Quentin Tarantino Compares Once Upon A Time In Hollywood To Pulp Fiction

Quentin Tarantino Compares Once Upon A Time In Hollywood To Pulp Fiction

If you ask many film fans, or even many laypersons, what their favorite Quentin Tarantino movie is, there’s a good chance they’ll say Pulp Fiction. The auteur’s 1994 tale of the intersecting lives of criminals in Los Angeles is his calling card and the film in his oeuvre that is the most firmly engrained in pop culture. Speaking about how his 9th film, the Los Angeles-set Once Upon a Time in Hollywood compares to Pulp Fiction, Quentin Tarantino said:

This film is the closest thing I’ve done to Pulp Fiction. [It’s also] probably my most personal. I think of it like my memory piece. Alfonso [Cuarón] had Roma and Mexico City, 1970. I had L.A. and 1969. This is me. This is the year that formed me. I was six years old then. This is my world. And this is my love letter to L.A.

Long before we saw the first trailer for Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, the film was being described as Pulp Fiction-esque and Quentin Tarantino affirmed the comparisons in his recent interview with Esquire. While all of Quentin Tarantino’s films bear certain hallmarks of the director’s style, his new film will be the closest thing he has done to Pulp Fiction, a tease that is sure to delight fans of that movie.

What this comparison should mean in practice, beyond the similarity of both films being set in Los Angeles, is that like Pulp Fiction, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood will be an ensemble film with multiple characters. Some of those characters are based on real people and others are born entirely from Tarantino’s imagination.

Like Pulp Fiction, these vignettes of the character’s individual stories in 1969 Los Angeles are seemingly disparate until the characters and their stories collide in unexpected and consequential ways. We don’t know how this will come about yet in Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, but it brings to mind Jules and Vincent eating breakfast at the diner Honey Bunny and Pumpkin rob or Butch catching Vincent unawares while on the toilet.

This quality definitely adds a bit of excitement and tension to Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, because while we are watching the film we will wonder what the overarching story is and what the circumstances are that will bring characters together. The answer to that must be pretty wild and exciting considering how Quentin Tarantino has requested that nobody spoil the film in their reviews.

In addition to the Pulp Fiction comparison, Quentin Tarantino also calls Once Upon a Time in Hollywood his most personal film, comparing it to what Roma was for Alfonso Cuarón. Roma depicted the Mexico City of Alfonso Cuarón’s childhood and the film itself was semi-autobiographical.

While Once Upon a Time in Hollywood isn’t autobiographical in quite that way (presumably six-year-old Quentin Tarantino never had a run-in with the Manson family) the film is depicting the Los Angeles the director grew up in. The Los Angeles of Quentin Tarantino’s youth shaped him and meant a lot to him and thus his new film is reflective of that, acting as a love letter to the city and that time period.

Once Upon a Time in Hollywood premiered at the Cannes Film Festival yesterday and the early reactions are quite positive, as you might expect. Coinciding with the world premiere, a new trailer was released for the film and even in those brief 2+ minutes that love for Los Angeles comes through.

Once Upon a Time in Hollywood opens in theaters on July 26. Check out our 2019 release schedule to keep track of that and all of this summer’s biggest movies.

Scary Stories To Tell In The Dark Trailer Is Going To Totally Invade Your Nightmares

Scary Stories To Tell In The Dark Trailer Is Going To Totally Invade Your Nightmares

The horror boom is already proving to have some crazy strength in 2019, with titles like Us, Pet Sematary, and Happy Death Day 2U getting some nice buzz and heat - but these scary treats aren't going to be limited to the first half of the year. Instead, there is some haunting material set to come out in basically every quarter of this year, and now, thanks to the new teaser trailer for Scary Stories To Tell In The Dark, we have a much clearer idea of what's going to be haunting our nightmares come August. Check it out!

We got a nice taste of what to expect from Scary Stories To Tell In The Dark when little online teaser and artwork were released promoting the title last month, but this is our first real look at the upcoming film. Produced by Guillermo del Toro, it's the latest movie from Trollhunter and The Autopsy of Jane Doe director André Øvredal, and it looks like we're going to be getting a feast of horrific images on the big screen later this year.

There's been some question in regards to exactly how this movie would be able to string a narrative together, given that Alvin Schwartz's original books didn't really have any kind of consistent continuity or larger story to speak of. However, this trailer for Scary Stories To Tell In The Dark seems to suggest that the project has taken a Goosebumps-esque path, only instead of the works of R.L. Stine coming to life, it's the writings of a fictional author named Sarah Burrows.

Obviously that doesn't make the film seem all that original, but if it can make up for in scares what it lacks in narrative creativity, it may still work out for the best.

One can imagine that some of the material featured in this footage would give anyone nightmares, but it weirdly is extra special for those overly familiar with the source material - which I definitely am. It was scary enough reading stories like The Big Toe, The Red Spot, and "Aaaaaaaaaaah!" as a kid and simply imagining Stephen Gammell's brilliant artwork coming to life, but now actually seeing these terrible nightmares in realistic forms is next level freaky.

The cast of Scary Stories To Tell In The Dark is mostly made up of young newcomers, including Zoe Margaret Colletti, Michael Garza, Austin Zajur, and Gabriel Rush, but there are some familiar veteran character actors as well, including Lorraine Toussaint and Breaking Bad's Dean Norris - who doesn't appear to be in a great emotional state when he briefly appears in this trailer. Clearly there is a lot of responsibility being put on a lot of young performers here, but one also has to wonder how it will affect the atmosphere of the finished film. In a weird way, seeing big time movie stars offers a bit of comfort for audiences, as there are certain expectations for their safety, but that's not really something in play here.

CBS Films is all set to release the film later this summer, letting it invade theaters on August 9th. Are you excited yet? Hit the comments section below with your thoughts, and stay tuned for more updates about Scary Stories To Tell In The Dark here on CinemaBlend.

Guys, The John Wick 3 Dog Action Scenes Are Much Harder To Film Than You Realize

Guys, The John Wick 3 Dog Action Scenes Are Much Harder To Film Than You Realize

The following story will get into spoilers for John Wick: Chapter 3 – Parabellum**. Do yourself a favor and turn around now if you haven’t yet seen the film**.

Hard-to-kill hitman John Wick (Keanu Reeves) remains on the run at the start of John Wick: Chapter 3 – Parabellum. He is declared excommunicado by the organization he used to call “home.” And there’s a bounty on his head, meaning every assassin in the greater New York City area is hunting him down. Wick needs allies… and some of his allies in the sequel are four-legged friends.

Director Chad Stahelski unleashes two ferocious dogs in several fight sequences for John Wick: Chapter 3 – Parabellum, with Halle Berry commanding her two animals to defend her character, and John from attackers. During an appearance on the ReelBlend podcast, Stahelski explained in great detail the difficulty of shooting with the dogs, and the sheer amount of prep work that goes in to training a dog to attack – and the complications that come from that. He explains:

I would say that when you see an animal in a movie, the animal doesn't know it's a movie. There's no such thing as a movie dog. It's just a dog doing his thing on a set. … There's no half speed with an animal. The animal goes, like, when you tell him, ‘Go get the Frisbee,’ he doesn't get to go, ‘Let's walk one through. Let's rehearse.’ … So when a dog attacks, it's actually trying to injure a person. So now, you have an animal that's gone to a psychological place of fight or flight and survival mode of actually trying to hurt, kill, maim, whatever it is. And another individual wrapped up in protective gear that’s trying not to be maimed or [killed].

How does a filmmaker choreograph complicated long takes involving trained dogs who still are not really able to tell the difference between a fictional film set and a realistic fight? Especially when they are trying to complete the dog attack in the middle of an unbroken tracking shot, with loud gunshots and explosions going off all around them?

According to Chad Stahelski, speaking to the ReelBlend podcast, it requires an immense level of time commitment so that everyone involved with the stunts in the scene – from the actors to the stunt choreographers to the actual camera people – come to set months in advance to train with the dogs and familiarize themselves with the animals. He said:

You have to have all that incorporated into the financials of it -- what you're going to do with the animals after [the movie], and how you train them -- because you don't want the animals to hurt their teeth, hurt their jaws. The stuntmen have to be exceptionally trained, because if they're going to do these gigantic air-out reactions, you don't want your stunt guys to injure the animals. You want them landing on the poor doggy or anything like this. So the skills have to be rehearsed and rehearsed and rehearsed and rehearsed and rehearsed and rehearsed. ….

You [also] can't just isolate, go into one room and train an animal to attack one stunt guy. Who else is on set when you're doing that? All the background players. Guess who’s even closer to the dogs than the stunt men? Cameramen. So who does a dog have to know the most? Camera guys? Most of the time, camera men are only brought on maybe a week, maybe two weeks before the entire movie starts. I have to bring my team on three months before they start just to stand there and let the dogs that used to the smell.

Chad Stahelski goes on to say that a movie like John Wick: Chapter 3 – Parabellum might five different dogs working with 10 different stuntmen, which requires each participant to spend two hours a day with the different dogs just so they know who to attack. As he explains in the interview, even though the stunt involving the dog doesn’t look massive, the amount of time it takes to get the dog to run from Point A to Point B and tackle the right person can take months to get right.

This is one of the many fascinating stories that Chad Stahelski told about the behind-the-scenes on the making of John Wick: Chapter 3 – Parabellum. You really should give the whole interview a listen, as part of this week’s ReelBlend podcast:

This past weekend, the third John Wick movie finally dethroned Avengers: Endgame as the box office champ of the weekend, though the superhero ensemble adventure has banked more than $2.6 billion at the worldwide market, and can only go up from there. What did you go see this weekend? Did it involve dogs biting crotches? If so, then now you know how complicated those sequences were to pull off.

Dumbo’s Original Source Material Remains A Mystery To This Day

Dumbo’s Original Source Material Remains A Mystery To This Day

In the discussion about Tim Burton’s Dumbo, most speak to its original source material as the 1941 Walt Disney Animated film of the same name – but while that’s not entirely wrong, it’s also not entirely right. While there is absolutely no questioning that the new film was heavily inspired by the classic cartoon, calling it the original source material ignores the fact that the first Dumbo movie was itself an adaptation. This by itself isn’t all that interesting, but what adds a few wrinkles to the situation is the fact that the first ever version of the story no longer appears to exist.

While the Disney film obviously popularized the tale of Dumbo, it was actually first envisioned by writers Helen Aberson and Harold Pearl and illustrator Helen Durney for a toy called a Roll-a-Book. It’s believed that a prototype was created, and there is some limited artwork still floating around, but apparently it’s impossible to actually find it.

This is not due to a lack of trying, however, as I learned earlier this month during the Los Angeles press day for the new live-action Dumbo. Having learned about this strange circumstance prior to seeing the Tim Burton film and become curious about it, I decided to inquire about the mystery of the Roll-a-Book during interviews with the movie’s producers. What I discovered was that efforts were definitely made to track down the original version of Dumbo, but nobody wound up having any luck.

I first sat down with producer Justin Springer and screenwriter Ehren Kruger, and right off the bat asked if they had any luck finding the mysterious invention. What I learned was that they did a full archive sweep shortly after development on the project started, and while they were able to find some incredible treasures that have been beautifully preserved by the Walt Disney Company, one item that wasn’t included with the wide variety of materials was the Roll-a-Book prototype. Springer explained,

It doesn't exist. Disney doesn't have it. As soon as Ehren and I started talking about it, we did go to the Disney archives and we were able to go to the animation archives and they pulled like 20 boxes of Dumbo stuff for us. And there were old treatments, and screenplays, and artwork, cell animation, early drawings, and model sheets. One of the opportunities at Disney is that you can go back to that source material and see what some of the original thinking was… But the Roll-a-Book itself was something that we found out about because we were doing research on where the original idea came from, and read about it. But we don't know that one exists.

The patent for the Roll-a-Book, filed November 2, 1938 and credited to inventor Everett Whitmyre, suggest that the device operated like an encased scroll that the user would navigate through with a pair of nobs. The reader would turn the nobs simultaneously, changing the image shown and letting the story continue. Specifically in the case of Dumbo, the story of a baby elephant with ears so giant that they allow him to fly.

Justin Springer and Ehren Kruger were unable to track down the Roll-a-Book, but interestingly it seems that their interest in digging through the archives was a touch contagious. The producer noted that the material they had found was passed along to Tim Burton and his team once they started becoming involved with Dumbo:

When I first met Tim [Burton] and Derek [Frey], when they were coming on-board the movie, I brought them a bunch of those files so that they could have them as well.

That was only the start for Derek Frey, though, as I later learned when I sat down with him and his producing partner Katterli Frauenfelder. During that interview I again opened by asking about the Roll-a-Book, and Frey admitted that the mystery was one that intrigued him as well in the making of Dumbo. And not only was it interesting to him, but it caught the attention of his wife Leah Gallo as well. Said Frey,

We looked [for the Roll-a-Book], and actually, my wife, who wrote the making-of book, she contacted Syracuse. I think it's Syracuse University has some kind of record of it, or maybe the original artwork. I don't think it's the Roll-a-Book itself, but they were so happy that we contacted them, because we wanted to get the information on like where did this originally come from? Obviously everybody thinks of the Disney animated picture, but they got the rights to do it based off of that little Roll-a-Book. So it's interesting.

If you can’t tell where this is going, however, the efforts ultimately didn’t bear any real fruit. Even with all of the resources of the Walt Disney Company supporting the search, the original Roll-a-Book prototype that inspired Dumbo remains a lost item… if you can even call it lost, given how it’s unclear whether or not it ever physically existed. Derek Frey summed it up this way:

From what I understand, it's kind of like one of these myths. There was a Roll-a-Book being planned. I guess the fact is I don't know if anyone's actually found a physical copy of one. I think there's imagery of it, or artwork that was created for it, and there could have been like maybe like a prototype created for it. But I don't think there's actually a physical Roll-a-Book. We didn't have one, but we looked.

Frankly, this sounds like a case where the thing will randomly turn up in someone’s basement someday, with the person in possession of it being totally and entirely clueless about its pop culture significance. But until that day comes, we’ll just have to live with the material we know exists.

On that note, the original Walt Disney Animation classic Dumbo is widely available on Blu-ray, DVD, and digital. And if you're curious about the new live-action take, Tim Burton’s Dumbo – starring Colin Farrell, Nico Parker, Finley Hobbins, Eva Green, Danny DeVito, Michael Keaton, and Alan Arkin – is now playing in theaters everywhere worldwide.

Us Box Office: Jordan Peele Horror Dethrones Captain Marvel In Massive Debut

Us Box Office: Jordan Peele Horror Dethrones Captain Marvel In Massive Debut

Daaaaaamn, Jordan Peele. We knew Us would make a lot of money -- much more than the initial projections from $38 million to $48 million -- but Us' opening weekend nearly doubled that. It made $70.2 million from March 22-24, which is literally double what Captain Marvel made this week in its third time on the chart. This is the first time Captain Marvel has been dethroned at #1, after its own better-than-expected debut. Us has set all kinds of records, and we'll get to that and more, but first check out the full top 10 domestic box office chart:

Us set a new record for an original horror movie, easily passing A Quiet Place's $50 million debut. It marked the third best horror opening of all time behind It and Halloween. Also -- and this is pretty cool -- it's the best opening for an original live-action movie since Avatar in 2009, per Deadline. Huzzah for original films!

Us demolished the $33 million opening of Jordan Peele'e previous hit, the 2017 film Get Out. That movie won Jordan Peele the Oscar for Best Original Screenplay. It was a tough act to follow, but it also added more anticipation for this film, which must've contributed to the huge opening box office. Plus, no one likes to be spoiled, so many fans rushed to theaters to see what happened in Us before someone spoiled it for them online. (If you're still confused on exactly what happened, here's help.)

Very strong reviews are also known to help at the box office, although fans don't seem to be quite as fond of Us as the critics. The movie currently has a 94% fresh rating from critics but only 69% from RT users, and a "B" CinemaScore from moviegoers polled on opening night.

Us winning doesn't really mean Captain Marvel loses. The MCU movie did see a drop of -48.5% this week (and a loss of 32 screens), but those chart numbers are just from the domestic box office. Captain Marvel currently has a worldwide total of $910,298,835, and it's expected to hit $1 billion later this week. One billion dollars within a month of release? Not too shabby.

Most of the chart order above looks the same as last week's figures from Box Office Mojo. There are some changes, though, like the arrival of Gloria Bell in the top 10. Julianne Moore's movie added 615 screens, putting it up to 654, giving it a box office boost of +394.5% over last week.

Other that that, this weekend pushed How to Train Your Dragon 3 very close to $500M worldwide -- it's currently at $488M -- and Alita: Battle Angel is barely a hair under $400M with a current worldwide gross of $399,866,842. The total may be above $400M by the time you read this, depending on how much still comes in from the impressive foreign box office. But the question remains on whether it can reach $500 million, which seems to be the benchmark people are looking at for profit/sequels.

At any rate, Us should enjoy #1 while it can, because next weekend we have Dumbo and then it's Shazam! time. And in just over one month, Avengers: Endgame will arrive to show every film how box office winning is done. Keep up with everything headed to theaters in busy 2019 with our handy movie schedule.

Did you predict a $70 million opening for Us? If so, now's the perfect time to brag in the comments below. (No one will believe you without proof, but that's fine.)

Dark Phoenix's Nicholas Hoult Would Totally Play Beast In The MCU

Dark Phoenix's Nicholas Hoult Would Totally Play Beast In The MCU

The Marvel Cinematic Universe is on everyone's mind currently, as Avengers: Endgame has been in theaters for nearly two weeks. The Russo Brothers delivered a blockbuster that was the true cumulation of 22 movies, and included just about every character you could imagine. There is still one movie left in Phase Three, but the public has been theorizing about what might come in the next slate of movies.

One of the biggest questions looming above Phase Four is the Fox/Disney merger, and the new characters that might join the MCU. Chief among them are the Fantastic Four and X-Men, although the latter group offers an interesting set of challenges. But will Marvel Studios invite any of the current X-Men actor to return, or just recast? Nicholas Hoult has been playing Beast since First Class, and recently expressed his interest in joining the MCU, saying:

Yeah, I think that would be cool if they do blend them together. I’m not sure what their plans are, but I loved playing the role and I got to take him to a new spot in this film and try different things. So if there was a way to keep growing within that character then that’d be something I’d be interested in.

Dark Phoenix marks Nicholas Hoult's fourth movie as Beast, and it looks like he's not quite done with the big blue guy. And he'd love to join the Marvel Cinematic Universe if Disney Studio decides to somehow combine the franchises.

Nicholas Hoult's comments come from his recent chat with MTV International. While publicizing his role as the title character on Tolkien, the conversation eventually turned to Hoult's superheroic tenure as Beast in the X-Men franchise. Dark Phoenix has been teased to be the final installment in the property as we know it, but there are lots of fans hoping the mutants will be brought into the MCU.

Related: Nicholas Hoult Doesn't Make A Big Deal About Working With Ex Jennifer Lawrence On X-Men Set

But Marvel Studios' plans for the future are almost a complete mystery, save from Spider-Man: Far From Home and Black Widow. Studio head Kevin Feige did recently claim that the X-Men wouldn't be brought into the MCU for years, likely allowing audiences to move on from the long running franchise. But the MCU is a place full of twists, so there's always the possibility that those comments were a red herring.

Comic book fans have been waiting for the X-Men to meet The Avengers since the MCU introduced serialized storytelling to the film world. While this seemed like an impossibility for the last decade, Disney's acquisition of Fox seemed to open the doors. But exactly how Marvel will be introducing the beloved mutants to the greater shared universe is unclear.

If the current class of X-Men are offered, Nicholas Hoult is one actor who is ready to crossover to the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Let's just hope that Kevin Feige and his team are considering this as an option.

Nicholas Hoult's Tokien arrives in theaters on May 10th, and Dark Phoenix will debut on June 7th. In the meantime, check out our 2019 release list to plan your next trip to the movies.

Triple Frontier's Twist Was Actually Ben Affleck's Idea

Triple Frontier's Twist Was Actually Ben Affleck's Idea

Warning: spoilers for Netflix's Triple Frontier are in play. If you haven't seen the film yet, and want to remain unspoiled, bookmark this page and come back later.

It's a moment that comes as a shock to everyone who watches Triple Frontier: the moment where Ben Affleck's Tom “Redfly” Davis is taken out by a fatal headshot, thanks to a rash action he'd taken earlier in the film. The karmic consequence of killing a handful of farmers, it's a kill that shocks and surprises anyone who would expect someone like Affleck to make it to the end of the movie. But as co-writer/director J.C. Chandor recently explained, the decision to kill Ben Affleck's character was not only spawned in a re-write, it was from a note from Affleck himself. Chandor's version of events goes like this:

When I first read the script it was a secondary character [who got killed], I can’t even remember which one of the other guys it was. It was someone else… It was actually in meeting with Ben for the first time, he suggested it. He said would you ever be willing to do that? I had actually moved it to a different character than the one that I originally read [in Mark Boal’s draft of the script]. I won’t get into who, but it was to another character and it was very secondary. Ben said, ‘Would you ever be willing to, if I got the studio to agree to it, to allow that to be me?'

Killing off any random character that wasn't Ben Affleck might have worked in Triple Frontier. Doubly so, considering that by time Affleck's lead is killed while defending his friends in a mountain range fire fight, it really felt like the whole team would be walking away from this caper with their lives. But even in the movies, when it's your time to go, it's time to go.

According to remarks Ben Affleck made to Collider during the Triple Frontier press day, that decision was inspired by, among other things, a random crime drama from the 1980's. That specific film, and the effect it had on Affleck's decision, can be read below:

I thought that would be interesting and I wanted to see somebody actually pay a price for what happened. I always liked To Live and Die in L.A., how Bill Peterson’s character died. It kind of takes you off guard. I wanted to do the same thing. This is a little bit later in the movie than Bill Peterson’s character, but it highlights the risk to people’s lives. It focuses on the mortality question and theme, which I think is really interesting.

As mentioned before, Tom's death is the consequence of his cold blooded murder of South American farmers trying to claim some of the money stolen in Triple Frontier as their own. If it wasn't for that particular incident, Ben Affleck's character wouldn't have been hunted down by one of the farmer's sons, and he would have lived happily ever after. Or as happily as he could have with $5 million. But who was originally supposed to die?

While J.C. Chandor isn't divulging which Triple Frontier character was originally on the chopping block, the smart money would be on either Garrett Hedlund's Ben or Charlie Hunnam's William originally taking the big dirt nap. With one being shot during the actual robbery, and the other going out of their way to protect their brother, the process of elimination helps narrow it down to those two characters. And comparatively, they could be considered characters secondary to Affleck's Tom or Oscar Isaac's Santiago.

This only makes the effect of this big rewrite all the more impressive. The finished film doesn't feel like it has just two “star” team members and three “secondary” characters. Rather, the entire team of Triple Frontier is important in their own individual ways. So no matter died, it would have stung. But the fact that it was Ben Affleck is even more shocking, as it violates the conventional wisdom that a star of his stature always makes it to the end. A decision to which we, as movie fans, must say bravo.

Triple Frontier is currently available on Netflix, and being shown in limited theatrical release.