list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Extras [TV Series] 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/Extras_TV_Series/270116/default.aspx Title: Extras [TV Series]
Year: 2005
Director: Stephen Merchant, Ricky Gervais
Plot: Ricky Gervais and Stephen Merchant, the same team responsible for the runaway British TV hit The Office, were at it again with the weekly, half-hour comedy Extras. Ricky Gervais himself headed the cast as Andy Millman, a would-be actor in his early forties who quit his day job to become a full-time movie and TV extra. This didn't give him much opportunity for artistic expression, but did allow him to rub shoulders with such real-life celebrities as Ben Stiller, Samuel L. Jackson, Kate Winslet, and Patrick Stewart, who according to envious Andy were "just lucky" in their success (these celebs had no compunction about satirizing their own established personae, and were even willing to appear nasty and obstreperous if it paid off in big laughs!). Also seen was Ashley Jensen as fellow extra Maggie Jacobs, whose outspokenness habitually cost her valuable job opportunities, just as Andy's monumental ineptitude and gracelessness was a constant source of embarrassment for him. Rounding out the regular cast was series co-creator Stephen Merchant as Andy's unnamed agent, who in his own way was just as incompetent and woebegone as his client. Using the "showbiz" milieu to make savage comic swipes at topics ranging from genocide to mental illness, Extras was a deliciously outrageous skewering of the perennial "fringies" in the entertainment business. Originally telecast on Britain's BBC2 beginning July 21, 2005, Extras was picked up for American cable play by HBO beginning September 25 of that same year. ~ Hal Erickson, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 48
Number of Lists: 1
Number of blog posts: 3
SpoutRating: 4
]]>Mon, 09 Mar 2009 14:01:13 GMTExtras [TV Series]2005Stephen Merchant, Ricky Gervais<a href="/players/P___373404/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Ricky Gervais</a> and Stephen Merchant, the same team responsible for the runaway British TV hit <a href=/films/96389/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>The Office</a>, were at it again with the weekly, half-hour comedy <a href=/films/129012/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>Extras</a>. <a href="/players/P___373404/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Ricky Gervais</a> himself headed the cast as Andy Millman, a would-be actor in his early forties who quit his day job to become a full-time movie and TV extra. This didn't give him much opportunity for artistic expression, but did allow him to rub shoulders with such real-life celebrities as <a href="/players/P___112816/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Ben Stiller</a>, Samuel L. Jackson, <a href="/players/P___198332/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Kate Winslet</a>, and <a href="/players/P____68265/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Patrick Stewart</a>, who according to envious Andy were "just lucky" in their success (these celebs had no compunction about satirizing their own established personae, and were even willing to appear nasty and obstreperous if it paid off in big laughs!). Also seen was <a href="/players/P___446671/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Ashley Jensen</a> as fellow extra Maggie Jacobs, whose outspokenness habitually cost her valuable job opportunities, just as Andy's monumental ineptitude and gracelessness was a constant source of embarrassment for him. Rounding out the regular cast was series co-creator Stephen Merchant as Andy's unnamed agent, who in his own way was just as incompetent and woebegone as his client. Using the "showbiz" milieu to make savage comic swipes at topics ranging from genocide to mental illness, <a href=/films/129012/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>Extras</a> was a deliciously outrageous skewering of the perennial "fringies" in the entertainment business. Originally telecast on Britain's BBC2 beginning July 21, 2005, <a href=/films/129012/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>Extras</a> was picked up for American cable play by HBO beginning September 25 of that same year. ~ Hal Erickson, All Movie Guide48Tag Target (>10)134http://www.spout.com/images/no_image.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Extras_TV_Series/270116/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2009/3/9/40898.aspxPost By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 3/9/2009 10:01:13 AM
Body: There are those who think it’s time for a moratorium on Holocaust movies, and there are those who stand by the belief that there won’t be enough until there’s been 6 million produced and released. As of 2003, we were up to at least 442 titles, according to Annette Insdorf’s book Indelible Shadows. And due to last year’s boom of Holocaust-related features, it seems as though Insdorf could easily add another 100 more to the list in her next edition. But there’s no need to put an end to Holocaust films, anymore than there’s a need to cease making any genre of movie. A good film is a good film, no matter if it’s set in a concentration camp, features Nazis or merely alludes to the Shoah. And a bad movie is a bad movie, an exploitative movie is an exploitative movie and Oscar bait is Oscar bait. Beginning this Tuesday, when The Boy in the Striped Pajamas arrives on DVD, those hungering for more Holocaust movies will get another shot at seeing 2008’s contributions to the genre, but they’ll also start to see why critics were getting tired of these films. It wasn’t the subject matter, though, and it wasn’t necessarily the quantity so much as it was the quality. These days, Holocaust films are more dependent on clichés and are adversely affected by trends than ever before, even when they appear to be intent on breaking with conventions. Here is an excellent bit from a Mr.Cranky review of Defiance: Here’s the thing: the more bad Holocaust films you make, the more Holocaust clichés you employ, the more the Holocaust itself becomes a cliché. The first few Holocaust films had a message and were probably intended to be meaningful. The last hundred were commercial vehicles designed to play on audience sympathies and line the producers’ pockets with money. Ultimately, Hollywood has done what every Jew on the planet pleas desperately to never happen: made the Holocaust meaningless on a pop culture scale. As soon as filmmakers can completely abandon all ten of the following problems with the Holocaust genre, the better off we’ll be in getting to those 6 million titles without further protest. 10. The Academy Awards Cliché “The fact that it was recently nominated for a best picture Oscar offers stunning proof that Hollywood seems to believe that if it’s a ‘Holocaust film,’ it must be worthy of approbation, end of story,” wrote Ron Rosenbaum in a Slate piece earlier this year requesting that the Academy not to honor The Reader. Not every Holocaust film has a shot at winning or even being nominated for an Oscar, though. Notice the lack of Academy love this year for The Boy in the Striped Pajamas, Adam Resurrected, Good, Valkyrie and, most surprisingly, the documentary Blessed is the Match. But there is nonetheless continued reason to believe that Holocaust=Oscars. The Reader snuck in with some shocking nominations, and Defiance managed a single nod, while Kate Winslet proved her own Extras gag by winning one. And then there was the predicable honoring of live-action short Spielzeugland. Why is this tradition negative? Because it encourages too many safe, conventional, mediocre contributions to the genre produced solely and clearly as Oscar bait. It’s possible The Reader might have been better if Harvey Weinstein hadn’t rushed it for a release date that would be best at acquiring Academy recognition. And the rest of 2008’s titles could have benefited as well. Hollywood needs to go a couple years without handing out a single Oscar to any Holocaust film (even if Spielberg makes Schindler’s List 2 and it’s even better than the first) to break free of the genre’s reputation for Oscar favoritism. 9. Music Cues That Stress Tragedy There are a few Holocaust movie clichés that are fine to stick around. Trains carrying Jews to their doom is an easy symbol for any WWII-set film that doesn’t directly involve concentration camps yet wants to remind the audience that it’s going on. Bleak cinematography and production design and costuming limited to a cold color scheme, particularly blues and grays, just fits the history and the tone of these films too well to eliminate (a bright, colorful Holocaust movie is so wrong that it goes passed the point of breaking conventions to instead demolish recognized truths). However, music cues in Holocaust movie scores (such as Marius Ruhland’s for The Counterfeiters) that are used to stress specific tragedies or emphasize especially harrowing moments are unnecessary and distracting. After all, these are Holocaust movies, and nothing will ever be more tragic or harrowing in the Western consciousness than the extermination of 6 million Jews. So there’s no need to enunciate the melodrama of a single character being shot or a certain event occurring, because the audience should already be feeling emotional and, unless they are robots, will respond appropriately to what’s shown rather than from what’s cued. This is of course an issue to be had with many Hollywood movies, but applies especially to their Holocaust films. 8. The Child’s Perspective While it makes sense for a lot of Holocaust films to be seen through the eyes of a child, because those children grow up to ultimately tell their Survivor story, it’s also a major cliché of any film about intolerance to involve a children’s perspective merely for the sake of having an innocent, naive and possibly precocious view of what’s happening. Certainly no youth has ever abstained from asking, “Why are they being mean to that black man, Mommy?” or “When will the Russians rescue us, Daddy?” However, such characters are more often mere narrative tools useful to filmmakers who prefer to pander to the audience, via other characters’ pandering to these children. Even a film that has the guts to have a prominent child character die in the death camps will counter with a child on the other side of the fence who has to ask the unnecessary question of, “Why are we killing the striped pajama boy, Father?” 7. The Happy-Go-Lucky Concentration Camp Prisoner Fortunately, there hasn’t been much to this trend since Robin Williams tried his shtick in the ghetto in the Jakob the Liar remake, but it’s enough that it existed. And enough that Life is Beautiful was actually quite popular. And should have been enough when Jerry Lewis tried bringing comedy to the concentration camps in The Day the Clown Cried. But Hollywood will probably resurrect the death camp comic relief for some film or other, because there’s just so much desire to lift the tension and actually entertain audiences. Yet Holocaust movies aren’t for entertainment, no matter if there were indeed some prisoners in real life that told a joke or goofed around once in awhile in order to remain positive. So Hollywood, Roberto Benigni and everyone else need to knock it off with this trend and keep the stories sad. It’s not like they put harrowing concentration camp scenes in broad comedies, after all. So why do the opposite? 6. The Good Nazi As with the happy-go-lucky prisoner, good Nazis may have existed in real life. But cinema is not supposed to be a complete representation of real life anyway, and everyone is better off just holding on to the idea that all Nazis were bad guys. The very word “Nazi” is forever equated with evil, and for eternity it will be easy to involve Nazis as villains, even in fantasy films set in modern times, without the audience questioning whether or not this one or that one was really a kindhearted man who was just doing his job or being forced to be a Nazi by his government. Good Nazis have turned up recently in the varied forms of the not-quite-Schindlerific Bernhard Kruger (Devid Striesow, pictured above) in The Counterfeiters, the relatively saintly and sexy Ludwig Muntze (Sebastian Koch) in Black Book and, of course, the half-blind, wannabe Hitler assassin Claus von Stauffenberg (Tom Cruise) in Valkyrie. 5. The Morally Ambiguous Nazi Supporter Even more prevalent lately than the good Nazi is the morally ambiguous or ambivalent character who is either a Nazi or working for the Nazis in order to survive and/or because he or she will later claim ignorance to the evils being committed. Examples include Kate Winslet’s character in The Reader, to an extent, as well as Ronnie (Halina Reijn, pictured above) in Black Book and the protagonist of The Counterfeiters, Salomon Sorowitsch (Karl Markovics). Again, it might have been a common reality for such persons to exist, but they shouldn’t be so populous in every Holocaust film made nowadays, because then it seems more excusable to believe that a good percentage of opportunist Nazi supporters weren’t all that bad. 4. The Really, Really Bad Nazi It seems that this stereotype has become a modern Holocaust movie cliché due to the increased employment of both good Nazis and morally ambiguous Nazi supporters. In Black Book, for instance, the sadistic Gunther Franken (Waldemar Kobus) is the yang to Muntze’s yin, and similarly in The Counterfeiters, Hauptscharführer Holst (Martin Bramback, highlighted in the picture above) contrasts against Kruger. As a counter-trend, though, it’s even worse than the initial clichés. Sure, it makes sense on some narrative level for there to be a really, really bad Nazi, one who’d go so far as to literally piss on the head of a protagonist (a la Holst), to make up for the fact that there’s a likable Nazi character. But why not just do away with the good Nazi trend and either return to having all Nazi characters assumed evil or merely act like three-dimensional human beings — that is, if they must be humanized? Once again, it’s best just to keep to the Nazis=evil convention, because it’s tried and true and doesn’t complicate things or cause controversies. 3. The Holocaust As Weight in Non-Holocaust Movies The fact that X-Men’s Magneto is a Holocaust survivor enriches his character, but that’s a back-story that existed and has been developed in comics long before making an appearance in the movie adaptations. But non-adapted films, particularly horror flicks, attempting to be taken more seriously due to a Holocaust subplot or back-story just seems exploitative. Take the recent movie The Unborn, for example. In her review for Tiger Online, Melissa Kim makes a good point regarding the misguided intent to give a movie more weight by involving the Holocaust, noting that the tragedy is much too important to be cast in a bit part. “The Unborn is so ridiculous,” she writes, “it actually diminishes the prestige of the Holocaust, reducing it to little more than the weak punch line in a wholly un-funny joke.” 2. The Desire to Kill Hitler This isn’t so much of a movie trend, since aside from Valkyrie the only other Hitler assassination plot movies are others based on the same 20 July plot, but it’s still something of a cliché. Really it has to do with the typical response and discussion people have regarding the possibilities and ethics of time travel. Everyone’s first realistic idea is to go back and kill Hitler before he can come to power and exterminate the Jews, right? Well, it’s quite a futile hypothetical, because there is no time travel. But, filmmakers have the power to at least visualize the hypothetical a little more by, time and time again, adapting the 20 July story for the screen. Of course, it does no good, either, because the plot was unsuccessful and no film version, even with a changed ending, will change that. And anything else would simply be wishful thinking. However, there is at least Downfall, which was surprisingly not as popular despite this idea. Viewers can take pleasure in the literal downfall and demise of Hitler in the film. It doesn’t erase what happened with the Holocaust, but there is some satisfaction to be had. 1. Claiming a Holocaust Film Isn’t a Holocaust Film Harvey Weinstein attempted to have his cake and eat it too this past awards season. He marketed The Reader to certain groups under the assumption that it is a Holocaust movie, but he also attempted to sell it off as not a Holocaust movie by including this Elie Wiesel quote in the well-distributed Reader-defense statement: “it is not about the Holocaust; it is about what Germany did to itself and its future generations.” And many critics and journalists were in agreement, that the movie doesn’t belong grouped in with the others. In a way, the film actually is and isn’t a Holocaust movie, but attempting to deny that it’s one in order to escape the genre’s inaccessibility is still misleading and somewhat dishonest marketing. Anyone going in expecting not to see a concentration camp or survivors or Nazis will be greatly disappointed. A few of 2008’s Holocaust films were also more marketable as other kinds of films than Holocaust films, probably to detach from the stigma attached to them. And at least one, Valkyrie, is for the most part not a Holocaust film at all. But it seemed to work for Weinstein, both with Academy favor and box office success. So this could be a continued trend, even with films that are clearly Holocaust Oscar-bait or films attempting to gain weight through slight Holocaust connections. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Mon, 09 Mar 2009 14:01:13 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com3/9/2009 10:01:13 AMThere are those who think it’s time for a moratorium on Holocaust movies, and there are those who stand by the belief that there won’t be enough until there’s been 6 million produced and released. As of 2003, we were up to at least 442 titles, according to Annette Insdorf’s book Indelible Shadows. And due to last year’s boom of Holocaust-related features, it seems as though Insdorf could easily add another 100 more to the list in her next edition. But there’s no need to put an end to Holocaust films, anymore than there’s a need to cease making any genre of movie. A good film is a good film, no matter if it’s set in a concentration camp, features Nazis or merely alludes to the Shoah. And a bad movie is a bad movie, an exploitative movie is an exploitative movie and Oscar bait is Oscar bait. Beginning this Tuesday, when The Boy in the Striped Pajamas arrives on DVD, those hungering for more Holocaust movies will get another shot at seeing 2008’s contributions to the genre, but they’ll also start to see why critics were getting tired of these films. It wasn’t the subject matter, though, and it wasn’t necessarily the quantity so much as it was the quality. These days, Holocaust films are more dependent on clichés and are adversely affected by trends than ever before, even when they appear to be intent on breaking with conventions. Here is an excellent bit from a Mr.Cranky review of Defiance: Here’s the thing: the more bad Holocaust films you make, the more Holocaust clichés you employ, the more the Holocaust itself becomes a cliché. The first few Holocaust films had a message and were probably intended to be meaningful. The last hundred were commercial vehicles designed to play on audience sympathies and line the producers’ pockets with money. Ultimately, Hollywood has done what every Jew on the planet pleas desperately to never happen: made the Holocaust meaningless on a pop culture scale. As soon as filmmakers can completely abandon all ten of the following problems with the Holocaust genre, the better off we’ll be in getting to those 6 million titles without further protest. 10. The Academy Awards Cliché “The fact that it was recently nominated for a best picture Oscar offers stunning proof that Hollywood seems to believe that if it’s a ‘Holocaust film,’ it must be worthy of approbation, end of story,” wrote Ron Rosenbaum in a Slate piece earlier this year requesting that the Academy not to honor The Reader. Not every Holocaust film has a shot at winning or even being nominated for an Oscar, though. Notice the lack of Academy love this year for The Boy in the Striped Pajamas, Adam Resurrected, Good, Valkyrie and, most surprisingly, the documentary Blessed is the Match. But there is nonetheless continued reason to believe that Holocaust=Oscars. The Reader snuck in with some shocking nominations, and Defiance managed a single nod, while Kate Winslet proved her own Extras gag by winning one. And then there was the predicable honoring of live-action short Spielzeugland. Why is this tradition negative? Because it encourages too many safe, conventional, mediocre contributions to the genre produced solely and clearly as Oscar bait. It’s possible The Reader might have been better if Harvey Weinstein hadn’t rushed it for a release date that would be best at acquiring Academy recognition. And the rest of 2008’s titles could have benefited as well. Hollywood needs to go a couple years without handing out a single Oscar to any Holocaust film (even if Spielberg makes Schindler’s List 2 and it’s even better than the first) to break free of the genre’s reputation for Oscar favoritism. 9. Music Cues That Stress Tragedy There are a few Holocaust movie clichés that are fine to stick around. Trains carrying Jews to their doom is an easy symbol for any WWII-set film that doesn’t directly involve concentration camps yet wants to remind the audience that it’s going on. Bleak cinematography and production design and costuming limited to a cold color scheme, particularly blues and grays, just fits the history and the tone of these films too well to eliminate (a bright, colorful Holocaust movie is so wrong that it goes passed the point of breaking conventions to instead demolish recognized truths). However, music cues in Holocaust movie scores (such as Marius Ruhland’s for The Counterfeiters) that are used to stress specific tragedies or emphasize especially harrowing moments are unnecessary and distracting. After all, these are Holocaust movies, and nothing will ever be more tragic or harrowing in the Western consciousness than the extermination of 6 million Jews. So there’s no need to enunciate the melodrama of a single character being shot or a certain event occurring, because the audience should already be feeling emotional and, unless they are robots, will respond appropriately to what’s shown rather than from what’s cued. This is of course an issue to be had with many Hollywood movies, but applies especially to their Holocaust films. 8. The Child’s Perspective While it makes sense for a lot of Holocaust films to be seen through the eyes of a child, because those children grow up to ultimately tell their Survivor story, it’s also a major cliché of any film about intolerance to involve a children’s perspective merely for the sake of having an innocent, naive and possibly precocious view of what’s happening. Certainly no youth has ever abstained from asking, “Why are they being mean to that black man, Mommy?” or “When will the Russians rescue us, Daddy?” However, such characters are more often mere narrative tools useful to filmmakers who prefer to pander to the audience, via other characters’ pandering to these children. Even a film that has the guts to have a prominent child character die in the death camps will counter with a child on the other side of the fence who has to ask the unnecessary question of, “Why are we killing the striped pajama boy, Father?” 7. The Happy-Go-Lucky Concentration Camp Prisoner Fortunately, there hasn’t been much to this trend since Robin Williams tried his shtick in the ghetto in the Jakob the Liar remake, but it’s enough that it existed. And enough that Life is Beautiful was actually quite popular. And should have been enough when Jerry Lewis tried bringing comedy to the concentration camps in The Day the Clown Cried. But Hollywood will probably resurrect the death camp comic relief for some film or other, because there’s just so much desire to lift the tension and actually entertain audiences. Yet Holocaust movies aren’t for entertainment, no matter if there were indeed some prisoners in real life that told a joke or goofed around once in awhile in order to remain positive. So Hollywood, Roberto Benigni and everyone else need to knock it off with this trend and keep the stories sad. It’s not like they put harrowing concentration camp scenes in broad comedies, after all. So why do the opposite? 6. The Good Nazi As with the happy-go-lucky prisoner, good Nazis may have existed in real life. But cinema is not supposed to be a complete representation of real life anyway, and everyone is better off just holding on to the idea that all Nazis were bad guys. The very word “Nazi” is forever equated with evil, and for eternity it will be easy to involve Nazis as villains, even in fantasy films set in modern times, without the audience questioning whether or not this one or that one was really a kindhearted man who was just doing his job or being forced to be a Nazi by his government. Good Nazis have turned up recently in the varied forms of the not-quite-Schindlerific Bernhard Kruger (Devid Striesow, pictured above) in The Counterfeiters, the relatively saintly and sexy Ludwig Muntze (Sebastian Koch) in Black Book and, of course, the half-blind, wannabe Hitler assassin Claus von Stauffenberg (Tom Cruise) in Valkyrie. 5. The Morally Ambiguous Nazi Supporter Even more prevalent lately than the good Nazi is the morally ambiguous or ambivalent character who is either a Nazi or working for the Nazis in order to survive and/or because he or she will later claim ignorance to the evils being committed. Examples include Kate Winslet’s character in The Reader, to an extent, as well as Ronnie (Halina Reijn, pictured above) in Black Book and the protagonist of The Counterfeiters, Salomon Sorowitsch (Karl Markovics). Again, it might have been a common reality for such persons to exist, but they shouldn’t be so populous in every Holocaust film made nowadays, because then it seems more excusable to believe that a good percentage of opportunist Nazi supporters weren’t all that bad. 4. The Really, Really Bad Nazi It seems that this stereotype has become a modern Holocaust movie cliché due to the increased employment of both good Nazis and morally ambiguous Nazi supporters. In Black Book, for instance, the sadistic Gunther Franken (Waldemar Kobus) is the yang to Muntze’s yin, and similarly in The Counterfeiters, Hauptscharführer Holst (Martin Bramback, highlighted in the picture above) contrasts against Kruger. As a counter-trend, though, it’s even worse than the initial clichés. Sure, it makes sense on some narrative level for there to be a really, really bad Nazi, one who’d go so far as to literally piss on the head of a protagonist (a la Holst), to make up for the fact that there’s a likable Nazi character. But why not just do away with the good Nazi trend and either return to having all Nazi characters assumed evil or merely act like three-dimensional human beings — that is, if they must be humanized? Once again, it’s best just to keep to the Nazis=evil convention, because it’s tried and true and doesn’t complicate things or cause controversies. 3. The Holocaust As Weight in Non-Holocaust Movies The fact that X-Men’s Magneto is a Holocaust survivor enriches his character, but that’s a back-story that existed and has been developed in comics long before making an appearance in the movie adaptations. But non-adapted films, particularly horror flicks, attempting to be taken more seriously due to a Holocaust subplot or back-story just seems exploitative. Take the recent movie The Unborn, for example. In her review for Tiger Online, Melissa Kim makes a good point regarding the misguided intent to give a movie more weight by involving the Holocaust, noting that the tragedy is much too important to be cast in a bit part. “The Unborn is so ridiculous,” she writes, “it actually diminishes the prestige of the Holocaust, reducing it to little more than the weak punch line in a wholly un-funny joke.” 2. The Desire to Kill Hitler This isn’t so much of a movie trend, since aside from Valkyrie the only other Hitler assassination plot movies are others based on the same 20 July plot, but it’s still something of a cliché. Really it has to do with the typical response and discussion people have regarding the possibilities and ethics of time travel. Everyone’s first realistic idea is to go back and kill Hitler before he can come to power and exterminate the Jews, right? Well, it’s quite a futile hypothetical, because there is no time travel. But, filmmakers have the power to at least visualize the hypothetical a little more by, time and time again, adapting the 20 July story for the screen. Of course, it does no good, either, because the plot was unsuccessful and no film version, even with a changed ending, will change that. And anything else would simply be wishful thinking. However, there is at least Downfall, which was surprisingly not as popular despite this idea. Viewers can take pleasure in the literal downfall and demise of Hitler in the film. It doesn’t erase what happened with the Holocaust, but there is some satisfaction to be had. 1. Claiming a Holocaust Film Isn’t a Holocaust Film Harvey Weinstein attempted to have his cake and eat it too this past awards season. He marketed The Reader to certain groups under the assumption that it is a Holocaust movie, but he also attempted to sell it off as not a Holocaust movie by including this Elie Wiesel quote in the well-distributed Reader-defense statement: “it is not about the Holocaust; it is about what Germany did to itself and its future generations.” And many critics and journalists were in agreement, that the movie doesn’t belong grouped in with the others. In a way, the film actually is and isn’t a Holocaust movie, but attempting to deny that it’s one in order to escape the genre’s inaccessibility is still misleading and somewhat dishonest marketing. Anyone going in expecting not to see a concentration camp or survivors or Nazis will be greatly disappointed. A few of 2008’s Holocaust films were also more marketable as other kinds of films than Holocaust films, probably to detach from the stigma attached to them. And at least one, Valkyrie, is for the most part not a Holocaust film at all. But it seemed to work for Weinstein, both with Academy favor and box office success. So this could be a continued trend, even with films that are clearly Holocaust Oscar-bait or films attempting to gain weight through slight Holocaust connections. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/8/7/33699.aspxPost By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 8/7/2008 2:00:31 PM
Body: We’re less than a week away from the release of Tropic Thunder, and as the reviews and puff pieces make their way onto the web, there’s one thing clearly uniting the media’s coverage: talk of Tom Cruise’s appearance in a small role as a Hollywood studio boss. Everyone seems to agree that he steals the show and that his performance — or the joke surrounding it — is one of the comedy’s major highlights, if not the actual best part. Of course, we can expect a good cameo from Cruise every now and then. He showed up for a bit part in Young Guns and played himself as playing “Austin Powers” in Austin Powers in Goldmember. But from what it sounds like, his role in Tropic Thunder is featured for longer than might qualify as a cameo. Some are regardless referring to the performance as an “extended cameo”, and in theory it certainly fits in with the huge crop of so-called “ironic cameos” that have become popular in movies and TV in the last ten years. Still, despite my not having yet seen the movie, I’m thinking that Tom Cruise’s involvement in Tropic Thunder is more like the following list, which consists of merely small roles filled by big stars. You might consider some of them to be technically cameos, especially the ones that aren’t integral to the plot and/or call attention to themselves. But with each of the roles I’ve included, I consider them to be either the best part of their respective movies or at least a major highlight, which is how Cruise’s appearance is being touted. Anyway, forgive me for trying to come up with something different than simply a best cameo list, even if the focus here seems less than clear. 10. Marlon Brando as “Jor-El” in Superman - He was probably paid too much for the part, especially if all the trivia surrounding his involvement (reading his lines off baby Superman’s diaper; desiring that only his voice be used; demanding to be paid double if any footage was to be used in the sequel) is true, but it’s pretty cool having Brando appear at the beginning of what I still consider to be the best superhero comic book adaptation of all time (sorry Dark Knight fans). He’s not the best thing about the movie, but he’s an immediate highlight. As for his payment (reportedly $3.7 million), Warner Bros. has leveled out his worth a little by featuring him in the Donner cut of Superman II and in Bryan Singer’s Superman Returns — a movie that also creatively employs Brando’s On the Waterfront costar Eva Marie Saint appropriately as Superman’s adopted mother. 9. Drew Barrymore as “Casey Becker” in Scream - Having your biggest star killed in the opening scene is kinda like having your best action sequence at the head of the movie (a la Bad Boys II), but fortunately the rest of the first Scream is pretty good, and Barrymore’s (don’t call it a cameo) part doesn’t overshadow the movie too much. In a way, since this wasn’t a sequel yet the movie was a bit of a parody of all slasher movies, the familiarity of Becker’s face could be taken to be akin to how, often, horror sequels begin by killing off the heroine of the previous installment in the first few minutes. 8. Arnold Schwarzenegger as “Prince Hapi” in Around the World in 80 Days - There isn’t much to enjoy about Frank Coraci’s 2004 version of the Jules Verne tale, especially since there appears to be a lot of missed opportunities in terms of guest appearances (Wikipedia counts 45 “cameos” in the 1956 version; I count maybe 10 that could be considered “cameos” in the newer movie). Therefore, Schwarzenegger’s hilarious appearance as a lecherous Turkish prince — one of his last roles filmed before becoming Governor of California — is one of the few highlights, if not the sole highlight (personally, I enjoy Jackie Chan in anything, and I liked more of this movie than most people did). The role is especially funny and creepy if you’ve ever seen that old footage of Schwarzenegger being sleazy at Carnival in Rio. 7. Orson Welles as “Unicron” in Transformers: The Movie - Welles’ voice had been overpowering in films before — he had a good side career going throughout his life as a narrator — but considering this was ridiculously his final performance and considering he easily overshadowed his fellow celebrity voice lenders (including otherwise commanding vocal talents Leonard Nimoy, Robert Stack and Casey Kasem), his part completely dominates the movie, both diegetically and extradiegetically. 6. Bruce Willis as “Harry Rydell” in Fast Food Nation - Far and away the only good part of Richard Linklater’s botched attempt to dramatize Eric Schlosser’s non-fiction classic (I consider the book a kind of bible since it inspired me to give up fast food and subsequently lose 60lbs., so it pains me even more to think about Schlosser being a co-writer and producer of the movie), and not just because of his oft-quoted line about how we all have to eat a little shit from time to time. His whole characterization of the cynical meat supplier is brilliant, enough that he unfortunately makes the rest of the movie play even less interesting that it already is. 5. Charlie Sheen as “Charlie” in Being John Malkovich - I wanted to stay away from roles in which actors play themselves, mainly because that’s a big percentage of the ironic cameo stuff that’s so overused these days. However, Sheen’s part here is a little more than a mere cameo. And it’s kind of an ironic parody of the ironic cameo, even as it predates a lot of these cameos in Entourage and Extras and the like (by crediting the role as “Charlie” rather than “as himself”, it’s also a precursor to the more exaggerated than exaggerated “Neil Patrick Harris” character of the Harold and Kumar films). Perhaps intended to redirect the audience’s perspective on John Malkovich’s titular character, which is up until Sheen’s entrance possibly accepted as an authentic self-portrayal, the overstatement of the role raises the already ingeniously funny film up another notch to put it at the level of best comedies ever made. 4. Matt Damon as “Donny” in Eurotrip - I’ve actually never seen Eurotrip, but I hear there’s no reason to watch it other than to see Damon’s bit role as the singer of a pop punk band (the otherwise real Lustra). And I’ve seen that on YouTube, so I’m good. Even more than Cruise and some of the others, Damon seems to love doing guest stints in movies and on TV (he’s also given us the only reasons to ever watch Jimmy Kimmel). Some of his other small roles and cameos can be found in Youth Without Youth, Confessions of a Dangerous Mind, Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back, Finding Forrester, Jersey Girl and The Majestic (the last in voice only). 3. Sean Connery as “King Richard” in Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves - After making us suffer through Kevin Costner’s terrible performance in the lead role, the producers of this disappointing version of the classic legend actually rub it in how bad their casting choice was by sneaking Connery in at the last minute. Of course, despite the way his appearance increases our dissatisfaction with the rest of the movie, he’s still the highlight. Especially since he’s immediately followed by that awful Bryan Adams song playing over the credits. 2. Alec Baldwin as “Blake” in Glengarry Glen Ross - Sure, the rest of the film is really good, mostly because of the stellar cast filling out the rest of the ensemble, but the first thing you remember about this David Mamet adaptation is Baldwin’s monologue. It’s good enough that I almost also included on this list the Blake-inspired character from Boiler Room as played by Ben Affleck. But it’s also too good to actually accept Affleck’s ripoff as being in the same league. 1. Gene Hackman as “Blindman” in Young Frankenstein - I’m in the minority as far as my appreciation of Mel Brooks’ parody of James Whale’s Frankenstein films. I think it’s really funny, but I don’t think it’s one of the funniest movies I’ve ever seen. Yet the few minutes that Hackman is on screen always leave me in tears, enough that I wholeheartedly accept the movie’s status as one of the greatest comedies ever made. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 18:00:31 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com8/7/2008 2:00:31 PMWe’re less than a week away from the release of Tropic Thunder, and as the reviews and puff pieces make their way onto the web, there’s one thing clearly uniting the media’s coverage: talk of Tom Cruise’s appearance in a small role as a Hollywood studio boss. Everyone seems to agree that he steals the show and that his performance — or the joke surrounding it — is one of the comedy’s major highlights, if not the actual best part. Of course, we can expect a good cameo from Cruise every now and then. He showed up for a bit part in Young Guns and played himself as playing “Austin Powers” in Austin Powers in Goldmember. But from what it sounds like, his role in Tropic Thunder is featured for longer than might qualify as a cameo. Some are regardless referring to the performance as an “extended cameo”, and in theory it certainly fits in with the huge crop of so-called “ironic cameos” that have become popular in movies and TV in the last ten years. Still, despite my not having yet seen the movie, I’m thinking that Tom Cruise’s involvement in Tropic Thunder is more like the following list, which consists of merely small roles filled by big stars. You might consider some of them to be technically cameos, especially the ones that aren’t integral to the plot and/or call attention to themselves. But with each of the roles I’ve included, I consider them to be either the best part of their respective movies or at least a major highlight, which is how Cruise’s appearance is being touted. Anyway, forgive me for trying to come up with something different than simply a best cameo list, even if the focus here seems less than clear. 10. Marlon Brando as “Jor-El” in Superman - He was probably paid too much for the part, especially if all the trivia surrounding his involvement (reading his lines off baby Superman’s diaper; desiring that only his voice be used; demanding to be paid double if any footage was to be used in the sequel) is true, but it’s pretty cool having Brando appear at the beginning of what I still consider to be the best superhero comic book adaptation of all time (sorry Dark Knight fans). He’s not the best thing about the movie, but he’s an immediate highlight. As for his payment (reportedly $3.7 million), Warner Bros. has leveled out his worth a little by featuring him in the Donner cut of Superman II and in Bryan Singer’s Superman Returns — a movie that also creatively employs Brando’s On the Waterfront costar Eva Marie Saint appropriately as Superman’s adopted mother. 9. Drew Barrymore as “Casey Becker” in Scream - Having your biggest star killed in the opening scene is kinda like having your best action sequence at the head of the movie (a la Bad Boys II), but fortunately the rest of the first Scream is pretty good, and Barrymore’s (don’t call it a cameo) part doesn’t overshadow the movie too much. In a way, since this wasn’t a sequel yet the movie was a bit of a parody of all slasher movies, the familiarity of Becker’s face could be taken to be akin to how, often, horror sequels begin by killing off the heroine of the previous installment in the first few minutes. 8. Arnold Schwarzenegger as “Prince Hapi” in Around the World in 80 Days - There isn’t much to enjoy about Frank Coraci’s 2004 version of the Jules Verne tale, especially since there appears to be a lot of missed opportunities in terms of guest appearances (Wikipedia counts 45 “cameos” in the 1956 version; I count maybe 10 that could be considered “cameos” in the newer movie). Therefore, Schwarzenegger’s hilarious appearance as a lecherous Turkish prince — one of his last roles filmed before becoming Governor of California — is one of the few highlights, if not the sole highlight (personally, I enjoy Jackie Chan in anything, and I liked more of this movie than most people did). The role is especially funny and creepy if you’ve ever seen that old footage of Schwarzenegger being sleazy at Carnival in Rio. 7. Orson Welles as “Unicron” in Transformers: The Movie - Welles’ voice had been overpowering in films before — he had a good side career going throughout his life as a narrator — but considering this was ridiculously his final performance and considering he easily overshadowed his fellow celebrity voice lenders (including otherwise commanding vocal talents Leonard Nimoy, Robert Stack and Casey Kasem), his part completely dominates the movie, both diegetically and extradiegetically. 6. Bruce Willis as “Harry Rydell” in Fast Food Nation - Far and away the only good part of Richard Linklater’s botched attempt to dramatize Eric Schlosser’s non-fiction classic (I consider the book a kind of bible since it inspired me to give up fast food and subsequently lose 60lbs., so it pains me even more to think about Schlosser being a co-writer and producer of the movie), and not just because of his oft-quoted line about how we all have to eat a little shit from time to time. His whole characterization of the cynical meat supplier is brilliant, enough that he unfortunately makes the rest of the movie play even less interesting that it already is. 5. Charlie Sheen as “Charlie” in Being John Malkovich - I wanted to stay away from roles in which actors play themselves, mainly because that’s a big percentage of the ironic cameo stuff that’s so overused these days. However, Sheen’s part here is a little more than a mere cameo. And it’s kind of an ironic parody of the ironic cameo, even as it predates a lot of these cameos in Entourage and Extras and the like (by crediting the role as “Charlie” rather than “as himself”, it’s also a precursor to the more exaggerated than exaggerated “Neil Patrick Harris” character of the Harold and Kumar films). Perhaps intended to redirect the audience’s perspective on John Malkovich’s titular character, which is up until Sheen’s entrance possibly accepted as an authentic self-portrayal, the overstatement of the role raises the already ingeniously funny film up another notch to put it at the level of best comedies ever made. 4. Matt Damon as “Donny” in Eurotrip - I’ve actually never seen Eurotrip, but I hear there’s no reason to watch it other than to see Damon’s bit role as the singer of a pop punk band (the otherwise real Lustra). And I’ve seen that on YouTube, so I’m good. Even more than Cruise and some of the others, Damon seems to love doing guest stints in movies and on TV (he’s also given us the only reasons to ever watch Jimmy Kimmel). Some of his other small roles and cameos can be found in Youth Without Youth, Confessions of a Dangerous Mind, Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back, Finding Forrester, Jersey Girl and The Majestic (the last in voice only). 3. Sean Connery as “King Richard” in Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves - After making us suffer through Kevin Costner’s terrible performance in the lead role, the producers of this disappointing version of the classic legend actually rub it in how bad their casting choice was by sneaking Connery in at the last minute. Of course, despite the way his appearance increases our dissatisfaction with the rest of the movie, he’s still the highlight. Especially since he’s immediately followed by that awful Bryan Adams song playing over the credits. 2. Alec Baldwin as “Blake” in Glengarry Glen Ross - Sure, the rest of the film is really good, mostly because of the stellar cast filling out the rest of the ensemble, but the first thing you remember about this David Mamet adaptation is Baldwin’s monologue. It’s good enough that I almost also included on this list the Blake-inspired character from Boiler Room as played by Ben Affleck. But it’s also too good to actually accept Affleck’s ripoff as being in the same league. 1. Gene Hackman as “Blindman” in Young Frankenstein - I’m in the minority as far as my appreciation of Mel Brooks’ parody of James Whale’s Frankenstein films. I think it’s really funny, but I don’t think it’s one of the funniest movies I’ve ever seen. Yet the few minutes that Hackman is on screen always leave me in tears, enough that I wholeheartedly accept the movie’s status as one of the greatest comedies ever made. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/4/25/27819.aspxPost By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 4/25/2008 4:00:30 PM
Body: The sequel to Harold and Kumar Go to White Castle opens in theaters today, and you can read my SXSW review of the movie, titled Harold and Kumar Escape From Guantanamo Bay, over here. Though I enjoyed it, H&K2 disappointed me for taking on too much plot. But apparently some other reviews are favoring the second installment, and according to Craig Phillips at Green Cine, the matter has critics divided. Phillips, who marginally prefers the sequel, uses the opportunity to revisit those sequels that improved upon the original. Obviously, the list includes The Empire Strikes Back, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan and The Road Warrior. However, surprisingly, The Godfather Part II is not in the top ten, because he considers the first and second films tied, and he claims both Terminator 2: Judgment Day and Gremlins 2: The New Batch are only honorable mentions, because their definite superiority is up for debate (true, I’ve never been able to decide if I like them better than their respective counterparts). Over at Entertainment Weekly, there’s another list associated with H&K2 in honor of Neil Patrick Harris’ return as “himself”. It’s a list of favorite performances by stars playing themselves, and it features my favorite cameo of all time, Kurt Vonnegut in Back to School. While thanks to Entourage and Extras, it has become too popular nowadays to lampoon your celebrity through exaggeration or false self-representation, I think Harris does rise above in the H&K movies. It’s probably only secondary to John Malkovich’s good sportsmanship in appearing as himself in a film titled Being John Malkovich. And here’s one more: Cinematical’s Jette Kernion continues the comparisons between H&K2 and Blazing Saddles (which I hear may be turned into a Broadway musical, unfortunately) by coming up with seven “Deliberately Offensive (But Fun) Comedies.” Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Fri, 25 Apr 2008 20:00:30 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com4/25/2008 4:00:30 PMThe sequel to Harold and Kumar Go to White Castle opens in theaters today, and you can read my SXSW review of the movie, titled Harold and Kumar Escape From Guantanamo Bay, over here. Though I enjoyed it, H&K2 disappointed me for taking on too much plot. But apparently some other reviews are favoring the second installment, and according to Craig Phillips at Green Cine, the matter has critics divided. Phillips, who marginally prefers the sequel, uses the opportunity to revisit those sequels that improved upon the original. Obviously, the list includes The Empire Strikes Back, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan and The Road Warrior. However, surprisingly, The Godfather Part II is not in the top ten, because he considers the first and second films tied, and he claims both Terminator 2: Judgment Day and Gremlins 2: The New Batch are only honorable mentions, because their definite superiority is up for debate (true, I’ve never been able to decide if I like them better than their respective counterparts). Over at Entertainment Weekly, there’s another list associated with H&K2 in honor of Neil Patrick Harris’ return as “himself”. It’s a list of favorite performances by stars playing themselves, and it features my favorite cameo of all time, Kurt Vonnegut in Back to School. While thanks to Entourage and Extras, it has become too popular nowadays to lampoon your celebrity through exaggeration or false self-representation, I think Harris does rise above in the H&K movies. It’s probably only secondary to John Malkovich’s good sportsmanship in appearing as himself in a film titled Being John Malkovich. And here’s one more: Cinematical’s Jette Kernion continues the comparisons between H&K2 and Blazing Saddles (which I hear may be turned into a Broadway musical, unfortunately) by coming up with seven “Deliberately Offensive (But Fun) Comedies.” Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/funny/MemberTagFilms.aspxfunny
Number of films tagged: 607

Number of people who tagged: 316

Number of times used: 940

]]>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 00:46:10 GMT607316940Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/comedy/MemberTagFilms.aspxcomedy
Number of films tagged: 1086

Number of people who tagged: 253

Number of times used: 1340

]]>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 21:38:24 GMT10862531340Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/hilarious/MemberTagFilms.aspxhilarious
Number of films tagged: 222

Number of people who tagged: 165

Number of times used: 331

]]>Mon, 03 Aug 2009 18:39:04 GMT222165331Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/friendship/MemberTagFilms.aspxfriendship
Number of films tagged: 6791

Number of people who tagged: 154

Number of times used: 979

]]>Wed, 09 Dec 2009 05:08:37 GMT6791154979Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/movie/MemberTagFilms.aspxmovie
Number of films tagged: 363

Number of people who tagged: 114

Number of times used: 187

]]>Wed, 19 Aug 2009 16:09:46 GMT363114187Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/film/MemberTagFilms.aspxfilm
Number of films tagged: 657

Number of people who tagged: 82

Number of times used: 190

]]>Tue, 22 Sep 2009 20:35:41 GMT65782190Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/british/MemberTagFilms.aspxbritish
Number of films tagged: 610

Number of people who tagged: 75

Number of times used: 264

]]>Sat, 26 Sep 2009 01:53:04 GMT61075264Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/relationships/MemberTagFilms.aspxrelationships
Number of films tagged: 203

Number of people who tagged: 74

Number of times used: 249

]]>Sat, 28 Nov 2009 14:40:59 GMT20374249Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/life/MemberTagFilms.aspxlife
Number of films tagged: 1082

Number of people who tagged: 52

Number of times used: 224

]]>Wed, 02 Dec 2009 23:13:43 GMT108252224Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/relationship/MemberTagFilms.aspxrelationship
Number of films tagged: 1090

Number of people who tagged: 50

Number of times used: 189

]]>Sat, 24 Oct 2009 19:18:01 GMT109050189Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/hysterical/MemberTagFilms.aspxhysterical
Number of films tagged: 62

Number of people who tagged: 42

Number of times used: 76

]]>Mon, 03 Aug 2009 18:30:35 GMT624276Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/humor/MemberTagFilms.aspxhumor
Number of films tagged: 207

Number of people who tagged: 34

Number of times used: 55

]]>Mon, 06 Jul 2009 22:22:49 GMT2073455Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/television/MemberTagFilms.aspxtelevision
Number of films tagged: 945

Number of people who tagged: 34

Number of times used: 91

]]>Tue, 06 Oct 2009 18:28:57 GMT9453491Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/business/MemberTagFilms.aspxbusiness
Number of films tagged: 1747

Number of people who tagged: 27

Number of times used: 70

]]>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 13:05:14 GMT17472770Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/tv/MemberTagFilms.aspxtv
Number of films tagged: 73

Number of people who tagged: 26

Number of times used: 79

]]>Tue, 06 Oct 2009 18:28:57 GMT732679Tag