Anyoe who had any question about whether WB was intending to associate The Good German with their classics, like Casablanca, will find a clear answer in this pakage the studio sent out this week.
More images from the package in the following pop-ups….
Detail of the letter
Cover of the enclosed promo booklet
The players
Detail
Detail
Detail
Susu on: The Letters From Iwo Jima review
Krillian on: 20 Weeks To Oscar: Rush To Poor Judgment?
Kristopher Tapley on: 20 Weeks To Oscar: Rush To Poor Judgment?
Kristopher Tapley on: 20 Weeks To Oscar: Rush To Poor Judgment?
Hallick on: 20 Weeks To Oscar: Rush To Poor Judgment?
Joe Parts on: Welcome To The Future
qbtqpidc on: Oscar Morning Coming Down
IOv3 on: 20 Weeks Extra: Could There Be One More Turn?
20 Weeks To Oscar: Rush To Poor Judgment?
20 Weeks Extra: Could There Be One More Turn?
see all »
[twitter-widget username="DavidPoland" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"][twitter-widget username="MCNTweets" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"]
It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” ā some novel, you know?
So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.
And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it ā I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.
There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.
I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury ā he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” ā and I’d forgot who he was.
So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging ā I was with her at that moment ā she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.
But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy namedā” “Yeah, sure ā you want his phone number?”
My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher
“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that Iām on the phone with you now, after all thatās been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didnāt seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. Thereās not a case of that. He wasnāt using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had ā if that were what the accusation involved ā the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. Iām not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, āYou know, itās not this, itās thatā? Because ā let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. TimesĀ piece, thatās what it lacked. Thatās what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.
~ David Simon
It seems like a risky idea, to compare your new movie with two beloved classics. I can imagine a lot of Academy voters getting the thought it their heads ‘it was good, but it wasn’t as good as Casablanca’.
Is it me, or does that promotion letter refer to “film noir classics like Casablanca and The Maltese Falcon”?
Looks like the WB promotional department is hittin’ the pipe again. There’s no way Casablanca qualifies as noir. Hell, The Maltese Falcon is even questionable (I’ve never bought it as noir), but certainly more understandable.
But hey, look at the audience they’re sending these to. Anyone that needs to be told what kind of look Soderbergh is going for probably has no clue what film noir is.
Either way, I’m anxiously awaiting Dave’s take on the film. I want Soderbergh to pull an Eastwood-M$B type of surprise and just steamroll the shit out of the Oscar season with this film. The trailer was fucking brilliant.
Awesome press kit and you’re right, Mark…no way CASABLANCA is a film noir!
Maltese Falcon is more of a “proto-noir” instead of a full-fledged film noir. It lacks much of the Expressionistic qualities that the German ex-pats soon lent the genre.
But who ever confused marketers with film historians?
After seeing the trailer I wasn’t reminded of “Casablanca” at all. The movie it reminded me of was “The Third Man.”
You’d think these guys would be more careful, because when you make comparisons like that you more often than not fall flat on your face. And when you’re making these comparisons, there’s a long, long way to fall.
i don’t want to call the marketing department idiotic or just plain fucking stupid… but i swear to god every time i hear someone refer to a black and white movie as being “noir”, it makes me think that somebody working on an oscar campaign should probably know the fundamentals of film before releasing something this laughable.
I don’t think it’s risky to visually compare the film to these classics. In an interesting sort of way, it kind of brings the whole thing into a “romp” perspective rather than a “prestige” perspective.
Yeah, but this is a ‘prestige’ movie and from the look of the trailer, a fairly somber, serious thriller. If it was Ocean’s Thirteen the ‘romp’ idea would be applicable, not here with Awards-bait.
Ya’ll are overreacting. Saying THE MALTESE FALCON is “questionable” as a noir? Next thing you know, JAWS won’t be a horror film…
On THE GOOD GERMAN, I can’t say I agree that the trailer looked very good. Clooney looked particularly wooden and anacronistic, and it looked more like one of Soderbergh’s stylistic experiments, which tend to be particularly cold (KAFKA or SOLARIS), than the kind of film that could be widely loved…
But then again, I haven’t seen it!
I love Soderbergh though, I consider myself the world’s biggest SCHIZOPOLIS fan, and still remember being at SLAMDANCE in the days before OUT OF SIGHT when Soderbergh’s career trajectory was hardly on the rise, and talking to him about the film, and him just being shocked that anyone really even liked it…
Thrilled that he’s now at the top of his profession…while retaining his vision…a great success story…
Man, I’d be psyched to get a press kit with those two movies in it!
Even if The Good German fails, at least you have two great movies to fall back on. I’ve got movie only DVDs of those two. Would love to have those 2 discers š
“Saying THE MALTESE FALCON is “questionable” as a noir? Next thing you know, JAWS won’t be a horror film…”
It really isn’t. It’s more of a modern B-monster movie (or adventure film with horror elements). But must we pidgeonhole every film?
I don’t think The Good German is a prestige movie, really. And that’s certainly not the vibe coming out of a number of screenings (I think I heard of ONE guy that’s liked it…I guess I’ll know tonight).
Really, Kris, it’s getting some less than stellar love? The plot gets more interesting by the week, doesn’t it?
BTW, did Clooney’s ear bandage give anyone besides me “Chinatown” flashbacks?
maybe the marketers were going excessive on the Marshall McLuhan, or I am, as the statuette on Maltese Falcon, if you looked quickly, sorta makes you think of “Oscar”.
Hence, a subliminal comparator (I love that expression) to have the viewers be thinking about the Oscar statuette when viewing Good German via their studio package.
It looks like nothing more than rich people playing dress-up. Hopefully I’m wrong.
Good, bad or indifferent, it’s a major studio release in black-and-white, and we should all go see it for that reason alone; if those malletheads who greenlight pictures can see that it’s not an automatic turn-off, we’ll get more B&W movies.
I sort of agree with Cadavra. I don’t think people MUST see it, but personally I love seeing black and white on the big screen and I love highly stylised movies such as this appears to be and I love me some George and Cate, so I’ll be there.
This packaging sure does look purdy, but as someone up there said, it reminds me more of The Third Man (especially the shot of Cate in the tunnel)
It’s a good thing I’m not a member of the press. If I got a kit like that in the mail every other film released this year would be fucked.
The least they coulda done is got a Casablanca DVD that didn’t say Two Discs at One Low Price! Unless that “one low price” is zero, then I doubt the people getting this in the mail are paying anything.
I think they had that sticker saved from the days of vinyl and double LPs: two records for the price of one. Really, everything about this promo is retro.
Just came from a screening and all I can say is that no one connected with the film should be preparing any speeches.
It’s confusing and complicated. It crosses The Third Man, Casablanca, Chinatown and a half-dozen other films. Clooney is a bit subdued, Maguire is grossly miscast and Blanchett struggles with her accent.
Several walk outs during the screening. It’s not horrible, but it certainly isn’t going to appeal to the crowds at the multiplex in Peoria either.
Just got from the movie… it was okay. It’s more of an achievement for the way Soderbergh samples shots and music from other movies, but Cate Blanchett is pretty amazing. Even knowing it was her, I was watching her on screen and couldn’t imagine it was her because she looks and sounds so different (she has a German accent and a deeper voice). Not a terrible movie, though it’s not likely to be loved loved by everyone. I’d say Actress, Screenplay (maybe), and technical awards, maybe Soderbergh for director again.
I saw it last night. Admired it, but didn’t love it. It’s incredibly cold (everyone’s an asshole, even Clooney), but without the redeeming layer of humor you’d get from the Coens or Wes Anderson…or for that matter, the typical ’40s WB film, where there was always a Lorre or Greenstreet or Tobias or Sakall to lighten things up every now and then. And while one can appreciate Soderbergh’s desire to make a ’40s movie free from the Production Code, the near-Scorsese level of profanity (Maguire can’t seem to get through a complete sentence without at least one “fuck,” even in the presence of women) keeps yanking you out of the picture. The applause at the end was polite, not enthusiastic–despite Soderbergh being there–which suggests this will probably end up falling short of even GOOD NIGHT, AND GOOD LUCK.