Kind of awesome:
Blog
-
10/7 Oscarweb Round-up
• David Poland writes up a mini-reaction to “W.” Yours truly will get a crack this morning. [The Hot Blog]• Jeffrey Wells, meanwhile, can’t wait to see it. [Hollywood Elsewhere]
• Jeremy Piven in “Speed the Plow?” Best…casting…ever? [The Daily Beast]
• Yet another article wondering how “Body of Lies” will fare in the ghetto of Irag war cinema. [Risky Biz Blog]
• Robert Deutsch gets some face time with Clint Eastwood. [USA Today]
• More on EW’s Oscar revote. [Pop Watch]
• In honor of “Nick and Norah’s Playlist,” 10 favorite “one night out” movies. [Vulture]
• Christopher Campbell thinks Sony Classics should aim for Best Animated Feature Film with “Waltz with Bashir,” over Best Foreign Language Film. Why not both? [Spout Blog]
-
Miramax Highlights goes live
First Paramount Vantage, then Universal, and now Miramax Films. Studios are leaping into the online FYC phase of campaigns this season. MiramaxHilights.com is showcasing three modest enterprises for contention: John Patrick Shanley’s “Doubt,” Mike Leigh’s “Happy-Go-Lucky” (with a new poster I haven’t seen yet) and “Fernando Mereilles’s “Blindness.”There isn’t anything available for each film yet. No screenplays or score downloads. I assume that will come in time, as will category placements. The biggest question mark for these films in that arena is whether Philip Seymour Hoffman is pushed as a lead or supporting actor in “Doubt.” My guess is still the latter.
Thanks to reader Jacob for the tip.
-
Weiser on the prescience of ‘Wall Street’
Buried in the pages of the Los Angeles Times’ entertainment section over the weekend was this intriguing op-ed from “W.” screenwriter Stanley Weiser. But it wasn’t his upcoming George W. Bush biopic he had on the mind, it was 1987’s “Wall Street,” which Weiser co-wrote with Oliver Stone.It’s a real coup for the Times, if you ask me. It’s interesting to read through the short story of how the film came to pass, the “read ‘Crime and Punishment’ over the weekend” stuff from Stone is classic. But it’s the sad note of responsibility in Weiser’s words, the feeling that he may have helped create little Gordon Gekkos the world over.
Here’s a look:
Gekko’s character was written to create an engaging, charming, but deceitful and brutal being. I have nevertheless run into quite a number of younger people, who upon discovering that I co-wrote the film, wax rhapsodic about it . . . but often for the wrong reasons.
A typical example would be a business executive or a younger studio development person spouting something that goes like this: “The movie changed my life. Once I saw it I knew that I wanted to get into such and such business. I wanted to be like Gordon Gekko.”
The flattery is disarming and ego-stoking, but then neurons fire and alarm bells go off. “You have succeeded with this movie, but you’ve also failed. You gave these people hope to become greater asses than they may already be.”
Read the rest here. And a bit of nostalgic “fun” (here as well):
-
EW’s Oscar revote
From Thompson on Hollywood:Entertainment Weekly wants Hollywood to rewrite Oscar history by giving the film industry a chance to revise the Oscar history books. It’s called “Recall the Gold.”
On October 6, EW is inviting more than 7,000 Hollywood insiders to participate in an extensive survey to re-vote on past Oscar races. EW wants to test which movies truly stand the test of time. With the benefit of hindsight, did the right films and performances win over the past 25 years? To look at 2003, will Robert Begnini still beat Tom Hanks? Will Shakespeare in Love still beat Saving Private Ryan? Will Gwenyth Paltrow still beat Cate Blanchett?
Alright, let me stop it right here and get this out of the way: a nice diversion, nothing else. Not to poo-poo the experiment, because it’s a fun idea, but the buzz and manipulation of a given Oscar season is in the same league as the manipulation that comes from loud fans and film-goers who think this film deserved to win over that and scream about it for years after the fact. Nothing like this can happen in a vacuum, so let’s not consider an “Oscar revote” anything more than it actually is.
And when you see that EW editor Sean Smith’s idea was inspired by the “Brokeback Mountain” loss to “Crash,” it becomes a little more irritating, in my book. Let it go, folks.
More:
Monday EW is mailing out their official “Recall The Gold” ballot inviting the industry to vote in six major categories for five given years spaced five years apart–2003, 1998, 1993, 1988, and 1983–five, ten, fifteen, twenty and twenty-five years ago…
“We built it from scratch,” says Smith. EW reporters and editors scrolled through their rollidexes. They added everyone who had ever been nominated or won an Oscar, and crew members of films that grossed over $100 million. They looked at the news reports of Hollywood people who had been added to the Oscar ranks in recent years. They culled creative directories for execs, producers, publicists, editors, costume designers, art directors, directors, cinematographers, writers, animators, sound mixers, composers–all the categories covered by the Academy.
EW made one HUGE change. They invited top film (not TV) agents, who are not permitted to belong to the Academy, to join the list of Oscar revoters. And Smith thinks his list may skew slightly younger than the Academy’s. “We’re not trying to duplicate the Academy,” he says. “What do people working in the film industry think about these Oscar-winning movies now?”
So, they added more people with agendas to the voting pool. Nice. Click the ballot image above for a larger image. And read the rest of Thompson’s story here.
-
Bloggers dish ‘Changeling,’ O’Neil surprised by Sheen’s lead push
Gold Derby’s Tom O’Neil corralled a bunch of Oscar bloggers over the weekend to discuss his topic of choice: Angelina Jolie’s Oscar chances for “Changeling” after an AMPAS funk for the last few years. I decided to abstain, since I won’t be seeing the film until next week and would prefer not to spin my wheels with the rest, but it’s a nice back and forth. Give it a look here.O’Neil is also somehow surprised that Michael Sheen is being pushed as a lead for Universal’s “Frost/Nixon,” a fact we’ve been peddling around here for months. Here’s his reasoning against the move:
Yes, sure, they both really are leads, with Sheen actually having more face time and lines of dialogue to speak as British talk-show host David Frost compared to Langella as the disgraced U.S. president he infamously interviewed on TV in 1977: Richard Nixon.
That means nothing at the Oscars. Denzel Washington had less screen time and dialogue than “Training Day” costar Ethan Hawke, but won in lead while Hawke had to settle for a losing nomination in supporting. Forest Whitaker won best actor over “The Last King of Scotland” costar James McAvoy, who had more screen time and dialogue too, but was placed in the supporting slot where he wasn’t even nominated.
Welcome to four months ago. But all kidding aside, I don’t think “Frost/Nixon” is in the same vein as these films. Sure, Langella dominated on the stage, but I’m hearing that the film is more about Frost than Peter Morgan’s play. Our own John Foote wrote a few weeks back that it is “one of those “Amadeus” situations where one performance cannot exist without the other,” and I agree with that assessment.
Additionally, people close to the film have been thumping the lead drum for Sheen since the early summer, so they certainly think they have a shot. I have refused to move Sheen from our chart of 10 lead actor contenders because I could honestly see both men finding room, despite the crowded field.
What do you guys think? Is it crazy for Universal to ignore the supporting field for Sheen or can you just not put these things in neat little boxes?
-
Foreign and doc predix
FYI, the predictions for Best Foreign Language Film and Best Documentary Feature have been added to the sidebar. No charts for these categories, as they aren’t given to the shift and slide in buzz like the rest. You just take a stab and go with it. These seem to make sense for now, but I’ll probably make some changes down the line.
-
OFF THE CARPET: Who we are, who we want to be
In the last few weeks, drama has persisted in the yet-to-be-heated Oscar season. Producers are debating exhibitors in public and mid-summer opinions of awards-caliber product are being revisited — in some cases disavowed — as more and more viewers get their peeks.On the positive side, two studios have launched the screener circuit with indie films they hope can muster some remembrance, while the foreign film news bite barrage has come to a close with the qualification deadline. But there isn’t much to go on in terms of assessing the season, not a lot in the way of tangible grist for the mill.
Lots of smoke, very little fire.
In part, that should explain a lack of predictions updates here at In Contention, shifting and sliding for no reason. And indeed, this week’s update isn’t a massive overhaul — or even an overhaul — beyond putting a few things into context here, trimming the fat there. But as I set out to update our projections this week, I became more and more aware of 2008’s striking theme of self-reflection this Oscar season. And hey, it seemed as good an idea for a column as any.
-
‘Reader’ still
Reader David sent this into us over the weekend (apparently elsewhere as well). I’m just now able to get it up, so if you haven’t seen it yet:
-
10/6 Oscarweb Round-up
• Choire Sicha talks to Ellen Burstyn about “W.” and her new memoir. [Los Angeles Times]• A year later, Jeffrey Wells still very much hearts “Things We Lost in the Fire.” [Hollywood Elsewhere]
• Peter Knegt profiles “Rachel Getting Married” screenwriter Jenny Lumet. [indieWIRE]
• David Gritten corners the Coen brothers across the pond. [Daily Telegraph]
• John Anderson details the Iraq war film as risky business with Ridley Scott tackling the subject in “Body of Lies.” [New York Times]
• Doing more press for the Brits than Stateside these days, Oliver Stone chats it up with Oliver Burkeman. [The Guardian]
• The diversity that is character actor Toby Jones. [Los Angeles Times]
• Steve Daly talks with a Bill Maher-less Larry Charles. [Entertainment Weekly]
• More fuel for the “‘Gran Torino’ is Eastwood’s last performance” fire. [Reuters]
-
Is Alfred Hitchcock — gasp! — over-appreciated?
Random thoughts…and writing this I risk having my head taken off by angry fans and film buffs, but I have always had some issues believing Alfred Hitchcock to be the great filmmaker artists and historians have claimed him to be. In many ways, despite having personally lectured the man and his work to film school classes, I feel he may be the most overrated filmmaker of all time.Aim your weapons and open fire on me, as I have placed a target on my back and surely know it, but there must be some folks out there who share my opinion?
Admittedly, “Psycho” is a powerful film. It was responsible for ushering in a new form of horror movie, and “Vertigo” is beautifully made, but is there anyone else out there (again) who finds the characters in his films a little…cool, remote, ah, hell…cold? Never have I felt anything for a Hitchcock character. Never have I invested myself emotionally with a single one of them, not even when portrayed by the great James Stewart or Cary Grant.
It bothers me that “Hitch” had the film finished in his head by the time he started shooting, leaving nothing for chance and removing any sense of creativity from the actors. He spoke, they listened and moved and that was that. No where can I find any reference to any collaboration between the director and his actors, which to me is essential in filmmaking and strengthens the characters, giving the actors something to attach themselves to. If an actor is shown how to do it all, how to move, how to speak, how to play the role, when and where are they permitted to be creative?? Look at the dreadful acting in “The Birds” and you get an idea of what I mean.
“Frenzy” turned out to be a very powerful film, truly frightening, and his last good picture. However, if you ask me, his best film was “Lifeboat.”
OK, have a go…my secret is out. I’m not a Hitchcock fan. My God the shame, the shame…the horror. Tell me why I should think otherwise.
-
More than just happy
I’ve already discussed how many critics seem to be misinterpreting Mike Leigh’s “Happy-Go-Lucky” and its protagonist, Poppy, by interpreting it as a sheer feelgood work — and in doing so, missing much of the film’s complex, subtle social observation.
So I’m glad to see that Mike Leigh has addressed the issue at a NYFF press conference. In this video courtesy of IFC.com, Leigh and the film’s star, Sally Hawkins, discuss with Lisa Schwarzbaum the issue of Poppy’s optimism, with Leigh stressing that there is a lot more to her character than simple cheeriness. First saying that “to desribe her as being unadulteratedly happy is not really to understand her at all,” her goes on to draw an interesting parallel between Poppy and the title character in the very differently-toned “Vera Drake.”
Finally, with a grin, he insists that while “Happy-Go-Lucky” is indeed “anti-miserablist,” it’s not necessarily the start of a trend in his work: “Wait until you see how depressing the next film might be!”
More from the conference here.
-
‘Changeling’ provokes dissent in the blogosphere
Uh-oh. Since its premiere at Cannes, “Changeling” has provoked both breathless raves and withering putdowns, but after its NYFF screening, a number of prominent bloggers are falling into the latter camp, expressing disappointment over both the film and Angelina Jolie’s much-hyped performance.The most articulate view expressed so far is by the ever-readable Nathaniel Rogers, who, despite high hopes for the film, thinks it is “overlong, overwrought” and suffers from an identity crisis:
Somewhere buried in “Changeling” is an interesting story about a woman finding her strength against significant odds … Unfortunately the movie as directed and scripted works against this potentially thrilling internal drama. The plotting and direction can’t decide which kind of movie this is: melodrama, courtroom, serial killer picture, procedural, period epic?
“Changeling“‘s title accurately reflects its early creepy child switch and its relentlessly mediocre shift from melodrama to true crime story. A better more disciplined film would have earned that title in a more ambitious way. It’s a shame that there’s so little real fluidity, few emotional surprises and no transformative character arcs within the sprawling story.
As for Jolie, Rogers doesn’t doubt her Oscar chances, but he finds her fatally miscast:
Angelina Jolie’s screen presence is, as everyone knowns, competent and forceful which is usually a good thing. Unfortunately her largeness somewhat robs Mrs. Collins of the journey from socially conditioned feminine weakness to lioness strength that we need to watch her stumble through. Jolie is technically proficient enough in these “womanly confusion” scenes but they don’t feel organic to the actress and there’s no surprise or reveal once she starts fighting back.
-
Paul Cantelon’s beautiful ‘W.’ score
A huge thank you to commenter Markku who points us to emusic.com’s sampling of Paul Cantelon’s original score for Oliver Stone’s “W.”I have to say, it’s a beautiful piece of work on the whole. Lots of haunting melodies, plenty of southern flavor here and there, a nice waltz thrown in to emphasize the bumbling nature of the “protagonist.” I’m loving this stuff!
Cantelon, by the way, is having a hell of a year way, WAY under the radar. His work on Justin Chadwick’s “The Other Boleyn Girl” is still one of the better scores from 2008. If he keeps this up, he’ll find himself on a fast-track to awards success just like Alexandre Desplat did after bursting onto the scene in 2004 and 2005.
I should be seeing “W.” any day now. The film has been screening for various journalists, I just haven’t been considered cream of that crop to date. But we will definitely be covering all the “W.” goings on from the London International Film Festival as Guy brings us the daily latest. So keep an eye out for that later this month.
-
Listen to the scores from ‘Changeling’ and ‘Frost/Nixon’
Fresh on the heels of Paramount Vantage’s annual Vantage Guilds unveiling, Universal Pictures has launched its For Your Consideration site this season. The five films featured are “Changeling,” “Flash of Genius,” “Frost/Nixon,” “Mamma Mia!” and “The Tale of Despereaux.” Currently you can check out portions of the scores from “Changeling” and “Frost/Nixon.”
By the way, Vantage has added some more content since we first pointed toward Vantage Guilds on Thursday. Stills and a screenplay for “Defiance” and “The Duchess,” as well as score samples for the latter to go along with a behind-the-scenes featurette. Nothing much for “Revolutionary Road” yet, though this pic is new to me:
By the way, I’ve been told the poster for “Revolutionary Road” that dropped a few weeks back is indeed a teaser and that a final one-sheet is still to come. Looking forward to that.
-
James Earl Jones and the SAG Lifetime Achievement Award
I’m two days behind in writing something up about this. The press release landed Thursday but I haven’t been able to squeeze in two minutes to comment. I’ll just link The Envelope for the story, which takes this quote from the release:“James Earl Jones’ distinguished career on stage, in film, on television, in commercials and as a vocal presence without peer commands our admiration and respect,” SAG President Alan Rosenberg said. “His long and quiet devotion to advancing literacy, the arts and humanities on a national and local scale deserves our appreciation. It is our honor to bestow the Guild’s highest tribute on this extraordinary actor.”
Very cool news. Jones always been an actors’ favorite, going back to his SAG nomination in the guild’s first awards year, 1995, for “Cry, the Beloved Country,” when almost all other awards-giving bodies ignored his work in the film. The clip reel should be fun, everything from “The Great White Hope” to “Star Wars” to, fingers crossed, “The Sandlot.”
Big congrats to Mr. Jones. It’s been a long time coming.
-
10/4 Oscarweb Round-up
• Dave Karger “rounds up” the best bets for Oscars hitting cinemas this week. [Oscar Watch]• Off the cuff with Mike Leigh across the pond. [Los Angeles Times]
• Tom O’Neil wonders whether Kristin Scott Thomas can grab an Oscar and a Tony in the same year… [Gold Derby]
• …and thinks Clint Eastwood might be able to pull Angelina Jolie out of her Oscar funk. [Gold Derby]
• On the heels of Rotten Tomatoes’ list of 50, John Campea runs down the 10 best animated films of all time amid a spiffy new layout for his site. [The Movie Blog]
• Errol Morris to screen “Standard Operating Procedure” at 27 medical schools around the country. Talk about grass roots. [Thompson on Hollywood]
• Scott Bowles kicks off a DiCaprio/Crowe interview piece with one hell of an interesting lede. [USA Today]
