Archive for March, 2010

Miramax has long been considered a haven for independent financing and distribution, but with it being limited to only a few films per year who will pick up the slack?

Every few months or so, I get into this strange mood where I think the film industry has become all hype and no substance and I feel nostalgic for the movies I used to love.  Typically during these periods, every film I see only seems to confirm that sense and I grow increasingly disappointed until something finally snaps me out of it.

This time last year, I found myself in the midst of one of my film industry doldrums and I walked into Greg Mottola’s coming-of-age film Adventureland expecting yet another gross-out teen comedy like his previous film Superbad.  However, what I encountered was a film that restored my faith in the medium.

I remember the moment exactly.  Kristen Stewart’s character Em and Jesse Eisenberg’s character James are simply driving in a car as the Velvet Underground’s “Pale Blue Eyes” plays on the radio.  They have just left a bar after Em’s secret lover and his wife walk in and the couples share an awkward and loaded exchange.  Em is clearly thrown by the encounter and the scene that follows basically shows her reaction to it.  As she drives, Em’s face goes from sad to angry to disappointed to confused in a matter of seconds, displaying all of the complicated emotions she feels.  And it was during that scene that I remembered how much I love film and how powerful film could be.  It wasn’t just Stewart’s incredible performance or the music choice or the way Mottola filmed it, it was the combination of all those things.  It was the realization that I was seeing a truly extraordinary moment of creation happening on the screen and I had suddenly regained that passion for movies I had experienced as a child.

I’ve recently felt myself moving toward another bout of movie despondency so I popped in my Adventureland DVD and prepared to have my faith restored.  On a whim, I watched the previews before the film and one of them happened to be a roundup of Miramax films, the same company that distributed Adventureland.

As the preview rolled, I realized how many Miramax films I’ve enjoyed throughout the years.  I mean, this is the production/distribution company that first sparked my love for movies all the way back in 1996 with the release of Anthony Minghella’s The English Patient.  I may not have fully understood all the film’s themes at eight years old, but I certainly appreciated the beauty.  The passionate yet tragic love story of the central characters and the gorgeous cinematography are the reasons the film remains one of my favorites even today.  Miramax was the company that sparked my love of musicals too.  Sitting in a half-empty theater in the middle of the day watching Chicago was a positively transformative experience.  The sex appeal and the combination of stage performance and cinema that only film could supply was positively incredible.  Miramax was even the company that taught me about post-modernist referencing: I delighted in the way Wes Craven’s Scream deconstructed the horror genre and was positively astounded by the endless layers of pop culture reference Quentin Tarantino used in the Kill Bill films.  So I began to wonder, what happened to Miramax?

Miramax began some thirty years ago in New York as an independent production and distribution company founded by Bob and Harvey Weinstein.  The goal of the company—named for the Weinsteins’ parents Miriam and Max—was to produce and distribute independent films which were often more notable for their artistic value than their potential box office earnings.  Between their opening in 1979 and 1993, Miramax distributed such films as Sex, Lies and Videotape and Reservoir Dogs.  However, it really began to flourish after the Walt Disney Company bought it in 1993.  After the sale, with more financial backing at their disposal, the Weinsteins were able to run the company fairly independently of the rest of the Disney family.

The Weinsteins had always been fairly aggressive in their business practices, from acquiring films to acquiring promising filmmaking talent, and that same style carried over in their Disney period.  Nowhere was this aggressive business style more apparent than the company’s Oscar campaigns.  Perhaps the best example of a successful Miramax campaign came in 1998 when Shakespeare in Love beat Saving Private Ryan for a Best Picture Oscar.  According to a New York Magazine article from 1995, Miramax spent an estimated $5 million campaigning for the film and its arguable whether it would have been so fortunate without such significant backing.  Miramax carried on in this manner with one successful Oscar-winning film after another.  And then 2005 rolled around.

The Weinsteins had a tenuous relationship with former Disney CEO Michael Eisner over issues like financing and creative matters and when it came time to renew the brothers’ contracts in 2005, the negotiations went so poorly they ultimately decided to leave to create The Weinstein Company.  Miramax continued relatively unchanged under the direction of Daniel Battsek until this past January when Disney closed the its New York and Los Angeles offices and made it a part of the larger Disney infrastructure, thereby reducing the production output to only a handful of films per year.  Though companies like Summit Entertainment and even The Weinstein Company have showed interest in purchasing Miramax from Disney, it’s likely the $700 million asking price, as reported by The Deal Magazine, will mean the company will stay in Disney’s possession for years to come.  However, the real question in all this madness is what company can audiences expect to take up the creative slack?

Miramax’s most obvious heir is The Weinstein Company.  In it’s few short years, it has already made some impressive films like quite a few of this year’s Oscar nominees including Inglourious Basterds, Nine and A Single Man.  And it has quite a few promising films in the pipeline including two Sundance Favorites, The Company Men starring Ben Affleck and Chris Cooper and Blue Valentine starring Ryan Gosling and Michelle Williams.  However, another independent company that might give the Weinsteins a run for their money is Summit Entertainment.  Former Paramount Vice Chairman Robert G. Friedman and Patrick Wachsberger established Summit in April 2007, but it’s already shown some promise.  It produced and distributed this year’s Best Picture winner The Hurt Locker and with the cash cow that is The Twilight Saga as one of its properties, Summit shows no signs of disappearing anytime soon.

Regardless of what the future may hold, I’m sure there will always be films to help remind me why I fell in love with the medium in the firs place.  And if not, I can always pick something from the Miramax library for a little reminder.

Legendary Pictures and Warner Bros. are teaming up to produce another entry to the Godzilla library, and hope to release it sometime in 2012.

“Godzilla is one of the world’s most powerful pop culture icons, and we at Legendary are thrilled to be able to create a modern epic based on this long-loved Toho franchise,” said Thomas Tull, chairman and CEO of Legendary. “Our plans are to produce the Godzilla that we, as fans, would want to see. We intend to do justice to those essential elements that have allowed this character to remain as pop culturally relevant for as long as it has.”

… Added Jeff Robinov, president of Warner Bros. Pictures Group, “Godzilla is emblematic of the kind of branded, event films for which Warner Bros. and our partners at Legendary are best known.” – Hollywood Reporter

The films Robinov is referring to are such films as Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, Superman Returns, and the soon to release Clash of the Titans.

Nothing is known about the possible plot at this point, as things have yet to reach any sort of pre-production. Dan Lin (Sherlock Holmes), Roy Lee (The Strangers, Quarantine), and Brian Rogers are producing.

Sources: Hollywood Reporter, ComingSoon.net

Quick Opinion: It will be curious to see whether Legendary and Warner Bros. will try to seriously revive the Godzilla brand in the United States (where its popularity has been demoted to cult status) like they did for Batman and tried to do for Superman, or if they will make it a self-aware romp that pokes fun at itself. The 1998 Godzilla directed by Roland Emerich made close to $400 million worldwide despite terrible reviews, so even if they model the next film after it perhaps they feel the monster is still popular enough to enjoy the same type of success. I have my doubts, though.  

Disney's "Alice in Wonderland" has made the majority of its profits off 3D ticket sales, but did the technology justify the higher ticket price?

There is a big debate going on about the influx of 3D movies that has been going on the past few years, and continues going on strong. Some claim that the technology has already reduced itself to a gimmick, while others believe wholeheartedly that it is the future of cinema. Who is right? Can anyone be wrong? In order to come to any kind of conclusion, we first have to look at the facts.

Much of this topic comes down to economics. An article in Variety by Pamela McClintock examines this angle in-depth, and answers a lot of questions regarding why the film industry is so keen on this latest and greatest technology. To put it simply, there is a lot of money in it. The unfathomable success of James Cameron’s Avatar has driven a number of studios into a frenzy, spurring them to make some 2D movies into 3D in order to cash in on the popularity. The upcoming Clash of the Titans (April 2^nd) is one such film that was made into 3D at the 11^th hour. For some, these half-baked conversions are one of the major points of contention. The claim is that such last-minute conversions are adding to the thinking that 3D technology is nothing more than a money-grabbing gimmick. This may be true, but consider this: producing a film in 3D from the get-go adds $20 million to its budget almost automatically, while converting a film into 3D during post-production only adds $10 million to the budget (some studios even claim $5 million). The issue over post-production conversions, then, may not entirely be an issue about getting more money from audiences, but also about saving money. So, it is not completely about the first goal of business (making profit) but also the third (reducing cost). But what about the second goal (increasing revenue)? Read the rest of this entry »

The 2010 version of the Kraken

With blockbuster season starting with April 2^nd’s remake of Clash of the Titans, we here at Movie-Thoughts thought it would be interesting to look into the history of one of the film’s most fearsome monsters, the Kraken. In the film it will be one of the final monsters that Perseus (Sam Worthington) must defeat in order to save Princess Andromeda (Alexa Davalos) and mark the largest act of defiance against Zeus and the others atop Mount Olympus, who continually manipulate and take advantage of mankind like pawns on a chessboard.

The reason for Andromeda being offered to the Kraken deals mostly with her mother, Queen Cassiopeia (Polly Walker). The myth goes that Cassiopeia was known throughout the kingdom of Ethiopia as an incredible beauty, and her vanity caused her to boast about her exquisiteness to the point where she claimed to be superior to the Nereids (sea nymphs friendly to the sea God Poseidon). Poseidon grew furious with Cassiopeia’s egotism and thus proceeded to curse the land of Ethiopia. The only way to lift the curse was for the queen to sacrifice her only daughter Andromeda to the Cetus (sea monster), and so the princess was fastened to the rocks on the nearby shore, helpless against her impending doom. Read the rest of this entry »

Zoe Saldana ("Avatar," "Star Trek") in Warner Bros.' "The Losers" - Opens April 23rd

IGN.com published a set visit article yesterday about their trip to Puerto Rico where Warner Bros. is currently filming The Losers, based on the Vertigo graphic novels of the same name. The high-octane action film is being directed by Sylvain White (Stomp the Yard) and stars Jeffrey Dean Morgan (Watchmen), Zoe Saldana (Avatar), and Chris Evans (Sunshine).

The story is about a former CIA black ops team that got double-crossed and tries to get revenge. The part of that story that IGN walked in on is the ending, which according to the article will supposedly entail a plethora of gunfire (naturally). Grasping the tone and style of the film was not easy for some of those involved, apparently because the story mixes moments of sincere drama with one-liners and gags. Chris Evans explains how he first reacted to the script.

“I just knew that Peter Berg wrote it, it was Warner Bros., it was a war-type movie,” Evans recalls. “And by page 20 I was a little confused as to what they were going for. Because there were a lot of jokes. There were times of high drama, shootouts and someone’s cracking a line. And I said, ‘What is this?’ Because I think nowadays we want … Bourne Identity . You want very raw, very real, very authentic stuff. And the days of the Die Hards and Lethal Weapons, those movies where there was room for some humor, you don’t see a lot of them. So I put the script down on page 30 and I called my agent and I said, ‘What is this? What am I missing? I’ve got to go back and start over and get the right tone in my head. I’m not thinking clearly on it.’ And he said, ‘This is Joel Silver. It’s based on a graphic novel. Why don’t you read the graphic novel first, then crack the script?’ So I went back and started over and it made a whole lot more sense. And I really, actually thought, ‘You know what? There’s room for this.’” – movies.IGN.com

The article as a whole provides a number of details, none of which would likely be considered spoiling. Those details, though, are mostly on the level of tidbits, failing to indicate much besides how difficult it is to shoot an action movie. As someone who still has yet to look into the graphic novel series, a rudimentary exploration into any of the characters or discussion with the director about what he’s aiming to accomplish would have helped. Besides these shortcomings it should prove to be an interesting read for those anticipating the release of The Losers, which opens April 23rd.

Brad Bird is now being considered to direct the next "Mission: Impossible"

Star of the hit Mission: Impossible franchise Tom Cruise has pegged the series’ next installment as his next picture, which has meant that him and fellow producer J.J. Abrams (director of M:I 3) have been on the hunt for the fourth film’s director.

Candidates include but are not limited to Ruben Fleischer (Zombieland), Edgar Wright (Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz), and now Brad Bird (The Iron Giant, Pixar’s The Incredibles, Ratatouille). What makes Bird an unorthodox candidate is the fact that he’s never directed a live-action film before, although his two Pixar films have both won Oscars for Best Animated Picture. For these movies Bird has been praised by critics for his storytelling skills and choreographing skills for stunts and chase sequences.

Details about M:I 4‘s story are being kept under wraps, but J.J. Abrams is said to have worked with writers Andre Nemec and Josh Appelbaum (who Abrams knows from working with them on TV’s Alias) to formulate the script.

Source: Hollywood Reporter

Quick Opinion: If Bird is hired to direct M:I 4 it would obviously mean that he would have the blessing of J.J. Abrams, which should be exciting news for fans of the series. Although M:I III didn’t do as well at the box office as Paramount would have liked (which many attribute to negative publicity regarding Tom Cruise’s television antics about his wife Katie Holmes and professed allegiance to Scientology), many fans (such as myself) regarded the film as the best yet in the series. If this is in fact the case, then J.J. Abrams’ involvement should only be considered positive, as well as the news about whoever is hired to direct the fourth film. As proficient as Bird might be at storytelling (I’m assuming this compliment is regarding his prowess with narrative construction, pacing, and emotional wherewithal) I would suggest there be concerns about his ability to direct the type of gritty project that M:I 4 is likely to be. Aside from having to be more hands-on with actors and the whole filming process (as opposed to primarily using computers and voice recordings), he’ll be tested to expand is aesthetic style into the realm of visceral violence and visual maturity. This isn’t all to say that Bird would be a poor choice, but because of these reasons he would definitely make an unusual one.

Would critics like Rolling Stone's Peter Travers be as influential if his reviews weren't published before the release dates?

In thinking of what kind of strange changes could be made to drastically alter the movie industry, I tried to think about how different things would be if we simply changed the time at which movie reviews were allowed to be published. Obviously most of them are written and published before the movies they judge are released into theaters, but some studios decide every so often to not hold critic screenings for some of their films. When this happens it is usually taken to be an indicator that the studio is not confident in its product and therefore wants to spare the film in question any bad publicity for as long as it can, which is up until the end of its first weekend.

What if, though, there were no preview screenings for critics period? Some might say this would completely change what most people take to be the function of a movie critic, which is to act as a sort of consumer reporter that evaluates the quality of a product and relays its findings and opinions to the public. No one wants to go to a “bad” movie for obvious reasons – it’s a waste of time and money. Right? So if there were no advanced critic screenings then how would people know which movies are worth their time and money, and which ones aren’t? Moviegoers would be forced to rely more on their friends, family, and general word of mouth. This may seem hugely inconvenient, but some studies show that people already put more stock into word of mouth than in movie reviews (this Variety article proves very enlightening on this topic). Read the rest of this entry »

Jennifer Connelly recently joined the cast of "Salvation Boulevard"

Jennifer Connelly (Blood Diamond) and Greg Kinnear (Green Zone) have been cast for the project Salvation Boulevard, funded by Mandalay Vision (a branch of Mandalay Entertainment Group). The two join a cast consisting of Pierce Brosnan, Jim Gaffigan, and Ed Harris.

The film is a comedy/thriller based on a book of the same name written by Larry Beinhart, and will be directed by George Ratliff (Joshua).

“[The film] centers on a former Deadhead turned born-again Christian who finds himself on the run from fundamentalist members of his mega-church who will do anything to protect their larger-than-life pastor.” – Variety

Marisa Tomei is also currently in negotiations to join the cast.

Source: Variety.com

Short Take: Contrived and unoriginal

Director: Allen Coulter (Hollywoodland, The Sopranos)

Screenwriter: Will Fetters (Début)

Cast: Robert Pattinson (Twilight: New Moon, Little Ashes), Emilie de Ravin (Lost, The Hills Have Eyes), Tate Ellington (Red Hook, The Invention of Lying), Ruby Jerins (Shutter Island, Nurse Jackie), Chris Cooper (The Kingdom, Breach), Pierce Brosnan (The Ghost Writer, Mamma Mia!)

Length: 1 hour 53 minutes

Synopsis: Tyler Hawkins (Pattinson) is a disaffected young NYU student looking for direction.  After being wrongfully assaulted by a cop (Cooper), Tyler’s friend Aidan (Ellington) encourages him to get revenge by bedding and then breaking up with the cop’s daughter Ally (de Ravin).  However, Tyler soon falls for her and their connection helps both of them deal with past traumas. Read the rest of this entry »

Director Joseph Kosinski at Comic Con 2009

For those of you who missed it, ComingSoon.net published the first of three articles documenting their visit to the set of Tron Legacy this past week, which is the long anticipated sequel to the sci-fi cult classic Tron (1982). This first piece covers a number of elements about the project but mainly focuses on detailing the circumstances which have led the film to being made at this point in time.

One such detail is Disney’s (who owns the rights to the franchise) decision to hire Joseph Kosinski to direct the movie. For starters, he is a first-time director with a background primarily in commercials and his studies are rooted in architecture (he has a Masters from Columbia University in the field), which make him a peculiar candidate for the job. Nevertheless, everyone seems convinced that he withholds a great vision for the film. Steven Lisberger, the director of the original film, is fulfilling a consultant’s role on set and also is encouraged by the work Kosinski’s doing.

Actor Jeff Bridges, also from the original, is reprising his role as programmer Kevin Flynn. His role here wont be very big because his character’s son is the main protagonist this time around, but it is nevertheless integral to the story and helps bridge the gap between the two stories.

“Joe, our director, was an architect,” says Bridges. “That’s where he’s coming from. It’s interesting, different filmmakers, where they come from and what they bring to the film and he’s an architect and so the film has a very heightened design feel to it. By the way, this is his first film. Can you imagine? I don’t know if it’s the most expensive ever made but it’s right up there. To have a first-time guy… Got to give Disney credit for taking that risk. They were smart because he’s such a calm, can-do guy. He’s gonna pull this off. He’s out of commercials, and I saw some of the technology that he had available to him that he could use. It was basically the same reason that I did the first one.” – ComingSoon.net

For those interested in keeping up with Tron Legacy until its eventual release in mid-December, this set visit article series is definitely something to check out and keep checking up on. This opening article steers clear of spoilers, and because ComingSoon.net is publishing it you can feel pretty safe that you wont run into them later on.