"Zodiac" situation updated

Pete Hammond jumps into the will- Paramount-give- Zodiac-a-platform-opening-in-late-December story in his latest Hollywood Wiretap column, which is basically about how end-of-the-year crowding has left the studios with an embarassment of riches. But before exploring the Zodiac particulars, I have a suggestion.


Robert Downey

Paramount is apparently still on the fence (i.e., reluctant but unwilling to give this reluctance a full voice) about opening David Fincher's allegedly top-drawer policier in New York and L.A. on or before before 12.31.06. (The studio intends to release it wide on 1.17.07.) I've written two or three articles pushing for this, but I've only read an early version of the script. Since Fincher is now, according to Hammond, "completing editing and mixing and the film should be pretty much wrapped in a couple of weeks," he and his producers should simply arrange for a quiet little columnists-and-critics screening of Zodiac so certain parties can see it and respond first-hand.

Zodiac may not be all it's cracked up to be, in which case nobody has to write anything one way or the other and Paramount and the Zodiac team can duke it out between themselves. But if it's an exceptional wow, which I've been told by certain parties, then certain columnists and critics could conceivably proclaim this and the Zodiac team would have a stronger case to make to the Paramount foot-draggers.

"Sources are saying it is brilliantly made with great performances across the board," writes Hammond. "The cast includes Jake Gyllenhaal, Robert Downey Jr., Mark Ruffalo and Anthony Edwards. And even though Fincher's hard edged previous films (Fight Club, Panic Room, Se7en) have received a grand total of 2 Academy nods in tech categories, this is said to be the one that could change that pattern.

"That is, if Zodiac receives a qualifying run in December ahead of its wide January release. If it has to wait until next year, the odds are long [for '07 Oscars] since January films are a distant memory come nomination time. But hope remains that Fincher's film will still be a part of this year's kudos story. We've been told that it's a complex situation and there are 'discussions that are probably going to take place.'

"One hurdle may be that Paramount really doesn't need another picture going for the gold this year since they already have World Trade Center and the upcoming Dreamworks'films Flags Of Our Fathers (10.20) and Dreamgirls (12.21). And although it is a completely separate entity, specialty division Paramount Vantage has a major contender in Alejandro Gonzalez Inarittu's Babel (10.27).

"But if Zodiac really does deliver the goods (as those few who have seen it believe), then how can it be denied a passport to the Kodak? After all, remember 1974. One studio accounted for three, count `em , three of the five Best Picture Oscar nominations. The movies were The Godfather Part II , Chinatown and The Conversation. The studio was, you guessed it, Paramount."

Bottom line: if Zodiac is the goodie its supporters say it is, there is no downside -- zip, nada, none -- to giving it a platform debut in four or six theatres in N.Y. and L.A. in late December. Paramount can't lose, especially given the apparent likelihood that Zodiac will need some kind of big advance sell since it's fairly long (about three hours) and doesn't end its hunt-for-a-serial-killer plot with a conventional finale.

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on September 22, 2006 at 9:58 AM

comment #1

Kristopher Tapley Author Profile Page says ...

Face it, they should hold onto it and not release it at the end of the year. The studio is too fucking jammed and they would not give the thing the right attention, they'd chase some awards and pick up some dollars and that'd be it. Next year, with the right focus, it could be huge. Why now, now, now?

Posted by Kristopher Tapley Author Profile Page at September 22, 2006 10:54 AM

comment #2

jeffreywells Author Profile Page says ...

Wells to Tapley: Not "now, now, now"....late December, late December, late December. Qualify it for the Derby and maybe something good will come of that. Where's the downside?

Posted by jeffreywells Author Profile Page at September 22, 2006 11:01 AM

comment #3

Jeremy Smith Author Profile Page says ...

Or - and this is only valid if ZODIAC truly delivers the goods - they could stop giving WORLD TRADE CENTER undue attention, and get behind something that isn't a pandering embarrassment. Unfortunately, there are a couple of folks with a little bit of juice at Paramount who aren't going to let that happen.

So I'll reluctantly agree with Tapley; shelve it until Fall 2006, maybe try to get it into Cannes, and see if that will give what's going to be a tough sell anyway some traction.

Posted by Jeremy Smith Author Profile Page at September 22, 2006 11:13 AM

comment #4

le corbeau Author Profile Page says ...

Worrying about having too many nominees? Be glad you have such problems! Paramount will sure feel stupid if only one of its vaunted movies ends up with a Best Picture nod, won't it?

Side note (apology for hijacking): I didn't realize until today it was Barzini all... I mean, that All the King's Men has been moved up from the Depression into the 40s and 50s. Which is sort of like moving the space program into the 20s, if you know anything about history-- I mean, Southern politics had a big issue in the postwar era, can anyone name what it is? Rhymes with face, with snivel lights... RACE. So Hollywood just made a movie about a demagogic Southern politician in the early years of the civil rights movement, and just ignored the real-life all-consuming issue of that era? So what, we could spend more time seeing Jude Law anguish about selling out in an Alabama cockney accent?

All the King's Men really seems gutless (and pointless) when you think about that way-- especially when you realize there really could have been a bold, interesting tack to take with it. Forget Huey Long-- tell the same story but attach it to the historical particulars of George Wallace. That version would have a real pair of cojones, unlike the gelding that is slouching into theaters this week.

Posted by le corbeau Author Profile Page at September 22, 2006 11:15 AM

comment #5

PaulKolas Author Profile Page says ...

Does Paramount, or anyone else, for that matter, really think "World Trade Center" is a legitimate Oscar contender at thia point? I say to hell with it and release "Zodiac" for a qualifying Oscar run in NY and LA for a week at the end of December, and then bolstered by what will no doubt be an avalanche of critical raves, go wide in late January. Look at how many so called early in the game Oscar bait films have fallen by the wayside, most notably "All the Kings Men". You can't have too many good films to choose from, especially in a year that has been begging for great films.

Posted by PaulKolas Author Profile Page at September 22, 2006 11:21 AM

comment #6

PaulKolas Author Profile Page says ...

Does Paramount, or anyone else, for that matter, really think "World Trade Center" is a legitimate Oscar contender at thia point? I say to hell with it and release "Zodiac" for a qualifying Oscar run in NY and LA for a week at the end of December, and then bolstered by what will no doubt be an avalanche of critical raves, go wide in late January. Look at how many so called early in the game Oscar bait films have fallen by the wayside, most notably "All the Kings Men". You can't have too many good films to choose from, especially in a year that has been begging for great films.

Posted by PaulKolas Author Profile Page at September 22, 2006 11:21 AM

comment #7

Jeremy Smith Author Profile Page says ...

Obviously, I meant Fall 2007.

And, Jeff, I'd rather see Paramount give ZODIAC the best possible shot at awards (and a wider audience) than cram it onto an already crowded plate.

Posted by Jeremy Smith Author Profile Page at September 22, 2006 11:21 AM

comment #8

Jeremy Smith Author Profile Page says ...

Obviously, I meant "fall 2007".

And, Jeff, while I'm as excited for ZODIAC as you are, wouldn't you rather that Paramount not opt for a late December qualifying run when they're preoccupied with DREAMGIRLS, FLAGS OF OUR FATHERS and, regrettably, WORLD TRADE CENTER? I'd hate to see them pull a BLACK HAWK DOWN and hastily blow its awards eligibility.

Posted by Jeremy Smith Author Profile Page at September 22, 2006 11:28 AM

comment #9

MASON Author Profile Page says ...

Poland is guaranteeing that they won't release it until 2007 because of WTC and the fact that it's not "Silence of the Lambs" and won't play to women.

So, you know, look for it to open in selected cities in December.

Posted by MASON Author Profile Page at September 22, 2006 2:06 PM

comment #10

The Winchester Author Profile Page says ...

Flags, Dreamgirls, and Babel haven't even come out yet. Is Babel the only one that has screened in it's entirety?

They could all turn out to not be the right taste of the voters. And Zodiac (is it being called that again? what happend to "Chornicles", which sounded a little like that Vin Diesel movie?)

I still think it's ridiculous to not release it because they have too many other "Oscar Contenders" to worry about. Just release the damn thing.

Posted by The Winchester Author Profile Page at September 22, 2006 2:14 PM

comment #11

zoey Author Profile Page says ...

I think Paramount owes me Zodiac this year to make up for my having sat through World Trade Center. Movie of the Week, anyone?

Posted by zoey Author Profile Page at September 22, 2006 3:37 PM

comment #12

romeoisbleeding Author Profile Page says ...

I don't know anyone who is interested in any of the movies mentioned here that are crowding the end of December. People I talk to are interested in seeing Zodiac.. not Dreamgirls for gods sake. This seems so freaking unfair! why can't they give Zodiac a chance??? I think about crap like this going on and it makes me gag at how corrupt it all sounds. You can't tell me they don't have enough money to promote Zodiac. I hope to god they change their minds and release it in time.

Posted by romeoisbleeding Author Profile Page at September 22, 2006 7:30 PM

Leave a comment