Matthew McConaughey on why he passed Guardians of the Galaxy 2 for the Dark Tower movie

Adam Chitwood at Collider on why Matthew McConaughey refused a role in Guardains of the Galaxy 2 in order to work on the Dark Tower movie:

Well, as the actor explains it, it came down to a choice between doing Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 2 or the Stephen King adaptation The Dark Tower. During an interview with Playboy, McConaughey sounded off on why Dark Tower was the more appealing choice:

“I like Guardians of the Galaxy, but what I saw was ‘It’s successful, and now we’ve got room to make a colorful part for another big-name actor.’ I’d feel like an amendment. The Dark Tower script was well written, I like the director [Nikolaj Arcel] and his take on it, and I can be the creator, the author of the Man in Black—a.k.a. the Devil—in my version of this Stephen King novel. We’ve done the first one. It’s a fantastic thriller that takes place in another realm, an alternate universe, but it’s very much grounded. For instance, the gunslinger’s weapon isn’t a lightsaber or something; it’s a pistol. I enjoyed approaching my character as if I were the Devil having a good time, getting turned on by exposing human hypocrisies wherever he finds them.”

Wayne sent me this article a few days ago but I just got around to reading it now and hoooooollly shit am I now insanely hyped for the movie, especially after seeing some of the images (Like the one above of McConaughey in Tull. He shows the calm power and menace the Man In Black should have1).

I hold a special attatchment for the Dark Tower series, I got my first (The Gunslinger) around the time I moved to New Zealand, and was on the fourth (Wizard and Glass) by the time I met Wayne. Despite being my first Steven King book, and most people I knew telling me that it was scary, I never found it to be that. The Gunsligner was surreal in a pleasing way. It created an effect of distortion and mystery to the character and the world which almost entirely sucked me in and got me obsessed with Roland.

Hyped af

(via Wayne)


  1. But no insane grin. 

How Arrival’s Designers Crafted a Mesmerizing Alien Alphabet

Wired gives us an interview with the lead production designer of this years movie Arrival about how they created the splotchy, weird language in the movie:

The shapes in Bertrand’s paintings made it into the movie. Vermette and his team assigned meaning to the inky tendrils that project from each ring, developing a dictionary of 100 symbols. A single logogram can express a simple thought (“Hi”) or a complex one (“Hi Louise, I’m an alien but I come in peace”). The difference lies in the complexity of the shape. A logogram’s weight carries meaning, too: A thicker swirl of ink can indicate a sense of urgency; a thinner one suggests a quiet tone. A small hook attached to one symbol makes it a question. The system allows each logogram to express a bundle of ideas without adhering to any traditional rules of syntax or sequence.

Interesting how much it relates to a real design process for a real world typeface.

How Arrival’s Designers Crafted a Mesmerizing Alien Alphabet | WIRED

How Quentin Tarantino uses violence

A brilliant video essay by the Discarded Image, analysing how the greatest director of all time uses violence in his films. It also analyses one of my favorite movie scenes of all time, the torture scene from Reservoir dogs, and details every reason why I love it. The juxtaposition of the music being played, the sounds, and the camera angles make it a very intense scene, and perfect in Mr. Blonds characterisation.