I’ve never patted or pinched the ass of any unacquainted person in my life, male or female, and if someone were to pat or pinch my derriere the groper would be sorry about this immediately, trust me…unless she happened to be an attractive woman, of course. Why am I talking about this stupid subject? Because there’s something bizarre about the following AP news report, which is linked to a front page call-out on the cyber edition of the N.Y. Daily News: “The actor Christian Slater [now appearing in The Glass Menagerie with Jessica Lange) was arrested early Tuesday for allegedly groping a woman on a Manhattan street, police said. Slater, 35, was accused of touching the woman’s buttocks near 93rd Street and Third Avenue on the Upper East Side around 1:50 a.m., said a police spokesman, Detective John Sweeney. The woman, who was not identified, flagged down police to report the incident, Sweeney said. Slater was found nearby and the woman identified him as the man who groped her.” How stupid is Slater? In this day and age what kind of dumb-ass cops a feel on a New York Street and assumes it will go down agreeably with the woman and nothing bad will come of it? (And yet it sounds like an incomplete story…I don’t think we’re getting all the details…an enterprising reporter needs to do some digging.) Isn’t it funny how Al Pacino can do that bit in Heat (“Because she has a…great ass! And you’ve got your head all the way up it!”) and everyone laughs because they know where he’s coming from, but when a guy like Slater does a dumbbell thing like ass-patting on 93rd Street everyone recoils and wonders what the hell. I’ll tell you what Slater’s problem might be. Being a name actor, he might have decided that the rule we all live by, which is that we’ve got to hold it in until it’s cool to let it out, doesn’t apply to guys in his position.

I’ve run Cinderella Man tipoffs before, but here’s a conservative variation. National Review and New York Post columnist John Podhoretz is calling Ron Howard’s 1930s boxing film (Universal, opening 6.3)”a thrilling piece of work. No, more than thrilling. I left the screening room this afternoon exhilarated, moved, excited, stirred and overwhelmed, convinced that Cinderella Man is one of the best movies ever made. It’s a great boxing movie…but it’s not just a boxing movie. It’s a terrific Depression melodrama, but it’s not merely a Depression melodrama. It’s a sterling biopic, but it’s not a standard-issue biopic. It’s, rather, the story of a family man and a portrait of a good marriage — and it’s the depiction of these simple phenomena that makes Cinderella Man so wonderfully powerful. Howard has become his generation’s answer to William Wyler — a classic cinematic storyteller who can work wonders in any genre.”

New York Times reporter Laura M. Holson is not Chicken Little. She is, of course, on to something…a turn of the cultural screw that has seemed evident to me for some time…in her 5.27 article about younger folks being less and less interested in going to theatres to see movies. The headline says it all (“With Popcorn, DVD’s and TiVo, Moviegoers Are Staying Home”) and while the drooping box-office over the last few months is about more than just this phenomenon, the leisure-time paradigm does seem to be shifting. A lot of people just watch the tube, rent DVDs from Netflix, instant message their friends, futz around with video games and go to theatres only to see monster attractions like Star Wars. It’s terrible in a way (the death of communal movie-watching would constitute one of the coldest social winds to ever blow through this country), but it’s not fantasy…and Movie City News‘ David Poland should know better than to dismiss this as another dubious report from “the paper of Wreckord.” Of course, movie quality has always been a key factor in attracting or repelling audiences. It is hugely ironic, to say the least, that Holson’s story quotes Amy Pascal, the Sony Entertainment motion picture group chairman who greenlit the two McG Charlie’s Angels films — certainly among the most wretched, big-grossing, shit attractions of all time — as saying with an apparently straight face, “We can give ourselves every excuse for people not showing up — change in population, the demographic, sequels, this and that — but people just want good movies.”

Richard Linklater is making Fast Food Nation into a fictional story? Come again? What’s next….French Women Don’t Get Fat as a thriller starring Jet Li? If the hoi polloi who can’t be bothered to read and who continue to patronize the sludge peddlers want to remain ignorant, why make a movie just to reach them? I don’t get the concept of inventing characters in order to lightly touch upon the ideas so thoroughly explored in the book. Then again, it’ll probably still be better than anything from George Lucas.

I had begun to entertain the soothing notion that with wi-fi being so commonly available that all the technical mucky-muck that used to be part of getting a new cyber hookup in a new location (like, for example, my modest new swap pad in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, where I’ll be parking it this summer) was a thing of the past. Nice dream. The last day and a half has reminded me that tech hassles are as constant as the moon, not to mention huge gulpers of time…especially when you’re on the receiving end of technical “support” provided by those Indian guys. You know who I mean…those extremely polite, undeniably fastidious, collosally dim professionals who do their part to make life a living hell for so many of us, courtesy of those cost-saving dedicated phone feeds from the land of Gandhi. One of these guys in particular is the main reason why the column is so late today (i.e., Wednesday, 5.25). I don’t need to tell anyone this and nobody likes a whiner, but these guys are a menace. Please send in your own horror stories about tech support from Bombay…I’ll run some on Friday.

In a 5.21 Cannes Journal entry, New York Times critic A.O. Scott wrote that he was “disheartened” by Anne Thompson’s also-recent Hollywood Reporter column which reported/asserted that U.S. moviegoers don’t know and almost certainly won’t care about this year’s big Cannes attractions, much less who their creators are. Her column quoted indie distributors like Warner Independent’s Mark Gill and ThinkFilm’s Mark Urman expressing this realistic (although certainly pessimistic-sounding) view. Scott complained that Thompson’s piece “seemed almost intended to perpetuate the situation it pretends to describe. If you assume that American audiences aren’t interested in certain kinds of movies, and therefore don’t release or write about those kinds of movies, then your assumption will of course appear to be proven right.” The same principle applies to all the whoopin’ and yellin’ over the $300 million-plus earned worldwide thus far by Star Wars: Episode 3 — Revenge of the Sith. If Hollywood-covering editors and journalists were to openly practice advocacy journalism (which of course they don’t — they practice it covertly), they would refuse to report any and all box-office figures for those especially pernicious, grossly disappointing, spiritually polluting movies that come along every so often, like Sith. This is fantasy, of course — you can’t not report about massive box-office earnings anymore than you can omit reporting on huge Asian tsunamis. But one or two local news channels in Los Angeles have talked about refusing to run video coverage of freeway chases and New York Daily News columnist Lloyd Grove has refused to run any more items about Paris Hilton, so there’s some precedent. As God is my witness, showbiz salutations about how the Sith grosses are good and healthy things and that the public has finally and wondrously awakened from its months-long slumber with the release of Sith, blah, blah…these exclamations are feeding the underlying malignancy. To me, these box-office reports seem to almost perpetuate the situation they’re pretending to dispassionately describe. If you assume that American audiences are hugely delighted and/or feel profoundly fulfilled about having seen Revenge of the Sith, and therefore you write about the statistical box-office figures that confirm this assumption, then your assumption will of course appear to be proven right. I have said this over and over in years past, but millions upon millions of easily seducable slackers lining up to see a blockbuster can, depending on the dynamic, mean (and should mean) absolutely nothing in the greater scheme of things. (Which of course if where we should all be living in our heads…in Greater Scheme Land.) What does it mean when a dust storm blows across Kansas and everyone covers their faces and stays inside their home(s)? Is this something to jump up and down about, examine from this and that angle, compare statistically to previous dust storms, and talk about the various ramifications with dust-storm experts like Paul Dergarabedian? People can go to see Sith by the mega-millions and a tip of the hat to those who have shrewdly profited from this, but in a better, smarter and more spiritually focused world, editors and journalists would try to report this dispiriting phenomenon with a bit more perspective…and without quite so much of a “yea, team!” cheerleader tone.

It’s 2 pm on Sunday afternoon in London, and it looks like it’s going to rain. Unusual! If any London readers are in the mood for a pint or two sometime this evening, write me this afternoon and we’ll figure something out. I’ll be checking mail off and on all day.

Flash! You’re reading it here dead last! The surprise Palme d’Or winner did turn out to be Jean-Pierre and Luc Dardenne’s L’enfant (The Child) after all…which I was told might happen just as I was unplugging at the American Pavillion on my final day in Cannes (i.e., Saturday). Hearty congrats to (a) Jim Jarmusch’s Broken Flowers for copping the Grand Prize, (b) Tommy Lee Jones for taking the Best Actor award and Guillermo Arriaga winning the Best Screenplay trophy for The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada, (c) Hidden‘s Michael Haneke for winning the Best Director award, and (d) Free Zone‘s Hanna Laslo for being named Best Actress. Good calls all around.

I couldn’t file when I got to London last night due to my lodging situation being up-ended when I arrived at the hotel, and then having to scramble around town betwen 11pm and midnight for a place I could afford. The hotel I found (near Sussex Gardens) didn’t have Wi-Fi, of course. (Which is partly what makes places like this affordable.) And the nearby internet cafes start to shut down around midnight, so the hell with it. I walked around in the surprisingly chilly and windy night air and had a really delicious, super-greasy shawarma. I don’t take days off anymore — I take hours off. But it felt like peace.

Do you literally have to live in the U.S. to knock its values or criticize its culture or politics? David Cronenberg, a Canadian whose recently-screened A History of Violence addresses America’s shoot-em-up, fistifcuff tendencies, is quoted thusly by L.A. Times critic Kenneth Turan: “Does a fish know about water? Living in a tributary, not the ocean, [Marshall] McLuhan had a different perspective. The insights he had into America would not be possible to anyone living in America. Stepping away has a lot to do with it.”

A lot of press people in Cannes have been doing their usual ranting against Lars von Trier for making another film critical of the U.S. (i.e., Manderlay) without having ever visited American shores. Certainly one needs to absorb a country’s culture first-hand to get a thorough understanding of what it’s about…but it also seems absurd to insist that a visitation has to happen before one can render a strong opinion about a country’s history with a film like…well, Manderlay. As von Trier told the Hollywood Reporter‘s Anne Thompson, “America dominates world culture” and “is a big part of our lives in my country. 60% of the main words in all the experiences of my life are American…I am an American, but I can’t go there to vote [and] I can’t change anything. That’s why I make films about America.”

“The general opinion of Revenge of the Sith seems to be that it marks a distinct improvement on the last two episodes, The Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones. True, but only in the same way that dying from natural causes is preferable to crucifixion.” This from Anthony Lane’s pan in the current issue of The New Yorker. Hail to this fellow…his review is hilarious.