I don’t pay much attention to weekly Variety covers or any print publication, for that matter, except for Vanity Fair (which has been feeling less substantial and therefore less enjoyable over the last couple of years) and Esquire and GQ when I’m about to leave on a flight. But the satirical role-playing Bill Murray cover obviously alludes to those George Lois Esquire covers of the ’60s and early ’70s. Is this a new vein or did this cover just happen as a one-off?

Damien Chazelle‘s Whiplash (Sony Classics, 10.10) was the first 2014 movie I went apeshit for. I reviewed it out of Sundance almost exactly nine months ago…and then the months flew by and I began to think of it as a very strong Spirit Awards contender. Then it got another jolt out of Toronto/New York, and then it finally opened nine days ago. And then it began to connect in certain flotational ways. And then the clincher: Jett and his girlfriend saw it last night, and he reports that while she “liked” or “respected” but didn’t quite love Gone Girl and Birdman, she’s over the moon about Whiplash. That settles it. Whiplash, which has earned about $416K in 21 theatres so far, is a Best Picture contender because it fills not one but two Oscar Bait Bingo squares — it’s the Best Picture contender that GenY regards as its own (at least one BP nominee has to “belong” to the under-30s or they won’t feel invested in the Oscar telecast) and it’s the leading indie-level Best Picture nominee, which is a healthy thing for the Academy as nominating only big-name, medium-to-hefty-budget, mainstream-vibey films sends the wrong message. On top of which Whiplash is currently sitting in tenth place on the latest Gurus of Gold ranking — the admirers include Thelma Adams, Tim Gray, David Poland, Nathaniel R and Anne Thompson. I am including it in my Gold Derby Best Picture ranking as we speak. To repeat, Whiplash is no longer a Spirit Awards contender (although it can and will compete in that arena) — it’s a bona fide Best Picture contender.

Four hours ago on Reddit a man called “Toss My Salad Gently”, who sounds like a fair-minded guy with an actual sense of reason and judgment (as opposed to being some fluttery falsetto fanboy raving about all things Nolan), began to offer a semi-serious assessment of Interstellar following yesterday’s Fort Hood screening. Just a series of random, uncoordinated but intelligent-sounding comments, but you can sense a guy who knows a couple of things and has an idea of what’s good and what’s not. The bottom line is that while TMSG shared some flattering observations about Interstellar, he wasn’t over the moon about it. Definitely admiring and respectful but no cartwheels.

Three TSMG up-thoughts: (a) “It’s a really, really ambitious and enjoyable film,” (b) “It definitely had its moments! I found myself trying to hold back the tears a couple times” and (c) “2001: A Space Odyssey comparisons are pretty valid [and yet] the difference is Nolan didn’t take the plunge and leave a lot of things up for interpretation like Kubrick did…there is a bit of thinking to do after watching, but I believe it is accessible to anyone who pays attention.”

But he also offered a ranking of how Interstellar stands up to previous Nolan films, and here it is: (1) tie between Memento (8.5/10) and The Dark Knight (8.5/10), (2) Inception (8/10), (3) tie between Interstellar (7.5/10) and Batman Begins (7.5/10) and (4) The Dark Knight Rises (7/10).

And then he said this: “I just want to say that I feel bad because I’m really not any kind of film aficionado. Just someone who likes movies a lot. It was a really, really ambitious and enjoyable film. My rating is based off story, delivery of story, visuals, the music score and a couple other things. Some of you will like it more than I did but this is how I would rate it.

I’ve been searching around for some kind of considered reaction to yesterday’s Fort Hood screening of Interstellar, and so far I’m finding nothing. I’m not talking about effusive tweets — I’m talking about someone writing at least four or five thought-out paragraphs. How was the story? Did it add up? Did it end well? What’s the exploration of an Iceland-like planet thing about exactly? Why did that 12 year-old girl call it “probably the most depressing film I’ve ever seen” or some such shit? What did it make you feel? Where it take you? How does it stack up to Nolan’s other films? You’d think that somebody would post something other than some falsetto “oooh, the movie is wonderful!…ecstasy!…and Matthew McConaughey came here…eeeeee!!” Pathetic.

In the bad old days scenes with a woman saying “no…no…I mean it, no!…get out…dammit, no!…oh, all right” used to be regarded as pretty hot. Our politically correct culture has forbidden any savoring of this kind of thing as it now feels too close to date rape or worse. Maybe the women who say no and then yes don’t exist any more. But there was a British lady I knew in the mid ’80s who went there from time to time. She never said “no” exactly but she liked to maintain a certain reserve or decorum. In her mind she saw herself, accurately, as smart and well-ordered but…I guess what I’m saying is that she didn’t trust the inner beast. She held herself in check. But the beast always came out of the cave. I won’t repeat what she said one night, but it was another way of saying “if I was a stronger and more disciplined and well-mannered person I wouldn’t succumb to this crude animalistic writhing but God help me, I can’t fight it.”

20-plus years ago Sony Pictures chairman Peter Guber carved his name in cultural stone when Spy magazine quoted him as telling a female acquaintance, “The thing you have to understand is, this is a pussy-driven business.” That definition held for a long time, but two nights ago James Cameron came up with a better one. “There has to be some underlying IP in order to gather enough momentum for studio executives to make decisions the way they make decisions, which is fear-based,” the Avatar director said. “They have to fear making the movie less than not making it. The moment they’re afraid the guy across the street will make the movie and they’ll look stupid — that’s when they’ll make the film. There’s no sense of ‘I want to make this movie, I believe in this movie.’”

If anyone hears of any tweeted or tapped-out reactions to today’s Fort Hood screening of Chris Nolan‘s Interstellar, please advise or pass along. The showing is apparently happening at the Palmer Theatre, and this Nolan fan site claims Matthew McConaughey will attend. It’s likely that a certain percentage of viewers at tonight’s FH screening say “reach for the stahhrs” or “to break bahhriers” with the same yokel accent that McConaughey speaks with. It’s not generally known that Fort Hood has a greater concentration of military film critics than any other military installation in the continental U.S., but it’s…okay, I’m kidding. Seriously, this is obviously some kind of respectful gesture to the Fort Hood community for some Interstellar– or McConaughey-related reason. Tomorrow night’s Manhattan screening is strictly for friends and family of Paramount honcho Brad Grey, I’m told. Elite press will probably get their first look sometime during the coming week, but no official word has gone out yet.

Nobody knows what Angelina Jolie‘s Unbroken has in its quiver and nobody should say anything until they do…period. And yet the spitball games continue. For whatever reason (most likely the instinct to show obeisance before power) Jolie’s World War II-era survival saga has been enjoying a kind of speculative semi-front-runner status. Not king of the mountain-y but roughly on par with the Best Picture prospects of Boyhood, The Imitation Game and Birdman…all at the front of the pack.

At the very least Unbroken has seemed like one of the top hotties since Tom O’Neil‘s Gold Derby and David Poland‘s “Gurus of Gold” began asking Oscar-watchers for their hunches and guesses just before Telluride/Toronto. That’s been the general impression, I mean.

Which is why I was surprised to discover a couple of days ago that in the latest Guru chart Unbroken is now ranked seventh…even though it’s still ranked as the #2 favorite at Gold Derby. Seventh is almost indistinguishable from ninth, and if you’re going to be in ninth place you might as well be in tenth. Yes, it’s all hot air and bullshit, I know. But I was curious about who the actual friends of Unbroken are at this stage. And I was wondering how to explain the disparity between being a #2 choice vs. being seventh-ranked.

Birdman began playing yesterday in four theatres (two in Los Angeles, two in Manhattan) and took in $135,602 or $33,901 per situation…pretty big-timey. Presumably a portion of the HE community saw it last night and…well, you know what. Please. Thank you.

“Birdman is one of the most antsy, emotionally exposed, drill-down big-city comedies I’ve ever experienced, and probably the most transcendent, spirit-lifting film I’ve seen this century with Children of Men running a close second. It’s actually more of a psychological angst-and-anxiety movie with an infusion of Ingmar Bergman enzymes and occasional hyena laughs. It’s not a laugh riot per se but when it connects it’s fall-on-the-floor.

There have been complaints about missing comments in stories that are more than a year old plus a reported inability to upvote or downvote comments. Two or three days ago HE’s tech person tried to restore the missing comments but couldn’t quite crack it. If anyone knows anything or anyone who could help, please advise. HE tech comments/analysis after the jump:

From a producer friend: “WWII movies and difficult spiritual journeys are two currents during the current fall season. Whiplash and Foxcatcher don’t quite constitute a third as they number only two — obsessive-compulsive crazy coaches and their brilliant protege/prey.”