Movie news on your iPhone today!
Advertisement
Sign in
Username   Password         Forgot password?
Wanna join? Sign up
Find movies you'll love

SpoutBlog on spout.com

  • Stumbling Towards Digital: BlogNosh 04/28/08

    Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]

  • The latest issue of Reverse Shot is online. “For this issue, we attempted a unique approach by asking our writers to select a filmmaker who’s traditionally worked in film and has moved to digital video, as a brief sidestep or a career-changing ideological statement,” explain editors Michael Koresky and Jeff Reichardt. “Then we asked them to contrast and compare this digital foray with their earlier cinematic style (unfortunately no one picked up the offered gauntlet of The Godfather vs. Youth Without Youth). With filmmakers as varied as Robert Zemeckis and the Kuchar brothers occupying the same space, we feel we’ve covered a lot of ground.”
  • Above, and also on the theme of the encounter between analog and digital: Radiohead Buster Keaton Style, via Nick Dawson.
  • Pamela Cohn offers word that Forbidden Lies, which I saw and loved at True/False, has won the top prize at the Aljazeera International Documentary Festival.
  • Today in Painfully Updated Theme Songs From TV Shows That Are Being Turned Into Movies: Speed Racer

  • Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

  • Tribeca 2008: War, Inc

    Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]
    Under discussion:

    War, Inc.  (2008)

    War, Inc is a debacle. Starring, co-written and produced by John Cusack, it’s an impotent, cheap-looking political satire that longs for relevance, but feels years stale. (It has, in fact, been around for awhile––it was once titled Brand Hauser, it went into production in fall 2006, it was rumored to have been set up for  premiere slots at both Toronto 2007 and Sundance 2008, neither of which, for whatever reason, ever happened.) It’s a sign that Hollywood filmmaking about the current war and its associated politics has fatally passed over from merely irrelevant preaching to the choir, to a kind of solipsistic naivete that should make anyone with an intellectually-rooted anti-war position feel embarrassed to have their politics associated with it. War, Inc personally makes me want to put my head in my hands in shame. The Left deserves to be mocked as much as the Neo-Cons, but nobody deserves to have their reputations sullied by indefensible garbage like this.

    Cusack plays Hauser, a hit man in existential crisis who is sent to a fictional, war-torn middle eastern country to lay waste to its leader. As a cover, Hauser pretends to be a conference producer for Tamerlane, a corporation to whom the fighting of war in that zone has been outsourced by the US. Marisa Tomei and Hilary Duff (coated in olive-colored foundation in an attempt to convince that she’s a “Central Asian pop princess”), are the potential love interests. There’s a narrative twist involving the latter actress that the audience figures out about an hour and half before Cusack comes to his own Shocking Realization, which in turn leaves open a gaping plot hole involving that olive-colored foundation. Ultimately, Hauser has a crisis of conscience that prevents him from killing his intended target but mandates the murder of many, many other people, and everyone who remains standing lives happily ever after.

    As a brand, John Cuscak is only really saleable when he’s playing a certain kind of romantic anti-hero, and the only thing remotely of interest in War, Inc is the manner in which his persona from countless romantic comedies is recycled into War, Inc’s limp critic of corporatized warfare, virtually without change. The familiar Cusack character is a resolutely single-minded romantic;again and again, this actor has played men for whom nothing is as important as love, who have no goals in life beyond the pursuit and acquisition of a single girl. It’s really bizarre to watch that romantic solipsism transposed into a film that aims to Say Something about a global conflict with potentially apocalyptic implications.

    Maybe Cusack’s lefty indignation mandated an attempt at war satire, but for all that this film actually has to say about war profiteering and multi-national relations, it might as well be set in Manhattan. In fact, strip War, Inc of its physical setting and you’ve got an unfunny retread of Grosse Pointe Blank, in which that film’s sexy wink has been swapped out for a thread of family drama that fails to convince. In War Inc’s climax––which is essentially a wholesale replica of the climax of the high school reunion movie, with Ben Kingsley playing Dan Ackroyd and Tomei playing Minnie Driver and 50 or 60 Middle Eastern extras who exist only to be blown away––any sort of political commentary goes out the window. The Cusack character, and the film as a whole, give up on Saying Anything and become chiefly concerned with literally killing off all obstacles in order to abscond with a girl.

    With this climax, War, Inc abandons all grounds to claim that its project is truly satirical. As much as something like Zombie Strippers protects itself with the pretense of ironic distance but ultimately offers as much one-dimensional pleasure as a fan of either zombies or strippers could possibly ask for, War, Inc tells us that wanton destruction carried forth in protection of personal interests is bad, and then asks us to indulge in and root for a non-ironic blood bath–and in the B-movie cliches of invincible hitmen and babes toting machine guns–in order to secure the protagonists’ consequence-free escape.

    The War, Inc press notes are full of pull quotes from people like Arianna Huffington and Naomi Klein, positioning this star-studded action comedy as a noble work of activism. But like so many contemporary narrative films that intend to grapple with the bungled war in Iraq and the spectre of global terror from a liberal-pacifist perspective, War, Inc has no new point to make, nothing to offer in the way of intellectual insight, no interest in actual ideological dialogue, and it’s certainly not capable of proposing any sort of solution. Films like this and Redacted and Where in the World is Osama Bin Laden exist to make their makers feel good about their political correctness and content that their razor-thin world views are accurate and viable, when in fact they represent a tiny fraction of the bigger picture. This is not activism––this is self-congratulation.


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

  • The Dark Knight is a Remake

    Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]
    Under discussion:

    Batman  (1989)

    The Dark Knight  (2008)

    Apparently there is a new trailer for The Dark Knight premiering online tonight. But I’m not so good at playing those viral marketing games, plus I’m a relatively patient guy, so I’ll just wait until it hits YouTube and watch it tomorrow.

    In the meantime, while you wait for the secret time that the trailer goes live (I hear 5:30 PM PST), here’s a video submitted to College Humor that compares the previous trailer for The Dark Knight with that of Tim Burton’s 1989 Batman.

    Yes, it looks kinda like the latest Batman film is a remake of the one from almost 20 years back (boy, do I feel old typing that!). But really it just looks like the trailer is paying homage to the trailer of old. Of course, I can’t seem to find this exact Batman trailer on YouTube, so methinks its not an official trailer and is merely a fan-made trailer cut from Batman footage. Either way, it’s pretty neatly done.


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

  • Tribeca 2008: Somers Town

    Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]

    Somers Town

    I saw six films at Tribeca this weekend, and five of them were completely blown off the map by Somers Town, Shane Meadows’ practically perfect follow-up to his 2007 triumph, This is England. England was one of my favorite films of last year, but its political/historical aims, admittedly, occasionally overwhelmed Meadows’ more subtle, character-based observations. Somers Town is less ambitious but more impressive, a 70-minute portrait of a moment with zero fat to cut and not a false note.

    Like England, Somers stars young Thomas Turgoose as a British teen in search of identity through a surrogate family, but in every way Somers is the tighter, more precise work. Shot mainly in black-and-white in the streets, shops and flats of contemporary London, Somers tracks the friendship between Tomo (Turgoose), a crafty ball of wounded bravado who runs away from his Midlands home and promptly gets mugged, and Marek (Piotr Jagiello), a lonely Polish boy about the same age who secretly sequesters Tomo in the small apartment he shares with his oft-absent construction worker dad. Budding photographer Marek divides his time working odd jobs for a semi-sleazy neighbor, and shyly flirting with Maria, a local French waitress who is friendly but probably a couple of years out of his league. Tomo quickly proves to be adept at both activities, and the boys soon fall into a routine, working together for the funds to fuel their mutual woo.

    The dynamic between the two boys is minutely observed, often poignant and very funny. Tomo, in particular, is competitive on every front, but both boys seem to have a silent understanding that they need each other more than either needs to win. When Maria bids farewell one evening with the sing-song salutation, “I love you both the same,” Tomo and Marek don’t fight––they high-five. Maria seems to understand that her role in this barely-pubescent menage a trois is not to pick one or the other, or even to let both down easy, but to function as the catalyst for Tomo and Marek to come together, to project their individual longings for affection towards a common goal and ultimately gain strength from one another. This idea comes across beautifully in the film’s coda, a trip to Paris shot on low-gauge color film stock, a pleasingly gauzy bit of nostalgia that feels softer and less cynical than anything I’ve previously seen in a Meadows film.

    Somers Town was originally planned as a short designed to promote the Eurostar rail line, and its eventual promotion to feature length brings two issues to mind. First, it’s not the only feature in Tribeca’s World Narrative Feature Competition that could very well have been relegated to a sidebar––certainly, films like My Marlon and Brando (formally experimental, if ultimately narratively incompetent) and Let The Right One In (the Swedish vampire film that is so far hands down the most talked about film at this festival) are unlikely to find slots in a major competition elsewhere. For all the criticism leveled at their program Tribeca deserves praise for implementing a curation strategy blind to traditional but ultimately arbitrary distinctions of prestige.

    And second, speaking of arbitrary distinctions of prestige: the day after I saw Somers Town, I went to a triumphant sold out screening of Behn Zeitlin’s short Glory at Sea; the day before, we learned that The Pleasure of Being Robbed, another short feature that started life as a promotional short, has been selected as the only American film in the Director’s Fortnight at Cannes. These are all films that are receiving an enormous amount of attention–and deservedly so–but imagine if Josh Safdie and Shane Meadows’ films had been submitted to festivals at their original intended lengths. Would anyone have taken them nearly as seriously if they had been relegated to a shorts program, or tacked in front of a two-hour feature? Glory at Sea did make its debut within a shorts program at SXSW, but it was singled out by a number of writers for coverage like no short film I’ve ever seen. The rise of web video distribution has created an audience for shorts that far outnumbers the traditional festival audience for features. If critics and festival programmers continue to make it a point to take shorter works seriously, their ghettoization as standard practice might soon be a thing of the past.


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

  • Amy Winehouse Confirmed But Not Confirmed for 007 Song

    Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]
    Under discussion:

    Casino Royale  (2006)

    At least once a month I see another headline claiming that Amy Winehouse is singing the title track to Quantum of Solace (aka Bond 22). But with the latest story, from BBC News, I finally understand why the internet rumor mill keeps on pumping out the claim without word of a confirmation. According to music producer Mark Ronson, he and Winehouse are merely recording a demo of a song they hope winds up on the Quantum of Solace soundtrack:

    “They asked Amy, and I think Amy said that if she did it, she’d want to do it with me. So hopefully something will come of it,” he told the station’s Music Week’s show.

    “The demo sounds like a James Bond theme, hopefully. But I don’t know if it’ll get used.”

    He added: “I’m sure there are loads more really famous people that probably we’re competing with and we don’t know about. I’m not sure.

    “But hopefully I’ll still be alive for at least 12 more Bond themes. If we don’t get this one maybe we’ll get another one.”

    I was never aware that each 007 movie theme was subject to a competition, but that’s the way it sounds. So, I took a look at the Wikipedia page for James Bond Music. And I discovered that a number of artists, such as Alice Cooper, Blondie, Pet Shop Boys and Pulp, have recorded unused, alternative versions of themes, and that at least seven artists/bands submitted tracks for Tomorrow Never Dies, for which Sheryl Crow ended up the winner.

    About a year ago, WENN (via IGN) reported that Bond producer Barbara Broccoli fell in love with Winehouse’s album “Back in Black” and wanted the singer for a role in the next film. At the time, I was really down with Winehouse’s retro sound and was excited about having an old-fashioned, Shirley Bassey-type track for Quantum of Solace (then still unnamed). But since then I’ve decided that Sharon Jones, whose backing band, The Dap-Kings, perform on “Back in Black”, would be a much better choice.

    Unfortunately, if the makers of Quantum of Solace plan to stay in line with the previous film, Casino Royale, we’ll have another crappy ’90s-rock type theme by someone like Scott Weiland or Creed’s Scott Stapp.


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

  • Critics Watch: Seitz Out, Lee In

    Was this review helpful? [Be the first to tell us!]

    In a podcast conversation with Keith Uhlich at The House Next Door, the group blog whose Blogger URL contains his name, Matt Zoller Seitz has announced that he’s giving up writing print criticism. This formal declaration comes two weeks after Seitz made some critical comments about the conflict between print and web criticism at the Moving Image Institute; two weeks before that, Seitz writes in the podcast’s comments, he gave notice that he was leaving his post as back-up critic for the New York Times, meaning his piece on the jazz in film series at MoMA will be his last for that publication. In the same comment, Seitz says he’ll be replaced by Nathan Lee, who intimated in last week’s Rotten Tomatoes interview that all those Saturday afternoons devoted to sex and Madame Bovary had paid off in a new position at a major publication.

    The House Next Door will carry on under Keith Uhlich’s leadership. Seitz, says he’ll continue to post on the site and is also planning on devoting the summer to making a puppet movie––anyone who will be in Dallas in July and August who wants to get involved with production is invited to send him an email through the site. I’ve excerpted a portion of the transcription of the podcast, in which Seitz succinctly explains his decision to move on from the print world, after the jump.

    I certainly wouldn’t mind sticking around and continuing to write pieces, but in all honesty I write a lot more slowly than I used to, and I have a lot less patience with print than I used to. When I’m writing, when I’m doing pieces in print, that are print only, I find my mind starting to wander, and I’m thinking about movies. I’m thinking about watching movies and making movies and I’ll go off and start storyboarding the puppet movie. […]

    And I’m also gonna be making some really short apropos-of-nothing documentaries on whatever the hell I feel like doing them on, and I’ll probably post those on The House as well. I mean, I’m certainly not gonna go away. I’m just not gonna be writing straight out print reviews, certainly not very often. I’m just at the point where I feel like I need to try to concentrate my energies, which are not as profuse as they used to be, on things that I think have a reasonable shot at making me happy. Print does not satisfy me in the way that it once did. In fact, it feels too much like work. And I want to do things that feel like play. And maybe turn ‘em into work, you know? The ideal is to have your job be something that doesn’t feel like a job, and that was the case for me for years with print criticism. It’s not the case anymore.


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog