Of the Toronto Film Festival Galas and Special Presentations announced today, between 25 and 28 are worth a tumble. Okay, make it 20. How many of the 20 will turn out to be way-up-there exceptional? Less than ten, if that. Probably less than five. More films will be announced, of course, but let’s be honest and admit that right now the TIFF slate feels a bit weak.

I woke up this morning to an abbreviated Variety headline on my iPhone. It read “Toronto Film Festival Opens with Denzel Washington’s…” before the jump. My first thought, “Holy moley, Toronto is going to debut Fences?…that’s very exciting!” Then I realized Variety‘s Denzel possessive was incorrect. TIFF’s opening night attraction will be Antoine Fuqua‘s The Magnificent Seven (Columbia, 9.23), which for Denzel is nothing but a straight mercenary paycheck gig + a chance to go up against Yul Brynner and Toshiro Mifune. Fuqua is a genre wallower, a shoveller, a primitive.

Even though Denis Villeneuve‘s Arrival has been given a TIFF gala berth, it’s listed as a Canadian premiere so the Telluride debut I mentioned last weekend still holds.

Toronto Gala Head-Turners: Peter Berg‘s Deepwater Horizon (you know Berg — Patriot’s Day may turn out be one-note, rah-rah patriotic crap, but right now it reps his best potential shot at non-escapist, popcorn-transcending respectability); Garth Davis‘s Lion (Dev Patel uses Google Earth to find his parents after 20-year separation); Paul Dugdale‘s The Rolling Stones Olé Olé Olé! — A Trip Across Latin America, Oliver Stone‘s Snowden (no Telluride), Jeff Nichols‘ Loving (as an opportunity to re-appraise Ruth Negga‘s performance). Ama Asante‘s A United Kingdom (2nd interracial marriage drama following Loving) (6)

Read more

I spent the early part of Monday evening catching David Lowery‘s Pete’s Dragon (8.12) on the Disney lot. Then it was back to WeHo to study the DNC speeches. I loved them all. I got off on all that spirit and brainpower, all that character and eloquence and well-honed intelligence plugging a presidential candidate who isn’t as good as any of them. If Hillary’s speech on Thursday turns out to be better than any speech delivered tonight I’ll be very surprised. Michelle Obama‘s speech was tied with Bernie Sanders‘ fire and brimstone, followed by Elizabeth Warren, Sarah Silverman and Al Franken. The Bernie bellowing ended when Silverman told them they’re “ridiculous.”

Read more

I need to express this carefully but honestly, so here goes. If I was a young, rich, highly fetching actress who had decided a year or two ago that for the time being (or maybe forever) that I was into girls, I would naturally go for the hotties. Which is to say the same kind of foxy, dishy women whom most guys find highly desirable, with or without a same-sex orientation. But no way would I be into (here comes the trouble) dykey-looking women, which is to say women who have what many of us might describe as butchy, male-ish, non-petite features. You know what I’m talking about. I just can’t figure why a beautiful, famous, highly rated bi actress wouldn’t want to hook up with super-hotties. I recognize that butch is a lesbian aesthetic in the same way that bears are a gay male thing, and that I can’t hope to understand or relate to it, but it seems curious. No criticism — I just don’t get it.

Respect for famed ghost singer Marni Nixon, the soprano who dubbed Deborah Kerr, Natalie Wood and Audrey Hepburn‘s singing in The King and I, West Side Story and My Fair Lady, respectively. Until today I didn’t know Nixon had also dubbed Marilyn Monroe‘s higher-pitched notes in her rendering of “Diamonds Are a Girl’s Best Friend” in Gentlemen Prefer Blondes (1953). Nixon died yesterday at age 86, from breast cancer. She was 34 when she appeared in this segment of “What’s My Line?”

Read more

Apologies to anyone who got a questionable email from me within the last 60 to 90 minutes. It was sent by the devil, not me. I was dumb enough to open my devil mail, and now my email accounts are half-frozen (I can receive but not send). Don’t open any emails from me until further notice! I’m on my way down to Stan’s Tech Garage to try and clean this up. Sorry but I’m just as much of a victim as anyone else.

From Amazon synopsis of Irvine Welsh‘s “Porno”(’03), which is the basis of Danny Boyle‘s Trainspotting 2 (TriStar, 1.27.17):

In the last gasp of youth, Simon “Sick Boy” Williamson (Johnny Lee Miller) is back in Edinburgh. He taps into one last great scam: directing and producing a porn film. To make it work, he needs bedfellows: the lovely Nikki Fuller-Smith, a student with ambition, ego, and troubles to rival his own; old pal Mark Renton (Ewan Mcgregor); and a motley crew that includes the neighborhood’s favorite ex-beverage salesman, ‘Juice’ Terry.

“In the world of Porno‘, however, even the cons are conned. Sick Boy and Renton jockey for top dog. The out-of-jail and in-for-revenge Begbie (Robert Carlyle) is on the loose. But it’s the hapless, drug-addled Spud (Ewan Bremner) who may be spreading the most trouble.”

Imagine if Elizabeth Warren had run against Hillary Clinton — laying it down, whipping it up, using the same grass-roots fundraising strategy that worked so well for Bernie Sanders. As conservative N.Y. Times columnist Ross Douhat noted three months ago, she probably would have won the Democratic presidential nomination. And we wouldn’t have the current Hillary nightmare with us. Things would be looking a lot brighter and happier, let me tell ya.

We would have a strong, passionate progressive candidate whose message fits the times. Donald Trump wouldn’t be calling Sanders “Crooked Elizabeth,” women everywhere would be supporting her, she would be the fresh new energy force, I would’t be writing about her negatives, Millenials would be excited about her, people wouldn’t be groaning at the idea of eight years of dynastic entitlement or Hillary’s secretive plotting and conniving, and there would be no Sanders delegate rebellion in Philadelphia.

Posted on 4.21.16: Why didn’t Warren man up and run? Was it just…what, cowardice? A lack of gumption? Some kind of hesitancy over her age or health? The likeliest reason, I suspect, is that sometime in the winter or spring of ’15 Warren was advised by Democratic party power-brokers to play ball and not cause trouble by launching a renegade campaign against Hillary.

Read more

This morning Susan Wloszczyna (‪@wozerina) ‬tweeted the following: “Who thought it was smart to open The Infiltrator (7.13), Indignation (7.29) and The Intervention (.8.26) within weeks of each other?” She probably has a point, but anyone looking beyond the use of the same first syllable should know that James Schamus‘s Indignation is the must-see standout. I’ve seen all three, and there’s no question of this. I have a bit of an argument with the ending of Indignation, which I’ll post later today or tomorrow, but it’s still the strongest. Rankings: James Schamus‘s Indignation first, Brad Furman‘s Infiltrator an honorable second, and Clea DuVall‘s Intervention bringing up the rear.

Read more

Uh-oh…Jack Huston‘s Judah Ben-Hur is back to identifying himself as “Ben-Hur” when Morgan Freeman asks his name. He used the two-syllable moniker in an early teaser, and then broadened it to include “Judah” in a subsequent trailer. Now, for the benefit of those ticket-buyers who might be confused or challenged by four syllables, it’s been shortened again to just “Ben-Hur.” If I’d cut this trailer I would have shortened it further. Freeman: “What’s your name?” Huston: “Ben.” Freeman: “Ben? What’s your family name? What is your house?” Huston: “I am not my family or my house. I’m just me. I stand alone. Just call me Ben.” This joke of a remake opens three weeks hence.

10:45 am Pacific update: Embattled DNC chairperson Debbie Wasserman Schultz has told the Orlando Sun-Sentinel that she won’t be gavelling the Democratic National Convention or appear on stage at any time. She’s become a toxic boo magnet.

Earlier: It seems clear that Donald Trump is in some kind of cahoots with Vladimir Putin, and that Putin’s Russian hackers were key in hacking emails that have proved what everyone knew all along, which is that operatives within the Democratic National Committee worked against Bernie Sanders and carried water for Hillary Clinton.

And yet, despite the malevolent motives of Putin-Trump, the emails nonetheless point to a rigged and odious pro-Clinton bias, chiefly enforced by recently resigned DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, against the Sanders campaign. If you were a Berner, how would you feel this morning?

What did Hillary do in the wake of this? True to form, she immediately announced her high regard for Wasserman Schultz and announced that (a) DWS has been hired to serve as “honorary chair” of an effort to elect Democrats nationwide, and (b) will continue to serve as a Clinton surrogate in Florida.

This should basically be a pseudo-Manchurian Candidate story about Putin manipulating the Presidential race with Trump’s winking complicity — as well as his recently stated willingness to not necessarily challenge Putin in terms of any future potential conflicts with NATO in Europe.

Read more

From a 7.24 Washington Post piece about the resignation of divisive Democratic National Committee chairperson Debbie Wasserman Schultz: “According to one Democratic member of Congress involved in the discussions leading up to her resignation, Schultz strongly resisted giving up her position amid discussions that staff should shoulder some of the blame.

“Among the options discussed was having Amy Dacey, the DNC’s chief executive officer, put out a statement, according to two Democratic sources.

“That served to exacerbate other Democrats’ frustration with Wasserman Schultz, and led to accusations that she had made the situation worse by not acting swiftly to step aside as the convention loomed.

“’There was a lot of drama,’ this lawmaker said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter. ‘She made this as painful as she could. She did not want to go…she wasn’t going to resign until the president called her. She put a lot of people through hell.”

Read more

I was surprised to hear a couple of days ago that Nate Parker‘s The Birth of a Nation (Fox Searchlight, 10.7) will not make an appearance at the Telluride Film Festival. That’s a bit of an eyebrow-raiser for a festival regarded as a significant Best Picture harbinger, and one that Fox Searchlight has often favored (and vice versa) in years past. 

Most handicappers will tell you that Birth is a likely Best Picture nominee, especially in a year in which Academy and guild members are expected to “get their black on” to atone for last year’s Oscars So White narrative.

Parker’s film will play Toronto, I’m told, but not Telluride. You could presume this is because Telluride honchos are disinclined to present films that, like The Birth of a Nation, premiered at Sundance eight months earlier. 

This rule-of-thumb is likely to be challenged, however, if and when Kenneth Lonergan‘s Manchester By The Sea, which also had its debut at Sundance ’16, turns up in Telluride, which I understand is probable.

HE’s Telluride 2016 spitball lineup so far: Manchester By The Sea, Damian Chazelle‘s La-La Land (Venice Film Festival opener), Pablo Larrain‘s Neruda (Cannes) and Denis Villeneuve‘s Arrival (Venice).

Even though Tom Ford‘s Nocturnal Animals (Focus, 11.18) is playing Venice, I’m told it won’t play Telluride. Nor will Jeff Nichols‘ Loving, another Focus film. This despite having played well in Cannes.

Read more