Archive for February, 2010

Christopher Plummer is this year's frontrunner for the Best Supporting Actor Oscar.

Continuing our Countdown to The Oscars, we are pleased to present our analysis of the Best Supporting Actor category. Like with this column’s previous entries, we examine each nominee’s chances for earning the esteemed Academy Award so that you the reader will have an idea of what to expect come time for the ceremony on March 7th. We here at Movie-Thoughts like to spur debate, so let us know what you think! Tell us if you agree, disagree, and why. In the end, it’s all for fun anyways, right?

Also see: Best Supporting Actress, Best Actor

Best Supporting Actor

We find that this year Christopher Plummer is the most likely to win because of the combination of his age/long tenure as an actor, the quality of his performance, the weight of his performance, the novelty that this is his first Oscar nomination, and the fact that the only thing he has decreasing his odds are the strong suites of the other nominees. Meanwhile, all the other candidates have various issues that could anchor their dreams of delivering a teary-eyed acceptance speech. Critical and/or press momentum haven’t been playing much of a role with this particular category, with the exception that The Lovely Bones (for which Stanley Tucci is nominated) is the only film relevant to this category that has received overwhelmingly negative reviews. With all of this said, let’s get to it! Read the rest of this entry »

Antoine Fuqua, directing Richard Gere

ComingSoon.net has published an interview with Brooklyn’s Finest director, Antoine Fuqua (Training Day). The interview is a follow-up to one the site conducted with the director back at Sundance, so some references have been made that may not register without reading that previous interview.

“The way [the movie's] three stories are woven together is what makes it such a fine addition to the [street movie] canon, and it shows a lot of growth in Fuqua as a filmmaker in being able to tell these stories without judgment. It’s also his first movie made outside the studio system, which probably allowed him to focus as much on the characters rather than on the violence inherent to the genre.” – ComingSoon.net

The three stories they pertain to are that of the rookie cop (Ethan Hawke), the undercover cop (Don Cheadle) and his criminal friend (Wesley Snipes), and the 25 year officer about to retire (Richard Gere).

The interview is very informative and highly recommended reading for fans of Fuqua’s work.

"Superman Returns," although successful, was not nearly successful enough to please Warner Bros.

David Goyer, who helped write Batman Begins and The Dark Knight with Christopher and Jonathan Nolan, is in negotiations with Warner Brothers and Legendary Pictures to pen the script to the next Superman movie. Goyer’s help in making the Batman brand so financially valuable is no doubt the reason behind the studios’ decision, but he is also recognized for his efforts with the Blade series.

Actor Brandon Routh and director Bryan Singer will not return due to Warner Bros.’ dissatisfaction with how much Superman Returns earned at the box office (costing about $270 million and grossing $391 million worldwide according to BoxOfficeMojo.com). Despite the film’s respectable totals they apparently thought that a character as iconic as Superman should have earned much better numbers.

Goyer’s pitch regarding the Superman script dealt with lots of action and battles with arch-nemesis Lex Luthor and super villain Brainiac, which must have appealed to both studios.

Warner Bros. is in kind of a hurry, as they must create a finished Superman film by 2013 because that is when their copyright on the character of Superman expires and all rights go to the heirs of co-creator Joe Shuster.

Source: Variety

Quick Opinion: I’ve said this before with regards to Warner Bros. beef with Bryan Singer and I’ll say it again – the problem with Superman Returns‘ returns was not Singer’s fault. The character and brand, while certainly still iconic in the United States, is not nearly as popular outside of the U.S. because he was birthed from WWII patriotism. People around the world got behind Superman because what he stood for – in essence – was the might of the U.S. army and allying forces against the Nazi regime. Superman was pro-American justice and anti-tyranny. Such a character does not fit with modern America, who loves to root for the little guy (Spider-Man) and tortured soul (Batman). Anymore, Superman is thought of as being too powerful to like. Batman and Spider-Man, though special, are viewed to be more on the level of the everyman, which is a position that has been the most popular with superhero audiences since before 2006′s Superman Returns and continues to this day. The next Superman movie might earn more money because it will supposedly be more action-packed (attracting the large Transformers-type crowds), but if they invest the same amount that they did for Bryan Singer’s film they’ll be whining about returns again in 2014.

(For more elaboration on this topic, see Movie-Thoughts’ Deep Thoughts “A Different Look at ‘The Dark Knight.’” Comments on Superman being unfitting with modern times are near the end.)

Short Take: The story isn't bad, but unfortunately it's mismanaged

Director: Julio DePietro (Début)

Screenwriter: Julio DePietro (Début); Ford Madox Ford (novel, The Good Soldier)

Cast: Alexis Bledel (Post Grad, The Sisterhood of the Travelling Pants), Bryan Greenberg (Bride Wars, Prime), Scott Porter (Dear John, Bandslam)

Length: 1 hour 30 minutes

Synopsis: Narrated by slick Wall Street trader Tommy (Porter), the film shows how his life goes from perfect to depressing in a matter of six weeks.  During that time, Tommy works on his relationship with new girlfriend Beth (Bledel) who works as an urban conservationist and leads a book club with her friends.  Tommy also coaches his sensitive coworker Daniel (Greenberg), an ex-soldier, on both dating and trading. Read the rest of this entry »

With "500 Days of Summer" (above) and "The Hangover" both being critically acclaimed comedies, which film received the bigger Oscar snub?

A recent Variety article by Glenn Whipp takes a (very) light jab at the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences by pointing out, as many have done, that comedies have yet again stayed out of the Oscars’ list of Best Picture nominations. Two pics he mentions specifically are 500 Days of Summer and The Hangover. The latter made the American Film Institute’s Top 10 of the year, and the former even made the Movie-Thoughts Top 10. Both films were critically acclaimed, with The Hangover earning 78% on RottenTomatoes.com and 500 Days of Summer earning 86%.

Whipp notes in his article that it is not the concept of comedy that the Academy has excluded, being that A Serious Man has black comedy, Up in the Air has spurts of humor, Up is debatably an action/comedy, and Inglourious Basterds is peppered with tongue-in-cheek fantasy.

So what’s keeping The Hangover away? Crudeness is no doubt the answer, but that’s only an explanation for its brand of humor. In other matters that the Academy judges, which include artistic quality and technical prowess, the film can be said to fall short. The topic of human interest (which couldn’t be a broader label) is another favorite of the voters, so if Judd Apatow’s 40 Year Old Virgin didn’t have a chance, then certainly The Hangover wouldn’t. But what about 500 Days of Summer? A smart, funny film about how to get over what you thought was a great relationship surely satisfies the Academy’s criteria, right? Apparently not. We are left to only guess, which is really all we can do.

This all begs the question of, if we were to consider these two films’ omission by the Academy a snub, which was the bigger snub? Leave your vote in the comments section of this post or via this site’s Contact page. Tell the world what you think!

Freddy's back April 30th

ShockTillYouDrop.com published their findings of when they visited the set of the new Nightmare on Elm Street remake. The film is meant to reboot what had become a tired franchise, which was launched with Wes Craven’s career-defining 1984 film of the same title. Michael Bay’s Platinum Dunes production studio is the creative entity behind the movie, which also helped create The Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake back in 2003 as well as the recent Friday the 13th remake.

The set visit documents various aspects of the new film, from the look of the actors, the attitude of the creative minds behind the project, and the differences between this picture and its original. One feature of the film that its director Samuel Bayer stresses was how it’s trying to be legitimately scary, not “fun horror” like the remake of Friday the 13th.

The article includes many quotes from director Bayer and producer Bradley Fuller, which do well to explain exactly what their aims are with this film. According to the article, Bayer was pursued feverishly by Platinum Dunes and Newline Cinema because of his knack for being a visual storyteller (almost all of his credits are for directing numerous music videos). As Spike Jonze has proven (Where the Wild Things Are, Adaptation, Being John Malkovich), a background in directing music videos is not a bad one.

The article overall proves very revealing – so much so that if you’re not one for spoilers then you might want to avoid it. Likewise, if you can’t get enough information about this remake (which opens April 30th) then you’ll want to check it out ASAP.

Also See…

ComingSoon.net interviews Johnny Depp about his role as the Mad Hatter in Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland, as well as some other upcoming roles. The film opens March 5th.

According to Diane Garrett, "Up in the Air" is just one of this year's films that acknowledge the frequency of infidelity

Diane Garrett of Variety.com wrote in an article the other day how it seems the topic of infidelity is hot this year in Hollywood. The reason for this suspicion – 4 out of 10 nominated films for the Best Picture Oscar deal directly with the subject.

Up in the Air, Precious, An Education, and A Serious Man are those 4, and aside from these there’s still those films that weren’t nominated, such as It’s Complicated and Nine.

Garrett notes that, socially, infidelity is a topic that the country can’t seem to avoid, with news breaks about Tiger Woods, John Edwards, Mark Sanford, David Letterman, and John and Kate Gosselin flashing day and night. For something that’s supposedly so immoral, it sure seems to happen quite a lot. Could this be why it’s such a popular topic in recent films?

On the contrary, Garrett makes a different conclusion, chalking the timeliness of the subject up to its versatility in the field of writing.

“It’s interesting, it’s common, and it’s juicy,” says Wesleyan U. film scholar Jeanine Basinger. “You can tell it as comedy, drama, whatever.” – Variety

Infidelity is an issue that audiences seem to have a strange interest in. Strange, that is, because the negative effects of it are well known (scarred children, emotional pitfalls, birthed insecurities, etc.) but because it’s so common it’s traversed from being a serious taboo to fodder for entertainment. And beyond the incorporation of the topic in this year’s four nominees, Garrett insinuates they treat it as a common indiscretion like the most of us. This contrasts, she says, with films like Unfaithful which explicitly claim that such an act should not be tolerated.

To add to Garrett’s article, at least this year’s films aren’t in any way condoning the act of cheating.

Short Take: Intelligent and gripping

Director: Martin Scorsese (The Departed)

Screenwriter: Laeta Kalogridis (Alexander), Dennis Lehane (novel)

Cast: Leonardo DiCaprio (Revolutionary Road), Mark Ruffalo (Zodiac), Ben Kingsley (The Wackness), Michelle Williams (Brokeback Mountain), Max von Sydow (Minority Report)

Length: 2h 18m

Synopsis: It’s 1954. U.S. Marshal Teddy Daniels (DiCaprio) is assigned to investigate the mysterious disappearance of a patient at Shutter Island, which is a mental hospital for the criminally insane. Paired with a new partner named Chuck (Ruffalo), the two are convinced that those at the asylum are not telling them everything they need to know. A conspiracy seems like the most logical explanation for what has occurred, but why such a conspiracy would exist baffles them. The answers they find turn out to be the kind that they’d rather not know. Read the rest of this entry »

Short Take: Thorough in its approach, which is regurgitation

Director: Garry Marshall (Pretty Woman, The Princess Diaries)

Screenwriters: Katherine Fugate (The Prince and Me, Carolina)

Cast: Ashton Kutcher (What Happens in Vegas, The Guardian), Jennifer Garner (The Invention of Lying, Juno), Anne Hathaway (Bride Wars, Rachel Getting Married), Jamie Foxx (The Kingdom, Dreamgirls), Jessica Biel (Easy Virtue, I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry), Shirley MacLaine (In Her Shoes, The Apartment), Hector Elizondo (The Princess Diaries, American Gigolo)

Length: 2 hours 5 minutes

Synopsis: During Valentine’s Day in Los Angeles, a number of related characters celebrate love in all its forms.  The film mostly centers on lovesick florist Reed (Kutcher), who proposes to his girlfriend, and his interactions with the other characters throughout the day.  Reed’s best friend, Julia (Garner), decides to surprise her mysterious boyfriend.  Liz (Hathaway) is a secretary who moonlights as a phone sex operator and tries to keep it secret from her new boyfriend.  Valentine’s-hating sports agent Kara (Biel) throws a party lamenting the holiday and shares her hatred with Kelvin (Foxx), a sports newscaster forced to report on the holiday. Kate (Roberts), a soldier on leave, gets to know a handsome and friendly business man (Cooper) as she flies home to see her valentine. Read the rest of this entry »

Disney has two songs nominated from "The Princess and the Frog", either of which they would have certainly been proud to perform. But alas.

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences  has announced that this year’s nominees for Best Original Song will not be performed during the Academy Awards ceremony on March 7th. Instead, each song will be shortened and showcased with an accompanying clip from their respective films.

Best Song nominees are -

“Almost There” from The Princess and the Frog, Randy Newman
“Down in New Orleans” from The Princess and the Frog, Randy Newman
“Loin de Paname” from Paris 36, Reinhardt Wagner and Frank Thomas
“Take It All” from Nine, Maury Yeston
“The Weary Kind (Theme from Crazy Heart)” from Crazy Heart, Ryan Bingham and T Bone Burnett

Source: Hollywood Reporter

Quick Opinion: I wonder what the impetus was for breaking with tradition? Usually the Best Song performances are some of the more glamorous, theatrical, and overall entertaining parts of the entire show. Hosts Alec Baldwin and Steve Martin will surely provide musical moments of their own that were created specifically for the show, but why not give the actual nominees the same spotlight? The Academy has not released a reason for this move, which naturally prompts negative speculation. My best guess is that the aim is to shorten the lengthy ceremony. Many have complained just as much about how long the awards show is as they did that certain films got “snubbed” for Best Picture nominations. If the goal is to shorten the show and appease audience interests, why then would they scrap the Best Song performances instead of electing to not televise categories most people don’t care about (e.g., Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing, Best Documentary Short, Best Live-Action Short and, depending on who you talk to, Best Foreign Language Film as well)? Personally, I’d just be happy if they reduced the amount of those extended commercial breaks.