The Five-Year Engagement is cut from the same cloth as 2008′s Forgetting Sarah Marshall and shares many of the elements that made that film successful. It was co-written by Sarah Marshall writer/star Jason Segel and Nicholas Stoller (who directed both FSM and this movie), and has a cast that effortlessly embodies the movie’s characters. Along with a certain sweetness that permeates both films, there’s also something here that most romantic comedies are sorely lacking these days: characters that actually feel like real people. Thanks to Segel and Stoller’s writing and the easygoing and likeable cast, I can easily imagine life for these characters both before the film starts and long after it ends, a feat to which I’m not sure any movie in the “Katherine Heigl” subgenre of rom-coms could lay claim.

Emily Blunt and Jason Segel star as Violet and Tom, a couple one character later describes as being “almost perfect for each other.” Tom is a chef at a sleek San Francisco restaurant and works with Alex (Chris Pratt), who I swore was his character’s brother, but realized upon looking it up he’s just his best friend. Violet is applying to grad schools to become a psychologist, and in the opening scene, the two get engaged and take the audience through a flashback of the night they met. Violet quickly gets accepted to a graduate program, but much to the dismay of her sister (Alison Brie) and mother (Jacki Weaver), the new program is all the way in Michigan, so the wedding is delayed. Tom gives up a head chef position and ends up working at a local college sandwich shop while Violet studies with her new professor, an arrogant ladies’ man named Winton (Rhys Ifans), and with wedding plans perpetually pushed back, you can see where the conflicts would arise.

I don’t want to make this film out to sound groundbreaking or anything, because it definitely follows a standard formula for these kinds of movies. If you’ve seen four or five romantic comedies in your life, chances are pretty good you’ll be able to chart out every major plot point in this film before you see it. But the same thing could be said about a lot of action movies after watching their trailers, and ultimately, enjoyment comes down to the execution. Segel and Blunt are wonderful to watch (and, I suspect, inherently likeable in almost any role because of their infectious personalities). The supporting cast is made up of a ton of funny people, including Brian Posehn and Chris Parnell as Tom’s creepy and sometimes-inappropriate friends and Kevin Hart and Mindy Kaling as Violet’s co-workers who are obsessed with masturbation and gossip, respectively.

Pratt and Brie are especially hilarious, but I’ll admit that my fondness for them stems heavily from being an avid fan of their NBC shows “Parks and Recreation” and “Community.” (Despite the fact that I may be blinded by bias, Brie’s English accent is impressive and consistent throughout the movie, even during an adorable scene in which she and Blunt speak to each other in Sesame Street character voices because children are nearby.)

Stoller seems to have mastered the art of directing talented comedians, employing his typical reserved style and allowing the performances to outshine the flashiness of the direction. There’s always something authentic about his films that seems to justify their existence outside of a simple premise or one sentence synopsis, and if I were to pinpoint that specific element, I’d say it’s a sense of heart. We care about what these characters are doing because they’re so well-crafted and well-acted; as we watch them for two hours, their relationships matter. I’ve seen a few criticisms that point out this film’s thesis is basically “settling is good enough,” but I don’t actually think that’s what’s being said here at all. Yes, one of the characters might have said those words (or similar ones) in the movie, but if you look at the larger picture and see what these two mean to each other, I think a more positive message can be taken away from this experience.

The Five-Year Engagement deals with some complicated issues but never gets bogged down with them, always remembering that it’s a comedy first and foremost. A decent premise, honest characters, and a really funny script put this movie way above the average romantic comedy. Until next time…

Read similar posts to Review: The Five-Year Engagement on Filmonic

What’s cool about red band trailers is there’s basically no sugar-coating, you get a real, raw sample of the film and when that movie is rated R, a red band trailer is a must. With just 4 more days to go until the opening night, this is probably the last trailer for The Five-Year Engagement and dare I say it, the best.

Watch below:

The Five-Year Engagement is a film about the ups and downs in the relationship of an engaged couple that has to delay their wedding over and over again. It probably sounds like a chick flick but since Jason Segel and director Nicholas Stoller (Forgetting Sarah Marshall, Get Him to the Greek) co-wrote the screenplay, it should be a lot more. Also, quite a few genuine laughs are all but guaranteed when this duo is behind a flick.

Besides Jason Segel, the film stars Emily Blunt, Chris Pratt and Alison Brie.

The Five-Year Engagement makes its theater debut on April 27th in North America and judging by the talent involved here, I have very high hopes for this one.

Read similar posts to New red band trailer for The Five-Year Engagement on Filmonic

The very cool looking sci-fi thriller Looper just had its first trailer released a few hours ago, and my advice to you is to stop whatever you are doing this instant (unless you are working on a nuclear plant or something) and watch the following video.

As you might have guessed from the trailer, Joseph Gordon-Levitt plays Joe, what they call a ‘Looper’. They’re basically a trained assassin hired by the mob to terminate targets sent back 30 years from the future (replacing the now classic “drop-him-in-the-river”). Everything changes one day when his future self (played by Bruce Willis) becomes his target.

Cool looking trailer aside, Looper stars Bruce Willis, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Emily Blunt, Jeff Daniels, Piper Perabo and Paul Dano.

Between this and 6 other films scheduled for 2012 (Expendables 2 being one of them), Bruce Willis is a very busy man. Joseph Gordon-Levitt is also rather busy with 3 others projects for 2012 (including The Dark Knight Rises) and while I can fault him for sometimes playing it safe, he sure knows how to pick a good script.

Directed and written by Rian Johnson (Brick, The Brothers Bloom), Looper opens September 28th in North American and I’m very much looking forward to it.

Read similar posts to First official trailer for Looper on Filmonic

Universal has released the first trailer for The Five-Year Engagement, which re-teams Jason Segel with Forgetting Sarah Marshall director Nicholas Stoller. The movie looks at what happens when an engaged couple (Jason Segel and Emily Blunt) keeps getting tripped up on the long walk down the aisle.

Watch the trailer below:

The script was written by both Jason Segel and Nicholas Stoller, and is produced by Judd Apatow (Knocked Up, The 40-Year-Old Virgin). Universal will release The Five-Year Engagement on April 27th, 2012.

Read similar posts to First trailer for The Five-Year Engagement on Filmonic

Universal has today announced the The Adjustment Bureau DVD and Blu-ray release date for June 21, 2011. The movie, starring Matt Damon and Emily Blunt, was released back in March and earned $60 million in North America, and $110 million in total worldwide. For a budget of $50 million that’s pretty good, as were the reviews.

Full specifications for the DVD and Blu-ray release can be found below:

BONUS FEATURES AVAILABLE EXCLUSIVELY ON BLU-RAY™ COMBO PACK:

• THE LABYRINTH OF DOORS: INTERACTIVE MAP OF NEW YORK – Explore the bustling metropolis of New York City as only a member of the Bureau can: using the intricate network of portals to leap from location to location. Each location will trigger a short video pod, either with a behind-the-scenes look at that location with cast and crew or a scene from the film that took place there.
• BD-LIVE™—Access the BD-Live™ Center through your Internet-connected player to get even more content, watch the latest trailers and more.
• pocket BLU™: The groundbreaking pocket BLU™ app uses iPhone®, iPod® touch, Android™, PC and Macintosh to work seamlessly with a network-connected Blu-ray™ player. Also available on the iPad®, owners can enjoy a new, enhanced edition of pocket BLU™ made especially to take advantage of the tablet’s larger screen and high resolution display. Consumers will be able to browse through a library of Blu-ray™ content and watch entertaining extras on-the-go in a way that’s bigger and better than ever before. pocket BLU™ offers advanced features such as:
• Advanced Remote Control: A sleek, elegant new way to operate your Blu-ray™ player. Users can navigate through menus, playback and BD-Live™ functions with ease.
• Video Timeline: Users can easily bring up the video timeline, allowing them to instantly access any point in the film.
• Mobile-To-Go: Users can unlock a selection of bonus content with their Blu-ray™ discs to save to their device or to stream from anywhere there is a Wi-Fi network, enabling them to enjoy content on the go, anytime, anywhere.
• Browse Titles: Users will have access to a complete list of pocket BLU™-enabled titles available and coming to Blu-ray™ Hi-Def. They can view free previews and see what additional content is available to unlock on their device.
• Keyboard: Entering data is fast and easy with your device’s intuitive keyboard.
• uHEAR™: Never miss another line of dialogue with this innovative feature that instantly skips back a few seconds on your Blu-ray™ disc and turns on the subtitles for the section you couldn’t hear!
• MY MOVIES™: Consumers can rent a variety of Universal favorites such as Meet the Parents, Fast & Furious, Mamma Mia!, Coraline, Knocked Up, The 40-Year-Old-Virgin, Forgetting Sarah Marshall, or Role Models for $2.99 each, to instantly stream via BD-Live™, the pocket BLU™ app or on the web at UniversalHiDef.com

BONUS FEATURES AVAILABLE ON BOTH DVD AND BLU-RAY™ COMBO PACK:

• DELETED AND EXTENDED SCENES
• LEAPING THROUGH NEW YORK – An inside look at how the production team filmed David Norris’ (Matt Damon) race to the courthouse, featuring interviews with Damon, director George Nolfi, special effects coordinator Mark Russell and producers Michael Hackett and Chris Moore.
• DESTINED TO BE – The Adjustment Bureau provided Matt Damon with his first opportunity to play a true romantic lead in a feature film. Co-star Emily Blunt, director George Nolfi and Damon himself reflect on this new role for the star and the relationship between David Norris and Blunt’s character, Elise Sellas.
• BECOMING ELISE – A look at Emily Blunt’s dance training for the role of Elise. Blunt, Matt Damon, George Nolfi and Blunt’s dance choreographer discuss her transformation from slender actress to well-muscled athlete.
• FEATURE COMMENTARY WITH WRITER AND DIRECTOR GEORGE NOLFI

Read similar posts to The Adjustment Bureau coming to DVD and Blu-ray in June on Filmonic

If you would have told me before this week that I would have enjoyed Rango more than The Adjustment Bureau, I would have called you crazy. George Nolfi’s directorial debut has star power, a relatively original plot, and a trailer that seems to hint at greatness. While it does tackle some complex issues (like fate vs. free will), the film just scratches the surface of its potential and, though never quite taking it to the next level, still ends up as an enjoyable ride.

The concept for the movie is really interesting: young politician David Norris (Matt Damon) has a chance meeting with a Elise (Emily Blunt), a beautiful young dancer who inspires him to give a particularly moving speech which sets him up to be the frontrunner for the upcoming Senatorial race. We are also introduced to the fedora-sporting Adjustment Bureau, an organization operating without human knowledge in the background of society, gifted with undefined powers to alter people’s destinies to fit a Master Plan. When a bureau agent (Anthony Mackie) slips up, Norris discovers their existence and confronts their leader (John Slattery), promising that he won’t stop until he’s with Elise. The rest of the movie – despite its abrupt time shifts – is basically a combination romance and chase thriller, which works fine but never truly explores the big ideas they’re working with in a meaningful way.

If the bureau sounds a bit like angels working on behalf of God, that’s on purpose – it’s specifically referenced in the film (though never confirmed as truth). There’s even a man upstairs: The Chairman, an entity who – spoiler alert! – is never explicitly shown in the movie. The climax eventually includes a chase to see The Chairman, but like the rest of the ideologies in this film, this one is just explained away, never explaining the “why” to the audience. If the entire film were more cerebral, I would take that as a statement unto itself, perhaps as a commentary on the hierarchy of religion or a condemnation of its structure. But since most of this movie never mines psychological territory in the same way that, say, Inception does, I just found the lack of payoff a bit underwhelming.

It’s almost impossible for the seasoned movie-goer to watch this film and not think of Inception. One of the biggest criticisms of Chris Nolan’s movie is that it spends too much time in exposition, featuring in-depth explanations from character to character about the rules of the dream world. The same issues arise in The Adjustment Bureau; characters sit around and explain arbitrary rules to Norris as the film progresses, and as the movie moves forward the rules get more outrageous. The final act of the film begins with a training montage of how to travel through a labyrinthine portal system the bureau has access to, with qualifiers such as “you have to be wearing a hat to enter the door” and “ALWAYS turn the handle clockwise.” No, I’m not joking – that’s the level of ridiculousness into which this film devolves, and it’s a shame because the rest of it is actually pretty good.

Damon and Blunt have solid chemistry; it’s so much fun watching two people who are great at their jobs perform, even in the confines of an ultimately disappointing movie. Emily Blunt is an actress on the rise – she hasn’t been in many high-profile releases in her career thus far, but expect that to change in the years to come. She’s got the whole package, equally adept at playing royalty and the girl next door. And Matt Damon is just so freaking likeable that it’s impossible not to root for the guy. (The filmmakers play on this in the movie, too, utilizing his boyish good looks as a plot point for his character’s arc.)

George Nolfi, best known for his screenwriting work (Ocean’s Twelve, The Bourne Ultimatum, The Sentinel), transitions to the director’s chair for this project, which he updated from a Philip K. Dick short story. As a director, he’s confident and thorough – every shot feels planned and the editing reveals the vision of a man with a clear plan in his head. (Being a writer/director also helps.) It’s just unfortunate that he didn’t strive for a bit more here; there’s so much interesting territory to be covered with a premise like this, and though it touches on some overarching questions, it never really comes down on them with any sense of meaning.

Despite some over-reliance on exposition, The Adjustment Bureau succeeds on the backs of its leads and strong supporting cast. The concepts explored are fascinating and the cinematography is slick, so I’d say this is absolutely worth a rental. Actually, for me, this is the perfect example of what I consider to be a rental: a good movie that doesn’t have any outstanding qualities deserving of a big screen viewing, but one that features good performances and is intellectually stimulating enough to watch with friends and talk about it afterwards. Until next time…

Read similar posts to Review: The Adjustment Bureau on Filmonic

Marvel has been watching Emily Blunt for a numbers of year now. They originally wanted the actress for Black Widow in Iron Man 2 but 20th Century Fox still had her under contract to make another film with them following her appearance in The Devil Wears Prada. As a result Blunt had to pull out to film Gulliver’s Travels (she’s probably regretting that) and was replaced by Scarlett Johansson.

They then approached her for the role of Peggy Carter in Captain America: The First Avenger, however Blunt was close to signing on to other projects at the time, so the role went to Hayley Atwell instead. After all of these offers and close calls will we ever see Emily Blunt in a superhero movie?

Collider asked her that very question while the actress was on the rounds promoting The Adjustment Bureau.

Do you think you’ll ever be in a Marvel movie?

Blunt: I’ve been offered certain parts, [but] either through scheduling or it just not being quite the right thing for me I haven’t done them. But I think for me, being in some kind of superhero movie it just has to be the right time and the right thing. I’m not prepared to sign onto many movies at one time.

So you don’t want a 9-picture contract?

Blunt: Not really. I just can’t, I don’t wanna do that. I think the joy of the job for me is the about the unknown and “who knows what’s coming next” so to feel like I’m straight-jacketed in some way might be tricky. But at the same time, I love what they do and I think that they make amazing superhero movies. So if something came along that was right, I would definitely consider it.

You watch the video interview here.

I suppose she has a point about the handcuffs Marvel places on it’s actors (Samuel L. Jackson is signed for 9 movies, Chris Evans for 6). Playing someone’s girlfriend in movie after movie would prevent her from taking on potentially meatier roles.

Personally I thought Blunt would have made a great Catwoman, but seeing as Anne Hathaway has that one we’ll have to hold out for the possibility of Lois Lane appearing in Blunt’s future. She’ll no doubt be on the short-list.

Which comic book character, if any, do you think Blunt should play in future movies?

Read similar posts to Emily Blunt would be in a superhero movie at the “right time” on Filmonic

Get ready for 84 minutes of Shakespeare on mushrooms. The 3D animated Gnomeo and Juliet is based off the famous writer’s 16th century play. In the opening monologue, a little gnome alerts the audience that this take will be a bit different from all the other versions. What the little gnome – and the nine other writers – forgot to mention is that this will blatantly steal the Toy Story concept. Now retreads are part of the process these days and this practice is accepted. With that said, the producers, writers and director better bring their A-game in the creative department.

After the monologue is completed, the setting of this story takes place in the connecting backyards of two upscale senior citizens. As they exchange insults when leaving for work, the one thing they do have in common is the pristine upkeep of their backyards. Both fenced in areas are decked out with tiny ceramic gnome statues. On one side we have the elegant blue gnomes. The other is the quasi-grumpy red gnomes. Once the respective homeowners leave for the day, the gnomes come to life and begin tending to their lands. Yet every now and then, the rival factions like to take subtle shots at each other. Whether it be in sabotaging ones flowers and/or partaking in the heated lawnmower races in the back alley just beyond the fence, the two sides are very competitive when interacting with each other.

The story glosses over all the characters so the audience can get a proper introduction. Yet the main focus is on the heralded son of the blues, Gnomeo (voiced by James McAvoy) and the princess like daughter of the reds, Juliet (voiced by Emily Blunt). Both have a sense of adventure in them, which leads them to an unexpected meeting, when both decide to venture beyond the fence. It becomes love at first sight, but the obstacle of being a blue and a red, forces them to hide their passion for each other. Eventually, the grudge between the blues and the reds escalates, leaving the two lovebirds in a tough position.

It’s fine to do an alternate take on a revered story. Disney’s Tangled is evidence of that, for it managed to successfully execute the formula in an entertaining way. Gnomeo and Juliet does a few creative things and pays attention to the small details (no pun), when using its surroundings. Problem is the gnome characters were not the proper vehicle to helm this tale based on the layout of the script. You would think having nine writers, the creative lighting bolt would eventually strike somewhere. Sadly, the potential (if any) is never fully realized.

Audiences – especially the younger audiences – will chuckle in a few choice spots. A chuckle is all though. Put it this way, you know when something hilarious happens on-screen and the audience is still laughing to the point you may miss a few lines of dialogue in the movie? Well, this will not happen at all in this guy. In fact, it seems the writers were cognizant of that above practice in theaters and purposely added a buffer between jokes. Which is met with dead silence. Now that isn’t to say the jokes were complete duds, but they (writers) definitely needed to spend more time on the material in accordance with the animated sequence that accompanied these said duds. What is funny though, Ozzy Osbourne voicing a ceramic deer the size of a shoe.

Comparisons to Toy Story are natural since the gnomes and a other random ceramics all freeze when humans enter the frame. What this flick is missing that Toy Story had was more depth in each character’s persona. None of the ceramic statues – which also include a French frog and a Super Mario Bros. mushroom – had the charisma necessary to make this memorable. The chosen environment the characters are put in was never fully developed, therefore, not all that interactive. It’s a shame too, because random flashes of brilliance were on display and could entertain. The not-so intelligent Pink Flamingo is an example of things the story did right.

Overall, Gnomeo and Juliet needed more preparation. The final version looks more like a second or third draft. Maybe Touchstone Pictures sent out the wrong copy to theaters. The physical animation is worthy of the big screen but the story and creativity regarding the characters is not quite there. Which suggests this title probably should have went straight to DVD. This is a product that will not annoy you in anyway, but the flick never engages the audience (old and young). At least it’s short (again, no pun intended).

RATING: 2.5 out of 5

Read similar posts to Review: Gnomeo and Juliet on Filmonic

This has been said in previous columns, but it needs to be put out there once more. When it comes to fam-friendly flicks, Twentieth Century Fox can do wrong according to audiences. And box office receipts solidify this. So no matter which path this review of Gulliver’s Travels takes, it really doesn’t have any influence when it comes to the above mentioned tag-team.

With that being said, we’re going to give it our best shot to guide you – the reader – down the right path in that quest for finding quality entertainment. Here’s how much one will get out of this 88 minute adaptation.

Lemuel Gulliver (Jack Black) is a dreamer with no dreams. He’s stuck working in the mailroom for the New York Tribune and has absolutely nothing on the horizon. The guy lacks the desire to put himself out there, as noted by his new boss (T.J. Miller), who was promoted over Gulliver after just one day on the job. Gulliver does have one desire in mind though. He fawns over travel editor Darcy Silverman (Amanda Peet). He lacks the courage to ask her out but comes up with a plan to grab her attention. After plagiarizing a bunch of travel related articles, Darcy becomes impressed and gives the grunge looking guy a chance. She sends him on assignment into the Bermuda Triangle. Spoiler alert, Gulliver disappears.

He ends up in a land where he is literally the big man on campus. In the kingdom of Lilliputian, Gulliver is a giant. He is eventually embraced by the King (Billy Connolly) and forms a strong friendship with a peasant Horatio (Jason Segel). The one person who becomes insanely jealous upon the big guy’s arrival is General Edward (Chris O’Dowd). Gulliver quickly becomes an idol of sorts, as he tells his new little friends about his past life. Which is essentially a bunch of lies taken from Star Wars and Titanic lore. The once popular General becomes enraged and it only gets worse when his reluctant bride to be in Princess Mary (Emily Blunt) also takes a liking to Gulliver and his pal Horatio. General Edwards resorts to a plan by siding with the sworn enemy of Lilliputian, in the hopes of ridding this world of the “beastly” Gulliver.

Although the story keeps the prevalent theme found in Jonathan Swift’s original 18^th century novel, the way it projects the meaning out to the viewer slightly misfires. It seems that director Rob Letterman realizes this toward the end of the flick, for they haphazardly piece together a cookie-cutter sequence – complete with half-hearted dialogue – in a poor attempt to project the intended message before the credits roll. There’s absolutely no feeling for any of the characters. Compassion is not on this menu. What is available for selection are a few pop-culture shenanigans/references. Don’t get me wrong, these are funny moments. Yet there are only a handful of them. If there were more “live guitar hero” sequences, then this might have ushered in fresh comedic vibe to an already fabled story. Instead, it becomes too commercialized and negligible.

Stories such as Shrek found the perfect blend of mixing pop culture into a fairy tale setting. The hip nature of the script landed precisely where it should have in Shrek. By doing so, it didn’t have to worry about overshadowing the escapism from the fairy tale angle. With Gulliver, the flick can’t make up its mind. Of course the script was geared toward working in a modern perspective with a game Jack Black. Just seems the creativity couldn’t reach a high enough level to continuously entertain an audience. It won’t bore you, but it fails to truly get the an audience involved.

There are moments though. Chris O’Dowd’s take on General Edward is the crowd pleaser. Think of his character as the Sherriff of Rottingham from Mel Brooks’ Men in Tights. Jack Black is doing the same shtick again, but he eventually gets one to smile. The guy gave it his all. Too bad the writers did not. Everyone else gets into their roles and perform well enough to keep the younger viewers engaged. Speaking of those younger viewers, do not succumb to the pressure of them wanting to see this flick in 3D. There is not one scene where the 3D enhances anything. Nothing flies at you and the environment can be thoroughly appreciated in a normal 2D setting.

Overall, Gulliver’s Travels will not offend anybody. It may not entertaining anyone unless this is their first introduction to a Jack Black movie. The atmosphere is fun to explore and the special effects (besides the 3D) are interesting to see. Younger crowds (single digits in age) will be all about exploring this. The rest of us will probably never visit this one again.

Rating: 2.5 out of 5

Read similar posts to Review: Gulliver’s Travels on Filmonic

One project to keep on your radar is Looper from Brick and The Brothers Bloom director Rian Johnson. The movie, which will begin filming early next year, is set in a post-apocalyptic time traveling world and will star Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Bruce Willis, and Emily Blunt.

While on the rounds promoting Gulliver’s Travels Blunt spoke about her character and described it as “a very cool high-concept movie”.

From MTV:

“It’s sort of post-apocalypto time travel, time-traveling world where it’s a dog-eat-dog world,” Blunt said of the film. “And it’s set in sort of 2050 or 2060, that sort of time, when the world has gone to s***.”

Blunt revealed that she’ll share the majority of her scenes with Gordon-Levitt — “I have one [scene] with Bruce and the rest is with Joe,” she said — but declined to elaborate too much on the plot, which reportedly revolves around a group of time-hopping killers known as Loopers. “It’s really a very cool high-concept movie that I probably will take all day if I try to explain it,” she said. “But I think Rian Johnson is somewhat of a genius, and I thought ‘Brick’ was phenomenal as a movie. So I’m really excited.”

I play a really tough girl, sort of Midwestern, lives on a farm. I wield an ax and shoot a gun,” she shared enthusiastically. But while she’s not daunted by the physicality of the role, Blunt did acknowledge at least one skill that will need some honing before filming starts. “I’ve got to learn how to chop wood at some point.”

While Blunt didn’t want to reveal any plot details, we know that the story takes place in the future where killers called “Loopers” send murdered bodies back in time for stationed Loopers to dispose of them – the perfect crime, considering there’s no evidence. But when Joseph Gordon-Levitt’s character, a Looper in the near future, experiences complications, all bets are off. Bruce Willis will play an older version of the same character as JGL.

No studio is attached and a release date has yet to be set, but we can expected it to hit sometime in 2012.

Read similar posts to Emily Blunt says she will “wield an ax and shoot a gun” in Looper on Filmonic