Say What, Secretariat?

I asked you to amuse us by adding a caption or dialogue to this film still in the comments. The pic is from the upcoming inspirational drama Secretariat starring Diane Lane & John Malkovich and the winner is John T for this say ahhh silliness


For now at least... maybe one day Diane and John will get golden boys and fillings.
*

There Can Be Only Link

Today's Must Read: Big Media Vandalism "Inglourious Snatch" which is not simply about Tarantino's latest film but more expansively about "the structural integrity of the shot" and classical film technique. Thanks to the response post on Scanners for pointing me its way.

Pop Vox good piece on Keats and Brawne as portrayed in Bright Star
Filmbo's Chick Magnet has a great idea regarding film restorations for true movie lovers
In Contention chooses the best Best Picture winners. Let me count the ways I disagree with Kris's list... let's see one, two, three, four, five, six... Worth a look


The Big Picture We're entering the last quarter of the year. That means we'll soon see another Clint Eastwood picture. And that also means he's prepping his next picture. They both star Matt Damon
Guardian the rebirth of Colin Firth with A Single Man
Movies Kick Ass observes and learns from The Towering Inferno (fun!)
The Film Doctor on Diablo Cody's feminism, male-dominated film criticism and Jennifer's Body
My New Plaid Pants congratulations to JA for his contribution to Winq Magazine. Go, JA
IndieWire ah, lists. This one claims that critics and bloggers liked the Coen Bros A Serious Man best at TIFF, what's surprising is that Precious is all the way down at #6. Colin Firth takes the #1 lead performance for A Single Man and Mo'Nique tops the supporting ranks. Could they both win Oscars?

Finally, Film School Rejects conveys the news on the upcoming Highlander remake. I liked the movie when I was a teenager (I had a thing for Christopher Lambert at roughly the same time Diane Lane did though I got it over more quickly than she) but "there can be only one" is so laughable now that the movie has spawned so many sequels and spinoffs. This also reminds me of a great line about reality television from the Monkey See Emmy live blog which went like so: "I love how we've reached a point in the genre's evolution where the best way to get on a reality show is to have been on a reality show." It's not just that genre's evolution. It's entertainment, period.

1984 Jams and Starman

I blame the T-800 model for my sudden 1984 enthusiasm. Don't worry, I think it's a 24 hour bug. It'll pass. See, I was watching The Terminator again yesterday (a few posts coming your way to lead up to Terminator Salvation). So, I started researching 1984 and if these old movie songs have to be stuck in my head today, they should also be stuck in yours.

I believe in sharing.




I often forget how long Diane Lane (Streets of Fire, the second clip) has been rocking the movie screens, don't you?

On the other hand, I do remember Jeff Bridges (Against All Odds, third clip) circa 1984, both bearded and un. He made quite an, um, impression in Starman. That's still one of the weirdest Oscar nominations ever for Best Actor. I love that he was nominated for his alien role but I didn't realize it was at the expense of another performance that I've always been furious missed the shortlist, Steve Martin's comedic genius in All of Me. According to my bible Inside Oscar both Clint Eastwood for Tightrope and Jeff Bridges for Starman were campaigning hard that year. Steve Martin was considered to be way ahead of them in the race for his NYFCC winning comedic role in All of Me. Who knew?

It states

Jeff Bridges journeyed through America, visiting Boston, St. Louis, Denver, San Francisco, and, on three separate trips, New York, in order to remain in the public eye after starring as a sweet-natured extra-terrestrial in Starman. The head of publicity for the film noted, "He's wonderful to look at and friendly to talk to and the press likes him." So did Hollywood. "Within the movie industry," commented New York magazine, "Bridges is thought of as a hard-workding, untemperamental actor."

Despite their self-ballyhooing, Eastwood and Bridges remained long shots, so columnist Marilyn Beck checked in on a sure thing: "Steve Martin, anxiously awaiting tomorrow's announcement of Academy Awards nominees, reports, 'Three months ago I wasn't even thinking I'd be included, but now so many people are talking about it, they've got me all worked up.' "

Poor Steve. It must be especially rough to be the one everyone thinks will make it that gets snubbed... especially if you've never been nominated for your acting (see also: Dennis Quaid, Far From Heaven in 2002). I'm confident that history will continue to smile on Martin's early and midcareer work. If you ask me he should have Robin Williams' Oscar tally rather than his own.

Vanity Fair's Hollywood ~ Episode 10 (2004)

Missed previous episodes? See: 1995 , 1996, 1997, 1998 , 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005

With the annual Vanity Fair "Hollywood" issue about to debut for 2009 -- I'm guessing we see the new cover in less than two weeks (UPDATE: the new cover has been leaked and Vanity Fair has chucked their traditional photo shoot *sniffle* for the millionth magazine cover featuring President Obama), let's briefly return to our Vanity Fair retrospectives. "Send in the Gowns" was the title of 2004's photo shoot and they returned to the first year's game plan of glamour girls. The cover was more crowded though, bringing us an unlucky 13. But who was this cover unlucky for?


Maybe all of them, with the exception of Maggie Gyllenhaal (hurrah) and Hilary Swank (known affectionately around these parts as Beelzebub), who was just 11 months away from her second Oscar. Vanity Fair had gotten less daring in their cover selections as the year's passed (at least in terms of fresh "they'll be famous!" proclamations), but many of these careers had arguably peaked and were headed downhill.

Strange coincidence: 23% of these women are starring in He's Just Not That Into You

Julianne Moore was 43 at the time. She had been on the first "Hollywood" edition in spring '95 (before anyone had seen [Safe]) and got a deserved promotion. In the 9 years between the covers she'd gone from gorgeous up and coming redhead to a famously talented familiar actress as well as an Oscar nom' magnet. Unfortunately, round about this time as her fame and price kept escalating, she stopped wowing. 2004 brought her her only solo film-carrying "hit" in the traditional sense (The Forgotten) but it also brought stinkers like Laws of Attraction and films that no one even knows exist like Marie and Bruce (the only Moore film I haven't managed to get my eyes on). She's been misfiring both critically and box office wise since though she did have small roles in two acclaimed films Children of Men and I'm Not There.

This past year's double Moore dip, Savage Grace and Blindness (FB Body of Work nomination), reminded us that she's a unique and formidable dramatic actress... when she's not trying to be a romantic comedienne or action heroine. Next: She has three films in the can for 2009: the lead in a thriller (uh oh -- not playing to her strengths!) called Shelter, and supporting roles in the dramas The Private Lives of Pippa Lee and fashion god Tom Ford's filmmaking debut A Single Man.

Jennifer Connelly was 33 newly married to fine actor Paul Bettany and had just starred in a hit that everybody thought of as a flop (Hulk) and an Oscar misfire of sorts (House of Sand and Fog) but she was still considered a major get. Only she wouldn't be got. So to speak. She took only co-lead or supporting roles that didn't do much for her in Oscar Bait projects that didn't hook any statues (Little Children, Reservation Road, Blood Diamond) and now she's doing CGI flicks (The Day the Earth Stood Still and Inkheart). Is there a second wind to this career? And if there is, doesn't it need to come very soon? Next: He's Just Not That Into You and then Creation, a Charles Darwin biopic where she and her husband will play the Darwins.

Gwyneth Paltrow, 31, was still arguably suffering from the Oscar Curse -- that messy career period that can follow an Oscar win (which she won for Shakespeare in Love, discussed at length right here). The Royal Tenenbaums and Sylvia had reminded that she had plenty of acting skill but something about the career wasn't taking with Oscar or the public. Did she not care enough? She was a newlywed when this cover hit (to Coldplay's Chris Martin) and already pregnant with their first child, though she wasn't yet showing (she's pictured right, a few months later). Her acting career definitely went on the back burner. She's had 7 films released since this cover debuted and only one true leading role among them (Proof). She's now far more of a celebrity than an actress. The fame part stuck. Next: Two Lovers is inching it's way into view. King Lear and Iron Man 2 are coming for 2010.

Naomi Watts, 35, had recently moved out from under that 'Nicole Kidman's best friend' tag and into her own celebrity. The fresh Oscar nomination for 21 Grams (due in no small part to the Mulholland Dr lead in we're sure) went a long way towards that. She was still dating Heath Ledger, who came with her to the Oscars, but their relationship was about to end. (Thank god she convinced him to take Brokeback Mountain first!). In 2004 she had two heavy dramas and one comedy (the brilliant I Heart Huckabees) on the way. She chased those with the massive King Kong. Ever the multi-tasker since stardom hit she's still busy busy busy despite being a new mom. Next: Mother and Child for actress-loving director Rodrigo García and possibly Need with Nicole Kidman. That would be their first movie together since the charming Australian romance Flirting in 1991.

Salma Hayek, 37, still had residual heat from the success of Frida in late 2002. She had broken up with Ed Norton and was dating Josh Lucas but her movie career was about to collapse. Flops like Ask the Dust, Lonely Hearts and After the Sunset were all on the way. A savvy star she's stayed in the game by seguewaying to television production, bringing the big hit Ugly Betty to ABC and doing guest work (30 Rock). Next: "Madame Truska" in Universal's Cirque Du Freak opening in time for Halloween

Jennifer Aniston had just celebrated her 35th birthday, and her career was coming to the crossroads. She was finishing up her last season on TV's mega hit "Friends" and her marriage to Brad Pitt was also close to wrapping (though we didn't know it at the time). They divorced in late 2005 shortly before her first two post TV stardom movies (Derailed and Rumor Has It) opened. Her feature career has been middling peppered with the occasional high concept hit but she's forever ubiquitous in the media thanks to that decade in our living rooms as "Rachel" and her gossip-drenched marriage and split from Mr. Pitt. Next: the star studded romantic comedy He's Just Not That Into You

Kirsten Dunst, almost 22, was about to dump Jake Gyllenhaal (my theory as to one of the reasons people hate her so), Eternal Sunshine was playing (she does not get enough credit for her wistful funny turn in that film) and Spider-Man 2 was about to open. She was extremely famous / busy. It's been a bumpy ride since with rehab, a misunderstood star vehicle (Marie Antoinette), internet backlash and flops outside of those webslinging blockbusters. Next: All Good Things, the narrative feature debut of documentarian Andrew Jarecki (Capturing the Friedmans) opens this summer. Possibly Spider-Man 4 after that. Don't do it Kiki! Save yourself

Diane Lane, who had been famous since she was only 14 had just turned 39. She had seen her lengthy career hit a new peak with an Oscar nomination for Unfaithful in 2002 which she followed with another minor hit Under the Tuscan Sun. She was about to marry Josh Brolin whose career was still a couple years away from supersizing. More films were lining up for Lane but things aren't as rosy now since none have really matched that Unfaithful triumph and some (Kill Shot and Fierce People) had trouble even getting into theaters. Next: nothing announced.

Lucy Liu, 35, had just given the performance of her career in Kill Bill but then... that tends to happen to people when they star in Quentin Tarantino movies, doesn't it? Liu had always toggled between features and TV and she kept doing so. She's never left wanting for work but no great successes since. Next: nothing announced since her last two televisions series Lipstick Mafia and Dirty Sexy Money were both cancelled.

Hilary Swank in '04. Photographed by Stephen Meisel for Calvin Klein (photo source)

Hilary Swank, nearing 30, was on this cover because she had a frankly amazing agent. I kid, I kid. Her career post 1999 Oscar had been unremarkable. The Core was her last release prior to this cover but 2004 was looking big for her on paper (a respectable TV movie Iron Jawed Angels and a Clint Eastwood picture Million Dollar Baby -discussed here) and looks weren't deceiving. She won another Oscar for the latter and promptly returned to doing what she does: random disposable projects of multiple genres. Next: Two Oscar hopefuls for 2009 and in both of them she plays the title character. There's Amelia, a biopic in which she plays the famous aviatrix and Betty Ann Waters an Erin Brockovich style working mother turned legal eagle drama.

Alison Lohman, 24, was just off of a few high profile gigs (Big Fish, White Oleander and Matchstick Men) but her follow ups were very low profile. Tell me, have you seen: The Big White, Where the Truth Lies, Things We Lost in the Fire or Flicka? Next: Two thrillers one called simply Game leans scifi, the other Drag Me to Hell is auteur Sam Raimi's return to the horror genre. That might be something to look forward to but can it raise Lohman's profile back to early 2004 levels?

Scarlett Johansson, all of 19 years old, had just become the movies hottest young star. Offscreen she was a dynamo in the Young Hollywood scene --vaguely around this time she moved from dating Jared Leto to a fairly lengthy romance with Josh Hartnett. Onscreen she was a fresh sensation. Girl with a Pearl Earring and Lost in Translation had both opened to enviable acclaim for the young starlet and an awards run, too (though Oscar passed). When this cover was shot she was a critics darling, a paparazzi treasure and very much in demand by both auteurs and corporations (her endorsement side career might be as profitable as her film career by now). She's been super busy these past 4 years with numerous films, marrying Ryan Reynolds and that fledgling recording career. But is it quantity over quality. A lot of people are beginning to think so. Next: He's Just Not That Into You

Maggie Gyllenhaal, 27 at the time, had become ubiquitous around 2002 appearing in critical hits like Adaptation and Secretary. She and Jake her brother ascended in very close succession. The next year or so was less eventful cinematically for Maggie but two years after this cover hit she was all over the screens again delivering you-can't-look-away performances in films ranging from World Trade Center (blech) to Stranger Than Fiction to Sherrybaby and off screen she was having her first child with Peter Sarsgaard. Oscar still hasn't taken a liking to Maggie but few would argue that she isn't one of the most impressive actresses of her generation. Next: Crazy Heart a drama with Colin Farrel and Away We Go a comedy for director Sam Mendes.

PLEASE NOTE: If you'd like to read more about any of these stars, click the names in the labels section below.

*
median age: 32. Julianne Moore was the mamma (isn't she always?) and ScarJo the baby.
noticeably absent: Who else was topical around 2003/2004? Let's see... Halle Berry was about to screw up her career with Catwoman, Angelina Jolie (who has never been on one of these "Hollywood" covers) had a bunch of movies about to come out, Emmy Rossum was just off of Mystic River and about to co-star in two epics, Kate Beckinsale had had a minor hit with Underworld and was chasing it with another supernatural flick before co-starring in Martin Scorsese's The Aviator.
collective Oscar noms before this cover: 10 nominations (40% of those for Julianne) and 3 winners (her front cover co-stars Connelly & Paltrow and then Swank in the backfold)
collective Oscar noms after this cover: only one but she won (Hilary Swank)
fame levels in 2009, according to famousr, from most to least: Jennifer Aniston, Gwyneth Paltrow, Hilary Swank, Kirsten Dunst, Scarlett Johansson, Lucy Liu, Salma Hayek, Julianne Moore, Naomi Watts, Jennifer Connelly, Diane Lane, Maggie Gyllenhaal and Alison Lohman
previous episodes of 'VFH': 1995 ,1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005.
*

Red Carpet Lineup (Awards Show Edition)

It's that time of year. You're probably back at the gym trying to lose the holiday weight gain but the movie stars just get their cardio on red carpets for the next six weeks. So herewith, some gowns from the BFCA show and the People's Choice --and yes it's the last time I'll be mentioning "People's Choice". [sigh] People... they're always making the wrong ones!

images by way of @ JAMD

Anne Hathaway, who is a smart smart girl, was the princess of the ball in white -- she even referenced her Princess Diaries days in her speech. Don't think she doesn't know how much Oscar loves the princesses. Queen Latifah is always fun and Kate Hudson is always (no comment) but I include them to show that the color palette of the People's Choice Awards is very loud as if these mythical united People continually need to see bright colors to stay interested. Ooh, look...Shiny! Meanwhile, the critics and media types at the BFCA are treated to a solemn area of creams, whites, greys and blacks. Coincidence? I think not. Consider Dakota Fanning's color coding...


But back to the line-up.

Diane Lane is hot. I normally think it's silly how people imagine that actors can't handle seeing their husbands and wives kiss other people onscreen. It's such a "well, duh" part of their job who could be offended / jealous over it? It's like marrying a vampire and complaining about the bloodlust. But with Diane Lane and Josh Brolin, I always find myself wondering. When your spouse is married to someone else in the public consciousness (Diane has been romantically entangled with Richard Gere three times onscreen and she presents him with awards and they're always kissy kissy) might that be a little weird?

<-- Bassett in 1995, during her short but great movie peak.

Another weird thing: Angela Bassett's career. I know she's 50 and only actresses named Meryl Streep are allowed regular leading movie roles past that age. But should she really have to settle for running on ER's exhaust fumes? It makes me so crazy. Finally... Angelina Jolie is a goddess. And knows it. Hey, wait a second, why is Anne Hathaway here twice? Answer: She was smart enough to wear a two sided dress. Therefore you must see her from several angles to fully appreciate. Several angles means more air time and more magazine photos. Savvy girl, that one.

Thoughts I Had While Watching Jumper

Hayden Christensen wishing he were Keanu Reeves

1 Why am I watching this?

2 The first minute of Jumper is dizzying... and not because the camera spins around Hayden Christensen as protagonist "David Rice". It's because the movie starts with the Fox logo which always arrives with that endearing pompous trumpeting. Blow your own horn, baby. I love that moment because it reminds me of Moulin Rouge! My mood plummets immediately since right after that I see and hear Hayden Christensen. Oh yes, there's voiceover and he's already giving a bad performance just talking into a mic. How does one do that? And why is their voiceover? There's voiceover because we're all too stupid to understand totally simple things we are seeing with our own two eyes. Haven't you all learned by now? Film is not a visual medium. It's an aural medium accompanied by cute illustrations. [/sarcasm]

"Hayden Explains It All!" Well, until the film gets complicated and then Jamie Bell takes over exposition duties. He's better with the words.

<--- 3 Can the whole movie star this kid who is playing the younger Hayden instead of Hayden Sr? Normally I wouldn't ask that given the other kid who played the Hayden Jr. I don't know how you can be a worse actor than Hayden but that one accomplished it. er... congrats?

4 I always kind of geek out when Michigan gets mentioned in a movie. Turns out David and his love interest Millie (Rachel Bilson) grew up together in Ann Arbor. The first time our hero "jumps" (i.e. teleports) he ends up in the Ann Arbor Public Library. For those of you unfamiliar with Michigan, Ann Arbor is kind of like an oasis of sanity in otherwise nutsy midwestern conservative land.

Michigan has lots of trees. The abundance of foliage has nothing to do with the movie but I wanted to share. Michigan is beautiful but the movies never show you that.


5 Hayden takes over the role of "David" 14 minutes into the movie. It was too much to hope that he wouldn't ever show given that he's the "star" (the term being applied loosely) Thankfully the young over-employed actor is playing an asshole so it's one of his most believable turns. David sees people trapped in floods on TV and doesn't teleport in to help them, though he literally can't stop teleporting to meet his every other self-serving whim. Basically he's a lazy prick. He teleports all over his own apartment rather than move a muscle. He even jump/shifts position on the couch rather than get up to fetch the remote. In other words, if this were a realistic movie he'd be looking a lot more like Jonah Hill @ this point in his life rather than Hayden. But it's the movies. We forgive erring on the side of beauty.

I'm hard on Hayden, I realize. There's always Shattered Glass (2003). But his position in the industry warrants a tough stance. Actors and actresses who take up movie space that's disproportionate to their actual talents are a problem for everyone ...most notably audiences and better screen actors. Basically he's OK... but it's the same thing as TV stars who can vaguely carry tunes getting leads in Broadway musicals. It ain't right. You shouldn't be a headliner unless you're great. You just shouldn't.

Sadly, Hollywood is not a meritocracy.

<--- 6 Movie parentage. David's dad is Henry the Serial Killer? Yikes. I'd teleport away, too. Run little David, run! The mother who abandoned him @ 5 years of age is the ever lovely Mrs. Josh Brolin, Diane Lane who is slumming here --and how! -- she's barely even trying in her tiny but pivotal role. One of David's fondest memories is visiting New York with her. So off to New York City young David goes. Good choice. David is a jerk but he isn't stupid. He robs banks by teleporting inside them and lives the good life never wanting for anything.

7 Something odd: The longer I watch the movie the more I'm totally confused by its quality level. There are some decent shots, good compositions, lighting, etcetera. Technical stuff seems strong and then... doesn't. It's very uneven. Doug Liman is the director. His credits include Go, The Bourne Identity, Swingers, Mr & Mrs. Smith ...pretty good movies but this one is all over the place. The concept is fun, the storytelling a mess. For example at one point, after a jarring edit that should be more of a "meanwhile" style transition, we're in the conclusion of some battle in the jungle. A Jumper (David isn't the only one) is roped to a tree, while being steadily electrocuted. It prevents teleportation. Samuel L Jackson shows up as a 'Palladin' to mutter some religious wackiness "Only god should have this power!" and stabs the unfortunate kid. The scene is very random. It sets up the central violent conflict (Palladins vs. Jumpers) of the franchise --excuse me, plot. But it does so about as clumsily as it could.


8 JAMIE BELL! A real actor. He's not top billed. But again... Hollywood ≠ meritocracy. So much fire, conviction and watchability. He's a kleig light surrounded by 40 watt bulbs. Bell is an actor we'll be seeing until he's ancient and gray. You can always tell. The bland ones can't really keep it up once they can no longer coast on youth and Hollywood's love of same. Movie careers for Hayden and Rachel will not last through wrinkles, loss of skin elasticity and general thickening. Bell's character "Griffin" keeps popping into frame watching David. It takes him quite a long while to get involved in the plot, damnit. He's another Jumper but he's crafty. He's practicing guerilla warfare to take out the Palladins rather than being taken out himself. Griffin has learned to use his powers in clever violent ways and the movie does make some fun use of his jumping... though the teleporting attack of Nightcrawler way back in X2 was handled with more skillful choreography, camerawork and editing.

9. I think the problem is that teleporting in Jumper happens too quickly and too often. You've barely registered where the characters are and they're gone. For an action sequence to be exciting, for it to work up any emotional armchair gripping, you have to be able to follow along. When David and Griffin's uneasy Jumper camaraderie turns to Jumper vs. Jumper infighting, it's not exciting but funny: they look like staccato jumping beans bouncing around various parts of the screen. Where will they pop up next? But at least their choice of weapons was exciting. I'll give the movie that.

<--- 10 Jackson looks silly and I'm so over him as an actor. Exactly when did he jump the shark to become a self-parody? He was so terrific in Pulp Fiction but he hopped the big fish long ago, no? sigh. His best scene: beating the crap out of Hayden Christensen. That was
___________________________... satisfying.

11 For what it's worth Rachel and Hayden aren't terrible in this, just dull. A lot of fanboys (the presumed target audience for action flicks with superpowered elements) are stereotyped as disdaining romantic subplots. Maybe I give people too much credit but I think moviegoers hate romance in action movies because it usually plays like a marketing requirement or a cheap emotional shortcut rather than an organic element. It's squeegeed in there for demographic concerns. Romantic screen chemistry is tricky. If actors have it a screen romance is among the most electric things that can be captured on film. But it's elusive and rare. Hayden and Rachel hit their beats well enough (their painful parting at an airport is well conveyed --she no longer trusts him. He hasn't come clean) but ... zzzzz.

12 I'm entertaining myself by noticing how often Rachel gets her hair touched up in between shots. Consider...


Those two shots are 30 seconds apart and there's no change of narrative scene. Either "Millie" has superpowers involving superspeed hairstyling or this sequence took too long to film. Side note: Rachel Bilson has huge eyes. That helps in the movies. Just ask Anne Hathaway.

13 In concept I give this movie a B. I wonder if the source material is any good. Anyone read it? In execution it's a D. Sloppily performed, uneven, nonsensical... too enamored of its franchise potential to think about how it's telling the story. Even the superpowers are uneven. If you're dealing with the "super" you need to have some rules that you stick with. For example: Kryptonite always f***s Superman up. Go! This movie doesn't seem to know what the limits of the Jumpers are... or what may or may not hurt them. If there's nothing at stake, how can we worry about their safety. And if they're in danger, we should worry. Not that anyone would ever worry about Hayden Christensen.

14 Jumper 2 is supposedly teleporting to a movie theater near you in 2011. They could take it to a higher level instantly by switching it up. Jamie Bell is now the lead. Go!
*