1. A Good Day to Die Hard (Fox, 3,552 Theaters, 97 Minutes, Rated R): There was 12 years between Die Hard with a Vengeance and Live Free or Die Hard. There was a little under six years between that one and this one. So, by that count, does that mean Die Hard 6 will hit in 2016?

Well, a sixth volume has been confirmed so why the heck not? So what if Bruce Willis will be in his sixties when it comes out or that the character in that installment will bear little resemblance to the character in this film, let alone the original. The concept is evergreen and adaptable to every type of story. The only thing that needs to happen is that the story needs to get bigger.

This time around, we are introduced to John McClane Jr in, of all places, Russia. Daddy has gone over there to straighten his son out. Turns out that Junior is a government operative investigating the sale of nuclear weapons. Things turn hairy, as they do whenever papa is around, and the two must team up to save the world and bring in the bad guys.

2. Safe Haven (Relativity, 3,223 Theaters,115 Minutes, Rated PG-13): What is Valentine’s Day with out a romance? And I guess a Nicholas Sparks adaptation meets the barest minimum requirement.

Sparks’ brand of treacly, star-crossed lover starring romance novels have been hitting the big screen since 1999′s Message in the Bottle (bet you didn’t know that was one of his) but really hit the big time with 2004′s The Notebook, which, along with his abs, is the main reason why women find Ryan Gosling so dreamy. The success of that movie has caused producers to scour Sparks’ back catalogue for more weepy romances to bring to the big screen.

This one seems to owe a lot to 1991′s Julia Roberts vehicle, Sleeping With the Enemy. Julianne Hough (see, even the name is similar) plays a woman who relocates to a sleepy North Carolina town. She is constantly looking over her shoulder, waiting for someone to over take her, all the while trying not to make any contact with any of her fellow neighbors and townsfolk. That doesn’t last long as the sensitive and hunky Josh Duhamel breaks down her guard and makes her want to love again. But, unfortunately, her past catches up with here. Here’s where the films diverge–she’s not being stalked by an abusive husband, but and obsessive policeman! See, she might have killed a man in her hometown of Boston. Okay, you know she really didn’t do it, but yet that’s is what she is running from.

What shocking is the shlock is directed by Oscar-nominated Lasse Hallström. What’s even more shocking is that its his second Sparks adaptation! What is the world coming to?

3. Beautiful Creatures (Warner Brothers, 2,950 Theaters, 124 Minutes, Rated PG-13): Oh, look. It’s a gender-reversed Twilight with witches instead of vampires! Only with more Oscar winners/nominees!

I’d imagine that the producers of this film would take umbrage to this comparison if that’s they whole impression they were trying to sell. This film is intended to be the first installment of a franchise based on a successful book franchise (one which was getting a lot of promotion at last year’s New York Comic Con). I’m sure they hope that a lot of Twi-hards become BeaCreaFreaks™ and spend inordinate amounts of cash on Beautiful Creatures merchandise and movie tickets.

This film focuses on a young girl who just happens to belong to a family of witches. Her sixteenth birthday is coming up and that’s when her witchly powers are going to be amped up. But will she become a good witch or a bad witch? The family moves to a small town in the hopes of nudging her to the good side. But a relationship with a muggle…er…non-magical human might tip the balance in the other direction.

It’s that time of year again. Tomorrow, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences will announce the nominees for the 84st Annual Academy Awards.

Every year there are snubs and surprises, thrills and controversies. There is no way of knowing who will be nominated, especially in a year when the Best Picture nominees could be 5 films, or ten films, or any number in between.  We here at FilmBuffOnLine, who believe the day nominations are announced should be a National holiday, are going to try and handicap the process for you.

We will try to tell you, in the most non-committal way possible, who we think are Almost Certain to get a nomination, who Definite May Be nominated, and whose nomination is a Outside Shot in the major categories (the four acting categories, Best Director, and Best Picture). We are trying to cover all bases, but don’t come to us if you lose money on your Oscar Nomination pool.

Best Actor:

Almost Certain:

George Clooney, The Descendants; Jean Dujardin, The Artist

Definite Maybe:

Michael Fassbender, Jane Eyre, X-Men: First Class, A Dangerous Method or Shame; Leonardo DiCaprio, J Edgar; Brad Pitt, Moneyball

Outside Shot:

Demián Bichir, A Better Life; Ryan Gosling, Crazy, Stupid Love, Drive, or The Ides of March; Gary Oldman, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy

Clooney and Dujardin have won the most hardware this year, which not only make them a lock to be nominated, but also likely one of them will be taking home the award.

Fassbender has been great in a lot of films (listing X-Men: First Class was a bit of a joke, he’ll most likely get the nod for Shame, but I think he gave an Oscar worthy performance in that film) so he is practically a lock for a nomination. The next two are about 50/50 of getting in. The Academy seems to have something against DiCaprio, and his performance as J. Edgar Hoover while not horrible (he got a lot of nods for other awards for it), was not amazing enough to overcome that film’s lackluster performance critically or financially. Brad Pitt eked out a couple of wins along the way (most notably, the New York and Boston critics), and while Moneyball was well received, I don’t see it as 100% Oscar material.

If DiCaprio and Pitt don’t get nominated, there are worthy choices waiting to take a spot. Bichir was great in a small film with a limited release that opened over the summer. These all work against him, but he is deserving of a nod. Gosling, like Fassbender, was great in a lot of films this year, and has been nominated before, but none of the films he was in seem to pass Oscar muster. Oldman was flat out amazing in Tinker Tailor, but his subtle performance might be lost on Oscar voters.

Best Actress

Almost Certain:

Viola Davis, The Help;  Meryl Streep, The Iron Lady; Tilda Swinton, We Need to Talk About Kevin; Michelle Williams, My Week with Marilyn

Definite Maybe:

Glenn Close, Albert Nobbs

Outside Shot:

Bérénice Bejo, The Artist; Elizabeth Olsen, Martha Marcy May Marlene; Charlize Theron, Young Adult

On paper, this seems to be the category that seems to have the least wiggle room. Davis, Streep, Close, Swinton and Williams are all in the type of roles that Oscar voters seem to trip over giving nominations to. But in every round of nominations, there are bound to be surprises, and this category is ripe for one.

Bejo and Olsen have the best chance of breaking in, in my opinion. But Bejo is getting pushed for Best Supporting Actress instead of Lead, even though she essentially had a lead role. Olsen got good notices in her role, but suffers from the same “too early/too small handicap” that Bichir has. Theron has received nods for Best Actress in the Golden Globes (where there are nominations for comedy and drama) and the Critic’ Choice Awards (where there are six nominees). She has an Oscar pedigree, but Young Adult could very well be seen as less than Oscar worthy.

Best Supporting Actor:

Almost Certain:

Kenneth Branagh, My Week with Marilyn; Christopher Plummer, Beginners

Definite Maybe:

Albert Brooks, Drive; Jonah Hill, Moneyball

Outside Shot:

Nick Nolte, Warrior; Viggo Mortensen, A Dangerous Method; Andy Serkis, Rise of the Planet of the Apes or The Adventures of Tintin; Armie Hammer, J Edgar; Tom Hardy, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy

Plummer has won the Golden Globe and Critic’s Choice award Supporting Actor, making him a lock for an  Oscar nomination, if not the actual award. Branagh has been consistently nominated for his apt portrayal of Laurence Olivier, so he could get the nod as well. Slightly less certain but highly possible are nomination of two actors best known for comedy, Brooks and Hill, for playing against type. After that, place your bets. Will Nolte’s “sports mentor” role make the grade? Will Mortensen’s change of pace role as Sigmund Freud catch the Academy’s attention? Will the Academy make a statement and move towards the future by giving Serkis the nod for his superior motion-capture work? Does the Academy like J Edgar more than the critics and the general public do, thereby swing the nod to Hammer? Will Hardy represent Tinker Tailor‘s stellar cast with a nomination? Will it be another cast member? Or will the film be ignored?

Best Supporting Actress

Almost Certain:

Octavia Spencer, The Help; Bérénice Bejo, The Artist

Definite Maybe:

Melissa McCarthy, Bridesmaids

Outside Shot:

Jessica Chastain, The Help or Take Shelter; Janet McTeer, Albert Nobbs; Carey Mulligan, Shame; Shailene Woodley, The Descendants

What I said for Christopher Plummer above also applies to Spencer. The only chance Bejo doesn’t get nominated here is if she gets nominated for Best Actress. But that race is crowded so I think she’ll land here. She is deserving.

The only thing keeping me from making McCarthy almost certain is the Academy’s apparent hatred of the comedy. They do not like to give nominations from comedies, no matter how good the role or film is. This time, though, I think they’ll make an exception.

After that, pick two. Chastain and Woodley might have a slight advantage, but McTeer has a good chance and Mulligan could sneak in.

Best Director:

Almost Certain:

Michel Hazanavicius, The Artist; Martin Scorsese, Hugo

Definite Maybe:

Woody Allen, Midnight in Paris;  Alexander Payne, The Descendants

Outside Shot:

David Fincher, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo; Terrence Malick, The Tree of Life; Bennett Miller, Moneyball; Steven Spielberg, War Horse or The Adventures of Tintin; Tate Taylor, The Help

Hazanavicius is definitely most deserving and Scorsese won the Golden Globe, so they should both be nominated. After that, Payne is almost a lock, as is Allen, due to the number of nominations they received. After that, well, ot depends. Fincher got a Directors Guild nomination, Malick has been on a lot of west coast critics awards list, which might be a barometer of how the Academy will go. Miller might ride the surprising accolades Moneyball is getting this award season with a nomination. And months ago, it looked like it wouldn’t be a question if Spielberg would be nominated, but for which film. Now, here he is, a long shot for any nomination at all. Weird. And Taylor has to be consider taking into account the number of great performance that came from that film.

Best Picture:

Almost Certain:

The Artist; The Descendants

Definite Maybe:

Hugo; The Help ; Midnight in Paris

Outside Chance:

The Tree of Life; War Horse; Moneyball; The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo; The Adventures of Tintin; Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy or just about any other film out there that has a miniscule amount of buzz.

Not having a definite number of nominees beforehand really plays havoc with the prognosticating business. I tried to pick out the five most likely films to get nominated, but with the possibility of five more, well, it could be any film of a certain stature.

So, what do you think? Am I on to something, or totally wrong? I guess we’ll find out tomorrow.

1. Real Steel (Touchstone Pictures, 3,440 Theaters, 127 Minutes, Rated PG-13): This will either turn out to be one of the silliest misfires in film history or start a trend where tired old tropes are freshened by adding robots to the mix. Personally, I hope it’s the latter because I can’t wait for the first all-robot romantic comedy.

The film takes place in the near future where robot boxing has replace human boxing in popularity (no word on how MMA is faring in this future). A struggling promoter (Hugh Jackman) finds a robot that might just turn his business around.  At the same time, if that wasn’t enough, the promoter reestablishes a connection with his 11-year old son.

I am conflicted about this film. It seems utterly mock-worthy, but I can’t help but feel that there might be some potential here. It could be completely stupid, and odds are good that it will be, but I have a feeling it might be a little bit more.

2. The Ides of March (Sony/Columbia, 2,199 Theaters, 101 Minutes, Rated R):  On paper, it’s hard to see where this could go wrong. It’s a heavy political drama being released just on the cusp of Oscar season and when politics is all over the news, it has an all-star cast including a lead with a whole lot of buzz, and an actor/director who has made the most of the intriguing choices he has made.

The film focuses on an idealistic young campaign worker (Ryan Gosling) working for a charismatic Democratic presidential candidate (director George Clooney). During the course of his job, he uncovers some incredibly damaging information about his boss. This rocks his faith in his employer, the political system and might have more damaging personal effects than he anticipates.

1. Drive (FilmDistrict, 2,886 Theaters, 100 Minutes, Rated R): Ryan Gosling, fresh of gaining a whole new batch of fans due to his overall studliness in Crazy, Stupid, Love. takes another step towards a more mainstream career with this film.

Gosling did star in The Notebook, but  never truly capitalized on mainstream stardom from that role. He is mostly thought of as the indie film star with such efforts as Half Nelson, Lars and the Real Girl and Blue Valentine. But depending on how audiences relate to this hard-boiled action film, he might be making a permanent break towards the mainstream.

He plays a wheelman who finds out a contract has been put out on his life due to job gone wrong. Somehow, Carey Mulligan gets pulled along for the ride.

The film has an interesting cast, including Christina Hendricks, so it might be worth a look.

2. I Don’t Know How She Does It (The Weinstein Company, 2,476 Theaters, 95 Minutes, Rated PG-13): Sarah Jessica Parker as Carrie Bradshaw in Sex in the City presented the idealized version or the metropolitan woman. She had a fun job that made little or no demands on her time yet provided a strong enough financial foundation so she could live her life exactly the way she wanted. Meet the girls for two hour lunches? Done! Shopping sprees on 5th Avenue? Sure, why not? Travel to exotic locales? She’ll meet you at the airport.

Taking that into consideration, her role in the film might be considered her an acting stretch. She plays an urbanite who has to work hard to succeed at her job while trying to juggle a family at home and is constantly trying to make the ends of her life meet. Perhaps no more realistic that the fairy tale that was Sex in the City, but perhaps more relatable for modern audiences.

The film has an interesting cast, including Christina Hendricks, so it might be worth a look.

3. Straw Dogs (Sony/Screen Gems, 2,408 Theaters, 110 Minutes, Rated R): While the protagonist of the film has changed from a mathematician to  a screenwriter and the location moved from rural England to the rural Deep South, U.S.A. (because that is the only place that a plot like this can happen, right? Like nobody up north ever gets violent? Sheesh.), this film appears to be a direct copy of the 1971 original, right down to the poster itself.

The story is about that screenwriter (James Marsden) who relocates to his wife’s (Kate Bosworth) redneck home town. The move is one of many causes of tensions between the pair, tensions which are exacerbated when the locals start harrassing the couple. When the locals cross a line that should never be crossed, the screenwriter gets his revenge in the most bloody way possible.

This of course raises the question, if you are going to do a shot for shot remake of a classic film, what will bring people to see this in the theaters rather than just renting the original? Will James Marsden bring something to the role that Dustin Hoffman didn’t? I like Marsden’s work but even I don’t think that’s possible.

If you do decided to go see this film, and regret the decision half way in, just pretend that Richard White and Lois Lane from Superman Returns are on a vacation that goes horribly wrong, and keep hoping for Superman to come in and save them.

4. The Lion King (3D) (Disney, 2,330 Theaters, 89 Minutes, Rated G): I just think it’s ironic that this film, one of the first of presumably many films in Disney’s catalog that will be rereleased in the 3-D format, will be hitting theaters one day after a Slate article that decares the 3-D trend all but dead.

The articles shows that the trend has been in decline since August of last year, and that a number of high profile films were earning more money in good ol’2-D than they were in 3-D.

Of course, this is just for new films being released in 2-D as well as 3-D. This here is a re-release of a classic movie in the 3-D format. This will bring a bit of novelty that will bring in the customers, right? And the fact it is in a limited two-week only release will make it more of an event, therefore, more successful? Right?

Maybe, maybe not. But since this one in a planned line of 3-D rereleases by Disney and other companies, I’m sure there will be a lot of people checking the pulses of the 3-D fad to see if this film revives it.

Whether its the fact that Crazy, Stupid, Love.‘s star-crossed lovers who can’t seem to get together because of who they are, the mix of heart-wrenching dramatics with near slapstick humor, or the many cases where just the right song from unknown indie band or a deep album cut from a popular band scores the moment on screen perfectly, this film reminds me of late 80s, early 90s Cameron Crowe.

I’m not saying this is a bad thing, unless, of course, you can’t stand Crowe’s output from Say Anything to Jerry Maguire. I happen to like those films and when that style works, as it does here, I think it makes for an entertaining film.

The movie begins with Cal (Steve Carell) being asked for a divorce by his wife, Emily (Julianne Moore). The couple were childhood sweethearts, and were married at 17, so Cal is ill-prepared to enter the dating scene. Luckily, he catches the eye of Jacob (Ryan Gosling), a young pick-up artist who’s a hit with the ladies. Jacob helps Cal find his inner mojo, but will it be enough so Cal can win Emily back? Does he even want to? And what kind of complications arise when the player finally finds the one girl he want to spend all of his time with in the quirky Hannah (Emma Stone).

There’s a lot to like about this film. It’s a well constructed movie with many carefully crafted scenes that involve the audience. It is perfectly cast, with every actor playing their roles to perfection. Granted, you have Steve Carell playing a sad sack, a role he can do in his sleep, but I never pictured Ryan Gosling as being that much of a ladies man before this film, but I do know. Especially good are Kevin Bacon and Marisa Tomei in glorified cameos. Their work in this film is proof of the adage that there are no small part, only small actors. Both light up the screen whenever the show up. Bacon plays what could easily be the villain of the piece but makes the character geeky and human. And Tomei goes from needy and vulnerable to righteously angry without ever falling into parody.

The writing is great as well, as Dan Fogelman is brave enough to use foreshadowing without drawing too much attention to it. There is quite a big reveal during the third act that was set up in the preceding scenes yet still caught me by surprise. The dialogue always sounds realistic and the plot point always ring true, even when the film finds its way into out and out farce in the third act.

There are a lot of great moments in the film, a lot of great characterization and a lot of great writing in the film. It’s a good alternative to the summer blockbuster.

Ryan Gosling will not be saddling up alongside Johnny Depp in Disney’s upcoming The Lone Ranger as was reported over the weekend.

A rep for the actor told EW yesterday that Gosling will not be playing the part.

This leaves director Gore Verbinski and Depp back on the trail of finding a leading man for their adaption of the classic western hero. Gosling, meanwhile, will next be seen in Crazy, Stupid, Love on July 29.

For some time, Johnny Depp has been set to play Tonto in Walt Disney’s in The Lone Ranger, but no one had been attached to the project in the title role of the masked man of the Old West. We’ve now learned who may be riding along side of Depp when cameras finally role on the project.

The Wrap is reporting that Ryan Gosling is currently in talks to star in Disney’s new adaptation of the classic western hero. The one condition to his taking the role, though, could be the planned fall shoot for the film could conceivably conflict with another project that Gosling is already signed for. He has previously been set to star in Warner Brother’s Logan’s Run remake, which is also eyeing a fall shooting start.

Gore Verbinski, whom Depp worked on with the original Pirates Of The Caribbean trilogy, is set to direct from a screenplay by Revolutionary Road‘s Justin Haythe. Disney is aiming to have The Lone Ranger galloping into theaters in 2014.

Warner Brother’s seemingly perpetually in development remake of Logan’s Run has (yet another) new writer on the project. The studio has brought on former Los Angeles police officer turned screenwriter Will Beall to be the latest scripter to try and bring the 1967 science-fiction novel by William F. Nolan back to the screen.

The original 1976 adaptation was set in a futuristic society that maintained its Utopian appearance by placing citizens to death when they turned 30 years old. Michael York starred as Logan 6, who in his job as a “Sandman” is tasked to track down those who try to run away from their death sentence. But as his own 30^th birthday approaches, Logan begins to question the laws he is sworn to uphold and decides to make his own run for freedom from them.

Even though he has no genre experience, Beall strikes me as an interesting and perhaps even inspired choice for the job. At its heart, Logan’s Run isn’t so much a science-fiction adventure story as it is a story about characters who are in law enforcement. Logan’s disillusion with the system he has sworn to protect is a common enough trope in such stories. It is the type of material that strikes me as playing to Beall’s strengths.

Beall will be working with director Nicolas Winding Refn on the script’s latest draft. Producer Joel Silver has also attached Ryan Gosling to the project.

Currently, Beall is a staff writer on ABC’s Castle series. His screenplay Gangster Squad has just been greenlit for production by Warners and the studio tapped him in January to work on a remake of Lethal Weapon.

Warners has been working on this remake of Logan’s Run since the mid-1990s. Future GI Joe: The Rise Of Cobra director Skip Woods was signed to the project in 2000 before Bryan Singer took over in 2004. Writers Ethan Gross and Paul Todisco a draft of the screenplay and then Singer teamed with collaborator Dan Harris for a pass before another of Singer’s frequent collaborators Christopher McQuarrie delivered a rewrite. However, after two years of work on a screenplay, Singer backed out of the project in May 2006.

Things lay quiet on the remake for over a year until Joseph Kosinski pitched a version in August 2007 of the story that excited Warners brass so much that they virtually hired the neophyte director on the spot. Although Kosinski worked on yet another new screenplay with Timothy J. Sexton, he soon left the project to direct TRON: Legacy for Disney.

Last May, commercial director Carl Erik Rinsch was brought on board along with writer Alex Garland. Their participation didn’t last that long however.

So by my count that makes Beall at least the eighth writer to attempt to tackle Logan’s Run over the past decade.

As director Derek Cianfrance’s Blue Valentine goes into release today, we re-present our review of the film from when it screened at the Philadelphia Film Festival this past fall.

Blue Valentine is a devastating portrait of the disintegration of a marriage, a slow-motion car crash where you see things inevitably spinning out of control but are unable to stop the tragic tableau unfolding before you.

Whatever love Dean (Ryan Gosling) and Cindy (Michelle Williams) had between them is gone. Although they’ve made a home together and are raising a precious little girl, the stresses of their life have taken their toll. Cindy’s dream of being a doctor has been reduced down to a job as a nurse, while the ambitionless Dean seems content with his job as a housepainter. They both know that their marriage is in trouble, but neither know what to do to fix things. In desperation, Dean books them a room in what could be politely described as a “honeymoon motel” with the hopes that they can reconnect on any level.

But as we watch them make a last, fumbling grasp at saving their marriage, the film flashes us back to five years earlier, showing us their chance meeting, courtship and then hasty marriage. Oddly enough, many of these beats can be found in typical Hollywood romantic comedies, but here they are played for a sweet realism, not the cloyingly cute tone endemic to that genre. And given what happens to Dean and Cindy, it is hard not to think that maybe writer/director Derek Cianfrance is critiquing if not outright rejecting the notion of the Hollywood happy ending.

The contrast between the couple then and now is stark and at times jolting, leaving the audience to wonder what happened between the two. While Cianfrance doesn’t show us the intervening years directly, we can make some good guesses as to why things fell apart the way that they did from what we do learn about the pair and their upbringings.

But for all the strength of Blue Valentine‘s script, it is the performances of Gosling and Williams that deliver the emotional heft of the story. The pair manages to simultaneously create a marvelous chemistry in the flashback scenes and an agonizing estrangement in the present day portion of the film. Williams continues to show that she was one of the most underrated actresses working today as she injects into Cindy’s inability to fully articulate the anger and frustration she feels at how her life has overwhelmed her a raw energy. Gosling’s Dean comes across as deeply conflicted, his male ego under attack whenever Cindy tries to voice her complaints to him. The two create a self-sustaining loop of pain from which they can not escape and which is heartbreaking to watch.

George Clooney has secured financing to go ahead with his cinematic adaptation of the play Farragut North, which has also undergone a name change to The Ides Of March.

Clooney is also set to star in the film as a state governor making a run at his party’s presidential nomination. Joining him in the cast are Ryan Gosling as the campaign’s press spokesman, Marissa Tomei as a New York Times reporter, Evan Rachel Wood as a campaign intern and Paul Giamatti as the manager of a rival campaign.

The original play was written by Beau Willimon, and based loosely on his experiences working on the 2004 Howard Dean campaign. Clooney and his producing partner Grant Heslov worked with Willimon on adapting the script. Production is set to start in February in Michigan and Ohio.

One has to give Clooney credit, as not many actors make a successful transition to the director’s chair and I’m certainly glad that he went back on his announcement that Confessions Of A Dangerous Mind was going to be the only film he would ever direct that he made after that film’s release. Sure, his last film, the early days of football comedy Leatherheads, did not do well, but with Confessions and Goodnight And Good Luck in Clooney’s win column, it’s looking like Ides Of March is a film to look forward to.