It’s a rare thing for a single performance to encapsulate an era, but I think there’s a fair argument to be made that Michael Douglas’ work in Wall Street is a terrific example of it. There were still a few years left in the 1980s when the Oliver Stone movie first arrived in theaters, but Douglas’ turn as the villainous, avaricious Gordon Gekko is a perfect representation of the hyper capitalism that defined the penultimate decade of the 20th century (summed up in the iconic line “Greed, for the lack of a better word, is good”).

It’s a sharp and vicious performance – and the story of how it was cultivated is pretty shocking. During a recent interview on Turner Classic Movies (via People), Douglas spoke about how things didn’t go swimmingly in early days of making Wall Street, with the actor being on the receiving end of some brutal criticism from his director. He explained that he had a sitdown with Stone that featured some extremely blunt feedback, saying,

For those who need some context here: Michael Douglas wasn’t some kind of up-and-comer or just a promising performer at this point in his career. By the mid-1980s, he was already a big name with titles on his filmography including The China Syndrome and Romancing The Stone (not to mention he had all of the clout that came with being the son of big screen legend Kirk Douglas). These were some harsh words from an acclaimed director to his veteran star.

As for Douglas’ response, he was a bit blindsided, in part because he was not accustomed at that point in his career to watching back his own performance (a tendency that a lot of actors share). He wasn’t checking out footage, but Stone urged him to do so:

The two men watched a couple of scenes together, including a key moment in which Gordon Gekko is really trying to sink his metaphorical teeth into Charlie Sheen’s Bud Fox and make him an acolyte. Michael Douglas didn’t see much wrong with what he was seeing, but Stone insisted that the performance was wrong.

In the interview, Douglas doesn’t get into exactly what it was that wasn’t working in his performance, but he does say that it manifested a certain antagonism between him and the director, and that was an energy that he was able to use in his performance and give Gekko an extra darkness. Said the actor,

Michael Douglas and Oliver Stone have only made one movie together since then – the 2010 sequel Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps – but that film didn’t make quite the same kind of pop culture impact.

If you haven’t seen Wall Street or haven’t seen it in a while, it’s a movie worth revisiting. While it’s not presently available on any subscription streaming service, it is widely available for digital rental and/or purchase, and physical media collectors can easily find the film available on Blu-ray.

Charlie Sheen has worked with director Oliver Stone in movies like Platoon and Wall Street. However, he thought that he would be starring in one of Stone’s best Vietnam War movies, Born on the Fourth of July. Sheen talked about how his brother Emilio Estevez felt he “needed to be seated” to break the news that Tom Cruise got the part.

Given the history Charlie Sheen had with Oliver Stone, it was natural for him to believe he’d be starring in one of his upcoming projects. However, on a segment of In Depth with Graham Bensinger, the Two and a Half Men alum got real about the confusion he felt not hearing from the award-winning director about Born on the Fourth of July:

That would leave me baffled if I had a meeting with the person I thought I was portraying, only to hear nothing again. I’d probably start second-guessing what I did wrong, if the project fell apart or if they had someone else in mind.

While Charlie Sheen heard nothing from Oliver Stone, there was one important person who reached out to him. Emilio Estevez, his sibling who has frequently starred alongside him, was the one who broke the news that casting went in a different direction:

It’s funny that the Major League actor didn’t take the news as hard as his brother imagined. As Sheen was a bankable actor at the time, he probably knew there would be other opportunities coming his way. Still, it's better to hear disappointing news from your brother compared to in a headline.

While Charlie Sheen didn’t “faint” finding out Tom Cruise would be playing Ron Kovac, it doesn’t mean he was happy about the news. He continued to tell Graham Bensinger what hurt the most about being passed over:

I don’t blame Charlie Sheen for feeling betrayed. It’s very upsetting to have meetings and talks only to hear in the most indirect way that you’re not getting the part. After the Oliver Stone film became one of Tom Cruise’s greatest movies of all time and made him leading star material in the ‘90s, it makes you think about how the military role would have shaped Sheen’s career.

The Primetime Emmy nominee and Oliver Stone may not have gotten to cross paths for one of the most patriotic movies of all time, but fate did bring the two together again. After the former collaborators ran into each other at a bar, here was the interesting exchange Sheen described:

The film/TV actor continued to mention that Stone was using his instincts to determine that Sheen wasn’t the right actor for the job. Sometimes, there’s no rhyme or reason why an actor doesn’t land a part. It could be that Tom Cruise showed Stone the charisma and intensity that the director was looking for to play the sergeant-turned-activist.

Despite the Top Gun actor getting to play Ron Kovic instead of Sheen, he explained why he doesn’t resent Cruise for it:

You can’t deny that Tom Cruise blew it out of the water in Born on the Fourth of July. It was his best performance of that decade, showing the powerful transformation of a young, patriotic Marine's war experiences turning into an anti-war voice. It’s hard to believe he never won an Oscar for that movie, but at least it was his first award recognition role.

The Young Guns actor also made sure to mention that everything may be meant to be the way it all played out. He believed that if he had taken on Born on the Fourth of July, he probably wouldn’t have been able to be in the cast of Major League, one of his most recognized films.

It must have been tough for Charlie Sheen to lose a role he thought was his to someone else. But even if he didn’t get the opportunity to hear the bad news from Oliver Stone, at least his good brother was there to soften the blow.

Back in 1994, audiences witnessed arguably Robert Downey Jr.'s most engaging film and role of the entire decade, with respects to Chaplin, in the form of Oliver Stone's wildly chaotic mass-murder romance Natural Born Killers. Downey's enjoyably over-the-top performance as tabloid TV journalist Wayne Gale is on par with the film itself, and he's spoken up about just how blitzed he'd get during the production.

Technically, the Natural Born Killers oral history from Esquire goes into detail about quite a few cast members being under one influence or another during the production. But it's the future MCU Doctor Doom who seemingly put himself in the roughest positions when it came to getting the job done.

The Oscar-winning actor talked candidly about a worst-case, anti-FOMO scenario that formed when his decision to get ripped colldied with a filming schedule shift for the big prison interview that led to the deadly riot. As Downey put it:

Without going into too much speculation about what might have been included in that "vitamin" booster that he was given, I can attest as a viewer that it did the trick. Especially as a younger viewer first watching Natural Born Killers in the '90s, I never would have guessed that the prison interview was such a miserable experience for RDJ. Whatever ups and downs his sobriety took during that shoot, it all fits amazingly well within Stone's madcap reality. (Who knows how it would have fared with Quentin Tarantino's fued-sparking original screenplay still intact?)

It speaks to Robert Downey Jr.'s professionalism that the production didn't have to trash that entire day of filming the way that things may have gone for other actors in that position. He continued his reflection by pointing how prepared he already was going into that scene, even if everything happened hours earlier than expected.

I can imagine how stressful it might have been for the cast and crew that day, not quite knowing how things would go with Downey, and then hitting that endpoint (presumably) without any outright disasters happening. It might still be worth applauding in some of their minds.

For all that it turned out to be a success, though, I will still happily go the rest of my life without having a similar experience if possible. So I guess it's a "good" thing I don't have any big Hollywood movies coming with Woody Harrelson and Juliette Lewis? Wait, maybe there is a bit of FOMO for me to gnaw on....

To rewatch Downey's performance, or to see it for the first time, Natural Born Killers can be streamed now with a Netflix subscription, and for those who enjoy Oliver Stone's darker instincts, read why you should watchThe Hand, his 1981 horror film co-starring Michael Caine and Andrea Marcovicci.

Ever since I saw Natural Born Killers at a friend’s house in high school, I’ve considered it one of the best ‘90s movies as well as one of director Oliver Stone’s greatest films. Watching Mickey and Mallory Knox, played brilliantly by Woody Harrelson and Juliette Lewis, go on a cross-country road trip expressing their love for one another through acts of murder and mayhem is a wild and transfixing experience like no other. 

So, you can imagine how I felt way back when as I discovered that Quentin Tarantino, who wrote the original screenplay, was no fan of Natural Born Killers, to put things mildly. Over the years, the director of movies like Pulp Fiction, Reservoir Dogs, and Once Upon a Time in Hollywood has voiced his displeasure with the movie and the changes Stone made to the material. It’s not one of the biggest Hollywood feuds, but the story behind it all is still rather fascinating.  

Quentin Tarantino Wrote Natural Born Killers, But Moved On To Reservoir Dogs

Back before Quentin Tarantino made a name for himself as one of the brightest young filmmakers in Hollywood, he got his start selling screenplays. True Romance, directed by Tony Scott in 1993, and Natural Born Killers were two of the most notable. Sometime in the early ‘90s, before making his directorial debut with Reservoir Dogs, Tarantino penned the Natural Born Killers screenplay, which explains all those Tarantinoverse Easter eggs present throughout the movie

When speaking with Roger Ebert in 1994, Oliver Stone touched on various aspects of the movie, including Tarantino’s decision to pass on the project and instead sell it off to someone else. In the chat, Stone said “it was a clever script,” but Tarantino didn’t want to do it and instead moved on to direct Dogs. But as we all know now, that wasn’t the end of it. In fact, it was just the beginning.

Oliver Stone Thought His Massive Changes To Natural Born Killers' Story Upset Tarantino

By all accounts, Tarantino’s original version of Natural Born Killers was a more straightforward and less over-the-top version than what we saw with the final product, and that’s because Stone made some massive changes to its story and central argument. While a lot of the major players were present in both versions, Stone’s revisions focused more on attacking American pop culture and the social climate of the times, something he told IndieWire in 2019 was one of the reasons the Kill Bill director was upset:

Those changes ended up making Natural Born Killers feel less like a movie and more like a two-hour video essay about the country’s obsession with the likes of O.J. Simpson, the Menendez Brothers, and “if it bleeds it leads” journalism. Oh, and it pretty much predicted the reality TV craze that followed a few years later.

Though Natural Born Killers Is Now Considered A Cult Classic, It Was Considered One Of 1994's Worst Movies

Natural Born Killers is one of the most iconic movies from 1994, but while the movie now has cult classic status, it wasn’t all that well received by critics 30 years ago. The same year Pulp Fiction, arguably Quentin Tarantino’s best work, took the world by storm, changed the face of Hollywood, and was the top film of Rolling Stone critic Peter Travers, Stone’s genre-bending experiment didn’t get off so easy.

In his listings, Travers wrote that the movie “gets off on the violence it pretends to be condemning.” He wasn’t alone, as the movie was generally trashed by reviewers at the time. But hey, sometimes good movies get unnecessarily harsh reviews.

In 1994, Stone Said He Understood Tarantino's Point Of View, But Didn't Care For Him Trashing The Film Publicly

When asked about the critical response to his film and comments Tarantino made about it upon its release, Stone told MovieMaker Magazine in 1994 that while he understood why he was upset from a screenwriter’s point of view, he didn’t appreciate how far things had gone:

In the comments, Stone explained the changes his team made to the script including expanding the Knox couple, and even complimented Tarantino’s story. He also added that several of his screenplays were changed by directors in his early days but he never “went out with a hatchet for the director.”

There Was A Legal Fight After Tarantino Made Plans To Publish His Original Screenplay In 1995

Nearly 25 years before releasing the expansive Once Upon a Time In Hollywood novelization, Tarantino made plans to publish a paperback version of his original Natural Born Killers screenplay. Though the script would eventually land on shelves in 1995, Stone and the film’s producers led a legal fight to prevent it from being published. 

According to the Independent, Stone and his team argued that because Tarantino sold the rights to the screenplay years earlier, he also surrendered his publishing rights. Once finally published, the script joined other Tarantino projects like Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, and True Romance, which were both released as paperbacks upon their films’ respective releases. 

Tarantino Claims To Have Never Seen Natural Born Killers From Start To Finish

As much grief as Tarantino has given Stone and company over the years, you would think he would have watched Natural Born Killers countless times. However, as he revealed in a 2007 interview with Opie & Anthony, he’s never seen it all the way through:

The scene Tarantino referenced was the satirical “I Love Mallory” sequence at Juliette Lewis’s character’s house with Rodney Dangerfield. He said it was so bad and made him so mad he took his name off as screenwriter and instead only kept the “story by” credit, giving up a ton of money in the process.

With 2024 being the 30th anniversary of Natural Born Killers’ release, now would be a good time to revisit the film some love and others love to hate. No matter how you feel, I’ll go on the record saying it’s one of the best movies on Netflix right now and I plan on watching it again very soon. 

For as much as anyone wants to argue the historical accuracy of Oliver Stone’s JFK, it cannot be denied that it’s an intriguing and powerful piece of filmmaking. The 2024 movie schedule is about to see Kevin Costner deliver his own powerful and intriguing picture to the masses, with Horizon: An American Saga - Chapter 1 being released in theaters this weekend. So when being given the opportunity to speak with Mr. Costner after his co-star Donald Sutherland’s passing, it only felt right to ask about his memory of working with the Canadian legend.

In advance of Horizon’s release date that kicks off this sprawling four-part epic, the director and his cast were available to give us a glimpse into the future of the cinematic western. But of course, there was a moment to inquire about the past, as Kevin Costner’s part in the 1991 conspiracy drama landed him a scene alongside Sutherland himself.

Looking back on that moment, as well as his own fandom of Donald’s work, Mr. Costner shared this remembrance with CinemaBlend:

Hearing that reaction from Kevin Costner meant quite a bit to me as a movie fan, as well as a fellow aficionado of the late Donald Sutherland. On a day where his Horizon cast graciously shared their own memories of this directing/acting hybrid working his craft, to have the man behind Dances with Wolves paying tribute to a hero of his own was heartwarming.

Much like Horizon: An American Saga, Oliver Stone’s JFK is one of those movies where the cast is so packed with winners, that it redefines the term “all-star.” Though his appearance is limited to a powder keg of a scene that acts as the crux of the supposed conspiracy at hand, the list of Donald Sutherland’s best movies is somehow incomplete without mentioning JFK.

Though it’s not the full scene, there is a good clip that sets up just how entrancing Mr. Sutherland’s character Mr. X. truly was in the film. And as you’ll see below, it’s not hard to see Kevin Costner maintaining his end of the scene, while also showing himself to be as entranced as we are:

Rewatching that clip while researching the write-up was kind of painful for me, as like I said, this JFK moment isn’t presented in its entirety through this method of display. The screenplay by Oliver Stone and Zachary Sklar really shines through Donald Sutherland’s delivery, as his keen instincts make it crackle with energy. It’s a moment where the pieces are starting to fall into place for Costner’s portrayal of Attorney Jim Garrison, and each revelation hits harder than the last.

Ask any Kevin Costner fan, and they’ll tell you that the man is passionate about what he believes in, and the people he values. That much was proven once again in the news cycle, as Costner defended casting his son Hayes in Horizon: Chapter 1. Knowing the man behind the talent as a fiercely loyal and reverent being, his tribute to Donald Sutherland, as an admirer and on-screen colleague, is a special moment I’m proud to have shared with Kevin Costner.

If you’re looking for more on JFK, you can check out Oliver Stone’s ReelBlend interview from 2021, as he helped commemorate the picture’s 30th anniversary. And of course, if you’re ready to travel the path of the Old West in new fashion, Horizon: Chapter 1 starts Kevin Costner’s truly epic spectacle this weekend, only in theaters.

If you’re any sort of film fan, then I’m sure you’ve seen some Oliver Stone movies. 

On a basic level, you’ve likely seen one of the best war movies of all time, Platoon. Or, if you’re not into war flicks, then you’ve probably seen his historical drama, JFK. Hell, if you want to get into some deep cuts, then you might even know that Oliver Stone wrote the screenplay to one of the best ‘80s movies, Scarface. 

But, did you know that like many prominent directors, Oliver Stone cut his teeth making horror movies? His directorial debut was 1974’s Seizure, which was fine. However, his sophomore release, 1981’s The Hand, is actually an excellent psychological horror picture, and one that I think that every comic book fan should check out. Here’s why! 

It's About A Comic Book Artist Who May Or May Not Be A Killer. What More Could You Possibly Want? 

Based on the Marc Brandel novel, The Lizard’s Tail, The Hand is about a comic book illustrator (Played by Michael Caine) who, after a disastrous incident, ends up losing his hand (and it’s the one he illustrates with, to boot!). After trying to cope without it, his agent suggests that somebody else continue the series that he was working on, but you slowly see his descent into madness, as weird things start to occur in his life. 

To get away from it all, he travels to a remote community college where he goes to teach comic book illustration, and once there, he strikes up a relationship with one of his students. But then, she suddenly goes missing, only for us to see several black and white shots of… A SEVERED HAND! 

Yes, it sounds a bit silly (and it is!), but it's also super effective in that we’re never quite sure until the very end whether any of these events are actually occurring, or if they’re just in the comic illustrator's mind, sort of like the ending to American Psycho. 

In fact, American Psycho is a good comparison to this film, as it’s very psychological, and moves at a gradual pace, only to build toward an extremely dramatic conclusion. Plus, the whole comic book angle was a bit ahead of its time back in 1981, as it’s actually taken quite seriously here as a genuine form of artistic expression. 

So, while it’s definitely not an actual comic book movie (It instead uses comic books as a backdrop, sort of like my favorite Shyamalan movie, Unbreakable), I still think comic book fans would really appreciate it, given its lead character. And, speaking of which… 

Even Better, It Stars The Dark Knight Trilogy's Alfred As Said Possible Killer  

I briefly mentioned who stars in this movie, and yeah, it’s Michael Caine, who played Alfred Pennyworth himself in The Dark Knight trilogy. And, let me just tell you, he’s amazing in this movie. 

If you’re only familiar with Michael Caine from Christopher Nolan movies, then you likely won’t be prepared to see such an unhinged performance from him, as he really does fly off the handle at a moment’s notice. This Michael Caine will yell about how you “don’t cut the balls off of Superman!” and will even scream at his wife, even though she’s just trying to help. 

It’s also the kind of performance where you can totally buy that he could possibly have killed his mistress and hid her some place where the cops can’t find her. But, since it’s Michael Caine, he also comes with his own sort of gravitas, and you can totally buy that the blackout headaches that he’s frequently getting are just that. Blackout headaches. In that way, Michael Caine walks a tightrope of being both a scary character, but also one who we feel sympathy for.

He also does an excellent job of slowly showing his mental decline, and it’s a fully three dimensional performance, which seems like it might be a bit too good for a flick that’s essentially a B-movie, but we’re all the better for it. 

The Story Feels Like It Actually Comes Straight Out Of A Comic Book  

One thing I absolutely love about this movie is that it actually feels like it could come right out of a comic book. And while yes, I suppose it could come from something like Marvel or D.C., I’m thinking more along the lines of something like EC Comics, which specialized in horror (and is probably most known for its Tales from the Crypt series of stories).

There aren’t any superpowers here, but there is definitely a supernatural element involved, especially after Michael Caine’s character, Jon Lansdale, starts searching for his missing hand out in a field, only to find the signet ring that his wife gave him right on his pillow. 

That’s where the psychological trip begins. When asked to provide new work in the series that he illustrates for, it turns out that all of his work is covered up in angrily scratched in lines. He blames his daughter since he doesn’t remember ever doing it, but we’re never quite sure if he was blaming the right person or not, since his mental breakdown takes its time. 

In every way, even though The Hand operates as a horror movie, it still very much feels like the origin story to a supervillain, which is definitely a nice touch.  

Comic Book Fans Don't Get Enough Horror Movies Centered Around The Medium, And This Is A Great One 

You know what comic book movie I really love? Blade. In fact, the first Blade is probably just as good as you remember it being, and maybe even better. Blade is definitely more of an action movie than a horror movie, but it also swerves into that horror lane quite effectively, and I wish more comic book movies would do that. 

Constantine (which is finally getting a sequel!) is another example of a comic book movie that also moonlights as a horror flick, and it feels wholly unique in the medium. There’s just something about comic book films fitting into the universe of horror that we really don’t get enough of.

And, as I said earlier, even though The Hand isn’t a comic book movie in the traditional sense, the fact that it deals with comic book illustration, and is also a first-rate B-movie is super refreshing. 

In fact, I’ve honestly never seen another movie like it, as it almost feels like a scary, psychological version of American Splendor, if you’ve ever seen that movie before. There isn’t any comedy here, but it goes deep into the psyche of a creator (this time an illustrator rather than a writer), and delves into the madness. 

Honestly, when it comes to horror movies about comic book artists, The Hand is really the best example that I can think of. As I said before, I’ve never seen any other movie like it. 

It’s a super unique film, and if you’ve never seen it before (And especially if you’re an Oliver Stone fan, or a comic book lover), you definitely should. You likely won’t be disappointed. 

The directors on this list are among the greatest in the history of cinema, with films that are considered the best of all time; films that will never be forgotten. What about those movies they brought all their tremendous talents to, but which aren’t remembered as well? Here is our list of great movies, by great directors, that don’t get talked about enough these days. 

The Frighteners - Peter Jackson

The Frighteners is such a great movie, and it’s criminally underrated. No, it's not as sprawling or overwhelming as Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings films, but it has all the heart and more. Michael J. Fox leads as a con man/exorcist who can see and interact with ghosts. The Frightners is really funny, well-paced, and delightful. 

The King Of Comedy - Martin Scorsese 

When you think of Martin Scorsese, “comedy” is not usually the first word that pops into your head, but The King Of Comedy is really a pretty great movie, and while it’s technically a comedy, it’s really dark. Goodfellas has some comedy in it, like Joe Pesci acting like a clown… but a true (dark) comedy? This Robert De Niro and Jerry Lewis-led film stands alone in Scorsese’s canon. 

Peggy Sue Got Married - Francis Ford Coppola

Peggy Sue Got Married is a deceptively simple film. Unlike Francis Ford Coppola’s more-talked-about epics like The Godfather films and Apocalypse Now, this film, starring Nicolas Cage and Kathleen Turner, is smaller, but that doesn’t mean it’s lesser. It’s a weird time-travel tale, but at its heart, it’s really a love story, and while it's not Coppola’s best work, it’s well worth a watch and should be talked about more often. 

Jackie Brown - Quentin Tarantino

Quentin Taratino has famously said that his next movie, his 10th, could be his last. Whether that holds true or not remains to be seen, but it’s a safe bet Jackie Brown will still be his least talked about.

Strange Days - Kathryn Bigelow

Kathryn Bigelow’s won Oscars (for The Hurt Locker) and she’s directed cult classics (Point Break). Strange Days is certainly closer to the latter. In it, Bigelow dabbles in science fiction, a rarity for her, but it’s unsurprising, as Strange Days was written by her then-husband James Cameron. It doesn’t have the iconic quotes that Point Break has, nor is it as white-knuckle as The Hurt Locker, but it is a great time capsule to filmmaking in the mid-90s and well worth remembering. 

Amistad - Steven Spielberg

Wedged between The Lost World: Jurassic Park and Saving Private Ryan in Steven Spielberg’s filmography, is Amistad. It’s easy to understand why this powerful historical drama revolving around a landmark court case regarding the slave trade is overlooked, but it shouldn’t be. It’s a moving story, told expertly as only Spielberg can, with a monster cast including Matthew McConaughey, Anthony Hopkins, Morgan Freeman, and Djimon Hounsou, among many others. 

Clockers - Spike Lee

Let’s be clear here, Clockers is not Spike Lee’s finest work. It doesn’t reach the heights of movies like Do The Right Thing or Malcolm X, but it's still a really good movie. It gets lost in Lee’s stellar filmography, which is understandable. It’s also a testament to just how good Lee’s career has been. 

Talk Radio - Oliver Stone

Talk Radio has everything you expect from an Oliver Stone movie. Its pacing and storytelling are perfect, it’s a fascinating and terrifying story that pulls from the real-world events of a murdered radio show host. It also has a healthy dose of conspiracy, as any great Stone film does. 

The Bling Ring - Sofia Coppola

Sofia Coppola’s The Bling Ring is a meta-tastic heist film that is not only a ton of fun to watch with celebrity cameos and great acting performances, but it also touches on some of the emerging trends that exploded in the years after the movie came out, notably influencer culture. It’s too often overlooked in Coppola’s stellar filmography. 

The Game - David Fincher

David Fincher is a master, and his filmography is full of great movies, like Se7en and Fight Club. The movie he made between those two classic is The Game with Sean Penn and Michael Douglas. Understandably, it’s overshadowed, but it’s an amazing film that is every bit as good as those two more talked-about movies. Even when people watch Fincher’s whole body of work, The Game gets overlooked and it shouldn’t. 

Casualties Of War - Brian De Palma

Casualties of War was released in 1989, which was the tail end of a slew of excellent Vietnam War movies released in the late ‘80s, like Platoon, Full Metal Jacket, and Hamburger Hill. Despite earning well-deserved praise from critics, the Brian De Palma film bombed, and as such, it's unfortunately one of the director’s least talked about movies when it should be one of the most. 

Matchstick Men - Ridley Scott

Usually, when movie fans talk about Ridley Scott, it’s his sprawling historical epics like Gladiator or Napoleon that dominate the conversation, along with sci-fi classics like Alien and Blade Runner. Matchstick Men is a smaller movie, a dark comedy about a con man with a myriad of personal problems played by Nicolas Cage. It’s a wonderful performance by Cage, and despite not performing well at the box office, it’s been well-reviewed over the years.

Inherent Vice - Paul Thomas Anderson

Inherent Vice from Paul Thomas Anderson is a complicated movie, based on a complicated book by Thomas Pinchon. It’s easy to understand why it’s not as talked about as some of Anderson’s other movies, like There Will Be Blood and Boogie Nights, but it’s every bit as good as those, featuring great acting performances and wonderful cinematography. 

Out Of Sight - Steven Soderbergh

Steven Soderberg is known for stylish filming techniques with snappy dialog and interesting plot twists. It’s all right there in Out Of Sight, but the movie still gets overlooked. It was Soderbergh’s first big-budget film, and maybe that’s why it doesn’t get talked about enough. It was also his first collaboration with George Clooney, which makes it even more confounding that it’s not more popular. 

Barry Lyndon - Stanley Kubrick

It’s hard to really argue that any of Stanley Kubrick’s films are not talked about enough, but Barry Lyndon comes the closest here. It’s most revered for its cinematography, but it’s also a wonderful story. While it doesn’t have the panache of A Clockwork Orange or the scope of 2001: A Space Odyssey, it’s still a Kubrick film and it’s one of the best ever made. 

Stardust - Matthew Vaughn

Matthew Vaughn has quietly put together one of the finest resumes in Hollywood. The Kingsman movies are a hot franchise, he’s dabbled in Marvel, and may have inspired the choice of Daniel Craig as James Bond after directing him in Layer Cake. Stardust seems to get lost in the shuffle, but it’s maybe, low key, his best film. 

Ryan's Daughter - David Lean

David Lean is rightfully most remembered for three films, The Bridge on the River Kwai, Lawrence of Arabia, and Doctor Zhivago. Lost in the discussion of those films is Ryan’s Daughter, a retelling of Madame Bovary set at the end of World War I. It was the last film Lean directed for 14 years and we can only wonder what he might have done had he not semi-retired. 

Fantastic Mr. Fox - Wes Anderson

Wes Anderson has developed one of the most distinct styles in film history, which translates brilliantly to animation, as well. Anderson’s first foray into the genre was Fantastic Mr. Fox, starring George Clooney, Meryl Streep, and Bill Murray, among others. While it may never outshine his live-action classics, it should be discussed more as one of his best works. 

Bound - The Wachowskis

The DNA of the Wachowskis is very evident in Bound, their first movie. It was made on a shoestring budget, so it doesn’t have the over-the-top effects of The Matrix series, but you can see where they were headed in their filmmaking. 

Intolerable Cruelty - Coen Brothers

When you have a filmography like the Coen Brothers, inevitably, some of the movies won’t get talked about as much as others. Intolerable Cruelty is one of those that gets lost in the mix, behind movies like The Big Lebowski and others that are among the best movies of the ‘90s and beyond. 

Insomnia - Christopher Nolan

Christopher Nolan is among the most beloved directors of the 21st century, creating what feels like independent films, but with monster budgets. That DNA was on display early in his career with Insomnia, which has everything you’d expect from a Nolan movie, but with less than half the budget of Oppenheimer. 

The Fan - Tony Scott

There are few better action directors in Hollywood history than Tony Scott. Most remembered today for classics like Top Gun, and Days of Thunder, The Fan should be talked about more. It’s not a perfect movie, but De Niro’s performance is terrifying (in a great way) as a baseball fan obsessed with Wesley Snipes' character. It’s action horror, and it’s great. 

Vincent And Theo - Robert Altman

Robert Altman had one of the most up-and-down careers in Hollywood history. After a string of successes in the ‘80s, his career was almost sunk by Popeye. It took years for him to rebound, but he did with Vincent & Theo. That led to a career revival, but it’s hardly remembered anymore, overshadowed by his early and later films. 

She's Having A Baby - John Hughes

One of the biggest reasons John Hughes is so loved by people who came of age in the ‘80s and ‘90s was his ability to write and direct genuine teenage characters. That extended to a young married couple starting their lives together in She’s Having A Baby. It’s not as quotable as some of Hughes’ other movies, but it’s still sharply written and a fun watch. 

Only The Lonely - Chris Columbus

Chris Columbus has some directed some huge films in his career, most notably Home Alone and Harry Potter And The Sorcerer’s Stone. He's also got movies like Mrs. Doubtfire and Adventures in Babysitting on his resume. One film that is not talked about enough is Only The Lonely starring John Candy as a man looking for a wife, but dealing with a controlling mother. 

Beowulf - Robert Zemeckis

Generations of high schoolers have been confounded and frustrated by Beowulf. Some love the old English classic, but many hate it. It takes a bold director to take it on as a movie. Robert Zemeckis makes it work, and work well. Still, given the material, it’s not a surprise it’s not talked about as much as Zemeckis’ more popular movies like Back to the Future. 

Great Expectations - Alfonso Cuaron

Director Alfonso Cuaron has made some of the best movies of the last 20 years, including Roma, Gravity, and Y tu mamá también. One of his films that doesn’t get talked about much anymore is 1998’s Great Expectations starring Gwenyth Paltrow and Ethan Hawke. It’s a bold modernization of the classic Dickens novel that can be polarizing, but still worth talking about more.

Ed Wood - Tim Burton

Of all the movies Tim Burton has made, it’s unsurprising that Ed Wood is one of his least discussed. It’s a love letter to legendary B-Movie director Ed Wood, and despite being filled to the brim with great performances, it's not as popular as many of Burton’s other works. 

Midnight In The Garden Of Good And Evil - Clint Eastwood

Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil is not exactly the kind of film you might expect from Clint Eastwood, but you should. Some of his best work is when he strays away from the tough guy movies he’s so well known for and this is a great one, starring John Cusack and Kevin Spacey. 

Away We Go - Sam Mendes

Sam Mendes is best known for movies that cover heavy topics, movies like American Beauty, 1917, and Road to Perdition. That's probably the reason 2009's Away We Go with John Krasinski and Maya Rudolph isn't talked about as much, but it's a sweet movie about a couple dealing with major changes in their life and how to handle them. 

Sleepers - Barry Levinson

Sleepers is a dark, dark film. It's also really, really good. With an all-star cast that includes Brad Pitt, Dustin Hoffman, Robert De Niro, Kevin Bacon, and many more, it's surprising it doesn't get talked about as much as some of director Barry Levinson's other work, but given the subject matter, it can be a very hard watch.  

High Anxiety - Mel Brooks

Mel Brooks is a living legend and his filmography is filled with some of the most quotable movies of all time. One that doesn't get quoted much, or even talked about much, is High Anxiety. It was, believe it or not, the first time Mel Brooks also played the lead in one of his movies, so that alone should garner more attention. 

Great directors usually have long filmographies, so it's only natural that some of their finest work would be talked about less than their most groundbreaking or biggest films. That said, many movies should be talked about as much as those classics, but aren't. Here's to that changing now! 

Barbie was one of the biggest (and best) films of 2023. It broke box office records for Warner Bros. and was a critical smash, with many praising Robbie’s film. However, everyone has different tastes, and it's no surprise that some people don't care for the Matell property adaptation. Recently, a story was circulating that the iconic filmmaker Oliver Stone was speaking out about his dislike of the film. Although, it seems that reports about the movie maker's dislike of the flick might have been overstated. After his comments about Ryan Gosling "wasting his time" went viral, the Platoon director is backtracking his take on the Greta Gerwig-helmed flick.

Oliver Stone recently took to his official X (formerly Twitter) account to express regret over his remarks about Ryan Gosling's role in Barbie while also taking issue with Deadline’s reporting on the matter. According to the filmmaker, his comments were taken out of context from an interview he gave before even seeing the movie. In Stone’s words:

After watching the movie, the JFK writer acknowledged its creativity and the depth of its themes, showing a newfound appreciation for the film. He continued: 

The director of Wall Street is known for sharing his opinions on the work of other filmmakers. However, he seems to hold Greta Gerwig in high regard, as he has stated that Lady Bird was one of his favorite films released in 2017. He wrote:

It's definitely possible for Gerwig and Barbie’s cast and crew to bring home the gold. Gosling received his third Academy Award nomination for his portrayal of Ken, following his previous nominations for Half Nelson and La La Land. The movie garnered eight nominations, including Best Screenplay and Best Picture. 

While Stone is walking back his comments regarding Barbie, some other high-profile names have been open with their criticism of the movie. Prominent political commentator Bill Maher disapproved, labeling the film overly didactic and antagonistic towards men. Furthermore, several conservative commentators have raised objections regarding the movie's production. In response to these critiques, director Greta Gerwig recognized the intense emotions stirred by these reactions. She also shared her aspiration for the film to be a welcoming experience, inviting everyone to join what she describes as "the party."

Oliver Stone and Bill Maher have shared their opinions on the movie, but if you haven't watched it yet and want to form your own opinion, you can now stream Barbie with a Max subscription. Remember to check out our 2024 movie schedule to see what other films are coming your way.

It goes without saying that one of the biggest (and best) films of 2023 is Barbie – the Greta Gerwig-directed fantasy romp starring Margot Robbie. Not only did it break records at the box office for Warner Bros., but critics also praised Robbie’s film. Of course, as is the case with all movies, not everyone is a fan. A handful of notable individuals have spoken out against the flick, and the latest to do so is veteran filmmaker Oliver Stone. He recently expressed his disdain for the production and didn’t mince words while doing so. Among Stone’s thoughts was even the notion that “Ryan Gosling is wasting his time.”

Oliver Stone has crafted some of the most iconic films within the history of cinema, from Wall Street and Born on the Fourth of July to JFK and Nixon. Aside from discussing his own movies, he doesn’t mind sharing his opinions on the work that other filmmakers have done. With that in mind, he had no problem sharing his two cents on Barbie after an interviewer joked about the possibility of him helming a sequel to the pink-tinted motion picture. In addition to taking issue with the flick itself, Stone also believes it contributes to a negative trend in the entertainment industry:

It’s worth mentioning that the 77-year-old Oscar winner didn’t clarify to CityAM whether he actually watched the movie for himself. Still, regardless of whether he’s screened it or not, the movie’s existence and impact don’t seem to sit well with him. The sentiments he shared seem to tie into a larger discussion that’s been present within the film community for a while now. Many have debated the industry’s heavy dependence on major IPs and blockbusters in order to get movie lovers in theaters. Some believe that such fare negatively impacts viewers, because they supposedly lack substance. Some probably remember when Martin Scorsese made headlines several years ago for comparing Marvel movies to theme parks and saying that cinemas “shouldn’t be invaded” by them.

As mentioned, Oliver Stone isn’t the only person who’s spoken out and chastised Barbie. Another notable figure that did that was political pundit Bill Maher, who blasted the film for being “preachy” and “man-hating.” Additionally, some right-wing pundits have taken issue with the production. Greta Gerwig responded to the backlash and acknowledged the considerable amount of “passion” prevalent within the responses. At the time, she also expressed her hope that the film would serve as “an invitation for everybody to be part of the party.”

The criticism aside, it would seem that most were taken with the production, with many lauding it for its direction, script, production design and more. A considerable amount of praise also went towards the cast of Barbie, especially Ryan Gosling. His humorous and heartbreaking turn as Ken has been considered one of the highlights of the movie. And now, Gosling is in the Best Supporting Actor discussion when it comes to the Oscars. 

As awards season pushes on, it’s pretty much a given that Greta Gerwig’s latest will continue to be praised. What’ll be interesting far beyond that, though, is how the movie continues to resonate with audiences in the years to come. We’ll also see what other notable filmmakers opt to weigh in on it and whether their sentiments line up with Oliver Stone’s.

Barbie is now available to stream using a Max subscription. Those who are now looking towards upcoming releases can check out the 2024 movie schedule.

Colin Farrell had a great start to his acting career with his first lead role being the war drama Tigerland and his breakthrough co-starring with Tom Cruise in Minority Report. He even starred in one of the top films of 2022 The Banshees of Inisherin. But like all successful actors, there’s always that one movie that sets you back, such as when Farrell’s historical epic Alexander bombed at the box office.

You would think the Oliver Stone epic Alexander would have shown great promise for its grand scenery and having big-name stars like Angelina Jolie, Val Kilmer, and Jared Leto. While speaking at THR’s Actor Roundtable, Colin Farrell spoke about the high expectations he had while working on what would end up being a box-office failure.

This Irish actor had a very prominent career in the early 2000s with big roles in Phone Booth, The Recruit, and S.W.A.T which had positive reviews and box office successes. He even stood out in supporting roles with one of his best roles in Daredevil as the projectile-throwing antagonist to the hero. Then, Farrell took to independent films as he co-starred with Cillian Murphy in Intermission which broke the record of being the highest-grossing box office film for three years. 

With all of the luck this talented actor was having, he went through a brief twist of it once Alexander was poorly received. Farrell continued to speak to his fellow actors about finding out Alexander was getting hit with incredibly harsh reviews.

Alexander was not without controversy with historians not happy with the insinuations that Alexander the Great was bisexual with romantic tension between him and Hephaestion. It’s a good thing Zack Synder’s 300 sequel idea of a gay love story involving Alexander the Great didn’t come to fruition. There was also criticism of the portrayal of the Persians in their garments and military organization. Critics felt that this movie had more the tone of a history documentary with not enough action and emotional depth to fit the historical epic genre. With Alexander’s $155 million production budget and the cost of additional marketing costs, it suffered a loss of $71 million. No Oscar nominations were had here, but Alexander did receive a number of nominations for 2005’s Golden Raspberry Awards and the 2004 Stinkers Bad Movie Awards. 

Colin Farrell never would have expected his next project to turn out so badly and make him question his acting ability. He went on to say he was so embarrassed that he took part in Alexander that he wished he could apologize to disappointed audience members. 

While no amount of recut versions could salvage Oliver Stone’s Alexander, Colin Farrell was not going anywhere. He was still making bank in his second historical epic New World as Captain John Smith and won his first Golden Globe in another best role of his, In Bruges. While it’s true that it just takes one movie to ruin an actor’s career, Colin Farrell was not one of those actors to succumb to that setback. He just came back stronger.

This native Irishman’s acting career was thankfully not ruined by the doomed film Alexander. During the past year, he’s received a lot of award nominations and wins for his role in The Banshees of Inisherin. Be sure to watch this serious Academy Awards contender on your HBO Max subscription.

Legendary filmmaker Oliver Stone joins ReelBlend to celebrate the 30th Anniversary of the release of JFK, starring Kevin Costner, Gary Oldman, Jack Lemmon and more. We chat about the process of editing the massive film, the many tribulations that the project was met with during production through its release, and how it was eventually received. The film earned a number of Oscar nominations and took home a few wins, including a stellar box office haul of over $200 million. 

Want More ReelBlend?

Sign up for our premium membership, which includes an extra episode a week, a bi-weekly newsletter from Sean, and ad-free episodes. Also, be sure to subscribe to ReelBlend on YouTube for full episodes of the show in video form. Finally, we have all kinds of fun merchandise for dedicated Blenders to flaunt their fandom with pride.

Hollywood is loaded with iconic directors who have given audiences some of the best entertainment for decades. For that reason, they're often given more work, which always opens them up to giving audiences more to love... or something they may really, really hate. Most of these icons hit far more often than they miss, though even the greatest have that movie where they struck out.

To be completely upfront, there will be some hot takes on this list. Every item on this list is the lowest-rated movie from the mentioned iconic director on Rotten Tomatoes, so blame the critics of the time, not me. With that out of the way, let's run down the list of terrible movies from iconic directors that may or may not deserve a spotlight.

Guillermo Del Toro - Blade 2

Ironically, what many would consider the best Blade movie is also the worst movie made by Guillermo del Toro. Not that Del Toro is ever really given a ton of blame for that; his job was to direct, and he did his best with the script he was given. Unfortunately, even the most foreboding and dark areas fall flat when the movie uses fight scenes with dialogue only to move Blade along to the next fight scene. Thankfully, del Toro would win critics over in the superhero genre with his two Hellboy movies down the road.

David Lynch - Dune

David Lynch had a tremendous task cut out for him in Dune, and by most metrics to this day, he failed. The man who perfectly captured the life of The Elephant Man somehow couldn't find a proper way to adapt Frank Herbert's classic in a way that could be easily understood by its audience. The movie is widely considered a miss for Lynch, and while he's come close with a couple of features, it's the only movie of his considered "rotten" by critics on Rotten Tomatoes.

George Lucas- Star Wars: The Phantom Menace

George Lucas' track record is somewhat skewed considering 2/3rds of his directing work is for Star Wars projects, but he did create the franchise after all. Unfortunately, he also gifted the world the most critically panned entry in the franchise, The Phantom Menace. I thought it was fine in my younger years, but a recent re-watch made me question why plans for the trilogy weren't heavily reconsidered after that entry alone. Was the world just so desperate for more Star Wars that they looked past it? Obviously, there were people who knew right out the gate, as many critics were not shy to say this wasn't nearly on the same level as A New Hope.

Martin Scorsese- Boxcar Bertha

When it comes to violent movies that revolve around a world of crime, typically Martin Scorsese is the guy to call. That said, that wasn't known back when he made Boxcar Bertha, which was only his second directorial feature at the time. Hilariously enough, most of the complaints were due to the violence, which was often a criticism Scorsese has gotten for successive films that are now considered masterpieces. Unfortunately, Boxcar Bertha has not been nearly as acclaimed as the rest.

Tim Burton- Dark Shadows

Tim Burton has a knack for putting his own spin on classic stories, even with works that may not initially seem like they could work with his dark charm. Weirdly enough, Dark Shadows seemed like a perfect and relatively sensible fit for Burton, and he had Johnny Depp on board. It should've been a hit, but critics found the premise played out. The jokes fell flat and Burton was criticized for struggling to find a tone throughout the movie. Sometimes the "sure things" in Hollywood just don't work out in execution, and this movie is proof positive of that.

Peter Jackson - The Lovely Bones

Peter Jackson is known for a lot of things, but paranormal thrillers aren't really his bag. Sure, Frodo did turn invisible a handful of times in The Lord Of The Rings, but even in the context of all he'd done before this movie, The Lovely Bones was a pretty out-there film for Jackson. Of course, that was part of the point, as Jackson went on the record saying he enjoyed doing something that wasn't a large-scale epic for once. Three years later he was doing The Hobbit, though it's worth noting he wasn't the first choice.

Steven Spielberg - Hook

Hook is a beloved classic by many, but that was not how it was received by critics. This movie got a thorough thrashing for being an ill-begotten story of Peter Pan and was hated by critics so much that its aggregate Rotten Tomatoes score is a measly 28%. The movie was called unimaginative, the effects were not well integrated, and the overall story was garbled down by too many Hollywood ideals. Perhaps the biggest criticism was that it had such a great premise, but did so little to further adapt or bring in elements from the original story.

Ridley Scott - A Good Year

Similar to what I touched on earlier with Peter Jackson, there are things iconic directors are known for, and things they aren't. When you think of Ridley Scott, I highly doubt you think of romantic comedies. Scott has a wide range of movies he can make a hit, and with Russell Crowe as the lead in A Good Year, it stood to reason he could do it again. This time it just didn't happen, as the end result was seen as a soulless romantic comedy that went on a little too long. It's not necessarily bad, but certainly not one anyone needs to make time for.

David Fincher - Alien 3

The final entry is the most perhaps fitting, because not even David Fincher will defend Alien 3. The third installment in the Alien franchise already had a lot to live up to with the first two movies, which was directed by two other directing icons, Ridley Scott and James Cameron. Unfortunately, Fincher's film wasn't considered nearly as exciting or bold as the prior two films, though it has gathered its share of fans over the years. Still, when even Fincher himself disowns it, it's hard not to side with the crowd who thinks this sequel just wasn't up to par.

Spike Lee - She Hate Me

She Hate Me has all the ingredients for a great film. It's a challenging script from Spike Lee and Michael Genet, it has a dynamite cast that includes Anthony Mackie, in one of his earliest roles, and Kerry Washington in the lead roles, and, of course, is directed by Lee, one of the most acclaimed directors of the last 30+ years. The movie misses though, weighted down by the heavy message it tries to make while also trying to be a comedy. 

Barry Levinson - Sphere

After the huge success of Jurassic Park in 1993, Hollywood was clamoring to adapt other Michael Crichton novels. The mid and late '90s were chock full of adaptions like The 13th Warrior, Congo, Rising Sun, and Disclosure. Right in that mix was Barry Levinson's adaptation of Sphere and while the book was fantastic, the movie just falls flat, perhaps because people staring at mysterious orb for most of a movie isn't all that exciting. 

Sam Raimi - For Love Of The Game

Director Sam Raimi has a remarkable hit record, with only a couple movies rating below 50% on Rotten Tomatoes, the lowest being the Kevin Costner baseball movie For Love Of The Game. If you love Costner and baseball, it's actually a decent movie, but it isn't Raimi's best, that's for sure. 

Francis Ford Coppola - Jack

Francis Ford Coppola had a run in the 1970s that is almost unprecedented in Hollywood with The Godfather movies, The Conversation, and Apocalypse Now. He found success in the 1980s too, with movies like The Outsiders and Tucker: A Man and His Dream. Then there is 1996's Jack. All you can ask is, "What were Coppola and Robin Williams thinking?"

Penny Marshall - Renaissance Man

The late Penny Marshall is a Hollywood icon for many reasons. Renaissance Man is not one of them. If you've never seen it (which wouldn't be surprising) think of it like Dead Poet's Society crossed with Pauly Shore's In The Army Now, and just as unfunny as the latter. Danny DeVito plays a guy who loves quoting Shakespeare and finds himself teaching army recruits how to read. That's all you need to know, really, there is no reason to ever watch it. 

Oliver Stone - Alexander

Oliver Stone knows how to tell a war story. His Vietnam films Platoon and Born on the Fourth of July rank among the best war movies of all time. His telling of the ancient battle of Alexander the Great in Alexander is as good. The original release was a hot mess and while he has improved it with a couple of subsequent director's cuts, it still doesn't hold a candle to his other films. 

Ivan Reitman - Father's Day

The late Ivan Reitman has always been hit-or-miss with critics. Even some of his most popular movies, like Twins, were poorly reviewed. His worst movie though, based on both audience and critics' scores. is Father's Day starring Billy Crystal and Robin Williams as two men trying to find their former lovers' son to determine which man is the father. It's... not funny, nor is it heartfelt. It's just a miss. 

Amy Heckerling - Night At The Roxbury

Clueless and Fast Times At Ridgemont High are two of the most beloved teen comedies of all time, both define two generations. For director Amy Heckerling they are high water marks in her career. On the other side of those is Night At The Roxbury. Though it’s her lowest-ranked movie on Rotten Tomatoes, it’s not the worst movie based on SNL characters, so it could be worse. 

Kathryn Bigelow - The Weight of Water

Oscar-winner Katheryn Bigelow is pretty picky about the movies she chooses to direct, and most of the time, she nails it, like The Hurt Locker, Point Break, and Zero Dark Thirty. Occasionally she misses, like The Weight Of Water. Though it’s nowhere near the worst movie on this list, it’s still the worst of her movies according to the critics on Rotten Tomatoes. 

The Coen Brothers - The Ladykillers

When your worst-reviewed movie on Rotten Tomatoes is still 54%, you’re doing pretty well. For the Coen Brothers, The Ladykillers is a very rare example of a miss, as they have 13 movies north of 80%. I’m a fan of The Ladykillers and I think it’s vastly underrated, but sticking with the rules, it’s the one of this list. I’d have Hail! Caesar at the bottom, however. 

Danny Boyle - The Beach

Before Alex Garland became an acclaimed director of movies like 2024’s Civil War, he was a novelist. He wrote The Beach in the ‘90s and captivated a generation of would-be adventure travelers. Combine that with the talents of the great director Danny Boyle and star Leonardo DiCaprio and you’d think there was no way the movie would be bad. The Beach isn’t terrible, but it’s not Boyle’s best work by far. It just misses the sense of adventure the novel has. 

Alfonso Cuarón - Great Expectations

Alfonso Cuarón takes his time when making a movie, and while Great Expectations is no exception, it falls short of the lofty expectations we have of the director. Sure, it’s based on a classic novel (though a modern retelling of the Dickens book) and it has a great cast, but it just misses. It’s certainly not up to his usual standards. 

Alex & Emma - Rob Reiner

Some of the best rom-coms of all time have been directed by Rob Reiner. Alex & Emma, starring Luke Wilson and Kate Hudson is not one of them. It’s a rare miss from the This is Spinal Tap director, with a brutal 11% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. 

M. Night Shyamalan - The Last Airbender

M. Night Shyamalan has never really been a critical darling, but his fans always stick up for him, with one exception: The Last Airbender. The movie, based on the Avatar: The Last Airbender franchise, is despised by critics and fans alike, especially fans of the source material. 

Eagle Vs. Shark - Taika Waititi

As debut movies go, Taika Waititi’s Eagle Vs. Shark isn’t that bad. The director’s now-legendary humor is very evident, but it’s clearly a low-budget first outing for Waititi. It’s excusable, given what would come later. What is less excusable is the miss he had with Thor: Love & Thunder, but it’s still better ranked than this one, for some reason. If given the choice between the two, pick Eagle Vs. Shark.

James Cameron - Piranha II: The Spawning

Okay, so this one really isn’t fair. The worst movie that the great James Cameron directed is a B-movie called Piranha II: The Spawning. From the title alone, you know it’s going to be bad. There isn’t much redeemable about it, except that it got Cameron’s foot in the door in Hollywood and his next movie, The Terminator has a perfect 100% on Rotten Tomatoes, so you can ignore the 5% this one got. 

Ron Howard - Inferno

Did you know that Ron Howard and Tom Hanks teamed up for three movies based on the books of Dan Brown? You probably remember The Da Vinci Code and you might have even seen Angels & Demons but there is a third, terrible installment in the franchise called Inferno. CinemaBlend called Howard’s direction “slow, ponderous and dull,” which is not what you explicit from the Hollywood legend. 

Robert Altman - Beyond Therapy

Throughout his career, director Robert Altman had some serious highs, like The Player and MASH, but he also had some pretty low lows, and none were lower than Beyond Therapy in 1987. It came at a low point overall in the legendary director’s career, a time that also included similarly poorly reviewed movies like Popeye and O.C. and Stiggs.

Ivan Reitman - Beverly Hills Cop III

This one is a little unfair, because Ivan Reitman and Eddie Murphy have both made worse movies, but it likely suffers from coming on the heals of two previous Beverly Hills Cop movies that are, without a doubt, superior to this sequel. 

Elia Kazan - The Arrangement

There is no doubt of Elia Kazan’s place in Hollywood history. Considered one of the most influential directors of all time, fans of his can also boast that his movies launched the careers of actors like Marlon Brando and James Dean. However, not every movie he made was a classic and while The Arrangement has been somewhat re-evaluated in recent years, it still holds a dismal 15% ranking on Rotten Tomatoes. 

Brian De Palma - The Bonfire Of The Vanities

Tom Wolfe has only had a couple of books adapted into movies. The first, The Right Stuff is one of the best movies about The Cold War. The second, The Bonfire of the Vanities, directed by Brian De Palma, is… not very good. In fact, it’s pretty brutal. It tries hard to hit all the cultural critiques that Wolfe laid out in his novel, but it just doesn’t get the point across nearly as well. It’s a clunky mess. 

Richard Linklater - Bad News Bears

When he sticks with his own original stories and writes his own screenplays, Richard Linklater is a master. Movies like Dazed and Confused, Before Sunrise, and Boyhood are iconic. The Bad News Bears is also iconic, just not the remake Linklater directed in 2005. The original is far, far better. 

Gus Van Sant - Even Cowgirls Get The Blues

For Gen X, the combination of Gus Van Sant and novelist Tom Robbins was an enticing prospect. Sadly, the movie adaptation of Robbins’ classic Even Cowgirls Get The Blues is simply a disappointment, a very rare miss for Van Sant, especially at that point in his career coming off the back-to-back masterpieces Drugstore Cowboy and My Own Private Idaho. 

Over the course of his career, Oliver Stone has become one of the influential (and controversial) filmmakers of our time. From Platoon and Wall Street to Born on the Fourth of July and Nixon, it goes without saying that he’s made a serious impression on cinema. However, his career hasn’t been without its setbacks. Now, he’s looking back on one of his more recent films, which opened against Seth MacFarlane’s Ted, and how the film’s reception dealt a blow to his career.

While 2016’s Snowden was Stone’s last major film, the last “mainstream” movie he was produced was the 2012’s Savages. Universal Pictures released the film a week after Ted, another one of its productions and, ultimately, Savages would fail to find an audience, earning an underwhelming $83 million global sum.

Oliver Stone doesn’t hold any bitterness towards Universal for shifting Savages to a summer release date, but he does believe Ted hurt its chances to make an impact at the box office:

The filmmaker went on to tell The New York Times that while he still gets offered film projects, he doesn’t necessarily feel the motivation to make them. He attributes this to the “pain and misery” from Savages’ failure and his difficulties while making Snowden:

Hearing that a cinema veteran like Oliver Stone has become somewhat disillusioned with filmmaking may come as a bit of a shock to some. But the fact that it was Seth MacFarlane’s Ted that caused it is arguably an even bigger surprise. What’s ironic about the situation is that Ted had many detractors when it was first announced. Even Seth MacFarlane was sure the film would flop, yet it succeeded at the box office and even spawned a sequel.

Right now, Oliver Stone says he’s keeping himself busy by working on two documentaries, one on his 1991 film JFK and another about clean energy titled A Bright Future. So it would appear he’ll continue to take a break from more narrative-driven features for the time being but, at the very least, fans of Stone still have a few pieces of work to look forward to. And time will tell if he decides to return to mainstream filmmaking.

Few actors can pull off the tough guy persona quite like Jon Bernthal. From his role as Shane Walsh on The Walking Dead to his more recent tenure as Frank Castle on The Punisher, the guy knows how to tap into something primal. Now it seems that at least a portion of that stems from his own innate ability to put his money where his mouth is. In fact, a new story from Bernthal himself even suggests that he once almost got into a fistfight with Oliver Stone on the set of World Trade Center over a decade ago.

As the story goes, things got somewhat intense on the set of the 2006 thriller about 9/11. Jon Bernthal was cast in the film in a fairly substantial role as a Port Authority police officer, and Oliver Stone took a pretty aggressive approach in his direction of the up-and-coming actor. At one point, Oliver Stone apparently started yelling at the actors to call them out for being "vain," and he specifically singled Bernthal out as "the worst" of them.

Not one to take anything from anyone, Jon Bernthal (who has had his nose broken fourteen times, some apparently even during fights) stood his ground and fought back against the Platoon director. According to Bernthal, he looked at Oliver Stone and said:

That's about as crystal clear as you can get when you're threatening to beat up an Academy Award-winning director. Following the encounter, Jon Bernthal was approached by World Trade Center star Nicholas Cage, who provided his own commentary on the incident. According to Bernthal in his recollection of the event to Esquire, Cage said:

We're not entirely sure if that is Nicholas Cage's way of admonishing or praising Jon Bernthal's actions towards Oliver Stone. Given the National Treasure star's reputation for delightfully-bizarre antics, neither option would surprise us. It sounds like Bernthal and Stone ultimately never got to the point at which they were indeed ready to trade blows behind the scenes, but Bernthal later went on to explain that this was actually a trick by Oliver Stone, and the intention was to get a more intense performance out of the actor. Bernthal admitted that he was "young and stupid" during the incident, and he eventually would go on to become friends with the director in the long run.

Even in the face of that tense showdown with Oliver Stone, it looks like Jon Bernthal has managed to carve out a pretty strong career for himself as an actor in films like Fury and The Accountant. CinemaBlend will keep you posted with more updates related to any of his upcoming projects, and for now, you can catch him in The Punisher, which is currently streaming on Netflix.

Oliver Stone is no stranger to making movies on controversial topics, including controversial U.S. Presidents. So would Stone consider making a movie about Donald Trump? The director says that he hasn't yet contemplated the idea of making such a movie, and while he doesn't discount the idea of making a movie about the current President entirely, he says he certainly doesn't want to make one right now. It seems the major reason is that it's simply too early to make a film like that. As there's still so much that will likely happen for the next few years, any movie that came out now would simply be trying to cash in on current headlines. According to Stone....

The idea of Oliver Stone making a movie about Donald Trump certainly feels like the sort of thing that could happen, so it's not shocking that Yahoo asked the director about the idea. Stone has never been shy about making movies like Wall Street, which critique business, as well as movies that delve deep into politics, like Nixon. A movie about Donald Trump would surely deal with both ideas, making it seem like the perfect Oliver Stone subject matter.

Oliver Stone has even made movies about Presidents while they were still in office. W. was released in 2008 while George W. Bush was still President. Although, it was released in October of that year, less than a month before Bush's successor was to be elected, and the timeline of the movie ended in 2004, so there were a few years of separation between the material and the present day. At this point, it hasn't even been a full year since Donald Trump's election, which would likely make for an intriguing movie by itself, nevermind the events of the presidency. So much is happening every day with the President of the United States that any movie that tried to go into production would be writing new scenes daily and likely would never reach an endpoint. As Stone says, it would chase the headlines.

While a movie about Donald Trump seems like something that will likely happen one day, controversial topics can make for popular films, after all, it makes much more sense to wait. A few years down the road a movie can tell the whole story, or focus on a specific event of particular importance. It's possible the most important part of the Trump presidency hasn't even happened yet and any movie that was made before that happened would prove to be ultimately worthless.

Filmmaking can make people do truly outrageous and terrible things, especially when you have both written and directed the piece, and you're looking to galvanize the desired performance from your actors. It transpires that Oliver Stone is one such filmmaker who's willing to go to any length to get the cast and crew to do what he wants, something that Alec Baldwin saw first hand when the pair worked together on 1988's Talk Radio. And while the entire experience sounds like it was particularly harrowing, Baldwin also noted his begrudging respect for Stone's commitment to the cinematic cause. Baldwin recalled:

There are two ways to look at Alec Baldwin's above comments, which come courtesy of his recent book Nevertheless. Clearly if any boss or employee is forcing his subordinates to booze in order for them to deal with how they're being treated then it is inexcusable. I can only imagine that drinking made the entire situation umpteen times more painful, though, because dealing with Oliver Stone on a hangover must have been hell on Earth. But then there will be the cinephiles that insist that a filmmaker is well within their rights to do whatever they want to the cast and crew so that their vision can be plastered up on screen, a point of view that Baldwin suggests he is actually sympathetic to. Not to the extent that he ever actually appeared in another Stone film, though.

Released back in 1988 to impressive reviews, Talk Radio is one of Oliver Stone's lesser known films. It revolved around the ascent of radio-host Barry Champlain (Eric Bogosian), who himself is based on Alan Berg, a Jewish radio host that was shot and killed in his own driveway by white supremacists. Alec Baldwin's character in the film is actually similar to that of his work in Glengarry Glen Ross, and you can get a snippet of his performance in the film by checking out the trailer for Talk Radio below.

This isn't the first time that Alec Baldwin has courted controversy with his new book Nevertheless over the last few days, as he's not only elaborated on his disdain for Harrison Ford, but he's also currently embroiled in a dispute with producer Dana Brunetti over whether or not he actually knew the age of Nikki Reed in Mini's First Time, too.

Joseph Gordon Levitt's in the middle of an unusual streak. With Snowden, the actor delivers his second dramatic feature that -- while notable on numerous levels -- is deflated because it follows in the footsteps of a superior documentary that covers the same ground.

This happened when Gordon Levitt played Phillippe Petit, the death defying wire walker whose World Trade Center stunt powered the exquisite doc Man On Wire and the less-excellent feature film The Walk. Now there's Oliver Stone's Snowden, which expands the scope of the systematic whistleblower doc Citizenfour, and loses some of the impact of Edward Snowden's brazen accomplishments as a result.

Even those who only casually follow political headlines should know that Edward Snowden (Joseph Gordon Levitt) was an NSA analyst whose security clearances and coding accomplishments opened him up to the knowledge that our government uses cutting edge technology to spy on ordinary citizens, all in the name of "national security." Unwilling to accept that as the new normal in our hyper-sensitive War on Terrorism society, Snowden smuggled evidence out of the NSA and turned it over to journalists Laura Poitras (Melissa Leo) and Glenn Greenwald (Zachary Quinto) once he established a trust that they'd share his story with the world.

The nerve-wracking, multi-day ordeal between Snowden, Greenwald and Poitras is laid out, step by painful step, in Poitras' Citizenfour, and the Hong Kong hotel room that was the backdrop of their pivotal conversations is touched on by Oliver Stone in Snowden. But the Platoon and Wall Street director is more interested in bigger picture politics -- as well as the man at the center of the maelstrom -- when assembling Snowden, so this feature film operates as more of a traditional biopic, for better and for worse. Stone and Gordon Levitt offer a dramatization of the key beats in Snowden's controversial life, from his short-lived military career to the romance he established with Lindsay Mills (Shailene Woodley) -- a relationship that's still in place to this day, despite the fact that Snowden and Mills live in exile because our government views him as a traitor.

I did wonder, while watching, why a textbook biopic like Snowden worked well (for the most part) when the similarly paranoid Julian Assange story The Fifth Estate fumbled. It boils down to Stone making smart casting decisions at the top in Gordon Levitt and Woodley, then surrounding then with an all-star ensemble that puts a human face on techno-babble hacker jargon that is integral to Edward Snowden's biography. This is a sturdy, stoic and moderately compelling biopic of a patriotic whistleblower, the type of figure in U.S. history that Stone enjoys dissecting. Gordon Levitt is powerful and commanding as Snowden. Leo and Quinto are feverish as Poitras and Greenwald. And Stone even casts Nicolas Cage as his surrogate, of sorts, hiring the World Trade Center collaborator to play an NSA instructor who is slightly paranoid, smart, distrustful and anti-establishment.

Ultimately, the point of Snowden is lost on me, when people can (and should) just watch Citizenfour. But Stone's Snowden does get its messages of privacy invasions and personal revolutions across, loud and clear. Facebook accounts will be deleted following screenings this weekend. Cell phones may get dropped into a fish bowls, and laptops (especially the ones with cameras) could get thrown from the nearest skyscraper. But I don't think it's powerful enough to inspire you to abandon society and move to the isolation of Joshua Tree national state park... unless you already have a tin-foil hat on your head, and Alex Jones on your airwaves as you read this review.

You might think that while researching the role of Edward Snowden, Joseph Gordon-Levitt would have only focused on the positive coverage of famous figure. After all, the former NSA contractor ultimately fully believed that what he was doing was the right thing, and reading material that supports that mindset would presumably provide the most insight to the character. This, however, would be a false assumption, as Gordon-Levitt recognized that the real Snowden was entirely conscious of the negative backlash that would come as a result of his actions, and so the actor felt it was an important thing to recognize all perspectives on the man while getting into his mindset.

The incredible controversy surrounding Edward Snowden and the confidential files he leaked back in 2013 was one of the many subjects that I discussed with Joseph Gordon-Levitt when I had the chance to sit down with him recently during the Los Angeles press day for Snowden. While Gordon-Levitt was discussing the way he got into the mindset of the character and the research that he did early in the process, I asked about what kind of coverage he was reading, and if it skewed more towards stuff that agreed with Snowden's actions, or rebuked him. The actor said that he ultimately decided to take a balanced approach, and explained why:

It's a heated controversy that continues as Oliver Stone's Snowden prepares to launch into theaters. Some argue that Edward Snowden did the right thing -- performing a duty as a privacy-respecting individual by dragging immoral behavior into the spotlight. Others believe that he is a traitor who compromised national security by revealing protected information to America's enemies. And still others believe that he was correct in his actions, but was wrong for not facing the consequences by staying in the country instead of fleeing to Russia. It's not by any stretch a simple issue, and because this was something that Joseph Gordon-Levitt believed Snowden considered before his actions, he felt it was important to have it inform his performance.

The level of authenticity that this approach winds up giving Joseph Gordon-Levitt's portrayal of Edward Snowden is something that you can all now judge for yourself. The film is in theaters this Friday, September 16th -- and be sure to stay tuned here on Cinema Blend for more Snowden-related news.

The following story contains very mild spoilers for Oliver Stone's upcoming drama Snowden. You have been warned.

Later this year, you will get the opportunity to see a dramatization of the Edward Snowden saga, as filtered through the unique perspective of Oliver Stone. This is not a Snowden review, as we are embargoed for the next few weeks, but rather a very interesting story about a special cameo in the film, and how it came to pass. I'll even hide it beneath this image of Snowden star Joseph Gordon Levitt, playing the title character.

For two-plus hours, audiences will be mesmerized by Joseph Gordon-Levitt's transformation into Edward Snowden, government agent turned whistleblower who now lives in exile after exposing programs used by our own government to spy on the world's citizens. You will become so engrossed in Gordon-Levitt's portrayal that it'll be stunning when, in a bit of camera trickery, the REAL Edward Snowden shows up in a scene that begins with Gordon-Levitt in the role, and gracefully transitions into the actual Snowden. The mind reels with questions. Why did Oliver Stone do this? Did he actually go to Moscow, where Snowden resides, to shoot this scene?

Thankfully, as part of a special Snowden screening in San Diego, Edward Snowden participated in a live Q-and-A via satellite from Moscow and answered questions alongside Stone, Gordon-Levitt and co-star Shailene Woodley. And he opened up about the creation of this eye-catching scene, explaining:

Does Oliver Stone agree? He took the baton from Snowden and elaborated:

Here's a shot of Edward Snowden, live via Moscow following the screening in Comic-Con.

See how this scene plays for yourself when Oliver Stone's Snowden opens in theaters on September 16.

If you are reading this, then you probably spend a more than decent amount of time on the internet. Prepare to be utterly terrified by this fact. The new trailer for Oliver Stone’s oft-delayed story about Edward Snowden is finally here and it gives us our first look at the man who blew the whistle on the scope of government surveillance. Get prepared to watch the trailer, but be aware, the government will know you did.

Snowden has been an Oliver Stone project for two years, and the way it kept getting pushed back, we began to wonder if there was some sort of conspiracy involved. Even though it now looks to be moving forward for release this fall, we’re still not sure that wasn’t the case. Snowden tells the story of the man who went to work for the CIA, and then the NSA, to serve his country, only to become very concerned with the way his nation was collecting intelligence on American citizens. He feels a need to inform the world, but in doing so he becomes a wanted man.

Based on the information in this trailer Edward Snowden wasn’t simply a patriot, he was also a genius. While it becomes clear why the government would want somebody with his ability working for them, he also becomes the guy capable of sneaking classified documents out of a secure building. And that's when things get interesting.

The most notable thing in the trailer for Snowden is its star. Joseph Gordon-Levitt is just short of unrecognizable physically. What’s even more amazing is that he sounds nothing like Joseph Gordon-Levitt. Levitt here is very nearly a pitch perfect Edward Snowden. If you listen to the voice of the actual man you can hear how closely he’s come to nailing the man’s speech. It’s not simply the tone but the style as well.

The actions of Edward Snowden were polarizing, to say the least, and so we fully expect that the film will be as well. Oliver Stone has never been one to shy away from controversial topics. Many will criticize the movie, and its authenticity will surely be questioned. However, from this brief look, we’re certainly interested in seeing more of Snowden. We put this one on our list of potential Academy Award nominees for the year, and nothing here has told us that we were wrong. What do you think of your first look at Snowden?

Oliver Stone has never been known to shy away from politics in his film, and later this year he will continue this tradition by making a movie about one of the most polarizing people in the world: Edward Snowden. The film won't be out until the end of the year, but the first trailer has found its way online, and you can watch it below:

This first look at Snowden sadly doesn't contain any actual footage from the film, instead choosing to simply promote the movie with the true story angle, but it still is a pretty cool tease. The movie's titular figure has a story that's certainly worth telling on the big screen, and it's all wrapped up with a tagline that will surely start some murmurs:

The very end of this trailer shows off the impressive cast list that the movie has lined up, but it's surprising that we don't even get a slight glimpse at Joseph Gordon-Levitt as Edward Snowden. In previously released images we've seen, it appears as though the guy has undergone an impressive transformation for his role in the docudrama, and you'd think that the marketing team behind the film would want to show him off.

Based on a script by written by Kieran Fitzgerald and Oliver Stone, and adapted from the book "The Snowden Files: The Inside Story Of The World’s Most Wanted Man" by Guardian reporter Luke Harding, Snowden will follow its titular subject on a journey to become one of the most important whistle-blowers in history. In 2013, he was working as a government contractor within the National Security Agency, and wound up leaking classified information regarding their surveillance programs. Charged with theft and violating the Espionage Act, he was forced to flee the country and currently resides in Russia.

Oliver Stone and Joseph Gordon-Levitt are the big headliners for Snowden, but the movie has an impressive supporting cast that also includes Shailene Woodley, Nicolas Cage, Timothy Olyphant, Scott Eastwood, Zachary Quinto, Melissa Leo, Tom Wilkinson, Rhys Ifans, and Joely Richardson. We fully expect it to be in the Oscar conversation as we get towards the end of the year, but we'll only know its real potential when it hits theaters on Christmas Day.

Ladies and gentlemen, we now have our first look at Joseph Gordon-Levitt as Edward Snowden, and it looks as though The Dark Knight Rises, Don Jon, and Brick actor will be completely disappearing into the role. You can check out the image below.

Only a truly vivid and evocative image can instantly incite excitement, so it speaks wonders for Snowden’s debut still that you can’t help but be immediately engrossed by Joseph Gordon-Levitt’s impending portrayal of Edward Snowden. Not only is JGL already showcasing a brooding intensity, but there’s something truly heart-breaking and complex about his gaze that suggests he has already wholly embraced his character.

But this wasn’t the only image from the set of Snowden to emerge today. Joseph Gordon-Levitt also took to Twitter to upload a picture of himself on-set with Oliver Stone. In fact he also revealed that the legendary director was in the midst of taking his first ever selfie. And boy did he make it count, because he simply looks joyous in it.

This Tweet gives us a better look at what Joseph Gordon Levitt will look like for the most part in Snowden. And I honestly think it’s good to see that he’s not decided to dye his hair to try and exquisitely match the look of the National Security Agency whistleblower. More often than not, an actor’s decision to radically change their look eclipses their portrayal, as it immediately takes you out of and distracts you from their performance. In this writer’s opinion, Steve Carell’s somewhat over-rated turn in Foxcatcher is a clear example of this.

Snowden promises to be at least a tad controversial. After all, it’s being directed by Oliver Stone, and deals with with one of the most divisive news stories of the modern age: Edward Snowden’s decision to leak classified NSA documents - which has seen him labelled as both a whistleblower and traitor, and resulted in him being granted political asylum in Russia. Stone loves to approach his subjects in a brash and borderline sensationalist manner so that he can fully extract every ounce of drama. This is something that I fully endorse, as his aim to provoke and entertain is never blighted by any worries for his reputation.

The fact that the stellar cast is rounded off by Shailene Woodley, Nicholas Cage, Mellisa Leo, Zachary Quinto, Tom Wilkinson, Rhys Ifans, Joely Richardson, and Timothy Olyphant, means that the film has all the raw ingredients to deliver. We’ll see if that’s the case when Snowden is released on Christmas Day.

Hollywood is full of stories about child stars who made it big young, then flamed out and met tragic ends. Inception star Joseph Gordon-Levitt is not one of those cautionary tales. The actor, who got his big break as a fresh-faced kid on television series like Roseanne and Third Rock from the Sun, has made quite a career for himself in years since those shows went off the air. And the latest industry buzz has the actor potentially playing one of the most controversial figures in recent American history: NSA whistle-blower Edward Snowden.

Deadline reports that Oliver Stone is keenly interested in getting Gordon-Levitt to headline his new bipoic about the former CIA system administrator. Snowden became a hot topic in 2013 after divulging the extent of governmental surveillance in the wake of 9/11, eventually forcing him to seek asylum in Russia. With filming set to begin this December in Munich, time is of the essence when it comes to casting.

The Natural Born Killers filmmaker has the rights to a book titled Time of the Octopus, written by Snowden’s Russian lawyer. Stone also bought the rights to The Snowden Files: The Inside Story Of The World’s Most Wanted Man, a non-fiction treatise by Guardian reporter Luke Harding. With this much material at his disposal, it appears Stone – who’s been relatively quiet since departing a project about the life of civil rights activist Dr. Martin Luther King – is ready to bring the world the story of a man who is revered in some circles as a great patriot, and in others as a modern day Benedict Arnold.

Stone’s film isn’t the only Snowden biopic in the Hollywood pipeline. Sony has already acquired the rights to Glenn Greenwald’s yet-to-be-published No Place To Hide: Edward Snowden, The NSA, And The U.S. Surveillance State, which will be shepherded through production by Bond series producers Barbara Broccoli and Michael G. Wilson. That duo knows a thing or two about spy movies and espionage.

Joseph Gordon-Levitt would make for an interesting Edward Snowden, and it’s not hard to imagine Stone presenting the former government contractor in a sympathetic light (the filmmaker loves to rail at governmental conspiracies – just watch JFK if you’re unconvinced). The actor recently finished shooting Robert Zemeckis’ The Walk, and has been recently filming Jonathan Levine's upcoming Christmas comedy with Seth Rogen. He’s clearly on a tight schedule, but it seems likely that he could make it to Munich for a December shoot with Oliver Stone if all the fine details can be hammered out.

No matter which side of the Snowden debate you come down on, it’s a fascinating story that should make for a compelling film. Stone has made a good choice for the part in Joseph Gordon-Levitt, and now all he has to do is get the actor officially on-board and start making movie magic.

Happy Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, everyone! It is on this day we remember a civil rights leader who wasn’t afraid to be outspoken about his dreams for equality in this great nation. And no one knows visions of equality better than director Oliver Stone, as his film JFK certainly attested. (Sarcasm, folks!) Those who were hoping for Stone’s take on King’s life, with Jamie Foxx potentially starring, will be disappointed to know that the project is now dead in the water, as the film’s producers have turned down his script rewrite.

Announced by Stone himself via his Twitter page, the news is far from surprising, though one has to wonder if it was DreamWorks or Warner Bros. that passed on the project, or if everyone involved wanted to back off. Stone’s brand of storytelling, which has given audiences versions of Jim Morrison and Alexander the Great, often polarizes crowds and I never really thought his MLK film would ever see the light of day. But it is quite interesting that the plain Jane reason was Stone’s script being rejected for its subject matter. Did they really think Stone was going to pump out a story that glorified the man without also delving into the uglier details of his personal life? Here are a few more tweets he sent out further detailing things.

I remember thinking that Stone’s take on 9/11 with World Trade Center would create all kinds of controversy, but it ended up just being a boring movie. I guess he wasn’t taking that route with this script, though. The original script was written by Kario Salem (Chasing Mavericks), who almost certainly had a more generic take on things.

Warner and DreamWorks have had the rights to King’s life story and the "I Have a Dream" speech since 2009, so they’ll definitely be filling Stone’s shoes before too long, hopefully by someone who knows how to pepper controversy into the drama instead of peppering drama into a controversy. Stone made no mention of Foxx’s involvement in the project, so Warner and DreamWorks may very well keep the Oscar-winning actor involved while they search for another filmmaker.

Of course, we may first get to experience another take on King’s life with the project Memphis from Captain Phillips director Paul Greengrass, with Forrest Whitaker attached in the lead role. Greengrass is a filmmaker who often delivers tension without ostracizing anyone.

How do you guys feel about this? Would Stone have delivered the definitive MLK biopic or just another controversy?

Director Oliver Stone is no stranger to the biopic genre, having previously made Born On The Fourth of July, The Doors, Nixon, and more, and now he's getting ready to bring yet another important 20th century figure to the silver screen. According to sources over at The Wrap, the Oscar winning filmmaker is now in negotiations with DreamWorks and Warner Bros. to direct a new film about Civil Rights champion Martin Luther King Jr. What's more, Jamie Foxx is already in talks to play the lead role.

This new project is being based on a script by Kario Salem (Chasing Mavericks), and the King family has "agreed to lend their support to the movie," but it's worth noting that this isn't the only MLK biopic in town. Director Paul Greengrass, who will be back in theaters this weekend with the new film Captain Phillips, has been working on a competing project titled Memphis since 2011, and back in May of this year there was talk of Forrest Whitaker playing King. Greengrass is planning to make the film in his personal docu-drama style and will largely focus on King's assassination in 1968, but it's been said that the story would show a darker side to the Nobel Peace Prize winner that we don't normally get to hear about. As a result, the project has been surrounded by some controversy because the King family won't support it. That certainly gives Dreamworks and WB a leg up, though they also have director Ava DuVernay's Selma (Lee Daniels' former project) to contend with. That movie The Butler's David Oyelowo set to star.

While this project may seem new, however, it has its own long history as well. The Wrap notes that Dreamworks got the rights to King's life story as well as the famous "I Have A Dream" speech in 2009, and then in 2011 they teamed with Warner Bros., which had already been working with Salem developing a script. The screenwriter reportedly spent three years doing research and interviews with craft the screenplay and make it as accurate as possible. Where things go from here, though, remain unclear. The site doesn't say when the studios are looking to start production, but if they are roping in a director and a star we can bet that they want to get the movie made fast.

As for the casting, Stone does have some experience working with Foxx, as the two previously collaborated on the 1999 football drama Any Given Sunday, in which the Academy Award winning actor played a third string quarterback named "Steamin" Willie Beamen who gets his moment to shine in the spotlight:

The trailer for Oliver Stone's Savages shows the potential for a film that's gritty, dark and violent. In this new featurette, John Travolta even uses the words, "the Pulp Fiction of now" when discussing the movie. Whether or not the movie lives up to that standard remains to be seen.

Based on Don Winslow's crime novel, Savages stars Aaron Johnson and Taylor Kitsch as two close friends who run a pot growing/selling business in California and also happen to share a girlfriend (Blake Lively). Things take a turn for the dangerous and violent when a Mexican Baja Cartel shows up and tries to go into business with them.

The recently released featurette (courtesy of iTunes) begins similarly to the trailer we saw back in April, with Blake Lively's voice making it clear that the fact that she's telling this story doesn't mean she lives through it. And after that, the cast walks us through the basics of the movie while we're given a look at scenes from the film…

"This will hit you across the face," Kitsch says, as we're shown glimpses of gun-shooting and explosions. "And then when you're down crying, we're gonna come over and kick you when you're not looking. That's what this movie's gonna bring."

It seems fitting that Del Toro would bring up Natural Born Killers, given the implied focus on romance and violence in Savages. It does set the standard high, but it seems like a better connection to make than Travolta's mention of Pulp Fiction, given the director. Then again, both NBK and Pulp Fiction released in 1994, so maybe there's something to that. We'll have to see how Savages looks.

In addition to Lively, Kitsch and Johnson, Savages stars John Travolta, Benicio Del Toro and Salma Hayek. It arrives in theaters July 6. More information, photos and video can be found in our Blend Film Database.

Though Savages is a dark drama about drug dealers and is directed by Oliver Stone, it includes among its cast Battleship star Taylor Kitsch and Gossip Girl star Blake Lively, which means it's got enough youth appeal for the trailer to premiere at MTV. You can see that very trailer below, in which we see Kitsch, Lively and Aaron Johnson living in idyllic drug-dealing paradise, until Benicio del Toro and Salma Hayek show up and make everything go very, very wrong. See how wrong when you watch the trailer and we'll talk after.

Without Oliver Stone attached I might assume this was some forgettable exploitation movie about drugs and guns and hot women and violence beyond your imagination. But this is Stone, the guy who made Natural Born Killers and Platoon-- he understands violence and darkness in ways that have defined generations in the past, and after recent detours into disasters (Alexander) and odd retreads of the past (Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps), we might be seeing a return to form for the director, and a young cast who look eager to take on this next challenge.

Johnson, Kitsch and Lively all have something to prove-- Johnson looked like a breakout star after Kick-Ass but hasn't really followed through on it, Kitsch is coming off his wooden performance in John Carter, and Lively was last seen slightly adrift in the mess of Green Lantern. All three look like they'll have plenty to work with, especially bouncing off veterans like Hayek, del Toro and John Travolta. Savages comes to theaters July 6, as pretty canny counterprogramming to the usual big summer blockbusters. After seeing this trailer, do you think you'll check it out?

When Oliver Stone first started putting together his upcoming drug-trafficking drama Savages, attempting to bring in Jennifer Lawrence to play one of the major roles, he was already eyeing Benicio del Toro to play the enforcer for a Mexican drug cartel who threatens some small-time pot dealers and their shared girlfriend (Lawrence). Now del Toro is getting ready to make it official; according to Deadline he's in talks for the film, which will star Aaron Johnson and Taylor Kitsch as the Laguna Beach-based drug dealers but no longer has Lawrence thanks to The Hunger Games.

With the men on board Stone is now looking to set up the female roles, "casting a wide net" for the girlfriend role Lawrence was set to play, and also considering Salma Hayek for a role as the "Mexican drug cartel matriarch," though nothing is set in stone yet. Hayek's character is actually the one starting all the trouble in the film, sending del Toro to force the drug-dealing to work for her; when they refuse, he kidnaps the girlfriend, O, and demands a fortune in ransom. The plot sounds soapy and potential ridiculous, but the caliber of actors Stone is bringing on board gives it a little added potential. Universal is looking into acquiring the film, which presumably starts shooting soon given Lawrence's Hunger Games conflict.

Leonardo DiCaprio is one of those actors constantly signed on to half a dozen projects, and it's always a shot in the dark as to which will actually get moving any time soon. But on the same day that a j. Edgar Hoover biopic popped up out of nowhere to grab his attention, a project that DiCaprio has been attached to for a while has had life breathed into it as well.

THR is now reporting that Oliver Stone may be interested in directing DiCaprio in Travis McGee, an adaptation of the first of a series of detective novels by John D. MacDonald, about a Florida-based detective.

Of course, Stone coming on board means absolutely nothing for when the project will happen, and given the way Clint Eastwood likes to put his project together, DiCaprio will likely soon be tied up with Hoover. But it's an interesting development for a director who has most recently been revisiting his own past with Wall Street 2, and a collaboration I wouldn't mind seeing.

So maybe they'd planned to use a Carey Mulligan Oscar win to bump the box office of Wall Street 2: Money Never Sleeps, and when that didn't pan out they scrapped it? Whatever the cause, THR is reporting that Fox has pushed Oliver Stone's sequel to his 1987 film from an April 23 release date to September 24.

Given that the marketing campaign for the film has been virtually nonexistent, aside from a glossy Vanity Fair photo shoot, we probably should have seen this coming. The April 23 date was actually pretty clear for a movie like Wall Street, with just the rom-com The Back-Up Plan and the action comics adaptation The Losers up against it, but it and all its competition would have been annihilated just a week later by Iron Man 2. September, on the other hand, is traditionally more open, both for potential blockbusters and Oscar hopefuls. Are they positioning Michael Douglas for yet another Oscar run as Gordon Gekko? Or is this a September dump-off? Given how little they've shown us of the film so far, it's impossible to tell.

10 days ago the Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps marketing attack kicked off with a set of fancy promo pics shot by renowned photographer Annie Leibowitz. Today the set pictures continue to roll out, but instead of Vanity Fair, this time the images come from USA Today.

In the slideshow, you get to see several shots of director Oliver Stone at work with actors both young and old as he puts together his first sequel ever. Each image is accompanied by a brief set-up of the scenes and characters involved, giving us the first really deep look at just who everyone is and how they’re connected. The nine photos do a great job at raising excitement for the film, for me at least.

Stone’s next project, a documentary series for Showtime called Secret History of America, promises to be even more intriguing and controversial than his film work. No start date has been announced for that yet, but you can catch Wall Street 2 April 23rd.

What is there to be excited about in Oliver Stone's Wall Street 2: Money Never Sleeps? Well, it might be interesting to see Shia LaBeouf put on a suit for once, and rising star Carey Mulligan is part of the ensemble somewhere, putting on an American accent. But probably what everyone will bother with this movie for is the return of Gordon Gekko, the role that earned Michael Douglas an Oscar and defined an entire generation of corporate greed.

Talking to Empire Online, Douglas admitted that we probably won't see a softer side of Gekko this time, but that it's an interesting time to revisit Wall Street in general. "The picture predominantly focuses on these last couple of years on Wall Street, which nobody anticipated. We shot the first one in 1986 and it was a wild, wild colourful time. And here we have both a train crash and a larger-than-life period leading up to that train crash. It’s an exciting time to make a picture about Wall Street."

Now that greed has been proven not to be not so good, Oliver Stone is revisiting his classic capitalism movie Wall Street, with a sequel.

Variety says he’s signed on to helm Wall Street 2 for 20th Century Fox, a sequel to Stone’s original 1987, Michael Douglas starring movie. Douglas, is already on board to join the sequel and reprise the role of Gordon Gekko. Shia LaBeouf is also currently in negotiations to join the cast alongside him. No word on who he’ll play, but it’d be easy to picture him as son of Gekko.

The movie, as you’d expect with a Stone flick, was borne out of the recent economic troubles. Obviously it’s an idea that’s now worth revisiting. The sequel will involve the recent economic meltdown, created by the greed and corruption of people like our old friend Mr. Gekko.