Sure, 2005’s Pride & Prejudice has been sitting right there at home to watch with my Netflix subscription (until it leaves at the end of the month anyway), but I had a feeling going out of my way to see the movie’s 20th anniversary re-release in theaters would be a unique experience I wouldn’t forget, and I was absolutely right. But, I wasn’t expecting Donald Sutherland’s performance as Mr. Bennet to be the thing about it that I walked away wanting to talk about the most.

I can’t believe Joe Wright’s Pride and Prejudice is two decades old because the movie doesn’t feel like it has aged a day, except for seeing its incredible cast in their younger years, of course. My recent in-theater viewing experience cemented for me how timeless and exquisite it is, making it absolutely one of the great movies based on classic literature in my book. While I went into it ready to be dazzled by Elizabeth Bennet and Mr. Darcy’s romance (including that iconic hand flex), the way the filmmakers intended, instead, I want to take some time to appreciate the late Donald Sutherland’s part in the movie.

Donald Sutherland’s Performance As Mr. Bennet Really Floors Me

While I remembered Donald Sutherland being in the movie, this was the first time I had seen the movie since the actor’s passing in the summer of 2024 at the age of 88, so maybe my attention was more keenly focused on Mr. Bennet, but honestly I don’t think that would have made a difference, because wow, is he the underrated highlight of this movie.

Mr. Bennet is Elizabeth’s father, and Sutherland takes a supporting role in most of the story, as most of the focus goes to Knightley’s performance as the young, headstrong woman navigating being courted by numerous men alongside her four sisters while living in 18th-century England. While his role is small, Sutherland makes a huge impression because he’s the character who ended up getting me to tear up by the movie’s conclusion.

I Love His Reaction When Elizabeth Rejects Mr. Collins

Remember the scene where Elizabeth is proposed to by an eccentric clergyman named Mr. Collins (played by Tom Hollander)? Well, earlier in the movie, before that happens, when Mr. Collins first comes to town, Elizabeth and her father exchange understanding looks about their distaste for the clergyman. I felt that moment wonderfully illustrates how the father/daughter are emotionally connected, and it rewards the audience later when he asks for her hand.

She refuses him, even though she was passing on a comfortable living for herself and her family, and, as an audience, we understand that he’s on her side. While her mother gets instantly enraged by Elizabeth’s actions, her father shows undying support for her by revealing he’ll never talk to her again if she goes back on her decision and listens to his wife/her mother.

How Mr. Bennet handles the Mr. Collins' situation made me feel like I was witnessing a real relationship because you can see how his fathering supports Elizabeth’s strong-willed personality she has in turn and tendency to go with what she feels is right. Certainly, many women of her time would just blindly agree with any proposal out of fear, but what makes Elizabeth special is her inability to go along with something just to fit in.

Mr. Bennet truly cares for her happiness more than anything, and isn’t having any of the societal politics her mother might care about. It kind of reminds me of the dynamic I share with my own dad on many occasions when my mom has gotten caught up in the details and emotions instead. Sometimes dads just have your back because they simply get you like no one else does!

The Scene That Made Me Cry Was When He Realizes Elizabeth Has Found Her Husband

This brings me to the scene that really got me during my Pride and Prejudice rewatch. It’s the moment right after Mr. Darcy meets with him to ask for Elizabeth’s hand in marriage, and he meets with his daughter. Even though her new suitor is unbelievably rich as is, he’s confused because he didn’t suspect this marriage after she showed clear distaste for Mr. Darcy. Elizabeth then explains how she misjudged Mr. Darcy, and it took her some time to see his true colors.

It’s suggested then that she goes on to explain to him how Mr. Darcy went out of his way to make things right between Jane and Mr. Bingley after originally steering him away from her sister, along with finding her youngest sister, Lydia, who ran away with Wickham, and secretly paid for their wedding. The scene ends with Mr. Bennet in tears because he realizes his daughter has found a good man and is truly in love. It leads him to say this:

And that’s the moment I couldn’t help but tear up. I hadn’t focused on it before in prior viewings, but Pride & Prejudice is as much about a family’s connection to marriage as it is about falling in love itself, and that's so simple, but so special to me. In a single scene, Donald Sutherland is able to communicate a lifetime of deep love for his daughter, whom he knows he’ll have to part with and give away to a man. The realization on his face that his daughter is going to be OK and happy as he continues to get older is the sweetest scene in the whole movie, in my opinion.

Pride & Prejudice’s Romance Is Actually Better Because It Includes The Father’s Perspective With Such Vulnerability

So many love stories deal with the dynamic of a young woman falling in love despite their parents’ wishes or consent, but I actually found this story to be more romantic because she has these moments with her father. Sure, there’s nothing wrong with those stories, especially when the female character is listening to her own heart rather than going for what’s expected of her, but there’s something really wonderful about this story having the father being on the side of the daughter and checking in with her before getting incredibly moved by the result of her finding her person. At the end of the day, most of us look up to our parents and want them to be happy, and I love that the movie spent time on Elizabeth getting that with her father rather than her sisters or anyone else.

I promise you, without those scenes, Pride & Prejudice just wouldn’t work as well as it does. It’s definitely time to count this among the best Donald Sutherland movies. Anyway, you can still catch the movie in select theaters and stream it at home. I wonder if the Pride & Prejudice series, which is among upcoming book adaptations, will spend time on this plotline, too, or go in another direction.

Mr. Darcy is the king of pining. The man got a degree in yearn-alism, he’s an expert at longing looks, and his love for Elizabeth Bennet is to die for. That’s made abundantly clear throughout the entirety of one of the 2000s' best movies, Pride & Prejudice, thanks to Matthew Macfadyen’s brilliant performance. However, one moment everyone still talks about is that hand flex – you know which one I’m talking about. Now, right as the movie turns 20, the director is sharing the story behind that iconic moment.

In this scene, Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth are parting ways, and as she starts to step into the carriage, he puts his hand out to help her up. Sparks fly, and as Macfadyen’s character walks away, he flexes his hand. According to Joe Wright, the director of the Jane Austen adaptation, that final piece wasn’t in the script, but it was important to the story, as he told People:

Honestly, I feel like this scene is pivotal in turning these enemies into lovers, and it helps paint an intricate love story that makes Pride & Prejudice one of the best romantic movies. So, it’s wild that this almost didn’t happen. However, thank goodness Matthew Macfadyen had the idea, because it became one of the film’s most iconic scenes.

Wright went on to explain that this moment shows how Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy have an attraction that their minds don’t understand quite yet. The way Macfadyen's hand flexes shows – subtly – that he was impacted by touching Elizabeth’s hand, and after that, we see both of them fall head over heels for each other.

Speaking more about the meaning of this scene, the director of one of Keira Knightley’s best films said:

Ah! I’m swooning all over again. Every time I watch Pride & Prejudice, I fall deeply in love with the way Mr. Darcy specifically falls for Elizabeth, and this moment is one of the reasons why.

However, at the time, Wright wasn’t so sure. He recalled what it was like filming this carriage scene back in the early 2000s, and explained why he initially thought it didn’t convey what he wanted it to:

They didn’t just get the shot, they created a pop culture moment. It’s been 20 years since this film came out, and people still talk about the Mr. Darcy hand flex all the time.

Now, they’ll get to see it on the big screen too, as Pride & Prejudice is returning to theaters between April 20 and 23. If you can’t witness it back on the big screen, you can swoon over Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy by streaming the 2005 classic with a Netflix subscription.

Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice remains a timeless enemies to lovers story we’ll likely go back to again and again for two hundred more years. And the story of Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy was beautifully immortalized on film back in 2005 when Joe Wright helmed an adaptation starring Keira Knightley and Matthew Macfadyen as the unexpected couple. It’s a movie that went viral this past year thanks to TikTok. Just the reach the late Austen expected I’m sure. 

Likely fanned by the flames of Bridgerton’s success as of late, people have been revisiting Pride and Prejudice and talking about one specific scene where Mr. Darcy helps Elizabeth into a carriage and then is seen flexing his hand as he walks away. Check out the much circulated TikTok: 

Following the video, a whole side of TikTok was talking about Mr. Darcy’s hand flex left and right – so much the topic itself on the platform has nearly 10 million views. One user even flexed her decision to get the moment as a tattoo after the moment became famous again: 

One fan of the moment also took to the social media platform to parody the moment using a Celine Dion song. Hey, why not? Check it out:

It’s safe to say TikTokers are bewitched body and soul by the moment in 2005’s Pride and Prejudice. Here’s one more:

The film’s director was recently asked by Insider about the big Pride and Prejudice resurgence. Here was his response: 

Apparently Wright had no idea his movie had reached viral status on the social media app. The filmmaker is currently promoting his latest film Cyrano, which is another movie version of a classic story. Wright was also on CinemaBlend’s podcast ReelBlend to discuss the film. Last month, Matthew Macfadyen was also educated on the viral status of the hand flex. He shared how the scene was filmed on NPR”s Fresh Air podcast: 

I love this Pride and Prejudice revival. It 100 percent deserves renewed attention. The movie is still among Keira Knightley’s best movies and offers up the kind of period fantasy Bridgerton will likely continue with its upcoming Season 2. You can rewatch the romance with an HBO Max subscription. 

Cyrano starring Peter Dinklage is finally hitting theaters! We sat down with director Joe Wright last fall to discuss the making of the movie, working with actors, our love Atonement, and that iconic one-er at Dunkirk and more. 

Also this week, we dive into the controversy surrounding the Oscars choosing to prerecord and cut down 8 categories for this year's Academy Awards ceremony rather than present them live. The Critics’ Choice Super Awards might be the populist film problem with most awards shows, and we discuss the recent nominations. 

Timestamps (approx. only)

00:00:00 - Intro
00:03:47 - Interview with Joe Wright
00:32:06 - Academy Awards Controversy
00:53:35 - Critics Choice Super Awards
01:03:25 - Cast List for Christopher Nolan’s Oppenheimer
01:04:45 - This Week In Movies
01:05:00 - Studio 666 Review
01:13:00 - Cyrano Review
01:20:15 - John Singleton Blend

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.

There is not a single number on the soundtrack of Joe Wright’s Cyrano that isn’t stellar, but the war-set “Wherever I Fall” is something special. Sung by a trio of unnamed soldiers – played by Glen Hansard, Sam Amidon, and Scott Folan – the song’s verses are structured as letters written to loved ones before what has been determined to be a suicidal charge on the battlefield, and it’s both beautiful and emotionally devastating. Despite the fact that it doesn’t feature any of the movie’s principal stars, it’s the best scene in the film… which is why it was pretty shocking to learn that it was almost cut from the production schedule.

Fortunately, Joe Wright recognized the impact of “Wherever I Fall” and refused to let it be excised from his movie – employing his skills as a director to ensure that the sequence became essential to the production.

I learned this amazing bit of trivia last week when I had the pleasure of interviewing the filmmaker and Cyrano star Kelvin Harrison Jr. during the movie’s virtual press day. Having been floored by the song in the movie, I asked both men separately what it was like to shoot it, and they explained how it had nearly not made it to the editing room, let alone the proverbial editing room floor. Wright explained,

Some say that any creative must kill their darlings, but “Wherever I Fall” was one that Joe Wright wouldn’t let be murdered. The song was originally written as a part of the stage musical on which the new film is based (hence why no Oscar nomination), with music by Bryce and Aaron Dessner, and lyrics by Matt Beringer and Carin Besser, and the director would not let it be skipped over in his adaptation.

So what did the filmmaker do? He made it impossible for the scene to be removed by altering his plans for shooting it. He blended together an establishing shot with the performance of the song, and the way it was constructed meant that it became essential in the editing. In Joe Wright’s words,

While the scene is a special thing to witness as part of the cinematic experience of Cyrano, you can listen to the heartbreaking song “Wherever I Fall” below:

Joe Wright’s move to save the sequence not only benefitted the film as a whole, but also impressed his collaborators. As I had spoken to him earlier in the day, Kelvin Harrison Jr. was actually the first person to tell me about the director’s “crafty little trick,” and he expressed awe at Wright’s inspiration and execution:

Continuing, the actor reflected on what it was like when the song was first performed during the Cyrano cast’s script read through, and what he remembers is emotional devastation:

Audiences everywhere will be able to experience the power of “Wherever I Fall” themselves this week, as Cyrano – starring Peter Dinklage, Haley Bennett, and Ben Mendelsohn along with Kelvin Harrison Jr. – will be arriving in theaters everywhere this Friday, February 25. Do yourself a favor and purchase a ticket, and do yourself another favor by bringing along a travel pack of tissues.

To discover all of the films that are set to be released between now and the end of December, check out our 2022 Movie Release Calendar.

Thanks to awards season, winter of any given year is typically overflowing with spectacular prestige pictures designed to delight cinephiles the world over. This year is no different, as some of the best filmmakers working today have been releasing some brilliant movies in the last couple months – and one of the great highlights among them is Joe Wright’s new musical Cyrano. Nominated for 4 BAFTAs, including Outstanding British Film, the film features a spectacular cast, an amazing soundtrack and is a wonderful story. It’s an emotional cinematic experience you really don’t want to miss.

Based on the classic play Cyrano de Bergerac, and adapted based on the 2018 stage musical of the same name, the new movie tells the tale of its titular hero, Cyrano, (played by Game of Thrones star Peter Dinklage) – who is a soldier left suffering through life as a result of bottled emotions, caused by the fact that he can’t tell the target of his affections his true feelings. He has been in love with his best friend, Roxanne (Haley Bennett), for almost as long as he has known her, but fear that she doesn’t feel the same way about him forces him to hide how much he cares for her. When he learns that Roxanne has fallen for Christian (Kelvin Harrison Jr.), a new cadet in his regiment, Cyrano agrees to help the young man woo the beautiful woman, and in doing so the protagonist finds himself expressing his real emotions to his beloved through his romantic rival.

It’s a great adventure full of terrific drama, humor, and music, and while there are a great number of reasons why you should make a special effort to see the film on the big screen, here are five specific ones that will hopefully motivate you to buy a ticket.

Peter Dinklage Delivers A Phenomenal Performance

It’s certainly an open secret that Peter Dinklage is a talented actor. From The Station Agent to Game Of Thrones, he has consistently delivered spectacular and emotional turns that have earned him tremendous respect and excellent reputation. This reputation is only further bolstered by his performance as Cyrano. The film marks his first time playing the romantic lead in a film, and as the eponymous character his performance is full of great wit and deep emotions as a man who lets his pride get in the way of his heart – preventing him from confessing his true feelings to the woman he loves. He is surrounded by a stellar supporting cast, all of whom are also brilliant, but Dinklage’s work here is next level, and some of the best work we’ve seen from him in his perpetually impressive career.

It’s An Enchanting And Inspirational Love Story

Based on a true story, the original play Cyrano de Bergerac – written by Edmond Rostand – is well over a century old at this point, but the fact that it is still as impressive and meaningful today as ever is perfect proof of how genuine and heartfelt the material is. As ever, society is riddled with judgements about class and perceptions of beauty, and the new movie is a story about how far too frequently those aesthetics can be rigorous opponents of truth and authentic emotion. While changing a few of the plot elements, but maintaining the original setting, screenwriter Erica Schmidt has sincerely and earnestly captured all of the most important themes and truisms of the original tale, and it feels just as powerful now as it must have felt in the late 19th century. It has a great deal to say about romance without ever feeling schmaltzy or overbearing, and the themes and message of the piece are genuinely inspirational. 

The Movie Has Humor To Match Its Big Heart

The film is primarily a romantic drama, as it’s the intense pangs of unrequited love that drive the plot up until its deeply emotional conclusion, but part of what makes the musical such a stirring cinematic experience is its blend of tones – specifically the regular injections of humor. The movie never loses its commitment to its period setting, which extends to the dialogue, but in this cadence the movie finds many moments to be witty and fun, which serves to only further endear an audience to the cast of characters. Peter Dinklage’s eponymous hero has a wicked tongue that has the ability to tear down any clown who shows him disrespect, but there is also a sparking comedic chemistry between him and Kelvin Harrison Jr.’s Christian that regularly inspires wide smiles. 

The Soundtrack Is Exhilarating And Emotional

Recent months have been huge for the big screen musical, as genre fans have seen some fantastic new releases hit theaters, and it’s with that in mind that this sentiment should hold a lot of water: the soundtrack for Cyrano is among the best in recent memory. Aaron and Bryce Dessner, best known as members of the band The National, composed the music for the new movie, with lead singer Matt Berninger contributing lyrics, and the songs are wonderful. The incredibly emotional "Heaven Is Wherever I Fall" is the highlight of the tracklist, sung from the perspective of soldiers penning goodbyes to loved ones as they prepare for a deadly charge on the battlefield, but every ballad featured is gorgeous and performed brilliantly by the cast. 

Joe Wright’s Direction And Seamus McGarvey’s Cinematography Are Gorgeous

Making the film all the more impressive is the fact that it’s Joe Wright’s first venture into the musical genre – the director best known for period dramas like The Darkest Hour and Pride & Prejudice. He proves himself a natural with the material. The movie reteams Wright with cinematographer Seamus McGarvey – who earned Oscar nominations for two of his previous collaborations with the director (Atonement, Anna Karenina) – and they create cinema magic with a vast collection of bold musical sequences featuring sweeping and striking camera work. It’s an adaptation that utilizes every advantage of the medium, as it’s as aesthetically stunning as it is dramatic in its storytelling.

Cyrano will be in cinemas in the UK on February 25, and for all of the reasons noted above and more, you should definitely do yourself a favour and see it on the big screen.

For the past year we’ve been waiting to see Amy Adams, Julianne Moore, Gary Oldman, and Bryan Tyree Henry team up for the claustrophobic thriller The Woman in the Window. The movie is adapted from the 2018 novel from A.J. Finn and directed by Pride and Prejudice’s Joe Wright. Now that the movie has landed on Netflix, we can finally talk about the audience consensus for the new streaming release.

Now, originally, The Woman in the Window was set to hit theaters last fall, until the Fox film was delayed (for obvious reasons). It was later removed from the release schedule and announced as a Netflix title, raising some eyebrows. On the critic front, it’s been greatly panned and for the past week, but it has been high on the streamer’s trending movies. With that in mind, let’s take a look at what the social media chatter has been surrounding The Woman in the Window on Netflix.

Overall It’s Mixed, But Some People Really Liked It

Considering all the bad reviews, a lot of people went into The Woman in the Window expecting a disaster, but that’s not what everyone saw. There’s a range of opinions on the movie that we’ll get to throughout this piece, but first we should recognize the true fans of it. Check out this short review:

The Woman in the Window has fans who have read the book before seeing the movie, and by this Twitter user’s measure it was a good adaptation of the novel, which he really dug. He wasn’t the only one, either. Another fan took to social media to not only second the ‘I don’t get the hate’ take, but send some love the way of Amy Adams and Julianne Moore (who will soon co-star in Dear Evan Hansen). So, here you go:

It’s always interesting to watch a movie that is being broken apart as much as The Woman in the Window and not feel like you 're watching the same film as those critical of it. It’s always better when you like a movie, but it can also just be odd when you feel like you didn’t watch the same thing everyone is talking about. As this person shared:

Hey, movies are subjective! That’s the beauty of them. If you liked something someone else hated, congratulations, you have different tastes then that person. Now, let’s dive deeper into the other elements of The Woman in the Window.

It Left A Lot Of People Bored And Confounded

While it’s been established that there are a lot of different opinions here about Amy Adams’ latest role, and there are those who weren’t feeling it due to the tone and structure of the movie. It sits at one hour and 40 minutes and follows an agoraphobic woman and psychologist who spies on her neighbors and reports a crime in their apartment. One viewer made some progress on the movie before taking to social media to ask people if it was even worth it to keep going:

In reply, a lot of people told her it was “a waste of time,” while others referred her to the book instead. It goes to show that the pacing just didn’t grab some people. Another Woman in the Window viewer complained about the stillness of the movie, which involves a lot of Amy Adams nearby a window. If you like people watching, this might be the movie for you, though:

Some people just couldn’t believe what they were watching. One admitted that they felt like they were hallucinating in the back half of the film, and decided to actually watch it again to see if it was real. It sounds like the movie surprised some viewers in a negative way:

How puzzling. It’s comments like this that may have more people pressing play, purely out of curiosity of what goes on in the film.

Punch The Cat Was A Fan-Favorite

Some movies find an unexpected twist in the characters who fans gravitate towards, and on social media one might be surprised to see so many people ditching praise for the all-star cast to write up posts about Amy Adam’s cat in the film, Punch. One viewer wasn’t super impressed with The Woman in the Window, but chose to give a shout out to the white kitty, because praise is given, where praise is deserved:

Another person was ready to send Punch straight to award season with its performance and cuteness:

Considering the movie revolves around Amy Adams’ character in her home as she deals with witnessing a deadly stabbing, Punch serves as an important companion to her throughout the panic. Another viewer couldn’t help but empathize with Punch’s role in the film, as Adams' Anna Fox deals with the disturbing events throughout the movie:

Long live Punch! That looked like a stressful work environment, but we can't wait to follow more of your work.

It Couldn’t Escape Rear Window Comparisons

At the beginning of The Woman in the Window, the movie references Alfred Hitchcock’s Rear Window with a scene of the movie being shown on a TV. It seems to be tipping its cap off to a movie that must have influenced it. If you’ve seen the classic Hitchcock movie, though, the set up is quite close to this Netflix movie. And, many people on social media were not here for this film borrowing from it:

Some people actually thought The Woman in the Window was supposed to be a Rear Window remake. One viewer called the movie straight up plagiarism while viewing the film, saying this:

It sounds like if you’re a big fan of the ‘60s classic, the movie may rub you the wrong way. It could be noted that the novel’s author, A.J. Finn, was subject to a controversy about aspects of his life, career, and plagiarism, following a report in The New Yorker, that he has since addressed.

Now that you’ve heard what some fans had to say, what did you think? Vote in our poll and check out what’s next for Amy Adams with her upcoming projects, including a sequel for Enchanted!

This poll is no longer available.

SPOILER WARNING: The following article contains major spoilers for Joe Wright's Darkest Hour. If you have not yet seen the film, and don't wish to know about any key details from the ending, please bookmark this page and return after your screening!

Walking away from director Joe Wright's Darkest Hour, there is one scene in particular that truly sticks with you. On the advice of King George VI (Ben Mendelsohn), Winston Churchill (Gary Oldman) makes the decision to let the voice of the people guide his decisions at a crucial moment, seeking their opinions while taking a ride on the London Underground. It's a powerful moment in the movie that showcases the remarkable strength of the British people during a perilous time in history... but the truth is that the events in real life didn't exactly happen as they are portrayed. Wright recently told me,

I am always curious about the line between factual and emotional truth that filmmakers draw when it comes to making movies based on a true story, and I had the chance to inquire about it in the case of Darkest Hour when I sat down with Joe Wright and Gary Oldman earlier this month. Interviewing the two men during the Los Angeles press day for the new movie, I asked about the accuracy of the story that is portrayed, and while discussing the idea, Wright revealed that one of the film's greatest scenes isn't actually based on specific events that happened during World War II. Instead, it is more a representation of interactions that the real Winston Churchill might have had, given the legitimately important impact that the vox populi had on his governance.

Late in Darkest Hour, Winston Churchill faces extreme challenges in his new role as Prime Minister of Great Britain, not only trying to manage the terrifying and expanding presence of Adolf Hitler in Europe, but also mounting political pressure from his rivals to enter peace talks with the Nazis. Unclear how to proceed, he decides to take a stroll down to the London Underground, and for the first time in his life hops on the Tube. He asks the individuals on the train -- all shocked by his presence -- how they feel he should handle the growing fascist threat, and he receives a uniform response: the Nazis must be defeated at all costs. It's an amazing, deeply emotional sequence, and while not entirely factual, it cuts to the heart of the times and represents a very true part of Churchill's time in office.

You can watch Joe Wright discuss the brilliant Underground scene in Darkest Hour by clicking play on the video below!

Darkest Hour, which chronicles the incredibly intense start of Winston Churchill's tenure as Prime Minister of Britain, is now in theaters in limited release. But for those of you who don't live near a major city playing the film, you'll have your own opportunity to catch it on the big screen when the feature enters wide release on December 22nd.

Gary Oldman has always been a transformative actor. Whether he was becoming history's most iconic vampire for Francis Ford Coppola's Dracula, or a sci-fi villain with a southern twang for Luc Besson's The Fifth Element, the actor has had a career-long harmonious relationship with intense prosthetics and makeup, and they have helped him create some of the most memorable characters of the last 30-plus years. Now, starring in Joe Wright's Darkest Hour, he has undertaken arguably his most impressive disappearing act thus far -- playing a legendary historical figure with whom he shares no physical traits -- but it only makes the quality of his turn more impressive. Playing Winston Churchill, Oldman puts on one of the best performances of his career, and does so in what shapes up to be one of the great dramas of the year.

Following his misfire that was his garish, over-the-top Pan, Joe Wright returns to period drama with Darkest Hour, and weaves an intensely thrilling narrative about one of the tensest periods in Great Britain's history -- set during the rise of Adolf Hitler in Germany, and the dictator's efforts to conquer Europe. Armed with not just an amazing performance from Gary Oldman but an entire ensemble of gifted actors, it's an impressively told story that not only shines a light on an immensely important time period, but also succeeds in feeling tremendously relevant.

Based on a script by Anthony McCarten, the film begins in May of 1940, when British Parliament found itself in a tumultuous position. Not only was the nation dealing with the looming threat of the Nazis, but Prime Minister Neville Chamberlin (Ronald Pickup) was essentially forced to give up his position following his failed strategy of appeasement. Though Viscount Halifax (Stephen Dillane) was the Conservative Party's preferred choice to replace Chamberlin, hope to appease the Labour and Liberal parties left no choice but to name Winston Churchill (Gary Oldman) as the successor.

A controversial figure notorious for his day drinking and boorish behavior, Churchill did not have the immediate acceptance of the people nor the reigning King George VI (Ben Mendelsohn), and immediately faced what any normal individual would only see as a series of impossible choices. Within just a few weeks, he not only had to try and organize the Dunkirk evacuation, trying to save the lives of thousands of soldiers, but also face down the threats from the Conservatives, who demanded consideration of negotiations with Adolf Hitler. As portrayed in Darkest Hour, it's a story of fortitude and bravery -- and delivers a strong and clear message about the unending importance of always standing up for what's right.

Joe Wright outfits his film with an excellent cast, featuring not only the names mentioned above, but also Kristen Scott Thomas as Churchill's sharp, devoted wife Clementine, and Lily James as his young, passionate assistant, Elizabeth Layton. Brilliant as they all are, though, Darkest Hour's more fitting name would be Gary Oldman IS Winston Churchill. With awe-inspiring makeup designed by Kazuhiro Tsuji (who the star specifically brought out of retirement for the job), the idea of "Gary Oldman" completely disappears from your mind as soon as Churchill is introduced on screen, eating an impressive English breakfast in bed while harshly barking at the newly-hired Ms. Layton. He only becomes more captivating from there, whether he is at the radio microphone reciting the real Churchill's own words to instill confidence in his people, or engaging in an intimate, desperate phone conversation with United States President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, asking for any kind of assistance that can be provided.

Had Oldman brought Winston Churchill to life with the same kind of performance simply reciting the legendary politician's speeches he would be Oscar-worthy, but Darkest Hour truly delivers more than that. At this point in history most can only imagine the terror that must have been felt by Europeans during the awful rise of the Third Reich, but Joe Wright makes it almost unbearably palpable, and successfully maintains that atmosphere for the entire film (even while instilling the film with lighter moments, such as Churchill's famed reverse "V For Victory" photograph). Even knowing how events ultimately transpired doesn't relieve the tension, as your connection with the great British leader is so strong that you're constantly perceiving events through his eyes in the moment.

Unlike Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk, which showcased a very different side of the same time period and events earlier this year, Darkest Hour isn't a war film built on explosions and spectacle, but it is stunningly gorgeous all the same. With due credit going to both the cinematography and production design, there is no shortage of elegance and magnificence in Winston Churchill's aristocratic home or King George VI's palace -- but the movie also offers up some perfect contrast with the stark, dark, greyness of the war rooms where the gravest and most important decisions are made about the future of the country. The persistent beautiful image of curling cigar smoke caught in sunbeams is the perfectly lit cherry on top.

It was only a few years ago that Gary Oldman recieved his first Academy Award nomination -- for his excellent starring turn in Tomas Alfredson's Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy -- and while he didn't take home any hardware that night, there's an incredibly high chance that this is his year. It's true "next level" stuff from an actor who has been putting out "next level" stuff for his entire career, and Darkest Hour proves the perfect vehicle.

It's been an interesting and surprising year for cinematic storytelling about the famed Dunkirk Evacuation. This past summer, Christopher Nolan took audiences directly into the chaotic World War II event in his big screen blockbuster Dunkirk, and now director Joe Wright is about to show off the political side of that same time in his new historical drama Darkest Hour. It's surprising that two very different takes about the same event would come to the big screen in the same year, but Darkest Hour star Gary Oldman recently proposed to me a cool way the two films can co-exist going into the future:

While both Darkest Hour and Dunkirk are set during the same dramatic and intense period of British history, they each tell a very different side of the story featuring completely different characters -- with the former following Winston Churchill as he makes the big picture decisions for the country, and the latter bringing audiences to the frontlines. This lack of crossover has evidently inspired Gary Oldman to think that the two films could potentially co-exist in close harmony as one edited piece -- as he recently told me during the Darkest Hour press day in Los Angeles. Director Joe Wright, who was sitting beside him at the time, was on board with the idea as well, saying,

Gary Oldman, of course, has his own personal history with Christopher Nolan -- having starred as Jim Gordon in all three movies in the director's Dark Knight trilogy -- and what he proposes is certainly a logistically possible idea. While Dunkirk is structured non-linearly, both it and Darkest Hour make their specific timetables in their respective narratives very clear to the audience, which would make the two stories surprisingly easy to cut together. It should be recognized that the finished product would be nearly four hours long, but it would be one hell of a thing to see.

You can watch Gary Oldman and Joe Wright (who also shares his very positive thoughts about the Christopher Nolan film) talk about the relationship between Darkest Hour and Dunkirk by clicking play on the video below!

Featuring a stunning, transformative performance by Gary Oldman, Darkest Hour tells the story of Winston Churchill's trials and tribulations guiding Great Britain towards war with Adolf Hitler and the Nazis, and is one of the most impressive historical dramas of the season. You'll be able to get eyes on it yourself when it arrives in theaters November 22nd, but also be on the lookout for more from my interview with Oldman and Joe Wright here on CinemaBlend!

When looking at the image above, you'd never guess that the actor portraying Winston Churchill is the legendary Gary Oldman... but you'd be wrong. The Oscar-nominated actor is playing the legendary British Prime Minister in director Joe Wright's upcoming Darkest Hour, and his transformation is absolutely incredible. In fact, the only thing more amazing than the final look is Oldman's efforts to ensure that it happened, as he actually brought an artist out of retirement to get the job done right. He recently told me,

I had the wonderful opportunity to talk with Gary Oldman this past week on the Focus Features press line at CinemaCon, where the actor was on hand to promote his part in the aforementioned historical drama. With only the chance to ask one question, I inquired about his breathtaking transformation, and Oldman totally surprised me with his story about convincing Kazuhiro Tsuji to return to the movie industry for one last job.

When you look at Kazuhiro Tsuji's history of work, you begin to understand why Gary Oldman specifically wanted to work with him on Darkest Hour. Some of his notable credits include Guillermo Del Toro's Hellboy, Tim Roth's Thade in Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes, and Jim Carrey's The Grinch in Ron Howard's How The Grinch Stole Christmas. Those movies feature some of the greatest prosthetic work of the last 20 years, and Tsuji's job with Oldman is once again absolutely stunning. He's been nominated for two Oscars already, but this film could actually get him the trophy.

Between Dracula, True Romance, The Fifth Element, and Hannibal, Gary Oldman has spent the bulk of his career as a chameleon, and Darkest Hour could prove to be his most amazing transformation yet. Based on a script by Anthony McCarten (The Theory of Everything), the new movie is set in the early days of World War II and chronicles the Winston Churchill's clashes with Adolf Hitler. The impressive cast also includes Ben Mendelsohn, Lily James, Kristin Scott Thomas, and the dearly-departed John Hurt.

You can watch Gary Oldman talk about his transformation into Winston Churchill in Darkest Hour in the video below:

Darkest Hour doesn't have a trailer yet, as the movie won't be out until the fall, but look for it in theaters on November 24th and stay tuned here on CinemaBlend for more details.

Joe Wright’s whimsical Pan didn’t do well when it hit theaters last year. Critics savaged it, for the most part. It has a 26% on Rotten Tomatoes, and our own Greg Wakeman could only give it 2 stars out of 5. Audiences were curious, as the film did $35M in the U.S. and better overseas (to the tune of $93 million… very little of which came from China). But the film’s cast has issues with the movie, and the way that it has been perceived… and they are still wrestling with the truth of a difficult situation. Just ask Rooney Mara.  

Mara is busy making the publicity rounds for Carol, a searing drama that earned the actress her second Oscar nomination. And yet, in an interview with The Telegraph, the actress still must answer questions about Pan, and the "whitewashing" claims that follow her role as Tiger Lily in the fantasy. Rooney Mara has been ahead of this discussion ever since she was cast in the part, and she continues to say that she hates the fact that the role has included her name in a racial controversy that has plagued this year’s Oscar campaign. Mara tells the Telegraph:

What Rooney Mara is referring to is the controversy stemming from casting a white actress in a role that traditionally has gone to Native Americans. In a similar interview with Deadline, where Mara addressed the topic of "whitewashing," the actress added that the population in Joe Wright’s Neverland (as well as in J.M. Barrie’s book) were meant to be global citizens, not Native Americans, and so limiting the way that they could be portrayed on screen "curbs art and creativity." However, the actress did admit:

The reviews that picked Joe Wright’s Pan apart rarely focused on the whitewashing of particular roles as the reason why the movie didn’t work. And Rooney Mara has done nothing to shy away from this conversation. As she says, there were two stages of disagreement: the first being when she was cast; and the second arriving when the movie came out. It’s clear that she and her director believe they were making an artistic decision when they cast Mara as Tiger Lily in this Peter Pan story, but I’m surprised, and I’m sure Mara is surprised as well, that she’s still answering for the role as she promotes Carol and prepares for the Academy Awards.

What do you think? Should Rooney Mara really be "embarrassed" for her portrayal of Tiger Lily putting her on the wrong side of the #OscarsSoWhite discussion? Or was she an actor trying a role because she liked the director and wanted to be part of his vision? Let us know your thoughts.  

Never underestimate the power of China. For years, the country has served as something of a safety net for Hollywood blockbusters that don’t perform as well as expected domestically. Joe Wright’s Pan has already been deemed a domestic failure, which means Warner Bros. is pretty much banking on success at the Chinese box office to save the film – but don’t be so sure about that eventuality.

According to The Hollywood Reporter, Chinese audiences have responded to Pan in a similar fashion to those in America: lukewarm at best. The Peter Pan origin / retelling earned roughly $740,000 on its opening night in china, and went on to gross a paltry $3.4 million over its opening four days. In total, the film has grossed around $30 million domestic and $63.8 million overseas against a reported $150 million budget – which only factors in production costs. For WB to even begin to see a profit from the film, Pan will have to somehow achieve $400 million at the worldwide budget, which does not exactly seem likely at this stage of the game.

One of the primary reasons for this colossal failure stems from the fact that Pan opened against a fairly deep pool of competition – something that is not usually the case in the Chinese market. Negative critical response played an obvious factor, as would be the case in any major market, but that does not explain how other American failures often make their money back in the China.

The almost universally panned – no pun intended – Terminator: Genisys performed admirably in China because it opened against almost no other major motion pictures, allowing it to thrive at their box office. By contrast, Pan faced stiff competition from France’s The Little Prince, Japan’s Detective Conan: Sunflowers of Inferno, and America’s own Ant-Man (which has been putting on an absolute clinic overseas).

Pan’s failure has brought the film industry back to the drawing board on numerous other projects. For example, the film’s current flop status has all but eliminated Joe Wright’s chanced of directing the upcoming film Emperor. The film’s lack of success also raises the concern of whether or not Hugh Jackman has any real box office appeal unless he has muttonchops and adamantium claws. Cinema Blend will keep you posted on any and all Pan news, and just remember: if you haven’t seen Pan yet, don’t worry, you’re definitely part of the majority on this one.

White washing has become a point of serious contention in Hollywood these days. Complaints regarding a lack of diversity have become increasingly common – especially in adaptations in which white actors take on the roles of traditionally ethnic characters. For the upcoming film Pan, director Joe Wright cast Caucasian actress Rooney Mara as native character Tiger Lily – and he stands by the decision.

According to New York Daily News, Wright made the decision to cast a white actress as Tiger Lily in order to prevent an even more offensive portrayal of the character from occurring:

So while the character of Tiger Lily may be white, the village she hails from is inhabited by a variety of characters from a variety of ethnicities. Wright reportedly auditioned numerous actresses for the role; only to end on Mara more for the way she inhabited the role than for the color of her skin. In doing this, Wright avoided a potentially offensive depiction of Native American culture by giving the film’s tribe an otherworldly aura to it. It’s a difficult assessment to make, because while Wright most certainly created a diverse group of natives for Pan, all of the members of the main cast are white – even the natives – and Mara herself has recently apologized for the outcry the decision has caused.

This issue may not have seemed quite so problematic if it wasn’t already a major issue among modern Hollywood films. This year’s Oscar ceremony drew backlash once people realized that every single nominated actor – both lead and supporting – was white. Even casting white actors in the roles of established ethnic characters has become a common practice – see: Ben Kingsley as The Mandarin in Iron Man 3, and Jake Gyllenhaal as Dastan in Prince of Persia.

What are your thoughts on the casting decision? Does Hollywood have a race problem? Whether or not Wright made the right call with regards to his casting of Tiger Lily remains to be seen. Rooney Mara is an undoubtedly talented actress and shares characteristics the director saw in the character, however, set against the monochromatic cast of Pan the casting choice is not only jarring – it highlights a serious issue that Hollywood needs to address. We will see if the decision pays off when Pan hits theaters on October 9.

Peter Pan has a long cinematic legacy dating back all the way to the 1920s, when director Herbert Brenon first brought J.M. Barrie’s beloved protagonist to the big screen. Since then, we’ve seen many, many more adaptations in all kinds of forms – from live-action versions to cartoons to TV specials. Now the fairy tale hero is coming back to the big screen thanks to director Joe Wright’s new film Pan - and what separates this version from every other one we’ve seen is that this is the first one to be made in 3D.

As we do with every newly released 3D film, we’ve broken down the experience watching Pan into multiple categories to determine exactly the best way to see the movie on the big screen. To 3D or not to 3D, that is the question! So read on for the answer…

Fit Score

5/5

History has shown us that 3D really works best when it A) opens up exciting new worlds that can be explored with depth, and B) features a good deal of action that will maximize the space. Joe Wright’s Pan most certainly fits into both of these criteria, and gets a perfect category score for it. If a filmmaker is going to be bringing the fantastical tale of Peter Pan back to the big screen, it makes plenty of sense to develop it as a giant spectacle and give it every opportunity to really pop.

Planning & Effort Score

5/5

Joe Wright made the decision to film Pan in 2D and convert the film during post-production (a process that has come a long way since the Clash of the Titans days), but the project was always planned to be a 3D adventure. In storyboarding, production design, and crafting mise en scene, the director kept the added dimension in mind throughout filming, and made concentrated efforts to enhance the special theatrical experience. It’s true that some films fans still look down on non-native 3D, but Pan does deserve full credit in the planning and effort department.

Before the Window Score

3/5

With James Cameron initially working hard to focus audience’s attention on the depth aspects of 3D, the Before The Window aspect was somewhat pushed aside by Hollywood as being too gimmicky. As gimmicky as it may be, however, it’s also certainly the more entertaining aspect of the extra-dimensional experience, and Joe Wright and his team do a solid job utilizing it in Pan. It doesn’t happen all that often, but the director does use occasion to have movie-goers share space with stars, dropping bombs, and more. When the film uses this aspect of 3D, it works well – but you’re left wanting just a bit more of it.

Beyond the Window Score

3/5

Given the work that was put into the 3D, I wish I could say that Pan is a beautifully immersive experience, but the truth is that I was never really overwhelmed by it. There are surely plenty of moments crafted to make use of the technology, including airplane chases, rope swings, and even a couple musical numbers, but it never exactly delivers the full feeling that you’re looking into another world or that you’re going to fall into it. It’s not "cardboard cutouts" bad, but it isn’t super impressive either.

Brightness Score

4/5

Surely there will come a day when Hollywood technological wizards figure out a way to generate a 3D experience that doesn’t require the use of special lenses – but until that day comes filmmakers will just have to continue compensating when it comes to brightness in their movies. Joe Wright has great success with Pan in this department, and it most certainly helps that most of the action is set during daytime and that there is a very vivid color pallet in operation. Things do get a bit muddied and greyed in the film’s darker scenes, but for the most part it isn’t one of Pan’s greater issues.

Glasses Off Score

3/5

Want to see exactly how much 3D your buck is getting you while you’re in the midst of watching a film? Acquiring the answer is as simple as lowering your 3D glasses on the bridge of your nose and peeking over the frames. Viewing the movie this way, without using lenses to adjust the stereoscopic image, reveals the artificially created layers that create the extra-dimensional experience – and as a rule of thumb, the harder the screen is to watch, the stronger the 3D. With Pan, my experience in this area was a mixed bag. Certain scenes – particular long shots or action sequences – did have a great deal of blurriness, but there were other moments in the film that I had zero issue watching with my glasses off.

Audience Health Score

5/5

Bad 3D can leave members of the audience feeling nauseous, motion sick, or headachy, and while some people are just more sensitive than others, the truth is that filmmakers can take steps to make their movies more comfortable to sit through. This primarily includes creating focal points with the technology that prevent eyes from wandering and making movie-goers ill. I’m happy to report that I walked out of my Pan screening feeling 100% fine.

3D SCORES RECAP

3D Fit

5

P & E

5

Before The Window

3

Beyond The Window

3

Brightness

4

Glasses Off Test

3

Audience Health

5

Total Score

28/35

Final Verdict: At the end of the day, Pan is really a "take it or leave it" film when it comes to 3D. There certainly are sequences that really pop thanks to the added dimension, and the filmmakers certainly crafted the movie for the special theatrical experience, but I also can’t say that I walked away from it being all that impressed by what it has to offer. A B- is an appropriate grade here – which basically means that if you don’t want to pay the extra money for a ticket, it’s not the worst mistake you can make.

This poll is no longer available.

Click to visit our full To 3D Or Not To 3D Archive.

In what sounds like it could be a cinematic match in heaven, director Joe Wright is in talks to oversee The Lifeboat, which Anne Hathaway has already signed up to star in. Why are Wright and Hathaway so perfect for each other? Because they’re both dramatic heavyweights, and you can imagine that Wright is going to make sure that Hathaway sheds a tear or two (or 15) in what should be a compelling drama.

Deadline exclusively reports that Joe Wright is currently holding discussions with Film 360, Working Title and Focus Features to direct and bring Charlotte Rogan’s book to the big screen. Alongside this trifecta of studios, Anne Hathaway is also in line to produce and star in The Lifeboat, which tells the story of a newlywed/widow who stands on trial accused of murder in 1914. The current script has been adapted by Apollo 13 and Castaway's William Broyles Jr.

Anne Hathaway will take the lead role of Grace Winter, who, alongside her new husband, sets sail for New York in the summer just before World War I commences. However, their journey across the Atlantic soon turns into chaos when the transatlantic ocean liner they’re on-board, the Empress, sinks. In amidst the chaos, Grace suddenly finds herself thrown onto a lifeboat that is already filled beyond capacity.

It takes three weeks for Grace and the lifeboat passengers to be rescued, and during this time there is a power struggle between the ruthless John Hardie and the enigmatic Ursula Grant. Those on the lifeboat also discuss a variety of topics, while also plotting, scheming, and consoling each other. When Grace is finally rescued, though, it’s only the start of her troubles as she is soon put on trial for her life, and even her attorneys aren’t sure what to make of her story.

Basically it sounds as if its Titanic meets Life Of Pi by way of A Few Good Men. And by being linked to those epics, you can see why the adaptation has been placed into development. On the face of it, it also seems as if Joe Wright and Anne Hathaway are the perfect individuals to be involved in this production.

Wright has proven to be adept at wringing every snippet of drama out of his productions in a weighty yet still artistic and far from cheesy fashion. It also helps that the likes of Pride & Prejudice, Atonement and Anna Karenina have not only been lavished critically but they’ve also returned healthy box office figures, and The Lifeboat sounds as if it possesses a story that will give Wright the opportunity to truly flaunt his visual and storytelling flair too.

On the other hand, Anne Hathaway has always proved to be somewhat of a divisive figure because of her perceived-to-be grating personality. But that’s never stopped her talents from being appreciated, and whether it’s been in The Dark Knight Rises, Les Miserables, Interstellar, The Devil Wears Prada or Rachel Getting Married, you’ve always been able to heart-achingly invest in her portrayals, which led to her claiming her first Academy Award in 2012. Simply put, with these two involved, The Lifeboat sounds as if it is going to be a bona-fide awards contender.

Warner Bros. recently made a strategic decision to push Joe Wright’s Peter Pan origin story, Pan, out of this year’s summer season and back to October 9, where it would have room to breathe, and properly prepare audiences for the journey. Based on the new trailer, though, the move also suggests that Wright needed time to polish his visuals, because this trailer looks more stunning than the previous pass.

When you are creating Neverland from scratch, though, you are going to need every minute in post-production that the studio will allow, so I’m really hoping the Pan move leads to an improved movie-going experience. As we have mentioned in previous articles, Pan will be a new take on the early days of Peter (played by newcomer Levi Miller), starting in a London orphanage and following him on his journey to Neverland, where he’s hoping to reunite with his mother (Amanda Seyfried)… and fulfill a prophecy of a young savior with the ability to fly.

But before he can become Pan, Peter looks like he’s going to have to go through Blackbeard, portrayed here by a scenery-chomping Hugh Jackman. Because Joe Wright is using the original text of author J.M. Barrie as a guide – and NOT the Disney animated feature we all grew up on – we see completely different versions of the classic characters we know and love. While many may come to Pan expecting to see Captain Hook (Garrett Hedlund), the chief nemesis in Wright’s tale is Blackbeard, the pirate. And Hook’s around… but he’s a human adventurer who starts off as an ally of Peter’s. Will he stay that way for long?

This new trailer for Pan also turns up the action that Joe Wright promised us when we visited the film’s London set last year. The production has been keeping a lid on the impact that Rooney Mara’s Tiger Lily will have on this story. From a lot of what we have been told about Pan, Mara will be the breakout action star of the family-friendly fantasy, and this great shot of her battling Blackbeard on the masts of captured pirate ships hints at the large-scale set pieces Wright has cooked up for this feature.

The big question might be how open audiences are going to be to the tweaks and alterations Joe Wright brings to the traditional Peter Pan story. I have been told that there will be loose connections to Wendy, Nana and the Pan characters we’ve grown to love. But Pan looks like it wants to take everything that you know about the Peter Pan fairy tale, and filter it through Joe Wright’s imagination. And that’s more than enough to get me in a theater in October. How about you?

For the record, Rooney Mara didn’t initially believe she could play Tiger Lily in a Peter Pan movie, either. Shortly after it was announced that the star of The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo would play Tiger Lily for director Joe Wright in a Peter Pan prequel, internet outrage (whether real or imagined) erupted on the usual chats and forums. There was even a petition to get Mara replaced. The actress understood… until she met with Wright and learned about his vision.

"I feel like there really hasn’t been a proper interpretation of the character," Mara told us when we visited the set of Pan last year. We talked at length about her trepidation to play a character that she "always thought of as a Native American." But long conversations with her director – who she was anxious to collaborate with – and readings of Jason Fuchs’ screenplay showed Mara how her interpretation of Tiger Lily could help define the role for a new generation. She explained to us:

In fact, everything we learned about Tiger Lily, in Pan, focused on her abilities, rather than her race. Wright and producer Sarah Schechter expressed joy at having a strong female role-model character at play in this story of Peter Pan (Levi Miller), Hook (Garrett Hedlund) and the wicked Blackbeard (Hugh Jackman). According to Rooney Mara, her Tiger Lily is a tree-hugger, who is punk. She’s not dirty but a little bit of a hippie. And from everything we saw, she’s a full-blown action star who will fit in beautifully during the summer thrill season at the multiplex.

Audiences will be able to judge for themselves whether they buy Rooney Mara – and all of Joe Wright’s cast members – when Pan opens in theaters this summer:

Read our full set visit here. Pan reaches theaters on July 24.

Hugh Jackman is dangling from a wire, floating roughly 35 feet over a full-scale model of a majestic pirate ship. Down below, diabolical sea-dwellers engage in an animated fistfight, and Jackman – dressed to the teeth as the pirate Blackbeard – descends over and over again into the fray. Once, when the wire pulls the A-list actor back into the rafters, he spies us… a small group of film journalists invited to the set of Pan to watch the actor and his colleagues at work. For just a moment, he breaks character. The menacing pirate is gone, and Hugh Jackman, The Movie Star, is flashing his brilliant smile and waving happily, prop sword in hand. It’s a beautiful, bizarre and wonderful movie moment I’ll never forget.

Pan, in case you don’t yet know, is director Joe Wright’s foray into the imaginative world of Peter Pan, for a live-action blockbuster that will hit theaters on July 24. The 3D family adventure stars Jackman, Rooney Mara (Tiger Lily), Garret Hedlund (Hook), and 11-year-old newcomer Levi Miller (Peter) in a unique spin on the traditional Peter Pan narrative.

To help explain Wright’s vision for Pan, Warner Bros. invited us to a sprawling film set on the outskirts of London, where we ate with pirates, walked the planks of huge pirate ships, waved at Hugh Jackman (see above), and learned the following about this summer’s Pan:

This Is NOT A Remake Of The Disney Cartoon

Joe Wright and his creative team on Pan made it abundantly clear during our set visit that they weren’t setting out to do a live-action version of the classic Walt Disney cartoon that most of us grew up on. Their inspiration comes from J.M. Barrie’s works, Peter Pan, of The Boy Who Wouldn’t Grow Up. Most of the creators in the production offices admitted to not watching the Disney cartoon in preparation for working on this feature, because Joe Wright’s vision is so different from the world that exists in the animated take. That’s not to say Wright (Atonement, Hanna, Anna Karenina) doesn’t utilize familiar aspects from the Peter Pan cartoon. Quite the contrary. But it’s HOW he uses them in Pan that sets this movie apart. Let’s continue to explore.

Pan Is A Prequel To The Story We Know And Love

Peter isn’t Peter when Pan starts. This might be an easy analogy, but Pan feels like Batman Begins for the boy who refuses to grow up. The story gets underway with Peter (Miller) in an orphanage in the 1940s, during the war. The boy clutches a letter, which he’d received from his mother (Amanda Seyfried) many years ago. It’s Peter’s mission to reunite with his mom – a mission that’s interrupted when Blackbeard and his pirates descend on the orphanage and carry kidnapped children to Neverland. Wright’s team talked at length about the progression of color that will signify Peter’s journey through Neverland. What starts in a monochromatic London orphanage will transition, from scene to scene, into a vibrant, imaginative playground filled with wondrous creatures such as fairies, Lost Boys, mermaids, the Never Bird, an albino crocodile and, of course, pirates. But Pan sees Peter coming to terms with being Peter Pan, and it’s not as simple of a journey as you might assume.

They Literally Built Neverland

If you are familiar with Joe Wright’s brilliant films, you know he favors practical effects over CGI, and Pan is no different. On vast soundstages outside of London, we were able to walk on a full-scale replica of the Jolly Roger pirate ship. We traipsed through colorful villages, held weapons and props that belonged to the denizens of Neverland, and we watched the first meeting between Peter (Miller) and Hook (Hedlund). The best part? We walked through the sprawling, incredible recreation of Neverland, a set that stretched for multiple soundstages and included towering trees, massive mushroom stumps, pieces of shipwrecked boats, a tunnel (where an important fight will take place), and a trampoline circle surrounded by chairs where the "ruling counsel" of Neverland sits. It’s a wonderful set that promises to house some impressive action set pieces – from underwater battles to swordfights and martial arts-based trampoline wars – and Wright made sure that it physically existed in this world, in which his cast was encouraged to play.

Young Levi Miller IS Peter

There could be no more important casting for Pan than finding the ideal Peter, and Wright seems to have hit a home run with 11-year-old Levi Miller. The young Australian held court with this small team of reporters, convincing all of us at the end of the lengthy interview that he’s a real find for the casting department. According to Miller, his Peter is adventurous and charming, and he’s driven by his "singular mission" to locate his mother. "He’s kind of a normal 19th century boy," Miller told us. Can he fly yet? "Maybe he can, and maybe he can’t," the seasoned pro dodged with the media! Well, at least Miller revealed that Peter, in this film, has a complicated relationship with both Hook (Garret Hedlund) and Tiger Lily (Rooney Mara) – something we were fascinated by because these are characters who will remain part of Peter’s fabric if the story is to continue.

Garrett Hedlund Will Steal The Show

Everywhere we went on the set of Pan, everyone made it clear that Garrett Hedlund was operating at another level playing Hook, and we were told repeatedly that audiences will exit the theater raving about his winning performance. If we heard it once, we heard it 1,000 times. Hedlund, naturally, downplayed expectations but told us he was having a blast exploring the goofy, comedic tone Wright wants for James Hook. That’s right, Hook isn’t yet Captain Hook in this movie. He’s an American – from the Midwest – who has been in Neverland for quite some time and actually starts off helping Peter during the early stages of the film. In fact, when we watch Hedlund work, he had both hands intact. Pan is as much Hook’s origin story as it is Peter’s, and Hedlund opened up about how they’re dynamic will change over the course of the film, starting as allies and becoming… something different. When Hedlund revealed that Hugh Jackman’s Blackbeard had tremendous influence over the development of Hook as a character, that didn’t bode well for the fate of young Peter Pan.

Pan (Hopefully) Is The Start Of A Franchise

Producer Sarah Schechter opened up, during our visit, of the possibility of Pan kickstarting a new franchise of live-action Peter Pan movies. With a leading man not even in his teens, and a wealth of possible stories left to tell, the sky over Neverland truly could be the limit for this cast and this series. Garrett Hedlund, who plays Hook to Miller’s Pan, admitted, "We signed on for multiple films." So if Pan does well, expect more stories in this universe. But Schechter made it crystal clear that the decision to make more movies centered around Levi Miller’s Peter Pan would be "organic" and not calculated. They love the world. They love these characters. They would love to keep telling stories with them, but nothing is set in stone. That being said, it’s worth noting that Pan will connect – loosely – to the familiar story of Wendy, John, Nana and the characters we love. It does not directly lead into that tale, but we might see a few very interesting hints as Pan draws to a close.

Joe Wright Is Done With Long, Unbroken Takes… For A Reason

Joe Wright made a name for himself (in the film-geek community, at least) for choreographing impossibly long, stylistic, unbroken single-take shots in movies like Atonement and Hanna. But don’t look for one in Pan, as the director told us during a lively conversation that there’s no use in trying to outdo the incredible camera work Alfonso Cuaron recently did with the Oscar-winning sci-fi masterpiece Gravity. While on set, we were lucky enough to sit in a small theater and watch a rough-cut of one of the film’s opening scenes – when the pirates soar over London in flying pirate ships and Peter tries to escape… then to hold on for dear life. And in this moment, there’s an unmistakable Gravity homage that Wright said he had a lot of fun including. The director emphasized over and over that his inspiration for doing Pan was a desire to entertain his three-year-old son, saying he’s fascinated with finding new things that make his child laugh. And while Wright isn’t a franchise guy, when we asked if he’d keep telling stories in this world, he smiled and replied, "We’ll see."

And so will you when Joe Wright’s Pan opens in theaters on July 24.

"Welcome to Neverand!" With the vocal boom of a carnival barker, Hugh Jackman helps kick off the first full trailer for Joe Wright’s Pan, a wondrous origin story for the legendary hero that will reinvent the fairy tale next summer.

You had me at "Joe Wright." The director of such lush and mesmerizing epics as Atonement, Anna Karenina and Hanna puts a unique spin on the classic work of J.M. Barrie to portray young Peter Pan (newcomer Levi Miller) as a stolen orphan snatched by the crew of Blackbeard (Jackman) and transported on a wild and colorful adventure to Neverland.

The tone of Pan appears to aim right at families – particularly parents, playing up Amada Seyfried’s character as having to give up her child (and Peter’s tender hopes that he will one day reunite with her in another life).

But on a recent visit to the London set of Pan, Joe Wright told me specifically that he wants to up the action in this story and appeal to children who are the same age as his young son. He's a father now, and that desire to entertain younger audiences will ensure that Pan goes for the humor and the heart as well as for the Yo Ho Ho of it all. Will you be brave enough, Peter?

Will it work, Blackbeard?

Don't be such a jerk! The trailer wraps with some hints at the pizzazz Joe Wright wants to bring to this Neverland tale. There are mermaids, and flying pirate ships, explosions of color that happen whenever someone dies in Neverland, and -- again -- mermaids.

What isn't conveyed -- yet, anyway -- is how important Rooney Mara's Tiger Lily will be to this production. She really ends up being the hero of this adventure, and information we picked up on the set proves that there will be a lot more with Mara in the marketing campaign as we get closer to the film's release. Right, Hugh?

OK, fine. Pan will be in theaters on July 17, 2015.

You know who looked crazy dapper at the Tonys on Sunday? Hugh Jackman. He rocked slicked back hair and a full beard with a tux, and made it look sensational. But as you can see from the shot he shared above, his thick head of hair has been sacrificed for his upcoming role in Pan.

Hugh Jackman shared this image on his Instagram, giving us all a first look at his Blackbeard--as in the character he plays in Pan, not his literal black beard.

Here's a handy before and after his Pan transformation:

Warner Bros. is producing Pan, a gritty re-imagining of J.M. Barrie's Peter Pan. This family-friendly adventure will be angling for the same audiences that made Alice In Wonderland and Maleficent such formidable hits, but earning this commercial pic some prestige is director Joe Wright. Best-known for bringing to life dense novels like Atonement, Pride & Prejudice and Anna Karenina with opulent, poignant and acclaimed movie adaptations, Wright's Pan is already earning award season buzz as production kicks off.

The screenplay by Jason Fuchs has na orphan called Peter Pan being spirited away to the wondrous world of Neverland, where he meets Indian princesses, fairies, and pirates. Hugh Jackman is slated to play the pirate Blackbeard, but before you rush to thinking that's a re-imagined Hook, let me assure that role has gone to Tron: Legacy star Garrett Hedlund. Also on board is Rooney Mara, Wright's controversial pick for Tiger Lily, newcomer Levi Miller as Peter Pan, Game of Thrones' Nonso Anozie as a character called Bishop, and the recently added Amanda Seyfried as Mary Darling.

Notably, this not the only Peter Pan re-imagining in the works. Disney is developing a movie version of the successful Broadway musical Peter and the Starcatchers, which has Peter teaming up with the titular star catchers--a girl called Molly--to defeat the power-hungry pirate known as Black Stache. A Peter Pan origin story is being produced by Channing Tatum once titled Peter Pan Begins. And a third revamp on Peter Pan was teased back in 2011. Also called Pan, this version lined up Aaron Eckhart as Captain Hook, who is this case is a police captain tracking a deadly childlike killer. Guillermo del Toro was involved, and AnnaSophia Robb was on board as Wendy, who teams up with hook to bring down the killer Pan. Audiences could have been poised for Peter Pan overload, but Wright's Pan is the only one of the four that is ready for production.

Joe Wright's Pan is set to fly into theaters on July 17th, 2015. The rest are still waiting on fairy dust.

Never say never, as the old saying goes, but feel free to say it with "land" behind it all you want during this story. Warner Bros. has been hot on the trailer of the young actor who will lead (or follow within) their upcoming reimagining of Peter Pan, and now they’ve found him, without the help of Tinkerbell no less. Newcomer Levi Miller will make his feature debut in Pan, British director Joe Wright’s follow-up to 2012’s Anna Karenina.

The whole point of Wright’s U.K. casting calls was to find an unknown actor to take the part, according to THR, and Miller is just that. His acting resume consists of a single episode of Fox’s shortlived sci-fi series Terra Nova, and two short films. One of those is Gerald Lambkin’s imaginative Great Adventures, a preview for which you can see below.

And before that he played a boy who brings a Holocaust survivor out of his shell in Katrina Irawati Graham’s drama Akiva. You guessed it! You can watch a trailer for that as well.

We don’t get much of a sense of his prowess from those two videos, but he’ll have some seriously talented company around to guide him along the way. And even when Wright’s films haven’t been the greatest, the casting is consistently spot-on. As such, we’ve decided to give Miller the "We Don’t Believe You’ll Be the Next Jake Lloyd" brand of approval.

In the film, he’ll play a young orphan whose not exactly enjoyable London existence is disrupted when he is found and taken to Neverland, where he must do some sort of battle with the evil pirate Blackbeard, as played by the often bearded Hugh Jackman. This version of the story will of course take a different approach, so I’m not sure where Garrett Hedlund’s Hook fits into the equation, but you can bet he won’t be peachy keen on Peter Pan running amok with childish glee. Rooney Mara recently signed on to play the Native American Tiger Lily, which doesn’t exactly match up with THR’s claim that this film is "using an international cast to present the characters in a new way," unless using white actors as Native Americans is a "new way."

Old or new, the magic will fly into theaters (and never grow up) on July 17, 2015. How do you guys feel about a fresh face stepping into this somewhat iconic role?

Yo ho ho and a bottle of brass monkey, it’s officially a pirate’s life for Hugh Jackman.

This was rumored. Today, it has been confirmed that the X-Men and Les Miserables star has signed on to play the vicious pirate Blackbeard in Warner Bros. planned spin on the Peter Pan myth, Pan, according to The Hollywood Reporter. Greg Silverman, president, creative development and worldwide production at Warner Bros., said in a statement:

And he will. Jackman’s a go-to actor who rarely gets the credits he deserves. Don’t get me wrong. He’s an A-lister with a mega-franchise under his belt and an Oscar nomination on his resume. But how many other actors can claim to be as versatile as Jackman. He can host the Oscars, and hold court on Broadway. In the same year, he can open a superhero movie like The Wolverine, then captivate a grown-up audience in something as harrowing as Prisoners.

I’m in the tank for Pan, and it has nothing to do with Jackman. I’m 100% on board with everything Joe Wright does. Yes, even The Soloist. The Brit director has such a unique and powerful voice. He’s bored by convention, and explores genres by turning them on their side and looking for new ways in. Hanna was a fascinating take on the spy genre, stimulating enough to get people talking about Wright helming a Bond movie someday. And his Anna Karenina was one of the most engaging interpretations of the classic novel that the film industry has ever produced. Seriously. Love.

Now, I’m familiar with the Pan story, and I don’t remember Blackbeard being a part of J.M. Barrie’s play. Captain Hook? Sure. (And Garrett Hedlund might play him.) Mister Smee? Absolutely. Neverland’s a big place, and Jackman likely will have a lot of creative freedom to create a villain – I’m assuming he’ll be a villain. Maybe he’ll be an ally to Peter Pan? As long as Blackbeard is different from the one Ian "Deadwood" McShane played in On Stranger Tides, we’re good to go.

The fantasy bug that bit Hollywood after Alice In Wonderland continues to ravage the industry unabated. Last year, Oz: The Great And Powerful made almost half-a-billion worldwide, while this summer fans are preparing for Maleficent. And in 2015 comes another one, the dramatic re-imagining titled Pan. In this fantasy film, from director Joe Wright, Peter Pan and Hook are good friends who team up to lead a pirate revolt, and with casting starting, they’re about to beef up the names in consideration for what they see as a potential franchise.

According to THR, an offer is out to Garrett Hedlund to star as the young Hook. Hedlund is clearly someone Hollywood likes a lot, as he was attached to the failed Akira remake for quite awhile, before everyone involved realized what they were doing was insane. Since then, he’s rejected roles in both the new Terminator film and 50 Shades of Gray, while he stole small moments in Inside Llewyn Davis as a mumbly, sensual nomad that brought back memories of Heath Ledger. Hedlund is also in this year’s Unbroken from director Angelina Jolie, and he’s still contractually obligated to return, should Disney get started on a follow-up to Tron: Legacy, though don’t hold your breath.

The role of Pan remains uncast, though an offer has gone out to Hugh Jackman to play the villain Blackbeard, which THR reports as "unconfirmed." Wright in the director’s seat seems like the most exciting part of this project, given that his style, half-fantastical and half-Earthbound, seems perfect for a more realistic take on a fairy tale. It’s pretty much exactly what he did with Hanna, the action film with fairy tale undertones that definitely isn’t made for the younger set.

Peter Pan remains one of the more indelible fictional characters in film and television. NBC is planning a live-version of Peter Pan for the holiday season. There remains a shortage of news regarding the planned 2011 version of Pan, which had Aaron Eckhart as a cop named Hook pursuing a childlike killer named Pan through the streets of England with his partner Smee. Which is a pity, because that sounded hilarious. Hopefully, though, there’s a rediscovery of the lovely 2003 live-action version of the film that featured an amazing performance by Jason Isaacs as Captain Hook. He also plays Wendy’s father: chew on that, Freud.

Can you hear that? It's not the sound of jingle bells but the sound of release dates falling into place! Cha-ching! The latest titles to join in the dance of new release dates are Andy and Lana Wachowski's Jupiter Ascending and Joe Wright's Pan. Box Office Mojo notes the sci-fi epic fronted by Mila Kunis and Channing Tatum has shifted from its slot July 25th, 2014 forward a week to July 18th, 2014. As for Wright's take on Peter Pan, that's been set down for June 26th, 2015.

Following-up their ambitious Cloud Atlas, the Wachowski siblings have ventured to the wider universe for Jupiter Ascending. This universe is one where humans are considered to be near the very bottom of the evolutionary ladder - and yet a lowly human maid named Jupiter (Kunis) is thought to be a threat to the Queen of the Universe. This marks Jupiter for execution, but not if an extraterrestrial warrior named Caine (Tatum) has anything to say about it. In case you somehow missed its trailer drop earlier this week, check it out below:

In its old spot, Jupiter Ascending would have been facing off against Bret Ratner's Hercules, (not to be confused with the Kellan Lutz Hercules movie). It seems that Warner Bros is clearing a path for what will likely be a dominating force that weekend. Fronted by Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson , Hercules may as well have a license to print money. After all, Johnson has proved a box office behemoth this year. With a steady line-up of successful films, his 2013 releases crossed the billion-dollar mark in June. Since White House Down crumbled, the chink in Tatum's star power armor has shown, so best shuffle forward a week.

On July 18th, there's far less competition. And by that I mean Planes: Fire & Rescue, a sequel to a spin-off of a lesser-renowned Pixar movie. The only thing Jupiter Ascending has to fear here is being overshadowed by the previous week's releases: Dawn of the Planet of the Apes and (for now anyway) Fast & Furious 7. The former could well snatch up audience members craving sci-fi. Plus, its predecessor Rise of the Planet of the Apes swept its opening weekend in the summer of 2011 to the tune of $54 million dollars, trouncing The Smurfs ($20 mil) and Cowboys and Aliens ($15 mil). And of course the Fast and Furious franchise has become a global phenomenon. Fast & Furious 6 pulled in a whopping $788 million worldwide by the end of its run.

As for Pan, this update seems to confirm that Wright, who entered into negotiations last month, is set to helm. Penned by Ice Age: Continental Drift's Jason Fuchs, this adventure will serve as an origin story for Peter Pan. But Warner Bros has so far been tight-lipped on which of his fellow Neverland neighbors will make appearances. From here, it'll be interesting to see who Wright brings in to play Peter, and whether or not he makes room for his recurring leading lady Keira Knightley, whose served him well in Atonement, Pride & Prejudice, and Anna Karenina.

From Atonement to Pride & Prejudice and Anna Karenina, English auteur Joe Wright has built a reputation constructing elaborate and inventive adaptations from beloved novels. So, it's little wonder Warner Bros would eye him for a new angle on the long-established story of Peter Pan. THR reports Wright is in negotiations to direct a Peter Pan project for Warner Bros "that would give Pan the Batman Begins treatment.

Written by Ice Age: Continental Drift scribe Jason Fuchs, this Peter Pan will focus on the origin story of the mischievous boy who was destined to high-flying adventures with fairies, pirates, Indians, and lost boys. At this time its unknown what members of Pan's iconic crew will appear in this re-imagination, but we may find out in short order as Warner Bros is reportedly highly motivated to get this film rolling. We suspect part of their enthusiasm is over the project itself, while part is surely thanks to a wish to beat other studios to the gate, as two other prequel Pan projects are currently brewing elsewhere.

Both Columbia and Disney have Peter Pan origin stories in the works. Since 2011, Pan (formerly Peter Pan Begins) has had Channing Tatum attached as a producer--and possibly star. But few headlines have been made by that project in the meantime. On the other hand, Disney, who of course created the beloved animated Peter Pan, is developing the Broadway musical based on the Dave Barry and Ridley Pearson novel Peter and the Starcatcher into a live-action and family-friendly adventure. In the summer of 2012, The Hunger Games helmer Gary Ross signed on to direct for Disney, but little headway seems to have been made since then.

Could this lead to Snow White-like showdown at the box office? Frankly, with none of these possible prequels announcing start dates it's too soon to say how this will shake out. But of all these proposed properties, I'm the most interested in WB's Peter Pan almost solely because they could have Wright. The story of Peter Pan has of course been tackled again and again in movies like the 1953 animated adventure, P.J. Hogan's underrated 2003 live-action take, and less conventional approaches like Marc Forster's Finding Neverland or Steven Spielberg's latter-day Pan tale Hook.

Basically, there's a lot of fun that can be had with J.M. Barrie's story. But of all the contemporary filmmakers who could give it a go, Wright would be at the top of my list. Not only do his adaptations often capture the emotions and spirit of their source material, but he manages to tell period piece tales in a way that makes them feel fresh and relevant to modern audiences. On top of that, he has a daring directing style that involves awe-inspiring long takes and risky maneuvers like the surreal staging of Anna Karenina within a literal theater. In short, no matter how high a price Wright demands for his involvement, I think WB should pay it and get Peter Pan flying along before Disney or Colombia gets their acts together.

This poll is no longer available.

Few famous figures have a reputation as multi-faceted as magician Harry Houdini. Sure, he was best known for being a showman and stunt performer who could dazzle audiences with his extraordinary escape acts from handcuffs, straitjackets, ropes, chains, and other claustrophobic confinements. But he was also an actor (albeit a failed one), an aviator, and a passionate debunker of people claiming to be psychics and mediums. Basically, there's enough fascinating stuff in the life of Houdini to fill a string of movies (which may explain why four are in development), and yet Summit Entertainment has been struggling to get their biopic going for years.

Summit first began developing their Houdini project back in 2009, after purchasing the movie rights to the William Kalush and Larry Sloman's book The Secret Life of Houdini: The Making of America's First Superhero, which posits that in addition to all the vocations listed above, Houdini was also a spy! The proposed action-adventure movie would make the man known for breaking out of manacles a mix of Sherlock Holmes and Indiana Jones, which sounds preposterous but possibly awesome. Still, the project has had a hard time nailing down a director, but Deadline reports Summit in currently in early negotiations with Dean Parisot, helmer of Galaxy Quest and the upcoming Red 2.

While Parisot is by no means a recognizable name to mainstream moviegoers, he has shown a flair for helming action-comedies. Okay, I haven't seen Red 2 yet, but Galaxy Quest is way more fun than it has any right to be and its action scenes work well within its whimsical setting. Summit's consideration of him for the director's chair suggests this presently untitled biopic is aiming to be a lot of wild fun, perhaps in the vein of Guy Ritchie's Sherlock Holmes movies…though hopefully better than those clunky adventures. But Parisot is not signed on yet, and could still prove the latest in a growing string of directors who've become detached from the project.

Little over a year ago, Gary Ross, hot off the record-breaking success of The Hunger Games, entered into negotiations to helm this Houdini pic. However, within a few months he had dropped the project to better pursue his adaptation of the Broadway hit Peter and the Starcatchers. On the hunt once more, Summit Entertainment (a Lionsgate subsidiary) looked to acclaimed helmer Joe Wright, who has directed such outstanding adaptations as Atonement, Pride & Prejudice, and Anna Karenina. But since then, Wright has been attached to Neil Gaiman's The Ocean at the End of the Lane and has been deemed a frontrunner for the Fifty Shades of Grey, and apparently fell off Summit's radar for this feature.

There is still no mention on when Summit hopes to roll into production on their Houdini film, but the pressure is on as three others are in-development elsewhere. Sony's Houdini has been in the works since the 1990s, and has had Paul Verhoeven, Ang Lee, and Robert Zemeckis as possible directors at different points. But upon its last report, this biopic that involves a romance plot with a con-woman/spiritualist had The Hunger Games: Catching Fire's helmer Francis Lawrence attached to direct. Walden Media has Chuck co-creator Chris Fedak penning an untitled script that centers on a teen boy who discovers Houdini is his relative, spurring him in a quest to uncover the "greatest magical secret known to man." And lastly, there's Chernin Entertainment's The Houdini Box. An adaptation of Brian Selznick’s young adult novel centers on an aspiring magician who crosses paths with Houdini in a life-changing exchange. But when it comes to which of these might make to production—much less theaters first—that is at present a mystery.

Between its widespread popularity and steamy subject matter of the novel, a movie version of E.L. James' Fifty Shades of Grey has been a hot topic for over a year now. Who will star!? Who will helm? While Krysten Ritter and Mila Kunis have leaned in to potentially playing the female lead of Anastasia Steele, Emma Watson has flatly denied rumors she was in contention for the part. As for directors, Angelina Jolie was rumored. Then Gus Van Sant lobbied for the job, now THR reports Bennett Miller (Money Ball) and Patty Jenkins (Monster) are also being considered. But the frontrunner is reportedly Joe Wright.

The English auteur has been responsible for three lusciously realized adaptations of heartbreaking romances, the Academy Award-winning Atonement, the BAFTA-winning Pride & Prejudice, and insanely sumptuous Oscar winner Anna Karenina. So, it makes some simple sense that he'd be considered for the Fifty Shades of Grey movie adaptation. It is a romance, though more modern in setting and--let's say--tone than his previous works. Adding to Wright's momentum for the project is his close connection with Focus Features, which had a hand in four of Wright's films so far, and owns the rights to Fifty Shades of Grey.

It's worth noting that no deal is said to be in place; it's just that Wright is being considered the favorite by "multiple sources." This doesn't mean he'll actually sign on. I'm hoping he won't.

Wright has proven to be an astoundingly original filmmaker with an incredible skill at capturing complex character portraits and conflicted tales of love. This makes him an obvious choice for the Fifty Shades of Grey adaptation, plus his involvement could add an air of prestige to the project it may well need. But as someone who attempted to read the novel (I admit, I got bored and quit), I'm crestfallen at the idea of Wright focusing on this particular love story. It just doesn't seem ambitious enough in scope to be worth his time.

Focus, go with Van Sant. He's not afraid of sexually taboo topics, and he wants this so bad he (allegedly) made his own spec shoot for it. Leave Wright out of it.

This poll is no longer available.

For a while Domhnall Gleeson didn't think he'd become an actor. As the son of famed Irish actor Brendan Gleeson, he had every young person's urge to separate himself from his parents-- even as it became clear to him that acting was what he wanted to do anyway. And he figured it out just in time too, since with his long red hair and freckles, Domhnall was pretty much perfect to play a member of the Weasley family in the Harry Potter movies-- a franchise his father happened to be part of already.

So while the wider world may know him best know as eldest Weasley son Bill, Gleeson has been making a name for himself both onstage (in Martin McDonagh's The Lieutenant of Inishmore) and in striking supporting roles onscreen, as the doomed young thief in True Grit, as one of the tragic clones in Never Let Me Go, or as the blind tech geek working for the evil gangster in Dredd. Now he's got his first big shot as a romantic lead, as part of the star-studded ensemble of Anna Karenina, the sumptuous new film from Joe Wright. Though Gleeson says that Wright showed "a huge amount of faith in casting me," he's perfect as Levin, the idealistic farmer who's a bit removed from the high society world of Imperial Russia, but who falls hard for society girl Kitty (Alicia Vikander) anyway.

A few weeks ago I spoke to Gleeson about how he adjusted to the theatricality of Wright's Anna Karenina adaptation, how he learned to finally enjoy rehearsal and choreography to prepare for the film, and how on the Harry Potter films he was never sure if what he was doing was actually acting. Take a look at our conversation below, and see Gleeson in the marvelous Anna Karenina in theaters now.

More so than even in the book, Levin seems like the relatable, earthy center of this movie. Did you know he would have such an increased role when you talked to Joe about the movie?

When I first talked to Joe about it, the theatrical setting , that wasn't part of the script, that hadn't happened yet. The first thing Joe told me was that Levin was a farmer, that he wanted him to be more than another love interest in the story, he wanted him to be a man obsessed with ideas and a better way of living. One of the ways of living he finds it love. I was trying to concentrate on making him a ma who was striving for honesty. All you can do is look to your own experience and look to the book and mesh those two in certain ways.

How did the change to the theatrical setting affect the way you were developing the character?

It didn't change it at all. Tom Stoppard wrote this perfect script. The fact that the script was so perfect was the reason Joe could change it so late; the structure was so strong. It held up to being investigated on that level. My character was so well draw by Tom, and Joe had been so direct and helpful and supportive and helping me get to the right place, it didn't change my thinking at all. The only thing that changed slightly was the physicality. Joe had his choreographer, on board. What was it like learning all of that choreography?

I've never done anything quiet like that. I've done some plays that had amazing choreography, particularly choreography of violence in a play I did with Martin McDonagh. But this was quite different. The emphasis was quite different, creating something that was beautiful and at the same time compelling. Especially if I'm the guy who messes up. You don't want to be the guy who drops his line and the whole thing comes crashing to the ground. You really felt the energy on set that day.

Was there a lot of rehearsing required to nail it?

We did some really interesting physical exercises. You watch the film and the whole point is that it's invisible. We did incredible stuff in terms of who were the aristocrats and who were the servants, and where did the power lie. We investigated all that physically. Then I spent a lot of time with Alicia [Vikander], a lot of time with her trying to create a feeling that physically these two people were meant to be together. Being aware of each others' bodies and how we moved and the rest of it. I hadn't done that before. Joe likes working in a different way and pushing himself in different directions, and bringing the actors along with him.

Did that level of rehearsal compare to the theater work that you've done?

It did, but funnily enough I'd never bought into that before in theater. I didn't hate people who did [those physical exercises], I just hated them because they didn't do anything for me. This was the point where that made sense for me. I realized I had to be physically in tune with it. Once it started working, everything opened up all of a sudden. It's not your normal way of doing a film. I think Joe is really good at making people better than they might ordinarily be.

What do you mean by that, that he makes people better?

He did create an ensemble atmosphere, which is really great. You don't have anyone being greedy. Everybody's working really hard to the same ends, and that goes across the whole crew as well. I think just the way he talks to people, and how much he cares about the characters themselves. It's an interesting mix of being really cinematic-- you see films that are cinematic, but the performances get left behind ,and then other films there's very little thats cinematic about them. Joe mixes those things very well.

You've been doing a lot of supporting work in various films in the last few years, and now this is a pretty big step up to a major part. Did that feel like a natural progression or was it a big leap?

It's funny, it didn't feel like a natural progression. When I read the script, I couldn't believe I was being asks to audition. I'd met Joe before and he showed a huge amount of faith in casting me. I can't imagine I was at the top of anybody's list, much less his. It was certainly a step up in that regard. Then I felt like I did have to match it. I always work hard, but then I felt like I had to match that with the faith shown in me. It was a big step up, but I cherished every second of it. I loved every day on set. I just loved working hard, I was lucky that since then I've gotten to do bigger roles. Working hard is kind of a joy.

The set of Anna Karenina is pretty elaborate, and you've got experience on the mammoth Harry Potter sets. Is there any comparison between the two?

Harry Potter was one of the first films I did, I was only in the last two. But really I felt kind of overwhelmed by the production. I really loved it, but I never knew whether what I was doing was acting or being an extra with a wand over my head. I never knew which was which. If Ralph Fiennes has to do a take again because you slip on your ass, that's probably not a good thing. For me the responsibility on Anna was that I felt it a lot more. I was more exposed.

You had said you didn't really want to be an actor because your dad was. What was the moment that you changed your mind and realized you should be an actor anyway?

It was never really what I meant. As a young man, you don't want to be defined purely by what your parents do. I read a script when I was 19 that made me want to be an actor, a Martin McDonagh script, and if the material is good, it's all I want to do. It's when you're not working that being an actor becomes a very depressing thing to be. In the last three years I've gotten into my stride a bit.

Well if you keep working with Martin and John Michael McDonagh, you'll never run out of work anyway.

Those two guys are mad geniuses. I will forever be grateful

Just when you think you think Joe Wright is going to zig, he zags. The director who made an impressive debut with Pride & Prejudice went on to make the Oscar-nominated Atonement, which seemed to be establishing him as the 21st century's answer to Merchant-Ivory. Then he made the modern-day, not-very-good drama The Soloist, and followed it up with the terrific punky fairy tale Hanna, which swapped period frocks and sweeping scores for a little girl on the run and techno beats. That film then appeared to give Wright permission to team up with two of the muses from his earliest works: classic literature and Keira Knightley.

So now we have Anna Karenina, which might be the umpteenth adaptation of the Tolstoy classic but which stands very much on its own, partly because of Wright's bold decision to set most of the film inside a dilapidated theater, where bedrooms are tucked in among the rafters and horses can trot among the audience seats. It's a bold move made even bolder by the fact that Wright only decided to do it a few weeks before production began, facing budget constraints and a desire to make something truly ambitious. Teaming up with frequent collaborators like cinematographer Seamus McGarvey and costume designer Jacqueline Durran, he accomplished just that.

Speaking to Wright by phone last week, I asked about the confidence that seems to drive his work, the difference between the heightened reality of the theater in Anna Karenina and the occasional scenes that take place in the "real" world, and why he regrets ever comparing his work to Baz Luhrmann. Read it all below and please please please see the magnificent Anna Karenina in theaters this weekend.

You made the decision to set the entire movie within a dilapidated old theater with just a few weeks before the start of production. Was there just this crazy confidence on your part that it would work or were you driven by the fear that you couldn't do it?

I think excitement and fear are probably two sides of the same coin. I just have to practice some breathing techniques to get through it. I'd been wanting to make a film with this kind of stylized aesthetic for some time, and it was with this one i finally accepted that I had to get out of my system.

It seemed like making Hanna, which was so different from all of your other films, also helped you get some stuff out of your system and maybe emboldened you to make something even more ambitious like Anna Karenina.

Yeah, I did. I think I've been regaining confidence over the past few years. I had a confidence with Atonement, and then I made The Soloist and, although I loved making it and I'm very prod of that film and working with Downey and Jamie Foxx, the release of it was a fairly heartbreaking experience. I guess since then I've been trying to regain my confidence.

You said in another interview this could turn out to be the campiest movie made by a straight man who isn't Baz Luhrmann. Did you keep his films in mind as a kind of step too far from what you wanted to do?

I kind of regret saying that about Baz, because one tries not to compare oneself to other filmmakers. I didn't really keep him in my rearview mirror. The influences were closer to home, really. Films of Powell and Pressburger and my parents' puppet theater were both big influences on this movie, also the Czech animator Jan Svankmejer. The camp thing is interesting. I remember a lovely quote from Milan Kundera, who said the definition of camp is ripe to the edge of rotten. I felt that Russian society of that period was indeed ripe to the edge of rotten. It was just that tipping point at the last dance before the end of that civilization, or civilization as they knew it. So I think the film, the background of the story is inherently camp, if camp can be defined that way.

When you've got this heightened reality of the world within the old theater, and then also Levin's reality shot out in the actual world, how do you keep track of where reality actually is?

If I knew where the edges of reality, were, I would not need to make films, and I would live happily as a woodcarver with my wife and son. [Laughs] I'm constantly trying to define the edges of reality for myself, and they are constantly eluding me. In terms of the reality of this film, definitely, you're trying to give yourself parameters prior to the beginning of the shoot. The idea is that Anna's story, which is pure fiction, is set in this fictitious, artificial environment of the theater. And Levin's story, which is a more autobiographical portrait of Tolstoy, is expressed in what we think of as being realism, or cinematic reality. Of course there is no reality in cinema.

Long takes are often seen as getting films closer to reality, like in Italian neo-realist films, but you seem to use them to make a film even more heightened, with so much choreography as in this film.

Entirely. A long take requires even more choreography than, for instance, a close-up or something. A close-up you line the shot up and you basically follow the actor, you allow the actor to do what they're doing. Whereas the long Steadicam takes are very much choreographed pieces of theater.

If you saw Total Recall this weekend and didn't know who directed it, you might have thought you got a hint once or twice. There are a bunch of lens flares in there-- maybe it's J.J. Abrams? Or, the set design looks a whole lot like Blade Runner-- could it be Ridley Scott?

The answer is that it was directed by Len Wiseman, a director who seemed solely devoted in Total Recall to aping the signature styles of other directors, and of course making them way less effective. We're not arguing that every director has to have an immediately recognizable style-- would we love the Coen Brothers nearly as much if they weren't constantly changing things up?-- but it's great to realize when a director has established him or herself away from the pack, with the confidence to bring their own flair to everything they make. So to get the bad taste of Total Recall out of our mouths, we're celebrating 5 current directors for their signature styles, whether they're good or bad, and whether or not they drive everyone crazy. Take a look at our choices below along with some examples of their work.

J.J. Abrams and his lens flares

In the world of J.J. Abrams's Star Trek, the future is so bright the camera's gotta wear shades-- but it doesn't. To keep the world of the U.S.S. Enterprise from looking as stagey and fake as, say, the original series, Abrams crammed the set of Star Trek with enough light sources that would make the camera "flare"-- that is, explode into a bright, colorful spot or streak of light-- in almost every scene. He's explained the flares as a way of conveying that "the future was so bright it couldn't be contained in the frame," or that "just off camera, something spectacular is happening.

That worked just fine for Star Trek. But then the lens flares were back in Super 8, a movie set firmly on Earth and in the past, and then it started getting a little ridiculous. Asked to explain them Abrams basically told us he just included them anywhere they'd look cool, which means he's done explaining a technique that's clearly become his style. And if you look back, he's been doing it all along-- the Mission: Impossible 3 trailer contains quite a few, and well, have you looked at the credit sequence from his series Alias lately? Lens flares are Abrams's bright and shiny way of putting his stamp on film-- and driving the haters crazy in the process.

Zack Snyder and his speed ramping

To call slow motion Zack Snyder’s ‘signature’ is an oversimplification of the artistry in his speed ramping, zooms and movement, but then again the techniques are used to cover up razor thin plots and one-dimensional characters. Dawn of the Dead uses the trait sparingly but it’s still there in the explosions and to make the deaths more dramatic. 300 is just an experiment in style with maybe seven minutes of story in the whole 117. Don’t believe me? Watch this fight and then it again at normal speed to see the difference. Now multiply by the number of fights.

Watchmen tried to have substance as well as style, but his signature just bloated the run-time, demonstrated by comparing the Watchmen trailer and its ’regular speed’ edit. Snyder turned to an animation for complete control over the rate of motion and, well, Guardians of Ga'Hoole is an exquisite example of the technique. For Sucker Punch, his first and only original idea, the director brought his speed ramping best. No sensible story, but lots of frame rate changes. The first five minutes say it all. But, to everyone’s surprise, his Man of Steel teasers take place entirely in regular time. Perhaps he’s slowly grown.

M. Night Shyamalan and his frame shots

"That is one fine frame. One fine frame that is."-- Dr. Malcolm Crowe, The Sixth Sense.

There is evidence of M. Night Shyamalan's appreciation for creative framing in all of his films, but The Sixth Sense in particular emphasizes his love affair with doors and frames. Donnie Wahlberg's creepy cameo near the beginning of the film is one of the best examples here because the doorframe is continuously in the shot while he's on screen, but we see doors (also windows and shelves) used numerous times throughout the movie, occasionally obstructing the view slightly. In that way, it creates a sort of voyeuristic perspective to his shots, making us feel like we're peeking in on a moment.

Doors are used to frame the characters more neatly in his other films, too. Bruce Willis is framed in a doorway numerous times in Unbreakable, which almost makes the moment seem like something pulled from a comic book. And there's more than one occasion in Signs when we see the family seated together and framed by a doorway or window. Then, the framing seems to capture the characters in that moment, literally boxed in by the door or window. Shyamalan eases off the door focus a bit after The Sixth Sense, but there are examples of the technique in his later movies, along with his appreciation for reflections.

Quentin Tarantino and his trunk shots

Whether it’s Mr. Pink, Mr. Blonde and Mr. White lifting the lid on the cop hidden in the car in Reservoir Dogs, The Bride getting ready to have a second, violent conversation with Sofie Fatale in Kill Bill Vol. 1, or Vincent Vega and Jules Winfield complaining about their lack of shotguns in Pulp Fiction, the trunk shot is a camera move that director Quentin Tarantino has been employing throughout his entire career. And while it may not be the only trademark of his films – he also typically includes a shot of a woman’s bare feet, likes to set up long tracking shots and regularly sets up complex Mexican Standoffs – it’s the trunk shot that best defines the director’s aesthetic. Since arriving on the scene in the early 90s, Tarantino has done his work to define the word “cool,” and the trunk shot accomplishes just that, showing off those behind the car from a low angle, making his characters seem larger than life, while also giving them a secret to hold on to, as they know what’s in the trunk before the audience does. Tarantino didn’t invent the shot, as it was seen in movies long before he came around, but there is no filmmaker in the world that uses it better.

Joe Wright and his tracking shots

Joe Wright didn’t invent the tracking shot. You can go as far back as Orson Welles’ opening sequence to Touch of Evil or Alfred Hitchcock’s Rope for early examples of masterful tracking shots. Nor did Wright perfect the tracking shot. That credit probably has to go to Alexander Sokurov, who filmed his entire 96-minute picture Russian Ark in one, unbroken take.

But Wright lands on this list for his conscious effort to make the complicated tracking shot his visual trademark, employing it in multiple features. He started experimenting with longer shots in Pride and Prejudice before knocking audiences for a loop with the near-five-minute beach shot in the middle of Atonement. Grace in the midst of chaos became Wright's calling card. In Hanna, Wright once again choreographed a breathtaking tracking shot as he followed Eric Bana into a subway station … and right into a multi-person fist fight. The camera never looks away. And now we’ll never look away from a Wright film as we wait to see if and when he attempts to outdo his previous, spectacular efforts.

When a extensive six-minute clipr for Anna Karenina debuted earlier this month, we momentarily forgot all about the glamour and glitz of Baz Luhrmann's forthcoming The Great Gatsby and couldn't wait to get a look at Joe Wright's ambitious take on the classic Russian story. Spinning off the idea that the Russian aristocracy of the 19th century were living their lives "on a stage," and faking everything as they took their cues from France, Wright has set much of the film inside an old theater, and imbued the entire film with a theatricality that could make it fascinating or completely impossible to watch.

It's still hard to know exactly how it will work out, but today we get another glimpse at the film and, once again, it's cramming with arresting visuals and some intriguing looking performance. The clip also has a lot of Keira Knightley and Wright talking about the idea behind the film's melodramatic style. Take a look below.

"What is the point in doing a safe adaptation?" Well said, Keira Knightley. It's no surprise she and Wright are totally on the same page, since she's starred in two of his most acclaimed films, Pride & Prejudice and Atonement. After the Oscar-nominated success of Atonement Wright seemed to be heading down the road of a fairly standard prestige film director, but the failure of The Soloist seemed to put a kink in that path-- last year's bloody and wild coming-of-age fairy tale Hanna was like nothing else Wright had made, and brilliant for it. Now you really never know what Wright might do next, and as much as Anna Karenina sounds like a return to his Pride & Prejudice prestige days, it's obviously something a whole lot more complicated.

Anna Karenina comes to theaters on November 9 this year. Let us know in the comments if the film's unusual style has you more or less interested in seeing it.

Director Joe Wright has thrice teamed up with English ingénue Keira Knightley to bring literature to life with Atonement, Pride & Prejudice, and the upcoming Anna Karenina. With the first two winning much praise and Oscar acclaim, the third film of the pair's collaboration has some incredible expectation to live up to. But from the release of Focus Feature's glamorous poster and enchanting first trailer, Anna Karenina has had us in its sway.

Now, Wright has released a clip that gives us a look at six minutes of the film, while revealing a surprising device the trailer and poster only hinted at. As Wright explains it in the clip's intro:

You can view the awe-inspiring results below in a clip that features Knightley, Aaron Johnson, and Jude Law:

Wright has been praised for his incredible and complicated long takes, like the beach scene in Atonement and the underground fight scene in Hanna. But now his love of this elegant but hard-earned fluidity has informed the entire construction of his Anna Karenina, an epic breathtaking in its ambition. From this clip we can see the linearity Wright speaks of as Anna moves seamlessly from the ball to her home, but there's so much more here to savor.

Matching the drama's setting, the actors have chosen a heightened more theatrical performance style than what is typically seen in contemporary films, and is supported here by a looming orchestral score. While this is sure to turn off some moviegoers, it seems a majestic and bold choice that could make Anna Karenina all the more a standout in an autumn crowded with award-courting pictures. On top of that, we get a taste of Johnson and Knightley's shared screen time in which the heat of the chemistry they share is so intense it causes all the women about to flap their fans frantically! With so many daring choices on display, Anna Karenina has just become my most-anticipated feature of the fall.

Anna Karenina opens November 9th.

Between Baz Luhrmann's Great Gatsby and Joe Wright's Anna Karenina, moviegoers will be spoiled for choice this winter when it comes to luxurious adaptations of novels that explore ill-fated love in high society. Though the former won't be hitting theaters stateside until Christmas Day, Warner Bros has already been teasing Luhrmann's ambitious adaptation's over-the-top glamour with a gilded poster and a garish trailer. As for Anna, Focus Features has previously unveiled a striking string of first look images for Anna that revealed an almost unrecognizable Jude Law, a stunningly regal Keira Knightley, and a mustachioed—yet dapper—Aaron Johnson. And now, MSN has uncovered the film's first trailer, viewable below:

Inspired by Leo Tolstoy's classic novel, Anna Karenina stars Knightley as the titular aristocrat who rejects the norms of 19th century Russian high society to pursue her passion for the dashing Count Vronksy (Johnson), much to the dismay of her husband (Law). Helmed by Wright, who directed Knightley in such Oscar-honored adaptations as Atonement and Pride and Prejudice, this drama has promised to devastate and delight us since it was announced, and its first trailer does not disappoint. Unfurling a bold vision for this well-known romance, it is thoroughly glorious.

Doubling our anticipation, Focus Features has also released its first poster—fittingly at Glamour Magazine —which promises passion, drops names, and teases the tale's tragic finale. It's an image that beautifully blends style and substance, as the high contrast colors make the characters pop and a bold font brags about the incredible talent in front of and behind the camera. (Heralded playwright Tom Stoppard penned the screenplay!)

The embrace that Knightley and Johnson share here is both enviably passionate and utterly captivating, while Law's side-eye signals conflict. And even Levin (Domnall Gleeson) and Kitty (Alicia Vikander) share in the rapture of this promotional poster, all standing before the edge of a stage, signaling the high drama audiences are in store for. Watch out, Gatsby, because Karenina's got swagger for days.

Anna Karenina opens November 9th.

In 2007 director Joe Wright made a huge splash when he directed Atonement, a period drama starring Keira Knightley, Saoirse Ronan and James McAvoy. The film was a huge hit, both with audiences and critics, and it ended up earning seven Academy Award nominations (and it won for Best Original Score). Wright's last two films, The Soloist and Hanna, were both a step away from what we have typically seen from the director - before Atonement he directed an adaptation of Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice, but this year he's returning to the period drama game with Anna Karenina and Focus Features has just released the first four stills from the movie.

Check out all of the images below and click on each one to see it full size in our database.

Based on the classic novel by Leo Tolstoy, Anna Karenina stars Knightly as the titular character, who is stuck in a loveless marriage. When she begins an affair with the affluent Count Vronsky (Aaron Johnson), however, her life becomes increasingly complicated. The adaptation has an all-star cast that includes Michelle Dockery, Emily Watson, Jude Law, Matthew Macfadyen, and Olivia Williams. The film does not currently have a release date in the United States.

I'm a big fan of Joe Wright's newest film Hanna-- my full review posts later today-- and once again excited about the director of Pride & Prejudice and Atonement, who baffled me and many other people by turning in last year's drab and pandering The Soloist. To follow up on his new teen-assassin film Wright is moving back to classical literature, preparing to tackle Leo Tolstoy's Anna Karenina and assembling a dynamite cast to help him do it. Keira Knightley, Aaron Johnson and Jude Law are all confirmed for roles, Atonement co-stars James McAvoy and Saoirse Ronan are trying to make the scheduling work, and as Wright told The Playlist, two more up-and-comers are on board as well.

"Kelly Macdonald‘s confirmed, Benedict Cumberbatch is confirmed. I’m still waiting on Saorise and James," Wright told them yesterday. Cumberbatch actually makes this even more of an Atonement reunion, having played the actual rapist who goes off scot free when Ronan's character Briony accuses McAvoy instead. The British actor has been working steadily for years in all kinds of films you might recognize him in, and after appearing in last year's Four Lions he's got a huge 2011 lined up, with roles in Tinker, Tailor, Soldier Spy, Spielberg's War Horse and the Rachel Weisz drama The Whistleblower. Macdonald isn't doing too bad for herself either, stealing scenes in No Country for Old Men and leading herself to a lead role on Boardwalk Empire as the ambitious Irish immigrant Margaret Schroeder.

As The Playlist pieces the cast together, they've got Knightley starring in the title role, with Law playing her husband Karenin and Johnson her lover Vronsky. Once McAvoy and Ronan get their schedules put together-- he just had a baby, she's likely waiting to settle a deal for The Hobbit-- they'll be able to decide on this Wright reunion, and production is set to start in the fall. Even without McAvoy and Ronan this is a British acting supergroup for the ages, and if you're feeling wary about Wright after The Soloist, please see Hanna this weekend and get as excited about this as I am.

A few days back, rumors started hitting the internet that Kick-Ass star Aaron Johnson was mulling an offer to star opposite Keira Knightley in a new adaptation of Tolstoy's Anna Karenina. He's still yet to officially board, but now it seems the studio has also honed in on its other potential male lead.

According to Variety, the actor in question is Jude Law, though it's still a little unclear which role he might potentially be attached to in the eight-part novel. There's Anna husband, twenty years her senior, which might work considering Law is thirteen years older than Knightley. There's also the soldier she falls in love with and her brother Stiva, who philanders around as well. There's a good amount of cheating that will go on regardless.

Anna Karenina is being directed by Joe Wright who has proven himself more than capable with period pieces such as Atonement in the past. Because of that success, he's attracting an A-list cast to fill out the roles. The novel, an absolute masterpiece, deserves nothing short of a brilliant film, and if both Law and Johnson come on board, audiences should get just that.

The word first broke last November that Joe Wright was collaborating with legendary playwright and screenwriter Tom Stoppard to adapt Anna Karenina, the Leo Tolstoy novel that has been adapted for the screen no fewer than 10 times, the most famous version starring Greta Garbo. Since last fall, though, Wright has been hard at work on his teen assassin thriller Hanna, starring Saoirse Ronan and coming to theaters on April 8. Now that that one's finished, though, Wright, is ready to set his sights on the future, and talked to About.com about Anna Karenina, which he's hoping to shoot in the fall.

First of all, it looks like Keira Knightley will indeed be starring as Anna, as was rumored last fall; though Wright says he's "not sure yet" who the star will be, he also admits "it's fairly obvious" and "I'm loyal to my actors," and is only holding back because "she hasn't signed on the dotted line." Given that Knightley has starred in two of Wright's previous films, and is pretty much perfect to play the glamorous, romantic heroine, it's not too hard to guess what he's hinting at here.

As for the details about the project and Stoppard's script, which Wright calls "amazing," he says it will focus on both Anna's story-- about her affair and divorce-- and Levin's, about his attempts to woo Anna's relative Kitty. Oh, and the parts about agriculture that you skimmed over when you read the book in high school? Wright's ignoring that part too:

What Wright seems to be most interested in tackling is the fact that the Russian aristocracy of the period, where Anna Karenina is set, decided to adopt French mannerisms, going so far as to learn French at the exclusion of Russian. As Wright puts it,

If Wright gets moving on the project in the fall, we could see the movie as early as fall 2012, possibly in time for awards season if the film turns out as prestige-friendly as it seems on paper. After the disappointing The Soloist and Hanna, a fine movie that will definitely not be an Oscar contender, Wright seems ready to return to his period film wheelhouse from Pride & Prejudice and Atonement. With Keira Knightley as his Anna and Tom Stoppard adapting one of literature's classics, it's hard to image that this move won't work out well.

Hanna is the next film from director Joe Wright, but even though it stars his Atonement actress Saoirse Ronan, don't think for a minute this is anything like a British period piece or even a beautifully photographed film about romance of any kind. This time around Ronan is playing a killer, raised in the woods by her father (Eric Bana) to be ruthless and tough, sent on the run throughout Europe while hunted by the harsh CIA agent (Cate Blanchett) who killed her mother years before. The movie looks great-- it wouldn't be a Wright film if it didn't-- but it also features more violence, action and gritty modern locales than anything we've seen from Wright before.

I saw Hanna tonight at a special screening in New York, though sadly I'm forbidden from saying much more for a while. One my way out of the screening, though, I was given a flash drive that included the first released clip from the film plus some brand new images. You can check them all out below, and see larger versions of the images in our Blend Film Database. Just a few seconds into this clip you'll realize this is not the same Joe Wright we've known before-- and with the music from the Chemical Brothers and the flashing strobe light in the background, that feels like a very good thing. Hanna opens April 8.

While 2010 was the year that introduced us to both Chloe Moretz and Hailee Steinfeld, we mustn't forget that there is a third brilliant under-20 actress out there, and her name is Saoirse Ronan. Earning her first Oscar nomination when she was only 13, she has an insanely bright future ahead of her, and it looks to continue with Hanna.

The first international trailer for the Joe Wright film has popped up over at MSN Latinoamerica and, just like the first domestic trailer, it looks utterly badass. In the film, Ronan plays a young girl who has been trained by her father (Eric Bana) to be the perfect killer. After being given her mission she sets off into the world, hunted by CIA agents and learning about her own existence.

Check out the trailer below.

It's somewhat ridiculous how cool this movie looks, though I'm still waiting for the debate "Hanna vs. Hit Girl" to begin. Joe Wright is typically known for making movies like Atonement and Pride and Prejudice, but just like Michel Gondry did with The Green Hornet, this may be an excellent way to show off some talent as an action director. Hanna hits theaters on April 8 and to read more about the film, head over to our Blend Film Database

There was a weird imbalance at first at the New York Comic Con panel for Hanna, the assassin drama that reunites director Joe Wright with his Atonement star Saoirse Ronan. While Wright, Ronan and co-star Eric Bana were all on hand for the panel, the first clip they presented focused entirely on Cate Blanchett, who plays an American CIA agent apparently trying to track down Ronan's titular assassin character. The scene was filmed well, with excellent building tension and staging within the hotel room, but it was a little weird to get amped to the teenage girl assassin movie and see Cate Blanchett dodging bullets instead.

Luckily the second clip brought the goods the audience was actually looking for. Hanna has been captured in some kind of concrete cell by Blanchett and her cohorts, and a patronizing doctors starts off asking her questions, while Ronan's Hanna sits there with wild, tangled, Carrie-esque hair and a blank stare. When she asks to see Blanchett's character Marissa Wiegler, both we and Blanchett knows she's up to something, so they send in a decoy instead. It looks like Hanna is just some traumatized girl looking for comfort, but when she wraps her arms around fake-Marissa's neck you'd better believe there's a neck-snapping on the way. Oh, and then she gets her hands on a gun, and you don't get raised in the woods as an assassin without knowing how to handle a gun in a time of crisis.

Bana didn't get a lot of play in either of the clips, but the panel made it clear that his role raising Hanna is important in the film; it's just been the two of them for her entire life, so that her only concept of the outside world comes from books and fairy tale stories. As Wright put it, when it comes time for her to leave home, "she thinks the world she's going to is going to be a beautiful fairy tale, with princes and princesses," while Ronan put it more simply: "She's a bit of a freak. But I like freaks." You really only need one look at her in the orange jumpsuit in the prison scene to know exactly what that means.

The gunplay and general assassin stuff is clearly what everyone in the Comic Con crowd showed up to see, but I'm more interested in what we saw of Wright bringing his lush, meticulous filmmaking style to a grittier and more violent story. I'm imagining something like that famous war tracking shot in Atonement, but with kick-ass Saoirse Ronan running around instead of battered World War II soldiers. Oh, and with music from the Chemical Brothers-- there was no score in place for anything that we saw, but Wright confirmed they'll be doing the score for the entire film, and based on what we saw it will complement the film perfectly. No, not exactly what you were expecting from the director of Pride and Prejudice, but that's the fun of it.

Hanna hits theaters on April 8 next year, and though there's no specific plan for a trailer release, head of Focus Features James Schamus shouted up form the audience during the panel that it was coming "soon." Keep an eye out and brace yourself for well-directed teen assassin madness next year.

From getting raped and murdered in a hole in a cornfield to becoming the perfect killing machine, Saoirse Ronan seems to be making her mark in a big way. Oscar nominated at 13, Ronan is on her way to the top of the young Hollywood ladder faster and with more talent than most.

USA Today recently got their ink-covered hands on a first look photo of the young star from her upcoming assassin thriller, Hanna, in which the title character is raised in Finland by her ex-CIA father to be a well-trained, unsupicious killer. Making a disgustingly adorable girl look like a bad ass is a tough task and despite the fact that she is undeniably cute, her cold stare and icy eyes tell the story of her decidedly different upbringing. It doesn't hurt that instead of a rifle she seems to be hunting with an exponentially more brutal bow and arrow.

Hanna is being directed by Joe Wright, of Pride and Prejudice and Atonement fame, and co-stars Eric Bana and a bigger version of Ronan in the form of Cate Blanchett. The film won't be released until 2011, but for now take a look at this picture and expect some more as we roll into the summer.

Joe Wright's Hanna, which we only learned was in the works in November, has been moving along swiftly ever since his Atonement ingenue Saoirse Ronan signed on to star. Now Deadline Hollywood is reporting that Cate Blanchett will join Ronan and Eric Bana in the film, in which Ronan plays a 14-year-old spy.

No word on what Blanchett's role will be, but I'm hoping she's on the side of the assassin world and not the French family that shelters Ronan's character through her adolescence. I contend that the movie could be amazing, particularly given Wright's fondness for strong female characters (we'll just forget about The Soloist for now), but Josh is convinced it will be boring and slow-moving. Below is the synopsis of the film; read that and tell me a movie about the emotional side of being an assassin also has to be boring:

When I wrote about Joe Wright's upcoming project Hanna, about a teenage girl assassin, a few months ago, it took a sharp commenter to point out that the obvious casting for the role would be Saoirse Ronan, who was brilliant in Wright's Atonement and is now the perfect age to play a 14-year-old Eastern European girl "raised by her father to be a cold-blooded killing machine."

And would you look at that-- THR is reporting that Ronan is negotiations for the part. Congratulations, commenter Alex! You are the smart one in this room.

Even though The Lovely Bones was a gigantic disappointment, Ronan came away from the whole thing pretty unscathed, and as she moves into more adult roles, how better to do it than play a complete ass-kicker? As for Wright, who broke a lot of hearts when The Soloist totally sucked, he's due for a bit of redemption himself. Let's hope these two can help each other out.

Lately all the news about Joe Wright has been what he's not working on-- not making a romance in India, not remaking My Fair Lady. After so many rebuttals, Wright finally seems ready to say yes to something. According to THR, he's got his eye on Hanna a spy thriller about someone resembling the teenage girl version of Jason Bourne.

Oh yes, such an awesome movie can actually exist., particularly with someone as in tune with girl power as Wright directing. The movie has been at Focus Features since 2007 and has even had Danny Boyle and Alfonso Cuaron interested, but apparently they're more interested in going with someone less experienced in action, but maybe more up for a chance following the disappointing results of The Soloist. The plot alone sounds like a major departure for Wright:

Given that Chloe Moretz seems likely to wow us at Hit Girl in Kick-Ass, we may be facing some kind of new era of teenage girl badasses. Either Keira Knightley is guaranteed the role, or some other teenage girl is about to get a seriously big break. Anyone in particular you guys would like to see break out with a role like this?