Push: Based on a Novel By Sapphire's Recent Activity - Spout

Film:Push: Based on a Novel By Sapphire

Tue, 25 Aug 2009 16:23:47 GMT

Title: Push: Based on a Novel By Sapphire
Year: 2009
Director: Lee Daniels
Plot: Monster's Ball producer Lee Daniels follows up his 2005 directorial debut, Shadowboxer, with this adaptation of author Sapphire's best-selling novel about an overweight, illiterate African-American teen from Harlem who discovers an alternate path in life after she begins attending a new school. Clareece "Precious" Jones is only a teenager, yet she's about to give birth to her second child. Unable to read or write, Clareece shows little prospect for the future until discovering that she has been accepted into an alternative school. There, with a little help from a sympathetic teacher (Paula Patton) and a kindly nurse (Lenny Kravitiz), the young girl receives something that most teens never get -- a chance to start over. Mo'nique co-stars in an inspirational drama featuring the debut performance of screen newcomer Gabourey "Gabbie" Sidibe. ~ Jason Buchanan, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 5
Number of Lists: 4
Number of blog posts: 14
SpoutRating: 4

Spout Post: make a good collection of movies you like the most

Mon, 14 Dec 2009 14:35:18 GMT

Post By: reniltm
Post To: reniltm Blog
Post Date: 12/14/2009 9:35:18 AM
Body: download and watch movies online for free at, http://www.moviesmeter.com/

Spout Post: What did you think of Precious? Responses Needed!!

Thu, 19 Nov 2009 23:07:46 GMT

Post By: chirowz
Post To: chirowz Blog
Post Date: 11/19/2009 6:07:46 PM
Body: If you saw "Precious" tell me what you thought: A.) Enjoyed it - found it uplifting or motivational B.) Liked it, but it was way too depressing C.) Indifferent D.) It just wasn't my kind of movie E.) Felt it was too stereotypical F.) Disliked it for other reasons For me, Precious is a great drama, but it’s not necessarily uplifting. Sure, Precious is now better off than she was before, but she still has many hurdles to overcome, and although she will no doubt do her best to succeed, the whole film was just depressing. This film showed the wrongs and the horrors of teenage pregnancy, rape, abuse, STDs and their outcomes, but didn’t express or inform how young girls should seek help in such situations. Precious herself didn’t completely seek help for her problems; she fell into and went along with “help” due to the structuralist members of her society. In the final scene, Precious is walking with her two children and looks at peace with her life. It seems as though she has decided to keep her children for now; however, she also says that deep down, she knows in order for herself and her children to grow, that she can’t handle them right now. The audience is then left to their own assumptions about what Precious will ultimately choose to do, and if she will do it in time.Please respond to the posted article above and/ or the poll. It’s actually for a class assignment and I need lots feedback. If you are extra passionate about Precious, or would like to read the full article, please click the link:http://imincubating.deviantart.com/* Please keep in mind that the paper (full article) is written for a class on visual culture, and it will get intellectual when I discuss the theories of psychoanalysis, structuralism, post-colonialism, and a brief history of Black cinema in the U.S. The article is in progress, and needs the online responses in order to be completed.Thanks!

Spout Post: New Directors/New Films Picks Push, Public, Cove

Fri, 27 Feb 2009 23:02:35 GMT

Post By: Karina
Post To: Karina on SpoutBlog
Post Date: 2/27/2009 6:02:35 PM
Body: MoMA and the Film Society of Lincoln Center have released the schedule for New Directors/New Films, and as in the past, it’s heavy on films that recently played Sundance, including award winners (Push, We Live in Public, The Cove and The Maid). I’m looking forward to catching Amreeka (the ND/NF opening night film), Stay the Same Never Change and Unmade Beds, all of which I missed in Park City, as well as Bob Byington’s Harmony and Me, a world premiere starring Justin Rice. indieWIRE has the full lineup. ND/NF starts March 25. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Karina Longworth

Spout Post: PUSH Drama, ARLEN FABER sells to Magnolia

Thu, 05 Feb 2009 22:01:19 GMT

Post By: Karina
Post To: Karina on SpoutBlog
Post Date: 2/5/2009 5:01:19 PM
Body: To loosely paraphrase Journey: the Sundance movie deals never end, they go on and on and on and on. As Magnolia announces (via indieWIRE) that they’ve picked up Sundance Narrative Competition title Arlen Faber (starring Jeff Daniels, Lauren Graham and Olivia Thirlby) the biggest deal of the festival is getting infinitely more complicated. We’ve added Faber to our Sundance 2009 deal chart, and have also ammended the purchase price of Humpday. We’ll hold off on ammending the Push entry to reflect Harvey Weinstein’s claims, at least for now. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Karina Longworth

Spout Post: PUSH Drama, ARLEN FABER sells to Magnolia

Thu, 05 Feb 2009 22:00:51 GMT

Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 2/5/2009 5:00:51 PM
Body: To loosely paraphrase Journey: the Sundance movie deals never end, they go on and on and on and on. As Magnolia announces (via indieWIRE) that they’ve picked up Sundance Narrative Competition title Arlen Faber (starring Jeff Daniels, Lauren Graham and Olivia Thirlby) the biggest deal of the festival is getting infinitely more complicated. We’ve added Faber to our Sundance 2009 deal chart, and have also ammended the purchase price of Humpday. We’ll hold off on ammending the Push entry to reflect Harvey Weinstein’s claims, at least for now. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

Spout Post: Harvey Weinstein Pulls on Push. Today in Film Bloggery 02/05/09

Thu, 05 Feb 2009 21:01:21 GMT

Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 2/5/2009 4:01:21 PM
Body: In a turn of events that recalls an infamous Sundance story of yore, Harvey Weinstein is insisting that The Weinstein Co. locked down rights to Push (not that one, the Sundance one) before Lionsgate made its deal. Fortunately for everyone in Park City, this fight waited until after the film festival ended and ol’ Harv was nowhere near making a scene in a restaurant. Instead, the rights tug-of-war is going to the courts (on both coasts), making everyone think this is the indie version of the Watchmen battle and giving the blogs something more interesting than actors’ rants and masquerades to comment on: “Harvey Weinstein constantly pleads poverty on behalf of his The Weinstein Co so that filmmakers will dig into their own wallets for re-shoots that he demands yet won’t fund. But suddenly he’s got big bucks to spend on the nation’s highest priced lawyers,” writes an almost angry Nikki Finke. “Of course what all this points up is just how informal those Sundance negotiations are,” writes Risky Biz Blog, “Back of the envelope, middle of an alley, front of a bar. That’s usually where a lot of these discussions take place. Was there enough of a discussion, or agreement, to give TWC a claim? A judge will decide. We just can’t wait until he does — it’s not everyday the judicial system parses the finer points of a night at the Riverhorse.” indieWIRE received a joint statement from Cinetic Media’s John Sloss and Bart Walker: “We respect Harvey tremendously. In this case he is over-reaching. There was never a deal with The Weinstein Company, there were numerous material unresolved points.” Also at indieWIRE, Eric Kohn discusses the Watchmen parallel: “Push is also a highly anticipated adaptation, one that will also raise the voices of unsatisfied future audience if the fate of its distribution remains in peril. Both movies have pop culture forces enhancing their commercial appeal, although we’re talking about vastly different cultures here: Watchmen has Kevin Smith and Lost co-creator Damon Lindelof, among others, while Push will supposedly get boosted by support from Oprah and Tyler Perry.” Vulture points out that, unlike Watchmen, Push is a film that won’t make a lot of money. Referencing yesterday’s NY Times piece on its marketing challenges, they have this bit of snarky inquiry: “Which studio will win the right to distribute Push in like, five theaters? How much additional money will the film lose now that its budget might include a protracted legal battle? Also, who owns the sequel rights?” Also on the marketing issue, The Playlist simply says, “Maybe Weinstein should just count his blessings and cut n’ run.” Seriously, he doesn’t need another flop and this isn’t a guaranteed film. Defamer also references the Times piece, but argues in favor of its box office appeal: “this film is poised to hit its key money demographic: not black audiences, but women. There’s no way this film won’t be enormously talked about in the press, and Mo’Nique is a sure frontrunner for the Best Supporting Actress Oscar, which ensures that the film will stay in the public eye long enough to far exceed some industry watchers’ expectations.” Sticking to the “urban” demographic stance, David Poland notes that Push is better off with Lionsgate than TWC: “Unlike Lionsgate, TWC is NOT a company with a strong history of releasing films for black audiences. On the other hand, they now have Tom Ortenberg, who was probably drooling at the opportunity to top Lionsgate with TWC’s first real urban film.” Finally, Cinematical’s Peter Martin asks the big question: “Wouldn’t it be wonderful if Harvey Weintein was actually fighting to get the rights solely because he thought he could mastermind a better release than Oprah, Tyler Perry, and Lionsgate?” Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

Spout Post: PUSH Bought By Lionsgate, with help from Oprah & Tyler Perry

Mon, 02 Feb 2009 21:01:18 GMT

Post By: Karina
Post To: Karina on SpoutBlog
Post Date: 2/2/2009 4:01:18 PM
Body: Variety reports that Lionsgate has signed a deal to acquire Sundance Grand Jury and Audience Award winner Push: Based on the Novel by Sapphire, directed by Lee Daniel and featuring a tour de force supporting performance from Mo’Nique. According to the bare-bones news blurb, “Oprah Winfrey and Tyler Perry will support Lionsgate’s distribution through their respective motion picture companies.” This news brings two thoughts immediately to mind: 1) the old conception of Lionsgate as a slash-horror factory is even more out of date this afternoon than it was this morning; and 2) Being that Lionsgate were rumored to be zeroing in on Push at least hours if not days before it won multiple awards on the final night of Sundance, if they were waiting for Oprah and Perry to pledge assistance before making the deal final and/or public, then maybe there’s something to the whispers (largely drowned out by media coverage of those awards, but still prevalent on the ground in Park City) that just because rich white people (ie: critics, Sundance audiences and jury members) take an interest in an art film about poor black people, that doesn’t guarantee an easy path to selling the film to actual black people. The fine details of racial demographics may or may not be the major factor here, but it’s certain that this is a time for safe bets, and it doesn’t get much safer than aligning an unknown quantity indie with name brands. In any case, check out our Sundance review and interview with Mo’Nique. UPDATE: indieWIRE is pegging the value of the deal at $5.5 million, making it the biggest of Sundance 2009. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Karina Longworth

Spout Post: PUSH Bought By Lionsgate, with help from Oprah & Tyler Perry

Mon, 02 Feb 2009 21:01:00 GMT

Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 2/2/2009 4:01:00 PM
Body: Variety reports that Lionsgate has signed a deal to acquire Sundance Grand Jury and Audience Award winner Push: Based on the Novel by Sapphire, directed by Lee Daniel and featuring a tour de force supporting performance from Mo’Nique. According to the bare-bones news blurb, “Oprah Winfrey and Tyler Perry will support Lionsgate’s distribution through their respective motion picture companies.” This news brings two thoughts immediately to mind: 1) the old conception of Lionsgate as a slash-horror factory is even more out of date this afternoon than it was this morning; and 2) Being that Lionsgate were rumored to be zeroing in on Push at least hours if not days before it won multiple awards on the final night of Sundance, if they were waiting for Oprah and Perry to pledge assistance before making the deal final and/or public, then maybe there’s something to the whispers (largely drowned out by media coverage of those awards, but still prevalent on the ground in Park City) that just because rich white people (ie: critics, Sundance audiences and jury members) take an interest in an art film about poor black people, that doesn’t guarantee an easy path to selling the film to actual black people. The fine details of racial demographics may or may not be the major factor here, but it’s certain that this is a time for safe bets, and it doesn’t get much safer than aligning an unknown quantity indie with name brands. In any case, check out our Sundance review and interview with Mo’Nique. UPDATE: indieWIRE is pegging the value of the deal at $5.5 million, making it the biggest of Sundance 2009. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

Spout Post: Sundance Critical Consensus Goes to PUSH

Tue, 27 Jan 2009 22:01:41 GMT

Post By: Karina
Post To: Karina on SpoutBlog
Post Date: 1/27/2009 5:01:41 PM
Body: indieWIRE polled a number of critics and bloggers (including yours truly) on their favorite films and performances at this year’s Sundance, and the results are in: the pros think the jury and the audience got it right in selecting Push: Based on the novel by Sapphire as the best narrative feature at the festival. I didn’t see that film (Paul did the review, and Eric Kohn interviewed Mo’Nique for us), and in general my ballot included a few films that didn’t make the consensus cut; I’ve pasted it after the jump if you want to take a look-see. indieWIRE also posted some anonymous comments from participants, including one which I think I mostly agree with in sentiment, but which still irks me a bit: How nice to see a Sundance where the quality of the festival was not judged by how many films sold and for how much. Is it a coincidence that the strongest Sundance lineup in years was also the one that did not result in any big ticket acquisitions a la Little Miss Sunshine or, um, Happy, Texas? It probably was, actually. But as I think back on it I’d like to rewrite this festival in my mind as the Sundance that started to fight back—just a little bit—at the increasing, ongoing, and ominous convergence of film writing and business reporting. With all due respect to the anonymous critic (who I’m sure is smarter and more experience than me, and whose comment I’m going to feel really bad about bitching about once I learn who it is), I’m confused as to what amorphous concept shorthanded as “Sundance” is doing the fighting back. Does the writer think festival programmers deliberately sought out un-commercial work, and if so, can their programming decisions be divorced from factors like the writers strike, the dissolution of the indie arms, and the economy in general? Or is it that attendees and press “fought back” by celebrating films which fall outside the realm of acquisition interests — and if so, how do you account for the fact that 3 of the 5 top films on the indieWIRE poll landed three of the festival’s most significant sales? The thing is, “the quality of the festival” can only be “judged by how many films sold and for how much” if we, the media, let it, and anyway, I’m not totally convinced that wasn’t the case this year. Look at all the wrap-up pieces that focused on sales: critics Manohla Dargis, Todd McCarthy and Scott Foundas all noted the slow climate right up front, with Foundas warning that “the highs weren’t as high as those of some Sundances past … [no] eight-figure deals to write home about” long before bitching that his “own personal jury would have awarded [Lynn Shelton] a tripod instead” of a jury prize for Humpday; Those of us who have always tried to asses a fest based on quality first, commercialism second continued to do the same this year; maybe the big difference is that, with critically acclaimed and award winning films like Push, The Cove, We Live in Public, The September Issue and Sin Nombre — many of which were crowd pleasers, and accorded attention by not just the cinephile press but the mainstream media –– there were no sales to speak of. High quality films that lead to happy audiences and inspired critics are good. But if these films can’t ever reach a wider audience, will we start to wish that Sundance was more about the sales again? If I see any appreciable change in the ever-present quality/commerciality conundrum at this year’s Sundance, it’s that the “gotta sell” panic of previous years seemed to be nonexistent. Films which didn’t sell over the course of ten days do not seem to be tainted, the way they might have been in the past. There seems to be a confidence that the many highly-praised films awaiting distribution will eventually get it. With the average festival title now taking a full four months to land a buyer, this is probably the more healthy attitude to have. But let’s re-evaluate in six months, because if The Cove or Push are still looking for a theatrical deal come summer, it may no longer look like a sales-slow, “all about the movies” Sundance is actually the best thing for the movies. And now, my ballot: BEST NARRATIVE FILM: 1. Moon 2. You Won’t Miss Me 3. Humpday 4. Children of Invention 5. The Girlfriend Experience BEST DOCUMENTARY: 1. O’er the Land 2. The September Issue BEST PERFORMANCE: 1. Sam Rockwell, Moon 2. Paul Giamatti, Cold Souls 3. Daryl Sabara, World’s Greatest Dad WORST FILM: 1. Brief Interviews With Hideous Men 2. Boy Interrupted 3. Paper Hearts UPDATE: I also participated in Movie City News’ Gurus of Sundance, where Moon landed in the top spot, and Push fell down to ninth most favored. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Karina Longworth

Spout Post: Sundance Critical Consensus Goes to PUSH

Tue, 27 Jan 2009 22:01:12 GMT

Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 1/27/2009 5:01:12 PM
Body: indieWIRE polled a number of critics and bloggers (including yours truly) on their favorite films and performances at this year’s Sundance, and the results are in: the pros think the jury and the audience got it right in selecting Push: Based on the novel by Sapphire as the best narrative feature at the festival. I didn’t see that film (Paul did the review, and Eric Kohn interviewed Mo’Nique for us), and in general my ballot included a few films that didn’t make the consensus cut; I’ve pasted it after the jump if you want to take a look-see. indieWIRE also posted some anonymous comments from participants, including one which I think I mostly agree with in sentiment, but which still irks me a bit: How nice to see a Sundance where the quality of the festival was not judged by how many films sold and for how much. Is it a coincidence that the strongest Sundance lineup in years was also the one that did not result in any big ticket acquisitions a la Little Miss Sunshine or, um, Happy, Texas? It probably was, actually. But as I think back on it I’d like to rewrite this festival in my mind as the Sundance that started to fight back—just a little bit—at the increasing, ongoing, and ominous convergence of film writing and business reporting. With all due respect to the anonymous critic (who I’m sure is smarter and more experience than me, and whose comment I’m going to feel really bad about bitching about once I learn who it is), I’m confused as to what amorphous concept shorthanded as “Sundance” is doing the fighting back. Does the writer think festival programmers deliberately sought out un-commercial work, and if so, can their programming decisions be divorced from factors like the writers strike, the dissolution of the indie arms, and the economy in general? Or is it that attendees and press “fought back” by celebrating films which fall outside the realm of acquisition interests — and if so, how do you account for the fact that 3 of the 5 top films on the indieWIRE poll landed three of the festival’s most significant sales? The thing is, “the quality of the festival” can only be “judged by how many films sold and for how much” if we, the media, let it, and anyway, I’m not totally convinced that wasn’t the case this year. Look at all the wrap-up pieces that focused on sales: critics Manohla Dargis, Todd McCarthy and Scott Foundas all noted the slow climate right up front, with Foundas warning that “the highs weren’t as high as those of some Sundances past … [no] eight-figure deals to write home about” long before bitching that his “own personal jury would have awarded [Lynn Shelton] a tripod instead” of a jury prize for Humpday; Those of us who have always tried to asses a fest based on quality first, commercialism second continued to do the same this year; maybe the big difference is that, with critically acclaimed and award winning films like Push, The Cove, We Live in Public, The September Issue and Sin Nombre — many of which were crowd pleasers, and accorded attention by not just the cinephile press but the mainstream media –– there were no sales to speak of. High quality films that lead to happy audiences and inspired critics are good. But if these films can’t ever reach a wider audience, will we start to wish that Sundance was more about the sales again? If I see any appreciable change in the ever-present quality/commerciality conundrum at this year’s Sundance, it’s that the “gotta sell” panic of previous years seemed to be nonexistent. Films which didn’t sell over the course of ten days do not seem to be tainted, the way they might have been in the past. There seems to be a confidence that the many highly-praised films awaiting distribution will eventually get it. With the average festival title now taking a full four months to land a buyer, this is probably the more healthy attitude to have. But let’s re-evaluate in six months, because if The Cove or Push are still looking for a theatrical deal come summer, it may no longer look like a sales-slow, “all about the movies” Sundance is actually the best thing for the movies. And now, my ballot: BEST NARRATIVE FILM: 1. Moon 2. You Won’t Miss Me 3. Humpday 4. Children of Invention 5. The Girlfriend Experience BEST DOCUMENTARY: 1. O’er the Land 2. The September Issue BEST PERFORMANCE: 1. Sam Rockwell, Moon 2. Paul Giamatti, Cold Souls 3. Daryl Sabara, World’s Greatest Dad WORST FILM: 1. Brief Interviews With Hideous Men 2. Boy Interrupted 3. Paper Hearts UPDATE: I also participated in Movie City News’ Gurus of Sundance, where Moon landed in the top spot, and Push fell down to ninth most favored. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

Spout Tag:school

Fri, 06 Nov 2009 18:49:18 GMT

school
Number of films tagged: 1231

Number of people who tagged: 56

Number of times used: 130

Spout Tag:teacher

Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:24:37 GMT

teacher
Number of films tagged: 1225

Number of people who tagged: 40

Number of times used: 84

Spout Tag:Sundance

Sat, 31 Jan 2009 20:57:41 GMT

Sundance
Number of films tagged: 154

Number of people who tagged: 24

Number of times used: 161

Spout Tag:overweight

Tue, 31 Mar 2009 13:07:06 GMT

overweight
Number of films tagged: 73

Number of people who tagged: 5

Number of times used: 7

Spout Tag:secondchance

Wed, 07 Jan 2009 14:04:44 GMT

secondchance
Number of films tagged: 132

Number of people who tagged: 5

Number of times used: 8

Spout Tag:kindness

Tue, 12 May 2009 19:41:09 GMT

kindness
Number of films tagged: 38

Number of people who tagged: 3

Number of times used: 8

Spout Tag:africanamerican

Mon, 13 Jul 2009 13:04:22 GMT

africanamerican
Number of films tagged: 418

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 3

Spout Tag:award-winner

Wed, 28 Jan 2009 19:27:13 GMT

award-winner
Number of films tagged: 1

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 1

Spout Tag:jury-prize

Wed, 28 Jan 2009 19:27:13 GMT

jury-prize
Number of films tagged: 1

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 1

Spout Tag:sundance-2009

Mon, 29 Dec 2008 18:32:37 GMT

sundance-2009
Number of films tagged: 117

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 117

Spout Tag:the-sundance-film-festival

Mon, 29 Dec 2008 18:32:37 GMT

the-sundance-film-festival
Number of films tagged: 117

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 117