So Deadline reported last week that Warner Bros. is moving forward with a sequel to the latest film adaptation of I Am Legend from a few years back.

I saw it the first weekend it was in theaters (it was my birthday) and never again. I’ve seen The Last Man On Earth with Vincent Price, which was okay. I have not seen The Omega Man.

But I Am Legend was awful – not necessarily as a story or film on its own, but definitely when you consider its source material. It’s one of the most influential and powerful vampire stories that’s ever been written, but you wouldn’t know that if you’ve never read the book. Because somebody thought having vague sort-of-zombie-vampire-creatures was a better idea.

It took all the humanism out of the “others” in the story, and that is what makes them so horrifying. Yes, they are now vampires, yes they want to kill him – but they are also living, breathing creatures. They think, and speak, and rationalize.

So their approach really turned me off from the film more than anything. I can understand the thinking behind the decision, but man, how rich the story could have been. And if you change a fundamental aspect of the story so much that it alters the entire thematic atmosphere, especially of the ending, please – please change the title.

In the book the title is more of a revelation than anything, a sick and ironic ending to his life and years of loneliness. He realizes just before he dies that the world has changed, it’s inverted – vampires are no longer legend, they are fact. Humans are no longer fact. Humans are now the ones that come in the night (daytime for the vamps) and destroy you and your loved ones. Humans are now the ones the vampires tell stories about. Robert Neville is immortal in the folklore of the new vampire society because of how he has hunted them for years. Neville is legend. It’s so powerful and thought-provoking, especially in the way it makes you consider how you relate to the world around you, a world that is ever changing.

In the movie, he hates the monsters, wants to cure them, captures them to run tests, then they come after him when they find out where he lives. They get in. Two random people he’s come across are able to escape when he blows his lab up with himself and many creatures in it in order to give them time. Then…he is legend?

So no, I don’t want a sequel to that. Or a prequel. I want a redo.

I (among many others, I’m sure) would love to tackle another film adaptation of this story, but based on the financial success of this latest one, I doubt that will happen for a long time. Then again, the Hulk, Spiderman, reboots can be right away – so what if we did another I Am Legend remake within five or six years of this last one that’s more true to the source material and we keep Will Smith in the lead role? That could be crazy/awesome/crazy-awesome.

A while back I scribbled down an opening sequence for another take on it – I’ve done some tinkering but here it is, a humble attempt at an opening. Let me know what you think!

The first glimpse of the next chapter in the Bourne series is here, and it does its job well. It’s vague but titillating, picking up with pieces of where we left off and then making the leap to this continuation by letting us know that there was never just one Bourne.

I was skeptical at the first news of this fourth movie, because as I’ve said before, fourth entries usually suck, and it didn’t seem necessary. The third one really wasn’t necessary, but we showed up at the theater anyway to see what they came up with – and it was satisfying.

Now we have no Matt Damon, but the rest of the cast is there plus the new leading man in Jeremy Renner. The look, feel, the tone – I think everything about this teaser is promising. It’s a continuation of the series but a new direction in the story and based on the fleeting images we’re given, there is plenty more territory to explore than we (I) may have imagined previously.

Kudos to Universal for betting on Renner and another quality entry in the series. It’s too early to tell if it’s a bet that will pay off, but when the marketing starts from the very beginning on the right foot it’s definitely a positive sign.

Marketing bait-and-switch tactics are nothing new, especially when it comes to the movies. But the instances where the film ends up being a more meaningful and impactful experience than any of the ads could have possibly indicated? Pretty rare. Luckily, The Grey is one of those films. You go in expecting some awesome Liam-on-wolf action interspersed with a plane crash and guys braving the Alaskan elements. You get all that, just not necessarily in the measurements or contexts you were thinking.

We start off with Neeson’s character, John Ottway, writing a letter to his wife. She’s gone, and if you’ve read up on the flick you may already know the context, but if you haven’t, you are left wondering.

It’s a great set up to the character and film – he’s on the edge of darkness both physically and mentally, and it’s a wolf’s cry that keeps him from taking an irreversible step – perhaps an overlooked irony by many once the movie ends.

Ottway wanders through the camp, fulfilling his duty, more like a zombie than a man. A ghost of whatever his former self was capable of being. He’s distant and cold like his surroundings, and when he gets on the plane to leave there’s a sense that he’s about to become even more lost. But that changes when a horrific crash results in Ottway being one of just eight survivors.

Minutes after they gather together to assess the situation, one of the men’s wounds take him. It’s a stirring scene that sets the dismal tone for the rest of the movie and features an inspired, brief exchange that Neeson pulls off perfectly. So with only seven left, they gather things together and start a fire. Night comes first. And then the wolves.

What follows is a thrilling horror film with plenty of dramatic elements. Each character is real, relatable, conflicted and contradictory. They are people and as they band together you can’t help but be enthralled with their fight for survival. Whether by the wolves, the elements, or each other, their numbers dwindle with time. But rather than a simple horror movie in a race to a last-man-standing battle, this film dares to have its characters think and ask questions. And it asks questions of us.

The brilliance of it lies in the fact that we aren’t allowed to just watch these characters fight for their lives, we are engaged within the experience. What would we do in those situations? What would we fight for? What would we believe? What would take us home?

Obviously these are huge questions, central to the core of any person and informing our entire worldview. And the survivors have differing answers to those questions, and ask different questions of their own. It’s not all in alignment, there is no agreement at the end of each conversation,  and I think that’s the point. The movie starts with the premise that life is. It just is. Beyond that, we make choices, whether right or wrong, and it’s all we can do. What we believe, how we feel, how we act – all things that are up to us at any given moment, and capable of dramatic change depending on so many factors in our lives. So when it comes down to the line, when it’s just a case of survival and nothing else, the biggest question is – do we fight?

This movie features tough scenes and poses unflinching questions about life, love, and faith, and I was very moved by its raw emotional honesty. It’s affecting in an exact way that I don’t know that I’ve ever experienced before – it’s more than just the “slow burn” or cathartic/inspiring finish we so often see, it’s almost like a tantric exercise in the filmgoing experience. What I mean by that phrasing is that it’s a horror thriller with dramatic elements throughout the course of the story, with the balance constantly shifting up until the very end – when some questions are answered (“it’s worth fighting for”) and a whole slew of others are raised and left up to us. Some people may not like it, or they many find it unfulfilling at first, but I found it to be just what I needed to round out that story. It really is expertly crafted.

There came a moment during the lead up to the end where I thought they may close the movie in a certain way, and then they did. It took guts. It’s not some cheap trick to get sequels or to provoke a surface-level reaction in the audience – it’s a measured device that serves the story perfectly and provokes a serious gut-level reaction. It’s more than just the normal scrambling to answer questions when the credits roll.

If you’re squeamish with guts, whether visually or metaphorically, this may be too rough of an experience for you. And there’s nothing wrong with that. This film is most certainly not for everyone. It’s dark, it’s dismal, and it’s grim all the way through. That being said, if it’s the type of film that you are up for, it really can move you at your core – but only if you let it.

Word on the street is that The Expendables 2 will carry a PG-13 rating when it comes to theaters. If you are thinking it’s an odd move to take an R rated movie’s sequel and water down the language (or excessive violence) to a PG-13, it’s really not that strange. (Remember Die Hard 4? Yeah, I tried to forget it too as soon as it was over. And every day ever since…) The issue here is the reasoning. Because it’s stupid.

But first, let’s remember that typically the reason to downgrade is something like “hey if we make this PG-13 it means more people can see it and that means more money!” Which is the same logic behind the latest 3D surge. It’s not very sound, not very artistic, but at least it’s not totally stupid. I’m sure there are instances too where the story just isn’t as brutal/sexy/whatever in tone as the first, so there really is no legitimate reason to throw in some extra dialogue in order to receive an R rating. (The exception to this rule is Snakes on a Plane. That movie, without Samuel L. Jackson’s signature line, would have been loathed upon release. Granted, it wasn’t a blockbuster, but without that line the entire audience that did go see it would have left the theater in a really bad mood).

But what’s behind the rating change for The Expendables 2? Chuck Norris. He agreed to be in the movie if they would take out the foul language. So they did. Cool. Why did he want it to be toned down in the words department? Because that way more kids can see it. For real.

“In Expendables 2, there was a lot of vulgar dialogue in the screenplay. For this reason, many young people wouldn’t be able to watch this. But I don’t play in movies like this. Due to that I said I won’t be a part of that if the hardcore language is not erased. Producers accepted my conditions and the movie will be classified in the category of PG-13.”

This is stupid because while Chuck Norris has a problem with kids hearing swearing, he apparently has no problem with them watching people violently beating other people to death.

I’m cool with the ratings downgrade if you want it to be less violent and have less foul language so more kids can see it and be inspired by an actual story or ideas or themes. But this is The Expendables, so there’s not a whole lot of substance going on. And no one should think a child hearing “shit” twenty times is worse than them seeing someone’s head get kicked so hard it splatters.

I wasn’t sure if I would even see the sequel, but with this news and Chuck Norris’s plans to turn the move into an extended episode of Walker Texas Ranger, you can definitely count me out.

You may remember hearing about this movie focused on brothers in a mixed martial arts tournament earlier in 2011. You may have seen some TV spots, maybe some internet ads, and a whole lot of positive tweets – but if you’re like me, you didn’t see the movie in theaters. Why? Well, it didn’t look all that interesting. I don’t remember seeing a full trailer for it at any point, just short tv spots and blurbs online, and the previews I did see weren’t compelling. But I kept seeing positive buzz online, and then this past weekend I found the movie available to rent through Redbox.

The story focuses on two brothers, Brendan and Tommy, and their father, Paddy. It’s clear from the beginning that they’ve had a rough life up to this point. Tommy returns to his dad’s house, mostly silent but a tough-as-nails hulk of a guy. Paddy taught them how to wrestle as children, and Tommy asks him to train him once again for a mixed martial arts tournament that’s coming up. He makes it clear he doesn’t want to talk or bond with his father, just train. All business. His motivation for all of this is revealed gradually throughout the film.

Brendan is a teacher with a wife and children who is about to lose his house to foreclosure. He put his wrestling to use earlier in life as a UFC fighter, and now he goes to small night fights to pick up extra cash on the side. This complicates things and leads to him also train (with an old friend) to enter the same tournament.

Throughout the course of the film the guys train and we explore their family’s history and how it brought them to where they are – it’s all in bits and pieces, and contrary to what you may think, it’s very compelling. The storytelling is fantastic here, and the three leads are all perfect in their respective roles.

Nick Nolte is subtle yet powerful as a recovering alcoholic desperate to make up for lost time with his children. Joel Edgerton’s character is focused and determined, anything but a quitter. And then there’s Tom Hardy’s Tommy. He’s quiet, mean, hostile and aggressive – all of which is explained by the things we learn about him and his past along the way. In a few particularly powerful scenes, he unloads on his father before showing a completely different side, one which is only hinted at and vaguely referenced up until that point. He’s the toughest character in the story, but it’s because of his childhood. He expects complete and utter vulnerability before he will show it in return – and it’s then and only then that he does so.

I don’t want to spoil anything because the story is really captivating and worth experiencing, but as you’d expect the film climaxes with the brothers being the last two opponents in the tournament. The final fight is a powerful moment, and it grabs you and holds you up until the very end even if you don’t realize it – you may even find yourself in tears by the time the credits roll.

I loved Hugo because it was a celebration of the power of movies. But now that I’ve seen Warrior, it is definitely the best picture of 2011 in my opinion – because it is that power. An underrated, inspiring, and deeply moving film that I encourage you to check out.

You’d think that after seeing this I would be bursting at the seams with excitement! And I am – for the most part (more on that in a bit). This is only a preview, but from what we can see it looks like the tone and atmosphere of LOTR has been carried over well to The Hobbit. These stories are going to make sense and feel like they fit in the same world, and that’s not just good, that’s great! With a decade in between, I think it was legitimate for all of us to be concerned as to how well the stories would fit together visually.

Honestly, there’s not much to say, just keep watching this thing over and over because this glimpse looks promising as can be. My only doubts relate to the 48 frames per second rate at which they decided to film (due to the 3D gimmick) and how that will change the movie-going experience. I haven’t decided whether or not I’ll actually go see this because of that. If the next few trailers improve on what is already a stellar preview, there’s a strong chance I’ll be visiting the theater and giving it a shot.