• Matt Damon on packing on the pounds for “The Informant!,” among other things. [USA Today]
• Which earth crisis documentary is for you? [Beyond the Multiplex]
• In honor of “A Prophet,” newly submitted as France’s foreign film Oscar representative, a list of the best-ever prison films. [Awards Daily]
As we sit in the flurry of festival season, with the even more flurry-ful (sorry, I’m tired) awards season upcoming, everyone’s eyes are pointed forward, as we impatiently await the supposedly Oscar-tailored collection of movies peppered across the next 3 or 4 months.
At this point, it’s easy to forget that the year is actually 12 months long, and that the warmer seasons offer their (admittedly, usually smaller) share of work worthy of celebration.
So I’m grateful to friend, reader and generally superb film writer Nick Davis for assembling this handy (though very idiosyncratic) alterna-Oscar ballot of the best work released in 2009 thus far.
• In the wake of the new “Nine” trailer, Ryan Adams takes a look at the story’s awards ancestry. [Awards Daily]
• Helen O’Hara on the trouble with romantic comedies and how to fix them. Screw it, I kind of want to see “The Proposal.” [Empire]
• Andrew O’Hehir on why the original “Star Trek” series still matters. [Beyond the Multiplex]
• Linda Milazzo takes a mean-spirited cheap shot at “The Soloist.” [The Huffington Post]
• Lauren Wissot talks to “Girlfriend Experience” star Sasha Grey. [Spout Blog]
• George Johnson wonders why a 200-year-old conspiracy theory still haunts the Vatican. [Slate]
• David Thomson remembers the great James Mason, who would have been 100 today. [The Guardian]
• Nat Rogers: “Nine reasons I must see ‘Nine’ NOW.” [The Film Experience]
• Gill Pringle chats with Dustin Hoffman about acting in love stories. [The Independent]
After all the hype, “X-Men Origins: Wolverine” opened with a solid $87.0 million at the box office this weekend. Both “X2” and “X-Men: The Last Stand” started with over $100 million* but “Wolverine” does better the $72.6 million of Bryan Singer’s original from 2000. When a film is received as poorly as Brett Ratner’s third entry in the franchise was, it’s only natural for the follow-up to start a bit lower.
Almost any franchise will prove this but the easiest example is “Batman.” Schumacher did his worst with “Batman & Robin” and unsuspecting customers shelled out $67.1 million* on opening weekend. The movie collapsed from there and it took Warner Bros. years to attempt another shot at the bat. In steps Christopher Nolan and “Batman Begins” debuted with a cautious $54.6 million. Everybody loved it, the stars aligned and “The Dark Knight” opened to $158.4 million. Obviously, there were other factors at play but look at the “Back to the Future,” “Mission: Impossible” and “The Matrix” films for further proof.
Anyway, all that is to say that $87 million isn’t really disappointing, nor is it that spectacular. “Iron Man” debuted with $98 million on this weekend last year without any previous big screen incarnations. “Wolverine” will most likely not make it to $200 million and life goes on.
Matthew McConaughey tried his luck at counter-programming and brought in $15.3 million for “Ghosts of Girlfriends Past.” That’s the worst debut he’s had in the romantic comedy genre since “EdTV” in 1999 and only a tiny fraction better than “Made of Honor”’s debut last year versus Tony Stark. I’m willing to go out on a limb and guess that McConaughey’s salary was a bit larger than Patrick Dempsey’s so that return is just not good enough. I like to think that it didn’t do well because it looked awful but that wouldn’t explain “Wolverine”’s numbers.
America liked it and they put a ring on it.
Beyonce’s new thriller “Obsessed” topped the domestic box office this weekend with $28.5 million, adding another impressive performance to the budding actress’s career. Impressive box office performance that is.
Whether or not Beyonce truly and gracefully inhabits the character of a woman forced to kick ass when some other crazy bitch starts stalking her man, I can’t be certain. This should easily make $70 million+ from a $20 million budget so all involved have just gotten a nice bonus.
Despite gunning for the same target audience, Universal’s “Fighting” also performed admirably and earned $11.4 million for third place. You can’t accuse them of not being straight to the point and enough males or teens must have thought that a movie called “Fighting” had to be bad ass and worth their $10. Channing Tatum’s career lives to fight another day.
Actual star power enters the fray at number four with “The Soloist.” Joe Wright’s once-Oscar hopeful earned $9.7 million, which is okay but not enough to justify moving out of the 2008 season. Even though audience reaction is bound to be positive, I just don’t see the legs being great here and a sub-$30 million finish won’t have anybody remembering these folks when ballots are due next year.
For the second weekend in a row, a product of the Disney Channel has headlined the top film at the box office. This week it’s Zac Efron in the Warner Bros. comedy “17 Again.” Sure, this plot has been done before multiple times (three in 1988 alone), but not with that distinct new millennium flavor. What’s that? “13 Going on 30?” Okay, so no movie this millennium has done it with a boy as the lead.
And that’s why this film needed to be made. Conceptual gripes aside, I actually like Zac Efron and if the trailers are any indication, his timing and charm are the only things this film have going for it. A $24.1 million opening weekend is virtually identical to the aforementioned Jennifer Garner vehicle, which helped her establish an identity outside of “Alias.” Her next film was “Electra” so hopefully Efron is paying attention.
“State of Play” investigates second place with $14.1 million and a handful of decent reviews. In previous years this kind of film would have done better (Affleck’s 2002 April thriller “Changing Lanes” debuted with $21.2 million), but in 2009, Universal will take that result. Direct competition comes from “The Soloist” next week but the word of mouth among adults should be strong enough that this sticks around until Memorial Day.
After the demanding “Master and Commander” shoot, Russell Crowe said he wasn’t interested in doing movies where he was in every shot any more and that explains his last four films pitting him against an equally famous co-star. With the exception of “American Gangster,” all of them have debuted with $13-$14 million.
When Joe Wright’s “The Soloist” was shifted from prime Oscar territory last autumn to a considerably more low-profile 2009 slot, many presumed that the film was something of an artistic disappointment. However, word also went round that the move was a sympathetic one, aimed to place less pressure on a film that, despite the talent involved, was more crowdpleaser than prestige item.
Meanwhile, two diametrically opposed trade reviews do very little to clear up the picture ahead of the film’s release next week. (They appeared a few days ago, but escaped my notice until now.) Todd McCarthy’s Variety pan confirms the suspicions of the sceptics, actually suggesting that the film appears uncomfortably caught between awards-baiting and more populist urges:
Neither rarefied art film nor widely accessible inspirational drama, “The Soloist” falls between the cracks both creatively and commercially … Joe Wright’s first American feature has moments of power and imagination, but the overworked style and heavy socially conscious bent exude an off-putting sense of self-importance, making for a picture that’s more of a chore than a pleasure to sit through.
Charismatic and dynamic as they’ve been on any number of previous occasions, both Foxx and Downey seem to labor here as they grapple with roles viewers will find difficulty warming to. Downey, in particular, fails to find either outer charm or inner soul in Steve Lopez.
The Hollywood Reporter’s Kirk Honeycutt, however, sings a very different tune, describing the film as “excellent, if flawed.” His disagreement is most pronounced on the matter of the film’s lead performances, going so far as to suggest that they remain strong awards contenders:
Robert Downey Jr. and Jamie Foxx are on fire in the lead roles: They’re both charismatic as hell without sacrificing any of the emotional honesty necessary for you to believe that these movie stars are a scruffy reporter and a mentally ill musician … True, Academy members tend to remember only the last three months of a year when voting, but these performances are extraordinary enough that the memory should not fade by fall.
We have yet to see how Joe Wright’s first foray into contemporary American cinema turned out, though the demotion of “The Soloist” from prime 2008 awards-bait to quiet 2009 spring release has had the sceptics whispering for some time now.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, then, Wright’s next project will find the “Atonement” helmer in the more familiar territory of the British period drama: “Indian Summer” will chronicle the last days of British colonial rule in India in the 1940s, following the handover of power from Viceroy of India, Lord Mountbatten, to new Indian PM Jawaharlal Nehru. (Some sources, meanwhile, suggest that the focus of the film will be a rumoured affair between Nehru and Mountbatten’s wife Edwina.)
Besides Wright, more notable names are falling into place: as the fourth collaboration between Wright and Working Title, Tim Bevan and Eric Fellner are naturally on board as producers, while William Nicholson (“Shadowland,” “Gladiator”) is taking script duties. The Guardian reports “speculation” that Cate Blanchett and Hugh Grant are in line to star, which I’d take with a pinch of salt — though it’s plausible enough casting.
As a fan of the widely misrepresented “Atonement” (it was a far smaller, stranger film than the romantic epic it was sold as), I’m on board for this. It’s not going to do much to clear the “next Anthony Minghella” buzz that has been circling around Wright for a few years now (misplaced talk at best, not least because he isn’t a writer), but it seems a good fit for his storytelling abilities. “The Jewel in the Crown” remains the benchmark for screen depictions of this fascinating era — if Wright can conjure similar magic, this could be a real contender.
Ahh. The dust is settling. And on the horizon, just visible through the mist and waiting to drive us all up the wall once again: the 2009 Oscar season.
I’ve been writing this year-in-advance column for probably six years now, and I always look forward to gazing ahead. No one dives in so pathetically deep this far out as yours truly, but in exchange for not having a life for the past few months, I get to unload this burden the day after our annual season’s peak and forget about little gold men entirely for a few months.
It’s quite liberating.
The most interesting thing about the season to come, from my vantage point, is the lack of a dreaded “frontrunner status” for any of the contenders. Some might say Clint Eastwood’s Nelson Mandela project (which is not called “The Human Factor,” mind you — the director says the film is currently untitled and is based on John Carlin’s book “Playing the Enemy”).
Others might say Rob Marshall’s “Nine” (coming from a money-tight company hoping to avoid echoes of “Memoirs of a Geisha”). But I don’t see a “Geisha” from here, or a “Charlie Wilson’s War,” expected heavies waiting to miss the mark. The field is curiously flat, and as a result, excitingly broad.
Let’s get to it, shall we?
After initially being booted out of awards season into the cinematic no man’s land of March 2009, it seems Joe Wright’s “The Soloist” has been rescheduled yet again.
It’s now apparently slated for release on April 24, which sounds like a beneficial move into early summer-movie territory. Read into that what you will. Perhaps it’s a vote of confidence in the film’s commercial viability, though I suspect this is still no awards contender.
It’s interesting to note that, in addition to citations for the respective casts of “The Dark Knight” and “Sex and the City: The Movie,” only five film actors made EW’s recently unveiled list of the 25 Entertainers of the Year. (Six if you count their #2 pick, Tina Fey — which I don’t.)
Perhaps it chimes in with the widespread feeling that 2008 isn’t a vintage year for cinema, perhaps the worlds of TV and music simply had more to offer, or perhaps I’m simply over-analysing. It’s curious to see arguably the year’s two most overexposed stars, Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt, absent from the list — make of that what you will.
Nevertheless, the list was topped by a movie star: Robert Downey, Jr. Even with the bumping of “The Soloist” from the 2008 slate, it’s difficult to deny what a great year he’s had — between “Iron Man” and “Tropic Thunder,” he really found his popular touch, and even the most elitist critic had a kind word for him. Whether or not that unlikely Oscar campaign for the latter film takes flight, he has, as EW aptly puts it, “pulled off one of the smartest second acts in showbiz history.”
Other names present on the list include Meryl Streep, James Franco and Elizabeth Banks — but the most surprising and delightful inclusion is Richard Jenkins. I can’t imagine that the humble 61 year-old character actor ever thought he’d appear on a list alongside the likes of Leona Lewis and The Jonas Brothers, but good for him. It’s an appropriate recognition for a year that saw him supplement a career performance in “The Visitor” with cunning appearances in two mainstream crowdpleasers. Here’s EW’s take:
Richard Jenkins has had a colorful career, but he never seemed like an actor who’d get interrupted during dinner. After growing up in De Kalb, Ill., he became one of those ubiquitous character actors whom only a few know by name: the gay federal agent in Flirting With Disaster, the psychiatrist in There’s Something About Mary, the deceased patriarch in HBO’s Six Feet Under, and on and on. This year, Jenkins played Will Ferrell’s stepdad in Step Brothers and a gym manager in Burn After Reading. Though Jenkins has worked with just about every big-name filmmaker and actor in Hollywood, The Visitor writer-director Tom McCarthy was still considered brave for elevating him to leading man. ”There was never a question about whether he could do this,” he says. ”Richard has proven himself.’
Indeed he has. That Best Actor nomination for “The Visitor” looks more and more likely to me.
Apologies for the slightly delayed wrap. Much to discuss this week — here are the highlights:
• With some formerly hot prospects now off the radar, this week’s Off the Carpet column surveys the landscape, and concludes that things look good for “Benjamin Button.”
• “The Soloist” withdrew as the AFI fest opener; their loss is “Doubt”‘s gain.
• With a trailer for “Gran Torino” finally emerging, we wonder if Clint Eastwood is the real frontrunner for Best Actor.
• The Gotham Independent Film Awards unveiled the season’s first set of nominees — good news for titles like “Ballast” and “The Visitor.”
• More impressions from the London Film Festival, including hot foreign-language contender “The Class.”
• Still in London, we caught up with “Happy-Go-Lucky”‘s superb Best Supporting Actor contender, Eddie Marsan.
• This week’s edition of Tech Support put Art Direction in the spotlight.
• We were in a listmaking mood this week, rounding up some of the most scandalously unnominated actors of this era …
• … while John Foote reminisced over his personal favourite movie moments.
• And finally, who should host the Oscars? Our answer may surprise you.
The press release, in part:
The festival will screen an unfinished version of DOUBT when it opens AFI FEST on Thursday, October 30, 2008, at ArcLight Hollywood’s Cinerama Dome Theatre. The Opening Night Gala is the film’s World Premiere and is presented by Audi of America…
“The movie is still being finished, but we were so excited to show DOUBT and help our friends at AFI FEST and the American Film Institute at the same time. We couldn’t possibly pass up the opportunity,” said Miramax president Daniel Battsek.
“We are grateful to Miramax Films and producers Scott Rudin and Mark Roybal for providing AFI the honor of premiering this highly anticipated, unfinished version of DOUBT. There is no doubt that bringing together Meryl Streep, Philip Seymour Hoffman and Amy Adams in concert with the extraordinary talents of writer/director John Patrick Shanley promises an evening that will celebrate the finest in American film,” said Rose Kuo, AFI FEST Artistic Director.
Truthfully, we should have seen this coming. Of the major films that are basically completed and ready to go, it was the only possibility (though the “unfinished version” bit is made clear at throughout — hedging their bets). “Milk” has its fancy San Francisco debut on Tuesday, “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” is too comfortable in its position as the year’s last minute wower. “Revolutionary Road” is completed, but only just, while “Australia” is still in the editing lab.
The New York screening of “Doubt” tonight is for friends and family with the original cast of the play in attendance and the film will be screening for trade press on Wednesday, just before AFI’s opening night the next day. Perfect timing.
When the news came down last week that the release Paramount’s “The Soloist” would be delayed until March 2009, the initial indication was that the film would go on to bow at this year’s AFI Fest as scheduled. Well, in a just-issued press release (which landed after business hours), the festival has announced that the debut has been scrapped.
The release, in part:
In a joint statement from Paramount Pictures, Dreamworks Pictures and Participant Media: “Due to the change in THE SOLOIST release date, we unfortunately had to withdraw from the AFI FEST Film Festival. It was an honor to be invited as the Opening Night film and we are very grateful to the festival for their support and understanding. THE SOLOIST filmmakers, DreamWorks, Universal, Participant and Paramount are very proud of this film and we are excited and committed to bring it to the world in March.”
“While we are greatly disappointed that AFI FEST will not have the opportunity to offer the World Premiere of THE SOLOIST, AFI’s priority is to honor the artists. We wish to be supportive in any endeavor that will help a film of this quality reach a greater audience,” said AFI FEST Artistic Director Rose Kuo.
It’s a shame, personally speaking, because I was looking forward to this film and being able to give it a look sooner rather than later, as I’ll be covering AFI here next month. But it might be the wisest move all around for the studio to just remove all aspects from the 2008 landscape.
Every Oscar season is about managing expectations. Studios, of course, want to keep the murmurs to a minimum whether they have the goods or not because the peril of peaking too early is just as bad as the sting of negative word-of-mouth. Similarly, being “the one to beat” sets a film up to rise to an unfair occasion rather than coming to the table fresh.
Holding back is a tradition and is even one of two philosophies on the awards season sell. There are those who’ll tell you that, if you have a great movie, you should show it and show it proudly. The other side of the equation believes in the manipulation of when and where opinion will trickle out. It seems every year a train wreck of sorts occurs, and this year, that train wreck was obviously “Frost/Nixon.”
After landing in London to some mediocre reviews (no one at this site, by the way, ever said the film was bombing with critics across the board), should Universal Pictures have been particularly surprised? Ron Howard, America’s white-bread filmmaking standard exhibiting to the chilly British disposition? It wasn’t going to be a rapturous reception, and with the film having been completed for months on end, holding back until the London festival to give anyone a sanctioned peek raised eyebrows long ago.
With rumors that “The Road” may be bumped to 2009, (not Harvey Weinstein’s choice of release year) and “The Soloist” already moving on, along with the rumblings that “Frost/ Nixon” does indeed lack that edge I wrote about not so long ago, one can feel the Oscar race shifting day to day. Even “Changeling,” once thought to have a decent shot at Best Picture and Best Director nominations, is now looking like a maybe in the race, as 2008 and continues to confound audiences and critics.
2008 has been a rather weak year at the movies with only “Stop Loss,” WALL-E,” “Iron Man” and best of all, “The Dark Knight” making much of an impact before the Toronto International Film Festival. When that 10-day event did not really produce a frontrunner as it has in years past, all eyes turned to New York and London. Eastwood’s film received decidedly mixed reviews out of New York while “Che” continued to struggle with the length of the picture. In London, Ron Howard’s political work, “Frost/ Nixon” has not been knocking the critics out as hoped.
I’ve been worried about the film for some time. But the screenplay is based on an award-winning play, Frank Langella is giving the performance that won him accolades on Broadway, but hey, in my view, Howard just isn’t the right director for this sort of film. Give it to Sidney Lumet who, in his 80s, has more edge to his work than Howard. It’s not that he is a terrible director. On the contrary, he has made some very good films, the criminally under valued “The Missing” among them, but a picture like this needs the very things he lacks as a director.
So where are we in terms of the Oscar race now, if these films are indeed falling off the radar (the jury is still admittedly out on “Frost”)? What if the remaining releases are not very good at all and the Oscar race is saddled with an array of mediocre films, which has not happened for many, many years? In fact, the last time I can think of a slew of weak films making up Oscar’s major line-up was 1968, when curiously, “2001: A Space Odyssey” and “Planet of the Apes” were left off the list, shunned for their sci-fi brilliance.
Busy week, this. Here is how it went down:
• In the biggest story of the week, the pool of contenders narrowed as “The Road” got bumped to 2009…
• … followed, in quick succession, by “The Soloist.”
• The London Film Festival kicked off with “Frost/Nixon,” which got off to a middling critical start. We were underwhelmed.
• More London coverage here, here and here.
• As Tech Support ran down the Visual Effects contenders, we got an angle on the tantalising FX for “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button.”
• Heath Ledger’s buzz remains as solid as ever — word went round that a lead campaign was in the works, but they’re staying put in supporting. Good move.
• More (and still more) foreign film contenders bring the field to a record tally of 67.
• We responded to the bad “Changeling” buzz with a kinder view, but like everyone else, are looking ahead to “Gran Torino.”
• And finally, we solve your sartorial dilemmas in time for Halloween.
Heath Ledger is “100% supporting,” according to Entertainment Weekly’s Dave Karger. It seems Karger did what I was too lazy to do this week: call the studio and get the goods. I figured we’d just wait until an FYC site popped up, but for now, it seems to be settled.
The “Dark Knight” star has been batted around as a lead actor contender by pundits, including yours truly, but even with the news that “The Soloist” and (possibly) “The Road” have vacated the 2008 season — leaving two fresh holes in the lead actor gerby — Warner Bros. is going to be campaigning Ledger as a supporting actor.
Wise move. And truthful to both the performance and the material.