Ron Howard on board makes me nervous, but the plan is ambitious enough to give me goosebumps. Your thoughts?
Tag: Ron Howard
-
12/15 Oscarweb Round-up
• Karina Longworth holds her nose and writes about Oscar, but makes a compelling case for “Avatar” as the “timeliest” film of the season. [Little Gold Men]• The film’s star, Zoe Saldana, on the state of women in Hollywood. [Speakeasy]
• Charting the best music documentaries of the decade. [The Playlist]
-
‘American Graffiti’ — why it still resonates, 36 years later
George Lucas grew up in a small town, Modesto, California, where on Friday nights the guys hopped in their freshly washed and waxed cars and cruised the streets, rock and roll blaring out of the rolled down windows. Everyone knew each other so the streets were alive as though one big party were happening.Lucas, with William Huyck and Gloria Katz, would later write the screenplay for “American Graffitti,” a remarkable little film set in 1962 and a small town in California on the last night of summer before school begins. Loosely based on experiences Lucas had as a teenager, the film would become a touchstone for a generation, having an impact on pop culture no one expected. For the generations after the 1970s that have seen the film, it has the same curious effect, and without sounding self-important or condescending, that impact will grow as they, and we, continue to age.
Why? We knew people like this. We were people like this.
The film is familiar for almost anyone who ever went to high school, perhaps more so to small town natives. We all knew the town tough guy who hung around with the high school kids long after he had left school because he needs the adoration they give him. There was the class geek: glasses-wearing, short, trying a little too hard to please, but likable just the same.
The class jock, who would also be the class president dating the head of the cheerleader sqaud, and the intellectual, who could not wait to get out of the town and see what the world held for him. All of us, sometime in our lives at school, knew people like this, perhaps even were people like this.
-
5/19 Web Round-up
• Anthony Breznicaan reports on the big “Christmas Carol” to do at Cannes. [USA Today]• John Hiscock talks to Ron Howard about getting around the Vatican’s disapproval of “Angels & Demons” while filming on location. [Daily Telegraph]
• David Cox, meanwhile, believes the film will indeed hurt the Catholic Church with its depiction of an organization out of touch with modernity. [The Guardian]
• And Noah Forrest just wants to know what happened to the Tom Hanks he knew and loved. [Movie City News]
• Richard Woodward reports on the Jacques Tati retrospective going down at the Cinemathèque Française in Paris [Wall Street Journal]
• A bit out of the blue, a list of the 10 best suspense films of all time. [The Independent]
• Erica Abeel talks to Steven Soderbergh about his latest, “The Girlfriend Experience.” [indieWIRE]
• Nikki Finke reports that yet another actor you could care less about has been cast in Marvel’s “Thor.” [Deadline Hollywood Daily]
• Well that’s thinking outside the media coverage box for you: a look at…ahem…the “slash” fan fiction of the “Star Trek” dedicated. [Newsweek]
• Sam Raimi wants to go back in time and do everything on the “Spider-Man” franchise differently. You and me both, Sam. [Hero Complex]
-
5/18 Web Round-up
• “Star Trek” looks to be a hit off-world. [The Carpetbagger]• It looks like Kenneth Branagh and Marvel have found their Thor: Chris Hemsworth from “Star Trek.” [Deadline Hollywood Daily]
• Jeff Sneider takes a long, hard look at the MTV Movie Awards. [Examiner.com]
• Tom O’Neil poses the obvious question: Will “Angels & Demons” bring another Razzie bid for director Ron Howard? [Gold Derby]
• Speaking of which, someone finally calls out the two worst writers in the business as responsible for the clunky film. [Peter Bart]
• Dan Jolin wonders if the latest 3D craze is a bunch of hogwash. [Empire]
• Laughing stock Roger Friedman gets a new gig as “senior correspondent.” [Hollywood Reporter]
“Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian” premieres in D.C. [Washington Post]
• On the stamina of fan-movie filmmakers. [The Independent]
• Sad to see a once-great magazine reduced to nothing but constant top 10 lists, but here’s another one: top 10 “safe for work” movie strip scenes. Oy. [Premiere]
• Tom Shone talks to Ryan Fleck and Anna Boden, writer/directors of the brilliant “Sugar.” [The Guardian]
-
Keep hidden
In trying to disentangle the order of Martin Scorsese’s upcoming projects (in the wake of this week’s news that the master is taking on Sinatra), AwardsDaily’s Ryan Adams takes a peek at the range of titles that IMDB Pro lists on the director’s slate.
I am mistrustful of IMDB’s information at the best of times, particularly with a director like Scorsese who seems to nurture multiple projects indefinitely. (For how many years has “Silence” been in the conversation, after all?) But I was intrigued and a little puzzled to see an optioned property titled “Cache” at the head of the list, with a projected date of 2011.
Is this the long-mooted American remake Michael Haneke’s 2005 masterpiece, or is it unrelated? (There’s no accent aigu on the title, after all.) Can anyone enlighten me? I remember recoiling in horror when Ron Howard was mentioned in connection with the project a few years ago. Scorsese is obviously a step up, but a remake — by anyone — of Haneke’s very idiosyncratic film still strikes me as a dicey prospect, given how rooted it is in a very specific historical and political context.
-
Realization: Dan Brown is tailor made for TV
I’m not going to review “Angels & Demons.” Sometimes the idea of tearing a film apart just doesn’t quite appeal to me, believe it or not. But watching the expected unfold on the Sony lot last night, it suddenly occurred to me that Dan Brown’s bloated if intriguingly researched fiction has no place on the big screen. It might, in fact, be better suited to television.Think about it. A show like “24” (which is compelling this season for the first time in three years) milks every close call for what it’s worth. Each tick of the final episode clock mixes with the soaring brass of the score, all but announcing: “Tune in next week, same Bauer time, same Bauer channel.” And that’s what a Brown adaptation feels like. Except the effect is exhausting in a two-hour span of time. The conduit of cinema simply doesn’t support it.
One could go back and forth on the issue of quality all day long. Those championing the thrill ride experience would be equally justified in their assessment as those who find their foreheads red from constant smacking at the amount of regurgitated exposition (which seems to be an unfortunate necessity in these films). But the breadth of the episodic could make a story like “The Da Vinci Code” or “Angels & Demons” sing. Brown, a masterful storyteller in that can’t-put-it-down kind of way, could make every carefully plotted (some would say contrived) set piece or dramatic beat count within the consistent ups and downs of a television series or mini-series. And theatrical audiences worldwide would be spared the headache of trying to keep up for too brief a time in a darkened room.
I’m certainly no studio or network head, so what do I know? “The Da Vinci Code” pulled in bucketloads of money across the globe and made Ron Howard, Brian Grazer and the lot much richer people. Though I don’t expect “Angels & Demons” to have the same success (not as immediately recognizable from a pop culture standpoint, regardless of the sequel factor), I also don’t expect “Digital Fortress” and “Deception Point” to go unfilmed forever. Ditto the upcoming “The Lost Symbol” (which will probably finds its way to screens first, completing the Robert Langdon trilogy). But I think there’s an alternative to cinema worth exploring with Brown’s work.
It might rescue the material from being panned outright, if nothing else.
-
Ron Howard on Real Time
Ryan Adams over at Awards Daily reminded me of Ron Howard’s Friday appearance on Real Time with Bill Maher, so I figured I’d offer the same trio of clips here. It was actually a pretty sober and valuable half hour chat, I thought.
-
Who almost starred in the season’s Oscar nominated films?
The folks at notstarring.com have put together a list of the year’s Oscar contenders and the stars who turned down opportunities to star in them. There is, of course, Nicolas Cage in “The Wrestler” and Russell Crowe in “Australia.” Heath Ledger is also mentioned for the latter (somehow I didn’t know that).“The Curious Case of Benjamin Button,” given its lengthy gestation period in Hollywood, had a slew of names attached: Steven Spielberg, Spike Jonze and Ron Howard in the director’s chair, Tom Cruise, John Travolta and Rachel Weisz in front of the camera.
Those of us who follow Batman casting decisions closely know all the names that pop up in the “Dark Knight” section, though somehow I never realized Linus Roache was going to reprise his role of Thomas Wayne in flashbacks. I feel like that would have worked and been a nice element to tie the film more closely to “Batman Begins.”
There are plenty others to read through, including Matt Damon and Chris Evans being considered for the roles that eventually went to Josh Brolin and James Franco respectively in “Milk.” There’s even a beefy section on “Wanted.” Go have a look.
-
Start from scratch, Academy
I do love a good rant about the Academy Awards. And Ryan Gilbey is, for my money, one of the sharpest, most entertaining film writers around these days. So it figures that a Gilbey-written attack on the Oscars, in the lefty political mag the New Statesman, should make for good reading.Gilbey cheerfully admits that he “hates” the Oscars, even as they fascinate him by “systematically disparag(ing) the creativity and alchemy of filmmaking.” And as in David Denby’s own recent rant, he dislikes all of this year’s Best Picture contenders save for “Milk,” though he still thinks Gus Van Sant’s film “pales beside” the likes of “WALL-E.” (I particularly like the accuracy with which he skewers “Frost/Nixon,” arguing that it is “built like a sitcom — every joke has its payoff in the following shot.” Bingo.)
But he also offers some ideas for how to fix the supposedly broken machine that is the Oscars. And while some of them are typically playful and even perverse (ban Ron Howard and Meryl Streep from future nominations, he pleads), some of them (to me, at least) really make a lot of sense. I particularly like his two-birds-with-one-stone approach to rectifying the embarrassing foreign-language situation, starting by abolishing the Foreign Film category altogether:
Scrap the only award specially designed to allow a sliver of glory to fall on cinema from other cultures. Why? Well, it’s patronising, for a start. Not quite as bad as the Best British Film Bafta, I’ll grant you, but still only a hair away from being termed The Special Needs Award For Hopeless Cases. It’s nothing short of insulting to see Laurent Cantet’s The Class and Ari Folman’s Waltz With Bashir consigned to this subsidiary category when there is more accomplishment in one frame of those films than in the entirety of most of this year’s Best Picture contenders. An awards system that does not consider The Class good enough to compete with Frost/Nixon or Slumdog Millionaire deserves to be a laughing stock.
So how will foreign-language films get a look-in? Call it positive discrimination or affirmative action, but from now on, the total number of Best Picture nominees should be raised to six, of which two must come from non-English-speaking countries. There is simply no other way to redress the balance than to force Academy voters to consider films that are not being screened at the local mall. Let’s put The Reader up against Waltz With Bashir and then we’ll see some real tears from Kate Winslet.
Good stuff. The rest here.
-
The new millennium Oscars?
Looking back over the previous Oscar winners for Best Picture since 2000, the start of a new century (and a new millennium), I find myself wondering sometimes what the hell the Academy was thinking. It’s no secret I disagree with the Academy a lot, but I can also admit that when they get it right, they get it right.But since 2000, their Best Pic choices have run the gamut from incredibly ridiculous, “Gladiator” and “A Beautiful Mind” being just goofy, to bang on, with “The Departed” and “The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King.” I am told the Academy is moving in a more progressive direction, willing to take more risks, and I suppose some of these winners do just that. But they could have gone further.
Year by year, here’s a quick look, with some thoughts about who might have won, and who should have at least been nominated…
-
DGA discrepancies with AMPAS are not uncommon
The announcement of this year’s DGA nominees has left the sense that the races for Best Picture and Best Director are over. Not so. While the guild and Academy line up most of the time, and have a decent track record with the directing branch, we must not forget the years that proved otherwise. This could be such a year.Ask yourself how many times the Best Picture category has lined up perfectly with the nominees for Best Director? Please also be aware that the DGA has awarded their prize sometimes to directors not even nominated for an Oscar: Ron Howard for “Apollo 13” and Steven Spielberg for “The Color Purple” to name a couple. So while the race is certainly clearer, it is by means over.
I still believe Woody Allen stands a strong chance for being nominated for “Vicky Christina Barcelona,” just as I believe that Darren Aronofsky could sneak in for “The Wrestler.” But who gets snubbed?
Gus Van Sant, Christopher Nolan, Ron Howard, David Fincher and Danny Boyle are worthy nominees all, most deserving of their attention and potential award. But who of those esteemed five could the Academy allow to slip away? It’s a tough call.
I hate to say it, but I think Fincher is the most likely snub. A stunning film to be sure, and likely the major nominee recipient…just as “The Color Purple” was in 1985. My gut tells me Fincher might get the shaft only because he’s been on that side of things before, and the others are just too hard to ignore. That said, let’s not forget that Ron Howard has been a victim of this sort in the past, for his finest work in fact, “Apollo 13.” And Nolan is in some dicey waters, though I doubt he could be the victim of the blockbuster mentality that haunted Spielberg for “Jaws” (and much of his career).
-
DGA nominees
I think we’re locked and loaded, folks…David Fincher, “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
Christopher Nolan, “The Dark Knight”
Ron Howard, “Frost/Nixon”
Gus Van Sant, “Milk”
Danny Boyle, “Slumdog Millionaire”What more is there to add at this point? This is where John Shanley needed to show up if there was any more hope for “Doubt.” This is where Darren Aronofsky needed to stake a claim if there was any Best Picture juice in “The Wrestler.” Ditto Stephen Daldry and “The Reader,” I guess. But with this, I think the consensus has become overwhelming and a bit difficult to ignore.
-
Guessing the DGA
So, with SAG, PGA and ASC out of the way, and with WGA still to come in a matter of hours, I guess it’s worth mentioning that the big daddy guild is announcing tomorrow: the Directors Guild of America (DGA). Now’s as good a time as any to take a stab at guessing the nominees…The DGA has been one hell of an Oscar Best Picture barometer for the last decade or so. Last year was the first real hiccup as the guild only nailed three of the eventual five nominees with their director choices. 2006 saw one misfire (but we all still figured “Dreamgirls” was in around this time two years ago). Then it was four years in a row five-for-five until we have another hiccup, Ridley Scott making it in for “Black Hawk Down” and Christopher Nolan (in the mix again this year) for “Memento.”
After that, the general trend was four-for-five with some 100 percents thrown in here and there, but you get the picture. This is, more often than not, quite the prognosticative (that’s so not a word) guild. With the PGA clearly establishing a consensus of sorts (not that those five films haven’t been the obvious contenders for weeks upon weeks), I see no real reason to get creative right now, so I’m going with the following:
David Fincher, “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button”
Christopher Nolan, “The Dark Knight”
Ron Howard, “Frost/Nixon”
Gus Van Sant, “Milk”
Danny Boyle, “Slumdog Millionaire”There are only two filmmakers that I think have a shot of cracking this quintet: Woody Allen for “Vicky Cristina Barcelona” and, perhaps more so, Darren Aronofsky for “The Wrestler.” John Patrick Shanley and “Doubt” showing up would truly shock me and Andrew Stanton is not eligible for “WALL-E,” so the field is rather thin.
What are you thinking?
-
New to DVD, the real Frost/Nixon Watergate interviews
As Ron Howard’s “Frost/Nixon” continues to step up during the film awards season this year, it might be worth noting that Liberation Entertainment has gone to the trouble of putting together a hell of a study guide: “Frost/Nixon: The Original Watergate Interviews,” currently available on DVD.Patching together the Watergate portion of Sir David Frost’s legendary four-part interview session with the former Commander-in-Chief, the DVD captures a moment in time that was of course expanded to an edge-of-your-seat drama by playwright Peter Morgan two years ago.
One thing that I paid attention to, seeing as I’ve never taken the time to view these interviews in the past (and certainly wasn’t around for their original airing), was Nixon’s unmitigated manipulation, reminding me of Robert McNamara’s peculiar obssession with control in Errol Morris’ sublime “The Fog of War” from 2003. It also adds a whole other perspective to Frank Langella’s performance on stage and screen, clearly an embodiment of Nixon the idea rather than Nixon the man (because a straight impersonation of the man’s disposition from the interviews would have been perhaps overly awkward and flat).
The piece runs roughly an hour and a half, with introductory and intermission commentary from Frost himself. There is also, of course, Frost’s book, “Frost/Nixon: Behind the Scenes of the Nixon Interviews,” if you really want to be completest.
Here’s a trailer for the DVD:
-
12/10 Oscarweb Round-up
• The Gurus settle on a predicted five that seems to be becoming “the knowledge.” [Movie City News]• David Poland, meanwhile, takes the opportunity to spotlight 10 under-the-radar contenders. [Movie City News]
• Always eager for a “look, we said something about it first” story, Steve Weintraub calls an exclusive (seriously, we need to define this term already) on a story Eric Roth has been talking about here and there for a while now…his desire to pen a space film, among other scripts the writer is working on, all reported elsewhere long ago. Can’t wait to read about the bitching once Variety breaks the ACTUAL story when (and if) it comes to pass. (Sorry, got carried away there.) [Collider]
• Getting back on track, Tom O’Neill chats it up with Penelope Cruz. [Gold Derby]
• Erica Abeel sits down with “Reader” director Stephen Daldry. [indieWIRE]
• Having already released, “Australia” still isn’t finished? Wait…what? [The Independent]
• Do the European Film Awards matter? [The Guardian]
• Anita Chabria catches up with the female cinematographers story. [The Envelope]
• Patrick Goldstein reports on the inner strife of yesterday’s LAFCA vote. Apparently “Slumdog Millionaire” was “a close third in the best picture race.” [The Big Picture]
• The most vanilla Oscar preview yet. [Associated Press]
• 12 rules of Christmas movies. [New York Daily News]
• Anthony Breznican profiles Ron Howard’s career behind the camera. [USA Today]
• Anne Thompson reports from the Monday night premiere of “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button,” with some video to boot. [Thompson on Hollywood]
-
11/30 Oscarweb Round-up
• Nathaniel Rogers muses on the Best Supporting Actor contest. [Film Experience]• Tom O’Neil ventures a tenuous (to me, at least) theory about gay roles and the Oscars. [Gold Derby]
• Despite his fandom, Jeff Wells has some reservations about “Slumdog Millionaire.” [Hollywood Elsewhere]
• A study of Hollywood’s ongoing fascination with the Holocaust. [The Independent]
• Ron Howard on filming Nixon… and voting for him. [New York Post]
• Gongs for “Frozen River” and “Hunger” in Stockholm. [Screen Daily]
• A profile of Jon Hamm. Before you say that’s not film-related, he’s totally going to be a movie star. [The Times]
-
11/11 Oscarweb Round-up
• Peter Bart worships at the alter of Brian Grazer and Ron Howard. [Peter Bart]• Tom O’Neil reports on the 14 animated features submitted for toon consideration this year… [Gold Derby]
• …and he interviews “Changeling” psycho Jason Butler Harner inside Hannibal Lecter’s prison cell deep in the bowels of the Hollywood Museum. [Gold Derby]
• Jeffrey Wells has his “Eureka” moment regarding “Frost/Nixon.” [Hollywood Elsewhere]
• Kim Voynar has the right idea about exploring issues of nudity in films, but picks the wrong example to kick it off. Uh…Marisa Tomei DOES play a stripper. [Movie City News]
• Russell Crowe talks his 50 lb. “Body of Lies” weight gain across the pond. [Daily Telegraph]
• Five picks for a black James Bond. [New York Daily News]
• Despite “W.” having come and gone, Christopher Campbell kicks around Josh Brolin’s Oscar chances. [Spout Blog]
• Lev Grossman talks to “Watchmen” artist Dave Gibbons. [Time]