It’s really easy to be cynical about horror movie posters. Most of them are garish, Photoshop nightmares unworthy of a second look. But we really owe it to ourselves to bask in the sublime surrealism of the one-sheet for The Possession . A poster like this one, for a low-budget horror film with a decent pedigree (Sam Raimi is among the producers) that will play as late-summer counterprogramming in multiplexes around the country, comes around, oh, never. I’ll grant you that it is of questionable construction. It’s flat and nearly monochromatic, the Photoshop is sloppy in spots (especially where the wrist meets the mouth), and it feels like a detail from the poster for another Raimi film, Drag Me to Hell : Still, there’s beauty in the simplicity. Take away the title, taglines, and credit block and you instantly know this is a person-possessed movie. No weird upside-down people , no impossible-for-even-the-most-elastic-yogi posing , no one stuck to the ceiling — just a person being mauled from the inside out by a demon clawing its way out of that person’s maw. Any other image meant to illustrate “possessed” looks like unicorns and rainbows in comparison. And why not? Reality is always stranger — and scarier — than fiction, and, my God, this really happened! Somewhere, out in the world, someone is telling the story about that time a girl they knew vomited up a gnarled ghoul hand that then ripped her face off. That’s the takeaway, anyhow, when “Based on a True Story” is placed above the poster’s horrific, inspired image. It’s an audacious juxtaposition. For nearly a decade, horror movies brandishing their ripped-from-reality bonafides have hewed to relatively realistic depictions of their content. The Exorcism of Emily Rose , for example, is atmospheric and unsettling in its depiction of a girl lost in foggy desolation. Similarly, the remake of The Amityville Horror exists in a scuzzy, off-balance suburbia, but it’s one that feels relatively in-step with our world. Even the ridiculous, porny poster for The Devil Inside feels grounded in some perversion of reality. Not so for The Possession . It’s a true story spewed forth from the interior worlds of Lovecraft and Dalí. Our first instinct is to laugh at the absurdity of selling a movie using this image as “based on a true story.” But disbelief quickly gives way to something like awe. On one hand it’s a complete inversion of how to market a real-person-possessed movie. Instead of people contorted by unseen supernatural forces — that is, something we can go in believing actually happened — we’re getting a person brutally face-hugged by a tangible hellspawn, a practical and realistic impossibility that subverts the scare power of these sorts of movies. It’s not frightening, after all, if we know it can’t really happen. (Shock cuts only go so far.) On the other hand, it’s a deft commentary on these kinds of films. We all know they’re ridiculous. But you’d never know it to look at their posters. From the images to the copy, they’re humorless voids of self-righteousness, like an ad for a sanctimonious documentary or a foreign art-house film. Except these are ads for movies about a kid puking, what, smoke? A scarf? Oil? Liquid gold? Or being suspended upside down, against one’s control . And on and on. The Possession one-sheet, in the grand Raimi tradition, is self-aware and calls attention to how ridiculous it all is while simultaneously giving us a good, solid modern horror movie image. I’d be surprised if the image on this poster is ever brought to life in The Possession (but here’s hoping!), and time will tell how grossly it misrepresents the tone and content of the film. But all that seems beside the point when you have a poster of such sly wit and artistry. PREVIOUSLY IN ONE-SHEET WONDER The Simple, Fan-Driven Pleasures of Moonrise Kingdom ‘s First Poster Dante A. Ciampaglia is a writer, editor and photographer in New York. You can find him on Twitter , Tumblr , and, occasionally, his blog .
Simons Cowell and Fuller have been in the legal trenches for years over ‘Idol’ and ‘Factor.’ By Gil Kaufman Simon Fuller of “American Idol” and Simon Cowell of “X Factor” Photo: Slaven Vlasic and Dimitrios Kambouris/ Getty Image In one of life’s bizarre coincidences, the two men most instantly associated with the global phenomenon that is “American Idol” are both named Simon. Unfortunately, that’s where their similarities end, as, once again, “Idol” creator Simon Fuller and breakout star Simon Cowell find themselves locked into a legal battle for control, credit and what is likely a massive pile of cash. “It’s this horrible fate for both of them that they’re both incredibly ambitious people who very much like to and need to be the powers of their world, but their fate has been inextricably bound since they rose together on the strength of what was Simon Fuller’s creation, ‘American Idol,’ ” Richard Rushfield, author of “American Idol: The Untold Story,” told MTV News. And though Fuller was the brains behind launching “Idol” in England in 2001 (where it was called “Pop Idol”), the show quickly rose to immense popularity, thanks to the breakout stardom of then-little-known music executive Simon Cowell. “This fight has gone through several permutations, but because both have had a hand in the creation of [‘Idol’], they have been locked in this combat over it.” That latest twist comes courtesy of a recent lawsuit Fuller filed in Los Angeles Superior Court in which he claimed that he had negotiated an executive-producer fee and producer credit on “X Factor” as part of a settlement in the 2004 copyright-infringement suit against Cowell when “X Factor” launched in the U.K. Eager to have his own talent show, Cowell launched “X Factor” in the U.K. through his own production company, Syco, putting a twist on the singing-competition genre by adding a rotating cast of celebrity mentors. Cowell saw it as an eventual successor to “Pop Idol,” which went on indefinite hiatus after its second season because of Cowell’s eagerness to launch “Factor.” Fuller filed suit against Cowell, Syco and the producer of both shows, FremantleMedia, and a lengthy trial was avoided after the two sides came to an out-of-court settlement in 2005 that granted Fuller a “minority interest” in the show and kept Cowell on “American Idol” for five more years, as well as giving him a bigger stake in “Idol.” The deal also required Cowell to not launch “Factor” in the U.S. until 2011, at which point Fuller agreed to pull “Pop Idol” off the air in England. According to The Hollywood Reporter, Fuller is now claiming that Fox and producer Fremantle North America — which produces both “Idol” and “Factor” — are refusing to honor that deal as they plan to unleash the heavily hyped “Factor” on American audiences in September. “Fox and Fremantle made hundreds of millions of dollars thanks to the creative efforts of Fuller,” the suit claims. “Now, when it is time to finally perform on these unequivocal promises, Fox and Fremantle refuse to provide Fuller his executive producer credit for Defendants’ new television show, ‘The X Factor,’ and refuse to pay Fuller an executive producer fee ‘commensurate with his duties and stature in the entertainment industry.’ Defendants refusal to honor their promises made to Fuller is particularly malicious given that but for Fuller’s agreement, the ‘X Factor’ show would not be able to broadcast in the United States at all.” The timing of the suit is curious, according to Shirley Halperin, music editor at The Reporter and founder of its Idol Worship blog . “I think that promo Cowell made where he was making fun of ‘Idol’ really stung and it propelled this action,” she speculated. “It was obnoxious and it made Fox compulsory, since it had to approve the ad. The lawsuit came seven days after that.” She also noted that the suit does not name Cowell as a defendant, but does take aim at Fox and Fremantle. “They came up together and have had this symbiotic relationship for a long time, but over the years, their interests have diverged,” she said, with Fuller taking on more management and TV production duties, while Cowell has mostly stayed the course as a TV presenter with the occasional foray into TV producer. “That’s divided them over time.” But, curiously, Halperin said when she was compiling her book on the show, “American Idol: Celebrating 10 Years,” she looked at the photo archive of every image taken of the two over the years, and even as recently as 2009, the pair looked “incredibly” friendly, even chummy, in the photos. “The relationship is a lot more complex than we know, and it’s easy to say it’s a love/hate thing, but I think there’s a deep friendship and mutual respect, but at the same time they are very competitive and have become adversaries at times.” Rushfield said the battle comes down to “two tremendous personalities” who are used to controlling things at a very high level. ” ‘Idol’ is probably the most valuable entertainment franchise in the world now that ‘Harry Potter’ is gone,” he said. “The stakes are in the billions of dollars … and [based on] a relationship that came together very quickly and that they’re locked into. If they could do it over, I’m sure they would all give themselves a bigger piece.” Fox and Fremantle responded to the suit with a comment to The Reporter, in which they said, “Mr. Fuller has not been hired, nor performed any duties, on the U.S. version of ‘The X Factor.’ His suit seeks payment and credit as an executive producer despite his neither having been approved by the required parties, nor hired, as such. We believe this lawsuit is without merit, and we expect to prevail.” Fuller’s attorneys threw water on that claim, saying Fox was “contractually obligated” to approve Fuller as an executive producer on the show and that it has breached that obligation. “They both want the honor and the credit,” Halperin said. “Fuller has always had the credit and no one is taking that away, but Cowell wants more than just to be the guy that judges. He wants people to look at him as a real force.” Get your “Idol” fix on MTV News’ “American Idol” page , where you’ll find all the latest news, interviews and opinions.
From Peter Parker’s ‘daddy issues’ to his new leading lady, Spidey clip hints at what’s to come in 2012. By Josh Wigler Andrew Garfield in “The Amazing Spider-Man” Photo: Columbia Pictures This weekend’s “Captain America: The First Avenger” continues the charge of superhero supremacy at the box office this summer, and the grand tradition of Marvel heroes is sure to continue a year from now when “The Amazing Spider-Man” swings into action. The first “Spider-Man” trailer hit the Web earlier this week (through both official and leaked channels), gifting comic book fans with the great power and great responsibility of delivering their snap judgments on Sony’s developing reboot — well ahead of its summer 2012 release. Of course, we’re not immune to having our own reactions here at MTV News. To that end, we took a closer look at the new Spidey trailer and found quite a bit to pick apart. Even The Best Web-Heads Have Daddy Issues Most “Spider-Man” fans are familiar with Peter’s relationship with Uncle Ben and Aunt May Parker, but the newest film’s first trailer puts a heavy emphasis on our hero’s birth parents. Although this territory has been covered before in the comics, it’s a story far less frequently told than Peter’s struggles with Uncle Ben’s death. But director Marc Webb has said before that “Amazing Spider-Man” will deal heavily with Peter’s daddy issues, and judging by the trailer, he wasn’t kidding. The Dark Spider If there’s one thing to take away from the “Spider-Man” trailer, it’s that this isn’t Sam Raimi and Tobey Maguire’s web-slinger. In the hands of Webb and leading man Andrew Garfield, we’re seeing a Spider-Man story that takes itself much more seriously than the whimsical nature of the Raimi and Maguire era. Whether you approve of the tonal change will vary based on personal taste, but there’s certainly no arguing that this “Spider-Man” movie feels different than the last three, if nothing else. When Andrew Met Emma Another big change from the “Spider-Man” films of yesteryear is the removal of longtime love interest Mary-Jane Watson in favor of Gwen Stacy, played here by Emma Stone. Much of the trailer’s focus is on the budding relationship between Andrew and Emma’s characters, and already it feels as though they share more common ground with each other than Peter and MJ enjoyed in the first film’s opening chapters. Back To Start One thing that isn’t different from the previous Spider-flicks is that “Amazing” appears to be an origin story, just like the first Raimi-directed picture. It’s a curious choice: The original “Spider-Man” movie swung into theaters in 2002, and only 10 years later we’re seeing yet another re-telling of how Peter Parker got his radioactive spider-powers. There’s already debate about whether another origin story was worth the narrative cost, but we’ll reserve some judgment until we see the finished product — or, at least, another trailer. First-Person Heroics Speaking of other trailers, here’s hoping that the second “Spider-Man” spot puts a heavier emphasis on action than this first one. We don’t see Garfield in action albeit for a few shots two thirds of the way into the trailer, and even then, he’s without mask or costume. The final portion of the trailer, clocking in at almost a minute, focuses entirely on Spidey swinging from rooftop to rooftop … but all from the character’s own perspective. Again, it’s a curious choice to show the web-slinging action from Spidey’s point of view rather than allowing the viewer to gaze upon the hero in all of his glory. It’s bound to be a breathtaking sequence when the full movie hits theaters; as the capper for a first trailer, however, the “Spidey-cam” will likely turn some fans off. What do you think of the first “Amazing Spider-Man” trailer? Tell us in the comments! Check out everything we’ve got on “The Amazing Spider-Man.” For breaking news and previews of the latest comic book movies — updated around the clock — visit SplashPage.MTV.com .
Writer-director Shane Black is reportedly in negotiations to direct Iron Man 3 , taking over from series helmer Jon Favreau for the threequel, which is already slated for release on May 3, 2013. But hey, no pressure! Two years should be plenty of time for the guy who wrote Lethal Weapon in six weeks. Besides, Black’s got plenty of qualifications that should inspire fanboy confidence. Such as:
Everyone’s favorite Oscar-snubbee Mila Kunis is reportedly set to join Sam Raimi’s Oz, the Great and Powerful , the lonnnnng-gestating Wizard of Oz prequel with James Franco attached as the title character. Kunis would play Evanorah, the young witch-in-training who develops into the Wicked Witch of the East. Of course. Shooting is rumored to begin in July, but I think we all know Raimi’s protracted dawdling really portends an awesome Oz / Sex and the City 3 Memorial Day showdown in 2016. Or something. [ Vulture ]
Everyone’s favorite Oscar-snubbee Mila Kunis is reportedly set to join Sam Raimi’s Oz, the Great and Powerful , the lonnnnng-gestating Wizard of Oz prequel with James Franco attached as the title character. Kunis would play Evanorah, the young witch-in-training who develops into the Wicked Witch of the East. Of course. Shooting is rumored to begin in July, but I think we all know Raimi’s protracted dawdling really portends an awesome Oz / Sex and the City 3 Memorial Day showdown in 2016. Or something. [ Vulture ]
On cable this week, the past isn’t forgotten, it isn’t even past — if any of us need to be reminded what Kathryn Bigelow or Sam Raimi or Woody Allen movies used to be like…
Apparently, James Cameron wrote a treatment and put together storyboards for a Spider-Man movie back in 1992. With Sam Raimi's Spider-Man 4 canceled will Cameron's version have a chance at seeing the light of day? See the whole scriptment here . View