Channing Tatum Explains His Gravity Boots in First Clip from JUPITER ASCENDING

by     Posted 224 days ago


The first Jupiter Ascending clip has landed online for writers/directors Lana and Andy Wachowski’s ambitious sci-fi adventure.  The story follows Jupiter Jones (Mila Kunis), a recent Russian immigrant who scrubs toilets for a living, but then discovers she has the genetic signature that makes her next in line to be Queen of the Universe.  Channing Tatum plays an ex-military half-werewolf half-albino hunter tasked with tracking her down.  This debut clip is a quiet scene between Kunis and Tatum’s characters, as Tatum’s hunter explains how his gravity boots work before they board an invisible spacecraft.  The film still looks like a whole lot of fun and wildly inventive, and I can’t wait to see what crazy surprises the Wachowskis have in store.

Hit the jump to watch the first Jupiter Ascending clip.  The film also stars Eddie Redmayne, Sean Bean, Douglas Booth, Tuppence MiddletonJames D’ArcyTim Pigott-Smith, and Doona Bae.  Jupiter Ascending opens in 2D, 3D, and IMAX 3D on July 18th.

Watch the Jupiter Ascending clip below, which first debuted on Ellen.

Here’s the official synopsis for Jupiter Ascending:

From the streets of Chicago to the far-flung galaxies whirling through space, “Jupiter Ascending” tells the story of Jupiter Jones (Mila Kunis), who was born under a night sky, with signs predicting she was destined for great things. Now grown, Jupiter dreams of the stars but wakes up to the cold reality of a job cleaning other people’s houses and an endless run of bad breaks. Only when Caine (Channing Tatum), a genetically engineered ex-military hunter, arrives on Earth to track her down does Jupiter begin to glimpse the fate that has been waiting for her all along—her genetic signature marks her as next in line for an extraordinary inheritance that could alter the balance of the cosmos.


Like Us


FB Comments

  • Em

    Really bad acting

  • DirkBelig

    >”The film still looks like a steaming load of manure and wildly stupid”


    Why are the Wahackskis still being allowed to make movies? They’ve made 2.1 decent movies (Bound and The Matrix plus the few cool bits from the sequels), but Speed Racer was a disaster and Cloud Atlas a flop, albeit and ambitious and fully committed flop. They literally haven’t had a good movie in 15 years, so how come they keep getting handed piles of money to burn? This looks insipid even by to low standards they have now.

    • Guest

      Speed Racer was a flop but it is a good movie – usually people who haven’t seen it are the only ones to call it a disaster and Cloud Atlas was far from a flop internationally and it is a great film.

      However- this one hasn’t captured my attention yet…

      • DirkBelig

        >”Speed Racer was a flop but it is a good movie”

        Factually incorrect.

        >Cloud Atlas was far from a flop internationally and it is a great film.”

        Cloud Atlas grossed $130.4M worldwide on a reported $102M budget. That’s a flop. It’s not a great film, but it is an interesting mess.

      • Guest

        wow. lol. Ok, show me the facts that contribute to Speed Racer being a disaster…

        so Cloud Atlas made 28.4 Million. By “factual” definition a movie that made money cannot be called a flop.

      • DirkBelig

        Depending on the size of the marketing budget and distribution costs, the general rule of thumb is that a movie must gross 2-3 times its production costs. Considering it was a 3-hour sci-fi epic starring Tom Hanks and Halle Berry, they didn’t just take out ads in the Penny Saver and Auto Swapper papers. They probably put at least $50M into promo, so even if it was just 2X costs to get into the black, it would’ve needed to make $300M to break even. Even your dumb ass can do that math. Cloud Atlas was a flop. Period. [drops mic]

        At least they only spent $102M on making it. Pacific Rim was over $210M so even its $400M gross made it a modest disappointment. If they’d brought it in for under $150M, it would’ve been a modest hit. AAA VFX-driven flicks are $$$$$$$$$$$$$ these days. The rumor is that Fox has spent the most on X-Men: Days of Future Past than anything else that didn’t have James Cameron directing it, though that’s been denied. Still, they’ve probably spent a ton and thus need to make $600M to make it worthwhile.

      • Guest

        so you have no facts. thank you.

      • DirkBelig

        WTF are you talking about?! Speed Racer was a terrible movie (39% RT) that was an unmitigated box office flop even by your idiotic math skills, grossing $94M on a $120M budget. (Don’t forget promo and distro costs.) I’ve explained how Cloud Atlas was a box office flop.

        You’re just acting like the Black Knight now. You have been thoroughly PWNED and are just embarrassing yourself now instead of thanking me for the enlightenment I have provided you. Grow up, kid.

      • GunzOfNavarone

        I’d give up – the fact you’re talking to a Speed Racer fan says it all. smh.

      • Rotten Tomatometer

        Seriously? The Tomatometer is a joke. Quoting the Tomatometer is saying “I think it’s bad because they think it’s bad”. If you’re not going to critically break down the movie into why you think it was bad, then you can’t expect people to take you seriously and with any credibility. Citing other peoples opinions is an asinine move.

      • Lex Walker

        Okay, how about the fact that the identity of Racer X might be the most obvious twist in the world and so in an attempt to put a band-aid over it, the writing tries to lie about it as if to say ‘Oh, you think you figured out this twist? Well thbbbbbt, no you didn’t. Okay, yes you did.’ That’s just horribly sloppy writing, and it’s not the only example.

      • The Rotten Fruit

        Point noted. It’s a total Nolan move!

      • DirkBelig

        I’m not the one with a credibility problem here, Bub, and the RT score is secondary to the lethal MATH I dropped. No matter how you slice or spin things, the Wahackskis are bad investments.

      • Bub

        Similar to the MATH behind the huge success of the Transformers movies?

      • DirkBelig

        Not only are you a boring troll, you’re a retarded troll. The Transformers series returns 4-5+ times their production cost. Despite their high price tags, they’re almost guaranteed gold mines.

        Transformers – Production cost: $150M – Global gross: $710

        Transformers 2 – Production cost: $200M – Global gross: $836M

        Transformers 3 – Production cost: $190M – Global gross: $1,123M

        Combined cost: $545M – Combined gross: 2.669 BILLION.


      • Yay!

        Cloud Atlas was mainly a narrative flop, which is logically why it was a box office flop…

      • notneo

        The international rights were presold in a way that it only had to make 30 mil domestic to turn a profit. It was indie financed with warners covering marketing and distributing. It’s done well in ancillary and home video. It’s made a profit. It also opened the weekend of hurricane Sandy.

      • Max

        I watched Speed Racer and didn’t like it at all and most critics agree with me seeing as how Speed Racer is at 38% on Rotten Tomatoes and that’s good enough for me.

      • tarek

        I have seen Speed Racer. I experienced nausea.
        Cloud Atlas was not bad. But it is not a movie I will watch again.
        And Matrix Sequels were a pile of … they destroyed the myth.

    • iPadCary

      MY. THOUGHT. EXACTLY. Matrix & some cool parts from the sequels.
      Why the fuck ARE these one-hit-wonders still being given HUNDREDS of millions of dollars after Matrix 2/Matrix 3/Speed Racer/Cloud Atlas/and now this steaming pile?!?
      Does Hollywood have THAT much money to just, quite literally, throw away?
      And listen to that super-authentic recent-emigre-from-Russia
      accent Kunis is doing. Sweet Christ almighty, what DOGSHIT this is.

    • Max

      They make visually appealing movies, I guess the studios still think they have that diamond they found in the rough years ago.

      • Lex Walker

        See also: Zack Snyder

      • Twitteris

        Zack Snyder = Terrible writer, but talented director.

      • Lex Walker

        Semi-talented director. Good on visuals, not very good on coaxing good performances or knowing the difference between a good take and a bad (because he either took the bad takes he was given because he couldn’t get any better or he doesn’t know well enough to ask for a better one). If he was a professional CGI supervisor/Technical Director – he’d be amazing at his job.

    • The Flobbit

      Cloud Atlas is one of the greatest movies of the last 10 years. It is visually stunning, epic, original, brilliantly acted, emotionally POWERFUL, and filled with the Wachowski’s best action since Trinity said dodge this.


    as visually stunning as this film looks, i really don’t know about these two as leads for a sci-fi film. i have a feeling this film will bomb, big time

  • Georce Miller

    The more I see of the Wachowskis, them more I think someone else wrote that first Matrix movie. All of their other work is on the level of the Matrix sequels. Call it Shayamalan syndrome.

    • Brain in a Vat

      True. The Matrix is a purposeful film and it was necessary that it be created. It’s themes and philosophy are straight from the writings of Rene Descarte. They should stick to making deep-thought provoking stories. Cloud Atlas had it, but was too convoluted to hold anyone’s attention long enough to think. But who knows, JA might have substance…

      • Brain in a Vat


    • lordjim

      well they stole the matrix story from a comicbook who´s writer complained that they didn´t steal the second and third part too, so here you have your explanation ;)

      • Brain in a Vat

        Rene Descartes was born in 1596.

  • Alboone

    Ahh man…this isn’t looking good. I like the Wachowskis but man that dialogue is groan inducing. WTF! I bet you after this flops they’re just going to have to retreat to television and start from the ground up, build back their rep.

  • Max

    LMAO! She cleaned toilets until she discovered she had the genetic
    makeup to be the QUEEN OF THE UNIVERSE!!! Ahhh thanks you I haven’t
    laughed that hard in a while.

  • Mike Branson

    Jupiter Ascending looks different from what we are used to seeing, that’s why there is so much negative comment about this movie that no one his seen.
    The negative comments sound like these people actually seen this movie.
    A lot of you people don’t like movies that is new and different, so you bash the movie.
    I’m not saying this movie is good or bad, but to immediately calling it bad because of a two minute trailer and a 35 second clip is jumping the gun.
    There are plenty of movies that may look bad and turn out to be good movies, and vice versa

Click Here