With the gut-wrencher Shame, an uncomfortably funny Young Adult, Spielberg’s heart-string pullin’ War Horse, a high-flying Tintin adventure, the shining return of Cameron Crowe, the oversized popcorn blockbuster Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol, the overlooked hilarity of Carnage, the pulpy thrills of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, and the subdued near-masterpiece that is Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy, last month was a pretty fantastic time at the movies.

Now we’re entering January. While this time of the year is usually a dumping ground — and we’ll be getting plenty of films of that low-caliber — there’s a surprising amount of films to check out this month, mainly the award-ready expanding releases.

Newlyweds

Opens January 13th. Now on iTunes and VOD.

I haven’t seen much of Edward Burns’ directorial work, but after Newlyweds, I definitely plan on fixing that. Burns’ cheap as nickels indie — 9,000 bucks, to be exact — is so damn enjoyable. It takes a few minutes for the documentary/breaking the 4th wall approach to work, but once it does, the film begins to play as a solid dramedy with some strong performances and plenty of relatable awkward situations.

Coriolanus

Opens January 13th.

Ralph Fiennes‘ first venture into filmmaking isn’t as badass or as silly as the first trailer sold it. Plus, if Coriolanus was all action, that’d be a bad thing, since the scarce gun battles are certainly not the film’s strong suit. Outside of the clunky action, the bombastic drama is excellent. Fiennes makes a good first-impression with a gritty take on Shakespeare, but it’s his powerful and loud performance as Coriolanus which stands out.

The Grey

Opens January 27th.

I missed the chance of seeing Joe Carnahan‘s survival film last month, and it’s been bugging me ever since. Not only because of the glowing feedback out of the Butt-Numb-a-thon screening, but mainly because Joe Carnahan’s a director I follow with great interest and excitement. He’s capable of overblown fun, proven by The A-Team and the underappreciated darkness of Smokin’ Aces, but he can also deliver compelling drama, as shown by Narc. The Grey comes off as a mixture of both sensibilities.

We Need to Talk About Kevin

Opens January 13th.

By far the best horror film of 2011. Lynne Ramsay‘s heightened horror film is, out of only three pictures, her best effort yet. Movern Callar and Ratcatcher were very good, but We Need to Talk About Kevin is on another level. Ramsay’s adaptation isn’t meant to be taken literally, though. With the over-the-top nature of the flashback scenes, both tonally and stylistically, it’s not intended as realism. This is a dark, funny, and all around excellent film.

Rampart

Opens January 27th.

See Oren Moverman‘s Rampart more than once, even if you come out hating it. Unlike The Messenger, the type of film one sees the greatness of right away, his follow-up takes time to work. At first, I admired Rampart, but not until my third viewing did I come to love it for its audacity, the main character’s symbolic messineness, and Woody Harrelson‘s intense and vulnerable performance. Moverman either twists or throws out all the dirty cop cliches we know and goes for something more existential and internally bleak, making Rampart something kind of special and one of my favorite films of 2011.

Haywire

Opens January 20th.

Even if everyone who saw the film at AFI loathed it,  Haywire would still remain at no. 1. It’s Steven Soderbergh, someone who could film a box for 2-hours and probably still make it exciting or interesting. Good thing the reviews out of AFI, such as our own Kate Erbland’s, haven’t squashed the excitement for Gina Carano’s big screen debut. Apparently it’s quite ass-kicking. With the cast Soderbergh has, he would almost have to go out of his way to make a weak movie.

Honorable Mentions: Red Tails (alone for the aerial sequences, not the cheesy-looking drama), Man on a Ledge (could be a cool B-thriller, which I’ve heard it is), Miss Bala (haven’t seen it, but all the reviews say it’s an excellent and dark thriller), and, no, I’m not going to make One for the Money an honorable mention.

Warning: This article contains spoilers for Young Adult, Shame, and The Descendants.

2011’s holiday movie season ended the year with a barrage of relatively conventional heroes. From Ethan Hunt saving the world from yet another MacGuffin to Sherlock Holmes solving an additional mystery to a cyberpunk and a journalist battling wealthy Swedish career-misogynist neo-Nazis, December was packed with varied iterations of good triumphing over its clearly delineated evil opposition.

In contrast, the holiday season’s slate of smaller-scale filmmaking brought forth several protagonists who function in strict contrast to your conventional hero. These protagonists are (decidedly) so toxic, broken, unheroic, and even unlikeable that they can’t even be deemed antiheroes. These characters (to varying degrees of success) challenge the assumed connection that filmic convention makes between the “main character” and the “film itself” by presenting protagonists who don’t triumph over adversity, who don’t fight or win a “good” battle, and who frankly don’t warrant an act of rooting.

These protagonists trip up an oft-unquestioned notion conditioned by cinematic tradition: that films should serve as a means of rooting for a clearly demarcated, pre-telegraphed, unassailable idea of goodness. These are three protagonists that we aren’t often asked to spend ninety minutes with.

Mavis Gary in Young Adult

Charlize Theron’s Mavis is an enduringly superficial grown-up adolescent whose delusional sense of self-importance seems to have arisen entirely from a myth she’s constructed around herself in her hometown of Mercury, MN as a success story living a life of luxury, celebrity, and big-city knowhow in the “Mini-Apple.” Young Adult follows a narrative familiar to many who have left their own small town for somewhere bigger and, by arbitrary association, “better” (a connection guided by the idea that population has a more direct intrinsic relationship with being “part” of “something”).

It’s appropriate that Young Adult received a holiday release, for that means many migrants in their 20s and 30s will see the film in their own Mercury. What Young Adult accomplishes quite devastatingly is pulling the veil away from Mavis’s (and her archetype’s) sense of entitlement and cultural distinction that her prodigal status ostensibly warrants. She finds out that the people of her hometown do not necessarily envy her life, but pity her, and her ignorance of this is part of the same delusion that allowed her to think she could steal her high school sweetheart away from his wife and daughter simply through her big city will.

I struggled with the ending of Young Adult for awhile, thinking it gestured toward a slight and convenient attempt at redemption for a character who needs a lot more help in order to change, but upon reflection it’s become clear that her “return to the Mini-Apple” and her act of leaving Mercury one last time fully situates Mavis back where we began with her. Even if a neighborhood party full of Mercureans tell her how sorry they feel for her single, childless, unfulfilled life, it only takes is one misguided soul who tells her how pretty she is for Mavis to return full-force to her self-destructive delusion. But perhaps most cynically of all, Young Adult never offers a third option between Mercury and the Mini-Apple.

Brandon Sullivan in Shame

Michael Fassbender’s Brandon Sullivan is something of a cipher. As a full-time sex addict, he simply seems to exist without context or history. Sure, it would have been cheap for the film to simplistically justify his sex addiction through, say, an abuse story, but that we don’t even know his history with his own sister, who plays a massive role in the film, gives Shame a minimalist approach to character tied with its quiet approach to style (both of these aspects stand in sharp contrast to Steve McQueen’s dynamic and historically specific first film Hunger).

Like Mavis, Brandon has two-sided life: the visible, “outside” life he has constructed for himself, and a sad private life, this one being sex addiction taken to eleven. The very attractive Fassbender is well chosen here, for (as in the sexual dynamic of Fish Tank), his looks make his conduct not seem as creepy or troubling at first. Take the first subway scene with the married woman for example, which begins as a quiet but enthralling exchange of looks, but then quickly morphs into something a bit more sinister as Brandon exits the train. His quick morph from flirtation to stalking complicates what may or may not have actually been happening. Though Shame is a decidedly un-sexy film, Fassbender is seductive enough on the surface to sell a truly unlikeable human being. Would anybody see Shame if the protagonist were ugly?

Similarly to Young Adult, Shame plants seeds of suggested redemption that are not followed up on for what is essentially an unredeemable character. The prospect of a real relationship quickly ends when feelings mix with sex, so our protagonist sinks to what is aesthetically presented as “the bottom,” from which convention tells us there is only one way left to go. That the climactic descent for Brandon consists of gay oral sex followed by an orgy at a brothel is a strange distinction – on Shame’s moral compass, how is this “worse” than sex depicted earlier with a classy, straight, solitary prostitute? The only valuable answer I can surmise is that no distinction exists. The notion that he has hit rock bottom is a false one – he’s only continuing a cycle that ostensibly existed well before the film’s timeline began. The film’s “ambiguous” ending insinuates that there are several things that can happen with the woman on the train. However, only one option makes sense.

Matt King in The Descendants

The Descendants represents the closest that these three films get to a conventional narrative arc of a broken character’s redemption, and is arguably Alexander Payne’s most traditional and predictable character arc to date. What characterizes Payne’s best work is his ability to make us empathize with antiheroes who we are given critical distance to through his incisive and modest-yet-quirky film style. George Clooney‘s Matt King seems oddly disparate in this respect. From the film’s opening narration, he’s surprisingly aware that he’s not a good father or husband, and he demonstrates this aspect in full force: he repeatedly fails to achieve parental authority with his daughters or their friends, he can’t communicate (much less empathize) with a confused younger daughter, and he constantly has to recruit the older daughter to do the actual parenting even as he takes them both on a hubristic, pseudo-revenge mission.

Matt’s anticipated confrontation with his dying wife’s mister was a surprisingly restrained and calculated moment for what was laid out as the film’s dramatic locus, but if we are as aware as Matt is about his status as a bad father (and thus not “distanced” critically any more than our self-critiquing subject), then are we meant to feel as satisfied and redeemed as he does afterward? Matt technically does “the good thing” by not selling his family’s land (has anything in a Payne film been as predictable as this?), but he’s (once again) so self-conscious about it that it he seems to be asking us directly to take his character’s transformation at his word. The final shot of The Descendants suggests a family recovered, but there is little that denotes Matt’s actual redemption beyond his own repeated insistence on it. More than any of these films, The Descendants confounds the assumed relationship between character and film.

Final Thoughts

It’s interesting that, during a tumultuous moment in American culture when honest and good people are routinely taken advantage of by the unchecked power of the few, we get a crop of small-scale films that ask audiences to spend several hours with “bad,” unheroic, unredeemable protagonists. I’m not quite sure what the answer to “why now” may be (if there is a cogent answer to be found), but these films collectively challenge the convention that filmic protagonists must be “worthy” ones, warranting an audience’s respect and energy from the get-go, rather than one of many potential lenses through which we can see America, whether that be a Minnesota small town, New York City, or the Hawaiian Islands. Most people aren’t heroes, so why should everyone on our movie screens be?

Do the right thing and read more Culture Warrior

Why Watch? One day, the Ramsey Brothers got together to watch old home movies and deliver some incredibly insightful DVD featurette-style commentary. The result is nostalgia relived as art and as comedy. What’s the symbolism of the lifted shirt? Can we consider the camera a truthful narrator? In their own words, Not Where You Saw “tells the riveting tale of one brother’s courageous stand for justice.”

Or it’s brothers fighting with each other on a basketball court while their father tapes it on a handicam. Or it’s both. Either way, it’s inspired.

What does it cost? Just 2 minutes of your time.

Trust us. You have time for more short films.

Luis Buñuel’s adaptation of Octave Mirbeau’s novel “Diary of a Chambermaid” (1964) was made at a decisive point in the master filmmaker’s long, dynamic, and illustrious career. The film marked Buñuel’s second foray into European filmmaking after an almost thirty-year hiatus, during which time he made a large number of films in Mexico, contributing greatly to what is now considered the nation’s midcentury cinematic Golden Age. The Spanish filmmaker first returned to Europe to make Viridiana (1961) in Spain (the only film Buñuel ever completed in his native country). Viridiana proved a sensation in every sense of the word: it made a huge splash for international critics and audiences starting with its enthusiastic reception at that year’s Cannes Film Festival and it was met with legendary controversy (no stranger to the filmmaker) in Franco’s tightly-regulated Spain.

Viridiana revisits several of Buñuels’ thematic preoccupations from his Surrealist years in France and his pseudo-social-realist films in Mexico, specifically in terms of the infamous atheist’s routine subversion of religious iconography. The now-iconic scene where a group of vagrants sit around a grand dinner table, positioned in a way reminiscent of Da Vinci’s The Last Supper (1495-98), proved to be a heretical image for one audience and a brilliant and beautiful inversion for another (By the way, why did nobody in the Catholic community say that critiquing Renaissance art isn’t heretical? Is Da Vinci Jesus?).

Diary of a Chambermaid structurally resembles Viridiana in its first act with its portrayal of an attempted sexual attack from a sexually deviant patriarch. But unlike Silvia Pinal’s relatively submissive and virginal protagonist (the Mary connotations are not without weight), Jeanne Moreau’s enigmatic chambermaid is a self-assured “new woman,” free of coherent ideology and open to taking advantage of men just as she is taken advantage of by them. Moreau had certainly developed a star persona as a strong, autonomous, and enduringly mysterious woman, having helped usher in the New Wave with Louis Malle’s Elevator to the Gallows (1957) and Francois Truffaut’s Jules and Jim (1962). While Spain retained its stringent class and religious structures, the France Buñuel returned to in the mid-1960s possessed little in common with the country he left in the mid-1930s. It’s meta-appropriate that Diary of a Chambermaid takes place during the first step of the decisive historical transition that determined the second stage (from France to Mexico) of Buñuel’s career, but was made during a time that would characterize his last (his return to Europe).

The French Spaniard

Diary of a Chambermaid arguably begins the “French period” that would define the remainder of Buñuel’s lengthy filmography and bring forth some of his most celebrated later films (e.g., The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie (1972), his swan song That Obscure Object of Desire (1977)). While religious themes would certainly surmise during these years, they do not hold a central place in films made for a France (or, at least, a Paris) that valued religion less and less in its cukture. For instance, by the time Buñuel released The Milky Way (1969), a pseudo-sequel to his Surrealist anti-religious satire L’Âge d’Or (1930), its critique of organized religion already seemed irrelevant to a France that had experienced the modernist revolutions of May 1968.

Even the director’s brief return to Mexico in the meantime still brought forth a “European” approach to his work. Buñuel himself admits that his Discreet Charm-resembling Mexican film The Exterminating Angel (1962, made in between Chambermaid and Viridiana) takes place in a Mexico that does not, in fact exist, as the bourgeois class depicted and critiqued in this film greater resembled that of his native Spain and his precious France than possessing any direct correlation with the class structures of 1960s Mexican society. The Exterminating Angel (and his incomplete, final return to Mexico that followed Chambermaid, Simon of the Desert (1965)) marked a distinct break from the social-realist style Buñuel imbued throughout his Mexican period in films like Los Olvidados (1950) and Nazarín (1959, though many of these films have isolated surrealist moments or sequences). Even in the brief epilogue of his Mexican career, Buñuel was firmly entrenched in his Late European period and preoccupied with European culture and themes from Viridiana, and Chambermaid, onward.

France, 1930

1930 was an important year for Buñuel. His 1928, Salvador Dalí-co-directed short Un Chien andalou was, to Dalí and Buñuel’s measured disappointment, a lauded success in Paris upon its release. These pioneering Surrealists hoped the film would prove controversial and garner catcalls and riots, but in the celebrated avant-garde of 1920s Paris (the one depicted in last year’s Midnight in Paris, complete with actors portraying Dalí and Buñuel), nearly anything went and anything received. This was not without potent irony considering that the bourgeois class obliquely criticized in the film also financed and celebrated it.

But Bunuel’s next film, L’Âge d’Or (which was co-credited to but had less involvement from Dalí), would prove to find the violent reaction the filmmaker was hoping for with Un Chien anadalou. The hour-long film is a more involved and thorough critique of bourgeois culture and religious symbology (and a superior film in this author’s opinion). During a screening held on December 3, 1930, the anti-Semitic and pseudo-fascist organization The League of Patriots organized an in-house protest of the film, complete – in perhaps the dumbest and most futile attempt at “destroying” a film on historical record – with throwing black ink at the screen onto which the film was projected. The moment that motivated their ire was the juxtaposition of a Catholic monstrance next to a woman’s bare legs as she is let out of a town car for a social soiree. The joint critique of class and religious institution is abundantly clear. If only the rioters had stuck around long enough to see Jesus Christ portray the Marquis de Sade in the film’s last act.

The 1930 riot predicted a rise in far-right politics that would lead to the Catholic Church’s complicity in (through lack of condemnation of) the rise of European fascism in the following decade. A challenging Surrealist film in the more conservative 1930 proved a great deal more threatening than one exhibited a mere two years earlier. Buñuel, though not Jewish, became an ex-pat like so many great artists of the time as he entered his Mexican Period. The terrifying, portending ending of Diary of a Chambermaid is not without incredible significance to Buñuel’s own career, as it illustrates an ascent towards Fascism and a rise in anti-Semitism amongst the French in the exact year that one of Buñuel’s most notorious works was protested against and eventually banned. The jarring lightning strike and jump cuts that accompany the “1930” title card even resemble the deliberately haphazard assemblage of sound and image in L’Âge d’Or, which marks a stylistic break from Chambermaid’s relatively classical style leading up to this point. Buñuel’s return to France with Chambermaid, and the great entries on his ouvre that followed, signals that it only took three harsh decades for France to catch up with Buñuel.

Punch your ticket to the arthouse with more Criterion Files

Ah, the television midseason. By now, the public has decided which new shows they’ll stick with (Revenge, 2 Broke Girls, New Girl), which they’re unsure about (Pan Am, Prime Suspect, Once Upon a Time) and which aren’t even worth thinking about (The Playboy Club, Free Agents). There’s little chance that if something hasn’t become appointment viewing by now, it’s worth cancelling the DVR season pass. So while we’re all finally getting over the tragedy that was Charlie’s Angels, the network bigwigs are using their highly-representative sample (comprised, one can only imagine, of elderly people, religious zealots, and the entirety of the state of West Virginia) to determine just what they’ll throw at us next. Sure, some of the best shows have been birthed out of a midseason replacement (ahem, Happy Endings, ahem), but the pickings are often more than slim – shows the networks don’t often find strong enough to debut with their fellow newbies in the fall.

So what will we have to look forward to (or to run away from) in our TV Guide in the coming weeks? Sure, PBS will kick off the second season of critical and ratings darling Downton Abbey January 8th, while NBC’s 30 Rock is back January 12th. Cee-Lo Green will once again be gracing our television screens with The Voice’s post-Superbowl premiere, and Timothy Olyphant will be emanating his rugged swagger on Justified once more, as the lawman drama kicks off its third season January 17th. But what of the newly minted TV fare? Here are a few of the networks’ latest offerings worth considering, and a few that your mom will probably love.

The Good

The Firm, NBC

The Pitch: A legal thriller that follows the best-selling novel by John Grisham, 10 years after the conclusion of the film. Stars the underrated Josh Lucas.

Why it’s worth checking out: Lucas has potential to lead a series, especially in this role originated by Tom Cruise, and John Grisham (hackneyed as many perceive him) has put his support behind the adaptation.

Alcatraz, FOX

The Pitch: A suspense-thriller about the shocking reappearance of the prison’s most notorious inmates, 50 years after they vanished.

Why it’s worth checking out: Hurley! From Lost! Who doesn’t love Hurley? Plus, J.J. Abrams has attached his name to the project, so we can expect a departure from our everyday sci-fi fare.

Luck, HBO

The Pitch: Dustin Hoffman helms this inside look at the dark and dirty world of horse racing.

Why it’s worth checking out: It comes from Deadwood creator David Milch, who’s unique brand of storytelling made that show a critical darling. Plus, with a cast list that includes Denis Farina, Michael Gabon, and Nick Nolte, it’s bound to at least build upon Boardwalk Empire’s streak of crime drama success.

Smash, NBC

The Pitch: While this Broadway drama sounds a little cheesy out of the gate, the buzz surrounding it is pretty difficult to ignore.

Why it’s worth checking out: Listen, even the hippest of girls out there (sorry, guys) can admit to liking Center Stage at one point or another, and this isn’t far from it. American Idol alum Katharine McPhee makes her TV debut, and the cast also includes Uma Thurman, which is beyond random. Plus, NBC clearly has enough faith in the show to premiere it near the Super Bowl, so it has potential to hit it big.

House of Lies, Showtime

The Pitch: Don Cheadle and Kristen Bell lead a group of con artists hell-bent on targeting corporate fat cats.

Why it’s worth checking out: It’s a comedy! With Don Cheadle! Plus, television has been depressingly Kristen Bell-less since the cancellations of both Veronica Mars and Party Down. Double-plus, any show that adds Parks and Recreation standout Jean-Ralphio to its cast is A-okay with me.

The Maybes

The River, ABC

The Pitch: A prime time horror jaunt from the creator of Paranormal Activity that has a crew searching for a rescue team after some harrowing footage is found.

Why I’m skeptical: As previous attempts at prime time scare have gone a little down the deep end (American Horror Story), this has the potential to either be horribly frightening, or reek of fail.

Don’t Trust the B**** in Apt. 23, ABC

The Pitch: A woman from the country relocates to New York City and moves in with a raucous party girl.

Why I’m skeptical: Krysten Ritter is funny, and underrated to boot, but there’s one thing keeping me from overwhelming excitement on this one, and that thing is a one James Van Der Beek. Dawson Ritter stars as himself, which is meta in a Matt Leblanc Episodes way, so I’m willing to at least give it a chance.

The Finder, FOX

The Pitch: A Bones spinoff about a man (Geoff Stults) who has a gift for locating people and things.

Why I’m skeptical: Who really wanted a Bones spinoff?

The Ugly

Work It, ABC

The Abomination: Two men dress as women to get jobs.

Why I’m disappointed that this is a show: Clearly this gem was envisioned following those oh-so-progressive Tim Allen Last Man Standing meetings. Those who watch How I Met Your Mother may remember Ben Koldyke as Robin’s boyfriend Don. Well, Don is back, and starring in a Bosom Buddies-style hate crime of a television show.

Rob, CBS

The Pitch: Rob Schneider stars as a newlywed dealing with his Mexican-American wife’s family. Oh, that doesn’t sound vaguely racist.

Why I’m disappointed this is a show: It brings Rob Schneider back into our lives.

Napoleon Dynamite, FOX

The Pitch: An animated take on the 2003 cult film.

Why I’m disappointed this is a show: I loved this film as much as the next person, but do we really need to revisit this almost 10 years after the fact?

So there you have it, my two cents for your perhaps sparser midseason TV schedule. What are you looking forward to, or looking forward to making fun of, on the new schedule?

Stare mindlessly into your television and then read more Channel Guide

In our first show of the 2012 season, we set off the filmmaking fireworks by finding out why Innkeepers director Ti West doesn’t believe in spooks, and by talking to indie icon Ed Burns about the twitter revolution, his $9,000 budget, and his new must-see movie Newlyweds.

Plus, Neil Miller stops by to dangle the hope and potential of 2012′s most anticipated movies over our noses. Will he say the movie you’re thinking of and validate his opinion to you, or will he neglect it, making everything he says in the future suspect?

Be prepared to find out a metric ton about movies and their makers, because it’s our third season, and we’re only getting started.

Download This Episode

On This Week’s Show:

Your Dreams Were Your Ticket Out: [Beginning - 21:40] Our very own Dear Leader, Neil Miller delivers his 5 most anticipated movies of 2012 – a tough task, considering we could only whittle our site list down to 52 of ‘em.

Booking a Room at the Yankee Pedlar Inn: [21:40 - 39:00] Ti West is back with another horror flick. This time he’s tackling ghosts and ghost hunting, and we tackle why he should stop being called “The Slow Burn Kid.”

The Honeymooner: [39:00 - End] Ed Burns bucked the system as an indie filmmaker in the 90s, and he’s set to do it twice in one career. His method? Using twitter to engage directly with fans, to get feedback, and to use $9,000 to make the kind of movies he wants to make. It’s the future of film, and @Edward_Burns talks to us from the edge of it.

Rate us on iTunes.

On Next Week’s Show:

Talkin’ ’bout movies. Talkin’ ’bout crazy cool medallions. See you then.

Get In Touch With Us:

• Call Reject Radio: (512) 212-1301
• Email Reject Radio: radio@filmschoolrejects.com
• Reject Radio on Twitter: twitter.com/RejectRadio

Subscribe to Reject Radio:

Last year’s lady-centric comedy Bridesmaids cost Universal $32 million to produce and ended up banking over $288m at the box office. Plus it made viable, hit anchoring stars out of both Kristen Wiig and Melissa McCarthy. So, would you imagine that the studio wants to make a sequel? The answer is yes, yes they do, very much, but unfortunately they have a huge stumbling block in front of them. According to a report from THR, the original film’s co-writer and star, Kristen Wiig ,isn’t interested in doing another one.

When asked about the potential sequel, that should definitely be once again written by Wiig and her collaborator Annie Mumolo and directed by Paul Feig, Wiig replied, “We aren’t working on that. Annie and I aren’t planning a sequel. We are writing something else.” Oh. Ouch. That sucks for Universal. THR’s speculation over why Wiig refuses to play ball centers on the minuscule $100 thousand bonuses the cast got on the first one, after it became a runaway financial success, but Wiig refused to comment on whether her reluctance to work on another Bridesmaids is financially motivated or not.

She also might not want to start doing comedy sequels because she’s trying to move her career in a more dramatic direction. She’s got upcoming dramatic roles opposite people like Annette Bening in Imogene and Robert De Niro in The Comedian. That sounds like a potential springboard into Oscar territory to me. Doing something as lame as a “getting the band back together” comedy sequel could derail a dramatic career pretty quickly if it didn’t turn out really good. Is Wiig trying to make the move to more respectable, awards-grubbing work?

And what does this mean for Universal? Well, Bridesmaids 2 is a potential bucket full of dollar signs, so it means they now have to try and go forward and turn this into a series without the creator of the original, and they have to somehow do it without offending fans. To that end they’re tossing around some of those studio-speak quotes about how they’ll only do another one if the situation is right. One Universal rep said, “We are over the moon with the success of Bridesmaids, and if we do a sequel we want to get it right. We are talking to filmmakers now about concepts, and if the right one emerges, we’ll move forward.”

If Wiig isn’t on board, then one would imagine the right concept would simply just be one that slides McCarthy over into the starring role. If they’re really going to go forward with a Wiig-less Bridesmaids, I’d say that McCarthy is now the one lynchpin that they need to make audiences buy into it. But with her now-busy schedule, will she be willing to play ball?

Even uber-producer Judd Apatow is getting in on the studio-speak on these matters. When asked about the sequel he said, “The key is we have to come up with an idea that is as good or better than the first one. We don’t want to do it unless it can be great. I don’t think anyone has had the brain space to think about it yet. Hopefully that can begin this year.” But is it really possible to make a sequel better than the first one without the participation of the creative force behind the first one? An unnamed source says of Apatow, “I don’t think [Judd] would proceed without Kristen and Annie’s full participation.” That remains to be seen, but keeping a close eye on how this sequel develops should be a pretty good indicator of who’s in it for the work and who’s in it for the pay day.

While Universal may be scraping to get together a sequel to their comedy hit, Bridesmaids, New Line and Warner Bros. are having significantly better luck with their latest incarnation of a comedy hit. The studios have closed a deal with Horrible Bosses screenwriters John Francis Daley and Jonathan Goldstein for a second film, one that is expected to see its three leads, Jason Bateman, Charlie Day, and Jason Sudeikis, all back in front of the camera. And behind the camera? Original director Seth Gordon is also “in early talks” for the sequel. Now that’s how you get a band of merry murderers back together.

The summer release was a surprise hit – made on the relative cheap for $35m, it racked up $209m worldwide. A cross between workplace comedy and hitman flick, the film saw Bateman, Day, and Sudeikis as three best friends who all hate their bosses (played by Kevin Spacey, Jennifer Aniston, and Colin Farrell, respectively) for very different reasons. In the film, the three knuckleheads conceive of a plan to knock off each other’s headache-inducing supervisors, the sort of plan that sounds okay-ish on paper, only to crumble spectacularly (and hilariously!) in execution.

The film was Daley and Goldstein’s first project together, and they have also written another New Line comedy, the upcoming Burt Wonderstone (filming early this year), along with the sequel to the charming Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs.

While I was not the biggest fan of Horrible Bosses, I did find it frequently funny, thanks to some great chemistry between the three leads and the sort of tossed-off one-liners that will likely only get better with age and repeat viewings. Of course, we can only wonder what a sequel will entail (guessing it will involve more horrible bosses, but that’s just spit-balling).

Do you want a Horrible Bosses sequel? [THR, via The Film Stage]

Of all the films being developed in the Hollywood-sphere right now, perhaps no other has more reasons to be excited about it than the upcoming, based-on-a-true-story shocker Freezing People is Easy. First off, it’s based on the life story of Robert Nelson, a man who spearheaded a movement in cryonics that saw several bodies being frozen back in the 60s, with disastrous results. Nelson’s story is darkly funny, shockingly grizzly, and endlessly interesting due to its many twists and turns. It’s already been documented to great success in the man’s memoirs, “We Froze the First Man,” and also in a segment on the radio program This American Life entitled “Cold as Ice,” and it’s really a tale that everyone needs to hear.

Secondly, the talent bringing this story into yet another medium, this time the big screen, is impressive. Freezing People is Easy is set to be the second dramatic work by famed documentarian Errol Morris (Tabloid), and it’s being shot from a screenplay that was written by Stranger Than Fiction’s Zach Helm. These are names whose next projects I would have been anticipating whether they were attached to a story I was already interested in or not. Throw them all together and there’s reason to celebrate.

The third reason I’m looking forward to this one is how well the cast seems to be shaping up. It’s already been reported that Paul Rudd is attached to play Nelson as the lead, and now a report from Deadline Redondo Beach says that he’s likely to be joined in the cast by three big, exciting new names. Though what roles they’re going to play haven’t been disclosed, apparently Owen Wilson, Christopher Walken, and Kristen Wiig are all circling the project, and are said to be likely to join.

Wiig is the biggest wildcard, as she still has some Saturday Night Live commitments to take care of and already has a full dance card after that. But even if they can’t land Wiig, that’s still an impressive lineup of talent already. This one is set for a mid-2012 start, so start clearing your schedule in 2013; you’ll have to fight me to be first in line.

We’ve all heard the grumblings and complaints over the prospect of a new remake of Brian De Palma‘s adaptation of Carrie. What’s to care about with this remake? We’ve already got a pretty perfect adaptation. But now some of us can care, with the news that Kimberly Peirce could possibly be at the helm.

Peirce is both an odd and kind of perfect choice for this project. Her acclaimed Boys Don’t Cry and lesser acclaimed but still pretty good Stop-Loss are both what one could call psychological horror movies, and Carrie very much is that. Peirce seems adept crafting films that chronicle young people going through a tough time, so she makes for an oddly suitable fit, really.

MGM and Screen Gems are supposedly interested in a “gritty” take, despite the story involving a girl using psychic powers. Peirce, clearly being a lover of making all things gritty and realistic, could probably give them the realism they (oddly) want. Deadline Hermon is currently reporting she’s “in talks” to direct, and I certainly hope that deal goes through.

Get ready to cringe, people who hate the idea of remakes, reimaginings, and redos, the latest news about the Evil Dead remake is a doozy. Anybody who is a fan of the original Evil Dead movies, or any of Sam Raimi’s work in general, knows the name Bruce Campbell. He of big chin and cocky attitude is such a strong personality, such a big screen presence, that finding somebody to replace him in his iconic, fame-making role as Ash was probably the biggest hurdle that this remake had in front of it. How many young actors can you think of out there that could feasibly replace Bruce Campbell and not make it seem like a total letdown when he chops his hand off? I can’t think of many. Maybe Paul Dano would have been fun, just for the overacting.

Well, instead of dealing with this problem head-on and trying to find the perfect person to play the new Ash, it looks like the creative minds behind this new Evil Dead are throwing us a curveball. In this movie, the main character is no longer Ash. Ash is now Mia, and the role is going might be played by…Lily Collins.

I know what you’re asking yourself right now, you’re asking yourself, “Who the heck is Lily Collins?” I know, I had the same reaction. Well, she’s a young actress who was not only in the movie Priest (did anyone go see that one?), but she was also the daughter in The Blind Side. Oh, and she is also Phil Collins’ daughter.

That’s right, instead of Bruce Campbell the new Evil Dead movie is starring the teenage girl from The Blind Side whose dad led Genesis. I guess you have to give the creative team behind this one credit for taking things in a new direction and not just churning out a rehash, but I can’t help but think I’d be giving them even more credit if they had just made a film called something like, A Completely New Movie That Has Nothing to Do With The Evil Dead At All, instead.

Collins will next play Snow White in Mirror Mirror. [Bloody Disgusting]

As pre-production on the J.J. Abrams directed sequel to 2009′s Star Trek intensifies, we are beginning to see some updates from the folks at Paramount. Namely casting rumors about villains, rumors about what villains will appear and a few things about Benicio Del Toro being in, out and everything in between. Tonight brings us reason to forget about all that and celebrate something slightly more official. Benedict Cumberbatch, the star of Steven Moffat’s incredible BBC series Sherlock, Steve Spielberg’s War Horse and soon to be the voice of ‘Smaug the Dragon’ in Peter Jackson’s The Hobbit, has joined returning cast members for the still untitled but very much anticipated Star Trek sequel.

The update came from Deadline Ceti Alpha V, who is reporting that Cumberbatch’s role is being kept under wraps. Whether he will play a hero or villain is not yet known to the public. Many, including TrekMovie, seem convinced that he’s going to be the villain, which would be very cool if it turns out to be true. What we do know is that Cumberbatch will bring his usual gravitas to the role, using all the brilliance we’ve seen, all of which went into the likes of British GQ to name the Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy star “Actor of the Year 2011.”

Star Trek 2 will hit theaters May 17, 2013. Abrams will be back in the director’s chair, with Alex Kurtzman, Roberto Orci and producer Damon Lindelof working out the details of the story as I type this. Or maybe they’re already done. Either way, I’m excited.

What is Movie News After Dark? It’s a nightly movie and entertainment news column that, now that it’s a year old and feeling mature, is looking to bring you only the best links of the day. Think of it as your one-stop-shop for the best of the entertainment web. If you didn’t see it here, it probably wasn’t that good. If we missed it, just email it to neil@filmschoolrejects.com and we’ll consider it for tomorrow. We do this every night.

We begin tonight with a new shot of Emma Stone in The Amazing Spider-Man as a funeral-going Gwen Stacy. She’s looking quite sad. I wonder who died. Oh right, they are telling the origin story of Spider-Man again. I know who’s going to die.

Roger Erik Tinch, the curator of Reelizer, presents his The Top Ten Movie Posters of 2011 (Alternative Works), which includes art so good that it might make your little hearts break. Pocketbooks, I mean pocketbooks. If you can find places to buy prints, that is. Also, it serves as a reminder that I need to frame my Aaron Horkey Jurassic Park poster and put it up so as to make all my friends jealous.

Mark Ruffalo explains the depth of The Avengers to WSJ’s Speakeasy: “You have all these disparate egos, superheroes in this and that, and they refuse to give up some of their positions in order to make a more perfect union and to join the team. That’s really what the whole movie is about: subjugating your own best interest momentarily to further that of the whole.” Way to keep it simple, Hulk.

This evening’s featured art is that of brilliant drawer Sam Spratt, who has taken one of the more enjoyable subplots of Community‘s third season and created a legit poster for Inspector Spacetime. The Question, Constable, isn’t Where but When. Quick, somewhere tell me both where and when I can buy a print. Never mind, I found a place and the time was ten minutes ago.

Aaron Sorkin has written a musical about Houdini. Godspell and Wicked composer Stephen Schwartz has written the musical numbers. Hugh Jackman will escape from boxes. I will be adding this to my list of things to see on Broadway, right below Book of Mormon.

Below you will find a list of the 10 films that remain in the running for Best Visual Effects award in the upcoming 84th Academy Awards. As you will see, there’s plenty left to be excited about, including Rise of the Planet of the Apes still in the running. Now if only we can get Andy Serkis a Best Supporting nod.

• Captain America: The First Avenger
• Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2
• Hugo
• Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol
• Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides
• Real Steel
• Rise of the Planet of the Apes
• Transformers: Dark of the Moon
• The Tree of Life
• X-Men: First Class

According to an Analyst’s findings, Netflix is more watched than MTV and CNBC and all but about 14 other cable networks. It’s going to be a pretty big deal, I tell ya.

In a somewhat interesting investigation, Movies.com shows you what would happen if you tried the Office Space scam in real life. Basically you’d be arrested, forced to pay a bunch of fines and you would not get to date 90s hot Jennifer Aniston. Sad times.

We close this evening with a new video from Lee Hardcastle, the talented claymation filmmaker who we featured recently in Short Film of the Day with his film T is for Toilet. He’s brought that same verve to his latest work, Pingu’s The Thing.

The doors of Norway’s Bastoy Residential School remained open from 1900 to 1953, and in that half century hundreds of wayward boys called it home. They found themselves there for crimes big and small, but the goal was the same for all of them. Find the “honorable, humble, useful, Christian boy” inside the criminal, and then return them to society. But while this small chunk of rock adrift just south of Oslo was a home it was never meant to feel like one.

A biting cold pervaded the place, inside and out, and it was as prevalent as the rigid discipline, hard labor and overall oppressiveness that was the school’s daily routine. And as inescapable as the island itself.

King of Devil’s Island is based on the true story of a student uprising that occurred at Bastoy in 1915. An incident triggered by sexual abuse but fueled by pent-up rage led to the boys overthrowing their guardians and rioting until a unit of the Norwegian army arrived to quell the situation. The film is an affecting drama that mostly overcomes a familiar story with strong acting by Stellan Skarsgard and others, atmospheric cinematography and a core message of integrity and solidarity.

“Make sure they learn the rules.”

Two new boys arrive by boat in the fall of 1915. Erling (Benjamin Helstad) is rumored to have killed someone, and his face bears the bloodied bruising of police brutality. Ivar (Magnus Langlete) is a skinny and weak willed boy, timid and easily frightened, whose crime is unknown but one can’t imagine as anything more than petty or mistaken. They’re rechristened C19 and C5, respectively, before being stripped and paraded in the nude past their new neighbors and on to their dorm.

The harsh conditions of their open-ended stay at Bastoy are immediately visible in the frozen sea that surrounds them and in the eyes of the other boys. The island’s governor, Bestyreren (Skarsgard), lords over the place with his unhappy wife at his side, but while his intentions are noble his methods stretch the boundaries of the word. Isolation, caning and forced exertion are a few of the official tactics, but Bestyreren’s right-hand man, house father Brathen (Kristoffer Joner), has one more that he keep secret.

Erling feels a certain protectiveness over Ivar, but he has little interest in anyone else. His only goal is escape, but when his behavior catches the eye of a model student due to be released any day now a challenging but oddly rewarding friendship develops. Olav (Trond Nilssen), aka C1, is the student leader on the verge of freedom, but while the truth can sometimes set you free it can also seal your fate.

The film follows these three boys and the others as they interact and learn to deal with their lot in life until that no longer remains an option. We’ve seen dozens of prison-set films before where prisoners are presented in somewhat compassionate light so that we cheer their inevitable uprising and bid for escape, and King of Devil’s Island does little new with the premise aside from setting and historical basis. But that familiarity is the film’s only real weakness.

The characters come to us as enigmas. Their past lives are left unspoken at Bastoy and are therefore unknown to the viewers. Has Erling actually killed someone? We only see him and the others in the here and now as they’re driven to find conformity and friendship in what appears to be the coldest damn place on Earth.

Of course Norway isn’t anywhere near the cold of Antarctica (the actual coldest place on Earth), but director Marius Holst and cinematographer John Andreas Andersen have crafted a place that looks and feels as cold and foreboding as no other. The boys’ breath is visible at night in their beds, and the wind bites at their faces throughout the day. The bitter cold is paired with and against the shots of the darkly beautiful island and crashing sea, and you’ve never seen such a starkly gorgeous vision of hell.

The visuals reach their peak in scenes that bring to life Erling’s repeated tale of life aboard a whaling vessel. We see large mammals cresting the waves, bloodied and taut harpoons impaled in their sides, and we know that some creatures will fight to survive in even the most dire situations. Erling, Olav and the others find strength in the stories, and through them they find a bond with each other.

Foreign Objects travels the world of international cinema each week looking for films worth visiting. So renew your passport, get your shots, and brush up on the local age of legal consent!

Since your plans to go meat bowling fell through, why not stay home and watch a thrilling documentary about high school students in Chicago delivering their experiences through the energetic art of spoken word?

Is Louder Than a Bomb a tough sell? Of course it is, unless you’re already a slam poetry fan, but this is the kind of movie that you have to give a chance because it will richly reward you. Greg Jacobs and Jon Siskel have directed a movie here that is genuine down to its bones, equal parts heartbreaking and triumphant, and engaging beyond its concept.

You can watch it tonight (Jan. 5th) on OWN at 9pm ET/8pm CT. Plus, if you’re so inclined, you can ask the directors questions and make comments on The Twitter during the broadcast by hashtagging with #LTAB.

A movie about high school poetry sounds dreadful, but these kids really are talented beyond their years, and their personal stories are thoroughly compelling. If you need more proof, check out the trailer:

You can also check out my interview with Jacobs about the process of making the movie.

Thomas Newman had his first feature job as an Orchestrator on Return of the Jedi, and has since crafted a career scoring more movies than you can shake a stick at (go ahead, try it). His most recent work includes moving music for Wall-E, The Help, Revolutionary Road and Little Children. He’s got a moderate spectrum of style, but it’s clear he focuses on dramatic, sweeping work.

Beyond the third entry on that list, he also composed for American Beauty, Road to Perdition, and Jarhead; it looks like his working relationship with Sam Mendes has brought about a job on Skyfall. According to MI6 HQ, the ten-time Oscar nominee has been hired to maestro some notes for the forthcoming Bond film.

Fantastic news all around. His work for Shawshank Redemption might be one of the best scores in modern movies, and anyone who helped make Real Genius should get every job ever. However, this move also means that composer David Arnold, who has worked on Bond from Tomorrow Never Dies through Quantum of Solace will have to skip this one. Apparently, he’ll be unavailable due to his duties with the London Olympics in 2012.

It looks like fans won’t have to wait five years between Sarah Polley directorial projects this time around. Even though it took that long between Away From Her and Take This Waltz, The Hollywood Reporter is reporting that she’ll be writing and directing a project called Alias Grace based on the Margaret Atwood novel of the same name.

The book, which is inspired by real life, explores the psychological state of Grace Marks – a young maid who was put in jail for murdering her employer and suspected of killing his mistress in 1843. The story is bubbling with drama and controversy as Marks was both considered by some to be an unwilling participant and was ultimately pardoned after being in an asylum for three decades.

All of this took place in Canada, but in spite of popular belief, it was not the only murder to take place there in the last two hundred years.

This is great news because Polley has a keen talent for both story and character, but a lot will hinge on what teenage actor she gets to play the part of Marks. It will undoubtedly be a demanding role, but it’s an exciting challenge to see Polley take on. However, it also means we probably won’t get to see Polley make sweet, sweet love to a creature she made in a lab with Adrien Brody for a while.

One of my greatest loves, besides full-frontal male nudity in films, is a beard. Normally I would get up on my soap box and spout out tributes to the greatness of male facial hair, how it can instantly make a baby-faced boy look tough and intimidating. Or take a scrappy young man and make him appear soulful or whimsical. Facial hair can even play as much importance in telling the difference between a hipster or a homeless person (a game that is one of my favorite past times). And while I like to think more people share my love of male facial muffs, I’ve come to realize many audiences see facial hair as a costume or accessory meant to show a level of untrustworthy or roguish manliness that a clean-shaven character lacks. This is unfortunate as any level of facial hair can really mean more than just good versus evil on screen.

I have spent many years disappointing my parents with my choice in men and their accompanying facial hair, starting from the celebrities I chose to crush on (90s teen boy bands aside) to the men I brought home for Sunday night dinners. I have long been cursed with a love of beards I cannot deny myself. And as I have spent years writing about and stroking them (research!) it is about time Hollywood takes note of the diversity in beards and how they aren’t just for the bad guys anymore.

Moustache

For anyone who is not a pogonophile, let’s start light with the hair choice made most famous by Burt Reynolds and Tom Selleck: the moustache. Being a child of the 90s, my father rocked one of these until he got too exhausted with maintaining it and just grew out a full beard. But if the last few years are anything to go by, the moustache is making a comeback in a big way on screen. Of course period films will feature more moustaches than not, as the actors want to touch the full sense of the character’s soul. Last April’s Kill the Irishman featured a moustached Ray Stevenson as Irish gangster Danny Greene. He played a character full of charm and sexuality, and 90 percent of that charisma radiated from that place between his nose and top lip. It might not have been the greatest film, but it did leave many ladies feeling an intense attraction to the Irishman.

Before the spring is over two more moustached heroes will make their debut on screen, both of whom appear to be less than likely Lotharios but who will certainly charm the pants off any one in the audience. Those lucky enough to attend this month’s Sundance International Film Festival will be treated with Rubber writer/director Quentin Dupieux’s newest feature Wrong starring the usually fabulous Jack Plotnick as Dolph a man who is on the hunt for his lost dog. If the trailer is to be believed this dog-gone-missing journey seems more Bellflower surreal than Wendy and Lucy heartbreaking, but what’s more compelling than the puppy story is the caterpillar residing under Dolph’s nose. It is less than intimating, and actually makes the 40-something actor look in his early thirties. The film promises to be an exploration of disappearing sanity, but what I can’t wait to see is how many men will start rocking a similar moustache.

Now you might say this next entry is not as highly anticipated as I might make it out to be, and you’re probably correct. But this isn’t an article on the film’s potential adorableness but rather the adorable creature sporting a bushy mo’. Danny DeVito stars as The Lorax in the newest CGI adaption of the Dr. Seuss classic, The Lorax. This time around 3D technology has advanced so much that audiences will have the chance to all but feel the small moustached peanut’s whiskers brush our cheeks. What made How to Train Your Dragon so memorable was the overwhelming 3D facial hair, and in a way Dr. Seuss’ The Lorax looks like it might just be as visually stunning as Vikings with dragons.

Freestyle

One of the most anticipated films released this spring is the adaptation of Suzanne Collins’ young adult novel The Hunger Games. A film about children being taken from their homes and entered into a post-apocalyptic fight to the death sounds terribly depressing and utterly heartbreaking by the time we get to see all three films. But one grain of solace we get comes in the form of the costumes donned by the characters. One in particular was incredibly striking, that of Wes Betley’s Seneca Crane whose embellished beard points to a sense of opulence his character needs. Yes, he is not a good guy but Seneca’s beard, with its dark black color and curly waves near his ear, attracts all eyes to him and leaves many feeling an immediate need to trace the outer linings of his cheeks.

Shadow

After December’s disastrous New Years Eve, Zac Efron has a lot to live up to, despite being the only charming thing in that entire mess of a romantic comedy. And as he is a teen heart throb who wants to be taken seriously it was about time he followed in Channing Tatum’s emoting footsteps and tried his hand at a Nicholas Sparks emotionally manipulative adaptation.  April’s The Lucky One stars Efron as a recently returned soldier named Logan who is in love with a girl in a picture. He sets out to find this lovely lady, along the way growing out a sadness five-o’clock shadow beard surely meant to leave any lady in his wake swooning. What’s a real tragedy here is that Foley artists haven’t quite mastered the delicious sound of scruff on bare skin for each of the times Logan has his cheek brushed. I think it’s time to start a letter writing campaign to the guilds.

Full beard, Care of Liam Neeson

Finally after assessing my anticipated moustaches, creative follicle designs, and baby-man scruff available over the next six months, we arrive at what I really want. Let’s call all of the above foreplay and in the words of Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson, give me the dessert. Beards and all their bushy lush glory is where all the fun is at, and 2012 promises to not disappoint. Starting with the always beardy Liam Neeson, whose facial hair prowess is found in three films out between January 27th and June. First he stars, alongside some rabid looking wolves, in The Grey where he plays Ottway an oil-driller trying desperately to stay alive so his wife can once again rub his face in bed. Along the way he is attacked by wolves, frozen to the bone, and often picks out a mixture of snow and blood from the tips of his silver fox mountain man beard. Ottway’s beard functions both as a chin sweater and an accessory to make the tough guy look even more formidable—to wolves.

Next Neeson brings his beard back to the abomination that is Phantom Menace. George Lucas celebrates the 10^th anniversary of the movie that never should have been and the only consolation we get is the chance to once again see Qui-Gon Jinn’s epic Jedi beard. Not even Ewan McGregor’s goatee in Attack of the Clones can compare to wisdom obviously prevalent in Neeson’s face coat.

Meanwhile, Neeson returns as Zeus in the never-asked-for sequel to 2010’s Clash of the Titans, Wrath of the Titans. Now if you thought the two previous beards were worthy of attention, you might want to power your way through the Wrath trailer one more time. Go ahead, I’ll wait here.

Now, that is one impressive beard, which I’m sure Neeson did not grow on his own (sorry to burst that bubble), but regardless if he did or he didn’t the length and size of it only increases the power a character like Zeus both exudes and demands. He is a daunting, yet wise figure, and the decision to hide Neeson behind a beard wig only sends that message home harder. Honestly, even if I didn’t adore Neeson’s facial hair I would be excited to see this film since almost every man in the film features some sort of war beard. And there really isn’t anything wrong with that.

Don’t worry, there’s always more Reel Sex

This is the kind of story that sounds too absurd to be true. According to an insider for Vulture, Matt Damon will no longer be making his directorial debut with the project previously reported on. The idea came from Dave Eggers and John Krasinski, and the script was co-written by Krasinski and Damon, but the insider is citing “script issues” as the reason for Damon getting up from the director’s chair. Thus, Matt Damon is having trouble with the script from Matt Damon.

The best part? Apparently he’s still on board to star.

So there are 3 options here: 1) Either Matt Damon thinks the writing he (and Krasinki) did is good enough to star but not good enough to direct 2) he is having an existential crisis where he’s arguing with himself or 3) the insider is wrong.

Maybe Damon really is stepping back from directing, but the reasoning here sounds ludicrous in light of the work he’s already done. Hopefully some clearer information will come out before the FSR offices run out of aspirin.

Why Watch? You’ve been cut off before, right? Director/animator Nick Khoo decided to channel the aggression that comes with traffic into a short that he made, somehow, only using After Effects.

It’s a sharp, funny adventure into horn-honking frustration, sweet retribution, and it all comes with a bow on top of an ending.

What does it cost? Just 2 minutes of your time.

Trust us. You have time for more short films.