Now that Sam Taylor-Wood‘s Nowhere Boy (Icon/Weinstein, 10.8) is finally opening, here’s an abridged recap of my original 10.29.09 review. I called it “a marginally effective, vaguely muffled chick-flick account of John Lennon‘s teenage years in Liverpool, circa 1956 to ’60. I’m not calling it dull, exactly, but Nowhere Boy‘s somewhat feminized, all-he-needs-is-love story just didn’t turn me on.

“Matt Greenhalgh‘s script is based on a memoir called ‘Imagine This‘ by Lennon’s half-sister Julia Baird. I understand that this was the key issue of Lennon’s youth, but the film didn’t sell me on this, and in fact seemed to be frittering away its time by focusing on it. Lennon’s anguish was primal enough (‘Mother, you had me but I never had you,’ etc.) but my reaction all through it was, ‘Okay, but can we get to the musical stuff, please?’

“Nowhere Boy boasts a relatively decent lead performance by Aaron Johnson. He doesn’t overdo the mimicry and keeps his Liverpudlian accent in check. And yet it’s a somewhat overly sensitive, touchy-feely rendering of a rock ‘n’ roll legend who was known, after all, for his nervy, impudent and sometimes caustic manner, at least in his early incarnations.

“I didn’t believe the hurting look in Johnson’s eyes. All those looking-for-love feelings he shows are too much about ‘acting,’ and hurt-puppy-dog expressions don’t blend with the legend of the young Lennon (as passed along by biographies, articles, A Hard Day’s Night etc.) Emotionally troubled young guys tend to get crusty and defensive when there’s hurt inside, and this was certainly Lennon’s deal early on.

“And Johnson is needlessly compromised, I feel, by a curious decision on Taylor-Wood’s part to create her own, reality-defying physical version of Lennon. She ignores the fact that he had light brown, honey-colored hair by allowing Johnson to keep his own dark-brown, nearly-jet-black hair. Nor did she have Johnson wear a prosthetic nose — one of the oldest and easiest tricks in the book — in order to replicate Lennon’s distinctive English honker. Where would the harm have been if they’d tried to make Johnson look more like the real McCoy?”

A loquacious, full-length trailer for Joel and Ethan Coen‘s True Grit (Paramount, 12.25) , as opposed to the teaser that posted a few days ago. Graying grizzly bear Jeff Bridges, mouthy smart-ass Texas Ranger Matt Damon, straightforward Hailee Steinfeld, and ornery scurvy swine Josh Brolin and Barry Pepper.

Comment #1: “There’s what a movie is, and what people of brains, experience and insight say about it, and a certain kind of serenity that flows from this. And then the movie plays for the public and the folks in the Academy, and something else happens. It’s not real. It’s the Twilight Zone.” — posted by yours truly in response to yesterday’s “Admired, Not Beloved” report.

Comment #2: “Could it be that there are possibly forces out already to take down The Social Network? Count on it. And it isn’t only rival studios that will attempt to float info that will change the perception of the film — it will be anyone and everyone. Once the Oscar year finishes, the film can finally rest in peace. But by the end of it, it resembles nothing so much as the Bonnie and Clyde car. You’ll know the minute The King’s Speech truly becomes the frontrunner because it will get the same treatment. Such is just part of the game of Oscar.” — Awards Daily‘s Sasha Stone in a 10.3. post called “Oscar Hysteria Officially Launched.”

Yesterday’s recording of Oscar Poker, which runs just over an hour, included a visit from Box Office.com’s Phil Contrino and a discussion of how The Social Network and Let Me In performed at the box-office. (Apologies to Contrino for our failing to thank him sufficiently and give him a verbal hug as his report ended, but this an aural illusion due to a sound editing issue.) I sound obsessive at times, but that’s me. Awards Daily‘s Sasha Stone delivers her usual insightful, cut-to-the-chase commentary.

Here’s the iTunes Oscar Poker page, which for some dumb reason won’t stop identifying yesterday’s podcast as having originated on 9.26, as well as a straight mp3 link via Awards Daily.

NY Times media columnist David Carr is reporting that varied reactions to The Social Network are illustrating a gap in values between the GenY/younger GenX crowd and the older GenX-boomer set.

“Many older people will watch the movie and see a cautionary tale about a callous young man who betrays friends, partners and principles as he hacks his way to lucre and fame,” Carr notes. “But many in the generation who grew up in a world that Mr. Zuckerberg helped invent will applaud someone who saw his chance and seized it with both hands, mostly by placing them on the keyboard and coding something that no one else had.

“By the younger cohort’s lights, when you make an omelet this big — half a billion users — a few eggs are going to get broken. Or as the film’s artful tag line suggests, ‘You don’t get to 500 million friends without making a few enemies along the way.’

“‘When you talk to people afterward, it was as if they were seeing two different films,’ said Scott Rudin, one of the producers. ‘The older audiences see Zuckerberg as a tragic figure who comes out of the film with less of himself than when he went in, while young people see him as completely enhanced, a rock star who did what he needed to do to protect the thing that he had created.”

Forbes media critic Bill McCuddy discussed Oscar toppers The Social Network, The King’s Speech, Black Swan and 127 Hours (while throwing a little ding at Inception) during this morning’s Good Day NY on Fox 5. The coming TSN vs. King’s Speech battle will be about “New Hollywood vs. Old Hollywood,” McCuddy explains.

A message from the gang at Rebellious Pixels: “This is a re-imagined Donald Duck cartoon remix constructed from dozens of classic Walt Disney cartoons from the 1930s to 1960s. Donald’s life is turned upside-down by the current economic crisis and he finds himself unemployed and falling behind on his house payments. As his frustration turns into despair Donald discovers a seemingly sympathetic voice coming from his radio named Glenn Beck.

“This transformative remix work constitutes a fair-use of any copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US copyright law. ‘Right Wing Radio Duck’ by Jonathan McIntosh is licensed under a Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 3.0 License – permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.”

Reactions assembled by Deadline‘s Pete Hammond to Saturday night’s Social Network Academy screening were basically enthusiastic and respectful but — let’s face it — a bit cool at the same time. A portion of the over-55s didn’t think it was emotional or cuddly-bear enough so they’re holding out for a movie that will make them cry. Who’s surprised?

“Reaction very good,” one witness tells Hammond. “Big applause at the end and good applause when the credits were over, though I have to say that I have seen what I think are beloved reactions and this was not one of those. Those are few indeed, but I think Sony should be very happy with the turnout.”

Another reaction: “I liked it, thought it was well-written, [but] I got bored and hated everyone two thirds of the way through, even the hot chicks, so I think it won’t win Best Picture….nothing warm about it. The applause at the end was good and one-third stayed through the credits and applauded a little bit again. But nothing through the credits. But that may be the way they roll. All in all sort of like The Town reaction, but more people.”

Can anyone who’s seen The Social Network imagine anyone complaining that there’s “nothing warm about it”? That’s like someone coming out of the original King Kong and saying, “Why didn’t it have a few songs and dance numbers?” We’re talking about people with very skewed perceptions, and in some cases diminished ones.

A “dedicated” Academy member says he “just loved this movie, particularly the portrayal of Mark Zuckerberg and his lack of social skills.” He also characterizes last night’s Academy theatre as “really hopping.”

Scott Feinberg has tapped out a fairly comprehensive list of Twitter links to many of the filmmakers behind 2010’s award-calibre contenders as well as virtually every Oscar columnist and handicapper in the game.

In Secretariat (Disney, 10.8), Diane Lane gives an earnest, steady-as-she-goes performance as Penny Chenery Tweedy, the conservative housewife who risked financial ruin and defied her husband (Dylan Walsh) and brother (Dylan Baker), who wanted to sell their inherited horse farm for a quick profit, in order to nurture, train and place into competition one of the most celebrated racehorses in history.

The horse was initially named Big Red but eventually became Secretariat — legendary winner of the 1973 Triple Crown. And it’s a thrill to watch (and hear) him run. The film gives you that amazing charge with exceptional you-are-there photography and sound. But Secretariat is as rote and regimented and corny as Kansas in August, and I don’t see it selling many tickets beyond its base constituency — squares, tourists and hardcore horse-racing fans.

In short, I loved the story of Secretariat more than the movie. Actually, not the story so much as the horse-racing footage. The problem (and the movie has more than one) is that director Randall Wallace uses every trick in the book to make it seem touching, suspenseful, a cliffhanger…a story that massages your heart. Every. Trick. In. The. Book. And you’re not “in” the groove of Secretariat as much as fully aware of everything he’s trying to do to crank you up. You never forget you’re watching a Randall Wallace family-values movie for the schmoes — i.e., white people who stroll around in plaid shorts and white socks and La Crosse golf shirts, and who have an allegiance for old-fashioned Wonder Bread conservatism.

Everything is so right down the middle. And for me, Wallace’s directing style is too tight and straight-laced. There’s a little cut-loose dance sequence when Lane and her team are shown bopping and grooving to a ’70s soul tune, but Wallace doesn’t know how to cut and bump to this kind of thing, or at least not very well. Nor is he especially good at depicting early ’70s counter-culture kids and their behavior. It feels fake, “performed” — like some 1971 Methodist minister’s view of how hippie kids dressed and spoke and acted.

Lane has three moments that play exceptionally — (a) an argument/firing scene with a horse-farm manager in the first act, (b) a moment when she looks into the eyes of Secretariat to see if he’s ready to run, and (c) a financial face-off scene between she, Walsh and Baker. Except the latter scene is brought home by the housekeeper (Margo Martindale) when she spells out the specifics of their father’s will. A solid award-worthy performance needs three powerful moments, not two and a half. Lane’s performance wants to be as good as Sandra Bullock‘s in The Blind Side, but doesn’t quite get there. Sorry.

And Mike Rich‘s script doesn’t really give her any huge killer moments. Solid moments, but not great ones. The staring-at-Secretariat moment might be the best of all. Lane has a hold on the heart and spirit and determination that surely drove her character forward. Nice lady and mildly hot under the circumstances. But why did that wig she was wearing have to look so much like a wig? Don’t hairdressers know how to make wigs a little mussy and more natural-looking?

I quickly lost patience with Scott Glenn, who plays Lane’s ailing dad. Alzheimer’s, a stroke….die, you fucking boring actor!

Walsh’s conservative hubby is a total drag to be around. Over and over he’s saying to Lane, “You’re supposed to be my wife and take care of me and the kids rather than go galavanting around the country with a race horse.” I was sitting there muttering, “Get a clue, you Republican asshole. Your wife is doing something really remarkable and ballsy. Be a real man and support her!” He comes around at the very end, but when it’s easy to come around (i.e., when Secretariat is winning races), and so it doesn’t mean as much. So he’s a washout and a putz.

And I really, really didn’t relate to the old-fashioned, come-back-to-Denver, family values element that Walsh (and the movie) is constantly bringing up or our consideration. I hate Republicans and all their creepy family-values hypocrisy.

I just wish that Rich’s dialogue wasn’t so cliched-sounding. I wish it had more of a poetic curve-ball quality. The writing feels like it comes out of the Reader’s Digest Words of Wisdom and Charity or something. It feels too pat, too Christian, too right down the middle. Time and again I was guessing the dialogue before a character would say it, and then he/she would say it!

John Malkovich gives a colorful and eccentric turn as Lucien Laurin, Secretariat’s trainer, but it’s kind of a rote role. He’s fine, but they don’t give him enough to do. Entourage‘s Kevin Connolly and some other guy play racetrack reporters whose sole function is to comment on the action like a Greek chorus, rotely and tediously. Nestor Sorrano plays the owner of Sham, Secretariat’s chief competitor in the last two Triple Crown races, by way of The Sopranos…boast and bluster, open-collared shirts, gimme a break.

And what’s with using “O Happy Day” twice? Is there supposed to be some kind of spiritual God component in the story of Secretariat? That’s what the music seems to be implying…except it’s not there. The movie is about a straight-laced lady who stood by a beautiful horse that wound up winning big…and that’s it.

I loved the racing footage so much that I went right home and watched the original races on You Tube. I’ve watched the Belmont Stakes race four or five times since.

Bottom line: A so-so to mildly decent film with a great horse story, but not written well enough or directed by someone good enough to really lift it off the ground. And with a first-rate, very admirable Diane Lane performance with two and half strong moments but lacking those serious killer ones.

Update: Awards Daily’s Sasha Stone and I just finished the second “Oscar Poker” podcast. Today’s topics included (a) locked vs. maybe Best Picture calls, (b) Secretariat, (c) What happened this weekend at the box-office with Social Network and Let Me In? (c) Client 9, Alex Gibney and a discussion about what constitutes serious relationship betrayal — seeing someone on the side or seeing a pro?, (d) award-class filmmakers with personality problems, and (e) why the five-hour Carlos is easily one of the year’s finest.

Cinemablend‘s Eric Eisenberg has caught a little Social Network joke that I missed. That midpoint scene in which Jesse Eisenberg Mark Zuckerberg tells Andrew Garfield‘s Eduardo Saverin that he’s created a fake Facebook page so he can cheat on an Art History assignment? There’s a quick shot of the fake Facebook page, and the name Zuckerberg has used is Tyler Durden, Brad Pitt‘s character from David Fincher‘s Fight Club.