list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around The Women 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/The_Women/332484/default.aspx Title: The Women
Year: 2008
Director: Diane English
Plot: Veteran producer/director Diane English (The Lathe of Heaven, Murphy Brown) helms this contemporized remake of George Cukor's beloved proto-feminist comedy drama The Women (1939), an adaptation of Clare Boothe Luce's play. The English version follows the gossip, bitchy wisecracking, and overall disillusionment that erupt among a group of socialite friends when their dearest and most envied learns of her husband's marital infidelity at the hands of a backstabbing shopgirl. The all-female cast is fronted by Meg Ryan, Annette Bening, Eva Mendes, Debra Messing, Jada Pinkett Smith, and Candice Bergen, with supporting roles inhabited by Bette Midler, Cloris Leachman, and Carrie Fisher. ~ Nathan Southern, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 43
Number of Lists: 2
Number of blog posts: 11
Number of discussion threads: 1
SpoutRating: 2
]]>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 15:07:28 GMTThe Women2008Diane EnglishVeteran producer/director Diane English (<a href="http://www.spout.com/films/19802/detail.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>The Lathe of Heaven</a>, <a href="http://www.spout.com/films/286324/detail.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Murphy Brown</a>) helms this contemporized remake of <a href="http://www.spout.com/players/P____86340/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>George Cukor</a>'s beloved proto-feminist comedy drama The Women (1939), an adaptation of Clare Boothe Luce's play. The English version follows the gossip, bitchy wisecracking, and overall disillusionment that erupt among a group of socialite friends when their dearest and most envied learns of her husband's marital infidelity at the hands of a backstabbing shopgirl. The all-female cast is fronted by <a href="http://www.spout.com/players/P____62388/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Meg Ryan</a>, <a href="http://www.spout.com/players/P_____5346/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Annette Bening</a>, <a href="http://www.spout.com/players/P___277850/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Eva Mendes</a>, <a href="http://www.spout.com/players/P___224925/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Debra Messing</a>, <a href="http://www.spout.com/players/P____56892/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Jada Pinkett Smith</a>, and <a href="http://www.spout.com/players/P_____5591/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Candice Bergen</a>, with supporting roles inhabited by <a href="http://www.spout.com/players/P___102748/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Bette Midler</a>, <a href="http://www.spout.com/players/P____41211/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Cloris Leachman</a>, and <a href="http://www.spout.com/players/P____89886/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Carrie Fisher</a>. ~ Nathan Southern, All Movie Guide43Tag Target (>10)21112http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/s332484.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/The_Women/332484/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/mercurial/archive/2008/12/26/38866.aspx Post By: mercurial
Post To: a filmblog
Post Date: 12/26/2008 6:55:38 PM
Body: Almost three quarters of a century has passed since The Women was unleashed on an unsuspecting populace; the inner sanctum of Manhattan socialites and all the cattiness, backstabbing and unapologetic malice that seethed through their painstakingly coiffed hairdos and razor sharp, yet finely manicured nails was revealed for all to see. Sadly, the 2008 remake of The Women has nothing to offer a modern audience. Virtually a shot for shot remake of the original 1939 film, sporadic injections of melodramatic ennui are given to each of the main leads that does nothing more than detract from the originally intended comedic tone and distorts the remake into a uninspiring mishmash of soapy cliches unfit for a Lifetime movie of the week. These women are nothing more than redundant caricatures of characters whose heyday has long since passed: the mousy wife of an adulterer that does nothing but bemoan her husbands existence, the emasculating businesswoman that exchanges her loyalty to her friends to keep her job, the butch lipstick lesbian / African American that seems to speak only in interjections, and the pregnant housewife dragging a handful of kids behind her and stuffing food in her mouth every chance she gets. Nothing but pathetic stereotypes that should offend anyone that watches it.
]]>Fri, 26 Dec 2008 23:55:38 GMTmercuriala filmblog12/26/2008 6:55:38 PMAlmost three quarters of a century has passed since The Women was unleashed on an unsuspecting populace; the inner sanctum of Manhattan socialites and all the cattiness, backstabbing and unapologetic malice that seethed through their painstakingly coiffed hairdos and razor sharp, yet finely manicured nails was revealed for all to see. Sadly, the 2008 remake of The Women has nothing to offer a modern audience. Virtually a shot for shot remake of the original 1939 film, sporadic injections of melodramatic ennui are given to each of the main leads that does nothing more than detract from the originally intended comedic tone and distorts the remake into a uninspiring mishmash of soapy cliches unfit for a Lifetime movie of the week. These women are nothing more than redundant caricatures of characters whose heyday has long since passed: the mousy wife of an adulterer that does nothing but bemoan her husbands existence, the emasculating businesswoman that exchanges her loyalty to her friends to keep her job, the butch lipstick lesbian / African American that seems to speak only in interjections, and the pregnant housewife dragging a handful of kids behind her and stuffing food in her mouth every chance she gets. Nothing but pathetic stereotypes that should offend anyone that watches it. http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/10/2/35824.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 10/2/2008 12:00:44 PM
Body: With Halloween less than a month away, it’s time to start thinking about what to go as. That is, if you haven’t already. A good costume-loving cinephile typically knows well in advance what he or she will dress up as for Halloween (and Comic-Con, too). But if you’re one to wait until the last minute, and also one who likes to be a lot more contemporary than, say, dressing up as a Ghostbuster or Edward Scissorhands, I’ve got some suggestions for you for costumes based on recent films. Check them out after the jump. “Nuke the Fridge”  - from Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull For this costume, you need to prepare a basic Indiana Jones costume and then build a ’50s-style fridge costume out of cardboard to go around your whole body. It could look something like this, except instead of just exposing your head, you show your whole body, dressed in Indy clothes. When people ask what you are, explain the terrible scene from Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, as well as how it has spawned this new term for when a movie franchise goes sour. Also, if you like to be demonstrative, feel free to throw yourself into the air as if being propelled by a nuclear blast. “Chad Feldheimer”  - from Burn After Reading This should be a pretty easy homemade costume. Just get a dark red polo, patch on a handwritten “Hardbodies Fitness Center” logo to the chest, spray a little temporary blond into your hair and strap an ipod to your arm. Maybe even add “Chad” name tag, despite Brad Pitt’s lack of one in the film. For lack of a better quirky indie character this year (like Napoleon Dynamite), it’s a good enough idea to get you by without need for too much explanation. “Didier Revol”  - from Son of Rambow If you want to be a little quirkier and a lot more obscure, though, you could seek out appropriate ’80s Euro clothing in your local thrift shop and go as this popular French exchange student. For this, you’ll still need some kind of temporary hair coloring for that skunk stripe, and you definitely need some red shoes. The jacket doesn’t need to be perfect, and anyway you can also just find a triangle-print midriff-exposing t-shirt and be fine. For your few cool friends who’ve seen the movie, it shouldn’t be too hard to get the idea across. “Pepper Pots”  - from Iron Man Another thing lacking this year was strong female roles in comic book and action movies, from which you can usually get hot costumes like Lara Croft and Selene from Underworld. But as boring as it will be to go as Pepper Pots (or Rachel Dawes, or Betty Ross), putting on a women’s pantsuit and dying your hair light orange will also serve as a protest against the 2008 tough woman drought. Sure, you could try to pass something off as Fox from Wanted, but nobody will get it. If you really need to do something with skimpy outfits and machine guns, there’s always the Sarah Palin costume. However, that’s obviously not movie related enough, unless you somehow make it clearly reference Miss Congeniality. “The House Bunny”  - from The House Bunny For the girl who likes to keep things simple, there’s fortunately the old Playboy Bunny staple. And now it’s more movie-themed thanks to the comedy The House Bunny. Just get some hot pink duds and some basic bunny ears and you’re all set. Just don’t let people assume you’re just a sexy bunny, or, worse, either Bridget Jones or Elle Woods. Another old standard that has recently become movie-themed: zombie stripper. “Eve”  - from Wall-E The girl who doesn’t like to keep things simple may want to attempt a homemade Eve costume. It’s possible that it could serve as a sexy costume, as it can consist of a white body stocking, posterboard-cut flap arms and a white garbage pail top for the head. But as hot as that tight-fitting stocking will be, the real shape of Eve’s body is far sexier. So get out those plastic-welding tools and come up with something more streamlined and rounded. Otherwise people might just think you’re an iPod or some other Mac product. “There Will Be Blood group”  - from There Will Be Blood If you’re looking for a good group-costume idea, and you don’t want to be Scooby and gang, then the characters and iconic props from There Will Blood are sure to be a hit. While three friends dress up as Daniel Plainview, H.W. Plainview and Eli Sunday, three other friends must dress as a bowling pin, a milkshake and maybe an oil rig (copy this Eiffel Tower costume). “The Dude Playin’ a Dude Disguised as Another Dude” (aka “Robet Downey Jr. Blackface”  - from Tropic Thunder Even Halloween is now a questionable time for a white person to put on blackface, but you might be okay with the dark face paint if you go as Robert Downey Jr.’s character, Kirk Lazarus, as his African-American Army sergeant character. It’ll be fun doing the voice, but it’ll be even more fun telling people why your race-altering costume is not un-PC, because it’s ironic and satirical. You can also invite your friends to dress up as the other actors and make it a Tropic Thunder group costume. Just don’t have anyone be Simple Jack, because that’s definitely not PC. “Joker-Faced Meg Ryan”  - from The Women Sometimes a good Halloween costume can come about by turning an another costume into something new. Like how John Carpenter turned a William Shatner mask into a Michael Myers make for Halloween. Now, for anyone wishing to go as the plastic-surgery disaster that is modern Meg Ryan (or her character, Mary Haines, in The Women), all you have to do is take a Dark Knight-style (and Heath Ledger-style) Joker mask, change the hair color or add on a curly blonde wig, and maybe flesh-out the color of the face. “The Dark McCain”  - from The Dark Knight Inspired by the cartoon of McCain as Batman printed in Entertainment Weekly, this may be the easiest and most timely movie-themed Halloween costume of all. Because this is going to be a heavy year for both political costumes and movie-related costumes, but this one fits both categories (as do a Bristol Palin Juno costume, a Bristol Palin Baby Mama costume, a Sarah Palin Miss Congeniality costume, a Barack Obama Hancock costume, etc.). Because there were readings of The Dark Knight in which people said the Caped Crusader is Bush or Cheney, those alternates will also work. Just be sure to get your McCain mask (or Bush or Cheney) and your Batman costume before both sell out. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Thu, 02 Oct 2008 16:00:44 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com10/2/2008 12:00:44 PMWith Halloween less than a month away, it’s time to start thinking about what to go as. That is, if you haven’t already. A good costume-loving cinephile typically knows well in advance what he or she will dress up as for Halloween (and Comic-Con, too). But if you’re one to wait until the last minute, and also one who likes to be a lot more contemporary than, say, dressing up as a Ghostbuster or Edward Scissorhands, I’ve got some suggestions for you for costumes based on recent films. Check them out after the jump. “Nuke the Fridge”  - from Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull For this costume, you need to prepare a basic Indiana Jones costume and then build a ’50s-style fridge costume out of cardboard to go around your whole body. It could look something like this, except instead of just exposing your head, you show your whole body, dressed in Indy clothes. When people ask what you are, explain the terrible scene from Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, as well as how it has spawned this new term for when a movie franchise goes sour. Also, if you like to be demonstrative, feel free to throw yourself into the air as if being propelled by a nuclear blast. “Chad Feldheimer”  - from Burn After Reading This should be a pretty easy homemade costume. Just get a dark red polo, patch on a handwritten “Hardbodies Fitness Center” logo to the chest, spray a little temporary blond into your hair and strap an ipod to your arm. Maybe even add “Chad” name tag, despite Brad Pitt’s lack of one in the film. For lack of a better quirky indie character this year (like Napoleon Dynamite), it’s a good enough idea to get you by without need for too much explanation. “Didier Revol”  - from Son of Rambow If you want to be a little quirkier and a lot more obscure, though, you could seek out appropriate ’80s Euro clothing in your local thrift shop and go as this popular French exchange student. For this, you’ll still need some kind of temporary hair coloring for that skunk stripe, and you definitely need some red shoes. The jacket doesn’t need to be perfect, and anyway you can also just find a triangle-print midriff-exposing t-shirt and be fine. For your few cool friends who’ve seen the movie, it shouldn’t be too hard to get the idea across. “Pepper Pots”  - from Iron Man Another thing lacking this year was strong female roles in comic book and action movies, from which you can usually get hot costumes like Lara Croft and Selene from Underworld. But as boring as it will be to go as Pepper Pots (or Rachel Dawes, or Betty Ross), putting on a women’s pantsuit and dying your hair light orange will also serve as a protest against the 2008 tough woman drought. Sure, you could try to pass something off as Fox from Wanted, but nobody will get it. If you really need to do something with skimpy outfits and machine guns, there’s always the Sarah Palin costume. However, that’s obviously not movie related enough, unless you somehow make it clearly reference Miss Congeniality. “The House Bunny”  - from The House Bunny For the girl who likes to keep things simple, there’s fortunately the old Playboy Bunny staple. And now it’s more movie-themed thanks to the comedy The House Bunny. Just get some hot pink duds and some basic bunny ears and you’re all set. Just don’t let people assume you’re just a sexy bunny, or, worse, either Bridget Jones or Elle Woods. Another old standard that has recently become movie-themed: zombie stripper. “Eve”  - from Wall-E The girl who doesn’t like to keep things simple may want to attempt a homemade Eve costume. It’s possible that it could serve as a sexy costume, as it can consist of a white body stocking, posterboard-cut flap arms and a white garbage pail top for the head. But as hot as that tight-fitting stocking will be, the real shape of Eve’s body is far sexier. So get out those plastic-welding tools and come up with something more streamlined and rounded. Otherwise people might just think you’re an iPod or some other Mac product. “There Will Be Blood group”  - from There Will Be Blood If you’re looking for a good group-costume idea, and you don’t want to be Scooby and gang, then the characters and iconic props from There Will Blood are sure to be a hit. While three friends dress up as Daniel Plainview, H.W. Plainview and Eli Sunday, three other friends must dress as a bowling pin, a milkshake and maybe an oil rig (copy this Eiffel Tower costume). “The Dude Playin’ a Dude Disguised as Another Dude” (aka “Robet Downey Jr. Blackface”  - from Tropic Thunder Even Halloween is now a questionable time for a white person to put on blackface, but you might be okay with the dark face paint if you go as Robert Downey Jr.’s character, Kirk Lazarus, as his African-American Army sergeant character. It’ll be fun doing the voice, but it’ll be even more fun telling people why your race-altering costume is not un-PC, because it’s ironic and satirical. You can also invite your friends to dress up as the other actors and make it a Tropic Thunder group costume. Just don’t have anyone be Simple Jack, because that’s definitely not PC. “Joker-Faced Meg Ryan”  - from The Women Sometimes a good Halloween costume can come about by turning an another costume into something new. Like how John Carpenter turned a William Shatner mask into a Michael Myers make for Halloween. Now, for anyone wishing to go as the plastic-surgery disaster that is modern Meg Ryan (or her character, Mary Haines, in The Women), all you have to do is take a Dark Knight-style (and Heath Ledger-style) Joker mask, change the hair color or add on a curly blonde wig, and maybe flesh-out the color of the face. “The Dark McCain”  - from The Dark Knight Inspired by the cartoon of McCain as Batman printed in Entertainment Weekly, this may be the easiest and most timely movie-themed Halloween costume of all. Because this is going to be a heavy year for both political costumes and movie-related costumes, but this one fits both categories (as do a Bristol Palin Juno costume, a Bristol Palin Baby Mama costume, a Sarah Palin Miss Congeniality costume, a Barack Obama Hancock costume, etc.). Because there were readings of The Dark Knight in which people said the Caped Crusader is Bush or Cheney, those alternates will also work. Just be sure to get your McCain mask (or Bush or Cheney) and your Batman costume before both sell out. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/csprague/archive/2008/9/12/35066.aspx Post By: csprague
Post To: Bloggity Blah Blah Blog
Post Date: 9/12/2008 2:22:24 PM
Body: Well, there's a whole host of potentially interesting films coming out this weekend. In weighing my options for Friday night viewing it narrows down pretty quickly to two films:First, is The Women. It has a great cast and is sure to deliver on lots of the usual chick-flick types of subjects. It could go one of two ways though, really fun and relatable (making me glad to be a woman) or terrible and catty (making me hate my gender). I really like Meg Ryan though and I am glad to see her in a movie again, it's been a while. One of my favorite movies has always been Proof of Life, which I thought she did a great job in.Secondly and speaking of supporting people I like, the brothers Coen are putting out their newest flick Burn After Reading. I am a big fan of these guys' sense of humor. The quirky characters and laughable scenarios are always entertaining. But it could really go either way for me at this point. I have to recall how little I liked The Ladykillers and this could be just as big of a miss. But Fargo and O Brother, Where Art Thou? were great, so I will just have to wait and see.So, which one am I going to go and see? It depends on who I can get to go with me. If I can find a lady friend, we'll see The Women, if I take my husband, we'll see Burn After Reading. I'll let you know later.
]]>Fri, 12 Sep 2008 18:22:24 GMTcspragueBloggity Blah Blah Blog9/12/2008 2:22:24 PMWell, there's a whole host of potentially interesting films coming out this weekend. In weighing my options for Friday night viewing it narrows down pretty quickly to two films:First, is The Women. It has a great cast and is sure to deliver on lots of the usual chick-flick types of subjects. It could go one of two ways though, really fun and relatable (making me glad to be a woman) or terrible and catty (making me hate my gender). I really like Meg Ryan though and I am glad to see her in a movie again, it's been a while. One of my favorite movies has always been Proof of Life, which I thought she did a great job in.Secondly and speaking of supporting people I like, the brothers Coen are putting out their newest flick Burn After Reading. I am a big fan of these guys' sense of humor. The quirky characters and laughable scenarios are always entertaining. But it could really go either way for me at this point. I have to recall how little I liked The Ladykillers and this could be just as big of a miss. But Fargo and O Brother, Where Art Thou? were great, so I will just have to wait and see.So, which one am I going to go and see? It depends on who I can get to go with me. If I can find a lady friend, we'll see The Women, if I take my husband, we'll see Burn After Reading. I'll let you know later. http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/9/9/34950.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 9/9/2008 4:01:08 PM
Body: Anticipating the worst from Diane English’s new remake of The Women is not just typical low expectations regarding remakes in general. My dread is specifically based on dissatisfaction with remakes and updates of films from the 1930s, arguably the best decade in cinema (it is certainly my favorite). While I may recognize and appreciate some favorable redos, such as DePalma’s Scarface (of which I’ve never really been a fan), Mazursky’s Down and Out in Beverly Hills and the multiple repeats from Hitchcock, I am more often disappointed with attempts to recreate ‘30s classics, even when I approach them with already low standards. Worst, for me, doesn’t necessarily have to do with the quality of the film alone, especially when related to remakes and updates. The titles and versions I’ve selected are hardly the worst in terms of craft or production value — you’ll note there are no Dracula movies on this list — and a few would almost be acceptable if they were more unique or solitary works. 10. Return to Oz (1985) I begin with a film that is not a remake in any form but tone. Yet I still see it as a kind of response to and update of the far more popular classic The Wizard of Oz (1939), which was viewed by some as not faithful enough to the source literature of L. Frank Baum.  It was a bit of a guilty pleasure for me growing up, but I lost regard for the film after suffering through a professor’s defensive screening of it on the last day of a film history course. Sure, it’s truer to Baum and the illustrations of W.W. Denslow and John R. Neill, but as MGM’s beautiful 1939 interpretation shows, it’s better to be imaginative than loyal when translating works between mediums. 9. The Front Page (1974) Billy Wilder’s version of the Ben Hecht and Charles MacArthur play, which was first adapted to film in 1931, is plenty hilarious thanks to stars Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau, as well as to a slew of terrific character actors, including Vincent Gardenia, Charles Durning, Austin Pendleton and Dick O’Neill. Also, the film’s homosexual innuendo is an interesting way of acknowledging Howard Hawks’ 1940 gender altering redo, His Girl Friday. I’d definitely choose Wilder’s film over the subsequent big screen version, the 1988 update Switching Channels, but compared to earlier adaptations and to Wilder’s earlier work, the ’74 Front Page is still quite a dissatisfying effort. My biggest problems are with the film’s artificial look, particularly its use of costumes that look more appropriate for a costume party than a period film, the gaudiness of the dialogue, especially the double entendres, and the miscasting of both Carol Burnett and Susan Sarandon (though my annoyance with the women in the film provide further acceptance of the gay undertones). 8. The Distinguished Gentleman (1992) This loose and uncredited reworking of Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (1939) could have been a worthy update had it included more laughs and more of a bite. The concept of placing a small-time con man in the big-time con of politics is ripe for good comedy and satire, plus it makes me think of the respectable crook/crooked respectability angle of Lubitsch’s Trouble in Paradise. Too bad the script was unsatisfactory (not surprising given it came partly from the screenwriter behind Leonard Part 6) and star Eddie Murphy was at the awkward moment of his career when he somehow lost his usual talent for comedy. 7. Flash Gordon (1980) I have to admit that I do actually love this movie. Well, to be fair, I only really love Queen’s score, Brian Blessed’s voice and Max Von Sydow’s makeup. The rest I just like. Anyway, despite my guilty pleasure in watching the thing on television throughout my childhood, it’s neither a good movie nor a successful update. It doesn’t really do the ‘30s Flash Gordon serials justice by being either a big-budget improvement or a tonally and narratively faithful throwback (comparatively, Star Wars succeeded at doing both). 6. The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1996) Disney’s idea to animate Victor Hugo’s novel was of questionable taste, but the studio’s need to so closely imitate William Dieterle’s 1939 adaptation was of questionable creative judgment. When I watch Disney’s Robin Hood, I’m not reminded of how much better Michael Curtiz’s 1938 version is; similarly, I’m able to appreciate the animated Beauty and the Beast and Alice and Wonderland without thinking of previous adaptations. Especially given the controversial lewdness and the simplification of the story, Disney’s version of Hunchback seems an insult to the source novel, Dieterle’s film and Charles Laughton’s characterization. 5. Meet Joe Black (1998) I’m a hypocrite to criticize anyone’s inability to be concise, but a three-hour remake of a 78-minute film (1934’s Death Takes a Holiday) displays a level of excess that even my meandering can’t compare to. Don’t get me wrong, though; I’m no hater of long films. But if you can make a long story short, it’s preferred that you do so. 4. The Mummy (1999) There’s no problem with reimagining a classic horror film as a blockbuster action movie, but taking something so iconically frightening as Boris Karloff’s Imhotep (in the ‘32 version) and updating the look with laughably cartoonish CGI is unfortunate. I know I’m on the other side of the fence from the moviegoers who made this a hit, but I would have actually enjoyed it more if the villain were depicted as a guy wrapped in bandages. 3. Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein (1994) Of course, CG may have been better than this. In fact, the only thing worse than Robert De Niro as the Creature would have been a hand-drawn animated Frankenberry in the role. 2. King Kong (2005) Technically, the 1976 remake with Jeff Bridges is a worse film, but that version at least took some interesting liberties in updating the 1933 classic. Peter Jackson’s intention seemed to be only to faithfully recreate the original with better special effects. And given the fact that many of the CG sequences are embarrassingly awful, I have to say this film was a more monumental failure in terms of purpose and promise. Jackson gave me yet another reason for questioning the point of filmmakers remaking their favorite films. 1. Mr. Deeds (2002) Other than the minor way in which this comedy updates the conservative message of Mr. Deeds Goes to Town (1936), there is really no reason for Capra’s film to have been remade, especially with such broad, immature comedy from Adam Sandler. While the original Mr. Deeds completely speaks to and of its time, this includes no topicality, no compelling historical or contemporary relevancy and no lasting cultural significance. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Tue, 09 Sep 2008 20:01:08 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com9/9/2008 4:01:08 PM Anticipating the worst from Diane English’s new remake of The Women is not just typical low expectations regarding remakes in general. My dread is specifically based on dissatisfaction with remakes and updates of films from the 1930s, arguably the best decade in cinema (it is certainly my favorite). While I may recognize and appreciate some favorable redos, such as DePalma’s Scarface (of which I’ve never really been a fan), Mazursky’s Down and Out in Beverly Hills and the multiple repeats from Hitchcock, I am more often disappointed with attempts to recreate ‘30s classics, even when I approach them with already low standards. Worst, for me, doesn’t necessarily have to do with the quality of the film alone, especially when related to remakes and updates. The titles and versions I’ve selected are hardly the worst in terms of craft or production value — you’ll note there are no Dracula movies on this list — and a few would almost be acceptable if they were more unique or solitary works. 10. Return to Oz (1985) I begin with a film that is not a remake in any form but tone. Yet I still see it as a kind of response to and update of the far more popular classic The Wizard of Oz (1939), which was viewed by some as not faithful enough to the source literature of L. Frank Baum.  It was a bit of a guilty pleasure for me growing up, but I lost regard for the film after suffering through a professor’s defensive screening of it on the last day of a film history course. Sure, it’s truer to Baum and the illustrations of W.W. Denslow and John R. Neill, but as MGM’s beautiful 1939 interpretation shows, it’s better to be imaginative than loyal when translating works between mediums. 9. The Front Page (1974) Billy Wilder’s version of the Ben Hecht and Charles MacArthur play, which was first adapted to film in 1931, is plenty hilarious thanks to stars Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau, as well as to a slew of terrific character actors, including Vincent Gardenia, Charles Durning, Austin Pendleton and Dick O’Neill. Also, the film’s homosexual innuendo is an interesting way of acknowledging Howard Hawks’ 1940 gender altering redo, His Girl Friday. I’d definitely choose Wilder’s film over the subsequent big screen version, the 1988 update Switching Channels, but compared to earlier adaptations and to Wilder’s earlier work, the ’74 Front Page is still quite a dissatisfying effort. My biggest problems are with the film’s artificial look, particularly its use of costumes that look more appropriate for a costume party than a period film, the gaudiness of the dialogue, especially the double entendres, and the miscasting of both Carol Burnett and Susan Sarandon (though my annoyance with the women in the film provide further acceptance of the gay undertones). 8. The Distinguished Gentleman (1992) This loose and uncredited reworking of Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (1939) could have been a worthy update had it included more laughs and more of a bite. The concept of placing a small-time con man in the big-time con of politics is ripe for good comedy and satire, plus it makes me think of the respectable crook/crooked respectability angle of Lubitsch’s Trouble in Paradise. Too bad the script was unsatisfactory (not surprising given it came partly from the screenwriter behind Leonard Part 6) and star Eddie Murphy was at the awkward moment of his career when he somehow lost his usual talent for comedy. 7. Flash Gordon (1980) I have to admit that I do actually love this movie. Well, to be fair, I only really love Queen’s score, Brian Blessed’s voice and Max Von Sydow’s makeup. The rest I just like. Anyway, despite my guilty pleasure in watching the thing on television throughout my childhood, it’s neither a good movie nor a successful update. It doesn’t really do the ‘30s Flash Gordon serials justice by being either a big-budget improvement or a tonally and narratively faithful throwback (comparatively, Star Wars succeeded at doing both). 6. The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1996) Disney’s idea to animate Victor Hugo’s novel was of questionable taste, but the studio’s need to so closely imitate William Dieterle’s 1939 adaptation was of questionable creative judgment. When I watch Disney’s Robin Hood, I’m not reminded of how much better Michael Curtiz’s 1938 version is; similarly, I’m able to appreciate the animated Beauty and the Beast and Alice and Wonderland without thinking of previous adaptations. Especially given the controversial lewdness and the simplification of the story, Disney’s version of Hunchback seems an insult to the source novel, Dieterle’s film and Charles Laughton’s characterization. 5. Meet Joe Black (1998) I’m a hypocrite to criticize anyone’s inability to be concise, but a three-hour remake of a 78-minute film (1934’s Death Takes a Holiday) displays a level of excess that even my meandering can’t compare to. Don’t get me wrong, though; I’m no hater of long films. But if you can make a long story short, it’s preferred that you do so. 4. The Mummy (1999) There’s no problem with reimagining a classic horror film as a blockbuster action movie, but taking something so iconically frightening as Boris Karloff’s Imhotep (in the ‘32 version) and updating the look with laughably cartoonish CGI is unfortunate. I know I’m on the other side of the fence from the moviegoers who made this a hit, but I would have actually enjoyed it more if the villain were depicted as a guy wrapped in bandages. 3. Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein (1994) Of course, CG may have been better than this. In fact, the only thing worse than Robert De Niro as the Creature would have been a hand-drawn animated Frankenberry in the role. 2. King Kong (2005) Technically, the 1976 remake with Jeff Bridges is a worse film, but that version at least took some interesting liberties in updating the 1933 classic. Peter Jackson’s intention seemed to be only to faithfully recreate the original with better special effects. And given the fact that many of the CG sequences are embarrassingly awful, I have to say this film was a more monumental failure in terms of purpose and promise. Jackson gave me yet another reason for questioning the point of filmmakers remaking their favorite films. 1. Mr. Deeds (2002) Other than the minor way in which this comedy updates the conservative message of Mr. Deeds Goes to Town (1936), there is really no reason for Capra’s film to have been remade, especially with such broad, immature comedy from Adam Sandler. While the original Mr. Deeds completely speaks to and of its time, this includes no topicality, no compelling historical or contemporary relevancy and no lasting cultural significance. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/groups/Coming_Soon/Upcoming_Movies_Week_of_9_12/216/34885/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: SkyPilot
Post To: Coming Soon
Post Date: 9/8/2008 12:14:02 PM
Body: Waa-hooo! This Friday we are officially delivered from the movie release Dead Zone! Let Oscar-bait season begin!FEATURES1. Burn After Reading -- New Coen bros. movie this Friday! Does the trailer for this dark spy comedy remind anyone else of the dark stoner/detective comedy The Big Lebowski?Brad Pitt and John Malkovich are both interviewed about the film on SpoutBlog.And there's a Recast The Big Lebowski contest you're all welcome to join in the Filmgaming group. The swag we're giving away would go great with a bathrobe.2. Righteous Kill -- Robert Deniro and Al Pacino do the bad cop/bad cop routine.This could be...(a) a supremely awesome, double-espresso shot of testosterone, a la Michael Mann's Heat. Or this could be ...(b) a blown opportunity on the level of The Score (remember that extremely forgettable movie with Deniro, Marlon Brando, and Ed Norton?) Unfortunately I'm expecting Righteous Kill to be closer to option (b). Director Jon Avnet is no Michael Mann. His most recent film 88 Minutes starred Al Pacino, was in theaters for about half an hour, and barely got a kind word spoken about it. There's some hope for Avnet, though -- the first film he directed was Fried Green Tomatoes.3. Tyler Perry's The Family That Preys -- Of all Tyler Perry films, this one looks most interesting to me. Kathy Bates and Alfre Woodard are long-time friends and the matriarchs of two seemingly different families: Bates' family is wealthy and WASPy, while Woodard's family is working class African American. The families experience similar crises, including extramarital affairs and unethical business practices.I haven't seen any Tyler Perry movies. Any fans out there that could recommend a film to start with?4. Christmas on Mars: A Fantastical Film Freakout Featuring the Flaming Lips -- (limited release) This sci-fi flick is the directorial debut of Flaming Lips frontman Wayne Coyne. The story: it's Christmastime on Mars. When the community's life support system begins to malfunction, one man on the repair team begins to hallucinate about the birth of a baby. The Lips provide the music and each band member plays a role.I'm far from a die-hard Lips fan, but this sounds incredible! The film sounds like a natural (but inspired) progression from creating rock operas like Yoshimi Battles the Pink Robots. I'd enjoy seeing more rock opera movies. Are there any films you guys would recommend? I was disappointed by Tommy, and I haven't seen Pink Floyd: The Wall (I only like about half of the music on The Wall). If you guys haven't watched The Wizard of Oz while listening to Dark Side of the Moon, I highly recommend it.Here's the trailer for Christmas on Mars: 5. The Women -- This contemporary remake of feminist comedy drama The Women (1939) stars Annette Bening, Candice Bergen, Jada Pinkett Smith, Meg Ryan, Eva Mendes, and Debra Messing. The story begins when the most-envied of the women discovers her husband is having an affair with a shopgirl. With smaller roles played by Bette Midler, Cloris Leachman, and Carrie Fisher, this movie has as many stars as The Thin Red Line.Has anyone seen the original The Women? The remake is being called gossipy and bitchy-wisecracking; do you have any other bitchy-wisecracking favorites?DOCUMENTARIES6. Flow: For Love of Water -- (limited release) Presents how corporate privatization of water is adversely affecting many around the world. 7. Moving Midway -- (limited release) When Raleigh, NC man Charlie Cheshire decides to relocate the historic buildings of the Midway plantation, white Raleigh residents are outraged at the idea of moving their beloved symbol of the Old South. This is contrasted by the perspective of another branch of the Chesire family--the descendants of the slaves who were owned by the white Cheshires. The two branches of the Cheshire family meet on camera, which would be very interesting to see. Here's the trailer:
]]>Mon, 08 Sep 2008 16:14:02 GMTSkyPilotComing Soon9/8/2008 12:14:02 PMWaa-hooo! This Friday we are officially delivered from the movie release Dead Zone! Let Oscar-bait season begin!FEATURES1. Burn After Reading -- New Coen bros. movie this Friday! Does the trailer for this dark spy comedy remind anyone else of the dark stoner/detective comedy The Big Lebowski?Brad Pitt and John Malkovich are both interviewed about the film on SpoutBlog.And there's a Recast The Big Lebowski contest you're all welcome to join in the Filmgaming group. The swag we're giving away would go great with a bathrobe.2. Righteous Kill -- Robert Deniro and Al Pacino do the bad cop/bad cop routine.This could be...(a) a supremely awesome, double-espresso shot of testosterone, a la Michael Mann's Heat. Or this could be ...(b) a blown opportunity on the level of The Score (remember that extremely forgettable movie with Deniro, Marlon Brando, and Ed Norton?) Unfortunately I'm expecting Righteous Kill to be closer to option (b). Director Jon Avnet is no Michael Mann. His most recent film 88 Minutes starred Al Pacino, was in theaters for about half an hour, and barely got a kind word spoken about it. There's some hope for Avnet, though -- the first film he directed was Fried Green Tomatoes.3. Tyler Perry's The Family That Preys -- Of all Tyler Perry films, this one looks most interesting to me. Kathy Bates and Alfre Woodard are long-time friends and the matriarchs of two seemingly different families: Bates' family is wealthy and WASPy, while Woodard's family is working class African American. The families experience similar crises, including extramarital affairs and unethical business practices.I haven't seen any Tyler Perry movies. Any fans out there that could recommend a film to start with?4. Christmas on Mars: A Fantastical Film Freakout Featuring the Flaming Lips -- (limited release) This sci-fi flick is the directorial debut of Flaming Lips frontman Wayne Coyne. The story: it's Christmastime on Mars. When the community's life support system begins to malfunction, one man on the repair team begins to hallucinate about the birth of a baby. The Lips provide the music and each band member plays a role.I'm far from a die-hard Lips fan, but this sounds incredible! The film sounds like a natural (but inspired) progression from creating rock operas like Yoshimi Battles the Pink Robots. I'd enjoy seeing more rock opera movies. Are there any films you guys would recommend? I was disappointed by Tommy, and I haven't seen Pink Floyd: The Wall (I only like about half of the music on The Wall). If you guys haven't watched The Wizard of Oz while listening to Dark Side of the Moon, I highly recommend it.Here's the trailer for Christmas on Mars: 5. The Women -- This contemporary remake of feminist comedy drama The Women (1939) stars Annette Bening, Candice Bergen, Jada Pinkett Smith, Meg Ryan, Eva Mendes, and Debra Messing. The story begins when the most-envied of the women discovers her husband is having an affair with a shopgirl. With smaller roles played by Bette Midler, Cloris Leachman, and Carrie Fisher, this movie has as many stars as The Thin Red Line.Has anyone seen the original The Women? The remake is being called gossipy and bitchy-wisecracking; do you have any other bitchy-wisecracking favorites?DOCUMENTARIES6. Flow: For Love of Water -- (limited release) Presents how corporate privatization of water is adversely affecting many around the world. 7. Moving Midway -- (limited release) When Raleigh, NC man Charlie Cheshire decides to relocate the historic buildings of the Midway plantation, white Raleigh residents are outraged at the idea of moving their beloved symbol of the Old South. This is contrasted by the perspective of another branch of the Chesire family--the descendants of the slaves who were owned by the white Cheshires. The two branches of the Cheshire family meet on camera, which would be very interesting to see. Here's the trailer: http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/9/5/34805.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 9/5/2008 4:00:30 PM
Body: September is often used as a dumping ground for movies, but this year it also appears to be a dumping ground for once-great or once-promising talents who’ve lost their way. I’ve taken note of at least 10 individuals (actors, actresses and a couple filmmakers) who have new films out this month (I’m counting the Labor Day weekend, too) who are due for a visit from the Ghost of Movies Past. More specifically, these people need to backtrack to the ‘90s, which is when most of them did their last truly great work. Perhaps they need to take a look at that earlier work and remember what it was they used to do. Or perhaps they just need to get advice from the Coen brothers, who similarly hit a slump in the new millennium, but who are now back on track with a few more Oscars in hand and a new comedy, Burn After Reading, which looks to be more in line with their ‘90s classic The Big Lebowski than their 2000s missteps Intolerable Cruelty and The Ladykillers. Nicolas Cage (guilty September 2008 release: Bangkok Dangerous) It could be argued that Cage made just as many worthless movies in the ‘90s as he has in the ‘00s. Also, considering his box office success with Ghost Rider and the National Treasure movies, plus his excellent Oscar-nominated dual role in Adaptation, it’s debatable that he’s “lost his way.” But it’s clear to me, at least, that he currently lacks any concern for the quality of his work, as evidenced by this month’s Bangkok Dangerous, which makes even Con Air look well crafted by comparison. In the ‘90s, Cage was doing much greater work for Scorsese, Lynch and even Michael Bay, and he won an Oscar for Best Actor, too. Unless he starts caring about the roles he chooses, he’s more likely to one day receive lifetime recognition by the Razzies than a lifetime achievement award from the Academy. Who he needs to work with again to get it back: the Coens; Uncle Francis (Ford Coppola); Scorsese; even Michael Bay would be good. Neil LaBute (guilty September 2008 release: Lakeview Terrace) He directed Nic Cage in the terrible 2006 remake of The Wicker Man, placing him a long way in the wrong direction from that promising playwright/filmmaker who gave us the wicked men of In the Company of Men and Your Friends and Neighbors in ’97 and ’98, respectively. With 2000’s Nurse Betty, LaBute began working from other people’s scripts, which actually wasn’t too bad considering his next fully self-authored work, the 2003 adaptation of his own play, The Shape of Things, was a one-note disappointment. This month he attempts to rise up from his 2006 disaster with Lakeview Terrace, again from material he didn’t write, and it could be decent. But despite my rejection of Shape, I’d prefer he return to the kind of mean-spirited stuff he wrote himself a decade back. If anyone else, though, I’d say he could potentially do well adapting something by Bret Easton Ellis. Who he needs to work with again to get it back: himself; Aaron Eckhart. Mathieu Kassovitz (guilty September 2008 release: Babylon A.D.) It may be hard to imagine, but the guy who helmed the critically panned new sci-fi movie Babylon A.D. was once honored as Best Director at Cannes. The year was 1995 and the film was La Haine, a powerful black-and-white French drama about three hooligans from the low-income outskirts of Paris. On Rotten Tomatoes, it is rated 100% fresh by critics; Babylon has a nearly inverse score of 7%. Kassovitz, who has also done fine work as an actor (Amelie; Munich), recently claimed that the movie is bad because of alterations made by 20th Century Fox rather than because of his work as a director. Well, fine, but the guy’s previous film, Gothika, was pretty shitty too (how it received a RT score of 73% or earned $150 million is beyond me). What he needs to work with again to get it back: French dialogue; independent distributors. Vin Diesel (guilty September 2008 release: Babylon A.D.) The star of Babylon A.D. is also in need of a ‘90s backtrack. Between Saving Private Ryan in ’98 and both Boiler Room and Pitch Black in 2000, I believed Diesel was to be this generation’s greatest action hero, one who could actually act, too (he seemed like he could then, anyway). But the guy’s been a real loser in the action and the acting departments since 2002’s xXx. Diesel made a recent try at quality work with Sidney Lumet’s Find Me Guilty, but it’s possible audiences don’t want to or simply can’t take the actor seriously enough. It’s probably too late for him, now, although he should see some increase in audience size with his return to the Fast and the Furious franchise next year. Who he needs to work with again to get it back: Spielberg. Meg Ryan (guilty September 2008 release: The Women) Can you reverse the effects of collagen implants? Ryan, who was such a cutie as a staple of ‘90s romantic comedy, now looks so creepy with all the work she’s had done on her face that it’s no wonder Picturehouse had to be so excessive with the Photoshop in the poster for The Women (though Ryan is at least slightly more recognizable than Annette Bening). To give Ryan’s doctors credit, the actress’ downturn may have actually had more to do with that misguided affair she had with Russell Crowe while making 2000’s Proof of Life, which was pretty much the beginning of her career slump. Who she needs to work with again to get it back: Tom Hanks; Nora Ephron. Jason Biggs (guilty September 2008 release: My Best Friend’s Girl) Yeah, it’s a shame that Biggs’ greatest achievement was American Pie, but that movie truly is a masterpiece compared to most of the films he’s appeared in since. However, my hope for him to backtrack to the ‘90s isn’t so he’ll recall what made him a star in a ’99 gross-out comedy; it’s to make the plea that he return to sitcoms. Before he was the pie-fucking kid, he was a semi-regular on the early ‘90s series Drexell’s Class. While I never saw the show, which only lasted 18 episodes, I do think Biggs is better suited for television, mainly because I’d rather not see his face on the big screen any longer, especially as yet another embarrassment-prone comedic sidekick, as he is in this month’s My Best Friend’s Girl. Hopefully one day he’ll get out of the cinemas and realize he’s this generation’s Jon Cryer, who eventually found his place in a lame yet popular series. Who he needs to work with to get it back: ABC; NBC; CBS. Woody Harrelson (guilty September 2008 release: Surfer, Dude) Following the signoff of Cheers in the early ‘90s, Harrelson seemed on track to be one of this generation’s most prestigious actors, on the level of Sean Penn and Russell Crowe even. Yet after wowing us in Natural Born Killers and then receiving an Oscar nomination mid-decade for The People vs. Larry Flynt, he kind of left the spotlight to appear in less-prominent films (like his other release this month, Battle in Seattle) and some less-prominent roles in major releases. He’s at least working a lot (8 releases in 2008 alone) and showing up in great movies like No Country for Old Men, but I have to wonder what he’s thinking by being in Surfer, Dude. OK, so he’s good in the occasional comedy, including this year’s Semi-Pro, but he’d far more respected if he cut back on the quantity of films and concentrated on the quality ones. Who he needs to work with again to get it back: fewer filmmakers; an agent that can get him bigger, meatier roles. Matthew McConaughey (guilty September 2008 release: Surfer, Dude) I guess it’s not surprising that McConaughey ended up in a movie called Surfer, Dude, but I still wish he’d stayed the course of films like Lone Star, A Time to Kill, Amistad and Contact instead of the sorts of romantic comedies and adventures he’s done since the turn of the century. He was even obnoxious in Tropic Thunder. Personally, I enjoyed him in 2002’s Reign of Fire, but otherwise he’s been a real disappointment this whole decade, and reuniting with his EdTV costar Woody Harrelson for a dumb surfing comedy may well be the biggest upset so far. Who/what he needs to work with again to get it back: Spielberg; Grisham novels; Jodie Foster. Cole Hauser (guilty September 2008 release: The Family That Preys) Like McConaughey, a number of fellow actors from Dazed and Confused have experienced slumps this decade, including Ben Affleck and Hauser. I honestly once believed the latter to be one of the most promising newcomers of the ‘90s. I guess it could be difficult to make a prestigious career out of only playing bad guys, but with his performances in Higher Learning and All Over Me, he seemed perfectly suited to try. Unfortunately, his villain from 2 Fast 2 Furious was a lot less than I thought him to be capable of. And he hasn’t really wowed me in anything else this decade, either. It’s possible that appearing in Tyler Perry’s attempted crossover film, The Family That Preys, will be a good career move, but I’m highly skeptical. Who he needs to work with again to get it back: Richard Linklater; Ben Affleck. Al Pacino (guilty September 2008 release: Righteous Kill) I’m picking only one of the two veteran actors united for this month’s Righteous Kill, because I’d probably be saying the same thing about each. Despite their being accepted as two of the greatest actors of the 20th century, neither has seen Oscar recognition since the early ‘90s, and neither has been very good at choosing quality roles lately. But at least Robert DeNiro has tried to do more interesting things with his career, whether it be appearing in broad comedies or returning to directing. Plus, it seems like he tried to backtrack a bit by re-teaming with his Wag the Dog director, Barry Levinson, for What Just Happened? He probably shouldn’t have just dropped out of Martin Campbell’s Edge of Darkness, but whatever. As for Pacino, he seems even more tired and passed his prime than DeNiro does, and I don’t believe he’s even tried to give a great performance in anything since 2000. The fact that he appeared in Gigli is the biggest disappointment, although it’s somewhat understandable since he was reuniting with the guy who directed him finally toward his first Oscar. His upcoming portrayal of Salvador Dali in next year’s Dali & I: The Surreal Story proves he has potential to do something unpredictable, but I’m honestly expecting another unfortunate ham effort. I’d love to see him and DeNiro paired up for an actual Scorsese movie rather than a film that’s pretending to be one (was there any other reason for the Righteous Kill trailer to feature “Sympathy for the Devil”?). Who he needs to work with again to get it back: Lumet; Coppola; DePalma. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Fri, 05 Sep 2008 20:00:30 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com9/5/2008 4:00:30 PM September is often used as a dumping ground for movies, but this year it also appears to be a dumping ground for once-great or once-promising talents who’ve lost their way. I’ve taken note of at least 10 individuals (actors, actresses and a couple filmmakers) who have new films out this month (I’m counting the Labor Day weekend, too) who are due for a visit from the Ghost of Movies Past. More specifically, these people need to backtrack to the ‘90s, which is when most of them did their last truly great work. Perhaps they need to take a look at that earlier work and remember what it was they used to do. Or perhaps they just need to get advice from the Coen brothers, who similarly hit a slump in the new millennium, but who are now back on track with a few more Oscars in hand and a new comedy, Burn After Reading, which looks to be more in line with their ‘90s classic The Big Lebowski than their 2000s missteps Intolerable Cruelty and The Ladykillers. Nicolas Cage (guilty September 2008 release: Bangkok Dangerous) It could be argued that Cage made just as many worthless movies in the ‘90s as he has in the ‘00s. Also, considering his box office success with Ghost Rider and the National Treasure movies, plus his excellent Oscar-nominated dual role in Adaptation, it’s debatable that he’s “lost his way.” But it’s clear to me, at least, that he currently lacks any concern for the quality of his work, as evidenced by this month’s Bangkok Dangerous, which makes even Con Air look well crafted by comparison. In the ‘90s, Cage was doing much greater work for Scorsese, Lynch and even Michael Bay, and he won an Oscar for Best Actor, too. Unless he starts caring about the roles he chooses, he’s more likely to one day receive lifetime recognition by the Razzies than a lifetime achievement award from the Academy. Who he needs to work with again to get it back: the Coens; Uncle Francis (Ford Coppola); Scorsese; even Michael Bay would be good. Neil LaBute (guilty September 2008 release: Lakeview Terrace) He directed Nic Cage in the terrible 2006 remake of The Wicker Man, placing him a long way in the wrong direction from that promising playwright/filmmaker who gave us the wicked men of In the Company of Men and Your Friends and Neighbors in ’97 and ’98, respectively. With 2000’s Nurse Betty, LaBute began working from other people’s scripts, which actually wasn’t too bad considering his next fully self-authored work, the 2003 adaptation of his own play, The Shape of Things, was a one-note disappointment. This month he attempts to rise up from his 2006 disaster with Lakeview Terrace, again from material he didn’t write, and it could be decent. But despite my rejection of Shape, I’d prefer he return to the kind of mean-spirited stuff he wrote himself a decade back. If anyone else, though, I’d say he could potentially do well adapting something by Bret Easton Ellis. Who he needs to work with again to get it back: himself; Aaron Eckhart. Mathieu Kassovitz (guilty September 2008 release: Babylon A.D.) It may be hard to imagine, but the guy who helmed the critically panned new sci-fi movie Babylon A.D. was once honored as Best Director at Cannes. The year was 1995 and the film was La Haine, a powerful black-and-white French drama about three hooligans from the low-income outskirts of Paris. On Rotten Tomatoes, it is rated 100% fresh by critics; Babylon has a nearly inverse score of 7%. Kassovitz, who has also done fine work as an actor (Amelie; Munich), recently claimed that the movie is bad because of alterations made by 20th Century Fox rather than because of his work as a director. Well, fine, but the guy’s previous film, Gothika, was pretty shitty too (how it received a RT score of 73% or earned $150 million is beyond me). What he needs to work with again to get it back: French dialogue; independent distributors. Vin Diesel (guilty September 2008 release: Babylon A.D.) The star of Babylon A.D. is also in need of a ‘90s backtrack. Between Saving Private Ryan in ’98 and both Boiler Room and Pitch Black in 2000, I believed Diesel was to be this generation’s greatest action hero, one who could actually act, too (he seemed like he could then, anyway). But the guy’s been a real loser in the action and the acting departments since 2002’s xXx. Diesel made a recent try at quality work with Sidney Lumet’s Find Me Guilty, but it’s possible audiences don’t want to or simply can’t take the actor seriously enough. It’s probably too late for him, now, although he should see some increase in audience size with his return to the Fast and the Furious franchise next year. Who he needs to work with again to get it back: Spielberg. Meg Ryan (guilty September 2008 release: The Women) Can you reverse the effects of collagen implants? Ryan, who was such a cutie as a staple of ‘90s romantic comedy, now looks so creepy with all the work she’s had done on her face that it’s no wonder Picturehouse had to be so excessive with the Photoshop in the poster for The Women (though Ryan is at least slightly more recognizable than Annette Bening). To give Ryan’s doctors credit, the actress’ downturn may have actually had more to do with that misguided affair she had with Russell Crowe while making 2000’s Proof of Life, which was pretty much the beginning of her career slump. Who she needs to work with again to get it back: Tom Hanks; Nora Ephron. Jason Biggs (guilty September 2008 release: My Best Friend’s Girl) Yeah, it’s a shame that Biggs’ greatest achievement was American Pie, but that movie truly is a masterpiece compared to most of the films he’s appeared in since. However, my hope for him to backtrack to the ‘90s isn’t so he’ll recall what made him a star in a ’99 gross-out comedy; it’s to make the plea that he return to sitcoms. Before he was the pie-fucking kid, he was a semi-regular on the early ‘90s series Drexell’s Class. While I never saw the show, which only lasted 18 episodes, I do think Biggs is better suited for television, mainly because I’d rather not see his face on the big screen any longer, especially as yet another embarrassment-prone comedic sidekick, as he is in this month’s My Best Friend’s Girl. Hopefully one day he’ll get out of the cinemas and realize he’s this generation’s Jon Cryer, who eventually found his place in a lame yet popular series. Who he needs to work with to get it back: ABC; NBC; CBS. Woody Harrelson (guilty September 2008 release: Surfer, Dude) Following the signoff of Cheers in the early ‘90s, Harrelson seemed on track to be one of this generation’s most prestigious actors, on the level of Sean Penn and Russell Crowe even. Yet after wowing us in Natural Born Killers and then receiving an Oscar nomination mid-decade for The People vs. Larry Flynt, he kind of left the spotlight to appear in less-prominent films (like his other release this month, Battle in Seattle) and some less-prominent roles in major releases. He’s at least working a lot (8 releases in 2008 alone) and showing up in great movies like No Country for Old Men, but I have to wonder what he’s thinking by being in Surfer, Dude. OK, so he’s good in the occasional comedy, including this year’s Semi-Pro, but he’d far more respected if he cut back on the quantity of films and concentrated on the quality ones. Who he needs to work with again to get it back: fewer filmmakers; an agent that can get him bigger, meatier roles. Matthew McConaughey (guilty September 2008 release: Surfer, Dude) I guess it’s not surprising that McConaughey ended up in a movie called Surfer, Dude, but I still wish he’d stayed the course of films like Lone Star, A Time to Kill, Amistad and Contact instead of the sorts of romantic comedies and adventures he’s done since the turn of the century. He was even obnoxious in Tropic Thunder. Personally, I enjoyed him in 2002’s Reign of Fire, but otherwise he’s been a real disappointment this whole decade, and reuniting with his EdTV costar Woody Harrelson for a dumb surfing comedy may well be the biggest upset so far. Who/what he needs to work with again to get it back: Spielberg; Grisham novels; Jodie Foster. Cole Hauser (guilty September 2008 release: The Family That Preys) Like McConaughey, a number of fellow actors from Dazed and Confused have experienced slumps this decade, including Ben Affleck and Hauser. I honestly once believed the latter to be one of the most promising newcomers of the ‘90s. I guess it could be difficult to make a prestigious career out of only playing bad guys, but with his performances in Higher Learning and All Over Me, he seemed perfectly suited to try. Unfortunately, his villain from 2 Fast 2 Furious was a lot less than I thought him to be capable of. And he hasn’t really wowed me in anything else this decade, either. It’s possible that appearing in Tyler Perry’s attempted crossover film, The Family That Preys, will be a good career move, but I’m highly skeptical. Who he needs to work with again to get it back: Richard Linklater; Ben Affleck. Al Pacino (guilty September 2008 release: Righteous Kill) I’m picking only one of the two veteran actors united for this month’s Righteous Kill, because I’d probably be saying the same thing about each. Despite their being accepted as two of the greatest actors of the 20th century, neither has seen Oscar recognition since the early ‘90s, and neither has been very good at choosing quality roles lately. But at least Robert DeNiro has tried to do more interesting things with his career, whether it be appearing in broad comedies or returning to directing. Plus, it seems like he tried to backtrack a bit by re-teaming with his Wag the Dog director, Barry Levinson, for What Just Happened? He probably shouldn’t have just dropped out of Martin Campbell’s Edge of Darkness, but whatever. As for Pacino, he seems even more tired and passed his prime than DeNiro does, and I don’t believe he’s even tried to give a great performance in anything since 2000. The fact that he appeared in Gigli is the biggest disappointment, although it’s somewhat understandable since he was reuniting with the guy who directed him finally toward his first Oscar. His upcoming portrayal of Salvador Dali in next year’s Dali & I: The Surreal Story proves he has potential to do something unpredictable, but I’m honestly expecting another unfortunate ham effort. I’d love to see him and DeNiro paired up for an actual Scorsese movie rather than a film that’s pretending to be one (was there any other reason for the Righteous Kill trailer to feature “Sympathy for the Devil”?). Who he needs to work with again to get it back: Lumet; Coppola; DePalma. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/karina/archive/2008/6/30/31924.aspx Post By: Karina
Post To: Karina on SpoutBlog
Post Date: 6/30/2008 5:01:44 PM
Body: Two quotes just popped out of my feed reader and clubbed me over the head; when I came to, I recalled a couple of other soundbites from my week in LAFF that sort of seem related. First, from David Poland’s eye-roll at “Tom & Jerry On Crack cartoon” Wanted: Wanted is more like the last of big budget porn, throwing around endless style along with massive fake boobs and enough smoke to choke a Scott. Guys still get off on it - guys can get off on anything that tells them it wants to get them off - but one simply has to wonder, “Doesn’t anyone just f*** anymore?” We’ll get back to that. First, a digression… When I was at LAFF, I met an famous gay filmmaker at a party, and he started cattily joking about how a certain extremely famous married actor and actress are always going on shows like Letterman and bragging about how they “love to have heterosexual sex.” The filmmaker said this couple had to be covering for one another’s secret gay life, because no one who is actually having heterosexual sex uses the phrase “heterosexual sex” to talk about it. The actress in question is, totally coincidentally, a costar in Diane English’s much-feared remake of The Women, for which Nikki Finke says she singlehandedly convinced Warner Brothers to quadruple their marketing budget. Her reasoning as to why an extra $20 million or so of ads is going to pay off: Forget about the merits of the movie: there’s potential for box office moolah stirred up by some savvy Sex-exploiting, Even if the movie is no good, it could reach SATC’s two-quadrant audience with ad slogans like: “If you loved Sex And The City, then you need to see The Women who started it all.” … I bet women eager for another pic about female friendships and upscale lifestyles and urban sex will open The Women for a $20+M weekend. Ah, the old “bad sex is better than no sex at all,” argument. Might be more feasible if English herself hadn’t, just days before at LAFF, a) implicated herself as Finke’s top informant, and b) announced that her back-up plan for the film involves the sloppy math-dependent invention of a “fifth quadrant” for gay men. So the boys get their porn, the girls get theirs, and if they decide they’ve already had enough this summer, gay men will be graciously offered the scraps. Everywhere you look, Hollywood’s asking us to shout our heterosexual impulses from the rooftops––or at least, funnel them into the box office, “even if the movie is no good.” To answer David Poland’s question: no, I don’t think they do. Related: the TCM newsletter that just arrived in my inbox informs that the original The Women will be airing on the cable channel at 10pm EST tomorrow night. Preview it above. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Karina Longworth
]]>Mon, 30 Jun 2008 21:01:44 GMTKarinaKarina on SpoutBlog6/30/2008 5:01:44 PM Two quotes just popped out of my feed reader and clubbed me over the head; when I came to, I recalled a couple of other soundbites from my week in LAFF that sort of seem related. First, from David Poland’s eye-roll at “Tom & Jerry On Crack cartoon” Wanted: Wanted is more like the last of big budget porn, throwing around endless style along with massive fake boobs and enough smoke to choke a Scott. Guys still get off on it - guys can get off on anything that tells them it wants to get them off - but one simply has to wonder, “Doesn’t anyone just f*** anymore?” We’ll get back to that. First, a digression… When I was at LAFF, I met an famous gay filmmaker at a party, and he started cattily joking about how a certain extremely famous married actor and actress are always going on shows like Letterman and bragging about how they “love to have heterosexual sex.” The filmmaker said this couple had to be covering for one another’s secret gay life, because no one who is actually having heterosexual sex uses the phrase “heterosexual sex” to talk about it. The actress in question is, totally coincidentally, a costar in Diane English’s much-feared remake of The Women, for which Nikki Finke says she singlehandedly convinced Warner Brothers to quadruple their marketing budget. Her reasoning as to why an extra $20 million or so of ads is going to pay off: Forget about the merits of the movie: there’s potential for box office moolah stirred up by some savvy Sex-exploiting, Even if the movie is no good, it could reach SATC’s two-quadrant audience with ad slogans like: “If you loved Sex And The City, then you need to see The Women who started it all.” … I bet women eager for another pic about female friendships and upscale lifestyles and urban sex will open The Women for a $20+M weekend. Ah, the old “bad sex is better than no sex at all,” argument. Might be more feasible if English herself hadn’t, just days before at LAFF, a) implicated herself as Finke’s top informant, and b) announced that her back-up plan for the film involves the sloppy math-dependent invention of a “fifth quadrant” for gay men. So the boys get their porn, the girls get theirs, and if they decide they’ve already had enough this summer, gay men will be graciously offered the scraps. Everywhere you look, Hollywood’s asking us to shout our heterosexual impulses from the rooftops––or at least, funnel them into the box office, “even if the movie is no good.” To answer David Poland’s question: no, I don’t think they do. Related: the TCM newsletter that just arrived in my inbox informs that the original The Women will be airing on the cable channel at 10pm EST tomorrow night. Preview it above. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Karina Longworth http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/6/30/31923.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 6/30/2008 5:01:04 PM
Body: Two quotes just popped out of my feed reader and clubbed me over the head; when I came to, I recalled a couple of other soundbites from my week in LAFF that sort of seem related. First, from David Poland’s eye-roll at “Tom & Jerry On Crack cartoon” Wanted: Wanted is more like the last of big budget porn, throwing around endless style along with massive fake boobs and enough smoke to choke a Scott. Guys still get off on it - guys can get off on anything that tells them it wants to get them off - but one simply has to wonder, “Doesn’t anyone just f*** anymore?” We’ll get back to that. First, a digression… When I was at LAFF, I met an famous gay filmmaker at a party, and he started cattily joking about how a certain extremely famous married actor and actress are always going on shows like Letterman and bragging about how they “love to have heterosexual sex.” The filmmaker said this couple had to be covering for one another’s secret gay life, because no one who is actually having heterosexual sex uses the phrase “heterosexual sex” to talk about it. The actress in question is, totally coincidentally, a costar in Diane English’s much-feared remake of The Women, for which Nikki Finke says she singlehandedly convinced Warner Brothers to quadruple their marketing budget. Her reasoning as to why an extra $20 million or so of ads is going to pay off: Forget about the merits of the movie: there’s potential for box office moolah stirred up by some savvy Sex-exploiting, Even if the movie is no good, it could reach SATC’s two-quadrant audience with ad slogans like: “If you loved Sex And The City, then you need to see The Women who started it all.” … I bet women eager for another pic about female friendships and upscale lifestyles and urban sex will open The Women for a $20+M weekend. Ah, the old “bad sex is better than no sex at all,” argument. Might be more feasible if English herself hadn’t, just days before at LAFF, a) implicated herself as Finke’s top informant, and b) announced that her back-up plan for the film involves the sloppy math-dependent invention of a “fifth quadrant” for gay men. So the boys get their porn, the girls get theirs, and if they decide they’ve already had enough this summer, gay men will be graciously offered the scraps. Everywhere you look, Hollywood’s asking us to shout our heterosexual impulses from the rooftops––or at least, funnel them into the box office, “even if the movie is no good.” To answer David Poland’s question: no, I don’t think they do. Related: the TCM newsletter that just arrived in my inbox informs that the original The Women will be airing on the cable channel at 10pm EST tomorrow night. Preview it above. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Mon, 30 Jun 2008 21:01:04 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com6/30/2008 5:01:04 PM Two quotes just popped out of my feed reader and clubbed me over the head; when I came to, I recalled a couple of other soundbites from my week in LAFF that sort of seem related. First, from David Poland’s eye-roll at “Tom & Jerry On Crack cartoon” Wanted: Wanted is more like the last of big budget porn, throwing around endless style along with massive fake boobs and enough smoke to choke a Scott. Guys still get off on it - guys can get off on anything that tells them it wants to get them off - but one simply has to wonder, “Doesn’t anyone just f*** anymore?” We’ll get back to that. First, a digression… When I was at LAFF, I met an famous gay filmmaker at a party, and he started cattily joking about how a certain extremely famous married actor and actress are always going on shows like Letterman and bragging about how they “love to have heterosexual sex.” The filmmaker said this couple had to be covering for one another’s secret gay life, because no one who is actually having heterosexual sex uses the phrase “heterosexual sex” to talk about it. The actress in question is, totally coincidentally, a costar in Diane English’s much-feared remake of The Women, for which Nikki Finke says she singlehandedly convinced Warner Brothers to quadruple their marketing budget. Her reasoning as to why an extra $20 million or so of ads is going to pay off: Forget about the merits of the movie: there’s potential for box office moolah stirred up by some savvy Sex-exploiting, Even if the movie is no good, it could reach SATC’s two-quadrant audience with ad slogans like: “If you loved Sex And The City, then you need to see The Women who started it all.” … I bet women eager for another pic about female friendships and upscale lifestyles and urban sex will open The Women for a $20+M weekend. Ah, the old “bad sex is better than no sex at all,” argument. Might be more feasible if English herself hadn’t, just days before at LAFF, a) implicated herself as Finke’s top informant, and b) announced that her back-up plan for the film involves the sloppy math-dependent invention of a “fifth quadrant” for gay men. So the boys get their porn, the girls get theirs, and if they decide they’ve already had enough this summer, gay men will be graciously offered the scraps. Everywhere you look, Hollywood’s asking us to shout our heterosexual impulses from the rooftops––or at least, funnel them into the box office, “even if the movie is no good.” To answer David Poland’s question: no, I don’t think they do. Related: the TCM newsletter that just arrived in my inbox informs that the original The Women will be airing on the cable channel at 10pm EST tomorrow night. Preview it above. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/karina/archive/2008/6/3/30418.aspx Post By: Karina
Post To: Karina on SpoutBlog
Post Date: 6/3/2008 3:01:10 PM
Body: Oh good! The long-gestating remake of George Cukor’s bitchy masterpiece The Women has a trailer––and just in time to catch all those lady filmgoers in the afterglow of their weekend orgy! Some thoughts: __Cukor’s original, released in 1939 and based on Clare Boothe Luce’s hit play, was basically a melodrama cranked up to the tempo of screwball; the performances today play as camp, but even the comedy is underlined with some kind of emotional truth. This new trailer plays broad, broad, broad throughout. The whole idea of the text is that it offers a glimpse into the way women behave when together in uncomfortably intimate spaces; going too big with the punchlines and the delivery seems like a tonal mistake. –Where the original film had an ultimately cynical view of female friendships, depicting them as nuanced and unstable and constantly flipping between fingers-crossed faux sympathy, outright hostility and tentative trust, thisThe Women seems to be surrounding Meg Ryan’s Mary with a Sex and the City-like cadre of demographically varied Bestest Friends. The Annette Benning character, who I think is a stand-in for Rosalind Russell in the original film, seems annoying, but hardly the busy-body back-stabber that Russell made classic. –What happened to Annette Benning? Wasn’t she, like, attractive, just a couple of years ago? I wonder if they’re purposefully making her look frumpy, to hammer home the point that she’s supposed to be slightly older than Ryan. Ryan, incidentally, looks neither old, nor young, nor like Meg Ryan. She just sort of looks like a ball of wax. –In the original, Joan Crawford played romantic rival to Norma Shearer; in real life, both actresses were in their 30s, and the film didn’t suggest a beauty or an age gap between the two women as much as a gap in flash and class. Based on this trailer, the new The Women makes a big deal out of Ryan’s husband leaving her for the much-younger, much-foxier Eva Mendes. This would seem to turn the story into a midlife-crisis cliche, rather than a reckoning with the mysteries of long-term love. –There was an amazing scene in the original where Shearer goes to Reno to get a divorce, and she stays in a house with (I think) Russell and Paulette Godard, and those two women literally get into a catfight––there’s a big close up of one of them biting the other’s leg, which is pretty much the raciest thing that I can remember seeing in a film released within ten years of the Production Code. From this new trailer, I can’t tell if there even *is* a divorce, or a Paulette Godard character, never mind leg biting. I understand the need to modernize, but The Women isn’t The Women without a cat fight. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Karina Longworth
]]>Tue, 03 Jun 2008 19:01:10 GMTKarinaKarina on SpoutBlog6/3/2008 3:01:10 PM Oh good! The long-gestating remake of George Cukor’s bitchy masterpiece The Women has a trailer––and just in time to catch all those lady filmgoers in the afterglow of their weekend orgy! Some thoughts: __Cukor’s original, released in 1939 and based on Clare Boothe Luce’s hit play, was basically a melodrama cranked up to the tempo of screwball; the performances today play as camp, but even the comedy is underlined with some kind of emotional truth. This new trailer plays broad, broad, broad throughout. The whole idea of the text is that it offers a glimpse into the way women behave when together in uncomfortably intimate spaces; going too big with the punchlines and the delivery seems like a tonal mistake. –Where the original film had an ultimately cynical view of female friendships, depicting them as nuanced and unstable and constantly flipping between fingers-crossed faux sympathy, outright hostility and tentative trust, thisThe Women seems to be surrounding Meg Ryan’s Mary with a Sex and the City-like cadre of demographically varied Bestest Friends. The Annette Benning character, who I think is a stand-in for Rosalind Russell in the original film, seems annoying, but hardly the busy-body back-stabber that Russell made classic. –What happened to Annette Benning? Wasn’t she, like, attractive, just a couple of years ago? I wonder if they’re purposefully making her look frumpy, to hammer home the point that she’s supposed to be slightly older than Ryan. Ryan, incidentally, looks neither old, nor young, nor like Meg Ryan. She just sort of looks like a ball of wax. –In the original, Joan Crawford played romantic rival to Norma Shearer; in real life, both actresses were in their 30s, and the film didn’t suggest a beauty or an age gap between the two women as much as a gap in flash and class. Based on this trailer, the new The Women makes a big deal out of Ryan’s husband leaving her for the much-younger, much-foxier Eva Mendes. This would seem to turn the story into a midlife-crisis cliche, rather than a reckoning with the mysteries of long-term love. –There was an amazing scene in the original where Shearer goes to Reno to get a divorce, and she stays in a house with (I think) Russell and Paulette Godard, and those two women literally get into a catfight––there’s a big close up of one of them biting the other’s leg, which is pretty much the raciest thing that I can remember seeing in a film released within ten years of the Production Code. From this new trailer, I can’t tell if there even *is* a divorce, or a Paulette Godard character, never mind leg biting. I understand the need to modernize, but The Women isn’t The Women without a cat fight. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Karina Longworth http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/6/3/30417.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 6/3/2008 3:01:01 PM
Body: Oh good! The long-gestating remake of George Cukor’s bitchy masterpiece The Women has a trailer––and just in time to catch all those lady filmgoers in the afterglow of their weekend orgy! Some thoughts: __Cukor’s original, released in 1939 and based on Clare Boothe Luce’s hit play, was basically a melodrama cranked up to the tempo of screwball; the performances today play as camp, but even the comedy is underlined with some kind of emotional truth. This new trailer plays broad, broad, broad throughout. The whole idea of the text is that it offers a glimpse into the way women behave when together in uncomfortably intimate spaces; going too big with the punchlines and the delivery seems like a tonal mistake. –Where the original film had an ultimately cynical view of female friendships, depicting them as nuanced and unstable and constantly flipping between fingers-crossed faux sympathy, outright hostility and tentative trust, thisThe Women seems to be surrounding Meg Ryan’s Mary with a Sex and the City-like cadre of demographically varied Bestest Friends. The Annette Benning character, who I think is a stand-in for Rosalind Russell in the original film, seems annoying, but hardly the busy-body back-stabber that Russell made classic. –What happened to Annette Benning? Wasn’t she, like, attractive, just a couple of years ago? I wonder if they’re purposefully making her look frumpy, to hammer home the point that she’s supposed to be slightly older than Ryan. Ryan, incidentally, looks neither old, nor young, nor like Meg Ryan. She just sort of looks like a ball of wax. –In the original, Joan Crawford played romantic rival to Norma Shearer; in real life, both actresses were in their 30s, and the film didn’t suggest a beauty or an age gap between the two women as much as a gap in flash and class. Based on this trailer, the new The Women makes a big deal out of Ryan’s husband leaving her for the much-younger, much-foxier Eva Mendes. This would seem to turn the story into a midlife-crisis cliche, rather than a reckoning with the mysteries of long-term love. –There was an amazing scene in the original where Shearer goes to Reno to get a divorce, and she stays in a house with (I think) Russell and Paulette Godard, and those two women literally get into a catfight––there’s a big close up of one of them biting the other’s leg, which is pretty much the raciest thing that I can remember seeing in a film released within ten years of the Production Code. From this new trailer, I can’t tell if there even *is* a divorce, or a Paulette Godard character, never mind leg biting. I understand the need to modernize, but The Women isn’t The Women without a cat fight. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Tue, 03 Jun 2008 19:01:01 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com6/3/2008 3:01:01 PM Oh good! The long-gestating remake of George Cukor’s bitchy masterpiece The Women has a trailer––and just in time to catch all those lady filmgoers in the afterglow of their weekend orgy! Some thoughts: __Cukor’s original, released in 1939 and based on Clare Boothe Luce’s hit play, was basically a melodrama cranked up to the tempo of screwball; the performances today play as camp, but even the comedy is underlined with some kind of emotional truth. This new trailer plays broad, broad, broad throughout. The whole idea of the text is that it offers a glimpse into the way women behave when together in uncomfortably intimate spaces; going too big with the punchlines and the delivery seems like a tonal mistake. –Where the original film had an ultimately cynical view of female friendships, depicting them as nuanced and unstable and constantly flipping between fingers-crossed faux sympathy, outright hostility and tentative trust, thisThe Women seems to be surrounding Meg Ryan’s Mary with a Sex and the City-like cadre of demographically varied Bestest Friends. The Annette Benning character, who I think is a stand-in for Rosalind Russell in the original film, seems annoying, but hardly the busy-body back-stabber that Russell made classic. –What happened to Annette Benning? Wasn’t she, like, attractive, just a couple of years ago? I wonder if they’re purposefully making her look frumpy, to hammer home the point that she’s supposed to be slightly older than Ryan. Ryan, incidentally, looks neither old, nor young, nor like Meg Ryan. She just sort of looks like a ball of wax. –In the original, Joan Crawford played romantic rival to Norma Shearer; in real life, both actresses were in their 30s, and the film didn’t suggest a beauty or an age gap between the two women as much as a gap in flash and class. Based on this trailer, the new The Women makes a big deal out of Ryan’s husband leaving her for the much-younger, much-foxier Eva Mendes. This would seem to turn the story into a midlife-crisis cliche, rather than a reckoning with the mysteries of long-term love. –There was an amazing scene in the original where Shearer goes to Reno to get a divorce, and she stays in a house with (I think) Russell and Paulette Godard, and those two women literally get into a catfight––there’s a big close up of one of them biting the other’s leg, which is pretty much the raciest thing that I can remember seeing in a film released within ten years of the Production Code. From this new trailer, I can’t tell if there even *is* a divorce, or a Paulette Godard character, never mind leg biting. I understand the need to modernize, but The Women isn’t The Women without a cat fight. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog 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: 980

]]>Mon, 14 Dec 2009 22:42:20 GMT6791154980Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/revenge/MemberTagFilms.aspxrevenge
Number of films tagged: 5189

Number of people who tagged: 145

Number of times used: 489

]]>Wed, 02 Dec 2009 23:13:41 GMT5189145489Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/remake/MemberTagFilms.aspxremake
Number of films tagged: 156

Number of people who tagged: 71

Number of times used: 204

]]>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 22:39:44 GMT15671204Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/marriage/MemberTagFilms.aspxmarriage
Number of films tagged: 3471

Number of people who tagged: 67

Number of times used: 267

]]>Sun, 29 Nov 2009 15:39:11 GMT347167267Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/children/MemberTagFilms.aspxchildren
Number of films tagged: 212

Number of people who tagged: 66

Number of times used: 270

]]>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:28:15 GMT21266270Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/betrayal/MemberTagFilms.aspxbetrayal
Number of films tagged: 1035

Number of people who tagged: 62

Number of times used: 155

]]>Sun, 20 Dec 2009 18:42:32 GMT103562155Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/mother/MemberTagFilms.aspxmother
Number of films tagged: 2522

Number of people who tagged: 53

Number of times used: 152

]]>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 20:51:56 GMT252253152Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/divorce/MemberTagFilms.aspxdivorce
Number of films tagged: 1042

Number of people who tagged: 45

Number of times used: 121

]]>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 05:35:44 GMT104245121Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/pregnancy/MemberTagFilms.aspxpregnancy
Number of films tagged: 1306

Number of people who tagged: 44

Number of times used: 110

]]>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 05:22:12 GMT130644110Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/women/MemberTagFilms.aspxwomen
Number of films tagged: 598

Number of people who tagged: 44

Number of times used: 107

]]>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 13:02:59 GMT59844107Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/daughter/MemberTagFilms.aspxdaughter
Number of films tagged: 3658

Number of people who tagged: 40

Number of times used: 138

]]>Mon, 14 Sep 2009 21:01:02 GMT365840138Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/jealousy/MemberTagFilms.aspxjealousy
Number of films tagged: 1295

Number of people who tagged: 39

Number of times used: 120

]]>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 16:13:05 GMT129539120Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/lesbian/MemberTagFilms.aspxlesbian
Number of films tagged: 58

Number of people who tagged: 35

Number of times used: 70

]]>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 11:01:03 GMT583570Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/affair/MemberTagFilms.aspxaffair
Number of films tagged: 84

Number of people who tagged: 29

Number of times used: 96

]]>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 17:27:26 GMT842996Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/new-york/MemberTagFilms.aspxnew-york
Number of films tagged: 87

Number of people who tagged: 26

Number of times used: 98

]]>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 22:25:46 GMT872698Tag