I hope that everyone had a happy and safe holiday season. Mine wasn’t that bad. Yeesh, has it gotten cold around here lately. But you’re not here about that, are you?

So, we took last week off and now we’re back into the swing of things. Here to help us out on that end are Chad Webb and Wyatt Beougher. Let’s see what they have to say.

The Woman In Black 2: Angel Of Death won’t be as good as the original.

Wyatt Beougher : FACT The first The Woman in Black wasn’t necessarily my favorite horror movie of 2012, but once you got past the fact that Harry Potter was cast as an adult in a horror movie, it was actually pretty good. It managed to create a spectacular atmosphere for a haunted house movie, and while the plot wasn’t always airtight, it made enough sense that it didn’t detract from the movie. In an era where a lot of horror has chosen to go for gore over The Woman in Black‘s more nuanced chills, it was actually refreshing to watch a film that focused so much on building up its characters and consequences. Unfortunately, from the trailers, it feels like this sequel has foregone a lot of the atmosphere in favor of jump scares, and by the simple virtue of being a sequel it loses any shred of originality that its predecessor possessed. A quick glance at Rotten Tomatoes would seem to support my belief, as the sequel is currently at 50%, as compared to the original’s 66%. A lot of the reviews have criticized the film for playing it safe in order to ensure that the franchise remains financially viable, but without the allure of seeing Daniel Radcliffe in his first post-Potter role, I feel like the sequel needs to do more to draw in similar audiences. I still plan on seeing the film when it hits the second-run theater near my house, but I just can’t convince myself that it is worth paying full price for, especially with several other films I want to see already out or coming out in the next few weeks.

Chad Webb : FACT I had heard enough positive things about The Woman in Black that I knew I was going to watch it at some point, so I did so just for this column. I had planned on checking out the original 1989 version first, but oh well. The 2012 movie was ok. We’ve seen ghost stories and haunted house stories such as this before. However, director James Watkins used restraint in unraveling the tale so it’s not a complete chore to sit through. Daniel Radcliffe gives a nice low-key performance and the style is very gothic horror which is cool. But it did rely on cheap scares at times and the story did nothing that was super exciting all the way up until the end. As I said, we’ve explored this territory many times before. Ghosts with “unfinished business” as they said in Casper. But this story was adapted from a novel and was produced by Hammer films, the latter of which may have given it some street cred. The sequel just seems unnecessary, but complaining about that is futile in the horror genre. Milking a franchise is a given. I’ve never been a huge horror fan and this is one reason why. The Woman in Black was an acceptable piece of horror and was fine left alone. But now they have go back to the well and churn out more of the same. At least the first story had emotional resonance. Angel of Death just strikes me as a quick money grab. We know what to expect and the titular villain will deliver what she did previously. The author of the original novel, Susan Hill, is allegedly helping with this screenplay in some form, so that might give fans a sign of hope, but I don’t see any reason to care about this.

It’s too soon to reboot The Pirates Of The Caribbean franchise.

Wyatt Beougher : FACT Can I say “Fact” on this one on the premise that it’s time to just let this one go? Sure, the franchise still makes money for Disney, and by hiring the Oscar-nominated directing team behind Kon-Tiki, it seems like Disney is intent on improving the overall quality of the films, but right now, I’m suffering from a condition that I like to call “Jack Sparrow Fatigue”. If you, too, are tired of seeing Johnny Depp playing some variation of Captain Jack Sparrow with a myriad of costumes/awful accents (regardless of who the character is/is supposed to be) and would greatly prefer to see Depp return to the form that originally made him popular in films like What’s Eating Gilbert Grape, Ed Wood, Don Juan De Marco, and especially Donnie Brasco and Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, then you might be suffering from JSF as well.

With that formal statement of bias out of the way, I will admit that I have yet to watch On Stranger Tides, and I honestly don’t know that I ever will. While a reboot/refresh of the Pirates franchise would theoretically appeal to me, I also realize that such a reboot will not take place without Depp’s Captain Jack Sparrow, so in truth, I would rather see the franchise expire. Bury the rights on an island somewhere and dig them up when Depp is an old, old man, and see if that will actually freshen things up.

Chad Webb : FACT So as far as I can tell, it was Orlando Bloom that started this speculation because he revealed in an interview what he had heard. I’m not sure how it can be a reboot with actors reprising their roles. Wouldn’t that be an expansion/sequel? And if it’s a genuine reboot and they’re just using Johnny Depp and Orlando Bloom in the same roles, I don’t get it. Recast the parts and start completely fresh. Disney wants to milk the franchise for all its worth and I understand that but there is still money in a sequel, with or without Bloom. From a financial standpoint, I see no need to reboot the series at this juncture. How much buzz could that possibly drum up? Not a lot if you ask me. What demand is there for this to start again? Personally, I think the series should stop because On Stranger Tides was easily the worst installment of the franchise and Gore Verbinski’s absence as director was felt in a big way. I am one of the few who enjoyed the first three films. I agree with Wyatt on the Jack Sparrow fatigue thing. Depp has become almost a parody of himself lately and he’s a better actor than that. With a director who knows how to handle the universe, the Pirates franchise could go on without being re-launched though. To re-launch now would be foolish and desperate, not to mention totally unnecessary. Bloom’s mention of a reboot has me confused though because all of the ideas he talked about refer to a sequel instead of a reboot. If Disney is thinking of wiping the slate clean, I doubt Depp or Bloom would be asked back.

Source Code is a good idea for a TV series.

Wyatt Beougher : FACT I liked it the first time around, when it was called Quantum Leap. Before I am accused of being overly snarky, let me say that I mean that in the best possible way, as I am a big fan of both Quantum Leap and Source Code. I think that, if done properly, not only does Source Code lend itself perfectly to television, but that it could also conjure up fond remembrances of its small-screen forebearer. I think for the premise to work well as a television series, though, they will need to ensure that the same basic rules of the movie are followed. Without spoiling too much of the film’s plot for those who have yet to see it, I think it is crucial that each season features a different person entering the “Source Code” device. That way, each character gets an actual story arc, rather than one character being endlessly trapped in different scenarios, which, for those who know the film, know would be an incredibly cruel fate. Of course, those that have seen the movie will be without some of the intrigue that made the film so much fun to try to figure out. Still though, just on premise, the show has tons of potential, and if it actually does end up making it to series (this idea has been in gestation since shortly after the movie became a hit in 2011), I will most certainly tune in.

Chad Webb : FACT I loved the movie. Not only am I partial to time travel as a concept, but the film was pretty complex and raised plenty of questions by the conclusion that could be expanded upon on the small screen. Is it a good idea for a show? Of course. Time travel has been proven to work on television and in theaters. Wyatt mentioned Quantum Leap, but we also had Seven Days in 1998. And obviously the amount of time travel movies have been numerous. Here’s the problem. While I love the potential the show has, even on CBS, it will be airing without the energetic direction of Duncan Jones and without the star power of Jake Gyllenhaal and Michelle Monaghan. That doesn’t mean it can’t still flourish. But I hope the writing is intelligent and the premise is used in an inventive, intense manner. It can wear out its welcome if the writing is lazy. We have to remember that this will be limited travel, not open ended, so that could make the show more intriguing too. I am curious as to whether or not the show will retain many of the movie’s plot points or if it will be a procedural with a time travel twist that goes off on its own with bubble episodes. That wouldn’t be as exciting. This is coming from Mark Gordon, producer of Criminal Minds, one of many average procedurals. Still, I’m hopeful for this.

SWITCH!

A Most Violent Year will be one of the year’s best movies.

Chad Webb : FICTION Ahh, iIt’s really hard for me to declare a movie as one of the year’s best when I haven’t seen it and when the director has such a short resume. I’ll say this. A Most Violent Year has positive reviews thus far and stands a healthy chance at being one of the best, but how do we measure what qualifies as “best?” The amount of Oscar nominations it receives, the number of Top 10 lists it appears on, the Metacritic/Rotten Tomatoes ratings? It also has a good shot because it is directed by J.C. Chandor, who by most accounts is now 3 for 3 in his career. Margin Call and All is Lost were both outstanding and they each garnered an Oscar nod and they were both favorably reviewed. But they both float in that zone of movies between those that are average and those that are unanimously praised. A Most Violent Year also sports an amazing cast with Oscar Isaac, Jessica Chastain, Alessandro Nivola, Albert Brooks, and David Oyelowo. This is a tough call to make. There is enough evidence that the movie will be among the year’s best, but I’m not ready to say that yet.

Wyatt Beougher : FACT Sure, why not? The film has excellent reviews, and writer/director JC Chandor appears to improve with every film, so the early buzz around it certainly seems to indicate that it will be one of the year’s best. When looking at its competition, 2014 actually had a handful of very good films, but assuming A Most Violent Year actually lives up to its early critical reception, I think it will stand with the Birdmans and Boyhoods as one of the year’s best films.

Justin Lin is a good choice to direct Star Trek 3.

Chad Webb : FICTION Justin Lin is a busy man right now. He did the Scorpion pilot, is at the helm for at least two episodes of True Detective season 2, and is attached to a Wolf Man remake and a couple of other projects, including Star Trek 3. Lin has shown that he knows how to handle action sequences despite a shaky resume. Fast Five and Fast & Furious 6 were both tremendous fun, but this is the guy who gave us The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift and Annapolis. His career has seen hills and valleys since day 1, but to take on a Star Trek film is another animal entirely. He cannot skate by with just quality action here. The writing needs to be there, and in my opinion the rebooted Star Trek franchise is already headed down an uncertain path as far as that’s concerned after Star Trek Into Darkness (which I didn’t care for). It is becoming more reliant on standard action and mainstream traits, less on plot and philosophy. That may or may not be a bad thing depending on who you ask. The cast is wonderful, but Lin has an uphill battle ahead of him. He is a capable filmmaker, but I have my doubts that a jump from the Fast and Furious series to Star Trek makes sense. Lin isn’t necessarily a bad choice, but he isn’t a great choice either. This is basically a “wait and see” scenario. I hope this next sequel is decent, but it has ground to make up and I’m not sure Lin is the best person to handle that task.

Wyatt Beougher : FACT DISCLAIMER: I am not a diehard Trekkie, and the first Star Trek film that I watched from start to finish more than once was JJ Abrams’ 2009 entry. With that said, I think Lin has shown that he can handle an ensemble picture that is heavy on action and still present complex interpersonal relationships between its main characters. Were the Fast and Furious movies that Lin directed over-the-top and at times ridiculous? Indeed, but were they any more ridiculous than the original Star Trek television series? As Chad has mentioned, this film is going to live or die by its writing, as Lin will almost certainly be able to competently handle the action of the film, but if the writing isn’t there, the Trekkie community will almost certainly be up in arms, regardless of how well Lin directs the picture. Honestly, I don’t see that Justin Lin is any worse a choice than JJ Abrams, who has made one excellent Star Trek film and one decidedly average one. At the worst, Star Trek 3 will be a fun action movie that is loosely related to the Star Trek universe; at best, it will be another quality entry into the ST universe. Either way, I think Lin is a fine choice to continue the franchise.

You’d tune in to Krypton, a prequel series that focuses on Superman’s grandfather.

Chad Webb : FACT Absolutely. This could be outstanding and make good use of the Superman universe, especially aspects of it not everyone is familiar with. It could also end up like Gotham, which I had to stop watching due to the poor acting, weak writing, and the constant “wink win nudge nudge” approach to what characters will become. But there is a wealth of Kryptonian lore to draw from, so I certainly hope it’s worthwhile and I’ll definitely tune in to see how it goes. DC properties have proven to be served well on the small screen the majority of the time, so I’m optimistic about this. David S. Goyer is writing the pilot and he has a long history in adapting comic book material, so I have faith he’ll do this justice (or try to anyway). He’s far from perfect mind you, but he’s an acceptable choice to kick off this pilot in my eyes. Superman has enjoyed some of his finest moments on the small screen and the backstory is ripe with possibilities. I wonder if it will tie-in to Man of Steel. There are several questions, but we’ll have to be patient. I can’t guarantee this will be as entertaining as Arrow or The Flash, but I will give it a shot.

Wyatt Beougher : FACT I would absolutely give it a watch. The plot synopsis, about Jor-El’s father trying to bring the House of El back to good standing, is an angle that we haven’t seen a thousand times, and while Goyer is often maligned for his entries into the superhero on film genre, I have actually enjoyed Constantine. And unlike DC’s resident master dabbler of the dark arts, Krypton will actually have a network that is committed to the genre and will be happy with even a moderate ratings success, which should allow Goyer and producer Ian Goldberg, who is no stranger to genre shows himself, having produced ABC’s Once Upon a time, the chance to establish the show and its characters without worrying about the network suddenly pulling the rug out from beneath them. For me, these are all positive examples of why this show will be worth watching, and if it ties into Man of Steel or the larger DC Universe in any way (unlike Flash, Arrow, Constantine, and Gotham, apparently), that will simply be a bonus.

And there you have it. Chad and Wyatt agree more often than not.Thanks to them both for playing, and see you all again next week!

-BP

http://www.twitter.com/411wrestling

http://www.twitter.com/411moviestv

http://www.twitter.com/411music

http://www.twitter.com/411games

http://www.twitter.com/411mma