Why Watch? Despite the amateur nature of the filming here, it’s the last 20 seconds that really count. For added fun, have a friend take a picture of your face when it sinks.
Plus, it’s only a minute, and its punchline hits hard. Can someone buy them a camera rig and some sound gear?
What will it cost? Only 1 minute.
Skip Work. You’ve Got Time For More Short Films.
We’ve featured a few of Lee Harcastle‘s short films before, and they’re always good for a bloody violent, clay-filled time. Now, according to Twitch Film, he’ll be teaming up with Kill List director Ben Wheatley for a clay animated prison exploitation flick called Megaevilmotherfuckers.
Score one for good titling.
There’s limited information at this point, and Wheatley still has a black comedy (Sightseers), a non-black comedy (I, Macrobane featuring Nick Frost) and a science fiction movie (Freak Shift) on the table after Kill List hits theaters this week and The ABCS of Death becomes available later this year. He’ll also probably have to stop to eat or sleep at some point.
Great title, great pairing, great genre. Both Harcastle and Wheatley are about to be very busy filmmakers, so be prepared. Also, just imagine what sort of gore and sex and violence they can get away with when it’s all clay.
With the entire original run of The Twilight Zone available to watch instantly, we’re partnering with Twitch Film to cover all of the show’s 156 episodes. Are you brave enough to watch them all with us?
The Twilight Zone (Episode #150): “Stopover In a Quiet Town” (airdate 4/24/64)
The Plot: A couple wake up after a night of heavy drinking and quickly realize they’re not in their own bed. Or home. Or town. Or…
The Goods: Bob and Milly Frazier (Barry Nelson and Nancy Malone) awaken fully clothed and with a hazy memory of the night before. There was a party and a drive home, but then nothing. A shadow over the car perhaps, but nothing more. They find the strange house they’re in to be empty and head outside to an equally deserted stretch of suburbia. Trees, grass and telephones are little more than props, the illusion of life is attempted with a stuffed squirrel and a mannequin, and a child’s laughter can occasionally be heard nearby.
It appears the Wolf Pack has found the premise of The Hangover Part Three.
“The moral of what you’ve just seen is clear. If you drink, don’t drive. And if your wife has had a couple she shouldn’t drive either.”
Bob recalls having quite a bit to drink which necessitated Milly driving them home, and he immediately suspects she got them into an accident. Of course, they think, we were in a crash and the other driver has brought them home to sleep it off. Makes perfect sense. At least until they wander downstairs to find prop drawers, cabinets and food. They head outside to the sound of a little girl laughing, but she’s nowhere to be found. The streets are empty, as are nearby houses and a church, and there’s a not a single bird to be heard.
At this point viewers will be wondering just as ferociously as Bob and Milly as to what the devil is happening, and the options run the gamut from mundane to insane. Are they dead and stuck in purgatory or hell? Bob does have a clear disdain for the suburbs. Are they dolls in a dollhouse? The Twilight Zone touched upon a similar idea in “Five Characters In Search Of an Exit.” Are they mannequins come to life in a nuclear testing ground? Nah, that’s a bit too similar to “The After Hours.” Perhaps they’ve mistakenly wandered onto the set of HGTV’s House Hunters International during the secretive staging process? Dammit man no, HGTV is still decades away from existence. What the hell is happening here?
Bob and Milly hop aboard a train they expect will bring them to civilization, but instead it simply loops around and returns them back to the same station. Scared, angry and still suffering the effects of a hangover, the couple set out on foot with the intention of walking their way home. Until a giant shadow swoops over their head and the answers to all of their questions are made apparent. Well, maybe not all of their questions.
This is one of the better season five episodes for a few reasons, but my favorite is Rod Serling’s wrap up featuring the quote on the story’s moral above. It’s just so direct and hilariously absurd after what’s transpired. The ending itself is also a fun surprise, as the episode allows for plenty of possible solutions along the way. Many of the show’s “twist/surprise ending” stories are actually fairly predictable, but this one is far more difficult to pin down even if the child’s laughter leads you in the general direction.
Third act touches aside, the best part of the episode is actually the couple themselves. Both the performances from Nelson and Malone and Earl Hamner Jr.’s script work to make them two of the most believable and well fleshed out characters in the series’ history. They bicker and flirt, touch each other nonchalantly like real couples do, and work together well in unison. We believe they’re a couple, and we believe they have more in their heads than simply the next line of dialogue or piece of stage direction. Characters on most of the other episodes, both great ones and the dregs, are far flatter and more limited in their personality. That’s fine, but it leaves all the heavy lifting to the story itself.
But here, it’s the quality of the couple that gives the “ah ha!” ending an additional, albeit small, amount of emotional weight.
What do you think?
The Trivia: Writer Earl Hamner Jr. was also the narrator on The Waltons.
On the Next Episode: “A World War II veteran and a young Japanese man have a fateful encounter with a sword that is determined to avenge its master.”
Catch-Up: Episodes covered by Twitch / Episodes covered by FSR
We’re running through all 156 of the original Twilight Zone episodes over the next several weeks, and we won’t be doing it alone! Our friends at Twitch will be entering the Zone as well on alternating weeks. So definitely tune in over at Twitch and feel free to also follow along on our Twitter accounts @twitchfilm and @rejectnation.
Last summer’s X-Men: First Class breathed some necessary life back into the superhero franchise, thanks to a stylistically cool film, an up-and-coming cast, and some generally energetic direction from Matthew Vaughn. While I don’t think anyone was particularly worried about Vaughn coming back to helm the film’s inevitable sequel, Deadline Warsaw has gone ahead and confirmed that Vaughn is indeed on to direct, with Bryan Singer back to produce.
Their post also confirms that Simon Kinberg is set to script the film (news we’ve known about since November), which will likely be the film’s greatest hurdle, as Kinberg has yet to impress me with films like Jumper and the first Sherlock Holmes. Next up, he’s got two projects coming out that I cannot even remotely gather interest in – This Means War and Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter. He also helped script X-Men: The Last Stand, which was decidedly not good, but at least he has familiarity with his characters. Paired with Singer and Vaughn, who both have great affection for the franchise, this next X-Men could shake out just fine.
It’s suspected that all of the original cast will return, thanks to multi-picture contracts. Basically, give me James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender again, and we’re all good.
As a side note, /Film points out that this news continues to distance Vaughn from the chance to direct that Kick-Ass sequel he’s been jawing about for years, which may not be a bad thing (and I say that as a Kick-Ass apologist).
Here we are, once again, talking about Steven Soderbergh’s upcoming thriller about depression and medication, Side Effects. The last time we left our players in this ongoing drama Annapurna Pictures had pulled their funding from the film, reportedly over a kerfuffle about casting. You see, rumor had it that there was some uneasy feelings about Blake Lively playing the lead role in this film, that of a depressed woman who battles addiction and is in the middle of a love triangle involving both her husband and her doctor. Further rumors indicated that there were a whole short-list of actresses that Soderbergh and his people were looking at to replace Lively, and hopefully restore faith in the project.
Well, it looks like at least most of those rumors were true. Deadline Bedford is reporting that Lively has been shuffled off the film and The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo star Rooney Mara will now be taking her place as the lead. Seeing as Mara just turned a lot of heads playing a dark, troubled woman and Lively hasn’t ever turned too many heads doing anything, this is probably good news for the movie overall.
That question about funding still looms overhead, however. Now that this casting issue has been solved will Annapurna come back on board and reform their partnership with distributor Open Road, or has that deal gone permanently sour during this back and forth? And if Annapurna isn’t coming back, are there any other companies giving this one a look and wanting to cough up some dough?
You can throw out all of the Rooney Maras, Catherine Zeta-Joneses, Channing Tatums, and Jude Laws you want in these casting reports, but if somebody doesn’t step up and actually pay for this movie to be made, then nobody is going to be in it. Stay tuned. With the speed that news about this production keeps coming out, I’m sure we’ll have our answers and a whole new set of questions within a couple of days.
If you’re the sort of person who loves conspiracy theories, hidden meanings, codes, ciphers, clues, and other mysteries that bear unraveling, then Room 237 is right up your alley. Director Rodney Ascher has put together a fascinating movie that will most likely change the way you watch Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining forever, or will at least make you search out some of the things that are discussed in this documentary.
Ascher, the director of the hilarious (and creepy) short from The S From Hell about the Screen Gems logo that was shown at Sundance 2010, is behind this clever documentary that mostly uses footage from Stanley Kubrick’s films (including The Shining, of course) to tell the stories of several different interview subjects: who each have a different view of the secret meanings of The Shining.
Bill Blakemore, Geoffrey Cocks, Juli Kearns, John Fell Ryan, and Jay Weidner all believe that Kubrick’s 1980 film (based on Stephen King’s 1977 novel of the same name) is not just about a writer to takes his wife and young son to become the off-season caretakers at a remote hotel before he succumbs to the spirits that haunt the place. To each one of them, the film represents something different, ranging from Kubrick’s take on the Holocaust, to the plight of Native Americans who had everything taken away as the United States claimed the continent.
Blakemore, a longtime journalist, claims the Native American imagery throughout the film (rugs, portraits on the walls, even cans of Calumet baking powder with artwork of an Indian on the side) combined with the absence of any actual Native Americans in the film point to the fact that we have driven them entirely from their land and taken it over.
Cocks claims that the film is about the Holocaust, because Kubrick had always wanted to make a film about that event, but couldn’t figure out how to approach it. In his mind, Kubrick used this unique story to channel the Holocaust, particularly in the scenes where Danny has visions of past violence in the hotel, and the scene where the elevators spill forth gallons of blood.
Kearns believe that the film is meant to link to the Greek myth about the Minotaur at the middle of the labyrinth, which is why Kubrick included a large hedge maze which was not in the novel. She also claims that a poster in the game room advertising skiing at Monarch is meant to resemble a Minotaur, and is a clue due to the fact that the manager at the hotel explains to Jack why there is no skiing in the area. So why have a poster for skiing?
Other theories speculate that the movie is meant to explain that we never landed on the moon (the carpet pattern that Danny plays with his cars on is eerily similar to the design of Apollo 11 launch pad 39A), and these interview subjects can show you everything in the film from blatant erections, to piles of luggage meant to represent the suitcases Jews were forced to abandon in concentration camps, and the seemingly bizarre architecture of the Overlook Hotel.
While most of this sounds like an enormous load of horse manure (and it could be for all we know, given that Kubrick himself can’t exactly comment on these theories), Room 237 is an extremely fascinating film to watch whether you believe it or not. You will see things in The Shining that you never noticed before, and thanks to Carlos Ramos’ design and animation, you’ll be able to go inside the Overlook as never before.
By the time you get John Fell Ryan showing The Shining forwards and backwards at the same time while superimposed on itself, you’ll definitely find it interesting even if you are a skeptic, which I remain after seeing this film. Still, it is a highly enjoyable movie, and students of cinema should consider watching this just for the symbolism and imagery alone. I imagine double features of this movie follow by The Shining itself will become popular late-night showings at colleges around the nation. In fact, I’m going to fire up the movie right now and see if they can make a believer out of me.
The Upside: This movie will force you to see The Shining differently, whether you like it or not. It will also give you a deeper appreciation of Kubrick’s films, including (oddly enough), Eyes Wide Shut.
The Downside: It’s hard to buy all of these theories on face value, and since they can’t all be correct, you come away skeptical of everything.
On the Side: Rodney Ascher funded this film through Kickstarter, which is entirely awesome. He went over his goal of raising $5,000, and now his film has just premiered at Sundance. Pretty slick!
—
Snuggle up with the rest of our Sundance 2012 coverage
A few days ago I reported on a story that two former female leads from Charlie Kaufman movies would both be working with the writer again, this time on his next directorial effort Frank or Francis. It turns out that was only half right. While Catherine Keener does appear to be attached to the film, buried in a report about Paul Reubens joining the cast is confirmation from THR that Kate Winslet has not. That’s a pretty big blow to my enthusiasm for the added girl power that this movie would have gotten by casting both Keener and Winslet, and the inclusion of Pee-Wee does little to soften the blow.
Fortunately for me, there’s some more news that does soften the blow a bit. In another report, THR says that Elizabeth Banks has joined the cast, and in a role that sounds like it has some potential for hilarity. As we know already, Steve Carell and Jack Black are playing the title characters, a director and a film blogger who come into conflict with one another over a series of bad reviews. Well, it appears that Banks will be playing the Carell character’s girlfriend, an actress who keeps making “formulaic comedy bombs.” Seeing as the focus of this movie is the world of filmmaking vs. the world of film criticism, I’m imagining that Banks’ character will provide some delicious jabs sent the way of actresses like Kate Hudson and Katherine Heigl, the undisputed queens of the formulaic comedy bomb.
Not only does that sound funny to me, it’s the first indication I’ve read that says this film will not only be poking fun at the wasted lives of people who bitch about movies on the Internet all day, but that it will also look at things from the other side of the fence and make fun of the people who waste their lives making really bad movies all day. That’s good, spread the abuse around. I don’t think my already fragile self-esteem could take the full force of Kaufman’s satiric wit without shattering at the blow. Now I also get to laugh along as we tear down rich blonde actresses!
Not a whole lot of negotiators on film look like Elizabeth Banks. They’re usually gruff, jaded, overweight, sloppy, and any other cliche description you can think of. Most of those adjectives don’t much apply to Banks, whose negotiator even uses her looks for the job. However, even though the actress doesn’t come anywhere close to the appearance of a 300-pound 50-something, she still gets to do plenty of things those old men get to do.
She gets to shout, “This is my negotiation,” and without having to be bold and off-putting while doing it. That’s an accomplishment right there. It’s a nice little twist on the genre, and in my brief conversation with Banks, that’s what she seemed to be the most impressed about when it came to Man on a Ledge, the new thriller involving Sam Worthington hanging on a ledge for mysterious reasons…mysterious reasons that were mostly revealed in the trailer.
Here’s what what Elizabeth Banks had to say about no-brainer titles, playing with archetypes, and working with Gary Ross:
When you got the script, were you pretty taken with the title? I don’t think it could be more straight-forward.
[Laughs] You know, I’m always intrigued by things that promise exactly what they are, and then back it up with other things.
You also got Zack and Miri Make a Porno and The 40 Year Old Virgin, which, again, make for pretty straight-forward titles. [Laughs]
[Laughs] Yeah, it’s what makes the marketing a lot easier. “This is what you’re getting, everybody!”
[Laughs] You don’t even need a trailer. Jumping into the film, what I think works about the film is the structure, which is pretty tight.
I agree. It read like a really tight thriller. Two of my favorite movies in this genre are Inside Man and The Italian Job, and, to me, this is a great combo of those two movies. I love things that surprise me and trick me, and I definitely felt like…clearly there’s more going on than a guy on a ledge, and you know that’s going to be the case. You don’t really know what you’re watching until the twist comes, and I love that. As an audience member, I love that. The archetype is pretty well set up, but you don’t see the twist coming.
You even get that classic archetype line, “This is my negotiation!” When you approach an archetype like this, do you try to infuse it with something different, or did you already see it as being different on the page?
[Laughs] One of the things I really liked about this is that gender doesn’t come into play. She’s not girly, doesn’t have a breakdown, and I basically got to play this as a man, which I appreciated. I felt like that was kind of new. I also liked that I got to run around, chase bad guys and do stunts, that really appealed to the tomboy in me. Also, we spent a good amount of energy creating that sense of camaraderie that the NYPD clearly has; it’s sort of a boys’ club that exists there. I just wanted to make sure I actually had something to do and say. I feel like my character’s the smartest one in the room.
I like how you say boys’ club, because a lot of the movie feels like a pissing contest.
[Laughs] Yeah, I know.
There’s even that line Titus Welliver has, the one about Mikey sticking his dick in the wrong door. [Laughs] It’s one of those great, “Who would say something like that?” kind of lines.
[Laughs] I know. I mean, you’d be surprised, the NYPD dish it out to each other.
[Laughs] I’ll be using that line in the future. You mentioned how the role wasn’t gender specific, and usually this character would be a tired, 50-something old guy. Do you see a lot of roles like that, non-gender specific ones?
No. I mean, I mostly just read “wives” and “girlfriends.” Yeah, she’s got a bit of John McClane in her, which is a lot of fun for me.
Is it ever tiring just seeing the girlfriend role?
Yeah, but they get weeded out now a little bit more. By the way, sometimes the girlfriend is a pretty interesting character. [Laughs]
[Laughs] I thought Our Idiot Brother handled women well.
Yeah, I really thought so, too. Each sister was very recognizable, but at the same time there was a lot of nuance and specificity.
When you’re doing a film like this or The Next Three Days, where they are these fairly tight yarns, does it require you to be pretty disciplined with the material?
You know, not really. So much of that is done in editing. I’m really just trying to play authentic character beats, and whatever gets me to that place. In The Next Three Days, I was in jail isolated from my loved ones, so I spent a lot of time sitting in corners and not talking to anyone…so that was not a very fun moviemaking experience. [Laughs] On this I sat around on a rooftop with Edward Burns drinking coffee, it definitely felt like we were cops on a stakeout. We were actually out on the ledge, so that was a true gift, since you don’t have to act that. The sense of adrenaline pumping through you, the sweaty palms, and the nervousness — I definitely felt I had a four percent chance of dying at any moment. [Laughs] In the back of your mind it’s, “Accidents happen, accidents happen!” I had an amazing group of stunt guys I trusted and precautions are taken, but human error and accidents happen, so I was thinking, “Something could go wrong.”
It’s interesting comparing The Next Three Days and Man on a Ledge because both of a lot of their drama takes place off-screen. We don’t see that, but do you fill in those blanks for yourself?
Absolutely. I had a really strong backstory here. I heard an amazing story before we started filming, from a female negotiator, about a fellow police officer who was in a bad custody battle with his wife, and he took his daughter hostage. It was a bad situation and the negotiator ended up getting the daughter out, but then he ended up killing himself. Two years later, the negotiator ended up killing herself. You know, that was the backstory I kept going through in my mind, that she lost a fellow police officer and it wasn’t just anybody. What would bring that much notoriety to someone? You know, I spend a lot of time in New York and I used to live here, so I know what the Post cover looks like everyday. I know if a police negotiator let a police officer die under their watch, of course they would splash their photo on the cover of the newspaper, there would be an investigation, and the whole thing would go sideways.
For the most part, these guys have a pretty great track record. You know, their motto is, “Jumper’s jumper,” meaning if you want to kill yourself, you go to the top of the building and jump off, and you’re not still standing there by the time I put my pants on, head uptown, and have a cup of coffee. [Laughs] If you’re still there by the time the negotiator gets there, you likely want to live and will let your rational mind takeover, unless you’re just crazy. They usually can help someone in that situation, so their track record is pretty good. It is life and death, and I never would want someone’s life in my hands. They’ll also tell you, once you get there and the person does go over, then you really blame yourself.
I know I gotta wrap up, but I gotta say I’m really looking forward to The Hunger Games.
Thanks!
And I actually haven’t read the books, but I’m a big fan of Gary Ross.
Oh yeah, he’s a great moviemaker and a great storyteller.
Yeah, he has a great handle on character. How is he as a collaborator?
So much of it is that. He’s a writer too, so every character matters and it’s about the fun performances he’s trying to get everyone. I mean, Effie Trinket is an amazing character, so we had a great time figuring her out together. I can’t wait for people to see it.
It looks a lot different from Seabiscuit. [Laughs]
Yeah, it’s very different from Seabiscuit, but I think all his movies are different. I’m really impressed by Gary’s taste in everything; he has such great taste.
—
Man on a Ledge is now in theaters.
As Austin’s filmmaking community migrates back to Austin from the snowy slopes of Park City, everyone is anxiously awaiting to hear whether or not their latest film(s) has been accepted into the 2012 South By Southwest Film Festival (March 9-17, 2012). According to SXSW, ”no news is good news! If you haven’t heard from [SXSW] yet it means your film is still in the running.” All filmmakers will be sent notification one way or another by Thursday, February 9, 2012.
What are my predictions (and hopes) on the local front for SXSW 2012? Well, I do not want to start rumors, but I am fairly certain that the Zellner Brothers’ Kid-Thing will be getting a regional premiere at SXSW 2012 — that is, after they celebrate their European premiere at Berlinale (February 9-19, 2012)! Also, Kat Candler’s short film Hellion is as close to a sure-thing as SXSW applicants can get. But if I was a praying man, I would be praying that Don Swaynos’ Pictures of Superheroes and Mark Potts and Cole Selix’s Cinema Six will get accepted into SXSW 2012, because if I have to wait much longer to see either of those films I am going to freakin’ explode! For now, we all just need to be patient and stay tuned to Film School Rejects for any breaking news about SXSW 2012.
One of the most surprising recent developments in local film news is that our good friends over at Slackerwood will now be published by the Austin Film Society. What does this mean?! According to Slackerwood’s founder and Editor-in-Chief Jette Kernion’s recent post about the merger, the hope is that Slackerwood’s content will now be able to expand beyond Austin’s city limits, incorporating film coverage across the state of Texas. To assist with the wider scope of focus, AFS staff and interns will be contributing to Slackerwood. Don’t worry, Kernion will remain at the helm, while Jenn Brown, Don Clinchy and the rest of Slackerwood’s local team of contributors will continue to bring us news and features about the Central Texas film community, as well as reviews of films screening in Austin theaters. Most importantly, there will be a party on February 1st to celebrate the merger at Red’s Porch (more info).
As for other exciting news… Drafthouse Films, the distribution arm of Alamo Drafthouse, got their very first Oscar nomination! Holy crap! When Drafthouse Films bought Bullhead (after it played at Fantastic Fest 2011), no one ever expected the Belgian film to make the Oscar shortlist for the Best Foreign Language Film category, let alone snag an actual nomination. Bullhead has done very well on the U.S. festival circuit, winning Best Actor (Matthias Schoenaerts) at Fantastic Fest and the Palm Springs International Film Festival, as well as Best Director (Michael Roskam) and Best Film at Fantastic Fest. However, Bullhead is very raw and brutal story set in the world of the meat industry. The lead character, Jackie (Schoenaerts), is haunted by childhood trauma and shoots mafia-controlled steroids into himself to bulk up. Let’s just say that Bullhead is not your traditional Oscar fodder, especially in a year with such strong contenders in the foreign language category. I do not know who deserves greater congratulations, the Bullhead team for the nomination or the Academy for making such a bold, frakked-up choice?
Cinematic Things To Do in Austin This Week:
1/30 – Alamo South Lamar – Not to be confused with Matthew Robbins’ Dragonslayer (1981), Tristan Patterson’s documentary is about skateboarding, relationships and getting totally fucked up. The Grand Jury Prize winner for Best Documentary Feature at SXSW 2011, Dragonslayer is totally a must see. (More info)
1/30 & 2/1 – Alamo Ritz – A relentless action film that does not hesitate to find harsh — and occasionally, lonely — ways to kill its protagonists, Fantastic Fest 2011 alumni A Lonely Place To Die returns for a brief reprise in Austin. (More info)
1/31 – Alamo South Lamar – Invited to Hollywood by studio mogul William Fox, F.W. Murnau’s first American production became one of the most beautiful silent films in the history of cinema. The Austin Film Society screens Sunrise: A Song Of Two Humans (1927) as part of their series The Great Escape: Three European Émigré Filmmakers. (More info)
2/3 & 2/4 – Alamo Ritz – Playfully directed and co-written by Edgar Wright and reverentially based on Bryan Lee O’Malley’s uber-hipster series of wide-eyed manga-styled graphic novels, Scott Pilgrim vs. the World offers a peachy keen pop perspective of the worlds of indie-rock bands and video games. Thanks to The Late Show for bringing my favorite Michael Cera film back to ATX for a few late night screenings! (More info)
2/4 – Blue Starlite Urban Drive-In – In preparation for Valentine’s Day, I recommend taking that certain someone in your life to see Harold and Maude at the Blue Starlight (make sure to take advantage of their “Be My Valentine at the Drive-In” package)… but then again, I’m single, so what do I know? (More info)
What is Movie News After Dark? It’s a nightly movie news collection that doesn’t usually involve so much nudity, or Dance Dance Revolution references, but Mondays are always a little special.
We begin this evening with a new shot from The Hobbit, a film you may have heard about. It’s also a film that will undoubtedly be filled with little people, tall wizards, shires, middling earths and rings inscribed with “From Sauron, with love.” This one features Martin Freeman as Bilbo Baggins, standing amongst friends.
Fear not fans of action films based on somewhat popular toys from like, forever ago, a Stretch Armstrong movie is still happening. In related news, Taylor Lautner is out as the project moves to Relativity under the watchful eye of producer Ryan Kavanaugh. The situation, if there ever was one, has already been improved.
Many people saw Joe Carnahan’s The Grey this past weekend, including yours truly. It was quite good, with plenty of Liam Neeson badassery, excellent sound design and a little poetry about cold, black death. What I didn’t notice, however, is what PETA has called the film’s ability to “make wolves look bad.” Dudes… Wild wolves are not going to stop and have tea. Still, the likes of the very intelligent Jen Yamato at Movieline ask, Does PETA have a legitimate beef with The Grey? No.
The Sundance Channel has published a great interview with Man on Wire director James Marsh, who talks about the Academy’s absolute snubbing of not only his film Project Nim, but also the likes of The Interrupters and Senna. It’s embarrassing for the documentary branch to make such egregious oversights. They also overlooked Rise of the Planet of the Apes star Andy Serkis. I’m beginning to believe that the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences is racist against monkeys.
Here lies a new poster for The FP, a Drafthouse Films release that will go down in history as having perhaps one of the most ridiculous opening sequences in the history of movies about Dance Dance Revolution battles. Screw it, I’m calling it the greatest movie about Dance Dance Revolution battles. That’s all you need to know. Also, The FP will open in select cities on March 16. You should know that, too.
Producer Keith Calder, who has worked on such films as The Wackness and a little horror flick that’s going to blow your mind in 2012 called You’re Next, has published The Big Filmmaking Book List, a list of books that he views as a starting point for anyone that wants to learn about filmmaking. There’s some usual suspects — including Robert Rodriguez’s Rebel Without a Crew – as well as some killer pulls, which is basically everything from and about Walter Murch. If you’d like to participate in the making of films and know how to read, this is a list for you.
The folks at FilmSpotting have launched a new alternate podcast called Filmspotting: SVU (Streaming Video Unit), hosted by Alison Wilmore and Matt Singer. It’s more than worth your time.
Sundance did a neat thing this year, utilizing Instagram to get people involved in the festival. The project, #Sundance on Instagram, features images from filmmakers, fans, Sundance staff and other attendees, all capturing a great snapshot of the Sundance experience.
MSN’s James Rocchi talks to William H. Macy about Catholicism and his naked body. Basically I wanted to be able to write that, because I’m mentally four years old. Also, it’s a fine interview.
Did you know that our own Robert Fure was on The Golden Briefcase last week raging about Extreme Prejudice, The Grey and Man vs. Nature films? We’re hoping that he didn’t break anything while he was there, though we won’t be surprised when we get the bill.
Yahoo Movies counts down all the Sundance 2012 breakout performances, including the likes of Andrea Riseborough, John Hawkes and just about everything about Beasts of the Southern Wild.
Sometimes finding a good closing video for News After Dark is a tall task. The web can only deliver so many gems on a weekly basis, and I have a standing policy not to post crap. So on a night like tonight, when I don’t have anything better, the answer is as simple as reaching into my own recent viewing history. Earlier this evening I watched Frank Oz’s wonderful 2007 dark comedy Death at a Funeral. Tonight I end our session with this clip reel of Alan Tudyk as Simon, the unintentionally high, oft-nude funeral guest. The way he yells “NO!” (at the 4:24 mark of this video) kills me, every time.
My former hometown of seven years, Santa Barbara welcomed me back with open arms — and by open arms I mean aggressive festival volunteers, and a short but unpleasant bout of food poisoning. I still love you regardless, State Street.
Between bouts of trying not to hork in public, I managed to swing some wildly different screenings that left me more fulfilled than not with my time at this year’s festival to this point. I squeaked into the Metro Theater II just in time to catch one of the more mystifying but engaging films at the festival, Victor Ginzburg’s Generation P, an adaptation of Russian novelist Victor Pelevin’s book of the same name. I was born in 1980 — so while I do have some reference points for that decade, I’m considered a child of the 90s. I have vague recollections of the waning years of the Cold War, never knowing the fear of the powerful Soviet Union of my parent’s generation. By the time 1994 rolled around, Gorbachev had already paved the way for a series of revolutions that ensured the death knell of the Russian socialist state.
Generation P drops us into the life of Babylen Tatarsky, a copywriter in the advertising industry in a newly independent but struggling Russia. Much of the film focuses on the conflict of Russian citizen’s desires for Westernization while still retaining a national identity. Tatarsky is a man that has no horse in either race — he’s a “creative”, his job to appeal to the political and social whims of the ad-space buyer. All of this is deftly laced into a narrative of social corruption, psychedelic drug use (Che Guevara cameos during a rough Tatarsky acid trip to rail against the evils of television), and a strange but deeply interesting focus on Mesopotamian mythology.
It’s intense, and much of the film is still beyond me, a result of a lack of reference points. It is a very Russian film. Keep an eye out for my interview with director Victor Ginzburg, as I will be picking his brain for even more details on my favorite film of the festival thus far.
My second film of day two was director Mischa Webley’s first feature effort, The Kill Hole. I make an effort not to review films I didn’t enjoy from filmmakers that are not in a position to prospectively bounce back from a poor review. There are deep, deep flaws in Webley’s story of a rogue war veteran, and the former Marine and private military contractor sent to track him down, Samuel Drake (Chadwick Boseman). There are exhausting strings of overly-flowery monologuing, inexplicable plot points that are wholly unrealistic, and a lack of service-related knowledge to provide a level of reality to the military talk. Jargon is important — I would have called up a soldier and taken notes.
While this sounds like a wash, I did find a valuable thread of story and moments that shined that helped me appreciate what I felt like Webley was attempting to accomplish. Once upon a time I was a Marine — not even a particularly good one so far as I’m concerned, and certainly not one of the folks that saw and participated in the very worst of what war had to offer. Regardless, there is almost a universal difficulty in transitioning to civilian life, no matter how many classes you attend before leaving the Corps, Army, Navy, etc…
The Kill Hole, when not busily shifting between trying to be The Hunted and a pure drama, has a noteworthy number of scenes that I feel touch well on that sense of confusion and inability to assimilate that many servicemen and women feel when they take off the uniform and attempt a transition to day-to-day life. Billy Zane does an admirable job as an ex-military counselor bringing together his former brothers-in-arms, his best scenes taking place early in the film. Additionally, Chadwick Boseman is a lead with a lot of promise, elevating scenes that may have otherwise fallen flat. I’d like to see him in more big-screen offerings.
In the end, Mischa Webley shows promise. As is generally the case for most first-time full length feature writers, the initial attempt has a tendency to try to do too much over too many landscapes in an hour and a half of film. That said, he has a great eye behind the camera, and when his dialogue is on point it sings. My suggestion is to keep an eye out for Mischa Webley.
My first weekend film was Zam Salim’s Up There, an off-kilter, pure candy UK offering based on Salim’s YouTube short, Laid Off. Martin (Burn Gorman) is recently deceased, and having a difficult time coming to terms. The afterlife is much like a really lame office job/probation; you’re entered into the pecking order, required to work, and must meet particular milestones with a guidance counselor — namely, developing a positive outlook on your untimely passing.
Meet said milestones, and a promotion to heaven is forthcoming. Don’t, and your options are grim.
When Martin is assigned as the welcome wagon for the freshly dead with manically upbeat partner Rash (Aymen Hamdouchi), things go comically wrong with their first customer. Martin is left with precious little time to save his job, come to terms with his lot in life (death, as it is), and meet his scheduled evaluation for promotion to *insert film title*.
Gorman is dry, endearingly overwhelmed, and the moments when he cracks Martin open for a bit of levity are done deftly and to great effect. He is an excellent sad-sack. Hamdouchi is a human Super Ball — he’s course, vulgar, unintentionally offensive, and finds a way to make what could have been a tired odd-couple pairing unfailingly fun.
That’ll do ‘er for this update — keep an eye out for further coverage of the Santa Barbara International Film Festival as we move into next week’s programming.
Dustin Hucks writes for Film School Rejects, has written for Ain’t it Cool News, Hit Fix, and can additionally be found at the Metacafe Entertainment Network.
Joel Edgerton and Jessica Chastain both had pretty big years in 2011. Edgerton broke onto the Hollywood scene with a big role in the high-profile The Thing remake and also turned a lot of heads with his powerful performance in the MMA drama Warrior. And Chastain, well she had a critically acclaimed supporting role in pretty much every art film that came out during the calendar year. So, to hear that these two budding superstars are teaming up on a movie should be pretty good news. But to hear that they’ve signed on to star together in two films with very unique premises, well that’s just downright intriguing.
Deadline Liverpool has posted a press release from Myriad Pictures saying that the duo is set to star in both The Disappearance of Eleanor Rigby: His and The Disappearance of Eleanor Rigby: Hers. The two films, both from writer/director Ned Benson, will tell the story of the same rocky marriage, but one from the perspective of the husband and the other from the perspective of the wife. Edgerton’s character is said to be a restaurant owner, and Chastain’s a woman who is going back to school.
Doing two movies that tell the same story but from different viewpoints sounds like it could have the potential to be very interesting, but are they really going to be able to get people to pay to see the same story twice? Myriad CEO Kirk D’Amico seems to think so. He says of the project, “Ned has created rich and engaging characters. They are complex, and it is unique to have two different scripts to tell the story. It doesn’t matter which script you read first, you absolutely want to read the other perspective.”
Say that doesn’t hold to be true though, and seeing one of these movies doesn’t make you immediately want to catch the other, will that really matter? Not necessarily, because apparently they’re both designed to stand on their own as well. D’Amico explains, “We have to make both films work on their own, both for the buyers but also for the audiences. Together these films will describe a fully, more complete look at these characters and their lives.”
That “for the buyers” line is interesting. If this set of movies becomes successful, might it be the beginning of a new fad in Hollywood? Shooting two films together, that basically use the same sets and the same actors, but can be sold twice, could be very profitable. We saw Harry Potter start a trend where big literary series are now often splitting their books into several different film adaptations, might that be taken one step further where a different movie starts being made for each character? If that’s the case, then the Hunger Games franchise might get real confusing, real fast. I’ll totally watch Catching Fire: Katniss and Catching Fire: Haymitch, but if they think I’m paying for Catching Fire: Peeta then they must be crazy!
South Korean filmmaker Bong Joon-ho‘s English-language debut was always going to be a hotly anticipated feature, but as the cast for Snow Piercer rounds out, it’s become obvious that The Host director is really going all out for this one. The next star to join the sci-fi indie film is Octavia Spencer, who just won a SAG Award for Best Supporting Actress and is viewed as the frontrunner for the Oscar in the same category for her work in The Help. She joins an already impressive (both in terms of talent and how wonderfully varied it is) cast that includes Chris Evans, The Host star Kang Ho Song, and veteran talents John Hurt and Tilda Swinton.
The film, which has been adapted from the French graphic novel Le Transperceneige has been co-scripted by Bong (with the most recent draft coming from Kelly Masterson), and is set in a future world ruined by a failed attempt to finally stop the fallout from global warming. The experiment to end global warming has led to an Ice Age that has destroyed all living creatures, except for those who live on the Snow Piercer, ” a train that travels around the globe and is powered by a sacred perpetual-motion engine.” The film will center on a revolution that stirs up between the train’s inhabitants, who had previously settled into an uneasy class system. Spencer’s role will be that as a mother who takes up with the revolution ” in order to save her son” (from what, we don’t quite know). [THR]
Editor’s note: This review was originally published as part of our SXSW 2011 coverage on March 17, 2011. We’re bumping this baby back up to remind all of you dear readers that the film is finally hitting limited theaters this Friday, February 3.
Claire (Sara Paxton) and Luke (Pat Healy) do not have what you might call glamorous jobs. They manage the front desk at the oldest hotel in town that just happens to be closing its doors forever. These unflappable, amateur paranormal investigators decide that their last hurrah will involve drinking beer and capturing definitive proof that this tiny little inn is indeed haunted. But when a washed up actress-turned psychic checks into the hotel, she becomes convinced that the novel little pastime these two share may end up being their undoing. I don’t know, I’ve had worse jobs.
I really enjoyed The Innkeepers. It’s a very basic horror film that actually benefits as much from its comedic elements as it does its frights. The crux of the film is the relationship between Sara Paxton and Pat Healy who play the desk clerks at the failed Yankee Peddler Inn. I had a blast with these two wannabe ghost hunters. Their dry back-and-forth fosters some fantastic laughs. The dialogue batted between them is very genuine which is both a compliment and a criticism; it’s genuine to a fault. Occasionally, though not often, the lines ring true but un-cinematic in a way that makes them flat and dull. It’s a strange thing for which to fault a writer but it gave the film an almost made-for-TV quality at times that undermines both the effective comedic moments and the horrific moments.
What I appreciated wholeheartedly about the horror elements of the film is the antithetical position taken toward jump scares. There are some surprising moments that catch you off guard, but no frame is constructed in such a way as to allow specters to leap between you and the action on screen in a cheap effort to confuse or startle with legitimate fright. Director Ti West wears his sardonic perspective on jump scares on his sleeve as he incorporates playful jabs at the horrendously trite convention. The final shot of the movie is not only a call back to an earlier gag, but rather a mouthpiece for West’s firm position against jump scares. On the contrary, the scares in The Innkeepers are rooted in visually haunting imagery that is thankfully on screen long enough to be appreciated and not coupled with clangs, bangs, and shrieks. There are images that will unnerve you in both their content and the time they are allowed to occupy your perception. I won’t say more for fear of spoilers.
The one carryover from House of the Devil that manages to find purchase in The Innkeepers is the extensive manner in which Ti West photographs his sets. Much like the house in House of the Devil, the inn in The Innkeepers seems to expand ad infinitum as every hallway, every closed door, and every tunnel in the basement becomes its own apparition. The cinematography, much like in House of the Devil, adopts methods to keep the inn itself visually interesting. One particular shot that worked remarkably well involved a girl running from the start of one hallway to the end of another. With the way in which it’s framed, it looks like she’s running along the edge of an enormous ‘V’ and is wonderfully disorienting.
The one qualm I have with the way The Innkeepers is shot is the lighting. It’s almost as if the lighting designer cranked up the set lights in order to replicate the appearance of fluorescent bulbs. It makes the film look washed out and contributes to that previously mentioned made-for-TV quality. What was so phenomenal about House of the Devil is the way in which the house felt sinister from the moment she walked in, which is what garnered a sense of foreboding that carried the audience through a minimalist plot. Much of that was due to how it was shot, but also how it was lit; shadowy and mysterious. And while I’m aware that a good portion of The Innkeepers takes place during the day whereas House of the Devil was almost entirely shot at night, I just wish the daylight scenes didn’t look so bland.
The Upside: Genuinely funny at times, terribly frightening when it needs to be and bold enough to reject jump scares.
The Downside: Some of the dialogue is naturalistic to the point of being overly ordinary and the lighting design leaves much to be desired.
Editor’s note: This review was originally published as part of our SXSW 2011 coverage on March 15, 2011. But, just like another stand-out horror flick from that festival (look down!), we’re bumping this baby back up to remind all of you dear readers that the film is finally hitting limited theaters this Friday, February 3.
Some films send their characters to hell and back, but few do so with the genre-bending, mind-fucking intensity of Kill List. Equal parts drama, thriller, and horror, the movie takes both characters and viewers on a hellish descent down the bloody rabbit hole with stops along the way for mystery, murder, and flesh-busting madness.
Jay (Neil Maskell) has been out of work for eight months, and his wife Shel (MyAnna Buring) is not about to let him forget it. They fight constantly about finances pausing periodically to assure their young son that mommy and daddy still love each other before returning to the fray. Jay’s friend Gal (Michael Smiley) comes over for dinner along with his new girlfriend, Fiona (Emma Fryer), and the four spend a raucous night of laughs and alcohol punctuated with an ugly and awkward outburst between the feuding couple.
It should be noted that Jay’s past career was that of a hit-man, and when Gal offers him the opportunity to get back into the game he jumps at the chance. The two of them partner up on an assignment for a mysterious client who slowly doles out their targets one at a time. As the hits progress so does Jay’s increasing blood-lust and desire to inflict pain, and soon the act of killing becomes less of a job and more an act of sadistic righteousness.
Trust me when I say that you have never seen a hammer used as effectively, cruelly, and beautifully as you will here. Seriously, prepare to wince.
Writer/director Ben Wheatley‘s follow-up to his blackly comic and violent debut, Down Terrace, is three films in one. And all three work in perfect unison. What starts as a domestic drama grows into a violent hit-man thriller before finally morphing into…something else. There’s no twist here, but the third act explodes into such pure, unrestrained madness that going into it blind is the preferred method of entry.
There are some laughs to be found between the two friends and a sweetness apparent between Jay and his son, but this is far from lightweight entertainment. Domestic clashes and increasingly messy murders are soon eclipsed by an insane third act that among other delights features a scene in a tunnel that rivals the best horror films for sheer tension and terror.
Wheatley’s script playfully places odd but brief bits throughout the film’s first two acts when everything else is relatively normal. Fiona visits the bathroom during the dinner party, removes a mirror from the wall, and carves a strange symbol onto the back before replacing it. One of targets on Jay’s hit list seems to recognize him with a smile before he’s shot dead while another tells him “thank you” after each bloody blow. Viewers are as in the dark as Jay himself, but the answers are right around the corner. By way of that terrifying tunnel and some freaky woods…
In addition to the darkly intentional script and atmospheric direction the movie’s success is due in large part to the two lead performances. Maskell moves flawlessly from a man forced to endure verbal emasculation by his wife to someone who rediscovers the lost joy of mutilation and torture. (The journey between them isn’t as long of one as you’d think.) He also finds humanity in his character through several scenes with his son. Smiley is also quite good and provides most of the film’s limited humor through his warmth and wit.
Kill List is sure to lose some folks in the ambitious and surprising home stretch, but if you stay with it and place your trust in Wheatley’s blood-stained hands the reward is a twisted ride towards some intense and unsettling entertainment.
The Upside: Fantastic structure; strong performances; script weaves small mysteries throughout first two-thirds before everything goes to hell (in a good way (for the viewers, not the characters)); musical score ratchets up the tension.
The Downside: May be too ambiguous at times for some viewers.
We are told early on in Big Miracle that “everybody loves whales!” It’s both an excuse and a rallying cry and, had Ken Kwapis‘ film stuck with its first moniker, it would have also been the title of his latest film. Someone apparently had the foresight to slay that terrible name, but it’s still managed to worm its way into the finished feature, where it’s pronounced earnestly, practically begging for its audience to nod and say, “yep, it’s true – just everybody loves whales.” Strangely enough, it’s that tossed-aside title that sums up Big Miracle quite neatly – earnest, insane, and conducive to crowd participation and (positive) involvement.
The film ostensibly centers on local television reporter Adam Carlson (John Krasinski), who has been tasked with spending time in various locales around the state in order to craft colorful pieces about Alaskan life. Adam is just about to finish his stint in Barrow, which is a good thing, as material is running scarily thin (his latest piece is about the town’s sole Mexican restaurant, a spot that, bizarrely enough, becomes of the film’s primary locations). While attempting to gather more material with his best pal, Inuit tweenager Nathan (while how the odd couple became pals is never explained, their bromance is actually sort of sweet), Adam stumbles upon the biggest story of his career – a family of whales trapped in the growing ice, miles from open sea, in desperate need of some kind of rescue. Adam’s inevitable news piece on the situation steadily gathers interest across the country, and soon tiny Barrow is deluged with all manner of people looking to get in on the action (oh, and maybe to save the whales).
While that story may sound simple enough, Big Miracle is about twenty times more complicated and convoluted than it initially reads. Barrow becomes ground zero for an ungodly amount of people and interests – best exemplified by the film’s leading ladies, who show up to serve as both love interests to Adam and as representatives of diametrically opposed interests in the context of the whales. Drew Barrymore plays her usual brand of cockeyed optimist, Greenpeace zealot Rachel Kramer, who continually appears to be the one person genuinely concerned with the actual well-being of whales, while Kristen Bell‘s Jill Jerard is a big-haired television reporter from Los Angeles who just wants to land a good story.
In addition to the environmentalists and the journalists, Big Miracle is also overrun with big oil, the government at large, the local Inuit population, the military, the town’s inhabitants, and even a couple of out-of-state yokels who show up to save the day on their own terms. Despite the built-in drama of animals and peril and the dueling interests of a whole cast of nutbars, Big Miracle is virtually without conflict. Of course, there is the appearance of conflict – will big bad oilman J.W. McGraw (Ted Danson) do the right thing, will the Inuits back off from their plan to harvest the whales, will those cute little schoolchildren who are repeatedly shown watching the entire thing unfold via television ever recover from such drama? Go ahead and guess. But amidst the film’s adherence to tossing together people, places, ideas, philosophies, and plans and mistaking the whole stew for an actually well-crafted movie, Big Miracle accomplishes something wholly unexpected – it is almost unfathomably entertaining and engaging. It’s ludicrous and more than a bit strange, but it’s also very sweet, quite well-intentioned, and consistently charming. It may even be deserving of that oft-used slice of poster art: “crowd-pleasing.”
Of course, it’s also entirely possible that Big Miracle could make even less sense than it already does (which is to say, not a whole damn lot), because the film is (incredibly enough) based on a true story. Even more incredibly enough, Big Miracle actually sticks to a number of facts while telling its true story; “Operation Breakthrough” did take place in 1988, three whales were trapped in the Beaufort Sea, a barge was initially dispatched from Prudhoe Bay to break the ice, and Soviet Union icebreakers were called in to assist (in reality, two icebreakers were involved). See? There is some truth amidst the vast sea of insanity that Big Miracle swims in.
The Upside: Watchable to the point of compulsion, Big Miracle manages to hit just about every emotional trigger an audience could possibly possess without any real sense of stakes or conflict. By and large, it’s entertaining, predictable, and easy.
The Downside: Goshwhaleit, the film’s downside is pretty much exactly the same as its upside. Sheesh.
On the Side: Stick around for the credits to see proof positive that one of the film’s most hard to buy sub-plots is legitimately based on fact.
Found footage films are often called (by me at least) the new 3D for a few reasons. They’re clearly enjoying a surge similar to the one enjoyed by 3D films for the past couple years. They’re cropping up in a handful of different genres. They’re almost never an integral or relevant element of the film’s narrative.
And most filmmakers who employ the technique have no goddamn clue how to make it work.
Which brings us to the fun albeit cliched and otherwise entertaining Chronicle.
“The camera needs to stay on for our investigation.”
Andrew (Dane DeHaan) is somewhat of an outcast at school, but the bullying and harassment is still a welcome relief from the abusive father and mother on her cancerous deathbed at home. His cousin, Matt (Alex Russell), is one of the few bright spots as he makes an effort to hang out with Andrew and help him assimilate into high school. Both of them rank far down on the pecking order though when compared with Steve (Michael B. Jordan) who just may be the most popular kid in school. The three of them bond one drunken and curious night when they discover a cave in the woods with a mysterious object inside. Lights, sparks and general confusion give way to the three teens discovering some startling new abilities.
They can manipulate physical objects with their mind. In short, their telekinesis eventually leads to being able to lift, throw and crush items as big as a car. And once they discover that their own bodies are simply objects they begin to master the art of flight as well. But with great power comes, well, you know, and a reflexive act of aggression by Andrew leads to the boys setting ground rules. Don’t use the powers in public, don’t use them on living creatures and don’t use them when you’re angry.
It doesn’t take someone who’s actually seen the movie to see what’s coming next, and soon Andrew’s sadness and rage mix to volatile and deadly effect.
Chronicle is essentially a Carrie-inspired, teenage riff on M. Night Shyamalan’s Unbreakable complete with high school dramas and a catering toward shorter attention spans. We’re witness to an origin story of both hero and potential villain and an ideological clash of comic book proportions.
The first two thirds feature a surprising amount of character work, and even if the results are predictable and lacking in any degree of originality the effort is still a pleasant surprise. The three leads all do well in their roles and show real personality in scenes both comedic and dramatic even if their characters don’t always act the way you’d expect. I can buy that none of them rush out and start saving lives, but one leaf blower gag aside there aren’t even any Zapped-style moments of bikini tops popping off or cameras floating into the girls’ locker room. That may just be the most unbelievable aspect of the entire film.
There’s a brief scene at a party where the possibility is teased that the story is going to buck cliches with a fresh and bold turn of events, but it’s quickly dropped in favor the obvious. But as unoriginal as the script events are they lead nicely into a third act that entertains and excites with larger scale action, well crafted special effects and a darker edge that’s both welcome and appreciated. At ninety minutes the movie never drags or bores, and once the big battle begins time flies alongside the characters and miscellaneous objects onscreen.
Were this a standard, gimmick-free film the review could essentially end here, but for some reason director Josh Trank and writer Max Landis decided their debut feature should be in the found footage format. Some films manage to make that into a naturally explained positive, with Rec being the finest example. That film featured a news crew filming and lighting the way with a camera, so it made sense as well as heightened several of the film’s scares.
Chronicle‘s use of the format accomplishes nothing aside from annoyance and a very clear disregard for logic. Andrew decides early on to film the events, and the script’s one cool trick is how it gets around the use of his camera through several scenes. But there’s also a girl who exists for no reason aside from having another camera in the mix as she shows up periodically filming everything for no good reason. She even pulls a Cloverfield by occasionally focusing the camera on Matt while helicopters are crashing around them or they’re being thrown through the air. And don’t get me started on the number of times edits are made to the video but the audio stays continuously in sync.
Nitpicking at its execution aside, there’s no real purpose for the found footage angle. Who assembled the footage from all of these disparate sources (including security cameras, cell phones and police car cams) and why? It doesn’t fit the “police evidence” explanation used by the Paranormal Activity films, and it’s not presented as a record compiled by a specific individual. The only purpose it serves is to the title.
It’s a minor shame the film went that route as the characters, narrative and overall execution are all part of an otherwise enjoyable piece of popcorn entertainment. It’s fantastic to see new filmmakers working with a small budget turn out a product that’s as exciting and fun as Chronicle, but I just wish they had resisted the urge to pander to trends. See the movie, shrug off the ill conceived found footage aspect and you’ll have a good time at the movies.
The Upside: Fun and creative effects; third act is exciting and filled with aggressive action.
The Downside: Found footage angle is pointless and at times nonsensical; script is predictable and offers no surprises with its characters; no footage of trio discovering their ability seems odd.
On the Side: Max Landis is currently writing a script based on a book by Max Brooks for a film that will be directed by Jason Reitman and most likely star Colin Hanks. (This is not true, but someone should make it happen.)
According to The Hollywood Reporter, newcomer Matthew Lieberman has been signed to write the Short Circuit reboot going on over at Dimension Films. He’d previously written the not-at-all-liked Dr. Doolittle: Tail to the Chief which went straight to video on the coattails of the Eddie Murphy movies, but this project is an interesting way to get a foot in the door of the feature world.
What’s more important is that Tim Hill is set to be the director. Hill’s recent work includes Alvin and the Chipmunks, Hop and Garfield: A Tail of Two Kitties (apparently everyone involved loves “tail” puns). All of that sounds awful, but once upon a time, Hill also directed Muppets From Space. How someone got from weird and wonderful to boringly broad and homogenous is anyone’s guess. Forget it, fans. It’s Chinatown.
That’s sad, but the most fascinating thing about bring back Johnny Five to life is that instead of appealing to a movie geek crowd, the production is attempting to take a character from a strange little 80s movie that’s been reduced to a catch phrase and make him a children’s entertainment icon. To do that, Hill and company will be able to sidestep the treacherous balance between old fans and new by completely disregarding old fans.
Of course, the bigger question will be whether a robot movie like this will fly in a time where actual robots are running our lives for us. Will Johnny look like an Erector Set that talks or will he look like that creepy Japanese lady-bot that scares everyone all the time?
James Wan is back. Leigh Whannell is back. Insidious is back.
That loud burst of discordant music you just heard is all part of the plan to scare you out of your seat. The cat that just ran by isn’t part of it; your house is just infested with cats.
According to Variety, the green light has been given to Insidious 2 which means a continuation/birth of a horror franchise that genuinely delivered excitement to a big audience. It’s screenwriter Whannell’s goal to have the main players from the first film return. That also means that Whannell has what he and the team assume to be a solid creative idea for the next installment. Last year, producer Jason Blum claimed they wouldn’t move the massive moneymaking beast forward simply for more large checks. Looks like they’re smart enough to do it for the right reasons and to strike when the iron is hot.
Now what would spell story success for the sequel?
That’s right. We’ve officially gone from grey to black. This means the evil side of the Reject Report is about to rear its ugly head and its taking names. First up, Daniel Radcliffe. He’ll have some stiff competition, though, in the form of teenage super heroes and whales. Those whales might have a miracle up their sleeves, and they’ll need precisely that to come out on top this weekend. It’s not looking to be a massive weekend for box office receipts, but there’s apparently some big football game this weekend that’s sure to take away even more of that dwindling box office. Go ahead and put on your favorite team’s colors. We’re still decked out in black.
If we’re going by past weekend openings, the latest film starring Daniel Radcliffe is bound to break in with around $120-130m. We’re talking about The Woman in Black, though, not a new Harry Potter movie, so those rules go right out the doors of Hogwarts. The Woman in Black is a gothic horror movie that’s faring relatively well with critics. Likewise audiences haven’t had a good, straight-forward horror film in a while – no found footage or unrated cuts here.
The best comparisons to this films are found in the low-to-mid double digits when it comes to weekend box office. The Others debuted to $14m in 2001, and Drag Me to Hell dropped in with $15.8m. Without a noted director like Sam Raimi on board, you can expect The Woman in Black to open closer to the former of those two comparisons. The Radcliffe factor will sway it a few notches, but not enough to even get it up to $15m. It probably won’t even be enough to beat out the other, big, genre release this weekend. Expect The Woman in Black to debut somewhere between $14-14.5m, not up to Radcliffe’s standards but certainly the biggest opening CBS Films has ever seen. J’Lo’s Back-Up Plan is about to get knocked off its high post.
Woman in Black? Meet the Lady in White. You two are sure to have something fashionable to talk about:
What’s better than teen movies? What’s better than teen superhero movies? What’s better than teen superhero, found footage movies? The descriptors end there, because that’s precisely what Chronicle is. It’s also the favorite to win the weekend thanks to the combined efforts of found footage and some staggering buzz coming from test screenings. It’s pretty impressive the amount of steam Chronicle has been able to generate in only a matter of a few weeks. Not many had even heard of this film at the beginning of 2012. Now, opening on more than 2800 screen and with commercials running non-stop, it’s sure to use those super powers to some seriously good use come box office earning time. Expect Chronicle to debut at #1 this weekend with somewhere between $16.5-17m. Hey, that’s better than Sky High.
Now we all know superheroes aren’t real, but, if they were, this is what one of their funerals might look like:
So John Krasinski and Drew Barrymore are doing this movie where they rescue whales. They’re not superhero whales nor are they evil spirits who haunt the moors, so Big Miracle won’t have the same push The Woman in Black or Chronicle have. Director Ken Kwapis isn’t exactly a money factory, either. His last film, the ensemble He’s Just Not That Into You debuted with $27.7m, but, before that, it was $4m, $9.8m, and $10.4m openings for The Beautician and the Beast, The Sisterhood of the Travelling Pants, and License To Wed, respectively. He’s re-teaming with Krasinski from License to Wed this go-around. Big Miracle might come in somewhere around $10m, but closer to $9m is more likely. Barrymore might start taking McG’s phone calls again after this weekend.
Much of the remaining top 10 will have their typical drops. The Descendants, still on an Oscar nomination kick, will have less of one than everything else, but the expansion days are taking a break this weekend. The Artist breaks into 1000+ screens, but the extra 100 or so theaters it’s hitting this weekend won’t be enough to get it onto the chart.
It should be noted that Journey 2: The Mysterious Island, which doesn’t get a US release until February 10th, has already pulled in $24.2m in foreign markets. It opened on Sunday in seven territories, the biggest moneymaker of them being South Korea with $7.6m. It could be The Rock. It could be Michael Caine. It could even be the giant butterflies. Something’s a draw for the South Korean moviegoers, and it’s a pretty fair guess Journey 2 doesn’t involve horribly painful revenge. That’s just a guess, though. Luis Guzman might throw down if you mess with him too much.
You can find Rob Hunter’s Kill List review right here and Brian Salisbury’s review of The Innkeepers right here. Both films have been available for that past few weeks on VOD, but this week they’re hitting theaters, maybe even one near you. Kill List is Ben Wheatley’s mind trip of a horror movie, while Ti West’s The Innkeepers is solid, haunted hotel thrills mixed with a healthy dose of good humor. These are both films worth checking out with a crowd if you have that opportunity. If not, there’s always the 16 or 17 different ways you can watch each of them in your own home. Kill List even plays like an interesting game if you’re not interested in football this weekend. Kill List and The Inkeepers open in select cities and are both currently on VOD.
Also opening in limited release are Dysfunctional Friends opening in select cities, Perfect Sense opening in select cities, W.E. opening in New York and L.A., and Windfall opening in New York City.
Here’s how the weekend is shaping up:
You hear that rumbling? You hear those computer keyboards clacking away. That’s industry analysts typing the word “slump” over and over and over again. That’s what you get when you have a weekend come in with $82.6m for the top 10, which is what we’re looking at here. No surprise it’ll be the lowest weekend of 2012 so far. Even if these numbers prove to be skewed lower than what we actually get, the weekend is still a lock for weakest hitter of the new year.
It’s not a surprise, though. The same weekend last year generated a measly $68.4m. What can you expect when the only film to break into double digits is The Roommate. So we’ll have a low weekend. People will cry slump. It’ll all get sorted out over the next couple of weeks. If all else fails, the lead-in to the Summer movie season starts early and starts strong in early March, and we still have a little movie called Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace in 3-D hitting next weekend. Man, that’s a long title.
We’ll be back early next week to go over the weekend numbers.