ScreenCrave.com » brad pitt

New ‘Killing Them Softly’ Clip Features Brad Pitt Explaining A Kind And Gentle Way To Murder

Travis Woods — Sat, 26 May 2012 00:35:35 +0000

In Killing Them Softly, three dolts rob a card game protected by the Mob, sending the local underground economy into a tailspin. Enter Brad Pitt, who plays an enforcer sent in to track the thieves down and get back the money. Directed by Andrew Dominik (The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford), it’s a movie we’re, well, dying to see in 2012. And to tide us over, there’s a new clip from the film, featuring Pitt’s characters views on how to kill someone, well, softly.

Based on the novel Cogan’s Trade by George Higgins, Killing Them Softly was also scripted by Dominik, who gives Pitt a nice bit of dialogue to chew on here. It’s a darkly funny scene, in which Pitt complains about how emotional and “touchy feely” and “embarrassing” people become right before he murders them. He then goes on to haggle a deal about the affordability of an outside contract killer. Entertaining stuff.

Killing them Softly also stars Richard Jenkins, James Gandolfini, Ray Liotta, Scoot McNairy, Ben Mendelsohn, and Vincent Curatola. The film had its Cannes premiere on May 22, and is set to debut in the United States on September 21, 2012.

Will you be seeing Killing Them Softly?

Source: IGN

Brad Pitt’s ‘Killing Them Softly’ Gets A Poster

Laura Aguirre — Mon, 21 May 2012 21:38:38 +0000

Brad Pitt‘s Killing Them Softly will be making its debut at the Cannes Film Festival tomorrow. We’ve already gotten a taste of the film in a clip involving Ray Liotta‘s character getting an unpleasant visit from Sam Shepard and rapper Slaine. Now, thanks to Moviefone, we’ve got a poster to go along. Check it out.

Killing Them Softly, formally known as Cogan’s Trade, is based on a novel by George V. Higgins. Pitt plays a professional enforcer named Jackie Cogan, who investigates a heist that occurs during a high stakes, mob-protected, poker game.

The cast also includes James Gandolfini, Ray Liotta, Scott McNairy, Ben Medelsohn and Richard Jerkins. Killing Them Softly marks director Andrew Dominik‘s return after his 2007 film The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, also starring Pitt.

The poster has a minimalist design, yet somehow still feels quite violent. The smudged background paired with a revolver pointed straight at the viewer and aviators covered with United States Flag decor work well. Check out the exclusive poster below:

This is a crime drama you’re not gonna wanna miss. The film opens September 21, 2012.

What do you think of the poster? Are you excited for Killing Them Softly?

Cogan’s Trade, Scary Movie 5 and Butter Get Dated

Damon Houx — Thu, 16 Feb 2012 19:24:12 +0000

One of our most highly anticipated films of the year reunites Brad Pitt with The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford director Andrew Dominik, and after the extended post-production schedule of their last film, it was hard to know how long the wait would be for their follow-up Cogan’s Trade. Wonder no more, The Weinstein Company has updated their schedule, and the film will be hitting theaters September 21. They’ve also changed the release dates for Butter and Scary Movie 5. Check it out…

The Cogan’s Trade date suggests they want it to be near Oscar consideration, but aren’t sure if it’s a contender. It’s hard to know if the film will premiere at Cannes, or go to Toronto or Venice’s September festivals. Venice is where Brad Pitt won best Actor for Jesse James, so it may be a lucky location for the filmmakers.The film also stars Ray Liotta, James Gandolfini, and Sam Shepard.

Butter was originally scheduled for a March release, and has been bumped to October 5. The film played Telluride’s film festival last year, and may be better served in awards-bait season, but as it’s a black comedy, it’s one of those films that either clicks or doesn’t. Word is good though. The film stars Jennifer Garner, Hugh Jackman, and Olivia Wilde.

And Scary Movie 5, perhaps subtitled “Contractual Obligation” is scheduled for January 11, 2013. So it’s less than a year away!

What release date would you like to see announced? (I’d pick Wong Kar-Wai’s latest)

Brad Pitt’s ‘World War Z’ On Track To Become A Zombie Film Trilogy

Travis Woods — Thu, 05 Jan 2012 18:55:47 +0000

Well, this isn’t entirely surprising.

News broke today that World War Z, the Brad Pitt-starring, Marc Forster-directed adaptation of the Max Brooks novel might be evolving from a single-film adaptation and into a three-movie franchise, all of which will star Pitt as a UN fact-finder up against a world-wide zombie pandemic.

While there is only one World War Z book, /Film notes that the novel is segmented enough that it may actually lend itself to a three-feature franchise. Further, in case you haven’t noticed (or been paying the slightest attention over the past 30 years), movie studios have been developing and increasing jones for movie sequels and franchises. And a movie trilogy centered around zombies and featuring Brad Pitt as the hero/star? That’s essentially a guaranteed blockbuster franchise.

Reportedly, Paramount Pictures is looking to establish a World War Z trilogy as a combination of “the grounded, gun-metal realism of, say, [Matt] Damon’s Jason Bourne series” with “the unsettling end-times vibe of AMC’s The Walking Dead.”

While there are very few absolutes in the world, a trilogy starring Brad Pitt fighting zombies in a series designed to reflect both the Bourne movies and The Walking Dead… well, there’s a reason why people are hearing bizarre “ch-ching ch ching ch-chiiiiiiing!” exclamations all around the Paramount lot this morning.

What do you think of a World War Z trilogy?

Brad Pitt To Retire In Three Years

Travis Woods — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 18:15:09 +0000

Well Brad Pitt fans, the worst news since the cancellation of Oceans 247: Jesus, We Just Keep Churning These Out, Don’t We? broke yesterday: Brad Pitt will quit acting in three years. Gasp! That means there’s only 1095 days left to make Interview with a Vampire II: Interview Harder!

While being interviewed on Australia’s version of 60 Minutes, Pitt let it slip that he’d like to retire from acting at age 50 — three scant years from now. Why? He said, he’d like to focus on “the producing side and development of stories and putting those pieces together,” as well as spending time with his 54 children, and the remaining 77 that he and Angelina Jolie may adopt in the near future.

After the internet caught wind of the news, Pitt backed down somewhat, claiming that there’s no “exact deadline” to his acting retirement. He’s leaving his options open. It sounds like Pitt-fans better soak up his new movies while they still can!

In the meantime, let’s hope that actors like Shia LaBeouf take a page from Pitt’s book, retire early and go far, far away, never to return. We’d all appreciate it.

What do you think of Brad Pitt’s decision? Should he go through with an early retirement?

Source: The AV Club

Moneyball: Movie Review

Mali Elfman — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 18:46:53 +0000

When I saw Moneyball I realized one thing — thank the Cine-Gods, it’s fall. Most of the silly action flicks, meaningless horror films, and silly rom-coms are out of the way, and it’s time to get into those hard hitting, meaningful, 2+ hour, dramas that will soon be award contenders. I love this time of year, though I didn’t necessarily love this film, it fulfilled a need that I think all cinema-goers have been needing for some time and has a number of wonderful qualities that make it worth a trip to the theaters.

The Players:

Director: Bennett Miller
Writers: Steven Zaillian and Aaron Sorkin (screenplay), Stan Chervin (story), Michael Lewis (book “Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game”)
Stars: Brad Pitt, Robin Wright, Jonah Hill, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Robin Wright, Chris Pratt, Stephen Bishop

The Plot:

Moneyball follows the story of Oakland A’s general manager Billy Beane’s, a man who was known as a failed baseball player, who went on to successfully put together a baseball club on a budget by employing computer-generated analysis to draft his players.

The Good:

Success Junkie: They did a absolutely wonderful job of capturing all of the complexities of a success junkie, who as they say in the film “hates to lose, more they they love to win.” The kind of person who will never accept the good, but always wait for the other shoe to drop. It’s wonderful to see a script, director and actor seem to understand this concept so well and really show the audience what it means in all its different forms.
The Acting: Though the burden of carrying the film was largely placed on Pitt, who carried the film with ease, the supporting cast of Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Jonah Hill, Robin Wright and the surprisingly wonderful Chris Pratt all added wonderful dynamics to the film and were a joy the watch.
The Humor: There’s not much of it, but when it’s there it’s strong and well used. Pitt has always had great timing on screen and this film really shows that he’s able, with a mere eyebrow or pause, give the film that extra something that makes it special.
The Metaphor: It’s great when a film ends with a morality tale that is relevant and clever but not shoved down your throat, and this film does exactly that. So whatever my problems with the film, I can safely say that I left the theater with a smile on my face — and I like that.

The Bad:

Some Errors: The film doesn’t always follow the facts, though it doesn’t really hurt the journey to an untrained eye. The broad strokes were all added and the story was well told. I have to say that I know NOTHING about baseball, but heard others that did have some complaints coming out of the theater. So if you’re a fan of the sport, you may have some issues, though I have NO idea what or what they are. My only problem was that they play a song in the movie several times that didn’t come out until years after this story took place. Details.
Length: This is definitely a film you have to settle into and one that about 100 minutes into I was ready to have it be wrap up. It’s not too slow, but there is just a LOT of sadness and failing before we get to any pay off. It’s 133 minutes, so be prepared to settle in for the long hall.

Overall:

This is a fine film, one that again, kicks off the fall season. I think there will be a number of others that top it in coming months, but it’s still a contender and one worth your almighty dollars.

Rating: 7/10

Moneyball hits theaters today, September 23rd.

Brad Pitt’s ‘World War Z’ Adaptation May Upset Fans With Plot Changes

Travis Woods — Mon, 15 Aug 2011 17:45:59 +0000

Well, this is sure to miff World War Z fans—turns out that the Brad Pitt-starring film adaptation of Max Brooks’ hyper-popular World War Z novel (in which planet Earth is overrun by a zombie infestation) has tinkered with the novel’s original storyline, leaving some concerned that hardcore fans of the novel will revolt against the film.

As Movie Fanatic reported earlier today, World War Z takes place after “a full fledged world takeover by zombies as a U.N. official (Pitt) crosses the globe gathering first-hand accounts of how the undead overtook mankind.” Sounds pretty cool, right? Of course it does.

So what has the hardcore devotees of the original novel all miffed? Well, it has to do with a recently released plot synopsis of the film adaptation, which is describes “a U.N. worker who races against time traveling the world in an effort to stop an attack of zombies that could destroy humanity once and for all.”

Translation? In the book, the story takes places well after the zombie apocalypse has taken place, giving it a far bleaker tone than what the film sounds like, in which Pitt works to stop the apocalypse from happening. And while that may be no big deal to the average filmgoer, it does seem like a bit of unnecessary Hollywood meddling with a story that was already great to begin with.

What do you think of the World War Z alterations?

Tree of Life: Movie Review

Damon Houx — Fri, 27 May 2011 00:00:15 +0000

In 2010, there was word that Cannes was holding up announcing their slate in hopes that Terrence Malick‘s Tree of Life would be ready in time. Cannes got Tree of Life- where it recieved some boos and won the Palme D’or – but a year later, as Malick and company were still deep in post-production. Most filmmakers have scant months (and sometimes weeks) to do their post-production, but such lengthy tinkering with the final cut is part of the legend of Terrence Malick, a mercurial talent who’s proved more productive over the last ten years than he had for the first thirty of his career. Tree is Malick’s fifth film, and easily his most personal. It goes out on limited release this weekend…

The Players

Director/Writer: Terrence Malick

Stars: Brad Pitt, Jessica Chastain, Sean Penn, Hunter McCracken

Cinematography by: Emmanuel Lubezki

The Story

The film begins from the perspective of the mother (Chastain), who briefly recounts her childhood, and then is faced with the death of one her children (some have suggested it was suicide, the period of the film and the telegram suggests a war-related death). The film then moves to the viewpoint of Jack (Penn), who lives in the present time and reflects on his childhood (where he’s played by McCracken) and his brother, which then leads to him thinking about the creation of life on Earth (yes, there are dinosaurs). His father (Pitt) is temperamental and obsessed with doing better, but also with a sensitive side – he plays the organ at church, and loves his classical music. The film presents the memories and thoughts of the experience of growing up in Waco, Texas in the 1950′s in the context of life’s eternal questions.

The Good:

The Cinematography: Working with Emmanuel “Chivo” Lubezki for the second time, Malick and Chivo have mastered the look they want. The film was shot with steadicams and using nothing but natural light. The thought process for period films has long been to go with an amber hue, as if the past has yellowed like old newspaper, but natural light proves just as evocative – especially for childhood. There is a great logic to that: Childhood has no artificial lights. Regardless, the look of the film helps create the right tone.
Malick is Aiming for the Fences: Terrence Malick has been working on this film in one form or another for most of his career. In Tree of Life - instead of putting his themes and concerns into a genre piece or exploration of history – he decides to make a film that seems largely autobiographical (it’s hard to say how much as Malick no longer gives interviews). Regardless, this is Malick at his most pure – for better or ill – and from the questioning narration to the elliptical style, this is the work of someone who is putting it all out there. Some have been annoyed by the lack of humor (there are funny bits here and there), but the tone is right – this isn’t a standard film in any way. By connecting a single life to the creation of the cosmos, the film wrestles with what it means to be a kid, what it means to be a son, what it means to exist, and what there might be in the next world or life. Compared to something like The Hangover Part II, this is something entirely removed from modern cinema, but even in the context of our great artists who eschew more commercial enterprises (like, say, David Lynch), this comes across as both singular and the natural extension of what Malick’s been building to in his career.
The Singularity: America has had its experimental filmmakers, but it’s hard to compare Tree of Life to anything by Stan Brackage. The easiest analogy is probably Stanley Kubrick, and his 2001: A Space Odyessy, but where that film doesn’t explain itself neatly, it’s a different beast entirely. Other comparisons (to either the work of Andrei Tarkovsky, or Gaspar Noe’s recent Enter the Void) only point out the differences in approach. There is no real mystery to what’s on screen, but how sequences fit together and what is to be taken is up for grabs. The fun of the film is putting those pieces together. I watched the film twice, and on second pass, the film coalesced in ways it hadn’t before – when you’re dealing with a filmmaker working in a language that is either never or rarely on the big screen, it’s that much harder to know how to read that film. To that end, the film has a number of key symbols, from the flame that opens the movie and repeats a couple of times in the film, to the attic where it is at one point empty and at another point has a young kid riding a tricycle and a tall man who barely fits in the room. What does this mean? The film doesn’t tell you. Some may see it as weirdness (and there is a creepy clown in the film, though what childhood didn’t have one of those?) or pretension, but it can just as easily be read as symbolism, where the attic (which none of the main cast enter) represents a moment in a child’s life where one is torn between remaining a child and growing up. Of course, that’s just an interpretation. Some images (like a child emerging from water as a baby is born) are more obvious. There’s moments of great poetry – like shots of the mother floating in the yard – that have lingered in my memory longer than most films. But Malick’s choice to not tell a narrative with the standard three-act structure means that many are going to bored with the wistful imagery that builds but doesn’t do so through a standard plot.
Brad Pitt: Pitt does some of his best work in this film. He transforms himself into that strong father figure who’s filled with violence, doubt, resentment and love. But like many Malick performers, his look is perfect. When he’s wearing glasses and has that old man’s crew cut, he becomes that father figure.
The Children: Child actors are difficult, but the people Malick got for the children, especially McCracken and Laramie Eppler as the ill-fated brother, have a great realism on screen. Sure, they act like Malick protagonists, but as McCracken comes to understand morality and sexuality, you are never conscious of him acting. And when there’s a group of boys running around and destroying things, it feels so right.

The Bad:

The Roarshach Approach: Though I can say I was “entertained” watching this movie, this is not – as should be evident by now – a film that is like anything else that’s going to be released by a major studio this year. Critics have been divided on this one, and so will audiences – even some Malick die-hards don’t care for the movie. Boring, like funny, is in the eye of the beholder. None of this is a knock against the movie but with a film this vast and challenging, insta-reactions are going to cover the map. But great art doesn’t always congeal immediately. After a second pass I felt like I had a better handle on what I was seeing, but on first pass I was blown away, and slightly confused. Does the film add up? Does it need to? If most cinema is done in prose, Malick wrote a poem of a movie, and with anything so outside of the normal context, it’s that much harder to dissect. To that end, I’ve given a number of Tarkovsky films a look, and have never warmed to them, even if I know something is there. This is a terrible movie if you want to go just for a couple hours of escapism, but as an experience, it’s indelible.
Expectations: They’re a hassle. For those looking for a lot of Sean Penn, you’re going to be disappointed, and few films like this grab you by the short hairs and scream “You’re watching one of the greatest films ever made!” The film is a meditation, as such it’s pleasures are going to be more quiet. Than, say, Christopher Nolan at his best.

Overall:

Tree of Life left me shaken, somber, thoughtful, and reflective. There are shots in this film that are magical, that made a mark on me. This is a film that I will revisit again and again – as I have most of Malick’s films - and though it’s hard to say if this is one of the greatest films ever made or anything like that right now, it’s a strong work that will be remembered and championed long after the majority of what came out this month (or any month this year) have been forgotten.

Score: 10/10

Tree of Life hits New York and Los Angeles May 27. The film will start expanding shortly thereafter.

Brad Pitt’s ‘World War Z’ Zombie Apocalypse Film Back From The Dead

Travis Woods — Wed, 30 Mar 2011 15:32:00 +0000

After being locked in the throes of development hell, it looks like World War Z, the Brad Pitt-starring adaptation of Max Brooks’ novel, World War Z: An Oral History of the Zombie War, is back from the dead (see what I did there? Back from the dead! ‘Cause it’s a story about a zombie apocalypse! Get it? Get it?… Ahem. I’m sorry).

After looking like it was simply going to be too expensive to produce, according to /Film, World War Z is back on—/Film reports that David Ellison’s Skydance Productions (the company that was the primary financier behind Paramount’s True Grit and the upcoming Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol) could possible resurrect the near-defunct zombie apocalypse film for Paramount Pictures, as it appears that Ellison and “as many as two other financiers” are chatting with Paramount about financing the flick.

What’s amazing about this whole process is simply how long it has taken to green-light the project—think of it this way: a zombie apocalypse special effects extravaganza (profits, profits, profits) that’s rated PG-13, so just about everyone can see it (even more profits, profits, profits), and is starring Brad Pitt, one of the biggest movie stars in the world (even more even more profits, profits, profits). In a business driven by the bottom line, you’d think Z would be a winner.

What do you think of the World War Z news?

The Tree of Life Poster, Possibly Troubling U.K. Release Date

Damon Houx — Mon, 28 Mar 2011 21:02:03 +0000

In America, we’re less than two months away from the release of Terrence Malick’s long-in-gestation The Tree of Life, which is due May 27. Cannes is supposed to get it before that to show as one of their premieres, but it seems the U.K. release patten might dampen that as (according to Empire) it’s supposedly getting the film on May 4. This U.K. release date coincides with the film’s second poster, which was provided by the IMDb. Take a look…

This is the sort of poster that tends to look better in a full size in a theater where each image can be considered. It does get across that this is an arty film, one that won’t offer movie star turns from leads Sean Penn or Brad Pitt. But this is the sort of film that its core audience doesn’t need a poster because it’s a new Terrence Malick. I don’t know how well this sells the films to people who don’t care.

As for the British release date, my guess is that gets fixed quickly. Though some films have come to Cannes after other festival screenings, they – like so many other festivals – want their exclusives, and England getting the film for two full weeks before it can show at the fest is not going to go over well. If the U.K. release date holds, then the film definitely won’t be in competition – which points out that whether it’s competing is still unknown.

That noted, it’s also unlikely that the director will show up. He didn’t show up for the Oscars, so it seems likely – especially since he’s in the midst of his next production – he won’t go for this. Or perhaps Cannes is something he respects, and maybe he needs to pay lip service to his financiers. If he goes, expect a number of new Terrence Malick pictures besides this one:

Who knew this film would develop this much drama?

Does the title The Tree of Life get Madonna’s Ray of Light stuck in your head as well?

Terrence Malick’s Tree of Life Cannes-Bound

Damon Houx — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 05:25:34 +0000

The speculation on when the world would see Tree of Life – Terrence Malick’s latest film, which stars Brad Pitt and Sean Penn – became a great sport of inside baseball until Fox Searchlight picked it up and announced a May release date. For Tree of Life there were likely to be two periods of release: Cannes or award season. With the May date, it seemed the film premiering at Cannes was inevitable, and now Variety has confirmed that it will be playing the festival – though it is unknown if it will play in or out of contention.

This is interesting for a number of reasons, one of which is that the film was rumored to show at Cannes last year, and supposedly the festival held off on announcing their titles in hopes of getting Malick’s latest. But Malick – much like Hong Kong Auteur Wong Kar-Wai – is notorious for having prolonged post-production periods, as he often finds his film after he’s done shooting. The film was also independently financed, so until it was picked up by Fox Searchlight there was no definite release plan.

There was a thought – even until early December – that the film might be ready for 2010′s Oscar season. When Searchlight grabbed it that was dashed – they already had a full plate with both 127 Hours and Black Swan gunning for Oscar position (which they did), and Malick’s film looked to be too much competition for themselves. When a May release date was announced, it seemed unlikely it wouldn’t go to France first.

Cannes is a natural fit for Malick because he won a director’s prize there with Days of Heaven back in 1978. Malick is famous in film circles for having directed two films – two of the best films of that decade – in the 1970′s, and then disappearing off the scene. Rumors suggested that he was helping with re-writes without credit during that off period, but he was also known to translate philosophy. He returned in 1997 with The Thin Red Line, and since then moved on to another film in 2005 (The New World), and now has Tree of Life, and another film in production. His new dedication to cinema has proven fascinating, as Malick is nothing if not a mercurial director.

His long absence is unexplained as Malick is now notoriously press-shy, and does not talk about his work or much of anything publicly – which has also led to him not having been photographed all that much. In that way, it’ll be interesting to see if he shows up for Cannes. He’s a maverick, and that’s partly why his cult has bloomed.

In America, the release date hasn’t changed, which means it will be up against the Hangover Part II and Kung Fu Panda 2.

Do you think Tree of Life can win its weekend?

Brad Pitt’s World War Z May be too Expensive

Damon Houx — Tue, 22 Mar 2011 20:30:15 +0000

For a while there after Zack Snyder‘s Dawn of the Dead remake, everything seemed to be coming up Zombie. Horror cycles through certain ideas, and the undead became a staple. This trend seems to be dead as Paramount is – according to Vulture - balking at making World War Z for a $125 Million dollar price tag. The film was to star Brad Pitt, and to be directed by Marc Forster with an eye for a PG-13 rating.

Based on the Max Brooks novel, the story is of how the world survived the fictional Zombie War, as told from the survivors perspective. If the film was going to go with a straighter narrative or includes wraparound is unknown.

Horror has a box office ceiling, especially in America, and even with a PG-13 rating, most horror films don’t do much more than $100 Million domestic (Paranormal Activity did $107, The Ring did $129). The modern formula for horror is generally based around low-cost productions and remakes. In the 90′s the studios tried to make more A-list horror movies by using great actors and directors to reinvent the Dracula, Wolf Man and Frankenstein mythos, but those films (Bram Stoker’s Dracula, Wolf, Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein) ranged in quality from interesting failures to abject misfires. Then there was the misbegotten production of The Wolfman, which was a box office misfire.

The expense ceiling for horror was going to be busted by Guillermo del Toro with his At the Mountains of Madness, but that fell threw – likely for the same reasons this is falling apart. Even with big names attached, horror is considered a turn-off for women (even though they have turned books and films like Twilight and Carrie into hits), and therefore a bigger gamble. Of course films like Jaws and Gremlins seem to disprove this theory, but those films are old and/or completely different- at least in the logic of decisions like this.

Would you line up to see Brad Pitt fight the undead?

ScreenCrave.com » brad pitt

New ‘Killing Them Softly’ Clip Features Brad Pitt Explaining A Kind And Gentle Way To Murder

Related Posts

Brad Pitt’s ‘Killing Them Softly’ Gets A Poster

Related Posts

Cogan’s Trade, Scary Movie 5 and Butter Get Dated

Related Posts

Brad Pitt’s ‘World War Z’ On Track To Become A Zombie Film Trilogy

Related Posts

Brad Pitt To Retire In Three Years

Related Posts

Moneyball: Movie Review

The Players:

The Plot:

The Good:

The Bad:

Overall:

Rating: 7/10

Related Posts

Brad Pitt’s ‘World War Z’ Adaptation May Upset Fans With Plot Changes

Related Posts

Tree of Life: Movie Review

The Players

The Story

The Good:

The Bad:

Overall:

Score: 10/10

Related Posts

Brad Pitt’s ‘World War Z’ Zombie Apocalypse Film Back From The Dead

Related Posts

The Tree of Life Poster, Possibly Troubling U.K. Release Date

Related Posts

Terrence Malick’s Tree of Life Cannes-Bound

Related Posts

Brad Pitt’s World War Z May be too Expensive

Related Posts