CINEJABBER: One more time to kill the pain

Posted by · 2:31 pm · October 2nd, 2010

Catch the idea behind these weekend posts here.

I don’t have much in the way of a conversation starter this week.  However, I was happy to see Emma Stone’s career taking off with the news that she’ll be offered the Mary Jane Watson role in Sony’s “Spider-Man” reboot.

Many first took notice of the actress in last year’s “Zombieland” but most really perked up with her “Easy A” performance.  Personally, I’ve been quite taken by her since her big screen debut in Greg Mottola’s “Superbad.”

I never took to Kirsten Dunst in the role, by the way.  There’s a certain sultriness to the character that Dunst (an actress I don’t like in general, “The Virgin Suicides” excepted) just didn’t have.  Stone has that in spades, though I feel like there’s still something slightly off.  Maybe it’s just the general idea of a “Spider-Man” reboot that I still can’t wrap my head around.  Who knows?  But this would be a smart choice by a young star at the beginning of her career.

Also, caught up with “Let Me In” yesterday, as promised during Oscar Talk.  I was sad to see that so much of the original film’s sense of brooding implication was mostly sacrificed for spelling things out.  And that final shot?  Arbitrarily butchered.

Chloe Moretz and Kodi Smit-McPhee, however, were both wonderful and I mostly enjoyed their developing relationship.  But even that ran dry after a while.  I started to find the sustaining of Abbey’s subdued nature almost humorous, whereas that wasn’t really the case in the original.  I’m eager to watch Tomas Alfredson’s film again, though, and hopefully this remake will at the very least spark interest in it from a wider audience.

Anyway, that’s it for my brain vomit.  Anything you guys have caught up with, new or old, that you’d like to discuss?  Open thread.

[Photo: Marvel Comics]




→ 42 Comments Tags: , , , , , , | Filed in: Cinejabber

42 responses so far

  • 1 10-02-2010 at 2:36 pm

    Derek 8-Track said...

    “Stone has that in spades, though I feel like there’s still something slightly off.”

    maybe its because Mary Jane is supposed to be the ‘hottest’ person in the entire Marvel Universe and Stone isn’t that.

  • 2 10-02-2010 at 2:37 pm

    Guy Lodge said...

    Tom Petty reference FTW.

  • 3 10-02-2010 at 2:43 pm

    Kristopher Tapley said...

    Maybe, Derek, but I still find her appealing as all hell. I don’t want to be crass, either. But if that’s the case, well, the role of Black Widow has already been filled by the cast member we’d need…

  • 4 10-02-2010 at 2:44 pm

    Kristopher Tapley said...

    Guy: If I’m honest, Rick James was my first choice. But there was just nothing to work with, alas.

  • 5 10-02-2010 at 2:50 pm

    Danny King said...

    “Let Me In” is on my plate for tonight, and I also plan to see “Never Let Me Go” tomorrow afternoon. I’ve also developed somewhat of a poker habit lately, so I want to take in “Rounders” soon as well.

    The Chicago Film Festival is starting up this week, so I’ll be busy with that. “Stone” is opening on Thursday, and I’ll also be seeing “Uncle Boonmee,” “Conviction,” and “Certified Copy” this weekend. Later on in the festival, I’ll be catching up with “Black Swan” and “127 Hours.”

    And if that weren’t enough already, there is a screening of “Love and Other Drugs” downtown on Tuesday that I might try and catch if I find the time.

  • 6 10-02-2010 at 2:55 pm

    Kid said...

    I don’t know what to think about the new Spider Man franchise, I just can’t see Andrew Garfield as Spiderman. I’ve been beginning to fall for him after seeing him in NVLMG and TSN week after week but being Spiderman just doesn’t seem right (Though I’m sure he could pull it off). I just can’t see Mary Jane Watson talking the way Emma Stone talks, it’s just not right.

  • 7 10-02-2010 at 3:12 pm

    al b. said...

    Yes! Love Emma Stone! This is the best news I have heard all day!

  • 8 10-02-2010 at 3:16 pm

    Robert Hamer said...

    My Spidey-Sense is telling me that Emma Stone should stay the hell away from this offer and that this goddamn reboot is going to be career poison for everyone involved.

  • 9 10-02-2010 at 3:24 pm

    Kristopher Tapley said...

    Bad Spidey sense.

  • 10 10-02-2010 at 3:32 pm

    caro said...

    i liked Dunst in Spidey 1&2

  • 11 10-02-2010 at 3:40 pm

    Winston said...

    I liked Dunst also! Lay off the dunst bashing! she’s a legit actress, loved her in Marie Antoinette, Virgin Suicides, Eternal Sunshine!

    There’s a reason why that franchise did so well, and she was part of it!

  • 12 10-02-2010 at 3:42 pm

    Patriotsfan said...

    Thanks Guy, I knew the title of the article was from some song, but I just couldn’t remember from what.

  • 13 10-02-2010 at 3:42 pm

    Jonathan Spuij said...

    Dunst is a fine actress but she looks very scary. Also, she’s plainly unattractive.

  • 14 10-02-2010 at 3:47 pm

    ninja said...

    Don`t get Dunst hate. She generated great chemistry with Tobey and that`s so important for a romantic couple . Upsidedown kiss was hot!

    That said, Emma Stone is a greta choice and this reboot`s cast is shaping up better than of something more prestigous such as The Hobbit. Garfield and Stone are top notch actors with great potential to have long and prosper careers and the trend of casting amazing actors for comic book/fantasy continues on many movies currently in production, save The Hobbit where advantage is given to some TV people from UK. Ugh. Pointless. 15 minute famers guaranteed and than back to UK TV.

    Anyway, my thoughts are straying but congrats Emma, you are perfect. Now if Sony will be so kind and get the Glee girl for Gwen Stacy.

  • 15 10-02-2010 at 3:52 pm

    Duncan Houst said...

    I’m becoming more and more comfortable with this reboot as the casting continues. I’m really hoping they cast Mia Wasikowska as Gwen Stacy. Still wondering who they’re going to cast as Harry Osborne or who the villain will be.

  • 16 10-02-2010 at 4:04 pm

    Guy Lodge said...

    You might not see anything in her, Jonathan, but how is Dunst “plainly” — as in inarguably, self-evidently, beyond dispute — unattractive?

    Let’s not make cruel or unsupportable statements.

  • 17 10-02-2010 at 5:02 pm

    al b. said...

    Also, I really liked Let Me In! It’s fantastic in it’s own way, just like the 08 film.

    I like the kid’s in the Reeves film more than in Alfredson’s. I felt the American remake was also more terrifying and exciting than the previous movie.

    However, Lindqvist’s novel is spectacular, definitely worth the read!

  • 18 10-02-2010 at 5:13 pm

    Michael said...

    First off, I just have to proclaim to everybody to go and see “Monsters” (dir. Gareth Edwards) right away!!!! It is for rent on iTunes and you will be doing yourself a favor b/c it was absolutely brilliant and one of my favorite films of the year so far. Even Guy liked it! (Here’s the link to his review from Edinburgh festival back in June: http://incontention.com/2010/06/27/edinburgh-monsters-the-dry-land-mouth-of-the-wolf/ )

    Now back to the discussion on hand, I am gonna have to disagree with Kris and say that I actually preferred Let Me In over the original. The tight close up shots did so much more for me at getting me to feel connected to the characters (especially Owen who I empathized with way more in this version than in the Swedish version.) I just thought the whole thing was a lot tighter and more engaging and left out the silly “cat attack” scene from the first. Plus having the dude that lost his girlfriend in the first movie being just some random townsperson felt weird when he broke into the vampire’s apartment. Replacing that character with a cop made it so much more believable (except for why didn’t that cop have a partner?)

    Anyway, I am literally heading out the door right now to go see The Social Network to see if it lives up to all this damn hype I keep hearing about. I am gonna try and take Guy’s advice from this week’s Long Shot and not watch the movie trying to calculate its Oscar chances or whether it will show up in my personal top 10 of the year and just sit back and try to be entertained.

  • 19 10-02-2010 at 5:18 pm

    Michael said...

    Actually Guy said that during last week’s Long Shot but you know what I mean. It is gonna take all the restraint and willpower in the world not to go into the film with such high expectations and try to make check marks about which Oscars it should be nominated for, etc. I wish critics hadn’t compared it to Citizen Kane b/c now I am gonna have to turn my critical head off so that I can go into it with a clean slate.

  • 20 10-02-2010 at 5:35 pm

    Kyle said...

    I just hope the Spider-man reboot does the one thing that I felt was really missing from all the Spidey films, which was making him funny. His quippy puns, as lame as they can be at times, are what makes Spider-man who he is and distinguishes him from say, Daredevil.

    Casting has been awesome so far…Andrew Garfield has really impressed me with his dramatic chops, and Emma Stone is about as pitch-perfect a young Mary Jane as I can think of.

  • 21 10-02-2010 at 5:37 pm

    kevin said...

    Mia Wasikowska is too much of character actress. She mostly pursues indie films. I hope doesn’t act in this reboot- she is too good for it. Emma Stone has talent , but I just wish she takes more creative risks- stop following the Julia Roberts commercial route.

  • 22 10-02-2010 at 5:47 pm

    Guy Lodge said...

    Indie films like Alice in Wonderland and Defiance?

    I admire actors who play both sides of the field. There’s no shame in commercial stardom.

  • 23 10-02-2010 at 5:58 pm

    Graysmith said...

    Stone definitely got on my radar with Superbad, even though she had such a small role. Glad to see her career taking off. Not sure I think she should do Spider-Man though, seems like a waste of her talents, comedic and otherwise. It’d be a big paycheck in a major movie, but it’d hardly advance her career unless she gets more to do than Dunst got.

    Most of all though, I just find it incredibly boring that they’re rebooting Spider-Man already. It really doesn’t feel like the past trilogy is that far in the past that I have any real desire for another Spider-Man movie. Webb, Garfield and now apparently Stone could all do better things with the time they’ll spend making this.

  • 24 10-02-2010 at 6:02 pm

    Graysmith said...

    The thing about Let Me In that makes me the most sad is that it’ll by default relegate the original film into obscurity. One could argue that it already is, but without a remake that’d be the only version of it you could see, and now the Hollywood remake is going to be the one widely available. It’ll be like with The Ring, where the Hollywood remake is well-known while only the die-hards seek out the original.

  • 25 10-02-2010 at 6:06 pm

    Mark Kratina said...

    Well, Kris DID say it was an open thread, so I won’t consider this a full-blown hijack.

    I wrote my first novel this past year and it was just released last week. I won’t bore you with the details, but if you’re interested, the link is below. Oh, and the main character’s name? None other than Baron Tapley. Great name, Kris.

    http://www.fedorahouse.com

  • 26 10-02-2010 at 6:07 pm

    Chad Hartigan said...

    Love Garfield. Love Stone. Won’t set a foot near a Spider-Man movie. Someone else cast these two in something interesting please!

  • 27 10-02-2010 at 6:22 pm

    Keith said...

    If they got Stone + Wasikowska… i’d be pretty excited for this. Though, i’d be kinda surprised to see them involoved in a franchise as love interests with all their recent success.

  • 28 10-02-2010 at 6:33 pm

    James said...

    I like Dunst in the first two films, but yea she’s no bombshell. Nor is Emma Stone, but she is very attractive and amusing in Superbad, Zombieland, and even something as bad as The House Bunny. What I love about people like Garfield casted in the film and Stone and Wasikowska in talks, you feel like you are really watching a young cast.

  • 29 10-02-2010 at 7:01 pm

    Duncan Houst said...

    @Kevin – She’s relatively new to acting. I don’t think we can yet classify her as a “character actress”.

  • 30 10-02-2010 at 7:25 pm

    JJ1 said...

    Emma Stone may not be “drop dead gorgeous”, but she certainly has appeal, and is my TYPE of girl. So, I’m all for seeing her do her thing is as much stuff as possible.

    Andrew Garfield impressed me in ‘Lions for Lambs’ (ugh), and ‘ … Dr. Parnassus’. Seeing TSN tomorrow and can’t wait to see how he does there.

    I’m onboard for the Spidey re-boot.

  • 31 10-02-2010 at 8:32 pm

    Derek 8-Track said...

    hmm that did come off mean. I was just saying no actress can really live up to what Mary Jane is ‘supposed’ to be, and that may be why it feels ‘slightly off’ to you. I dig stone as well, especially in House Bunny. quote hilarious. I feel like she must run around with Jonah Hill a lot. I think she’s picked up a lot of his mannerisms.

  • 32 10-02-2010 at 8:41 pm

    James D. said...

    Emma Stone has the mannerisms of an old lady. I am not a fan.

  • 33 10-03-2010 at 12:06 am

    Paul Outlaw said...

    Three words for the weekend:
    “…and Juliette Lewis”

  • 34 10-03-2010 at 1:40 am

    Glenn said...

    The thing is, and I’m going by years of tumultuous careers for “sexy” “bombshell” actresses, female viewers don’t necessarily WANT to watch a “bombshell”. And I also believe that guys don’t want that either. “Spider-Man”‘s key male audience wanna know they could score the girl, too. Someone like Scarlett Johansson or, blegh, Megan Fox would just not work in cinema for this franchise.

    Stone and Garfield feels like an odd match, but we can go with it.

    Also, “House Bunny”. She’s really funny in that.

  • 35 10-03-2010 at 3:47 am

    Guy Lodge said...

    “Even Guy liked it!”

    That makes it sound like I don’t like anything! But seriously, so glad people are seeking out that film. Take Michael’s advice, everybody.

  • 36 10-03-2010 at 9:54 am

    Red said...

    I like the Stone casting, but I was in the camp that was hoping maybe Wasikowska could get the job.

    As for ‘Let Me In’, while it didn’t match up to the first, it certainly didn’t shit the bed like I thought it would when I first heard about it going into production. A couple things I do believe they improved on from the original is the relationship between Abby and her caretaker, as well is the removal of the whole cat scene.

  • 37 10-03-2010 at 10:45 am

    kevin said...

    Guy , it is nothing wrong with commercial success . But I just wish more A-list actors take more creative risks or , at least mix edgy indie films with quality commercial films. Also, the media continues to make a big deal about the box-office success of movie stars- like Julia Roberts ( or Sandra Bullock) . The main reason Roberts became a big box-office sensation -because she practically portrayed the same character in back-to-back lousy commercial films, that appealed to the masses. I just don’t want Emma Stone ( and other young talented actresses ) to aspire to that type of career. Julia shouldn’t be a role model for gifted actresses. Reese Witherspoon is following this type of Roberts-career formula- it is hurting her career and her credibility ( not her bank account) . I truly miss the strong and edgy Witherspoon in “Election” ,”Pleasantville” , and “Freeway”.

    P.S. I do have hope for Jennifer Lawrence and Mia Wasikowska . I get a sense their primary goal is to continue to evolve as actresses and explore their artistry.

  • 38 10-03-2010 at 10:58 am

    kevin said...

    Also, Guy concerning Alice in Wonderland and Defiance. Every actor wants to work with Tim Burton and Ed Zwick has a reputation of illicting good performance from the thespians he directs.

  • 39 10-03-2010 at 11:52 am

    R.J. said...

    I’ve never really understood the hate for Kirsten Dunst either, I think she’s a fantastic actress but I agree she was not right for “Spider-man” (though I think she a good job with what she was given). I really like Emma Stone, I think she has enough personality and the sense of humor to make Mary Jane really come to life. I don’t think she’s traditionally “sexy” the way many people think Mary Jane is/should be, but her quirkiness lends an undeniable appeal.

  • 40 10-03-2010 at 1:35 pm

    Michael said...

    @Guy – I promise I did not intend for that to sound like you don’t like anything. Quite the contrary, the movies that you tweet about and review on here from time to time are films that I may otherwise not hear about and so I put them in my queue to discover at the first opportunity. What I meant by “even Guy liked it” was so that there would be some validation other than a random commenter named Michael telling people to go see the film b/c I thought it was cool. If people were reminded that you had reviewed it favorable 4 months ago then that might boost a little bit of interest up. I apologize if it came off at all negative. I think it is pretty clear that you definitely love films and do a great job at making us aware of good films that are worth discovering.

  • 41 10-03-2010 at 1:53 pm

    Guy Lodge said...

    No apology necessary — I was only kidding.

  • 42 10-03-2010 at 2:08 pm

    Michael said...

    oh haha – I admit I am pretty dense at noticing jokes especially through the internet or text, etc. All is well!