Box Office Blather: Princess Dividends and Per Screen Averages

The box office for New Year's weekend was little changed from Christmas weekend when Jeff Bridges double dipped and I had a creepy 90s flashback (that whole post still applies) so instead of sharing their grosses in that banal way you can get anywhere, let's share their gross minus their budget. This is an inexact science for sure. It doesn't include the $$$ of worldwide grosses but it also doesn't include the $$$ of advertising costs so we like it as a vague snapshot of how the movies are doing.

Top Ten Box Office
key: red (budgets way too big) black (passed their budget) green (heading towards significant profits.)

1. Little Fockers + $2 million (second week)
2. True Grit + $48 million (second week)
3. Tron Legacy -$39 million (third week)
4. Yogi Bear - $15 million (third week)
5. Chronicles of Narnia -$69 million (fourth week)
6. The Fighter + $21 million (fourth week)
7. Tangled - $93 million (sixth week - not as disastrous as it looks since Disney is its own franchise. People really like this gargantuanly expensive movie so it might restore some faith in the faltering "brand" and help the next movie. Plus it adds another "princess" to their merchandise line. Ka-ching!)
8. Gulliver's Travels -$85 million (second week)
9. Black Swan + $34 million (fifth week)
10. The King's Speech + $7 million (sixth week)

This is far less depressing than just regular ol' box office reporting right? The good movies aren't as expensive to make and they're making significant money. [Tangent: Let True Grit (review) and Black Swan (plentiful posts) be a lesson to filmmakers and studios: these movies look sensational and feature movie stars. How on earth is your movie so much more expensive?]

One more list. How about the best per-screen averages? Naturally this favors movies in very few theaters that have withheld themselves for several months of buzz whilst waiting for Golden Globe and Oscar fever to kick in. From my throne armchair that looks like distributors just throwing money away while people talk about product they can't spend money on for 3 to 12 months. This only increases the likelihood of piracy and/or likelihood that people might be sick of you in the abstract when you're finally available for tangible purchase. Yes, I live in NYC and seeing movies is easy but I remember quite well what a trial it was before I moved here. I'm still, I'm still Jenny from the block.

That list goes like so...

Top Per Screen Average

1. Blue Valentine (4 theaters) $48,000+ (debut)
2. Country Strong (2 theaters) $20,000+ (2nd week)
3. Another Year (6 theaters)  $18,000+ (debut)
4. Somewhere (8 theaters) $17,000+ (2nd week)
5. The Illusionist (3 theaters) $15,000+ (2nd week)
6. The King's Speech (700 theaters) $11,000+ (6th week)

They must be partying at the Weinstein Co. right now (#1 and #6)

I can't fathom why Country Strong, built to appeal to an enormous market of people who love country music, didn't just open wide? If the film isn't very good -- which they keep saying -- why not make all your money up front before word of mouth doesn't kick in? Naturally this chart is very good news for The King's Speech since it's already gone wide and it's still filling plentiful seats wherever it plays. But here's the sad news: It's rough going out there for Rabbit Hole which has only a $4,000+ average on 34 screens in its 3rd week. Now that's a better number than most of the top ten movies but it's not generally enough to get distributors excited about spending more money to release you winder. Sniffle. Rabbit Hole is not half as depressing as Blue Valentine so if the "depression" factor is keeping people away, they're being silly. It's a really good movie. Why can't Nicole catch a break? Sigh.

What did you spend your money on over New Year's? (I mean, besides booze)
*

Make Room For Pearce

Michael C. here from Serious Film to file a complaint.

If I were to name the biggest problem currently facing the nation today that problem would be category fraud. Okay, maybe not, but it still irks the hell out of me. Not because, like some political press release, this Oscar-grubbing is treated completely legit despite everyone knowing it's total bull. That's no biggie. No, what bugs me is the way this screws over the guys and girls this category is there to honor in the first place: the supporting players who show up for two or three scenes and absolutely kill it. Not only are the leads hogging the precious few slots, but they're overshadowing the real supporting players from their own films. Look no further than this year's The King's Speech to see this problem in action.

If it was called The King's Therapist would this even be an issue?

By pushing Rush as supporting they're sidelining the real standout supporting turn in the film, Guy Pearce as King Edward. With just a few well-chosen strokes Pearce deftly suggests his rebellious, feckless character. The audience's immediate reaction is, "Jesus, don't put that guy on the throne." The performance supports the movie perfectly, setting the stage for the main conflict. Yet Pearce can't get any oxygen because Rush is sucking it all up. What's the point of having a supporting category if major screen time is practically a requirement? The same thing happened when Jamie Foxx was laughably crammed into the supporting category for Collateral despite being in literally every scene in the movie. Barry Shabaka Henley's unforgettable seven minutes as the jazz club owner with regrets and secrets never had a chance.

Spot the supporting actor. Hint: It's not the guy in 99% of the film.

I don't see how anyone could classify Geoffrey Rush as supporting and keep a straight face since the whole movie is a two-hander between him and Firth. Listen closely, Academy: Just because one character is royalty and the other is a commoner doesn't mean the actor playing the king is somehow more important. I feel like this should be a simple concept to grasp.

This Link Roundup Will Soon Be Adapted Into a Stage Musical

Towleroad Far From Heaven being adapted into a stage musical. I've been burned on this sort of thing too many times but at least it's by the composer of Grey Gardens and that had a few lovely tunes.

 

And would make a good stage-to-movie candidate actually...

NYT the latest injury from the set of the Spider Man musical on Broadway. Wednesday matinee cancelled. I am 100% certain that someone will one day write a bestseller about the behind-the-scenes of this disaster prone production
Cinema Blend Peter Weir not interested in a sequel to Master & Commander. Awww. Maybe they should just adapt it for a stage musical instead. Kidding.

photo src

Movie|Line has a jolly interview with Mike Leigh on the eve of the release of Another Year. I love this bit on why he'd never make a superhero film (no, really. the question was posed to him in a way that's not as crass as it sounds)

I use film to make a personal kind of film in a very specific, particular way. And there is no more reason for me to do what I think you're suggesting than there would for me to give up being a film director an become the pilot of a jumbo jet flying across the Atlantic. Or a brain surgeon or, indeed, a coal miner.

I love thinking of Mike Leigh as coal miner. Tee hee. Come to think of it. He would make a GREAT director for a coal mining movie or a... wait a minute. I have it. Topsy-Turvy demonstrated that Leigh can sell a musical number. So... Mike Leigh, directing the acclaimed musical Floyd Collins about that explorer trapped in a cave!

Floyd Collins is so pretty. Let's listen to a couple of its songs.

Her Awesomeness Audra McDonald & Hair's Will Swenson doing
"Through the Mountains" from Floyd Collins. 

Matt Doyle (Gossip Girl) doing "How Glory Goes" from Floyd Collins.
This song is perfection but it must be hard to sing because there are a lot
of bad versions on YouTube. This version gets better as it goes.

My brain does like to wander. Obviously needed a break from thinking / writing about Oscar Oscar Oscar Oscar Oscar...

Moving On...
Pop Eater have you heard this crazy story about 80s star Marilu Henner? Seems she has something called "superior autobiographical memory" - fascinating story really and totally unrelated: I've always thought Marilu was a hilarious celebrity.
Go Fug Yourself Fug or Fab Style: Mila Kunis
In Contention Jafar Panahi banned from making films. So terrible. As Guy says, this puts the silly annual Oscar bitching into perspective.
AV Club Will Smith and Mark Wahlberg offered $1 million to box each other for charity cuz they both starred in boxing picture, see? This story cracks me up on so many levels. Like, no movie stars would risk their billion dollar faces for charity. The only risk movie stars take with their moneymakers is plastic surgery.

Tired of critics awards yet? You can say so if you are. The London Critics Circle have offered up nominations. Sadly, The King's Speech -- the only British film that doesn't need any Oscar boost -- is the only one they're willing to back for crossover attention; it shows up on both their "Film of the Year and "British Film of the Year" lists and doubles up on Helena Bonham-Carter and Colin Firth in two acting categories, too. (sigh) Whew... I thought Colin Firth was in danger of losing his Oscar momentum there for a second. Thank god, they threw their weight behind him.

Kathleen Turner Checks Out "The King's Speech"

Look it's Kathleen Turner attending a screening of The King's Speech. (The woman to her right is Jean Doumanian who produced many of Woody Allen's 90s pictures)

Photo Src

Kathleen has one of the most famous speaking voices in the entirety of cinematic history. How could she possibly relate to the king's predicament?

I kid. Perhaps she loved it. How much would you love to see Ms. Turner's Oscar ballot?

I liked The King's Speech (though the "best of year" kudos puzzle) but if there were ever a biopic called The Kathleen's Speech which was all about Ms. Turner's husky pipes and how she developed her amazing line deliveries, I would totally campaign for it to win every award.

SAG Injustice: When a Nomination is Still a Snub

In the afterglow of the SAG nominations, when publicists, stars and pundits are all aglow with congratulatory messaging of every sort and critics are bemoaning the fate of talented but snubbed performances, one annual dismaying group of snubs always slips through the cracks. I'm talking about the people who contributed to the movies nominated as Best Ensemble but weren't actually included when the nomination was awarded.  The nominated ensemble casts of The Fighter, The King's Speech, Black Swan, The Social Network and The Kids Are All Right do not, in all cases, fully represent the acting achievements within the film.

The following actors were not nominated in "ensemble"

Black Swan ~ This nomination includes all those demented raven-haired beauties: Natalie Portman, Barbara Hershey, Mila Kunis, Winona Ryder and the man fucking with their pretty heads: Vincent Cassell. Noticeably absent: Benjamin Millepied, the principle male dancer should have also been listed. While it's true he doesn't have a lot of "acting" to do, he gets some in, and actors sometimes get nominated for a lot less; he is one of the chief contributors to the film being its choreographer as well.

The Fighter ~ This nomination includes only the principle Oscar seeking cast: Wahlberg, Bale, Adams and Leo and one more for good measure. That's Jack McGee who plays Melissa Leo's husband so beautifully. Noticeably absent: cameo players like Sugar Ray Leonard (remember that Gwen Stefani got nominated for dressing up like Jean Harlow in The Aviator), the entire gaggle of big haired comic relief sisters, Mickey O'Keefe, the cop/trainer who Bale loves to mock (name?) and everyone else who contributed to the film's invaluable local color and weird but hugely enjoyable tragicomic bent.

The Kids Are All Right ~This nomination includes only the immediate family: Moms Bening & Moore and kids Mia Wasikowska & Josh Hutcherson and "Interloper" Mark Ruffalo. Noticeably absent: Yaya daCosta, who so deliciously handles her role of Ruffalo's fuckbuddy and employee. Seriously now, she delivers fantastic line readings in this movie and underlines some of the movie's more subtle points about Ruffalo's character as well as contributing to its randy high spirits. I consider it an egregious omission. Also absent are Mia & Josh's friends and the gardener who Julianne fires who each get more than one scene.

The King's Speech ~ This nomination includes the three principles plus Anthony Andrews, Jennifer Ehle, Michael Gambon, Derek Jacobi, Guy Pearce and Timothy Spall. It's arguably the most inclusive of all the nominated cast lists but it still manages to diss one key player. Noticeably absent: Eve Best (from Nurse Jackie) who plays the controversial and plot-relevant Wallis Simpson.The royals didn't want her around and treated her like shit. So... did the Weinstein Co decide to follow suit and do the same? 

The Social Network ~ The Facebook movie has the most bizarre and confusing case of the internal snubbings. Obviously the triumvirate of Eisenberg, Garfield and Timberlake are accounted for as are the Winklevi (both played by Armie Hammer) and their business partner (Max Minghella). But what's most curious is that the body actor Josh Pence who helped to play the Winklevi but whose face does not appear in the film was nominated but the following six actors were not. Noticeably absent: Rooney Mara's soulful portrayal of Erica kicks off the entire successful dynamic of the film's rapid-fire dialogue which in turn reveals, comments on and delights in every badly managed personal relationship within the film. The film is smart enough to return to Mara on three key occasions but she was not nominated. All of the lawyers, officials and interns are also absent. You can't include everyone of course but a few people's contributions are very noticeable including Douglas Urbanski's audience-beloved cameo as Larry Summers, John Getz and Rashida Jones as Zuckerberg's council, Denise Grayson as Eduardo's lawyer (great write up of her work at Nick's Flick Picks) and Brenda Song as Eduardo's terrifying girlfriend?

Can someone please explain how these people are not an intrinsic part of the acting network within The Social Network? 

From my understanding, the nominating committee does not pick and choose which members of a cast receive the official title of SAG nominee, they merely vote on the film titles. The studios themselves also sometimes submit For Your Consideration cast lists that already do the omissions (The Fighter's FYC screener, f.e., lists only the five names). Or perhaps the problem is the SAG rules which go like so

"The Cast of a Motion Picture includes all performers whose names appear in the cast credits of the final release print. Motion Picture casts shall be represented by those actors billed on separate cards in the main titles, wherever those titles appear. In cases of special, unusual or non-billing or credit, eligibility shall be at the sole discretion of the Screen Actors Guild Awards Committee. Members of the cast who are not single billed but are credited in the cast crawl of the motion picture announced as the recipient of the Outstanding Performance by the Cast of a Theatrical Motion Picture shall each receive a certificate."

So by this rule, no matter how great you are in a movie, no matter how large your role, if your agent can't get you single billing, you can't be nominated.
Every year there are glaring examples of actors adding to the texture, tone and overall success of their movie, that are kicked to the curb when it comes time to say "Great Ensemble!"  We think, in a prize meant to honor the whole being greater than the individual parts, that this is a terrible and avoidable injustice. So here's to those snubbed actors inexplicably dropped from the honor bestowed to their co-workers! We salute you one and all.
*

You Sweet Link.

I Need My Fix Cameron Crowe and Nancy Wilson (of Heart fame) are divorcing. God, it feels like forever since Crowe made a movie, right? Maybe I've just forgotten something.
Mr Hipp imagines Inception's dream team. So cute! I love the take on Joseph Gordon-Levitt.
Boy Culture Isabella Rossellini finally addresses Madonna's "Sex" 18 years after the fact. To your left is one of my favorite photos from the book.
THR a three way discussion on Best Actress and theories as to why Annette Bening isn't really campaigning.
The Awl Ed Koch reviews Black Swan. Whaaaa...?
If Charlie Parker... awww. Natalie Wood wishes you happy holidays.
Time Magazine does a top ten of everything but that link goes to the movies, led by Toy Story 3. Rather annoyingly each entry gets its own page. They want to get 500 page views from you. Boo.
Time Magazine also does a top ten performances, led by Noomi Rapace. But...  Jacki Weaver & Tilda Swinton make the list. So you may applaud.
ABBA try this quiz if you love ABBA. it's so hard. I already forgot my score but I wasn't proud of it.
Towleroad a few words on this weekend's new releases. And a few more links.

Finally, the Detroit Film Critics have announced their nominees. I normally don't link to critics awards before they announce winners (so self indulgent) but it is Detroit and I like to say yes to the home state... especially since I never get back there anymore.

 Unfortunately they're one of those silly silly silly groups (like the upcoming SAG no doubt *sigh*) which feel the need to nominate The King's Speech's entire cast in their individual categories and then again for Best Ensemble. Seriously Detroit? Calm down. In such a stellar year for ensemble casts there really is no excuse for the ensemble nominations and prizes this film is going to ring up from now until the SAG Awards. No one on god's green earth will ever convince me that each of the three principals in The King's Speech needs two nominations for their trouble. Or that Guy Pearce and Eve Best are so sensational as King Edward and Wallis Simpson that they had to be recognized in this way since they won't get to reprise the roles in Madonna's 2011 feature W.E. (which is at least partially about those characters who will be played by James D'Arcy and Andrea Riseborough).

"Ensemble" categories make me crazy. Movies consisting of repeated scenes where two people talk to each is not "ensemble work." Detroit's other nominees in this category (The Kids Are All Right, The Fighter, Scott Pilgrim vs. The World and Winter's Bone) demonstrate that at least some of the Motor City's film journalists are sound of mind.

The King's Weakness

Michael C here from Serious Film.

That low hissing you may have heard coming from the Hollywood area over the last week is the sound of the air leaking out of Tom Hooper's The King’s Speech and its status as Oscar frontrunner. That’s the trouble with leading the pack. Any indication you’re not steamrolling the competition is instantly seized upon as proof that you are nothing but a lot of well-orchestrated studio hype, and before you know it voters are mentally test driving the image of David Fincher holding an Oscar to see how it feels.

So what is tripping up the King? It’s not simply that its current chief rival, The Social Network, has staked out an early dominance in the critical awards circuit. Being the critics darling can be helpful, as it surely was for The Hurt Locker, but just as often it's a sign that a film will end up an Oscar bridesmaid. Films like Sideways or Lost in Translation garnered critics prizes by the bucketful and they couldn’t so much as ding the Oscar favorites for their respective years.

My hunch is that more people are seeing the film and finding that it's not clearing some basic hurdle. To be perceived as a viable Best Picture winner a film has to connect to some grand emotional current, to make it about more than the nuts and bolts of the story. It’s not enough to be an amusing story well told, which is where it appears The King’s Speech is landing, despite all its prestigious trappings.

Sure, Speech has big ideas around the periphery, the ones about Colin Firth finding great recesses of strength at the crossroads of history, and so on. But at heart it really is just the story of poor Bertie overcoming his bizarre childhood to conquer his stutter, and a stammer vanquished does not a Best Picture Oscar make. The fact the Churchill is wheeled on and off a few times for the occasional portentous line doesn’t automatically lend the story significance. It’s an anecdote.

In other years that might be enough, but Hooper's film is up against an assortment of movies that do reach that deeper plane. 127 Hours, quibbles with the film aside, made you ask how much you would be willing to sacrifice for life. That rock was every obstacle, every fear Aaron Ralston ever faced. The Social Network, contrary to scuttlebutt about how cold it is, really lands those themes about loyalty and friendship in a way that stays with the viewer. David O. Russel’s upcoming The Fighter packs an enormous emotional wallop with many of the same ideas King’s Speech was circling: casting off the limitations instilled by your family and taking control of your own destiny. 

Maybe I’m wrong and Speech can coast to victory on being pleasant and well-crafted, but Hooper’s film certainly has its work cut out for it holding off the threat of more resonant films.
*

The King's Acceptance Speeches Begin

King and Queen of the BIFAs

The British Independent Film Awards forced the reluctant king to the mic again when they gave Colin Firth the Best Actor prize for his stammering royal in The King's Speech. The BIFAs also gave the movie 4 additional prizes: Helena Bonham-Carter and Geoffrey Rush took their first wins of the season and the film won screenplay and the BIFA equivalent of Best Picture "Best British Independent Film."

The smear campaign or truth-telling depending on how you view these things has also begun but the Oscar buzz isn't letting up any time soon.

After the jump the complete BIFA winners list with commentary.



British Independent Film The King’s Speech
Director Gareth Edwards, Monsters
Debut Director Clio Barnard,The Arbor
Screenplay David Seidler, The King’s Speech
Actress Carey Mulligan,  Never Let Me Go
Actor Colin Firth, The King’s Speech
Supporting Actress Helena Bonham Carter, The King’s Speech
Supporting Actor Geoffrey Rush, The King’s Speech
Promising Newcomer Joanne Froggatt, In Our Name
Achievement in Production Monsters
Raindance Award Son of Babylon
Tech Achievement Visual Effects, Monsters
Documentary Enemies of the People
British Short Baby
Foreign Film A Prophet

Carey & Rosamund @ the BIFAs

Beyond the big dog (King's) the indie genre flick Monsters did quite well for itself. I have the screener right here. Maybe I should watch.

As for Carey Mulligan winning Best Actress for Never Let Me Go, Monty would not approve. And if you ask me Andrew Garfield was "best in show". And I don't understand Helena's win at all. I hope everyone understands that I am in HBC's corner -- I think she's been grossly underrewarded for years and ought to have 3 Oscar noms and an actual statue on her mantle -- but I just don't see it for this performance. There's nothing to it beyond the very typical awards bait of "supportive spouse." If she's nominated it'll be the easiest get outside of Bill Murray's for Get Low; two people doing things they can do with their eyes closed that aren't remotely challenging or interesting.

I have to say that I'm surprised as anyone (maybe moreso) that Geoffrey Rush is the true champ within The King's Speech. How he managed to curtail his usual hamminess into something nearly subtle when it's actually one of his hammiest and most eccentric characters is a minor miracle. But then I'm far more allergic to him than most so perhaps my perception is skewed. Alas, despite my enthusiasm for his turn here comes yet another awards season where the gigantic roles will win the supporting prizes. Poor character actors everywhere can never catch a break.

Moving on. Have any of you seen Monsters? Are you happy that The King's Speech is winning prizes?

7 Word Reviews: Black Swan, Rabbit Hole, The King's Speech

What I've been up to: Wrote up a piece for Tribeca Film on the avalanche of screeners and the insanity of the holiday season inbetween rush of screenings. Also was buried in avalanche of screeners and rushed 'tween screenings whilst fretting about the holiday. Symmetry! Posting will be light for the rest of the week (it can't be helped: holidays, off-blog duties, etcetera) but December will be robust with excitement.

Until time frees up itty-bitty teeny-weeny reviews.

Black Swan
In which a ballerina loses her shit when she wins the lead role in Swan Lake.
7WR: Thrillingly fuses camp (?) horror and highbrow metaphor. A-

The King's Speech
A new king sees a speech therapist as WW II approaches.
7WR: Fussy but somewhat endearing. Unfortunately few surprises. B


Kawasaki's Rose
Czech Republic Oscar submission about a decorated psychiatrist who may or may not have been an informant during the Communist region.
7WR: Heavy novelistic depth buffered by nimble storytelling. A-/B+

Rabbit Hole
A married couple struggles as they approach the anniversary of their child's tragic death.
7WR: Refreshingly unhistrionic grief; Kidman superbly three-dimensional. A-/B+
*

Oscar Bait Fading?

Michael C here from Serious Film enjoying one more post before I hand the reins back to Nathaniel. It's been a blast guest-blogging but if you're like me you want Nat back pronto. If for no other reason than I've nothing of interest to say about Burlesque, and I'm betting he's going to have some sharp commentary on the subject.

It has been noted in just about every piece on this year's Oscar race that The King's Speech is as Oscar-friendly a film as has ever hit the holiday movie season. If The Weinstein Company had a secret laboratory under the studio filled with film scientists working round the clock to produce the most irresistible Oscar bait known to man, their finished product would look a lot like The King's Speech. World War II, true story, disabilities, royalty, pretty period detail, just the right touch of comedy and romance, and Geoffrey Rush making a series of funny faces. I half-expected the trailer to end with Colin Firth running out to the middle of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool to hug Robin Wright.

Conventional wisdom is that Tom Hooper's film should coast to Oscar glory with relative ease, but is The King's Speech out of step with the times? Looking back over the last decade of Best Picture winners one sees a shift in what we normally associate with an Oscar film. Is there a chance voters will resist it sheerly for being such a painfully obvious choice?  Especially when it appears voters have become increasingly daring in their voting over the last few years.

Of course the last decade started out perfectly par for the course with winners Gladiator, A Beautiful Mind, and Chicago. After that the template started to stretch in subtle ways. Lord of the Rings, Million Dollar Baby, and Crash might look traditional on the surface - epic, sports film, social message movie - but they each broadened the concept of what a Best Picture looks like. Lord of the Rings was the first fantasy winner. Baby may be a prestige drama by a name director but it's also a dark and unsparing downer. Crash was a low budget surprise winner employing a no lead, multi-character style that hasn't produced a winner since Grand Hotel.  

So far so interesting, but hardly conclusive. The Oscars have a tradition of throwing in the occasional curveball - The Silence of the Lambs or Midnight Cowboy. But in the last four years the winners have thoroughly shattered the idea of what can take the top prize. Unorthodox choices have been the rule, not the exception. The Departed is a profane, violent crime flick that would likely have lost to The Queen in the 80's. The Hurt Locker is a ultra-low grossing war thriller without uplift or an easy message. Slumdog Millionaire seems like the usual crowd-pleaser, but it's also a borderline foreign film, completely lacking in stars, that clobbered four traditionally award-friendly films. As for No Country For Old Men, do I need me to point out what a stark, almost nihilistic, choice this is? Would voters fifteen years earlier have had the stomach for it or would they have fled to the more familiar vibes of Atonement (which is itself a more subversive movie than it's surface would suggest)?

It gets increasingly difficult to deny a major shift in taste has occurred. Pundits can no longer declare with confidence what type of movie isn't an "Oscar film." Would last year's showdown between Avatar and Hurt Locker been thinkable twenty years ago? Would Precious and Inglorious Basterds been conceivable as nominees? 

So what is responsible for this trend away from comfortable run-of-the-mill winners? A large part of it is undoubtedly because studios have basically removed themselves from the Oscar game so they can adapt every comic book to ever give a kid ink-smudged fingers. Academy members can't vote for wide appeal Oscar-type films if they aren't being made. 

But more to the point is the fact that somewhere in the last ten years the Academy members who cut their teeth watching the golden age of 70's filmmaking started to outnumber the traditional fuddy-duddies we usually think of as Oscar voters. Major studios may not be turning out the daring wide-release films like they did when movies like Five Easy Pieces were getting nominated, but this more adventurous breed of Oscar voters is still looking for them. Today's voters have shown they will sooner nominate a slate of challenging films before they except the watered-down likes of Dreamgirls or American Gangster even if they might be more popular with Oscar viewers. 

Of course, even if a shift has occurred daring voters could still go for The King's Speech simply because it is a fine piece of filmmaking. Let's not forget that Oscar bait and quality often coincide (see: Quiz Show, Milk and many more). Still current trends favor a Social Network or - gasp - Inception grabbing the top prize. It could happen. Even if a good chunk of the Academy digs in their heels and votes the safe choice, with the nominee pool expanded to ten the need for consensus has been drastically reduced. If King's Speech ends up checking every box on the Oscar wish list and still loses then this will go from being a trend to being a new reality. 

Posterized: Rabbit Hole & The King's Speech. What Are They Telling Us?

If you've been wondering what happened to the Posterized series, it comes down to this: A month or so back, I had been reading the book The Art of Drew Struzan -- he's the artist who used to do all those painted posters for Spielberg films and the first Harry Potter and so on -- and while reading it is I was preparing a "posterized: ben affleck" article. Ben Affleck movies, as it turns out, have hatefully ugly posters (no offense Ben, you're a handsome fella). So I didn't finish it. Too disheartening. Have to rethink that series. We still like the idea of movie posters, just not the reality so often, so they shan't go without comment.

Let's look at a few relative newbies.

The more we think about The King's Speech, the more we worry for The Social Network. (Seriously.. We'll see what happens with the precursor awards. Will critics rally like they have lately for one film, or will the votes be divvied up between a few darlings?). Speech was the easiest Oscar call to make back in the first round of predictions (April 1st) since it's one of those movies: The kind that wouldn't exist at all if there weren't such things as gold statues to be won.

But what to make of the poster? One supposes it's adequately conveyed what it needed to. If it were a personal ad it would be like so:

Weinsteinian 3some Seeks AMPAS Swingers to Cuddle. We're serious-minded but totally not stuffy; We could be elitist (the royal We!) but we're populist at heart, like you!  If you enjoy endearing peculiarities and good-hearted companions, have a sherry and join us for exuberant conversation (some stammering) and light role-play (WW II reenactments!).

Will you date that movie or is that the most boring poster you've ever seen? And why do their faces all have differently light sources? Couldn't Colin, Helena and Geoffrey at least pose for the poster together? I mean, you had them all in the same room several times for weeks. Damn you, Photoshop!

The Rabbit Hole marketing team has a trickier sell. They've got a bigger star to work with (Nic') but they can't really sell it as a star vehicle since it's prestige drama and public reaction to her tends to be so divisive. I like what they've done, though. Though I write about the theater far more than any other movie blog, I'm not well versed with this particular play, so I only know that it's about a couple who've lost a toddler. But that tire is pretty haunting and easy to project feeling onto, even if you know nothing about the material. The rope is unsettling too in its noose-like way. But before you get too depressed, there's that pastel blue sky and transparent type suggesting spirituality rather than emotionally pornographic gloom. Smart move, yes?

Or is it too calming like those anti-depressant ads on TV. Abilify!

I'm including these two posters to illustrate the marked difference between posters that have actual creative joy/heft [only allowed in "teaser" form] and posters that someone created at their desk only because they are given paychecks to do so. Now, it may well be that, as movies, Tyler Perry's For Colored Girls is terrible whilst Peter Weir's The Way Back is great (This is surely the first time in the history of the world that anyone has ever compared Tyler Perry to Peter Weir: enjoy.) but if that's the case, their movie's one-sheets tell the exact opposite story.

Floating movie star heads may well be the bane of movie posters for the past three decades, but stripes have been torturing us for nearly as long, now. It's weird that Hollywood loves them; horizontal stripes make you look fat!

This Link Goes to 11

Live Feed Glee inspired political attack ad. Who knew an attack ad could be cute?
Kenneth in the (212) my friend Kenneth will be seen briefly in the new Mindy Cohn gay flick Violet Tendencies. When was the last time you heard "new Mindy Cohn flick"... let alone a gay one?
Pop Justice "Bad Romance" is one year old today. Kinda. Still love it.

This Leonardo TotallyLooksLike double got
saved on my computer months ago. Every time I
notice it I start giggling. So I must finally share.

Vulture worries that Thor's Frost Giants will battle for the home tree in Avatar. Please. Thor should be so lucky to be (favorably) compared to Avatar. I'm guessing. I am just sensing a terrible terrible movie coming our way.
IndieWire assures us that the Spirit Awards are returning to their Saturday afternoon by the beach tradition.
ArtsBeat Broadway cools down its celebrity lust... for the current moment at least.
Popbytes Speaking of... can you believe that The King's Speech is already planning its Broadway bow? It hasn't even opened in movie theaters yet!
MTV Ang Lee's Life of Pi gets one step closer to production by casting its lead actor 17 year-old Suraj Sharma
Just Jared Tom Hardy for Snow White and the Hunstman? I'm in. Just please let some of these new fairy tale movies NOT view Tim Burton's hideous Alice as something to emulate.

...and some artwork for you
Y'all don't comment on the art related posts but you're going to keep getting them because Nathaniel likes to draw and he loves the artists out there making the internet a more beautiful / whimsical / imaginative place. Deal!
Becky Cloonan "Sluts of Dracula" omg love these sketches. And the title is to undie for.
Austin Translation "Bitter Moments with Count Chocula" a wee Twilight dig.

Yes, No, Maybe So: The King's Speech

I suppose I must pick up my Oscar-pundit speed now. Sorry for the delays...

Let's talk about The King's Speech



As you know this film came roaring out of Toronto as the audience award winner (see previous post) and The Film to Beat at the Oscars... unless you think that's The Social Network but it's since it's only late September fans of either (in reality or in theory) need to calm down. We were always confident that The King's Speech was an Oscar film even before they started filming which is why we've predicted it for several nominations since April. But now that the trailer is here allowing non-festival goers to have a looksee, what do we think?

On the bright side, it looks fun. Or at least it looks fun to anyone who loved watching Eliza Doolittle learn to properly e·nun·ci·ate. It also gives Colin Firth a meaty role that seems like a reward for elevating A Single Man (2009) (but for the fact that he probably signed for this before anyone saw how great he was in last year's nominated turn). I'm also THRILLED -- and yes it needed to be typed in all caps -- to see that Helena Bonham Carter has managed to escape Burton's gothic dungeon for some badly needed air. She's probably heading straight to her second Oscar nomination with relative ease; You know how they love those supportive wives. What's most surprising about the trailer is that the production values look superb and not in some vaguely rote prestige way but with a vividly handsome specificity. I didn't expect great visuals so maybe Tom Hooper's Best Director buzz isn't so far-fetched for a film that on paper seemed like one for the acting and production design branches mostly.

On the other hand, I am completely allergic to Geoffrey Rush in hambone mode. His win for Shine (1996) is one of my least favorite Best Actor prizes in the category's history and they nominated him for the entirely wrong film in 1998 as he was much more restrained and effective in Elizabeth than he was in Shakespeare in Love. He looks to be bringing the kook to scenes that already have inherent kookiness (speech therapy's comedy friendly exercizes) and I may just break out in hives watching him go for a second Oscar. I'm taking epipen into the theater with me... just in case.

Then we come to the Oscar Bait -- as if Royalty Porn weren't enough of it -- which is the World War II 'Nazi's are coming!' time frame. I hope it's less awkwardly handled here than it was in Mrs. Henderson Presents which this film vaguely reminds me of sight unseen. That's not a purposeful mental jump. It's worrisome rather but probably just based on account of early Oscar buzz, prestige actors, and the world war haunting the periphery of a "light" film.

Again, I might need the epipen but the festival buzz is certainly something to think about in an optimistic way. I'm a Yes leaning Maybe So because, again, Geoffrey Rush is a total No for me most of the time ...especially whilst clowning around. Look, we can't help what we're allergic to. Don't give me a hard time about it.

Are you a Yes, No or Maybe So? And do you buy the Oscar frontrunner (or thereabouts) hype?
*

TIFF: The People Speak.

Unlike many of the A-list festivals, Toronto does not do the big celebrity jury thing to hand out their awards. So it's up to festivalgoers to vote and the Audience Awards result. This is why, roughly speaking, the TIFF winner usually goes on to Oscar success, popularity being the key to both honors. This year's winner The King's Speech can now follow the same path as famous films before it like Whale Rider, Precious or Slumdog Millionaire. We already suspected, long before it screened anywhere (it was among my Early Bird predictions in April) that this would be an Oscar hit.

Audience Awards
Feature: The Kings Speech by Tom Hooper
Can we just give Colin Firth the best actor statue now? Given the momentum from last year, don't you think there's no way they're not going to hand him the statue this year? We might be looking at a boring Best Actor race with no real competition, even though the nominations themselves will have plenty of competition.
runner up: The First Grader by Justin Chadwick
This one I hadn't heard of but it sounds inspirational enough to play well with Oscar, too. It's based on a true story of a Kenyan man who showed up on the first day that free primary education was offered, ready to be a student... at 84 years young. This is only Chadwick's second feature film. His first was The Other Boleyn Girl.

Midnight Madness: Stake Land by Jim Mickle
I love the poster so much I had to include it (pictured right). But even I -- who once loved all things vampyr -- am deadly sick of the fanged beasties given today's pop culture. There's vampires everywhere you look. These ones look like the bloody gross monster versions though and I prefer the kind that are beautiful (but still monstrous at heart).
runner up: Fubar II by Michael Dowse
Documentary: Force of Nature: The David Suzuki Movie by Sturla Gunnarsson
This is one of several current environmentally focused documentaries.
runner up: Nostalgia for the Light by Patricio Guzman
Will we see either of these titles in the documentary Oscar race? I can't even pretend to be able to describe this one for you.


Canadian Specific Prizes
Feature: Incendies by Denis Villeneuve. This will likely be the Canadian choice for Oscar submission for the Best Foreign Language Film race though nothing is official yet. Sony Pictures Classics is handling the release and they do good work with foreign fare... though unfortunately they almost never release them in the year of their Oscar eligibility (unless they're from Almodóvar) so we're looking at 2011 here.

Incendies

I've only seen one Villeneuve picture before, a short film called Next Floor, but it was very very impressive -- here's Nick's review from our time on the shorts jury in Nashville that year. Incendies is about twins who try to piece together their mother's last days in the Middle East could be a real contender. Keep an eye out.
First Feature: High Cost of Living by Deborah Chow.
Short: Les fleurs de l’age (Little Flowers) by Vincent Biron which is 18 minutes long and about schoolchildren (though it takes place in the summer)

FIPRESCI Critics Prizes
Discovery: Beautiful Boy by Shawn Ku. This film stars Maria Bello and Michael Sheen as the parents of a college student involved in a shooting massacre. I suspect we'll see this in 2011 now that Anchor Bay picked it up. I keep rooting for Maria to get another role as demanding / high profile as A History of Violence. Will this be it or does only a tiny release await?
Special Presentation: L'Amour Fou by Pierre Thoretton which is a film about fashion god Yves St. Laurent

The big takeaway news though, now that TIFF 2010 has wrapped, is that there were a lot of sales. Far more films found distributors than people were originally suspecting. The Los Angeles Times even called it a "flood" of sales. That's good news for us. If current official or rumored plans hold, we'll see Rabbit Hole this year from Lionsgate and sometime next year we'll get the Lincoln assassination courtroom drama The Conspirator from Lionsgate and Roadside as well as the father/son gay-themed drama Beginners starring Ewan McGregor and Christopher Plummer next year from Focus to name a few dramatic examples.