Moviefone Editorial

Tag: @movieid:20089868

  • The ‘Life’ Writers Talk About the Movie’s Shocking Twist

    If you saw “Life” this weekend (and if you didn’t, well, you should), you know that the movie has some pretty big twists. In fact, it’s bookended with them. And we’re going to talk about them. So if you haven’t seen the movie, then shoo. We got this.

    Seriously, if you haven’t seen the movie please don’t read this. Come back afterwards; it’ll still be here.

    All right, so the movie opens with the crew of an international space station uncovering some Martian soil, which produces an honest-to-goodness Martian. Earth is alerted, everyone rejoices. Except that this Martian isn’t as cute and cuddly as it seems, and pretty soon it’s growing at an exponential rate and murdering crewmembers. You know, that old killer-space-beast chestnut.

    The shocking thing is who goes first, though. It’s Ryan Reynolds, a person so unnaturally handsome that you assume he’s going to make it until the end credits. (Maybe that “and Ryan Reynolds” distinction on the poster gave it away, though.) When we talked to director Daniel Espinosa about the twist, he said it was one of the things that drew him to the project, and referred to Reynolds’s death as his “Janet Leigh moment,” referencing the shocking death at the beginning of Alfred Hitchcock‘s “Psycho.”

    When I talked to the writers (Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick) about the movie, just before its world premiere at SXSW, I had to ask them about what it was like murdering Reynolds so early.

    “We tell people Ryan’s our muse,” Wernick said, sweetly. “We always have him in mind when we’re conceiving and writing projects, and it’s so great to continue our partnership with Ryan, which has lasted since 2009. We’ve worked hand-in-hand as one creative voice.” Reese then piped in: “They say kill your darlings. Well, we killed our darling.” There was a pause and Wernick added, “We can’t kill Ryan as Deadpool because he’s un-killable, but we can sure kill him in ‘Life.’”

    Sorry, Ryan. 🙁

  • ‘Life’ Writers Talk Technological Advances, That ‘Venom’ Rumor, and ‘Deadpool 2’

    This week’s terrifying sci-fi odyssey “Life,” which stars Jake Gyllenhaal, Ryan Reynolds, and Rebecca Ferguson as crewmembers aboard a doomed international space station that comes in contact with a very nasty Martian (they nickname the squid-like beast “Calvin”), began, like the monster, as a simple, single-celled idea in the minds of writers Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick. The screenwriters, who have penned wise-ass classics like “Zombieland” and “Deadpool,” take a surprisingly straightforward approach with “Life.” This is a singularly scary movie. Prepare to clutch your significant other’s hand until you hear bones break.

    I got a chance to chat with them ahead of the film’s world premiere at the SXSW Film Festival, and we talked about the inspiration for the movie, what it was like seeing their visions come to life (not only Calvin but the entire space station), the possibility of a sequel, and what’s going on with “Deadpool 2.”

    Moviefone: What’s interesting about this movie, especially coming from you guys, is how straightforward it is. Had you always wanted to do a straightforward sci-fi horror movie?

    Rhett Reese: Absolutely. It really is. I grew up with a very active imagination, and movies like “Alien” and “The Shining” absolutely terrified me. When I was younger, I wouldn’t even get to see them, but I’d see the commercials and they would absolutely terrify me. Deep down inside I always wanted to write something that was really scary. And this was the attempt to do that. We had fun. It was certainly not going for the same things we normally go for, so we got to flex a different writing muscle.

    Technology seems to have freed you up, too. Because if you had been writing this 30 years ago there would have been no way to visualize something like this creature.

    Paul Wernick: Absolutely. And not just the creature but the technology of the weightlessness and how that all visualized itself on screen and visual effects and wirework it’s just … We’ve been afforded so many gifts on this movie, with the ability to do stuff we couldn’t have done even five years ago at the price point that we wanted to do it. And as for Calvin, he’s a creature that we did extensive research on going into this. He’s one of the seven main characters and the primary villain in the piece. We visualized him in a way that we tapped into research we did on the deep-sea world with these translucent sea creatures and the octopus was a great inspiration of ours. And then Daniel and the visual effects guys and the creature design guys brought it to life in a way that far exceeded even our expectations.

    Was there ever a point where you guys said, “Screw it, let’s give him a face”?

    Reese: There was, at some point, because you’re so used to seeing faces. But everybody felt that to anthropomorphize it too much would be a mistake. Because it really is based on the idea that it’s all these interconnected cells that perform the bodily functions of all the differentiated tasks of a human body. So a cell that could be an eye cell and a muscle cell and a nerve cell all at once. It doesn’t look as much like the average creature on Earth, let’s say.

    What was it like seeing the set for the first time?

    Wernick: It was amazing. There’s such detail, and I don’t know if you know this, but it was shot on two soundstages at Shepperton in London, and they built basically the entire space station. The level of detail on everything, there was Russian on buttons that you’d never actually see on screen. The level and attention to detail was incredible and really awesome. It shows on screen. We could have shot this on the space station. It’s pretty astonishing. And they had to build it in such a way that it had to be open air so the wires could move above it. It was a technological and artistic thing of beauty.

    [Director] Daniel Espinosa said the film is loaded with references to other movies.

    Reese: I’m not sure what he’s talking about.

    Wernick: He might have put in some definite Easter eggs. There were some on “Deadpool” we didn’t know about either. Everyone likes to throw stuff in there. I’m sure there’s a bunch of stuff in this one. You know, “Alien” was definitely a huge inspiration of ours. It’s a great movie, and almost 40 years ago it came out. For us it was making the thing as current and relevant and up to date as we could.

    It also has such an international feel, which is really great in today’s climate, with all of these countries working together. Was that something that you guys were cognizant of?

    Reese: Yes, and that’s the way the space station is, with astronauts from different countries aboard it. We didn’t want to get into the divisiveness between nations or the divisiveness between characters in the sense that one character wants to bring the sample back to Earth to turn it into a weapon or something like that. We wanted a diverse but united crew that did their jobs well and had each other’s back. That was part of the realism factor, with these astronauts putting aside their country’s differences to come together on that space station to do work together.

    Have you guys thought about a sequel to “Life”? The ending is terrific and definitely leaves the possibility for another film open.

    Reese: Well, the sequel is going to be “Venom.” [Laughs] We would love a sequel but it depends on whether or not people buy tickets.

    Wernick: We always felt that an unconventional ending to a big tentpole movie would be cool, to us at least. We’re always left-of-center and it felt left-of-center to us. But studios do love franchises so that set up the potential should the movie succeed, we’d love to make another one on Earth. It brings a smile to our face.Let’s talk about “Deadpool 2.” The first film was such a surprise for so many people. How do you do that again?

    Reese: I think we’ll find some more rules to break hopefully. I think sequels should have the familiar and the new in them. They shouldn’t feel too similar to the previous movie otherwise people will get bored but I think they should also carryover in terms of tone and character so that people will still see what they know and love in the new movie. So we have similar elements, the tone will be the same, but the story is very different — it’ll have more characters, different characters, Deadpool is going to go on a new emotional journey so we want to keep it emotional. So it’s all about striking that balance.

    How did you guys feel about the movie hitting the way that it did?

    Reese: It was probably the most gratifying moment of our careers. Because we’ve certainly reached big audiences but never a massive international audience like that, and the passion people had with it was so intense. We meet people all the time and the second you mention “Deadpool” they just light up. That, for us, is why we do it. There’s that line in “Zombieland,” when Woody Harrelson is gushing at Bill Murray and Bill says, “Well that’s why we do it.” That’s what we say about “Deadpool.” It’s really fun.

    Was it also fun introducing that character to the world?

    Wernick: Well, there was always the fear that “Deadpool” was a one-quadrant movie. I think that’s why it took six years to get made. And the fact that it extended all over age ranges, including kids as young as 10, which I cringe at, all the way to grandparents, to hit all four quadrants in a movie that could have, if it had gone wrong, was astonishing to us and really gratifying. Because it was a passion of ours, it remains a passion of ours. And to see that passion come across on screen and relay that to audiences is amazing and awesome for us.

    Can you talk about working with new director David Leitch and what he brings?

    Wernick: He’s the best. His mind works in ways that others don’t in terms of visualizing the action. We were just in the production offices and saw the pre-viz on one of the action scenes that we’d written and it elevated it in such a way that’s jaw-dropping. So we’re playing to his strengths and we feel like audiences are going to be blown away.

    Reese: He also really gets the tone and the character. There was no learning curve. He came in and just got it.

    So is it going to have more action?

    Reese: I think it’ll be a little bigger, just by virtue of it being a sequel and wanting to top ourselves. But we’re not going to be lifting cities into the air or having alien invasions.

    Wernick: We’re saving that for the third one.

    Reese: The first film was an underdog movie, and we don’t want to feel like “The Avengers” — that big and bloated and huge. It will always have a scrappy, underdog feel to it.

    “Life” comes to our galaxy tomorrow.

  • Ryan Reynolds & Stephen Colbert Mock Green Lantern’s ‘Dumb Superpower’

    Not to pile on, but “courage bladder” really is a cooler superpower than what Green Lantern can do.

    Ryan Reynolds is promoting his new movie “Life,” but he’s also firing more shots at his 2011 movie “Green Lantern.” He’s been poking fun of himself and that DC Comics movie for years now, with its only saving grace being that it paired Reynolds with his future wife, Blake Lively.

    Reynolds was on “The Late Show” last night, taking a spot on the blanket for Stephen Colbert’s regular segment, “Big Questions With Even Bigger Stars.” While gazing up at the night sky, asking each other tough questions about the universe, they added a joke about Green Lantern:

    Ryan Reynolds: “Hey, Stephen, if you could have any superpower, what would it be?”

    Stephen Colbert: “Oh, I’d like to have, like, this super-cool alien high-tech ring, and it’s green and it has a lantern on it, and I could use my imagination to make anything out of green light.”

    Long pause, and applause.

    Ryan: “Wow. That’s a really dumb superpower.”

    Stephen: “Yeah. What superpower would you want?”

    Ryan: “I’d like to be able to pee at a public urinal when someone’s standing directly behind me.”

    Stephen: “Oh. Courage bladder.”

    Courage bladder! Watch the full segment; the joke about “Avatar” is pretty good, too:

    Green Lantern is about to get back in action in the DC Extended Universe. Henry Cavill (Superman) was just posting about the character, who may or may not be played by Armie Hammer in “Green Lantern Corps.”

    “Life” opens Friday, March 24. For more shenanigans, check out Ryan’s insane junket interview with co-star Jake Gyllenhaal.

    Want more stuff like this? Like us on Facebook.

  • ‘Life’ Director Daniel Espinosa Won’t Tell Us Where the ‘Alien’ Easter Eggs Are

    I talked to director Daniel Espinosa the morning before his brand-new sci-fi thriller, “Life,” had its world premiere in front of an audience at the SXSW Festival. (One of the greatest film festivals in the world, by the way.)

    He said watching the film, in that setting, with an audience, would leave him a ball of “anxiety.” “It’s like a personal experience for me to sit there with other people. I’m sitting there going, Is this a good silence? Is this a bad silence?” I asked him what his ideal reaction would be. “It’s quite nice when people miss five minutes of the movie because they can’t look,” he said.

    And while I wasn’t at the screening, I’m sure that people missed five minutes of the movie because they were afraid to look. “Life” is a crackerjack sci-fi horror tale of six doomed astronauts (among them: Ryan Reynolds, Rebecca Ferguson, and Jake Gyllenhaal, who had great things to say about making the movie) who uncover a Martian life form in a soil sample and then … things go very bad.

    Espinosa is a Swedish director who made the breakout film “Easy Money,” before helming such big Hollywood productions as “Safe House” and “Child 44” and, based on our brief phone conversation, is a lovable madman. We talked about the obvious comparisons to “Alien” (and the multitude of Easter eggs he refused to divulge), how he shot the movie, and the joys of having an extremely truncated post-production schedule.

    Be advised, minor spoilers follow.

    Moviefone: “Life” obviously fits very literally into the monster-on-a-space-ship genre. Was that something that you’d always wanted to do?

    Daniel Espinosa: Well, the whole idea of moving into science fiction, when you work in Sweden it is such an absurd idea. So it was more that I adored many of those movies but I never thought it would be possible. But when I got the script it hit me that it had such a great turn towards the end and had such a great surprise in the beginning, which I thought were a little bit unusual. I got to have my own Janet Leigh/”Psycho” moment. And then what hit me was the realism that it had. Those two turns and the realism differentiated it from the obvious comparison, which is “Alien.” “Alien” took place in the future in this dystopian future, which is what we feared the most in the 1970s because of the atomic era, but I think the greatest fear right now is what happens tomorrow. I liked to pursue that.

    Were there any references you snuck in to “Alien” or any of those earlier movies?

    Oh my god, there’s tons! It’s littered with it! But that’s a fun game. If you made a science fiction movie wouldn’t you fill it with numbers, with what people are saying, with writings on the wall, with shapes? That’s what makes it so fun, making one of these movies. I don’t know about you, but I’ve watched “The Shining,” for example, so many times, looking at the numbers on the door and thinking about what they mean.

    Yeah, I mean, they made a whole documentary about the things hidden in “The Shining.” Maybe they’ll do that for “Life.”

    Yes!

    Can you tell us one really good, hidden Easter egg?

    I can’t because it’s hidden, man! You’ve got to find it yourself! That’s the fun of it. I can say this: Look at the walls.

    Was part of the appeal for you how streamlined the movie is?

    Yes, I loved that it had such forceful energy to it, which I think is quite nice. The pauses become moments like small breaths. But what I loved was — the combination of that energy usually leads to a cute Hollywood ending, but what I liked was that it was more like a zombie movie with a more noir ending, or a “Twilight Zone” ending.

    Can you talk about your approach to the film’s visuals?

    I looked a lot into still photography from the first voyage to the moon, which was shot with this Hasselblad big format. So what we decided to do was get these Hasselblad lenses and re-house them for the 65 mm Alexa [digital camera] to get the same kind of feeling. Those old Hasselblad lenses have this very particular kind of flair, which was actually the first encounter we, as human beings, had of how images looked in space. I thought if I’m going to do it naturalistic it would be nice to tap into the core essence of the first images that we saw as space images.

    The movie has such a wonderful combination of awe and terror. Was that something that you were going for?

    Oh, completely. We wanted to create a vignette around these characters that became stronger and stronger throughout the picture. I worked with this color grader who had done “The Revenant” and “Gravity,” and us three together could work on this bright movie to become darker and darker and walk into this almost Kubrickian red.

    This movie is pretty quick. Was there anything that you cut for time or pacing that you wish was still in the movie?

    No, I was quite lucky because we were supposed to have a six month post-production period, but we got so squeezed because Ridley Scott kept moving [“Alien: Covenant“] closer and closer to mine and I had to back off … the quickness of the post-production meant that the influences that usually drop down on you weren’t as strong as normal. We were pretty much able to do the movie the way we wanted to.

    “Life” opens in our galaxy this Friday.

  • Watch Ryan Reynolds & Jake Gyllenhaal Lose It Through ‘Useless’ Junket Interview

    Move over, Blake Lively and Hugh Jackman, ’cause Ryan Reynolds just found his perfect goof-off partner: Jake Gyllenhaal. The two stars actually had to be spoken to on the set of their new sci-fi movie “Life” because they “wasted so much money” by laughing through (expensive) takes. You can watch an example of that beautiful tomfoolery in the interview FOX 5 DC attempted to do with the pair during the “Life” junket.

    Reporter Kevin McCarthy tried desperately to get out one question about a tracking shot in the movie, but before he could get a semi-serious answer, he got something much better — a live comedy act between the riffing co-stars. The hilarity started with Gyllenhaal throwing his “Deadpool” gift pin over his shoulder, sending Reynolds into hysterics, and continued with a raunchy discussion of Reynolds’s use of the term “big oner” to describing one long take. Blake Lively’s name got thrown in there at one point, and the two stars kept things at a junior high level by joking about the name tags on their chairs — in case they couldn’t figure out where to sit — and also made some fake earrings.

    The stars laughingly acknowledged that they had given the reporter a “useless interview” with no actual information, but this was much better, no?

    “The Tonight Show,” Gyllenhaal talked to Jimmy Fallon about his bromance with Reynolds, and revealed that the producers pulled them aside to the corner and told them to “cut it out” ’cause they were wasting so much time and money.

    Check out Moviefone’s (much more serious) interview with Gyllenhaal on “Life” and the 10th anniversary of “Zodiac.” “Life” — which is actually horror, not comedy, opens March 24.

    Want more stuff like this? Like us on Facebook.

  • Jake Gyllenhaal Talks ‘Life,’ ‘Okja,’ and the 10th Anniversary of ‘Zodiac’

    “Life,” the brand-new science-fiction thriller about a crew of unlucky astronauts (led by Ryan Reynolds, Rebecca Ferguson, and Jake Gyllenhaal) who pick up a soil sample from Mars that isn’t just soil, will scare the hell out of you. It’s an unrelenting, terror-filled journey into the deepest, most uncomfortable parts of space exploration and an absolutely thrilling time at the movies.

    I was lucky enough to chat with Gyllenhaal the morning after the movie’s uproarious SXSW world premiere, where we talked about getting drawn to the project, what it was like shooting the movie, and whether or not he’d return for a sequel. I also had to ask him about “Zodiac,” one of his very best performances (and one of the very best movies, well, ever) and an upcoming movie I’m very excited about, “Okja,” due out on Netflix this summer.

    Moviefone: This is the first time you’ve done a movie like this. Had you always wanted to do something in the space/horror genre?

    Jake Gyllenhaal: No, if you ever talk to me I don’t have any specific desire to do any particular type of film. It mostly has to do with the community of people you work with and the opportunity to play around and explore. And [director] Daniel Espinosa is very particular in that way and really allows for that type of exploration. That was a promise he made. That was part of it, along with a terrifying script. And Seamus McGarvey was already shooting it and we had some incredible department heads so I thought, Hey, these people are going to do some very interesting things with this idea.

    Daniel has said that part of the appeal was the Janet Leigh aspect of getting rid of a major character early. Was that fun to play around with as well?

    Absolutely. I think those qualities that the movie has are great and subverting things is always fun. There are so many things that are really trying to pander and in a lot of ways this is pure entertainment but in that space it’s always fun to f*ck around.

    What was it like shooting the movie?

    Oh, it was fun. Being on wires every day, we came in and didn’t have to wear shoes and wore jumpsuits. It was the easiest costume to put on and take off. You fly around on wires every day … There are definitely physical strains on your body at a certain age that aren’t always fun. It was claustrophobic and there are some tense moments when you’re trying to create those things but ultimately it was really fun. Daniel is lovely and his attitude is great and he has a great sense of humor. It was a wonderful, great cast that was very humble and happy to be there. I haven’t been on many movies with such a lovely process.

    Did they show you what the monster was going to look like, or was it pure speculation on your end?

    They more showed us where it would be. Daniel wanted us to use own own imaginations. And we had these ear pieces in, where our characters could communicate with each other in the movie but Daniel could get on there and he would tell us to look at things or turn our heads in different directions and explain to us what was happening. It was a strange discovery as we went. We had kind of an idea of what Calvin would look like and what he’d change into but it was mostly our imagination.

    What did you think when you finally saw it? Did it line up at all?

    It changes, so I think in that way, as it grows and behaves that way … It was a little bit of both. But definitely f*cking scary.

    The writers of “Life” have talked about being open to a sequel. Is that something you’d be open to if called upon?

    Always! I’ve never done that before but always!It’s the 10th anniversary of “Zodiac” this year. Looking back on the process — and with some distance — what was that experience like?

    Oh man … It was life-changing and career-changing, and to work with David Fincher and to have that experience was extraordinary. I was very young at the time and thought very highly of myself, which has absolutely changed. When you’re that age and you’re not even so clear about the kind of geniuses I was working with — performers, filmmakers, all the crew around me. It was definitely such a dark movie to create and make and so ambitious in a lot of ways. Not necessarily in the ways we consider films ambitious but in this very subversive film that I think is ahead of its time and is a classic in a lot of ways. It’s an honor.

    It’s great, too, that people still talk about it. Has the fact that it has remained, even after getting a lackluster initial release, surprised you at all?

    No. David hadn’t made a movie in a while when he made that, and I remember the script was a certain way. It was 100 pages when it was written, and when he got on it became 180. He knew about it before, obviously, but as he tried to shape the movie he was trying to figure out who this person was, even to the day we were shooting it, up until the end of shooting, to see if we could find out who the Zodiac Killer was.

    Really?

    Yeah! The thing that is incredible about David is that he’s really not afraid of these corners of the world, and he wanted to figure it out as much as all the characters in the movie want to figure it out. I think that need, that want, that desire, that ache is in the movie because it’s his ache. He grew up with the Zodiac Killer in his hometown, so all of those things run very deep inside him and they run in the movie and that’s what I think makes it so special.

    You have another movie that is coming out that I am so excited for: “Okja.” What can you tell us about that movie and what was it like working with Bong Joon-ho?

    Well, again, another brilliant mind. He’s a true visionary, from his early movies in Korea to the movies he’s ventured out with a more international cast. He’s so incredible to work with and he’s such a visual artist so, in a way, you’re just fitting into this painting. But he also loves the idea of absurdity and creation, so in terms of creating a character with him it’s truly inspiring and so fun. The creature he’s created is beautiful, and I think he’s created a story in the vein of the classics we love; I’d say things like “Pan’s Labyrinth” and “E.T.,” where you watch the journey of a child growing up and moving to adulthood in a way that’s really beautiful and heartbreaking and moving.

    I can’t say enough wonderful things about it. There’s no one I know working today that has the agility with tone that he has — visually, with humor. There are moments in the movie where I’m crying and then immediately start laughing, and I found myself crying and laughing at the same time. There’s something about him. Maybe it’s his understanding of all of our cultures, his understanding of the connection between all of us in the world and where similarities exist. But, man, is that man a craftsperson and I love him as a person and it was a joy to work with him. I can’t wait for you to see the movie.

    “Life” is in theaters Friday.