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

  • The Week Sundance Begins To Freeze Our Hearts. SpoutBlog Week in Review

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

  • Dirt! The Movie. Sundance 2009 Preview

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

    Silent Tongue  (1994)

    After Life  (2000)

    According to the typically preposterously effusive Sundance catalogue entry, Bill Benenson and Eugene Rosow’s documentary Dirt! The Movie, based on William Bryant Logan’s book Dirt, The Ecstatic Skin of the Earth “posses[es] both a cosmic perspective that reaches into the vastness of time and space, and the kind of warm, earnest energy that inspires small revolutions inside human hearts.” We like cosmic revolutions! When Benenson and Rosow answered the 4 Questions We Ask Everybody, they namechecked Buster Keaton, quoted Margaret Atwood, and made a lot of “dirty” puns.

    Tell us about your movie: who did you work with, what did you shoot on, why did you make it? Give us the reductive, 25-word or less, “It’s like [pop culture reference a] meets [pop culture reference b]!” pitch, then explain what the quick and dirty sell leaves out.

    Benenson: We worked with Dirt around the world, wherever there was Dirt we considered going there but choose only the most impressive Dirty Countries to film in, with support from our local “participants” on the ground (and under) around the world. Our film is like What the Bleep… meets Michael Moore on a good day.

    Rosow: We’re currently on the only planet we know of that’s got dirt and us humans.  Without dirt humans couldn’t survive.  Without humans dirt stands a chance….

    DIRT! The Movie tells the story of humans trying to re-connect to Dirt – the living skin of the earth.  For thousands of years we humans got along very well with this magical matrix of all life on land.  Then we grew apart. DIRT! The Movie explores how we can restore and repair this broken relationship…before it’s too late.

    If you funded your film through a “day job” or through working on projects that were not your own, tell us about that. If not, tell us a story from your past work life, before you became a professional filmmaker.

    Benenson: I have a day job at times but it isn’t Dirty enough for me to very happy in. I never had a life before Dirt as we are all come from Dirt.

    Rosow: As a producer of independent documentaries I’ve done my fair share of fundraising. How you collect funding is different for every project you do, especially now with how much and how fast media and entertainment are changing. When I started out I used Mel Brooks’ Producers as the model.  Did it different ways. Raised money from studios, pre sales etc.  Beg, borrow, sell… well… just sell.  This project has one funder whose commitment and willingness to take a big risk made it happen. Dirt is a great story, and one we feel has yet to be told — when you’ve got that you’ve got something worth making. People see that. Then they give you money. Only it’s never that simple or that easy.


    Have you been to Sundance before? If so, tell us your best moment (or worst, which ever is funnier).

    Benenson: I’ve been to Sundance several times before but am now looking forward to getting Dirty there, before it was always too clean for my taste.

    Rosow: I’ve been to Sundance before as a producer with bigger movies. (Sam Shepard’s Silent Tongue) and smaller ones (Britney Baby One More Time)  It’s exciting to return to the festival as a director — at least you get flown in, and they seem to feed you at more events.  It’s always a crazy time there, no matter who you are.

    Let’s get hypothetical: You’re on death row. The night of your execution, you’re allowed to watch any two films of your choice. What would you pick for your last-night-on-Earth double feature?

    Benenson: Chinatown because of the water in LA, needs cleaning up and my previous PBS documentaries, The Marginal Way and Diamond Rivers, which were Environmental films before there were explicit Environmental films.

    Rosow: Death row?  Last night on earth?  Sheesh, why watch a movie… but if so, there’s always Laurel and Hardy, Buster Keaton etc. to take you to the afterlife. Then there’s After Life the movie…

    Margaret Atwood quote, thought i’d send: “in the spring, at the end of the day, you should smell like dirt.”


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

  • Hurt Locker Trailer Blows Away Iraq War Hurdle. Clip of the Day

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

    Black Hawk Down  (2006)

    The Kingdom  (2007)

    Twilight  (2008)

    The Hurt Locker  (2009)

    Back in September, Kathryn Bigelow told SpoutBlog that there’s a misconception regarding the failure of movies dealing with the Iraq War because so far we’d really only seen dramatic films about soldiers coming home. We hadn’t exactly seen any war movies about the ongoing conflict. “I mean, war is inherently dramatic, look at Black Hawk Down,” she explained, picking a film released a year prior to the U.S. invasion of Iraq.

    Now it should make more sense that she referenced that specific title, as a new international trailer for Bigelow’s The Hurt Locker almost makes this film appear to be Black Hawk Down reset in Iraq. There seems to be a lot of similarly chaotic action involving an ensemble of talented actors running around a war-torn metropolis. The main difference is all the stuff with Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD), which actually makes it potentially even more appealing to the action movie crowd, they who never tire of the “which wire do I cut?” cliches.

    So why are we only seeing an international trailer, with no domestic release date for The Hurt Locker in sight (Summit Entertainment’s 2009 preview only mentions a Spring opening)? Over at Vulture, they joke that Summit is too busy with the Twilight sequel to pay attention to the acclaimed and awarded The Hurt Locker, yet they also speculate that this movie could leap over the supposed Iraq War film hurdle due to its action-heavy plot. I think it could do more than be a breakthrough for the subject matter; it should appropriately blow away the hurdle. Then again, The Kingdom, which didn’t even mention or take place in Iraq, should have done the same thing.


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

  • BATTLE FOR HADITHA DVD Review

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

    At the cinema, 2008 was the year when it was hip to depart from the moral outrage any conscientious individual might feel about our countries’ on going illegal and immoral war 6,000 miles away. Light satire, be it of the buddy (Harold and Kumar Escape From Guantanamo Bay) or “five minutes in the future, things will be even more remarkably FUBAR” variety (War Inc.) were fashionable. Stop-Loss, much like last year’s ill conceived Lions for Lambs, luke warm Rendition and sneakily powerful In the Valley of Elah, was too sincere for most audience members and a large swath of critics’ taste. On the other hand, did we really need Morgan Spurlock to go looking for Osama Bin Laden? What if he would have found him? That might have been a beheading worth watching.

    Thankfully the much-maligned documentarian Nick Broomfield, best known for his perpetual work-in-progress (i.e. shoddily constructed), Tragic Musicians of the 90s Docs Kurt and Courtney (1998) and Biggie and Tupac (2002), finally surfaced with a genuinely terrific film. His 2007 TIFF entry Battle for Haditha, a picture that, in perhaps the year’s biggest cinematic surprise given its author’s dubious track record and relative inexperience in the realm of narrative, is so eerily verisimilar that it puts much of what one could accurately call combat cinema to shame.

    Shot in grainy, fluid 16mm with Jordan doubling for Iraq, and starring non actors culled from local Iraqi refugees and ex-American military personnel, Broomfield’s movie paints a potent and altogether horrifying picture of American military brutality that would be fodder for the knee jerk responses of hawkish pundits if a) it had been seen by anyone; b) if its events weren’t almost entirely drawn from the documented atrocities of November 19th, 2005; and c) if it had been directed by Brian DePalma, whose Redacted could have been this relevant if its director wasn’t so busy navel-gazing and rubbing his bald spot.

    With a structural conceit that resembles Gus Van Sant’s long build up to tragedy in Elephant (but with much less artifice and showy stylistic hijinks to burn), Battle for Haditha recounts not the 2005 battle for which it’s named (that took place in August of 2005 and featured the death of just about every marine from Brook Park, Ohio), but the massacre of twenty-four Iraqis, fifteen of them confirmed civilian noncombatants, by Americans servicemen out for revenge after a member of their platoon, Corporal Miguel Terrazas, was killed by an IED within the city.  That IED was initially listed as the cause of the fifteen civilian deaths in the military’s official report on the incident, only to be discovered as the mere spark for a clinical retribution on the part of a tired, emotionally scarred and trigger happy platoon. Broomfield paints the soldiers as limited and essentially decent men who, under the right circumstances, are subject to the worst human nature has to offer.

    The film has a small share of inauthentic-seeming moments, which will always occur when you unleash an inspired non-performer in a set of dire given circumstances and make them create without a safety net. But even in the midst of these moments, the film retains its power to both enrage and enthrall. Especially riveting is former Marine corporal Elliot Ruiz as Cpl. Ramirez, whose rage spills over to needless violence with a ferocity that can be hard to watch at times, but whose vulnerability, his essential optimistic sweetness, breaks your heart. At times the performance seems designed to provoke a Liberal wussie’s worst suspicions about the men who serve us in uniform; in other moments, you completely fall in love with the man. It’s dynamite work, a fully lived-in sensation.

    That those on both sides of any armed conflict are left wounded and this is no small thing might be Broomfield’s thematic intention, but his film transcends his schematic desires by putting us so equally in the shoes of combatants on both sides. It’s also leisurly enough to glimpse small moments with surprising restraint and unexpected beauty. From he sensuality of a woman removing her hijab to have intercourse and then a quaint shower with her lover, to a soldier watching as children flee their Madrasahs in the wake of the retaliatory massacre, Broomfield reveals himself to be a visual poet, albeit a minor one.

    The banality of evil is the film’s (and this whole war’s) real subject, but as it floats between the daily routines of the platoon and various groups of Iraqi civilians (and a few insurgents), many of whom we know will not see another day, the film manages to truly put to bed Francois Truffaut’s notion that war cinema is always too visceral to be considered truly pacifist. I’m glad I’ve seen it and, deity willing, I never, ever want to see the real thing.


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

  • Oscars: 10 Unlikely Nominations We’d Like To See

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

    The Dark Knight  (2008)

    Wall-E  (2008)

    Bolt  (2008)

    Doubt  (2008)

    Milk  (2008)

    Man on Wire  (2008)

    Happy-Go-Lucky  (2008)

    W.  (2008)

    Tony Manero  (2008)

    Wendy and Lucy  (2008)

    We’re less than two weeks away from receiving this year’s Oscar nominations, and though none of the major categories are completely predictable just yet, each has at least three or four certain favorites. Meanwhile, the final slots for Best Picture, Best Director and the acting and screenwriting categories may be simply a random grab from small handfuls of rotating contenders. As of now, it doesn’t appear we’ll be seeing any huge surprises come the morning of January 22nd, when the Academy announces the nominees. The Dark Knight is sure to become the first comic book film up for Best Picture, and it won’t even be a shocker if animated feature Wall-E is listed alongside it in the same category.

    But the ballots don’t need to be mailed out until Monday, so I’m taking one last chance to reach out to the procrastinators within the Academy membership. If you still don’t know who and what to write in, and you’re unwilling to go the safe route and nominate the expected bunch of films and talent, then consider some of these underdogs, under-appreciated and pretty much unlikely possibilities:



    Best Picture: Rachel Getting Married

    There was a time when Jonathan Demme’s “Altmanesque” family drama was thought a frontrunner for the Academy’s top prize, but now it looks like it may not even garner a much-deserved Original Screenplay nod for Jenny Lumet, let alone Best Picture. Anne Hathaway is still a good bet in the Best Actress category, though she’s perhaps the least worthy element of the film. Demme deserves his first Best Director nomination in 17 years for reinventing and revitalizing his career with such a rich ensemble piece, while editor Tim Squyres needs to be recognized for piecing together the ingredients so perfectly. I could go on and on about more individual achievements that need be honored (I’ve already spotlighted Robyn Hitchcock’s worth), so let’s just sum it all up and say Rachel Getting Married is highly worthy of being nominated for Best Picture.




    Best Director: Mike Leigh, Happy-Go-Lucky

    Like Jonathan Demme, Mike Leigh is one of the finest living directors in terms of working with actors. They both constantly get Oscar-worthy (if not Academy-recognized) performances from otherwise serviceable thespians, yet Leigh is typically more regarded for his screenwriting, for which he’s received three Oscar nominations against two directorial nominations. With Happy-Go-Lucky, it’s more his directing skill that shines through, and if the Academy can’t find room to honor either Sally Hawkins or Eddie Marsan (respectively for Best Actress and Best Supporting Actor) they might want to nominate Leigh, since neither would have been so remarkable without his leadership.




    Best Actress: Michelle Williams, Wendy and Lucy

    For the minimalist kind of films that Kelly Reichardt makes, most filmmakers would rather go with an unknown lead than with a familiar, gossip magazine-friendly actress, even one as talented as Michelle Williams. Yet the former Oscar nominee disappears into the role of Wendy in Wendy and Lucy, so much that it’s easy to forget that she’s a famous movie star. She seems as fresh and unknown as any actor in a De Sica or, more currently, a Ramin Bahrani film. The Academy will likely overlook Williams this year, not so much because the film was barely distributed, but because she doesn’t give a particularly flashy performance. Plus, although the actress appears relatively unfamiliar on screen, it isn’t the kind of “unrecognizable” transformation that Oscar prefers with beautiful young starlets.




    Best Supporting Actress: Bette Midler, Then She Found Me

    If a performance is great and nobody sees it, is it still Oscar-worthy? Of course, but it’s not likely to be nominated. I don’t foresee any Academy members scrambling to rent Helen Hunt’s terrific directorial debut, Then She Found Me, this weekend, which is too bad. Bette was back this past year and just as good as, if not better than, before. She was lively yet somewhat reserved compared to what we expect from her. The two-time Best Actress nominee will hopefully receive her due win one day, probably in the supporting category and as a career-honoring nod, but it may not be as deserving as this.




    Best Actor: Josh Brolin, W.

    I’ve already written a whole column about why Brolin should receive a Best Actor nomination for W., so I needn’t devote too much more space here. Apparently he’s gained more heat for his supporting role in Milk, though, and while that should be plenty recognition for him this year, I continue to hope for a double nomination. His two performances this year are equally amazing, and they couldn’t be more different, despite how they may both be deemed villainous roles.

    Best Supporting Actor: Mark Walton, Bolt

    Let me first acknowledge that I got this idea from Bolt’s biggest fan, Kristopher Tapley of In Contention, who called Mark Walton’s voice acting, “the closest I’ve ever come to considering a vocal performance Oscar-worthy since Ellen Degeneres in ‘Finding Nemo.’” I don’t necessarily agree with Tapley’s decision to put Bolt at #2 on his Best of 2008 list, but I would love to see a non-actor like Walton be recognized non-traditionally for vocal work, a form of acting that doesn’t garner enough consideration. Who needs big name casting in an animated film when a storyboard artist gives a more hilarious vocal performance than even Jack Black?




    Best Original Screenplay: Charlie Kaufman, Synecdoche, New York

    Kaufman may need some fine-tuning in the directorial department (though he did a pretty good job for a first-timer), but his latest screenplay, for Synecdoche, New York, is every bit as brilliant as his three Oscar-nominated scripts (one of which, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, was a winner). There’s not much originality in the attempt to put everything into a screenplay — in fact, it’s a common mistake for narcissistic novices — but Kaufman is quite original for having been the first to be successful at it.




    Best Adapted Screenplay: James Marsh and Philippe Petit, Man on Wire

    There is no screenwriter credited for Man on Wire, but there had to have been some sort of adaptation involved, even if it was simply a single-page treatment and some notes about how to turn Petit’s unexceptional (though fairly enjoyable) book To Reach the Clouds into one of the most riveting documentaries of all time. Unfortunately, the lack of credit means that the Academy will certainly overlook this, the greatest cinematic storytelling of the year.

    And now, some extra-long shots in two of the non-major categories:




    Best Cinematography: Jeremy Lasky, Martin Rosenberg, Danielle Feinberg, Roger Deakins, Wall-E

    I almost chose Wall-E, which I don’t think should be given a Best Picture nod, for the Best Director slot, for Andrew Stanton. But if any animation filmmaker is going to break such ground, I’d rather first see Brad Bird recognized in that category. Besides, much of the innovative camera work in Wall-E is courtesy of new concepts in cinematographic technique for animation. Even if the Academy blew our minds and nominated Wall-E for Best Cinematography, Deakins, whom Pixar hired for some uncredited consultation, wouldn’t be named as one of the nominees. But since the guy is so deserving of an Oscar, why not just name him in some additional slots this year (a repeat of his double duty from 2007, he’s expected to receive two nods, for Doubt and Revolutionary Road)?




    Best Foreign Language Film: Tony Manero

    Pablo Larrain’s Tony Manero, which is Chile’s official submission to the foreign language category, is currently without a distributor in the U.S. How might that change? An Oscar nomination. Sure, not every Oscar nominee for Best Foreign Language film is guaranteed distribution, but it could help a film as highly praised as this one — recently it placed third on indieWIRE’s Critic’s Poll of the best undistributed films of the year. Currently, it’s a strong contender, though it may be just on the outside of the Academy’s top choices (it’s up against either Sweden’s Everlasting Moments or Germany’s The Baader Meinhof Complex for that last spot). Personally, I haven’t actually seen Tony Manero, but I’d really like to, and that is why I wish for it to be recognized.


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog

  • FilmCouch #103: Comedy, Tragedy, Criticism

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

    Beautiful Losers  (2008)

    Che  (2008)

    A remark made in Aaron Rose’s art-nerd documentary Beautiful Losers, about humor acting as a sledge hammer, got us thinking about the power of both the comic and the tragic. Not long ago, Karina reviewed a little known documentary called Dear Zachary: A letter to a son about his father. Then the film was played on MSNBC, and her analytical criticisms of the film set off a firestorm of angry comments. We chat about tragedy, context, and the dangers of critiquing non-fiction films as works of art.

    Another type of movie that often avoids critical attention is comedy. A new PBS mini-series seeks to correct this. Make ‘Em Laugh explores the evolution of American comedy, revealing its power as a cultural force.

    (Subscribe to FilmCouch–Spout’s weekly movie podcast–in the iTunes store or to our RSS feed and an episode will download each Friday)

    0:00 - Intro, Che giveaway

    4:45 - Listener e-mail

    9:40 - The Dear Zachary dust-up

    19:31 - Make ‘Em Laugh

    filmcouch-103


    Originally posted on:SpoutBlog