• Tom O’Neil wonders whether “G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra” is Razzie-bound. [Gold Derby]
• Devin Faraci, meanwhile (one of the “easy marks” Paramount screened the film to over the rest of the nation’s critics), comments on the “No ‘Joe’” brouhaha. [CHUD]
• And Steve Weintraub talks to the film’s screenwriter, Stuart Beattie. [Collider]
Movie stars are often given much attention for the fashion that they sport off-screen. Seldom does the on-screen attire garner as much publicity.
Nevertheless, the Academy Award for Best Costume Design recognizes those talented men and women who design the threads actors wear on screen. Not only does this work add to the elegance and authenticity of the film, but it can also express the character and the period, mood and setting of the piece.
For the last three years, this category has chosen films which have highlighted the extravagant attire of the upper class from centuries ago. Period films almost always triumph in this field and, in fact, garner the vast majority of nominations, though a spot or two is usually reserved every year for a fantasy effort.
This is also a category which tends to reward designers who have been around a long time, with most nominees every year having been in the race before, although a spot or two is almost always reserved for a newcomer as well. And unlike many other crafts categories, the costume branch does not seem averse to nominating a film which scores in few if any other places.
The most likely nominee this year, if not the most likely winner (sight unseen, of course), might be Janet Patterson for “Bright Star.” This Jane Campion effort was very well received at Cannes in May and the crafts look exquisite. Patterson, who landed two of her three previous nominations for Campion collaborations (“The Piano” and “Portrait of a Lady”), looks likely to return to the race after 12 years. I’d be surprised if she failed to be nominated.
• Jeremy Piven would like to see an “Entourage” film. Who wouldn’t? [CNN]
• Vincent Cassel refuses to court Hollywood. Who needs it when you’ve got Monica Bellucci at home? [Daily Telegraph]
• Robert Levin sits down with “In the Loop” director Armando Iannucci. [Film School Rejects]
I’ll get to Quentin Tarantino’s latest misfire in due time, but for now, this David Poland video review of the film is its own special kind of brilliance, even if it provides no insight at all as to why Poland liked the film:
• Quentin Tarantino set to raise funds with special Chi-town screening of “Inglourious Basterds.” [Chicago Tribune]
• Andrew O’Hehir on the lawsuit that could derailed the “Hobbit” adaptation. [Beyond the Multiplex]
• In a tight economy, how do you decide what films deserve your hard-earned cash? [The Guardian]
Zoom. Smash. Bang. Grunt. Zap. Splash. Screech.
A single sound effect can capture a character, emotion or setting. And creating such sounds is no easy task, requiring creativity, ingenuity and constant communication with the other filmmakers to best capture the feel of a film.
The manifestation of these aural components — as well as their integration into the overall soundtrack of the film — is recognized by the Academy with the award for Best Sound Editing.
I suspect we’ve seen at least two – very possibly three or even four – of this category’s eventual 2009 nominees already. (At this point last year, we had seen four of five!) Blockbuster entertainment tends to rule the day. Let’s take a look.
Though I doubt it will be able to win, given the failure of its predecessor to do so, I am pretty confident that massive box office, not the complex mechanics involved, will manage to bring “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen” into the final five. Michael Bay’s films do well with the sound branch.
Also from the summer, another film I strongly expect to enter the fray is “Star Trek.” Against all odds, the film managed to be a very successful reboot to this franchise and sound effects were pivotal to its success. While the series has only been embraced by the category intermittently, if there is one category where I expect this film to score, this is it. The sound effects were impressive and with a wide range.
I’m just settling in here at the Bayside Hilton next to the San Diego Convention Center. Killer view, badge pick-up within the hour. It’s all happening, etc. But I find myself pondering the “Con” aspect of it all more and more these days.
Of course, I disagree with David Poland’s notion that the festivities here don’t manage to move the needle at all. The mood is set, legions of journalists (every Tom, Dick and Harry with a Blogspot or a Live Journal gets in as “press” these days) spread the word and a culture is born right here, every year. It’s an unknowable variable, of course. Things can go one way or the other, and nothing will necessarily be made or broken. But the publicity opportunity is rather undeniable.
Which brings me back to a point I made just this afternoon, the idea of the web universe largely playing the role of extended mouthpiece for a studio system more and more desperate to reach audiences and drum up excitement in advance of their product’s unveiling. It’s marketing 101. But it’s not journalism, any more than the cut-and-paste press releases you find in the trades every morning.
So why do we cover it?
• Alex Pappademas talks “Inglourious Basterds” with Quentin Tarantino the day following David Carradine’s death. [GQ]
• How producer Don Murphy turned and online tiff into a novel option. [The Big Picture]
• Eight blatantly misleading movie posters. Hear, hear on “Reign of Fire.” Never felt so burned… [Empire]
What’s with all the poster action today? I can’t keep up. Anyway, in the interests of efficiency, I’ve paired up the new one-sheets for “Jennifer’s Body” and “Inglourious Basterds” (yes, another one) for your viewing pleasure. Why not? After all, they’re both advertising blood-spattered comedies from smart-aleck Oscar-winning writers, and they both seem destined to grace a lot of teenage boys’ walls, albeit for fairly different reasons.
[Source: Bloody Disgusting and Screen Rant]
These new “Inglourious Basterds” character posters have been knocking around for a few days now, but I only really paused to look at them this afternoon. I must say, whatever my suspicions of the film itself, the marketers deserve a bouquet: I wholeheartedly love the cinema-steeped wit and intelligence of the artwork we’ve seen thus far, and this is no exception.
The jury may still be out on Quentin Tarantino’s latest opus following a rocky Cannes premiere, but don’t tell that to Harvey Weinstein. Resurrecting the talk that surfaced over a year ago that Tarantino had designs on more than one instalment of “Inglourious Basterds,” the producer claims to be ready for seconds:
“Brad wants to do Inglourious II. We all want to do it. And the movie hasn’t even come out yet!” the movie mogul told GQ magazine. “But unfortunately I cannot give away the plot.”
Weinstein reports that Tarantino has so much material mapped out for the “Inglourious Basterds” universe that there was talk at one point of making a Band of Brothers style TV series.
“We could do two movies, three movies. I was begging for the movies, but Quentin wanted to do the TV series, Bob [Weinstein, Harvey’s partner in The Weinstein Company] wanted to do the TV series, so it was like two against one, you know?
“And I was getting outvoted all over the place, so I just figured, All right, forget it, I’m not gonna be a loser, I’ll jump to the winning side. And then Quentin turns it into one movie. Go figure.”
• More news on the James Tobak/Brett Ratner/Robert Evans John DeLorean biopic. This could be fascinating, but…Ratner? [The Carpetbagger]
• Patrick Goldstein responds to the news that Sony, Scott Rudin and Kevin Spacey will bring the Somali pirate saga to the big screen. [The Big Picture]
• Catherine Shoard talks to Diane Kruger about her work in Quentin Tarantino’s “Inglourious Basterds.” [The Guardian]
• Jon Favreau films on location in the Mojave for military authenticity. [Edwards Air Force Base]
• Ed Asner is ready for more roles. [Associated Press]
• Tom O’Neil chats up the actors of Broadways’ “God of Carnage.” [Gold Derby]
• Noah Forrest gets wrapped up in the excitement of seeing “Drag Me to Hell” with an audience (a week or so after decrying the public movie-going experience). [Movie City News]
• Indie filmmaker and noted script doctor John Sayles is trying to sell a work of historical fiction. [Los Angeles Times]
• Vicki Reid talks “Last Chance Harvey” with Dustin Hoffman across the pond. [Daily Telegraph]
• Anthony Breznican wraps up Cannes with a look at the convergence of light and dark subject matter. [USA Today]
• Quentin Tarantino talks about potential trims to “Inglourious Basterds” with Anne Thompson. [The Daily Beast]
• Tony Scott talks John Travolta’s villain and scripting a remake of “The Taking of Pelham 123.” [Empire]
• On the road with the boys from “Spinal Tap.” [New York Times]
It’s somewhat surprising that our year-in-advance Oscar coverage is only three months old. That now ancient list of predictions seems so long ago, and yet, even with Cannes behind us and this or that indication of a few of the contenders, I have no idea how to offer an educated update beyond general housekeeping. The season, it seems, will remain elusive for just a little while longer.
Here’s what we know: Critics didn’t respond to Universal’s “The Boat That Rocked” across the pond. But the Brits hardly have a soft spot for Richard Curtis. Along similar lines, Stephen Frears’s “Chéri” hasn’t exactly inspired either. But both films, from awards savvy studios, could find a second wind when they eventually open Stateside.
The biggest Oscar hopeful to emerge from this year’s Cannes fest is, in my opinion, Jane Campion’s “Bright Star.” Heralded in some quarters as a return to form for the director, and snatched up by the intrepid Bob Berney (formerly of Picturehouse and now closing in on a name for his distribution company with partner Bill Polhad), the film could be a nominations hog, anywhere from six to 10 possibilities. You’ll note all of my ponderings in that regard in the latest chart update below.
As it turned out, the most logical on-paper prediction turned out the be the right one. After emerging as the bridesmaid from several festivals past — winning the Grand Prix in 2001, Best Director in 2005 — the venerable Austrian auteur Michael Haneke has finally won the Palme d’Or for his stark moral drama “The White Ribbon.”
Whether or not jury president Isabelle Huppert, a two-time Haneke leading lady in the past, wielded much influence on this decision — or indeed, whether she even needed to — is something for the pundits to debate. (I personally doubt it, though there was no mistaking the sly smile on her face as she announced his name at the podium.) Either way, there’s little denying that Haneke was overdue for world cinema’s highest honor; perhaps there was a career-achievement angle to the award, but the critical acclaim for “The White Ribbon” has been extensive.
From watching the ceremony, it was clear that Haneke wasn’t the most popular winner of the night; that designation clearly goes to hometown favorite Jacques Audiard, whose “A Prophet” — like “Gomorrah” last year — was by and large deemed the favorite for the Palme, but ultimately had to be content with the silver-medal Grand Prix. The rousing standing ovation he received, however, spoke for itself. (I should add that a second-place finish for Audiard was, embarrassingly, the only correct call I made the whole night.)
The real talking point of the awards, however, will likely remain Charlotte Gainsbourg’s Best Actress prize for her evidently courageous work in “Antichrist” — a clear gesture of support by the jury for a film that has provoked prolonged media outrage since its unveiling, and a blatant slap in the face of Cannes’ alternative ‘ecumenical’ jury who went out of their way to condemn it. The irony of handing a female performance award to a film that has been repeatedly pelted with accusations of misogyny is rather delicious; at the very least, it’s an indication that this is a film to be taken seriously.
(More commentary, and a full list of winners, after the cut.)
• Scandalising media and polarising critics, Lars Von Trier’s “Antichrist” emerged as the undisputed talking-point of the Cannes Film Festival.
• That firestorm even managed to overshadow the Cannes debut of Quentin Tarantino’s divisive “Inglourious Basterds.”
• In other news from the Croisette, “A Prophet” impressed critics, while “Taking Woodstock” took a hit.
• We celebrated the start of summer (and provoked some argument) with a list of the all-time Top 10 action sequences.
• Unfortunately, our review deems “Terminator Salvation” unlikely to earn a place on any such future lists.
• In the wake of that disappointment, “Up” happily lived up to expectations.
• In box office news, “Angels and Demons” turned out to be a pale shadow of its predecessor.
• This week’s edition of Page to Screen reviewed the literary source for Jason Reitman’s upcoming comedy “Up in the Air.”
• John delved further through his personal cinematic treasure trove, returning to the 1990s, and reappraising last year’s “Revolutionary Road.”
• AFI launches its own YouTube channel. [YouTube]
• Robin Sanders reports on the Stephen Frears event from Cannes. [indieWIRE]
• The wars continue: Patrick Goldstein lays into Peter Bart (and Variety) once again for being soft on the industry. [The Big Picture]
• Lionsgate launches an impressive new website for festival Sensation “Precious.” [WeAreAllPrecious.com]
• Chris Lee talks to “The Girlfriend Experience” star Sasha Grey. [Los Angeles Times]
• Kim Voynar, meanwhile, dissects Grey’s character and wonders whether the film objectifies women. [Movie City News]
• The publicity floodgates open for “Terminator Salvation,” starting with Irina Aleksander’s interview with the film’s rookie producers. [New York Daily News]
• Todd Gilchrist, meanwhile, corners director McG. [Cinematical]
• And finally, headline of the day, from John Anderson’s review of the film: “Hasta La Levity, Baby.” [Washington Post]
• Aha, headline of the day #2: “Tarantino ‘Basterd’-izes Cannes. Such sweet truth. [USA Today]
