In Contention

Category: Daily

  • Swear to me!

    Four Your Consideration: The Dark Knight

    (Courtesy: Rope of Silicon)

  • Greatest film? Ever changing, ever evolving…

    Lawrence of ArabiaI just finished teaching a class of senior film students and we entered into a terrific debate about their choices for the greatest film ever made. These were not regular students of mine.  Another instructor had taught them film history, but being aware of my work as a historian and writer, they were excited for the chance to debate.

    It was shocking to me that not a single film they mentioned was made before 1980. Not one. My God…not even “Raging Bull.” Now in fairness it could be a fluke and this is a class not willing to challenge themselves by studying in depth the films of the past.  I have taught classes that dove right in and came away loving the work of Chaplin, or Renoir, for instance, without being exposed to it in the past.

    I challenged them in the next week to go and view some of the films on my personal 10 best list in the hopes their eyes would be opened to the great works of the past. Every film unseen is a new release, right?

    Though home entertainment, video and DVD has allowed for entire new generations to become better educated cinematically, I now wonder if that is actually happening? These students have been hammered with film history and film theory, they have screened “Citizen Kane,” “On the Waterfront” and “Lawrence of Arabia,” so they are certainly aware of them.  Yet the film most often chosen as the greatest was “Pulp Fiction.”

    I do not personally share the opinion that “Citizen Kane” is the greatest film ever made. There was a time when perhaps it was, and while it remains the most innovative film of its time, other endeavors have now surpassed it in my opinion, and at least one made before it was always better.

    Is film history being preserved? Are the great films from years gone by being remembered for the sublime works of art that they were? Are young people aware that many films of today are homages to the films of the past? It is among my greatest fears that the generations to come will lose touch with the great films of yesteryear.

    As a critic, I see my job to celebrate the great films and render an opinion of the pictures I see, but as an educator it goes much deeper than that. Film students should live, breathe sleep and eat cinema. I did. I am stunned when a student puts up his or her hand when I ask who hasn’t seen “The Godfather.” It is a fact I cannot simply not fathom that students making the decision to create films for the rest of their life come to a college and are not aware of the classics.

    I do my best to instill that love.  My office is a regular hang out for kids wanting to talk film, wanting an opinion, or hoping for a recommendation. I would not have it any other way. If one or two students per term leaves having seen the films I asked them to see, understood them, understand further why they are historically significant…I am confident I have done my job and my part to keep film history alive. Nothing pleases me more than turning today’s students onto something like the Universal monster legacy and having them come back amazed at the films…it is a thrill.

    For the record, my ten greatest North American films are in order of preference:

    1. “The Godfather Part II”
    2. “The Godfather”
    3. “Lawrence of Arabia”
    4. “The Wizard of Oz”
    5. “Schindler’s List”
    6. “Raging Bull”
    7. “The Searchers”
    8. “On the Waterfront”
    9. “Apocalypse Now”
    10. “The Treasure of the Sierra Madre”

    What about you?  What are your top 10 films of all time — the age-old question.

  • If you missed tonight’s ‘Uncut’…

    …check it out here.  John and I discussed “Star Wars: The Clone Wars,” the “Tropic Thunder” boycott and the Best Picture prospects of “The Dark Knight,” among other things.

  • Bernie Mac and Isaac Hayes to share a swan song

    Isaac Hayes on the set of Soul MenPerhaps I missed this little tid-bit in the sad news over the weekend, but apparently Bernie Mac and Isaac Hayes are staring alongside Samuel L. Jackson in November’s “Soul Men.”  I TOTALLY didn’t realize that.

    We get this from the New York Daily News (via The Movie Blog):

    Is “Soul Men” cursed?

    The upcoming comedy, set to be released in November, features both comedian Bernie Mac and singer Isaac Hayes, who died within one day of each other this weekend. And eerily enough, the movie’s plot is about death.

    In “Soul Men,” a rhythm-and-blues band reunites 20 years after their acrimonious breakup following the death of the band’s lead singer. Samuel L. Jackson and Bernie Mac play the group’s two main members, while Isaac Hayes portrays himself.

    The movie’s plot, with battling egos, appears to resemble the relationship between real-life singers Sam Moore and Dave Prater. The movie’s title comes from “Soul Man,” one of the hit songs Hayes co-wrote for Sam and Dave.

    It honestly sounds like an interesting little project.  No doubt it’ll be doubly sad watching these two on the screen together.

  • The Sunday Times digs into ‘W’

    Lionsgate Films' WYesterday’s edition of London’s Sunday Times carried a story from Christopher Goodwin analyzing the “W” phenomenon from the other side of the pond. It’s full of unoriginal information, but worth a read nonetheless.

    First, Goodwin gets into the obvious caveat that has a number of viewers skeptical:

    Some believe Stone, 61, may even have a deep-seated personal animus against Bush. Born in the same year, he and Bush were briefly classmates at Yale, although they didn’t know each other there. Stone dropped out to fight in Vietnam, a battle-scarred journey that eventually led to his radicalisation and to two Oscar-winning films born of the experience, Platoon and Born on the Fourth of July. Bush, of course, managed to avoid going to Vietnam by somehow winning a cushy noncombatant job at home with the National Guard.

    Touché so far. But then Goodwin gets into a thorough dissection of Stanley Weiser’s script to the point that we’re almost embarrassed to say we’ll be covering the work in tomorrow’s “Page to Screen” column. It seems everyone with a pulse has read this thing since it “leaked” out in April.

    Here’s the Goodwin’s closer:

    Stone says he’s beyond caring what people think. “I’m tired of defending the accuracy of my movies,” he says. “JFK was a case to be proven, Nixon was a penetrating biography of a complex and dark man. But I’m not bound by those strictures any more. Bush is not a complex and dark man, so it’s different. This movie can be funnier because Bush is funny. He’s awkward and goofy and makes faces all the time. He’s not your average president. So, let’s have some fun with it. What are they going to do? Discredit me again?”

    Sure, if they can.

    Well, all the bases have been covered, I’d say. Nothing left to do now but SEE THE DAMNED MOVIE. But maybe that was part of the strategy from the start, leak the script, get the trailer out there, pull the band-aid off quickly so that the shock of all this silliness is out of the way by the time the thing hits multiplexes.

    Still…good luck swallowing this yarn. Not that it hasn’t been nearly impossible to do so in painful reality.

    Read the rest of Goodwin’s story here.

  • BEST ACTOR WATCH: Mickey Rourke in ‘The Wrestler’

    Mickey Rourke in The WrestlerFor some time I have been cautiously anticipating Darren Aronofsky’s upcoming film “The Wrestler.” I say cautiously because, as much as I love Aronofsky’s vision of a cinematic world slightly askew, I recognize his potential for going off the rails in blind artistic rage.

    I loved “The Fountain.” I found it to be one of the two best films of 2006, a unique and vigorous demand for new barriers in the cinema. Some people hated, detested it, found it a waste of celluloid, but I saw a filmmaker dissatisfied with the limits of his medium and stretching to make a different kind of film entirely.

    Then again, I hated “Requiem for a Dream,” the film largely agreed upon as a testament to his considerable talents. I found it to be an embarassing display, the sophomore slump from a director clearly going places.

    And of course, in “Pi,” I think many would agree that the seeds of expertise were sewn, the potential glaringly apparent.

    And now we get “The Wrestler,” which will bow at the 65th annual Venice Film Festival later this month. The film stars Mickey Rourke as a professional wrestler “making his way through the independent circuit, trying to get back in the game for one final showdown with his former rival,” according to IMDb. And for some reason, it sounds like a story with a lot of potential, to say nothing of what an actor as gifted as Mickey Rourke could do with a role such as this.

    (more…)

  • POLL: Will ‘The Dark Knight’ be nominated for Best Picture?

    Simple and easy poll this week, what with all the escalating chatter about the Best Picture prospects of “The Dark Knight.” You tell us: is it all wishful thinking or can the Bat secure a spot in the final five?

    And if you want to give us your bright ideas as to why or why not, cut loose in the comments below.

  • Sasha Stone declares it for the Bat

    Warner Bros. Pictures' The Dark KnightSpeaking of Batman, Sasha Stone of Awards Daily has declared that “The Dark Knight” has become “too big too ignore” in her latest “State of the Race” column. She offers a sound argument for the film’s Best Picture chances, spotlighting four aspects of the effort and its mythos that seal the deal.

    Here’s a starter regarding the stellar box office:

    To not nominate it for Best Picture at this rate would undermine the process of having a Best Picture race in the first place; if you don’t honor a film this big you really do a dishonor to those who drive the entire business: the ticket buyers.

    And the closer:

    Titanic was only half a great film. But there was just something about it that made people want to see it over and over again, just as they did Star Wars and now The Dark Knight. Maybe it really is as simple as movie magic. Maybe it is something deeper. Either way, the time has come to start taking the film seriously as a contender.

    I’m sticking to my guns here. I’m more than happy that Oscarwatchers are getting this excited and that they are seeing gold in the Bat’s future, but I expect them all to be disappointed in the end (as if that’s the most unpredictable tool in the Academy’s arsenal). But, as I’ve been saying from day one on this, I’m happy to be wrong.

    And the editor isn’t unaware of the irony…

  • Ledger drew inspiration from the work of Grant Morrison

    Cover of Batman #663So it turns out, as a way of uber-preparation for his performance in “The Dark Knight,” actor Heath Ledger kept a “Joker diary” during the month leading up to production. And some of its contents seem to have given Bat-scribe Grant Morrison the willies.

    The writer recently sat down with MTV’s Jennifer Vineyard to discuss the parallels between Ledger’s performance and the Joker he’s envisioned in works such as “Arkham Asylum: A Serious House on Serious Earth” and “The Clown at Midnight” (“Batman” #663). Here’s a taste:

    In [the diary], there’s a list of what would make the Joker laugh – including AIDS, landmines, geniuses suffering irreversible brain damage, brunch, and sombreros. “It gave me this chill,” Grant Morrison said, because it was word-for-word what Morrison had written in one of his Batman stories…

    …As a response to his own “Arkham Asylum: A Serious House on Serious Earth,” Morrison had continued his themes of the duality of Joker and the Batman in “The Clown at Midnight.” Having established with “Arkham” that the Joker had a sort of “super-sanity” and that he shifted between personalities,” Morrison explored the idea further in “The Clown at Midnight,” by showing that each time the Joker escaped, one of those new personalities would emerge.

    “It’s a really good story,” Morrison said, “but because it was prose, people didn’t want to read it.”

    Except, apparently, Heath, who saw Morrison’s list and put it in his Joker diary. “He actually had a whole list — blind babies, doctors, accidents — really horrible stuff,” Morrison said. “Heath wrote it all down. So yeah, I can see there’s a lot of [‘Arkham’ and ‘Midnight’] in his Joker.”

    Very cool and savvy move on Ledger’s part. I’m one of the readers who doesn’t engage too well with Morrison’s work, but on a purely conceptual, off-the-page level, I’ve always felt his vision of the character was something of a definitive.

    Furthermore, I think Ledger hammered it out on the big screen in a big, exciting way. He carried across that “super-sanity” with striking clarity. In my review, I noted that Ledger’s “inflections, maniacal throughout the film until…fade into the background as he spews sincere, borderline reasonable philosophy.” You recall the mob meeting: “You’re insane.” “No I’m not. I’m not.”

    It just goes to show that this is a performance working on more levels than even the most triumphant reviews seemed to suggest. And with every record-breaking dollar it seems the Oscar moves closer to his posthumous grasp.

  • Tom Cruise “isn’t that funny?” What???

    Tom Cruise on the set of Tropic ThunderI have to say, I think Vulture is off the mark with their insistence that Tom Cruise “isn’t that funny” in Ben Stiller’s upcoming “Tropic Thunder.” I was holding my side in laughter for much of the extended cameo, less due to Cruise’s efforts than what the script called for, admittedly, but it’s real yuk-yuk value.

    Earlier this month I wrote:

    Cruise’s first moments on screen — a video conference call sequence — leads one to believe he’ll be reaching throughout the performance, trying too hard to connect the dots of Stiller’s absurdist comedy. But somewhere along the line, it becomes clear that Stiller knows how to best capture the performance: taking it over the top isn’t nearly enough. You have to keep doing it over and over until it’s funny again, and that is where the director’s choice to linger on Cruise’s antics provides a showcase that demands side-splitting laughter.

    And bravo to Cruise for going there. It’s probably the smartest thing he could do at this dicey time in his career. And when he slowly dictates his opinion of action star Tugg Speedman’s career, it’s difficult to imagine he wasn’t thinking of himself in some small part.

    I still feel pretty good about that.

    Meanwhile, that New York Times story is really irritating for some reason.  Sure, Stiller’s stint starring as a mentally disabled stable boy is played up for comedic value in the film, but it’s dead on in its clearly hyperbolic joshing of actors who “go there” to get awards.  Bravo to the studio for sticking to its guns on this one.  You can’t please everyone, nor should you strive to do so.

    Anyway, I’ll be looking forward to everyone else’s thoughts when the film lands next weekend.

  • Is Paul Greengrass taking up the reins of ‘Chicago 7?’

    Paul GreengrassFilmmaker Paul Greengrass has been drawn to the sphere of politics since day one in his career as a filmmaker. He launched into the fray with 2002’s blisteringly realistic “Bloddy Sunday” (an account of the Derry massacre of 1972) and followed it up with a “Bourne” installment, putting his unique knowledge of covert military operations to use.

    2005’s “United 93” was a tightrope walk that managed to land him a Best Director nomination, while 2007’s “The Bourne Ultimatum” was easily one of the best films of last year. He has been a director on an upward curve, settling quite comfortably in his role as an artist to watch, if not the artist to watch.

    One of my most anticipated productions of 2009 is Greengrass’s “Green Zone,” an adaptation of Rajiv Chandrasekaran’s “Imperial Life in the Emerald City” that could be a hell of a windfall for the Iraq stalemate when it finds its way to screen. Matt Damon will star and Greengrass will have yet another stage for his brand of cinema.

    Finally, though I’m excited for the visual splendor and dedication to source material of Zack Snyder’s upcoming “Watchmen,” I think we all would have been interested in Greengrass’s spin on the material had it come to fruition when the project was at Paramount Pictures a few years ago. The “‘Citizen Kane’ of comic books” certainly knows from the beast of politics.

    Now word is circulating that the director may be attached to direct DreamWorks SKG’s “The Trial of the Chicago 7,” a film originally stuck in Steven Spielberg’s ever-rotating wheel house of ideas. If it’s true, count this viewer excited.

    Here’s what Neil Miller of Film School Rejects has uncovered:

    Then this evening, out of almost pure chance, I was skimming through the pages of Production Weekly, checkout which productions are currently in active development when I ran across an updated listing the The Trial of the Chicago 7. After cross checking some other participants, including writer Aaron Sorkin and Producers Walter Parkes and Laurie MacDonald, I deduced that this was the same production. The only odd part was that instead of listing Steven Spielberg or no director at all, the production listed a different director: Paul Greengrass.

    Well…that’s a development, to say the least.

    Greengrass has shown in all the aforementioned films an adeptness to the even keel when dealing in hot button issues of war and policy. He spends a considerable amount of time focusing on character rather than the situation.

    I remember interviewing Kevin Macdonald in early 2006 about his then upcoming “The Last King of Scotland,” and he made it a point of mentioning that he was more interested in the way politics affects the individual, rather than the statement of the politics themselves. I think that characteristic is applicable to Greengrass’s work ethic as well.

    So count me in on this one.  I’ve never seen Brett Morgan’s “Chicago 10” documentary, but I’ve always thought this story could be a hell of a showcase in narrative form on screen.  Greengrass would be a great fit.

  • Thrilling Oscar nominees…when the Academy took a chance

    Willem Dafoe in The Last Temptation of ChristI love it when the Academy steps out and provides us with a genuine shock that is so richly deserved you feel like weeping for joy that they got it…they really got it.

    For all the ranting I do about the Academy’s lack of vision, every so often they pull something out of the air that so defies the odds, so stuns the critics and Oscar forecasters, it is a hearty reminder that these people do love film.

    I think the first time I really stood and cheered a shocking inclusion was Martin Scorsese’s directing nomination for “The Last Temptation of Christ,” a powerful film that it took a great deal of courage to make, and an equal amount for the Academy to acknowledge given the storm of controversy the film faced upon release.

    I remember going to see “Last Temptation” on opening day and asking one of the men picketing the film what he had thought. “Oh I haven’t seen it,” he stated, “my church warned me against it.” It was a clear indication of the power of religion over the masses.

    Two years earlier I championed David Lynch’s being nominated for “Blue Velvet,” a dark and frightening film that Roger Ebert and Gene Siskel dissed at every turn. What would have made the year complete would have been a nomination for Dennis Hopper in the film as opposed to his supporting nod for “Hoosiers.”

    In 1998 as I cheered when Canada’s Atom Egoyan found his way to the Best Director list for his haunting “The Sweet Hereafter.”  The film had been named the year’s best by the Los Angeles Times and finished runner-up for Best Picture and Best Director in the New York Film Critics Circle voting. Not only was this a huge accomplishment for Egoyan, a uniquely gifted director, but for Canadian cinema.

    Just last year, Sarah Polley was nominated for her screenplay “Away From Her,” which also earned Julie Christie a nod for best actress. In my opinion Polley should have been a nominee for Best Director as well.

    I guess I wonder today, in this age of super Oscar campaigns, does the Academy really sit up and take notice of the daring work, or should most of the credit rest at the feet of savvy PR pushes?  I have to think, at least in a number of cases, it has to be the Academy.  The aforementioned films did not have the money to spend on any major campaign, of course.

    So that leaves me feeling good about the AMPAS and what they are doing, despite my moaning.  They are still watching and appreciating art in cinema, and the proof shines through form time to time.

    Any bold choices you can think of to celebrate?

  • R.I.P. Isaac Hayes

    I’ve been out and about all day.  Really sad news to come home to.  Keep on soothin’ — wherever you are.

  • Paul Newman will leave us a legacy of greatness

    Paul NewmanIt’s no secret that actor Paul Newman has been on the ropes for a few months, but with reports surfacing that the screen legend has left the hospital to return home and “die in peace” settle the issue in with a painful clarity.

    To me this is devastating news because Newman is truly one of the greats of cinema, a brilliantly gifted actor who grew into that role before our very eyes, and a movie star able to walk that precarious walk. I had the immense pleasure of meeting and interviewing him in 2000 during a junket trip to Los Angeles.

    There was a nightmare of some sort I had been asked not to write about, which gave me time with Newman quite by accident, and we were ablse to discuss his career and performances. What a thrill, talking to the man who gave us so many fine characters, summoning the courage to portray out and out bastards, somehow making them all too human.

    Like Brando before him, Newman made acting look effortless, and though he did not necessarily explode into the industry like so many others, he grew consistently as an actor through the 1950s and became an icon in the 1960s.

    (more…)

  • Yeah…

    Top 10 domestic box office grossers of all time

    (Courtesy: Box Office Mojo)

  • Bernie Mac is dead

    Bernie MacHoly…this is sudden to say the least.

    CNN is reporting that actor Bernie Mac died early this morning of complications of pneumonia. The guy was only 50 years old.

    What a cold bucket of water to the face. We could go at any time, any place, anywhere. We’re not in charge of punching our ticket.

    Rest in peace, friend. You gave us some laughs in your time. That goes a long way in the end.

  • A tale of two trailers

    Sally Hawkins in Happy-Go-LuckyA journo friend sent a note tonight asking my thoughts on the Miramax trailer sell of Mike Leigh’s “Happy-Go-Lucky,” given that I’ve had a chance to see the film over in the UK before the domestic marketing machine took hold.

    It’s really interesting, actually.  This trailer is completely different from the original trailer, of course, and is geared toward the populist sell.  The earlier package seemed increibly limited in scope, if packed with considerable amounts of indie charm.

    But only now do I sense Miramax almost wilfully gunning for the “‘Juno’ slot” (a slot that we all know doesn’t exist beyond the hypothetical, but bear with me).  Meanwhile, with some negative whispers on the Hollywood winds for John Shanley’s “Doubt,” one has to wonder what last year’s Best Picture victor is working with.

    “Happy” is headed to Toronto, where it is likely to find a niche of followers that the studio could spin into a bigger phenomenon if the money is there.  What’s more, the fest seems to be a forum for smaller content…”Appaloosa” is the biggest film announced so far, really.  If “Happy” can stand out in that crowd, it could walk away from Toronto as the indie champion of the season as early as mid-September.

    Ultimately, the new trailer is a step toward diversifying their available awards content in the eyes of voters and audiences alike.  If anything can be considered the “‘Juno’ spot” at this point, it has to be the film that sldies in on the charm of being unique.  It goes a long way.

  • If you missed tonight’s ‘Uncut’

    You can view the show here.  John and I discussed the potential “Superbad”/”Pineapple Express” sequel, Shane Black’s “Lethal Weapon 5” and the MPAA’s recent decision to grant a “R” rating for Kevin Smith’s “Zach and Mori Make a Porno.”  Check it all out at The Movie Blog.