The End of Watch costars — Jake Gyllenhaal, Michael Pena, Anna Kendrick, Natalie Martinez, America Ferrera, Cody Horn — sat down last night (probably for the last time) for a Pete Hammond q & a following last night’s SAG screening at L.A.’s Downtown Independent theatre on Main Street. The premiere happened at L.A. Live. (More photos and videos after the jump.)

“I guess I’m a little bit confused,” In Contention‘s Kris Tapley wrote today. After being told up one side and down the other to beware Robert Lorenz‘s Trouble with the Curve, I found myself liking it just fine.

“It’s a bit unruly in spots and amateurishly conceived in others, but never to detriment. And even Clint Eastwood‘s grizzled performance, threatening to make good on the promise of Gran Torino (i.e. that he’ll be in the self-parody business from here on out) didn’t strike the sour chord I expected it to.

“Then as the movie went along, I realized the framing — my framing — was all wrong. This isn’t Clint Eastwood’s movie. This is Amy Adams‘s movie. And she’s great. Coupled with The Master, her work here further shows a dynamic range for the actress, who by the way landed three Oscar nominations in just six years, for those keeping score at home. And if you’re still not convinced, have a look at On the Road where she shows up out of nowhere and gives a unique if brief take opposite Viggo Mortensen.”

It occured to me that all the people who loved and wrote about The Silver Linings Playbook in Toronto are helping it now, yes, but in the long run they might be hurting it. Too much effusive praise always leads to second-wavers or ticket buyers expecting the moon, and when they don’t get that they get pissed off and complain it’s been over-praised. There’s nothing better than to see a really good movie cold. It almost never happens at film festivals, but it did with Silver Linings. I told Sasha Stone during our Oscar Poker podcast this morning that I had probably spoiled Silver Linings for her, and that I’m sorry. I didn’t mean to.

I returned to my home last night to suffocating heat and a dead air conditioner. I asked the lady who stayed here and fed my cats during my Telluride-Toronto-NYC travels, and she said the old living-room Fedders (one of those 21″ by 14″ models) gave up the ghost four or five days ago. It didn’t occur to her to alert me. If she had I could have made an appointment last Wednesday or Thursday for a fix-it guy to come today. I made an appointment today and the guy can’t come until Wednesday afternoon. So I’ll be living in a turkish bath until then. Thank you, cat lady!

I’m in hell. I slept on the couch in front of a fan last night, and I barely slept for the heat. I have to buy a new unit. Good wall-mounted air conditioners cost $300 or $400. I’ve been online and on the phone half the morning and into the afternoon about this. I’ve just agreed to buy a Friedrich air conditioner that will fit inside my wall box. I’m buying it from a guy from Anaheim name Ricardo. He’s agreed to me at the Citadel shopping center, three or four miles southeast of downtown, at 4:15 pm.

“Friedrich air conditioners are a superior product built from high grade materials and components that deliver dependable operation for years after the sale. As a leading pioneer in energy efficiency, their partnership with the U.S. Department of Energy’s Energy Star program was a natural continuation of their devotion to the development of products that conserve energy and help protect our environment. And, by designing energy efficient products, they help save money on your electric bill.”

In the view of HE reader Mike Bonifer, Tom Hanks‘ eulogy for Michael Clark Duncan “gives a sneak preview of what he’ll be like in John Lee Hancock‘s currently filming Saving Mr. Banks, a making-of-Mary Poppins movie. “Ignore his impression of MCD,” Bonifer says. “The twangy, folksy way he’s talking to the congregants, the haircut and the moustache are all hints at how he’s playing Walt. Have to be. Because he’s not talking in his regular Hanks voice.”

“A neglected house gets an unhappy look. This one had it in spades. It was like that old woman in Great Expectations, that Miss Havisham and her rotting wedding dress and her torn veil, taking it out on the world because she had been given the go-by.” — Joe Gillis (William Holden) in Billy Wilder‘s Sunset Boulevard.

Now that I’ve seen the trailer for Mike Newell and David Nicholls‘ adaptation of Charles Dickens‘ Great Expectations, I have a fairly clear idea what the movie will more or less be. I didn’t exactly beat a path to see it at in Toronto. (Or, to put it more precisely, I passed.) Rope of Silicon‘s Brad Brevet went and called it “perfectly serviceable, but overall nothing that offers a shift to the landscape.”

Right now David O. Russell‘s The Silver Linings Playbook feels to me like the slam-dunkiest Best Picture contender for six reasons — it portrays “crazy” as a state of exceptional openness and illumination in the same way R.D. Laing regarded schizophrenia, it’s fast and sharp and all the actors are “in the zone,” it reflects an anxious and cranked-up psychology that many of us share on some level, it’s funny and touching and a kind of ballsy ghoulash, it’s going to be a huge hit and, last but not least, Manohla Dargis has expressed semi-dismissive comments. That, for me, is fuel. That puts gas in my tank.

I’m obviously aware that many believe that Ben Affleck‘s Argo is just as strong or at least running a close second, but you can’t give a Best Picture Oscar for just craft and the director having grown in skill. It has to have something else going on, some kind of echo or undercurrent that punches through and adds up to something more than the sum of its parts. Boil out the patriotism and Argo is just a satisfying caper film, and yes, I know — nobody wants to hear that and nobody will listen.

And you have to put The Master up there, although we all know it won’t win the Best Picture Oscar (although I can imagine more than a few critics groups giving it their top prize).

And I’m infuriated that people are putting down Joe Wright‘s Anna Karenina, which delivers the kind of bold and exhilarating chops that I live for. It’s the kind of film that hasn’t been made in a long time, and what a rush to encounter it like I did in Toronto, cold and unprepared. You have to embrace it if you have the slightest interest in movies that step outside and say to themselves, “Let’s throw caution to the wind.” This movie is Ken Russell reborn in the most delirious sense of that term, and Dargis — Dargis again! — has called it a “travesty” — I can’t remember her ever sounding this rash or savage or dead effing wrong. This is my idea of a Best Picture contender.

And we can’t forget Benh Zeitlin‘s Beasts of the Southern Wild…right? The little movie that could, should and probably will.

The Five Big Unseens are Tom Hooper‘s Les Miserables (12.7), Robert Zemeckis‘s Flight (11.2), Kathryn Bigelow and Mark Boal‘s Zero Dark Thirty (12.14), Ang Lee‘s Life of Pi (11.21), and Steven Spielberg Lincoln, which I’m getting a really bad feeling about.

That’s ten titles, and I have a hunch that the weak sisters, no offense, are going to be Lincoln, Life of Pi, possibly Beasts of the Southern Wild (but maybe not) and possibly Anna Karenina if Dargis’s view carries inordinate weight.

I would have been rather surprised if David O. Russell‘s The Silver Linings Playbook hadn’t won the Toronto Film Festival’s BlackBerry People’s Choice Award. (Ben Affleck‘s Argo was the runner-up.) Past People’s Choice Awards have gone to American Beauty, The King’s Speech and Slumdog Millionaire.

Now all the Weinstein Co. has to do is (a) lay low between now and early November but also (b) put out a new trailer that reflects the second half of the film and not just the raggedy-jaggedy first half, but at the same time doesn’t scare off the girly-girls who like their romantic relationship flicks to be a little bit dumb.

“P.T. Anderson prefers to think of his Master characters as unrequited lovers, which results in a subtle, homoerotic tension that is triangulated in the film by the presence of Dodd’s loyal, steely wife,” etc. Okay, fine but why the horizontal taffy-pull distortion? Never mess with correct proportionality, ever. And no milkshakes.

Last Thursday’s announcement about Kent Jones and Robert Koehler being hired as dual replacements for outgoing Film Society of Lincoln Center senior programming hotshot Richard Pena can be taken two ways. One, as a resurgence of monk-dweeb power within the FSLC — a return to that somewhat insular, half-sleepy, curated, less-than-dynamic mode that Pena’s stewardship seemed to represent in years past. Or two, as an “exciting” new collaboration with nary a dweeb or monkish thought to be heard, least of all from Jones.

Jones will be the new director of programming of the NY Film Festival and Koehler will serve as year-round programmer for the Film Society of Lincoln Center. They’re both good fellows, extremely bright and knowledgable, etc. But it could be argued that they nonetheless represent a somewhat cloistered aesthetic. I could be wrong, but they seem to represent a return to the way things were before the Scott Foundas esprit de corps of the last two and a half to three years.

I asked a guy who is one of the high falutin’, vaguely crabby, vaguely know-it-all dweeb fraternity, a guy who’s in with the monastic “in” crowd (i.e., Jones, Gavin Smith, Amy Taubin, Koehler, Pena and their friend-supporter Manohla Dargis, film critic for the N.Y. Times). And I basically asked him if he could provide input into a working theory that after two and a half to three years, the cineastes in monk robes are back in power at the FSLC, and that the appearance, at least, of a Foundas flirtation or experiment, if you will, has been dealt a vote of “not yet” and “too soon” and “your time will come.”

I’ve written all pertinent parties about this and none of them are replying so take this with a grain.

Foundas was never that high on the totem pole — I get that — but he felt to me like the new way and Jones…well, I shouldn’t generalize, should I? Scott’s title is currently Associate Programming Director, but for myself Scott seemed like the most visible face and voice of things during NYFF of 2010, 2011 and 2012.

It seemed to me that it was Scott and NYFF programmer Todd McCarthy who landed The Social Network two years ago (although Jones, I’ve heard, had been nurturing a Fincher relationship beforehand) and in my view they seemed to energize the NYFF out of that cloistered 65th Street dweeb aesthetic — a mode that Pena’s stewardship seemed to nurture in years past.

You can’t deny Scott wasn’t at least highly visible. He introduced all the movies at public and press screenings and did many of the post-screening q & a’s, just as Richard Roud used to do in the old days. He was always at the ready when there was a question. (I never spoke to Pena.) He’s been, to me, the most visible and dynamic guy with FSLC, and now that Jones has the top NYFF job and Koehler has also been hired nobody has said “boo.” Scott’s name hasn’t even been mentioned in the announcement stories about Jones-Koehler.

I gather that Film Society of Lincoln Center executive director Rose Kuo felt she would be safer if she deferred to the established dweebs and in so doing sidestep the arguably risky move of giving the job to the youngish and untested Foundas. For the sake of her own political footing, she did the default thing.

The guy I asked about this basically said “not so fast.” He says things are a little more complicated than the way I understand them. But the well-liked Foundas is cool and in good shape, he said, and is going to keep plugging along in a vital way. And that he’s young and therefore time is on his side, etc. And secondly, he said, Jones is not so dweebish, really, and that he understands the basic drill about showmanship and putting a little rock ‘n’ roll into the NYFF lineup, particularly the opening and closing showcases. And lastly that Jones and Foundas working together is going to be a win-win. Fine.