list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Havoc on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 http://www.spout.com/films/Havoc/234972/default.aspx Title: Havoc
Year: 2005
Director: Barbara Kopple
Plot: A pair of naïve young girls learn that even the most insignificant actions can have lasting consequences in this music-driven take on teen culture starring Anne Hathaway and Bijou Phillips and directed by two-time Oscar-winning filmmaker Barbara Kopple. Influenced by the hip-hop thug lifestyle and seeking to explore life outside of their insulated, culturally homogenized suburb, pretty young teenagers Allison (Hathaway) and Emily (Phillips) set their sights on East L.A. to experience the "gangsta" lifestyle firsthand. By the time the pair meet some true-life Latino gang-bangers and realize just how far out of their element they really are, it may already be too late to turn back. ~ Jason Buchanan, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 2
Number of Lists: 5
Number of blog posts: 6
Number of discussion threads: 1
SpoutRating: 2
]]>Sat, 20 Jun 2009 16:22:12 GMTHavoc2005Barbara KoppleA pair of naïve young girls learn that even the most insignificant actions can have lasting consequences in this music-driven take on teen culture starring <a href="/players/P___292630/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Anne Hathaway</a> and <a href="/players/P___272318/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Bijou Phillips</a> and directed by two-time Oscar-winning filmmaker <a href="/players/P____97885/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Barbara Kopple</a>. Influenced by the hip-hop thug lifestyle and seeking to explore life outside of their insulated, culturally homogenized suburb, pretty young teenagers Allison (Hathaway) and Emily (Phillips) set their sights on East L.A. to experience the "gangsta" lifestyle firsthand. By the time the pair meet some true-life Latino gang-bangers and realize just how far out of their element they really are, it may already be too late to turn back. ~ Jason Buchanan, All Movie Guide2Slightly Tagged (1-5)5612http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/t68713kc7al.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Havoc/234972/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/10/13/36265.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 10/13/2008 4:00:59 PM
Body: In a crowded year for Best Actress contention, Anne Hathaway could be the only first-timer to receive an Oscar nomination in the lead category, possibly going up against mainstays such as her Devil Wears Prada costar Meryl Streep and Kate Winslet, as well as the less-nominated vets Nicole Kidman and Kristen Scott Thomas. Her main competition for the outsider, dark horse position is Frozen River’s Melissa Leo (who may benefit from her film’s initiatory screener campaign even though River’s theatrical release was early and hardly noticed), and Happy-Go-Lucky’s Sally Hawkins, whose film just debuted to favorable reviews citing her brilliant (as in talented and bright) performance. But Hathaway is sure to be the victor –– even though her performance in Rachel Getting Married is hardly deserving of such an honor. The Oscar buzz for Hathaway has been high for weeks now, enough that the actress apparently joked about it in her Saturday Night Live monologue earlier this month (I thought of it as less a current-year expectation than a general career goal, but it’s made Risky Biz Blog’s Steven Zeitchik compare Hathaway to Catherine O’Hara’s buzz-afflicted character in For Your Consideration). The fact that she’s a well-known movie star should make Hathaway’s buzz continually more reportable by the press and more noticeable by both the public and the voters, which gives her some advantage over Leo and Hawkins in terms of cultural consciousness. As much as the Academy loves Streep and Winslet (and Kidman and Cate Blanchett), and as much as voters like an Oscar comeback from a relatively M.I.A. past nominee like Scott Thomas (see Julie Christie, Sissy Spacek, Ellen Burstyn, etc.), the Academy really seems to have a thing for young, pretty, popular actresses who suddenly find their (probably once-in-a-lifetime) Oscar-worthy role. Hathaway will follow the likes of Gwyneth Paltrow, Winona Ryder, Elizabeth Shue, Helen Hunt, Renee Zellweger, Reese Witherspoon, Ellen Page, Charlize Theron and Keira Knightley (not to mention all of those in the Supporting Actress category), some of who have actually gone on to more nominations and therefore proven themselves deserving of their original transition into Oscar territory. However, for Hathaway it isn’t simply about box office beauties who take a pay cut and/or go bad (or at least more adult), as Tom O’Neill claims. If it were that easy, Hathaway should have been nominated for Havoc or Brokeback Mountain. Instead it’s more to do with the Oscar-favored tradition of recognizing the serious turn from the beauty-stripped Hollywood princess. And it helps Hathaway that Rachel Getting Married is additionally a strong film with countless strong performances, among which she stands out the most. But does she stand out because she’s that much better or because she’s that much more famous? To call Hathaway’s costars in Rachel comparative unknowns is a bit of an understatement. Plus, there’s the matter of Hathaway standing out because her character selfishly butts her way into attention-seeking situations. Yet despite this trait in her character and the basic plot of the film, a less-celebrated actress might have seemed more a part of the ensemble while still being the focal point of the story. It’s easy to notice Hathaway’s performance when you’re constantly reminded, thanks to star status, that it’s Hathaway as you’ve never seen her before. The sudden display of Oscar-worthy talent is what needs to be questioned, because oftentimes a surprisingly great turn by an otherwise fine actress is more the handiwork of the director than the actor or actress. Rachel helmer Jonathan Demme has a long history of nudging merely decent actors toward a nomination. Some of his one-hit-wonders include Mary Steenburgen (Melvin and Howard), Christine Lahti (Swing Shift) and Dean Stockwell (Married to the Mob), and, of course, he’s the guy who first really convinced us that Tom Hanks could be a serious actor with Philadelphia. Demme shows his talent as an actor’s director best with Rachel, as the majority of the film’s cast could just as well receive Oscar buzz if only they had more familiar names or faces. Even Oscar vet Debra Winger might have had a better shot at another nomination if she were more recognizable (seeing Rachel at a matinee filled with old folks had me hearing the “is that…?” question almost as much as I heard it during Tropic Thunder). It’s actually a bit of a shock that relative newcomer Rosemarie DeWitt, who plays the film’s titular role, appears to be gaining heat in the Supporting Actress race, though that category’s major contenders include a number of unfamiliar names, according to In Contention’s Oscar Prediction Chart. Without Demme’s direction, Hathaway might not have delivered the goods, as possibly evidenced in her lack of Oscar notice for Brokeback Mountain. Ang Lee is hardly an actor’s director, and yet Hathaway’s three main costars in that film (Heath Ledger, Jake Gyllenhaal and Michelle Williams) were each nominated by the Academy. Hathaway also stood out in that film, mostly as miscast and out-of-her-element, but she was extremely overshadowed performance-wise. A year later, she was upstaged in Prada by Streep, who went on to receive her 14th nomination. Now, with Rachel, she’s the upstager, but it’ll only be enough to get her into the pool of nominees.  Up against Streep and the other more experienced contenders, her celebrity alone won’t help her actually win. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 20:00:59 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com10/13/2008 4:00:59 PMIn a crowded year for Best Actress contention, Anne Hathaway could be the only first-timer to receive an Oscar nomination in the lead category, possibly going up against mainstays such as her Devil Wears Prada costar Meryl Streep and Kate Winslet, as well as the less-nominated vets Nicole Kidman and Kristen Scott Thomas. Her main competition for the outsider, dark horse position is Frozen River’s Melissa Leo (who may benefit from her film’s initiatory screener campaign even though River’s theatrical release was early and hardly noticed), and Happy-Go-Lucky’s Sally Hawkins, whose film just debuted to favorable reviews citing her brilliant (as in talented and bright) performance. But Hathaway is sure to be the victor –– even though her performance in Rachel Getting Married is hardly deserving of such an honor. The Oscar buzz for Hathaway has been high for weeks now, enough that the actress apparently joked about it in her Saturday Night Live monologue earlier this month (I thought of it as less a current-year expectation than a general career goal, but it’s made Risky Biz Blog’s Steven Zeitchik compare Hathaway to Catherine O’Hara’s buzz-afflicted character in For Your Consideration). The fact that she’s a well-known movie star should make Hathaway’s buzz continually more reportable by the press and more noticeable by both the public and the voters, which gives her some advantage over Leo and Hawkins in terms of cultural consciousness. As much as the Academy loves Streep and Winslet (and Kidman and Cate Blanchett), and as much as voters like an Oscar comeback from a relatively M.I.A. past nominee like Scott Thomas (see Julie Christie, Sissy Spacek, Ellen Burstyn, etc.), the Academy really seems to have a thing for young, pretty, popular actresses who suddenly find their (probably once-in-a-lifetime) Oscar-worthy role. Hathaway will follow the likes of Gwyneth Paltrow, Winona Ryder, Elizabeth Shue, Helen Hunt, Renee Zellweger, Reese Witherspoon, Ellen Page, Charlize Theron and Keira Knightley (not to mention all of those in the Supporting Actress category), some of who have actually gone on to more nominations and therefore proven themselves deserving of their original transition into Oscar territory. However, for Hathaway it isn’t simply about box office beauties who take a pay cut and/or go bad (or at least more adult), as Tom O’Neill claims. If it were that easy, Hathaway should have been nominated for Havoc or Brokeback Mountain. Instead it’s more to do with the Oscar-favored tradition of recognizing the serious turn from the beauty-stripped Hollywood princess. And it helps Hathaway that Rachel Getting Married is additionally a strong film with countless strong performances, among which she stands out the most. But does she stand out because she’s that much better or because she’s that much more famous? To call Hathaway’s costars in Rachel comparative unknowns is a bit of an understatement. Plus, there’s the matter of Hathaway standing out because her character selfishly butts her way into attention-seeking situations. Yet despite this trait in her character and the basic plot of the film, a less-celebrated actress might have seemed more a part of the ensemble while still being the focal point of the story. It’s easy to notice Hathaway’s performance when you’re constantly reminded, thanks to star status, that it’s Hathaway as you’ve never seen her before. The sudden display of Oscar-worthy talent is what needs to be questioned, because oftentimes a surprisingly great turn by an otherwise fine actress is more the handiwork of the director than the actor or actress. Rachel helmer Jonathan Demme has a long history of nudging merely decent actors toward a nomination. Some of his one-hit-wonders include Mary Steenburgen (Melvin and Howard), Christine Lahti (Swing Shift) and Dean Stockwell (Married to the Mob), and, of course, he’s the guy who first really convinced us that Tom Hanks could be a serious actor with Philadelphia. Demme shows his talent as an actor’s director best with Rachel, as the majority of the film’s cast could just as well receive Oscar buzz if only they had more familiar names or faces. Even Oscar vet Debra Winger might have had a better shot at another nomination if she were more recognizable (seeing Rachel at a matinee filled with old folks had me hearing the “is that…?” question almost as much as I heard it during Tropic Thunder). It’s actually a bit of a shock that relative newcomer Rosemarie DeWitt, who plays the film’s titular role, appears to be gaining heat in the Supporting Actress race, though that category’s major contenders include a number of unfamiliar names, according to In Contention’s Oscar Prediction Chart. Without Demme’s direction, Hathaway might not have delivered the goods, as possibly evidenced in her lack of Oscar notice for Brokeback Mountain. Ang Lee is hardly an actor’s director, and yet Hathaway’s three main costars in that film (Heath Ledger, Jake Gyllenhaal and Michelle Williams) were each nominated by the Academy. Hathaway also stood out in that film, mostly as miscast and out-of-her-element, but she was extremely overshadowed performance-wise. A year later, she was upstaged in Prada by Streep, who went on to receive her 14th nomination. Now, with Rachel, she’s the upstager, but it’ll only be enough to get her into the pool of nominees.  Up against Streep and the other more experienced contenders, her celebrity alone won’t help her actually win. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/9/11/35022.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 9/11/2008 12:00:32 PM
Body: Due to the unsurprising popularity of our “10 Movies Sold on a Sex Scene” list a few weeks back, I’ve decided to unleash a sequel. However, catering to both Spoutblog’s traffic and the interests of ever-abundant sex-attracted internetters is only half my reason for this follow-up list. I was mainly motivated by the outcome of the release of Woody Allen’s Vicky Cristina Barcelona, a film that also initially inspired the first list. While Vicky was partly sold on the promise of a threesome between Scarlett Johansson, Javier Bardem and Penelope Cruz, it is now fortunately being celebrated, and it will likely be remembered, primarily for Cruz’s performance. Not for the threesome or for the lesbian kiss. Other movies sold on a sex scene, though, are not typically so blessed with accolades. And even some that are recognized with high praise at time of release are often later forgotten as anything but fodder for MrSkin and other followers of onscreen sex and nudity. Obviously this means that most of my selections for the previous list may also qualify here, yet I’ve chosen to ignore some certainly fitting titles, including The Brown Bunny and 9 1/2 Weeks, so as not to repeat myself. Basic Instinct (1992) This was left off the earlier list, though I had originally planned on including it. Now that I’ve decided to do this follow-up, I’m positive that it fits better here. Many people undoubtedly went to see Paul Verhoeven’s erotic thriller more for the eroticism than the thrills, but that can’t be the case for every moviegoer who helped make the film a smash hit. There are plenty of erotic thrillers out there, but only one grossed more than $350 million (Fatal Attraction, which earned more than Basic Instinct domestically, came close). Could it be that the film is actually good? Plenty of respectable critics thought so, including Janet Maslin and Jonathan Rosenbaum, both of whom praised the Hitchcock influence. However, it’s easy to now remember the film primarily for the infamous Sharon Stone upskirt shot, which I deem qualifiable as a sex scene due to the way Stone’s character seems to have sort of psychological intercourse with her interrogators. Last Tango in Paris (1972) Here we have another mostly well-reviewed film that is possibly only still in the public consciousness due to its controversial sex scenes. That isn’t to say the critics and cinephiles don’t still appreciate it for other reasons than its buttery anal sex — it still screens theatrically in revivals and festivals. But ask any random person on the street what they remember, and most are sure to mention the sex scenes before talking of Bertolucci’s direction or Brando’s performance. Havoc (2005) I love the non-fiction work of Barbara Kopple, and I believe it possible that Anne Hathaway indeed gives an Oscar-worthy performance in her latest film, Rachel Getting Married, but neither woman’s talent is fully utilized with this movie, which also features a script written by Oscar-winner Stephen Gaghan. I will always think of this movie as an unfortunate hiccup in the careers of these three individuals, but I will mostly remember it, as will most people, for featuring Hathaway’s first topless sex scenes. A History of Violence (2005) Personally, my first recall is the graphic violence. The second thing I remember — more fondly, in fact — is William Hurt’s cartoonish yet canny performance. The sex scene on the stairs might not even be in the top five things that made Cronenberg’s film memorable for me, but I promise you there are guys who primarily think positively of A History of Violence for that moment. I even know some of them. Fat Girl (2001) Almost as dauntingly memorable as actually waking up to people having sex in the room you’re sleeping in, the infamous scene depicting such an event in Catherine Breillat’s film is likely the first thing you remember. And it probably doesn’t help your memory that the scene is significant enough to have spawned Breillat’s later film Sex is Comedy, which is basically about the difficulty of filming the Fat Girl scene (as seen in the above clip). Talk to Her (2002) With this film, I don’t mind that it’s a sex scene that I primarily recall, because it’s a scene that I think is extremely clever and surprisingly well-executed. No, I’m not referring to the part where Benigno (Javier Camara) rapes the comatose Alicia (Leonor Watling); I mean the black and white dream sequence in which a miniature Fele Martinez completely enters a large, constructed setpiece representing Paz Vega’s vagina. Team America: World Police (2004) There are plenty of side-splitting moments in this movie, but who walked away with anything sticking in their mind as solidly as the overlong sex sequence? The Hunger (1983) I could never remember if I’d seen this film or not when I was a kid. It’s one of those films that even if you haven’t seen the whole thing, you’re probably at least familiar with a specific, iconic scene. Here it’s definitely the lesbian sex scene between Susan Sarandon and Catherine Deneuve. Requiem for a Dream (2000) I wish that the “ass to ass” line wasn’t the most memorable thing about this film. It certainly isn’t my favorite part, just the one part that forcefully sticks out above all others. Hounddog (2007) Though it hasn’t even been released to theaters yet, this 2007 Sundance selection will forever be known and remembered as the Dakota Fanning rape movie. It’s possible that the scene could also be considered a “movie sold on a sex scene,” because some curious moviegoers will go see it, secretly or not, for the infamous and controversial scene. But I don’t want to think of those people who actually want to see a movie because they want to see Dakota Fanning raped, whether for pleasure or intrigue. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Thu, 11 Sep 2008 16:00:32 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com9/11/2008 12:00:32 PM Due to the unsurprising popularity of our “10 Movies Sold on a Sex Scene” list a few weeks back, I’ve decided to unleash a sequel. However, catering to both Spoutblog’s traffic and the interests of ever-abundant sex-attracted internetters is only half my reason for this follow-up list. I was mainly motivated by the outcome of the release of Woody Allen’s Vicky Cristina Barcelona, a film that also initially inspired the first list. While Vicky was partly sold on the promise of a threesome between Scarlett Johansson, Javier Bardem and Penelope Cruz, it is now fortunately being celebrated, and it will likely be remembered, primarily for Cruz’s performance. Not for the threesome or for the lesbian kiss. Other movies sold on a sex scene, though, are not typically so blessed with accolades. And even some that are recognized with high praise at time of release are often later forgotten as anything but fodder for MrSkin and other followers of onscreen sex and nudity. Obviously this means that most of my selections for the previous list may also qualify here, yet I’ve chosen to ignore some certainly fitting titles, including The Brown Bunny and 9 1/2 Weeks, so as not to repeat myself. Basic Instinct (1992) This was left off the earlier list, though I had originally planned on including it. Now that I’ve decided to do this follow-up, I’m positive that it fits better here. Many people undoubtedly went to see Paul Verhoeven’s erotic thriller more for the eroticism than the thrills, but that can’t be the case for every moviegoer who helped make the film a smash hit. There are plenty of erotic thrillers out there, but only one grossed more than $350 million (Fatal Attraction, which earned more than Basic Instinct domestically, came close). Could it be that the film is actually good? Plenty of respectable critics thought so, including Janet Maslin and Jonathan Rosenbaum, both of whom praised the Hitchcock influence. However, it’s easy to now remember the film primarily for the infamous Sharon Stone upskirt shot, which I deem qualifiable as a sex scene due to the way Stone’s character seems to have sort of psychological intercourse with her interrogators. Last Tango in Paris (1972) Here we have another mostly well-reviewed film that is possibly only still in the public consciousness due to its controversial sex scenes. That isn’t to say the critics and cinephiles don’t still appreciate it for other reasons than its buttery anal sex — it still screens theatrically in revivals and festivals. But ask any random person on the street what they remember, and most are sure to mention the sex scenes before talking of Bertolucci’s direction or Brando’s performance. Havoc (2005) I love the non-fiction work of Barbara Kopple, and I believe it possible that Anne Hathaway indeed gives an Oscar-worthy performance in her latest film, Rachel Getting Married, but neither woman’s talent is fully utilized with this movie, which also features a script written by Oscar-winner Stephen Gaghan. I will always think of this movie as an unfortunate hiccup in the careers of these three individuals, but I will mostly remember it, as will most people, for featuring Hathaway’s first topless sex scenes. A History of Violence (2005) Personally, my first recall is the graphic violence. The second thing I remember — more fondly, in fact — is William Hurt’s cartoonish yet canny performance. The sex scene on the stairs might not even be in the top five things that made Cronenberg’s film memorable for me, but I promise you there are guys who primarily think positively of A History of Violence for that moment. I even know some of them. Fat Girl (2001) Almost as dauntingly memorable as actually waking up to people having sex in the room you’re sleeping in, the infamous scene depicting such an event in Catherine Breillat’s film is likely the first thing you remember. And it probably doesn’t help your memory that the scene is significant enough to have spawned Breillat’s later film Sex is Comedy, which is basically about the difficulty of filming the Fat Girl scene (as seen in the above clip). Talk to Her (2002) With this film, I don’t mind that it’s a sex scene that I primarily recall, because it’s a scene that I think is extremely clever and surprisingly well-executed. No, I’m not referring to the part where Benigno (Javier Camara) rapes the comatose Alicia (Leonor Watling); I mean the black and white dream sequence in which a miniature Fele Martinez completely enters a large, constructed setpiece representing Paz Vega’s vagina. Team America: World Police (2004) There are plenty of side-splitting moments in this movie, but who walked away with anything sticking in their mind as solidly as the overlong sex sequence? The Hunger (1983) I could never remember if I’d seen this film or not when I was a kid. It’s one of those films that even if you haven’t seen the whole thing, you’re probably at least familiar with a specific, iconic scene. Here it’s definitely the lesbian sex scene between Susan Sarandon and Catherine Deneuve. Requiem for a Dream (2000) I wish that the “ass to ass” line wasn’t the most memorable thing about this film. It certainly isn’t my favorite part, just the one part that forcefully sticks out above all others. Hounddog (2007) Though it hasn’t even been released to theaters yet, this 2007 Sundance selection will forever be known and remembered as the Dakota Fanning rape movie. It’s possible that the scene could also be considered a “movie sold on a sex scene,” because some curious moviegoers will go see it, secretly or not, for the infamous and controversial scene. But I don’t want to think of those people who actually want to see a movie because they want to see Dakota Fanning raped, whether for pleasure or intrigue. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/4/8/27100.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 4/8/2008 2:00:41 PM
Body: It didn’t work out so well for Michael Moore, but who is to say other documentarians can’t succeed in fiction filmmaking? Recent notables to make the switch have included Nick Broomfield (whose unscripted yet dramatized Battle for Haditha opens at New York’s Film Forum next month), Barbara Kopple, Andrew Jarecki and Seth Gordon, who originally seemed to be crossing the line to remake his own The King of Kong as a narrative feature but has instead become attached to other fiction projects. The latest, though, is a bit of a shocker, even if he is famous for making a dramatization-heavy doc. According to The Hollywood Reporter, Errol Morris’ next project is a comedy, which he’s currently writing. Titled The End of Everything, the script is at least based on a true story and Morris says the film will be, “a new idea of how to blend drama with reality.” Fortunately, Morris isn’t simply whoring himself out to some Hollywood romcom, as his other quote would suggest: “I’m a funny guy, and I’d like to make something funny now,” he said. “I can’t see myself making one political film after another. I’m glad I made these two movies, but I’d like to do something different.” Doesn’t that sound like the defense of someone suddenly going from Oscar-winning drama to kid-friendly slapstick? But since this is the guy who made a riveting film out of a 95-minute interview with a single subject — an unpopular one at that — we’re probably in for something brilliant. Or else something a thousand times more disappointing than Canadian Bacon, Havoc and The Beverly Hillbillies combined. Anyway, I guess with so many people making docs these days, we need someone to make fiction films. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Tue, 08 Apr 2008 18:00:41 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com4/8/2008 2:00:41 PMIt didn’t work out so well for Michael Moore, but who is to say other documentarians can’t succeed in fiction filmmaking? Recent notables to make the switch have included Nick Broomfield (whose unscripted yet dramatized Battle for Haditha opens at New York’s Film Forum next month), Barbara Kopple, Andrew Jarecki and Seth Gordon, who originally seemed to be crossing the line to remake his own The King of Kong as a narrative feature but has instead become attached to other fiction projects. The latest, though, is a bit of a shocker, even if he is famous for making a dramatization-heavy doc. According to The Hollywood Reporter, Errol Morris’ next project is a comedy, which he’s currently writing. Titled The End of Everything, the script is at least based on a true story and Morris says the film will be, “a new idea of how to blend drama with reality.” Fortunately, Morris isn’t simply whoring himself out to some Hollywood romcom, as his other quote would suggest: “I’m a funny guy, and I’d like to make something funny now,” he said. “I can’t see myself making one political film after another. I’m glad I made these two movies, but I’d like to do something different.” Doesn’t that sound like the defense of someone suddenly going from Oscar-winning drama to kid-friendly slapstick? But since this is the guy who made a riveting film out of a 95-minute interview with a single subject — an unpopular one at that — we’re probably in for something brilliant. Or else something a thousand times more disappointing than Canadian Bacon, Havoc and The Beverly Hillbillies combined. Anyway, I guess with so many people making docs these days, we need someone to make fiction films. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/scswngr/archive/2007/11/26/22020.aspx Post By: scswngr
Post To: Film Obsessed
Post Date: 11/26/2007 1:52:35 AM
Body: After registering a mere blip on the Box Office radar this summer, I Know Who Killed Me will attempt to make up for its poor showing with its DVD release on November 27th. On the surface the film would seem to have all that the average suspense-obssessed DVD renter would desire; sex, a "hot" young starlet, a murder mystery, and an apparent plot twist. All I can say is viewer beware! The sexy young starlet , Lyndsay Lohan, teases you with the promise of T & A, but only delivers a dissappointing and rather raunchy exotic dance without any nudity. Perhaps young Lyndsay should have taken a lessons from Anne Hathaway, another child-star who had the guts to take her top off and then landed in an Oscar worthy movie, something Lohan is eons away from. What else does I Know Who Killed Me have to offer?, not much.The movie conspicuously leads you toward all kinds of theories, but in doing so makes it very obvious that none of them hold any water. Sure, you probably can't predict the ending at first, but by the time you get to the payoff you will have already scripted the ending which is oddly more reminiscent of Lohan's Parent Trap, only with more blood and decapitation. The performances are poor and there are far too many unecessary characters, like the FBI agents who never really piece anything together. WIth a plot that seems stolen from a dozen other movies, I Know Who Killed Me is a complete waste of time. Instead go rent Parent Trap or Anne Hathaway's Havoc, one of them is bound to satisfy any child starlet cravings you may have.
]]>Mon, 26 Nov 2007 06:52:35 GMTscswngrFilm Obsessed11/26/2007 1:52:35 AMAfter registering a mere blip on the Box Office radar this summer, I Know Who Killed Me will attempt to make up for its poor showing with its DVD release on November 27th. On the surface the film would seem to have all that the average suspense-obssessed DVD renter would desire; sex, a &quot;hot&quot; young starlet, a murder mystery, and an apparent plot twist. All I can say is viewer beware! The sexy young starlet , Lyndsay Lohan, teases you with the promise of T &amp; A, but only delivers a dissappointing and rather raunchy exotic dance without any nudity. Perhaps young Lyndsay should have taken a lessons from Anne Hathaway, another child-star who had the guts to take her top off and then landed in an Oscar worthy movie, something Lohan is eons away from. What else does I Know Who Killed Me have to offer?, not much.The movie conspicuously leads you toward all kinds of theories, but in doing so makes it very obvious that none of them hold any water. Sure, you probably can&#39;t predict the ending at first, but by the time you get to the payoff you will have already scripted the ending which is oddly more reminiscent of Lohan&#39;s Parent Trap, only with more blood and decapitation. The performances are poor and there are far too many unecessary characters, like the FBI agents who never really piece anything together. WIth a plot that seems stolen from a dozen other movies, I Know Who Killed Me is a complete waste of time. Instead go rent Parent Trap or Anne Hathaway&#39;s Havoc, one of them is bound to satisfy any child starlet cravings you may have. http://www.spout.com/groups/Range_of_Character/Re_Range_of_Characters/235/11279/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: lukasblu
Post To: Range of Character
Post Date: 6/17/2007 2:08:31 PM
Body: i too would love to see the lookout;it has the best reviews and he's my new found young fave actor since i saw him in mysterious skin;he was also in Shadowboxer (2005),Havoc (2005) and Latter Days (2003);he did not play the lead role in these movies but nevertheless good roles (especially at shadowboxer where he plays a very young doctor)
]]>Sun, 17 Jun 2007 18:08:31 GMTlukasbluRange of Character6/17/2007 2:08:31 PMi too would love to see the lookout;it has the best reviews and he&#39;s my new found young fave actor since i saw him in mysterious skin;he was also in Shadowboxer (2005),Havoc (2005) and Latter Days (2003);he did not play the lead role in these movies but nevertheless good roles (especially at shadowboxer where he plays a very young doctor) http://www.spout.com/blogs/jennpeck/archive/2007/6/10/10696.aspx Post By: jennpeck
Post To: jennpeck Blog
Post Date: 6/10/2007 11:35:55 PM
Body: To be straight, this movie went straight to dvd and as a general rule, I don't usually like Stephen Gaghan's work. Barbara Kopple's direction - she directed Shut Up and SIng, the Dixie Chicks documentary and one of my favorite Oz episodes (the season three finale) - encouraged me to watch Havoc along with the promise of good YA characters. But these are YA characters on crack. Literally. And you don't get close enough to any of them in the first half of the movie to care the least about what is going to happen. With that being said, I saw this movie two nights ago and I can't stop thinking about the last forty five or so minutes of the film. And I think that says a lot about a movie. Anne Hathaway's pretty good but you see more of her breasts here than in Brokeback Mountain. Bijou Philips is okay but there's not enough of it in the first part of the movie to justify her actions at the end. Freddy Rodriguez's Hector is on the opposite end of the spectrum as Freddy in Six Feet Under and so I found myself both intrigued and fascinated. Give this guy more work, Hollywood. He's fantastic. People who are sensitive by sexual violence should not see this film. It's pretty graphic. The action is not as disturbing as how the characters get there and I imagined it could offend those who do not like to see such scenes on television. The most disturbing part, ironically, is exactly why I find the movie so fascinating and the only reason I'd recommend it.So, four stars not because it's good. Because it's not. But because it was a story that I hadn't heard told in way that I wasn't expecting about characters I knew really well. And because I can't stop thinking about it.
]]>Mon, 11 Jun 2007 03:35:55 GMTjennpeckjennpeck Blog6/10/2007 11:35:55 PMTo be straight, this movie went straight to dvd and as a general rule, I don&#39;t usually like Stephen Gaghan&#39;s work. Barbara Kopple&#39;s direction - she directed Shut Up and SIng, the Dixie Chicks documentary and one of my favorite Oz episodes (the season three finale) - encouraged me to watch Havoc along with the promise of good YA characters. But these are YA characters on crack. Literally. And you don&#39;t get close enough to any of them in the first half of the movie to care the least about what is going to happen. With that being said, I saw this movie two nights ago and I can&#39;t stop thinking about the last forty five or so minutes of the film. And I think that says a lot about a movie. Anne Hathaway&#39;s pretty good but you see more of her breasts here than in Brokeback Mountain. Bijou Philips is okay but there&#39;s not enough of it in the first part of the movie to justify her actions at the end. Freddy Rodriguez&#39;s Hector is on the opposite end of the spectrum as Freddy in Six Feet Under and so I found myself both intrigued and fascinated. Give this guy more work, Hollywood. He&#39;s fantastic. People who are sensitive by sexual violence should not see this film. It&#39;s pretty graphic. The action is not as disturbing as how the characters get there and I imagined it could offend those who do not like to see such scenes on television. The most disturbing part, ironically, is exactly why I find the movie so fascinating and the only reason I&#39;d recommend it.So, four stars not because it&#39;s good. Because it&#39;s not. But because it was a story that I hadn&#39;t heard told in way that I wasn&#39;t expecting about characters I knew really well. And because I can&#39;t stop thinking about it. http://www.spout.com/blogs/insane169/archive/2007/4/16/7137.aspx Post By: INSANE169
Post To: INSANE169 Blog
Post Date: 4/16/2007 12:13:59 PM
Body: THIS MOVIE WAS ONE OF ANNE HATHAWAYS BEST FILMS I HAVE EVER SEEN, I LOVED HER IN THE PRINCESS DAIRIES , BUT BY FAR THIS IS THE BEST.
]]>Mon, 16 Apr 2007 16:13:59 GMTINSANE169INSANE169 Blog4/16/2007 12:13:59 PMTHIS MOVIE WAS ONE OF ANNE HATHAWAYS BEST FILMS I HAVE EVER SEEN, I LOVED HER IN THE PRINCESS DAIRIES , BUT BY FAR THIS IS THE BEST. http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/teenagers/MemberTagFilms.aspxteenagers
Number of films tagged: 3025

Number of people who tagged: 97

Number of times used: 399

]]>Mon, 14 Dec 2009 22:42:10 GMT302597399Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/gangster/MemberTagFilms.aspxgangster
Number of films tagged: 4065

Number of people who tagged: 60

Number of times used: 145

]]>Mon, 17 Aug 2009 01:37:08 GMT406560145Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/suburbs/MemberTagFilms.aspxsuburbs
Number of films tagged: 224

Number of people who tagged: 18

Number of times used: 27

]]>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 13:03:11 GMT2241827Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/innercity/MemberTagFilms.aspxinnercity
Number of films tagged: 221

Number of people who tagged: 9

Number of times used: 9

]]>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 13:03:11 GMT22199Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/underworld/MemberTagFilms.aspxunderworld
Number of films tagged: 287

Number of people who tagged: 8

Number of times used: 10

]]>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 13:04:09 GMT287810Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/fishoutofwater/MemberTagFilms.aspxfishoutofwater
Number of films tagged: 119

Number of people who tagged: 6

Number of times used: 12

]]>Tue, 21 Jul 2009 13:14:49 GMT119612Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/culturalshock/MemberTagFilms.aspxculturalshock
Number of films tagged: 33

Number of people who tagged: 4

Number of times used: 5

]]>Thu, 10 Aug 2006 14:02:55 GMT3345Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/streetgang/MemberTagFilms.aspxstreetgang
Number of films tagged: 130

Number of people who tagged: 4

Number of times used: 4

]]>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 13:04:09 GMT13044Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/culture-social-culture/MemberTagFilms.aspxculture-social-culture
Number of films tagged: 798

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 1

]]>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 13:13:22 GMT79811Tag