June 12
Call of the Wild 3D
Youssou N'Dour: I Bring What I Love
June 16
June 19
Dead Snow
Whatever Works
June 24
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen
June 26
Cheri
Fireflies in the Garden
July 1
Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs
July 3
The Girl from Monaco
I Hate Valentine's Day
July 10
July 15
Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
July 17
July 24
All Good Things
The Answer Man
In the Loop
July 29
July 31
The Cove
August 7
When in Rome
August 14
A Perfect Getaway
District 9
The Goods: The Don Ready Story
Ponyo
Pool Boys
Spread
The Time Traveler's Wife
August 21
Five Minutes of Heaven
Goose on the Loose!
It Might Get Loud
World's Greatest Dad
August 28
The Boat that Rocked
September 4
Amreeka
Carriers
Citizen Game
Shanghai
September 9
September 11
The Red Canvas
Tyler Perrys: I Can Do It All Myself
September 17
The Burning Plain
September 18
Brand New Day
Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs
Jennifer's Body
Splice
September 25
October 2
A Serious Man
Toy Story/Toy Story 2
I know I predicted this based on a reading of Peter Buchman's script, but the first half of Steven Soderbergh's 268-minute Che Guevara epic is, for me, incandescent -- a piece of full-on, you-are-there realism about the making of the Cuban revolution that I found utterly believable. Not just "take it to the bank" gripping, but levitational -- for someone like myself it's a kind of perfect dream movie. It's also politically vibrant and searing -- tells the "Che truth," doesn't mince words, doesn't give you any "movie moments" (and God bless it for that).
It's what I'd hoped for all along and more. The tale is the tale, and it's told straight and true. Benicio del Toro's Guevara portrayal is, as expected, a flat-immersion that can't be called a "performance" as much as...I don't know, some kind of knock-down, ass-kick reviving of the dead. Being, not "acting." I loved the lack of sentimentality in this thing, the electric sense that Soderbergh is providing a real semblance of what these two experiences -- the successful Cuban revolution of '57 and '58, and the failed attempt to do the same in Boliva in '67 -- were actually like.
Oh, God...the second half is starting right now. The aspect ratio on the second film is 1.85 to 1, but the first film was in Scope 2.35 to 1.
Posted by Jeffrey Wells on May 21, 2008 at 11:46 AM
comment #1
Zimmergirl
says ...
But the question remains, is he better than he was in Things We Lost in the Fire?
Posted by Zimmergirl
at May 21, 2008 12:15 PM
comment #2
JackTorrance
says ...
Just wanted to point out that Che Guevara was a right-wing lunatic masquerading as a leftist hero who murdered and imprisoned countless homosexuals, blacks, liberals, conservatives, artists, and whoever else he deemed unfit to be revolutionary.
Posted by JackTorrance
at May 21, 2008 12:18 PM
comment #3
bdboudreaux
says ...
my big question is how does it look? I'm dying to see what the Red camera looks like when shooting something realistically. In full tech nerediness, that camera is the future.
Posted by bdboudreaux
at May 21, 2008 12:27 PM
comment #4
Santo
says ...
I'm a little confused about the aspect ratio change between the two films. IMDB had them both listed as 2.35. I don't doubt that Soderbergh would change aspect ratios, I'm just curious if it's true or not.
Also, does anyone know if the awards ceremony is being aired in the US? IFC seems to have gone strictly internet this year.
Posted by Santo
at May 21, 2008 12:33 PM
comment #5
Jeffrey Kunze
says ...
Never heard Jeff rave this much about a film in such a short snippet. Wow, must really blow The Good German out of the water.
Posted by Jeffrey Kunze
at May 21, 2008 12:33 PM
comment #6
Geoff
says ...
Wells, be sure to give us something on the Red cam.
What does everyone think of the aspect ratios?
First film, going by Wells' take, is the revolution and pride before the fall. A building up of this powerful man. So scope seems appropriate.
Since the second film is the downfall, and much darker, perhaps a more intimate approach is needed? A grittier, TRAFFIC style thing.
Posted by Geoff
at May 21, 2008 12:36 PM
comment #7
actionman
says ...
Sounds excellent. I am certainly excited to see this but I can't help but be curious about what Malick would have done with this material.
Wells: is there anything Malickian about either of the films? Did any of Malick's work end up in Buchman's final scripts?
Posted by actionman
at May 21, 2008 12:47 PM
comment #8
T. Holly
says ...
Hey, I thought they were making changes back at the post facility last week, how'd they get it there?
Posted by T. Holly
at May 21, 2008 1:02 PM
comment #9
mutinyco
says ...
I would think the look of the RED would be determined by how it's projected -- whether it's 35mm, standard digital 2k, or full 4k...
Posted by mutinyco
at May 21, 2008 1:05 PM
comment #10
T. Holly
says ...
Fortunately, we have some info on that, I'm digging it up.
Posted by T. Holly
at May 21, 2008 1:08 PM
comment #11
T. Holly
says ...
"Both films are being finished at Technicolor," he says. "Tim Stipan of Technicolor Creative Services New York did the DI, and the DCDM for Cannes is being done at Technicolor Creative Services in London. And Technicolor Madrid is doing the filmout and video mastering."
http://hollywood-elsewhere.com/2008/05/correction_on_c.php
Posted by T. Holly
at May 21, 2008 1:15 PM
comment #12
mutinyco
says ...
That's not really an answer with regard to how it's screening at Cannes. DI is color correcting. DCDM is the digital mastering for digital projection. And filmout is transferring the digital image out to film. That piece is just a rundown of all the work being done at Technicolor.
I'll assume Cannes is digital. Hopefully they went a full 4k.
Posted by mutinyco
at May 21, 2008 1:25 PM
comment #13
lazarus
says ...
I can't tell if Jack Torrance's post is a parody of what our resident wingnuts usually write, or if he's just another one of them.
Posted by lazarus
at May 21, 2008 1:27 PM
comment #14
T. Holly
says ...
I'm gonna say they projected prints. Shouldn't you be asking how it was captured, not how it was output?
Posted by T. Holly
at May 21, 2008 1:28 PM
comment #15
Richardson
says ...
"I can't tell if Jack Torrance's post is a parody of what our resident wingnuts usually write, or if he's just another one of them."
if it helps, the typical wingnuts accuse him of all that but say he's left-wing.
Actually, i still can't tell.
Posted by Richardson
at May 21, 2008 1:31 PM
comment #16
mutinyco
says ...
It was captured at 4k on the RED ONE.
If it was projected via 35mm print, then the digital master was output to film.
Posted by mutinyco
at May 21, 2008 1:32 PM
comment #17
T. Holly
says ...
OK, now you're insulting my intelligence. I still think they went print. It's Cannes afterall.
Posted by T. Holly
at May 21, 2008 1:38 PM
comment #18
mutinyco
says ...
Probably. Though from what I've read, 24 City screened digitally. Whatever.
Posted by mutinyco
at May 21, 2008 1:40 PM
comment #19
Mgmax
says ...
Wow, must really blow The Good German out of the water.
God, what didn't?
I think Jack Torrance's post was a parody of the rightwing hatred for Che and the leftwing everything-bad-is-your-side's-fault school of revisionism, at the same time.
Or an unintentional parody of all that...
Posted by Mgmax
at May 21, 2008 1:51 PM
comment #20
T. Holly
says ...
Oh yes, from the Man/A.O. discussion.
Wingnuts, maybe if Che does well, there's a movie in this book that I'd like to see.
http://tiny.cc/7bIZX
Posted by T. Holly
at May 21, 2008 1:53 PM
comment #21
Mgmax
says ...
Actually, what I'd love to see someone make a movie out of is yesterday's New York Times story about the housewife-blogger in New Jersey who's become a leading figure in the Yemeni freedom movement.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/20/world/middleeast/20blogger.html
Posted by Mgmax
at May 21, 2008 2:02 PM
comment #22
corey3rd
says ...
Che wouldn't appreciate you paying $20 to see 2 movies about him with none of the proceeds going to overthrow non-communist countries. Free the cinema!!!
Posted by corey3rd
at May 21, 2008 2:09 PM
comment #23
Wrecktum
says ...
"DI is color correcting"
You are wrong. It's a 35mm negative made from the digital master. I trust nothing you say now.
Posted by Wrecktum
at May 21, 2008 2:21 PM
comment #24
mutinyco
says ...
DI = digital intermediate.
From Wikipedia:
Digital intermediate (often abbreviated as DI) describes the process of digitizing a motion picture and manipulating color and other image characteristics to change the look, and is usually the final creative adjustment to a movie before distribution in theaters.
Posted by mutinyco
at May 21, 2008 2:28 PM
comment #25
George Prager
says ...
But the question remains, is he better than he was in The Fan?
Posted by George Prager
at May 21, 2008 2:29 PM
comment #26
T. Holly
says ...
Wreck, we know what he meant. If it was just making a negative, the DP wouldn't be there, it's the modern equivalent of timing a print. Who loves ya, mutiny?
Mgmax, it's a global planet. She's from New Jersey via Flatbush.
Posted by T. Holly
at May 21, 2008 2:32 PM
comment #27
mutinyco
says ...
Furthermore, DI no longer refers specifically negative film. It's a generic term now for color timing/gradating in a digital space, whether the footage was shot on film or digitally, and whether it's output back to film or digital.
Posted by mutinyco
at May 21, 2008 2:38 PM
comment #28
aussieanywhere
says ...
I was at the screening. Jeff is spot on - the ratios of the two films are different. It also was definitely projected digitally, with no opening or closing credits or even titles.
However i have to say that i don't share Jeff's enthusiasm for the picture. As skilfully crafted at a technical level as it is, the narrative is punishingly uncompromising to the point of boredom. I nodded off several times. And i wasn't the only one.
I would estimate that 20% of the audience didn't return after the intermission - and another 10-20% walked out after the remaining section started.
It will be fascinating to see who takes on the incredible commercial risks of releasing this film.
Posted by aussieanywhere
at May 21, 2008 3:02 PM
comment #29
T. Holly
says ...
Re-cut.
Posted by T. Holly
at May 21, 2008 3:09 PM
comment #30
Josh Massey
says ...
"Or an unintentional parody of all that..."
My vote is for unintentional.
Posted by Josh Massey
at May 21, 2008 3:12 PM
comment #31
BurmaShave
says ...
I can't wait to watch bootlegs of this, communist style. Fuck Che.
Posted by BurmaShave
at May 21, 2008 3:18 PM
comment #32
D.Z.
says ...
Jack: "Just wanted to point out that Che Guevara was a right-wing lunatic masquerading as a leftist hero who murdered and imprisoned countless homosexuals, blacks, liberals, conservatives, artists, and whoever else he deemed unfit to be revolutionary."
And Bush masqueraded as a compassionate conservative while killing one million Iraqis. What's your point?
Posted by D.Z.
at May 21, 2008 3:25 PM
comment #33
MilkMan
says ...
I'd rather see a movie about that lost parrot who gave his home address and directions to a veterinarian.
Posted by MilkMan
at May 21, 2008 4:11 PM
comment #34
Josh Massey
says ...
"And Bush masqueraded as a compassionate conservative while killing one million Iraqis. What's your point?"
And then D.Z. goes and parodies himself! Brilliant!
Posted by Josh Massey
at May 21, 2008 4:21 PM
comment #35
Filipe
says ...
Pretty much every film that got finished at the last minute was shown on digital (Blindness, Two Lovers, 24 City). That said, I have talked to more than one critic that think Cannes has the best digital projection they've seen.
Posted by Filipe
at May 21, 2008 4:24 PM
comment #36
p.Vice
says ...
This snippet from McCarthy's review more or less guarantees another Wells retraction:
Neither half feels remotely like a stand-alone film that would satisfy audiences on its own, while the entirety offers far too many aggravations for the paltry rewards it offers.
Posted by p.Vice
at May 21, 2008 4:43 PM
comment #37
T. Holly
says ...
Like this one better, "far too many aggravations for the paltry rewards it offers. Scattered partisans are likely to step forward, but pic in its current form is a commercial impossibility except on television or DVD."
61 million dollars.
Filipe, thanks, people with odd names come out of nowhere all the time to help me out.
Posted by T. Holly
at May 21, 2008 5:04 PM
comment #38
Walter Sobchak
says ...
Any plans on how the two films will be released, that is, at the same time or spaced apart, a la "Kill Bill"?
(or has this question already been addressed...I'm admittedly a little late to this party)
And dammit, D.Z., for the last time it's been one billion innocent Iraqis killed by BushCo, not a million. That's Billion with a B. And 90 percent of them were babies. Get it right.
Posted by Walter Sobchak
at May 21, 2008 7:16 PM
comment #39
Dave Polands Gut
says ...
Just what the public wants. A 4 hr biopic on a leftist communist. Thank you Hollywood!
Posted by Dave Polands Gut
at May 22, 2008 6:51 AM
comment #40
D.Z.
says ...
"Just what the public wants. A 4 hr biopic on a leftist communist"
You have a point, actually. I wonder if most people who buy the Che merchandise even care about reading about him and/or seeing a movie about him, and don't just do it as a fashion statement.
Posted by D.Z.
at May 22, 2008 9:14 AM
comment #41
siamesecat
says ...
"Just what the public wants. A 4 hr biopic on a leftist communist. Thank you Hollywood!"
As long as it's got Warren Beatty, Diane Keaton, and Gene Hackman in it I'm there!
Posted by siamesecat
at May 22, 2008 1:36 PM
comment #42
Johanna
says ...
Dear Jeffrey:
....and that Che person is so dreamy.....
Posted by Johanna
at August 10, 2008 1:38 PM
comment #43
Johanna
says ...
Dear Jeffrey:
....and that Che person is so dreamy.....
Posted by Johanna
at August 10, 2008 1:39 PM
comment #44
Johanna
says ...
Dear Jeffrey:
....I agree....it's the best movie I've ever seen.
Posted by Johanna
at August 10, 2008 1:40 PM
Post a comment