list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Zodiac 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/Zodiac/261632/default.aspx Title: Zodiac
Year: 2007
Director: David Fincher
Plot: The true story behind the murders that many crime scholars believe to be the most perplexing series of unsolved crimes in modern history comes to the screen in chilling detail as Fight Club and Seven director David Fincher steps behind the camera to tell the mysterious tale of the infamous Zodiac killer. A relentless serial killer is stalking the streets of the San Francisco Bay Area, leaving citizens locked into a constant state of panic, and baffled authorities scrambling for clues. Though the killer sadistically mocks the detectives by leaving a series of perplexing ciphers and menacing letters at the crime scenes, the investigation quickly flatlines when none of the evidence yields any solid leads. As two detectives remain steadfast in their devotion to bringing the elusive killer to justice, they soon find that the madman has control not only over their careers, but their very lives as well. Jake Gyllenhaal, Mark Ruffalo, and Robert Downey Jr. star. ~ Jason Buchanan, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 44
Number of Lists: 52
Number of blog posts: 37
Number of discussion threads: 7
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Fri, 30 Jan 2009 18:00:46 GMTZodiac2007David FincherThe true story behind the murders that many crime scholars believe to be the most perplexing series of unsolved crimes in modern history comes to the screen in chilling detail as <a href=/films/134821/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>Fight Club</a> and <a href=/films/93032/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>Seven</a> director <a href="/players/P____89783/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>David Fincher</a> steps behind the camera to tell the mysterious tale of the infamous Zodiac killer. A relentless serial killer is stalking the streets of the San Francisco Bay Area, leaving citizens locked into a constant state of panic, and baffled authorities scrambling for clues. Though the killer sadistically mocks the detectives by leaving a series of perplexing ciphers and menacing letters at the crime scenes, the investigation quickly flatlines when none of the evidence yields any solid leads. As two detectives remain steadfast in their devotion to bringing the elusive killer to justice, they soon find that the madman has control not only over their careers, but their very lives as well. <a href="/players/P____29408/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Jake Gyllenhaal</a>, <a href="/players/P___197651/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Mark Ruffalo</a>, and Robert Downey Jr. star. ~ Jason Buchanan, All Movie Guide44Tag Target (>10)523773http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/s261632.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Zodiac/261632/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2009/1/30/40091.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 1/30/2009 1:00:46 PM
Body: It was shut out of the Oscar race for Best Documentary Feature, but Blessed is the Match: The Life and Death of Hannah Senesh, now playing in New York City, could easily inspire a Hollywood film about the life of its heroic subject. And that dramatic version could potentially garner multiple Academy Award nominations. It wouldn’t be the first time a figure documented in a nonfiction film was later portrayed in an Oscar-nominated movie. In fact, one of this year’s Best Picture contenders, Milk, is almost like a remake of the 1984 Oscar-winning documentary The Times of Harvey Milk. Actual dramatic remakes of documentaries include Werner Herzogs’ Rescue Dawn, which revisits the subject of his earlier nonfiction film Little Dieter Needs to Fly, Michael Caton-Jones’ Memphis Belle, which fictionalizes the story of William Wyler’s doc The Memphis Belle: A Story of a Flying Fortress, and Martin Bell’s American Heart, which is loosely based on one of the subjects of his Oscar-nominated doc Streetwise. Also, the upcoming HBO dramatic film Grey Gardens was inspired by the Maysles brothers’ doc of the same name, and Hollywood has toyed with or announced remakes of the films The King of Kong, Murderball, Bra Boys and Sherman’s March. To carry on the tradition, we’ve selected nine nonfiction films in addition to Blessed is the Match that would make great dramatic features. Beyond the Call (2006) This little-seen documentary has played at a number of film festivals (I reviewed it at Tribeca) and seems to have been quite popular at each, yet it isn’t likely that it’ll ever come to a theater near you. It may never even be available for your Netflix queue. But you’ve just got to see the work of the three old men who call themselves Knightsbridge, even if it has to be in a fictionalized form. So pray that someone in Hollywood grabs onto their story, which is filled with dangerous humanitarian aid missions and lots of humor. According to the doc’s official synopsis, the film is “an Indiana Jones meets Mother Theresa adventure,” and that’s just the kind of tagline that would suit a summer blockbuster based on this true story. Blessed is the Match: The Life and Death of Hannah Senesh (2008) One of the few Holocaust-related docs to not garner an Academy Award nomination, Roberta Grossman’s film is about Hannah Senesh, a Jewish poet who became part of a dangerous rescue mission to save Hungarian Jews and was eventually caught, tortured and executed by the Nazis. A dramatic film, which would be far more Hollywoodized than the doc’s re-enactment scenes, might be like a cross between Oscar-nominated films Defiance and Sophie Scholl – The Final Days. Brother’s Keeper (1992) Fratricide has made for great stories, from The Bible onward, but mainstream audiences may not run out to see a movie based on Brother’s Keeper, even if it does hold onto the Biblically influenced title. However, while homosexual incest and illiterate old country folk are difficult subjects to sell to moviegoers, murder mysteries will always fascinate people, and anyway the story of the Ward brothers could be more like a male Grey Gardens meets Capote than a dark, depressing drama that would only appeal to Sundance crowds. Changing Our Minds: The Story of Dr. Evelyn Hooker (1992) Now that the life of Harvey Milk has been turned into an Oscar-nominated dramatic feature, Hollywood should take on a biopic about Dr. Evelyn Hooker, whose life and work are depicted in this Oscar-nominated documentary from Richard Schmiechen (who also won an Oscar for producing The Times of Harvey Milk). Hooker’s research in the 1950s led to the discovery that homosexuality is not a disease. And subsequent study and activism resulted in the eventual removal, in 1974, of homosexuality from the American Psychiatric Association’s manual of mental disorders. A remake of Changing Our Minds would be like a cross between Milk and Kinsey. (note: the video above is not from Changing Our Minds, but is the best available alternative I have to present a clip of Hooker). Crazy Love (2007) In the typical Hollywood romance, female audiences see the same old reinforced fantasy about finding a man: while most guys lie, cheat, etc., there are Prince Charmings out there. Well, a dramatized version of Crazy Love might be the perfect romantic comedy for men to drag their girlfriends to. No, not to show them that they’d better not leave or they’ll get acid in the face. Rather, to say, “Look, no matter what I do, at least I’m not the kinda guy who blinds and disfigures the love of his life.” (Or, in other words, a lie to your face is not as bad as lye in your face.) Besides the appeal to boys who will be boys, however, a romantic comedy in which the couple meet, fall in love, are separated when the guy goes to prison for having the girl crippled, are reunited many years later, and eventually marry, is just crazy enough to hit a chord with moviegoers tired of the usual Renee Zellweger/Reese Witherspoon/Drew Barrymore crap. Dear Zachary: A Letter to a Son About His Father (2008) In her review of this documentary, Karina writes that it “sets up a foundation which it knows it’s going to pull out from under us, and that makes it every bit as emotionally manipulative as a studio film.” Perfect, the film already offers Hollywood a structure for the dramatic version. Other than that, though, the remake would potentially focus on Shirley Turner, who murdered her boyfriend and then gave birth to his child, rather than on the character of Kurt Kuenne, who documents the story in the original. Then again, it could stick with Kuenne, and, though not be as personal as the nonfiction film, might be along the lines of an investigative drama, such as Zodiac. Either way, due to his name appearing in Karina’s review, M. Night Shyamalan has to direct it. Deliver Us from Evil (2006) With Doubt a big success as far as Oscar nominations go (if not as far as box office is concerned), it might be an okay time for Hollywood to make a film that’s more directly focused on the subject of pedophilic priests. It could hardly make less money than Doubt, and if a great actor were to portray Father O’Grady, it could be as popular with the Academy, which already nominated the original film for Best Documentary Feature. Golden Venture (2006) Another little-seen documentary that played Tribeca a few years ago (I reviewed the film then), Golden Venture depicts a failed attempt at an illegal alien smuggling operation and its aftermath. In its first ten minutes, the film offers enough action involving a sea voyage from China to New York City, during which there was mutiny, gang violence and ultimately a Coast Guard rescue, that a dramatic version might not even have time to get to the aftermath part. But as much as turning the doc into an action movie could work, the more interesting stuff relating to immigration and population control should be integrated, too. Like the original film, the dramatized version could separately follow the paths of four characters, each of whom has a different outcome. Tim Robbins, who narrated the doc, could direct it. Street Fight (2005) Newark Mayor Cory Booker’s name has been tossed about on news channels over the past few months due to his similarities with newly elected President Barack Obama. So, considering entertainment magazines predict the new administration will have an effect on pop culture, why not honor that idea by making a dramatic film about Booker’s battle with incumbent Sharpe James for City Hall. It would be a little like Milk, only without the gay rights angle or the tragic ending. And to make it more crowd-pleasing than Marshall Curry’s doc, the new movie wouldn’t end with Booker’s loss in 2002 but would see him all the way to the Mayor’s office in 2006. Unforgivable Blackness: The Rise and Fall of Jack Johnson (2004) Hollywood has never tired of boxing movies and it always loves a good civil rights struggle, so it’s amazing that no studio has tackled an official biopic about Jack Johnson, the first African-American Heavyweight Champion of the World. Sure, there’s The Great White Hope, which is somewhat based on Johnson’s life. And sure, if people want the truth they can check out this doc from Ken Burns (or, if it’s ever released on video, the earlier Oscar-nominated film Jack Johnson). But again, Hollywood never tires of boxing movies, and it always loves a good civil rights struggle, so perhaps it’s just a matter of time before we see this story dramatized for real. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Fri, 30 Jan 2009 18:00:46 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com1/30/2009 1:00:46 PMIt was shut out of the Oscar race for Best Documentary Feature, but Blessed is the Match: The Life and Death of Hannah Senesh, now playing in New York City, could easily inspire a Hollywood film about the life of its heroic subject. And that dramatic version could potentially garner multiple Academy Award nominations. It wouldn’t be the first time a figure documented in a nonfiction film was later portrayed in an Oscar-nominated movie. In fact, one of this year’s Best Picture contenders, Milk, is almost like a remake of the 1984 Oscar-winning documentary The Times of Harvey Milk. Actual dramatic remakes of documentaries include Werner Herzogs’ Rescue Dawn, which revisits the subject of his earlier nonfiction film Little Dieter Needs to Fly, Michael Caton-Jones’ Memphis Belle, which fictionalizes the story of William Wyler’s doc The Memphis Belle: A Story of a Flying Fortress, and Martin Bell’s American Heart, which is loosely based on one of the subjects of his Oscar-nominated doc Streetwise. Also, the upcoming HBO dramatic film Grey Gardens was inspired by the Maysles brothers’ doc of the same name, and Hollywood has toyed with or announced remakes of the films The King of Kong, Murderball, Bra Boys and Sherman’s March. To carry on the tradition, we’ve selected nine nonfiction films in addition to Blessed is the Match that would make great dramatic features. Beyond the Call (2006) This little-seen documentary has played at a number of film festivals (I reviewed it at Tribeca) and seems to have been quite popular at each, yet it isn’t likely that it’ll ever come to a theater near you. It may never even be available for your Netflix queue. But you’ve just got to see the work of the three old men who call themselves Knightsbridge, even if it has to be in a fictionalized form. So pray that someone in Hollywood grabs onto their story, which is filled with dangerous humanitarian aid missions and lots of humor. According to the doc’s official synopsis, the film is “an Indiana Jones meets Mother Theresa adventure,” and that’s just the kind of tagline that would suit a summer blockbuster based on this true story. Blessed is the Match: The Life and Death of Hannah Senesh (2008) One of the few Holocaust-related docs to not garner an Academy Award nomination, Roberta Grossman’s film is about Hannah Senesh, a Jewish poet who became part of a dangerous rescue mission to save Hungarian Jews and was eventually caught, tortured and executed by the Nazis. A dramatic film, which would be far more Hollywoodized than the doc’s re-enactment scenes, might be like a cross between Oscar-nominated films Defiance and Sophie Scholl – The Final Days. Brother’s Keeper (1992) Fratricide has made for great stories, from The Bible onward, but mainstream audiences may not run out to see a movie based on Brother’s Keeper, even if it does hold onto the Biblically influenced title. However, while homosexual incest and illiterate old country folk are difficult subjects to sell to moviegoers, murder mysteries will always fascinate people, and anyway the story of the Ward brothers could be more like a male Grey Gardens meets Capote than a dark, depressing drama that would only appeal to Sundance crowds. Changing Our Minds: The Story of Dr. Evelyn Hooker (1992) Now that the life of Harvey Milk has been turned into an Oscar-nominated dramatic feature, Hollywood should take on a biopic about Dr. Evelyn Hooker, whose life and work are depicted in this Oscar-nominated documentary from Richard Schmiechen (who also won an Oscar for producing The Times of Harvey Milk). Hooker’s research in the 1950s led to the discovery that homosexuality is not a disease. And subsequent study and activism resulted in the eventual removal, in 1974, of homosexuality from the American Psychiatric Association’s manual of mental disorders. A remake of Changing Our Minds would be like a cross between Milk and Kinsey. (note: the video above is not from Changing Our Minds, but is the best available alternative I have to present a clip of Hooker). Crazy Love (2007) In the typical Hollywood romance, female audiences see the same old reinforced fantasy about finding a man: while most guys lie, cheat, etc., there are Prince Charmings out there. Well, a dramatized version of Crazy Love might be the perfect romantic comedy for men to drag their girlfriends to. No, not to show them that they’d better not leave or they’ll get acid in the face. Rather, to say, “Look, no matter what I do, at least I’m not the kinda guy who blinds and disfigures the love of his life.” (Or, in other words, a lie to your face is not as bad as lye in your face.) Besides the appeal to boys who will be boys, however, a romantic comedy in which the couple meet, fall in love, are separated when the guy goes to prison for having the girl crippled, are reunited many years later, and eventually marry, is just crazy enough to hit a chord with moviegoers tired of the usual Renee Zellweger/Reese Witherspoon/Drew Barrymore crap. Dear Zachary: A Letter to a Son About His Father (2008) In her review of this documentary, Karina writes that it “sets up a foundation which it knows it’s going to pull out from under us, and that makes it every bit as emotionally manipulative as a studio film.” Perfect, the film already offers Hollywood a structure for the dramatic version. Other than that, though, the remake would potentially focus on Shirley Turner, who murdered her boyfriend and then gave birth to his child, rather than on the character of Kurt Kuenne, who documents the story in the original. Then again, it could stick with Kuenne, and, though not be as personal as the nonfiction film, might be along the lines of an investigative drama, such as Zodiac. Either way, due to his name appearing in Karina’s review, M. Night Shyamalan has to direct it. Deliver Us from Evil (2006) With Doubt a big success as far as Oscar nominations go (if not as far as box office is concerned), it might be an okay time for Hollywood to make a film that’s more directly focused on the subject of pedophilic priests. It could hardly make less money than Doubt, and if a great actor were to portray Father O’Grady, it could be as popular with the Academy, which already nominated the original film for Best Documentary Feature. Golden Venture (2006) Another little-seen documentary that played Tribeca a few years ago (I reviewed the film then), Golden Venture depicts a failed attempt at an illegal alien smuggling operation and its aftermath. In its first ten minutes, the film offers enough action involving a sea voyage from China to New York City, during which there was mutiny, gang violence and ultimately a Coast Guard rescue, that a dramatic version might not even have time to get to the aftermath part. But as much as turning the doc into an action movie could work, the more interesting stuff relating to immigration and population control should be integrated, too. Like the original film, the dramatized version could separately follow the paths of four characters, each of whom has a different outcome. Tim Robbins, who narrated the doc, could direct it. Street Fight (2005) Newark Mayor Cory Booker’s name has been tossed about on news channels over the past few months due to his similarities with newly elected President Barack Obama. So, considering entertainment magazines predict the new administration will have an effect on pop culture, why not honor that idea by making a dramatic film about Booker’s battle with incumbent Sharpe James for City Hall. It would be a little like Milk, only without the gay rights angle or the tragic ending. And to make it more crowd-pleasing than Marshall Curry’s doc, the new movie wouldn’t end with Booker’s loss in 2002 but would see him all the way to the Mayor’s office in 2006. Unforgivable Blackness: The Rise and Fall of Jack Johnson (2004) Hollywood has never tired of boxing movies and it always loves a good civil rights struggle, so it’s amazing that no studio has tackled an official biopic about Jack Johnson, the first African-American Heavyweight Champion of the World. Sure, there’s The Great White Hope, which is somewhat based on Johnson’s life. And sure, if people want the truth they can check out this doc from Ken Burns (or, if it’s ever released on video, the earlier Oscar-nominated film Jack Johnson). But again, Hollywood never tires of boxing movies, and it always loves a good civil rights struggle, so perhaps it’s just a matter of time before we see this story dramatized for real. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/groups/Coming_Soon/Re_1_30_TAKEN_shaken_and_stirred_by_new_movie/216/39928/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: spout
Post To: Coming Soon
Post Date: 1/26/2009 6:53:00 PM
Body: NEW DVD's 1/27 1. RocknRolla -- Watch the trailer. RocknRolla made people say "Guy Ritchie is back," but when I recently watched Snatch I was surprised at how dated it felt. By contrast, RocknRolla seemed surprising, even as I recognized some of the trademark Richie-isms in the soundtrack choices and cinematography. I recommend this one, and I'm looking forward to the sequel. 2. Vicky Cristina Barcelona -- Watch the trailer. Most of the buzz around this Woody Allen film stemmed from the make-out scene between Scarlett Johansson and Penelope Cruz. But hey, it's Woody Allen, who once in a while he still puts together a really good movie (i.e. Match Point). Is VCB good? I haven't seen it. 3. Pride & Glory -- Watch the trailer. You've heard that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link? Well, this film has Ed Norton, Colin Farrell, and Jon Voight, and it's only as good as Jon Voight. 4. College -- Do not watch the trailer. Do not watch the movie. 5. Fireproof -- Watch the trailer. Something of a rarity, since it was produced by a Christian church and still received a wide release. Stars Kirk Cameron, as a fireman for whom it's easier to risk his life saving people than it is to work at his failing marriage. 6. Lakeview Terrace -- Watch the trailer. Samuel L. Jackson plays a psycho cop who's got an irrational beef with his neighbors, Patrick Wilson and Kerry Washington. 7. The Lucky Ones -- Tim Robbins, Rachel McAdams and Michael Pena are Iraq veterans on a US road trip. 8. Zodiac -- Watch the trailer. The one David Fincher made before The Curious Case of Benjamin Button. The one about the 1970s Zodiac killer. The one that was far too long and only so-so. Re-releases 1. Groundhog Day (1993) -- Watch the trailer. I watch this once a year around February 2. This is the "Anniversary Edition," commemorating the...16th anniversary? Hey, how many years of Feb. 2 do you think Phil lived through? Sixteen years? Less? More? 2. The Bourne Trilogy -- A couple weeks ago, I was asking a friend if he thought Underworld 3 would be the best of the series, and he said, "When was the last time any part three was the best?" I suggest to you: The Bourne Ultimatum. 3. Pink Panther Film Collection -- Includes A Shot in the Dark (1964), Pink Panther Strikes Again (1976), Revenge of the Pink Panther (1978), Trail of the Pink Panther (1982), Curse of the Pink Panther (1983), and Son of the Pink Panther (1993). I hadn't seen A Shot in the Dark until the first Steve Martin Pink Panther came out, and I was surprised at how little Peter Sellers is onscreen! I haven't seen any of the later films; anyone have favorites to recommend? 4. The Stewardesses, Deluxe Edition -- Watch the trailer. FilmCouch discusses how this crappy little porno became the most successful 3D movie in history.
]]>Mon, 26 Jan 2009 23:53:00 GMTspoutComing Soon1/26/2009 6:53:00 PMNEW DVD's 1/27 1. RocknRolla -- Watch the trailer. RocknRolla made people say "Guy Ritchie is back," but when I recently watched Snatch I was surprised at how dated it felt. By contrast, RocknRolla seemed surprising, even as I recognized some of the trademark Richie-isms in the soundtrack choices and cinematography. I recommend this one, and I'm looking forward to the sequel. 2. Vicky Cristina Barcelona -- Watch the trailer. Most of the buzz around this Woody Allen film stemmed from the make-out scene between Scarlett Johansson and Penelope Cruz. But hey, it's Woody Allen, who once in a while he still puts together a really good movie (i.e. Match Point). Is VCB good? I haven't seen it. 3. Pride &amp; Glory -- Watch the trailer. You've heard that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link? Well, this film has Ed Norton, Colin Farrell, and Jon Voight, and it's only as good as Jon Voight. 4. College -- Do not watch the trailer. Do not watch the movie. 5. Fireproof -- Watch the trailer. Something of a rarity, since it was produced by a Christian church and still received a wide release. Stars Kirk Cameron, as a fireman for whom it's easier to risk his life saving people than it is to work at his failing marriage. 6. Lakeview Terrace -- Watch the trailer. Samuel L. Jackson plays a psycho cop who's got an irrational beef with his neighbors, Patrick Wilson and Kerry Washington. 7. The Lucky Ones -- Tim Robbins, Rachel McAdams and Michael Pena are Iraq veterans on a US road trip. 8. Zodiac -- Watch the trailer. The one David Fincher made before The Curious Case of Benjamin Button. The one about the 1970s Zodiac killer. The one that was far too long and only so-so. Re-releases 1. Groundhog Day (1993) -- Watch the trailer. I watch this once a year around February 2. This is the "Anniversary Edition," commemorating the...16th anniversary? Hey, how many years of Feb. 2 do you think Phil lived through? Sixteen years? Less? More? 2. The Bourne Trilogy -- A couple weeks ago, I was asking a friend if he thought Underworld 3 would be the best of the series, and he said, "When was the last time any part three was the best?" I suggest to you: The Bourne Ultimatum. 3. Pink Panther Film Collection -- Includes A Shot in the Dark (1964), Pink Panther Strikes Again (1976), Revenge of the Pink Panther (1978), Trail of the Pink Panther (1982), Curse of the Pink Panther (1983), and Son of the Pink Panther (1993). I hadn't seen A Shot in the Dark until the first Steve Martin Pink Panther came out, and I was surprised at how little Peter Sellers is onscreen! I haven't seen any of the later films; anyone have favorites to recommend? 4. The Stewardesses, Deluxe Edition -- Watch the trailer. FilmCouch discusses how this crappy little porno became the most successful 3D movie in history. http://www.spout.com/blogs/usesoap/archive/2008/12/27/38883.aspx Post By: usesoap
Post To: usesoap Blog
Post Date: 12/27/2008 8:34:11 PM
Body: Make no mistake, 2008 was the year of the woman. From politics to multiplex, they were the most newsworthy. At the box office, week after week brought about stories about how, mother of all shockers, women enjoy going to the movies too. From summer “event movies” (usually an exclusive boys tree house where "No Gurlz Allowd"), to record-breaking such as best opening for a female director, women were the new black at the box office. In 2008: Twilight was the highest-grossing film opening by a female director (at $70 million); It received the second-largest advanced ticket sales, trailing only The Dark Knight; Sex and the City was the best opening ever for an R-rated comedy; The SATC gals also debuted as the fifth best R-rated film of all time; The film also bested Mission Impossible as the best debut of a film based on a TV show. Now, perhaps next year we can do the same with good movies. Sex in the City was the female equivalent of Iron Man, replacing magical gadgetry with matching accessories and pyrotechnics for Prada. The other glass ceiling-shattering film, Twilight, featured a lead who thankfully did not have to resort to sex for empowerment, but she really didn't do much else, either. Twilight's accolades are deserved for what it accomplished behind the camera, not what was captured on it. Though there were film aplenty that could populate both lists, I tried to limit this list to films that would have played in most major cities outside the metropolitan areas. BESTThe Dark Knight: Let me join the chorus of hosannas for this little underrated indie gem, for I know it could use the help financially.WALL·E: A family film with a virtually dialogue-free first half, a protagonist made of metal, an Earth barren of life and squelched by pollution, a cuddly cockroach sidekick, and a human cast that's a Dorito away from permanent bedrest. A film of staggering beauty from a company for which that is a trademark feature.The Curious Case of Benjamin Button: Director David Fincher's most accessible, polished film to date. While Zodiac and Fight Club may resonate longer, Button is the kind of marriage between theatrics, epic scope, and pure emotion that lands him in the top tier of working directors. Winning, tender performances by Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett only further cement the film's top 10 placement.Burn After Reading: After bumming us out of us with last year's stark, desolate (but excellent) No Country for Old Men, the Brothers Coen demonstrate their sharp comic chops with this irreverent, all-star dissection of middle-age madness and frustration of lives lived that come nowhere close to youthful aspirations. Milk: Sean Penn offers further proof of his necessity in cinema today with his ingratiating portrayal of slain politician Harvey Milk. Director Gus Van Sant lifts his vision from his navel (where it was focused during films such as Gerry and Last Days) to create a sensitive, intimate biopic that is saved from maudlin tendencies by Penn's presence. Tropic Thunder: Bold, unexpected comedy that does not wear out its welcome by the third act, like so many other mainstream comedies. Ben Stiller directs Robert Downey Jr. to his second standout performance this summer.Quantum of Solace: Some have decried the fact that Daniel Craig's Bond is just too mean. But Solace, which feels like a perfect extension of Casino Royale, feels as though it is taking its sweet time in creating the psyche of someone who has reason to be known as the greatest super-spy the world has ever known. Let the Right One In: This is a bit of a cheat, since this may have only appeared on area screens as part of a film festival, but its effect is one that reverberates far outside its limited runs nationwide. In a year when Twilight has been garnering all the attention, The Right One has become the one true vampire (and adolescence) film whose bite leaves a mark and should be sought out on DVD before the inevitable US remake. U2-3D: Demonstrating just why they are the world's biggest rock band, U2 raised the roof with this truly cinematic 3D spectacle that not only captured the feel of one of their concerts, but invited the audience on stage to jam with Bono and the boys. Slumdog Millionaire: Danny Boyle never disappoints, even with his misfires (A Life Less Ordinary, Sunshine). But he nails it again with Slumdog, a rather pedestrian tale told with wit, undeniable humanity and delivered with uncompromising conviction. WORST The Happening: When wind is your chief villain, it's time to rethink the script. The Love Guru: Mike Myers steps in Deepak doo-doo.Sex and the City: Inside this film's Sax Fifth Avenue window dressing lies the the cold, calculated heart of an empty Wal-Mart.88Minutes/Righteous Kill: Al Pacino should have known better after working with director Jon Avnet in 88, but instead enlisted fellow legend Robert DeNiro to further Kill both their careers.X-Files: I Want to Believe: But now I no longer do.Seven Pounds: Will Smith packed his bags for a guilt trip, and we're forced to ride along in the back seat. An American Carol: Looks like Republicans were just as good at making films as they were winning elections in 2008.Meet the Spartans/Disaster Movie: Cinematic parody: Born 1923, Died 2008.
]]>Sun, 28 Dec 2008 01:34:11 GMTusesoapusesoap Blog12/27/2008 8:34:11 PMMake no mistake, 2008 was the year of the woman. From politics to multiplex, they were the most newsworthy. At the box office, week after week brought about stories about how, mother of all shockers, women enjoy going to the movies too. From summer &ldquo;event movies&rdquo; (usually an exclusive boys tree house where "No Gurlz Allowd"), to record-breaking such as best opening for a female director, women were the new black at the box office. In 2008: Twilight was the highest-grossing film opening by a female director (at $70 million); It received the second-largest advanced ticket sales, trailing only The Dark Knight; Sex and the City was the best opening ever for an R-rated comedy; The SATC gals also debuted as the fifth best R-rated film of all time; The film also bested Mission Impossible as the best debut of a film based on a TV show. Now, perhaps next year we can do the same with good movies. Sex in the City was the female equivalent of Iron Man, replacing magical gadgetry with matching accessories and pyrotechnics for Prada. The other glass ceiling-shattering film, Twilight, featured a lead who thankfully did not have to resort to sex for empowerment, but she really didn't do much else, either. Twilight's accolades are deserved for what it accomplished behind the camera, not what was captured on it. Though there were film aplenty that could populate both lists, I tried to limit this list to films that would have played in most major cities outside the metropolitan areas. BESTThe Dark Knight: Let me join the chorus of hosannas for this little underrated indie gem, for I know it could use the help financially.WALL&middot;E: A family film with a virtually dialogue-free first half, a protagonist made of metal, an Earth barren of life and squelched by pollution, a cuddly cockroach sidekick, and a human cast that's a Dorito away from permanent bedrest. A film of staggering beauty from a company for which that is a trademark feature.The Curious Case of Benjamin Button: Director David Fincher's most accessible, polished film to date. While Zodiac and Fight Club may resonate longer, Button is the kind of marriage between theatrics, epic scope, and pure emotion that lands him in the top tier of working directors. Winning, tender performances by Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett only further cement the film's top 10 placement.Burn After Reading: After bumming us out of us with last year's stark, desolate (but excellent) No Country for Old Men, the Brothers Coen demonstrate their sharp comic chops with this irreverent, all-star dissection of middle-age madness and frustration of lives lived that come nowhere close to youthful aspirations. Milk: Sean Penn offers further proof of his necessity in cinema today with his ingratiating portrayal of slain politician Harvey Milk. Director Gus Van Sant lifts his vision from his navel (where it was focused during films such as Gerry and Last Days) to create a sensitive, intimate biopic that is saved from maudlin tendencies by Penn's presence. Tropic Thunder: Bold, unexpected comedy that does not wear out its welcome by the third act, like so many other mainstream comedies. Ben Stiller directs Robert Downey Jr. to his second standout performance this summer.Quantum of Solace: Some have decried the fact that Daniel Craig's Bond is just too mean. But Solace, which feels like a perfect extension of Casino Royale, feels as though it is taking its sweet time in creating the psyche of someone who has reason to be known as the greatest super-spy the world has ever known. Let the Right One In: This is a bit of a cheat, since this may have only appeared on area screens as part of a film festival, but its effect is one that reverberates far outside its limited runs nationwide. In a year when Twilight has been garnering all the attention, The Right One has become the one true vampire (and adolescence) film whose bite leaves a mark and should be sought out on DVD before the inevitable US remake. U2-3D: Demonstrating just why they are the world's biggest rock band, U2 raised the roof with this truly cinematic 3D spectacle that not only captured the feel of one of their concerts, but invited the audience on stage to jam with Bono and the boys. Slumdog Millionaire: Danny Boyle never disappoints, even with his misfires (A Life Less Ordinary, Sunshine). But he nails it again with Slumdog, a rather pedestrian tale told with wit, undeniable humanity and delivered with uncompromising conviction. WORST The Happening: When wind is your chief villain, it's time to rethink the script. The Love Guru: Mike Myers steps in Deepak doo-doo.Sex and the City: Inside this film's Sax Fifth Avenue window dressing lies the the cold, calculated heart of an empty Wal-Mart.88Minutes/Righteous Kill: Al Pacino should have known better after working with director Jon Avnet in 88, but instead enlisted fellow legend Robert DeNiro to further Kill both their careers.X-Files: I Want to Believe: But now I no longer do.Seven Pounds: Will Smith packed his bags for a guilt trip, and we're forced to ride along in the back seat. An American Carol: Looks like Republicans were just as good at making films as they were winning elections in 2008.Meet the Spartans/Disaster Movie: Cinematic parody: Born 1923, Died 2008. http://www.spout.com/blogs/stacey042/archive/2008/12/22/38686.aspx Post By: stacey042
Post To: stacey042 Blog
Post Date: 12/22/2008 4:14:44 AM
Body: I thought this movie was just ok. It wasn't very memorable, except for the story that it was based off of. It moved a little slow for my liking, but what can you really ask for from an unsolved murder mystery. I'm from San Francisco so I knew about the zodiac murders before the film, and I was vaguely aware of the details of the crimes. I think it was a good idea to expose this true story on a national level, but the movie didn't seem to reveal anything much. It basically seemed like one of those movies that build up a story (leading you to believe that the story is going to peak somewhere, but instead it doesn't really happen). Then, the ending seems somewhat more anti-climatic than anything else.
]]>Mon, 22 Dec 2008 09:14:44 GMTstacey042stacey042 Blog12/22/2008 4:14:44 AMI thought this movie was just ok. It wasn't very memorable, except for the story that it was based off of. It moved a little slow for my liking, but what can you really ask for from an unsolved murder mystery. I'm from San Francisco so I knew about the zodiac murders before the film, and I was vaguely aware of the details of the crimes. I think it was a good idea to expose this true story on a national level, but the movie didn't seem to reveal anything much. It basically seemed like one of those movies that build up a story (leading you to believe that the story is going to peak somewhere, but instead it doesn't really happen). Then, the ending seems somewhat more anti-climatic than anything else. http://www.spout.com/blogs/pippin06/archive/2008/12/21/38681.aspx Post By: pippin06
Post To: Reel Thoughts
Post Date: 12/21/2008 10:43:01 PM
Body: The next four non-AFI Netflix queue entries take a puzzling leap into thrillers (hey, I don't remember how I filled up my queue, I just did it). The first two are David Fincher thrillers. Of Fincher's catalog, I've only seen a few films, and I'm not sure I've seen enough of them to the point that I can definitively call myself a Fincher fan, though he has got some definite potential. I also don't feel qualified, based on what I have seen, to discuss any movie that might be called his "masterpiece" (or whether he has one still in the making). I've seen Alien 3, which I didn't really like (and neither did he, so I don't count it against him). I've seen Se7en and loved it, and want to own it, and I think I saw part of Fight Club, but I can only say I think I saw it because I might have been, er, um, under the influence at the time and can't really say one way or another. It was recommended by some friends who also recommended I try certain beverages. What can I say? I don't remember much of it or if I even liked it. Fight Club is on my queue somewhere, though, and I'll see it soon (again) enough, but until that time, Zodiac constituted the contents of my weekly red envelope because with all of the pre-release hype, I quickly became interested in the subject of it, even though it was heavily compared to Se7en. I think such a comparison was unfair, since the only common thread is a serial killer with a penchant for disturbing clues and especially since Se7en is a fictional story, while Zodiac is something of a docudrama, recreating actual historical events…but I digress. When Zodiac was released, it dredged up all of the back-story in the news again about the infamous Zodiac killer and piqued the interest of a whole new generation of people, myself included. Prior to the film's release, I knew nothing of this particular serial killer, and then as various news outlets began dissecting the facts again in the wake of the movie, I grew interested, or, at least, interested enough to see the film. So, I speak as someone only vaguely familiar with the original story. I was not alive during Zodiac's heyday, and most of the facts I've learned have now officially come from the film, except for the few bits and pieces I remembered from the news stories a year ago - and that was mostly stuff about the codes and letters Zodiac left- and whatever I've read since finishing the film almost a week ago. Fincher and company tell the story of the Zodiac killer much like a Law and Order episode, only with better photography and performances. The film opens on a young couple, parked and presumably ready for some alone time, in a car on a back road in the San Francisco area (Vallejo technically). A strange car pulls up, drives off, and then returns. The driver gets out, shining a flashlight into the couple's vehicle and blinding them from discerning his identity. Suddenly, the driver shoots each member of the couple, leaving them for dead. The boy survives, but the girl dies. Afterward, three newspapers, including The San Francisco Chronicle, receive letters and a cryptogram instructing the papers to print these letters and ciphers on the front page. In the letters, the murderer takes credit for the murder of this couple and of another couple one year earlier. These first incidents set off a chain of events that terrorized San Francisco and its surrounds for the next several years, as someone identifying themselves as the "Zodiac" commits four proven homicides/attempted homicides and sends letters to newspapers and police, taunting them and demanding press publication of his letters and cryptic codes. Robert Downey, Jr. plays Paul Avery, a Chronicle reporter who initially shrugs Zodiac off until he breaks a story about possible earlier murders attributable to him and receives a threat on his own life; Mark Ruffalo plays detective David Toschi, who along with partner Armstrong (Anthony Edwards), are assigned to investigate the murders. Jake Gyllenhaal plays Robert Graysmith, initially a cartoonist at the Chronicle, who takes obsessive interest in the Zodiac mystery and writes a book attempting to solve it. It's his book on which the movie is based. That is but a cursory plot summary for something as complex and chilling as the story behind the unsolved Zodiac murders. All in all, I really liked this movie. In fact, I almost loved it, but there was something that prevented me from crossing that line into five-star territory. I have to say that, days later, Zodiac is sort of haunting me, but I don't know if I should credit that to the movie or to the puzzling and frustrating nature of the true story behind the Zodiac. I'm going to take the position that the movie should receive at least partial credit. Fincher and his screenwriters, in an intelligent and thought-provoking way, attempted to lay out the events comprising the Zodiac murders and the ensuing investigations in a straightforward, objective manner, much, like I said, as a Law and Order episode might. And while Law and Order normally bores me, this film did nothing of the kind. First, it was well shot all around, using sophisticated cinematography and Fincher's trademark sense of visual style to really hook the viewer and reel him or her in. The photography, visual effects, use of motion either from the camera's perspective or from the background of the shot, were all very effective in not only carefully presenting the proven facts but also in making these historical situations exciting, even intense. I've never found a crime procedural so interesting or thrilling, and while the Zodiac murders may have had that intrigue about them by the very manner in which they were conducted and then broadcast via the news, they probably would have lost some of their allure without the suave, even hip visual presentation that Fincher and his photographers used. The performances were also very good and believable. I think the best performances belong to Ruffalo and Edwards because they seemed the most genuine to me, being directly involved in an investigation that turned out to be impossible, frustrating, and heartbreaking in some ways. Edwards was pitch-perfect, but it was Ruffalo and the passion he portrayed as Mr. Toschi (with whom he consulted for the part) that was the center of the entire film. Oh sure, Jake Gyllenhaal and Robert Downey, Jr. did a great job, but I think the public consciousness of the time and in the wake of the Zodiac murders was best reflected in the two cops' characters and their actors' performances. They're what made the story resonate for me, someone who was not alive contemporary to the Zodiac's heyday. I also thought the soundtrack was pretty awesome. The song choices were chilling at times and at other times perfectly captured the late 60s, early 70s vibe. Also, it was, in a disturbing way, refreshing to see a film about that time period that didn't include any mention of the Vietnam War or explore the free love sensibilities. The art direction was fascinating to me, from the newsroom (with only manual typewriters!) to strategically placed items, like movie posters of Dirty Harry or an old-style vending machine. These elements were obviously employed with great attention to detail, and, of course, I love those kinds of details. The problem I have with Zodiac, however, arises from a much more basic, more foundational level. I was talking to my mom about this movie, who watched it with interest, since she was alive at the time of the actual events. She started that conversation with: "Weren't you disappointed?" I asked her what she meant. She said: "Well, we never found out who the Zodiac is!" I told her, well, of course not, because they never the caught the guy; the investigation is still open, and the case is still unsolved. She asked: "Then what was the point?" I pondered that a minute because that was a valid question. What was the point, other than to dredge up details of a disturbed killer's morbid fascinations and attention-whore tendencies, possibly in the quest to make himself a legend, which is what the film helped to validate, at least in a step-in-the-right-direction manner? I think the answer to that question gets lost because the focus of the film becomes convoluted in the story being told. Personally, what disappoints me about the movie is not so much the fact that we never truly find out who the Zodiac is, since we never can. The authorities don't really know, so why should we? Instead, it comes from the fact that the film begins as a procedural, providing the viewer objective facts, descriptions, forensic evidence, testimonials, and focus on the investigators. The viewer is presented with various suspects and persons of interest, some more likely than others, but all circumstantially involved, without drawing any firm conclusions, due to the fact that some were ruled out under handwriting analyses and such, as this all took place before the marvel of DNA testing. The film's focus then reverts to the Graysmith character and his obsession with solving the mystery himself in pursuit of his book. So, basically, the film is presented first as a procedural crime thriller/mystery and then overlaps with a character study (seemingly) of Graysmith. I don't find anything amiss with trying to present two stories as one overlapping tale, but the problems lie in the fact that the overlap was so disjointed that both stories ended in a dissatisfying conclusion. The Graysmith character is in the background for the first half of the movie; obviously, the filmmakers want to show, cursorily, how Graysmith even got involved in writing his book to begin with, but it's done with truly short shrift. We don't really get any information into his personality or his motivations or his thought processes, except as it relates to Zodiac, and all we really know is that he becomes obsessed with trying to discern Zodiac's true identity because he is drawn in by Zodiac's various cryptograms. We learn only bits of personal information, such as that he is divorced with one kid, and that he, eventually, meets his future second ex-wife, who was played by Chloe Sevigny (since he also divorced her, which I only learned from Wikipedia after watching the film). We also only see him tagging after Avery and talking about Zodiac ad nauseum with no real clue as to why this particular mystery nags at him so. The second half of the movie is where Graysmith's character then becomes the focal point for our Zodiac timeline, approximately around the time Zodiac's activity finally tapered off. So, we follow his investigation, as he pumps former investigators for information and jimmies his way into several prohibited police files. We learn that his obsession overtakes his life and alienates him from his wife and children, but we still don't know why this has become such a magnet of interest for him. Maybe, he never really had that answer himself, but I find that doubtful, since he has had years to mull it over, even if he did not exactly know then. We're also given incomplete information as to what happens to Graysmith in the end, other than the fact that he writes his book. What's more, Graysmith wrote his book because he thought he had solved the mystery. He latched onto one of the suspects, a likely candidate to be sure, but one that has been ruled out repeatedly – first, through handwriting analysis and, more recently, through DNA evidence. Plus, the suspect in question is now dead. The bottom line is that this film would have worked better for me if the Zodiac had been solely the procedural portion, presenting our line of suspects and allowing the viewer to draw his/her own conclusion rather than forcing Graysmith's problematic results into the viewer's consciousness when he was never really qualified to make that assessment. Or, it would have worked better if the film had put Graysmith in the foreground throughout and examined his motivations more closely. Or, since the police investigation was the more exciting and interesting part of the film, it would have been more effective to leave that part structured as it was but make Graysmith more of a prevalent character and flush out his story more and give it some closure other than a mere footnote. He is still alive, and he is still talking about Zodiac, after all. More story construction would not be too difficult to come by, and it crossed my mind watching the film that I wonder what it would look like if a psychologist assessed Graysmith because his zeal for this disturbing case unsettled me almost as much as the Zodiac murders themselves. All in all, though, Zodiac was a fine film that kept me engaged from beginning to end, and though I was not satisfied with the conclusions being drawn by the film, I think it is a worthwhile one to watch because it gives the viewer enough to work with if, perhaps, they would want to figure it out themselves. Plus, it was all presented in a really cool, visually interesting way. I find myself erring toward a 7.5 on the ratings scale, between shaky but entertaining and very good but minor flaws. It would have been a straight 7 if not for the good elements like the performances and the visual presentation and the soundtrack because I honestly felt that the focus of the picture was so convoluted, that it left me feeling somewhat disappointed. Others have enjoyed it in its entirety, though, so it's still recommendable. As to the test, I'm on the fence. I actually want to watch it again before I make that determination because the first half to two-thirds of the movie is really good and inspired some interest from me in the unsolved Zodiac mystery. It provokes thought and interest in its subject, so, to that end and despite my heretofore mentioned disappointment, the film still sort of worked.
]]>Mon, 22 Dec 2008 03:43:01 GMTpippin06Reel Thoughts12/21/2008 10:43:01 PMThe next four non-AFI Netflix queue entries take a puzzling leap into thrillers (hey, I don't remember how I filled up my queue, I just did it). The first two are David Fincher thrillers. Of Fincher's catalog, I've only seen a few films, and I'm not sure I've seen enough of them to the point that I can definitively call myself a Fincher fan, though he has got some definite potential. I also don't feel qualified, based on what I have seen, to discuss any movie that might be called his "masterpiece" (or whether he has one still in the making). I've seen Alien 3, which I didn't really like (and neither did he, so I don't count it against him). I've seen Se7en and loved it, and want to own it, and I think I saw part of Fight Club, but I can only say I think I saw it because I might have been, er, um, under the influence at the time and can't really say one way or another. It was recommended by some friends who also recommended I try certain beverages. What can I say? I don't remember much of it or if I even liked it. Fight Club is on my queue somewhere, though, and I'll see it soon (again) enough, but until that time, Zodiac constituted the contents of my weekly red envelope because with all of the pre-release hype, I quickly became interested in the subject of it, even though it was heavily compared to Se7en. I think such a comparison was unfair, since the only common thread is a serial killer with a penchant for disturbing clues and especially since Se7en is a fictional story, while Zodiac is something of a docudrama, recreating actual historical events&hellip;but I digress. When Zodiac was released, it dredged up all of the back-story in the news again about the infamous Zodiac killer and piqued the interest of a whole new generation of people, myself included. Prior to the film's release, I knew nothing of this particular serial killer, and then as various news outlets began dissecting the facts again in the wake of the movie, I grew interested, or, at least, interested enough to see the film. So, I speak as someone only vaguely familiar with the original story. I was not alive during Zodiac's heyday, and most of the facts I've learned have now officially come from the film, except for the few bits and pieces I remembered from the news stories a year ago - and that was mostly stuff about the codes and letters Zodiac left- and whatever I've read since finishing the film almost a week ago. Fincher and company tell the story of the Zodiac killer much like a Law and Order episode, only with better photography and performances. The film opens on a young couple, parked and presumably ready for some alone time, in a car on a back road in the San Francisco area (Vallejo technically). A strange car pulls up, drives off, and then returns. The driver gets out, shining a flashlight into the couple's vehicle and blinding them from discerning his identity. Suddenly, the driver shoots each member of the couple, leaving them for dead. The boy survives, but the girl dies. Afterward, three newspapers, including The San Francisco Chronicle, receive letters and a cryptogram instructing the papers to print these letters and ciphers on the front page. In the letters, the murderer takes credit for the murder of this couple and of another couple one year earlier. These first incidents set off a chain of events that terrorized San Francisco and its surrounds for the next several years, as someone identifying themselves as the "Zodiac" commits four proven homicides/attempted homicides and sends letters to newspapers and police, taunting them and demanding press publication of his letters and cryptic codes. Robert Downey, Jr. plays Paul Avery, a Chronicle reporter who initially shrugs Zodiac off until he breaks a story about possible earlier murders attributable to him and receives a threat on his own life; Mark Ruffalo plays detective David Toschi, who along with partner Armstrong (Anthony Edwards), are assigned to investigate the murders. Jake Gyllenhaal plays Robert Graysmith, initially a cartoonist at the Chronicle, who takes obsessive interest in the Zodiac mystery and writes a book attempting to solve it. It's his book on which the movie is based. That is but a cursory plot summary for something as complex and chilling as the story behind the unsolved Zodiac murders. All in all, I really liked this movie. In fact, I almost loved it, but there was something that prevented me from crossing that line into five-star territory. I have to say that, days later, Zodiac is sort of haunting me, but I don't know if I should credit that to the movie or to the puzzling and frustrating nature of the true story behind the Zodiac. I'm going to take the position that the movie should receive at least partial credit. Fincher and his screenwriters, in an intelligent and thought-provoking way, attempted to lay out the events comprising the Zodiac murders and the ensuing investigations in a straightforward, objective manner, much, like I said, as a Law and Order episode might. And while Law and Order normally bores me, this film did nothing of the kind. First, it was well shot all around, using sophisticated cinematography and Fincher's trademark sense of visual style to really hook the viewer and reel him or her in. The photography, visual effects, use of motion either from the camera's perspective or from the background of the shot, were all very effective in not only carefully presenting the proven facts but also in making these historical situations exciting, even intense. I've never found a crime procedural so interesting or thrilling, and while the Zodiac murders may have had that intrigue about them by the very manner in which they were conducted and then broadcast via the news, they probably would have lost some of their allure without the suave, even hip visual presentation that Fincher and his photographers used. The performances were also very good and believable. I think the best performances belong to Ruffalo and Edwards because they seemed the most genuine to me, being directly involved in an investigation that turned out to be impossible, frustrating, and heartbreaking in some ways. Edwards was pitch-perfect, but it was Ruffalo and the passion he portrayed as Mr. Toschi (with whom he consulted for the part) that was the center of the entire film. Oh sure, Jake Gyllenhaal and Robert Downey, Jr. did a great job, but I think the public consciousness of the time and in the wake of the Zodiac murders was best reflected in the two cops' characters and their actors' performances. They're what made the story resonate for me, someone who was not alive contemporary to the Zodiac's heyday. I also thought the soundtrack was pretty awesome. The song choices were chilling at times and at other times perfectly captured the late 60s, early 70s vibe. Also, it was, in a disturbing way, refreshing to see a film about that time period that didn't include any mention of the Vietnam War or explore the free love sensibilities. The art direction was fascinating to me, from the newsroom (with only manual typewriters!) to strategically placed items, like movie posters of Dirty Harry or an old-style vending machine. These elements were obviously employed with great attention to detail, and, of course, I love those kinds of details. The problem I have with Zodiac, however, arises from a much more basic, more foundational level. I was talking to my mom about this movie, who watched it with interest, since she was alive at the time of the actual events. She started that conversation with: "Weren't you disappointed?" I asked her what she meant. She said: "Well, we never found out who the Zodiac is!" I told her, well, of course not, because they never the caught the guy; the investigation is still open, and the case is still unsolved. She asked: "Then what was the point?" I pondered that a minute because that was a valid question. What was the point, other than to dredge up details of a disturbed killer's morbid fascinations and attention-whore tendencies, possibly in the quest to make himself a legend, which is what the film helped to validate, at least in a step-in-the-right-direction manner? I think the answer to that question gets lost because the focus of the film becomes convoluted in the story being told. Personally, what disappoints me about the movie is not so much the fact that we never truly find out who the Zodiac is, since we never can. The authorities don't really know, so why should we? Instead, it comes from the fact that the film begins as a procedural, providing the viewer objective facts, descriptions, forensic evidence, testimonials, and focus on the investigators. The viewer is presented with various suspects and persons of interest, some more likely than others, but all circumstantially involved, without drawing any firm conclusions, due to the fact that some were ruled out under handwriting analyses and such, as this all took place before the marvel of DNA testing. The film's focus then reverts to the Graysmith character and his obsession with solving the mystery himself in pursuit of his book. So, basically, the film is presented first as a procedural crime thriller/mystery and then overlaps with a character study (seemingly) of Graysmith. I don't find anything amiss with trying to present two stories as one overlapping tale, but the problems lie in the fact that the overlap was so disjointed that both stories ended in a dissatisfying conclusion. The Graysmith character is in the background for the first half of the movie; obviously, the filmmakers want to show, cursorily, how Graysmith even got involved in writing his book to begin with, but it's done with truly short shrift. We don't really get any information into his personality or his motivations or his thought processes, except as it relates to Zodiac, and all we really know is that he becomes obsessed with trying to discern Zodiac's true identity because he is drawn in by Zodiac's various cryptograms. We learn only bits of personal information, such as that he is divorced with one kid, and that he, eventually, meets his future second ex-wife, who was played by Chloe Sevigny (since he also divorced her, which I only learned from Wikipedia after watching the film). We also only see him tagging after Avery and talking about Zodiac ad nauseum with no real clue as to why this particular mystery nags at him so. The second half of the movie is where Graysmith's character then becomes the focal point for our Zodiac timeline, approximately around the time Zodiac's activity finally tapered off. So, we follow his investigation, as he pumps former investigators for information and jimmies his way into several prohibited police files. We learn that his obsession overtakes his life and alienates him from his wife and children, but we still don't know why this has become such a magnet of interest for him. Maybe, he never really had that answer himself, but I find that doubtful, since he has had years to mull it over, even if he did not exactly know then. We're also given incomplete information as to what happens to Graysmith in the end, other than the fact that he writes his book. What's more, Graysmith wrote his book because he thought he had solved the mystery. He latched onto one of the suspects, a likely candidate to be sure, but one that has been ruled out repeatedly &ndash; first, through handwriting analysis and, more recently, through DNA evidence. Plus, the suspect in question is now dead. The bottom line is that this film would have worked better for me if the Zodiac had been solely the procedural portion, presenting our line of suspects and allowing the viewer to draw his/her own conclusion rather than forcing Graysmith's problematic results into the viewer's consciousness when he was never really qualified to make that assessment. Or, it would have worked better if the film had put Graysmith in the foreground throughout and examined his motivations more closely. Or, since the police investigation was the more exciting and interesting part of the film, it would have been more effective to leave that part structured as it was but make Graysmith more of a prevalent character and flush out his story more and give it some closure other than a mere footnote. He is still alive, and he is still talking about Zodiac, after all. More story construction would not be too difficult to come by, and it crossed my mind watching the film that I wonder what it would look like if a psychologist assessed Graysmith because his zeal for this disturbing case unsettled me almost as much as the Zodiac murders themselves. All in all, though, Zodiac was a fine film that kept me engaged from beginning to end, and though I was not satisfied with the conclusions being drawn by the film, I think it is a worthwhile one to watch because it gives the viewer enough to work with if, perhaps, they would want to figure it out themselves. Plus, it was all presented in a really cool, visually interesting way. I find myself erring toward a 7.5 on the ratings scale, between shaky but entertaining and very good but minor flaws. It would have been a straight 7 if not for the good elements like the performances and the visual presentation and the soundtrack because I honestly felt that the focus of the picture was so convoluted, that it left me feeling somewhat disappointed. Others have enjoyed it in its entirety, though, so it's still recommendable. As to the test, I'm on the fence. I actually want to watch it again before I make that determination because the first half to two-thirds of the movie is really good and inspired some interest from me in the unsolved Zodiac mystery. It provokes thought and interest in its subject, so, to that end and despite my heretofore mentioned disappointment, the film still sort of worked. http://www.spout.com/groups/Community_Recommendations/Re_Collaboration_Best_Films_of_2007/643/37963/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: mciocco
Post To: Community Recommendations
Post Date: 12/4/2008 5:04:55 PM
Body: I had a little trouble compiling this list last year, but overall I'm pretty happy with it. The only one that I thought about changing in retrospect was Zodiac, which I'd take off the list in favor of Black Book, which has grown on my in hindsight. But for now, I'll leave it the way it is. My top 10 films of 2007...in roughly reverse order (i.e. with the best at the bottom of this list) : Zodiac: This one barely makes it on this list. It's one of the few early year releases that has made it on the list, and as such, it's something I actually want to revisit. But of all the early year films I saw, I remember this being the most interesting and best made. If you know about the Zodiac killer, you know the ending won't provide any real explanations (nor should it) as the killer was never caught in real life. As such, this does diminish some of the tension from the film. Still, director David Fincher has made an impeccable film. It's not as showy or spectacular as his previous efforts. Stylistically, it's rather straightforward, and yet, it's a gorgeous film to look at, and Fincher does manage to imbue some tension throughout the film, which focuses more on the obsession of those trying to find the Zodiac than the Zodiac himself. Gone Baby Gone: It basically starts out as a straightforward crime thriller and mystery and those elements are very well done. But the ending introduces a moral dilemma that has no good answers. You can't help but put yourself into the movie and think about what you would do in such a case, and to be honest, I don't know what I'd do. I suppose I should mention that this is Ben Affleck's directing debut, and he proves shockingly adept at doing so. The Bourne Ultimatum: A fantastic action film, and one of the few sequels worth it's salt in a year of particularly bad sequels. Paul Greengrass' infamous shaky camera is actually put to good use here, and the film also features good performances and great stuntwork. Some may be put off by the camera work, but when you look at a film like this, and then you look at a film like Transformers, you can see a huge difference in style and talent. Superbad: Hands down, the funniest movie of the year. I'm a sucker for raunchy humor with a heart, and this movie has that in spades. Great performances by Jonah Hill and the deadpan Michael Cera, as well as just about everyone else. Of all the movies on this list, this one probably has the most replay value, and is also probably the most quotable. Stardust: This might the most thoroughly enjoyable movie of the year. A great adventure film that evokes The Princess Bride (perhaps unfairly leading to comparisons) while asserting an identity of its own. In a year filled with dark, heavy-hitting dramas, it was nice to sit down to a well done fantasy film. Well directed with good performances (including an unusual turn by Robert DeNiro as a flamboyant pirate) and nice visuals, the real strength of this film is the story, which retains the fun feeling of a fantasy while skirting darker, edgier material. The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters: Documentary films don't generally find much of an audience in theaters, but The King of Kong should be in every video game enthusiast's Netflix queue. It delves into the rough and tumble world of competitive video gaming for classic games, particularly Donkey Kong, but it does so kinda like an inspirational sports film. You've got your lovable underdog who has never won anything in his life, and of course the villainous champion who looks down on the underdog and seeks to steal his thunder. There's some controversy over the film, which perhaps takes some liberties with the facts, but it's still a great movie and highly recommended for video game fans. The Orphanage: Certainly the creepiest movie of the year. Though perhaps not exactly a horror film, it establishes a high level of tension all throughout the film, and the story, while a little odd, works pretty well too. A spanish language film that gets unfairly compaired to Pan's Labyrinth, it is nonetheless worth watching for any fan of ghost stories. The Lives of Others: This film actually won the Oscar for best foreign-language film last year (beating out Pan's Labyrinth - a surprise to me), so I might be cheating a bit, but it didn't really have a theatrical release in the U.S. until 2007, so I'm putting it on this list. Set in East Germany during the Cold War, this film follows a Stasi agent who begins to feel for the subjects he's surveiling. It doesn't sound like much, and it's not exactly action-packed, but it is quite compelling and one of the most powerful films of the year. All of the technical aspects of the film are brilliant, especially the script and the nuanced acting by Ulrich Mühe. This film would be amongst the top of any year's list Grindhouse: I'm referring, of course, to the theatrical release of this film. I say this because a lot of critics like to separate the two features and heap praise on Tarantino's Death Proof (which I'll grant, is probably the better of the two, if I were forced to chose), but to me, nothing beats the full experience of the theatrical version. It starts out with a hilarious "fake" trailer, then moves into Robert Rodriguez's Planet Terror, an over=the-top zombie action film done in true grindhouse style (missing reels and all). Following that we get three more absolutely brilliant fake trailers and Tarantino's wonderful Death Proof. The films are dark, they're edgy, and they're probably not for everyone. In attempting to emulate 70s grindhouse cinema, the filmmakers have lovingly reproduced the tropes, some of which may bother audiences (particularly the awkward pacing of both features, which is actuall brilliance in disguise). It's a crime that the theatrical version is not available on DVD. The double-billing was poorly advertised, so it looks like the studio opted to split the films up and give longer cuts of each their own DVD. Supposedly, a 6 disc boxed set containing everything is in the works. No Country for Old Men: The Coen brothers have outdone themselves. This is perhaps a boring pick, as this film is at or near the top of most top 10 lists, but that happened for a reason. It's a great damn film. Gorgeous photography, tension-filled action, and that rare brand of dark humor that the Coens are so good at. It also features the most memorable and terrifying villain in years. The ending is uncompromising and ambiguous (which may turn some viewers off), but I found it quite appropriate. Of all the films this year, this one is best made and most entertaining (if a little dark), a combo that's certainly difficult to pull off. Blatant link whoring: I have a whole slew of honorable mentions, and every year I do a set of awards at my blog, if you're interested...
]]>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 22:04:55 GMTmcioccoCommunity Recommendations12/4/2008 5:04:55 PMI had a little trouble compiling this list last year, but overall I'm pretty happy with it. The only one that I thought about changing in retrospect was Zodiac, which I'd take off the list in favor of Black Book, which has grown on my in hindsight. But for now, I'll leave it the way it is. My top 10 films of 2007...in roughly reverse order (i.e. with the best at the bottom of this list) : Zodiac: This one barely makes it on this list. It's one of the few early year releases that has made it on the list, and as such, it's something I actually want to revisit. But of all the early year films I saw, I remember this being the most interesting and best made. If you know about the Zodiac killer, you know the ending won't provide any real explanations (nor should it) as the killer was never caught in real life. As such, this does diminish some of the tension from the film. Still, director David Fincher has made an impeccable film. It's not as showy or spectacular as his previous efforts. Stylistically, it's rather straightforward, and yet, it's a gorgeous film to look at, and Fincher does manage to imbue some tension throughout the film, which focuses more on the obsession of those trying to find the Zodiac than the Zodiac himself. Gone Baby Gone: It basically starts out as a straightforward crime thriller and mystery and those elements are very well done. But the ending introduces a moral dilemma that has no good answers. You can't help but put yourself into the movie and think about what you would do in such a case, and to be honest, I don't know what I'd do. I suppose I should mention that this is Ben Affleck's directing debut, and he proves shockingly adept at doing so. The Bourne Ultimatum: A fantastic action film, and one of the few sequels worth it's salt in a year of particularly bad sequels. Paul Greengrass' infamous shaky camera is actually put to good use here, and the film also features good performances and great stuntwork. Some may be put off by the camera work, but when you look at a film like this, and then you look at a film like Transformers, you can see a huge difference in style and talent. Superbad: Hands down, the funniest movie of the year. I'm a sucker for raunchy humor with a heart, and this movie has that in spades. Great performances by Jonah Hill and the deadpan Michael Cera, as well as just about everyone else. Of all the movies on this list, this one probably has the most replay value, and is also probably the most quotable. Stardust: This might the most thoroughly enjoyable movie of the year. A great adventure film that evokes The Princess Bride (perhaps unfairly leading to comparisons) while asserting an identity of its own. In a year filled with dark, heavy-hitting dramas, it was nice to sit down to a well done fantasy film. Well directed with good performances (including an unusual turn by Robert DeNiro as a flamboyant pirate) and nice visuals, the real strength of this film is the story, which retains the fun feeling of a fantasy while skirting darker, edgier material. The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters: Documentary films don't generally find much of an audience in theaters, but The King of Kong should be in every video game enthusiast's Netflix queue. It delves into the rough and tumble world of competitive video gaming for classic games, particularly Donkey Kong, but it does so kinda like an inspirational sports film. You've got your lovable underdog who has never won anything in his life, and of course the villainous champion who looks down on the underdog and seeks to steal his thunder. There's some controversy over the film, which perhaps takes some liberties with the facts, but it's still a great movie and highly recommended for video game fans. The Orphanage: Certainly the creepiest movie of the year. Though perhaps not exactly a horror film, it establishes a high level of tension all throughout the film, and the story, while a little odd, works pretty well too. A spanish language film that gets unfairly compaired to Pan's Labyrinth, it is nonetheless worth watching for any fan of ghost stories. The Lives of Others: This film actually won the Oscar for best foreign-language film last year (beating out Pan's Labyrinth - a surprise to me), so I might be cheating a bit, but it didn't really have a theatrical release in the U.S. until 2007, so I'm putting it on this list. Set in East Germany during the Cold War, this film follows a Stasi agent who begins to feel for the subjects he's surveiling. It doesn't sound like much, and it's not exactly action-packed, but it is quite compelling and one of the most powerful films of the year. All of the technical aspects of the film are brilliant, especially the script and the nuanced acting by Ulrich M&uuml;he. This film would be amongst the top of any year's list Grindhouse: I'm referring, of course, to the theatrical release of this film. I say this because a lot of critics like to separate the two features and heap praise on Tarantino's Death Proof (which I'll grant, is probably the better of the two, if I were forced to chose), but to me, nothing beats the full experience of the theatrical version. It starts out with a hilarious "fake" trailer, then moves into Robert Rodriguez's Planet Terror, an over=the-top zombie action film done in true grindhouse style (missing reels and all). Following that we get three more absolutely brilliant fake trailers and Tarantino's wonderful Death Proof. The films are dark, they're edgy, and they're probably not for everyone. In attempting to emulate 70s grindhouse cinema, the filmmakers have lovingly reproduced the tropes, some of which may bother audiences (particularly the awkward pacing of both features, which is actuall brilliance in disguise). It's a crime that the theatrical version is not available on DVD. The double-billing was poorly advertised, so it looks like the studio opted to split the films up and give longer cuts of each their own DVD. Supposedly, a 6 disc boxed set containing everything is in the works. No Country for Old Men: The Coen brothers have outdone themselves. This is perhaps a boring pick, as this film is at or near the top of most top 10 lists, but that happened for a reason. It's a great damn film. Gorgeous photography, tension-filled action, and that rare brand of dark humor that the Coens are so good at. It also features the most memorable and terrifying villain in years. The ending is uncompromising and ambiguous (which may turn some viewers off), but I found it quite appropriate. Of all the films this year, this one is best made and most entertaining (if a little dark), a combo that's certainly difficult to pull off. Blatant link whoring: I have a whole slew of honorable mentions, and every year I do a set of awards at my blog, if you're interested... http://www.spout.com/groups/Community_Recommendations/Re_Collaboration_Best_Films_of_2007/643/37907/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: Tenenbaums
Post To: Community Recommendations
Post Date: 12/3/2008 4:38:28 PM
Body: Direct from December 2007!!! Zodiac A film that came out so long ago that I’m not convinced it was actually 2007 still manages to stick with me more than titles I saw last week. David Fincher and his crew (most notably screenwriter James Vanderbilt and cinematographer Harris Savides) take the notorious unsolved case and let it play out in a manner that pulls us in the same way that magnetically attracted those obsessed by the mystery. Instead of taking the unrealistic approach that many Zodiac films employ of only following the killer, Fincher’s film shows how three San Francisco men’s lives were forever altered by their unrelenting quest for truth and closure. The wise narrative choice allows Boy Scout cartoonist Robert Graysmith, Inspector Dave Toschi, and investigative reporter Paul Avery’s characters to grow in remarkable depth as they continue to pursue the case after everyone else has attempted to forget about it. An understated Jake Gyllenhaal as Graysmith leads a perfect cast of “I know that face”s that effortlessly embrace their respective real-life 60s/70s personas. Each shot and piece of dialogue feels so consciously precise and full of importance that 2.5 hours of screen time have rarely passed with such smoothness and intrigue. I highly anticipate the Director’s Cut DVD (I know where $25 of my Christmas money is going) as no other film this year is more worthy of a director’s commentary. Fincher’s meticulous attention to detail made for such a tight film considering the magnitude of the project that it will be priceless to hear his take on the process.
]]>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 21:38:28 GMTTenenbaumsCommunity Recommendations12/3/2008 4:38:28 PMDirect from December 2007!!! Zodiac A film that came out so long ago that I&rsquo;m not convinced it was actually 2007 still manages to stick with me more than titles I saw last week. David Fincher and his crew (most notably screenwriter James Vanderbilt and cinematographer Harris Savides) take the notorious unsolved case and let it play out in a manner that pulls us in the same way that magnetically attracted those obsessed by the mystery. Instead of taking the unrealistic approach that many Zodiac films employ of only following the killer, Fincher&rsquo;s film shows how three San Francisco men&rsquo;s lives were forever altered by their unrelenting quest for truth and closure. The wise narrative choice allows Boy Scout cartoonist Robert Graysmith, Inspector Dave Toschi, and investigative reporter Paul Avery&rsquo;s characters to grow in remarkable depth as they continue to pursue the case after everyone else has attempted to forget about it. An understated Jake Gyllenhaal as Graysmith leads a perfect cast of &ldquo;I know that face&rdquo;s that effortlessly embrace their respective real-life 60s/70s personas. Each shot and piece of dialogue feels so consciously precise and full of importance that 2.5 hours of screen time have rarely passed with such smoothness and intrigue. I highly anticipate the Director&rsquo;s Cut DVD (I know where $25 of my Christmas money is going) as no other film this year is more worthy of a director&rsquo;s commentary. Fincher&rsquo;s meticulous attention to detail made for such a tight film considering the magnitude of the project that it will be priceless to hear his take on the process. http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/8/31/34589.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 8/31/2008 2:00:26 PM
Body: Veteran documentarian Ken Burns is on the Board of Governors for the Telluride Film Festival. The creator of classic PBS documentary mini-series like The War, Baseball, and Jazz, all of which have a total runtime of many hundreds of minutes, it’s a wonder this guy watches anything other that the archival material he uses to assemble his films. He mentions a film called Hunger by Steve McQueen that’s playing here. No, it’s not the ghost of the Steve McQueen you might be thinking of, this Steve McQueen is a Turner Prize winning British video artist turned filmmaker. A full review of Hunger with an interview is coming soon. Spout: What films have you been watching lately? Ken Burns: Well, I come to the Telluride Film Festival to sort of end a draught. Being a very busy person, and living in rural New Hampshire, and having a small child, I  don’t get into the communion of dark theaters very often. So to be here, to see Hunger by Steve McQueen, this great British director, is a revelation. I’ve sponsored a tribute to David Fincher, so we’re looking forward to seeing the uncut directors version of his Zodiac, and of course to see the clips from his others films is exciting, and looking forward to the whole rest of the cinema. You know, during my daily life I spend a lot of time with sports, I spend a lot of time with politics, which I follow astutely, and this is a particularly exciting year. And as a member of the Academy, I wait for those screeners that come sometime around Thanksgiving and don’t stop until January, that gives me a chance to catch up on what I’ve been missing. Spout: My next question is what you’ve been watching on TV, but I guess you already hinted at that. Burns: I’m mostly a sports… I’m a huge baseball fan, I’m a devoted fan specifically of the Boston Red Sox, so I spend a lot of time catching up with their activities. I watch a lot of news. It’s funny, it’s been a long time since I’ve had that addiction to a fiction program that I have to see. My kids tell me what they are, and buy the DVDs for Arrested Development and Mad Men, and I catch up that way. But I’ve got that kind of schedule that makes it literally impossible commit to a specific time. Spout: What about the internet? Is there anything originating there that you’re sort of tuned in to, or no? Burns: I don’t have the time. I see a lot of my friends who spend a lot of time there, and I just don’t have the time. I can’t spend two or three hours surfing, I just have a lot of work to do, and kids to raise, and movies to make. It’s something that I miss. When I do have a moment and play around, it’s always fun, but I’m not there as much as most of the people I know are. Spout: Thanks so much. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Sun, 31 Aug 2008 18:00:26 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com8/31/2008 2:00:26 PM Veteran documentarian Ken Burns is on the Board of Governors for the Telluride Film Festival. The creator of classic PBS documentary mini-series like The War, Baseball, and Jazz, all of which have a total runtime of many hundreds of minutes, it’s a wonder this guy watches anything other that the archival material he uses to assemble his films. He mentions a film called Hunger by Steve McQueen that’s playing here. No, it’s not the ghost of the Steve McQueen you might be thinking of, this Steve McQueen is a Turner Prize winning British video artist turned filmmaker. A full review of Hunger with an interview is coming soon. Spout: What films have you been watching lately? Ken Burns: Well, I come to the Telluride Film Festival to sort of end a draught. Being a very busy person, and living in rural New Hampshire, and having a small child, I  don’t get into the communion of dark theaters very often. So to be here, to see Hunger by Steve McQueen, this great British director, is a revelation. I’ve sponsored a tribute to David Fincher, so we’re looking forward to seeing the uncut directors version of his Zodiac, and of course to see the clips from his others films is exciting, and looking forward to the whole rest of the cinema. You know, during my daily life I spend a lot of time with sports, I spend a lot of time with politics, which I follow astutely, and this is a particularly exciting year. And as a member of the Academy, I wait for those screeners that come sometime around Thanksgiving and don’t stop until January, that gives me a chance to catch up on what I’ve been missing. Spout: My next question is what you’ve been watching on TV, but I guess you already hinted at that. Burns: I’m mostly a sports… I’m a huge baseball fan, I’m a devoted fan specifically of the Boston Red Sox, so I spend a lot of time catching up with their activities. I watch a lot of news. It’s funny, it’s been a long time since I’ve had that addiction to a fiction program that I have to see. My kids tell me what they are, and buy the DVDs for Arrested Development and Mad Men, and I catch up that way. But I’ve got that kind of schedule that makes it literally impossible commit to a specific time. Spout: What about the internet? Is there anything originating there that you’re sort of tuned in to, or no? Burns: I don’t have the time. I see a lot of my friends who spend a lot of time there, and I just don’t have the time. I can’t spend two or three hours surfing, I just have a lot of work to do, and kids to raise, and movies to make. It’s something that I miss. When I do have a moment and play around, it’s always fun, but I’m not there as much as most of the people I know are. Spout: Thanks so much. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/8/29/34537.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 8/29/2008 5:02:48 PM
Body: There seems to be some consensus around and abouts on the Interwebz that this year’s Telluride Film Festival line-up is a non-starter. Its collection of foreign films, documentaries and classic films - along with a smattering of the more usual fare - seems to fly in the face of the perception of the festival as a launching pad for the next great independent-minded-but-mainstream-accessible crossover hit. Considering last year’s festival included first looks at Juno, There Will Be Blood, The Savages and others that went on to some mainstream success, such reaction is to be expected. But the - let’s generously say “oddly”  - formed 2008 list doesn’t mean a crossover success is completely outside the realm of possibility. Let’s look at five movies that could wind up getting some decent buzz coming out of Telluride and heading into the remainder of festivals and awares season. Happy-Go-Lucky: Anything from director Mike Leigh is sure to come with some expectations around it and this is likely to be no exception. While the odds are good this will be somewhat lighter in tone than some of Leigh’s previous films I wouldn’t bet on it being any less a sharp character study. And never underestimate the power of a powerfully perky female lead, which could help Happy-Go-Lucky become a feel-good hit in the non-entertainment areas of the country that are looking for an endearing story featuring a strong love story. Adam Resurrected: The perception - at least among the staffers at here at Spout HQ - is that a good deal of Jeff Goldblum’s appeal comes from his unpredictability. So with a career that’s had him saving the world, dodging dinosaurs and turning into a fly his latest turn is as a Jewish entertainer in Nazi Germany who survives because of his ability to entertain the children being held at the concentration camps. Combine that with the fact that he and co-star Willem Dafoe are directed by Paul Schrader and you have a film that could make a decent splash with audiences and awards voters. I’ve Loved You So Long: Kristen Scott-Thomas stars in a story about the members of an estranged family who find themselves coming together after one of them spends 15 years in prison. The emotional arc the story is sure to take Scott-Thomas on is one that is, at least on paper, seemingly tailor-made to please critics (there’s a lot of “Best Actress Oscar” talk from those who’ve seen it). While not a crowd-pleaser it could turn out to be something along the lines of There Will Be Blood should enough critics get behind it and turn the story of someone who might not be completely likable into a must-see movie. Youssou Ndour - I Bring What I Love: Known primarily in the U.S., I’m guessing, for his work with Peter Gabriel in the late 80’s, Youssou Ndour’s story is certainly a compelling one. There’s usually one documentary that breaks out from the pack and earns a place in the queues of people who don’t normally watch them and since the subject matter here is a tad more accessible than that of some other docs, this could be that one. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button: No, it’s not actually screening at Telluride, but a sneak peak of it is being included in the presentation of Zodiac: The Director’s Cut that’s happening. If the footage that’s shown of the movie, which stars Brad Pitt as a man who ages in reverse, is any good at all, Telluride could become the launching pad for a lot of buzz going into the remainder of the year. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Fri, 29 Aug 2008 21:02:48 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com8/29/2008 5:02:48 PMThere seems to be some consensus around and abouts on the Interwebz that this year’s Telluride Film Festival line-up is a non-starter. Its collection of foreign films, documentaries and classic films - along with a smattering of the more usual fare - seems to fly in the face of the perception of the festival as a launching pad for the next great independent-minded-but-mainstream-accessible crossover hit. Considering last year’s festival included first looks at Juno, There Will Be Blood, The Savages and others that went on to some mainstream success, such reaction is to be expected. But the - let’s generously say “oddly”  - formed 2008 list doesn’t mean a crossover success is completely outside the realm of possibility. Let’s look at five movies that could wind up getting some decent buzz coming out of Telluride and heading into the remainder of festivals and awares season. Happy-Go-Lucky: Anything from director Mike Leigh is sure to come with some expectations around it and this is likely to be no exception. While the odds are good this will be somewhat lighter in tone than some of Leigh’s previous films I wouldn’t bet on it being any less a sharp character study. And never underestimate the power of a powerfully perky female lead, which could help Happy-Go-Lucky become a feel-good hit in the non-entertainment areas of the country that are looking for an endearing story featuring a strong love story. Adam Resurrected: The perception - at least among the staffers at here at Spout HQ - is that a good deal of Jeff Goldblum’s appeal comes from his unpredictability. So with a career that’s had him saving the world, dodging dinosaurs and turning into a fly his latest turn is as a Jewish entertainer in Nazi Germany who survives because of his ability to entertain the children being held at the concentration camps. Combine that with the fact that he and co-star Willem Dafoe are directed by Paul Schrader and you have a film that could make a decent splash with audiences and awards voters. I’ve Loved You So Long: Kristen Scott-Thomas stars in a story about the members of an estranged family who find themselves coming together after one of them spends 15 years in prison. The emotional arc the story is sure to take Scott-Thomas on is one that is, at least on paper, seemingly tailor-made to please critics (there’s a lot of “Best Actress Oscar” talk from those who’ve seen it). While not a crowd-pleaser it could turn out to be something along the lines of There Will Be Blood should enough critics get behind it and turn the story of someone who might not be completely likable into a must-see movie. Youssou Ndour - I Bring What I Love: Known primarily in the U.S., I’m guessing, for his work with Peter Gabriel in the late 80’s, Youssou Ndour’s story is certainly a compelling one. There’s usually one documentary that breaks out from the pack and earns a place in the queues of people who don’t normally watch them and since the subject matter here is a tad more accessible than that of some other docs, this could be that one. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button: No, it’s not actually screening at Telluride, but a sneak peak of it is being included in the presentation of Zodiac: The Director’s Cut that’s happening. If the footage that’s shown of the movie, which stars Brad Pitt as a man who ages in reverse, is any good at all, Telluride could become the launching pad for a lot of buzz going into the remainder of the year. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/8/29/34517.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 8/29/2008 9:01:07 AM
Body: The 2008 Telluride Film Festival list of movies was revealed this afternoon. Our team on the ground is going to be back with more commentary on the selections but it looks to be an exciting and eclectic festival this year as usual. You can also stay up to date here on SpoutBlog or join in the conversation that develops around these movies on our Telluride Film Festival Group page. The full lineup is after the jump. A New Land (Nybyggarna) Adam Resurrected American Violet An Italian Straw Hat (Un Chapeau de Paille d’Italie) Daddy and Lili Marlene Elmer Gantry Everlasting Moments Firaaq Flame & Citron Gomorrah Happy-Go-Lucky Helen Here Is Your Life (Haer Har Du Ditt Liv) Hunger I’ve Loved You So Long… Innocence Unprotected(Nevinost bez Zastite) Kisses Learning Gravity Lola Montès Low Level Flight Meet You in Denver Nightmare Alley O’Horten On Dangerous Ground Philanthropy Pirate for the Sea Pirosmani Private Century Revanche Seconds The Emigrants The Fall of Berlin (Padeniye Berlina) The Good, the Bad and the Weird The Great Sacrifice (Opfergang) The Rest is Silence (Restul e Tacere) Tulpan Waltz With Bashir With a Little Help From Myself (Aide-toi le ciel t’aidera) You Must Remember This: The Warner Bros. Story Youssou Ndour: I Bring What I Love Zodiac Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Fri, 29 Aug 2008 13:01:07 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com8/29/2008 9:01:07 AMThe 2008 Telluride Film Festival list of movies was revealed this afternoon. Our team on the ground is going to be back with more commentary on the selections but it looks to be an exciting and eclectic festival this year as usual. You can also stay up to date here on SpoutBlog or join in the conversation that develops around these movies on our Telluride Film Festival Group page. The full lineup is after the jump. A New Land (Nybyggarna) Adam Resurrected American Violet An Italian Straw Hat (Un Chapeau de Paille d’Italie) Daddy and Lili Marlene Elmer Gantry Everlasting Moments Firaaq Flame & Citron Gomorrah Happy-Go-Lucky Helen Here Is Your Life (Haer Har Du Ditt Liv) Hunger I’ve Loved You So Long… Innocence Unprotected(Nevinost bez Zastite) Kisses Learning Gravity Lola Montès Low Level Flight Meet You in Denver Nightmare Alley O’Horten On Dangerous Ground Philanthropy Pirate for the Sea Pirosmani Private Century Revanche Seconds The Emigrants The Fall of Berlin (Padeniye Berlina) The Good, the Bad and the Weird The Great Sacrifice (Opfergang) The Rest is Silence (Restul e Tacere) Tulpan Waltz With Bashir With a Little Help From Myself (Aide-toi le ciel t’aidera) You Must Remember This: The Warner Bros. Story Youssou Ndour: I Bring What I Love Zodiac Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/scary/MemberTagFilms.aspxscary
Number of films tagged: 155

Number of people who tagged: 104

Number of times used: 197

]]>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 00:30:07 GMT155104197Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/intense/MemberTagFilms.aspxintense
Number of films tagged: 162

Number of people who tagged: 81

Number of times used: 249

]]>Mon, 12 Oct 2009 04:07:45 GMT16281249Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/obsession/MemberTagFilms.aspxobsession
Number of films tagged: 1134

Number of people who tagged: 64

Number of times used: 136

]]>Tue, 13 Oct 2009 15:00:49 GMT113464136Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/detective/MemberTagFilms.aspxdetective
Number of films tagged: 2345

Number of people who tagged: 43

Number of times used: 105

]]>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 13:02:59 GMT234543105Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/true/MemberTagFilms.aspxtrue
Number of films tagged: 42

Number of people who tagged: 37

Number of times used: 51

]]>Mon, 26 Oct 2009 03:25:13 GMT423751Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/long/MemberTagFilms.aspxlong
Number of films tagged: 53

Number of people who tagged: 35

Number of times used: 63

]]>Wed, 09 Dec 2009 05:08:36 GMT533563Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/serialkiller/MemberTagFilms.aspxserialkiller
Number of films tagged: 996

Number of people who tagged: 32

Number of times used: 64

]]>Fri, 31 Jul 2009 13:03:15 GMT9963264Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/California/MemberTagFilms.aspxCalifornia
Number of films tagged: 84

Number of people who tagged: 25

Number of times used: 91

]]>Mon, 14 Dec 2009 22:42:04 GMT842591Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/serial-killer/MemberTagFilms.aspxserial-killer
Number of films tagged: 64

Number of people who tagged: 23

Number of times used: 76

]]>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:25:45 GMT642376Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/reporter/MemberTagFilms.aspxreporter
Number of films tagged: 1590

Number of people who tagged: 22

Number of times used: 52

]]>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 13:02:59 GMT15902252Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/underdog/MemberTagFilms.aspxunderdog
Number of films tagged: 134

Number of people who tagged: 20

Number of times used: 27

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 00:50:39 GMT1342027Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/newspaper/MemberTagFilms.aspxnewspaper
Number of films tagged: 497

Number of people who tagged: 10

Number of times used: 23

]]>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 19:21:21 GMT4971023Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/really/MemberTagFilms.aspxreally
Number of films tagged: 9

Number of people who tagged: 10

Number of times used: 10

]]>Mon, 22 Dec 2008 23:01:45 GMT91010Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/frightening/MemberTagFilms.aspxfrightening
Number of films tagged: 7

Number of people who tagged: 7

Number of times used: 8

]]>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 00:30:43 GMT778Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/San-Francisco/MemberTagFilms.aspxSan-Francisco
Number of films tagged: 10

Number of people who tagged: 7

Number of times used: 11

]]>Mon, 24 Aug 2009 00:22:20 GMT10711Tag