In Contention

Blog

  • Robert Downey Jr.’s ‘Dark’ diss

    Robert Downey Jr. at the premiere of Zodiac in February 2007

    My whole thing is that that I saw ‘The Dark Knight’. I feel like I’m dumb because I feel like I don’t get how many things that are so smart. It’s like a Ferrari engine of storytelling and script writing and I’m like, ‘That’s not my idea of what I want to see in a movie.’ I loved ‘The Prestige’ but didn’t understand ‘The Dark Knight’. Didn’t get it, still can’t tell you what happened in the movie, what happened to the character and in the end they need him to be a bad guy. I’m like, ‘I get it. This is so high brow and so f–king smart, I clearly need a college education to understand this movie.’ You know what? F-ck DC comics. That’s all I have to say and that’s where I’m really coming from.

    Well…

    (Courtesy: Moviehole)

  • ‘Duchess’ website has an eye toward the threads

    www.theduchessmovie.comParamount Vantage has always been a safe haven for the crafts cateogries when it comes to the Oscar season.  Each year, the Vantage Guilds website showcases the below-the-line stuff that consistently gets the short end of the coverage stick.  (We harp on this a lot around these parts).

    With that in mind, the studio has launched an official website for Saul Dibb’s upcoming film “The Duchess.”  And as a part of the interactivity, there is a special section spotlighting Michael O’Connor’s costume designs, which could be a formidable contender for the film this year if nothing else.

    There’s also an extremely informative section called “Discover” that could keep you busy for quite a while…if Georgiana Spencer, the Duchess of Devonshire does it for you, that is.  There’s tons of stuff about “the Empress of Fashion” and plenty to indicate a strong push for the design aspects of the film.

    The trailer is also included (see below), as well as the usual media bells and whistles.  Give it all a look here.  And I suppose now’s as good a time as any to remind the readership that Gerard Kennedy’s weekly “Tech Support” column will launch on Thursday, September 4.

    httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLRoimyj9BE

  • Woah…’Thunder’ isn’t doing too shabby…

    (from left) Jack Black, Robert Downey Jr. and Ben Stiller in Tropic ThunderThis kind of surprises me.  I don’t know how long it’ll stay in the 80 percentile, but I kind of thought we’d see more assessments along these lines than the review highlights Ryan Adams has cherry-picked over at Awards Daily.  But there’s certainly more where that came from.

    Seriously, a film like this, I’d expect an up-in-arms deconstruction from every self-important critic in the country.  The protest controversy seemed like it would be fuel for that fire, but I guess it’s gone in a different direction.

    Curious.

    Not that I bother with the collective at Rotten Tomatoes or that I read — well — pretty much ANY critics anymore.  The art form is so stale, so lacking in the perspective it had not five years ago.  More often than not I just don’t bother.

    But good on ’em for finding some joy in this little farce.  It has its flaws, but it’s solid and even smart here and there and I’m obviously a fan of Tom Cruise’s antics, so bring on some more positive assessments.

  • ‘Brothers Bloom’ poster

    Like Brian, I was a big fan of 2006’s “Brick.”  It was easily the most underrated film of the year and announced the arrival of a considerable talent in writer/director Rian Johnson.

    The wunderkind’s latest, “The Brothers Bloom,” could be something special, but given the ambition, it also has all the makings of a sophomore slump.  Time will tell, though I’m more amped for his “Bloom” follow-up, “Looper.”

    Anyway, Rope of Silicon has landed the new poster from the film, as well as two additional stills featuring Adrien Brody, Mark Ruffalo and Rachel Weisz.  Here’s a look at the one-sheet:

    Summit Entertainment\'s The Brothers Bloom

    Honestly?  I don’t think I like it.  There’s something incredibly pedestrian about it.  And it’s certainly not as striking as the materials for “Brick” (here, here and here).  But you have to sell the pic, so I’m generally fogiving of stuff like this.

  • Logo

    Many of you may have been aware that over the past year the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has been systematically yanking the “Oscar” name and likeness from a number of websites.  Sasha Stone’s Oscarwatch was the first to go (now Awards Daily) and upstarts like The Oscar Igloo have also made a switch (now Awards Circuit).

    (The Academy definitely set the legal wheels in motion on Stone’s site, but I can’t be sure on the Igloo folks, who may have been off the AMPAS radar completely.  Ditto fan-oriented sites such as EverythingOscar.com.)

    Well, this month the Academy has taken further steps, setting its sights on In Contention and, namely, the Oscar silhouette that has so identified itself with the site’s logo since the dot-com launch in July of 2006.  And in the way of compliance (though what choice is there?), we have yielded to the Academy’s wishes and conjured up a new look for the logo.

    Really, it’s all for the best because that old red slash, however identifiable, has become tired in the editor’s view.  And with some special ideas in store for post-Oscar season in 2009, the AMPAS strong arm has frankly expedited a move that was a long time coming.

    So, I want to give a special thanks to graphic designer Dan Crook for whipping up the new banner.  I like the slickness of it, the iconic grab factor of the black streak.  I hope you’ll grow to feel the same way.

    And before I forget, I want to again acknowledge the work of Claes (a.k.a. Grizzly) for his assistance on the old logo’s look.  It got a lot of mileage, and all good things come to an end.  He’s been M.I.A. for over a year, but wherever you are, thanks chum.

    To the memories:

    To the memories

  • NYFF reveals full line-up

    Mickey Rourke in The WrestlerThe full schedule of the 46th annual New York Film Festival was released today.  indieWIRE has the scoop.

    The big showcase I’m looking forward to is, of course, Darren Aronofsky’s “The Wrestler” (which I touched on yesterday).  But also landing in the Big Apple will be Clint Eastwood’s “Changeling,” Mike Leigh’s “Happy-Go-Lucky” and Steven Soderbergh’s “Che.”

    Time will tell if the latter remains distribution-less after a North American bow.  Something tells me, given Soderbergh’s tenacity, that it will.

    I’m also interested in Matteo Garrone’s “Gomorrah” (with an “h” this time), which was a considerable favorite at this year’s Cannes fest, as well as Wong Kar-Wai’s “Ashes of Time Redux.”  Despite a personal distaste for the Chinese helmer, this project has a special something keeping my interest piqued.  Ari Folman’s Canne fave “Waltz with Bashir” will also make the trip.

    And then there is Steve McQueen’s “Hunger,” a meditation on the IRA hunger strike that made Bobby Sands a national hero in Northern Ireland.  I spent a weekend in Belfast while I was overseas this summer and remember coming across a giant wall mural of Sands, part of a guided tour with one of his former compatriots who also participated in the protest.

    I’ve been hearing fantastic things about Michael Fassbender’s performance in the film.  He dropped an amount of weight that supposedly makes Christian Bale look obese in “The Machinist.”  It might be one of the lowest flying turns on the awards radar so far, and if IFC Films can spin a valiant campaign around the actor, watch out.

    Check out the full roster of NYFF titles here.  The festival begins September 26 and runs through October 12.

  • Peter Gabriel’s road to Oscar

    Peter GabrielI just spent a pleasant four minutes watching Peter Gabriel’s ground-breaking “Sledgehammer” video from 1985, which Patrick Goldstein smartly linked to recently at The Big Picture.

    It’s one of those things…I haven’t watched “Sledgehammer” since the early 90s, when MTV still had a fingertip’s grasp on relevance.  Those weekend music video countdowns were the stuff of legend when I was a kid.  Two days counting down the top 100 videos of all time?  Forget about it, I parked it in front of the tube for the duration.

    “Take on Me,” “Thriller,” “Vogue,” “Losing my Religion,” “Need You Tonight,” “You Might Think,” “Money For Nothing” and perhaps the last truly great music video of an era that crashed and burned with Hype Williams and the like, “Virtual Insanity.”  “Sledgehammer” held court in the greatest of company, always in the top five or six.

    Goldstein is responding to a recent Fred Goodman story in the New York Times regarding Gabriel’s innovative thinking, not only in the creative sector, but in the business sector.  Consider Goodman’s lede:

    When Charles Grimsdale, a British investor, started the Internet music venture OD2 in 1999, he had a hard time persuading large record companies to license their music. But when he approached the rock musician Peter Gabriel about putting his music catalog online, he got a very different response: Mr. Gabriel was not only willing, he also wanted to take a stake in the company.

    And here’s Goldstein:

    At 58, Gabriel is a graybeard by pop music standards, but he’s been incredibly far-sighted in his ability to anticipate huge changes brought about by new technology. In 1999, when record companies were still trying to protect their lucrative CD business by preventing fans from downloading music on the Internet, a British investor couldn’t persuade any record labels to license their music catalogs to his new Internet venture, called OD2. When he contacted Gabriel, the artist not only offered up his catalog of songs but promptly invested in the company itself, which later sold for $40 million.

    Gabriel is at the forefront of Oscar talk this year for his work on Pixar’s “WALL-E.”  Specifically, his closing credits tune “Down to Earth” could be in the derby for Best Original Song.

    However, the Academy has shown a tendency of shying away from tracks relegated to a film’s credit roll, opting instead for songs that work organically with their respective films, paying close attention to how they are utilyzed, not simply the merit of the tunes themselves.

    Then again, an argument could be made that the closing credits sequence of “WALL-E” carries a narrative weight that is imperative to the story.  (You can give it a listen over the “WALL-E” trailer here.)

    In any case, I wonder if the industry goodwill reflected in Goldstein and Goodman’s pieces could go a long way for Gabriel during the season.  His is a vigorous creative spirit that deserves whatever accolades might be bestowed.

    Soon enough we’ll get the Best Original Song chart up and rolling.  Still waiting on contenders to show themselves.

  • Behind the scenes of Henry Selick’s ‘Coraline’

    Every time I walk into the comic book store lately I feel the urge to pick up Neil Gaiman’s “Coraline.” I haven’t done so yet (mainly because I’m buried in so many other books at the moment), but it’s an interesting tale that could make a fabulous feature film.

    Henry Selick is, of course, doing just that and Rotten Tomatoes has secured a behind-the-scenes look at the film. Focus Features is set to distribute “Coraline” in February of next year, but there is still an outside shot at an Academy-qualifying run in 2008 if the film is finished in time. It would enter into the animated feature derby with “WALL-E,” perhaps Sony Classics’ “Waltz With Bashir” and DreamWorks SKG’s “Kung Fu Panda” (which is just asking to be kicked to the awards curb).

    Next year, the competiton looks to be Pixar’s “Up,” Walt Disney’s “The Princess and the Frog” and Focus’s own “9.” Perhaps Robert Zemeckis’s “A Christmas Carol” will turn the tide for motion capture for the animators, but I doubt it.

    “Coraline” is currently set for release on February 6, 2009.

  • Swear to me!

    Four Your Consideration: The Dark Knight

    (Courtesy: Rope of Silicon)

  • PAGE TO SCREEN: “W” by Stanley Weiser

    Page to Screen at In Contention“Thirty days!  I’d like to shove a plate of Freedom Fries down that slick piece of shit’s throat.  Givin’ me lectures?  The next chance I get I’ll be glad to veto something French.  Damned glad.”

    Those were the words that seemed to send a shot through the industry when Stanley Weismer’s script “W” made its way into a number of hands last April.  The speculation set in, the timidity, and in more ways than one, it did so with good reason.

    I have heard “W” praised by smart journalists and gifted filmmakers alike, but when I flipped through its pages last spring, I was met with an effort taxing in its elementary construction.  Packed to the brim with dialogue meant to secure George W. Bush’s position as a simpleton who managed his way into the most powerful position in the free world, “W” reads more like a parody than the modest character study it aims to be.

    The script is bookended with a device that draws a distinct clarity about the film’s ultimate point: Bush is a simple man meant for pretzels, beer and a love of baseball, not a man who should have the keys to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.  And that’s a valid enough thesis, because the narrative — to its credit — doesn’t try to lambast Dub-ya throughout.

    (more…)

  • Greatest film? Ever changing, ever evolving…

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  • Not to ‘go there,’ but…

    SumoSac…it’s time for an In Contention product endorsement.

    A few weeks ago my friend John Campea wrote an ecstatic response to the SumoSac, a large “bean-bag-type” chair filled with shredded memory foam, over at The Movie Blog. See, my mouth used to water every time I walked by the LoveSac store at Hollywood & Highland (whatever happened to that place anyway?) and seeing that there was a new brand on the street, I decided to take the dive.

    The SumoSac prices are, first and foremost, a lot lower than the LoveSac, and that’s key — since, I mean, who has nearly a grand to blow on a giant friggin’ sac? But I thought it’d be worth tossing it out there at In Contention because, hey, it’s movie related, right??

    So I’ve been enjoying the Sac (man that sounds weird to say) for a number of weeks now and it’s a totally comfortable addition to any movie-goer’s living room. And for the game lovers out there, I parked it in front of the big screen a few days ago for a Madden ’08 send-off and lost track of the time.

    So if you’ve been looking for something like this, I’d definitely recommend taking the economy route and grabbing yourself a SumoSac. It’s one of those things that makes a DVD seem a little sweeter, a sporting event a touch more exciting. Anything to amplify the experience, right?

  • If you missed tonight’s ‘Uncut’…

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

  • Bernie Mac and Isaac Hayes to share a swan song

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

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

    Is “Soul Men” cursed?

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

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

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

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

  • The Sunday Times digs into ‘W’

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

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

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

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

    Here’s the Goodwin’s closer:

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

    Sure, if they can.

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

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

    Read the rest of Goodwin’s story here.

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

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

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

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

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

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

    (more…)

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

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

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

  • Sasha Stone declares it for the Bat

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

    Here’s a starter regarding the stellar box office:

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

    And the closer:

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

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

    And the editor isn’t unaware of the irony…