In Contention

Category: Daily

  • ‘Deadwood’ to re-air on DirecTV

    Ian McShane in DeadwoodDavid Milch’s “Deadwood” was, to my mind, the best show on TV until it was unceremoniously canceled in 2006.  It’s heartbreaking that its many complex plot threads were left twisting in the wind and that, in all likelihood, Milch will never bother with the feature films he once promised would close the chapter on his western yarn.

    As obsessed as I was with the series, I actually never picked up any of the seasons on DVD, though they were recently consolidated into a handsome set encapsulating the whole series.  Nothing on Blu-ray yet, but I’m sure I’ll buy it if it ever makes the HD leap.

    You might be like me, or you might have simply never seen the show and want to give it a look.  Well DirecTV is coming to your rescue.  Beginning May 31, the satellite company’s 101 Network will begin re-airing the entire “Deadwood” series Sunday nights at 9:00pm (the show’s old time slot at HBO).

    Here’s a brief synopsis from DirecTV:

    The town of Deadwood, South Dakota in the weeks following the Custer massacre is a lawless sinkhole of crime and corruption. Into this uncivilized outpost ride a disillusioned and bitter ex-lawman, Wild Bill Hickok, and Seth Bullock, a man hoping to find a new start for himself. Both men find themselves quickly on opposite sides of the legal and moral fence from Al Swearengen, saloon owner, hotel operator, and incipient boss of Deadwood. The lives of these three intertwine with many others, the high-minded and the low-lifes who populate Deadwood in 1876. At its core, Deadwood® is a western with modern-day sensibilities, encapsulating the birth of capitalism, democracy, justice, and Good vs. Evil.

    The 101 Network also came to the aid of “Friday Night Lights” last year, airing the third season before NBC finally picked the show back up (and subsequently re-aired that third season for those who don’t have DirecTV).  Stuff like this makes me happy.

  • Sony picks up ‘Prophet’

    A ProphetAnne Thompson confirms what had already been widely anticipated: Sony Pictures Classics has bought the rights to “A Prophet,” Jacques Audiard’s brutal prison drama that is the clear critics’ darling of Cannes so far, and the current bookies’ favorite for the Palme d’Or.

    As mentioned last week, SPC has also acquired Michael Haneke’s “The White Ribbon” and the awfully-titled French biopic “Coco Chanel and Igor Stravinsky” — not to be confused with Audrey Tautou starrer “Coco Before Chanel.” It’s a smaller collection of purchases than SPC made at last year’s festival, but they seem to have picked wisely.

    Thompson also wisely reminds awards-watchers not to be overly swayed by the Palme d’Or buzz for Audiard’s film, something I’ve been thinking too. Cannes has a long history of surprise victors, and more often than not, the annointed critical favorite only lands a runner-up gong. Such was the case when “The Wind That Shakes the Barley” topped “Volver” three years ago, or when the massively polarising “Dancer in the Dark” beat out the universally adored “Yi Yi” in 2000.

    It’s worth bearing in mind that jury members are discouraged from reading the press throughout the festival, so they can vote with open minds. In other words, we have absolutely no idea what they’re thinking. Of course, jury opinion and critical opinion have lined up for the last two years running, with “4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days” and “The Class” emerging as roundly approved winners. There’s no reason why “A Prophet” can’t continue the trend, though I still think it could face twin drawbacks in its nationality and its all-male cast.

    Meanwhile, the competition still looks feisty, with “Bright Star,” “The White Ribbon,” “Fish Tank” “The Time That Remains”  and “Vincere,” among others, all drawing vocal support, and two films yet to screen.

  • ‘Parnassus’ causes much head-scratching at Cannes

    Heath Ledger in The Imaginarium of Doctor ParnassusIt was always a safe bet that, in spite of the curiosity value of Heath Ledger’s final screen performance, Terry Gilliam’s “The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus” wasn’t cut out to be a crowdpleaser. It’s been over a decade since the defiantly eccentric filmmaker made anything approaching the term “accessible,” much less something widely liked. And the apparent opacity of his latest, beginning with that unwieldy title, didn’t suggest he was going any easier on his audience, or himself.

    So it’s no surprise to report that the reviews thus far are mixed at best, with some vocal detractors already apparent. (Catherine Shoard at the Guardian describes it as “a horrible mix of reheated Munchhausen and stale Faustian mumbo-jumbo.) Still, several critics have salvaged some value from the project, and are unexpectedly supportive in their reviews.

    Todd McCarthy asserts that Gilliam has made “a pretty good thing out of a very bad situation,” commending him for his “visual panache” and “considerable discipline,” but is careful to defuse any exaggerated expectations of Ledger’s work:

    It’s another “Alice in Wonderland”-like playground for Gilliam, and while all the specific action may not be entirely coherent or exciting, it’s always visually stimulating and allows the three incarnations of Tony to host assorted guests.

    Tony is not a demanding dramatic role, nor a particularly flamboyant one like the Joker, so this can’t legitimately be described as one Ledger’s most striking performances. Like most of the other actors here, he’s antic and frantic, dirty and sweaty, as the principals flail around trying to cope with their desperate straits.

    (more…)

  • 5/22 Web Round-up

    Alfred Hitchcock• Devin Faraci talks to “Terminator Salvation” star Moon Bloodgood, whose nude scene probably should have stayed in the film.  No, I’m not a perv, but…well, you tell me if you believe the relationship that develops. [CHUD]

    • Ian Freer wishes a happy 10th birthday to “Star Wars: Episode I — The Phanom Menace.” [Empire]

    • If it’s good for the ladies it’s good for the boys.  Alonso Duralde on Dylan Vox, the latest adult film star to follow in Sasha grey’s footsteps and bridge the gap to mainstream films. [MSNBC]

    • Jamin Borphy-Warren talks to Mike Judge about his latest animated foray, “The Goode Family.” [Wall Street Journal]

    • The great (yes, the great) Shane Black talks to Sam Delaney about what makes a good action film. [The Guardian]

    • Talking the machine uprising depicted in the “Terminator” franchise with a military technology expert. [Slate]

    • Speaking of which, the newly named SyFy channel could be in an opportune position to pick up the recently canceled “Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles.” [Premiere]

    • John Walsh on the timeless Alfred Hitchcock, whose work will be enjoying a tele retrospective across the pond. [The Independent]

    • Susan Wloszczyna digs into the risks of Pixar’s 10th entry, “Up.” [USA Today]

    • 3D at home: awesome or awful? [Cinematical]

    • Big ole’ rumor that stems from a /Film commenter, but some are saying the cute pink teddy bear you’ll catch a glimpse of in “Up” is named Lotso and will be the villain in next year’s “Toy Story 3.” [Pixar Planet]

  • Overture Films sets release date for Michael Moore’s latest

    Michael MooreTotally beside the point, but the first thing I thought when this press release popped up into my inbox was how happy I am to see studios like Overture and Summit succeeding in what has too long been an industry run by the big guns.  I miss the days when an October Films could get stuff done, or an Orion.  Anyway, here’s the press release, in part:

    Overture Films and Paramount Vantage have announced that Oscar-winner Michael Moore’s new documentary feature will be released domestically on October 2, 2009. The as-yet-untitled film will explore the root causes of the global economic meltdown and take a comical look at the corporate and political shenanigans that culminated in what Moore has described as “the biggest robbery in the history of this country” – the massive transfer of U.S. taxpayer money to private financial institutions.

    On this, the 20-year anniversary of his masterpiece Roger & Me, Moore returns to the issue that began his career: the disastrous impact that corporate dominance and out-of-control profit motives have on the lives of Americans and citizens of the world. But this time the culprit is much bigger than General Motors, and the crime scene far wider than Flint, Michigan.

    Says Moore: “The wealthy, at some point, decided they didn’t have enough wealth. They wanted more — a lot more. So they systematically set about to fleece the American people out of their hard-earned money. Now, why would they do this? That is what I seek to discover in this movie.”

    Full press release after the jump. Along similar lines, Vanity Fair editor Graydon Carter has written a scathing indictment of the banking industry (via Hollywood Elsewhere):

    It can fairly be said that the chain of catastrophic bets made over the last decade by a few hundred bankers may well turn out to be the greatest nonviolent crime against humanity in history. They’ve brought the world’s economy to its knees, lost tens of millions of people their jobs and their homes, and they could drive an estimated 200 million people worldwide into dire poverty. In other words, never before has so few done so much to so many.

    The full press release on Moore’s film after the jump.  Oh, and a suggested title for the film: “Mint Condition.”  Other ideas?

    (more…)

  • Glenn Kenny’s ‘Girlfriend Experience’ set diaries

    Glenn KennyIf you’ve seen Steven Soderbergh’s “The Girlfriend Experience” (which opens in theaters tomorrow after being available On Demand and for Internet download since April 30), you no doubt remember former Premiere film critic Glenn Kenny’s cameo performance as “The Erotic Connoisseur,” an assayer of upscale prostitutes in New York who digs into Sasha Grey’s call girl with fury toward the end of the film.

    To me, it’s a fantastic, biting portrayal that proves Kenny should try his hand at it once more.  Kenny has already written about this before, but as it turns out, he has now launched an exclusive series of set diaries, which kicked off yesterday at The Auteurs.  There is plenty of the critic/actor’s dry wit to go around, but I particularly liked this passage, which follows a recounting of the initial phone call he received about taking the part:

    A word, here, on my own acting career: Its major triumph was in my junior year of high school, playing The Silent King in Once Upon A Mattress, at Jefferson Township High, in 1976. So strongly did I prevail that I was considered pretty much a shoo-in for the lead role in Jefferson’s 1977 dramatic offering, Dracula. But no. Even before auditions were announced, the drama coach informed me that I would not be getting the part, because, as he put it, I “lacked sex appeal.” Which is a heckuva thing for an adult to say to any 17-year-old male, when you think about it. To add insult to injury, he handed the role to an individual even more awkward and gawky than myself. Who, not to make a bad pun or anything, sucked. And I was left to end my scholastic acting career in Jefferson’s second production of ’77, The Sound of Music, in the role of Uncle Max, which anyone can tell you is the most nothing part in the history of The American Musical Theater. Well. Now I would show that drama coach.

    As one guy notes in the comments, Kenny’s performance has already stirred some talk in the, as he puts it, “hobbyist” community.  Anyway, the diaries make for a great, if at times cruel (Harry Knowles gets an unnecessary dig), read, and I imagine there’s more to come.  Check it all out here.  And my short review of the film, in case you missed it.

  • Stronger stomachs

    Charlotte Gainsbourg in AntichristIt may be just a coincidence, but I’ve noticed that, for all the media kerfuffle over its maker’s supposed “woman-hating” agenda, a number of the most level-headed, inquisitive responses to “Antichrist” seems to be coming from female writers. Put it down to thicker skins, stronger stomachs, or nothing whatsoever — I’m just saying. Manohla Dargis, for one, isn’t a great fan of the film, but seems a lot more amused than shocked:

    At one point one of the characters ominously refers to nature as Satan’s playground or some such, which sounds like a line from Woody Allen by way of Ingmar Bergman. By the time the animatronic fox warns the understandably baffled-looking Mr. Dafoe that “chaos reigns,” it’s clear we’re not in Kansas anymore or even a serious movie. Chaos reigns, if not narrative sense, but I would be lying if I didn’t admit that this impossible movie kept me hooked from start to finish.

    Anne Thompson, meanwhile, defends the film, adding an interesting corrective to the plentiful “misogynist” interpretations:

    The movie does hang together. He knows where he’s going. It’s just that much like Ken Russell in The Devils, Trier’s taking you to horrifying, hallucinatory places where anything can happen. (Hieronymous Bosch comes to mind.) And where most people don’t want to go. Accused of misogyny, the film portrays a woman who is man’s worst nightmare, the embodiment of their anxiety about women.

    (more…)

  • Is Wes Anderson corroding the cinema?

    Rachel Weisz in The Brothers BloomI should say at the top that I have not yet seen Rian Johnson’s “The Brothers Bloom,” but I was an absolute disciple of the director’s 2005 debut “Brick.”  That said, “Bloom” has always had a particular sheen to it that has obviously kept it from being a must-see since the first screenings began back in September of 2008.  Elbert Ventura, writing in Slate, may have pegged the reasoning, at least as it pertains to my taste:

    Rian Johnson’s caper comedy The Brothers Bloom begins its nationwide rollout already burdened with a reputation as an imitation of an American original. If Johnson’s terrific debut, Brick, crackled with the borrowed brio of the Coen brothers, early notices for The Brothers Bloom have identified a new muse: Wes Anderson…

    But The Brothers Bloom is only the latest addition to a burgeoning subgenre. Over the last few years, Anderson’s movies have become touchstones for indie culture. In the 1990s, it seemed every NYU graduate and Sundance contender was making his own Tarantino knockoff. These days, the Tarantino imitators have been replaced by the Wes wannabes. A popular strain in recent American indie cinema has been the Andersonian quirkfest, a tendency that runs through movies like Juno, Napoleon Dynamite, Son of Rambow, Charlie Bartlett, and Garden State, among others.

    The appropriation doesn’t stop there. Anderson’s trademarks—poker-face eccentricity, affection for the oddball, fastidiously arranged clutter, an affinity for the precocious and childlike—have now become conventions in the larger culture. You can glimpse his style and sensibility in TV shows, music videos and—a true sign that you’ve arrived—commercials.

    Of course, I like one or two of those films, but as someone who considers nearly the whole of Wes Anderson’s portfolio to be incredibly disposable, and as a guy from the film school generation Ventura indicates (and therefore, witnessed the development of this new “wannabe” culture), allow me to simply say: God help us. I won’t pass judgment on “The Brothers Bloom” until I see it, of course, but items like this make it difficult to drum up enthusiasm.

  • Strong reviews for Haneke’s ‘White Ribbon’

    Michael Haneke's The White RibbonCould this year bring a close to Michael Haneke’s bridesmaid’s run at the Cannes Film Festival? Haneke has come within touching distance of the Palme d’Or before, taking the Grand Prix in 2001 for “The Piano Teacher” and Best Director in 2005 for “Caché,” but the big prize has so far eluded him.

    Now Haneke’s latest, “The White Ribbon,” has screened to largely admiring reviews from the Cannes press. The film, a black-and-white, score-free period drama studying the social disintegration of rural German community, was written with the collaboration of master scripter Jean-Claude Carriere, and is now inspiring repeated comparisons to the work of Ingmar Bergman. Nonetheless, it apparently still serves up the clinical narrative jolts we have come to expect from Haneke. IndieWire’s Eric Kohn raves:

    Pairing visual mastery with a quietly immersive story, “The White Ribbon” plays like a morbid version of “Our Town,” patiently revealing the inward discord beneath the surface of a settled community. It’s a frightening depiction of mortality.

    With this detailed exploration of anonymous retribution, Haneke returns to the haunting terrain he last explored in “Cache,” although in this case, the retribution expands from a personal level to a larger critique of religious zealoutry. As the violent acts cumulate, they expand to the larger world surrounding the village – especially with the political assasination and the eruption of World War I closing the movie. However, these events remain notably off-screen. Absence in “The White Ribbon” is the quality that makes it a harrowing work of art, rather than a historical soap opera.

    (more…)

  • 5/21 Web Round-up

    Sasha Grey• AFI launches its own YouTube channel. [YouTube]

    • Robin Sanders reports on the Stephen Frears event from Cannes. [indieWIRE]

    • The wars continue: Patrick Goldstein lays into Peter Bart (and Variety) once again for being soft on the industry. [The Big Picture]

    • Lionsgate launches an impressive new website for festival Sensation “Precious.” [WeAreAllPrecious.com]

    • Chris Lee talks to “The Girlfriend Experience” star Sasha Grey. [Los Angeles Times]

    • Kim Voynar, meanwhile, dissects Grey’s character and wonders whether the film objectifies women. [Movie City News]

    • The publicity floodgates open for “Terminator Salvation,” starting with Irina Aleksander’s interview with the film’s rookie producers. [New York Daily News]

    • Todd Gilchrist, meanwhile, corners director McG. [Cinematical]

    • And finally, headline of the day, from John Anderson’s review of the film: “Hasta La Levity, Baby.” [Washington Post]

    • Aha, headline of the day #2: “Tarantino ‘Basterd’-izes Cannes. Such sweet truth. [USA Today]

  • POLL: the most influential films of all time, round one, part six

    Alright, we’re at the end of round one with a final set of 10 films.  For background on this series, click here.

    By the way, “Jaws,” “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs” and “Toy Story” were the survivors from the last round.  Have your say in the left sidebar by picking up to three films to move on and join the 17 waiting the next round!

  • Get your votes in!

    Just a quick reminder, get your votes in for part five in our “most influential” poll series before the 2:00pm (PST) cut-off.  It looks like there’s a pretty tight race for the #3 spot.  We’ll have the final first round poll later this afternoon and then next week it’ll be onward with the 20 survivors.

  • The Film Experience’s ‘Terminator’ retrospective

    Arnold Schwarzenegger in The TerminatorBefore I tear into McG’s “Terminator Salvation” in T-minus 10 minutes, I thought I’d offer one last sliver of positivity for those who, like me, love this franchise.  The always intrepid Nathaniel Rogers over at The Film Experience has been writing up a retrospective on the three entries in the series to date, with extended looks at the first and second films already up.  He’ll be getting to “Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines” in due time, though I don’t know if he’ll be including “The Sarah Connor Chronicles’ or not.

    Here’s his intro on 1984’s “The Terminator”:

    In March of 1984 when The Terminator began filming, the director James Cameron and the producer Gale Ann Hurd were no Hollywood heavyweights. Cameron was no one’s idea of a visionary (except for perhaps his own) and had only one feature under his belt, Piranha 2: The Spawning — auspicious beginnings! Hurd had learned the production ropes on B movies for Roger Corman. Cameron and Hurd intended for the dark, fast and cheaply made robot movie to be their calling card. Seven months later in October the movie premiered with only its deceptively simple premise (killer machine hunts woman) and Conan the Barbarian (Arnold Schwarzenegger) to sell it. The Terminator was an immediate hit, though not quite a blockbuster. It earned a Conan-like $38 million gross in its initial run (which I believe is something roughly in the ballpark of $90 million in 2009 ticket sales).

    As a franchise it was a slow starter but as a stand alone movie The Terminator was anything but.

    And on the 1991 follow-up:

    The Terminator cost 6 million to make, Terminator 2: Judgment Day would cost 100 million plus. The budget wasn’t the only thing exploding: salaries, visual effects, setpieces, ambition, and public reaction were all supersized. Yet for all of this exponential external growth, Cameron smartly kept his focus tight and intimate.

    Sarah Connor’s opening narration and the imagery of post-apocalyptic LA it plays over, both review the first movie and download Cameron’s game plan for the sequel…

    In other words, it’s more of the same… only bigger (we notice immediately by way of shinier effects and massive fireball explosions). This repeat template is familiar but it won’t be comfortable. We’re also going deeper. The story structure is varied only enough to reflect the passage of time. But what has that passage of time wrought?

    Check out each of the in-depth pieces over at The Film Experience.

  • Dan Aykroyd confirms ‘Ghostbusters 3’ moving forward with all principals

    (from left) Harold Ramis, Ernie Hudson, Bill Murray and Dan Aykroyd in GhostbustersWhen I bumped into actor Ernie Hudson, an incredibly nice guy, at a Golden Globes event earlier this year at the Chateau Marmont in West Hollywood, I had just one thing to say to him: “I hope you guys do a third ‘Ghosbusters’ film.”  His response: “Hey, man, I hope we do it!”  Well, it’s looking more and more like Hudson and I might get our wish.

    I’ve been hoping for a third installment in the “Ghostbusters” franchise ever since the 1989 “Ghostbusters II” came and went (a film many hated, but I adored).  It’s just a comedy staple that I think could use another go.  The first film is, to my mind, one of the most quotable films of all time, and if you asked me to offer up a list of favorite movies (not necessarily “greatest films ever made”), “Ghosbusters” would be close to the top.

    As a reborn video game nerd, I’ve also been hotly anticipating next month’s “Ghostbusters” video game, which for a time was said to be the only third production to feature the continued adventures of the paranormal policing squad we could expect.  But that just wasn’t good enough.  And with a number of scripts, from originator Dan Aykroyd to “Office” scripters Lee Eisenberg and Gene Stupnitsky, there have certainly been options floating around.

    The one guy dragging his feet on a new film has been actor Bill Murray, who has never been shy about calling “Ghostbusters II” a turd.  But he’s been warming up to the idea.  You might remember those comments he made at Fantastic Fest in September of last year, that the “wounds” of the second film have finally “healed.”

    Well it seems that Hero Complex blogger Geoff Boucher has nailed down confirmation from Aykroyd.  Not only that, but it seems everyone — EVERYONE — is on board for a third installment.  Check out what Aykroyd had to say after the jump.

    (more…)

  • IFC to bring ‘Antichrist’ to U.S.

    Willem Dafoe in AntichristSpeaking of “Antichrist,” while some doubted that the controversial pic would see the light of day Stateside, IFC Films is ensuring that it will. The indie outfit has picked up U.S. distribution rights to Lars Von Trier’s film, and moreover, has announced that no cuts will be made to film ahead of its release. IFC president Jonathan Sehring’s states:

    “Since it premiered at Cannes on Monday, we haven’t been able to stop talking or thinking about ‘Antichrist’ … It is a towering work of cinema by one its greatest directors.  We are incredibly excited to bring this film to America and expect it to have a major impact on audiences not only in America but worldwide.”

    Given that the film will unquestionably land an NC-17 certificate, not to mention further media ire in the States, it’s a courageous move from IFC, and I think they should be commended for it. “Antichrist” certainly stands in stark contrast to IFC’s other Cannes acquisition of the day: Ken Loach’s gentle, well-liked character comedy “Looking for Eric.”

  • 5/20 Web Round-up

    (from left) James Cameron and Sam Worthington on the set of Avatar• Peter Sciretta asks for your most hated uses of CGI in movie history. [/Film]

    • Charlie Kaufman talks “Synecdoche, New York,” his “mutant horro film,” across the pond. [Daily Telegraph]

    • IMAX plans to cozy up next to James Cameron’s “Avatar” for an extended run. [The Carpetbagger]

    • Donna Freydkin chats up “Terminator Salvation” star Christian Bale. [USA Today]

    • Matt Bradshaw remembers the movie summer of 1980. [Cinematical]

    • Christopher Campbell puts together a casting call for Steven Spielberg’s recently announce Martin Luther King biopic. [Spout Blog]

    • Richard Corliss picks the top 10 Cannes films ever. [Time]

  • Gainsbourg defends Von Trier

    Charlotte Gainsbourg Charlotte Gainsbourg seems so impossibly delicate in person that it’s hard to imagine her mutilating herself on camera. I suspect it’s even harder to watch — part of what makes her a canny choice as one of Lars Von Trier’s notoriously put-upon leading ladies.

    In this excellent video interview with the Guardian’s Xan Brooks (no embed available, unfortunately), given in the wake of the incensed media reaction to “Antichrist,” Gainsbourg intelligently defends her participation in the project, as well as her director’s intentions.

    She politely but firmly dismisses the accusations of misogyny levelled at Von Trier as “stupid,” and laughs off the idea that she was somehow exploited on camera. (“I was willing to do it, and I knew what I was doing.”) Most interestingly, Gainsbourg suggests that her character was intended to be reflective of the director himself:

    The character was called “She,” he was called “He.” So we had no identity, and the way Lars picked me, I had the impression that he knew nothing about me. He never talked about any film that I had done, nothing like that. So I didn’t have a clue why he chose me, but it gave me a kind of mystery of being this anonymous woman.

    I really trusted him, and that’s also a thing that I find unjust when people say that he hates women. Because I really had the impression that I was portraying him. That he was the woman. That he was going through that misery of physical condition and panic attacks and I related to him completely, and I had the impression that he related to me, in that he was understanding my feelings.

    It’s a measured, thoughtful interview in that Gainsbourg still seems to be coming to terms with the film herself. The video also offers some footage from the film that I hadn’t seen before — check it out here.

  • Mixed early reviews for ‘Basterds’

    Inglourious Basterds

    UPDATE: Variety’s Todd McCarthy bucks the trend with a decidedly enthusiastic review. He cites some problems, including first-half tonal inconsistencies, but otherwise finds himself swept up in Tarantino’s self-reflexive games:

    By turns surprising, nutty, windy, audacious and a bit caught up in its own cleverness, the picture is a completely distinctive piece of American pop art with a strong Euro flavor that’s new for the director.

    The best characters are non-Yanks, all of whom speak their own languages and one or two others to boot. But this commendable gesture toward linguistic accuracy is virtually the only realistic aspect of the picture, which otherwise soars on its flights of fancy and deliberate anachronisms — the use of David Bowie’s “Putting Out the Fire” at a crucial point is particularly inispired — and flattens out only when Tarantino gets too carried away with over-elaborated dialogue scenes, a problem that could easily be addressed with some slight trimming between now and the skedded August opening … (It’s) never less than enjoyable and more than that in the second half.

    EARLIER: Blogger reactions to “Inglourious Basterds” may be scattered, but the first two trade reviews (we’re still waiting for  Variety to chip in) read fairly similarly, and not very positively at that.

    The critics agree that there are tasty morsels in the stew — rapid consensus seems to be emerging that Austrian star Christoph Waltz spectacularly outshines the rest of the ensemble — but accusations of overlength, indulgence and narrative inconsistency are to be found.

    Are we talking another “Death Proof,” a specialized item that will have its critical and public champions but doesn’t return its maker to the world-beating crossover status of this earlier work? It’s early days in terms of gauging critical response, but with the Guardian’s Peter Bradshaw crucifying the film (a “colossal armour-plated turkey from hell”), and the Telegraph indifferent (“not so much inglorious as undistinguished”), it seems the detractors will be plentiful.

    (more…)