Moviefone This Week In Movies RSS Feed

He's blown it up in "Independence Day" and crushed it with an aircraft carrier in "2012," but this week, Roland Emmerich rolls out his most concerted assault on 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue yet with "White House Down."

The film stars Channing Tatum as John Cale, a recently-rejected Secret Service applicant who's on a consolation tour of the White House with his daughter when a group of disgruntled domestic terrorists invade. With the grounds locked down and the cavalry helpless, it's up to Cale to save the President (Jamie Foxx), his daughter, and the day -- but not the White House, which he tears up almost as much as the bad guys.

So just what is it that the blockbuster director has against the presidential digs anyway? I broke down the destruction in "White House Down" in order to find out.

Emmerich takes his time.
For all the famous buildings the serial landmark killer has destroyed in his career, it's obvious he still has some unfinished business in Washington. Clocking in at 131 minutes, the director methodically works his way through the White House, leaving no nook or cranny undamaged, ripping up the South Lawn, blowing up the underground tunnels, and staging shootouts in the President's private residence. Despite the runtime, the film never drags, but this time around, it's clearly not enough for Emmerich to simply destroy the building. He wants to watch it suffer first.

Nothing is safe -- not even the décor.
It could be that Emmerich just wants to redecorate, because he saves most of the carnage for the White House's interior design. A piano explodes, a Ming vase is shattered, even a portrait of George Washington gets capped. In fact, the only art the director seems to actually like is a painting commemorating the White House being burnt down during the War of 1812. Then again, maybe he just thinks mixing all those different decades and styles is tacky.

The grounds get a makeover.
Every self-respecting action movie has to have a high-speed car chase, and since the White House has a basketball court, tennis court and swimming pool, but no racetrack, Emmerich improvises by holding his chase scene on the famous South Lawn. Also, after he's done with his landscaping makeover, the White House no longer has a basketball court, tennis court or swimming pool. It does, however, have a few downed helicopters, which could really spice up the next White House Easter Egg hunt.

Emmerich doesn't stop at the Oval Office.
It's not clear whether the director hate-watched "The West Wing" for research, but Emmerich's bullet-riddled behind-the-scenes tour isn't limited to just the Oval Office or the famous facade he blew up in "Independence Day" (something the movie has fun pointing out). Instead, Cale and President Sawyer also fight their way through the building's lesser-known territory, which besides providing "White House Down" some much appreciated variety for its big action set pieces, also gives Emmerich a chance to blow up even more publicly funded real estate.

It's nothing personal.
As President Sawyer, Jamie Foxx makes for a pretty good Commander-in-Chief. He's sincere, humble, loves his job, and his most controversial political move is trying to ensure peace in the Middle East. He also gets to kick the most ass out of any movie president since Harrison Ford, even if his catchphrases could use a little work. It's often said people should respect the office of the President, if not the man himself. Emmerich flips that sentiment around here -- then blows that office to bits. So even though the director's retreading old ground with "White House Down," he's also clearly still having a lot of fun, and it's important to do what you love.

"White House Down" opens in theatres on June 28.

James Badge Dale has one of those faces; you know you've seen him somewhere, but can't quite place it. I remembered him from the 1990 version of "Lord of the Flies," in which he played the quiet Simon (he was only 10 years old!). But this summer, you can see him in "The Lone Ranger" as well as "Iron Man 3" and "World War Z."

While his characters may not be huge roles, they'll all integral to the stories being told. In "The Lone Ranger," he plays Sheriff Dan Reid, brother to the eventual Lone Ranger (played by Armie Hammer). With a grizzly mustache and a two-gun belt, it's clear that Dale relishes this role.

Moviefone sat down with Dale to talk about his turn as one of the good guys in "The Lone Ranger," his horseback riding skills, and what it's like to wear that bad-ass sheriff outfit.

(Watch video interview below)

It's hard to figure out what exactly conspires to make an actor underrated, though in Sam Rockwell's case he might as well be the poster-child for undervalued thespians. Even in "The Way, Way Back," his latest movie, a touching indie about an introverted teen navigating the quiet indignities of adolescence while his mom gets drunk with her jerk of a boyfriend, Rockwell once again takes a backseat.

Instead, his strong supporting performance as Owen, the water park manager who's so relentlessly charming he helps young Duncan come out of his shell, gets overshadowed in Nat Faxon and Jim Rash's directorial debut after their screenwriting Oscar for "The Descendants." Or maybe it's the general shock of watching Steve Carell play a jerk, and do it so well.

Like most coming-of-age films, "The Way, Way Back" is about the underdog making good, and with his reputation for scene-stealing, well-documented dance moves and easy charisma, Rockwell's due for proper recognition eventually. It'll help if "The Way, Way Back" becomes the next breakout indie hit, like 2013's "Little Miss Sunshine" or "Juno." Until then, though, here's an unscientific look back at five movies that should've already made Rockwell a household name.

Justin Hammer, "Iron Man 2":
Playing the bad guy in a major summer blockbuster -- especially one as heavily-anticipated as "Iron Man 2" -- is usually enough to take an underrated actor to the next level. Only Rockwell's already done that once before, in "Charlie's Angels." And it didn't exactly translate into movie stardom then either. Still, having Rockwell play a less-beloved, darker version of Tony Stark was an inspired bit of casting. Because with his proven ability to play a narcissistic-yet-charming oddball, Rockwell isn't just Iron Man in an alternate universe somewhere, he's Robert Downey, Jr.

Victor Mancini, "Choke":
OK, so maybe it's not much of a surprise that playing an unrepentant sex-addicted con man in "Choke" didn't launch Rockwell to the A-list. Victor isn't your typical loveable, mainstream rom-com leading man. But after the huge success of Chuck Palahniuk's "Fight Club," you'd have figured his next big-screen adaption would've gotten a little more buzz. Especially thanks to Rockwell's Mancini, who played the film's anti-hero with almost as much misguided charm as Brad Pitt's iconic Tyler Durden. Director Clark Gregg went on to mainstream recognition with a recurring role as fan favorite Agent Phil Coulson for Marvel (and soon, his own TV show). Rockwell, meanwhile, went back to another solid but unsung supporting role in "Frost/Nixon."

Billy Bickle, "Seven Psychopaths":
Even for an accomplished scene-stealer like Rockwell, it's no easy task stealing a movie from Colin Farrell, Woody Harrelson and Christopher Walken (especially Christopher Walken). But as Billy, a dog-napping sociopath in the meta black comedy, Rockwell proved he could become king of the unhinged, even in an all-star cast filled with Hollywood's best. And while writer/director Martin McDonagh's follow-up to the cult classic "In Bruges" had its problems, Rockwell wasn't one of them. When you can out-crazy Tom Waits holding a pet rabbit, people should take notice.

Chuck Barris, "Confessions of a Dangerous Mind":
Based on the bizarre memoirs of game show creator and self-proclaimed CIA operative Chuck Barris, with a script by Charlie Kaufman, and the directorial debut of George Clooney (who also co-starred), "Confessions of a Dangerous Mind" looked like a sure thing for Rockwell. He romances Drew Barrymore (sort of), plays a self-destructive TV producer/secret agent, and even grows a mean Howard Hughes beard. And yet, Rockwell didn't even become the biggest star to portray Barris in his own movie: that award goes to Michael Cera, who shows up briefly in "Confessions" as young Chuck, ages 8 and 11.

Sam Bell, "Moon":
The biggest head-scratcher is "Moon," which made all of $5 million at the box office despite being a critical darling and 2009's best sci-fi film (and no, I'm not forgetting "Avatar"). As Sam Bell, tasked with the solo mission of manning mining operations on the dark side of the moon, Rockwell carries the movie all on his own, unless you count acting opposite GERTY, the series of emoticons later voiced by Kevin Spacey. This isn't a surprise, since Hollywood's littered with small indies that didn't get the recognition they deserve. And even though "Moon" didn't need win Rockwell any hardware, a commanding performance this good should've officially vaulted him into the next tier.

He gets another chance with "The Way, Way Back." But even if that doesn't work either, and Rockwell stays perpetually underrated, well, to paraphrase Owen, that's about us; it clearly has nothing to do with him anymore.

"The Way, Way Back" opens in select theaters on July 5.

Anyone who's seen the previews for "Pacific Rim" knows the main reason 10-year-olds and adults (who still act like one) will be lining up at movie theatres this weekend: they want to watch giant robots fighting giant monsters, preferably on a giant screen.

Set in the near future, skyscraper-sized alien creatures dubbed "kaiju" have begun traveling through an inter-dimensional portal located in a crack in the Pacific Ocean floor. So, to prevent them from playing Godzilla in major urban centres, mankind drops teams of fighter pilots into similarly sized robots called "jaegers" to go toe-to-toe with the beasts from beyond. With the jaegers winning battles but losing the war, General Stacker Pentecost (Idris Elba) recruits a former pilot Raleigh Becket (Charlie Hunnam) to help make humanity's last stand.

But there's more to Guillermo Del Toro's super-sized summer blockbuster than just its kaiju-on-jaeger action (there's also a lot of Idris Elba shouting). Here's a breakdown of the movie's key matchups.

Jaegers vs. Kaiju:
To be fair, watching jaegers duke it out with kaiju isn't just the main event in "Pacific Rim," it's the movie's raison d'etre. Considering Del Toro's calling card as a filmmaker has always been inventive creature design, it's no surprise then that the kaiju are as varied as the monsters mankind built to fight them. Both are broken down into various classes and categories, according to size: some of the kaiju can fly, others spit acid. Meanwhile, in addition to their government-issued, anime-inspired weaponry, the jaegers gain a competitive edge by using fistfuls of shipping containers like brass knuckles and a cargo ship as a baseball bat.

Verdict: For the most part, the kaiju and jaegers are pretty evenly matched, or at least put up more of a fair fight than the undercard bout of a kaiju versus a giant brick wall.

Raleigh vs. Chuck:
Each jaeger is piloted by a crew of two -- or in one case, three -- merging minds with each other and the machine through a process called "drifting." (Note: it's not as dumb as it sounds.) They're essentially fighter pilots in bigger, badder machines, with egos to match, which helps explain the Maverick and Iceman vibe given off by dueling jaeger pilots Raleigh and Robert Kazinsky's Chuck, who's reluctant to let Raleigh be his wingman after an early-movie tragedy. Sound familiar? Of course, Raleigh's the lead, which gives him a clear edge for audience sympathy. And just in case it doesn't, all those gratuitous shirtless shots are meant to seal the deal.

Verdict: Raleigh and Chuck trade punches and hard stares, but it's Rinko Kikuchi's Mako who makes for the most compelling top gun.

Charlie Day vs. Ron Perlman:
Every summer blockbuster needs comic relief, which means Day and Perlman jockey for the movie's laughs. As a kaiju biologist/groupie, Day's his usual manic self, only significantly smarter (you can tell because he's wearing glasses). Perlman has a much smaller role as a major player on the black market for kaiju organs, but makes his usual big impression. He also has the advantage of familiarity with Del Toro, but Day gets significantly more screen time, driving the movie's main subplot.

Verdict: Perlman steals a few scenes, but in the end, it's a numbers game, and Day lands the most one-liners.

Idris Elba vs. Indoor Voices:
Elba brings his usual intensity to General Stacker Pentecost, a former jaeger-pilot-turned-commanding-officer who apparently hates talking at a normal volume almost as much as the kaiju. At one point, after a sustained minute or so of regular conversation doesn't sufficiently get his point across, Elba ratchets his voice up to 11 in 30 seconds flat, then stays there for the rest of the movie. And his rousing "Today, we are cancelling the apocalypse!" shout is the odds-on favourite to be this summer's "Release the Kraken!"

Verdict: A decisive victory for Elba.

Story vs. Spectacle:
Since anyone who's seen a summer blockbuster before already knows who's going to win in a no-holds-barred jaeger/kaiju fight, this one's the real title card event. And it's a surprisingly fair fight, especially considering this is a movie about, well, giant robots fighting even gianter monsters, rinse and repeat. Most of the world-building is set up via opening narration, allowing "Pacific Rim" to get right down to what you came for: the sensory overload. But despite delivering all the fireworks audiences expect out of a massive summer action movie, Del Toro never short-changes the story for the sake of CGI-driven spectacle.

And while the plot's a relatively simple one, it works because Del Toro takes pains to make sure we actually care about the characters and their various traumas, and that the stakes for each battle royale get increasingly higher. It helps that the mind-meld concept allows Del Toro and co-writer Travis Beacham to trim much of the genre's usual cheesy speechifying; these characters already know what the other's going to say (and so does the audience, for that matter).

Verdict: As the rare summer blockbuster based off an original idea instead of a line of toys or pre-existing franchise, "Pacific Rim" finds the perfect balance between story and spectacle.

"Pacific Rim" opens in theatres on July 12.

With ads prominently pushing both its R-rated laughs and Jennifer Aniston as a stripper, you've probably figured out by now that "We're The Millers" isn't exactly a conventional family road trip movie. That's because the Millers aren't your conventional movie family.

Lead by Jason Sudeikis (fresh off his recent exit from "Saturday Night Live") and Aniston and directed by Rawson Marshall Thurber ("Dodgeball"), "We're The Millers" stars Sudeikis as David, a small-time pot dealer forced to graduate to international drug trafficking by his boss Brad (Ed Helms), who's like Tony Montana by way of Mr. Rogers. So, reasoning that clean-cut families draw less suspicion at the border, David recruits a fake wife and kids to help move his boss' product back from Mexico. Only this supposedly "all-American" family consists of a stripper, a runaway and a dorky teen.

In other words, the Millers aren't exactly a Norman Rockwell painting. So who are they then? I put together the following helpful guide to "We're The Millers" and its fake family.

David Miller
Played by: Jason Sudeikis
Real name: David Clark
Who he is: An easygoing bachelor who's perfectly content selling pot to new moms and local chefs, which makes him unmotivated -- at least compared to his former college partner, who's since become a massive drug lord and owns an orca. David's the type of dealer who's willing to loan his wares "on credit."
Who he's pretending to be: A khaki-wearing father of two with a Supercuts haircut and zero metric tons of drugs hidden in his RV. Or, the type of dad who thinks that buying (and wearing) matching sombreros is a fun idea.
Strengths: Delivering heartfelt climactic speeches and fake father/fake son talks, convincing people to do things they otherwise wouldn't, sharing.
Weaknesses: Negotiating, waiting for longer than 30 seconds, driving by himself.
What David really wants: A family to bicker with on long road trips. And to prove Sudekis can be a leading man.
Does it work?: David may resist at first, but because this is a "feel-good" movie masquerading as R-rated comedy, he's a changed man by the third act. That's undeniably cheesy, but thanks to Sudeikis' comic timing and well-practiced ability to play a likeable jerk, he's able to hold the family (and movie) together, even when David can't.

Rose Miller
Played by: Jennifer Aniston
Real name: Rose O'Reilly
Real real name: Sarah O'Reilly
Who she is: A "mean pretty" exotic dancer at a Denver strip club called Brass and Ass with a deadbeat ex-boyfriend, sleazy (some might say entrepreneurial) boss, and bad credit. She really hates David for some vague reason.
Who she's pretending to be: A Midwestern mom with a handle on her children and possessor of a million helpful tips for spicing up casseroles and marriages. She loves David and reading owners' manuals. Both for no apparent reason.
Strengths: Improvising prayer circles and stripper routines, kissing, latent maternal instincts.
Weaknesses: Paying rent, Pictionary, letting her guard down.
What Rose really wants: To have a husband and kids. And to prove Aniston is still a sex symbol.
Does it work?: By channeling her childhood summers with Aunt Barb and changing into "capri pants and sensible footwear," Rose makes the quickest transition of the bunch. And since we've already seen her take a motherly interest in a fellow co-worker, Rose's 180 from cynical stripper to protective fake mom isn't entirely unexpected. It also requires less suspension of disbelief than buying Aniston as a hard-luck veteran stripper, no matter how awkwardly or persistently "We're The Millers" pushes this.

Casey Miller
Played by: Emma Roberts
Real name: Casey Mathis
Who she is: A bratty "gutter punk" runaway who may not have a current mailing address, but does have an iPhone.
Who she's pretending to be: A model daughter who's capable of sitting in an RV for hours at a time without texting.
Strengths: Quick on her feet, curses like a sailor.
Weaknesses: A questionable taste in men, fireworks.
What Casey really wants: Parents who will yell at her.
Does it work?: Casey may trade in her lip piercings for pastel polo shirts, but her mouth is still stuck in the gutter. That said, her knack for lying bails the Millers out more than once. Ultimately, the real Casey proves far more useful (and entertaining) than the fake one.

Kenny Miller
Played by: Will Poulter
Real name: Kenny Rossmore
Who he is: A dorky teen whose mom wants nothing to do with him.
Who he's pretending to be: A dorky teen whose parents want nothing to do with him, but are willing to pretend otherwise.
Strengths: Not suspicious, sincere, has all the lyrics to TLC's "Waterfalls" memorized.
Weaknesses: Girls, spider bites, David, truthful to a fault.
What Kenny really wants: A family to hang out with, and a girlfriend.
Does it work?: Kenny already looked and acted the part going in, so becoming a Miller isn't much of a stretch. Still, thanks to his newfound fake family, he's able to learn how to talk to girls, how to kiss them, how to throw a punch, and the toxicity of Mexican tarantulas. And audiences are able to learn that Poulter is a hilarious rapper.

LeBron Miller
Played by: A brick of marijuana
Real name: Cannabis
Who he is: Illicit substances picked up from a Mexican kingpin. Also, an inanimate object.
Who he's pretending to be: A baby wrapped in a blanket.
Strengths: Quiet, never cries, everyone loves a baby.
Weaknesses: Drug-sniffing dogs, not a real human being.
What LeBron really wants: Undetermined.
Does it work?: No.

"We're the Millers" opens in theaters on August 7.

The grass may always be greener on the other side of the fence, but in the case of "Elysium," the latest thinly veiled social allegory-turned-action movie from writer/director Neill Blomkamp, that old cliché is quite literally true.

That's because, by the year 2154, Earth has become an impoverished wasteland, while humanity's elite inhabit a shiny space station called Elysium high above the planet. Free of disease, crime and, most importantly, poor people, it's a pretty nice place if you're lucky enough to live there. And if you're not, well, there's a reason why they call these kinds of movies dystopian.

So just how idyllic is Blomkamp's futuristic habitat? And, more importantly, is his follow-up to "District 9" worth the trip for audiences? Here's everything you need to know about living on Elysium, the happiest place not on Earth.

It's got serious curb appeal
As we're told via flashback, the movie's hero, Max (Matt Damon), has dreamt of getting to Elysium ever since he was a kid. Problem is, so has just about everyone else on the planet, and Secretary of Defense Delacourt (Jodie Foster) is staunchly anti-immigration. But it's easy to see why so many people would be willing to leave behind Earth's scenic rolling garbage hills and casual robo-police brutality for the gleaming paradise. A high-tech rotating space station, Elysium is like something out of "2001," only filled with palm trees and infinity pools. Not to mention gorgeous CGI.

Also, universal health care
Health care may be a big debate here on Earth, but not on Elysium. Instead, the fact that its citizens have access to futuristic medical care is the major selling point. Each house is equipped with state-of-the-art machines that are able to almost instantaneously cure everything from cancer to grenade wounds. And that's important, because for some reason, people seem to have a real problem with getting blown up in "Elysium." So, after an on-the-job accident leaves Max with a rapidly-approaching expiry date, it's understandable why he and so many others are looking to cure what ails them on Elysium.

Getting pre-approved is crucial
And we're not talking about for a mortgage. Delacourt takes a hard-line stance when it comes to immigration, which means if Elysium doesn't approve your entry, the welcome basket consists of a surface-to-air missile. Remember the whole thinly veiled social allegory part? Well, Elysium is the ultimate gated community, and there's nothing subtle about it.

It's going to cost you
Aside from being born there, the only way to get into Elysium is to enlist qualified help. And in Max's case, that doesn't mean an experienced real estate agent. Instead, he heads to Spider (Wagner Moura), the de facto resistance leader, who offers to help Max crash the gates by welding an exoskeleton onto his body in order to heist "sensitive brain data." Granted, this doesn't make much sense, but it does mean we get to watch Damon tear apart robots and throw down with Elysium's version of homeland security, Kruger (Sharlto Copley), a gleeful madman with a samurai sword and zero redeeming features. Which makes the suspension of disbelief well worth it.

Everyone's always thinking of the children
When it comes to prime real estate like Elysium, it's important to keep the future in mind, and not just in terms of resale value. Whether it's Max or Delacourt, everybody sees the floating paradise as a way to provide a better life for future generations. For Max and the others, that means not having to grow up in a world suffering from overpopulation and widespread disease. And for Delacourt, that means not having to share their parks with poor people. Again, subtlety isn't the movie's strong suit.

It's not perfect
Despite the great views and robot servants, Elysium isn't quite the blissful utopia it seems from down below. There's still political backstabbing and power plays, and it takes a lot of nasty means to justify such extravagant ends. As a movie, "Elysium" isn't perfect either, and whether or not you should make the trip ultimately depends on your tolerance for sci-fi clichés, predictable plotting and exploding bodies. Still, Blomkamp and his team do such an impressive job crafting both of the movie's futuristic worlds that it makes "Elysium" a nice place for audiences, and especially sci-fi fans, to visit for a couple hours.

"Elysium" opens in theatres on August 9.

eOne Films

There's no proven formula for coming up with the "next big thing" when it comes to young adult franchises -- even Stephenie Meyer's only 1-for-2. But if there were one, it'd probably look a lot like "The Mortal Instruments," which combines werewolves, vampires, and other fantastical creatures with a "Twilight"-esque love triangle, elements of "Harry Potter," and a franchise-ready five novels (and counting). It's also got a sizable -- and vocal -- fan base, as director Harald Zwart learned when he agreed to take on the first adaptation in the would-be series, "The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones."

Franchise hopes or not, Zwart wanted to make sure "City of Bones" was capable of standing on its own, and not beholden to any theoretical sequels that might or might not materialize. That measured approach was rewarded back in May when a second movie, "City of Ashes," was announced months before the first was scheduled to hit theatres, with Zwart returning to the director's chair.

So, with "City of Bones" premiering this Wednesday, and "City of Ashes" going into production in September, Moviefone spoke with Zwart in advance of the release about what first intrigued him about the series, what he was most surprised to learn about the books' fan base, and why he's not a fan of the "young adult" label.

Moviefone: You, Lily Collins and Jamie Campbell-Bower were all signed on for the sequel, "City of Ashes," a few months before this one's August release. Do you take that as a major vote of confidence?
Harald Zwart: Yes. I think the producers are great for doing that. I think the fans were hoping that would be the case, and I think what we've seen so far from the response, it might be the right decision also.

Was returning for another movie an easy call for you? Are you looking forward to exploring this world more?
Yeah, I think I've learned to really love all these characters and the world. And working closely with ["Mortal Instruments" author] Cassandra Clare, it was also such a gratifying experience. She was so respectful of the whole filmmaking process. And I think the second book is just as exciting, if not even more exciting, than the first one.

What'd you see in the project that made you want to do this over other things you may have been offered after the success of the "Karate Kid" remake?
First of all, I thought the books are great. I think they have a great main character. They're rooted in reality, which is a rare case sometimes with these fantasy [movies], so the gateway into the fantasy is through a very relatable world. And I thought there was an endless source of great fantasy ideas. All those things combined, and the fact that I always wanted to do a "Harry Potter"-type movie with a female lead, [it] was just exactly what I was looking for.

How do you make a story with obviously fantastical elements like this feel grounded as well? Do you try to do more practical effects than CGI to balance that out?
All in all, the movie's effects will all obviously seem real, but the approach to doing them was very much an attempt to do as much as we could in-camera, so that the actors had physical objects to respond to or react to, and act with around them. But also just the approach on how to justify some of the fantasy that happens in the movie, we tried to somehow make that all seem grounded as well. There's a little bit of the "Da Vinci Code" approach to some of these fantasy ideas.

Who do you think that approach benefits more -- the audiences, or the actors themselves?
I think it's both. I think there is this unspoken little thing in the audience's mind that tells you things are real or they're not real. It helps the actors tremendously, but actors can usually get there if they have to. But I think the audience will appreciate that. We also shot it on film, which is more and more unusual these days, and also that gives the movie a certain texture.

What made you decide to go film as opposed to digital?
Just because I wanted this to feel like an old universe, as if this Shadowhunter universe had existed for hundreds of years. It echoes way back into the Middle Ages. And I felt like that classic look could be best achieved with film. I think great movies, such as the last "Harry Potter," as far as I know, and the last "Star Trek," they were all shot on film. And they do get a certain fairy tale texture to them that it's harder to do with digital.

Did you take any other lessons away from observing other successful young adult franchises like "Harry Potter?"
It's been an educational process. Just like when I did "The Karate Kid," I decided with the filmmakers and the producers that let's not use the term "kids' movie" or "family movie." Let's think of it as just "the movie." Same thing here. We tried not to categorize it as a "young adult [film]," because as soon as you start mentioning those kinds of terms, it dictates a certain way of looking at things. And we just wanted to make this a movie on its own terms.

I think what I did learn from following Cassandra to all her book signings, I've been very impressed with meeting the fans and seeing that they're actually quite mature, and they're older than I first thought. So the approach of just making this a really seriously good movie without kind of putting the target group in front of us was a good thing. Because I think we all underestimated how wide this target group is.

Were you surprised by the dedication of the fans?
Yes, I was positively surprised. I always get energized whenever I encounter them and see their enthusiasm and how devoted they are, and how well they know the universe. And how smart they are. And that they actually value things in the books that they can't find in other books. A lot of them are young people who've searched for something in other book series and didn't find it. And then when they started reading Cassandra's work, they identified with it.

When you're adapting somebody else's work like this, something that's so strongly identified with Cassandra by all these fans, how do you stay loyal to what she's done, but still put your own stamp on the movie?
In this case, I happened to read the script before the book, and normally when I read a script, I always read them with my own vision in mind. So I walked into this with a vision, and then I had meetings with Cassandra and I explained to her how I saw the movie, and she was very open. So I feel like it's been a really great collaborative process, where I've been able to make it mine and it still has been synchronized with how she's seen it in her head.

Do you think having her onboard with the film helps sort of legitimize this adaptation from her fans' perspective?
Yeah, I think so. I think, regardless, just getting her approval on some of these things, you know, she's been living with this universe a lot longer than I have. So sometimes it was just a very helpful shortcut for me to run things by her. And when she gets behind it, I think automatically the fans will understand that I've respected the book.

Lily Collins had said that she was fan of the books coming in. Did she ever give you any trouble about changing things or condensing things from the book?
No, Lily never gave me any trouble whatsoever. [Laughs] She's fantastic to work with, we had so much fun doing this. And I think she liked what I had to say about the character. I mean, first of all, the Clary portrayed by Lily is an older person than what she is normally in the book. That also has some consequences, so I think she liked the way I wanted to take the story. And Lily's not the kind of person who would give anybody any trouble. [Laughs]

"The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones" opens in theatres on August 21.

According to "The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones" star Lily Collins, when author Cassandra Clare first started shopping her young adult fantasy series around, publishers asked her to change her central protagonist to a boy, reasoning that no one wanted to read about a young female heroine. And they weren't too sure about those vampires or werewolves either. Five best-selling books (and counting) later, and it's safe to say Collins isn't the only one who's glad that Clare stuck to her guns.

In the upcoming film version of "City of Bones," directed by Harald Zwart, Collins plays Clary, a seemingly ordinary teenager who finds out that she's actually part of an ancient bloodline of Shadowhunters -- half-angel, half-human warriors tasked with keeping our world safe from a host of demonic creatures (including, yes, vampires and werewolves). And when her mother (Lena Headey) is kidnapped by a disgraced former Shadowhunter named Valentine (Jonathan Rhys-Meyers) aiming to disrupt years of peace, it's up to Clary to stop him.

That alone is a lot to thrust on anyone's shoulders, not to mention the responsibility of establishing the next blockbuster fantasy film franchise. Luckily though, as a big fan of the book series, Collins knew what she was getting into.

With "City of Bones" releasing on August 21, Moviefone sat down with Collins to discuss approaching her character from a fan's point-of-view, how she first stumbled across the book series, and what separates "The Mortal Instruments" from other young adult franchises out there (namely, ahem, "Twilight").

Moviefone: Do you find it helped to have already been a fan of the books going in, to understand what fans' expectations might be for Clary?
Collins: Definitely. Having been a fan myself, I never envisioned myself reading the books as Clary. I never really read books envisioning myself [as a character], and I didn't know they were making it into a movie when I read them. Then after I read the first one, that's when I discovered they were making it into a series. But I wasn't active on social media, so I really had walked into a bookshop, saw the spine of the book, picked it out, thought, "Oh my God, I've discovered a really great series." Had no concept they'd been around for years, didn't know how many millions of copies had sold. [Laughs] So when they cast me and then released that, and then the fandom just burst with news, I was like, "Oh my God, I had no idea I was signing on for something this massive."

Still, I kind of felt like, as a fan, I had expectations [for] Clary. So I wanted to bring that into it, and be like, "I know what the fans want, they're gonna want this." So I did feel like one of them in that sense. It was exciting to have that attachment to her already, definitely.

Was it easy for you to relate to Clary because of that?
I've noticed in all these mall tours, when the fans are watching footage and getting so invested and showing their love for Clary, it's because they relate to her. And I think because she shows a vulnerability and a confusion and a very realistic teen experience within this fantasy world, and then can kick ass and have this superhuman kind of quality about her, everyone can somewhat relate to Clary. So I'd like to think that if my mom was stolen -- because I related to her on that level, my mom and I are so close -- on that level alone, I saw myself being able to have the passion to go after my mom like Clary. But then Clary also taught me a lot about self-discovery, and [that] your weaknesses can be your strongest points. And I think she can teach a lot without being preachy.

What did you see in this property that we maybe haven't seen in other young adult franchises? What sets it apart?
It's got a comedic undertone that I don't think the other ones have. We don't allow the audience to laugh at us, we beat them to it and laugh with them, with a joke, or with a lightness to the story. It's not a full-blown romance - it's got romance in it, of course, but it's not just a girl being defined by men. She never victimizes herself, she is one of the guys, she's not choosing a world that's not hers. She is a Shadowhunter and she's learning how to deal with that.

We're not defining our movie by fantasy characters like vampires or werewolves; they exist within our story, but you could take those away, as well as the CGI, and the story would stand alone on character and emotion. That's what Harald [Zwart] wanted. He wanted people to be invited in that didn't know the story, but also fans to appreciate the characters. As a fan of the books myself, I do feel that's what is so appealing about the books, that it is so character and emotionally-driven. It's set in a fantasy world, which makes it more interesting I guess, but it's really the characters that you feel for. Everyone really feels for Simon or Jace or Clary. People love Magnus, people love Isabelle, people love Alec.

It's not that they're like, "This is a vampire story, this is a werewolf story, I like vampires better." It's about character. And I think when you add in those elements it makes it maybe more modern, because that's really popular right now, but Cassie wrote these books before "Twilight" came out. The first publisher she took them to said, "Can you make Clary a male? Because no one wants a female heroine. And no one's going to be interested in reading about vampires and werewolves." [laughs] Like, clearly they were ahead of the game, right? So I do think that it can stand alone because it's not defined by these fantasy characters.

Were there any scenes you were really anticipating shooting going in? [Warning: Spoilers]
Probably the greenhouse scene. Because as a reader of the books, that's the most romantic moment, and the anticipation of that scene was so heightened in the book. So this greenhouse sequence is a moment where you're like, "Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes! Do it! Do it! Do it!" It's kind of like, you're excited, and then it happens, and if that wasn't magical in any way, it's a letdown. [laughs] Because all the girls are going, "Oh my God! Oh my God! It's the greenhouse scene!" Like, on the mall tour, literally all Jamie [Campbell Bower] and I had to go was, "Greenhouse" and they'd go, "Ahhhh!" It became this whole soccer match thing, and it was funny, it was like a game.

But yeah, I was excited about the greenhouse scene because it's a magical moment. It's where Jace shows his vulnerability, so I was excited for Jamie because he got to show a different side of himself, and it's the romantic part of the movie. Again, it's not a romance, but it is the moment of chemistry, it's the moment of romance, it's that gratifying moment of "Finally, they're together." Which only makes the scene later when they find out they're brother and sister that much more heartbreaking, because you need those extremes.

Was it encouraging for you when the sequel was announced well before the first movie was set to come out?
Oh yeah. That was a major boost of confidence. I think we all went, "What? [laughs] Excuse me? We're not even finished editing the first one yet!" That just proved to us that the studio really believed in it, and when you have that fueling you going into press and going into these mall events, it's great to be able to tell the fans we get to continue the story. Because as a fan myself, knowing Clary's journey, it would be such a shame not to maximize that and to keep going, because she has so many stories to tell. And also, it's really hard when you translate books into movies, especially a franchise like this. With the brother/sister thing, you have to introduce it, and then clear it up in a way that if you don't go to a sequel doesn't leave people going "Ew." [laughs] But also leaves them wanting to know more. And it's difficult when you don't know if you're going to get to do more.

We had finished shooting before we found out, obviously. But at least you get to go, okay, so if there's anything that wasn't tied up that people had an issue with, you get a second chance to almost bring that back. Or if we'd already planned on a way of doing that, we get to show that next time. And for me, especially as Clary, I only got to show this much potential of my fighting skills. I love the idea that she becomes bad-ass. So for the sequel, she is already a Shadowhunter, she can only show more. And I'm excited for more action. So yeah, we're definitely pumped. But it was a huge source of this fire to get us going again. It's great.

"The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones" is now playing in theatres.

Vin Diesel On

It's back to basics for Vin Diesel and his favorite Furyan warrior, Riddick. After surviving a horde of predatory creatures in "Pitch Black" and the religious zealot Necromongers in "The Chronicles of Riddick," the interplanetary killer has once again been dumped on a barren planet in the latest instalment, "Riddick." And he's not alone. The wastelands are crawling with a nasty alien race referred to as "mud demons," which are more lethal than anything Riddick has ever encountered. Throw in a dozen or so mercenaries looking to claim the bounty on his head and it's action-packed pandemonium.

It's all happening on a massive Montreal set in March, 2012. On the day Moviefone is on-set, the intimidating Riddick is slowly emerging from a rusty outpost in which he and the mercenaries have holed up. Earlier gunfire suggests they're under attack. Torrential downpours and the nighttime darkness have fully impaired normal vision. No matter for Riddick, who simply adjusts his trademark goggles and cautiously creeps down a ramp. It would be the perfect moment for those slithery creatures to spring from the mucky terrain, until director David Twohy yells, "Cut!"

This could be exactly what the diehard "Riddick" fans have been frothing for, but it isn't until the wee hours of the morning, 3 a.m. to be exact, that a giddy Diesel plunks down to discuss revisiting Riddick and the pressure to deliver the goods on his latest movie.

Moviefone Canada: Can you talk about some of the things that drove you, things that you were willing to sacrifice, in order to make this project happen? It's really rare to see someone revive a dormant franchise.
Vin Diesel: Exactly. I've been lobbying and leveraging for it for nine years, and even after leveraging everything in order to make it rated R ... unfortunately, I should probably care more about making money than I do. And don't tell the people who pay me, because they pay me a lot of money, that I would do all this s--t for free, but I did "Saving Private Ryan" for $100,000. We were shooting in a place called Wexford, Ireland, and I was paid $100,000 and I wasn't insured as an actor, meaning I had never made $7000 in my life in a year. As an actor, you have to make $7000 to be eligible for health benefits. Because I had never made more than that and had been an actor all my life, 20 years at that point, I was insured as a writer. Ted Field, who happens to be one of the crucial elements in "Chronicles of Riddick," was the guy fighting for me in "Pitch Black." He saw my film at Sundance, "Strays," and hired me before Steven Spielberg to write about the bouncer world I had lived in. I wasn't insured as an actor but as a writer, and I'm telling you that because on this picture, I'm basically working for scale. I've never worked for scale in my life. I can't tell you how grateful I am to be a part of all these cool sets, that I don't even think about the fact that it's scale.

You also had "Fast 6" coming up. Is it "Make one big studio movie for them, and then a project for you?"
But not at the cost of integrity. I really mean that and it's a tough load to carry. When they say, "Do '2 Fast 2 Furious' and here's more money than you've ever seen before," and I say, "No, instead I'll do a $50,000 WGA draft of 'Chronicles of Riddick.'" It was so much money the studio says, "You'll be independently wealthy, you'll never have to worry about money again." My father is an altruistic, idealistic artist that was eligible to live in artist's subsidized housing in New York. If you made more than $15,000, you were kicked out. When I told him I'd turned down '2 Fast 2 Furious' and $20 million, even he said, "Are you sure you're doing the right thing?" I thought he'd give me a pat on the back, but that was in service of protecting an integrity, and that's the real deal.

There must be some core elements of the character that has kept you passionate for all these years.
I enjoy playing a quintessential antihero. When I first read the Riddick character, I felt like I'd stumbled on an antihero I hadn't seen to the point where there's something therapeutic about playing the character. I know it sounds corny, but I feel like I learn about myself when I play that character. Going to that dark, isolated place produces some kind of vision about myself. He mirrors my own quest for identity, my eternal quest as a child. [Director] David Twohy asked me what I thought a Furyan was and depending on what day you asked, I would give a different answer.

David mentioned that there was a lot more pressure when you were doing the second "Chronicles of Riddick" because there were so many people that had opinions and there was so much money involved. Is there something enjoyable about making "Riddick" at a stripped-down level, more like "Pitch Black"?
Well, the head of the studio was here yesterday, looking at some dailies and just went, "Damn, Vin. This is the future of making movies." I still don't know what she was talking about, but I imagine she's onto something. There is a freedom. When you go in and you say, "We're going to make it like this. We're going scale. We're going rough, rugged and raw. It's rated R. We're going bare bones." In some ways, the freedom of that is that you don't have to make a movie by committee in the way that studios make movies. It's not a good or a bad thing. Sometimes I actually miss that. I think David's more renegade like that and wants to be his own person. That's more of a director's thing and a director's fantasy. A lot of times, I would be the first to feel the absence of a studio. I went and got a deal, a bungalow, over at Universal because I actually like that partnership. I like having people double-checking everything and putting up a fight for their own cause or their own reason. I appreciate that. But, you're 100 percent right. There is definitely something attractive and something fun about making a movie without parents anywhere around.

What kind of pressure do you feel when you walk out on the set as the star of this film? All eyes are on you; you're Riddick. What kind of pressure do you feel and how do you handle it?
The pressure was on before I even got out here. The pressure was, I'd already leveraged so much to do this movie that the pressure was indescribable. The second I walk onto the set and I know that there's a camera and I know that there's a David Twohy behind that camera, there is zero pressure. There is just me jumping into a pool called Riddick. It's the most free I am. It's like channeling something. It's like taking a drug called Riddick and living in that space. To answer your question, it's the one time that I feel the least pressure. But my process plays to that. My process of Riddick is kind of a bizarre process, meaning I'll go from April of last year or May of last year to October of last year or September, and I'll take three or four months and just go off into the woods. People are like, "What process are you doing for Riddick?" But it'll be a kind of a meditated process that will allow for me to walk on set and be able to pull that character instantaneously. It usually demands a very isolated time, a very reclusive period before coming here. When I finally come on the set, I'm releasing that and I'm almost breathing it in a way, if that makes any sense.

David said you guys have already talked about two more movies and if this one is successful, maybe it will be The Battle of the Underverse?
You've got to go to the Underverse; that's something I talked about at the beginning of our meeting today. It's expected. It's something I firmly believe. Yes, you have to go to the Underverse, you want to go to the Underverse and you'll have to go through the Underverse to get to Furya. So, those are the two stories that are mapped out. The Underverse is a much more costly venture and trying to do a rated-R movie, we went this direction, which is cool and even more interesting because it's so unexpected. Right after "Chronicles of Riddick," the studio said, "Yeah, we're not going to make another 'Chronicles of Riddick.'" And I said, "You know, if I paid you $10 million, if I put my house up, if I put all my houses up and took some loans, would you give me that property back?" And they said, "No." And it wasn't until that "Tokyo Drift" cameo came around that everything changed. It's all ... leverage.

"Riddick" is now playing in theatres.

Film Review Insidious Chapter 2

Cheap, creepy and -- most importantly -- insanely profitable, the first "Insidious" is widely credited with ushering in a new wave of old-school horror movies that kept their budgets low and scares high. That success, plus the movie's cliffhanger ending, meant bringing the Lambert family, director James Wan and writer Leigh Whannell (the duo behind that other breakout horror hit, "Saw") back for a sequel was a no-brainer.

Now, with "Insidious: Chapter 2," the next installment in the supernatural saga, coming out on Friday the 13th (of course), the big question for both Hollywood and horror fans is whether the pair can repeat their past success, or if they're doomed for a sophomore slump. Here is a guide to help moviegoers decide for themselves.

1. Did you like the first "Insidious?"
Whether you'll be interested in "Chapter 2" largely depends on how much you liked Chapter 1, considering the sequel picks up right after the last movie left off: with the Lamberts still haunted by the same spirits their son Dalton's astral projecting unwittingly attracted in the first "Insidious." Only this time, Wan ditches that film's slow-burn pacing for a more action-heavy sequel that gets right into the scares and keeps them coming. If you weren't a fan of the first installment, plan on spending the next hour and 45 minutes attempting to astral project yourself out of the theatre.

2. Do you like Patrick Wilson?
Obviously Wan does, since this marks the director's third straight collaboration with Wilson. And after spending most of the first "Insidious" in a thankless role as a clichéd and willfully ignorant horror dad, Wilson gets to have a whole lot more fun here. For a guy used to playing the straight man, it's no wonder he has such a good time hurling kitchenware.

3. Are you able to tell the difference between an homage and a rip-off?
Where the first "Insidious" channeled "Poltergeist," Wan turns to "The Shining" for inspiration on "Chapter 2." That means less focus on the Lambert's precocious son, and more on Wilson's Josh, who we last saw choking out a sweet old lady. And while there aren't any elevators of blood, when a possessed Josh starts terrorizing his family, the entire third act turns into one long Kubrick homage -- or rip-off, if you're feeling less charitable.

4. Do you enjoy when characters watch relevant horror classics in horror movies?
Speaking of references, right before the supernatural visits start ramping back up, Josh's mom Lorraine (Barbara Hershey) is shown watching "Carnival of Souls," a 1962 horror standard that just so happens to be about a woman plagued by ghostly visions. Because apparently nothing relaxes you after saving your grandson from evil demons quite like settling down with a movie guaranteed to remind you of that traumatic experience -- and that probably hasn't run on cable in 50 years. In hindsight, that should've been the first tip-off that something strange was going on in Lorraine's house.

5. Are you a proponent of squatter's rights?
In the first movie, we're told that the reason the dead become interested in Dalton's body is because he's left it vacant for too long, thanks to getting lost in an otherworldly realm known as "The Further." So when Josh does the same in "Chapter 2," it's no surprise his abandoned body attracts squatters. His family does their best to evict the spirit, but it's not easy. Apparently in horror movies, possession is 9/10ths of the law.

6. Have you ever wanted to play Boggle with a ghost?
Thanks to its rep as a sort of supernatural walkie-talkie, the Ouija board is a horror movie staple. But "Insidious: Chapter 2" adds a new wrinkle to this tradition with a ghost hunter whose methods of communicating with the dead looks an awful lot like playing Boggle. Of course, mixing board games and ghosts is something of an inexact science, and the lettered dice make it difficult to tell if a spirit is trying to scare you or just trash-talk: "You die now" could just as easily spell "I owned you."

7. Were you a middle child?
Unlike Dalton and baby Kali, who get visited by the dead on a pretty much daily basis in both films, the Lambert's middle child gets no love from the movie's evil spirits, or Wan for that matter. In "Chapter 2," he's basically there to connect tin cans to a string and then be forgotten. Expect this to bring back unpleasant memories for all you middle children out there.

8. Do you have a phobia of fog machines?
Part of the reason the first "Insidious" was able to keep its budget low is because its ghost world "The Further" was essentially the exact same set, only with the lights turned off and a fog machine running. With more money at his disposal for the sequel, Wan's able to expand his arsenal of creepy settings here. Still, not since John Carpenter has a horror movie made such concerted use of dry ice.

9. Did you want less of Specs and Tucker?
Too bad. Because while many moviegoers weren't been big fans of the first film's attempts at comic relief, Whannell (who also played Specs) heard those complaints loud and clear -- and promptly ignored them. So both Whannell and Angus Sampson reprise their roles as the bumbling ghost hunters, and if possible, are even more terrifyingly inept here. Consider yourself warned.

10. Are you capable of not asking too many questions?
Same as in the first "Insidious," whenever the astral projection angle ramps up, the story becomes increasingly convoluted. To their credit, Wan and Whannell attempt to plug any leftover plotholes from the first film with clever retroactive alterations. Still, it's not quite enough to answer the biggest head-scratcher that the sequel raises: since Wan's other 2013 horror release "The Conjuring" was so well-made, why wasn't this movie better? We'll probably have to wait until "Chapter 3" to find out.

"Insidious: Chapter 2" opens on Friday, September 13.

daniel bruhl, rush, rush movie

** NOTE: This interview contains potential spoilers! **

Since we saw him in "Inglourious Basterds," Daniel Brühl has had quite the career upswing. Later this fall, he's starring in Toronto Film Festival opener "The Fifth Estate" with Benedict Cumberbatch, and this Friday, he's one of the lead roles in the heart-pounding racing movie "Rush."

Don't be fooled by Brühl's docile, calm manner -- he's a force to be reckoned with on-screen, and steals the movie right out from under the chiseled, charismatic Chris Hemsworth. As world-renowned auto racer Niki Lauda, Brühl is charmless, calculated and prickly, but you can't take your eyes off him.

Moviefone caught up with Brühl at TIFF, and we chatted about driving fast cars, Niki Lauda in real life, and just how horrible putting on all that makeup was.

Moviefone: You talked to Niki Lauda before you started shooting "Rush," correct?
Daniel Brühl: I did. Niki was quite undiplomatic at first, when he first called me. The first conversation was like, "Yeah. I guess we have to meet now."

And I said, "Well, that would be wonderful." "Yeah, only bring hung luggage to Vienna, in case we don't like each other. Then you can piss off right away." [Laughs] That's him. Fortunately I had to buy some extra clothes in Vienna, and I stayed there longer than expected.

He sort of sanctioned the movie in some way, didn't he?
Yeah. Oh yeah, it's such a relief. I mean you want these people to like the movie. That's the most important reaction. He supported us all the way through and he's very happy with the result.

You've got a guy who never wants to grow up in James Hunt [Hemsworth], and then there's you [as Lauda], who seems to have never been a boy. Niki always seems to have been the super serious adult. Did you see him that way?
Yeah. He is, and has always been, a very focused man. He didn't have an easy life because his family didn't want him to be a race driver, so from very early on when he was a teenager, he had to fight against obstacles and fight his way into Formula 1. He took high risks. Not only physically as a driver but also economically. He's a tough, tough businessman and he's still around, still very successful. And if you have such focus and you're so disciplined, then yeah. It helps.

How amazing was the driving in "Rush"? What was that like for you?
It was an amazing experience because I like to drive and I like to drive fast. As you know, on the Autobahn in Germany, we don't have limits so I enjoy it, but it's completely different thing to sit in a race car, in our case a Formula 3 car. A Formula 3 car is already quite, quite fast. And the sensation of speed is much higher when you're low to the ground. The noise of the car is incredible. Your whole body vibrates and it smells of gasoline. I totally got the addiction to it. I absolutely felt the adrenaline and understood why young boys want to become a race driver. I would be a terrible race driver, though.

Why?
I realized that after the movie. I have so much more respect now after having done the movie, because it's so difficult to be in control of that beast of that machine. So it's easy to drive fast, but if something unpredictable happens it's very, very hard to control it.

How would you describe your relationship with Chris Hemsworth in "Rush"? Because you're not buddies, you're antagonists...
We didn't need that fake rivalry to get into our parts. In fact, we invented our own romantic comedy and love relationship between Hunt and Lauda in-between takes. Would have been an interesting movie, too. [Laughs] But he's a very laid-back Australian surfer kind of guy. I mean, it's very difficult to dislike him.

What do you want people to take away from "Rush"?
Don't drink and drive. [Laughs] Don't drive in the rain.

Can you talk about moving scene when you were in the hospital?
Oh yeah, that was terrible. I had to have a piece of bread here [points to his neck] down the throat so that they couldn't really push that tube. So it was really unpleasant, which makes that scene so horrible, but that's how it should look like.

Couldn't that have been a special effect?
[Laughs] What I like about this movie is that whenever it was possible it was not CGI, it was real. Also, the racing stuff, our precision drivers did the most incredible things. You really have the impression that you're in the race and it's so difficult to do. With these tiny cameras that were hidden by the engine block, in the car, or in the helmet, you have this claustrophobic feeling.

You said that you understood for the first time watching the movie how hard it was for people to actually look at him after the race, when he was so scarred and he'd lost his ear?
And it happened to me, too. Sometimes I had this prosthetic makeup, which by the way took six or seven hours. Sometimes I was picked up at 3:00 a.m. I was looking at the call sheet and it said, "Chris Hemsworth, pick up at 10 a.m." First scene, Chris Hemsworth kissing a nurse. Second scene Chris Hemsworth making love on a plane. Third scene, Niki Lauda checking his tires. [Laughs] And, by the way, Chris entered the makeup trailer was like "Hey!" [Laughs]

But then it was very helpful, this prosthetic makeup, because sometimes I would step on set and some extras didn't realize that it was fake. They were really shocked when they saw me, and that made me understand what Niki had gone through.

"Rush" opens in theatres on September 27.

Runner Runner Fight

Combining Justin Timberlake, Ben Affleck and online gambling may seem like easy money, but that doesn't necessarily make "Runner Runner" a sure thing. In fact, it's partly what makes the movie somewhat disappointing -- that director Brad Furman took the promising hand he was dealt and ended up with a mostly forgettable thriller.

Written by Brian Koppelman and David Levien (of "Rounders" fame), "Runner Runner" stars Timberlake as Richie Furst, a Princeton grad student who turns to online poker to help pay for tuition. But after a bad beat leads Richie to believe he's been cheated, he travels to Costa Rica to confront offshore gaming site mogul Ivan Block (Affleck). And while that doesn't exactly sound too bright for a Princeton man, Richie soon finds himself with a job at Block's site and a spot in his inner circle.

Still, there's a lot of questions raised by the gambling thriller -- like just what does "runner runner" mean anyway? (In poker terminology, it refers to a hand that was "improved significantly using the turn and river cards," or in other words, getting lucky.) As for who thought that would make a good movie title, well, some questions are a little harder to answer than others. When it comes to the biggest question of all, though -- should you go see "Runner Runner?" -- just follow this helpful guide to decide for yourself.

1. Are you capable of feeling bad for Justin Timberlake?
We're not talking about the multimillionaire singer/actor personally here, though that counts too. Because despite the movie's attempt to give him a sob story involving his deadbeat dad, one of the biggest issues in "Runner Runner" is that Richie simply isn't much of a sympathetic character, from the moment he starts complaining about not being able to afford his Masters in Finance from Princeton and having "no other choice" but to get involved with Block. Admittedly, "Runner Runner" would make for a much less interesting thriller if Richie attempted to solve this problem by taking out student loans rather than jetting off to Costa Rica, but when Timberlake's character is given multiple opportunities to just walk away, it's hard to feel too bad for what happens when he doesn't.

2. Would you like to see Ben Affleck pour chicken fat on a guy?
Granted, this one's something of a rhetorical question, because the answer is obviously "yes." And for all Richie's failings as a hero, Affleck's Block makes for one hell of a villain. Originally, it seemed odd that Affleck would do a movie like this after successfully reinventing himself as an Oscar-calibre director, until you realize what a blast he's clearly having playing a bored gambling magnate with a relentlessly foul mouth, a decent Spanish accent and a working crocodile farm.

3. Did you wish "Pain & Gain" had more Anthony Mackie?
If so, get ready to wish for more of him here too. As the all-bark-and-no-bite Agent Shavers, Mackie continues to show why he's such a promising up-and-coming actor. The clichéd FBI agent role could've just as easily been played by somebody adding up the paycheque in their head, but instead, much like Affleck, Mackie commits. And for all the energy and genuine enjoyment he brings to getting to screw with Timberlake's Richie, it would've been nice to see the movie use him more than just whenever they needed a lazy way to keep the plot moving.

4. Do you mind that the premise already feels slightly dated?
There's a definite risk with "trend" movies like "Runner Runner" -- "Rounders" hit at the perfect time back in 1998, helping launch the mainstream poker revival. But these days, offshore online gambling sites aren't in the news or public consciousness nearly as much as they were five years ago, especially not in light of recent pushes towards legalization in the U.S. Instead, clunky references to the recession and Ponzi schemes don't make "Runner Runner" feel timely as much as they feel like convenient buzzwords to plaster over plot holes.

5. Have you seen Brian Koppelman and David Levien's other movies?
Then you've seen "Runner Runner" too, which the duo seemingly wrote on the drive over to another pitch meeting. After movies like the aforementioned "Rounders" and "Ocean's Thirteen," the screenwriting pair have made a name for themselves writing high-stakes fantasy fulfillment packed with gambling and/or corruption. So while there's nothing particularly new or clever about all the double-crossing and back-room dealings going on in "Runner Runner," by the time you finally figure that out, somebody's already made off with your money.

Some comedic actors never lose their touch, and Canadian comedienne Catherine O'Hara is one of them.

O'Hara, who appears in "The Right Kind of Wrong" as Tess, the out-there mother of lead actress Sara Canning, is consistently funny in every scene she's in -- which, frankly, there aren't enough of.

The humour carries over into real life as well, as she had me red-faced and in stitches for the duration of our quick interview.

Moviefone caught up with O'Hara at the Toronto Film Festival, where she revealed a pretty intimate story to us about one of her first dates.

(Watch the video interview, above.)

"The Right Kind of Wrong" opens in theatres on October 11.

daniel bruhl, benedict cumberbatch, the fifth estate, fifth estate

Daniel Brühl is certainly breaking onto the scene lately, and in a big way.

He's co-starring alongside Benedict Cumberbatch in the Wikileaks movie "The Fifth Estate," which is being released this week, and he also led racing movie "Rush" with Chris Hemsworth back in September. In "The Fifth Estate," Brühl plays real-life character Daniel Berg, who's portrayed as Assange's right-hand man, and also as the entity who tempered the fire of the internet icon.

Moviefone caught up with Brühl at the Toronto Film Festival, where he chatted with us about taking on real-life roles, what Daniel Berg is like in real life, and how the relationship between he and Assange grew, and ultimately fell apart.

How early on were you aware that this movie was going to be from your perspective as opposed to being from Julian Assange's perspective?
Daniel Brühl: I didn't know it when I received the script. I didn't know it beforehand. I knew who Daniel was, being German; he was in the media a lot so it seemed to me that he's a very reasonable, interesting guy. When I first heard about WikiLeaks a couple of years ago, I was sure that sooner or later they were going to make a movie about it. So it was strange to then participate in that project and to play Daniel. Again, [as with "Rush"] I was playing a real person. It was very helpful to spend time with him. He invited me a couple of times to his place, and explained to me a lot about his intense relationship with Julian, but also about his future plans. As I've said a couple of times, I didn't have any reason not to believe in his integrity. I had empathy with him. I share most of the opinions he has on things, so it was easy for me to portray him, and like him.

When you met him, what were a couple of the things that you needed to find out so that you could play him accurately?
Most of it is well-captured in the book he's written, so we focused on talking about the book. I also wanted to know how the dynamic was in his relationship with Julian, and what this moment in life meant to him. I realized that this was maybe ... or probably, the most significant moment in his life. And he was willing to do anything, as we see in the movie, to leave his job, to do anything to support WikiLeaks.

What did you discover about their relationship?
I think [Daniel] admired him because Assange is a very bright and intelligent man. Daniel just loved the idea behind WikiLeaks, and found it to be very important on a personal level. Daniel is a very patient, reasonable man, and at first he could cope with some inner conflicts that they had for the greater good. How available did Daniel make himself to you? I read that you spent 4 days with him.
It's difficult with these guys. He didn't have a mobile phone number [Laughs]. He also had a strange email address [Laughs], so it was hard and tricky. He doesn't live in Berlin anymore, he lives outside [the city], like an hour away, in a house. I visited him there, and we were having a conversation down in the kitchen. All of the sudden, two pale guys came inside and spoke French and I asked, "Who are they?" He said "Yeah, they're two French activists, IT guys working on the upper floor."

So he has a whole floor which is fully equipped with computers and everything. He would invite activists that he likes over, and they stay there for free and just work. That was my first impression: that he's a true activist. He didn't stop after that painful experience with WikiLeaks. But he goes on, you know. And I admire that. I love playing characters that I partly envy, because I also have a political conscience, but I was never that active. I didn't know how to do it. And it's a problem of our generation, I guess. Because it was easier back in the day, my parents' generation, they went to rallies and to demonstrations and you had clearer enemies. Today, it's all become a bit blurry and that's also what the movie's about: how we perceive information, what we should oppose, and so forth.

There's that part of it, but it also seems like it's the classic "bromance."
I always liked that structure. In a way it's similar to "Rush," because it's not the typical thing. You have the villain and the goodie, and you stay with one and only have empathy with one character. But eventually you have empathy with both, in both movies. I found that quite interesting; that's another parallel. And the movie doesn't make a final judgment. It's quite neutral, in a way. I found it very interesting, and a good idea to give Julian Assange the last word, to let the film end like it ends.

I assume that your relationship with Benedict also helped the quality of film's end product.
[Laughs] Benedict is the most British guy I've ever met. And the first time I met him in London, it was hysterical, because before he said "Hi" he could tell me what I had for breakfast, that I'm left-handed, that I was trying to quit smoking, and he even had a recommendation of how to better clean my shirts. And I said, "Hi, Sherlock, it's a pleasure to meet you. I'm going to be Watson." [Laughs]

In the New York Times, you were quoted as saying something like 10 years ago for a German actor to have this kind of exposure would not have been possible.
This is so true, yeah, and I'm very glad that things have changed -- thanks to people like Quentin [Tarantino]. That was the first experience for me, in "Inglourious Basterds," and I heard that some of the American stars wanted to play certain parts in the movie, and Quentin said, "No, no, no. I just wanted to make it different and give German actors the opportunity to play Germans."

I found that very clever. It's also nice to see that more and more film companies, and Americans, are coming over to Europe, to Germany, to Berlin, to shoot their movies. Not only because of tax reasons, but also because of the facilities and the professional crews we have. And of the story, of the content of the story. So I find it very positive that if you're European or Asian or African, you should try and find actors who are actually from there. That makes cinema very interesting because you discover people that you didn't know before. So yeah, it gives us great opportunities. I hope.

Has acting in "The Fifth Estate" changed the way you think about media and Wikileaks?
Yeah, and it made me more curious and cautious. It's interesting to question information you gather from certain outlets, and I think it's a very good idea. The movie also refers to civil journalism, and to be more engaged as a citizen when it comes to getting your information and where you get it from, to widen your scope and not only trust one source. I can't say that I'm an activist again, but it changed the way I perceive news and information.

"The Fifth Estate" opens in theatres on October 18.

benedict cumberbatch, the fifth estate, fifth estate, julian assange

Playing a real-life character, especially one as polarizing and loathed as Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, is no easy task.

Red-hot British actor Benedict Cumberbatch took on the challenge in "The Fifth Estate," even going so far as to don prosthetic teeth and a bleach-blond wig. Cumberbatch worked hard to ensure his portrayal was as real as he could possibly make it; he revealed to us that his discussions with Assange are private, and what they talked about will never be made public.

Moviefone chatted with Cumberbatch at the Toronto Film Festival about all the costuming and working to make Assange a three-dimensional character rather than a tabloid assault -- something Cumberbatch took very, very seriously.

Did you enjoy your hair in this movie?
Benedict Cumberbatch: I kind of did, and the eyes were a little bit more arduous. I had a skunky badger thing going with white hair and my normal dark hair on top. I did love the fact that for about six months last year, both in "August: Osage County" and in "12 Years a Slave," I had my own color hair, which is great. But I really quite enjoyed putting the wigs on.

Does it take you there, when you put on the wig?
Yeah, it does. I think the first time I put it on, and I came into the room, people were like "Oh, wow!" And that's a great thrill when you think, OK, well, something's working. I mean, I think he's got softer features, and I think I'm a little more angular, which sometimes makes me look a little weird and creepy with some of the wigs, and that's not the intention at all. I've got a longer face, he's got a rounder face, so it was a challenge. The harder thing was the contact lenses because I've never worn them before.

And your eyes are different than his, too, correct?
I've got light aquamarine, greeny kind of eyes. It changes, whatever kind of light, I guess, is stronger, or colour is stronger. But mine are lighter, that's the thing, much, much lighter than his, and in certain lights his are just this really deep, rich kind of blue, and in other lights, they're kind of slate-y gray or dark. So I wanted to tone down my eyes a little bit, as well as the teeth here ... I had a new set of prosthetic teeth and a slightly bigger lip to push that forwards. I've got a very big bottom lip and we have a slightly different structure to our faces, so I wanted to try and experiment with that a little bit.

Did all of these prostheses add a layer of difficulty to your performance?
With the accent and the dialect, and also the slight lisp, the hard ridge lisp ... it's like a "shhh" [sound]. That was a huge change.

Did you talk to [director] Bill Condon about making Julian Assange somebody that the audience wouldn't hate?
It was important for me to portray him as a three-dimensional human being and not get into a slagging match about whether he was good or bad. I wanted to portray human characteristics about a man at the forefront of an incredible media revolution, with incredible ideas, whose controversy was primarily borne out of that, and not get bogged down in character assassination, which is so easy to come by. People want a headline, they want to grab something and run with a two-dimensional story.

I like the way the film tackles that. I also like the way Julian talks about his appraisal in The New York Times as getting equal bidding for the state of his socks as for collateral murder. It kind of highlights that idiocy. So it was important for me to portray him in a balanced way.

I read that you communicated with Julian, and at one point he attempted to dissuade you from doing the project. Can you describe your communications with him and what ways those informed you?
I tried to justify my reasons for doing the project and that was where that ended.

You weren't going to step out because Julian asked you not to?
It mattered to me a lot that he felt so passionately, but I wanted to persuade him that it wasn't necessarily going to be as bad as he feared it would be, from the script he'd had leaked to him, which is a very old draft. I don't even think I ever saw that draft.

Was your comunication via email?
Yeah.

Was it just a couple exchanges back and forth?
Yeah. And private between us.

There's so much material that you could use to pull together things for this. There are interviews, profiles, columns available everywhere online. What kind of research did you do when you were working on playing Assange?
As much as I could. A lot, an awful lot. It was important to concentrate on what we were doing, which is making a film, a dramatization of events. So while it was informative, it was important for me to always remember that this is a perspective, not the perspective. I think the film's central message is there's no such thing as objective truth, there's always going to be a personal truth. You have to take the inspiration of this film: it's about people journalism, it's about something that's powered by individuals, it's not about a consensus, and I think that's probably how the film will be greeted and reacted to, and that's not a bad thing.

Julian's intoxicating. Someone who has power like that, an interpreted power, is intoxicating -- how would you interpret the relationship between Julian and Daniel [Berg]?
I think it's really complicated and it's really for those two to disseminate it, not me as an actor outside of it. I think, in a moment of drama, you have empathy for your character, so I see his perspective as strongly as I can, as an audience can see both perspectives. It's a very complex relationship, and two very complex characters.

Daniel is no stooge, he's not this follower. He's a smart guy, he's an activist, he's incredibly pragmatic. He's not just a blind acolyte. I think Julian has a magnetic hold over people, and I think he's an incredible spokesperson for an extraordinary idea that was borne out of his realization of it.

We see flashes of Julian's past -- like when he admits to having a 19-year-old son. Did you see that as letting the audience see another side of him?
On a level, yes, because the perception of him in a tabloid sense is very two-dimensional. The character assassinations came hot on the foot of all the shifting perspectives and press war and everything that went on at the time of the leak, so I think a lot of people's perspectives on him are very crude. So anything that fleshes out who he is as a three-dimensional human being I think is to his benefit. Who knows what he'll think of that, but as an audience I think you can understand more of someone when they're part of something that's universal to all of us.

I think it's very clear he doesn't want the message to get confused with the messenger, and that's happened. We obsess about that, I think, in culture, all the time. We can't just take an actor's work, we need to know everything about their personality. We can't just take a politician's stance, again, we need to know what it is that relates us, and I'm not saying that's a good or a bad thing, but sometimes I think it can corrupt what at heart is an extraordinary thing.

"The Fifth Estate" opens in theatres on October 18.

rachel mcadams, about time

Every time travel movie comes with a specific set of rules and regulations for its would-be time travelers to follow. Usually these can be quantified in numbers, like 88 (MPH) or 1.21 (gigawatts), but in the upcoming "About Time," the latest romantic comedy from British writer/director Richard Curtis ("Notting Hill," "Love Actually"), the magic number is relatively simple: 21. As in years, which is when Tim (Domhnall Gleeson) discovers that the ability to travel through time runs in his family.

Still, time travel movies typically involve a fair bit of mental gymnastics to make sense of all the paradoxes and metaphysics, which was summed up perfectly by Bruce Willis in "Looper": "If we start talking about it then we're going to be here all day talking about it, making diagrams with straws." Combine that with romantic comedy, another genre with its own strict rules, and things can get even more confusing. So, as a public service, we've broken down the rules for time travel romance according to "About Time."

It's a guy thing: Like most genetic traits, Tim's is apparently passed down from the men on his dad's side. Unlike most genetic traits, this one you might actually want to inherit.

It's a rite of passage: Having "the talk" means something quite different in Tim's family. For reasons that go unexplained, 21 is the age when said time-traveling ability kicks in, presumably so you can go back and prevent yourself from a wicked hangover. Or maybe they're just late bloomers.

There's no equipment necessary: All Tim has to do is go somewhere dark, clench his fists, and concentrate on where (and more importantly, when) he wants to go.

You have to go back to move forward: In "About Time," time travel is seemingly an evolutionary adaptation meant to solve the problem of hindsight being 20/20. Tim can't travel into the future, but he can fix past mistakes.

There's a catch: There's always a catch. Curtis' time travelers can only go to places they've been and can remember, and can only travel within their own life.

Tim can't change world history, just his own: Tim can't "kill Hitler or shag Helen of Troy," according to his dad (the always-great Bill Nighy). Instead, he's limited to an endless supply of do-overs for his screw-ups. It's kind of like starting over again from a video game checkpoint.

There's no need to bring a change of clothes: Unlike the Terminator, Tim comes back in whatever he happened to be wearing at that time. Which is freaky, but also saves him significant time beating up bikers for clothes.

Don't worry about running into your past self: It's not an issue in "About Time," maybe because it would be too complicated to explain, but mostly because Curtis really isn't interested in the metaphysics of time travel so much as its potential for sight gags.

Chase girls, not money: Tim's dad warns him against about using his newfound gift to increase his bank account. But that's not a problem for Tim, who has something much more fulfilling in mind: finding a girlfriend. Also, presumably he's already seen what happens to Biff in "Back to the Future: Part II."

Cast Rachel McAdams: After "The Time Traveler's Wife," "Midnight in Paris" and now "About Time," apparently the actress has a type. Just FYI, wannabe suitors.

The time traveler needs to be unthreatening: In order to make audiences find Tim's time travel shenanigans charming and not, you know, sleazy, you need a leading man who seems too guileless to take advantage of his powers. Enter the up-and-coming Gleeson, who gives off a distinct "young Hugh Grant" vibe. (Apparently Curtis has a type too.)

It's all about the meet-cute(s): Most rom-coms only get one meet-cute -- unless their lead is a polygamist, or in Tim's case, a time traveler. And after accidentally erasing his initial run-in with Mary (McAdams), Tim uses his powers to give himself a second (and third, and fourth) chance.

You can't make someone love you: This rule is explicitly stated, presumably to make us feel less creeped-out by Tim's time travel-aided wooing of Mary -- she must already like him. She just likes him a little more when he's able to quote her exact thoughts on Kate Moss and sweep her off her feet.

Time travel is a lot like love: In that neither Curtis nor Tim are too interested in the how or why of his peculiar ability, or how a girl like Mary falls in love with him. Neither is really explained. They both just kind of happen.

Plan the perfect wedding: History is filled with terrible wedding toasts. But Tim is able to tweak his and Mary's big day until he settles on the best possible best man speech.

You can learn from mistakes without going back in time: That said, Curtis wisely stops short of having Tim re-do every tiny blunder. The movie's already over two hours as is.

Life is supposed to have some surprises: Like the fairly major "catch" that Tim's dad withheld from him during their initial chat, seemingly solely to give the movie a third act twist.

The moral of the story needs to be clear: Unlike Tim, audiences aren't necessarily going to go back to see what they missed. So Curtis makes sure the movie's big feel-good message is extremely obvious, having Tim explicitly narrate it while "About Time" wraps up.

Even time travel has its limits: Not all the movie's rules and internal logic makes sense (especially not the aforementioned late-movie curveball), but "About Time" is still charming enough that audiences should be willing to put down their straw diagrams and give Curtis and his cast the benefit of the doubt.

"About Time" opens on November 1.

her, her movie, joaquin phoenix

*** Warning: Contains Spoilers***

After a handful of Golden Globe nominations and being named the best film of the year by the National Board of Review, Spike Jonze's "Her" is a legitimate award season contender. But unlike his fellow hopefuls, that's all the more impressive because Jonze isn't exactly known for making traditional Oscar-bait or even "normal" movies, for that matter ("Malkovich Malkovich," anyone?). And "Her" is no exception, set in a near-future of high-waisted pants and remarkably complex AI, and about Theodore Twombly (Joaquin Phoenix), a lonely, recently divorced writer who falls in love with his new operating system (voiced by Scarlett Johansson).

But that high-concept premise is probably the least weird thing about the offbeat filmmaker's surprisingly touching techno-love story. Here's a rundown of what other strangeness you can expect from Jonze's unconventional science-fiction romance.

10. Theodore falls in love with an operating system named Samantha
Yes, Theodore and Samantha's meet-cute happens right after the installation process. But after some initial hesitance, Theo goes from testing the highly-adaptable OS to falling for her. It's odd, granted, but with people increasingly tethered to their devices, and the fact that this is a "woman" who was literally made for him (after a few diagnostic questions) -- not to mention that Apple had to program Siri with canned answers to user come-ons and marriage proposals -- the central love story is actually the least odd part of "Her." Samantha writes songs, draws dirty pictures, and sounds like Scarlett Johansson. Who wouldn't fall in love with that?

9. He's not the only one
Nobody else finds their relationship all that strange either, Theodore's ex-wife (played by Rooney Mara) notwithstanding. Instead, in Jonze's futuristic LA, relationships with OS are relatively socially acceptable. Theodore's friend Amy (Amy Adams) gossips about a co-worker who keeps getting shut down by his OS, one who's having an affair with someone else's, and admits to developing a strong friendship with her own.

8. Theodore and Samantha go on double dates
It's more logistically difficult, yes, but otherwise they've got a fairly normal relationship. By putting her camera in his shirt pocket, Theodore's able to take Samantha to the beach, on day trips and double dates. And she's the life of the party, charming his co-workers, friends, and (most adorably) his goddaughter.

7. Future fashion sense
Jonze supposedly went for a 1920s style with his movie's costuming, reasoning that fashion is cyclical, which means lots of high-waisted wool pants and strange collars. He also reportedly used Jamba Juice as an aesthetic inspiration for his sets. No, really.

6. Theodore's job is to write other peoples' letters
He's no freelance puppeteer, but Theodore works for BeautifulHandwrittenLetters.com, a service where paid professionals compose highly personalized letters -- written in the client's handwriting, naturally. His clients range from 12 years old to 80, most of whom he's spent years writing for.

5. It redefines "phone sex"
After a few great early-movie voice cameos from Kristen Wiig and Bill Hader (future or not, "Coming to America" references never get outdated), phone sex takes on new meaning when Theodore and Samantha eventually "consummate" their relationship, complete with an awkward morning-after conversation. That said, their sex life gets even more unconventional, once Samantha suggests spicing things up with a surrogate.

4. It features the most foul-mouthed video game character ever programmed
Video games also clearly fascinate Jonze, and Theodore plays one where the gameplay basically involves a Sisyphean crawl up a hill and aimlessly wandering through a cave that Samantha helps guide him out of (metaphors!). But the best/weirdest part is the impressively vulgar child-like creature that Theodore's avatar encounters (and was voiced by Jonze himself). Also deserving mention is the game that Adam's character is designing, called "Perfect Mom," where you collect "mom points" for getting to school first and otherwise not failing your children.

3. Samantha likes to watch Theodore sleep
As a highly-intelligent super-computer, Samantha spends most of her downtime evolving, as well as studying Theodore (when she's not communicating "post-verbally" with the other OSes). In real life, it'd be creepy. In Samantha though, it's somehow kind of sweet. It's also most likely part of a larger theme that Jonze edited down, since Amy is similarly working on a documentary that's seemingly just footage of people sleeping.

2. Scarlett Johansson's got a grassroots Oscar campaign -- and it's well-deserved
Let's be clear here: Johansson doesn't really have a shot, especially not after a snub by the Golden Globes, and since the Academy isn't exactly known for making left-field choices. She does deserve at least a nomination for her performance though, even if it's entirely voice-based. That's because it's crucial to "Her" that the audience falls in love with Samantha as much as Theodore does, and unlike Phoenix, Johansson has to do all that heavy-lifting without the aid of a body, or an Oscar-worthy moustache.

1. It's the most genuinely touching love story of the year
Despite a long career filled with music videos and short films, "Her" is only the fourth feature that Jonze has directed, and the first he wrote himself. Still, for all its strangeness, you don't just care about Samantha and Theodore's relationship, you root for them, as Jonze tugs all the right heartstrings. The film's got a bizarre premise, sure, but it's also absurdly funny, gorgeously filmed, and remarkably affecting, making "Her" not just a weird little movie, but also a great one. This'll stick with you for hours, if not days, if not forever.

august osage county, meryl streep, julia roberts, ewan mcgregor

Adapted for the screen from Tracy Letts' Pulitzer Prize-winning play, "August: Osage County" is a little like watching a sweeps week episode of "The Jerry Springer Show" as reenacted by an A-list ensemble cast. The shouting and plate smashing all starts when an epically dysfunctional Oklahoma family reunites thanks to inauspicious circumstances (the disappearance of their father), and is fueled on by their pill-popping matriarch, Violet Weston (Meryl Streep).

"August: Osage County" isn't the only major ensemble piece of the season though, with big names both in front of and behind the camera. You could probably fill up an entire Oscar ballot between it and fellow award season contender "American Hustle." And since you're always guaranteed to get a little friendly competition packing so many big names under one roof, here's a look at who comes out on top in the Weston family battle royale, from least deserving of an Oscar nomination to the shoo-ins. (Spoiler alert: never bet against Meryl.)

10. Ewan McGregor:
McGregor's a solid, likable actor, but he's unfortunately the weak link in the ensemble here. As Bill Fordham, the estranged husband of Julia Robert's Barbara, McGregor plays a mostly peripheral character, one who does his best to stay above the Weston family drama. But when Bill does have to get his hands dirty, McGregor's the only one who acts like "August: Osage County" is still back on Broadway, giving an overly-theatrical performance that's an awkward fit with the others.

9. Abigail Breslin:
Breslin's come a long way since "Little Miss Sunshine," but don't expect a repeat come Oscar season. As Jean Fordham, the apathetic teen dragged into the Weston madhouse, she's stuck on the JV team here, nailing her relatively small part, but mostly forced to just watch and learn from the sidelines during the movie's more explosive scenes.

8. Dermot Mulroney:
As Steve Huberbrecht, fiancé to Karen (Juliette Lewis), Mulroney is a definite scene-stealer -- even in this family, it takes a special personality to roll up to a funeral blaring Ricky Martin. But much like Steve's bright red convertible, he's mostly flash, a welcome momentary distraction to diffuse the constantly simmering tension. Still, as far as comic relief goes, Mulroney nails the sleazy Florida businessman.

7. Benedict Cumberbatch:
That's right. Despite 2013 being the "Year of the Cumberbatch," one of the hottest actors in Hollywood right now doesn't even crack the "August: Osage County" Top 5. We told you it's tough sledding against this competition. Playing the heartbreakingly well-meaning but meek Little Charles, it's nice to see a more sensitive side to Cumberbatch after his recent turns as icy villains in "Star Trek Into Darkness" and "The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug." I bet even those two characters would've been bullied into submission faced with the combined wrath of the Weston women.

6. Julianne Nicholson:
Nicholson may have the least name recognition of the bunch, but as Ivy, she more than holds her own against her fellow Weston sisters. Compared to her more volatile kin, Nicholson gives a much more restrained, low-key performance, but after "August: Osage Country," she's proved that she deserves to be on a lot more casting directors' radars from here on out.

5. Juliette Lewis:
Yes, Lewis has played this same sort of ditzy motor-mouth role before, but typecasting or not, it doesn't make Karen any less compelling, as she manages to balance her character with equal parts naivete, vulnerability and pathos. And even though Karen is mostly overmatched in the movie's ongoing war of words and wills, Lewis certainly isn't. She won't get nominated, but it's hard to imagine anyone else doing this character this well.

4. Chris Cooper:
Forced into action as the new patriarch of the Weston clan, Cooper delivers a predictably strong performance as the sweet-natured Charles (it's no surprise he married into this family). Whether it's kicking off the central dinner scene with one of the most rambling (and entertaining) graces in film history or sticking up for his son with a heartstring-tugging tirade, Cooper helps balance out the nasty streak in "August: Osage County," and just as crucially, gives audiences someone to root for -- both in the movie and come Oscar season.

3. Margo Martindale:
Martindale's better known for her comedic chops than drama, but thanks to a particularly feisty performance, ends up being the dark horse of the ensemble family drama. As the outspoken Aunt Mattie Fae, Martindale is a scene-stealer, holding her own against Meryl and the rest of her A-list co-stars. It's a showy role, certainly, but Martindale deserves just as much consideration as the more obvious awards season choices.

2. Julia Roberts:
It's hard to say definitively whether Roberts' Barbara or Streep's Violet is the true protagonist of "August: Osage County," though Letts has referred to Barbara as the story's main character in the past. But in a film that revolves largely around the idea of Barbara turning into her mother (and her increasing horror at that realization), we might just as easily be watching Roberts turning into the next Meryl Streep. And during each of the film's key dinner table scenes, the two venerated actresses might as well be wrestling for the Oscar as much as the pill bottle.

1. Meryl Streep:
Ensemble or not, clearly nobody told Streep, who takes control of this movie right from her opening scene. With a mixture of pill-addled incoherence and blind, shotgun nastiness aimed at her familial relations, in a role that would've made Elizabeth Taylor jealous, Streep is clearly gunning for Oscar #4, or at the very least nomination #18. And whether she loses this round to Roberts or not, Streep clearly isn't ready to give up her annual stranglehold on awards season just yet -- at least, not without a fight.

"August: Osage County" opens in the U.S. on Christmas Day 2013, and in Canada on January 10, 2014.

Tim Dahlberg

Billed as "Rocky" versus "Raging Bull," despite the fact that both those movies came out over 30 years ago, "Grudge Match" aims to settle the ultimate boxing movie debate -- or at least find a way to get Sylvester Stallone back in the ring one last time without trying to justify a "Rocky 7."

So "Grudge Match" pits two of Hollywood's most famous on-screen pugilists against each other as former rivals Henry "Razor" Sharp (Stallone) and Billy "The Kid" McDonnen (Robert De Niro). Each won one fight against the other in the '80s, but the deciding bout was called off when Razor left the sport for mysterious personal reasons. Now, three decades later, the two former light heavyweight champs are pulled back into the ring for one last big payday (how meta!) and the chance to settle who's the better boxer once and for all.

But since the three-decades-in-the-making title card bout only takes up about ten total minutes of screen time in "Grudge Match," here's a look at how the two veteran actors stack up outside the ring.

Records:
In the movie, both Razor and Kid's records have only one blemish: their loss to the other. In real life, the only time Stallone and De Niro competed against each other (for "Rocky" and "Taxi Driver"), they both lost out to Peter Finch's posthumous Oscar. While De Niro eventually got his for playing a boxer, Stallone never did.

Advantage: De Niro

Fighting Shape:
Both actors qualify for AARP membership these days, but while De Niro has mostly been relegated to playing crotchety dads and even crotchetier grandfathers at age 70, Stallone is still a bona fide action hero. Not to mention in freakishly good shape for a 67-year-old. That said, neither are able to pull off a green screen suit very well.

Advantage: Stallone

Business Savvy:
Like many retired athletes, Razor lost all his money to his corrupt former manager, which means he's stuck working at a Pittsburgh steel mill. Kid was much smarter, parlaying his fame into endorsement deals, a car dealership, and his own bar. Like De Niro, he's a man who understands the importance of making your money while you still can. Which means when a movie asks you to do a fart joke or a double entendre-filled monologue about why men love "butterscotch jellybeans (ahem, BJs)," you do it, no matter how many Oscars you have. Still, you've got to give Stallone credit for being able to continue cashing paycheques for playing the same punch-drunk lovable underdog character for this long.

Advantage: De Niro

Training:
Nobody does a training montage like Stallone, so he's got the clear edge here. And Kid's tried-and-true traditional methods of sparring and chin-ups have nothing on Razor's "old-school" approach, which involves flipping truck tires, chugging raw eggs (of course), racing a motorized scooter, piling up "Rocky" references, and being shouted at by Alan Arkin.

Advantage: Stallone

Attitude:
As a goofy comedy that gets most of its mileage out of old-age jokes and boxing movie references, "Grudge Match" is the type of production where everybody's just there to have a good time. And while nobody's having a better time than Arkin (playing Razor's cantankerous trainer), De Niro comes close, throwing himself into the antagonistic, scotch-swilling Kid with more energy than we've seen from him in a while. Stallone's Razor is much more of a wet blanket, especially in the scenes with his long-lost love, where he and Kim Basinger seemingly duke it out for who can deliver more incoherent, rambling dialogue.

Advantage: De Niro

Technological Aptitude:
Neither knows what a viral video is, though Razor is at least aware of YouTube. Kid, on the other hand, owns at least one TV, to Razor's zero. And judging from the overwhelming amount of jokes that "Grudge Match" tries to wring out of Razor's self-imposed cultural isolation, that's got to be a crucial point in Kid's column.

Advantage: De Niro

Heartfelt Speeches:
For someone who calls himself a poor communicator, Razor sure does a lot of talking, and as the movie's true lead, he dominates Kid in the cheesy monologue category. De Niro's character also goes for the heartstrings with a subplot involving his estranged son (Jon Bernthal) and precocious grandkid, and while neither lands much of an emotional punch, Stallone takes way more shots at adding some drama to the feel-good comedy.

Advantage: Stallone

Public Opinion:
Thanks to cell phone videos of the two making fools of themselves going viral, Razor and Kid's rivalry is trending enough to earn its own HBO special, video game, and a sold-out Pay-Per-View event. Razor's clearly the people's champ though, blue-collar all the way, with a bunch of his former steel mill co-workers rooting him on from the nosebleeds, while Kid's cheering section is located primarily in his bar.

Advantage: Stallone

Final Tally:
It's a split decision. De Niro draws first blood, but because this is a cheesy, broad comedy, "Grudge Match" is more about melodramatic moral victories and life lessons than knockouts. And as the movie says, it's not Stallone and De Niro's best, but it's pretty much the best they've got to offer fans these days.

"Grudge Match" is now playing in theatres.

kellan lutz, hercules, legend of hercules, kellan lutz hercules

"Twilight" actor Kellan Lutz sounds pumped to be playing a Greek demi-god in "The Legend of Hercules." Exiled by his stepfather, King Amphitryon (Scott Adkins) and sold into slavery, Hercules must embrace his birthright in order to win back the woman he loves, Hebe (Gaia Weiss), and reclaim the kingdom.

Recent trailers promise plenty of action, romance and ripped muscles -- what else would you expect? The ridiculously jacked-up star Lutz jumped on the phone with Moviefone Canada to discuss tapping into his inner hero, transforming into a demi-god and his bucket list for future projects.

Moviefone: A lot of people flock to sword and sandal-type movies. What do you love about them?
Kellan Lutz: It's a timeless, ageless story that they tell. We're all fascinated with those warriors and that period of time. Hercules, for me, is the first superhero. We got modernized by having "Thor," "Captain America" and all these Avengers movies that Marvel makes. But, I feel like Hercules was the first one. He is the original superhero. He is born of a mortal woman and Zeus, so he is a demi-god. He's struggling with the human downfalls of doubt, self-deception, insecurities and lost hope. He also has to grab the reins of his true identity of being part god, be the saviour of his people and kick his ugly stepfather, who is not a good king, out of the kingdom and take his rightful place.

For me, I love the costumes and being able to travel to a different time period. That is very fun. I did that growing up. I have middle-child syndrome, big time. You didn't have a lot of attention growing up because the older brother was running amok. Mom was cleaning up his mess. Then your younger siblings were the babies of the family, so you were just there. I just used my own imagination everywhere I went. I'd pick heroes like Tarzan, He-Man and Hercules to bring life to my imagination. Now, here I am, an actor being able to do that for a job. It's kind of fascinating.

The trailer features plenty of running, jumping, swordplay and horseback riding. What kind of special training did you have to go through for this movie?
So much. I live an active lifestyle anyway, but I've never been trained to ride a horse or wield a sword or shoot a bow and arrow. Being a part of "Immortals," I had a lot of staff training, so it was great to take that knowledge and use that in my spear training. Then stunt and wirework, there's always something new that you get to do. They trusted me with doing most of my own stunts. I did 99.9 percent of my own stunts. It was really a blessing having Liam McIntyre on my side to fight swords with, because he was Spartacus for the TV series. He was a badass wielding a sword. To have him on my side, he showed me some of his secrets. I can't thank him enough for that. Riding a horse takes some work, but I was very excited to be a horse rider, and now I am.

Even though it's laid out on the page, were you prepared for how grueling all that action would be and what it would require of you?
No. Not at all. On the script, it says two lines. "Hercules fights six gladiators in an arena." Then you see what we're trying to shoot. Our movie is about 90 pages, with maybe 10 pages of small little lines of description. The movie we originally shot turned out to be about three hours and now it's down to about 87 minutes. It's a fast-paced movie, but our action scenes blew my mind away. I was really glad our stunt team and coordinator and director Renny Harlin let me collaborate with them in designing the moves, and what we wanted to do from stuff like the mud pit fight. I love my Superman punch I got to use in there and some of the cool sword-moving techniques.

Can you talk about how challenging it was acting in those costumes?
They aren't functional at all. They are beautiful and I really felt like Hercules. I'm glad I didn't have long hair and have to try and fight with it, especially during the rain and riding horses. But the thing I did end up loving was wearing the skirt. I felt so free to move around. It was the chest plate that was quite hard to strike with.

You went through a transformation for this movie. How difficult was it slimming down?
I've fallen in love with the story of Hercules, just him as a hero, since I was a little boy, so I already felt the part. Trimming up, being athletic and fighting the good fight ... I already felt like Hercules. So slimming down or being more cut was what Renny wanted and I was willing to do whatever it took.

Renny can be extremely energetic and animated on set. How did you find him?
That's a great way to describe him. He knows what he wants. He had a shot list ready. He had very visual sets designed, so you really immerse yourself into the movie and into the settings he creates. He was very enthusiastic and was always running around. It's really great to see a director watch playback and get excited about something he just shot, to see the magic unfold before his eyes. He drove the ship with authority, but his enthusiasm really commanded everyone's attention. Everybody loved him. I did, that's for sure.

This movie has a certain "300" feel to it, but that was all green screens and Hercules was largely filmed on location. Did that real environment help you get into character?
As great as my imagination is, when I did "Tarzan," I really had to look at the world through my own eyes and create it because it's motion-capture. For Hercules, we had practical sets. The throne room was there. The gladiator arena was there. Everything was there and they just embellished it a bit more as they magnified the situations. It was quite easy to feel the part when you are mentally and physically there. You're wearing the costumes. You feel the presence of Hercules and the dire situation as you're in these arenas and six gladiators run through the doors that you are about to battle.

In the Marvel comic books, Hercules is a bona fide member of The Avengers. Have you previously auditioned for any superhero projects?
Yeah, I auditioned for Thor and Captain America. Both Chrises are amazing. Chris Hemsworth is Thor and Chris Evans is Captain America. I loved what they did with the characters. They are amazing guys. I just knew my time would come and then Hercules came and I got that one. But I would love to do Venom from Spider-Man. I've always loved that character. I love Flash. I love Aquaman or He-Man. I would love to be He-Man. Those characters are up there for me.

Let's put it out for the studios then.
Let's do it. Let's do it.

Or perhaps you can appear in a horror film where you don't die right at the beginning like in "The Nightmare on Elm Street" remake.
Trust me. Trust me. I grew up loving horror movies. I didn't choose that. They wanted me and I had to shoot "Twilight." They were like, "Well, we'll write him in. We can kill him first." I'm like, "Do I have to?" I'd love to be in the remake of "Puppetmaster." Do a new one. Those little dolls were freaky back then.

"The Legend of Hercules" storms into theatres on January 10.

What Does Roland Emmerich Have Against The White House?

James Badge Dale, 'The Lone Ranger' Sheriff, on Riding Horses and the Badass Outfit

Sam Rockwell in 'The Way, Way Back': Will It Be His Breakout Role?

'Pacific Rim' Review: It's More Than Just Monsters Vs. Robots

The Millers in 'We're the Millers': Who Are They, Really?

Is 'Elysium' Worth The Trip?

Harald Zwart, 'Mortal Instruments' Director, on Ditching the Young Adult Label

Lily Collins on 'The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones' and How It Compares to 'Twilight'

Vin Diesel on 'Riddick' and Why He Resurrected the Franchise

'Insidious: Chapter 2': Should You See It?

Daniel Bruhl on 'Rush' Driving, Niki Lauda, and the Accident Makeup

'Runner Runner': What Are the Odds You'll Like It?

Catherine O'Hara on 'The Right Kind of Wrong' and Maintaining the Funny (VIDEO)

Daniel Bruhl on 'The Fifth Estate' and Working With Benedict Cumberbatch

Benedict Cumberbatch on Playing Julian Assange in 'The Fifth Estate'

'About Time' Review: How to Handle Time-Travel Romance

'Her': Ranking the Weirdness in Spike Jonze's Latest Movie

'August: Osage County' Review: Who Are the Winners in the Family Battle Royale?

'Grudge Match' Review: Sylvester Stallone vs. Robert De Niro

Kellan Lutz on Playing Hercules and Getting (More) Ripped