list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around sex, lies, and videotape 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/sex_lies_and_videotape/39557/default.aspx Title: sex, lies, and videotape
Year: 1989
Director: Steven Soderbergh
Plot: Steven Soderbergh kickstarted the independent film movement of the 1990s with this landmark drama about the tangled relationships among four people and a video camera. John (Peter Gallagher) is an unscrupulous, self-centered yuppie lawyer with a beautiful wife named Ann (Andie MacDowell). Ann feels secure and well provided-for in their relationship, but she has almost no interest in sex; she tells her therapist that she's more concerned about waste disposal. John, however, is still quite interested in sex and is having an affair with Ann's sister Cynthia (Laura San Giacomo), whose personality is fire to Ann's ice; sex is the one area in which she's been able to best her more successful sister, and she relishes her ability to seduce Ann's husband. Into this dysfunctional picture comes Graham (James Spader), a college friend of John's whom he hasn't seen in nine years. Graham has decided that talking about sex is more interesting than actually having sex, so he meets women and asks them discuss their desires and fantasies as he tapes them with a camcorder. A sensation at the Sundance Film Festival, the film made that festival a synonym for a new brand of low-budget indie dramas about contemporary life and relationships. Together with Quentin Tarantino's very different Pulp Fiction (1994), sex, lies, and videotape was one of the most influential movies for independent filmmaking of the 1990s. ~ Mark Deming, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 15
Number of Lists: 37
Number of blog posts: 5
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Wed, 26 Aug 2009 21:03:58 GMTsex, lies, and videotape1989Steven Soderbergh<a href="/players/P___112040/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Steven Soderbergh</a> kickstarted the independent film movement of the 1990s with this landmark drama about the tangled relationships among four people and a video camera. John (<a href="/players/P____25621/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Peter Gallagher</a>) is an unscrupulous, self-centered yuppie lawyer with a beautiful wife named Ann (<a href="/players/P____44167/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Andie MacDowell</a>). Ann feels secure and well provided-for in their relationship, but she has almost no interest in sex; she tells her therapist that she's more concerned about waste disposal. John, however, is still quite interested in sex and is having an affair with Ann's sister Cynthia (<a href="/players/P____26671/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Laura San Giacomo</a>), whose personality is fire to Ann's ice; sex is the one area in which she's been able to best her more successful sister, and she relishes her ability to seduce Ann's husband. Into this dysfunctional picture comes Graham (<a href="/players/P____67051/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>James Spader</a>), a college friend of John's whom he hasn't seen in nine years. Graham has decided that talking about sex is more interesting than actually having sex, so he meets women and asks them discuss their desires and fantasies as he tapes them with a camcorder. A sensation at the Sundance Film Festival, the film made that festival a synonym for a new brand of low-budget indie dramas about contemporary life and relationships. Together with <a href="/players/P___113658/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Quentin Tarantino</a>'s very different <a href=/films/89494/default.aspx style='text-decoration:underline'>Pulp Fiction</a> (1994), sex, lies, and videotape was one of the most influential movies for independent filmmaking of the 1990s. ~ Mark Deming, All Movie Guide15Tag Target (>10)3753http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/t57138nhy4n.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/sex_lies_and_videotape/39557/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/karina/archive/2009/2/27/40736.aspx Post By: Karina
Post To: Karina on SpoutBlog
Post Date: 2/27/2009 6:02:39 PM
Body: Woah. indieWIRE is reporting that Geoff Gilmore, a key player at the Sundance Film Festival for almost two full decades, is leaving that festival to take a job as Chief Creative Officer at Tribeca Enterprises, the New York organization that, amongst other things, is responsible for mounting the Tribeca Film Festival. It seems too soon to assess What It All Means, but obviously, beyond each Festival’s assorted trials and tribulations, Sundance and Tribeca have had very different identities. Sundance is primarily associated with a certain type of actor-driven independent drama; Tribeca, in its brief history, has been most successful at unearthing international gems. Of course, this is not the first sign that Tribeca has an interest in moving in more of a Sundance direction. In late 2007, Tribeca announced plans to streamline in the hopes of becoming more significant as an indie film market. At the time, Nancy Schafer lamented, “we haven’t had our Sex, Lies & Videotape yet. That’s what we want, and that’s what the industry wants.” Tribeca 2008 was my favorite installment of the festival yet, but beyond Jury Prize winner Let the Right One in, which was not a world premiere, it came and went without a breakout narrative hit. In light of this, the luring of Gilmore seems like the next logical step towards Tribeca’s long-ago stated mission. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Karina Longworth
]]>Fri, 27 Feb 2009 23:02:39 GMTKarinaKarina on SpoutBlog2/27/2009 6:02:39 PM Woah. indieWIRE is reporting that Geoff Gilmore, a key player at the Sundance Film Festival for almost two full decades, is leaving that festival to take a job as Chief Creative Officer at Tribeca Enterprises, the New York organization that, amongst other things, is responsible for mounting the Tribeca Film Festival. It seems too soon to assess What It All Means, but obviously, beyond each Festival’s assorted trials and tribulations, Sundance and Tribeca have had very different identities. Sundance is primarily associated with a certain type of actor-driven independent drama; Tribeca, in its brief history, has been most successful at unearthing international gems. Of course, this is not the first sign that Tribeca has an interest in moving in more of a Sundance direction. In late 2007, Tribeca announced plans to streamline in the hopes of becoming more significant as an indie film market. At the time, Nancy Schafer lamented, “we haven’t had our Sex, Lies & Videotape yet. That’s what we want, and that’s what the industry wants.” Tribeca 2008 was my favorite installment of the festival yet, but beyond Jury Prize winner Let the Right One in, which was not a world premiere, it came and went without a breakout narrative hit. In light of this, the luring of Gilmore seems like the next logical step towards Tribeca’s long-ago stated mission. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Karina Longworth http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2009/2/27/40681.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 2/27/2009 6:01:21 PM
Body: Woah. indieWIRE is reporting that Geoff Gilmore, a key player at the Sundance Film Festival for almost two full decades, is leaving that festival to take a job as Chief Creative Officer at Tribeca Enterprises, the New York organization that, amongst other things, is responsible for mounting the Tribeca Film Festival. It seems too soon to assess What It All Means, but obviously, beyond each Festival’s assorted trials and tribulations, Sundance and Tribeca have had very different identities. Sundance is primarily associated with a certain type of actor-driven independent drama; Tribeca, in its brief history, has been most successful at unearthing international gems. Of course, this is not the first sign that Tribeca has an interest in moving in more of a Sundance direction. In late 2007, Tribeca announced plans to streamline in the hopes of becoming more significant as an indie film market. At the time, Nancy Schafer lamented, “we haven’t had our Sex, Lies & Videotape yet. That’s what we want, and that’s what the industry wants.” Tribeca 2008 was my favorite installment of the festival yet, but beyond Jury Prize winner Let the Right One in, which was not a world premiere, it came and went without a breakout narrative hit. In light of this, the luring of Gilmore seems like the next logical step towards Tribeca’s long-ago stated mission. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Fri, 27 Feb 2009 23:01:21 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com2/27/2009 6:01:21 PM Woah. indieWIRE is reporting that Geoff Gilmore, a key player at the Sundance Film Festival for almost two full decades, is leaving that festival to take a job as Chief Creative Officer at Tribeca Enterprises, the New York organization that, amongst other things, is responsible for mounting the Tribeca Film Festival. It seems too soon to assess What It All Means, but obviously, beyond each Festival’s assorted trials and tribulations, Sundance and Tribeca have had very different identities. Sundance is primarily associated with a certain type of actor-driven independent drama; Tribeca, in its brief history, has been most successful at unearthing international gems. Of course, this is not the first sign that Tribeca has an interest in moving in more of a Sundance direction. In late 2007, Tribeca announced plans to streamline in the hopes of becoming more significant as an indie film market. At the time, Nancy Schafer lamented, “we haven’t had our Sex, Lies & Videotape yet. That’s what we want, and that’s what the industry wants.” Tribeca 2008 was my favorite installment of the festival yet, but beyond Jury Prize winner Let the Right One in, which was not a world premiere, it came and went without a breakout narrative hit. In light of this, the luring of Gilmore seems like the next logical step towards Tribeca’s long-ago stated mission. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2009/1/13/39472.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 1/13/2009 5:01:36 PM
Body: Getting ready for the Sundance Film Festival can be very exciting. As we await the event’s Thursday opening, we can’t stop wondering what will be the next big thing. Will this year’s hit be the highly-anticipated Michael Cera project Paper Hearts, or will it be something that we as of yet know nothing about? It’s easy to forget, however, that oftentimes the next big thing is also the next lamest thing. Sundance sensations, those films that are much-buzzed-about, that sell for a lot of money, that go on to be marketed like crazy and ultimately receive Oscar recognition, tend to lend themselves most easily to backlashes. Usually such derision is deserved, as in the case of the following ten films, each of which made a big splash at Sundance despite being bad. 10. Brick (Rian Johnson; 2005 Sundance premiere) When Blade Runner was first released, critics attacked its novelty of combining film noir with science fiction. Yet when Brick arrived in Park City, its similar genre-bending mix of film noir and teen films was welcomed as the most original film in years. In both circumstances, critics were wrong, and while Blade Runner ultimately became a classic, Brick is retrospectively even sillier now than it was when it won a Special Jury Prize “for originality of vision” four years ago. Yes, the film is a fresh idea in theory, but it doesn’t really work on screen, no matter how much you want it to or think it does. It’s simply a novelty gag for film geeks who love noir — while not quite as enjoyable for fans of the teen genre. Is there really anyone who wouldn’t just rather watch a double feature of The Big Sleep and Heathers? 9. Little Miss Sunshine (Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris; 2006 Sundance premiere) Never mind its impact on the culture of Sundance. The annoying “what will be the next Little Miss Sunshine?” idea was just a substitute for similar questions going back as far as 1990 (“what will be the next sex, lies, and videotape?”). The real problem with LMS is that it’s a decent dysfunctional family comedy that falls apart in the third act. On the positive side, it finally got Alan Arkin an Oscar. But on the more glaring negative side, it also got Abigail Breslin an Oscar nomination. Hardly worthy, also, of its Best Picture nod or its Best Original Screenplay win, the film’s success is the product of a terrific marketing team and moviegoers’ acceptance of cheesy endings — and has nothing to do with the quality of the film. 8. The Brothers McMullen (Edward Burns; 1995 Sundance premiere) While the name Fox Searchlight is now synonymous with marketing the hell out of “indie” sensations like Little Miss Sunshine, Juno and Slumdog Millionaire, the specialty division has been overdoing it with unworthy films since the very first Sundance hit they distributed. The Brothers McMullen is not necessarily a bad film, but it isn’t anything special either. Some say the 1995 fest was the downward turning point for Sundance, whether because it showed us a major “sellout” who wasn’t actually as good as he’d been celebrated as being (Kevin Smith, who disappointed with his sophomore effort, Mallrats) or because a lackluster picture like McMullen won the Grand Jury Prize. And like Smith, Edward Burns ultimately revealed himself to be something of an embarrassment, talent-wise, to the reputation of Sundance alums. 7. Garden State (Zach Braff; 2004 Sundance premiere) 2004 was the year that indie quirkiness got out of hand at Sundance (see #3). Sure, Garden State got us all into The Shins, but it also got filmmakers too into a genre I call “homecoming of age” movies, those banal stories about twenty- and thirty- somethings who revisit their homes due to a dying or dead parent and involve themselves with wacky townies in the process. Any idiot can write a script of this type and fill it with quirky scenery and an obnoxious yet adorable love interest. Sundance must still be getting countless submissions of this kind of film, but unfortunately for the rest of the world’s idiot filmmakers, they aren’t TV stars like Zach Braff. 6. SherryBaby (Laurie Collyer; 2006 Sundance premiere) Sundance has long been a haven for depressing films involving junkies and/or incest, but few have been as overrated as SherryBaby. Once again, it’s all about the star power, as the film might not have been so hyped had Maggie Gyllenhaal not been in the lead. Then again, it might have actually been a better film without her. Grandly over-praised for her performance as the easily played rehabilitating mom, the actress got undeserved kudos simply for being raw and despicable. Her Oscar snub was a relief, at least. 5. Born Into Brothels (Zana Briski and Ross Kauffman; 2004 Sundance premiere) It may have won the documentary Audience Award at Sundance and the documentary Oscar a year later, but that doesn’t excuse Born Into Brothels from being a disgrace to nonfiction filmmaking. One of the most self-satisfying docs ever made, the film will forever be marked by its footage of co-director Zana Briski figuratively patting herself on the back during a fundraiser, with which she sinfully seeks sainthood for involving herself in the lives of her film’s subjects. If documentary was synonymous with charity, Born Into Brothels would indeed be a great film, but documentaries like this should merely be an inspiration to charity, not charity itself. 4. Masked and Anonymous (Larry Charles; 2003 Sundance premiere) One of the most anticipated films of the 2003 festival due to a script co-written by Bob Dylan and an unbelievable cast including Dylan, Jeff Bridges, John Goodman, Penelope Cruz, Ed Harris, Luke Wilson, Mickey Rourke, Angela Bassett, Jessica Lange and many other big names, the very messy Masked and Anonymous therefore ended up the biggest disappointment of that year. Its worth was later defended and praised by such critics as Jonathan Rosenbaum, who included it in his 2003 Top Ten list, and Salon.com’s Stephanie Zacharek. But most of us are in agreement that it’s one of the biggest wastes of talent in years. 3. Napoleon Dynamite (Jared Hess; 2004 Sundance premiere) Napoleon Dynamite’s inclusion on this list is likely to upset more people than Brick’s, but at least the Brick devotees can defend their fandom with more than just shouts of “It’s funny!” Because the thing is, Napoleon Dynamite is not comedy. It is merely quirky, which is not the same thing as funny. Jared Hess’ pop culture phenomenon does feature some highly original characters and situations, but his execution of these elements is obvious and uninteresting. “Gosh!” is neither a good punchline nor a good catchphrase. 2. The Blair Witch Project (Daniel Myrick and Eduardo Sanchez; 1999 Sundance premiere) It must be appreciated as much as attacked for its groundbreaking marketing campaign, and in many ways the film itself can be acknowledged for having a terrific premise with an almost perfect realization of that idea. But for the most part, The Blair Witch Project is a basic, amateur and poorly concluded effort that turned the appeal of indie simplicity on its head. Almost a decade earlier, when filmmakers saw Slacker and said “I can do that,” they were mostly mistaken. But The Blair Witch allowed every schmo with a digital camera to declare, “I can do that,” and be relatively correct in his or her statement. It’s okay for indie filmmaking to seem easy, but when it really is that easy, it degrades the truly talented. 1. Boxing Helena (Jennifer Lynch; 1993 Sundance premiere) Cult appeal notwithstanding, Boxing Helena was one of the first really awful movies to be up for Sundance’s Grand Jury Prize. And although in the 17 years since, the festival has been easily criticized for allowing bad films with lots of buzz and/or big name talent to be included in competition, no film has been as unworthy as this. Had it starred original choice Madonna in the part of the titular amputee, Boxing Helena might have really deserved to at least become a midnight movie. However, with its lesser-name casting, it’s barely even good enough for Skinamax programming. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Tue, 13 Jan 2009 22:01:36 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com1/13/2009 5:01:36 PMGetting ready for the Sundance Film Festival can be very exciting. As we await the event’s Thursday opening, we can’t stop wondering what will be the next big thing. Will this year’s hit be the highly-anticipated Michael Cera project Paper Hearts, or will it be something that we as of yet know nothing about? It’s easy to forget, however, that oftentimes the next big thing is also the next lamest thing. Sundance sensations, those films that are much-buzzed-about, that sell for a lot of money, that go on to be marketed like crazy and ultimately receive Oscar recognition, tend to lend themselves most easily to backlashes. Usually such derision is deserved, as in the case of the following ten films, each of which made a big splash at Sundance despite being bad. 10. Brick (Rian Johnson; 2005 Sundance premiere) When Blade Runner was first released, critics attacked its novelty of combining film noir with science fiction. Yet when Brick arrived in Park City, its similar genre-bending mix of film noir and teen films was welcomed as the most original film in years. In both circumstances, critics were wrong, and while Blade Runner ultimately became a classic, Brick is retrospectively even sillier now than it was when it won a Special Jury Prize “for originality of vision” four years ago. Yes, the film is a fresh idea in theory, but it doesn’t really work on screen, no matter how much you want it to or think it does. It’s simply a novelty gag for film geeks who love noir — while not quite as enjoyable for fans of the teen genre. Is there really anyone who wouldn’t just rather watch a double feature of The Big Sleep and Heathers? 9. Little Miss Sunshine (Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris; 2006 Sundance premiere) Never mind its impact on the culture of Sundance. The annoying “what will be the next Little Miss Sunshine?” idea was just a substitute for similar questions going back as far as 1990 (“what will be the next sex, lies, and videotape?”). The real problem with LMS is that it’s a decent dysfunctional family comedy that falls apart in the third act. On the positive side, it finally got Alan Arkin an Oscar. But on the more glaring negative side, it also got Abigail Breslin an Oscar nomination. Hardly worthy, also, of its Best Picture nod or its Best Original Screenplay win, the film’s success is the product of a terrific marketing team and moviegoers’ acceptance of cheesy endings — and has nothing to do with the quality of the film. 8. The Brothers McMullen (Edward Burns; 1995 Sundance premiere) While the name Fox Searchlight is now synonymous with marketing the hell out of “indie” sensations like Little Miss Sunshine, Juno and Slumdog Millionaire, the specialty division has been overdoing it with unworthy films since the very first Sundance hit they distributed. The Brothers McMullen is not necessarily a bad film, but it isn’t anything special either. Some say the 1995 fest was the downward turning point for Sundance, whether because it showed us a major “sellout” who wasn’t actually as good as he’d been celebrated as being (Kevin Smith, who disappointed with his sophomore effort, Mallrats) or because a lackluster picture like McMullen won the Grand Jury Prize. And like Smith, Edward Burns ultimately revealed himself to be something of an embarrassment, talent-wise, to the reputation of Sundance alums. 7. Garden State (Zach Braff; 2004 Sundance premiere) 2004 was the year that indie quirkiness got out of hand at Sundance (see #3). Sure, Garden State got us all into The Shins, but it also got filmmakers too into a genre I call “homecoming of age” movies, those banal stories about twenty- and thirty- somethings who revisit their homes due to a dying or dead parent and involve themselves with wacky townies in the process. Any idiot can write a script of this type and fill it with quirky scenery and an obnoxious yet adorable love interest. Sundance must still be getting countless submissions of this kind of film, but unfortunately for the rest of the world’s idiot filmmakers, they aren’t TV stars like Zach Braff. 6. SherryBaby (Laurie Collyer; 2006 Sundance premiere) Sundance has long been a haven for depressing films involving junkies and/or incest, but few have been as overrated as SherryBaby. Once again, it’s all about the star power, as the film might not have been so hyped had Maggie Gyllenhaal not been in the lead. Then again, it might have actually been a better film without her. Grandly over-praised for her performance as the easily played rehabilitating mom, the actress got undeserved kudos simply for being raw and despicable. Her Oscar snub was a relief, at least. 5. Born Into Brothels (Zana Briski and Ross Kauffman; 2004 Sundance premiere) It may have won the documentary Audience Award at Sundance and the documentary Oscar a year later, but that doesn’t excuse Born Into Brothels from being a disgrace to nonfiction filmmaking. One of the most self-satisfying docs ever made, the film will forever be marked by its footage of co-director Zana Briski figuratively patting herself on the back during a fundraiser, with which she sinfully seeks sainthood for involving herself in the lives of her film’s subjects. If documentary was synonymous with charity, Born Into Brothels would indeed be a great film, but documentaries like this should merely be an inspiration to charity, not charity itself. 4. Masked and Anonymous (Larry Charles; 2003 Sundance premiere) One of the most anticipated films of the 2003 festival due to a script co-written by Bob Dylan and an unbelievable cast including Dylan, Jeff Bridges, John Goodman, Penelope Cruz, Ed Harris, Luke Wilson, Mickey Rourke, Angela Bassett, Jessica Lange and many other big names, the very messy Masked and Anonymous therefore ended up the biggest disappointment of that year. Its worth was later defended and praised by such critics as Jonathan Rosenbaum, who included it in his 2003 Top Ten list, and Salon.com’s Stephanie Zacharek. But most of us are in agreement that it’s one of the biggest wastes of talent in years. 3. Napoleon Dynamite (Jared Hess; 2004 Sundance premiere) Napoleon Dynamite’s inclusion on this list is likely to upset more people than Brick’s, but at least the Brick devotees can defend their fandom with more than just shouts of “It’s funny!” Because the thing is, Napoleon Dynamite is not comedy. It is merely quirky, which is not the same thing as funny. Jared Hess’ pop culture phenomenon does feature some highly original characters and situations, but his execution of these elements is obvious and uninteresting. “Gosh!” is neither a good punchline nor a good catchphrase. 2. The Blair Witch Project (Daniel Myrick and Eduardo Sanchez; 1999 Sundance premiere) It must be appreciated as much as attacked for its groundbreaking marketing campaign, and in many ways the film itself can be acknowledged for having a terrific premise with an almost perfect realization of that idea. But for the most part, The Blair Witch Project is a basic, amateur and poorly concluded effort that turned the appeal of indie simplicity on its head. Almost a decade earlier, when filmmakers saw Slacker and said “I can do that,” they were mostly mistaken. But The Blair Witch allowed every schmo with a digital camera to declare, “I can do that,” and be relatively correct in his or her statement. It’s okay for indie filmmaking to seem easy, but when it really is that easy, it degrades the truly talented. 1. Boxing Helena (Jennifer Lynch; 1993 Sundance premiere) Cult appeal notwithstanding, Boxing Helena was one of the first really awful movies to be up for Sundance’s Grand Jury Prize. And although in the 17 years since, the festival has been easily criticized for allowing bad films with lots of buzz and/or big name talent to be included in competition, no film has been as unworthy as this. Had it starred original choice Madonna in the part of the titular amputee, Boxing Helena might have really deserved to at least become a midnight movie. However, with its lesser-name casting, it’s barely even good enough for Skinamax programming. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/1/22/24218.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 1/22/2008 3:01:03 PM
Body: One of the reasons I decided to review Sundance trailers throughout the festival was to hopefully draw attention to some deserving films that I’d want to see if I was in Park City this week. Unfortunately, it has so far been difficult to find appealing-looking movie trailers — or maybe it’s just actually difficult to find appealing-looking movies this year (could that be the reason for the lack of deals?). And so, I present you today with a trailer for a movie that looks far from appealing. Maybe instead of pointing to a movie for you to see, this can serve to point to a movie for you to avoid. I guess every year Sundance needs some kind of uncomfortable movie dealing with sex. After all, it was sex, lies and videotape that helped put the festival on the map. But boy is that film’s subject matter tame compared to some of the selections of late. When I was at the festival in 2005, I watched all but maybe two people walk out of Michael Winterbottom’s 9 Songs, a film that features actual sex intertwined with live rock concert performances (I stuck around for the Dandy Warhols song). Since I don’t think any cool bands appear in Downloading Nancy, despite it being the feature debut of music video director Johan Renck (Madonna’s “Hung Up” and “Nothing Really Matters”; Kylie Minogue’s “Love at First Sight”), I’ll have to say that I’d rather not watch a movie that might have a naked Maria Bello voluntarily being cut with a piece of glass as a form of foreplay. (more…) Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Tue, 22 Jan 2008 20:01:03 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com1/22/2008 3:01:03 PM One of the reasons I decided to review Sundance trailers throughout the festival was to hopefully draw attention to some deserving films that I’d want to see if I was in Park City this week. Unfortunately, it has so far been difficult to find appealing-looking movie trailers — or maybe it’s just actually difficult to find appealing-looking movies this year (could that be the reason for the lack of deals?). And so, I present you today with a trailer for a movie that looks far from appealing. Maybe instead of pointing to a movie for you to see, this can serve to point to a movie for you to avoid. I guess every year Sundance needs some kind of uncomfortable movie dealing with sex. After all, it was sex, lies and videotape that helped put the festival on the map. But boy is that film’s subject matter tame compared to some of the selections of late. When I was at the festival in 2005, I watched all but maybe two people walk out of Michael Winterbottom’s 9 Songs, a film that features actual sex intertwined with live rock concert performances (I stuck around for the Dandy Warhols song). Since I don’t think any cool bands appear in Downloading Nancy, despite it being the feature debut of music video director Johan Renck (Madonna’s “Hung Up” and “Nothing Really Matters”; Kylie Minogue’s “Love at First Sight”), I’ll have to say that I’d rather not watch a movie that might have a naked Maria Bello voluntarily being cut with a piece of glass as a form of foreplay. (more…) Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2007/11/2/21376.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 11/2/2007 2:01:51 PM
Body: The most welcome film festival news of the week comes from The Hollywood Reporter, by way of The Reeler. In a bid to increase their profile as an independent film marketplace, the Tribeca Film Festival will cut the size of their feature slate by as much as 25 percent. A program of 120 films would put Tribeca in the same league, size-wise, as Sundance, which is clearly the intention: “We realize our audience is getting a little overwhelmed by all of our titles,” said Tribeca co-exec director Nancy Schafer. Last year, nearly 30 titles were acquired out of Tribeca, but many were bought by smaller distributors; with the new focus, the festival hopes to bring in bigger buyers and yield more high-profile deals. “We’ve had a lot of movies bought out of the festival but we haven’t had our Sex, Lies & Videotape yet,” Schafer said. “That’s what we want, and that’s what the industry wants.” Steven Soderbergh’s 1989 film, of course, helped to cement Sundance’s status as the highest profile festival market in the States. The most successful titles to sell at Tribeca thus far have been Jesus Camp and Transamerica. Both were Oscar nominated, but neither really set the zeitgeist on fire, 90s style. So I can only see this as good news. I’ve been bitching for years that Tribeca has been too big, and too unfocused. If these promised changes actually stick, I’ll be the first to congratulate the Tribeca team on a step in the right direction. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Fri, 02 Nov 2007 18:01:51 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com11/2/2007 2:01:51 PMThe most welcome film festival news of the week comes from The Hollywood Reporter, by way of The Reeler. In a bid to increase their profile as an independent film marketplace, the Tribeca Film Festival will cut the size of their feature slate by as much as 25 percent. A program of 120 films would put Tribeca in the same league, size-wise, as Sundance, which is clearly the intention: “We realize our audience is getting a little overwhelmed by all of our titles,” said Tribeca co-exec director Nancy Schafer. Last year, nearly 30 titles were acquired out of Tribeca, but many were bought by smaller distributors; with the new focus, the festival hopes to bring in bigger buyers and yield more high-profile deals. “We’ve had a lot of movies bought out of the festival but we haven’t had our Sex, Lies & Videotape yet,” Schafer said. “That’s what we want, and that’s what the industry wants.” Steven Soderbergh’s 1989 film, of course, helped to cement Sundance’s status as the highest profile festival market in the States. The most successful titles to sell at Tribeca thus far have been Jesus Camp and Transamerica. Both were Oscar nominated, but neither really set the zeitgeist on fire, 90s style. So I can only see this as good news. I’ve been bitching for years that Tribeca has been too big, and too unfocused. If these promised changes actually stick, I’ll be the first to congratulate the Tribeca team on a step in the right direction. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/love/MemberTagFilms.aspxlove
Number of films tagged: 12478

Number of people who tagged: 338

Number of times used: 1480

]]>Fri, 11 Dec 2009 01:28:29 GMT124783381480Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Loved-It/MemberTagFilms.aspxLoved-It
Number of films tagged: 509

Number of people who tagged: 179

Number of times used: 921

]]>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 17:56:35 GMT509179921Tag 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/sex/MemberTagFilms.aspxsex
Number of films tagged: 2414

Number of people who tagged: 126

Number of times used: 549

]]>Sun, 20 Dec 2009 18:42:22 GMT2414126549Tag 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/deception/MemberTagFilms.aspxdeception
Number of films tagged: 1090

Number of people who tagged: 55

Number of times used: 123

]]>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 19:18:11 GMT109055123Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/secrets/MemberTagFilms.aspxsecrets
Number of films tagged: 1384

Number of people who tagged: 43

Number of times used: 100

]]>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 17:32:11 GMT138443100Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Indie/MemberTagFilms.aspxIndie
Number of films tagged: 49

Number of people who tagged: 28

Number of times used: 59

]]>Tue, 20 Jan 2009 22:22:28 GMT492859Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/sister/MemberTagFilms.aspxsister
Number of films tagged: 1459

Number of people who tagged: 24

Number of times used: 57

]]>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 20:51:56 GMT14592457Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/voyeur/MemberTagFilms.aspxvoyeur
Number of films tagged: 68

Number of people who tagged: 24

Number of times used: 28

]]>Sat, 01 Aug 2009 09:37:11 GMT682428Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/extramaritalaffair/MemberTagFilms.aspxextramaritalaffair
Number of films tagged: 3121

Number of people who tagged: 18

Number of times used: 31

]]>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 13:13:22 GMT31211831Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/husband/MemberTagFilms.aspxhusband
Number of films tagged: 1851

Number of people who tagged: 12

Number of times used: 42

]]>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 20:51:56 GMT18511242Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/interview/MemberTagFilms.aspxinterview
Number of films tagged: 1477

Number of people who tagged: 11

Number of times used: 21

]]>Wed, 19 Aug 2009 21:04:19 GMT14771121Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/therapist/MemberTagFilms.aspxtherapist
Number of films tagged: 128

Number of people who tagged: 11

Number of times used: 17

]]>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 13:13:22 GMT1281117Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/drifter/MemberTagFilms.aspxdrifter
Number of films tagged: 231

Number of people who tagged: 8

Number of times used: 10

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 00:50:39 GMT231810Tag