As No Time To Die put a final, emotional punctuation on the Daniel Craig era of James Bond movies, the reaction was quite varied. Most saw the ending to the 25th 007 adventure as a bittersweet coda, while others reacted as if it was one of the series’ worst decisions. However, when it came to the reaction of Quantum of Solace director Marc Forster, only one word came to mind when he shared his opinion: “sad.” 

Speaking with Forster on behalf of his new film, the Sony/Tom Hanks dramedy A Man Called Otto, our own Sean O’Connell asked the filmmaker that helped define the Daniel Craig Bond films about the still shocking finale. Much like the world at large, the man admitted to CinemaBlend that he didn’t know anything about this outcome. Which allowed Marc Forster to share the following reaction:

The reactions to No Time To Die’s killer ending haven’t all been somber remembrances. Just recently composer Hans Zimmer made 007’s death sound hilarious in his recollections. However, Marc Forster’s remarks about the death of Commander Bond are pretty much in line with what you’d expect from anyone who knows the franchise well. While James Bond will return, it’s still as much of a sadness as it is a stumbling block for the future.

No one knows just what will be in store for Bond 26, especially with how it'll handle the debut of the next face of Bond. The inevitability involved is that this will happen, it's just a question of how. In terms of what Forster has said above, he knows that eventuality is in place, but was still saddened by James Bond sacrificing himself in the name of love. 

Bond’s death was something that had been in the works since Daniel Craig made the request after Casino Royale’s premiere. For it to have been that much of a surprise for so long is a testament to how secretive the 007 family can be at times. With even Marc Forster not expecting this gigantic twist, there’s no telling what sorts of surprises the folks at EON Productions are keeping up their sleeves at the moment. Let’s just hope the next round dealt into theaters doesn’t involve as many tears and/or anger as No Time To Die has inspired.  

A Man Called Otto heads to theaters to warm hearts in limited release on December 25th, just in time to heat up the awards season race. The film will debut in wide release on January 13, as part of the 2023 new movie releases. Meanwhile, you can watch Marc Forster’s Quantum of Solace with a Netflix subscription, as the film is currently available on that platform alongside Casino Royale and Skyfall. 

David Harbour has many claims to fame in his career as an actor of all seasons. The man’s racked up credits that have seen him playing figures in both the DC and Marvel universes, as well as the fan-favorite Sheriff Jim Hopper in the Netflix series Stranger Things. Even in his new movie release Violent Night, Harbour can now claim the role of Santa Claus on his resume. 

As if that wasn’t impressive enough, many people may have forgotten the fact that early in his film acting career, David Harbour actually landed a role in the James Bond movies. I certainly didn’t, which allowed me to ask him about how he landed the role of smarmy CIA section chief Gregg Beam in 2008’s Quantum of Solace. Here’s what Harbour had to say on the matter to CinemaBlend during the press day for Violent Night:

David Harbour’s part in Quantum of Solace was one of a grayer shade of morality. Brokering a deal between the CIA and villainous eco-industrialist Dominic Greene (Mathieu Amalric), Gregg Beam saw aiding the main antagonist as the cost of doing business. But at the same time, he doesn’t sell out Felix Leiter for failing to identify James Bond as a party of interference. Though he’s only in the film for a handful of scenes, the experience was one that Harbour clearly hasn’t forgotten. 

At this point in his career, David Harbour had mostly been playing parts on TV, which saw him appear on various Law & Order series at the turn of the millennium. While his breakout role in Stranger Things wouldn’t arrive for another decade, that all owed to the actor jumping into anything he could land. Luckily for him, that meant a role in the second film of Daniel Craig’s James Bond run.

That good fortune wasn’t exactly reflected by those that the young Harbour would encounter on the set of the 22nd James Bond title. As if there wasn’t enough to worry about, thanks to the fact that Quantum of Solace started production without a full script, Marc Forster’s off-the-beaten-path approach was giving people concerns. David Harbour explained why as he continued his story about making Bond history: 

Arguably one of the most underrated 007 movies in the canon, especially during Daniel Craig’s tenure, Quantum of Solace certainly landed a winner when casting David Harbour. His chemistry with Jeffrey Wright’s returning Felix Leiter would set a precedent for the actor’s very well honed chops of sarcasm and taking charge in any situation. Those skills still come in handy thanks to the continuing adventures of both Sheriff Hopper, as well as Harbour’s role as Red Guardian in Black Widow.

It’s still hard to fathom a time where Daniel Craig was seen as a controversial casting choice as James Bond. And yet, looking at how things wound up once No Time To Die closed off his story, it all turned out for the better. The same could be said for David Harbour, as Marc Forster’s “insane” gamble paid off, even if we never got to see the character again thanks to his disgraced section chief being demoted after the events of Quantum of Solace.  

Who knows where David Harbour’s career would have went if he hadn’t landed his James Bond role? It feels like he’d have eventually found his feet, as his career has shown him off as an acting talent that can sell any world he steps into. 

It’s also what made him such a good fit for the new film from Universal Pictures, Violent Night, which you can catch in theaters starting this weekend. Those looking to revisit his role in Quantum of Solace can do so provided you have an active Netflix subscription at the time of this writing.

At this point, Winnie The Pooh can safely be called a big screen legend. The character has been showing up as a Disney character going back to the theatrical shorts made in the mid-1960s, and he and his stuffed animal pals have been pop culture staples ever since. Now their latest cinematic adventure has arrived in the form of Disney's Christopher Robin, and while not all reactions are super glowing, the movie is being appreciated as a cute diversion and a nice bit of family friendly fun.

To start with CinemaBlend's own critic, Mike Reyes saw and reviewed the movie for us this week, and he expressed real appreciation for the work put in by director Marc Forster, stars Ewan McGregor and Hayley Atwell, and the artists bringing Winnie The Pooh, Tigger, Eeyore and more back to life. Watching Christopher Robin felt like a nice homecoming for him, and an affecting return for some very important characters. Wrote Reyes in his four star write-up,

As of now, Mike Reyes' opinion falls in line with the majority of critics, who are giving the movie mostly positive marks, but right now Christopher Robin is balancing on a knife's edge with a 60 percent score on Rotten Tomatoes. Helping keep the thing currently rated fresh are people like Ignatiy Vishnevetsky of AV Club, who has given the new movie a "B-." Rather than being over the moon about it, he explains that it's a path we've seen taken before, but it's still a pleasant road the revist. Also referencing the Goodbye, Christopher Robin feature released last year, Vishnevetsky said,

Not all critics have been willing to give Christopher Robin the pass, however. For example, Alonso Duralde of The Wrap has published his thoughts on the feature, and they aren't super glowing. Apparently not even the cutesy side of the movie really worked for him, nor the nostalgia of hearing classic voice artist Jim Cummings perform as Winnie the Pooh and Tigger. He explains in his review that he's not really sure who the audience is supposed to be, and makes it clear that it definitely isn't him. Duralde says,

Most reviews for Christopher Robin aren't taking a firm stance either way - neither calling the movie exceptionally good, or really bad. Leah Greenblatt's piece for Entertainment Weekly is a nice example of that, having also given the film a passing "B-" grade. She clearly wasn't blown away by the whole exercise, but did find enough positives in it to call it charming and appreciated the cuteness very much on display. Greenblatt explains,

Now that you've heard what the critics have to say, you can make your own opinions about Christopher Robin. The film, sporting a cast that includes Ewan McGregor, Hayley Atwell, Jim Cummings, Brad Garrett, Peter Capaldi, Toby Jones, Mark Gattis and more, is in theaters now - and be sure to stay tuned here on CinemaBlend for more of our coverage.

Disney is plowing ahead with live action versions of their classic animated properties, including Winnie the Pooh. Yes, the small bear with an insatiable hunger for honey and his 100 Acre Wood pals will be brought back to the big screen in the near future, and they won't be their usual traditional, 2-D animated selves. However, aside from screenwriter Alex Ross Perry listing some inspirations for the new Winnie the Pooh adventure, there hasn't been any big news regarding its progress until today, when it was announced that the man who directed World War Z has been tapped to oversee the movie.

According to THR, Marc Forster has been hired by Disney to direct the Winnie the Pooh movie, which is now titled Christopher Robin. Along with news of Forster's recruitment came a plot description. While we're all familiar with Christopher Robin as a young boy who enjoyed spending time with the denizens of the 100 Acre Wood, this movie will follow him as an adult, and by this point he's "grown out of the joyful imagination" he had when he was young and is prioritizing his work as a businessman over his wife and daughter. Just as Christoper's home life starts to hit a breaking point, Winnie the Pooh pops back into his life to get his help with finding his friends. The movie is subsequently described as having "strong elements of magical realism," while its main goal is to tell a "emotional journey" mixed properly with a "heartwarming adventure."

Christopher Robin will be the latest entry in Marc Forster's resume of directing work, which kicked off in 1995 with Loungers. His more notable projects include the previously-mentioned World War Z (though he didn't return for the sequel), Monster's Ball, Stranger Than Fiction, The Kite Runner and Quantum of Solace. He also directed 2004's Finding Neverland, which somewhat ties into Disney's Peter Pan since it revolved around the life of the original play's writer J.M. Barrie.

While it was already a given that Christopher Robin would see the 100 Acre Wood animals as CGI creations interacting in the "real world," this reported plot synopsis sounds like an interesting mix of Winnie the Pooh's innocent roots and a more mature story that both younger and older moviegoers can enjoy. Rather than retread Christopher Robin's adventures as a lad yet again, we'll see how the magic in his life is reignited when Pooh reunites with him, even if Christopher is bothered by the little bear's presence at first. It's way too soon to tell how this Disney live action adaptation will be received by the masses compared to all the other ones on the way, but at the very least, the creative direction sounds intriguing.

We'll keep you updated on how the Winnie the Pooh movie is progressing as more news comes in, but let us know what you think of these director and plot developments in the comments section below.

From the “Uh, no shit” department comes today’s top headline: Marc Forster reportedly will not be back in the director’s chair if and when a World War Z sequel goes into production.

The nugget is buried in a puff-piece cover story The Hollywood Reporter wrote on Brad Pitt and his production company, Plan B Entertainment, as they prepare to open Steve McQueen’s 12 Years a Slave following a very successful film-festival run. The trade officially writes:

So no official quote on Forster’s status in the sequel. Just the confirmation of what we all believed: That despite the surprising success of the finished product, Pitt and Forster simply locked horns too many times for Paramount or the A-list star to ever consider bringing him back.

The on-set conflict became one of many running narratives as Word War Z worked its way to theaters. Co-writer Damon Lindelof gave an in-depth, blow-by-blow account of the chaos caused by the Pitt-Forster rift. (Read this and this if you need to catch up.) Of course, both played nice on the red carpets of the film’s various premieres, with Forster even saying at one point that if they continue the story, he’d like to listen to offers and possibly be a part.

Apparently we’re not going to get to that point.

So with Forster out, who should Pitt get to replace him? The director has an excellent working relationship with David Fincher. Maybe instead of allowing the Social Network director to plunge to great depths for a 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea remake (which no one needs), Pitt can dangle a zombie thriller in front of his Se7en and Fight Club collaborator? There’s also, George A. Romero. Sorry, I’m kidding. But how about The Walking Dead creator Frank Darabont, or someone from that show? Darabont also directed one of the most underrated horror films from recent years, the reboot of The Mist.

There’s also no need to rush anything here. Paramount was pleasantly surprised that audiences flocked to World War Z. Now it can take its time and develop a solid sequel. Pitt does so few of them. Make sure it’s worth his while … and ours.

There were better blockbusters released in theaters this summer, but maybe none as fascinating as World War Z, which looked like a complete catastrophe until it opened to a surprise $66 million and reviews that seemed positive almost despite themselves. Much of the credit went to the film's new ending, which was totally rewritten by Damon Lindelof and Drew Goddard to be a tense interior scene as opposed to yet another battle scene. Marc Forster, who had reportedly feuded with Brad Pitt, was seen as the guy from whom the movie had to be rescued. But now the director is finally giving his side of the story on the film, and those changes that rescued the finale.

"Basically in the original ending, after the Israel sequence and the plane crash, Gerry is in Russia, and the storyline of what he finds out at the WHO lab is what he finds in Russia but he applies his theory in a battlefield setting," Forster explained to Movies.com ahead of the film's release this week on Blu-ray. " We never finished that footage because we all agreed after Israel and the plane crash you’re battle fatigued and you really want the movie to be more quiet and you don’t want it to go into another huge combat situation" As Forster points out, some of the Russian battle sequence can be seen in the quick montage at the end of the film, but the complete sequence will never be seen. "I don’t think you’ll ever see the Russia sequence, because we never really finished it; we never spent the money to do the visual effects. Once we shot it and we did a rough cut, everyone agreed that this is too big and too exhausting, it would be better to go a simpler route."

Apparently ready to let bygones to be bygones, Forster also gets into detail on the film's actual ending, when Brad Pitt's character Gerry gets up close and personal with a zombie in the abandoned wing of the WHO headquarters in Wales:

That tense moment between Gerry and the zombie, and the entire suspenseful sequence inside the WHO office, is much more like a traditional zombie film, in which there isn't the budget to stage the kind of massive action sequences that World War Z thrived on. But that slamming on the brakes, and allowing Gerry to become a hero in a quiet setting, really did rescue the movie. Watching teeming piles of zombies overwhelm Philadelphia and Israel became exhausting well before Forster admitted it did, and especially given how chaotically he edited all of the action sequences, the idea of yet another one-- at night, no less-- would be horrifying. Who knows how Forster came to recognize that what he did with the final sequence didn't work, but kudos to him for being willing to go small-- and now talking about it as if it was all totally fine with him, whether it really was or not.

You can catch World War Z, though not that famously scrapped ending, on Blu-ray this week.

There are a couple of different ways that one can watch Marc Forster’s World War Z when the movie finally opens in theaters on Friday, June 21. You can challenge it to live up to your lofty expectations if you happened to read Max Brooks’ source novel (which tells its story in a completely different fashion). You can attempt to enjoy it as a large-scale, apocalyptic summer popcorn thriller. Or you can analyze it scene by scene to see where the “old” version of Forster’s movie stops and the “corrected” version begins.

It’s possible you aren’t aware of this, but Forster’s production endured a very difficult, rocky and tumultuous schedule that – according to reports – led to costly reshoots, multiple rewrites, and a new ending that fixed the previous conclusion (which wasn’t working). If that side of the movie’s existence interests you, your “Bible” will be the Vanity Fair cover story from earlier this year that documents several of the problems the movie endured.

But with the movie approaching, The Huffington Post quotes a source about specific scenes that were altered. Consider waiting if you haven’t yet seen World War Z and want to remain unspoiled.

Still with us? Here's the “dividing line” between the initial film Forster worked on and the reshoots – most of which were penned by the trio of Damon Lindelof, Drew Goddard and Christopher McQuarrie. Reports say that the original ending of the movie, which involved a large-scale zombie battle in Russia, didn’t work. And so the minute Pitt’s character boards an airplane in Jerusalem, the new ending kicks in – including the chaotic mid-air attack that you can see in most of the film’s trailers:

HuffPo confirms, “Everything starting with [Pitt’s character Gerry] Lane entering the aircraft, including every incident on the flight, was written by Goddard and Lindelof.” The rewrites also get credit for a completely different ending, which builds more suspense than a digital Russian battle likely would have generated.

But that’s not all. The HuffPo story says that certain scenes spotted in the trailers also were rewrites, including the opening of Pitt and his family at the breakfast counter watching news reports about the outbreak, and a couple of slower-beat character moments involving phone calls and conversations that give a nice reprieve from the zombie action.

There will be a ton of discussions over the next few days and weeks as to whether or not the corrections helped Z enough to succeed at the box office. I believe that the movie works very well in its current state, and I prefer the ending that exists now versus the big battle one we won’t be able to see (unless it’s on a DVD at some point in the future). Either way, this behind-the-scenes insight is priceless, and probably will get curious folks into the theaters to see where Z has been stitched together like a rag doll.

If you follow the movie industry closely, there's nothing more fascinating than an autopsy of a disaster, when the people behind a film get away from the promotional speak and soundbites and really dig into what made a film fall apart. It's rare to get that level of candor at any point, but it's practically impossible to get it before a film opens. Which is what makes Vanity Fair's cover story on World War Z an absolute, stop-everything must-read.

Brad Pitt doesn't chime in on the various setbacks and disasters on the film, and the conversations with Marc Forster aren't especially enlightening-- talking about a film that endured expensive reshoots and a complete rewrite of the third act, Forster says "For me, it’s like, I had a good time on this film. I didn’t feel like it was a big drama." But conversations with many other people on the project, including Pitt's Plan B producing partner Dede Gardner and Damon Lindelof, who was brought in to rewrite the film's ending, reveal a film that ran into all kinds of problems that might tank a smaller film. Millions of dollars of debts from the film's first shooting location, in Malta, went unpaid because someone lost the forms in a drawer. They shot an entire battle scene set in Russia even when everyone on the film now admits (with 20/20 hindsight) that they knew it didn't work for the script. And while Forster denies pervasive rumors that he and Pitt stopped speaking to each other on set, he admitted his falling-out with the film's on-set visual effects supervisor: “John Nelson and I, it was a chemistry thing." Nelson, who won an Oscar for Gladiator, was replaced during post-production.

Of course, these are all just standalone facts, and you've really got to read the whole thing for a story that sounds a whole lot more interesting than the version of World War Z that we'll see onscreen on June 21. From the moment Forster made the decision to adapt Max Brooks's heady novel as an action-packed adventure, the whole thing seemed to snowball into a mass of bad decisions. But did Lindelof and co-writer Drew Goddard manage to right the ship? More importantly, do you feel remotely inspired to pay for a ticket to this and find out for yourself?

Marc Forster’s upcoming adaptation of World War Z is going to be one of those films we end up talking about for the next few years … even though – much like the movie – the ending has yet to be scripted. If the movie’s a massive success, then we’ll be marveling at how Brad Pitt, Forster and a team of experts salvaged what was shaping up to be a disaster. If the movie falls flat on its zombie face, we’ll be dissecting where a global horror thriller went wrong, allowing a budget to balloon and working without a script when you have one of the world’s biggest stars at your disposal.

If you have been tracking World War Z, you know that production on the film was rocky. Pitt plays a U.N. representative helping respond to the outbreak of a pandemic that’s turning our planet’s population into zombies. But the news from the set centered around rewrites by Damon Lindelof, the need for reshoots, production problems, additional reshoots and more.

Very little of this matters to the audience if the corrections lead to a better film, and we’ll know that for sure once World War Z finally opens on June 21. But already, those who helped put Humpty Dumpty back together again are going on record to say what they did (or didn’t do) to help the film succeed.

In the cover story for the June issue of Vanity Fair, Lindelof explains to the magazine how Pitt brought him in after production had been well under way, saying they had an abrupt and incoherent ending that didn’t make sense.

This meant dumping a lengthy battle scene set in Russia, and reshooting a lot of footage to come up with an ending that made sense. Also speaking to the magazine, Marc Evans, president of production at Paramount, recalls the silence that met the first screening of Forster’s initial War Z cut, saying, “It was, like, Wow. The ending of our movie doesn’t work. I believed in that moment we needed to reshoot the movie.”

It’s rare to have people involved with the movie talking openly about production problems before the film reaches theaters. Perhaps it’s because they are confident that the finished product survived the problems? And now they’re saying, “Look, we went through hell, but it was the right call, because the movie is better.” I hope that’s the case. Pitt will carry World War Z across the finish line in June. We’ll see if all the effort in production paid off.

World War Z is one of the more famously troubled productions we've been following lately, with delays happening before production even began, then a pushed-back release date and, most recently, seven weeks of reshoots and a complete rewrite of the screenplay. With the source material being Max Brooks's excellent faux-historical novel, World War Z seemed to still have the potential to pull it together and make something of itself, but the latest news from the set suggests things are only going further downhill.

Star Brad Pitt is allegedly no longer on speaking terms with director Marc Forster, even with the production heading into the last three weeks of reshoots. All this is being reported by Vulture as the budget balloons up to $170 million, and the ending still isn't quite finished-- you can't blame Pitt for being frustrated. What's funny is he and his producing partner DeDe Gardner actually fought for Forster to get the directing job, despite having only directed one other big-budget film (Quantum of Solace); that film had major production problems that were attributed to the writer's strike, but with similarly problems cropping up on World War Z, Forster now seems to be the common denominator.

As we reported a few days ago, Cabin in the Woods director Drew Goddard teamed up with Damon Lindelof to help restructure the film's ending, but neither has time to do what's apparently "months of work" left to do, so they're reaching out to even more writers. World War Z is still set for a summer release next year, but if more production delays crop up, we might have to wonder if that date has to be pushed yet again.

From release date shuffling, to extensive reshoots, to a last-minute hustle for a third act rewrite, it's no secret that Marc Forster's World War Z adaptation has been plagued with problems. But as this dystopian drama trudges toward five weeks of "complex reshoots," THR has unveiled some more of the shocking missteps that appear to have marred the Brad Pitt-fronted—and produced—zombie drama that's had fan boys buzzing since its earliest announcement.

First off, it should be said that with all the bad calls Plan B has made thus far in the film's production, Pitt has been dedicated to making this movie something extraordinary, outlying his hopes to the magazine:

Perhaps it was his high dramatic aims that inspired Pitt to pick Kite Runner director Marc Forster, who despite having helmed Quantum Solace, is not well reputed for his management of major, effects-heavy productions. Because of this gap in experience, Pitt's Plan B banner brought in more seasoned crewmembers to surround Forster, cutting out Forster's usual collaborators. Several sources say this undercutting of Forster's input caused in-fighting, which led to crew shakeups, morale-sucking discontent, and a lag in many creative decisions including the look of the movie's zombies. One insider explained, “The director was not empowered. There was nobody that steered the ship. … When you get [a director] who can’t do it all … you get a struggle as to whose is the singular voice.”

But with Plan B bringing in Damon Lindelof to rewrite the screenplay's final act months after wrapping principal photography it's clear the production was jumbled before it even began. Second-unit director Simon Crane is said to have requested at least 60 days to capture the film's extensive second-unit shot list, but was ultimately given only a third of that. This kind of planning—or lack thereof—led to tensions on set which spurred widely heralded cinematographer Robert Richardson (who shot Inglourious Basterds, Hugo, and JFK just to name a few of his incredible credits) to attempt to wrangle the crew himself. It's also rumored this celebrated DP repeatedly asked to leave the project all together.

But despite all of this, Paramount is insisting World War Z can be salvaged. Paramount film group president Adam Goodman insists, "The footage from this film looks fantastic, but we all agreed it can have a better ending. Getting the ending correct is essential, and we are in that creative process. World War Z is a giant summer movie and we are confident it will be a global hit when it’s released June 2013."

While the film's originally proposed trilogy seems to be a pipe dream after all this, it is still possible for Forster and Plan B to salvage World War Z. After all, there are several wildly successful movies that overcame their notoriously troubled productions, including The Bourne Identity, Apocalypse Now and my all-time favorite summer movie: Jaws. Plus, the very fact that Paramount is pouring more money into this production—that is already over the $170 million mark—suggests they and Plan B are still trying to get this right. With a little luck, and some solid script changes and reshoots, World War Z could still be saved.

Reshoots on major summer tentpoles aren’t unique. They are standard fare, and usually not a cause for concern. But when they are happening on a massive Paramount blockbuster – and they are revealed mere days after the studio moved another of its tentpole thrillers in G.I. Joe: Retaliation -- those of us who are paid to pay attention are going to sit up and speculate.

Marc Forster’s World War Z is due in theaters on June 21, 2013. Today, the UK Daily Mail reports that star Brad Pitt and his co-stars are reuniting in Budapest for seven weeks of additional shooting on the adaptation of Max Brooks’ post-apocalyptic novel. The story is massive in scope, documenting humanity’s decade-long war against zombies using first-person accounts from various conflict zones.

As the Mail reports, Forster wrapped shooting last summer, so this news is off-putting. Also, seven weeks is a very long time to merely patch up problems that might be plaguing the finished film. However, the news item has very little details about what’s being shot, or who from the cast is joining Pitt for the shoot. Also, it’s the Mail, so this could be taken with a grain of salt.

My bigger concern is with Forster as a director. After landing on several radars with the promising Monster’s Ball, Forster has delivered one of the worst James Bind adventures in recent memory (Quantum of Solace) and a well-meaning but muddled feel-good drama in Machine Gun Preacher. He seems more comfortable with character-driven work like Stranger Than Fiction with Will Ferrell or the underrated Finding Neverland with Johnny Depp. But World War Z sounds like it’s going to be more of an action-heavy effort, and the notion of reshoots isn’t encouraging.

What do you think? Are these tiny cinematic band-aids meant to bolster a decent film? Or is Z is a little bit of trouble? We’ll see if this news means a shift in release date in the weeks to come.

The last time we heard about Cowboy Ninja Viking was in the Fall of 2010, when Disney hired Zombieland screenwriters Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick to adapt the strange graphic novel into an adventure flick fit for Disney distribution. At the time, we marveled that the family friendly film studio was interested in a property that centered on an evil doctor turning multiple personality disorder patients into multi-faceted assassins, as it seemed well outside their comfort zone. Apparently, Disney has come to the same conclusion, as Deadline reports the studio has sold the rights to Cowboy Ninja Viking as well as Reese and Wernick's script to Universal, who has already hired Marc Forster (Quantum of Solace) to helm.

Forster is currently in post-production on the Brad Pitt-fronted horror feature World War Z, which is due out next Christmas. But as soon as that zombie-centered movie is complete, he'll probably dive right into pre-production on Cowboy Ninja Viking as Universal is hoping to get production going by year's end. The studio is also hankering for this to be the beginning of a new action franchise, which makes Forster a curious choice.

The German-born writer-director has had an unusual career. He first drew notice in 2001 when his gritty and graphic drama Monster's Ball made Halle Berry an Oscar contender, then winner. Next, he helmed the sentimental and sweet biopic Finding Neverland, before crafting the star-studded but forgettable thriller Stay. Then came the bittersweet rom-com Stranger than Fiction, followed by the deeply dark tale of Taliban rule in Afghanistan The Kite Runner. I could go on, but you get the idea. It's practically impossible to predict what genre or material Forster will take on next. This makes it difficult to gauge what kind of film Universal is looking to get from Forster.

Will Cowboy Ninja Viking be a dark comedy with plenty of gore like Zombieland? Perhaps a quirky outsider tale with a edgy but sweet sense of humor? Or will it be a sterner offering that looks to capitalize on Forster's espionage thriller experience? Ultimately, Forster's wild card reputation makes him an intriguing choice for this property, and I'm intensely curious to see what will come of it.

Through his ambitious production company, Overbrook Entertainment, megastar Will Smith has been crafting a diverse range of projects. To name just a few of his most recent ventures there's the board game-inspired war dramaRisk, the Willow Smith-fronted remake of the musical Annie, and the Will and Jaden Smith-fronted M. Night Shyamalan post-apocalyptic adventure One Thousand A.E. And now Deadline reports a new development on Angelology, a supernatural thriller based on Danielle Trussoni's fantasy novel.

Sony Pictures, which is co-producing the film with Smith and James Lassiter of Overbrook and Marc Forster of Apparatus, has hired screenwriter Larry Brenner to craft the adaptation's script. Brenner is best known for having scored a coveted spot on the 2011 blacklist for his zombie and vampire-packed post-apocalyptic venture Bethlehem, and seems a great fit for Angelology, as it too has a batch of mythical beings at its center.

Angelology follows 23-year-old Sister Evangeline, a meek nun who accidentally becomes entangled in the brewing conflict between a group of angelologists—researchers dedicated to the study of angels—and a nefarious organization looking to harness the power of fallen angels for their own ends. Its premise is often compared to the wildly popular, religion-fueled mystery-adventure The DaVinci Code, so it's little wonder the book set off a bidding war in 2009 that resulted in a $1 million deal for Trussoni. However, online reader reviews on the novel are mixed at best, so it's a smart move to bring in a buzzed-about screenwriter to give the puzzling story some shape and texture.

At this point little else is known about Angelology. Though early reports had Forster (Machine Gun Preacher, Quantum of Solace) attached to direct, no mention is made of this possibility in Deadline's latest update. Of course, being an Overbrook production, it's possible we'll soon hear word that one of the Smiths will be stepping into one of the feature's major roles.

If it hasn't already been made abundantly clear, Hollywood loves franchises and sequels. Whether prudent or not, studios will do everything in their power to produce sequels to movies that may not necessarily need them. And it stars in pre-production too. The Hunger Games and Twilight were so appealing to the movie industry not just because of book sales but because they came prepackaged as a potential trilogy.

World War Z, however, was not that. While certainly epic, Max Brook's "oral history of the zombie war" was entirely contained in one book - and it's a great book at that. But now that there's a movie adaptation in the works, directed by Marc Forster and set to be released this December, apparently that story has changed.

An article from the Los Angeles Times has revealed that both Forster and Paramount Pictures are seeing World War Z not just as a one-and-done, but as a full trilogy. While the article doesn't go into depth about how the story would be split up (or if the entire trilogy will be taken from the book or new stories will be created) the goal is apparently to "have the grounded, gun-metal realism of, say, Damon's Jason Bourne series tethered to the unsettling end-times vibe of AMC's The Walking Dead."

What's interesting about this is that this would actually only be the second franchise that Brad Pitt has been involved in (the first being Steven Soderbergh's Ocean's movies) and the first time that he would be the star. We already know that the story is being changed quite a bit from Max Brooks' book, but we'll just have to wait and see just how significant those changes will be when the movie comes out. In the meantime, for more news and info about World War Z, head over to our Blend Film Database.

Gerard Butler’s on a world-saving kick lately. Shortly after the trailer for his drug-dealer-turned-freedom-fighter drama Machine Gun Preacher reached the Web, we’re seeing a story that links the burly 300 star to another thriller that would cast Butler as the captain of some butt-kicking Navy SEALS.

The story would be Hunter Killer, the name given to an adaptation of Don Keith and George Wallace’s novel Firing Point, which has been optioned by producer Neil Moritz’s Original Films with a potential to be distributed by Relativity Media. Coming Soon posted the news that Butler’s name was being considered for the role of Joe Glass, the captain of a submarine who must lead a team behind enemy lines in Russia to stop an adversary from launching an all-out war against the United States. At least they’re not officially calling it a remake of Crimson Tide or The Hunt for Red October.

The Relativity link makes sense, as the studio’s behind Butler’s Preacher, which was directed by Marc Forster. And seeing as how the studio also announced a (tentative) Dec. 21, 2012 release date for Hunter Killer, casting will have to ramp up shortly so production can begin. Butler certainly seems cut for this project, which sounds like it would require the leadership and physicality he brings to virtually every role. Then again, if Preacher brings Butler a sliver of the awards recognition we hear he’s angling for with the redemptive role, the actor might not need to do brainless action films like this anymore. Nothing is set in stone with this one just yet, but we may attach Butler’s name to Hunter Killer soon enough.

Yesterday we posted the first trailer for Ralph Fiennes' adaptation of William Shakespeare's Coriolanus. In that film Gerard Butler plays Tullus Aufidius, the story's antagonist who helps Coriolanus invade his own city, despite the fact that they are sworn enemies. Today we have another trailer for a Gerard Butler film, and while this character is still a violent individual who carries a weapon, this time he's fighting on the side of good.

The first trailer for Machine Gun Preacher has arrived online. In the film Butler stars as Sam Childers, a former criminal who turns to God and then moves to Sudan to help build an orphanage and fight off the Lord's Resistance Army. Check out the trailer below or in HD over on Apple.

I've spent the last few days wondering about how the film would treat the religious elements of Sam Childers' story, and it seems from this trailer that they aren't shying away from it in the least. In the two-and-a-half minute video we see Butler get baptized and build a cross into an orphanage, but honestly it works in the context of the story and probably follows actual events. There's also a good amount of action in the trailer, leading me to believe that this movie may actually live up to it's awesome title. Machine Gun Preacher is set to premiere next month at the Toronto International Film Festival and will be released on September 23rd.

In Machine Gun Preacher Gerard Butler plays Sam Childers, a former drug dealer and gang biker. After finding God and changing his ways, Childers moves to Sudan where he fights to save and protect children from the Lord's Resistance Army, which forced kids into service. The truth is, however, that I really didn't just need to tell you all that. Just taking one look at the new poster, courtesy of IMDb, tells you absolutely everything you need to know about the film.

One thing that has concerned me about this film is the religious element (I'm not a big fan of evangelicalism of any kind), but I actually appreciate how this poster seems to downplay it. The title has "preacher" in it, the official synopsis talks about the influence of God and the real-life Sam Childers is born again, but Butler isn't so much as wearing a cross in this one-sheet. A movie like this has the ability to be powerful without an underlying message of "everyone needs to be Christian," so hopefully director Marc Foster has equally done the same with the final cut.

Check out the poster below or full size over on IMDb.

It's a little mysterious when you think about the career of Gerard Butler, an actor who bolted to fame as the bellowing and muscled King Leonidas in 300, but has been more famous in the subsequent years for starring in rom-coms like The Ugly Truth and The Bounty Hunter that squandered pretty much all of that 300 goodwill. Gamer and Law Abiding Citizen would count toward his action movie cred if anyone had seen those movies. Those of you who have been rooting for him to return as a full-fledged action hero may still be hanging on until the 300 prequel (a.k.a. forever), but in an upcoming role Butler will at least be putting those muscles to use.

We've reported previously on the project Machine Gun Preacher, a true-life story which would star Butler as a former drug-dealing biker who wound up on a mission to rescue Sudanese children sold into slavery. Now, according to Deadline Hollywood, the project is officially a go, with Lionsgate snagging the domestic distribution rights and shooting scheduled to start this summer. Michelle Monaghan has signed on to play Butler's wife, a woman who cleaned up her own act and took care of their kids back home while he was overseas playing savior, and Michael Shannon is in talks to play the best friend to kept her company. Marc Forster, most recently of the Bond movie you didn't like that much, is directing.

Gerard Butler is already famous for playing an idealized, slightly silly version of a real-life hero from the very, very distant past, so why not go for something a little more realistic and modern-- but equally ass-kicking? According to Deadline Hollywood, Butler will play Sam Childers in Machine Gun Preacher, true story of a former drug dealer and biker who found religion and set up an orphanage to rescue 200 kids from the ongoing civil war in Sudan.

Marc Forster, of Quantum of Solace, would direct, based on Childers' memoir Another Man's War: The True Story of One Man's Battle to Save Children in the Sudan. Apparently when producer Robbie Brenner and screenwriter Jason Keller tracked down Childers to ask for the rights, he chewed them out, which makes me love the guy from the get-go.

Even though the project sounds like a tailor-made studio Oscar bait project, it's going forward through independent financing. That might change with Butler on board-- after all, we love nothing more than seeing someone famous for his muscles actually try and, you know, act for a change.

Quantum of Solace director Marc Forster is looking at two projects he has the option of making next, and of course, they couldn't be more different. One of them is a lame-sounding, He's Just Not That Into You-esque movie called Disconnect, except instead of being about the general topic of relationships, it'll be about the general topic of how we deal with technology. And then there's World War Z, an adaptation of Max Brooks' novel that "documents" the global zombie war through interviews with the survivors.

And which of these projects is Forster doing next? The boring one, naturally. He told Dark Horizons that the script for World War Z still requires a lot of writing and development, and is "still far from realization." So, OK, it's not exactly like Forster is abandoning World War Z, and I'd much rather him get the script in shape than go forward with a bad one. But we need our zombies! And Disconnect sounds boring! If I whine long enough, will this zombie action get going faster?