Predict the #1 film for the weekend of July 4-6 2008.
Remember, this means discounting the box-office grosses of Wednesday and Thursday.
Deadline is Tuesday 1th of July, at 6 pm (blog time).
For rules and updates on how the competition has fared so far, go to the main AGEBOC1-thread.
Current standings
filmman – 17p
Brian – 15p
James – 14p
Jeanine – 6p
Nick – 4p
Joe Webb – 4p
Jackrabbit Slim – 0p
Eddie Murphy to NBC/Universal’s Extra:
I have close to fifty movies and it’s like, why am I in the movies?” he said, adding, “I’ve done that part now. I’ll go back to the stage and do standup.
Previously: Greatest news of 2008?
Movieweb has an excerpt from an interview with Christopher Nolan and Gary Oldman on a panel for the upcoming The Dark Knight. Oldman was asked if he thought, considering Ledger’s death, whether the Joker might return. His response revealed not only his opinion on the matter, but also the potential identity of the next big Batman villain in the (inevitable) third film.
Well, Pixar has done it again. The animation studio has, in this person’s view, had an amazing streak of quality films that appeal to both children and adults. I thought only one was a clunker, and that was Cars, and it hindsight it probably suffers in comparison to classics like The Incredibles and Toy Story 2 and is still better than most animated films. Now Pixar and director Andrew Stanton have given us a science-fiction love story that is also a cautionary tale about the environment and corporations run amok.
It is the year 2775. Earth is so choked with garbage that the human race has abandoned the planet. All that’s left are robots who compact the refuse into cubes and stack it. These are labeled WALL-E, or Waste Allocation Load Lifter, Earth class. We only meet one of them, so I’m not sure if he is the only one, but he’s a lonely little mechanical fellow. His only friend is a cockroach (if you thought if was tough to make rats cuddly in Ratatouille, be amazed as you warm to this six-legged vermin). WALL-E has a personality, though, and likes to collect things that he finds among the junk. He has a de facto museum of humanity in his domicile, where he likes to watch a video of Hello, Dolly. In a way he’s the cinematic heir to the silent slapstick kings like Chaplin and Keaton, as he frequently is at physical odds with his surroundings.
Then one day he gets a visitor. Or rather, Earth does. It’s a sleek, ovoid-shaped robot with a feminine voice. After determining WALL-E is harmless, she doesn’t blast him to bits and eventually they communicate. She’s called Eve, and her directive is classified. WALL-E shows her his place and the lovestruck robot woos her, but once she finds he has a scraggly plant growing in a boot full of dirt, she zooms back to her point of origin.
Turns out she’s a probe from the “cruise liner” where mankind has been living for seven-hundred years. The suspiciously Wal-Mart like corporation that has taken over the world have taken on people in what was supposed to a five-year trip until the Earth was cleaned up, but things got a little behind schedule. Humans are now coddled so much they are grossly obese and don’t even walk, instead gliding around in hoverchairs and looking only at computer screens in front of their face. How procreation and elimination are handled are left to the imagination.
So it turns out that the plant is a very important thing, and the rest of the movie is spent with WALL-E and Eve trying to keep it safe. This is all suspenseful, funny and touching. Though the two robots have a very limited vocabulary (mostly they just say each other’s names) the relationship feels real. Legendary sound man Ben Burtt supplies the voice of WALL-E.
Of course there are all sorts of subtexts here. One is the environmental message, and it’s a bit daring for a Walt Disney picture to start off a kid’s animated film with a bleak vision of the future. Then there’s the slap at Wal-Mart, which is clearly the model for Buy ‘n’ Large, the superstore that has taken over the world (Fred Willard plays their CEO, and he’s not animated). Finally, there is the depiction of the overfed and infantilized humans. Some have seen this as an insult of middle-America of some sort, but this is op-ed bloviating. It only stands to reason that a civilization waited on hand and foot and discouraged from exercising would become this way, and it would be an all-around bad thing. Is that a shocking point of view?
It’s a given that the animation is brilliant. I was especially captivated by the details in WALL-E’s lair of the trinkets and gewgaws he’s collected, from a plastic spork to a Rubik’s Cube. As those of us who appreciate good cinema sit around and grouse about how movies are going to shit, driven by studios who just want to cater to the tastes of teenage boys, we can take comfort that in the arena of animation, Pixar has been churning out one classic after another, rivaling (and dare I say surpassing) the golden age of Disney.
Some reperatory news this week, the Facets Cinémathèque is running a series called Miloš Forman: The Formative Years. They’re running Competition, Black Peter, Loves of a Blonde, and The Fireman’s Ball. Unfortunately, I probably won’t get to the first two, and I’ve seen The Fireman’s Ball, but I’m really looking forward to Loves of a Blonde.
Also up this week is Otto Preminger’s Laura, which I haven’t seen, and one other special week-long run that’s listed below.
Alphabetically:
Brick Lane (trailer)
Director: Sarah Gavron
A young Bangladeshi woman emigrates to London for an arranged marriage. As is usually the case with these things, the trailer plays up the melodrama, making it look like a feature-length soap opera.
MC/RT: 60/62
Finding Amanda (trailer)
Director: Peter Tolan
Uh-oh, another Matthew Broderick sighting. Playing (according to the IMDb) “a television producer with a penchant for drinking and gambling … sent to Las Vegas.” There’s no way that can be good.
MC/RT: 56/37
Monsieur Verdoux
Director: Charles Chaplin (The Gold Rush, City Lights, Modern Times, The Great Dictator)
Chaplin’s 1947 thriller has gotten a new release. He stars as a man who marries rich women only to murder them, and originally was slated to be directed by Orson Welles before Chaplin had second thoughts. I’ve never completely warmed up to Chaplin’s Little Tramp, but I also haven’t seen any of his non-Tramp films, so I’m looking forward to this with very keen interest.
MC/RT: not listed/96
My Winnipeg (trailer)
Director: Guy Maddin (Dracula: Pages from a Virgin’s Diary, Cowards Bend the Knee or The Blue Hands, The Saddest Music in the World, Brand upon the Brain!)
I’ve not seen a Guy Maddin film before, though I don’t know why I missed The Saddest Music in the World; I remember seeing the trailer several times so it must have played in Dallas. Anyway, this is his recreation of his childhood in Winnipeg, hiring actors to play his family. You know what, just watch the trailer, no point in me trying to say what it’s about. Obviously a must-see.
MC/RT: 85/95
OSS 117: Cairo, Nest of Spies (trailer)
Director: Michel Hazanavicius
The ads say it’s France’s answer to James Bond, although it’s in spoof form. It actually looks moderately amusing, but in a busy week like this one it will be hard to find time to see it.
MC/RT: 61/74
WALL-E (trailer)
Director: Andrew Stanton (Finding Nemo)
Hooray! A Pixar movie. I’ve been trying to get a picture of the L trains that are decked out in Wall-E ads, because I think it’s cool, but have been unsuccessful thus far. If I happen to get one, I’ll share.
MC/RT: 91/98
Wanted (trailer)
Director: Timur Bekmambetov (Day Watch, Night Watch)
Oh man, someone gave the director of Night Watch a Hollywood film and Angelina Jolie. And judging by the trailer, he’s proceeded to make an obvious Matrix ripoff while using Angelina Jolie in the least imaginative way imaginable. Not sure I can take it.
MC/RT: 64/74
I think that’s nice.
Earlier this year, the trades reported that Paul Greengrass and Matt Damon were tossing around ideas for a fourth Bourne Identity picture. Both director and star immediately tossed water on the rumor, suggesting that talks were little more than exploratory and that we shouldn’t hold our collective breaths waiting for another sequel.
Well, either the guys were being coy or a fantastic script has fallen in their laps because Bourne Producer (and uncredited director) Frank Marshall tells IESB that he’s aiming to have the fourth picture in front of cameras next summer for a 2010 release.
Thoughts? Are they pushing their luck with another installment? Would you like to see them continue the series (ala Bond) indefinitely?
I found the first one bland and never fell in love with the second…yet I’d rank Ultimatum among the best action films of the last decade or two. As far as I’m concerned, these guys are just hitting their stride.
The trailer for the latest Guy Ritchie film, RocknRolla, is out “exclusively” over at Empire’s site. JS said in an earlier thread that he has trouble forgiving Peter Berg for Very Bad Things, well I have trouble forgiving Guy Ritchie for Revolver (I don’t even dare go near Swept Away). Worst piece of garbage I have ever seen. Seriously, I get ill just thinking about the film. I mean, Ray Liotta crying in speedos under neon lights. Yeah, the wastebasket is over there in the corner.
Still, this looks all right. It’s obviously Ritchie going back and doing a Lock, Stock… and Snatch carbon copy so he can get some kind of career back, and I’m fine with that. Those two were great fun. Besides it has Tom Wilkinson and Mark Strong in it, two of the best actors working today. This could be as bad as Revolver and I’d still be dutybound to see it because of that.
Also, Ludacris is now known as Chris Bridges.
Finally got around to delivering something I don’t feel absolutely ashamed with (now, anyway). Sorry for the wait, guys.
A few words of caution before the review
It’s perhaps best to mention that I have never written a script review before this one. I have read a few, understand the form, but am by no means a voracious script reader. I have certainly never written one. So if I am missing some particular aspect of this screenplay that one knowledgeable in screenwriting would see, then I apologize. If so, hopefully someone in the comments will point it out for me.
There will be what some might term spoilers in the review, but only if you lack basic historical knowledge. If you are unaware that Hitler survived all assassination attempts and died in a bunker in Berlin in the last weeks of World War II, then you first need to rent Der Untergang, then retake high school. I hate spoilers as much as the next guy (unless it’s to save me from some particularly idiotic film), but some things you ought to just know.
What is interesting in the story about the July 20 plot is not just what went wrong, but the character of the people behind the assassinations attempt(s), their reasons and their fates. I won’t talk about those things, though there’s plenty of historical data about it available around the net if you’re interested.
Still, I’ve added a summary, so that people who just want the gist from some unprofessional blogger can get that quickly. Scroll down to the end for that.
Predict the #1 film for the weekend of June 27-29 2008.
Deadline is Tuesday 24th of June, at 6 pm (blog time).
Current standings
filmman – 17p
Brian – 15p
James – 12p
Nick – 4p
Joe Webb – 4p
Jeanine – 2p
Jackrabbit Slim – 0p
This is certainly the first Kazakh film I’ve ever seen, but it’s parentage is pretty complicated, as it a German-Kazakh-Mongolian-Russian film, filmed largely in Mongolia and China and directed and co-written by a Russian, Sergei Bodrov. It was nominated for the Foreign Language Film Oscar last year, and while I liked it a tick better than the winner, The Counterfeiters, it is vastly inferior to the snubbed Four Months, Three Weeks, and 2 Days.
Simply put, it is the story of the young Genghis Khan. For Westerners like me, who knew nothing about him, you’ll learn a lot, such as that Genghis Khan is not a name but a title (something like supreme ruler). As a boy he was called Temudgin, and was the son of a Khan of a small clan. When he was nine his father took him out to find a bride, and after picking out his favorite, who would be the love of his life, his father gets poisoned by enemies, leaving the young fellow at the mercy of his father’s rivals.
Over the next several years, he endures lots of tough times, being enslaved and imprisoned and falling in and out contact with Borte, his beautiful wife. Eventually he perserveres and defeats his enemies, and is poised to rule an empire that would encompass almost all of Asia. This is the first film in a projected trilogy, so I guess we’ll see that in the sequels.
The film is a somewhat quaint biographical epic that reminds one of Cecil B. DeMille (not David Lean–his stuff was far better). It has the sweep of DeMille, with hundreds of extras, but also the ham-fisted dialogue (early on we get the old chestnut, “I didn’t know that this day would change my life.”) We also get lots of battle scenes, with more blood than DeMille, in glorious arterial sprays, but also lots of shots of warriors falling off horses in slow motion.
There are also a lot of gaps in the story. I appreciate that Bodrov didn’t make this movie longer than it is, but there are some jumps that hurt the film. At one point Khan is at his lowest, in a jail cell. He escapes, and the next thing you know he has a huge army that is explained in one line of voiceover. Also, in the climactic battle he is outnumbered by his opponent, but says he will win through strategy. Unless he has contact with an early form of The Weather Channel, we never find out what that strategy is.
The heart of what is wrong with this film is the script. It plays like a History Channel documentary, without much shading. The most interesting character, and the best acted, is Khan’s blood brother, Sun Hong Lei, who gives an intriguing performance. Otherwise, it’s just hero is captured, hero escapes, hero builds army, and that goes through a few gyrations. I wonder if Shakespeare knew this story–he would have done something interesting with it.
If last year’s “The Pixar Story” was indeed a loveletter (as I stated in my review here) with full cooperation from Pixar, David Price’s new book The Pixar Touch seems like a soft unauthorized biography at times. It airs some dirty laundry of executives but never delves deep enough to cause too many ruffled feathers.
The tale told is engrossing while the actual storytelling is sometimes maddening. Price unearths much new information (to the genearl public) but occasionally backs off just when you’d like to know more. His acknowledgements state that he was able to get interviews with current and former Pixar employees (and his notes are extensive) but the big players (Steve Jobs, Ed Catmull and John Lasseter) are conspicuously absent. Indeed in the epilogue Price pats himself on the back while chastising Pixar’s internally produced “biography” (To Infinity and Beyond) for glaring over some significant details (calling it a “public relations version of the company’s history”) - however there are a few stories where he ends up doing just that himself.
