By any measure, Christopher Doyle is one of the greatest cinematographers in the business, a painter of light whose career will always be defined by his woozily gorgeous collaborations with Wong Kar-wai (“In the Mood for Love,” “2046”), but who has also done remarkable work for such auteurs as Zhang Yimou (“Hero”), Gus van Sant (“Paranoid Park”) and Jim Jarmusch (“The Limits of Control”).

But while the Australian-born artist has been showered awards by everyone from US critics’ groups to the Cannes Film Festival, he has never been nominated by the Academy’s cinematographers’ branch. And that looks unlikely to change after Doyle’s candid, foul-mouthed tirade against the Academy in a recent interview, in which he makes no bones about what he thinks of Claudia Miranda’s recent Oscar win for “Life of Pi”: “It’s a f–king insult to cinematography.”

Doyle is far from the first person to suggest that Miranda’s digitally enhanced work on Ang Lee’s waterborne fantasy is arguably more a triumph of visual effects than of cinematography: the same complaints surrounded Mauro Fiore’s Oscar win for “Avatar” three years ago. But nobody in the industry has expressed an opinion on the matter quite as emphatically as Doyle, in this interview with Asian arts site Blouin:

“Since 97 per cent of the film is not under his control, what the f–k are you talking about cinematography … What it says to the real world is it”s all about us, we have the money, we put the money in, and we control the image … Are you f–king kidding? That”s not cinematography. That”s control of the image by the powers that be, by the people that want to control the whole system because they”re all accounts. You”ve lost cinema.

Of course [AMPAS] have no f–king idea what cinematography is. The lunatics have taken over the asylum … The award is given to the technicians, to the producers, it”s not to the cinematographer … If somebody manipulated my image that much, I wouldn”t even turn up. Because sorry, cinematography? Really?”

It’s an extreme stance, weakened by Doyle’s admission that he hasn’t actually seen “Life of Pi” in full, and obviously an over-simplified one: for all the digital input, the film’s framing, palette and camera movement plainly didn’t come about by accident, and I’m not going to presume to know Miranda’s exact degree of complicity in a sophisticated technical process. (I wouldn’t have nominated “Life of Pi” either, but less because the film doesn’t meet my definition of cinematography than because I didn’t find the final result all that aesthetically attractive.)

Still, it’s interesting that an expert peer like Doyle should take something of a layman’s view on his own craft, though he’s far from the only cinematographer to do so. (It’s worth noting, after all, that while the Academy has opted for such FX-integrating 3D achievements as “Avatar,” “Hugo” and “Pi” in recent years, the American Society of Cinematographers has chosen differently — and somewhat more traditionally — in each case, preferring “The White Ribbon,” “The Tree of Life” and “Skyfall,” respectively.)

Cinematography is an evolving art form, obviously, and it just be that it’s splintering into multiple, very distinct disciplines: in terms of technical process, there’s obviously a vast difference between the painstaking, hand-induced light play performed by Doyle on, say, “In the Mood for Love” and Miranda’s more synthetically constructed imagery — or, indeed, Roger Deakins’ deceptively traditional-looking digital lensing on “Skyfall.”

That “Pi” and “Skyfall” were nominated for the Oscar alongside three 35mm achievements shows just what a state of flux the cinematography world is currently in. Could it be that one cinematography award simply isn’t enough to represent the form any more? After all, from 1939 to 1966, the Academy had separate Oscars for black-and-white and color cinematography: It’s not inconceivable that we might one day see separate awards for films with differing degrees of digital manipulation. If so, where might the line be drawn?

Do you agree with Doyle, or is he speaking out of turn? Would you have given the Oscar to “Life of Pi?” Tell us in the comments.

A bit of a bombshell on the cineaste set recently when Steven Spielberg announced plans to transform Stanley Kubrick’s massive, unfilmed Napoleon biopic into a television miniseries. Last week, Hollywood Reporter film critic Todd McCarthy humbly suggested seven filmmakers to take up the reins on the project, should Spielberg opt out of directing it himself.

The names McCarthy suggested weren’t in and of themselves bad ideas: David Fincher, Paul Thomas Anderson, Martin Scorsese, Kathryn Bigelow, Ridley Scott, Christopher Nolan and Peter Weir. No one is going to argue that each and every one of them is talented and up to the challenge. But there was an overly wish-listy quality to the list, not all that reasonable, really.

Not only that, those are some disparate voices that probably wouldn’t work in a single boat. A miniseries like this, if farmed out to other talent and not placed on one filmmaker’s shoulders, would obviously need to find an organic rhythm across a spectrum of voices.

Of the list, I thought only Weir seemed plausible and, really, suitable. No one wants to end up mimicking Kubrick here but it would be nice if the filmmaker’s sensibilities were reflected. Nolan and Anderson have had sometimes dubious parallels drawn to the filmmaker, but on the whole, this A-list just feels like something we’d LIKE to see, but surely won’t.

But it’s a great jumping off point, so I reached out to HitFix’s Greg Ellwood and Guy Lodge to help cook up an alternative list. Additionally, given that we’re exploring a project set for TV, I asked our own Dan Fienberg for his suggestions on that front as well, and the result is a collective of 20 names that we’d like to humbly submit for consideration, again, if indeed Spielberg would prefer to produce while handing the directorial duties off to others.

Some names that didn’t make the list but were mulled over include Darren Aronofsky, Susanne Bier, Sofia Coppola, Walter Hill and James Marsh. I’d personally stump for Weir and MAYBE Anderson from McCarthy’s list, but there’s also one other filmmaker he mentioned “whose work is just as exacting and chilly as Kubrick’s and who is probably his intellectual equal: Michael Haneke.” I’d be on board for that, too.

Anyway, click through the gallery below to see which film and television directors we’d like to see considered. And feel free to offer up your own suggestions in the comments section as well!

Just to get this out of the way, no, this isn’t likely to happen in any universe. But bear with me…

I caught up with Harmony Korine’s “Spring Breakers” earlier this week and was as fascinated by it, as I imagine most viewers (even detractors) are. The interesting thing to me, while finally sifting through the film’s reviews that landed out of the Venice and Toronto film festivals last year, was that everyone, lover or hater, definitely saw the same film. The question is who was able to buy it as satire and who wasn’t, and even more, who was willing to buy it as willful satire.

“It’s a line this frequently amusing film never negotiates with complete success,” Guy wrote in his Variety review out of Venice, “though Korine might believe this ambiguity is itself indicative of the generation under scrutiny.” I’ll put a chip on the latter consideration and just say I went with it, for the most part. I think it’s a rather potent study of “spring break” as a state of mind, the desperate race for greener pastures that grows like a fungus in small town America. Korine has always dabbled in the disenchantment of youth, so what he was saying with this film, I bought it.

Formally, it’s a bit of a wonder, actually. DP Benoît Debie and film editor Douglas Crise deserve commendation as it’s a dreamy tapestry that bores down, at once seductive and repugnant: a nice distillation of the theme, I’d say. The sound design is equally enchanting.

In so many words, I think “Spring Breakers” is one of the year’s best films so far, but I won’t take umbrage with anyone who finds that it’s an abrasive exercise that misses its mark. What I’d like to talk about, though, is James Franco, who walks a razor’s edge with his performance as Alien, a St. Petersburg, Florida white boy thug who represents a sickening sort of exoticism for the story’s bikini-clad beach bunnies.

First of all, this guy — Franco — obviously can’t sit still. He’s working so much lately that you can’t help but be in awe, and whether you like the bulk of the work or not, you have to respect the ethic. If he hits a snag, doesn’t matter, chalk it up and keep rolling. Sometimes it’s a woeful misfire, sometimes it’s a freakin’ Oscar nomination. The drive is hugely inspiring.

Here, he carves out a character modeled on South Florida rapper Dangeruss (though Houston-grown nightmare RiFF RaFF sure would like to take the credit — the look of the character has obvious parallels). He’s as magnetic as he is repulsive, which, again, plays into theme. He also has a soft sort of core that I think few critics are bothering to investigate.

There’s a sense of loss in Alien, a longing buried deep in his “Look at my sheeit!” fronting. It’s no wonder he proclaims, believably, that the film’s anti-heroines are his soul mates: they’re as full of loss and longing as he is. These people have holes they’re looking to fill (um…no pun intended). Some are equipped with the emotional wherewithal to seek it out in the right places, others aren’t. But what are the right places, really?

The point is, Franco negotiates a spirited character amid all that blacklit gaudiness. And I think he deserves awards attention for what he’s accomplished. Charismatic portrayals that could have been mere ciphers have tickled the season’s fancy in the past, from Ned Beatty in “Network” to Kevin Kline in “A Fish Called Wanda” to Robert Downey Jr. in “Tropic Thunder” and Heath Ledger in “The Dark Knight.” Why not Franco?

The answer, obviously, is that most viewers likely won’t be willing to see Alien beyond his cornrows, guns and tats, but I like what I saw. I like the pulse Franco found. And I’d like for others to see the same.

Or maybe I’ll just be alone on this one.

“Spring Breakers” opens in limited release tomorrow. It goes wide on March 22.

Some of you might remember that, going on two years ago, Kris and I were big champions of “Martha Marcy May Marlene,” a confidently disquieting, much-laurelled debut feature from Sean Durkin that also marked a significant step forward for BorderLine Films, the independent production company set up by Durkin with filmmaker pals Antonio Campos and Josh Mond.

With just a handful of acclaimed features and shorts to its name, BorderLine is a small outfit, but one that’s already built a strong brand in the independent sphere. That achievement is due to be recognized at the Karlovy Vary Film Festival in the Czech Republic this summer, where the New York-based company will be honored with the first-ever complete restrospective of its work — only eight years after it announced itself with Campos’s 2005 short “Buy It Now.”

“Martha Marcy May Marlene” wasn’t the company’s first feature: that distinction goes to Campos’s “Afterschool,” a formally risky, calculatedly claustrophobic study of high-school alienation that won considerable praise on the festival circuit and a home at IFC Films, but never came out from under the radar. Their next feature, Alistair Banks Griffin’s languid but affecting family drama “Two Gates of Sleep” kept, if anything, an even lower profile, trickling onto New York screens in 2011, a few months after the Fox Searchlight-distributed “Martha” gave BorderLine its first real arthouse success story in Sundance, where it won Best Director for Durkin.

Since then, we’ve had Campos’s controversial “Simon Killer,” an arrestingly stylish portrait of a sociopath that caused a stir at Sundance last year, and is finally making its way into theaters next month. (Its star, Brady Corbet, is something of a totem for BorderLine, having also starred in “Two Gates of Sleep” and “Martha Marcy May Marlene,” as well as a couple of their shorts.)

All these films, plus their remaining shorts (including Durkin’s striking “Martha” blueprint “Mary Last Seen”) will be featured in the Karlovy Vary tribute — titled, obviously enough, “BorderLine Films: The First Ten Years.” Furthermore, Durkin, Campos and Mond will each select and screen a favorite film (not one theirs, of course) from past editions of the fest, and will teach a master class accompanied by regular BorderLine actors and associates.

It’s a suitably hip choice of retrospective for the long-running, independent-spirited European festival, now in its 48th year and among the most prestigious of the smaller European fests. I attended last year and hope to revisit this summer. Campos, Durkin and Mond offer this statement in response:

“We are truly humbled by this honor. As a company, we have spent the past 10 years making films we believe in and working with the people we love. We never stop creating and moving forward, but we are excited to take this week in Karlovy Vary to look back on the work with many of our collaborators/ extended family and to share the films with a new audience.”

NEW YORK – It’s fitting that Nora Ephron’s swan song, the play “Lucky Guy,” calls the Broadhurst Theatre on West 44th Street home. The venue, which has played host to productions of Agatha Christie’s “Ten Little Indians,” Neil Simon’s “The Sunshine Boys,” Peter Shaffer’s “Amadeus” and Arthur Miller’s “Death of a Salesman” over its century-long history, sits around the corner from the old New York Times Building that housed the operations of the Gray Lady for 94 years. And Ephron’s play, while an account of the rise, fall and vindication of New York journalist Mike McAlary, is just as much a celebration of the profession the author, filmmaker and playwright once called her own.

The production is also Tom Hanks’s Broadway debut, indeed, his first foray into theater since a (literal) college try over 30 years ago. And the rare air of a $1.1 million week of previews (fourth only to massive musicals “The Book of Mormon,” “The Lion King” and “Wicked”) owes plenty to that fact, hordes of people crowding around the theatre exit and across the street in front of the Helen Hayes Theatre to catch a glimpse of the star after each show. It’s the perfect project for someone of his stature, a lovely ode to his co-collaborator on the films “Sleepless in Seattle” and “You’ve Got Mail” and perhaps the best thing the late Ephron ever wrote.

The piece was originally conceived as a teleplay for HBO over a decade ago, but Ephron could never reconcile her chosen device of telling McAlary’s story through the recollections of colleagues. But it’s a perfect fit on the stage, Hanks, Maura Tierney, Courtney B. Vance, Christopher McDonald and Hanks’s old “Bosom Buddies” co-star Peter Scolari (among others) breaking the fourth wall and addressing the audience throughout. But when Ephron revisited it with the stage in mind a few years ago, she had something else to bring to it: an intimate knowledge of staring death in the face, as McAlary did when diagnosed with colon cancer in 1997.

Ephron, who died in June of 2012 from pneumonia complicated by the acute myeloid leukemia with which she had been diagnosed in 2006, never knew McAlary herself, but she certainly knew his ilk. She was a reporter herself at the New York Post in the early-1960s and married Watergate journalist Carl Bernstein not long after he and his Washington Post colleague Bob Woodward broke perhaps the biggest story of the 20th Century. She even had a hand in an unused rewrite of William Goldman’s draft of “All the President’s Men,” which led to her career as a screenwriter.

Finally getting around to it, McAlary’s story is rather epic. Beginning as an upstart shoe-leather beat reporter eager to hit the pavement and land scoops, he rose through the ranks of the New York news world in the crack-addled late-1980s. Inspired by titans of the trade such as Jimmy Breslin, he broke story after story of police corruption in the city, among other things, before becoming one of the highest paid journalists in the country in 1993 with a lucrative New York Post contract that brought him nearly $1 million over three years. Other publications like the New York Daily News and Newsday were bidding for the guy; his stuff was that good. And, similar to Ephron’s early dabbling in screenwriting, his novelization of the screenplay “Copland” — which he wrote in order to inject some truth into a narrative he found intriguing — reportedly caused some tweaking of the finished product. (For a more thorough primer, Broadway.com has a list of 10 things you should know about him.)

McAlary was a mensch, by all accounts. But there was a nebulous quality that the play attempts to reconcile with the various recollections from colleagues (and which a 2011 Off-Broadway play, “The Wood,” tried to address as well). To get to such a place, particularly in the world of journalism, you have to be dogged. You have to have ambition and an eye out for number one. Ephron’s work on the page goes there somewhat. The problem is Hanks’s performance never really does. At least personally speaking, it never allows you to dislike him when you probably ought to. It might be because he’s been such a beacon of decency on the screen for decades, but it also just seems like something the actor isn’t fully capable of achieving. Things obviously may be tweaked before the official opening. Either way, it’s not detrimental. Maybe it just doesn’t translate in the broader strokes of theater.

With that in mind, there is absolutely a movie in this yarn, as Ephron originally intended it. McAlary’s story, which at one point finds itself soaked in elements of disgrace as he suffers a near-fatal (alcohol-influenced) automobile accident and, perhaps worse, writes a story refuting a rape claim based on what turned out to be bad information from his police sources, is intriguing when seen in the abstract as a metaphor for the profession he held so dear.

What is the state journalism today? Has the Internet brought it to a pandering place of infotainment, ethics ever flirting with slippery slopes? Or do its glory years still lie ahead, the free flow of information demanding stewards of fact more than ever? Perhaps its darkest modern hour came all too recently when shoddy reporting led, this very month 10 years ago, to a manufactured “war” in Iraq, nadir to any zenith Woodward and Bernstein might have reached nearly three decades prior. There are themes to play with in McAlary’s rise-fall-rise story that could be profound in that light. In short, the material has a shot at landing in the pantheon of dramatic realizations of the form, from Sidney Lumet’s “Network” to Michael Mann’s “The Insider,” Alfred Hitchcock’s “Foreign Correspondent” to Billy Wilder’s “Ace in the Hole,” the aforementioned “All the President’s Men” to Billy Ray’s “Shattered Glass.”

In a recent interview with The New York Times, Hanks admitted that a movie version is still possible. With these kinds of receipts coming in for the Broadway production, one could probably bank on it.

McAlary’s story, at least, ended on a happy note. He earned a Pulitzer Prize in 1998 for his exclusive reporting on the wrongful arrest, savage beating and forced sodomizing of Haitian club-goer Abner Louima (portrayed briefly but powerfully by actor Stephen Tyrone Williams in “Lucky Guy”). It was a story he broke and continued to report while undergoing aggressive chemotherapy. It was a tough time for him to be tackling such a thing, but, in so many words, it was his job.

It also recalls Ephron’s intense work ethic in her waning years, during which only a close circle of friends and family knew of her condition. Writing in The New York Times Magazine about his mother, Jacob Bernstein reflected on that intriguing connection. I’ll close on his words, and leave you with this from me: “Lucky Guy” is a beautiful remembrance of a hard worker. It’s a poignant tale of ambition. It’s a profound study of a vital profession. But it is, above all, a declaration: Do the job that demands to be done.

Writes Bernstein:

“In the play my mother wrote, there”s a scene toward the end, in which McAlary, sick with cancer, goes to the Poconos to visit his friend Jim Dwyer, then a columnist at The Daily News. It”s a glorious summer day, and McAlary”s 12-year-old son, Ryan, wants to do a flip off the diving board, but he gets scared and can”t do it. So McAlary takes off his shirt, walks to the edge of the diving board and says to him: ‘When you do these things, you can”t be nervous. If you think about what can go wrong, if you think about the belly flop, that”s what”ll happen.’

“And then McAlary does the flip himself and makes a perfect landing.

“It”s a metaphor, obviously, for his view about life. And I”ve come to think it might as well have been about my mother. The point is that you don”t let fear invade your psyche. Because then you might as well be dead.

“As she saw him, McAlary was a role model not so much in life, but in death, in the way that he used writing to maintain his sense of purpose and find release from his illness. In the six years my mother had MDS, she wrote 100 blog posts, two books and two plays and directed a movie. There was nothing she could do about her death but to keep going in the face of it. Work was its own kind of medicine, even if it could not save her…”

“Lucky Guy” is currently in previews at the Broadhurst Theatre in New York. It opens April 1 and will run through June 16. And if you’re able, you should absolutely see it.

Comedian Jerrod Carmichael hosted the 2013 South by Southwest (SXSW) Film Conference and Festival’s jury and special awards ceremony tonight in Austin, Texas. Desin Daniel Cretton’s “Short Term 12” and Ben Nabors’s “William and the Windmill” took top honors in the narrative and documentary feature fields respectively.

Audience awards will be presented Saturday, March 16. The fest runs through Sunday, March 17.

Check out the full list of winners below.

“We start each year anew, never knowing what’s ahead,” said Film Conference and Festival Producer Janet Pierson via press release. “We fall in love with the films as we program, but they truly come alive in front of our audience, and the feedback for the entire program this year has been so enthusiastic and rewarding. We know the juries had a tough job, but are grateful for their commitment to the task. We’re thrilled with the quality of the work recognized.”

Feature Film Jury Awards

DOCUMENTARY FEATURE COMPETITION

Grand Jury Winner: “William and the Windmill”
Director: Ben Nabors

Special Jury Recognition for Cinematography: “Touba”
Director of Photography: Scott Duncan

Special Jury Recognition for Directing: “We Always Lie To Strangers”
Directors: AJ Schnack & David Wilson

NARRATIVE FEATURE COMPETITION

Grand Jury Winner: “Short Term 12”
Director: Destin Daniel Cretton

Special Jury Recognition for Ensemble Cast: “Burma”
Christopher Abbott
Gaby Hoffmann
Christopher McCann
Dan Bittner
Emily Fleischer
Jacinta Puga
Matt McCarthy
Kelly Aucoin

Special Jury Recognition for Acting: Tishuan Scott, “The Retrieval”

Short Film Jury Awards

NARRATIVE SHORTS
Winner: “Ellen is Leaving”
Director: Michelle Savill

Honorable Mention: “Sequin Raze”
Director: Sarah Gertrude Shapiro

Honorable Mention: “SKIN”
Director: Jordana Spiro

DOCUMENTARY SHORTS
Winner: “SLOMO”
Director: Josh Izenberg

MIDNIGHT SHORTS
Winner: “The Apocalypse”
Directors: Andrew Zuchero

ANIMATED SHORTS
Winner: “Oh Willy…”
Director: Emma De Swaef & Marc James Roels

MUSIC VIDEOS
Winner: Vitalic, “Stamina”
Director: Saman Keshavarz

TEXAS HIGH SCHOOL SHORTS
Winner: “The Benfactress”
Director: Alina Vega

SXSW Film Design Awards

EXCELLENCE IN POSTER DESIGN
Winner: “Kiss of the Damned”
Designer: Akiko Stehrenberger, Gravillis Inc

Special Jury Recognition: “We Always Lie To Strangers”
Designer: Erik Buckham, PALACEWORKS

EXCELLENCE IN TITLE DESIGN
Winner: “Joven & Alocada”
Designer: Pablo González, Fabula

Special Jury Recognition: “Crave”
Designer: Raleigh Stewart, Iron Helmet

SXSW Special Awards

SXSW CHICKEN & EGG EMERGENT NARRATIVE WOMAN DIRECTOR AWARD
Winner: Hannah Fidell, “A Teacher”

Special Mention: Katie Graham, “Zero Charisma”

LOUIS BLACK “LONE STAR” AWARD
Winner: “Loves Her Gun”
Director: Geoff Marslett

KAREN SCHMEER FILM EDITING FELLOWSHIP
Presented to: Jim Hession

A collective sigh may have been heard at many a viewing party a couple of weekends ago, when the Academy handed the Best Animated Feature Oscar to the conventional comforts of Pixar’s “Brave” over the zappy multimedia invention of “Wreck-It Ralph,” or the scrappy postmodernism of Tim Burton’s “Frankenweenie.” But it was easy enough to see what voters were going for: in a field thick with bristly new textures, the gentle, old-fashioned storytelling and comparative visual serenity of the Highland fairytale was that much more reassuring an option.

Not among the nominees, though it was on the category’s shortlist, was “From Up on Poppy Hill” — the latest from animation stalwarts Studio Ghibli. Only twice in the 12-year history of the animated feature Oscar has one of their films made the cut, yet Ghibli occupies a comparably elevated position to Pixar in the imaginations of animation enthusiasts. In an age where crude computer-animated money-grabbers are a dime a dozen, they’re a trusted brand that stands for wholesome, attentive storytelling, meticulous artistry and genuine wonder.

Ghibli is the handmade arthouse alternative where Pixar is the state-of-the-art multiplex titan, but both are seen as the standard bearers — small wonder that both companies have strong ties to Disney. (And, indeed, to each other — it was Pixar head John Lasseter, after all, who spearheaded the English-language version of Ghibli’s Oscar-winning phenomenon “Spirited Away” back in 2001.)

“From Up on Poppy Hill” finally hits US screens this Friday, nearly two years after bowing in Japan — given the vagaries of distribution and translation, Studio Ghibli’s films have a history of protracted travel. A mellow period piece following two high school students as they defy the authorities to defend their clubhouse, it’s a low-key work from a company best known for more extravagant, though equally pure-hearted, fantasies — many of them stemming from the imagination of veteran animation master Hayao Miyazaki (who is, indeed, a screenwriter on “Poppy Hill”).

The film’s release seemed as good an occasion as any to celebrate the still-flourishing creativity of Studio Ghibli with a Top 10 list, taking into account their gentlest, most kid-friendly work (“My Neighbor Totoro”), the sophisticated cross-generational fantasy of, say, “Princess Mononoke,” and their more recent melting-pot adaptations of Anglocentric fantasy (“Arrietty,” “Howl’s Moving Castle”).

Side note: As I look down the 10 Studio Ghibli favorites that I’ve assembled in the gallery below, however, I realize how much home video and DVD have been responsible for planting the Studio Ghibli library in the popular imagination: everything here is pure cinema, yet I regret how few titles here I’ve had a chance to see on the format they deserve. Alternative animation house GKIDS took over from Disney as Studio Ghibli’s US distribution ally in 2011, acquiring the theatrical rights to 14 of their titles — “Grave of the Fireflies” is due for a 25th anniversary re-release later this year, but let’s hope there’s more of that to come.

Meanwhile, check out my top 10 Studio Ghibli films in the gallery below, and chime in with your own in the comments. What’s missing? What are you most pleased to see? And which are you keen to catch up with?

When we laid out a slew of contenders for next year’s Oscar season recently, we left off David O. Russell’s currently untitled project revolving around the FBI’s ABSCAM public corruption investigation of the 1970s and early 1980s. The reason was we weren’t quite sure the film would make it out in time. Turns out, at least for now, that it will.

Sony Pictures has slated the film, formerly titled “American Bullshit,” for a December 13 limited release and a wide release on Christmas Day. The project reunites Russell with “Silver Linings Playbook” stars Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence, as well as “The Fighter” stars Christian Bale and Amy Adams with a little Jeremy Renner and Louis CK thrown in for good measure.

Sony has a full slate this year, from this to Bennett Miller’s “Foxcatcher” to George Clooney’s “The Monuments Men” to Paul Greengrass’s “Captain Phillips.” All are heavy-hitting films with stars and will demand a less ham-fisted approach than was offered to “Zero Dark Thirty” last season, that’s for sure.

If you missed that recent look ahead to the next season’s potential hopefuls, click through the gallery below.

When Warner Bros’ announced last year that they were shifting Baz Luhrmann’s lavish 3D interpretation of “The Great Gatsby” from Christmas 2012 to an early summer release date, my first thought was that a Cannes date had to be on the cards. Then, when the film’s US release date was nailed down as May 10, five days before the festival begins, I was both puzzled and doubtful: with US projects of that magnitude, Cannes tends to secure the world premiere.

Turns out I overthought things, and that my initial instinct was correct. “The Great Gatsby” has been selected as the curtain-raiser for this year’s Cannes Film Festival, 12 years after Luhrmann’s “Moulin Rouge!” performed the same duty.

Cannes may not have got a world premiere this time out — unlike such recent A-list openers as “Up,” “Moonrise Kingdom” and “Midnight in Paris” — but it’s a felicitous choice all the same. As well as assuring them a customarily starry red-carpet kickoff, with Leonardo DiCaprio, Carey Mulligan and Tobey Maguire presumably all in attendance,  it also maintains their longstanding relationship with Luhrmann: in addition to “Moulin Rouge!,” his debut feature “Strictly Ballroom” premiered in the festival’s Un Certain Regard section back in 1992.

After “Up,” it’s the second 3D film to open the festival. It will not, however, join Takashi Miike’s “Hara Kiri: Death of a Samurai” on the very short list of 3D films to have competed for the Palme d’Or. “Gatsby” is playing out of Competition, safe from the scrutiny of Steven Spielberg and his fellow jurors. That isn’t exactly a surprise — and indeed is often the case with Cannes openers, most recently with “Midnight in Paris” — though it’s worth noting that “Moulin Rouge!” braved the Competition in 2001.

The question now is whether or not Luhrmann’s risky project lives up to the pressure of the opening night slot, which is often seen as something of a poisoned chalice. From “My Blueberry Nights” to “Blindness” to “Robin Hood,” Cannes openers have missed the target more often than they’ve hit recently, but the festival reversed the curse in the last two years: “Midnight in Paris” and “Moonrise Kingdom” both found critical and audience favor (and went on to garner Oscar nominations).

Something tells me the critics will have the knives out for Luhrmann no matter what, but the film should still reap the benefits of both the prestige and the publicity that come with the slot. (It opens in France the very same day, so expect an all-out media assault.) And with the film opening in the US beforehand, Luhrmann’s team will have already faced the reviews, and can simply enjoy the Croisette razzle-dazzle. As can I: for all its intimations of folly, this remains one of my most keenly anticipated films of the year.

MIAMI – Whether it’s the brisk climes of his native Sweden or the lush comforts of rural New England, there are any number of landscapes one might associate more immediately with director Lasse Hallström than the balmy shores of Miami. Yet when I meet him, looking suitably relaxed in the retro-chic breakfast room of my hotel, he’s quick to say it’s not just Florida hospitality making him feel at home: Miami, or more specifically the Miami International Film Festival, is where the Oscar-nominated Swede, director of such films as “What’s Eating Gilbert Grape,” “Chocolat” and “Salmon Fishing in the Yemen” believes his Hollywood career actually began.

26 years ago, the Miami fest – then only in its fourth year of existence – had the savvy to grab the US premiere of “My Life as a Dog,” a modest but beguiling coming-of-age drama from Sweden from a director previously best known for steering “ABBA: The Movie.” The film grew into an unlikely arthouse smash. The director, Hallström, was rewarded not only with two Oscar nominations, but a US career that began with his very next film – and would reap another Best Director nod 12 years later for a glossier tale of innocence lost, “The Cider House Rules.” Such major festivals as Venice, Berlin and Toronto have since come calling, but Miami precedes them.

“That night, when I heard the response to ‘My Life as a Dog’ in the theater here, it was the first time I’d seen the film with an American audience,” the 66-year-old director recalls. “And it blew my mind how warm the response was. I’d thought it was very Swedish in its sensibility, but I guess it dealt with very universal emotions, and it was such a wonderful moment to have that confirmed. I realized that evening that the film would have a long journey, that things wouldn’t be the same.”

They weren’t – and some would say the change hasn’t entirely been for the better. Hallström’s Hollywood career has brought him considerable success, but never the level of critical acclaim that greeted his native breakthrough. Whether handling rose-tinted Miramax prestige fare or, more recently, misty-eyed Nicholas Sparks adaptations, the Swede has established himself in the industry as a safe but soft pair of hands. That’s an impression he’s done his best to overturn with his latest, least typical film “The Hypnotist” (review here), a grisly crime thriller that marks his first Swedish production since “Dog.” Appropriately enough, Miami again stepped forward to showcase this shift in direction.

“It does feel rather like coming full circle,” chuckles Hallström, who upped sticks permanently from Sweden to upstate New York in 1997, accompanied by his wife and compatriot, Oscar-nominated actress Lena Olin. “I’ve experienced different levels of homesickness over the years. It was worst the first five or six years. Then suddenly I rooted, and became more of an American. But I’d always been longing to go back and spend some solid time in Stockholm, where I grew up. It was heavenly just to go back and be there for more than a week. I spent half a year just getting to know the new Stockholm.”

If “The Hypnotist” is a homecoming, though, it seems simultaneously a drastic departure. As an adaptation of Lars Kepler’s bestselling psychological thriller concerning the slaughter of one family and the kidnapping crisis of another, its grim, bloody outlook is new terrain for a man more accustomed to trading in heartwarmers. Why return to Sweden with something so far outside his comfort zone?

“I’d never tried a thriller before, so I was curious to see what I could do with that,” he says matter-of-factly. “But at the core of it is a family drama that moved and intrigued me, so in a way it didn’t feel so unfamiliar to me. And it had a great part for my wife. Combined with this urge of mine to go back to Sweden, it made a lot of sense.”

Taking on a procedural thriller, meanwhile, didn’t strike Hallström as too great a stretch: “I may not have done one before, but I’ve always enjoyed jumping between different genres – and mixing genres within films. I like crossover films that balance drama with comedy: I’m less interested in solid comedies with no dramatic element, or in dramas with no sense of humor.”

Hallström’s catholic genre tastes could hardly be made clearer by the titles sandwiching “The Hypnotist” in his filmography, both polished, star-laden slabs of Hollywood escapism. Last year brought the whimsical enviro-romcom “Salmon Fishing in the Yemen,” for which Ewan McGregor and Emily Blunt recently received Golden Globe nominations. Last month, meanwhile, saw the release of “Safe Haven,” a sudsy romance that marks the director’s second Nicholas Sparks adaptation: “Dear John,” starring Channing Tatum and Amanda Seyfried, scored him a box office hit in 2010.

The Sparks double-bill hasn’t earned Hallström too many kind words from the critics, but he’s pleasingly forthright about why he made them, and for whom. “They’re commercial romances, sure, but romance still intrigues me,” he says breezily. “On ‘Safe Haven,’ I was able to play with the script a little more, though obviously it’s not a true labor of love – it’s made chiefly for commercial prospects, though that’s no reason not to challenge yourself within that.

“With ‘Dear John,’ it was trying to desentimentalize what was on the page, and make it real. That can keep me going through a project. ‘Safe Haven,’ same thing – and also to tell the progression of a romance in a very low-key tone, and not having to race through it. And bringing a sense of humor to it, which was not in the novel. So I think you can recognize my touch somewhere in there. So, as Steven Soderbergh says, I do one for them, and one for me.”

Does that make “The Hypnotist” – subtitles notwithstanding, a broadly accessible adaptation of a pop novel – one for him, then? He smiles slyly. “Okay, that one’s a bit of a combo. One for us all.”

That was clearly the hope of his compatriots, who selected the film last year as Sweden’s official entry for the Best Foreign Language Film Oscar. On the basis of name appeal, it seemed a sound choice, but the film always ran the risk of being too genre-inclined – and too gory – for fainthearted Academy voters, and it failed to make the January shortlist. Hallström was unfazed, though he senses others in the industry were disappointed in it.

“The fact that it was selected as the Swedish Oscar submission was maybe an overestimation of the picture, a little bit,” he says openly. He doesn’t think it’s a coincidence that “The Hypnotist,” despite being picked to represent the industry on such a major international platform, was entirely overlooked at Sweden’s top national film awards, the Guldbaggen. “I think as a punishment, the film was a bit under-recognized: Lena’s performance, which I think is great, was not even nominated. So I think the response to the film has maybe been a bit unfair in different ways.”

It’s one of several occasions in the interview that he doffs his cap to the talents of his wife, whom he first directed in “Chocolat” (for which she received a BAFTA nomination) but hadn’t got to showcase in a lead role until now. As the distraught mother of an abducted teen, Olin is indeed impressive, evidently secure in a collaboration Hallström describes as “not even like working – it’s just the exhilaration of spending time together and watching her flourish.”

When it comes to his own work on the film, however, he’s more critical. “It’s been a bit of an odd ride, the whole ‘Hypnotist’ journey. I like the film, but I wish we’d had one more week of fine-tuning it. We didn’t get to preview the film, which is important with such a complex plot, to see how audiences respond to it and adjust accordingly. After the Swedish premiere, I felt it needed a trim, so I took my computer, and I now have a version that’s 12 minutes shorter and I think flows better. It hasn’t premiered anywhere yet, but I hope it comes out on the DVD.”

Hallström’s so candid about his own work that I’m curious to know if there’s a title in his filmography that he feels is undervalued – one that didn’t get a fair shake from audiences, critics or both. “I think I have two of those,” he says, sounding rather pleased I asked. “One was ‘The Hoax,’ with Richard Gere, which I liked a lot, but it didn’t do much commercially. I thought it was kind of witty and fast-paced and sly, with an ironic tone to it that’s more ‘me’ than anything else I’ve made. And ‘Casanova’ was under-appreciated, I think. It’s a wild mix of bizarre comedy and romance, and Heath Ledger’s such a star in it. I know it didn’t work for everyone, but I still like that film.”

As if to prove his point, later that evening I attend a Miami Film Festival career tribute to Hallström, led by Griffin Dunne (producer of his first American feature, “Once Around”) and preceded by an extensive clip package that runs the gamut from “ABBA: The Movie” to “Salmon Fishing in the Yemen” – but features not one frame from either “The Hoax” or “Casanova.”

Next on the agenda, he says, is emphatically ‘one for him’: “It’s not official yet, so I can’t say much, but it’s a small film, very much a labor of love, and will hopefully shoot in the summer.” That’ll be an American production, but he’s not planning to wait another 26 years before returning to work in his homeland: “‘The Hypnotist’ opened a lot of doors to me coming back, so it feels more natural now.”

Hallström’s dream project, meanwhile, remains a reunion with star Leonardo DiCaprio, with whom the director worked 20 years ago on his second US film, “What’s Eating Gilbert Grape” – for which the then-teenaged DiCaprio scored his first Oscar nod.

“I have this obsession about working again with Leonardo,” he admits, almost bashfully. “He’s so wonderful in ‘Gilbert Grape,’ of course, and I made this awful career move once where I turned down doing ‘Catch Me If You Can,’ because of a phone call from an angry colleague saying, ‘You can’t do that movie! I’ll never work with you again!’ So I was stupid enough to pass on it, with everything signed and ready to go. So now I’m obsessed with reconnecting with Leonardo and doing something that good.”

For a man who’s obsessed, he seems awfully chilled about it, but that might be the Miami effect. In any event, this lucky-charm festival seems the best possible place for Lasse Hallström to make such wishes.

Only last week, we listed Danny Boyle and Ewan McGregor as one of several actor-director teams we’d like to see reunited, with a prospective “Trainspotting” sequel the ideal outcome. Well, if Boyle himself is to be believed, it looks as if we’ve got our wish.

Speaking at the SXSW fest over the weekend, where Boyle unveiled some footage from his new thriller “Trance” — already being press-screened, and due out in a couple of weeks — the Oscar-winning director claimed that “Porno,” the long-mooted follow-up to his hit 1996 junkie drama, is back on his agenda and set to roll in 2016.

Boyle says he’s working on the screenplay, a rough adaptation of Irvine Welsh’s 2002 novel, with scribe John Hodge, who received an Oscar nomination for “Trainspotting.” He also claims he can get the entire original cast on board — including McGregor, a three-time collaborator from whom he has been famously estranged since 2000, when the Scotsman was passed over in favor of Leonardo DiCaprio for the lead in Boyle’s “The Beach.” Says Boyle:

“This has been a long time coming. There’s always been this long term plan for ‘Trainspotting 2.’ If John can produce a decent enough script, I don’t think there will be any barriers to Ewan or any of the cast coming back. I think they’ll want to know that the parts are good, so they don’t feel like they are letting anyone down. The reason for doing it again is that people cherish the original, people remember it — or have caught up with it if they never saw it because they were younger. So you want to make sure you don’t disappoint people. That will be the only criteria, I think.”

It’s obviously risky returning this late in the game to follow a film held by many as a generational touchstone — it seems impossible that “Porno” could match the pop-cultural impact of “Trainspotting.” But Boyle has never been a cash-in filmmaker, and he’s never yet made the same film twice: I’m inclined to trust that he’s doing it because he has genuine faith in the material. The good news — if, like me, you weren’t a fan of Welsh’s sloppy, critically dismissed sequel — is that Boyle describes the project as a “very loose” adaptation.

Before “Porno,” meanwhile, Boyle has a pair of period pieces in the works — a typically full slate for the director who found time to shoot “Trance” while orchestrating the 2012 Olympic opening ceremony. A period piece would be first for the director. He’s not divulging any details, other than to say they’re not like “Downton Abbey”: “They’re interesting,” he says. Fine by me. 

Are you keen to see a sequel to “Trainspotting?” Do you share Boyle’s confidence about reuniting the cast? Tell us in the comments.

Perhaps even more so than his last couple of films, Martin Scorsese’s contributions to film preservation and education in recent years have marked him as one of the medium’s greatest guardians. From his “A Personal Journey Through American Movies” to the cineaste evangelising of “Hugo,” he’s taken on the status of a vastly informed, infectiously enthusiastic film history professor — sometimes those who can do indeed teach.

Scorsese’s most heartfelt, engaged tributes tend to be of the American films of his youth, so you know to expect a treat from his lengthy Hollywood Reporter guest piece on John Ford’s “The Searchers,” in which he discusses both the film itself and Glenn Frankel’s new book on it.

As the Oscar-winning director writes, “The Searchers” is held as something of a sacred cow by cinephiles — including Scorsese himself, who has listed it in his personal Top 10 — but, as an “uncomfortable… deeply painful” study of prejudice and solitude in America, deserves more complex discussion and debate. (Indeed, Kris said something not dissimilar when listing the film at #10 in his Greatest Westerns list, writing that “succumbing to that kind of groupthink allows for blinders.”

Here’s Scorsese echoes Frankel’s assertion that the film, while a little-disputed American classic, has perhaps always been more precious to film buffs than regular viewers: “‘The Searchers’ is perhaps the greatest Hollywood film that few people have seen,” writes Frankel.

In his lovely piece, meanwhile, Scorsese goes on to explain how even his reservations about the film — including the comic relief often cited by critics as a debit — have only deepened his love for it:    

“A few years ago, I watched it with my wife, and I will admit that it gave me pause. Many people have problems with Ford’s Irish humor, which is almost always alcohol-related. For some, the frontier-comedy scenes with Ken Curtis are tough to take, but again, I don’t think they mar the film; these interludes are as much a part of the director’s universe as Shakespeare’s clowns are a part of his … For me, the problem was with the scenes involving a plump Comanche woman (Beulah Archuletta) that the Hunter character inadvertently takes as a wife … This passage seemed unnecessarily cruel to me. But the last time I saw The Searchers, the picture seemed even greater than ever, and it’s not that the scene had stopped troubling me; in fact, it troubled me on an even deeper level. In truly great films — the ones that people need to make, the ones that start speaking through them, the ones that keep moving into territory that is more and more unfathomable and uncomfortable — nothing’s ever simple or neatly resolved.”

Scorsese, incidentally, voted for “The Searchers” in last year’s Sight & Sound Greatest Films of All Time poll, where it ranked #7 among critics — but, interestingly, only #48 among the directors polled. Is that indicative of the film being more a critics’ pet than anyone else’s? Maybe not: Scorsese’s still in some good peer company in his love for Ford’s harshly beautiful western, which also took votes from Kenneth Branagh, Terence Davies, Roger Michell and the Dardenne Brothers.

Where does “The Searchers” rank in your affections? Is there another film you love for the ways in which is troubles you? Tell us in the comments.

http://players.brightcove.net/4838167533001/BkZprOmV_default/index.html?videoId=4913140430001

One of the films I’m most looking forward to this summer is “The Bling Ring” — partly because I’m intrigued by the true-life story of teen burglars preying on celebrity homes in the Hollywood Hills, but mostly because Sofia Coppola is a filmmaker I’m still happy to follow anywhere.

I know a lot of viewers haven’t been on board with her since “Lost in Translation,” for which she won an Oscar almost 10 years ago, but I maintain that “Marie Antoinette” is a pretty rapturous remix of the historical biopic template, while the beguilingly low-key “Somewhere” was worthy of its much-questioned Golden Lion at Venice in 2010. Her privileged background and high-fashion aesthetic may make her an easy target, but she has yet to put a foot wrong in my book.

By the look of this fast, flashy, pleasingly oblique teaser for “The Bling Ring,” this isn’t going to get her back in the Academy’s good books, or win many converts to her style — but it’s clearly a more jumped-up effort than the woozy “Somewhere,” seemingly applying the youthful excess of “Marie Antoinette” to a contemporary LA context. This is the world she knows, and she’s clearly taken no heed of the critics who claimed she needed to stray from it after her last film. Good on her.

Emma Watson takes the role of the ringleader, as it were — and with this coming on the heels of an acclaimed turn in “The Perks of Being a Wallflower,” she appears to be edging ahead of Daniel Radcliffe in the contest for the most credible post-Potter career. Leslie Mann, fresh from “This is 40,” stars as Watson’s mother.

Below the line, meanwhile, it’s poignant to note that this is the last feature credit for the late, great cinematographer Harris Savides, who was also responsible for the gorgeous sheen of “Somewhere.” To complete his work on the film, Coppola his chosen wisely: “Meek’s Cutoff” DP Christopher Blauvelt has done the honors.

“Bling Rings” opens on June 14, and a week earlier than that in France — which suggests to be that a Cannes berth (Coppola’s first since the rocky reception for “Marie Antoinette” in 2006) is on the cards. Check out the teaser embedded above this post and tell us what you think.

If you’ve been following Christopher Nolan’s post-‘Dark Knight’ trilogy moves, then you know he has a lot going on. In addition to producing Zack Snyder’s “Man of Steel” for Warner Bros., it has also been reported that he will be brought into the fold to help spearhead the DC Universe on film as the studio tries to figure out how to get a “Justice League” film off the ground and compete with Marvel’s “The Avengers.”

Meanwhile, he jumped on board “Interstellar,” which was written by his brother Jonathan for Steven Spielberg to direct. But like so many Spielberg projects, it was back-burnered, and now with Nolan at the helm, merging one of his own ideas with his brother’s ambitious project, “Intersteller” will be a blend and a new production entirely. Today, Paramount Pictures and Warner Bros. announced that it will be a co-production jointly distributed by the two entities. Paramount will handle domestic, Warner Bros. the surely more lucrative international.

“As a filmmaker and storyteller, Chris has continuously entertained the world with his extraordinary and unparalleled talents,” Paramount honcho Brad Grey said in the release. “I am pleased beyond measure to welcome him to the Paramount Pictures family. Partnering with Chris, Emma [Thomas], Lynda [Obst] and Warner Bros. to release this original idea next November is the perfect way to start the Thanksgiving and holiday movie season for audiences around the world.”

An interesting point, that. The film will be released in theaters and IMAX on November 7, 2014, rather than a more typical summer slot for such a film. That may or may not put it in the Oscar race — certainly Nolan’s ambition and pedigree can give it that sheen from afar — but it will surely dominate the box office over the Thanksgiving holiday next year.

The film, by the way, deals with time travel and wormholes and just a whole bunch of stuff that’s sure to make sci-fi geeks squeal the squeals of the delighted.

Added Warner Bros. President Jeff Robinov, “Christopher Nolan is truly one of the great auteurs working in film today, and we”re extremely proud of our successful and ongoing collaboration with him and Emma Thomas.  We are excited to be teaming with Paramount, and look forward to working with the Nolans, and producer Lynda Obst, on this extraordinary new project.”

I bet you are, Jeff. I bet you are.

Again, “Interstellar” will land in theaters November 7, 2014. Mark your calendars.

I’m slowly making my way back to movie-watching mode after the onslaught of awards season. You need a palette-cleanser in the immediate wake of such craziness. And one of the biggest films of the year, Sam Raimi’s “Oz the Great and Powerful,” is hitting theaters this week after a rather sluggish start for 2013 at multiplexes. (Seriously, there may be good little films in this and that nook and/or cranny, but I walked past a marquee the other day and got immediately depressed. It’s dreary out there.)

I haven’t yet seen Raimi’s spin on the Emerald City with James Franco leading the charge, but I’ve heard good and bad, to say the least. In his review HitFix’s Drew McWeeny wrote “there’s enough genuine wonder to make this work where [‘Alice in Wonderland,’ an inevitable comparison point] failed, and it honors the world that Frank L. Baum first created instead of trying to rebuild it into something it’s not.” Others weren’t so kind. I’ll let you be the judge of that. So when and if you get around to seeing the film this weekend, give us your take in the comments section and vote in our new poll below!

Robert Redford’s latest film, “The Company You Keep,” saw its world premiere at the Venice Film Festival last September before heading on to Toronto and then bottling up for an April 5, 2013 release date. Based on the novel by Neil Gordon, the thriller centers on a former Weather Underground activist on the run after a journalist discovers his identity.

Reviewing out of Venice, HitFix’s Guy Lodge called the film “a kind of runway for several generations of plum stars and character talents, the rich ensemble rather ostentatiously showing off Redford”s continued pulling power.” Today, we have a few exclusive looks at elements of that ensemble, from Shia LaBeouf to Julie Christie to Chris Cooper. And really, that’s just scratching the surface of a who’s who roll call of actors.

Click through the gallery below to see the images. “The Company You Keep” opens on April 5.

I kind of fell for Noah Baumbach’s “Frances Ha” at last year’s Telluride Film Festival. I’m not a Baumbach acolyte, though I did like “Greenberg,” so that also made it a pleasant surprise, I guess. This kind of thing rarely works for me, though. Or at least, it has to hit a very precise target, and when that happens, it always feels pretty special. That’s what we’re looking for in a darkened theater, right?

So, in my opinion, chalk “Frances Ha” up on arrival as one of the best films of 2013 when it lands in May. It is the result of a top notch writing collaboration between Baumbach and star Greta Gerwig, and speaking of which, Gerwig’s performance will deserve awards attention whether it gets it or not. Captured in textured black and white hues by photographer Sam Levy, the film tells a story of a life in progress, and it keeps away from the edge of cliche when it could easily go sailing off of it.

That’s what makes the new trailer for the film kind of brilliant. It plays with cliche by dropping David Bowie’s “Modern Love” over a tightly constructed montage of scenes that play just slightly different outside of that context, though not drastically so. This is no piece of rom-com fluff but it knows what it owes to John Hughes and Howard Deutch because it grew up on them. It may be “Woody Allen by way of Williamsburg,” as it was once so eloquently put to me, but that assumes too much of a “Girls” quality, which, again, it certainly has that.

“Frances Ha” is its own thing. And that’s as apt a notion speaking to its themes as I think I could muster. Check out the new trailer, courtesy of Apple, below.

“Frances Ha” opens May 17.

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

The Tribeca Film Festival, gearing up for its 12th annual showcase in Lower Manhattan from April 17 – 28, has announced its full feature line-up for the 2013 program.

A healthy slate of world premieres is highlighted by films such as “Gasland Part II,” Josh Fox’s second dip into the controversial process of fracking; “Richard Pryor: Omit the Logic,” a Marina Zenovich documentary about the famed comedian; “Some Velvet Morning,” director Neil LaBute’s latest; and “Trust Me,” actor/director Clark Gregg’s (“The Avengers”) follow-up to 2008’s “Choke.” Whoopi Goldberg’s feature debut, “I Got Somethin’ to Tell You,” a documentary focused on the work and influence of African-American stand-up comic Moms Mabley, will also premiere.

Elsewhere, Ramin Bahrani’s “At Any Price” will come off the international festival circuit for its Big Apple premiere at the fest, as will Neil Jordan’s “Byzantium” and Mira Nair’s “The Reluctant Fundamentalist.” Sundance premieres such as Richard Linklater’s “Before Midnight,” David Gordon Green’s “Prince Avalanche,” Barbara Kopple’s Mariel Hemingway documentary “Running from Crazy” and, in the Midnight section, the horror anthology film “V/H/S/2” (née “S-VHS”) will screen as well.

Additionally, Tribeca has created the Storyscapes program in collaboration with Bombay Sapphire Gin. “This multi-platform transmedia program celebrates new trends in digital media and recognizes filmmakers and content creators who employ an interactive, web-based or cross-platform approach to story creation,” the press release reads. “Storyscapes program will present five selections at a public, interactive installation at the Bombay Sapphire House of Imagination (121 Varick Street, 7th Floor) starting from April 19 – April 21, 2013.”

Take a look at the full line-up, including the previously announced world documentary and narrative feature competition slates, below. For more information on tickets and whatnot, be sure to visit www.tribecafilm.com.

WORLD NARRATIVE FEATURE COMPETITION
“Alì Blue Eyes (Alì ha gli occhi azzurri)” (Claudio Giovannesi)
“Before Snowfall (Før snøen faller)” (Hisham Zaman)
“Bluebird” (Lance Edmands)
“The Broken Circle Breakdown” (Felix van Groeningen)
“Hide Your Smiling Faces” (Daniel Patrick Carbone)
“Just a Sigh (Le temps de l’aventure)” (Jérôme Bonnell)
“Lily” (Matt Creed)
“The Rocket” (Kim Mordaunt)
“Six Acts (Shesh Peamim)” (Jonathan Gurfinkel)
“Stand Clear of the Closing Doors” (Sam Fleischner)
“Sunlight Jr.” (Laurie Collyer)
“Will You Still Love Me Tomorrow?” (Arvin Chen)

WORLD DOCUMENTARY FEATURE COMPETITION
“Aatsinski: The Story of Arctic Cowboys” (Jessica Oreck)
“Alias Ruby Blade: A Story of Love and Revolution” (Alex Meillier)
“Big Men” (Rachel Boynton)
“The Genius of Marian” (Banker White and Anna Fitch)
“The Kill Team” (Dan Krauss)
“Let the Fire Burn” (Jason Osder)
“Michael H. Profession: Director” (Yves Montmayeur)
“Oxyana” (Sean Dunne)
“Powerless (Katiyabaaz)” (Fahad Mustafa)
“Raw Herring (Hollandse Nieuwe)” (Leonard Retel Helmrich and Hetty Naaijkens-Retel Helmirch)
“Red Obsession” (David Roach and Warwick Ross)
“Teenage” (Matt Wolf)

SPOTLIGHT
“Adult World” (Scott Coffey)
“Almost Christmas” (Phil Morrison)
“At Any Price” (Rahmin Bahrani)
“Before Midnight” (Richard Linklater)
“Big Bad Wolves” (Ahron Keshales and Navot Papushado)
“Bottled Up” (Enid Zentelis)
“Byzantium” (Neil Jordan)
“A Case of You” (Kat Coiro)
“Cycling with Moliere (Alceste à bicyclette)” (Philippe Le Guay)
“The Director” (Christina Voros)
“Elaine Stritch: Shoot Me” (Chiemi Karasawa)
“The English Teacher” (Craig Zisk)
“Gasland Part II” (Josh Fox)
“G.B.F.” (Darren Stein)
“Gore Vidal: The United States of Amnesia” (Nicholas Wrathall)
“I Got Something to Tell You” (Whoopi Goldberg)
“In God We Trust” (Victor Kubicek and Derek Anderson)
“Greetings from Tim Buckley” (Daniel Algrant)
“Haute Cuisine” (Christian Vincent)
“Inside Out: The People’s Art Project” (Alastair Siddons)
“Lil Bub & Friendz” (Andy Capper and Juliette Eisner)
“McConkey” (Steve Winter)
“The Motivation” (Adam Bhala Lough)
“The Pretty One” (Jenée LaMarque)
“Prince Avalanche” (David Gordon Green)
“The Project” (Shawn Efran and Adam Ciralsky)
“Reaching for the Moon” (Bruno Barreto)
“The Reluctant Fundamentalist” (Mira Nair)
“Richard Pryor: Omit the Logic” (Marina Zenovich)
“A Single Shot” (David M. Rosenthal)
“Some Velvet Morning” (Neil LaBute)
“Trust Me” (Clark Gregg)
“Whitewash” (Emanuel Hoss-Desmarais)

MIDNIGHT
“Dark Touch” (Marina de Van)
“Frankenstein’s Army” (Richard Raaphorst)
“Fresh Meat” (Danny Mulheron)
“The Machine” (Caradog James)
“Mr. Jones” (Karl Mueller)
“Raze” (Josh Waller)
“V/H/S/2”

VIEWPOINTS
“A Birder’s Guide to Everything” (Rob Meyer)
“Bending Steel” (Dave Carroll)
“BIG JOY: The Adventures of James Broughton” (Stephen Silha, Eric Slade and Dawn Logsdon)
“Bridegroom” (Linda Bloodworth Thomason)
“Cutie and the Boxer” (Zachary Heinzerling)
“Dancing in Jaffa” (Hilla Medalia)
“Deep Powder” (Mo Ogrodnik)
“Farah Goes Bang” (Meera Menon)
“Flex is Kings” (Deidre Schoo and Michael Nichols)
“Floating Skyscrapers” (Tomasz Wasilewski)
“Harmony Lessons (Uroki Garmonii)” (Emir Baigazin)
“Jîn” (Reha Erdem)
“Kiss the Water” (Eric Steel)
“Lenny Cooke” (Benny Safdie and Joshua Safdie)
“The Moment” (Jane Weinstock)
“Northwest (Nordvest)” (Michael Noer)
“Odayaka” (Nobuteru Uchida)
“The Patience Stone (Syngué Sabour)” (Atiq Rahimi)
“Run and Jump” (Steph Green)
“Taboor” (Vahid Vakilifar)
“Wadjda” (Haifaa Al-Mansour)
“What Richard Did” (Lenny Abrahamson)

SPECIAL SCREENINGS
“Alberi” (Michaelangelo Frammartino)
“Sidewalk Stories” (Charles Lane)
“Herblock – The Black & The White” (Michael Stevens)
“The Trials of Muhammad Ali” (Bill Siegel)
“Running from Crazy” (Barbara Kopple)
“Möbius” (Eric Rochant)

STORYSCAPES
“A Journal of Insomnia” (Project creators: Bruno Choiniere, Philippe Lambert and Guillaume Braun)
“Robots in Residence” (Project creators: Brent Hoff and Alexander Reben)
“Sandy Storyline” (Project creators: Rachel Falcone, Laura Gottesdiener and Michael Premo)
“Star Wars Uncut” (Project creator: Casey Pugh)
“This Exquisite Forest” (Project creators: Aaron Koblin and Chris Milk)