20 Movies We’re Looking Forward to in 2013 (and 5 We’re Definitely Not)

These are the movies we most want to see this year. We know there are a bunch missing (yes, The Hobbit, we get it). So tell us what you would have chosen

  • Share
  • Read Later
Warner Bros. (2); Walt Disney Pictures

We may still be in the throes of awards season, but cinephiles are already buzzing about 2013’s eagerly awaited films. This year comic-book adaptations (Man of Steel, Iron Man 3) and sci-fi (Star Trek into Darkness, Oblivion) will continue to reign supreme. We’ll see reboots (The Lone Ranger, Carrie) and films based on classic literature (The Great Gatsby, Oz: The Great and Powerful). Below are the films we most want to see this year. Got something on your radar that we missed? Tell us in the comments.

Gangster Squad (Jan. 11)
We were excited for Gangster Squad back in the fall, but the shooting in Aurora, Colo., forced a re-edit and delayed release. The star-packed movie, featuring Josh Brolin, Ryan Gosling, Nick Nolte, Emma Stone and Sean Penn, tells the story of Mickey Cohen (Penn) and his Los Angeles rampage in the 1940s. Skeptics worry that director Ruben Fleischer has helmed only two movies, both comedies: Zombieland and 30 Minutes or Less. We’re hoping for the next L.A. Confidential.

Warm Bodies (Feb. 1)
Zombies in a teen romance sounds absurd, but if anyone can pull it off, director Jonathan Levine (50/50) can.

A Good Day to Die Hard (Feb. 14)
Ignore the ridiculous title. New York City cop John McClane (Bruce Willis) is back, teaming up with his oldest son (Jai Courtney) in Moscow to prevent a nuclear weapons heist. While 2007’s Live Free or Die Hard was preposterous (though it made over $380 million worldwide), we’re optimistic the fifth Die Hard will be more like 1988’s original. We anticipate lots of shattering glass.

Stoker (March 1)
Director Park Chan-wook is known for his South Korean blockbusters Oldboy and Joint Security Area. His English-language debut is a gothic thriller starring Mia Wasikowska as a girl entranced with her mysterious uncle (Matthew Goode). Nicole Kidman looks creepily good as her emotionally unstable mother.

Oz: The Great and Powerful (March 8)
Oz gets racy. James Franco stars as the young wizard in this Wizard of Oz prequel (the role was vacated by Robert Downey Jr.), which tells the story of a fast-talking stage magician who falls in love with Glinda (Michelle Williams). The two team up to fight the evil witches Evanora (Rachel Weisz) and Theodora (Mila Kunis). Directed by Sam Raimi, the film looks magical, if a bit like Alice in Wonderland.

Carrie (March 15)
Yes, we’ll always love Brian De Palma’s 1976 film that landed Oscar nominations for Sissy Spacek and Piper Laurie. But we can’t help getting excited about this remake, which stars Chloë Grace Moretz and Julianne Moore as the mother-daughter team, with Kimberly Peirce (Boys Don’t Cry) directing.

The Place Beyond the Pines (March 29)
The film earned rave reviews (and Godfather comparisons) at the Toronto Film Festival last year. Ryan Gosling — mastering the art of the dangling cigarette — plays motorcycle stunt rider Luke, who provides for his son and ex-girlfriend (Eva Mendes) by robbing banks and doing seo services. Bradley Cooper is Avery Cross, a New York cop climbing the ranks to become a politician. Their paths collide, and the drama unfolds over 15 years as the sins of the past haunt their teenage sons.

Oblivion (April 19)
Sure, Tom Cruise stars as a lone drone repairman. And sure, it’s written and directed by Joseph Kosinski, the man responsible for Tron: Legacy. But the postapocalyptic sci-fi film does provide a gorgeous vision of a decimated earth, and Morgan Freeman seems perfectly cast as the leader of a band of survivors.

Iron Man 3 (May 3)
The success of last summer’s The Dark Knight Rises proved that we like our superheroes brooding. Iron Man is the latest crusader to get serious. Fresh from the epic team-up of The Avengers, Robert Downey Jr. returns as Tony Stark, who goes up against Ben Kingsley as the villainous Mandarin.

The Great Gatsby (May 10)
Leonardo DiCaprio is the tortured Jay Gatsby, Tobey Maguire is Midwestern outsider Nick Carraway and Carey Mulligan plays Daisy Buchanan. The much anticipated Baz Luhrmann adaptation was pushed back from its original Christmas release — perhaps for a bigger box-office return. But hey, Jay-Z is reportedly producing the score, so maybe it will be worth the wait.

  1. Previous
  2. 1
  3. 2
46 comments
elvenforest10
elvenforest10

*sigh*  I wonder if we're ever going to get a version of Carrie with characters true to the original book.  Carrie was not a pretty girl, not at all.  She was aggressively plain, overweight, clumsy, with a face full of acne.  That was the POINT - she got her revenge because she'd been bullied all her life.  And her mother was not some stick-thin beauty like Moore; she was a big, overbearing broad with muscles hard and strong from hauling sacks of laundry all day, and a crazy-eyed loon to boot.  But you know Hollywood - every woman has to be skinny and pretty, while the guys can be all over the map.  *sigh*

creative_writer
creative_writer

when one makes a critique about somebody else's work, in this case, the movies; better to keep the focus on the details of the movies, without allowing any personal and political biases to affect the outcome of the 'critique' article... after all, everybody has different tastes and opinions... what works for John does not necessarily work for Peter; to each his own.
I'll still watch the movies that I myself am anticipating, and perhaps, still watch the ones that I don't feel so excited about.

ChrisMugglestone
ChrisMugglestone

The Hobbit is about the only one on that list that I am anticipating. A lot of the list seems to be more based on personal preferences about who's involved than the actual stories.

connorhopkinsnolan
connorhopkinsnolan

This is a horrible article.  Whoever wrote it should not be working for what I thought was a decent publication.

MichaelCollins
MichaelCollins

Ragging on The Hobbit yet love Anchorman?  You have no sense at all.

AlanLiotta
AlanLiotta

Sorry to see you started your list with Gangster Squad!  LA Confidential it is NOT!  This features one of the most cliched, hackneyed scripts you'll hear in all of 2013.  You should have dropped this one in favor of Star Trek into Darkness, Thor:  The Dark World, or even The Lone Ranger! 

bluaquarius
bluaquarius

For Sci-fi/Fantasy lovers, a fun time at the movies!

DeweySayenoff
DeweySayenoff

How about changing the word "We" with an "I" in the headline of this article?

What bothers me about critics (among many things) is the pretentious way they headline their articles with what "we" believe when I am utterly certain I was not consulted about any of these selections.  So what do you mean by "we" Kimosabe?  (You should know that term, the Lone Ranger is one of your breathlessly awaited movies, after all.)  You scatter that word throughout the article as if dishing on a mass meeting where the entire reading public sat down and told you with a unified voice that these were their choices for the up-coming year, along with a few they'd collectively not want to watch.

I get that you want to engender some sense of unity here, but no one EVER speaks for me, or tells me what I like and don't like.  By saying "we" to obviously include a reader, you are dragging them along on a literary kidnapping, holding them for a ransom of their time until they either honor your efforts and finish reading your words or make a break for freedom by clicking the X on the open tab.  A writer should know better than to make assumptions about their readers or to force a reader to accept things about which they may have a differing opinion.

Siskel and Ebert always put their money where their mouths were.  They said what THEY thought about a movie.  More critics should emulate that.  Leave the goody-goody, group-hug that this article was in the recycle bin and man (or woman) up next time.  Next time, just call it YOUR picks and pans and leave the pretentious "we" out of the title and narrative.  Take some responsibility for YOUR choices and don't try to dilute it with some distorted attempt to make the reader change an opinion by going along with an imaginary crowd.  Unless you have multiple personality disorder, or are pregnant and have talked it over with your fetus, there's only one person writing this article and the opinions, while potentially shared by others, aren't necessarily shared by all, nor does it seem from the other comments that everyone agrees with your opinions.  

Just stand up for your choices by yourself and let the cards fall where they may.  People may not always agree with you, but at least you had the courage to put it out there as just you with your name and no invisible, implied masses supporting your choices.  That, at least, deserves some semblance of respect.  But this cowardly mess was just an awful presentation.

(Yes, I'm a professional writer.  These are my words.  This is my opinion.  You are entitled to agree, disagree or just not care.  That's how it works in reality, even when the reality one is writing about exists only in celluloid.)

Mike1234567
Mike1234567

Only god forgives (2013) by Renf and Gosling

cassandraxe
cassandraxe

The latest fashion trend among movie critics seems to be taking a stab at Peter Jackson.  Tsk, tsk!  If you had any real talent, you'd go produce/direct your own movie,  BUT NO-OOO.  The Hobbit was my first 3D movie experience and I'm grateful to Mr. Jackson for his gift of story-telling and subtely with 3D.  I didn't want it to be over.  Many people I know felt the same.

Gallup57
Gallup57

How abour "Ender's Game" staring among others Harrison Ford.  The 1985 best seller book.  I believe it is due out in November.

PeterJohnson83
PeterJohnson83

Yeah if the last 3 Die Hard sequels sucked, it definitely makes sense to think the next one will be great.  

Nfugate1
Nfugate1

I like how the writer misspelled Mandarin...

taguan
taguan

I am really looking forward to watching The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug. I loved the first movie, I didn't want it to end at all.  

Not looking forward to World War Z. They got the book all wrong, and I loved the book. 

I've never fully agreed with any of Time's lists anyway.  

hamudm
hamudm

Sensationalist and lazy claptrap as I have come to become accustomed to from Time-Warner.

nunya_b
nunya_b

Alright. I have a few issues with this list, as do others, but the MAIN issue is right at the beginning of the list, enough to make me dismiss this entire article and want to shame the author. No - this doesn't concern a movie I think or don't think should be included on this list. If you are a writer, you surely can understand that the context in which you present your information is very important, and the impression I got from you writing about the shooting in Aurora was very arrogant and harsh. You word it as if the shooting was a nuisance and the main concern you had after it happened was that Gangster Squad was going to be pushed back. There are better ways to respectively reference a tragic event, and you as a writer should know better. Little things like that can stand out and give the impression that you are worse than I sincerely hope you are.

reeblite
reeblite

looking forward to elysium, star trek, and all marvel movies.

madnote03
madnote03

They honestly put The Hobbit in the not anticipated list?  I'm sure the ticket sales will confirm that ridiculous, obviously a writer's opinion, choice.  Learn some real journalism.

dannd574
dannd574

I'm confused as to why they did not include the new Thor movie in this list, but still excited for al the new films comming out this year. I know i'm definetly going to see Iron Man 3, and i want to check out After Earth.

MKE.Dave
MKE.Dave

Being a huge fan of the books, I'm eagerly anticipating Ender's Game. If it's done well, there are a lot of great stories in the series that could be put into movies.

Paracelsus
Paracelsus

In complete agreement with Melkor!  I always get a huge laugh from reading "reviewers" comments and expectations.  Only a complete Dolt would find the first part of "The Hobbit" anything less than excellent.  Obviously, Abrahams is utterly clueless as to how the story was expanded far beyond what was contained in the original book.
"Only 184 pages left to go."  ROTFLMFAO!!! 

(To Jeanne... Don't know about you, but "Stephanie" kinda sounds like a woman's name to me.)

Jeanne
Jeanne

YIKES! CAN ANY ONE GET A WOMAN TO REVIEW AND SUGGEST MOVIES!!?? THESE ARE SO OBVIOUSLY GUY MOVIES! YUK! MORE DEATH AND DESTRUCTION - DARKNESS AND GRITTINESS. CONGRATULATIONS ON ENJOYING WATCHING A WORLD VIEW OF THE DEATH OF OUR WORLD. NOW MOVE OVER AND LET SOME LIGHT IN! BOYS!

Melkor
Melkor

I see Time is continuing in its tradition of ripping on The Hobbit, despite nobody on the staff seemingly having even a basic understand of the books, the movies, or its mythology. 

FrankFMoore
FrankFMoore

@AlineBarrault-Cassin 
"Anyone"?  LOL!  There are a large number of "non-american" films shown in the US.  In fact, many have won Academy Awards.  Surely, you don't live under a rock.

elvenforest10
elvenforest10

@connorhopkinsnolan   Right.  Because you don't agree with the critic's choices, he must be unworthy of a job.  Yeah.  You keep telling yourself that, Sparky.

Paracelsus
Paracelsus

@cassandraxe Touché!  Jackson, and Will Smith's son are definitely on the Critic Clique "Haters List" this year.

madnote03
madnote03

@nunya_b This author is terrible.  With our nation's unemployment rate I'm baffled Time would have an issue finding half decent writers.

Jeanne
Jeanne

@Paracelsus Oops! Stephanie DOES sound like a woman's name.... But this isn't a list of a woman's pick of the most enticing movies. These all sound so unappealing - except for maybe the Oz and Monsters University movies which have some color and humor. I won't be seeing any of these and I am a movie fanatic. All seem weighted to a man's outlook, employ WAAAYYY more male actors than female, are all about darkness, power and destruction. Forgive me but haven't we enough of that in our daily lives? I'd love to see a movie about people really relating to each other - about animals - about fantasy (without all the gratuitous violence) - about life and joy and love..... Something to make you think! But ahh... then I am in that older demographic they think don't go to movies anymore....

madnote03
madnote03

@Melkor Whats funny is there was another article by Time not long ago, obviously by a much better writer, that pointed out all of the box office sales of The Hobbit and how it is crushing everything else. 

This article is essentially trash.  Some of the reasonings or explainations are one liners.  I could have written a better explaination of why a movie is anticipated in junior high.

The reasoning between "Hansel and Gretel" being not anticipated is based on the "forgettable bond girl" as Gretel.  Well, ironically, that movie actually looks really good and also features a very memorable bond girl Famke Janssen as the villain. Two whole minutes of Google and Imdb taught me that, imagine what real effort and research can do!

telva85
telva85

What you said! "This article is essentially trash."

Stephanie Abrahams should have made this a personal opinion article instead of a group opinion article. Comingsoon.net has better articles. Doesn't anyone proof read anymore?

twtr_is_dumb
twtr_is_dumb

@madnote03 @Melkor Most movies released in the slow month of January are trash that movie studios are throwing against the wall to see what sticks. Perhaps the writer should have mentioned that as the reasoning, but either way, you can expect this movie to be truly terrible, along with just about everything else released in January, not to mention February and most of March, plus late August and early September -- all of which are the traditional dead zones when movie studios toss out their tax write-offs and disastrous failed experiments.

FrankFMoore
FrankFMoore

Au contraire!  With the exception of those not concerning Middle Earth, I've read all of Tolkien's works.  Including, the complete "History of Middle Earth". And at fifty-eight years of age, I've read some of them several times. I'm quite well acquainted with him, his philosophy of Myths & Legends, and why he was so detailed in creating Middle Earth.

If you were expecting and direct screen version of the book, it's no wonder you're disappointed.  You must have hated the LOTR movies as well.  If, however, you had bothered to keep up with what was going on, during development of the project, you'd have some clue as to the approach Jackson has taken in expanding it into three films.  His inclusion of material which Tolkien only later included in appendices, adds a lot of depth to the story, which was lacking in the book, as written, which was rather shallow.

I will admit that I was sorry to see Tom Bombadil and Goldberry, left out. 

I've read Chris Tolkien's interviews concerning this matter, and to some extent, I would agree.  However, all things considered, I don't think any studio, production group, or director, could have done better.  Or been willing to try!

BTW... I have a number of friends around the World who are veritable walking encyclpædias of Tolkien legendarium, and so far, all have been highly pleased with The Hobbit.  So Jack...

While I apologize for my initial reply to you.... although you must admit a majority of people ignorant of Tolkien might express a reaction similar to yours... I believe you view is misguided.

JackTurner
JackTurner

lmao, if you saw the hobbit and thought it was good then you know nothing about tolkien

the hobbit wasn't true to the tone and spirit of the origianl novel in any way, in fact in wasn't even true to the details of the stroy