Fox has made a big splash recently with materials for Ben Stiller’s “The Secret Life of Walter Mitty,” positioning it well with a New York Film Festival debut and pretty much following the “Life of Pi” playbook for what could be the filmmaker’s first big awards player to date. But meanwhile, a Holocaust drama from a “Downton Abbey” director with Geoffrey Rush, Emily Watson and 12-year-old lead actress has been quietly positioned in the midst of the Oscar fray and could be another player for the studio.

Indeed, the Nov. 15 positioning for Brian Percival’s “The Book Thief” was done so quietly in fact that it slipped right past the first outlet to let you know it might happen — ahem, us. We’ve had the film situated on our charts since they were first updated in early July, waiting to see if the move would come to fruition.

A couple of weeks ago, Fox locked it in, putting the young adult adaptation in the same release date air as Lionsgate’s “The Hunger Games: Catching Fire.” But has the studio set the board for a potential awards season sneak attack, or is the fall just a better strategic time to release the film, which was originally set for Jan. 17? Time will tell.

Adapted from the novel by Markus Zusak, “The Book Thief” stars Sophie Nélisse as a young foster girl living outside of Munich who scratches out a meager existence for herself by stealing. That thievery eventually extends to books, ever-scarce in Nazi-infested Germany. She soon discovers the joy of reading and shares her stolen books with her neighbors during bombing raids, as well as with the Jewish man being hidden in her family’s basement. Rush and Watson star as her foster parents.

Nélisse won a Genie Award recently for her feature film debut in the Best Foreign Language Film Oscar nominee “Monsieur Lazhar.” Rush, of course, won an Oscar for 1996’s “Shine” while Watson is herself a two-time Academy Award nominee for “Breaking the Waves” and “Hilary and Jackie.”

“The Book Thief” is the second theatrical feature for Percival, who has been a major directorial force on PBS’ Emmy Award-winning series “Downton Abbey.” It obviously has a meaty premise that plays like something of an echo to George Clooney’s expected awards play, “The Monuments Men.” And if awards are indeed part of the strategy, Fox is being smart by keeping it low on the radar, for now. If nothing else, keep an eye on the original score grabbing a nomination. As we all know, the legendary John Williams picks up nominations in his sleep and, perhaps surprisingly, he’s currently scoring the film, one of the rare occasions of him taking on a job that isn’t a Steven Spielberg or a George Lucas joint.

“There are some devastating aspects of watching a girl going from age 10 to 15 trying to make sense of a world so badly off balance,” Rush told USA Today in a recent first look at the film that was mostly an introductory piece for Nélisse. “But in a way it’s such a fresh story, there is such rich detailed humanity in the ordinary lives of these people.”

Along with films like Scott Cooper’s “Out of the Furnace,” David O. Russell’s “American Hustle” and the aforementioned “The Monuments Men,” “The Book Thief” will be bypassing the festival route in favor of a big immediate splash. Will it figure into the Oscar landscape? It certainly could.

“The Book Thief” arrives in theaters on Nov. 15.

I kept almost not liking “Elysium,” but ended up being totally won over by it. Whatever that means. The thought I had coming out of the screening was that there are few filmmakers I want to keep making movies more than Neill Blomkamp. In my opinion, reviews harping on the heavy-handed message of the film miss the forest for the trees. Sometimes a point ought to be made heavy-handedly, and after all, sci-fi isn’t necessarily the refuge of the subtle. Anyway, I’m a fan. I’ll be interested to hear whether or not you are, too, so if you see the film this weekend, cut loose with your thoughts in the comments section and feel free to vote in our poll below. And if there’s something else you’ve seen recently and want to discuss, consider this an open thread to do just that.

Two years ago, Rachel Weisz was the unofficial mascot of the London Film Festival, as “360” and “The Deep Blue Sea” opened and closed the fest, respectively. This year, Tom Hanks finds himself in that position, and this year’s festival will be bookended by both his Oscar-buzzed prestige dramas. Paul Greengrass’ thriller “Captain Phillips” was announced as the opening film last week; now John Lee Hancock’s “Saving Mr. Banks,” in which Hanks stars as Walt Disney opposite Emma Thompson’s P.L. Travers, will close things out on October 20.

Hanks, who is also attending the LFF opening with “Phillips,” will return to the red carpet for the Closing Night Gala, with Thompson and Hancock also confirmed to attend.

It wasn’t clear beforehand whether or not Disney wanted to go the festival route for what appears to be Oscar bait of the more mainstream variety, but it seems they do. Closing London is a non-competitive, relatively low-pressure festival gig, so whether or not it’s a film for critics, this appointment allows them to decorate their For Your Consideration ads with some prestigious-looking festival laurels. Win-win.

Previous films to have held the LFF Closing Night slot include “127 Hours,” “Slumdog Millionaire,” “Nowhere Boy,” “Babel,” “The Darjeeling Limited” and last year’s “Great Expectations” — which, incidentally, is finally opening in the US on October 11. It’s a slot that usually goes to UK productions or co-productions, and producer Alison Owen (an Oscar nominee 15 years ago for “Elizabeth”) took this news to remind us of the film’s British credentials: 

“‘Saving Mr. Banks’ is very much about British manners versus American values, as Pamela Travers and Walt Disney battle over the rights to Mary Poppins, so it feels absolutely fitting that the LFF Closing Night should be our European Premiere, and we feel very honoured. We hope Pamela Travers would approve wholeheartedly. We filmed the London sequences in the street where Pamela lived, and London was both the start of the journey for Mary Poppins and for our movie, so we feel like we’re beginning in the right place.”

The rest of this year’s LFF lineup will be announced on September 4.

Judi Dench was a near-annual presence in the Oscar race for a time, though it’s been seven years since she scored her last nomination (her sixth) for her remarkable work as an unhinged schoolteacher in “Notes on a Scandal.” I maintain that she deserved the Oscar that year, but she had no chance against fellow British veteran Helen Mirren, who won Best Actress at Venice for her turn as QE2 in Stephen Frears’ “The Queen” before bulldozing her way through the season. Which is funny, since that’s pretty much the narrative Dench is seeking to emulate with her titular performance in Frears’ latest, “Philomena.” 

We’ve been hearing for some time that this true-life dramedy, set to premiere in Competition at Venice, finds Dench on awards-baiting form as an Irishwoman on a quest to find the son she was forced to give up for adoption as a teenager. The first trailer landed this morning, and it’s easy to see what the buzz is about — particularly with The Weinstein Company behind this one.

As befits a film written by Steve Coogan (who also co-stars as the political journalist assisting Philomena in her search), the tone seems lighter than the material might lead you to expect, but it’s obvious the 78-year-old star has plenty of dramatic material to chew on; it runs a little over two minutes, but you can already start counting the potential Oscar clips. It’s evidently a more substantial showcase than Dench and Frears’ last collaboration, 2005’s puffball comedy “Mrs. Henderson Presents” — which, of course, still landed the actress a nomination. 

Reviews at Venice and subsequently Toronto will help determine whether this is simply a Best Actress vehicle for Dench, or whether Frears’ film, like “The Queen” before it, can make inroads into other categories. Obviously, it looks like an even stronger play for BAFTA attention — particularly with Coogan, set to rule the UK box office this weekend with his sitcom spinoff “Alan Partridge: Alpha Papa,” very much back in the UK limelight.

Check out the trailer below and share your thoughts in the comments. The film opens in the UK on November 1, with a (presumably later) US release date yet to be confirmed.

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fr88sVLxVeo&w=640&h=360]

As we steel ourselves for the season ahead with early lists of contenders and a harsh spotlight on unassuming films hoping to find an audience, let alone awards traction, it’s worth remembering that the list of coulda-been players in a given Oscar season is long and considerable. And if I’m not making the point clear enough early on in that sentence, let me do so now: this is every bit the fault of analysts like me, as much as it is the films themselves, if not more.

Covering the awards season, we forecast, we look ahead, we see how things look on paper and we set sometimes unfortunate bars. Not every film is looking for that kind of exposure, and often enough, the inflated expectations of industry watchers get in the head of many a would-be player only to amplify the eventual disappointment of a dead end. That having been said, there are obviously many films that set their sights on the awards race with the right formula, or so they thought, only to come up empty-handed at the end of the day. We see them every year.

What will it be this year? “Saving Mr. Banks” and “The Monuments Men” would appear to be the on-paper, sight-unseen, sure-to-be contenders. Well, will they be? Or will they go the way of countless expected awards players that, well, clearly weren’t.

So with that in mind, I thought it would be worth it to look back at the history of this, what should we call it, phenomenon, for lack of a better word. Most if not all of these films were at one time or another expected to be major players, but at the end of the day, all of them walked away with zero nominations. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the list is full of recent examples, partly because that represents my time covering this madness, and partly because that frame of time has seen an eruption in the amount of people and outlets who do what we do here, in media both old and new, ever shining that harsh light of expectation as the Oscar season continues to establish itself as more of a marketplace than a meritocracy.

Click through the gallery below for 10 examples, and of course, remember their lessons as we gear up for the 2013-2014 season.

Have your say about our choices and any other Oscar non-starters that come to mind in the comments section below.

Showbiz 411’s Roger Friedman — who some might call a noted Harvey Weinstein shill — bloviated about “Lee Daniels’ The Butler” under the cover of “Oscar observation” a few weeks ago but apparently no one else could. The embargo is up today so let’s get into it. The question on this one is, will it be an awards player or will it just fade out before the season even gets here? A few thoughts…

As the fictional/somewhat composited eponymous servant Cecil Gaines*, Forest Whitaker maintains a tightrope walk with his performance and steers clear of what could have been some embarrassing on-the-nose choices (though the same can’t always be said for the film itself on that last bit). But Oprah Winfrey, who Friedman was trumpeting, really does surprise with a performance that goes up and down on an emotional spectrum and could be the film’s best shot at awards recognition in the acting races. Friedman compared her to Mo’Nique in “Precious,” which is, uh, not at all accurate. It’s not a fiery portrait of a character. The performance is actually quite restrained and governed throughout, when it could have been more histrionic if it wanted to be.

The roll call of presidential cameos — Robin Williams (Ike), James Marsden (JFK), Liev Schreiber (LBJ), John Cusack (Tricky Dick) — is mostly just silly, as you might have imagined. Indeed, their walk-ons were met with laughs at my screening. But the point is there’s not enough screen time to warrant much consideration for any of that, though Alan Rickman’s Ronald Regan was scarily accurate. It made me want to see a biopic with the “Harry Potter” star in the role.

Worth noting is the makeup, both on the presidents and particularly in sequences that reflect aging. That could certainly stand out for the makeup and hairstyling branch. But the whole enterprise is one of those films that makes white people tear up at America’s ugly history of racist atrocity in an easily digestible “Forrest Gump”-like structure. (Indeed, similar to Gump, Cecil’s son somehow finds himself in the middle of every important moment in the history of the Civil Rights movement — a little difficult to swallow.) Because of that, it’s safe to assume it will have its fans throughout a liberal white-guilt-ridden organization like the Academy. It lands its share of easy emotional blows, and as we all know, that speaks to this group.

The film was strategically positioned on a date where fluff like “Eat Pray Love” and more notably “The Help” have found box office success in recent years. If it takes advantage and racks up considerable bank leading into the awards season, then I don’t see any reason to believe its sledgehammer flourishes can’t find room to navigate the circuit.

But there are a lot of movies still to come and, so far, “Precious” has proven to be the anomaly in Lee Daniels’ portfolio when it comes to this sort of thing. My hunch is the season will defer to less strained work. And of course, The Weinstein Company itself has a full slate of contenders to work with. Will it be “Mandela?” Will it be “August?” Will it be “Philomena?”

We’ll see what sticks.

“Lee Daniels’ The Butler” arrives in theaters on Aug. 16.

*For more on the true story that inspired the film, I recommend this 2008 Washington Post story about Gaines’ real-life counterpart, Eugene Allen.

http://players.brightcove.net/4838167533001/BkZprOmV_default/index.html?videoId=4912134605001

The Film Society of Lincoln Center announced today that Spike Jonze’s “Her” will close the 51st New York Film Festival on Sunday, Oct. 13. “Her” is Jonze’s first film since 2009’s “Where the Wild Things Are” and his first original screenplay.  

In a statement release by FSLC, Jonze noted, “”I”m very excited that it”s a premiere in the city. The New York Film Festival is where we premiered our first movie and that”s really special. It was our first U.S. premiere of ‘Being John Malkovich’ and we had all our friends there and it feels so nice to come back to NYFF.”

Rose Kuo, the Executive Director of the Film Society of Lincoln Center, added, “In dealing with tragi-comic puppeteers, renegade orchid growers, an island of wild things, or a man’s unique love affair, visionary film-maker Spike Jonze has shown himself to be the poet-laureate of our increasingly post-human world. Jonze”s extraordinary new film, ‘Her,’ features Joaquin Phoenix who delivers an unforgettable, emotionally nuanced performance. We are delighted to feature ‘Her’ as the Closing Night gala presentation of the 51st New York Film Festival.”

Set in a near future Los Angeles, Phoenix plays a heartbroken man who succumbs to the charms of a seemingly sentient operating system voiced by Scarlett Johansson. The Warner Bros. film also Amy Adams and Rooney Mara and is scheduled for a limited release on Nov. 20.

“Her” is the bookend to what has become a highly anticipated triumvirate of premieres for NYFF this year.  Paul Greengrass’ “Captain Phillips” will open the festival and Ben Stiller’s “The Secret Life of Walter Mitty” will be the festival’s Centerpiece Gala selection.

For those paying attention at home, this means the only potential awards season players that will not have screened by Oct. 18 include “American Hustle,” “Saving Mr. Banks,” “The Monuments Men,” “The Book Thief,” “Grace of Monaco” and “Diana.” It’s a safe bet that Martin Scorsese’s “The Wolf of Wall Street” could sneak at NYFF, but if not, you can add it to this list. Additionally, this list could shorten or lengthen with Telluride’s premiere schedule unconfirmed and there is more than enough time for TIFF to add to its already buzz worthy lineup.

The 51st New York Film Festival runs Sept. 27 – Oct. 13.

Shortly after the Venice Film Festival announced its heavyweight lineup last month, fest director Alberto Barbera teased us with the promise of later additions to the programme: “There are at least a couple of films we’re still working on, American films,” he said, stirring much excitement and speculation over various high-profile titles. Today, at least some of those latecomers were announced, and even if they’re not the breathlessly awaited A-list titles some pundits were improbably hoping for, they add further shading to an already eclectic selection.

Most prominent among the new additions is Petrice Leconte’s “Une Promesse,” a WWI-era romance that stars Rebecca Hall and Alan Rickman, which will play out of competition. Based on a novel by Stefan Zweig, the German-set film stars Hall as the wife of a wealthy industralist (Rickman), who finds herself falling in love with her husband’s young assistant (Richard Madden).

It sounds like material for the kind of elegantly romantic truffle on which Leconte built his reputation in the 90’s — perhaps most famously with the Oscar-nominated “Ridicule. as well as “The Hairdresser’s Husband” and “The Girl on the Bridge.” Lately, however, his form has taken a bit of a dip — certainly his films haven’t travelled as extensively. We can hope for a rebound on his foray into English-language cinema, though between its German setting, French production and British stars, this threatens to be something of a Europudding.

Three film-focused documentaries, meanwhile, have been added to either the Venice Classics strand or out of competition. They include “Double Play: James Benning and Richard Linklater” by US critic Gabe Klinger, and two Italian entries: Marco Spagnoli’s “Donne nel mito: Anna Magnani,” a tribute to the Oscar-winning actress, and “Dai nostri inviati: La Rai racconta la Mostra del Cinema 1980-1989.”

In other Venice news, the ninth and final member of the Competition jury has been announced, and it’s a delightfully unexpected choice for a highbrow European festival. Veteran actress, writer, comedienne and original Princess Leia, Carrie Fisher, joins the fray — and, interestingly, will serve as the lone American member of a jury being headed by Oscar-winning Italian auteur Bernardo Bertolucci.

Also on the jury are: British director Andrea Arnold (who competed at Venice two years ago with “Wuthering Heights”), Chilean director Pablo Larrain (director of the recent Oscar nominee “No”), German actress Martina Gedeck, French actress Virginie Ledoyen, Chinese actor Jiang Wen, Swiss cinematographer Renato Berta and Japanese composer Ryuichi Sakamoto — who, in a neat bit of bookending with the jury president, won an Oscar for 1987’s “The Last Emperor.”

It’s certainly a diverse bunch — have fun playing ‘six degrees of separation’ with that lot. Every year, I’m tickled by the composition of festival juries: I love imagining the director of “Fish Tank” and the writer of “Postcards From the Edge” finding common cinematic ground. Or not, as the case may be.

The Venice Film Festival, by way, kicks off on August 28 — less than three weeks away. Where did the summer go? 

http://players.brightcove.net/4838167533001/BkZprOmV_default/index.html?videoId=4912108397001

How is George Clooney’s “The Monuments Men” going to shape up this season? Frankly, this “movie” movie is starting to looking like another “Argo,” potentially, a middle-ground choice that entertains with a slice of history but has a populist edge to it that will draw in audiences, not just the industry.

Or at least that’s my take after getting a look at the first trailer for the film, which is handsomely and, for a studio film, surprisingly mounted. The film stars Clooney, Matt Damon, John Goodman, Bill Murray and Cate Blanchett, among others, in the little-known story of a team of museum curators and whatnot tasked with saving pieces of art and culturally important items before their destruction by Hitler during World War II. Goodman, in particular, looks like someone to watch out for (particularly between this and the Coen brothers’ “Inside Llewyn Davis”).

“It’s an extraordinary story,” Blanchett told me about the film last month. “I mean, it’s one I wasn’t particularly familiar with, this group of architects, curators, historians who go in and locate and save this stolen art that the Nazis were amassing, and with the Nero Decree, it was about to be destroyed so it’s a ticking time bomb. And talk about absurd. I mean you’ve got Bill Murray and Matt Damon and George all trying to locate the art, so it doesn’t always go to plan.”

Check out the first trailer for the film, originally dug up by The Playlist, at the top of this post. I think this one will end up landing in a big way. Two-for-two for Clooney? We’ll see.

“The Monuments Men” arrives in theaters on December 18.

Many of you will remember the days when Chad Hartigan was our reliably astute and highly discriminating box office analyst back at the old In Contention site — we miss him still. But that was then and this is now, and Chad’s been making waves on the festival circuit this year with his thoughtful, penetrating second feature “This is Martin Bonner.”  “‘Decency’ isn’t much of a buzzword in the current, irony-fuelled indie realm,” I wrote in my Edinburgh Film Festival review of the two-hander character study, “but ‘Martin Bonner’ possesses a pure, palpable strain of it from first cleanly composed frame to last.”

It’s a genuinely special piece of work, colored by quietly marvelous performances — some of you may have noticed Kris singling out Richmond Arquette in yesterday’s plea for indie Oscar consideration, while Paul Eenhoorn is every bit as good in the title role. Lest our coverage of it here at IC come over as some form of blog-related nepotism, that’s hardly an isolated view: the film won an Audience Award at Sundance, where it debuted, and has since picked up prizes at the Boston, Nashville, Florida and Sarasota fests.

And while the film has geen travelling the fest circuit both the States and Europe, it’s slowly been making its way to US theaters. Next week, however, is the big moment, as “This is Martin Bonner” finally goes on release in the key art house markets of New York and Los Angeles. I’ll be running my interview with Chad next week to mark the occasion, so look out for that.

Meanwhile, the film’s teaser trailer has also just been posted on Apple. Check it out there, or in the embed below, and tell us what you think. Perhaps you’ve even seen the film already? 

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrLlYqX5MkA&w=640&h=360]

http://players.brightcove.net/4838167533001/BkZprOmV_default/index.html?videoId=4912134627001

Looking over the past few months, you might think the summer surprise of 2013 was the critical and box office success of “The Conjuring.” Not really. All corners of the industry knew that Warner Bros. release was a hit in the making after early screenings started the buzz in the spring. It wasn’t the word of mouth success for “Fruitvale” either.  That award-winning drama had a passionate following out of Sundance in January.  And the disappointments of “Lone Ranger,” “White House Down,” “After Earth,””Turbo” or “R.I.P.D.”?  Um, yeah. Personally, I’m kicking myself for not going to Vegas to put money down on how those movies would perform months ago.  No, the surprise this summer is, hands down, “Blue Jasmine.”

Whether Sony Classics realized it was creating a media and audience bait and switch with its marketing plan is unclear, but a Woody Allen movie with a weak trailer (truth), a release date at the end of July (almost the art house death zone) and no festival premiere after both of Woody’s last two “good” films screened at Cannes? This one smelled very, very bad. Like “Cassandra’s Dream” bad.  Shockingly, everything turned out beautifully. “Jasmine” has arguably earned some of the best reviews of the year, is a smash at the box office and people are already lining up to give Cate Blanchett her second Academy Award (of course, no one has told this to the Academy, but I digress…). And while all this goes on, the 77-year-old Allen is in the South of France shooting his next untitled film with Emma Stone, Colin Firth, Marcia Gay Harden and Jacki Weaver, among others.  Makes you think they aren’t kidding when they say 75 is the new 55.  It’s definitely good to be Woody at the moment.

“Jasmine,” however, isn’t just the Cate and Woody show.  It features yet another great ensemble highlighted by the seemingly still underrated Sally Hawkins, a scene-stealing Louis C.K., a purposely understated Alec Baldwin, a nicely low key Peter Sarsgaard, an at the top of his game Bobby Cannavale and, the biggest surprise of all, Andrew Dice Clay who is pretty much the emotional center of the flick.  In our business it’s rare we get the chance to share our conversations with the film’s talent after the film’s release (most studios want the coverage beforehand), but “Jasmine’s” late LA press day allowed me to hold them a bit.  With the film now in 50 theaters across the country, there’s a good chance you’ve already seen it and you may be enlightened by what two members of the ensemble had to say about the project.*

*Blanchett was not available this go around. Hoping the strategy is to hold her until awards season when she’ll need to be a staple on the LA/NY circuit.

I’d never been a fan of Andrew Dice Clay’s comedy and can barely remember seeing him out of character on the CBS series “Wiseguy” back in the day.  But, he’s one of the best parts of “Jasmine” and its clear from our discussion (embedded at the top of this post) he knew how significant this opportunity this was.  And, as with most actors in Woody Allen films, the director wasn’t as helpful as you might think providing more details about his character.

“He said things like he’s a wife beater. He’s a drunk. And it actually wound up being none of that,” Dice Clay says laughing. “[His  background] wasn’t in the lines. It wasn’t in the actions. But I feel Woody’s casting is how he directs the actor also.”

Sarsgaard, on the other hand, has always been an odd interview. Even for some of his best work such as “An Education” he hasn’t always had that much interesting to say. Perhaps I caught him on a good day, perhaps the critical lauds of “Jasmine” were finally sinking in (like Dice Clay he also only saw his own sides during the production), but he was the most relaxed and upbeat I’ve ever seen him.  Sarsgaard took the role because it required little shooting time over a summer his wife, Maggie Gyllenhaal, was due to deliver their second child. Like Clay, he had to piece the movie’s storyline together in his own head.

“I had a feeling after we finished I thought, ‘She seems nuts. She’s having some sort of big crisis in her life.’ People ask how you play the character [and] I saw that I proposed marriage to someone that there isn’t a big love scene,” Sarsgaard says. “This isn’t a true love love story. I see that because I drop her off on the side of the road.”

Sarsgaard adds, “It’s interesting to root for a character for the shallow bullshit back in her life just so she’ll be happy. It’s not like you root for her to be with Andrew Dice Clay, but he’s the most soulful, genuine person in the movie.”

You can find more on Sarsgaard’s thoughts on the picture in the video embedded here.

If you’re a fan of “Blue Jasmine” they are two quick conversations that are incredibly enlightening on how Allen’s magic – sometimes – comes together.

“Blue Jasmine” is now playing in limited release.

For whatever reason, a lot of elements have combined lately to make me think of Terrence Malick’s “Badlands.” It’s never an unwelcome thought, of course: Malick’s debut feature, which somewhat unbelievably celebrates its 40th anniversary this year, remains his coolest and crispest work. That’s not necessarily to say it’s his best, but this portrait of a kid couple’s Midwestern massacre retains a bare, bony lyricism that cuts as close today as it must have in 1973; it’s at once his oldest and youngest film.

Attuned audiences will surely detect its influence (along with that of Altman’s contemporary, comparable “Thieves Like Us”) when David Lowery’s festival hit “Ain’t Them Bodies Saints” hits US theaters next week. Writing about the film from Sundance, I described it as something of a spiritual sequel to “Badlands”: following the grim fortunes of a young criminal couple after they’ve been apprehended, it’s a bleak study in elusive redemption that, I wrote, is “enough to make you wonder if Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow were better off preserving their love in a hail of bullets.” (Coincidentally — or perhaps not? — “Badlands” has been also been programmed in London’s annual Summer Screen festival this month. No better time to check it out.)

Today, however, I found myself thinking of “Badlands” for sadder, rather more lurid reasons, as the recent misfortunes of Caril Ann Clair hit the headlines. If you haven’t heard of her, Malick’s film wouldn’t directly inform you. Names and situations were altered, but the film was loosely based on the story of Clair (née Fugate), the youngest woman in US history to be tried for murder; in 1958, aged 14, she accompanied her 25-year-old boyfriend Charles Starkweather on a cross-country crime spree that claimed 10 lives, including those of her mother, stepfather and baby sister. It’s still not known how many, if any, of the murders she committed herself — Clair maintains her innocence to this day — though she served 18 years in prison for her involvement.

It was an unhappy beginning to an adult life that took another tragic turn on Monday, as the 70-year-old Clair was injured in a single-vehicle crash in Michigan that killed her husband of six years, Frederick. On the one hand, it’s a contained misfortune that wouldn’t be in the news at all if it weren’t for her salacious past, and it’s surely vulgar to examine it at any kind of symbolic level. Life-versus-art statements would be similarly tenuous: “Badlands” wasn’t even directly about her, after all, though her story has inspired a couple of less notable biopics.

Yet the story still rattles me somewhat, if only because it makes me contemplate the way we alternately preserve or extend film narratives in our memories; the way we allow some particularly vivid or affecting characters to carry on in hypothetical lives, and are happy to cut off others where the film leaves them, in permanent, uncertain stasis.

For me, Sissy Spacek’s Holly Sargis in “Badlands,” a piercing blank slate of a characterization, falls in the latter category. The film ends with her receiving probation, her life rather unprepossessingly before her, but I could never imagine where she’d go or who she’d be from there; Spacek’s performance, perhaps, is so unnervingly still that it’s easier to see her never growing up, never leaving that brink. And since I’d never thought to look up Clair’s subsequent movements, that wasn’t a difficult impression to sustain. Monday’s news, and the background biography that comes with it, paints a different narrative. So, if only in my idiosyncratic interpretation, does “Ain’t Them Bodies Saints.” Holly stays safely, if unhappily, frozen in fiction.

I’m not sure where I was planning to go with this, but it was on my mind. Best hand over to The Boss, then.

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwcOhOv4fho?rel=0&w=640&h=480]

I was thinking recently about something that really agitates me when it comes to the awards season, which is this notion that certain accomplishments are instinctively relegated to the “indie” bin of the Independent Spirit Awards or the Gotham Awards, like some ghetto of would-be Oscar contenders.

Every season when I have conversations with publicists and journalists about what’s in the mix for awards, I tend to mention things like, oh, Elizabeth Olsen in “Martha Marcy May Marlene,” or Woody Harrelson in “Rampart,” to name a couple of examples. “Yeah but that’s just Indie Spirits,” someone will reply. And it bugs the ever-loving crap out of me.

I don’t want to come off foolishly idealistic because we all know what’s what, but why does it HAVE to be? Why can’t that spotlight be shone? Why instinctively compartmentalize the season like that and not allow it to breathe a bit? I think we’ve always tried to be inclusive in our coverage rather than exclusive. Even if it’s clear something isn’t going to happen for this or that hopeful, we make it clear when they deserve to be in the ring. But others are far too quick to marginalize.

This year it’s already happening. “‘Frances Ha’ is too small.” Too small to be recognized as fantastic? Too small to give Greta Gerwig a deserved boost into the season by having the decency to include her with the wealth of other contenders that we haven’t even SEEN?

“‘Before Midnight’ is too small.” Too small to recognize that Julie Delpy’s work across three films eclipses most of the Best Actress winners of the last decade? Too small to take note of the fact that Richard Linklater’s achievement with his collaborating writer/actors is the kind of vibrant elixir that truly keeps cinema alive while others are chasing formula?

Brie Larson gives one of the most natural, organic and convincing performances of the year in festival darling “Short Term 12.” How do you square that with a dismissive, “Oh, that’s for the Spirits?”

Of course, it doesn’t help that the shifting goal posts of ceremonies like the Indie Spirits are allowing for dubious dominance by “indies” like “Silver Linings Playbook” or “The Descendants,” but that’s a whole other conversation.

Ben Foster in “Ain’t Them Bodies Saints.” Michael B. Jordan in “Fruitvale Station.” Tye Sheridan and Matthew McConaughey in “Mud” (and don’t get me started on the uphill climb actors like Sheridan face just because they dare to be young). Emma Watson in “The Bling Ring.” Ryan Gosling and Dane DeHaan in “The Place Beyond the Pines.” These are performances, among others, that deserve to be in the conversation, despite the odds and the money and the campaigns. And frankly, that’s just focusing on the indie film performances with the good fortune of a public profile. You could talk about someone like, say, Richmond Arquette in “This Is Martin Bonner” if you wanted to go a step deeper.

So let’s keep these players in that conversation. It is, after all, a conversation we in the media largely dictate. The job isn’t narrowing things down. The job is letting the light in.

It’s been a while since a Ridley Scott film fully delivered on its pre-release promise: disagreement lingers as to what degree of disappointment “Prometheus” was, while the likes of “Robin Hood,” “Body of Lies” and “A Good Year” languish largely unloved in his recent history. Still, given the sheer volume of talent involved, it’s hard not to get a little excited for his upcoming thriller “The Counselor” — not least because it represents the first time an original screenplay by Pulitzer Prize winner Cormac McCarthy has been filmed.

The all-star cast is also pretty mouthwatering — in more ways than one. Michael Fassbender (also due to be seen soon in “12 Years a Slave”) takes the title role of a lawyer who becomes tangled in drug trafficking, while Cameron Diaz, Penelope Cruz, Javier Bardem and Brad Pitt all feature in supporting roles. That’s an unseemly amount of hotness for one movie, if you ask me.

The trailer, released today, is a sleek, sexy affair that promises high-spec multiplex thrills. If it arguably bears a closer resemblance to the work of Scott’s late brother Tony, that’s perhaps appropriate: it was reportedly directed in his memory. The prestigious presence of McCarthy withstanding, the film doesn’t have the outward bearing of an awards contender, which is no bad thing. I’m hoping the film principally delivers as a genre piece; any further success can be taken from there. (There are whisperings, however, that Diaz, a fine actress who has been on autopilot for too long, may have a tasty opportunity here.)

The film opens Stateside on October 25. It looks unlikely to pop up in the Toronto fest, but could a NYFF date be in its future? Check out the trailer below, and share your thoughts in the comments.   

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4rTztvVx8E?rel=0&w=640&h=360]

http://players.brightcove.net/4838167533001/BkZprOmV_default/index.html?videoId=4912134605001

Spike Jonze has been firing on all cylinders since his 1999 debut “Being John Malkovich.” Every new film is cause for excitement, whether awards are in the picture or not. His is a vital voice and his latest, “Her,” promises to deliver another fresh stroke in the filmmaker’s feature career.

Starring Joaquin Phoenix as a lonely writer who develops an unlikely relationship with his newly-purchased operating system designed to meet his every need (voiced by Scarlett Johansson), I had been expecting “Her” to be an — I don’t know, something more…slight? But the new trailer for the film reveals that it’s anything but, a potential meditation on relationships and needs and, to paraphrase Amy Adams from the film, the insanity of falling in love.

We’ll see if awards are in this one’s future. Phoenix could certainly land in an already crowded Best Actor field. Adams could supplement her leading cause in “American Hustle” with a supporting bid here (does she ever slow down?). The film itself could take off. Or…it could merely be a fantastic new installment in Jonze’s canon. And that would be just fine.

Check out the new trailer above and tell us what you think.

Looks like Eastern Europe is currently leading the way in this year’s Oscar race for Best Foreign Language Film. Last week, Romania was the first country to officially submit an entry, with Berlinale Golden Bear winner “Child’s Pose.” Today, Hungary joined them with another European festival champ: “The Notebook,” which won the top prize at last month’s Karlovy Vary fest.

I’m afraid to say I missed the film there, though subsequent word on it has been highly positive. Based on an acclaimed, widely translated 1986 bestseller by Hungarian author Agota Kristof, Janosz Szasz’s film tells the story of teenage twin brothers sent to live with their cruel grandmother in the closing stages of the Second World War; as they learn to survive the terrors of war and domestic abuse alike, the story takes on the shape of dark, “Hansel and Gretel”-style fairytale.

Many might say this film is smart choice for the Oscar race, even if Variety critic Alissa Simon noted that the reportedly disturbing film “won’t win awards for congeniality.” In the past, the Academy has repeatedly favored WWII dramas in this category, as well as films about children — so one that combines the two must hit the jackpot, right?

Well, maybe and maybe not. Last year, Australia entered Cate Shortland’s German-language “Lore,” also a tough survival story with fairytale elements, set in the War’s last days and told from a teen’s perspective. Widely admired by critics, it semi-surprisingly failed to make the category’s pre-nomination shortlist; perhaps that film’s reversal of Holocaust-film convention by adopting brainwashed Nazis as its protagonists didn’t sit comfortably with some voters.

Whether Hungary is any more fortunate this year remains to be seen, though they’ve surely given themselves more of a chance than their last two submissions, worthy as they were: Bela Tarr’s imposing “The Turin Horse,” and last year’s sobering massacre study “Just the Wind.” Indeed, Hungary has a history of daring Oscar selections — most adventurously, if unwisely, they chose cult body-horror comedy “Taxidermia” in 2007 — which may explain why they haven’t scored a nomination since Istvan Szabo’s “Hanussen” in 1988. (Szabo also netted Hungary its first and only win in the category, with 1981’s “Mephisto.”)

The selection was made by a nine-film panel of Hungarian film professionals, including veteran director Peter Gardos and Oscar-nominated cinematographer Lajos Koltai. 

You can check out the trailer for “The Notebook” below. (Thanks to Hungarian reader Daniel Palinkas for the link.) What are your instincts telling you?

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-a3pso0_iUI?rel=0&w=640&h=360]

It’s a familiar situation in the film blogosphere: everyone’s mad at Harvey Weinstein, and it’s not even the Oscar season. A few hours have passed since the news broke that the business-savvy mogul, famously nicknamed “Harvey Scissorhands” in industry quarters, might be making some cuts to South Korean auteur Bong Joon-ho’s “Snowpiercer” – and already the inflamed (and inflammatory) headlines are circulating by the dozen. “Harvey thinks America is too stupid for ‘Snowpiercer,’” runs the general gist and, well, let’s calm down a little.

“Snowpiercer,” for those who haven’t heard of it, is genre expert Bong’s first English-language feature — a dystopian actioner set on a globe-crossing express train, with a starry cast including Chris Evans, Tilda Swinton, Jamie Bell, Octavia Spencer and Ed Harris. Already a smash in iits home country, early reviews (led by a Variety rave from Scott Foundas) have been highly encouraging, giving the Weinsteins every reason to feel bullish about the film as it readies for the international market.

Well, with some adjustments. Word is out — via Inside Film reporter Don Groves — that The Weinstein Company wants around 20 minutes cut from the 126-minute film before it faces English-speaking audiences. Groves quotes Tony Rayns, a festival programmer and Asian film specialist, as saying: 

“TWC people have told Bong that their aim is to make sure the film ‘will be understood by audiences in Iowa … and Oklahoma.’ Leaving aside the issue of what Weinstein thinks of its audience, it seems to say the least anomalous that the rest of the English-speaking world has to be dragged down to the presumed level of American midwest hicks.”

Those are some tangy statements there, and it’s not surprising that they’re being liberally quoted around the internet as supposed proof of Weinstein’s craven commercial instincts and contempt for audiences. But — and forgive me for pointing out the obvious — none of these words are actually Weinstein’s. Rayns is a passionate critic and a loyal auteurist, so it’s not surprising that he’s aggrieved by the prospect of cutting Bong’s work, but his words seem heavily colored by anger and protectiveness. Weinstein may be concerned about the film’s global accessibility, but that’s not to say he’s on a “dumbing down” mission. 

“Snowpiercer” is, of course, far from the first film to which the Weinsteins have proposed a little tweaking before their international release: Zhang Yimou’s Oscar-nominated “Hero” and Hayao Miyazaki’s “Princess Mononoke” are among the Asian titles to have received that treatment, while this year, Wong Kar-Wai’s “The Grandmaster” underwent some similar pruning. (Lest you think he only gets scissor-happy with foreign-language fare, David Lowery’s “Ain’t Them Bodies Saints” is another recent festival film that heeded the Weinsteins’ editorial advice.)

Is he out of line, or is he acting in the film’s best interests? Well, without having seen the film, it’s impossible to say. The purist stance that no distributor should demand cuts to a director’s finished work is an easy one to take — but positive early reviews and domestic box office don’t automatically render a film beyond reproach. Weinstein’s career has been built on a keen, if hardly infallible, sense of how audiences respond to a work in different contexts — that’s what makes him such an effective Oscar campaigner, after all. 

Anne Thompson makes the worthwhile point that the Weinsteins might have done well to program the film — in its original cut — at a North American festival like Toronto, to gauge audience reaction before settling on the necessary edits. That doesn’t seem to be on the cards at this stage, but there’s surely more to this story than the indignation of a righteous critic — including the as-yet-unclear response of Bong himself. In the meantime, I look forward to seeig the film in its most flattering form possible.

http://players.brightcove.net/4838167533001/BkZprOmV_default/index.html?videoId=4912108400001

It’s been a while since I giggled through a trailer like this. But then, of course, the sadness that hits when you think of James Gandolfini, gone. Sigh…

Nicole Holofcener’s “Enough Said” is set for a premiere at the Toronto Film Festival next month and looks to be a light romp for Fox Searchlight to play with this season. Globe potential? Maybe more? We’ll see how it lands, but the trailer establishes it as something fun to take the edge off as the “serious” months knock on our door.

It’s also Julia Louis-Dreyfus’ first on-camera performance in a film since 1997’s “Deconstructing Harry” (she’s offered her voice to animation here and there since). A Holofcener pairing seems like a perfect one.

Check out the new trailer, courtesy of Apple, above.