In Contention

Tag: Jeff Wells

  • Dweebs vs. Hot Dog Eaters

    (UPDATE: While he’s good and fired up, Jeff takes the opportunity to slam the “effete critics” who don’t like “Biutiful” as “coming from a stifled and constipated place.”)

    Hot dog eaters? Hey, you asked for more double entendres, though I’m guessing Jeff Wells doesn’t quite mean it that that way.

    I’ve been a fan for many years of Hollywood Elsewhere’s energetic, unguarded and often unhinged Cannes coverage, even — no, especially — when I suspected I’d eventually disagree with him on the films, once I saw them. Actually being at the fest, however, affords me the chance to disagree with him both immediately and in person — as we did last night, on Abbas Kiarostami’s rapturous Competition standout “Certified Copy.” (More on that anon.) What I like about Wells is that he’ll cheerfully join you for a drink mere minutes after posting this:

    Abbas Kiarostami’s Copie Conforme (a.k.a., Certified Copy) is what most hot-dog-eating humans on the planet earth would call a “dead movie” … However, if you’re a member in good standing of Film Dweeb Nation, a presumably human but possibly alien culture which tends to favor and in some cases worship the imaginations of sunlight found in anal cavities, you’ll stroll into the Orange press cafe just after the screening of Copie Conforme, like a certain British journalist did 20 or 25 minutes ago, and go “oh, I loved it!” I looked at this guy incredulously and said, “Hold up, let me get this straight. You didn’t like the Inarritu [i.e., Biutiful] but you liked Copie Conforme?”

    I can’t imagine which journalist he’s talking about … any ideas?

  • Waiting on the blog-o-rage

    BloggingI’ve been kinda, sorta keeping up with some Twittered reactions to the recent blogger smack downs by Cynthia Littleton, Michael Fleming and editor-in-chief Peter Bart, but curiously, no reaction from the peanut gallery…yet.  It’s a lazy Sunday, after all.

    In a nutshell, it seems with this trinity Variety has called for us all to get along.  The usual names are brought up in connection to incessant, unbearable cyber-squabbling: Jeff Wells, David Poland, Nikki Finke, Patrick Goldstein.  Sharon Waxman’s name is tossed into the hat as well, but why can’t anyone just say it?  Finke and the traffic she has generated as a result of questionable (and certainly grating) practices has put the fear into industry professionals and competetive journalists.  She is the 21st Century bad apple and she’s spoiling the bunch.

    Sadly, some smart people seem to consistently be taking her lead when it comes to sand box tactics.  If smart, longtime journalists like Goldstein and Waxman are being pulled down to her level, what can we expect of other naturally competitive and snarky writers?

    I’m in no position to stand on a soap box so I won’t.  I’ve been in my fair share of online spats and felt stupid afterwards.  Usually my bone of contention will stem from a beef on a writer’s representation of a film, hardly a fight for it’s own sake or a competitive drive to amp up the hits.  But I do hate what Finke is and has been doing and it should be brought up in a certain light.

    All of that said, I think Variety is putting itself in a precarious position by unleashing three editorials on this issue in the same day, one of them from an old media type who is widely (and wrongly) known as “hating” bloggers.  So far, no reaction, but I expect it to come soon.  And I don’t think it’ll be pretty.

    (A few greatest hits from the three pieces after the jump.  And click the pic for a larger version, by the way.)

    (more…)

  • Wells joins the guessing game

    In response to Tom O’Neil’s contender shortlist that I discussed yesterday, Jeff Wells at Hollywood Elsewhere has come up with his own list of Best Picture frontrunners – and predicted also-rans. (O’Neil has since significantly amended his list, by the way – wisely removing “Blindness” and “Synecdoche, New York” from Best Picture consideration, and adding some titles including, bizarrely, “Mamma Mia!” Meanwhile, names like Tommy Lee Jones, Rachel McAdams and Kristin Scott Thomas enter the actors’ mix.)

    Wells’ top choices include “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” (which he describes as “not the front-runner,  but the contender with the best script”), “Milk,” “Doubt,” “Gran Torino,” “Frost/Nixon,” “W” and “The Visitor.” “W” is a predictably contentious selection; I certainly know a few people who would disagree with his assertion that it “works on the page.”

    Rather more fun is Wells’ rundown of the titles that he thinks don’t have a prayer, which he breaks down as follows:

    “Appaloosa” (possibly worthy Ed Harris western but New Line leftover status dooms it); “Burn After Reading” (a dry Coen brothers goof, not an Oscar film); “Body of Lies” (I know nothing about this brilliant Middle Eastern spy thriller that would qualify it as Oscar bait); “Changeling” (Best Actress nom for Angelina Jolie but the film, while dramatically solid and well made, just isn’t stratospheric enough); “The Dark Knight” (are Tom and Pete having us off?); “Defiance” (an Ed Zwick World War II movie about Russian-Jewish resistance guerillas…hello?); “Mamma Mia!” (all right, that’s enough); “Miracle at St. Anna” (a Spike Lee movie in which a bank teller is shot by an old guy having a memory seizure?) and “Vicki Cristina Barcelona” (can’t and won’t happen).

    I must say I agree with him on most counts there – in particular, I’ll be somewhat surprised if “Miracle at St. Anna” and “Defiance” even turn out to be good films, let alone Best Picture possibilities. I can’t help thinking, though, that some little picture that’s slipped through all these lists will sneak up on us later this year. We sure weren’t talking about “Juno” a year ago.