• John Hillcoat and Joe Penhall already looking for life after “The Road.” [Variety]
• The “Slumdog” kids set to star opposite Anthony Hopkins? [PR Inside]
• Eugene Hernandez reports from the Telluride tribute to Viggo Mortensen. [indieWIRE]
Tag: Slumdog Millionaire
-
9/8 Web Round-up
-
‘Trainspotting’ named best British film of last 25 years
The Observer has just assembled one of the more interesting lists I’ve seen in some time — a collective of the 25 best British films of the last quarter-century, compiled from the votes of over 60 critics, film professionals and assorted outside voices, ranging from Ben Kingsley to Peter Morgan to our friend Anne Thompson.Looking down the list, there are remarkably few inclusions that I really take issue with, whether I’d necessarily put them on my own such list or not — the majority of titles here are films I admire that have a legitimate sphere of influence in modern British film history, and they’ve lucked into an intelligent balance between arthouse and populist titles.
“Trainspotting” is an obvious pick for number one, but sometimes obvious is fair. I don’t think it’s the greatest of the 25 titles listed here, but it’s an inarguably fine film that embodies the restless spirit of mid-1990s Britain from its whip-smart dialogue to its mega-selling soundtrack: its lightning-in-a-bottle blend of thrilling cinema and social document assures immortality.
(Further discussion, and The Observer’s Top 10 list, after the cut.)
-
In praise of the studio suits
It’s a few days old, but I only just got to this excellent Guardian piece in which Danny Leigh wonders whether Hollywood studio executives are done a disservice by the widespread perception of them as ruthless corporate shills with little sense of artistic responsibility. (An image best typified in semi-fictional form, of course, by Kevin Spacey’s Scott Rudin-inspired honcho in “Swimming With Sharks.”)Arguing that the media is complicit in the dominance of auteur theory, by championing only the directors of critical hits while vilifying the backers of cynical commercial drek in the “Transformers” vein, Leigh fears that a number of dedicated studio heads — several of whom put a lot of time and resources into nurturing new, offbeat filmmaking talent — are getting the short end of the stick.
-
TECH SUPPORT: Kicking the tires on a new season
Today marks the beginning of a fourth year of Tech Support here at In Contention. Over the past four years, we’ve sought to bring the otherwise under-reported crafts categories and crafts artists the attention they seldom receive, despite their enormous contributions to the art of cinema.This year, we plan on looking at nine of the categories – Art Direction, Cinematography, Costume Design, Film Editing, Makeup, Original Score, Sound Editing, Sound Mixing and Visual Effects – twice thoroughly between now and the morning the nominations are announced. Best Original Song will be previewed once, when we have a better idea of eligible contenders.
I will be offering the analysis of these categories but Kris will also be joining me for the first time this year with Tech Support features and interview pieces throughout.
Last year, a contemporary film – “Slumdog Millionaire” – managed to triumph in five of the 10 categories, a truly remarkable achievement, while “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” unsurprisingly took three others. (Meanwhile, the year’s blockbuster “The Dark Knight” managed one.) It will be interesting to see whether this year will be seen as having tech sweepers like “Millionaire” and “Button” or a greater spreading of the wealth, as we saw in 2007, when eight different films shared the 10 crafts awards!
-
All together now — awwww…
As if Dev Patel hadn’t had enough luck this year, he’s only gone and nabbed Freida Pinto into the bargain. The relationship between the 19 year-old Brit and the stunning 24 year-old actress has been something of an open secret for a while, but the couple have finally confirmed it to the press:The pair have been photographed cuddling up in Israel and ring shopping in London since the Oscar-winning film was released. The 24-year-old has now called 19-year-old Patel “a lovely boy”, according to The Sun. She added: “The friendship blossomed after the film, it got even stronger. This is all new to us.”
Pinto’s ex, Rohan Antao, blamed Patel for their relationship breakdown. “I don’t know if they were having a sexual relationship but if I came face to face with him I would have things to say. Now everywhere I go I see them on billboards. I am devastated,” he said.
Ring shopping! Cuddling! A love-rival barney! This riveting story was brought to you by Slow News Day, Inc. But hey, any excuse for a picture of Ms. Pinto, right?
-
Live your life
Make no mistake, I found 9 year-old Rubina Ali as adorable in “Slumdog Millionaire” as everyone else did. I also found her a rather more expressive actress than her elder incarnation, Freida Pinto. And I was as sad as anyone to hear of her home, along with those of many others, being bulldozed by the Indian government.But with all that said, I can’t summon much enthusiasm for the idea of her impending autobiography, even if it is for charity:
Rubina Ali, one of the child stars of the Oscar-winning film Slumdog Millionaire, is to publish her life story.
Madeline Toy at Transworld Publishers said on Friday that “Slumgirl Dreaming: My Journey to the Stars” will be published in Britain in mid-July. She said both Transworld Publishers and Random House Children’s Books will publish the book at the same time. Both companies are units of Random House Group Ltd. Toy said all royalties will go to Rubina and Médecins du Monde, a French medical aid organisation.
I tend to be of the mind that people should have a bit more life under their belt before they commit it to paper. (Or rather, have some anonymous hack do so for them.) I get irked when 20-somethings publish their life stories (as is de rigeur for British celebs, be they footballers or former “Big Brother” contestants), but this is a whole new level of bizarre.
Can the film adaptation be far away? Can the Academy resist the appeal of “Slumdog” redux, now with added biopic power? How meta would that be?
-
6/5 Web Round-up
• Carmike Cinemas honcho S. David Passman III gets back to basics, like cleaning the bathrooms. (This story hits home with me because I grew up going to a shoddy Carmike theater.) [Company Town]• Headline of the month. Not film related, but necessary for your morning LOL dose. [MyFoxBoston.com]
• Drew McWeeny dives head-long into the tank for Ubisoft’s “Avatar” video game with a detailed description of what must have been a breath-taking E3 demonstration. [Motion/Captured]
• Why Cannes awards mean squat for Oscar. [The Playlist]
• How “Slumdog Millionaire” is changing filmmaking in India. [The Guardian]
• Dumb list du jour… [Premiere]
• Paul Dano, “prince regent of independent film,” rides the subway. Just, you know, FYI. [The Times]
• Sam Mendes drew on Hal Ashby for “Away We Go” (he just missed the poignancy). [The Hollywood Interview]
• Searching for the Berkeley home that inspired Carl’s “Up” abode. [San Francisco Chronicle]
• CAA reaches out to James Cameron to represent the director’s new Fusion Camera System technology. [Deadline Hollywood Daily]
-
I don’t want my MTV
What do Paramore, The Rock and Kate Winslet have in common? Why, they’re all nominees for the 2009 MTV Movie Awards, of course. Like, duh.I have no idea what the MTV Movie Awards are for. Nobody knows or cares who wins them. (Who took Best Actor laurels last year? I doubt Will Smith could tell you — and he won, for Chrissake.)
Subject to public vote, they serve largely as a popularity contest along the lines of People’s Choice honours — but then they taint the purity of such a credo by throwing in a mention for something incongruously credible like “Milk.” (In the prestigious Best Kiss category, to boot — how honoured Gus Van Sant must feel.)
Anyway, this year’s nominees are a typically ill-thought and ill-fitting bunch. “Twilight” leads the race, closely followed by “Slumdog Millionaire,” which should tell you pretty much everything you need to know about the awards. They claim that the nominations were also determined by the public, though I have a hard time believing that the same people who decreed Vin Diesel a Best Actor contender for “Fast & Furious” also voted Kate Winslet in for “The Reader.”
Speaking of which, there’s a delicious hint of Bizarro World in the Best Actress category, which finds Anne Hathaway repeating her nomination success at the Academy Awards — except, wait, it’s for “Bride Wars,” not “Rachel Getting Married.” Riiight. Angelina Jolie, meanwhile, finds herself in the race for “Wanted” rather than “Changeling” — though that’s a preference I heartily endorse.
One thing is worth noting, however: even the bloody MTV Awards could be bothered to nominate Bruce Springsteen’s “The Wrestler” theme. The Academy will never live that one down. (Check out the MTV nods here, if you dare.)
-
Tell me something good
I quite enjoyed this NYT series of “memos to Hollywood” from Manohla Dargis and A.O. Scott, which include some well-deserved chiding of the Internet, the MPAA ratings board, and romantic comedy producers, among others. But I was disappointed that when it came to the ever-popular sport of bashing the Academy Awards, Scott only had this tired argument to hand:
It’s just not working: the Academy Awards broadcast, with its mixture of snark and high-mindedness; the pool of pseudoserious, faux-prestigious specialty-division B-pictures; the long, dreary slog of the awards “season.” You’re losing touch with the mass audience on one side and the tradition of popular art on the other. Take some risks, rejigger the formula, expand the membership pool. Do something!
He’s not wrong, exactly: we can all fill page upon page with a list of the Academy’s recurring failings. Year after year, they demonstrate an aversion to both daring specialist cinema and successful genre work that renders them irrelevant as a yardstick of artistic worth — but it was ever thus. (And to be fair, both critics’ groups and festival juries are capable of making blindingly short-sighted decisions on occasion. Awards are a fundamentally problematic institution, whoever dishes them out.)
-
The reality of the ‘Wolverine’ leak and box office
You may have already heard about a certain workprint for Fox’s “X-Men Origins: Wolverine” leaking onto the Internet two weeks ago since the resulting firestorm and fallout has been covered and re-covered by bloggers, journalists and former journalists alike. So there’s not much left to say on the issue. I do, however, want to go on record, as In Contention’s resident box office guy, as saying that this leak will have absolutely ZERO effect on the amount of money the film will pull in. Well, almost zero.First, let’s take a look at Fox’s logic. Potential customers see the movie on their computer before it comes out. Customers then do not go see the movie in the theater. It does seem to make sense and this logic most likely comes from the devastating effect that illegal downloading has had on the record business.
Now, here’s my logic. While the record business is definitely going down the tubes, the music business is doing fine. Concert business is relatively stagnant and vinyl sales are up significantly. Look at Flo Rida. His album only sold 80,000 units its first week, which is disappointing, but his single “Right Round” has been downloaded over a million times on iTunes alone. In other words, CDs may be dying, and possibly even the album format, but the music industry will be fine.
Look also at the top 30 Billboard debuts for artists like Animal Collective and Andrew Bird so far in 2009. Not only did both acts post career-high sales totals, but they both cater almost exclusively to the audience that is supposedly getting all their music illegally. Really, though, it’s silly to even compare the two industries, since buying a record was never a group activity or a night on the town to begin with.
-
With the emphasis on ‘Ho’
Here’s an, um, interesting addition to “Slumdog Millionaire’s” long list of accomplishments: how many Best Original Song winners are treated to a Pussycat Dolls remix? Words fail me.
(Memo to Ms. Scherzinger: it’s pronounced “jye,” not “jay.”)
-
TECH SUPPORT: Postmortem
What can I say? It was a big night for “Slumdog Millionaire” at the 81st Annual Academy Awards on Sunday.While I do like the film a great deal, I found its dominance this awards season unnecessarily monotonous. For instance, I preferred Thomas Newman’s work in both music categories this year, but I was nonetheless very happy with A.R. Rahman’s triumphs. The music branch needs to be seriously rewired, though. Their choices in recent years have often been bizarre and at times terrible.
Anthony Dod Mantle’s deserved victory in the cinematography feield means that Roger Deakins is still waiting for that first statuette. (Though, might I add, as effective as the work is in “The Reader,” I would have found it slightly disappointing if Deakins had finally won this year, considering Chris Menges shot most of the movie.) I would also like to think that Wally Pfister will eventually triumph in this category, considering Pfister has received three nominations in the last four years (all on Christopher Nolan projects).
Chris Dickens winning Best Film Editing was probably the easiest call of all the tech categories. Though I would say Angus Wall, Kirk Baxter, Elliot Graham and especially Lee Smith have built up good will with their fellow editors, while Mike Hill and Daniel P. Hanley must be considered in contention whenever they make a prestigious film with Ron Howard.
-
Thank you, Nick Hornby
As many of you already know, one of my central irritations of this year’s Oscar season has been the “Slumdog” backlash, an unnecessarily cruel response to a brilliant film’s rather boring sweep of all the major film awards over the past three months. I understand it on one level, because no one wants a predictable circuit. But Danny Boyle’s film has been unfairly maligned if only because it is such a masterful achievement in the face of the mediocrity to which it has been compared.Thankfully, those of us who share in this irritation have author Nick Hornby on our side. Here is what he had to say (via Awards Daily) in response to a letter published in the London Review of Books:
There’s a lot packed in here: the snobbery, the smug and unexamined assumptions, the writer’s apparent pride in his utter ignorance of the independent film-making process, the nonsensical contradictions (can something be both “garish” and “gaggingly photogenic”?) It’s perfectly possible not to enjoy Slumdog Millionaire, of course – nothing appeals to everybody, and I didn’t have enough invested in the love story for the film to lift me as much as it seems to have lifted others. But typically, when the success of a book or a film or a piece of music baffles the liberal intelligentsia, then that success will usually be put down to the cynicism of the makers, or the depressing ignorance of the consumers. (Sometimes, when these critics are trying to be nice, they make a plea for better arts education. “It’s not the public’s fault that they enjoy the paintings of Jack Vettriano. They just don’t know any better.”) This letter is a prime example of that attitude: you loved Slumdog? You’re a moron…
In film people tend to talk about films “working” or “not working”, and ‘Slumdog Millionaire’ clearly works – just as ‘Trainspotting’ and ‘Shallow Grave’, two of Danny Boyle’s other films, worked – in fact, Boyle’s ability to turn forbiddingly unpromising material into movies that people actually want to see is remarkable. If his films are commercial, it’s because he wants them to be seen by a mainstream audience; the money-making that ensues is a by-product, rather than a goal in itself…
It would be nice to think that our artier film-makers and more literary novelists could look at ‘Slumdog’ and steal a few of its underpinnings. Is energy, for example, as vulgar an attribute as many of them seem to believe? And is coherent structure really such an awful thing? On the evidence of the LRB letter, though, our intellectuals are more likely to sneer. I’m sure they’re all very clever people, but they can be terribly dim sometimes.
Amen, brother. Hornby, by the way, is likely to be in the thick of the awards season this year with his adaptation “An Education.”
-
Mike Leigh on Hollywood, Mickey and losing an Oscar
If, like yours truly, you’re one of those who believe that British auteur Mike Leigh was robbed on Sunday night, you’ll thoroughly enjoy his Oscar diary. Ever the Hollywood outsider, Leigh attended the Academy Awards with his two adult sons as his guests, and he reflects on the ensuing madness with all the droll, dry humour present in so many of his films.As you would expect, he’s not all that bothered about losing the Original Screenplay award for “Happy-Go-Lucky,” not least because he learned shortly before the ceremony that the bookies had him as a 54-1 outsider. (He mordantly notes that his son Toby then placed £20 on him, “just in case.”) In any case, he professes to liking “Milk” a great deal, and rather enjoyed the ceremony as a whole, describing it with typical British reserve as “far less tacky and schmaltzy than usual.” What I really liked, however, is his candour on the awards themselves:
The truth is, you only get the loser’s hump about the winners if you think that they’re crap, and tonight I get a real buzz out of nearly all the awards. Chuffed for jolly Michael O’Connor (best costumes, The Duchess), who assisted Lindy Hemming on Topsy-Turvy, and delighted that Benjamin Button got only technical awards!
Wanted Mickey Rourke to win best actor (I voted for him) and, no disrespect to Kate and the other girls, I desperately miss Sally (Hawkins). I genuinely can’t see how any of their performances are as original, creative, profound, witty or versatile as hers. But there you go.
Sure, most directors would probably say that about their leading ladies, but in this case, he happens to be right. I’m also interested to hear that he’s on Team Rourke — I recall sitting behind Leigh at “The Wrestler’s” first London screening back in October and observing his evident enthusiasm for the film then.
-
‘Slumdog’ sweep joins Oscar’s actorless trio
UPDATE: Okay, this is what happens when you skim emails too quickly and don’t do the research on your own. I’ve corrected the statistical errors on my part. THIS should be on the money:Not sure if this bit of trivia has already been consumed and digested, but thanks to Jeremy who sent it in weeks ago. We’ve already talked at length about “Slumdog Millionaire”‘s Cinderella season marking the winningest awards streak of all time (Oscar, BAFTA, PGA, DGA, WGA, SAG Ensemble, ACE, ASC, CAS, ADG, CDG, USC Scripter — hell, even an MPSE honor). But the film’s Oscar victory Sunday night also marked only the the fourth time a film won Best Picture, Best Director and a screenplay award without a member of the cast being nominated. The others were “Gigi” in 1958, “The Last Emperor” in 1987 and “The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King” in 2003.
I’ll read more carefully next time, I swear.
Other interesting stats contributed by Speaking English and The Z:
• “Slumdog” is the first film to win Best Picture and Best Cinematography since 1999’s “American Beauty.”
• It is also the first Best Picture winner since 1984’s “Amadeus” to win 8 Oscars.
• Additionally, it is the seventh film to win 8 Oscars after “Gone With the Wind,” “From Here to Eternity,” “On the Waterfront,” “Cabaret” and the aforementioned “Amadeus.”
• This was the first year since 1994 that all acting winners had been previously nominated.
• Sean Penn is the only actor to win twice this decade. (Tom O’Neil also notes he is the ninth male actor to win two lead Oscars after Spencer Tracy, Fredric March, Gary Cooper, Marlon Brando, Dustin Hoffman, Tom Hanks, Jack Nicholson and Daniel Day-Lewis. Twelve actresses have taken two.)
• With Penelope Cruz’s victory, Woody Allen is now third behind William Wyler and Fred Zinneman for most performances directed to an Oscar with seven, Chad tells us.
Anything else?
-
‘Slumdog’: what just happened?
Two days after the fact, in the comedown after six months of relentless Oscar hype, and the beautiful, surreal nature of what happened on Sunday is starting to sink in. Sure, “Slumdog Millionaire” was the red-hot favorite. Sure, it had won everything else going and had been ingeniously campaigned by one of the savviest studios in the business.But viewed out of context, is it not kind of incredible that an independent foreign production, from an iconoclastic director with no Oscar history, with not a single Western star (or a single white actor, for that matter) and a significant portion of Hindi dialogue, just scooped 8 awards from Hollywood’s most venerable institution?
The further back I step from the events, the more I wonder whether I dreamed it all up. What does it mean? Is this a significant bellwether of the growing globalization of the industry, or is it a freak anomaly that happened because a lot of people simply connected with one movie this year, and not much else? David Carr, who is left similarly dazzled and dazed by the film’s astonishing coup, seems to think it’s a bit of both:
American film is one of the last remaining exports, a kind of bejeweled software that the rest of the world clearly loves … But global imperatives go both ways. When a film with a British director, Indian actors and French co-financing goes home with eight Oscars, it’s hard not to see a message.
“I think it demonstrates that a good story well told, whether it is about someone in Mumbai, China or around the corner, will find an audience,” said Nancy Utley, chief operating officer at Fox Searchlight, the division of 20th Century Fox that found Oscar (and box office) gold after picking up “Slumdog Millionaire.” She added that the studio specialty division knew it had a winner on its hands when it screen-tested the film in Orange County, Calif. — sort of a ground zero of a conventional American audience — without any marketing or explanation, and the room loved it.
-
2/23 Oscarweb Round-up
The day after. This will be the final installment of the Oscarweb Round-up this year. I always enjoy scouring the net to find these little gems here and there and I hope you have enjoyed the daily cheat sheet. Special thanks to all the hard-working journalists and pundits who keep cranking out copy to fill this space…even if I get testy with your words from time to time.• Jeff Wells salutes that hilarious James Franco/Seth Rogen/Janusz Kaminski sketch. [Hollywood Elsewhere]
• David Carr’s on-the-spot Oscar coverage from last night, well worth a scroll. [The Carpetbagger]
• The “Slumdog” kids’ neighbors watch the show from India. [The Huffington Post]
• Anne Thompson wraps up the night and the season with coverage from the red carpet (including the Anne Cam!). [Thompson on Hollywood]
• Mourning the acceptance speech Mickey Rourke would have given. [Vulture]
• On the hateful protesters that lined the streets outside the Kodak: Sean Penn says ignore the ignorant. [Daily Telegraph]
• Roger Ebert reports on teh festivities with all of his usual insights. [Chicago Sun-Times]
• Patrick Goldstein was underwhelmed by the show (I don’t get it). [The Big Picture]
• Karina Longworth reports that Bennett Miller’s opening short film was cut because it basically sucked. [Spout Blog]
• Britain’s Press Association already digs into Kate Winslet’s speech. (I literally had a Brit at my Oscar party scream “Fuck off” when she won.) [The Independent]
-
Ebert gathers his thoughts
Ahead of tonight’s ceremony, Roger Ebert has collected some final, scattered musings — among them, a modest semi-boast that he predicted tonight’s probable “Slumdog” victory a mere 60 seconds after seeing the film last summer.
He also anticipates a successful hosting performance from Hugh Jackman (the combination of being both Australian and a youngest sibling bodes well, apparently), and shares my inkling about Viola Davis:
I choose Davis because her performance provided, for me, one of those rare Yes!! moments, when an actor appears on the screen, electrifies you, and makes you intensely happy. A lot of people must have shared that feeling, I reasoned.
Which performance is objectively better is of course beside the point. You can’t grade art objectively. It is worth reflecting that many best actor winners over the years have likely not scored a simple majority in their categories. We’ll never know who lost by one vote. The secret ballots have been called a rebuke to democracy, but there is nothing democratic about it. If there was, there should be primaries.
Fair enough. I must admit that if I was using “Yes!!” moments as my criteria, I’d be predicting Marisa Tomei, but I have yet to hear anyone breathe even a word of criticism about Davis’ performance. Almost a pity that one of the night’s most exciting contests will be settled right off the bat.