The Why Of It

• email this story
• read comments (33)
• post a comment
• 
  
  

A friend called a while ago to report that he and a major newspaper critic were laughing out loud during a screening of Jon Avnet's 88 Minutes at Sony Studios earlier today. The film has played all over Europe (it opened in France on 5.30.07) and is in fact currently available on DVD is seven or eight countries as we speak. Why did Al Pacino make this thing? For the money, obviously, but are things going so badly in his career that he's forced to do two movies with Avnet (i.e., this and Righteous Kill)?

"88 Minutes can't even live up to its title. With 19 -- count 'em, 19 -- producers, including director Jon Avnet, ensuring that every aspect of the film, from the script to the star's haircut, is ludicrous in the extreme, the picture easily snatches from Revolution the prize as Al Pacino's career worst. Available on DVD in some territories as early as February 2007 and rolled out theatrically in France and elsewhere beginning in May of last year, this gape-inducing fiasco is getting a token domestic release that at least saves its star the indignity of a dump straight to homevid." -- from Todd McCarthy's nearly week-old Variety review.

comment #1

Mark G. says ...

"it played all over Europe"???

It was straight to video (DVD) here in Germany...

comment #2

Jeffrey Kunze says ...

It's a shame.

At the very least hopefully this will teach Pacino a lesson (a lesson he should have known by now - can this really be worse than Simone?)

On a side note, just watched Ingmar Bergman's Persona. Wow. It's like David Lynch before there was David Lynch. Reminded me especially of Mulholland Dr., for obvious reasons. Very deconstructive of the film process. Love the split-second erect penis in the beginning. We know where the writer from Fight Club stole that from!

Any other suggestions for Bergman films like this. I've already seen Passion of Anna and plan to see Shame and Seventh Seal soon.

comment #3

dinovelvet says ...

Ehh, big deal. So its a thriller that doesn't work. I'll watch it eventually, since you're at least guaranteed a competent lead performance. It still doesn't look as bad as anything Deniro did from 1999-2006.

comment #4

actionman says ...

It pisses me off that after working with Michael Mann, De Niro and Pacino have an ultra-hack like Avnet calling the shots on their next team up. It's just not right.

comment #5

Reedyb says ...

Worse than Author, Author? I find that hard to believe.

comment #6

Cindy says ...

Hard to believe there is a worse movie than Revolution.

Just came from Anne Thompson's. Read the second item in - allegedly what a CAA agent has posted online about DeNiro leaving the agency (88 Minutes is mentioned).

Ouch!

http://weblogs.variety.com/thompsononhollywood/

comment #7

MAGGA says ...

Kunze, it's an obvious example, but if you haven't seen Fanny and Alexander yet, get the five-hour version and prepare for cinamatic bliss. One of my great film experiences, to be sure, and it balances between storytelling, character study and the more abstract in a perfect manner. Stunning photography, laugh-out-loud funny, moving, profound, great performances.

comment #8

Don Murphy says ...

Avi Lerner's company is this sinkhole where he overpays for actors with international value... his head is straight up his ass taste wise...none of his films (THE WICKER MAN!) are even watchable. But he paid Cage $20 m for it, his highest pay day and Cage being talented bounced back. If you do one of these crap films (RIGHTEOUS KILL next) then you SHOULD suffer career spasms. When you play with scum some of it cannot help but stick to you.

--------------------------
IRON MAN
from the director of ZATHURA

comment #9

BurmaShave says ...

It's really a wretched piece of shit. It's an Armand Assante TV movie, except he'd at least have fun with it.

comment #10

actionman says ...

I wonder how long after Iron Man opens and becomes a huge hit that Don Murphy will continue to end his posts with this "Iron Man, from the director of Zathura" tag.

comment #11

Jeffrey Kunze says ...

5 hours long version of Fanny and Alexander!

That's insane. Why is it so long?

Persona was only 85 minutes and it felt long (in a good way).

comment #12

MASON says ...

That is a very good question, actionman.

SHOOT EM UP
from the producer who got the taste slapped out of his mouth

I kid, I kid.

comment #13

erniesouchak says ...

Judging by the trailer, "Righteous Kill" is every bit as bad as "88 Minutes."

comment #14

AH says ...

What I can't understand, and maybe someone on here can explain this, is why would the next screenplay from the guy who did "Inside Man" be directed by Jon Avnet? Couldn't they have gotten someone better than him, esp. with DeNiro and Pacino leading the cast. Was it so difficult for both these guys to agree on a director?

comment #15

Reedyb says ...

I like Zathura.

If Iron Man's as good as that, I will be happy.

FANNY AND ALEXANDER
from the director of The Serpent's Egg

comment #16

jjgittes says ...

Ok, there's a couple different things at play here ;

1. 88 Minutes isn't good, but it isn't THAT bad. It's just a pumped up B movie : illogical, ludicrous, poorly acted apart from pacino (who is fine in it). I'll take it over Two For the Money (and Author Author) - it ain't good......but you''ve seen worse. It's not ambitious enough to rip.

2. Righteous Kill is a different animal and needs to be seperated from the discussion despite Lerner's involvement. Twice the budget - better script, some creative control given up - it is unique from the legacy of Lerner botches and should be judged seperately.

3. Pacino and De Niro like Avnet a lot. They're friendly with him, and obviously Pacino doesn't blame him for 88 Minutes. Avnet is NY guy ......

4. Those 2 guys came on board to Avnet's project - if he didn't direct it, they wouldn't have been in it. They were hired - they didn't bring him in to do "their" film.

5. Simone is a pretty funny movie for at least 45 minutes - Pacino's made some duds but that one isn't a bad film exactly. It's just a one joke premise stretched too thin.

Now, having said all that, I hope Pacino is done with this Recruit/Two For the Money/88 Minutes stuff. He turns 68 later this month - times a wasting Al and for those of us who love you it's time to get back into that awesome Angels in America / Merchant of Venice zone from 5 years back.

comment #17

jesse says ...

For all of you "it can't be as bad as..." commenters... I don't know, guys. I haven't seen every crap (or crap-by-rep) Pacino movie ever, but I can tell you right now this is a worse one than Simone. I'd even venture to say "far worse." That he would work with Avnet again after this is pretty insane. And I'm saying this as someone who can go for a pulpy, slightly silly Hollywood thriller... as someone who saw the trailer and adjusted his expectations downward accordingly... this movie may still be worse than you think.

comment #18

jesse says ...

That's funny -- Gittes and I posted near-opposite reactions at the same time. I'd like to say for the record that I think Two for the Money, watered down version of Recruit/Devil's Advocate that it is, is still a far more adult, less ridiculous, less hideously awful movie than 88 Minutes. It's not ambitious but you can still rip it.

comment #19

scooterzz says ...

having seen pacino on stage in 'salome', i'm pretty sure this movie isn't his 'career worst'.......
'88 minutes' may be his worst film but 'salome' really owns the overall spot........

comment #20

jjgittes says ...

Speaking of Salome , Pacino has filmed a version of it ala "Looking For Richard" due out later this year called "Salomaybe".........I have seen him play Herod in Salome 3 different times starting in 1992 on Broadway up to and including its last run in LA a few years back and I can honestly say he gave 3 entirely different performances of varying levels of success.

I'm quite curious to see that film - I like all of the "Pacino home movies based on plays" : Looking For Richard, Local Stigmatic, Chinese Coffee. I really wish he'd focus more on that kind of stuff rather than mainstream dreck film-work.

The guys a national treasure and one of the greatest actors this country has ever produced - you need to start thinking about going out on a high note, Al.

comment #21

scooterzz says ...

jj -- so, how did the l.a. performance compare to the others?..... i ask because in l.a. (opening night, at least) it was pretty much a train wreck....

comment #22

shawn says ...

FYI, in Portland we're getting to see this one after the print deadlines for the daily and the alternative weeklies have passed....

comment #23

jjgittes says ...

I didn't like the LA production as much as the 1992 stage production.

The LA one mimicked a late 90s one he did where they stage it as a "reading" of course - it was his conception along with Estelle Parsons.to do it that way, and while that's interesting it definitely comes of as more of a stunt, and his performance came off as almost an exhibition rather than an embodiment - although he gets some things really right - like his sense of self-loathing.

His film version which mixes scenes with the challenges of the play and some documentary type stuff on the play's history is based off the Parsons production with his LA co-stars.......and I think what they were trying to do may play better on film in the same way his Richard III worked when it was illuminated outside the play itself.

Clips of this "Salomaybe" film were shown when Pacino was on Larry King and it looked intriguing at least.

comment #24

scooterzz says ...

jj -- interesting, thanks.... wonder if we'll ever see the complete 'salomaybe'......
or, maybe it'll be the equivalent of welles' 'other side of the wind'.........

comment #25

truefaith says ...

Jeffrey Kunze: Glad to hear you're getting into Bergman. I would have to say he's one of my favorite filmmakers. I highly recommend WILD STRAWBERRIES, VIRGIN SPRING, and AUTUMN SONATA.

comment #26

Terry McCarty says ...

2 comments:
1. Re what Jeffrey wrote about Pacino working with Jon Avnet twice, I was reminded of Pauline Kael's barb about how Paul Newman worked twice with now-forgotten traffic-cop Jack Smight--though one of those two pictures was HARPER, which I'm guessing is head-and-shoulders above both 88 MINUTES and RIGHTEOUS KILL in quality.
2. Re the CAA guy's spray of contempt over De Niro "ankling" the agency, I couldn't help but be amused at the comment about Jack Nicholson "protecting the brand' considering some of his career choices this past decade. I'm trying to figure out how ANGER MANAGEMENT trumps either of the ANALYZE THIS/MEET THE PARENTS duologies.

comment #27

frankbooth says ...

"88 Minutes is 88 minutes too long" is as sure a thing as "Leatherheads Fumbles."

What was the deal with those photos posted here of DeNiro looking so good, the ones that had everyone all excited? Was it an effect by ILM?

comment #28

bill says ...

He is a cool man. we all love him. there are so many fans of him. and they set up the groups related to stars. you can even

check out his sexy and beautiful photos, videos and blogs at Wealthy Kiss.c o m.

comment #29

Spacesheik says ...

It's been straight to video in much of the world for over a year and i think its even played some cable

comment #30

Spacesheik says ...

"FANNY AND ALEXANDER
from the director of The Serpent's Egg"

HAHAHAHAH!! beautiful man beautiful !!

i still remember that flick, i think david carradine was in it - i shit you not

comment #31

hatchetface says ...

Jeffrey Kunze:
If you liked the Lynch vibe of PERSONA, definitely check out Bergman's HOUR OF THE WOLF. It's mesmerizing, pretty much a horror film, and quite insane.

comment #32

bill weber says ...

Fanny & Alexander is 5 hrs long because it was a television multi-parter.

comment #33

Terry McCarty says ...

Re Spacesheik's comment on THE SERPENT'S EGG:
Didn't Bergman's English-language THE TOUCH--with Elliott Gould--get even worse reviews?

Post a Comment