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

  • Entertainment Weekly in Trouble? Today in Film Bloggery 04/30/09

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

    Among my many love-hate relationships is my loyalty to Entertainment Weekly, a magazine I’ve been reading pretty much non-stop since its inception. Every year, though, I come very, very close to not renewing my subscription. Coincidentally each time my expiration comes up, EW does some kind of revamp of its format, usually in a way that makes it seem even more dumbed down than it already was. But I keep sticking with it, partly because it’s the only magazine that has that perfect balance between real journalism and gossip that I enjoy for such light-reading locales as the gym and the bathroom (sorry). It has somehow remained on the side of respectable movie coverage — even if it primarily serves Hollywood’s marketing departments — while its cousins US Weekly and Movieline completely caved to become clones of People and Star (hooray for the return of a better Movieline online, btw).

    EW may not be for everyone, but for those of us who love it or need it as a kind of week-ending recap of Hollywood news and pop-cultural fluff, it would be a shame to see the print version disappear (despite the fact that blog, I actually don’t prefer to read content online and rarely visit EW.com to read features) or even merge with a more gossip-centric mag. And now that Time Inc. has canned Scott Donaton, EW’s fifth publisher in five years, the rumors and speculation circulating about the mag’s troubles have me worried that I’ll soon only have Mental_Floss left as far as light, enjoyable magazines I subscribe to.

    Check out the terrific reactions of two other bloggers, both of whom have written for EW at some time (I actually wish I could say the same), after the jump. And chime in below if you also hope the mag sticks around and/or doesn’t change for the worse.

    • Jeff Wells at Hollywood Elsewhere spreads an old rumor about the mag potentially folding into People, for which he hated working, and fondly recalls his days with EW, for which he has some advice:

      the salad days are over. That means you abandon the big offices, have most of the staffers work from home, and…whatever, bump up Jess Cagle’s salary in exchange for a new title as publisher/managing editor. Don’t hire a new publisher at $250,000 a year — take the money and snag three or four new writers in order to add snappy content.

    • Anne Thompson at Thompson on Hollywood recognizes what EW does right and why they should continue doing it:

      The weekly should not be stinting, in my view, on what they have to offer over the competition–great reporters who can report the hell out of stories early. The web can handle the fast-breaking stuff–but there is room for depth and context and consolidation in the mag…I wish EW was more like Premiere and less like People. And I wish the studios would step up their endemic advertising and support it, because I for one don’t want to live in an online only world. Magazine covers and gorgeous photo spreads and smart elegant profiles by the likes of Christine Spines set up a movie star unlike anything else.


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

  • 10 Mutants Who Need an X-Men Origins Movie

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

    10 Mutants Who Need an X-Men Origins Movie

    As long as X-Men Origins: Wolverine is a success this weekend (and despite all its “bad luck,” it should do very well), Fox will follow it with another X-Men spin-off, this one detailing the back story of Magneto. Outside of that project, which has been in the works just as long as the Wolverine film, there’s interest in solo movies for Gambit, Deadpool and Emma Frost (White Queen), as well as a spin-off about the original X-Men team as students.

    Recently, in another list, we called for an Origins film focused on the shape-shifting villain Mystique, for which we even suggested Brian DePalma to direct. That spin-off is still our first choice, but since there are so many great mutant characters in the Marvel Universe, we’d like to pitch ten more X-Men origin movies to Hollywood (not just to Fox). To go along with the studio’s idea of hiring an unqualified filmmaker (Gavin Hood) for the job, we also recommend a barely appropriate director for each film.




    Professor X

    If Magneto gets his own film, it’s only fair to give one to Charles Xavier, too. While it’s true that he’s enough of a centerpiece in the first three films of the franchise, and he will certainly be prominent in the planned X-Men: First Class movie, we’d love to see the genius telepath’s pre-X-Men days. The film should deal with Xavier’s early encounters with characters who exemplify the negative aspects of the mutant evolution, beginning with his jealous non-mutant half-brother, Marko (Juggernaut), continuing with the evil Shadow King, at least slightly touching on the birth of his insane mutant son, Legion, and ending with his failed relationship with Amelia Voght, who believes that mutants should remain underground and anonymous, when he decides to found the X-Men. Zapped! Director Robert J. Rosenthal should return to the director’s chair to helm this, at least as a nod to Patrick Stewart’s Extras appearance, if not also to have a young Xavier using his psychic powers to render girls topless.




    Storm

    A spin-off of both the X-Men trilogy and the Professor X movie, in which a young pickpocket Ororo Munroe should make a cameo, Storm’s origin film could also lead-in to, or at least link up with, the Black Panther adaptation Marvel Studios is planning. The story would begin with her childhood in Egypt, when a jet crashes into her home, killing her parents and burying her beneath rubble. For a while, she’s a thieving orphan on the streets of Cairo before she ventures south and meets and falls in love with a young T’Challa (Black Panther) in the Serengeti. They part ways, her weather-controlling powers manifest and she ends up living among an African tribe who worships her as a rain goddess before she’s recruited to join the X-Men. The film could be bookended with a post-X-Men trilogy-set wedding between Storm and T’Challa. Continuing the trend of documentarians becoming narrative filmmakers, Rob Fricke (Baraka) should direct.




    Nightcrawler

    Alan Cumming’s portrayal of Nightcrawler was one of the best parts of X2: X-Men United, and it was unfortunate that the character did not return for the third X-Men movie. To make amends for the exclusion, Fox should give the blue mutant his own film, which could also be linked to a Mystique film, whether or not the connection is made that she is Nightcrawler’s mother. Set first in a Bavarian circus, where the young, demonic-looking Kurt Wagner stars as an acrobat, then in a Florida freak show, where his agility is wasted, the movie would conclude after the teleporting character returns to Germany and battles his child-killing foster brother, Stefan, and then an angry mob who accuse Wagner of being the murderer. Wim Wenders (Wings of Desire) should direct.




    Callisto

    The outcast group known in the comics as the Morlocks, which includes Callisto, briefly shows up in X-Men: The Last Stand (as The Omegas), but they deserve an entire movie of their own, which would place them in the tunnels of Manhattan and further examine the plight of these ugly mutants who aren’t as able to assimilate into society as are the X-Men. The plot could potentially include Callisto’s kidnapping of Angel (who also shows up in the third X-Men film) to make him her mate, as well as her battle with Storm for leadership of the subterranean group. The film should be directed by Marc Singer, who made the documentary Dark Days. Or by Marc Singer, the Beastmaster actor who is also the cousin of X-Men director Bryan Singer.




    Angel/Archangel

    Angel’s solo outing should directly follow the Callisto/Morlocks movie, in which his wings could be accidentally amputated during the struggle for his freedom. Therefore, this movie would get right into his transformation by the villain Apocalypse into his new incarnation as “Death,” and subsequently “Archangel.” To make it an actual solo film and not just another X-Men sequel, his and the other Horsemen’s attack on New York City should not be stopped by the entire team. Maybe he should only battle Iceman, or no X-Men at all. It could be a more internal struggle for him to break from the control of Apocalypse and then turn on and defeat his master. Nick Castle (The Boy Who Could Fly) should get the gig as director.




    Psylocke

    The character kind of appears in X-Men: The Last Stand, but we can forget that minor detail since she’s not that recognizable. In her own movie, Psylocke would begin as English telepath Betsy Braddock, twin-sister of UK superhero Captain Britain. Without acknowledging her early membership in the X-Men nor most of her other comic book chronology, by some newly written circumstance she is kidnapped by the Hand’s Matsu’o Tsurayaba, her mind is swapped with the man’s lover, Kwannon, and she becomes a deadly assassin. Mark Waters, who has experience with mind-swap movies (Freaky Friday) should direct.




    Cannonball

    Most of Cannonball’s origin film would just be about him growing up on a Kentucky farm and later working in a coal mine. We’ll get to meet his younger sister, Paige, who is also a mutant, but of course we never see her revealed as such. This won’t be that packed with action, but it will have some neat special effects as Sam Guthrie discovers and develops his flying abilities after they manifest in an accident at the mine. Towards the end of the film, he’s found out and recruited to join the Hellfire Club, which would link this to the White Queen film that David O. Russell wants to make. David Gordon Green (All the Real Girls) would helm this beautiful-looking and poetic comic book adaptation.




    Tabitha Smith

    The explosive teenage mutant who has gone by the names Timebomb, Boom Boom, Boomer and other aliases, should get her own film over similar candidates like Rogue, Kitty Pryde and Jubilee, because her bomb-creating powers make her more blockbuster-friendly. Especially if the movie involves her early bond with fellow suicidal teen Rictor, who causes earthquakes. Her story begins after she escapes from her abusive father, and the film is set mostly on the streets, where she encounters other runaways (possibly even Jubilee, who she famously clashed with in the comics for being so similar). Michael Bay would be appropriate as director, but he should merely produce while Martin Bell (Streetwise) takes the helm.




    Dazzler

    There aren’t enough musical action films, but that could all change after someone makes a Dazzler movie and the thing becomes a huge hit. Put Miley Cyrus in the lead, and the success is guaranteed. But the appeal of a rock-opera superhero movie isn’t the only reason Dazzler should get her own spin-off. There’s also the likelihood that such a movie would include scenes set in the Mojoverse and costar Dazzler’s lucky (in more ways than one) boyfriend, Longshot. Ideally, a fantastically visionary filmmaker like Terry Gilliam or Jean-Pierre Jeunet should be hired for this thing, but it’s more probable that Kenny Ortega (High School Musical) would get it.




    Northstar

    It’s about time we get an openly gay superhero movie, and there’s no better character to star in such a thing than the former Alpha Flight member whose homosexuality was a major news story in the early 90s, when Marvel officially outed him. Like most of the characters on this list, Northstar too would be shown first as a bad guy, joining a terrorist group fighting for the independence of Quebec. By the film’s end, though, he would join the Canadian team Alpha Flight, through which he reunites with his twin sister, Aurora, and they would go into battle against Wolverine, for any narrative reason at all (the real reason is that a Wolverine appearance will guarantee a bigger audience, anyway). Bryan Singer, who did a great job directing the first two X-Men films, and who deserves a gay-themed movie now that there’s no need for him to make his planned Harvey Milk biopic, would be a great pick to helm this, but we’re going to suggest Brett Ratner (X-Men: The Last Stand), just because.


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

  • A WINK AND A SMILE Review

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

    A WINK AND A SMILE Review

    The ten brave students at Seattle’s Academy of Burlesque, who shimmy in pasties and heels, unexpectedly and touchingly reveal themselves in more ways than one in Deidre TimmonsA Wink and a Smile. The film combines talking head interviews with the mostly average Jills and their anything-but-average headmistress Indigo Blue (who also serves as an enlightening guide and narrator through the burlesque scene of both today and yesteryear) with actual performances courtesy of the exhibitionist men and women of Seattle’s vibrant scene. But the biggest revelation of all is that this breathtaking doc just might be the sexy feel-good flick of the year.

    It’s no coincidence that the performers of burlesque and “boylesque” tend to run in the same circles as the mistresses and masters of the BDSM scene and the queens and kings of drag art. Not only do these stripper artistes share costumes (with the fetish world a penchant for corsets and stilettos, with the drag scene a preference for the lovingly handmade over the store-bought, a la the grand balls most notably featured in Paris Is Burning), but also a common goal. As much as the students in A Wink and a Smile, who come to Miss Blue’s school from every walk of life and for an equal variety of reasons, might profess a desire to wield their taboo female sexuality as a power tool, the reality is that burlesque (and S&M and drag) is really a tool of transcendence, rising above the simplistic gender binary of male/female (and by extension any gay/straight sexuality). As Miss Blue notes, the definition of burlesque is to mock something, in this case the very notion of a fixed female sexual construct. “The distinctions between male and female in our society are not as rigid as they were in the past – and neither are they in the burlesque world,” Miss Blue proclaims. Indeed, the biologically female Swedish Housewife was “raised by drag queens” and incorporates camp into her performance, while the male-born Waxie Moon makes a female student swoon that she’s “in love” even as he commands the stage in the ultimate symbol of femininity, a white wedding dress. Boldly, Timmons’ film makes visual that which is so freeing about burlesque – and also so terrifying.

    And like with S&M play and drag shows, body type within burlesque – the mere physical form – is truly irrelevant, while the melding of sexiness with silliness is crucial. It’s a return to an adolescent stage of sexual exploration, an infinite realm of possibility. One student chooses to create a Little Red Riding Hood routine in which she takes on the roles of both innocent child and wolf. Another was astonished to see that “gawky little girl” that she once was, staring back at her in the mirror as she rehearsed her dance. By the time the students reach the end of their life-changing journey, shown in a montage sequence in which the director deftly quick cuts between the (now nine) women’s class final/live show, their transformation onstage is nothing short of astounding, all the more so since it’s got little to do with tassels and boas. Miss Blue had defined the basic burlesque formula routine at the very beginning as, “Performer enters with some clothing, magic happens, and performer exits the stage with less clothing.” What’s truly remarkable is that Timmons’ lens has managed to capture that middle part.


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

  • BEESWAX to be released by Cinema Guild

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

    indieWIRE reports that Cinema Guild will distribute Andrew Bujalski’s Beeswax. The film, which I reviewed at SXSW, is Bulajski’s third feature; its predecesors, Funny Ha Ha and Mutual Appreciation, were self-released after the former won an Independent Spirit Award and the later completed a successful festival run. Word on the street is that the new film will open in New York later this summer, after its run at BAMcinemaFEST.

    Cinema Guild has been quite busy of late, actvely acquiring old fashioned art films in danger of falling through the ever-widening gap between festival acclaim and traditional theatrical release. A couple of weeks ago, they announced a deal on Clair Denis35 Shots of Rhum; a few weeks before that, they launched a home video label through which they plan to release a number of titles formerly owned by the shuttered New Yorker Films.


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

  • Wolverine Leak After-After-Aftermath. Today in Film Bloggery 04/29/09

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

    There is only one more full day before X-Men Origins: Wolverine hits theaters, and I’m having trouble choosing an excuse for why I won’t be seeing it this weekend. I can’t say that I watched the leaked version, because I don’t download movies illegally (though not so much because it’s illegal as much as I’m not savvy with torrent sites). So here are my remaining options: I hear it stinks; I’m angry about the multiple endings scam; I fear that I’ll get swine flu; I’m boycotting Fox for lying about the version of the film that was pirated.

    The last of these choices is a hot topic today, thanks to a post late last evening from Patrick Goldstein at The Big Picture, in which he addresses Fox’s apparent lie regarding the leaked version’s running time and shares a statement from a studio exec responding to the controversy. “A lot of information and misinformation was flying back and forth then,” says Chris Petrikin, Fox’s VP of corporate communications. “And there was no way to sort it out quickly or definitively. In fact, I think I told [Co-Chairman Tom Rothman] that there might be 10 minutes missing from the stolen version, based — obviously — on misinformation I was given or misinterpreted.”

    So those of you who downloaded the movie may no longer have an incentive to see it on the big screen, though I doubt this lie really makes any difference to anyone. Still, I am curious to know if anyone is really thinking of boycotting the movie because of a lie, fib or mistake made by a studio exec. Let me know if and why you’re avoiding the comic book flick this weekend, and check out the rest of the blogosphere’s response to the spin clarification after the jump.

    • Commenting on Goldstein’s post, “Andrew” criticizes the studio for lying:

      What is this? The Ari Fleischer school of PR - give me a break. If this is how it went down then it confirms the incompetence and mediocrity that allow people at Fox to keep their job. Either it was a lie, or Fox decided to spin a situation without getting all their facts straight. No wonder NewsCorp stock is in the toilet.

    • Lane Brown at Vulture thinks the studio needs to get their shit together:

      Remember, Rothman gave this interview only a full day and a half after Fox learned that Wolverine had leaked — how could the studio possibly have had time to watch a 107-minute video file to determine how much of its $150 million blockbuster was being freely traded on the Internet? (Though we’d certainly hate to imply that Fox is so on top of things that they could’ve come up with a couple of brief talking points in 36 hours.) And the real issue is the scale of the crime — for which there have been no arrests or named suspects, even a month later.

      Jeez, how did a studio this organized ever manage to misplace a DVD?

    • Rod at The Playlist sees the continued backlash against this movie as just business as usual for certain complainers:

      fact of the matter remains that Fox has a bad track record. We don’t especially care and the geek bloggers are excessive in their hatred for Fox — mostly because they tend to **** up films that nerds love (”Daredevil,” “Live Free or Die Hard,” etc.) — but still, color us skeptical. Others will probably have a field day with this rebuttal.

    • Commenting at In Contention, “alynch” makes a good point:

      Fox shouldn’t be trying to clarify this matter. They should simply say, “Yeah, we told a fib in order to discourage people from stealing our movie, and anybody who caught us in this lie is a thief.”

    • David Poland at The Hot Blog makes a suggestion:

      Personally, I think Fox should include the now-infamous leaked version in the eventually DVD package for this film. Own the situation. And if you are a film lover, the footage of unfinished effects is kind of interesting when you see the final version. It’s the kind of stuff that studios put in DVD extras in order to illustrate the process of building effects.

    • STV at Movieline adds to Poland’s reasoning that Fox must “own the situation”:

      After all, if studio reps and execs naturally can’t help but dig a deeper hole for Wolverine every time they open their mouths, don’t they eventually have no choice but to just sell the hole itself? It’s a lot more honest, and in any case, seems a much, much easier story to keep straight when the press come calling. Just a suggestion.


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

  • THE LIMITS OF CONTROL Review

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

    THE LIMITS OF CONTROL Review

    It’s hard to know how to go about using words to do justice to Jim Jarmusch’s The Limits of Control, a film seemingly designed to reveal the folly of associating language with meaning, so concerned it is with the rhythm and atmosphere of code over courting traditional satisfaction by suggesting conceivable systems for breaking it. In talking about a picture in which everything is surface (or else nothing is), and the relationship between all signs and their meanings are scrambled (or none are), is everything a spoiler? (Or, perhaps nothing is?)

    It’s possible that you’re frustrated already, and you wouldn’t be the only one; Jarmusch’s film is the first to be released this calendar year to truly polarize critics to the point where some of my colleagues have suggested that it’s one of the filmmaker’s worst efforts, while others champion it as one of his best. As such, it seems necessary to be more transparently subjective than usual: I like it. The Limits of Control seems to work best for those who can roll with the fact that Jarmusch is trafficking in vague genre promises that he only barely cashes in on, and that the story’s perceived mystery is a MacGuffin to pave the way for a rumination on creative idealism as a code that crosses transnational lines, bridging gaps of language and ethnic difference to unite dreamers/travelers (signified here as one and the same) in a common fight against those who seek to destroy their philosophy in the name of global capitalist homogeneity.

    Jarmsuch regular Isaach De Bankole stars as a wandering operative known only as Lone Man, who is on some kind of mission involving handovers of matchboxes, sometimes containing diamonds, sometimes containing small bits of paper with inscrutable writing which the man appears to memorize before ritually swallowing and washing down with a gulp from one of the two espressos he always orders simultaneously. The codes seem to lead him to new locations, where he picks up more codes through cafe conversations about culture and art with charismatic strangers (the film features meaty cameo-sized roles for a variety of international indie bold faced names, including a bewigged Tilda Swinton, a be-bearded Gael Garcia Bernal, a bespectacled and mostly naked Paz De La Huerta, and a bewigged Bill Murray). Characters are never named on screen, but in the credits are refered to by their reductive defining characteristics: American (Murray), Mexican (Bernal), Nude (de la Huerta), Blonde (Swinton). Each person the Lone Man meets uses the same words to confirm that he doesn’t speak Spanish.

    Clearly, it’s a film of pattern and repetition, increasingly forcing the viewer to question the nature of what we’re looking at and what it means every time the cycle repeats. He travels, he orders two espresso, he does tai chi, he wears a version of the same sharkskin suit, he reclines in his clothes but never seems to sleep. Perhaps because he’s ALWAYS asleep, because it’s all a dream? How would we know –– how would he know ––  how to determine if he were sleeping or awake? As Tilda Swinton’s operative reminds him, “The best films are like dreams you’re never sure you really had.” In the already much-discussed climactic scene between De Bankole and a Cheney-esque Bill Murray, the latter growlingly demands to know how the former penetrated his ultra-high security lair. The answer: “I used my imagination.” It’s the one scene in the film in which something undeniably happens and yet, it’s debatable whether the scene itself is actually happening in real time and space at all.

    The magic of Limits is that Jarmusch has used rigorous formalism (both within the narrative, and guiding it) to construct what feels like a loose, dreamy continuum of ideas. An inscrutable protagonist who literally feeds on encryption. A grafitied landscape of Spanish streets echoing the Cubist of paintings he visits at a museum, paintings themselves offering clues, delivering information in stylized form — art as its own kind of code, delivering sensitive information by disguising it in style. His contacts give him information, the building blocks of a crime, in the language of art appreciation. Or perhaps they merely appreciate the arts, and that’s their crime. The film’s climax implicitly suggests that if it is, the criminals will have their revenge against their oppressors.

    Perhaps the key to what Jarmusch is up to is offered in a scene very early in the film, in which the Lone Man recieves instructions in an airport from a man referred to in the credits as Creole, whose Spanish is translated into English by a companion who makes it known that he thinks he should be decoding the crypto-philosophy he’s been charged with transmitting from one man to another. “Reality is arbitrary,” says the Spanish speaker. “You want me to translate that?” asks the translator. “I don’t fucking get it.” The Spanish simply speaker nods at the Lone Man, and says, “He gets it.”

    Does he get it? Is he playing as though he gets it? Does it matter if he gets it? Do we have to get it? Is there a thing to get? The Limits of Control resists creating a discreet desire for the express purpose of satisfying it between credit sequences. If it satisfies you at all, it’s likely because of a desire you brought with you into the theater, one which the film doesn’t try to eliminate or even literally articulate as much as it sings of it. In code.


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog