You know… I hate the idea of rubbing a soft success in the WGA’s face,
I think that the Strike Committee did what they sincerely felt they HAD to do. I think that most of them continue to believe that the deal they got wouldn’t have happened without a strike.
I disagree.
The minor improvements on the DGA contract and the additional WGA-centric elements that WGA got were, I believe, available to the union through negotiating without a strike.
I don’t agree with anyone who says that strike was “self-destructive.” It certainly wasn’t taken on lightly or without serious intent. However, I would agree that the strike cost a lot of WGA members real money and didn’t come close to making up the difference with improvements to the ultimate deal. The timing was completely wrong-headed, in my opinion.
But the greatest cost of the WGA Strike is being paid by SAG, which has no chance to convert its issues – more serious than any other union – into a contract that isn’t, unlike the WGA contract, significantly destructive to the union’s future.
Was it WGA’s responsibility to look out for SAG? No. Did going out on strike when WGA did and, ultimately, settling when they did, doom SAG in its pursuit of a deal that more seriously addressed the death of re-runs? Yes.
The great unanswerable question of The WGA Strike of
Archive for February, 2009
Remember The WGAlamo
Saturday, February 28th, 2009Saturday's Poll
Saturday, February 28th, 2009
(The story where these quotes and many other idiocies can be read.)
Results after the jump…
Friday Estimates by Klady, 22809
Saturday, February 28th, 2009
Is there really anything to say?
The Jonas Bros. generated a strong number, which was overhyped going into the weekend.
The last Madea was off 57% in Weekend Two, 67% Friday-to-Friday..
Slumdog is getting a boost – not as all Oscar winners do, but as films that win and directly benefit from the new sense of public familiarity do – and has an outside shot of chasing down Juno ($143.5m domestic) to become Searchlight’s biggest grosser. Slummy is a near-lock to be bigger than pPreggo worldwide,with about $50 million to go and lots of big territories still yet to open.
The skinny former cop (Taken) cracks $100 million and the fat not-a-cop (Paul Blart) will crack $125m this weekend.
Coraline took a Jonas Bros. and 300 screen loss hit this weekend, but I actually expect it to recover and move up a slot or two this weekend as well as to remain in the Top Ten next weekend and perhaps longer.
And finally, a shout out to the Italian neo-realist thriller Gomorrah, which has done great at the IFC Center in NY for a few weekends now. For whatever reasons, it has not been coming up here on Saturdays as a big winner, but it really has been very strong.
Trying A Tweet Poll – Watchmen
Friday, February 27th, 2009
Fun with 3-D Trailers
Friday, February 27th, 2009Last night, I went to the midnight screening of Jonas Brothers: The 3-D Concert Experience, which you can read all about over here, if you’re so inclined. What was almost more interesting to me than the movie — forgive me, experience — itself, though, was the spate of 3-D previews that preceded the film. It was kind of like an extended animated warm-up act for the Big Show, and some of the previews were more interesting than others.
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, due for release now in July, looks promisingly dark and scary, as it should, given the nature of the storyline. I unabashedly love the Harry Potter books and have read the entire series multiple times. Half-Blood Prince is directed by David Yates, who did a solid job with the previous film, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, and is set to direct the two-part series finale, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Parts I and II. The trailer looks great, and with every film I’m struck by how much the three young leads — Daniel Radcliffe in particular — have grown through the series, not just physically, which of course one would expect, but in their range of acting skills. Can’t wait for July 17, and you can bet I’ll be at the midnight early screening with my daughter for that one.
There was a trailer for Monsters Vs. Aliens, which my pack of kids are eager to see, and also a trailer for G-Force, which, on the surface, sounds pretty banal — a squad of super-intelligent, special forces … guinea pigs (and a fly) try to save the world from an evil rich guy. And yet, my interest was piqued when I saw that Terry Rossio and Ted Elliot are listed in the “screenplay” credits, along with Tim Firth (who penned the smart Calendar Girls and Kinky Boots before tackling Confessions of a Shopaholic). Marianne and Cormac Wibberly, the screenwriting husband-and-wife team responsible for the scripts for both National Treasure Films and the 2006 remake of The Shaggy Dog are also credited, which would be concerning, but the presence of Rossio, Elliot and Firth does give one hope that it won’t completely suck.
There’s an all-star cast voicing the admittedly cute super-guinea pigs, including Nic Cage, Penelope Cruz, Sam Rockwell, Bill Nighy, Steve Buscemi and more, and the animation looks pretty spiffy, so hopefully it will end up being better than it looks based on the pitch. Not that you can (or should) judge a film just by its trailer, anymore than you can judge a film by it’s script, but this one might be cute.
Final Edition: Rocky Mountain News' video of day of death
Friday, February 27th, 2009
Final Edition from Matthew Roberts on Vimeo.
The almost-150-year-old Rocky Mountain News was thrown into the bushes on Friday; here’s their 20-minute video of the day.
Indie is screenering
Friday, February 27th, 2009BYOB Friday
Friday, February 27th, 2009The Jonas Brothers.
Uh…
Did my parents feel this way about The Monkees when my older sisters were into them?
The poor Beatles never had Live At Shea Stadium: The Motion Picture.
Nothing much to say, really..
Less, really.
Peter Scarlet, who never did much with Tribeca except spend money, is out. No great surprise… or loss… there.
Defamer.Gawker.com ran a note from the former editorial cabal that someone found a few bucks to buy the old Movieline name, logo, and URL and that there will now be a Defamer-type site there. I wish them luck – I really do – and I wonder why they think they will be ok launching a site like that in the middle of a recession. They do have the advantage of less infrastructure – half the revenues minus payments on Nick Denton’s multi-million dollar condo = enough for these guys to live on – but getting half the revenues will not be so easy. Micropublishing is not dead… but the niche better be nichier than “Snark About Showbiz.”
Speaking of snark, I quite enjoyed the Nikki Finke interview in I Want Media. When someone so passionately owns their own little patch of reality like that, you just have to sit back, relax, and appreciate the power of modern pharmaceuticals.
We did find this rare image from an interview Nikki did with Letterman during the WGA strike which never aired
Eddie's Oscar?
Thursday, February 26th, 2009EW broke the lingering news today that it looks like Bill Condon
Hurray, Independent!
Thursday, February 26th, 2009
Every year, in the days immediately following the Academy Awards, I rejoice in the knowledge that members of the mainstream and Internet media will get over themselves long enough to ponder something other than who’s wearing what, and by whom; which five, of the 25 equally qualified actors and directors nominated, are mortal-locks to take home an Oscar; why those predictions didn’t pan out; how many people around the world watched the ceremony; why the Nielsen ratings inched ahead, fell behind or remained the same; and, that old chestnut, how come it sucked so bad?
It wasn’t enough for the Los Angeles Times, for example, to assign a busload of specialists – including the architecture critic — to answer these questions and criticize the audacity of the producers, presenters and host for boring them to tears. Several columns in Tuesday’s Calendar were reserved for feedback from readers who disagreed with columnist Patrick Goldstein and TV critic Mary McNamara. She would go to write a reply, patting her dear readers on the head for their willingness to lend their two cents to the debate. They were still wrong, but at least they “cared.”
If they didn’t care, there would be little justification for printing the Times’ weekly collection of fluff, The Envelope, and endless pandering on the paper’s website. Indeed, if the studios were to cut back their print advertising budgets by another 10-20 percent, Sam Zell’s loss leader would go belly-up by Christmas.
On Tuesday, film critic Kenneth Turan, bless his pea-pickin’ heart, stirred the pot by publically admitting to enjoying the presentation and decrying the rumor-mongering, chitchat and temperature-taking that editors now demand of their key staff members. If he were king, he’d eliminate all the pre-Oscars hype and save his paper’s manpower for the night of the ceremony. Personally, I’d start with the meaningless announcement of the National Board of Review’s even more meaningless awards. Then, I’d limit coverage of the Golden Globes, People’s Choice and MTV Movie Awards to the next day’s briefs column. (As entertainment editor of one major daily newspaper, I managed to do just that for several years, receiving exactly no complaints.)
By the time Kenny and Mary’s words were published, though, most Americans had already forgotten the names and titles of the winners. Some diehard bloggers had already surveyed the release schedules and begun picking favorites for 2010. A couple thousand screenwriters and studio hacks were weighing the feasibility of re-setting Slumdog Millionaire in Harlem, East L.A. or the Navajo Nation, and locking Regis Philbin or Ryan Seacrest into the project.
Every other deep-thinker had already begun studying for the Final Four pools. (How many poor schmucks, I wonder, lost their Oscar pools by accepting common wisdom that Mickey Rourke and Waltz With Bashir couldn’t lose?)
For those of us who long for the days when Bob Hope and Johnny Carson effortlessly guided audiences from one category to the next, Sunday night represented just another broken promise. It would be impossible for the ceremony to live up to the incessant media hype and overblown expectations of gown, shoe and jewelry designers whose products are worn on the red carpet. People whose idea of a good time is phoning in votes for American Idol and Dancing With the Stars aren’t going to be too picky when it comes to Academy Award hosts.
After all, how many civilians actually can recall with any certainty the infamous Rob Lowe and Snow White duet during the 1989 opening number, let alone the man who produced it? There isn’t a critic in the country that can erase it from his or her memory, or Allen Carr’s role in the fiasco. Hugh Jackman would have had to have danced with his zipper open, or fallen flat on his face, to illicit much of a response from the folks watching at home. Only the most loyal of Oscar viewers would bother to compare Hugh Jackman’s top-hat-and-tails approach to the ceremony with Billy Crystal’s opening monologues and parodies.
Audiences have the luxury of being able to vote with their remote controls and TiVo players. Critics are required to pay attention throughout the show’s entire 3 1/2-hour length (add another half-hour for the Red Carpet infomercial). Even if they’re paid handsomely to endure the agony – and, of course, wear tuxes and gowns doing it – most critics are going into the assignment, thinking, like Nirvana, “Here we are now/entertain us.”
The same thing happened after NBC bought the rights for the Golden Globes ceremony, raising the show’s profile above any reasonable level expectation of relevancy and pitching it as a key barometer for the Oscars to come. It wasn’t. The higher profile prompted increased scrutiny of the bozos at the HFPA, and its booze-fueled ceremony became, “Hollywood’s best party,” which it wasn’t, either. Nor did the prizes translate into better box-office for nominees.
The Independent Spirit Awards soiree on the beach in Santa Monica once also was representative of the gung-ho, underdog personality of the hard-scrabble indie community. Indeed, it was so laid-back and fun that many in the entertainment media treated it as if it were a family picnic or garden party. The nominees, presenters and publicists could safely lower their guard, knowing that the press would consider anything that happened away from the podium to be off-the-record. The dress code was “California casual” and no one felt obligated to thank their agents, accountants or God in an acceptance speech.
Sometime in the last 10 years, though, the Spirits went legit. The success of Miramax’s marriage to Disney had prompted the other studios to create “boutique” shingles of their own and suddenly more was at stake than bragging rights. While their movies were produced under the same guidelines as the ones governing indie-indies, the titles were released with the support of big-time marketing campaigns and distribution networks. Despite some subsequent tinkering with the rules, many of the same movies that were nominated for Oscars and Globes also would compete against pictures – some without distribution deals in place – that were produced at a small fraction of their budgets.
This also meant that largely unknown actors and directors routinely competed against some of the biggest names in the business. (Woody Allen won a writing prize, in absentia, this year.) Another row of dominos was set up when the easy availability stars became known to the celebrity media and paparazzi. This meant that attendees would henceforth be required to fret about their appearance on the red carpet and hustle designer casual wear. This forced personal publicists to cling to their clients and escort them through the press gauntlet. The value of gift baskets grew exponentially, and live TV coverage meant profanity and other bad behavior would be discouraged. Attendance boomed, but only because the giant white tent had become a magnet for scene-makers, wanne-bes and industry weasels. The whole thing became dull, predictable and increasingly irrelevant. (The after-parties weren’t bad, though.)
Given its recent history, lovers of independent films naturally tuned into last Saturday’s IFC broadcast with some trepidation. Even though his indie cred is impeccable, host Steve Coogan remains a much better known commodity in England than in the U.S. His most recognizable characters are best described as insensitive, if not downright unlikable and obnoxious. Moreover, there was a distinct possibility that the important categories would be dominated by two or three favorites.
To my great joy and surprise, however, the Spirits bubbled with an energy and enthusiasm palpable even on television. There was an abundance of star power in the audience, and those in attendance seemed to be enjoying themselves. (Yes, cocktails are served.) The entertainment was delightful, and the clips plentiful and well chosen.
Just as Jackman would on Sunday night, Coogan opened with a production number. The stage wasn’t remotely as opulent as that in the Kodak Theater, but glamour and nostalgia were beside the point. A higher than normal percentage of lyrical digs and daggers hit their mark, but no one got hurt. Coogan’s monologue was observant, irreverent and reasonably timed. (This might have had something to do with his being from a country where filmmakers have to run much tighter ships and it’s believed the Hollywood sign is situated on the Big Rock Candy Mountain.)
The Best Feature nominees provided the inspiration for a series of clever musical parodies, including those in which Rainn Wilson lampooned Mickey Rourke’s Randy “The Ram” Robinson, Christina Applegate interpreted Frozen River in song and dance, and Teri Hatcher performed a send-up of the canine-themed Wendy & Lucy to the tune of Elton John’s The Bitch is Back. Indie emeritus John Waters also was on hand to pop the balloons of pretentious newcomers. It even had a Joaquin Phoenix impersonator of its own.
Best of all, though, was the recognition given to filmmakers and artists who must have been out of town when the academy was rounding up its usual suspects. Tom McCarthy won Best Director for, The Visitor, Synecdoche, New York walked away with a pair of awards; Heather Rea copped the Producers Award, for Frozen River; Gomorrah, denied an Oscar nomination, lost to The Class in the foreign-language category; and, here, at least, The Wrestler was given a shot at Best Feature.
Melissa Leo was a popular winner in the Best Female category for her amazing performance in Frozen River. Having worked below the radar for 25 years, she rightfully responded with an exuberant acceptance speech, declaring, “Frozen River is a truly independent film. Hurray, independent!”
Leo also set the bar for Rourke’s delightfully profane speech, which would be unleashed on the audience a few minutes later. Clearly, the spirit finally was back at the Spirits.
Rourke provided one of those rare moments that will be recalled and remembered fondly for years to come. After kissing director Darren Aronofsky on the lips, he recognized Eric Roberts in the audience and pleaded with the producers and directors, “He deserves a second chance.” Rourke dedicated his award to his recently deceased dog, Loki; described Aronofsky as a “mean son of a bitch”; and praised co-star Marisa Tomei for skills as an exotic dancer: “not many girls can climb the pole.”
Before presenting the Best Feature award, Alec Baldwin referenced Rourke’s rise from obscurity.
“I want back into the movie business so bad,” he said, with a deadpan delivery. “I gotta get a dog and start working out. … And drop a lot of F-bombs on live TV. And I want to second whatever Eric Roberts did 15 years ago, please let it go.”
God knows what Rourke would have said if he won Best Actor on Sunday night. Sean Penn gave him a nice shout-out from the stage, but it would have been fun to see if the ABC censor’s beeper could keep up with Rourke’s vivid imagination.
Wouldn’t it be wonderful if Rourke were asked to host next year’s Oscar broadcast?
Something tells me, however, the academy is going to do whatever it takes to put Billy Crystal back in the saddle. Even with a 13 percent bump over last year – when the ceremony was delayed by the writers’ strike — the 2009 edition was the third lowest rated Academy Awards broadcast in history. You and I might not care about such things, you can bet that AMPAS, ABC and advertisers want desperately to land another Titanic attraction.
- Gary Dretzka
February 26, 2009
Coppola introduces Tetro
Thursday, February 26th, 2009
Mentioned earlier, but wasn’t aware then that Coppola had also set up a YouTube channel for his Tetro videos.
BYOB Thursday
Thursday, February 26th, 2009Review – Watchmen
Wednesday, February 25th, 2009Will have to wait until I see it next week.
Yes, Virginia, I have been relegated by the very confident WB to seeing their mega-smash in what will surely be an overbooked all-media next week. When I spoke to the responsible on the film, not asking for a screening time, but actually trying to confirm a negative story floating around about the film (I still haven
Accepting Remakes
Wednesday, February 25th, 2009![]() |
Over the years, as the movie industry’s fetish for remaking anything and everything has become more prevalent, there have been tons of articles written about how “remakes” are destroying the very fabric of film or some such other hyperbolic thesis. You see, for me, I’ve never been truly offended by the idea of remaking a film, just as I’ve never been upset about James Joycere-writing The Odyssey and calling it Ulysses; remaking and repurposing stories is a part of making art. Hell, it’s become such a common practice on Broadway to restage classic plays and musicals that the Tony Awards even has a category for the best revivals.
So why is it that film fans have such a problem with the idea of remakes when it is widespread in other artistic endeavors?
One problem I see with my fellow movie addicts is the over-valuing of the original films. I wasn’t exactly thrilled with the idea of remaking Friday the 13th – and really, couldn’t we think of a different horror film set in a summer camp? – but I wasn’t about to grab my pitchfork either because the original film is a silly B horror film about a crazed woman killing a bunch of sex-crazed camp counselors. Don’t get me wrong, I enjoyed the hell out of the first film all throughout my adolescent years and I still jump every single time Jason pops out of the water at the very end. But, I’m sorry if I don’t think the filmmakers behind the remake were working with a sacred text.
Recently it came out that Steven Spielberg and Will Smith were planning on remaking Chan-wook Park’s Korean revenge flick Oldboy and I thought the internet was going to break from all the caps-locked screaming on message boards. But again, the original is a blood-soaked revenge film that already owes a huge debt to other material like the Death Wish films and Oedipus Rex. If the remake ever comes to fruition, it won’t be like Spielberg would be working with an already perfect film either; Oldboy, entertaining and violent as it is, takes a lot of silly detours and has a long-winded explanation for a pretty straightforward plot. There are fixable element in the first film that can be tightened in a remake and if the remake turns out to be a better film, then shouldn’t we all rejoice?
I can already hear the e-mailers screaming, “but Noah, what if they ruin the film and make it PG-13 and completely change the plot and blah blah blah?” And the answer to that is: go watch the original again. That’s the other thing that bothers me when people get up in arms about remakes; just because a film is remade, that doesn’t mean that all copies of the original get thrown in the garbage. In fact, chances are that more people will see the original in anticipation of the remake. So if Brett Ratner wants to remake Conan the Barbarian, nobody is forcing you to watch that film and if you do see it and it (inevitably) sucks, you can pop in the DVD of the original and pretend like you never saw the remake.
Every couple years, there is always some gossip BS about a remake of Casablanca and how so-and-so is attached to star and direct. And whenever I hear talk like this – and Casablancais one of my favorite films and it should be one of yours – I always chuckle and think, “good luck.” If somebody really has the temerity to think they could make that film better, then quite honestly, I would love to see them try. I’ve seen the original a hundred times and could quote every line from memory, but I would love to see which actor has the balls to think they could step into the role of Rick Blaine, made so famous by Bogie. And I’d love to know which actress thinks she’s beautiful enough to step into Ingrid Bergman’s shoes. To me, the real interest behind a remake of Casablanca is not about whether or not it would be any good – because even if it is, it wouldn’t touch the original – it would be about who has an ego big enough to tackle it. And that, my friends, is fascinating to me.
Remember in 1995 when Sydney Pollack decided it would be a good idea to remake Billy Wilder’s incomparable Sabrina? That film was an out and out disaster, not because the film was so bad, but because of the inevitable comparison to the original. If you had never seenBilly Wilder’s original, I’d venture to guess that you might even enjoy Pollack’s version; but, I would also guess that you wouldn’t fall in love with the film like you would with Wilder’s version. But what was so interesting to me was how they came up with the casting for that film; is Harrison Ford really the modern day Bogart and Julia Ormond the next Audrey Hepburn? Those were actually casting choices that seemed almost inspired to me compared to Greg Kinnear being casted in the William Holden role, another example of Holden being so underrated (in fact, I think he’s the most underrated actor of all-time, but that’s a column for another day). The bottom line is, though, that for fans of the original versions of films, it can actually be fun to watch a remake just to see how the process shakes out.
And I think that kind of “what-if?” question that is so prominent in sports – what if Barry Bondsnever left the Pirates? – is usually the kind of experiment that never makes it to Hollywood outside of remakes. So, if you look at remakes as a kind of grand experimental film, I think the helps to enjoy them more.
Look at Gus Van Sant’s shot-by-shot remake of Psycho; I’m a huge Van Sant fan, so of course I wonder why he would tackle such a ridiculous project. And I would have to guess that this must have been something like a pet project for him since it was the first thing he decided to tackle after he gained some cache with the financial and critical success of Good Will Hunting. Of course the remake is awful, but perhaps that was the point. Van Sant tried everything he could to recreate the exact film that Hitchcock made and everything from the plot, the shot selection, and the running time is identical.
So if we watch the movies back-to-back, we’re forced to see what works the first time around and what doesn’t the second time around. And what those two Psycho films do is to teach the importance of casting. Anthony Perkins makes Norman Bates believable and scary and lonely while Vince Vaughn makes him laughable; Janet Leigh is enigmatic yet likeable while Anne Heche is just lost. It’s a fascinating case study in how two actors can play the same part in the same movie with the same lines and play it completely differently. Much as he did with his Bela Tarr-style films later, Van Sant showed that he has a desire to experiment and see why film works and what the essentials are to making a film connect to an audience. His Psycho might have been a failure, but it was a noble and notable one.
Van Sant’s Psycho is a notable contrast to Michael Haneke remaking his own Funny Games last year with the same script, word-for-word and the same exact shot list. In fact, if you have seen one version of Funny Games, you have seen them both, making this a very strange and unfruitful experiment for Haneke because it was almost akin to dubbing his original version in English. But the alternative, I suppose, is to go the George Sluizer route, changing the ending of his own film The Vanishing when he remade it in the United States. That didn’t work too well, either, compromising his own vision, about four years before Ole Bornedal did the same thing with his film Nightwatch.
In the coming weeks, we’ll see a remake of Wes Craven’s The Last House on the Left and I just saw Craven’s version for the first time about a week ago. And if there’s anybody who is offended by the idea of this remake, it should only be because the original was so ridiculous that it’s astounding somebody could see something worthwhile enough to remake. The original is not high art, it’s a fetishistic exploitation film that would be unsavory and unsettling if it wasn’t so silly. But it’s a cult film and it has a built-in audience so the studios rounded up the usual suspects and remade it much in the same way they remade Craven’s The Hills Have Eyes, one of those odd remakes that is infinitely better than the original. The remake of The Hills Have Eyes replaces the wooden acting of the original with more accomplished thespians, making their screams much more piercing because their characterizations were that much more fully realized.
We’ll see if Last House on the Left is better or worse than the original when it comes out, but either way, I hope the fans of Craven’s version will think a bit longer before writing diatribes about damn remakes ruining the damn world. If you want to get really irrational about remakes, we could talk about how everything is ultimately the same story according to the wisdom ofJoseph Campbell. But really, what we should be doing is watching the films and deciding if they are better or worse than the original. And if they are indeed worse, as many remakes are, then we can shrug our shoulders and move on. Or we could just watch Casablanca again.
- Noah Forrest
February 25, 2009
Noah Forrest is a 25 year old aspiring writer/filmmaker in New York City.
The opinions expressed in these columns are the writers and do not neccessarily reflect the opinions of Movie City News or any of its editors or other contributors.
"This Aggression Will Not Stand, Man": an art show
Wednesday, February 25th, 2009
From the blog Gavin’s Underground, reportage and photos of art and artgoers from an opening of Big Lebowski-themed work at Signed & Numbered Gallery in Salt Lake City.
If Michel Gondry were to eat with his feet…
Wednesday, February 25th, 2009
And for only $17.50: “Offically licensed by Rubik’s, these Salt and Pepper mills have been produced as a tribute to the world’s most addictive – and some would say annoying, puzzle. The iconic 80′s gadget is brought to life here as a kitchen condiment dispenser!Each cube is exactly the same size as an authentic Rubik’s Cube – 2.24 inches cubed! Sit the mills down next to the real thing and you won’t be able to tell between them – only difference with these cubes is you can’t play them! The Rubik’s Cube mills are built around a durable ceramic mill that grinds various courseness salt & peppercorns. And so only the top layer of the cube rotates to operate the mill and grind the salt & pepper. The salt mill has a white top and the pepper mill has a red top so you can easily tell the difference between the two cubes.”
When Francis Met David [updated]
Wednesday, February 25th, 2009
Looking at Francis Coppola’s intro to Tetro and his palm-POV style, something chimed in my head, but it took a couple hours to realize what it was: David Lynch’s Los Angeles weather report videos, issued daily from the director’s work desk. The old guys are going all Lumiere Bros. on us. [Meanwhile, Lynch Twitters coyly about his imminent nuptials.]
Rating Poo Poo's The Imaginarium Of Doctor Parnassus
Wednesday, February 25th, 2009While Terry Gilliam’s Heath Ledger-starring The Imaginarium Of Doctor Parnassus hasn’t announced U.S. distribution, his Poo Poo Pictures Productions Ltd. has gotten a PG-13 for the finished film for ” violent images, some sensuality, language and smoking.”
The French Connection in Blu
Wednesday, February 25th, 2009Wow.
The French Connection on Blu-ray is one of the great additions to the highest shelf of my Blu-ray library, up there with The Godfather, the Kubrick films, and Pixar
American Zoetrope comes around to self-releasing Tetro
Wednesday, February 25th, 2009
A website for Francis Coppola’s self-financed, self-distributed Tetro debuted yesterday, with promises of more supplemental material before its June 11 limited release. There’s no trailer yet, so the hint that black-and-white stills and black-and-white posters offer of a monochrome film isn’t confirmed yet. But there is a two minute video with Coppola giving a glimpse of his Napa Valley office and making himself breathless from setting up the story while holding his video camera above his head as if taking a picture for a MySpace profile and spinning around in his desk chair. The arte povera quality of the gesture is oddly charming. It’s not over until the fat little 8-year-old girl in Ohio sings. [The Tetro website. The press release is below.]














