There was an error in this gadget

Friday, May 23, 2008

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart: You Probably Don't Understand the Iraq War

Former Bush Administration Under Secretary of Defense Douglas Feith was on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart tonight to set the record straight on the Iraq war. Apparently we were not mislead misled into war. I believe him. Unless he's misleading me now...

Anyway, Jon started summer early by firing up the grill and sticking Feith on it. Listen to the defense of a man who was in the room when all the planning went down and decide if it flips your script.

Original here

Featured 5 Awesome Movies Ruined By Last-Minute Changes



"We'll just fix that in post!" has always been the rallying cry for filmmakers in the middle of a troubled production. Unfortunately, sometimes things have a nasty habit of actually getting broken in post-production, usually thanks to studio interference.

Victims include ...

I Am Legend

The Way It Was Supposed To Be:
In this adaptation of Richard Matheson's classic horror novella, Will Smith plays Doctor Robert "Legend" Neville, the last man alive in a city overrun with CGI vampire mutants.

In the film's original ending, Neville is trapped as vampires break through his barricades and infiltrate his hideout (who would have guessed that locking yourself in an enclosed space in the middle of a city full of vampires would turn out to be a bad idea?). Then, this happens:

Yeah. In the original, the vampires are revealed to be thinking, benevolent creatures who were merely attempting to rescue a vampire that Neville had captured earlier.

Not only does the book end in a similar way, but it in fact was the entire freaking point of the book. That's where the title "I Am Legend" came from, Neville's realization at the end that the vampires were the good guys and that he was the monster of their legends, since he had been mindlessly driving stakes through their heart at every opportunity. Maybe a title like So I'm The Asshole would have been clearer.

The "Improved" Version:
Because test audiences apparently didn't like the original ending, the studio opted to go with a new one in which Neville fights back against the vampires to protect his new allies. He does so by igniting a grenade about two inches from their face, destroying the once-safe stronghold and severely injuring his companions. It should also be noted that going by the original ending, Will Smith just murdered scores of reasoning creatures who were attempting to rescue a little girl.

This brings up the other problem, which is that all of the little hints that had been inserted along the way indicating the creatures had intelligence (the complex traps they set, the same creature reappearing in some kind of leadership role) are completely ignored. In the new ending, the vampires are mindless savages with no other purpose but general horror movie mayhem.

Perhaps the saddest thing about all this is that it shows that no one involved really believed in the message of the final product. They didn't produce a film in order to convey any kind message, they just strung together a bunch of cool scenes and called it a movie. One more reason why audience feedback isn't always the best guide, as anyone who has read YouTube comments will happily tell you.

Where you can find the original:
The original ending is available as a bonus scene on the recent DVD release, where it is advertised as the "controversial original ending." Yes, coming to a peaceful reconciliation with your enemies is now more controversial than blowing them right the fuck up.

Superman II

The Way It Was Supposed To Be:
Superman II was to be Richard Donner's epic tale of earth's mightiest protector, and why he decided to let aliens take over the world so he could get some poontang. Superman II probably contains the first true superhero-movie brawl, a violent dust-up between Superman and General Zod that leaves the Man of Steel crushed beneath a bus.

Most of Superman II was actually shot at the same time as the original, by Donner. Donner was more of the Christopher Nolan school of superhero movies, rather than the Joel Schumacher one, meaning he didn't see the need for a lot of goofball camp in his superhero movies. He even brought on his own writer on both films to smooth out the most retarded parts of the scripts.

This all worked great, except for the fact that the producers hated Donner's guts, though probably not as much as he hated theirs. He was booted off the project with 75 percent of the film shot.

The "Improved" Version:
The studio brought in director Richard Lester to re-film much of the movie. The resulting film marks the exact moment in which a franchise that already hinged on an invulnerable man traveling through time by spinning really fast, became ridiculous.

For some reason, Lester thought it would be a good idea to splice slapstick comedy scenes that played like rejected America's Funniest Home Videos clips into the vicious superhero battle. So, when the bad guys unleash their super breath on the city, we are treated to a shot of an ice cream cone flying into a dude's face.

Lester also felt the need to give the Kryptonians a series of increasingly bizarre and useless powers. Apparently, the powers that be felt that flight, super strength, super speed, invulnerability, heat vision, ice breath, x-ray vision, time travel and super-ventriloquism weren't sufficient. In one of the most inexplicable changes to the Superman mythos, our hero is given the power to tear the insignia off of his costume and throw it at an enemy. Yes, they gave him super-logo powers.

Is it unfair to say that everything that was good about Superman II was due to Donner, and that all of the goofy parts were Lester's fault? Let's put it this way: When Lester was finally given control of an entire film from the start, he gave the world Superman III.

Where you can find the original:
In 2006, Donner re-created his film using his scrapped footage, and released it on DVD as Superman II: The Richard Donner Cut.

Unfortunately, because not all of the scenes were filmed, Donner was forced to cobble together old unused shots and test footage to fill in the gaps, and it's pretty noticeable at times.


OK, not that noticeable

Dawn of the Dead

The Way It Was Supposed To Be:
In this startling allegory, director George A. Romero decries America's rampant consumption with his resounding message of, "If you insist on buying worthless crap, don't be surprised if zombies break into your local mall and seriously mess you up. I'm just saying."


Above: Capitalism

In the film's original climax, the main characters, realizing that they will never truly be safe, choose to commit suicide rather than join the legions of the walking dead. The film was to conclude with a haunting final shot of our heroine Fran shoving her head into her helicopter's propeller. This was of course an allegory for America's failing educational system.

It also is the way that, in our opinion, most movies should end.

The "Improved" Version:
In the finished product, the film tries to have it both ways. The original desperate and atmospheric lead-up to the suicide sequence is kept ...

... then suddenly, Peter changes his mind for no reason at all and easily fights his way back to the helicopter, with heroic trumpets blaring in the background the entire time.

Apparently, the studio opted to go with the less depressing ending, in which our heroes are condemned to spend the rest of their lives in a post-apocalyptic wasteland dominated by murderous reanimated cadavers.

The 2004 remake reveals a major plot hole in the film's revised closing sequence: Why did they fight their way through those zombies when the obvious solution would be to simply construct an indestructible tank and some make explosives out of everyday materials?


Above: Logical conclusion

Where you can find the original:
Unfortunately for all you "girl decapitated by a propeller" fetishists out there, there is no existing footage of the film's original ending. The only proof that anyone has that it was even filmed is this picture of the puppet that was going to serve as Gaylen Ross' stand-in.


Stick a wig on there and man, you'd never know

Live Free or Die Hard

The Way It Was Supposed To Be:
In this installment of the popular Die Hard franchise, John McClane must stop a group of cyber terrorists (or are they?) who plan to firewall the central coding system of the primary flux capacitor. Or something like that. Look, we don't need to know the details. We go to watch Bruce Willis a) shoot people and b) taunt his adversaries with western vernacular and implications of an Oedipus complex.

The "Improved" Version:
Well guess what, he doesn't get to do that. Months into filming, the head honchos decided to trim the film behind the director's back in order to get the magical PG-13 rating, which, according to producers, would attract a new demographic at the small cost of making the film suck.

The result? The new McClane was so tame that he couldn't even say his famous catchphrase. Blood splatters were digitally removed (and taking the blood out of a Die Hard movie is like taking the blood out of a vampire movie).

We're predicting that by the time that Live Free or Die Even Harderer comes out, McClane will be fighting terrorists (or are they?) while armed solely with walkie-talkies.

Where you can find the original:
The unrated DVD release of the film contains numerous scenes that were removed from the theatrical cut. McClane gets to say his favorite phrase, and more graphic and visceral action scenes replaced the embarrassingly neutered material.

Yes, they still have the scene where a car flies into a helicopter and yes, the plot still makes no sense. But you'll be surprised at how adding the grit back in makes it feel so much more like a Die Hard movie.

Blade Runner

The Way It Was Supposed To Be:
Blade Runner is Ridley Scott's adaptation of Phillip K. Dick's classic science fiction novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? (a title rendered irrelevant since recent scientific studies have confirmed that robots actually dream about enslaving humans and forcing them to do their bidding).

In the film's original bittersweet conclusion, Rick Deckard chooses to harbor a renegade android, even though she will soon face an electric sheepless sleep of death.

The original film also contains implications that the main character might himself be a replicant, a twist so creative and shocking that we can forgive it for not making any goddamned sense at all.

The "Improved" Version:
The studio, upset with the film's bleak tone, redubbed it with a new voice-over narration from Harrison Ford, who sounds like he's reading his lines at gunpoint. The narration was intended to clarify some of the more confusing parts of the film using the unique storytelling tactic of having the narrator describe something entirely different from what's happening on the screen.

The narration also reveals that Deckard's robotic lover Rachael was not programmed to self-terminate, and they both got to live happily ever after until they both rode off into Heaven on a unicorn.

Where you can find the original:
Well, the good news is you have a lot of options here. In addition to the US theatrical cut, the 2007 re-release also contains the original workprint cut, the 1992 director's cut, and the new "final cut," all for only $78.99 plus shipping and handling.

Hell, at this point it'd almost be easier to read the damned book.

Original here

'Indiana Jones 4': 10 Things You Need To Know, From Real Crystal Skulls To Shia LaBeouf's Pulled Groin

Harrison Ford in "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull"

People whispered about Harrison Ford's age, but 21-year-old LaBeouf was the only actor injured on set.

For those who have kept themselves blissfully unaware of all "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" news, tread cautiously. There are light spoilers ahead.

Indiana Jones may go digging for the great lost treasures of the world, but if you really want to impress your friends, dig this: From George Lucas to Cate Blanchett to Harrison Ford to Ray Winstone, we went straight to the stars, writers and producers of the film to find out 10 things you should know before seeing "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull."

1. "The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles" is now officially canon
Ever since Indiana Jones went the way of "M.A.S.H." (which is to say, from the silver screen to the boob tube), fans have debated whether the series constituted "official" chapters in the life of the world's greatest archaeologist or whether, like some "Star Wars" novels, they existed outside of the series' established canon. Look for a brief mention of adventures with Pancho Villa when Dr. Jones is talking to Mutt as the pair travel through an old town in South America, firmly recalling the plot of the series' first episode, "The Curse of the Jackal."

2. Like Karen Allen's or John Hurt's appearances in the film? Thank Frank Darabont
Although ultimately rejected by George Lucas, "Shawshank Redemption" writer/director Frank Darabont was hired to write a draft of "Indy 4" some years before David Koepp. While he ultimately wasn't given credit for the story that wound up on the screen, which is why he anticipated a legal battle back in November, Darabont's two most important contributions might be some of the biggest. "[The return of] Marion! That was my idea," he told MTV News in August, referring to what made its way in from his script. "[And] I did suggest to Steven that he cast John Hurt in this movie. It's not entirely the role I suggested him for, but I did suggest him." Speaking of screenwriters ...

3. "Indiana Jones and the Quest Not to Be Awful"
He was the last man standing in an informal screenwriting contest that lasted 15 years, so what was Koepp's ultimate goal for "Indy 4"? "Just hope to God you don't screw up," he laughed when MTV News caught up with him in December.

4. Indiana Jones will continue ... without so much Indiana Jones
Following Lucas' recent proclamation that he already had an idea for a fifth "Indy," but with Shia LaBeouf in the main role, both Harrison Ford and LaBeouf told MTV News that they're more than game. "I just work here. I'm glad to work here," Ford told MTV News at the Cannes Film Festival on Friday. "Till they tell me otherwise, I will continue to be Indiana Jones." LaBeouf chimed in: "If ['Crystal Skull' is] received well, I don't imagine they would stop making them. I don't think a Mutt-spinoff would be as big as Indiana Jones. [But] fingers crossed!"

5. Harvard lecturer Marc Zender is a friggin' genius
For more than a year, Internet fans and journalists alike have been trying to divine the secrets of "Indy 4." Instead of hitting up various Web sites, maybe we should've spent more time in class. Nearly eight months ago, archaeologist Marc Zender told MTV News how the film would play out based on his knowledge of crystal skulls — and the result is eerily accurate. Is there a scene in which "people are able to gaze into the eyes of the crystal skull and ... either read the past with great clarity or predict the future"? Check! Was there confirmation that "this skull has stored all of the lost knowledge of the Mayans or Atlantians, or E.T."? Check! How about a climax that has someone "bringing them all together, [making] all those abilities available to everybody all at once"? Check! And a direct reference to the infamous real-life "discoverer" of a crystal skull Frederick Mitchell-Hedges? By now, you already know the answer, don't you?

6. The son wishes he was a daughter instead
Fedoras off to LaBeouf, the talented young actor put between a rock and a hard place, cast in the most-anticipated movie of the last decade — and unable to talk about it. But now that the cat's officially out of the bag and everybody knows he's Henry Jones III, would it surprise you to know he actually wishes there was a Henrietta instead? "As a fan, yeah, I thought it would have been cool to see Natalie Portman in this movie as the daughter, but that didn't happen," he told MTV News, being a bit coy about his own role. "But I was on that bandwagon. I was in the Natalie Portman fan club. I have a strange attraction to Natalie Portman."

7. The crystal skulls in the movie are props, but they didn't have to be
Unlike, say, the Holy Grail, crystal skulls are real artifacts. While they don't have the powers ascribed to them in the movie, you can see them for yourself at various museums and homes across the world. Producers Frank Marshall and George Lucas did. "The skulls themselves are real, and a lot of the stuff in the movie is real, just like in the other movies," Lucas said. "We don't base it on a lot of phony-baloney stuff." But did they transfer any of their powers to these superproducers to help make a better movie? "No," Marshall chuckled to MTV. "I don't feel any wiser after being in its presence." (If you live in London, check out a skull at the British Museum.)

8. Pain is temporary, Indiana Jones is forever
When word leaked out that 65-year-old star Harrison Ford was returning for another Indiana Jones film, some wondered whether he was too old. The answer, of course, is a resounding no. In fact, there was one major injury on set — and it happened to the 21-year-old LaBeouf. "I pulled a rotator cuff in my hip," LaBeouf told MTV News in April, gesturing to his waist. "It's the only time in my career I've ever been injured. What happened was, because the injury got worse and worse as the movie went on, I pulled my groin also. [The groin] is not a good thing to have anything happen to." It's actually pretty easy to surmise the exact scene in which the injury happens too. Look for Shia to put on a few moves during a thrilling jungle sword fight against Cate Blanchett, a scene Shia called his "favorite" in the whole movie.

9. There's more than one way to whip a Nazi
They all look the same to viewers, but Harrison Ford actually swings a total of 10 different whips throughout the films, each woven and sized differently for different kinds of stunts.

10. The stars themselves are Indy's biggest fans
"It's a film I never thought I'd ever be making. Then you get a little bit [more] excited, because it's something your kids are going to be able to watch. And working with Steven Spielberg and [George Lucas] — they're geniuses," Ray Winstone told MTV News in November. "I can remember ['Raiders'] was a big [movie] for me," Blanchett told us. "I thought, 'Ooh, gosh, when I grow up I'd like to marry a man like [Indy], even if he does fall asleep after I kiss him.' " LaBeouf was equally stoked: "Crazy! I don't know what else to say. It's crazy and unbelievable. It's almost like you're reflecting while you're in the middle of it, because you know you're gonna be telling your kids this, so you're in the middle of it going, 'Oh my God, let me get every detail. How many buttons are on that shirt?' "

Original here

A Bucket of Popcorn and Some

When you think of spam, unless you’re hungry, you’re thinking of unwanted, unsolicited, unbelievably annoying advertisements showing up in your email account. The main reason why they’re spam and not just “ads” is that you don’t expect the ads to show up, or rather, you feel they definitely don’t belong there. When you watch television or surf the net you know when and where ads are “supposed” to pop up, and as much as you may TiVo the commercials and ad-block the web, there’s no protection from the barrage of ads invading our brains at a rate of 3000 per day. To maintain our sanity, we like our ads in controlled environments, impossible when every surface, from restroom walls to subway floors, is jammed with visual spam.

And now, drum roll please, the reigning champion for decades and the ultimate surface for unwanted, unsolicited and unbelievable annoying ads, ladies and gentlemen, coming in at 30 by 70 feet and in digital surround sound, we give you: the silver screen!

theshiznit.co.uk gave Fantastic Four the
“Most company logos in one shot” award.



To give you an idea of how much cinematic spam is occurring in films today, check out just some of the brands being featured in this season’s blockbusters:

Iron Man: Apple, Audi, Bulgari, Burger King, Cadillac, Chevrolet, Cisco, CNBC, Dell, Dolce & Gabbana, Esquire, Forbes, Ford, Goodyear, LG, Maxim, Newsweek, Nissan, Operation, Persol, Ray-Ban, Rolling Stone, Rolls Royce, Saleen, Segway, Shelby, Tesla, Texaco, The Apogee Foundation, U.S. Air Force, University of California, Berkeley, Vanity Fair, Verizon, Wired.

Baby Mama: 7-Eleven, American Idol, Apple, Blimpie, Budweiser, Coca-Cola, Dr. Pepper, Exxon, Forbes, Infiniti, Marriott, Maytag, Mazda, Motorola, Pam, Perrier, Philadelphia Eagles, Pringles, Red Bull, Rolling Rock, S. Pellegrino, Sega, Sharp, Silk, Sony, Suzuki, Terra Chips, USA Today, Yamaha.

21: Beefeater Gin, Bombay Sapphire, Budweiser, Chrysler, Dunkin' Donuts, Everlast, Freitag, GMC, Grey Poupon, Gucci, Hard Rock Cafe, Harvard University, Jansport, Lincoln, Louis Vuitton, M.I.T., Pepsi, Planet Hollywood, Pony, Reebok, Republic, Samuel Adams, Sony PlayStation, Sunplus Technology, Twinkies, VitaminWater, Volkswagen.

The lists above are from Brand Channel, where you can find many more films and their creepy amounts featured brands.

Conglomerate Creativity

For a very interesting look at the dark marriage between the advertising and film world, check out this video, and the other parts that follow. It’s called Behind the Screens: Hollywood Goes Hypercommercial. It highlights the effect of major conglomerates on the production of film, and the priority of profit that inevitably erodes the quality of movies produced. It’s a tragic idealist expectation that the better the film, the more money it will make. The reality is that if a film of average quality can make enough money through merchandising and other partnerships, it will be made instead of a potentially excellent (and potentially flopping) film that has little spin-off (safe) revenue potential. Juggernaut hybrids of kid captivation include films like Toy Story and Space Jam. Michael Jordan and Bugs Bunny cannot go wrong, as far as toys, tees, and other logoed junk are concerned.

While the filmmakers do include interviews mentioning conglomerates needing to operate the way they do to survive, they don’t talk much about why this is the case, or if there are alternatives. All in all, though, the film is eye-opening, and well-made, covering a lot of angles. If you thought product placement was bad watch the video; it’s probably worse than you thought.

One aspect the film doesn’t discuss is the more philosophical, experiential side of the matter. The filmmakers take it as a given that when the product is displayed on screen, the viewer recognizes the product and has their suspension of disbelief shattered as they’re ripped back into the real world of people trying to make their buck. But when I was a nice and impressionable child, I didn’t notice the ads. I probably still miss a bunch of them. And if I don’t notice the ads, maybe I don’t care if later on I subliminally feel like drinking coke. While questions concerning the harmful effects of the subliminal ads are still wide open (and important), I wonder first if being overt about the placement is dangerous. Some of the clips above are so commercial-like that their cheese knocks you immediately. Could noticing the product become bad publicity? And is bad publicity still good publicity?

I remember hearing about commercials in Japan quite often being run twice in a row to really engrain the message. My first wonder was whether this pissed off enough irritated people that they associated the product with a negative emotion. The Cola wars in the 80s had Coke not only placing itself heroically and divinely in movies, but Pepsi in negative surroundings with villains and sadness and other crying babies. I wonder if the same principles apply to the negative emotions of noticed product placement.

That’s the great noodle-baking irony of the documentary, really. This film fills in some knowledge gaps such that I’d wager just about anyone, having seen it, would be more apt to notice ads in movies. Ethics of the advertising aside, I wonder if the viewer’s extra awareness of product placement will help or hurt future product placers. On one hand, you’ll say “ah ha! Caught you. You’ll never brainwash me, Coca-Cola!” but on the other, you will have spent an extra five seconds thinking about Coca-Cola. Then, of course, you have to think about the amount they talked about the product in the movie itself. I feel like a Cola now - what the hell. And I guess there’s this post, too, written and read to get you thinking of that cold, refreshing flavor. The kind that makes hugs soft and summers memorable.

Original here

7 reasons why Shia Labeouf can’t fill Indiana Jones’ shoes

George Lucas recently told Fox News

“I haven’t even told Steven or Harrison this,” Lucas said. “But I have an idea to make Shia [LeBeouf] the lead character next time and have Harrison [Ford] come back like Sean Connery did in the last movie. I can see it working out.”

Derober believes that Shia LaBeouf fighting terrorists in an Indy-esque role would be, well, Hindenburg-esque. His character’s name is Mutt for Christmas’ sake! Paying audience says, “No ticket. No ticket.” Why? Roll your mouse over each photo and enjoy the 7 reasons:

REASON #1
Shia doesn’t meet Indy height requirements

Harrison Ford stands a solid 6′1″ while Shia LaBeouf is a petite 5′10″. Indy is short for Indiana. Shia is short because he’s short.

~ Roll mouse over photo to Derobe ~

REASON #2
Indiana Jones punches men like a freight train. Shia LaBeouf punches women like a cotton candy hammer.

Have you ever heard Indiana Jones’ punch sound effects? They’re like a MAC truck full of roaring lions that just drove out of the Apocalypse. Their pitch frequency resonates at a level mankind will never fully comprehend. Blue whales off the coast of eastern Asia are rumored to be the only species that can decipher the code in Indy’s punches. Only teletubbies can hear the sound of Ninnypants LaBeof’s punches.

~ Roll mouse over photo to Derobe ~

~ Roll mouse over photo to Derobe ~

REASON #3
A LaBeouf and a Ford

The Surname Ford evokes strong masculine imagery of muscle cars and Americana. A LaBeouf is some sort of French Sea Monkey.

~ Roll mouse over photo to Derobe ~

REASON #4
Harrison Ford’s body of work is stout, while Shia LaBeouf is just a product of Disney.

Ford starred in not one, but two epic trilogies that helped catapult me into puberty–Star Wars and Indiana Jones (of course). He also did another little movie you might of heard of called The Fugitive. His presence on screen could captivate an army of ADD diagnosed children yipped up on cocaine. He could impregnate a woman (or man) with a subtle grin. Simply put, Ford wears the pants in any relationship. Shia LaBeouf on the other hand has a history of whoring himself out to massive audiences of children, staring in corporate gum-droppy kid’s shows for Disney. No leading man of mine is a mouseketeer.

~ Roll mouse over photo to Derobe ~

~ Roll mouse over photo to Derobe ~


Reason #5
Short Round would make a better Indiana Jones than LaDouche

Short Round, the show stealer in Temple of Doom makes Shia look like She-Ra. My dead cat’s name is She-Ra. Dollars to donuts Short Round could rip LaBeouf’s beating heart out of his chest and laugh about it. No time for love Dr Jones!

~ Roll mouse over photo to Derobe ~

Reason #6
Indiana is a ladies man, not a mangina

Harrison Ford can make girls wet by clipping his toe nails. True story. Ask Cary Fisher and I’ll bet she’ll plead the fifth due to a severe case of ‘can’t walk straight.’ Shia on the other hand has a chick’s name, 6 pubic hairs, and plays with transformers. Close the book on this one.
Our fingers are crossed that Shia’s “lead singer” is indeed stuffed between his legs this is not an actual cooter.

~ Roll mouse over photo to Derobe ~

Reason #7
General Douchebaggery

Shai exhibits feminine characteristics in all areas of running, jumping, swimming, skiing, and breathing. It’s a sort of douche-aura he carries with him at all times. This is our appeal to George Lucas, please don’t make this stubby little poser the next Indy -or Mutt, I should say. You have a responsibility to the next generation of Indy lovers. Do you want them to tell their kids, “I remember when Indiana Jones Jr. got himself in a spot with some snakes and soiled his diapers… strait through.”

~ Roll mouse over photo to Derobe ~


On a completely semi-related note, check out Shia’s co-star on Transformers (The Megan Fox) topless HERE

Original here

David Duchovny Wants To Believe


David Duchovny may have found television success again on Showtime’s Californication, but he will always be Fox Mulder to sci-fi fans. For movie goers, he hasn’t played his trademark role in a decade, but anticipation continues to build for X-Files: I Want to Believe, which hits theaters on July 25th, 2008. As more and more information about the movie has leaked out and fans start checking off already-released flicks like Iron Man and Indy 4, you can expect the X-Files buzz to become deafening. Duchovny sat down for a press conference recently to talk about his decision to come back, what we can expect from the movie, and even address the controversial final seasons of the show and, yes, the potential for yet another film. As the brilliantly simple tagline for X-Files 2 says, “Believe again.”

David Duchovny on his decision to come back as Agent Fox Mulder:

Coming back had always been my desire. I wanted to play this guy in a movie. I thought it would be natural to take this to cinema and turn it into a movie franchise. I would have done it sooner, maybe two years after the TV-show ended.

Duchovny on the last time he was in a real fight:

You mean a fist fight? ¬ Well, I box, but that’s a controlled fight. I haven’t been in an uncontrolled fight for a long time. I’ve been punched by my mom, but that doesn’t really count, does it?

On what we can expect from The X-Files movie:

Well, it’s very dark and frightening. It’s very much like how our TV show was in the beginning; very scary.

On whether the TV series lost its direction towards the end:

We forgot as we grew older and the show became so big that the show got so popular because it was that scary. This movie goes back to the original impetus of The X-Files, which is to scare the pants off people.

David Duchovny on playing Mulder differently this time:

Yeah, it was a little different. I had this fear that I looked different. Older Mulder was the term that was used on the set (laughs). But I wanted him to look more matured, psychically as well as physically. I mean, come on, this guy lost every battle. He is beaten down by life. That leaves some scars. I wanted to make sure we bring that across in this film. He’s the same guy, but he is “older Mulder”.

Duchovny on what he likes about Mulder:

I like that he doesn’t give up. His heroism is that he believes he will uncover the truth, and he is going to unmask the lies. I like that about him. I will share a little secret about this movie with you: Mulder’s quest is to rediscover the energy from the beginning. By the end of this movie he’s more like the original Mulder that started out in 1993.

On why The X-Files was so tremendously popular:

It probably has to do with this Holy Grail quest. It’s the idea that Mulder can actually bring the evidence in; that he can prove we are not alone, that paranormal activity does exist, that life after death does exist. It’s not just solving the murder mystery. In our show, you have the chance to solve one of the eternal questions in life.

On life after death:

I don’t think much about life after death so much. But I do have suspicions that we are not alone out there. It just makes more sense that there is more forms of life than just us. That makes intuitive sense to me.

David Duchovny on working with Gillian Anderson again:

I didn’t understand what she said. She has an English accent now. No, I’m just kidding. It was a highlight for me to work with her again. The first scene was just great. We immediately felt that there was still a connection.

On the rumors of Scully and Mulder finally hooking up in this film:

It’s an interesting thought, but again, the movie is dark and scary, and I don’t know if that hook up would add to that mood or destroy it. That’s for you to decide.

On whether he would’ve been disappointed if this movie didn’t happen:

This answer might surprise you. No, I wouldn’t have been disappointed. I am perfectly happy with the amount of work we’ve done with The X-Files. I couldn’t be happier with this show. However, I would love to continue to do this. I am hoping this movie will do some business, so I can continue as Agent Mulder.

David Duchovny on whether he ever considers working with his wife, Tea Leoni:

Probably not. We are trying to keep that separate. Acting, there is a certain lack of inhibition that you need when you act, and that’s hard to do with people you are involved with. You want to be real with them, but acting is not being real. And as a fan, I don’t really like to see real couples acting together in movies. I always ask myself why don’t they do that at home?

On still being as driven today as he was in the beginning of his career:

Yes, always, as a writer, director, and as an actor. It’s like the Beckett line: “Fail again, fail better.” I always try to fail better. Let’s face it, it’s all a failure. Even if it’s a great success, you know how you failed. There is no perfection. There is only certain degrees of failure in acting. And I am saying this as an optimist.

Duchovny on working with Chris Carter again:

I enjoyed being part of his debut as a first time movie director. I was happy to be there for him, to be the lead actor he can lean on.

On whether he is loyal:

I’d like to think so. My relationship to Chris Carter has grown over the years from being an employee to being a friend and a collaborator. I like to be able to help, to be reliable and responsible in a new endeavor he took on.

Original here