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

  • Bid on J.D. Salinger’s Review of ‘Raiders of the Lost Ark’

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

    Gigi  (1958)

    The Last Metro  (1980)

    The 39 Steps  (1935)

    My Foolish Heart  (1949)

    Alright, it’s not actually a film review, but in a letter of correspondence from 1981, to lover Janet Eagleson, the Catcher in the Rye author does pan the original Indiana Jones film. However, it’s difficult to say the man doesn’t have good taste in movies. In the same handwritten note, he also mention that he enjoyed Truffaut’s The Last Metro. Behold the great American novelist’s actual words:

    …Have seen no good movies, except The Last Metro…I got hooked into seeing Raiders of the Lost Ark, which might be excused for its unwitty, unfunny awful socko-ness if it had been put together by Harvard Lampoon seniors…

    I guess it’s not all that amazing, but I find Salinger’s comments interesting because I’d always figured he was a curmudgeonly hater of films. Part of my misconception is due to Holden Caulfield’s attitude toward cinema in Catcher, and part is due to Salinger’s refusal to permit a movie adaptation of Catcher or any other works post-My Foolish Heart (an adaptation of Salinger’s story “Uncle Wiggily in Connecticut” that apparently resulted in the author’s subsequent refusals).

    Yet according to Salinger’s daughter Margaret (via Wikipedia), who wrote the memoir Dream Catcher, the author was in fact a film buff. She even listed his favorite films as Gigi, Hitchcock’s The Lady Vanishes and The 39 Steps, and the comedies of the Marx Brothers, W.C. Fields and Laurel and Hardy. However, according to Joyce Maynard (also via Wikipedia), an ex-lover who also wrote a memoir, Salinger “loves movies, not films.” Of course, that would mean that he should have loved Raiders and disliked Truffaut, right?

    Anyway, you can bid on the letter with the Last Metro and Raiders comments in an Ebay Live Auction tomorrow evening, or if you’re short the few thousand bucks, you can just look at the photo of it on the auction’s listing.

    [via Empire]


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

  • ‘Land of the Lost’ Thankfully Avoids CGI

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

    Evan Almighty  (2007)

    Land of the Lost  (2009)

    It’s bad enough that Hollywood has to remake all of my childhood memories (yes, I admit my childhood memories are mostly TV shows and movies from the ’70s and ’80s). But when they go and use CGI rather than actors and completely alter the way I remember things (man, that sucked how the Who’s the Boss movie featured a computer generated Mona), I just get so upset I could rant on a blog. So, imagine my relief when I saw this official photo from the set of Universal’s Land of the Lost in today’s USA Today.

    Yes, those Sleestak look just as you remember. Only darker, more detailed, and a little (just a little) less like a costume with a human inside. But as much as I’d like to salute director Brad Silberling both for respecting my childhood and for shitting on CGI (which is still just too lazy a tool these days), the choice seems mostly to do with retaining the show’s cheesiness. Anthony Breznican writes for USA Today:

    In the ’70s TV show, they were guys in lime-green pajamas — and looked it. The Sleestak are much sleeker now, but the film is largely a comedy, so the guy-in-a-suit look has its charms, Silberling says. “There is a sense of humor that I loved from the original show that can only come from an actor trying to negotiate the suit. If it became CG, they’d be too perfect. For the Sleestak to remain in people’s memories, it tells you that it was about who was in the suit.”

    It’s funny that Silberling mentions the memories part, especially considering the Land of the Lost movie deviates in a number of ways from the series. Instead of being about a man and his two children, the story involves three adults (played by Will Ferrell, Danny McBride and Anna Friel) who accidentally wind up in a strange world filled with dinosaurs, Pukani (which are like Ewoks mixed with the Geico cavemen) and of course Sleestak (which, according to a character on the show, “taste a whole lot like lobster. But then again, not like lobster, if you know what I mean.”).

    Anyway, I’m at least glad the creatures aren’t rendered digitally, and I again disagree with Silberling that CG would make them look too perfect — unless of course the production got some LOTR kind of budget, and considering this is a kitschy Will Ferrell comedy, I can’t see Universal spending that kind of dough (last month Defamer mentioned the studio cut corners on the film, yet the IMDb listing for the film still mentions a budget of $100 million, which is of course way too high for a comedy post-Evan Almighty).

    As far as remakes of my childhood memories go, Land of the Lost is today looking better than Race to Witch Mountain, despite the latest news that original Escape to Witch Mountain child stars Kim Richards and Ike Eisenmann will make cameos. I have a feeling that that one will have a lot of terrible computer effects, though I suppose anything is better than those awful harmonica-harnessed-with-string effects from the original.

    (via Fark.com)


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

  • Iron Man: Too Critically Acclaimed To Be A Hit?

    1 out of 1 people found this review helpful. [What do you think?]
    Under discussion:

    Iron Man  (2008)

    Iron ManInteresting. David Poland, who is not crazy about Iron Man (”I just wanted a character who actually dealt with the obvious demons that he overcomes… and not just another really, really cool suit of CG armor”) posits that the fact that other critics are crazy about the film (it’s currently at 86% on Rotten Tomatoes) might be a sign that it’s not going to connect with audiences:

    This appears to be the Pass movie of the early summer for critics. Is it because of Downey or the middle-aged hero or talk about a huge opening or the use of the Middle East and the half-ass political arguments of the film that play out hypocritically but pay active lip service to liberals… I don’t know.

    All I do know is that when film critics are the ones identifying with your superhero, you may be being successful with the wrong demo for mega-bucks… which is all the film producers wanted in the first place.

    Those “half-ass political arguments” feature prominently in each of the film’s serious reviews, both negative and positive. Todd McCarthy cheerfully commended director Jon Favreau in his rave for having “found a sure-fire way to make money with a modern Middle East war movie: Just send a Marvel superhero into the fray to kick some insurgent butt.” But for David Denby, Iron Man’s Trojan Horse smuggling of the ideas and iconography of the current war is the film’s biggest sin:

    …the freelance fanatics, or whatever they are, waterboard Tony Stark, which, considering what some American interrogators and their surrogates have done to suspects recently, is enraging to watch. Such are the ways of pop: we cast our sins onto others. The complaint sounds a little wan, but it’s worth noting that, possibly, more Americans will see this dunderheaded fantasia on its opening weekend than have seen all the features and documentaries that have labored to show what’s happening in Iraq and on the home front.

    David Edelstein, who “loved it,” makes an interesting point about a certain action blockbuster tradition, wherein mass market entertainments “pick up on bad vibes in the air and transform them into something that lets us sleep better at night.” If amelioration of collective guilt is truly what Iron Man is up to, then Poland may have a point. If there’s anything certain about our pop cultural moment, it’s that the masses don’t want “bad vibes” to be “transformed”––that would require having to acknowledge that the “vibes” ever existed.


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

  • Coen Brothers in Venice: Trade Roughage 04/29/08

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

    • The Coen BrothersThe Coen Brothers’ Burn After Reading, which made some snippy headlines last month after Focus gave the film an undesirable September release date, has been selected to open the Venice Film Festival. For those keeping track: the last film Focus landed in that slot at that festival was Atonement; three years ago, they used the ame method to launch Brokeback Mountain.
    • There’s a long piece in this morning’s Hollywood Reporter on Sex and the City––the show, the movie, the brand––as a New York City tourist attraction. Says Michael Patrick King, director of the film: “The amount of girls coming to New York to have a $17 cosmo — everybody benefited in a great way.”
    • 2929 Productions have bought in to two projects from producers Kevin Spacey and Dana Brunetti and Ben Mezrich––AKA the creative team behind the hit 21. Brunetti sums up the appeal of working from a Mezrich literary source: “Guys that normally aren’t readers will dive into a Ben Mezrich story and read it quickly, and then pass it around to other guys. It’s chick lit for men.”

    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog