to take the reigns was at least partly down to the fact that he wants to make The Hobbit, rather than just because a load of people in New Zealand had already been employed.
Still, as one of the biggest LOTR fans there is (it's probably what got me into films in the first place), I absolutely can't wait. The Hobbit will be released in two parts - in December 2012 and 2013. Recent gossip has suggested that the parts will be called An Unexpected Journey and There and Back Again. Sounds good to me.
In the meantime, enjoy these first official photos from the set.
Joel at the European Premiere of Spider-Man 3, London Monday 23rd April 2007
A gloomy afternoon outside the Odeon, Leicester Square was severely brightened with the onslaught of glitz and allure as celebrities ranging from Fearne Cotton to Thomas Haden Church waltzed the red carpet in front of thousands of ear-splitting fans. Prime photographic positions were gained by my fellow correspondents and personal questions were on standby for impromptu interviews as Arsenal and England’s Theo Walcott kicked things off. Certain unrecognisable figures jumped out of a constant convoy of Mercedes and they seemingly disappeared into a sea of red carpet without trace. Snow Patrol, Sugababes and Fearne Cotton continued the stealthy entrances with only the audiences’ steady screams of “Wooooo!” exemplifying the constant anxiety and excitement of the impending main showstoppers. Rosemary Harris, Spidey’s aunt, who I inadvertently kept calling Eva Marie Saint after my confusion with the Superman Returns star, was the anomaly of the fan hostility and she was the precursor to the photo/autograph session. She seemed like a cracking lady and I was therefore very confused as to why she never bothered to compliment my knowledge of her “amazing performance in Hitchcock’s North by Northwest” or “the famous glove scene with Brando in On the Waterfront”. Luckily she never corrected my stupidity à la Julia Roberts’ Notting Hill heroine when she corrects Martin the bookshop worker about his cock-up with Demi Moore, and the photos came out relatively well in the end.
The main event was excellent. Topher Grace just zoomed passed (obviously desperate to see the film in the world famous auditorium!) but James Franco was a tad more hospitable, and, after giving his driver a near-empty bottle of red wine, he was his usual grumpy self, but he still allowed a few snaps. Kirsten Dunst and Tobey Maguire were different class though. I actually managed a small conversation with both in addition to the standard handshake. The highlight with Kirsten was my acclaim towards her great performance in Sofia Coppola’s The Virgin Suicides, to which she stopped signing Spidey merchandise amongst the bustling crowd and said very calmly, “Thank you so much, I love that picture too!” The handshake with Maguire was everything you would expect from a superhero but the magical conversation we shared seems to have escaped memory. The main reason for this was the red carpet inclusion of director Sam Raimi and Michael G. Wilson, producer of the James Bond franchise. With Raimi I had the longest interaction of all, and after the complimentary, “Hi, I’m director Sam Raimi, how are you?” handshake, we got down to magazine interviews, shooting schedules, work commitments involved in creating a blockbuster spectacle, the possibility of a fourth instalment, and much more. Raimi seemed like a real down to earth cinematic legend in the making, if he isn’t seen as such already, and I confirmed this by pointing to him and mouthing the aforementioned word as his son captured the episode on his HandyCam – embarrassing but worth it. Michael G. Wilson – I was the only person who recognised him - rounded off the enjoying couple of hours before I sloped off to produce this report. The Claudia Schiffer missed appearance which happened seconds after my team left is a lifelong regret however. In all, Caprice was stunning, DJ “Master of Ceremonies” Spoony was idiotic and Graham Norton, well, need I say more. In all seriousness though, the actual A-List stars justified their luminous stature and created an awe-inspiring environment for, hopefully, a grand film.
