Caught in the Crossfire
As I didn't say yesterday, one reasons Paramount decided to takeThe Soloist out of the year-end awards game (i.e., shifting its release date from 11.21.08 to 3.13.09) was to open thngs up Oscar-potential-wise for The Curious Case of Benjamin Button and Revolutionary Road. Another reason, many suspect, was that Viacom's Sumner Redstone wanted to pass along a little "up yours" message to Soloist producer DreamWorks in the wake of their rancorous split.
On top of which the Joe Wright drama, which I did mention yesterday, is thought in some quarters to be a little schmaltzy and therefore perhaps lacking the stellar chops that a strong year-end Best Picture contender should have. Which isn't to say it's a problem film. I've heard from two sources that it's somewhere between very good, good and not bad.
The Shine-like story of Los Angeles Times columnist Steve Lopez's relationship with a homeless musician, The Soloist was looking at the very least like a possible uptick opportunity for costars Robert Downey, Jr. and Jamie Foxx regarding possible year-end acting honors and distinctions. No more!
Here's Patrick Goldstein's take in his Big Picture bloggy-blog, which is still difficult to find and a huge pain in the ass for that.
"Paramount apparently told its partners, as well as top CAA brass, who represent most of the talent on the picture, that the studio was under pressure from Viacom superiors to cut costs, having recently acknowledged that it was thinning out its future release schedule. With even Sumner Redstone being forced to sell stock to keep his investments afloat, the studio was forced to take drastic measures. With four potential Oscar movies slated for year-end release, something had to give.
"It certainly wasn't going to be The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, an expensive and much-anticipated Brad Pitt and David Fincher collaboration that studio chief Brad Grey has already publicly embraced as his ticket to a front-row seat Feb. 22nd at the Kodak Theater. And it certainly wasn't going to be Revolutionary Road, a Scott Rudin-produced literary drama with a star too big to offend (Leonardo DiCaprio) and the kind of rarified subject matter that desperately needs Oscar buzz to sell tickets.
"That left the studio's Ed Zwick-directed drama, Defiance, which is a long-shot for Oscars, but still enough of a contender that while it's being pushed back to late December, is still getting an Oscar qualifying run before going wide in January.
"That made The Soloist the low man on the totem pole, since it conceivably has enough commercial potential to make a dent at the box office in the spring without the benefit of any Oscar coattails. Since the film was produced by Dreamworks, which just concluded an ugly divorce with Paramount, the inside chatter has focused on the idea that Paramount is somehow punishing Dreamworks by robbing the departing Spielberg team of any Oscar glory."
Posted by Jeffrey Wells on October 18, 2008 at 10:07 AM
comment #1
Webster
says ...
Quoting from my e-mail to Wells of 8/13, after seeing a test screening of The Soloist in Pasadena:
"Robert Downey Jr. and Jamie Foxx both give solid performances--and Downey has far more screen time than Foxx, who steers his performance clear of the shtick it could
have become--but the material doesn't feel sharp enough to push it out of B+ territory.
"Joe Wright has some problems with pacing (there are several scenes set in flashback that explain some, but not enough, of Foxx's character) and makes a few artistic choices that should be fixable between now and November (like a 3-minute-plus light show of music playing inside Foxx's mind).
"Catherine Keener is underused--she doesn't get much more time than the raccoons who are ravaging Downey's lawn. No one else outside of a handful of street people made much of an impression (the great Stephen Root is a co-worker at the L.A. Times, but only has a couple of chances to shine).
"I'm not sure how long the film ran in this incarnation, but it felt like close to 2 1/2 hours without credit. And while I don't smell Oscar, I think they could find an audience for this movie on the strength of the relationship (sometimes funny, sometimes scary) between the two leads--and it did make me want to go back and read Lopez's columns about the guy."
Posted by Webster
at October 18, 2008 11:08 AM
comment #2
iamjoe
says ...
It was curious timing anyway, especially with Downey in it, and drew this reaction from anyone I've talked to about The Soloist: I don't want to watch Jamie Fox go Full Retard. He should have never done that.
Posted by iamjoe
at October 18, 2008 12:49 PM
comment #3
D.Z.
says ...
Kind of dumb to me, to pick a bomb like button over a potential goldmine like Soloist. But then Redstone made a similar mistake in '04. http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110005669
Also, why do people keep saying Leo is a "big" star? He's only had one hit on his own name. All "Revolutionary Road" looks like to me is a 20-something version of American Beauty. If Paramount is going to flip off DW, why not just get out of that Tintin deal?
joe: He ain't retarded. He's got some sort of psycho-somatic disassociation with reality. [At least judging from the trailer.]
Posted by D.Z.
at October 18, 2008 1:06 PM
comment #4
erniesouchak
says ...
Paramount also wants to push Downey's "Tropic Thunder" performance and doesn't want him competing w/himself.
Posted by erniesouchak
at October 18, 2008 3:04 PM
comment #5
austin111
says ...
Hate to break this to you but obviously you are literary-challenged if you've never read one of the greatest modern American novels, Revolutionary Road. It ain't no 20-something version of American Beauty. Set in early '50s suburbia, it's about a young couple who've sold out their dreams and settled for a conventional life with kids in the newly minted 'burbs, and how that leads to a terrible mistake that ultimately destroys them. There is a difference.
Posted by austin111
at October 18, 2008 3:39 PM
comment #6
D.Z.
says ...
austin: "It ain't no 20-something version of American Beauty. Set in early '50s suburbia, it's about a young couple who've sold out their dreams and settled for a conventional life with kids in the newly minted 'burbs, and how that leads to a terrible mistake that ultimately destroys them. There is a difference."
And the difference is...?
Posted by D.Z.
at October 18, 2008 8:02 PM
comment #7
austin111
says ...
You tell me how that's like American Beauty!!! Revolutionary Road is about that time period when the american dream started to really sour. By the time zone in which American Beauty takes place, it is already putrid and in an advanced stage of rot. There's no denying that the former influenced the latter. Still, I highly recommend to anyone that they read the novel before thinking it's just some 20-something version of AB, which was simply trying too hard to accomplish what RR does with incredibly measured acuity.
Posted by austin111
at October 18, 2008 9:35 PM
comment #8
BurmaShave
says ...
With Ledger, Mortensen and Downey all vacating the Best Actor derby, and my sincere belief from the trailers and buzz that Langella doesn't have it, I would say things are looking better for Brolin. Just saw W. last night, it's okay, but he really is first class in it.
Posted by BurmaShave
at October 18, 2008 10:37 PM