I spoke with Suffragette director Sarah Gavron and screenwriter Abi Morgan because I wanted to do something besides write about how affecting and well-made their film is. Sappy as this sounds I felt obliged to do something for an experience that had really gotten to me. And then I saw Suffragette for the second time last night at the Academy premiere, and it sank in like it did five or six weeks ago in Telluride. No diminishment.

What’s with the 79% Rotten Tomatoes verdict? Suffragette is too stirring, too important, too well captured for any “well, yes but” responses. I was speaking to an older guy at last night’s after-party who shrugged and said “well, yes but a bit too much like a longform British TV drama.” No, not accurate. It’s a movie that lays it down and brings it home in 106 minutes. It pays tribute to rebels and tells the hard truth about what it costs to push back.

Suffragette is about the civil disobedience phase of the England’s women’s suffrage movement of 1912 and ’13, and much…actually most of it is about the hurt and the bruising.

It focuses on a group of five or six women (Helena Bonham Carter‘s Edith Ellyn, Natalie Press‘s Emily Davison, Anne-Marie Duff‘s Violet Miller, Romola Garai‘s Alice Haughton) but mostly on Carey Mulligan‘s Maud Watts, an exhausted and all-but-drained mother and factory worker who gradually “sees” and succumbs. Somewhat like Thomas Becket, she gradually falls for the honor of rebellion.

Read more

From “Mad’s Glorious Anti-Smoking Campaign,” a 6.26.14 New Yorker piece by David Margolick: “In the early to mid-nineteen-sixties, both before and after the Surgeon General issued his famous report on the dangers of tobacco, Mad magazine took on the industry more than any ‘respectable’ magazine. Free from any dependency on advertising, Mad could be fearless, and it was. Its campaign of ridicule was unrelenting.

“The magazine attacked not just the tobacco giants but the folks on Madison Avenue who hawked the poisonous products — many of whom, it noted, were too smart to smoke themselves. Fifty years later, many who read Mad devotedly still remember the crusade. The ads closely resembled the real ones that ran on television and in magazines. There was the one for ‘Marble Row’ funeral directors, showing horses grazing in a graveyard. ‘You Get a Plot You Like,’ it declared. Or the ad promising that ‘Likely Strife separates the men from the boys…but not from the doctors.’

Initially posted on 5.28.09: “The only people I know in real life who smoke are (a) young and courting a kind of contrarian identity, (b) older with vaguely self-destructive attitudes, and in some cases beset by addiction problems, (c) serious “party” people with unmistakable self-destructive compulsions and tendencies, and (d) life’s chronic losers — riffraff, low-lifes, scuzzballs.

“The point is that all the above associations seem to kick in every time sometime lights up in a film, and it’s gotten so that I don’t want to watch characters in movies smoke at all. Unless it’s a period film or unless they look extremely cool doing it (a la Robert Mitchum in Out of the Past or Jean Paul Belmondo in Breathless), but very few actors have that ability.

Read more

Nobody fully respects a guy who, when faced with a momentous career decision, ponders and frets and dithers and says “I don’t know if I’m ready,” etc. I don’t care what tragedy has befallen you or how gut-punched you feel. A person wanting to be president has to have the stomach to push through all that and do the hard thing regardless. In the end Joe Biden‘s Irish-heartbreak emotions won out, and on a personal level that’s fine. But if he had decided to run, people would be wondering “what if Joe’s going through a difficult emotional time when the next major crisis hits? Does he have the steel for this job?”

The apparently troubled Jane Got A Gun will open in the U.S. next February. Two and two-thirds years ago (mid-March of 2013) director Lynn Ramsey quit the film and was quickly replaced by Gavin O’Connor (Warrior, Pride and Glory, Miracle). O’Connor is a good director but the vibes aren’t right. Wiki boilerplate: Pic was set to be distributed in the U.S. by Relativity Media on 8.29.14, but then Relativity cancelled that on 4.10.14, switching the opening to a 2.20.15 release, which was then shifted to 9.4.15. And then Relativity sold the film to the Weinstein Co. amid their filing for bankruptcy. Pic opens in France on 11.25.

On top of which there’s my Joel Edgerton problem — i.e., whatever he’s in, I’ve learned that I probably won’t like it. The last full-bore Edgerton performance I’ve been down with was in Animal Kingdom. (He was fine in Zero Dark Thirty but that was barely more than a muscle cameo.) I didn’t like him in Black Mass or The Gift. I didn’t like him as Ramses in Exodus: Gods and Kings or as Tom Buchanan in The Great Gatsby. He’s marginally more tolerable than Ben Mendelsohn but that’s not saying much.

Jane Got A Gun is basically Edgerton and Natalie Portman up against a passel of bad guys, including Ewan McGregor.

Nobody bats .1000 but when’s the last time a Bill Murray flick tallied more than 90% negative?

Yup, that’s right — not a single mention of the Miracle Mop. This is so not a Miracle Mop movie. Running its own game, walking in the rain. And clearly not in it for the laughs. Speaking as a small business owner I know all about JLaw’s tough-it-out, stand-up-for-yourself attitude, and as much as I hate to say this I’m presuming the film will strike a chord with conservatives…right? David O. Russell takes no prisoners. That said, I don’t know what to expect any more. Well, I do and I don’t. I know that Joy test-screened last night at the Pasadena Arclight, and that one attendee (said to be an acute contrarian) has called it “a mess.” HE to Acute Contrarian: Shut up. More to the point, are you actually saying it doesn’t do the usual this-happens-and-then-that-happens “everything’s gonna be okay” backrub thing with a red ribbon tied in a bow? Maybe the Pasadena version was different than the one that screened in Manhattan Beach? My mind is flying back to that tweet about three editors having taken a whack at it. There’s nothing wrong with tossing lettuce leaves, re-scrambling the eggs, searching for clear light.

From HE 9.5 review, posted from Telluride: “Carey Mulligan, looking appropriately hangdog for the most part, handles every line and scene like a master violinist. She’s always been my idea of a great beauty, but when she chooses to go there she has one of the saddest faces in movies right now. And I don’t mean gloomy. The strain, stress and suppressed rage of Maud’s life are legible in every look, line and gesture. Mulligan is fairly young (she just turned 30 last May) but she’s a natural old-soul type who conveys not just what Maud (a fictitious everywoman) is dealing with but the trials of 100,000 women before her, and without anything that looks like overt acting. All actors ‘sell it,’ of course, but the gifted ones make the wheel-turns and gear-shifts seem all but invisible.”

Suffragette director Sarah Gavron following Tuesday night’s premiere screening at Samuel Goldwyn Theatre.

Suffragette dp Edu Grau (r.), dp Svetlana Cvetko (Red Army, Inequality For All, Inside Job).

Read more

Jerry Lewis‘s The Errand Boy (Le Zinzin d’Hollywood) was reviewed in the “Notes on other films” section in the March 1963 issue of Cahiers du Cinema by Bertrand Tavernier: “After having proven with The Ladies Man that he as well capable as each and everyone and better than anyone at directing an authentic burlesque-surrealistic masterpiece, Jerry Lewis returns with The Errand Boy to his first love: the conversion of an absurd scenario into a succession of gags without any logical sequence, a principle which he carried out in The Bellboy.” The Cahiers critics on the conseil des dix gave The Errand Boy three stars — François Weyergans, 2 stars — Jacques Rivette and André S. Labarthe while Eric Rohmer abstained. The Errand Boy was cited as one of the 10 Best Films of the year by Tavernier.

I somehow got past my Anomalisa blockage last night. My basic Telluride response was to call it “another downhead visit to Charlie Kaufmanland” — an emotional reaction to the melancholy, flirting-with-self-loathing worldview that you always get with any Kaufman-penned film. But last night’s screening at the London West Hollywood opened a couple of new doors and closed one in particular. The morose element didn’t bother me as much as I knew exactly what to expect so those feelings more or less left the room. And I paid much more attention to the painstaking craft that went into the making of this adult-level, stop-motion character drama, which required three full years (all of ’12, ’13 and ’14) as the average daily capturing was around 48 frames or two seconds. Plus I enjoyed listening to Kaufman, co-director Duke Johnson and producer Rosa Tan during the post-screening discussion. And fourthly, I began to appreciate Anomalisa more fully as a potential Best Animated Feature contender. What a landmark it would be if an animated film that eschews the usual family-friendly blah-blah wins the Oscar in this realm? A hand-made animated film about flawed, lonely, uncertain adults coping with real-world ennui and depression — the tyranny of peppy, sparkly CG-animated films would be temporarily overthrown at least once. I was also struck by the smallish size of the lead character puppets (i.e., Michael Stone and Lisa, who are voiced by David Thewlis and Jennifer Jason Leigh). The models in Wes Anderson‘s Fantastic Mr. Fox were twice as tall. By the way: Tan told me that an Anomalisa trailer will pop in about two weeks.

Little “Michael Stone” and “Lisa” shown to last night’s audience at the London West Hollywood. Maybe…what, ten inches? Less than a foot tall, I’d say.

Screenwriter/co-director Charlie Kaufman (second from right); co-director Duke Johnson (far right). The T-shirted bearded guy to Kaufman’s right was the interviewer — probably some journalist.

Fantastic Mr. Fox costar Meryl Streep, director Wes Anderson.

I have three…uhm, concerns about Mike Fleming‘s Deadline story, posted earlier today, about an intention by producers Beau Flynn and Basil Iwanyk to produce Mayday 109, a retelling of the famous story of Lt. John F. Kennedy‘s World War II adventure when his PT boat was cut in half by a Japanese destroyer and the ordeal that followed. Samuel Franco and Evan Kilgore‘s script reportedly tells the “true” story of what happened. Obviously the casting of the lead role will be crucial. For whatever reason Fleming chooses not to mention PT 109, the stodgy, overlong and obviously sanitized Warner Bros. film about the incident. Released in June 1963, it wasn’t well reviewed (JFK called it a “good product” but worried about the 140-minute length) and it didn’t make much money — basically a tank. Nor does Fleming ask what kind of “true” material the new version will have that will distinguish it from the Cliff Robertson version. And if I was a keeper of the PT 109 flame, I would be seriously worried about any re-telling co-produced by Flynn, whose San Andreas was a ludicrous CG cartoon. Iwanyk, producer of Sicario, reps a more respectable brand. Here’s Paul Mavis’s DVD Talk review of PT 109 is streaming in high-def on Amazon…odd.

Variety‘s Tim Gray is reporting that Chris Rock “is in serious talks” to host the 88th Academy Awards. “An official announcement [is] expected shortly,” Gray adds. Rock is funny but he flubbed the gig ten years ago…right? That was my clear impression. Hell, everyone’s. Those Jude Law jokes! No matter. Oscar co-producer Reginald Hudlin has worked with Rock before (he directed the pilot of Everybody Hates Chris) and it’s possible that decade-older Rock has learned a few things about what doesn’t work at the Oscars so maybe.

From a 2.21.15 Indiewire piece called “5 Terrible Oscar Hosts (and Their Worst Jokes),” by David Canfield:

“Chris Rock’s material as Oscar host wasn’t inherently terrible, [but] here was a case where the talent just didn’t fit the crowd. From the moment Rock made it onstage, he was rushing through his material, skipping over pauses for laughter and applause whenever he sensed a joke wasn’t landing. Even if the bits themselves were good, Rock didn’t handle the lack of an audience response particularly well.

Read more

Barry Levinson‘s Rock The Kasbah (Open Road) opens Friday but hasn’t been liberally press-screened, or at least not to my knowledge. The first screening I was invited to happens tonight. The review embargo is tomorrow morning at 6 am Pacific, but a review by the Village Voice‘s Alan Scherstuhl popped this morning. It’s a fun read. The best part is Schertstuhl’s assessment of the Murray formula:

“Quick! Name the movie where Bill Murray plays a proudly shabby dude who acts like a prick for an hour and then, for reasons of narrative convention rather than character-based truth, shambles toward either heroism or some vague be-nicer enlightenment. Maybe a tougher challenge would be to name the Bill Murray movie where that doesn’t happen: Zombieland? That one where he played FDR as our nation’s most twinkling hand-job enthusiast?

“Whether his sleepy-eyed hero is saving New York (Ghostbusters 1 and 2), his platoon (Stripes), or something more like his own threadbare soul (Scrooged, Groundhog Day, almost all of his whiskery late-career indies), Murray movies mostly hold to template whether they’re playing in the cineplex or the arthouse.

“In the final moments of last year’s miserable St. Vincent, his cantankerous bastard drunk is actually hauled onstage at an elementary school assembly and treated by local parents to a standing ovation, all just for being himself — a guy who in real life you would detest. The wearying thing about this? In those scenes where he’s a prick, Murray can still be an unsavory delight. He’s quite funny as St. Vincent‘s cartoon monster, right up until the movie starts insisting that we have to believe in this guy, too, just the way an Adam Sandler picture would.

“But even that doesn’t hold true in most of the listless and haphazard Rock the Kasbah.”

The bottom line is that Kasbah doesn’t, in Schertsuhl’s eyes, work very well. Again, the review.