wired

I always miss good movies at Sundance, every time, and one I missed last January is an intimate relationship drama called Off the Black. Directed and written by James Ponsoldt, the film has no website (a mistake) but ThinkFilm is releasing it on 12.1.06. I can’t seem to find a nice, tight little one-line description but it has something do with a high-school umpire (played by Nick Nolte) and a screwed-up kid (Trevor Morgan) and the kid’s not-very-nurturing father (Tim Hutton ).

I’m particularly interested because I’m a big Nolte fan (I thought he should have gotten more attention last year for his suporting performance in The Beautiful Country) and because I’ve been hearing that Off The Black might turn into a Best Actor Oscar shot for the guy in a small-time, limited-ad-budget, little-Oscar-campaign-that-could sort of way. Like Felicity Huffman managed to do with Transamerica, and Laura Linney managed with You Can Count on Me….one of those deals.
A guy named Matt Park wrote me this morning saying “this is the best performance Nolte has ever delivered. He said something about he and his girlfriend being choked up when the lights came up at the Eccles but you have to watch that stuff. Nolte’s umpire, he wrote, is “rough, vulgar, hilarious…he breaks your heart. And the film manages to be honest and emotional and funny without ever being overly sentimental. It felt like some of my favorite flicks from the 70’s.”
I’ve had to remind myself three times so far that Ponsoldt’s film isn’t called Into the Black. It’s a funny title. It doesn’t seem to “say” anything.
I’m going to be seeing it in two or three days, but the trades apparently liked it and so did MCN’s Stu Van Airsdale, and I’m wondering if anyone’s who’s seen it since has any reactions to share.

I filed “Apocalypto Later ” about 15 hours ago, and I’ve since read all the responses and elicited some new thoughts and the consensus, boiled down, seems to be this: Americans are not the media, and are fairly racist deep-down and don’t really care that much about Mel’s anti-Semitic rant so don’t worry about any negative reactions to the film, especially with some people apparently being more inclined to see Apocaylpto because of this episode.

The other factor is that unless Gibson himself asks for a release-date delay, Touchstone, the film’s distributor, is pretty much obliged to be supportive of Apocaylpto because not being supportive sends the wrong message to other filmmakers, and so the film will probably come out on 12.8 and that’s that.
Repeating for clarity’s sake: this seems to be a “consensus” view, okay? It’s not necessarily my own view that Americans are racist — it’s what people are telling me. Got it?
An industry consultant says that Apocalypto “is so out there” — foreign language, exotic Mayan culture backdrop, guys in loincloths and face-paint carrying spears — “that it won’t be a true test of Gibson’s popularity waning or waxing. I doubt most of America will punish Mel for anti-Semitic remarks as most of them are bigots themselves. This is a very bigoted country.
“Before this happened Apocalypto was a marketing challenge, to say the least. There’s a question about the film not having a strong villain, and without that you don’t have a strong hero figure. So how do you get people to see this movie? People don’t go to see the best foreign-language fims in this country, so I wonder how you’re going to get them to come see this one except…you have to wonder, you really do have to wonder…if it was sold as ‘this is the film Hollywood Jews don’t want you to see….if you want to see more Jesus films, go see this one.'”
The Touchstone situation is this: (a) The studio has a close relationship with Gibson dating back to Ransom , and yet the company at large does not; (b) Unless Gison asks them to delay the release date (which is possible), or corporate gets queasy (also possible), it’s doubtful that Touchstone will blink or do anything that looks unsupportive; and (c) The campaign will be much trickier now, but that will be the case anyway with a March of April ’07 release date since the press will resurrect the anti-Semitic drama no matter what.
And finally, I want to make sure everyone considers an idea floated by reader Nate West — an envelope-pushing comedy called Meet the Rabbis that you just know everyone would want to see, no question. The basic plot involves an aging, drunken movie star who blows up his career with a stunning racist tirade. Then he’s forced to attend sensitivity sessions with two rabbis played by Ben Stiller and Steve Carell. Of course, the funny part is that deep down he really does hate Jews. Even funnier is that his public doesn’t much mind that he hates Jews, because either they don’t know any or they hate them too.
In all seriousness, if Gibson, Stiller and Carell were to make this film — and of course, if it turned out to be as dark and funny as the premise suggests — Gibson’s troubles would be over. He would be totally in the clear…but the film wouldn’t work if Gibson didn’t play himself as bluntly and candidly as he probably really is, deep-down.

Jon Finch speaking the “cure her of that…sweet oblivious antidote” speech from Roman Polanski‘s Macbeth (1971), and also the “tomorrow and tomorrow” speech. For the nurturing.

I guess Warner Bros. really doesn’t want any advance word on The Wicker Man (9.1). Critic Steve Murray of the Atlanta Constitution says “they’re not screening it for critics. At least in Atlanta. Got the word here Friday from the local publicist that the screening will be 10 p.m. on Thursday, 8.31 — the night before it opens.”

I can’t believe this is a quality issue, not with director-writer Neil LaBute at the helm. He’s a shrewd writer, a pro-level director and no schlockhound. It must be about WB not wanting any kind of hint passed along about the Wicker plot, particularly the ending.

The last time I checked New Line Cinema was planning on doing the same thing with Snakes on a Plane — no screenings until 10 pm on Thursday, 8.17, the night before it opens. I’m guessing New Line publicity is going to arrange gratis passes for critics. It should be a rockin’ experience, especially getting home at midnight and having to write the review so it’s up the next morning.

This story by London Times correspondent John Harlow says that executors of Brando’s estate “including [Pheonix Pictures honcho] Mike Medavoy…are raising money by licensing Brando products including…a semi-fictional documentary called Citizen Brando.” The semi-doc, formerly called Brando and Brando, is about a Tunisian “boy” who traveled to the U.S. to meet Brando. Directed by Ridha Behi, it is said to be a partly fictionalized doc about Behi’s friendship with Brando.
Hold on….what about that series of acting-class videos called Lying for a Living, which Brando and director Tony Kaye partnered on roughly four years ago? It’s basically shows Brando giving acting lessons to an audience of mostly non-pros with drop-by’s (according to this and that news account) from Robin Williams, Michael Jackson, Nick Nolte, Leonardo DiCaprio and Sean Penn. Surely all the tapes that were shot of the Lying sessions (one of which I almost gained admittance to) can be asembled into some kind of shape? Two or three calls to Medavoy last week and two chats with his personal publicist Howard Brandy provided no answers.

N.Y. Times Ed Leibowitz asks if it’s “better to mimic or transcend” famous figures you’re playing in a movie? Uhmm…the best way is try and do both, no? All I know is, any piece using a photo of Kirsten Dunst as Marie-Antoinette (as she appears in Sofia Coppola‘s film) is an automatic turn-off. It doesn’t open until 10.20, but Marie-Antoinette is already fixed in people’s heads as this year’s Memoirs of a Geisha…if that. It may do some business with young women who aren’t that deep, and it’ll probably pick up some tech nomninations (costumes, production, design, makeup).

I didn’t mention the sad 63% drop suffered by Miami Vice this weekend, but obviously not enough people agreed with critics that the dense aroma of that film — the visual “fumes,” as I put it two or three weeks ago — more than made up for a not-that-great story and an emotional current that could have been stronger. It’ll be a push for Vice to reach $60 million domestic, which won’t cover prints and marketing. The Vice shortfall may not prove as much of a bath for Universal as Poseidon was for Warner Bros., but it’s in that vicinity. I don’t know what this means as far as Mann’s next film is concerned, but having to work with less money is never a bad thing creatively. Look at what Scorsese did with After Hours and The Last Temptation of Christ during his late ’80s down period.

Three days before World Trade Center opens and here‘s L.A. Daily News critic Glenn Whipp raising the United 93 Oscar flag. Go, Glenn! Oliver Stone‘s film is a thoroughly decent 7.8 on the HE scale, but Paul Greengrass‘s film is far superior and deserves all the salute pieces it can get.
The only thing “off” is that Whipp quotes David Poland as saying that United 93 “was not a powerful emotional experience for most people, and, as the academy goes, emotion leads intellect every time.” Of course, United 93 was nothing but emotional. The very idea of seeing it, in fact, was so emotionally threatening that a lot of people didn’t. What Poland tried to say but couldn’t quite articulate is that United 93 wasn’t sufficently emotional in the right way.
In other words, Academy members wanted a warm and reassuring 9/11 flick and Greengrass didn’t provide their idea of that. The irony is that “warm and reassuring” is precisely what United 93 provides by reminding us that Joe Schmoe Americans are made of very tough stuff indeed, and because of this courage what happened on that flight was one of this country’s absolute finest hours.

This Peter Howell piece about inside jokes is pretty good, but just because I blanked on “Hey 19” — I don’t know the titles of any Steely Dan songs — doesn’t mean I missed it. Walter Becker and Donald Fagen may have written that letter-to-Owen with a jocular tone, but You, Me and Dupree did rip their song off, and they were definitely half-pissed. A person talking in a flip or cavalier way about something doesn’t mean they’re 100% joking.
What’s “inside” anyway? One of my first big-star interviews was with Jack Nicholson back in ’82, and during our chat I mentioned that aspects of his Shining performance were, to me, an inside joke. Nicholson disputed this. He didn’t say this in so many words but his response was basically who was I, a mere journalist, to assume I had an inside view of things? He wasn’t agitated — he was relaxed and grinning — but I remember him saying, “I’m inside,” meaning somebody else wasn’t.
Our interview took place on a brutally cold day at the Hotel Carlyle, around 10:30 or 10:45 am. When I first arived at the high-up suite I was greeted by publicist Bobby Zarem in the foyer. Nicholson was sitting down the hall and around the corner, but in earshot. “How are ya, Jeff?” Zarem asked. Manhattan had been going through a long frigid spell and I wasn’t wearing a warm-enough jacket that day to cope with 15 degree weather, so the first thing that came to mind was, “Cold as usual.” And a split second later I heard Nicholson doing an imitation of me, saying “cold as usual.”
Like a lot of X-factor guys, Nicholson has a way of jumping the track in terms of conversational threads. We got to talking about cold-weather jackets and he mentioned he expected to head downtown later that day to buy himself a nice warm one. “What are you looking for?”, I asked, meaning what kind of jacket (goose down, motorcyle jacket, retro). And Nicholson answered, “I don’t know. I haven’t known for quite some time.”
I remember he began sipping a Miller High Life in the middle of the interview, and my deciding to drink one also as a gesture of solidarity.
My deepest apologies to anyone who may be thinking I’ve waited too long (48 hours) to riff on Howell’s piece.

Even though Sony is apparently projecting a $47 millon weekend tally for Talladega Nights, a rival studio is projecting $49,002,000. The Will Ferrell-Adam McKay comedy dropped 12% from Friday to Saturday. My guess it that it’s probably a bellwether of some kind.

Someone wrote this afternoon that “if someone tells you Talladega Nights is hateful, look at the hatred of the source” and that “only an arrogant jackass would suggest that large groups are too stupid to know they are being made fun of.”
Just for fun, let’s assume this guy was referring to my Talladega review. What I wrote (and what’s being indicated this weekend at the box-office) is simply that the people that Talladega “shits on the heaviest” — Southerners, NASCAR fans — “are going to be its biggest fans.” Where I come from that’s called irony. I didn’t say the NASCAR crowd is “stupid” to be liking this film. I didn’t laugh much when I saw it, but it’s got some funny stuff here and there. Co-writer Will Ferrell and director and co-writer Adam McKay know what they’re doing. They’re pros, I mean.
But what’s unmistakable, as I wrote a few days ago, is that “joke after joke, scene after scene, Talladega show us what total fools white-trash Southern hee-haws are. It says they’ve got no real values and they care only about conspicuous consumption, and that all they like to do is tear around in muscle cars, buy new stuff, serve their kids junk food and go apeshit at NASCAR races.”
I guess I didn’t put it the right way. Ferrell and McKay respect and admire local TV newsmen, which is where the humor in Anchorman came from. It came from love and affection. And now they’re chiding NASCAR fans affectionately, like one friend or family member to another. Oh, and there are no hee-haws, no rednecks, no downmarket sons of the South. These terms are evil media myths. Everyone is beautiful in their own way, and anyone who thinks differently needs to be shown the error of their ways.