Director Rupert Wyatt is folding his cards and passing on directing ‘Gambit’. In a statement by Rupert, he notes that it has to do with conflicting schedules after the movie was delayed.

Its seems like this project keeps getting dealt a bad hand. Recently rumors were of Channing Tatum leaving the film, but he doubled down and stayed. I’m sure Fox was hoping Rupert could use some of his kinetic energy from his time on Rise of the Planets of the Apes to make Gambit a success as well.

With Hugh Jackman soon retiring Wolverine‘s claws, and Fantastic Four going nowhere fast, Fox will likely want to build another franchise around a character. They seem so dead set on Gambit, but I just don’t think he’s that great of a character. I never had an affinity towards the rain cajin, but I guess time will tell if they can change my mind.

Now that Wyatt’s gone, who would you like to see take on Gambit?

Wyatt

Many aspects of life operate in cycles and Hollywood is no exception. The latest Tinseltown remake comes from Rise of the Planet of the Apes director, Rupert Wyatt, who teams up with Mark Wahlberg in the slightly re-imagined version of 1974’s The Gambler. When Paramount originally announced the remake in the summer of 2011, it was believed that visionary Martin Scorcese and his loyal leading star, Leonardo DiCaprio, were in line take on the project. But after viewing Wyatt’s unnecessary adaptation, I’m left to ponder what could have been.

Jim Bennett (Wahlberg) is a high stakes gambler who falls further and further into debt in an underground casino ring with his risky and careless betting habits. But after the self-destructive English professor borrows from a second loan shark and offers his life as collateral, his addiction continues to place him on a very dangerous path. And in Jim’s mind, his only way out of this mess is to go all-in one final time.

gambler1

For a brief moment before the film had ever been screened, some insiders gave The Gambler an outside chance at making an awards season splash. However, Rupert Wyatt’s effort is far from Oscar contention. Boasting a constrained and soulless script that’s drowned in timely cynicism and betting cliches, you can only watch a blackjack dealer flip over cards for so long before you start tuning out, and that limit is reached very early on. Simply put, The Gambler would rather show its protagonist losing than have the audience experience the feeling through a clever and well-crafted character-driven screenplay. As for the film’s leading star, Wahlberg’s performance is by no means a burden to the overall product, but he isn’t a bright spot either. Unlike the 1974 original where James Caan delivers a character that viewers can connect with, it’s difficult to tell whether Jim Bennett’s lack of allure is a product of Wahlberg’s acting, or the result of poor writing and development on the part of Academy Award winning screenwriter William Monahan. Odds are, it’s a combination of both.

gambler2

Thankfully, though, The Gambler offers a saving grace with its long list of exceptional supporting roles from John Goodman, Brie Larson and Jessica Lange. Each do their part to successfully transition Bennett’s collapse from scene to scene, and some of the film’s finest moments occur when John Goodman takes command of the screen. In fact, the movie would have been much better served opening the door a little wider for these vastly under-utilized characters. Brie Larson is such an emerging talent in Hollywood and, unfortunately, she isn’t given the proper platform to work with in the film.

No matter how hard Rupert and his team attempt to offer a slick and cool tale of underground gambling, the final product fails to resonate. The Gambler‘s biggest detractor is an unlikable protagonist who becomes impossible to connect with for a multitude of reasons. For example, if you’re trying to sell a story about an unlikely gambling addict, you should make the character significantly more endearing and vulnerable. Instead, all we’re given are Wahlberg’s frequent “woe-is-me” rants followed by a careless and unforgiving attitude that repels the audience almost immediately. There’s no rooting interest here, so I suggest spending your time elsewhere.

GRADE: 2.5/5

Check out tuns of other fun write-ups at MCDAVE’s Host Site

Last week it was revealed that Rupert Wyatt had stepped down as director of the upcoming sequel to Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes. Now 20th Century Fox has come up with a short list of directors to replace Wyatt for the upcoming sequel, Dawn Of The Planet Of The Apes.

Deadline have revealed that the directors on the list consist of Matt Reeves (Cloverfield), J Blakeson (The Disappearance Of Alice Creed), Juan Carlos Fresnadillo (28 Weeks Later0, Juan Antonio Bayona (The Orphanage), Jeff Nichols (Mud) and the final two names that are sure to excite a lot of people. Also on the list are Guillermo del Toro, who we don’t need to tell you what he’s done because you already know, and Rian Johnson (Looper).

Apparently Reeves is currently on the top of the list having stepped away earlier today from Warner Bros. planned remake of The Twilight Zone citing schedule conflicts. Could this mean that the director has chosen to take on Dawn Of The Planet Of The Apes instead? It’s quite possible. Expect an announcement very soon.

In a very disappointing turn of events, the director behind the critically acclaimed Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes, Rupert Wyatt has chosen not to return to direct the sequel. It appears the director has chosen to not return for the highly-anticipated sequel titled Dawn Of The Planet of the Apes due to not wanting to rush out the film for  20th Century Fox’s May 23rd, 2014 release date. A very similar reason to Gary Ross’s choice to not return to direct The Hunger Games sequel. Fox has not commented yet but an announcement should probably be expected soon. So, who do you guys think can fill Wyatt’s role for the sequel?

Source: Deadline