In Contention

Tag: Sam Mendes

  • Sam Mendes: he didn’t f#$% it up

    Sam Mendes on the set of Revolutionary RoadIn light of John’s recent praise piece on “Revolutionary Road,” I thought it a good time to shine a light over on indieWIRE and Peter Knegt’s recent interview with director Sam Mendes. Here are a few power quotes from the helmer:

    The most common comment from friends of mine who had read the book was, ‘don’t fuck it up.’ That was basically all they said, ‘don’t fuck it up.’ And the biggest compliment I get now is, ‘thank fuck you didn’t fuck it up.’ That’s all I get! Thank god I didn’t fuck it up.

    Retrospectively, it seems to be the beginning of a sort of genre of suburban literature that went into John Updike, Tobias Wolff, Rick Moody with ‘The Ice Storm’ and Tom Perrotta who wrote ‘Little Children. Yates is the granddaddy of all of that. Looking back, he sort of began that whole movement.

    It’s a sad film. It’s a tragedy. If a tragedy works, like ‘On The Waterfront’ for example… You leave it exhilarated. You don’t leave it depressed. You’re glad to be alive. You know, it’s a cautionary tale. And it was the same thing working on it. You’re plumbing the depths but you’re aware at all times how lucky you are not to have to go there in your real life.

    Read the rest here.

  • ‘Revolutionary Road’ — snubbed today, sure to be remembered forever

    Kate Winslet and Leonardo DiCaprio in Revolutionary RoadOne of the biggest surprises of the awards season for me is the fact that “Revolutionary Road” is being all but forgotten by many critics groups and has certainly slipped off the Oscar radar as a result. Is the film deserving?  Absolutley.  I think it is one of the best films of the year and among the finest I have seen this decade, but for whatever reason — and who can explain these things — it has not gotten a great deal of press.

    This is a major accomplishment, a work of art superbly directed by Sam Mendes who in eight years has become one of the most exciting directors in modern cinema. Though I count myself among those who though his breakthrough film “American Beauty” was very good but also radically over-praised, his follow-up, “Road to Perdition,” was superb and should have been among the nominees for Best Picture and Best Director in 2002, vastly superior to “Chicago.”

    His third film, “Jarhead,”  was darkly beautiful to look at but didn’t quite work with audiences who are still not interested in films about Afghanistan or Iraq (whichever installment).  Mendes possesses a gift with actors, one of those directors like Woody Allen, Martin Scorsese and more recently, Paul Thomas Anderson.  He’s able to bring out their best work.  It seems no surprise he married an actress.

    He is also patient with a narrative, allowing it to unfold with the knowledge the audience connects with the actors.  With “Revolutionary Road,” he has cranked out a crowning achievement in a career just getting started, and yet like so many other masterworks, it may slip through the cracks, barely noticed.

    (more…)

  • 12/13 Oscarweb Round-up

    Michelle Williams in Wendy and Lucy• Rod Lurie wants to steer comparisons of “Nothing But the Truth” away from Judith Miller, evokes Susan McDougal. [Los Angeles Times]

    • The company behind releasing his film, meanwhile, goes into chapter 11. [Variety]

    • Is the Academy ready to award digital performances? [Variety]

    • Sasha Stone spotlights the seasons actor reunions. [Awards Daily]

    • 10 best Christmas bits from non-Christmas movies. [Cinema Blend]

    • Theater (er, theatre) chains across the pond plan to invest in digital technology to capitalize on upcoming releases from Steven Spielberg and James Cameron. [Daily Telegraph]

    • Iranians don’t seem to understand the correllation of the Ayatollah in Darren Aronofsky’s “The Wrestler” to The Iron Shiek of 20 years ago. [Daily Telegraph]

    • Gaby Wood talks to “Revolutionary Road” helmer Sam Mendes. [The Guardian]

    • Clint Eastwood digs into his star and its purpose with Bruce Headlam. [New York Times]

    • Mark Olsen chats with Kelly Reichardt and Michelle Williams about “Wendy and Lucy.” [Los Angeles Times]

    • Kind of difficult not to take stabs at Fox lately. [The Big Picture]

    • Erica Abeel talks “I’ve Loved You So Long” with director Philippe Claudel. [indieWIRE]

    • A couple of talking points with John {atrick Shanley, Meryl Streep and Viola Davis on “Doubt.” [Newsweek]

  • Golden Globes: the nominees react

    Leonardo DiCaprioThe Hollywood Foreign Press Association tipped its collective hat to a number of the season’s hopeful contenders this morning, so it’s time to hear some reactions. Generally, a piece such as this is bound to consist of a bunch of gushing, perhaps even boilerplate gratitude from the nominees. And one certainly couldn’t fault them for it. But I always enjoy hearing reactions from people whose lives are being changed this time of year, and certainly, those who can’t help but feel humbled by the recognition.

    What can I say? I’m not a grouch all the time.

    Matteo Garrone was first to call this morning. His epic crime saga “Gomorrah” was predictably short-listed in the Best Foreign Language Film category.

    “The movie is going so well and everything is such a surprise,” he said. “We wanted to give the audience the instrument, the information to understand better how the Camorra organization works on the inside, without any glamorizing, but to try to show the real atmosphere, the real location. We wanted to make a movie that was universal, and this result, I think it proves that we achieved that.”

    When I interviewed author Roberto Saviano last month, who penned the original book “Gomorrah” is adapted from, he had similar sentiments to offer. The film is one of the year’s best, a triumphant piece of work that frankly should be getting more recognition than simple relegation to the foreign film fields, but any notice is fortunate, as Garrone is quick to point out.

    (more…)

  • Golden Globes: ‘Slumdog,’ ‘Button’ steady…whither ‘Milk?’

    Well, I said yesterday one should always expect oddities with the Golden Globes … but even with that in mind, they never fail to pull out some genuine “WTF” moments.

    Tom Cruise’s goofy Best Supporting Actor nod for “Tropic Thunder” may have been the most eccentric revelation of the morning, but surely the most significant shocker is the absence of “Milk” — presumed by many to be “Slumdog Millionaire”‘s chief rival in the Oscar race — in the Best Picture (Drama) category.

    The shut-out proved even more blatant when neither Josh Brolin nor James Franco, who have been making healthy progress in the precursors, landed in the Supporting Actor race. Still processing that one — right now, I can’t think of a suitable theory to explain its absence. (But hey, at least Franco landed a left-field comedy-category nod for “Pineapple Express” … I think I know one guy who will be stoked with that.)

    The producers of “Slumdog Millionaire” will no doubt be thrilled by the news, as will those of “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button,” which claws back some momentum after taking a knock in this week’s precursors. In an unusually spread-out slate, “Button” and “Frost/Nixon” lead the pack of Best Picture nominees, with 5 nods apiece — I must admit I never expected the latter to be a field leader. (Meanwhile, in yet another of the morning’s oddities, their tally is equalled by the Best Picture-omitted “Doubt.”)

    Some will be surprised by the failure of “The Dark Knight” to land Picture or Director nods, though I personally didn’t see the film the registering that strongly with the Foreign Press.

    On the other hand, I naively failed to foresee that Harvey Weinstein would work his magic once more on the organisation — Kris’ prediction of a strong showing for “The Reader” was right on the money. Meanwhile, despite whispers that the HFPA wasn’t all that keen on “Revolutionary Road,” the nominations tell a different story. The nod for Sam Mendes is one I find particularly surprising; Paramount Vantage will no doubt heave a huge sigh of relief after a terrible precursor week that saw the film blanked in the Broadcast Film Critics’ nominations.

    (more…)

  • OFF THE CARPET: Getting to know you

    Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet in Revolutionary RoadThis is the first season I can think of, at least since I’ve been covering this crazy beat on the west coast, that studios have become so terrified by the media that guild screenings are preempting press screenings with such consistency.

    Some have whined about “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” screening for SAG 10 days before the media at large gets a look (with the usual brand of entitlement that turns the stomach).  Others actually snuck into the screening, surely freaking out a few publicists desperate to unfold the film at their own pace (and the pace dictated by the meticulous David Fincher).  I’m just waiting.

    Plenty have taken the altered ending story behind “Australia,” not to mention the film being held from the press until two weeks before it opens, as a sign that the movie is in trouble.  I’m just waiting.

    Lots of anticipation has suddenly been blown into “The Reader”‘s previously deflated balloon.  I’m just waiting.

    But I have to say, seeing a couple of the year’s contenders last week with big industry audiences proved to be just the breath of fresh air this incredibly stifling season needed.

    (more…)

  • ‘Revolutionary’ screening

    I’m not allowed to get into my thoughts on “Revolutionary Road” in any real detail yet, but we’ve got a real Best Picture contender on our hands, one driven to that status by a dynamic blend of powerhouse performances that won’t likely be forgotten any time soon.

    Leonardo DiCaprio, joined on stage right now with director Sam Mendes and the cast for a post-screening Q&A (in front of a massive SAG audience that appears to have enjoyed the film), just described his response to the material as like being “a fly on the wall…I felt embarrassed.” I think that comment sums up both the power of Richard Yates’s incredibly truthful novel and the apparent success with which it has (finally) been brought to the screen.

    More next week.

  • Scott Rudin takes his name off ‘The Reader,’ walks away

    Scott RudinUPDATE (9:58 p.m.): Thanks to one of our readers for pointing out that “The Reader” has been removed from The Weinstein Company’s official site.  Could it mean that Weinstein will fold after all?  Could the pain of getting a publicity team in place, dealing with Rudin’s all-in public play and general bad buzz make TWC see the light and move the film to 2009?  We’ll see…

    EARLIER: I love Scott Rudin.  All along, throughout this whole nasty affair, I have hoped he would prove his balls are bigger than Harvey’s and I think he’s done that now.

    Patrick Goldstein is reporting that the producer has taken his name off of Stephen Daldry’s “The Reader,” which was suddenly jerked into the 2008 Oscar season by Weinstein Company honcho Harvey Weinstein, a move read by most in the industry as a gluttonous attempt at securing some Oscar glory this year.  With “Revolutionary Road” and “Doubt” already at the center of the season’s buzz cycle, the last thing Rudin needed, or wanted, was to have to split his attention a third way — let alone a way that would have been abandoned by its own star as well.

    Yes, it’s true.  Kate Winslet would not have hawked “The Reader” against her husband, Sam Mendes’s “Revolutionary Road” (in which she also stars).  Director Stephen Daldry himself had to respond diplomatically to the entire charade of Rudin and Weinstein kissing and making up in public, only to have before-the-fact private emails spread across the net by an industrious blogger.

    I’ve made my opinion of this fiasco known, and I definitely don’t think I was alone.  In fact, I know I wasn’t.  Weinstein scrambled to put together a publicity team but likely found a lot of road blocks, and to Rudin, it had to have been a painful march toward the inevitable:

    “The Reader,” produced by Alan Smithee.

    Goldstein reports:

    In recent days, negotiations had apparently taken a turn for the worse. Upset with Weinstein and worried that many of his long-standing talent relationships would be harmed, Rudin decided to separate himself from the project. Daldry remains contractually obligated to complete the film, though it’s uncertain of how he will complete the film without Rudin, a longtime collaborator with both Daldry and David Hare, who were the creative team on “The Hours.”

    And the closer, which says it all:

    Whatever the root cause, this is another body blow to “The Reader,” which loses a strong producer who is always a major force during awards season. Rudin will continue as producer of two other year-end pictures, “Revolutionary Road” and “Doubt.”

    Personally, I’m just glad Goldstein got this scoop and not Nikki Finke.

  • “Only murderers” and “I’m glad it’s you”

    These are the clips that likely assured the late Paul Newman a place alongside the supporting crop of contenders in 2002.  Stalwart, sincere, living inside the character with an eerie warmth.  Despite my spoken allegiance to “Hud,” I chose to remember Newman this morning by watching “Road to Perdition” for the first time in a number of years.  Criminally underrated, it is the shining beacon in Sam Mendes’s arsenal that gives me hope for “Revolutionary Road.”  Moreover, it contains a Newman performance for the ages, a subtle but meaningful display from an undeniable legend:

  • OFF THE CARPET: Make way for the little guys…or not

    Anne Hathaway in Rachel Getting MarriedIt may be Labor Day, but the work at hand is breathing down our necks. So it is that we come to the first weekly Oscar column of the new awards season.

    Though to be frank with you, I’m beginning to wonder whether we’ll be able to keep the conversation going, much less interesting on a weekly basis as we push through the last four months of the year. I knew going in to this year that it was going to be a somewhat low-key season, and my own worst fears have been founded in a number of pre-Toronto screenings of films that will be discussed in a week’s time, films leaving me cold, irritated or otherwise just unconvinced.

    I don’t sense a lull on the level of 2005 by any means, but I do get the feeling that after two solid years of cinematic goodness, 2008 could just be one of those “rebuilding” years, to steal a sports term and painfully attempt its application here. It’s interesting (and telling) that my two favorite films of the year are a stoner comedy and a superhero adaptation respectively (though the latter obviously has a legion of fans banking on major awards success…more on that later).

    The most intriguing component for me is the playground that Toronto will provide for a bevy of independent and genuinely smaller product. The heavy-hitters (or, at the very least, the presumed heavy-hitters) are incomplete and not prepared for fall fest unveiling (aside from “Frost/Nixon,” which has already been seen and seems to be riding a wave of confidence at Universal).

    But efforts like Mike Leigh’s “Happy-Go-Lucky,” Jonathan Demme’s “Rachel Getting Married,” Vicente Amorim’s “Good,” Guillermo Arriaga’s “The Burning Plain,” Rian Johnson’s “The Brothers Bloom,” Richard Eyre’s “The Other Man,” etc. — true indies with a fighting chance to turn some heads — won’t have to suffer in the shadows of big studio films angling for the press of an Oscar season starting gun.

    Meanwhile, Cannes entries such as Fernando Meirelles’s “Blindness,” Charlie Kaufman’s “Synecdoche, New York,” Matteo Garrone’s “Gomorrah” and Steven Soderbergh’s “Che” get an uninhibited second chance in front of festival audiences. Ditto Clint Eastwood’s “Changeling,” in the case of the New York fest.

    (more…)

  • Can ‘Revolutionary Road’ be too good for film?

    It’s a slow month for news, so I understand that film bloggers’ minds can wander. I sympathize with that. But even taking that into account, Jeff Wells’ recent post outlining his doubts over the upcoming ‘Revolutionary Road’ struck me as pretty tenuous. Wells’ essential argument is that the film’s stumbling block looks to be the sheer brilliance of Richard Yates’ source novel:

    The more formidable the reputation of the book that’s been made for the big screen, the greater the odds that the film will have problems of one kind or another. The motto, in short, is that it’s not the beauty of the prose but the strength of the bones that counts.

    Truthfully or not, fairly or unfairly, that’s the general belief. And given this, it’s hard not to feel a little queasy about Sam Mendes’ “Revolutionary Road,” the forthcoming Leonardo DiCaprio-Kate Winslet drama that’s based upon Richard Yates’ hugely respected novel about suburban middle-class malaise in the 1950s.

    In response, let me begin by offering offer a subjective, by-no-means comprehensive selection of exceptions to Wells’ stated theory – literary adaptations that are in equal proportion of greatness to their source material. “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest,” for one. “The Unbearable Lightness of Being” is another. “To Kill a Mockingbird” was okay, and “A Clockwork Orange” didn’t totally suck either. “The Grapes of Wrath,” “LA Confidential,” “Tess,” “Trainspotting,” “Kes,” “Howards End” … you get the idea.

    (more…)

  • OFF THE CARPET: 2008, a year in advance

    Another year, another set of wins…and another look ahead at what’s in store NEXT year.

    It’s never too late to take a long gander at what we might see dominating the film awards landscape in 365 days, and with that in mind, I’ve been doing my usual mulling over the possibilities for a few weeks to put together the sadly thorough examination of the 2008-09 award season that follows. Let’s get into it. There are some major considerations to take into account. right off the top.

    Like Leonardo DiCaprio, for instance, who is set to be the entertainer of the year. With performances in “Body of Lies” (Ridley Scott) and “Revolutionary Road” (Sam Mendes), DiCaprio is working with a duo of awards-proven talent this year. Perhaps that will work against him, much like it did in 2006, and no major Oscar success will come knocking. But we’ll wait until we see the performances. Each of them could be enticing.

    This year’s Best Picture Oscar victor Scott Rudin is back again, by the way, with “Revolutionary Road,” recently inherited by Paramount Vantage and probably one of the true “frontrunners” this far out that we could put our finger on. The only other film in Vantage’s arsenal is Edward Zwick’s “Defiance,” which could simply be a commercial success, but might find its way to multiple nods like “The Last Samurai” and “Blood Diamond” in recent years.

    (more…)

  • REVIEW: “Jarhead” (**1/2)

    JarheadSam Mendes’s “Jarhead” makes no immediate attempt to connect you to its central character. It makes no attempt to pump emotion and empathy into the veins of the audience. It falls in line with Mendes’ penchant for colder, more removed depictions, and it’s potentially the material that most suits this penchant that the director has come across to date.

    I don’t blame the film for any of this. In fact, I rather champion it for it. The thematics come across, even if Mendes doesn’t follow through when he could have REALLY hit it out of the park, but the overall sense one gets from the film is a mish-mash of the offerings we’ve seen from other war film directors.

    Following a protagonist reminiscent of Albert Camus’ central focus in “The Stranger,” Bill Broyles’s screenplay (based on the novel by Anthony Swofford) gets to the point abruptly and hammers it home for the remainder.

    In the eyes of a “jarhead,” as envisioned by Swofford, life is a meaningless existence.  The journey of a soldier is less about defending a nation than it is about defining himself (or herself). In the middle of the desert, miles away from anything that matters in their world, no matter what they’re told by those in positions of power, the lives of freedom fighters are worthless in the eyes of those who live them.

    (more…)