Karina Longworth at SpoutBlog has some interesting comments on Knocked Up and the alleged lack of realism therein:
Stepping away from Denby and Emdashes for a moment, this brings us back to the elephant that’s always in the room when talking Knocked Up: the idea that Katherine Heigl’s character is poorly written, because someone like that would never get involved with someone like the character played by Seth Rogen. I know it’s a stretch to ask anyone whose natural analysis of character stops at “Pretty” or “Fat” to think this way, but do you think it’s maybe possible that the Katherine Heigl character was written that way for a reason? Is it so hard to imagine that a woman whose chief asset is her body, whose greatest aspiration is to follow in the footsteps of Giuliana DePandi (no offense to Giuliani), who is clearly lonely as hell (her only friend is apparently her shrewish older sister, who’s clearly occupied with her own pre-midlife crisis) would be lacking in self-confidence and self-worth, and for all of the reasons above, would be attracted to the unconditional love that a baby would represent?
It’s like there some kind of post-feminist block that won’t allow some female critics/viewers to admit that some real-world women are less than total braniacs, and/or that *most* women make decisions from time to time that don’t make total sense, and/or that in real life, attractive-but-dim women often date down the social ladder, picking men who they feel they can control without worrying that they’ll get dumped. At least Seth Rogen’s character showed promising glimpses, signs that he was capable of being genuinely caring, witty and kind. This puts him miles ahead of the average 23-year-old boy.
More interesting thoughts on the film at the link above.
And now, the upcoming spin-off Wolverine seems poised to take a step back up the quality ladder — at least where the talent behind the camera is concerned. Variety says the producers have tapped Gavin Hood, the South African director of Tsotsi (2005), which won the Oscar for Best Foreign Language Film early last year:
Using several resources that include the Marvel Comics lore, along with the more recent Weapon X graphic novels by Frank Miller, “Wolverine” mixes action with an origin story about how Logan emerged from a barbaric experiment as an indestructible mutant with retractable razor-sharp claws.
I have no idea what to expect from this film on a story level. In the meantime, though, I wonder if Brian Cox will reprise his role as Colonel William Stryker, who seemed to have some knowledge of Wolverine’s origins when we met him in X2: X-Men United.
Two months ago, I noted that the Halcyon Co. had bought the rights to the Terminator movie franchise and announced its intention to make a whole new trilogy of sequels — but I also said it was unclear whether MGM was still involved in the series. Looks like it’s still unclear — Halcyon is suing MGM and accusing the studio of interfering with its distribution plans. Variety and Nikki Finke at Deadline Hollywood Daily have the details.
Among her observations:
If one were to translate the 850 page book into screenplay form without any but the most obvious of cuts, my guess is the screenplay would run about 1200 pages. That’s a 20 hour movie. So if you want, think of Order of the Phoenix-The Movie as a trailer for that 20 hour movie we’ll never see.
FWIW, I have always said that the Harry Potter books ought to be adapted as a TV series — or as a series of mini-series. Each book spans a full school year, and that’s about the same as a regular season on television, right? And a regular season of American television typically lasts about 20 episodes, right?
British seasons — or “series” as they call them — tend to be shorter, as few as six episodes each. But even if each Harry Potter story was compressed to that length, it would probably still allow more time to savour the character moments that are consistently cut from the film versions of these increasingly complex tales.
True, adapting Harry Potter for television would probably be less lucrative and less spectacular — no IMAX screenings — and each installment would be less of an “event”, but letting the stories unfold this way would be truer to the spirit of the books, I think.
The Chicago Film Critics Association is fed up with 20th Century Fox, the studio that has of late been refusing to show movies to critics until the last possible minute — assuming it bothers to let critics see those movies at all. Now the critics are boycotting the studio’s films — to a point, at least. Radar Online reports:
According to the Chicago Film Critics Association, 20th Century Fox has instituted a policy of favoritism in the Windy City, providing special treatment to select film reviewers. Others, it is charged, are not given adequate time to craft stories between seeing a movie and its release—or are shut out of screenings entirely. . . .
In response CFCA has instituted a boycott against Fox releases, vowing to write nothing but reviews for its movies, withholding the more coveted coverage in features, profiles, and interviews. And they’re calling on their film critic brethren to join in. “We’ve hit a common nerve among all critics’ organizations who are suffering under the same kind of tyrannical rule,” [CFCA president Dann] Gire told Radar. “We have had amazing support from all over the country.”
UPDATE: Jeffrey Wells at Hollywood Elsewhere gives his two bits.
JUL 18 UPDATE: Fox isn’t exactly happy with Jeffrey Wells.
JUL 19 UPDATE: Now David Poland at The Hot Blog offers his take.
UPPERDATE: Jeffrey Wells responds to David Poland’s piece, and he notes that Fox has suddenly and mysteriously cancelled its promotional appearances at Comic-Con next week.
In the words of one of Wells’s anonymous colleagues:
“Fox has declared war. We’ve been on the receiving end of this for a few years, and no one gave a shit because it was just us. Now that Fox is widening their attitude to everyone, people are now paying attention. Fox hates critics. Fox hates the press. Fox hates their audience. That is the truth.”
He forgot to mention that Fox hates Canada, too.
UPPESTDATE: Chris at Movie Marketing Madness chimes in.
It’s sad that Fox Searchlight is getting caught up in this and that its PR efforts on behalf of Sunshine etc. are being boycotted, since they have actually been very, very, very good about letting critics like me into screenings. Their publicists are completely separate from the publicists who work for “Big Fox” — the term Jeffrey Wells has used for the larger, more mainstream branch of the studio.
UPPERDATE: David Poland posts the Chicago film critics’ e-mail to Fox in its entirety, and criticizes the “antics” of Dann Gire.
UPPESTDATE: Jeffrey Wells reports that the “war” is now “over”.
UPPERDATE: David Poland also posts the letter, with comments.
JUL 27 UPDATE: The Los Angeles Times prints a correction — but take it from me, there is nothing “alleged” about 20th Century Fox’s discrimination against online critics. I say this as one who was actually uninvited to a screening this week after I was invited — and all because the publicists discovered that I have a blog.