The 10 Best Martin Scorsese Movies, Ranked

Goodfellas full cast

When it comes to living Hollywood directors with an impressive body of work, few can measure up to the accolades of Martin Scorsese. Scorsese has thrilled audiences throughout the years with his unapologetic depictions of violence and a fearlessness in storytelling, giving stories to individuals few audiences would label as heroes. With New York City often as the backdrop, Scorsese has found success again and again, but which of his movies rank among his best?

There’s plenty to choose from when it comes to Martin Scorsese, but obviously, some rank above the others in terms of quality, memorability, and how they embody the best of the director’s abilities. Below, we looked at all of those attributes, and ranked the 10 best movies from Martin Scorsese.

Hugo

10. Hugo (2011)

Hugo is the tale of a boy who is forced to navigate through some very difficult situations in the absence of responsible adults. Hugo is a crafty boy, however, so he manages to get along well enough thanks to his friend Isabelle and some luck. The impressive story, based on a graphic novel, makes for a tense but classic family film for all ages. That’s not something that can be said of most of Martin Scorsese’s movies!

Which is why Hugo comes in at number 10 on the list. Is it a classic children’s film that received many Academy Awards and critical acclaim? You bet, but it’s not necessarily an accurate representation of Scorsese’s best work. It’s a good movie, and it definitely showed he can step outside of the tropes that made him famous, however, hence its placement on this list.

The Wolf of Wall Street

9. The Wolf Of Wall Street (2013)

Money, partying, white-collar crime, and some good old-fashioned scamming are all at the heart of the plot in The Wolf of Wall Street, which is based on the memoir of Jordan Belfort. Specifically, the film goes through Belfort’s perspective of his career as a stockbroker, and how his firm ultimately committed fraud on Wall Street.

Whlie The Wolf of Wall Street has garnered its fair share of criticism over the years for its use of animals to its failure to recognize the scores of people Jordan Belfort harmed with his scamming, it’s still widely regarded as one of Martin Scorsese’s better movies. That’s thanks in no small part to the stellar cast, which is led by the dreamboat Leonardo DiCaprio and features Jonah Hill, Margot Robbie, Kyle Chandler, and Matthew McConaughey — just to name a few. A great watch to be sure, but not his best.

Casino deniro still

8. Casino (1995)

Martin Scorsese’s Casino tells the story of a man who goes from a lower-level gambling handicapper for the mob to the supervisor of a Las Vegas casino’s day-to-day operations. It sounds unbelievable, but the whole film is based on the life of Frank “Lefty” Rosenthal, who is known as Sam “Ace” Rothstein in the movie. Robert De Niro plays Rothstein, who goes through a series of highs and lows throughout the film thanks to his business venture.

Casino is the type of movie Martin Scorsese made his legacy on. It may not be his best of the mobster genre, and others will say it’s a bit derivative of one of his other works that is much higher on this list, but even a flawed mobster-themed Scorsese movie is still a damn good film.

Gangs of New York

7. Gangs Of New York (2002)

As the title of the film states, Gangs of New York chronicles the story of rival gangs in New York in Five Points Manhattan in the mid-1800s. The story is centered around one Bill The Butcher and the son of one of his dead rivals, nicknamed Amsterdam. The two have quite a history over the course of the film that ultimately spins a tale of a character hell-bent on revenge.

This is another Martin Scorsese movie that stars Leonardo DiCaprio, but more often than not lovers of this film will speak to the performance of Daniel Day-Lewis as the high point of this film. Others will simply like the historical setting of the New York of old, which doesn’t get a ton of play amongst screenwriters to begin with. Can we get some more films that are set in this era? I suppose we almost got a tv series.

Cape Fear Robert De Niro

6. Cape Fear (1991)

A remake on a top 10 list? Anyone who has seen Martin Scorsese’s Cape Fear will understand, as the director’s edge adds to the story of the original in a meaningful way. In it, a lawyer is forced to fight for his life when a violent rapist client realizes he kept evidence under wraps that would’ve reduced the time on his prison sentence.

Robert De Niro snagged an Academy Award for his performance in Cape Fear, and he’s a large part of what makes this remake so great. Another thing that makes this film so great is comparing it to the original, which showcases exactly what Scorsese brings to the table as an individual when brought to a film. Finally, this film is the basis for what may be one of the best episodes of The Simpsons, which has to count for something.

Taxi Driver still 1976

5. Taxi Driver (1976)

Taxi Driver tells the story of an honorably discharged war veteran trying to make his way in the big city of New York. He becomes increasingly frustrated with the amount of debauchery and evil he sees on a daily basis in his job as a taxi driver, and sets him on a path to do something about it.

“You talking to me?,” is the sequence that’s arguably more famous than the film itself, but that doesn’t mean Taxi Driver isn’t a phenomenal film. It’s not often adjectives like phenomenal are thrown around midway through a top 10 list, but when it comes to Martin Scorsese’s movies, he has quite a few masterpieces. This is one of them, thanks in large part once again to Scorsese’s style and a deranged Robert DeNiro.

The Departed matt damon

4. The Departed (2006)

A mole for the mob and a mole for the police attempt to sniff each other out in a cat-and-mouse affair that results in a whole lot of bloodshed. Leonardo DiCaprio and Matt Damon star in The Departed, and hang with a phenomenal supporting cast that includes Jack Nicholson, Martin Sheen, and Mark Wahlberg.

Perhaps the most satisfying thing about The Departed is its conclusive ending, which really marks a definitive ending for a vast majority of its characters. It also features that fantastic Dropkick Murphy’s song “I’m Shipping Up To Boston,” which will always be connected to this remake of a Hong Kong film.

The Aviator

3. The Aviator (2004)

The Aviator is a biographical film on the life of Howard Hughes that focuses on the era where he became a successful person in the world of film and aviation. It also chronicles his struggles with obsessive compulsive disorder, which seem to intensify along with his massive success. Leonardo DiCaprio stars yet again in a Martin Scorsese movie that offers a riveting tale on a prominent American figure.

The Aviator is one of those films that’s as inspirational as it is heartbreaking at points. Seeing Hughes go from what would be one of the peaks of his success to a recluse is such a powerful and sad thing to watch, and honestly Leonardo DiCaprio should’ve won an Oscar for his performance. Unfortunately, it would be years before he captured that award, for reasons we will always wonder given the equally great films he did after this.

Raging Bull black and white still

2. Raging Bull (1980)

Martin Scorsese’s movie about boxer-turned-comedian Jake LaMotta sounds like a bizarre story from that line alone, but it’s far darker than it sounds. LaMotta’s passion with boxing puts him up against the mob, his own well-being, and even his personal relationships in a film that gets heartbreaking by its end.

It’s similar in style to The Aviator, in which Scorsese shows a person at their absolute best, and shows their collapse from greatness as the years drag on. It’s something he’s really good at as a director, and something audiences respond to quite a bit. We can evaluate what that means about us as a society some other time. For now, let’s just leave it at the fact that Jake LaMotta’s story is among the best and most tragic tales to have been portrayed in modern cinema.

Goodfellas scorsese

1. Goodfellas (1990)

A young Irish boy finds a love for the mob in his formative years, and gradually works his way up the ladder to become a respected member of a crime family. Things really ramp up in intensity from that point on and get harder for protagonist Henry Hill, which as mentioned above, tends to be theme of Scorsese’s works.

It’s hard to say The Godfather isn’t the mother of all mobster films, but if there was any other film that could be suggested as the definitive film in its place, it’s Goodfellas. Scorsese pulled what may be the best performance in Ray Liotta’s lifetime out of the actor and elevated the story that much further with supporting roles from Robert DeNiro and Joe Pesci. Without a doubt, this is Martin Scorsese at his best, and the go-to film to see what’s so great about his style of filmmaking.

Love the picks, but hate the order? Maybe you feel like a movie was wrongfully snubbed. Air all grievances or praise in the comments below, vote in our poll below, and continue to stick with CinemaBlend for all the latest and greatest news in television and movies.

What Is Your Favorite Martin Scorsese Movie?

Blended From Around The Web

 

Do Movie Theaters Have A ‘Trailers’ Problem?

Dave and James Franco in The Disaster Artist

When people talk about the problems with going to the movies today, most of what they complain about doesn’t have much to do with what’s happening on the screen itself. High ticket prices, people coming in late, people on their cell phones during the movie, people talking during the movie, etc, are all annoyances of modern moviegoing. But there may be another element, one that’s part of the presentation itself, that’s rubbing moviegoers the wrong way: too many trailers.

So we must ask, do movie theaters have a ‘trailers’ problem?

According to a recent poll done by The Hollywood Reporter, they just might. The poll found that 59% of Americans believe that one to three trailers in the theater before a movie is ideal. While the preferences vary by age group, across the board, the majority of those surveyed prefer one to three trailers as opposed to four to six, or seven to nine.

One to three trailers before a movie might be ideal to many, but if you’ve went to a movie lately, the chances that you’ve had that ideal number of trailers before your feature presentation is probably pretty slim. The large chains like AMC Theatres, Cinemark Theatres and Regal Cinemas often include five to eight trailers before the movie, clocking in at 15-20 minutes.

ArcLight Cinemas sticks to a tight seven minutes, or around three trailers, and the same may be true of smaller independents. But for the most part, the bulk of American movie theaters are operating under a ‘more is more’ model when it comes to trailers.

This is only one poll, and more data on the subject is certainly warranted, but this disparity between moviegoers’ ideal amount of in-theater trailers and the actual amount shown in most of the big chains (where most people are seeing movies) suggests that there is indeed a trailer problem.

It is undeniable that trailers are a huge part of the moviegoing experience. They were first introduced all the way back in 1913 and began morphing into their modern form in the ’60s and ’70s. Movie trailers have been a part of moviegoing for nearly as long as movies have been around, and they are great in a lot of ways.

Yet for all their positive attributes, a lot of factors, both internal and external, have rendered the sheer amount of trailers attached to modern movies into more of a burden than a blessing. In my view, anything that detracts from the theatrical experience needs to be seriously looked at. Therefore, although opinions will vary greatly based on personal preference, it seems that movie theaters do have something of a ‘trailers’ problem.

That problem is several fold. For one thing, nowadays, you don’t have to go to the movies to watch the latest movie trailers; you can watch them at home on a TV, computer monitor or a six-inch phone screen often before they even show up in theaters. This is just conjecture, but I think that part of the reason that people tend to favor fewer trailers is because there’s a not-insignificant chance that you’ve already seen the trailers before you walk into the theater.

This is almost certainly truer for movie fans, but even general audiences have access to YouTube and social media, where the latest trailers are shared around for all to see. Because of that, trailers don’t have quite the novelty and effect they once did. We aren’t being shown something for the first time or having a new experience, we’re just being shown something we’ve already seen before and therefore we aren’t as engaged.

The recent trend of theater-only trailers is an interesting concept that could counter that kind of fatigue. It makes you sit up and take notice when a trailer neither you, nor anyone else in the audience, has ever seen before begins to play. However, if theater-only trailers are to become a thing, they are merely in their embryonic stage at this juncture.

The other big factor likely reducing the tolerance of a lot of trailers is runtime, and this is where a ton of trailers really starts to get annoying. Perhaps in an effort to compete with streaming alternatives by giving consumers more runtime for their buck, movies are getting longer. Just this year, movies like Avengers: Endgame, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, IT Chapter Two and the upcoming The Irishman (which will have a limited theatrical release) have bladder-busting runtimes attached to them.

Those runtimes alone can be challenging when it comes to audience patience, the bathroom break issue and the overall time commitment people have to make to go see a movie. When you tack on 20+ minutes of previews to a movie that’s already nearing or past the three-hour mark, it becomes quite a big ask.

Long runtimes might not stop people from going to the movies if Endgame and IT’s box office are any indication, but on films long and short, it probably does detract from the experience a bit when you’re forced to sit through a half-hour comedy’s worth of trailers. And consider this: with 20 minutes of previews on a three-hour movie, 10% of your experience is not the movie itself, but the trailers. Dropping down to a 90-minute movie, that percentage rises to 18%, making a fifth of your moviegoing experience advertisements.

People like movie trailers, as evidenced by the millions upon millions of views many of them get on YouTube. If you’re at the movies, there’s a good chance that you’re a movie fan and likely want to see some trailers before the feature. Anecdotally, I remember as a kid being totally stoked when a movie had more than three trailers. It felt like we were getting something extra, an unexpected and pleasant surprise.

And just as the theatrical experience of watching a film cannot be replicated at home, the same goes for trailers. There is something fun about seeing a trailer for an anticipated movie on the big screen surrounded by an engaged and excited crowd, and turning to the person next to you to deliver the standard “That looks good” or “I want to see that.”

Although not their explicit goal, trailers also allow you some time to get settled and in the mood to watch the movie. Your eyes are given time to adjust to the screen, and the lighting and stragglers have some extra time to get their concessions and get to their seats. Trailers act as something of a grace period in that way, and if you’re running especially late, the more the better.

However, and this is just based on personal experience, the more trailers there are, the more audiences begin to get restless. You can feel it in the theater usually after the fifth trailer; people are just over it. Then, on top of the movie trailers, you still may have to sit through an advertisement for Coke, the theater itself and perhaps even the premium format you’re watching the movie in. I’m already in the theater! You have my money, you don’t need to sell me anymore! Don’t tell me why it’s great, show me!

You can also make the case that lots of trailers, rather than acting as a grace period, actually encourage audiences to be late, because they know they have time. This leads to the distracting scene in the auditorium where people can’t find their seats, can’t keep their family together and generally stumble about to the chagrin of those who arrived on time.

The business utility of trailers is powerful and obvious. Trailers are advertisements designed to sell you on a particular film and get you to return to the theater to see more movies in the future. And unlike a trailer playing on TV or before a YouTube video, you can’t change the channel or press the skip button. When you are watching a trailer in the theater, you are a captive audience.

In-theater trailers mean guaranteed, measurable audience exposure to specific trailers. That is a powerful promotional tool to get eyeballs on an upcoming film. These promos can also be lucrative for the exhibitor, inclining them to play more trailers overall. So a wide net is cast, playing a lot of trailers to you, the captive audience.

The problem is that sometimes it can feel like you are just that, captive Not in an engaged sort of way, but captive in that you feel a bit trapped, unable to leave because you want to see the movie, but desperately hoping that it would just start already.

In an era of declining attendance, the sanctity of the theatrical experience is paramount, and the available evidence points to that experience not being an ideal one based on the amount of trailers playing in theaters before a movie. So while it’s not necessarily being reflected at the box office, at least not in any clear, measurable way, it seems to me that movie theaters do have a small ‘trailers’ problem.

Trailers are awesome; movies wouldn’t be the same without them, but there can be too much of a good thing. Although the poll suggested most moviegoers want one to three trailers before a movie, that seems a bit restrictive and unrealistic. I think somewhere between three and five trailers is the sweet spot, in addition to whatever other advertisements there are telling me how great the chair I’m sitting in is.

Check out our 2019 Release Schedule to see what’s headed to the theaters this fall and let us know how many trailers you prefer to see in theater before a movie in the poll below.

How Many Trailers Do You Like To See Before A Movie?

Blended From Around The Web

 

The Hilarious Problem John Wick Chapter 3 Had Filming With The Dogs

There’s an old Hollywood adage that one should never work with dogs or children. The idea is that dogs and children are cute, and will naturally upstage whoever they share a scene with. However, there can sometimes be other problems with making movies with dogs, as Helle Berry somewhat hilariously discovered on the set of John Wick: Chapter 3 – Parabellum.

Halle Berry discusses in the special features of the John Wick: Chapter 3 Blu-ray that she worked quite closely with the dogs that play her pets in the film. She even gained the ability to command them on set so that no other trainer was necessary. However, while filming scenes in North Africa, there was one problem that kept causing the dogs to go off script, cats. According to Berry…

One can only imagine how frustrating, though also sort of hilarious, it was to try to film an intricately choreographed fight scene only to have the dogs stop whatever they were supposed to be doing to chase a cat. Apparently, stray cats are quite prevalent in Casablanca, Morocco where the movie was filming, so this was an ongoing problem.

One can just picture Halle Berry and Keanu Reeves, armed with guns, going through these well defined action sequences, every step has been choreographed like a dance number, and then the dog is supposed to run in and do its thing, but instead it goes running after a cat, completely missing its mark.

The production tried to deal with the issue by having somebody sweep the set before each take, but, unfortunately, because of director Chad Stahelski‘s particular style of film-making, even that didn’t always work. Berry continues…

And of course, Chad Stahelski’s trademark long takes meant that if the dog ruined the shot by going after a cat, the entire sequence had to be reset and started again. The good news, based on the finished film, is that eventually they got the shots they wanted. Some of the longer takes in all of John Wick Chapter 3 are during the Casablanca fight scene and include Halle Berry and the dogs.

The dogs of John Wick: Chapter 3 – Parabellum were clearly well trained, but at the end of the day you can’t fight an animals nature. It seems that the ongoing battle of cat vs. dog will never truly come to an end.

Dogs are as important to the John Wick franchise as headshots and Keanu Reeves himself. One assumes that when John Wick: Chapter 4 comes along, they’ll still play an important role, even if the production has to continue dealing with cats.

The Goldfinch Could See Warner Bros And Amazon Losing A Lot Of Money

While Jennifer Lopez’s Hustlers was coming in second to IT Chapter Two with a solid performance over this past weekend, another newcomer had a positively abysmal opening. The Goldfinch opened in eighth place to $2.68 million, one of the worst debuts ever for a movie opening on over 2,500 screens. Now it looks like The Goldfinch could see Warner Bros. and Amazon losing a lot of money.

Warner Bros. is set to lose between $25-$30 million because of The Goldfinch, according to The Hollywood Reporter. The studio ponied up for all of the film’s marketing and distribution costs, and those losses could wind up being even greater. Warner Bros. won’t be suffering alone though, because Amazon is also taking a hit to the bottom line because The Goldfinch failed to take flight.

Amazon Studios co-financed 40% of The Goldfinch and paid $16-$18 million for the exclusive worldwide streaming rights to the John Crowley film. Now Amazon could very well lose that entire investment. The Goldfinch cost $44 million to make before marketing, but when it’s all said and done, after bombing at the box office, the film could lose a total of $40-$50 million between Warner Bros.’ and Amazon’s losses.

How bad those losses ultimately are will depend in part on how well The Goldfinch does overseas. It hasn’t opened in a lot of the bigger territories yet and will continue its rollout throughout September and into October, but the early signs are not super encouraging. Over the weekend, it opened in Russia and 11 other smaller markets, and made only $852,000 in total.

While Warner Bros. and Amazon will be fine, the huge loss on The Goldfinch does not exist in a vacuum. Although Warner Bros. has done well with larger films like IT Chapter Two, other smaller movies like The Kitchen and New Line’s Blinded by the Light have missed the mark at the box office. This financial motivation means that there is a possibility that Warner Bros. might not back as many adult dramas in the future.

The Goldfinch’s failure is interesting, because although an adult drama was never going to have the box office of a blockbuster, this film had a serious potential going in. The film is an adaptation of Donna Tartt’s 2013 Pulitzer Prize-winning novel, and it was directed by John Crowley, who previously directed Best Picture nominee Brooklyn. The Goldfinch features a strong cast including Ansel Elgort, Nicole Kidman, Jeffrey Wright, Luke Wilson (who wanted one of his scenes in the movie changed), Sarah Paulson and Finn Wolfhard, and it was lensed by Hollywood heavyweight Roger Deakins of all people.

Having not read the book and just judging by the trailer and the pedigree, The Goldfinch had prestige and awards potential written all over it. So what went wrong? Well, the reviews certainly didn’t help. The Goldfinch premiered at the Toronto International Film Festival to brutal reviews, and it currently sits at 26% on Rotten Tomatoes. Smaller adult dramas have their work cut out for them as it is, but horrible reviews and no buzz basically guarantees they won’t break out at the box office.

The Goldfinch is now playing. Check out our 2019 Release Schedule to see what else is headed to theaters this fall.

Quirky Birds Of Prey Poster Offers The Best Look At Characters In Costume

The DC live-action universe seems to have found its stride over recent years, abandoning crossover-heavy projects for solo flicks like Shazam! and Aquaman. Both of those movies fared well critically, although the next movie in the DCEU will be an ensemble project: Cathy Yan’s Birds of Prey (And the Fantabulous Emancipation of One Harley Quinn). The movie will feature the femme fatales of Gotham City, including the long-awaited return of Margot Robbie’s Harley. 

Moviegoers have been eager for any and all footage of Birds of Prey, but the upcoming blockbuster’s marketing proving surprising so far. A screen test of the cast in costume is the only real footage made available to the public thus far. The exception is a teaser than accompanied the release of IT Chapter Two, but was never got a wide release online. Now a bonkers poster has arrived, showing the best look at the cast in costume. Check it out below.

Arnold Schwarzenegger Had A Strict No Blinking Rule For The Terminator

Arnold Schwarzenegger defined what it was to be The Terminator in the original film back in 1984. Since then, other actors have joined the franchise and created different kinds of Terminators, but Arnold is still the gold standard. Arnold plays one of two Terminators in the new film Dark Fate, but as the expert he also had a significant influence in how Gabriel Luna played the brand new Terminator.

Luna recently told Men’s Health that he looked to Arnold for advice on how to play the role of the emotionless killing machine, and while Schwarzenegger mostly wanted Luna to create the new role himself, he did offer some tips, make everything look easy, and don’t blink. According to Luna…

The simple fact that a Terminator doesn’t need to aim a gun in a traditional way, because the machine is able to do the aiming internally, makes perfect sense, and goes a long way to explaining all the other things that a Terminator can do without it ever looking like it’s working hard.

However, the minor detail that the Terminator doesn’t blink while firing was apparently a much bigger deal for Arnold than you might expect. It was apparently one of the rules set out in the very first Terminator film that the machine would not blink. Though Arnold admits that it’s actually difficult to pull off.

Apparently, if you go back and look at the first movie and the scene where Arnold kicks in a door before shooting one of the other women named Sarah Conner, you’ll see that he does blink, though he doesn’t in the rest of the film. Maybe that’s why he spends so much of the movie in sunglasses.

It’s this dedication to getting the Terminator just right that ultimately is what led to Arnold Schwarzenegger getting the role in the first place. Originally, Arnold was going to play the hero Kyle Reese in the first movie, but director James Cameron realized the actor had given such thought to playing the machine that it’s the role he should be playing. According to Arnold…

It was certainly the right call. The fact that Arnold Schwarzenegger looks like a walking brick wall made the Terminator that much more terrifying. It’s unlikely anybody else would have felt that way up against Arnold as the hero.

Arnold returns as the Terminator, though also one of the good guys, in Terminator: Dark Fate November 1.

Looks Like Jurassic World 3 Is Beginning Filming Soon

Following the release of Colin Trevorrow’s Battle at Big Rock short film, many of us are extra excited to see what the director has in store for audiences with Jurassic World 3. We have a long time to wait though because the sequel to last year’s Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom and the third film in the Jurassic World franchise isn’t set to arrive in theaters until 2021. It’s on the way though and it looks like Jurassic World 3 is actually beginning filming soon.

According to HN Entertainment, Jurassic World 3 is expected to shoot at the legendary Pinewood Studios in Buckinghamshire, England. This would be a return for the franchise, as Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom also shot scenes at Pinewood Studios UK, as have other entries in massive franchises, including Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker, No Time to Die and Eternals.

This report is unconfirmed as of yet and should be taken with a grain of salt until we hear more. But if accurate, this could be a sign that the pieces are being put in place to go before cameras. With the production locking in its filming locations, it seems that Jurassic World 3 could be ramping up its pre-production process so that it can begin filming in the near future.

Jurassic World 3 settled on a release date before Fallen Kingdom had even hit theaters and all signs are looking good that it will actually hit that release date. And after the events of Fallen Kingdom and the taste we got of things to come in Battle at Big Rock, there is a lot to look forward to in Jurassic World 3.

With the dinosaurs being released on the mainland at the end of Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom, this threequel could have an entirely new dynamic than what we’ve seen before from this franchise. Director and co-writer Colin Trevorrow has promised Jurassic World 3 thankfully won’t have dinosaurs attacking cities and that it will be a celebration of the entire franchise.

To that end, there is a hope shared by many fans and vocally championed by actress Bryce Dallas Howard, that Jurassic World 3 see the return of the actors from the original Jurassic Park. Jeff Goldblum appeared briefly as Dr. Ian Malcolm in Fallen Kingdom, but as of yet we haven’t seen Laura Dern’s Ellie Sattler or Sam Neill’s Alan Grant.

We don’t know if the original trio will be returning for Jurassic World 3 yet, but with all the talk surrounding the possibility, it certainly seems likely. With Jurassic World 3 potentially shooting soon, hopefully we’ll begin to hear more about the story and perhaps some casting news as well.

Jurassic World 3 is directed by Colin Trevorrow and written by Trevorrow and Pacific Rim Uprising’s Emily Carmichael. Jurassic World 3 opens in theaters on June 11, 2021. Check out our 2019 Release Schedule to know what movies are coming this fall and for all the latest movie news, stay tuned to CinemaBlend.

Jamie Lee Curtis Says Halloween Kills Will ‘Unpack’ The Original Movie

The horror genre was built on long-running franchises, and there are few quite as beloved as Halloween. Starting with John Carpenter’s 1978 original slasher, Michael Myers has served as the thing of nightmares through decades of filmmaking and a whopping ten sequels. The most previous was 2018’s Halloween from Blumhouse, which was a direct sequel to the original and started a new timeline. Two more movies are coming, and Jamie Lee Curtis teased that the upcoming Halloween Kills is going to be deeply connected to Carpenter’s classic.

Jamie Lee Curtis is returning for Halloween Kills, alongside OG Michael Nick Castle and co-stars Judy Greer and Andi Matichak. Casting announcements show that characters from the 1978 Halloween are going to come back up in the upcoming sequel, and Curtis recently teased how that original movie’s contents will be fleshed out. As she put it:

Do you hear that sound? It’s Halloween fans everywhere jumping for joy. Because in addition to continuing the narrative begun with Blumhouse’s Halloween, next year’s Halloween Kills will also really focus on the events of the original movie. It seems that Laurie Strode wasn’t the only Haddonfield resident who was affected by Michael Myers’ first rampage through the town.

Casting information for Halloween Kills has slowly been trickling out, and certainly hints at a focus on John Carpenter’s Halloween. Real Housewives Of Beverly Hills star Kyle Richards is reprising her role as Lindsey Wallace, and Anthony Michael Hall will be playing the adult version of Tommy Doyle. Lindsey and Tommy were the kids that Laurie and her friends were tasked with babysitting, and were witness to Michael’s original reign of terror. Additionally, Robert Longstreet is playing Lonnie Elam, Tommy’s bully from Halloween.

Blumhouse’s Halloween introduced a Laurie Strode who was still struggling everyday to deal with the trauma of her assault. But it looks like she’s not as alone as that movie hinted, and it’ll be interesting to see how Tommy and Lindsey were affected by their near death experiences.

Later in her conversation with Collider, Jamie Lee Curtis further teased what Halloween Kills will be about, saying:

It looks like 2020 and 2021 will have some very exciting Octobers, at least where movies are involved. Halloween Kills will be followed up by Halloween Ends, creating a bonafide trilogy in the process. The story has already been crafted by David Gordon Green and Danny McBride, and it’s something that Jamie Lee Curtis seems thoroughly excited about. And considering how long she’s been playing Laurie Strode, that’s really saying something.

Our questions will be answered when Halloween Kills arrives in theaters October 16th 2020, followed by Halloween Ends on October 15th 2021. In the meantime, check out our 2019 release list to plan your next trip to the movies.

Fans Spot Endgame Error Related To Avengers Tower

Marvel Studios broke new ground in cinematic storytelling when it took the continuity driven model behind comic books and brought it into the movie theater. The way the various films have connected to each other, have made the MCU the biggest film franchise in the world and recently made Avengers: Endgame the biggest box office movie in history.

However, continuity can be a tricky thing. There are a lot of things to get right and movies frequently get called out when they make a mistake. While the MCU may be getting all the broad strokes right, it turns out it’s letting some of the smaller details falter. Somebody recently discovered an error with Tony Stark‘s elevator as it is seen in Avengers versus how it was seen more recently in Avengers: Endgame.

In Marvel’s The Avengers, known as Avengers Assemble in some other countries. Agent Coulson hijacks Tony Stark’s elevator in Stark Tower at the beginning of the movie in order to talk to Stark about the Avengers Initiative following the theft of the Tesseract. He’s seen here in the top of the two images shared to imgur, getting out of the elevator, with simple wood paneling and a horizontal metal crossbar.

In Avengers: Endgame, we get a scene that is set not more than a couple of days after this scene. The Battle of New York is over and the Avengers are victorious. The team is taking Loki,down to hand him over to S.H.I.E.L.D. and they pile into the same elevator, except this time we see a few differences. The interior wall of the elevator is quite different as is some of the set around it

This is, of course, the smallest of details. It’s hardly important. It’s actually more shocking that somebody discovered the difference than it is that the error was made. Enough of the set looks similar to make it pretty clear this is supposed to be the same elevator, but enough is different that it’s clear that Endgame missed the mark.

The crew of Avengers: Endgame almost certainly spent a lot of time looking at The Avengers in order to properly recreate the necessary scenes in Endgame. Knowing that it is a bit surprising that this piece is off. Considering how much of the film was created in a computer, it seems like, if rebuilding the set to look exactly like the earlier film wasn’t an option, the changes could have been made via CGI.

This is what happens when the highest grossing movie in the world comes out on Blu-ray. People pour over it ways you likely never expected. This isn’t the only continuity issue that Avengers: Endgame has. When you’re making a three hour long epic that’s a culmination of a decade’s worth of movies, you’re likely going to miss a few things here and there.

Why Sylvester Stallone Chose Not To Direct Rambo: Last Blood

Sylvester Stallone remains one of our industry’s most recognizable stars, a force in the action-movie world with titles such as First Blood, Cobra, Cliffhanger and Demolition Man on his resume. But casual movie fans who love going to Stallone’s sagas might not realize that he’s actually responsible for directing a handful of the most important films in his storied career.

Stallone took over directing duties on the Rocky franchise, his signature property, with Rocky II in 1979. He went on to helm the next three Rocky movies, and also helmed The Expendables and the most recent Rambo film, 2016’s Rambo.

Stallone did NOT decide to direct Rambo: Last Blood, however, and his reason was simple enough. Though in giving it, he opened up about what he saw in Last Blood director Adrian Grunberg as a collaborator. When asked by CinemaBlend why he didn’t helm this new movie, Stallone explained:

There is something to be said for that continuity. The Rocky franchise certainly stayed true to tone. That’s probably why casual fans might not even have known that Stallone took over the directing reigns. The same can’t necessarily be said for the Rambo franchise, as the sequels significantly ramped up their ’80s-inspired action, which was totally different from Ted Kotcheff’s First Blood.

However, as Sylvester Stallone elaborated on the hiring of Adrian Grunberg, he stated: