Which director...

...(dead or alive) do you most wish would deliver you a new movie annually. Who should be as regular as Woody Allen in other words.
*

Cate Convalescing

This may surprise those among you who think the worst of me for my occasionally vocalized Blagnostichettism but I spent all day inbetween deadlines worrying about Cate Blanchett and her head injury. In case you missed it, she was struck on the head in Sydney yesterday while performing Blanche Dubois in A Streetcar Named Desire. Live theater is dangerous! Seems that Stanley Kowalski -- ever the brute -- threw a radio at her. Maybe Stanley's (Joel Edgerton) aim wasn't true or Cate altered her blocking that night but the prop wasn't supposed to actually hit her.


I'm relieved to read that she's reportedly fine... but I'm still a little nervous. Head injuries are notoriously unpredictable. Gifted actresses are a precious commodity and should never ever ever come to harm. Especially not while they're in the middle of working their magic.

I don't really hear people vocalize this so much but do you think Blanche DuBois is the female equivalent of Hamlet? That Mount Everest role that every acclaimed actor feels compelled to climb.

Richard the Lion-Hearted

Robert here, noting quickly that it was 820 years ago today that Richard I of England was crowned. My original intent was to ask for your favorite portrayal of King Richard. But after just a little snooping I noticed a problem. Aside from Wallace Beery, Ian Hunter, Peter Ustinov, Richard Harris, Sean Connery and Patrick Stewart who all made brief appearances in Robin Hood movies, the character hasn't been portrayed that much.

So instead my mind turned to my favorite Richard portrayal in one of my favorite films of all time.



"I am a constant soldier, a sometimes poet and I will be king."
*

On the Nine Test Screenings

I've been withholding. Not purposefully or vindicatively but all the same...

I've heard from two readers who saw Nine (the musical!) at two different test screenings and I thought it was time to share their reactions.


The first to write me (test screener #1) saw what might have been an earlier cut in the summer. The second (test screener #2), whom I've met and who looooves musicals, saw it this past Monday. I didn't ask them to do this but they both divided their thoughts by actor, so let's take it that way. Neither of them gave many details about the songs that have been cut and added but I've been alarmed to read elsewhere about the multiple changes, including switching characters on key songs and the removal of "Nine". It's the title song, people! How can you go without? But the movie doesn't open until November 25th so perhaps they're still tinkering.

The lucky bastards disagree on Daniel Day-Lewis in the lead role of the blocked film director

Test Screener #1: Great in this film. He can sing, he can dance, and he brings out nuances in Guido Contini I didn't know existed from the stageplay.
Test Screener #2: DDL is typically good, but it's certainly one of his weaker efforts. He'll likely be in the hunt since he's the lead and I imagine the film to go over well with AMPAS, so I'd keep him in the top 10 tier for now, but I'm sure that you've been right all along - he won't be nominated.

But what about the glamourous actresses swirling around him? Both readers jump to Judi Dench next and here they also disagree.

TS #1: She's terrific. Her "Follies Bergeres" is well sung with style, presence, wit, and a gleam in her eye. She looks killer in a bodice, too. It's her sass-mouthed wry Queen Elizabeth from Shakespeare in Love blessed with magical sewing fingers and a 1960s bob. Consider her a contender in Supporting Actress if the film breaks out in a big way.
TS#2: Dench is fine but nothing remarkable. I know she has been nominated for unremarkable work in the past, but her character and screen time are too limited to warrant a nomination. I'd take her out of the top 10, or at least keep her near the bottom.

Split decisions again.

Rob Marshall directing two of the best screen actors on the planet --->

Both movie mad guys shrug off TFE favorite Nicole Kidman as the visiting movie star Claudia. I knew that the role wouldn't be large having seen both Fellini's masterpiece and the stage musical it inspired but I always spark to the possibilities of any Kidman appearance. Hopefully I'll feel differently when I see the film.

TS #1: Gets to look pretty in a dress. And not move her forehead.
TS#2: They build up to her character's appearance, and once she finally appears, they give her a boring musical number that's oddly patched together. It's a small role, and not a great use of her talents.

In the stage play Claudia sings the best song "In a Very Unusual Way" (previous post) but perhaps Kidman has the same problem here that I pointed to when writing about her ballad in Moulin Rouge! In short, she isn't a born/trained singer and slow emotionally intricate numbers only come off spectacularly if the performer is a musical professional. It's the danger of casting for stardom rather than musical ability though Claudia is a role that requires true A list mystique so perhaps Kidman was the only choice that would have worked.

The rest of the cast? Looks like Kate Hudson will be a polarizing part of Nine.

TS#1: Hudson is fantastic in a very limited role. Her one number (new for the film?) is the absolute highlight. It's slick, stylish, well sung, well choreographed, and catchy. This early cut of the film used it as the ending credits song, so I'm assuming it's brand new. I can see a Globe nod for Hudson (and an Original Song win if it is new), but I think her character isn't meaty enough to breakthrough elsewhere.

No, Fergie Ferg cannot act to save her life. Rob Marshall actually shot her solo song around her physical placement in the scene, never coming close to zooming in on her doing anything other then pouting her lips and tossing sand in the air.

Sophia Loren is the biggest victim of the changes to the script and score but she's great in the smallest role.

TS#2: The consensus of the people I went with was that Hudson was awful. Loren doesn't do much. Fergie just has the one scene (the song in the trailer), but it's quite a scene and she undoubtedly has the best voice in the film.

In keeping with the other buzz you might have been reading or hearing, Penélope Cruz and Marion Cotillard were both big hits with the test screeners and Oscar nominations might be coming

TS #1: Curse Cruz for winning the Oscar for Vicky Cristina Barcelona. This is easily her best performance and she steals every single scene she's in. She has the meatiest role of anyone in the film and milks it for all its worth. Think Catherine Zeta Jones in Chicago - Cruz juices this orange down to the pith and drains it of every delicious, sexy drop. "A Call From the Vatican" is probably the single sexiest moment I've ever seen in a filmed musical, even with more clothes on than I expected. The only reason I wouldn't consider her a lock in Supporting Actress is her recent win.

Marion Cotillard is the safest bet for a Supporting Actress nomination. With so much of the music eliminated from the film, Cotillard is the only one to benefit from clear additional screentime. She gets to show the most range in her vocals, from soft and vulnerable to raunchy and wild. It's pure Oscar Bait suffering wife, only with singing and dancing and sexy costumes.

TS#2: The two best performances were definitely Cruz and Cotillard. As a Penélope fanatic, I'd give the edge to her. She KILLS in her musical number and is quite funny and sexy throughout her entire performance. However, her musical sequence is the second in the film and the film forgets about her early on... I wouldn't bet on a nomination.

If anyone gets Oscar-nominated, it's likely to be Marion Cotillard. She has the most sympathetic role, and she pulls it off. Her first musical number is fairly low-key but it's generally moving and she pulls off a great second musical sequence. Ultimately, she's the character you care about and the one people will likely remember.

The horniest (known) call ever made from the Vatican

Neither of them consider the movie an unqualified success though they both obviously enjoyed it. Some final thoughts:

TS #1: Rob Marshall's direction is near-perfection. The difficult integration of fantasy/reality brought on by Guido's crisis is genius. The problems mostly come from the screenplay's adaptation choices. What could be a strong examination of deep emotional issues is whitewashed. For all the sexuality in the movie, the film has been turned into a sanitized version of a very engrossing and original musical eliminating any psychological complexity beyond "my husband doesn't love me" or "I'm very stressed". All the elements are there that a fan of the show would know, just not in a recognizable form. It pulls its cues from the lighter Broadway revival, down to a slightly more optimistic ending in a single staging decision. The screenplay pulls every punch, reducing what could be a knock-out climax to a slap on the wrist.

TS#2: I can tell you that it's a very good film that will likely go over very well with the Academy. It's made in the same style as Chicago -- the musical numbers are fantasies -- and I think it works. I don't think it's a GREAT film, but it was entertaining and handsomely made.

So there you have it. Or two of it. Moviegoing is a personal thing, even when the theater is sold out. Your reaction may well differ and maybe these two voices won't be 'on consensus' but if they are, Oscar will bite in several categories (as most expected) and Marion Cotillard is the one to watch for Oscar... again.

my current Oscar predictions
For more on the film or any of its actors, click on the labels below.
*

16 Years Ago Today...

...the starry The Age of Innocence team celebrated at the Venice Film Festival: Daniel Day-Lewis, Winona Ryder, Michelle Pfeiffer and Martin Scorsese. Expected to be a major Oscar contender it came up short in the big six categories with only Winona Ryder snagging a nomination.

Which early festival success this year isn't going to go the distance?

First and Last #54

First and Last: the first image after the opening credits and the last shot before the final credit scroll.

"Sweet"

Can you guess the movie? Cinematography by David Lynch

This concludes the first season of First and Last. Hope you enjoyed. It may return in altered form in October. We shall see...

Highlight for the answer if you're stumped: It's David Lynch's confounding INLAND EMPIRE (2006) for all first and last memory teasers, click the label below

Oscar Predictions September

Though I needed to update my prediction charts (done!) it always feels a bit foolish to do so immediately before the Venice and Toronto Film Festivals where buzz suddenly dissipates, congeals, ferments, explodes, flip-flops or otherwise ch-ch-ch-changeeesssss.


In the new charts you'll find big losses for Avatar. It's not that I haven't lost faith in James Cameron's ability to deliver a spectacle but that so much of the film appears to be entirely CGI. It'll have natural disadvantages in some of the categories I expected it to be a contender in because AMPAS still prefers the weight of actual objects and the atmosphere of actual sets to CGI generated ones. Which is probably a good thing when it all shakes out.

With so many big or baity or intriguing looking movies moving to 2010 (The Wolf Man, The Tempest, Shutter Island) and still more not truly settled release date or distribution wise there's a lot of movement in the charts. I'm probably taking a big risk predicting so many nominations for Sherlock Holmes for example and there's maybe not enough here for Up in the Air which is just beginning to hum rather than buzz yet. Guy Ritchie does not make people scream "OSCAR!" but the below the line team is delicious Academy bait, if you ask me. I mean: Philipe Rousellot behind the camera, Jenny Beavan's costume design magic, Sarah Greenwood heading up art direction and sets, um ... yes please!

We -- and by we I mean everyone who predicts Oscars professionally on the web and everyone who does so at home -- always think we know more about the acting categories in early September than we ever ever do. Keep that in mind when you're looking at anyone's predictions. It's not over till it's over and in fact it's barely begun. Expect shake ups to come. But where?

Index of Predicted Nominations | Picture | Director | Actor | Actress | Supporting Actor | Supporting Actress | Screenplay | Costume Design | Technical Categories (Visual) | Technical Categories (Aural) | Animation

Keep in mind these charts do not reflect my opinion of worth (that's what I sprinkle throughout my editorials throughout the year) but my sometimes faulty sometimes incisive prophesies about what Oscar will glom onto.

I'd also suggest reading the Film School Rejects long but necessary explanation of the new voting roles to determine "Best Picture" (if you haven't already). No, it's no longer as simple as checking the box by your favorite film's name.

turn and face the strange ch-ch-changessss

The foreign film pages and the actress psychic point totals (thus far) will be up as soon as I can manage. But in the meantime, discuss. Who'd I forget. Which film do you think is going to firm up its release date in time? Are there any more delays coming? Pull out your crystal golden ball in the comments...

Signatures: Patricia Clarkson

Adam of Club Silencio here with another look at my favorite actresses and their distinguishing claims to fame.

Patricia Clarkson is one the best supporting actresses alive. But the truth is, she's not always that supportive. While she's busy outshining whoever's in the lead spotlight, Patricia's characters are playing on the sidelines to their own cinematic agendas. She drifts into the background, glowing of warmth, wit and maturity. Much like a cinematic confidant, Patricia Clarkson's reliably brilliant even in her most minuscule moments. But to rely on Patricia Clarkson is to fall into the same trusting trap as her on-screen counterparts. She builds you up, holds you close and then pulls the rug out from under you.


Take Far From Heaven's vivacious socialite, Eleanor Fine, who teases the conflicted Cathy Whitaker (Julianne Moore) about her reputation for "kindness to negroes." They share plenty of tawdry laughs and idle gossip, but when Cathy finds herself at its center and falling in love with her gardener, Eleanor is the first to show how quickly a warm shoulder goes cold. Patricia works her way into the film as Cathy's one common voice -- a woman seemingly open to progress. As the film progresses, its clear it was all vicious set up for some judgmental glares and the juiciest gossip yet.


Building on that twist is Patricia's turn as Vera in Dogville. Vera's character is the first to admit, "I cry too easily." She comes across as a woman timid and reserved, who's married to a cold lout but who passionately loves her children and isolating small town. She soon warms to the mysterious Grace Mulligan (Nicole Kidman) once she's cared for her children and taught them lessons of Ovid. Soon they're laughing together, sharing favorite prose, and Grace is welcome in Vera's home anytime... for the next hour or so. Just as quickly as rumors of a philandering tryst spread back to Vera, we see this woman once prone to sadness become relentless in her pursuit of pain. She takes Grace's hard-earned collectibles and shatters them one by one, urging Grace's stoicism while begging for her tears. Patricia Clarkson again undermines her own sweet stoicism with a sour mistrust that goes far beyond the film's calculations. She'll smash your spirits and your Hummel figurines.


Of course Patricia's characters aren't all so savagely constructed. Often enough her characters are genuinely of good will, with reasonable motivations. Take her scant role Vicky Cristina Barcelona, a part that would probably have gone unnoticed in the hands of most actresses. Patricia manages to use her few scenes to work her way right into Vicky's trust and somehow gain pull on her relationships. In mere moments her character, Judy, begrudging of her own vapid vows, pushes Vicky into a radical and unlikely affair. Even when Patricia means well, in the end somebody still winds up getting shot.


Patricia Clarkson's career is High Art. In terms of screentime it probably adds up to so much less than the effect her scenes eventually have. Even if we should never depend on her characters, we can always depend on Patricia's one-of-a-kind radiance and sly "supporting" touch.

So what's your favorite Patricia Clarkson performance? More importantly: which stellar actress should she compliment and undermine next?

Far From Heaven. Still Heavenly

Elle: Cathy? Oh, she's been liberal ever since she played summer stock with all those steamy Jewish boys. Why do you you think they used to call her 'red'?

Cathy: Oh, for heaven's sake. Let's go inside before Joe McCarthy comes driving by.

Seven years ago today, Todd Hayne's Far From Heaven debuted at the Venice Film Festival. It won four prizes there beginning a strong early awards season showing that resulted in four Oscar nominations but two sad snubs: Todd Haynes for Best Director (he won the most precursor prizes that year, believe it or not) and Dennis Quaid for Best Supporting Actor (who ran second only to eventual Oscar winner Chris Cooper for Adaptation in terms in pre-Oscar honors).

It still bursts with auteurial colors, "red" and otherwise...
*

Team Experience: Oh, Those Basterds

As you may have noticed some blog buddies of mine have been pitching in randomly of late as my off-cinema life has pulled me away. Oh, to live only for the cinema! To get you acquainted with these life savers o' mine, I've decided to gather them as a collective once a week or so and ask them to share their individual feelings on a question posed by me. Yes, I'm a control freak.

Question for the Team
What's your favorite moment/performance/anything about Inglourious Basterds?

SPOILERS ahead obviously.

David: Maybe I was just blinded by the beauty. Or maybe it's my secretly perverse soul. But easily the most striking moment of Inglourious Basterds for me is the reciprocal shootings of Fredrick (Daniel Brühl) and Shosanna (Mélanie Laurent). Tarantino has a reputation for finding strange beauty in his moments of graphic violence, and it's no different here. It's the surprising possibility that Shosanna maybe did care about Fredrick after all, trumped by the shock (nonetheless prefigured by Shosanna being decked out in a vibrant blood-red dress) of him turning over and gunning her down. The cliche of the two young pretty leads falling in love overriden by their politics and bloodlust. It's the fall being filmed in slow-motion that does it, I think - she was ready for death, but not in this way. A moment of majesty amongst the madness.

Adam: It's Shosanna's vengeance that lingers most through all the smoldering celluloid. Her triumphant escape at the film's start and joyously maniacal act of resolve by the film's close is ultimately what elevates the movie for me. She's far more clever and efficient at killing those Nazi bastards than any of the Basterds we came here to see. Shosanna's like the French-Jewish Black Mamba. Quiet, calculating, and wholly deserving of the blood she's about to spill. She doesn't need a checklist reminding her to Kill Bill or Adolf Hitler, she gathers all her foes in one locale and does them away swiftly and with cinematic splendor. In true Tarantino style he finds the perfect musical accompaniment, this time in David Bowie's "Cat People (Putting Out the Fire)" as Shosanna dons lipstick and warpaint, readying to play host to her prey and bid a fiery, unforgettable farewell. After years of silent rage, Shosanna burns the house down and shares an exuberant laugh with the viewing audience, who've likewise held their breath through hours of tense conversation and Nazi loathing. Oh what a (cinephile's) relief it is...

David and Adam both took to Shosanna but I personally have to go with the underground bar and card game scene which centers around Bridget von Hammersmark (Diane Kruger) and the film critic lieutenant (Michael Fassbender). As noted in the vodcast, there's an undeniably wealth of well edited tension and ingeniously scripted surprise in that particular scene but the cherry on top is that the movie characters are playing a game of assumed identities (the character cards on their heads) over their reel life game of assumed identities (double agents / faux Germans).

BeRightBack and Robert refused to play my reindeer game in the way I intended. But maybe you share their gripes or their hold-out feelings?

BeRightBack: The thing that bothers me, even as I loved every minute of watching it in terms of its energy and humor, is that Tarantino goes out of his way to tell us that he is talking in the language of kitsch, not history. At the end, the movie points outside of itself to history anyway. The clean white sheet invaded by black-clad, menacingly debonair Nazis in the first scene turns into a burning movie screen haunted by Jewish anguish and revenge by the end. But the foregrounding of virtuosity throughout the movie undercuts the power of this cinematic catharsis; if these aren’t “real” Nazis, then these aren’t “real” Jews.

Consider the first scene: a discussion is conducted in a room under which a Jewish family is hiding from certain death. The tension ratchets up with every exchange, every beat. At one point, the Nazi takes out an enormous pipe; it is impossible not to laugh at this. The punchline has been set up perfectly, the performances have been calibrated for maximum effect. None of this would have worked without the Jews beneath the floorboards, providing the necessary tension for the punchline. But the scene is not about the Jews, it is about the punchline. So is the movie, until the end. And this is what doesn’t work for me.

Robert: Quite frankly I haven't seen it yet. Why not? Because every time a Quentin Tarantino movie comes out, its like the love/hate relationship that the film community has with him plays itself out in my brain. When I'm watching a Tarantino movie I'm entranced by the coolness and stylishness of it all. When I'm not I'm annoyed by the lowbrow as highbrow shtick. I openly despise his cohorts Eli Roth and Robert Rodriguez. And it's difficult to remember how Tarantino has ascended to an entirely different plain than others who do what he does. When Christoph Waltz's name was first floating around as potential Oscar nominee, I thought "yeah right, for a Tarantino movie?" before I remembered that Pulp Fiction garnered 3 acting nods, Jackie Brown got one, and Kill Bill seemed oh so close.

As my id and superego go back and forth it's necessary to take a moment and remember that a film is nothing more than what happens up on that screen when the lights go down. It's not the hyperbolic ranting of fans nor the dismissive musings of academics. And with that in mind I'm starting to look forward to seeing Inglourious Basterds. When opening weekend numbers showed surprising success I found myself doing something unexpected. I found myself rooting for Quentin Tarantino.

I consider you, faithful reader, to be a part of the larger team too. If you'd like to answer the question at hand or respond to any of these notions, do so in the comments. We'll move on from those highly discussable Basterds after this discussion and get back to Oscar talk.

And speaking of... since the new Tarantino made such a popular turnaround post-Cannes, do you see any Oscar nods in its future? Besides Christoph Waltz's Supporting Actor bid. Tech nods, direction, screenplay? Oscar is already famously scalped, is he not?

F&L #53

First and Last: the first image after the opening credits and the last shot before the final credit scroll.


Can you guess the movie?

That's right! It's [highlight for the answer]: The Oscar winning TOOTSIE (1982). In that final frame ♪ ♫ something's telling me it might be you... all of my life ♪ is playing. Memories! For more first and last, click the label below.