The Huntsman: Winter's War (2016)

[Trini]

http://www.thehuntsmanmovie.com
 

Long before the evil Queen Ravenna (Charlize Theron) was thought vanquished by Snow White’s blade, she watched silently as her sister, Freya (Emily Blunt), suffered a heartbreaking betrayal and fled their kingdom. With Freya’s ability to freeze any enemy, the young ice queen has spent decades in a remote wintry palace raising a legion of deadly huntsmen—including Eric (Chris Hemsworth) and warrior Sara (Jessica Chastain)—only to find that her prized two defied her one demand: Forever harden your hearts to love. When Freya learns of her sister’s demise, she summons her remaining soldiers to bring the Magic Mirror home to the only sorceress left who can harness its power. But once she discovers Ravenna can be resurrected from its golden depths, the wicked sisters threaten this enchanted land with twice the darkest force it’s ever seen. Now, their amassing army shall prove undefeatable…unless the banished huntsmen who broke their queen’s cardinal rule can fight their way back to one another.

 

[Trini]

This has been released internationally, and in the U.S. April 22nd.

 

I wasn't expecting Shakespeare, but I'm a little disappointed this is getting such bad reviews. (Currently 18% on Rotten Tomatoes) Although, I was mainly interested in the costumes and SFX.

[ribboninthesky1]

The first one was...mediocre, and not just because of Kristin Stewart.  I assume TPTB hoped to capitalize on the Frozen frenzy, not to mention Hemsworth, but too much time has passed from the former, and this film doesn't seem to be targeted to children.  On another thread, there was discussion about Hemsworth's career, but I have to wonder what he'll do once Thor is no longer a Marvel chess piece. Not that he'll be hurting for money, but there's an elephant in the room with his films to date. 

[SeanC]

Raise your hand if you're confused by this film's existence.

[Zuleikha]

Didn't the first one do very well at the box office? I think there was too much time in between the first and the second, though. 

[benteen]

This series isn't my thing but the idea of Charlize Theron vs Emily Blunt, who both played awesome action heroines recently in Mad Max Fury Road and Edge of Tomorrow, really is awesome.

Edited April 19, 2016 by benteen

[Bruinsfan]

I have basically zero interest in the story of this movie, but I could watch the cast have fun together on talk shows for the next year.

[Sharpie66]

I just saw this review of the film over at Ars Technica (spoiler-filled, so be warned), and it just eviscerates the movie. The headline lets you know exactly what the opinion is: The Huntsman: Winter’s War is so terrible that it will astonish you. The URL might be even better--"The Huntsman Winters War is 90 terrible and 12 miscalculated wtf."

Edited April 22, 2016 by Sharpie66

[SimoneS]

What struck me when I was watching those promos with Charlize Theron, Emily Blunt, and Chris Hemsworth was that he was doing most of the talking. All I could think was Charlize won an Oscar, she should be the star leading all this promotion not Hemsworth.

[Dejana]

What struck me when I was watching those promos with Charlize Theron, Emily Blunt, and Chris Hemsworth was that he was doing most of the talking. All I could think was Charlize won an Oscar, she should be the star leading all this promotion not Hemsworth.

That's interesting, because one of the criticisms I've seen from people who've already watched the movie is that Charlize is barely in it but she was all over the advertising. Hemsworth really is the star along with Chastain, and they have more screen time than Blunt, who appears more than Theron. But if your movie is a turkey, you might as well try to salvage what you can by selling it as a dark Frozen for grown ups.

Edited April 24, 2016 by Dejana

[SimoneS]

That's interesting, because one of the criticisms I've seen from people who've already watched the movie is that Charlize is barely in it but she was all over the advertising. Hemsworth really is the star along with Chastain, and they have more screen time than Blunt, who appears more than Theron. But if your movie is a turkey, you might as well try to salvage what you can by selling it as a dark Frozen for grown ups.

 

After reading your comment, I went to look for more info on Charlize's role in the movie and found the Vulture article below. You are right that she is hardly in the movie even though they used her image for most of the publicity. I did like that she demanded equal pay as Hemsworth who is actually the lead. This does explain why she doesn't say much in those promos. I don't know why they made this movie, the first one wasn't a success and what success it had was likely due Kirsten Stewart's Twilight fans.

 

http://www.vulture.com/2016/04/charlize-theron-huntsman-winters-war-pay-raise.html#

Edited April 24, 2016 by SimoneS

[Dejana]

After reading your comment, I went to look for more info on Charlize's role in the movie and found the Vulture article below. You are right that she is hardly in the movie even though they used her image for most of the publicity. I did like that she demanded equal pay as Hemsworth who is actually the lead. This does explain why she doesn't say much in those promos. I don't know why they made this movie, the first one wasn't a success and what success it had was likely due Kirsten Stewart's Twilight fans.

 

http://www.vulture.com/2016/04/charlize-theron-huntsman-winters-war-pay-raise.html#

 

Snow White and the Huntsman didn't do badly—a $56 million opening weekend, $155 million domestically as part of $396 million worldwide—and with those numbers, Universal probably hoped they could build on the success and what studio these days doesn't want another franchise? I remember the speculation being that the sequel could continue with Snow White's story and see how she handled having power. That was before the Kristen Stewart/Rupert Sanders "momentary indiscretion" got exposed, and even after he left the sequel, Universal still wanted to move forward with KStew on board. I think the studio spent so much time trying to make the sequel happen that they didn't want to give up without a movie to show for it. The budget is lower compared to the first one ($115M vs. $170M), at least, but so are the receipts—the $20.1 million opening weekend barely covers the salaries for Hemsworth and Theron. 

Edited April 24, 2016 by Dejana

[blugirlami21]

I actually heard the opposite.  They studio wanted nothing to do with Kristen or Rupert after the scandal but they still wanted to capitalize on the money that SWATH made so we wound up with a movie about the huntsman.  I saw the movie today and I liked it ok but I do think they ultimately made a mistake not continuing on with Kristen in the lead role.  Not everyone keeps up with what happens behind the scenes and I think a lot of people (my mom included) were confused that she was absent from the sequel to her own movie.

 

I was actually pleasantly surprised that they used so much story from snow white, including Sam Claflin reprising his role as William from SWATH.  Also that its both a prequel and a sequel.  I really like Hemsworth here and I think it's unfortunate that the movie isn't doing so well with his star power alone.  I also thought that Emily Blunt was very good as well.  Charlize was also good but I was never as taken with her performance in snow white like everyone else was.

Edited April 25, 2016 by blugirlami21

[lion10]

I really like Hemsworth here and I think it's unfortunate that the movie isn't doing so well with his star power alone.  I also thought that Emily Blunt was very good as well.  Charlize was also good but I was never as taken with her performance in snow white like everyone else was.

 

Has Chris Hemsworth had a solo movie that did well yet aside from the Thor movies?  In the Heart of the Sea and Blackhat didn't do so well.

[blugirlami21]

No he hasn't which is why I said it's unfortunate. I don't think he's a bad actor at all but his movies outside of thor never seem to do well.

[ribboninthesky1]

That's why I feel there is an elephant in the room with Hemsworth - whatever the reason(s), moviegoers don't have much interest in him outside of Marvel.   Hollywood seems invested in him, but I'm beginning to wonder if he's eventually gonna go the way of Sam Worthington.   

 

For my part, I think Hemsworth is a good actor (better screen presence than Worthington definitely). Still, I've long thought some of these franchises, Marvel in this context, are gilded cages.  If you're only in it for the money, it's all good.  If you want to have a varied career? Different ballgame.   

[blugirlami21]

In all honesty compared to his costars Hemsworth is the least known and the least experienced. He doesn't have the years of grind that Downey or even Renner have and it's prob unfair to expect him to be able to pull in the numbers needed to carry a movie on his own.

Say what you will about Kristen bts behavior, she was the main draw for me to see SWATH and she was the one with enough star power to make it the success it was. Take that away and this is the result.

Edited April 25, 2016 by blugirlami21

[KatWay]

Rush did pretty well I think and was critically acclaimed...I think maybe he hasn't found the right projects aside from that. 

[lion10]

In all honesty compared to his costars Hemsworth is the least known and the least experienced. He doesn't have the years of grind that Downey or even Renner have and it's prob unfair to expect him to be able to pull in the numbers needed to carry a movie on his own.

Say what you will about Kristen bts behavior, she was the main draw for me to see SWATH and she was the one with enough star power to make it the success it was. Take that away and this is the result.

I'm confused why KS was booted from the film. Yes, having the affair was a shitty thing to do, but it's not like she was working for Focus on the Family. So long as she turned in a good performance and the movie made a profit, why would the studio care who she slept with?

[SimoneS]

Hollywood generally judges women's sex lives harsher than men's, but I am willing to bet that the real reason that they didn't try to get Kirsten Stewart in this movie was because of the rumors that she was not straight. The rumors were all over when those pictures with Marsh came out. If the studio thought that she was about to be open about her sexuality, it would have decided not to risk having her as lead because her Twilight fans might turn against her and not go see the movie.

 

I like Hemsworth. I am not sure that he is a good actor, but it is early days in his career. He is white, male, and handsome as hell. Studios will keep giving him chances at juicy leading roles to see if he can eventually open a movie.

Edited April 25, 2016 by SimoneS

[lion10]

Hollywood generally judges women's sex lives harsher than men's, but I am willing to bet that the real reason that they didn't try to get Kirsten Stewart in this movie was because of the rumors that she was not straight. The rumors were all over when those pictures with Marsh came out. If the studio thought that she was about to be open about her sexuality, it would have decided not to risk having her as lead because her Twilight fans might turn against her and not go see the movie.

 

But I don't think that the general audience would know or care enough about KS's private life, would they?  I consider myself someone who's more interested in movies and nerd culture and I barely payed it attention, and it certainly wouldn't stop me from seeing the sequel.  The movie itself would stop me from doing that.  SWATM was disappointingly "meh", though granted I hyped it up to fanboy levels.  I don't know,maybe KS pissed of someone behind the scenes? 

 

What pictures with "Marsh"?  Who is this Marsh?

[SimoneS]

What pictures with "Marsh"?  Who is this Marsh?

 

Oops, I meant "Sanders," "Rupert Sanders." I am not sure where Marsh came from. I agree with you about the audience, but the "money" people in Hollywood are not liberal or progressive despite the claims to that effective. They are mostly white conservative heterosexual males who judge the movie going audience by their own standards and measures. They don't like different or scandals that they think will impact their bottom line. I could see them being spooked by Kirsten Stewart's sexuality and decide to play it safe by making Chris Hemsworth the lead and get Charlize Theron to add some start power.

 

[Dejana]

I'm confused why KS was booted from the film. Yes, having the affair was a shitty thing to do, but it's not like she was working for Focus on the Family. So long as she turned in a good performance and the movie made a profit, why would the studio care who she slept with?

The studio (at least publicly) said they wanted to continue with Kristen in the sequel, at first, and it wasn't until 2014 that they confirmed she wouldn't be back. Given the direction she's taken her career since Twilight, I doubt she was that desperate to return. Still, it's easy for me to see why the studio would be reluctant to have her back. If it had been an affair with any other married guy, it could be deflected as merely a private matter that has nothing to do with the production. Because it was the director of the first installment, in a marriage-ending scandal, even with a new director, the headlines and gossip about the sequel would be about whether she'd "seduce" this director, too. If that guy's married, In Touch is probably stalking Facebook/Instagram for pics to run side-by-side comparisons of KStew vs. the possibly civilian wife, to imply whether she's young/hot enough to hold on to her man (ridiculous, but it's how tabloids/bloggers think. Rupert Sanders was married to a model, though much was made of how she played Snow White's mother in the first movie). It would be even more of a thing if the new director's partner/wife was also in the business, to boost the fame quotient. Even the happiest woman with the most secure marriage might not welcome the scrutiny. And this is a case where bringing in a female director wouldn't necessarily stop the affair speculation. It would be the kind of publicity a studio really wouldn't want surrounding their sequel, or Kristen.

[ribboninthesky1]

 

I like Hemsworth. I am not sure that he is a good actor, but it is early days in his career. He is white, male, and handsome as hell. Studios will keep giving him chances at juicy leading roles to see if he can eventually open a movie.

 

Good point. (Pre-Deadpool) Ryan Reynolds is exhibit A.  And Hemsworth is even more handsome (IMO) than Reynolds. 

 

Hollywood generally judges women's sex lives harsher than men's, but I am willing to bet that the real reason that they didn't try to get Kirsten Stewart in this movie was because of the rumors that she was not straight. The rumors were all over when those pictures with Marsh came out. If the studio thought that she was about to be open about her sexuality, it would have decided not to risk having her as lead because her Twilight fans might turn against her and not go see the movie.

 

I don't know, I thought most of the controversy around Sanders/Stewart was more that she allegedly cheated on Robert Pattinson, and resulting fallout from the Twilight fandom.  I've always assumed that if she hadn't been with Pattinson, the scandal may not have been so...scandalous.  Maybe they would have just replaced Sanders, and kept it moving.  Ah well, we'll never know. 

 

Glad Marsh was clarified, because I wondered what I was missing.

Edited April 26, 2016 by ribboninthesky1

[BitterApple]

Has Chris Hemsworth had a solo movie that did well yet aside from the Thor movies? In the Heart of the Sea and Blackhat didn't do so well.

No, he hasn't and I'm surprised. Despite bad reviews, I actually liked In the Heart of the Sea. I didn't see Blackhat.

As far as the Huntsman, it's one of those movies I'll rent through Vudu or Netflix, but I'm not spending fifty bucks (between movie tickets and snacks) to see it in the theater.

[thuganomics85]

I didn't think it was too bad, although I'll admit that it could have gotten the worst reviews of all time, and I would have seen it just because it has Charlize Theron, Emily Blunt, AND Jessica Chastain in it, who are three of my favorite actresses out there.  I actually found the first film pretty dull, so I at least wasn't bored with this one, and was entertained enough.  I did think the dwarves were lame comic relief, the action was well directed, and the lack of Charlize was disappointing.  It did fee like Chris Hemsworth and Jessica Chastain were the leads, while Emily Blunt was the antagonist, and Charlize settles for the "surprise" cameo (even though trailers/advertising easily gave that away.)  Which was too bad since I think the best moments where when Theron and Blunt were facing off one another.

As for Hemsworth, I don't know.  I certainly don't think he is an award-winning actor, but I really do think he is better then a lot of young, white actors who are mainly known for their looks, so I do feel a bit bad that he can't seem to get to succeed at any non-Marvel related project.  Even Rush ended up disappointing at the box office and award season (and while he was good, admittedly Daniel Bruhl did walk away with that film.)  I certainly don't want him being mentioned in the same breath as other bland Aussie hunks like Sam Worthington, Jai Courtney, and even Liam Hemsworth.

Certainly enjoyed seeing Jessica Chastain being a badass in leather, even if the Scottish accent didn't quite work out.

Kind of surprised they got Sam Clafin to make an appearance as the Prince.

I do think it is weird Universal is still trying to make this a franchise.  Judging from the domestic box office returns, they clearly might want to think on that.  Either it was too long a wait, most people who saw the first film didn't like it enough to return for a second, or Kristen Stewart's absence had a bigger impact then predicted.

[bluvelvet]

I saw this yesterday, I was disappointed. I really liked the trailer and didn't read any reviews. It's  a bad thing when I checking my watch during the show because I'm really easy to please when it comes to movies. 

[filmfan2480]

So, I didn't hate this?

Having read some scathing reviews, I went in figuring to loathe this and so my expectation were lowered ... it worked.

Does the film make sense from beginning to end?  Nah.  Is it kinda bonkers?  Yep.

But I found myself enjoying enough of it that it just didn't matter too much in the end.

Charlize is barely in it, but I love how ridiculously over-the-top she is.

Emily Blunt was good.  Hemsworth was fine.  Chastain was badass, but her Scottish accent needed some work.

The production design, costumes, and make-up all enchanted me.  The special effects (those Goblins!!!) were great!  The music was rousing.  And I was excited during the climax.

Again, it is NOT a good movie by any stretch of the imagination -- but I didn't actively hate it while watching.

Edited May 1, 2016 by filmfan2480

[Boxofficetheatre]

I did not watched this one, but i liked the "Snow White and the Huntsman". Good work by Chris Hemsworth as Brighton and Kristen Stewart as Snow white.

[Enero]

I recently saw this and thought it was awful. The special effects were good as was the costuming but that was the only thing good about this movie. How was it possible for me to sit through two hours of this and not care about any of the characters? I guessed Queen Ravenna's betrayal of her sister from the start. The movie probably would've at least been watchable if the story was about the power struggle between Ravenna and her sister after the betrayal. 

The majority of the story focus being on the Huntsman was mind numbingly boring. I realized while watching this that Chris Hemsworth CANNOT carry a movie. He has about as much presence as his brother Liam, which is not good. He needs others to elevate his presence. Thor worked for him due to TM and Snow White and the Huntsman worked due to Charlize Theron and surprisingly Kristen Stewart. 

This was a waste of  two hours and $5.99 On Demand.

[BetterButter]