1/4 Oscarweb Round-up

Posted by · 7:59 am · January 4th, 2010

Andy SerkisJeffrey Wells passes along an aside concerning Walter Kirn’s original ending to “Up in the Air” and a lingering thread in Jason Reitman’s film.  Frankly, I think it would have made it even better. [Hollywood Elsewhere]

Sasha Stone previews tomorrow’s Scripter nominations announcement.  I’d say her predictions are spot-on. [Awards Daily]

Best Actor watch 2010?  Simon Hattenstone chats with Andy Serkis about his performance as Ian Dury in the upcoming “Sex & Drugs & Rock & Roll.” [The Guardian]

How Cormac McCarthy’s “The Road” became a film. [The Times]

Gregory Ellwood sits down with “The Young Victoria” star Emily Blunt. [Awards Campaign]

Peter Knegt runs down the top grossing independent films of the decade. [indieWIRE]

A.O. Scott remembers “The Apostle.” [New York Times]

Cast your vote for the best film of 2009. [Rope of Silicon]

→ 7 Comments Tags: , , , , , , | Filed in: Daily

7 responses so far

  • 1 1-04-2010 at 8:43 am

    aspect ratio said...

    Did James Cameron just buy In Contention now that his pockets have been replenished? It sure looks like it! ;)

  • 2 1-04-2010 at 9:03 am

    Adam Smith said...

    @aspect ratio: Wow, I honestly didn’t realize that EVERY ad on here is “Avatar”. But hey, it’s business. Kris, you keep makin’ that cheddar so that you can keep writin’ and we can keep readin’.

    Concerning the original ending of “Up in the Air”–I guess my big question is would it have come off as a cop-out? I mean, is it more powerful that he lives the way he does and eventually tries to make a change because he thinks he’s dying, or because he’s making a real conscious effort to be a better, fuller person? Frankly, I wonder if the cancer angle doesn’t cheapen his decision.

  • 3 1-04-2010 at 9:14 am

    Kristopher Tapley said...

    It’s called a roadblock buy. 100% of the advertising for three days. We had the inventory (and even ended up cutting back on the days originally planned), so we went ahead, but I’m not sure I’ll do it again. Did it once before this season for Fantastic Mr. Fox.

    The other campaigns are set for the entire phase one (two months or so), while these are specific buys geared toward specific dates.

  • 4 1-04-2010 at 9:22 am

    Guy Lodge said...

    Having read the book, I remember finding the film’s “cancer/can-sir” gag a bit of an awkward beat when the follow-up wasn’t delivered. Struck me as a stray thread from a previous draft of the script.

    Given how freely Reitman adapted the book — the Anna Kendrick character is entirely his invention, after all — I wondered if it wasn’t a kind of in-joke to Kirn’s readers.

  • 5 1-04-2010 at 10:55 am

    Silencio said...

    Very interesting, Guy. And Kris, I’m not sure that the mortality angle would have done much for what this film was really about. It might have come across as an unnecessary reach for gravitas.

    And regarding the sidenote, I definitely thought Ryan was covering his ass about that bridge jump.

  • 6 1-04-2010 at 12:20 pm

    Adam Smith said...

    @Guy: Along with that, the whole beat didn’t need but one repetition of “can, sir”. Or at least the actress needed different direction, because the first repetition sounded too close to “cancer” to be realistic, whereas it made sense the first time. But yeah, in retrospect, it seems odd.

    @Silencio: I definitely felt that he was covering for Natalie, not for himself. To say he was covering his own ass is to assume that he still operates by his original self-involved, business-liability-centric lifestyle, and not that he’s going to attempt to change.

  • 7 1-04-2010 at 3:46 pm

    Kristopher Tapley said...

    RE: the “cancer” scene, I spoke to Reitman today and, rather than dedicate and entire item to it, I thought I’d post his quote here:

    You find out at the end of the book that the character is dying of terminal disease and that he’s going to the mayo clinic. That’s something I never really wanted to include in the movie. I never shot a scene that suggested that the character was dying. For me, at the end of the movie, he’s making a choice about where he wants to go for the rest of his life, and certainly he does have a rest of his life.

    The “Do you want the can, sir?” scene came out of a real moment in which I was on a plane and I overheard a flight attendant ask someone, “Do you want the can, sir,” and I literally did a double take, then I realized what she was saying. It’s inclusion had to do with two things. One, I thought it would be a cute nod to the people who’ve read the book, and two, more importantly, it kind of speaks to the idea of how he collects things and the way we obsess over travel in the sense that it’s a disease, being that addicted to traveling and the obsessiveness over miles or any kind of fruitless collection is like having a disease.