In Contention

Blog

  • Johnny Depp to star as Tonto in Bruckheimer’s ‘Lone Ranger’

    The Lone RangerUPDATE (11:36 p.m.): Big oops on my part.  It turns out Depp will be playing Tonto in “The Lone Ranger,” not the hero himself.  Which, frankly, strikes me as even odder.  But anyway, sorry for getting ahead of myself this afternoon.

    EARLIER: So…what do we think about this?  The news has broken out of the Kodak Theater during a Disney event this afternoon and is slowly trickling its way through the web.  Before long, it’ll likely be the biggest entertainment story of the week, maybe the month, because these things get inflated when a guy like Depp and a property like “The Lone Ranger” come together, so let’s dig into it now.

    A Bruckheimer/Verbinski/Rossio/Elliot collaboration on this material is a perfect conception and exactly what would make it work at a time when the western is struggling to make its way to relevance once again.  But I’m approaching this news with some measured reserve.  The likely reaction will be a gigantic: “That’s awesome!”  But I dunno…

    This is an exciting project regardless.  “The Lone Ranger” has quickly become one of my most anticipated films in the Hollywood pipeline and despite my ambivalence about today’s news, it still is.

    Also announced at the event, by the way, was that there will be a fourth installment of “Pirates of the Caribbean.”  Considering the dollars involved in that franchise, it’s certainly not a surprise, but I don’t think I’m alone when I say: “Ugh.”

    Additionally, Depp was “officially” announced as Tim Burton’s Mad Hatter in the upcoming “Alice in Wonderland.”

    Tell us what you think of Johnny Depp’s casting trifecta this afternoon.

  • Cates out Condon/Mark in as Oscar telecast producers

    Bill CondonWow. This is a left-field choice to say the least, but it seems “Dreamgirls” director and producer Bill Condon and Laurence Mark have been tapped to produce this year’s Oscar telecast. Mark will be the producer, Condon the executive producer. The Hollywood Reporter has the scoop.

    Despite the negative B.S. that was flying around my opinion of “Dreamgirls” two years ago (things get perpetuated too far in a business governed by publicity), I genuinely like Condon and have a friendly chat every time I see him. He’s a true Oscar geek like the rest of us, a bright and creative guy who will probably do wonders for some of the telecast’s typically boring sequences (music performances are at the top of that list). And Laurence Mark is no slouch when it comes to putting stuff like this together.

    Good things. Here’s an excerpt from Gregg Kilday’s story (which briefly mentions Condon’s upcoming Richard Pryor movie):

    The “Dreamgirls” team of producer Laurence Mark and writer-director Bill Condon have been tapped to produce the 81st Annual Academy Awards telecast. Mark will serve as producer with Condon on board as exec producer; it’s the first time either has produced the Oscar show.

    Announcing their selection Wednesday, Academy president Sid Ganis said, “Larry and Bill are fresh thinkers who will bring a unique perspective to the Oscar show. That fact, joined with their enormous collective talent and enthusiasm, will serve the 81st awards proceedings perfectly.”…

    “What a thrill to produce the Oscar show,” Mark said. “I’m excited about this opportunity and look forward to the challenge of a live television show that celebrates the very best in film.”

    “The Oscars are the ultimate recognition of excellent work in movies, and I’m so pleased to be part of putting the show together,” Condon said.

    It’ll be interesting to see if the duo will be able to turn things around for a show that is consistently losing viewers. I’m sure they see it as a challenge, but a welcome one regardless. Good luck, guys.

  • ‘L’echange’ poster

    UPDATE (3:59 p.m.): Turns out the same art work will be used for the domestic poster.  Cinematical has it up.  I guess that’s that.

    EARLIER: Yes, that’s the French title for “Changeling.” We need some domestic materials fast, but this will do for now:

    Universal Pictures' Changeling

  • In defense of ‘Happy-Go-Lucky’

    Brad Brevet, over at Rope of Silicon, likes “Happy-Go-Lucky.” A lot. And like me, he’s a bit perturbed by some of the hostile criticism that has been lobbed at the film, and its protagonist Poppy in particular — such as Jeff Wells’ wildly off-base (to my mind) accusation that the film is guilty of “emotional fascism.”

    In response to such critiques, Brevet has written a smart, thoughtful defense of the film. (I praise it not only because he quotes extensively from my own review, though that’s an obvious point in its favour. Ha ha.) The core of his argument is that the film is less an isolated character study than it is a study of its own audience, and how they respond to character:

    Happy-Go-Lucky was hardly about any of the characters in the film as much as it was about the audience watching the film. Taking that into consideration, film critics are perhaps the absolute best audience for this film. Critics of any sort can be cynical and jaded creatures and when confronted with someone that is altogether happy despite not having an abundant amount of wealth or status (i.e. Hollywood reasons to be happy) it annoys the cynical sort.

    I say this in general terms and without direction of blame or accusation, but it is what comes out of judging art as a profession. Why else would the most trying times for the film’s central character be met with the most glowing responses? As Lodge said, the character hasn’t changed … As much as Poppy may want to change the folks she encounters inside the film she ultimately ends up changing the people watching.

    (more…)

  • By now you’ve surely seen the ‘Notorious’ trailer…

    Derek Luke in Notorious…if not, educate yourself below and rejoin the conversation in a minute.

    First off — how come I didn’t realize this film was in the works?  And with that in mind, why to I have a weird feeling I did know this film in the works, but thought it was a weird dream or something?  I don’t know.

    I think this is a story that has always had a lot of potential, to be quite honest.  It also has a lot of potential for playing, quite knowingly, to a crowd that wants something easily consumable and with a kickin’ sound track.  It could be both, who knows?  A January release date says little to me about a film like this, given the urban appeal and the fact that films like this tend to only do well really early in the year, a nice break from the heavy drama of awards season.

    I dig Derek Luke’s look as Sean Combs and I’m eager to see what Jamal Woolard can do with this.  Could be arresting stuff.  Could be merely passable imitation.  But there are some talented people involved here, so maybe.  Just maybe.

    Have a look.  Frankly, I think this trailer kicks ass:

  • James Franco profiled by Gus Van Sant in Interview Mag

    Cover of October 2008 issue of Interview MagazineI’ve been meaning to cancel my subscription to Interview Magazine for months upon months, probably years at this point.  I always forget until I get a new issue, then it gets tossed onto a stack on the shelf and I forget again.  But there’s always an interesting one-on-one and the closer we get the the awards season each year, the more pertinent the interviews become.

    Case in point, this month’s issue features the cover story: “James Franco by Gus Van Sant.”  It’s a solid Q&A between the star and director of “Milk” respectively, but I particularly liked the lede:

    Seven years ago he played James Dean in a television biopic, tinting his hair and squinting his eyes to Rebel Without a Cause-like perfection.  Ever since, the temptation has been to peg him as a good-looking young man felled by the moody blues.  While it’s a fact of life that no one can ever really know what lies beneath the surface of another, the Internet can help narrow the field of possibilities.  Lo and behold, Generalissimo James Edward Franco: a merry prankster, and the latest on-screen love interest of Sean Penn.

    The Oscar campaign begins.

    There are also interviews with Oliver Stone and Anna Paquin, by the way.  More at Interview’s website.

  • ‘Gomorrah’ is in — do we have a frontrunner?

    Well, as speculated a few hours ago, Italy has announced their submission for Best Foreign Language Film. And, to the surprise of precisely nobody, they have gone with Matteo Garrone’s “Gomorrah” — the sprawling, breathlessly acclaimed portrait of Naples mafia life that was arguably the breakout hit of May’s Cannes festival. (It received the runner-up prize.)

    It’s almost impossible to declare frontrunners in this category, given the foreign film committee’s wilful voting habits. Still, it’s safe to say that “Gomorrah” is the most anticipated and discussed contender to officially enter the race so far.

    Whether it will prove too bleak and violent for the blue-hair voters is difficult to predict — they acknowledged the edgy brilliance of “Amores Perros” in 2001, but since then, they’ve been unable to stomach the likes of “City of God” or last year’s “4 Months, 3 Weeks, 2 Days.”

    Based on the unanimously good word for the film, I’ve long been predicting that “Gomorrah” could even score breakout noms in the Best Director and Adapted Screenplay categories (a la “City of God”), but that was when I imagined Italy picking the more parochial “Il Divo” as their foreign-language entry. As it is, they’ve chosen the title with more crossover potential — it’ll be interesting to see what momentum Garrone’s film can build from its New York Film Festival screening.

    For my part, I’m seeing the film at its UK premiere this Sunday — hopefully to be followed by a Q&A with Garrone. I can’t wait.

  • 9/24 Oscarweb Round-up

    Harvey Weinstein• David Poland adds a nice perspective to yesterday’s nothing “news” about Weinstein vs. Rudin. [The Hot Blog]

    • Patrick Goldstein sticks his toe in the scuffle as well. [The Big Picture]

    • Ditto Brad Brevet. [Rope of Silicon]

    • 10 things you need to know about “The Wrestler.” [Vulture]

    • Jeffrey Wells thinks “Miracle at St. Anna” is a poblem movie because he didn’t get an invite. [Hollywood Elsewhere]

    • When will Hollywood start feeling the credit crunch? [The Guardian]

    • Keira Knightley could be lined up to play F. Scott Fitzgerald’s Zelda Sayre. [The Independent]

  • Naming and shaming

    I think it’s fair to say that Jack White and Alicia Keys’ Bond theme (which so disappointed yours truly) is not going down all that well.

    So much so that Popjustice, one of my personal favourite websites, is seeking retribution.

  • Editing honors for ‘Dark Knight,’ ‘Iron Man’

    One of the more oddly timed awards ceremonies of the year,  the Hollywood Post Alliance Awards revealed their nominees yesterday. (Variety has a report and full list of nominations here.)

    Amid the awards for lesser-recognised arts like colour grading and compositing, I was interested to see that they have a Best Film Editing category. Mashing together work from late 2007 and 2008, the nominees emerged as Lee Smith for “The Dark Knight,” Jay Cassidy for “Into the Wild” and Dan Lebental for “Iron Man.”

    Interesting that Cassidy is the only late-2007 Oscar nominee to reappear here. (For me, the finest editing achievement of last year was “The Diving Bell and the Butterfly,” but maybe it wasn’t rugged enough for their liking.) I highly doubt we’ll see “Iron Man” in the Oscar lineup in this category, but “The Dark Knight” is looking like a real contender.

  • ‘Three Monkeys’ joins the Foreign Film mix

    Nobody who was paying attention at Cannes will be surprised that Turkey has selected Nuri Bilge Ceylan’s “Three Monkeys” as their entry in the foreign-language derby.

    The film was one of the critical sensations of the festival back in May and was many pundits’ pick for the Palme d’Or — it wound up with the Best Director award. Just to jog your memory, here’s a rave from the ever-reliable Jonathan Romney:

    An ostensibly routine noir-style psychological thriller vaults into the realms of high art in “Three Monkeys” … For the first time, Ceylan really involves himself in narrative complexity, spinning a subtly-twisty yarn with echoes of such crime writers as Simenon and James M. Cain … the smallest amount of trimming could well turn an exceptional film into a near-perfect one.

    I have been excited by this for some time. Ceylan’s 2002 film “Uzak (Distant)” is one of my favourite films of the decade so far, a work of visual wonder and immaculate storytelling grace. While wildly acclaimed, his follow-up, “Climates,” did less for me — it was exquisitely rendered, but on a narrative and thematic level, Ceylan seemed to me to be treading water. So I like the idea of this move into more genre-tinged territory. It’s one of my must-sees at the upcoming London Film Festival.

    I suspect the film may prove a little too resolutely arthouse for the frequently auteur-shy Foreign Film committee, but no matter. As when Mexico selected Carlos Reygadas’ bold, beautiful and thoroughly Academy-unfriendly “Silent Light” last year, I applaud Turkey for the bravery of their selection.

    (more…)

  • ‘Miracle at St. Anna’ added to London fest lineup

    Just, you know, FYI. Curiously, the addition of Spike Lee’s film means they’re bumping “Rachel Getting Married” into a slightly less high-profile slot. Weird, since we all know which film has more heat in the wake of the festivals.

    Though I’m not very excited about “Miracle,” any expansion of the programme is encouraging to see. Now if they could just wrangle “The Wrestler,” I’d be most grateful.

    Check out further programme modifications here.

  • Israel picks the animated ‘Waltz’ for its foreign Oscar contender

    A website called cinemascope is reporting that Israel has chosen Ari Folman’s “Waltz with Bashir” to represent the country in the foreign film Oscar race.  Very wise.  Nice to see animated films getting this kind of an awards push, what with “Persepolis” repping France last year.  Let’s just hope “Waltz” doesn’t get the shaft like “Persepolis” and “4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days” last year from a majorly disfunctional branch of the Academy.

    Guy, by the way, has been doing a nice job of wrangling the foreign film news lately, so keep it hear as updates keep coming.

  • Gurus back on the scene

    It looks like David Poland beat The Envelope to the punch again this year with his collective of Oscar prognosticators, the Gurus o’ Gold.  I’m back on the team again this year after missing the boat last time around.

    Poland has done away with the Gurus 2.0 experiment, which was an interesting look at what the peripheral awards sites were thinking.  I guess he decided it better to whittle it down to a refined list of guessers, while The Envelope’s thing is having casting a huge net.  There are pros and cons of each approach, but at this point in the year, we’re all guessing anyway.

    I was surprised to see “Slumdog Millionaire” make it into the Best Picture predicted five with so much authority.  And despite my recent change of tack on the major category hopes of “The Dark Knight,” I certainly wasn’t anticipating a tie for #6.

    (The Gurus’ top 10 predicted Best Picture hopefuls with commentary after the jump.)

    (more…)

  • THE LISTS: Top 10 films of 1999

    (from left) Joe Pantoliano, Laurence Fishburne, Keanu Reeves and Carrie-Anne Moss in The MatrixRemember that Entertainment Weekly cover from November of 1999?  The headline boldly proclaimed: “The year that changed movies.”  Indeed, it has become nearly a cliche to harp on and on about those 12 months of solid product as a time not equaled since the glory year that was, 1939, but to many, the truth was the truth.  1999 was the best year for films in a long, long time.

    And it wasn’t a microscopic view of “quality” either.  A broad net was cast, from genre successes aplenty to art house sensations, both finding equal play in the film awards circuit that year.  And so it is that hammering out a list of the 10 best constitutes to be a pastime of sorts for the movie lover, especially those like me who were experiencing an awakening of sorts around that time.

    1999 was my first year of film school — the dark ages, as I like to call them (because I’ve come to know film school as a fool’s errand of sorts, an education not easily passed from one person to the next but better learned through trial and tribulation).  But I was still an eager, unjaded soul and took a trip to the local theater one day with a troupe of friends for our own double feature: Sam Mendes’s “American Beauty” and David O. Russell’s “Three Kings.”  It was our first real understanding of the year that had been unfolding right before our eyes.

    “American Beauty” has, of course, aged quite poorly, though Russell’s Iraq war film remains a staple of sorts, a unique blip in a consistently uneven genre.  This was already the year that had seen the release of the first “Star Wars” installment in over 20 years (however disappointing), the last great exhibit from the portfolio of the cinema’s greatest artist (Stanley Kubrick’s “Eyes Wide Shut”) and a science fiction masterpiece that owed as much to William Gibson as anything else (at least those ideas were making it to the screen).

    Moreover, this was a cinematic year that would see releases from more top-tier directors than any other year: Kubrick, Scorsese, Lucas, Lynch, Allen, Fincher, Burton, Leigh, Minghella, Anderson, Almodóvar, Mann, Lee, Stone, Jordan, Sayles, Soderbergh, Forman, Burton, Pollack, Darabont and Howard, while simultaneously launching the exciting careers of untold newbies.  The range of quality, as expected, was certainly wide, but that all of these guys were in neck deep in their work during the same stretch of time had plenty to do with the perception of 1999, then and now.

    So with that, I felt that this week’s top 10 list (a Tuesday regularity now, if you haven’t been keeping score) would address 1999, the year that was.  Here are my picks:

    (from left) Mark Wahlberg, George Clooney and Ice Cube in Three Kings10. “Three Kings” (David O. Russell)
    David O. Russell is a visionary of sorts, but he seems to always be right at the surface, just about to break through with an unyielding brilliance, never fully harnessing the wicked talent he clearly has.  But for a brief moment in the fall of 1999, he discovered an outlet in this Iraq War dramedy that became more famous for its off-screen drama than what unfolded on-screen.  Pity, because I would rank “Three Kings” in a list of the 10 greatest war films ever made without flinching.  George Clooney, Mark Wahlberg, Spike Jonze and Ice Cube headlined a sprawling cast that probably deserved some ensemble attention.

    (more…)

  • The battle over ‘The Reader’

    Cover of Bernhard Schlink\'s The ReaderThe news that Scott Rudin and Harvey Weinstein are in a tug-of-war over the release date of “The Reader” isn’t really news at all.  We were talking about this over a month ago, back when it seemed Rudin had won the debate.  But the pieces slowly fell into place and a 2008 release became a reality, so here we are.

    The problem: the film isn’t finished yet.  That’s all well and good.  Neither is “Revolutionary Road” or, last I checked, “Milk.”  The issue with “The Reader” is that it likely won’t be finished by the time Weinstein wants to release the film, and that is where the efforts of those involved could go to waste at the whims of an awards-hungry big-wig desperate for a major Oscar contender for the first time in four – count ’em – four years.

    What’s worse — or at least could be perceived as worse — is the notion floating out there that Weinstein is banking on good will for “Reader” producers Anthony Minghella and Sydney Pollack.  Both filmmakers passed away earlier this year.  Steven Zeitchik aludes to this in his Hollywood Reporter piece.

    Zeitchik has a lot of smoke but not much fire, though, since both Weinstein and Rudin declined commen.  And he’s likely peddling anonymous quotes from publicists on one side or the other — sentiments we’ve all heard, and probably from the same publicists.

    My guess, at the end of the day (and as one of Zeitchik’s sources concludes), is that Weinstein wins the battle.  He’s proven recently enough that he’ll push something down the collective AMPAS throat if he doesn’t have the goods (Sienna Miller in “Factory Girl.”)  It’s that insatiable awards appetite.  The tragedy this time around isn’t that he won’t have the quality, though, but, more likely, that he’ll have an incomplete product that could have been better serviced.  We’ll see how it turns out, but here’s a look at Zeitchik’s collection of a month-and-a-half’s worth of rumors:

    Weinstein is pushing for a December release for the movie, which director Stephen Daldry is working on in post. The romance set in postwar Germany and based on Bernhard Schlink’s novel already has buzz from strong test screenings, though there are post elements left to be completed…

    Rudin, however, has been lobbying hard for a 2009 release. The producer already has two Oscar candidates — “Revolutionary Road,” with Leonardo DiCaprio and Winslet as a married couple in the 1950s, at Paramount Vantage, and the Broadway transfer “Doubt,” toplining Meryl Streep and Philip Seymour Hoffman, at Miramax — and a third would mean he is vying heavily against himself.

    The producer faced a similar scenario last year when his “No Country for Old Men” and “There Will Be Blood” competed against each other for Oscar kudos.

    The fact that Winslet stars in both “Revolutionary Road” and “The Reader” would mean the actress too could wind up competing against herself.

    The rest.

  • On the economy

    Two things, since it’s a relatively quiet morning so far and I’m catching up on a lot here and there.

    First, the economy talk is crippling for many, including myself.  It’s tough to wrap one’s head around even the simplest Time Magazine cover story, let alone the most in-depth Wall Street Journal piece.  But staying true to form as one of the good guys, Ron Paul has laid out the particulars in the most easy-to-consume manner I’ve yet to come across in this CNN op-ed.  Give it a read if you’re interested in making sense of it all.

    Second, last night, David Letterman broought Bill Clinton on to discuss a few things, but key among them was the economic crisis.  It was an awesome three-segment visit that gets a bit dizzying in the language from time to time, but, again, in true Clinton form, he laid it all out in consumable terms for the most part.  But basically, it was just a damn fine interview and the audience was silent throughout, clearly taking it all in.  I haven’t found a YouTube clip yet, but again, if you’re interested, poke around for it and I’m sure it’ll turn up.

    Now, back to Oscar stuff…

  • ‘W.’ TV spot

    Bad quality, but here it is.  And a different one here.  I’m starting to sense a Best Actor nod for Josh Brolin is more in the cards than initially expected.  But that script.  I don’t know, maybe it’ll all come out in the wash: