The Nine (The Musical) Situation
Rumors are now swirling around The Weinstein Company’s Nine this week, made all the more (overly) dramatic by the purchase of A Single Man here at TIFF.
Here’s the deal: Nine is not being moved to 2010 at this point. But we should expect a Chicago-style rollout, with exclusive releases in NY/LA around Christmas, followed by an expansion to 200-300 screens in January, then a wider release after Oscar nominations in early February. Chicago did over $100m of its gross after nominations.
What does A Single Man have to do with this? Nothing at all.
There has been some wrestling over the cut of the movie. Harvey wants it shorter… and tested it to strong numbers his way a couple of weeks ago. Rob wants it longer… and his test was not as strong. Meanwhile, even though the film is months from release, a musical needs to lock this early because the music mix takes a long time. (They have already done a lot of work on the singing in DDL’s numbers, though his acting performance is said to be very strong.)
So that seems to be the deal. Yes, I am sure the company would like to have some revenue in from Youth In Revolt, The Road, and even Hoodwinked 2 before making the BIG push for Nine. I don’t think it’s unfair to suggest that Nine means a whole lot to the future of the company.
But the endless repetition of old rumors about TWC (and even some old news) really misses it. Yeah, when things aren’t going well and the media is waiting for you to kick the studio bucket, every choice is defined by that notion. But this choice for Nine makes every kind of sense. Not launching wide on a film like this is, in reality, a sign of confidence, not fear… no matter what the condition of the distributor.
None of this means that Nine will, in fact, be a magic bullet for TWC. It could crap out. Or like Inglourious Basterds, it could be a success with little significance in the bigger economic picture for the company. But, as the man says, only time will tell.
I figured A Single Man will only be gunning for Best Actor so, yeah, it really won’t mess around with Nine since we all know the critics at least won’t be giving Daniel Day-Lewis any prizes (a man in a role that is neither masculine nor gay? what to make of such a thing!) and, let’s be honest, Day-Lewis can’t be nominated for every movie he makes so I reckon TWC merely think a Colin Firth nod is more likely.
KC, what the hell are you talking about, masculine nor guy? I saw this shit on Broadway and the dude is a straight pussyhound, and the play is him thinking back on all the chicks he banged.
Also, A BRILLIANT LEX THEORY TO DROP in five, so ALL PAY ATTENTION:
I have NO FUCKING IDEA, nor does ANY STRAIGHT MAN ON THIS PLANET, who the FUCK Colin Firth is.
Colin Firth must have a lower testosterone count than Chris fucking Crocker, because Colin Firth has NEVER, NEVER, NEEEEEEVER been in a movie that any man on this planet would ever watch.
He might be the LEAST FAMOUS FAMOUS GUY ON THE PLANET.
OK, I kinda know who he is, because wasn’t he in GIRL WITH A PEARL NECKLACE (BOOYEAH, JOKE) with Scarlett Johotness? But in general, this guy is the POSTER BOY for PURE DOUCHE, the kind of Brit-pop who SUCKS, never does action, never does violence, never does horror, never does ANYTHING COOL AT ALL except for costume bullshit and the kind of Emma Thompason movies that fat EngLit majors and the gay men who love them go to see at the Pasadena Arthouse cinemas while never talking to a person of color, EVER.
Has Colin Firth or any of his fans EVER listened to a rap album or watched a gangster movie or hit the streets being awesome?
Colin Firth is like the Film Actor version of Television Without Pity: Some No-testosterone douchebag for fat cat women and gay dudes.
Hey, Colin Firth, you’re some GREAT ACTOR? Do a TRAINING DAY or a HARSH TIMES or a DOMINO and roll into Easr L.A. and kick it with some vatos locos and some hardcore motherfuckers. He’s a straight bitch and so is anyone who knows who this Colm Meaney lookalike even IS.
RACISTS.
Firth was in The English Patient with naked Kristin Scitt Thomas. Also in this year’s EASY VIRTUE with super-hot Jessica Biel.
Respect him even if it’s by proxy, because you wish.
Bullshit. This Brit-fro’d nance was most certainly NOT in the English Patient. I saw that thing when it came out and don’t remember some tubby British pussy in it.
The only thing this NOBODY has ever been in is that A&E Pride and Prejudice that every clunky-glassed Pasadena Lit Major who works in copy editing has seen 700 times, even though NOOOO ONE else in the history in the world knows what she’s talking about.
FACT.
The “Nine” switcheroo sounds like a smart move to me. That wide Thanksgiving release never did make sense.
I continue to root for Harvey, and hope that he can wring even a modicum of “Reader”-type Oscar success out of “A Single Man” which feels like a throwback to the early days of Miramax.
Dave may have been on the fence about “Man,” but I’m not. For me it was the revelation of the festival: a stunningly accomplished first film that hearkens back to ’90s Queer Cinema classics like Tom Kalin’s “Swoon” and Todd Haynes’ “Poison.” Firth gives a career performance and Moore hasn’t been this good in years.
On an unrelated front, I’m a little stunned that Don Roos’ “Love and Other Impossible Pursuits” has been generating so little distributer interest. Portman is extraordinary, and the film has been one of my TIFF favorites so far. Where’s the love?
I was also very pleasantly surprised by Marco Bellochio’s “Vincere” (aka “Mussolini: The Early Years”). I’ve run hot and cold on Bellochio for decades, but this is unquestionably his most accessible (and possibly finest) film to date. In the best of all possible worlds, IFC would find the cash to bankroll an awards season launch, if only to push Giovanna Mezzogiorno’s superb performance in the Best Actress category. Mezzogiorno is better than Marion Cottilard in “La Vie en Rose” and is every bit as good as Penelope Cruz in “Volver” (two recent foreign-language performances that won Oscar nominations).
Fantastic movie. Seek it out if you get the chance in 2010.
More TIFF musings: “The Disappearance of Alice Creed” is, I think, the film Dave confused “Harry Brown” with. A lean, mean British genre machine, made on an apparent shoestring (I’ve heard $1-million), it delivers the goods and then some. “Creed” makes a smashing industry calling card for first-time writer-director J Blakeson and plays like “Reservoir Dogs”-era Tarantino with a script by Ira Levin in “Deathtrap” mode. I counted at least seven reversals/twists in the pacy 98-minute running time, and never predicted a single one. Great work by Eddie Marsan, Gemma Arterton (hot British chick, Lex: you will dig her) and Martin Compston who’s all grown up since Ken Loach’s “Sweet Sixteen” and could be on the verge of a Cillian Murphy-style breakout.
LexG, as is often the case, hits an essential truth and then gets distracted by hyperbole. Firth has been in a lot o fbig crossover movies. But he is not “an opener.” A movie like When Did You Last See Your Father can do a very quiet $1 million with Firth in the lead at the same time that Mamma Mia! is breaking out.
On the other hand, he is a well liked, good man with a wife of the kind LexG goes on about. Model beautiful, smart, socially conscious… a hottie indeed.
It bothers me that anyone would call him “a douche” or a “nobody” on my blog. He is neither. Quite untrue and unkind.
But is he a guy they are waiting to give an Oscar to for lifetime achievement because he lands in a movie playing a gay man (not the first time by a long shot)? Not likely.
And Movieman – I have heard many good things about Alice Creed, even though no one seems to be buying it.
I don’t think I have confused Harry Brown with a lean, mean Brit genre machine. But because it’s Michael Caine killing drug dealers, it is more marketable than Eddie Marsan and Gemma Atherton. That doesn’t make it a better movie than others.
And the reason that many good films at TIFF go silent is because the fest is so overwhelmingly front loaded that there is little chance of press getting to anything other than what they HAVE to cover… bigger stars, English language. I will write about this later, but TIFF and other big fests are self-destructing by allowing the front loading to get worse and worse. Yesterday was the half-way mark of the fest and the IC was suddenly a ghost town. As far as I am concerned, that’s a disaster. And TIFF will blame the film companies that want first weekend slots, but not realize that it is that agreement to jam the first weekend that means that press can leave on Wednesday with no fear of missing their stories, saving thousands by abandoning the fest half way through.
Next time Lex gives somebody shit for going to an animated movie, they can point out to his admission in this thread of attending a Broadway musical.
(…not that there’s anything wrong with that.)
It bothers me that anyone would call him “a douche” or a “nobody” on my blog. He is neither. Quite untrue and unkind.
Really? Of all the crap LexG has spewed out over the past couple of years you’re going to call him out for calling Colin Firth a douche? Would you have preferred he go on in graphic detail about masturbating and spraying a hot load all over Firth’s face? Your tolerance of this loser boggles my mind and has reduced this blog to a joke.
Colin Firth was in The Last Legion. Swords, fighting, and Aishwarya Rai. Definitely a guy movie.
It sounds like Nine is doing the same roll-out as the two of the biggest musicals of the last several years. Dreamgirls and Chicago both scored $100 million+ with such a strategy, so I don’t see what the big deal is here. Go with what works.
I heard Lex saw MAMMA MIA! six times on Broadway. Straight-up douche, yo!
movieman, i’m not sure if i’ve mentioned it already but if not, i dig your TIFF reports
and just an observation: DP again with the teacher’s pet:
“On the other hand, he is a well liked, good man with a wife of the kind LexG goes on about. Model beautiful, smart, socially conscious… a hottie indeed.”
“It bothers me that anyone would call him “a douche” or a “nobody” on my blog. He is neither. Quite untrue and unkind.”
well it wasn’t ‘anyone’ who dissed firth royally, it was lex and lex only. if it was anybody else you’d very likely call them out and address them directly (goodness knows it’s happened to me and many others here many-a-time), but not lex, who gets the kid gloves
also, apart from the fact that mentioning the looks of firth’s wife as part of firth’s appeal is kinda creepy, to say “…with a wife of the kind LexG goes on about. Model beautiful, smart, socially conscious…” is really rather hilarious.
smart and socially conscious? have you only just met lex luthor? the kind of women lex ‘goes on about’ are 18-24 yr old starlets slathered in baby oil (preferably not very bright), hookers, porn stars, or stupid, mute cutters for one night stands, certainly not “smart, socially conscious” old married hags in their 30’s. you must not be paying attention
Why thank you, Leah (blush). That’s the nicest compliment I’ve had in months.
To be quite honest, I hadn’t posted any TIFF notes in awhile because I wasn’t getting any feedback to my last ones. I figured that nobody gave a damn what I thought about the festival.
But since you do care, my dear Leah, I’ll share some quick thoughts about a few of the films I saw today. Everyone else can just skip to the next posting, lol.
The new Jeunet film (“Micmacs”) feels a bit like a retrenchment for him: (it’s a lot closer to earlier works like “Delicatessan” and “City of Lost Children” than the hyperbolic romanticism of “Amelie” or “Very Long Engagement”). That said, it’s mostly enjoyable and this morning’s p/i audience appeared to eat it up. Yet I’d be lying if I said that I didn’t miss Audrey Tautou. Like Michael Moore’s “Capitalism” (which falls apart for me in the final act) and Woody’s “Whatever Works” this summer, it’ll play to Jeunet’s pre-“Amelie” fanboys base. But unlike, say, “Fahrenheit 9/11,” “Vicky Cristina Barcelona” or, yeah, “Amelie,” I don’t see it expanding his f-base any.
Herzog’s “reimagining” of “Bad Lieutenant” has as little to do with Ferrara’s film as Egoyan’s “Chloe” has to Anne Fontaine’s “Nathalie.” Egoyan and Herzog borrow their source materials’ basic premise then pretty much make it up as they go along. Since Herzog is some kind of mad genius (at least he used to be: “Aguirre,” “Kasper Hauser,” “Heart of Glass,” “Nosferatu,” “Even Dwarves Started Small,” wow!) so I’ll politely assume that the flat, dingy lighting and berserk performances were deliberate (after all, berserk perfs are sort of a Herzog-ian trademark) . All of the characters act like they’re playing cop/criminals on a TV crime show rather than actual cops or criminals. You know that a movie is seriously out of whack when the dependably bonkers Brad Dourif comes across as the straightest dude (or dude-ette) in the whole film. Gotta give Herzog props for having the cojones to cast Jennifer Coolidge as Cage’s stepmom. Boo-hiss, though, for not getting more out of Shawn Hatosy whose method madness has at times rivaled costars Cage and Val Kilmer.
I’m planning to see Herzog’s other TIFF movie (the David Lynch-produced “My Son, My Son, What Have Ye Done?” on Friday morning before skipping town. I’ll be sure to give you my feedback sometime this weekend, Leah.
Neil Joran’s “Ondine” w/ Colin Farrell is on my to-do list for tomorrow. The Variety review was genuinely enthusiastic–by the notoriously dyspeptic Todd McCarthy, no less–so I’m super-psyched.
My day ended a tad abruptly after discovering that the press office “video library” only had one copy–instead of their usual 5 or more–of “I am Love” (Tilda Swinton’s Italian film that finally started to generate some buzz after rave reviews from Venice), and that somebody had just borrowed it. Damn.
bonza, movieman, looking forward to more — and hopefully getting to see some of these films for myself! (you sound more enthused for this year’s crop of TIFF movies compared to the disappointment of last year’s festival. and you’ve made me want to see herzog’s ‘bad lt.’ even more than i already did if that’s possible, sounds positively bizarre. herzog IS a mad genius. i’m also very curious about ‘my son, my son’)
I’ll give Lex some slack for not knowing Colin Firth was in The English Patient… even though I had to look it up on the IMDb to be certain. The one and only time I saw it, I kept falling asleep, much to the annoyance of one of the chicks I was banging at the time.
“How could you keep falling asleep through that beautiful movie?”
“It was a piece of shit.”
“You’re not getting laid tonight.”
“We’ll see about that.”
We were both right. She didn’t get laid that night. I went over to the other girl’s place and threw her a fuck.
^ This guy speaks my language. GOOD STORY. ^
Though, time for another shocker: I’d probably never sit down to watch it again anytime soon, but I liked English Patient when it came out. Always thought ’96 was such a lame year for movies anyway, I never got why it had such a backlash for winning. Yeah, Fargo was better, but otherwise that was the year of style-less, overrated indie movies, and TEP had that epic, lush, old-school style. But I honestly don’t remember Firth being in it at all.
Apparently I’ve seen him in a bunch of stuff like that; Why, he was the other dude in that awesome Egoyan/Lohman/Bacon movie I referenced just yesterday.
And he was in “Love Actually”? Where? I liked that enough that I saw it TWICE, yet I don’t remember this dude AT ALL. I just remember Keira being CHARMING and Rickman being AWESOME. GOOD MOVIE.
Firth was the guy who was attracted to the girl who didn’t speak English. It was a minor thread but pretty cute, like pretty much everything else in that movie.
Love, Actually was in my bottom ten for the year it came out. God, I hated that movie.
Well, congrats on being a sour asshole then. That movie is delightful, one of the best films of its type in recent years. And I don’t usually go for any of that shit, but it was a likable movie filled with awesome characters.
And it’s apparently one of four movies that will ever be made where Keira Knightley isn’t dressed in some period frock with a fucking pirate hat on.
Thank you for your congrats. I have no compunctions whatsoever on calling that movie out for being awful.
And by the way, Lex, when you call something ‘delightful’ it brings to mind all manner of your disgusting habits and preferences. Use a different word.
You’re a minority of ONE, pal. Everyone loves that movie. I’m the most sour, sexist misanthrope in the world, but that movie had me GRINNING FROM EAR TO EAR, an UTTER DELIGHT. And not even just Keira’s scenes, but it hit a WIDE SWATH OF EMOTIONS and works as a drama, as comedy, as romance, and as a cast of colorful characters holding your attention the entire time.
Like ST. ELMO’S FIRE, it’s one of those movies where you like everybody and want them to be your friends. It came out in the UTTERLY AWFUL cinematic year of 2003, and is one of the BEST from that mundane year. (2002 and 2007 being the best of the decade.)
You know, back to Colin Firth: Okay, I remember him in it now… I think my problem with this guy is half the time I think I’m watching a better-looking Colm Meaney, and the other half the time I just think it’s a doughier Peter Sarsgaard doing a British accent.
So you would do Colm Meaney over Colin Firth?
Love Actually was one of those movies that sucked and was great at the same time, and I’ve never wanted to tap Keira Knightley more than when that douche bag starts singing to her even after she married Chiwetel. Heavenly. And Bill Nighy was almost as good in it as he was as a crazy rock star in Still Crazy.
I hated Love Actually with a fiery passion when it came out. Fine acting and a witty arc for Bill Nighy, but I hated pretty much everything else save for the Rickman/Thompson subplot. First of all, you can’t go for a cheap 9/11 emotional grab right off the bat, and then climax with several characters racing through a busy airport in a manner likely to get you shot in post 9/11-Europe/America. Second of all, nearly every story was A) about lust more than love and B) told from the pre-adolescent male fantasy standpoint. The only ones that felt like adult stories and/or told from the female perspective (Rickman + Thompson and Laura Linney + her co-worker) both had bitterly unhappy endings.
Having said that, I’m buying my wife the upcoming Blu Ray for Christmas (she’s a big fan) with the intent on giving it another shot. We’ll see…
I didn’t “hate” it, but I certainly didn’t enjoy it as much as so many others. As is often the case with those sort of films, there were storylines that were far more interesting than others and the less interesting ones dragged the whole film down.
i detest both ‘love, actually’ and ‘the english patient’ (i may have already said this here but at the risk of repeating myself, i’m like elaine bennis from ‘seinfeld’ in my loathing for and mockery of ‘the english patient’)
tap, douche, banging, thow a fuck…classy. sounds like lex luthor has found his ‘idiot frat-boy lexicon’ soul-mate in ‘edward havens’
“ST. ELMO’S FIRE…came out in the UTTERLY AWFUL cinematic year of 2003”
ST. ELMO came out in 1985. Did you get the year wrong or are you thinking of something else?
Cadavra, what are you TALKING about?
I said, like SEF, it’s one of those types of movies that etc…. and it came out in ’03. Never said St. Elmo came out in ’03.
Read it again. It is a perfectly constructed pair of senstences.
THREE COLLEGE DEGREES.
“Like ST. ELMO’S FIRE, it’s one of those movies where you like everybody and want them to be your friends.”
That’s the FAIL part of the sentence.
Lex, you are a cautionary example AGAINST too much higher education.
Or maybe just a cautionary example against refusing to grow up, get proper psychological care, and be an obnoxious internet troll.
Holy shit, Jeff, talk about a sentence that makes ZERO SENSE. That second gem is incomprehensible.
You know what’s awesome is I’m 1000 times more immature and juvenile and lowest-common denominator than I was TEN, 12 years ago. MIDLIFE CRISIS POWER.
It should have been ‘getting…’ and ‘being…’ but aside from that grammatical quibble, it made perfect sense.
And it’s great that you hate yourself as much as the rest of us hate you. I just wish that translated into deeds and not just words.
I have no idea what that second sentence means, Jeff. Seriously, dude. What, did your 3rd pink squirrel and highball combo go straight to your head tonight? You’re incoherent. Sleep it off.
Now everyone look upthread and BASK in my GIRL WITH A PEAL NECKLACE joke about S.J.
GENIUS.
Okay, I’ll reiterate with greater clarity. Lex, your miserable existence demonstrates the deleterious effects of (a) not growing up, (b) not getting proper care for your multiple psychological problems (alcoholism, sex addiction, depression, narcissism), and (c) being an asshole.
BETTER. Now, that was awesome, and has me GRINNING EAR TO EAR. Couldn’t be prouder.
Plus you apparently just won this round of STUMP THE GENIUS, because I have the highest I.Q. ever recorded on this planet (seriously), and have NO IDEA what the hell “deleterious” means. Did you make that up?
I don’t see the resemblance between Colm Meaney and Colin Firth. I like Firth though; he has a nice deadpan charm. This probably won’t raise Lex’s estimation of him, but one of my favorite Firth performances is in WHAT A GIRL WANTS, in which he plays Amanda Bynes’ father. Yes, I saw it on a date, and the movie wasn’t much (although it’s kind of hilarious when American Amanda touches down in Blighty to the strains of The Clash’s great “London Calling”). But Firth gave a real performance when he could’ve slummed.
As for Colm Meaney, I once saw him shopping at the Sears in North Hollywood. It’s so weird to suddenly see a noted actor trudging around a department store with the rest of us middle class schlubs.
I don’t know if that will RAISE MY ESTIMATION of Firth, but AMANDA BYNES certainly RAISES something else.
BYNES POWER. HAVE NO DOUBT.
Getting back on to topic… I suspect the rumor about Nine is probably coming from people who do not work inside distribution, who see the constant stories about the troubles with the Weinsteins, then see them acquiring a currently hot title that could be seen as competition to Nine in a couple categories, and are trying to make one plus one equal three.
As for Nine’s release pattern, I still think November 25th is too damn early. The Ziegfeld in New York City is booked with The Princess and the Frog until December 17th. If I were the Weinsteins, I’d push the release back until December 18th, open at the Ziegfeld and Grauman’s Chinese, and maybe the Music Box in Chicago. Go the reserved roadshow route for the first few weeks, then roll out over January and go wide after the nominations are announced.
Way late to this thread, and sort of off the main topic, but Lex, I’m really psyched to see you bash 2003 as a movie year. These what-recent-movie-years-were-best-and-worst discussions pop up pretty regularly, and I remember being shocked at the love for 2003, one of the weakest years of this decade. I guess if you’re really into Return of the King and/or Mystic River and/or Master & Commander and/or 21 Grams, it could really boost the year up a few notches, but as someone who found all of those overrated (except M&C, which I never saw), I found the love for it pretty puzzling. Kill Bill V1, Once Upon a Time in Mexico (yes), Big Fish, American Splendor, Lost in Translation, X2, Elephant, Matchstick Men… and then you’re pretty much done.
You’re right on about ’02 and ’07, too. I thought ’04 was surprisingly strong, too.
This year has gone pretty strong through August, but I’m getting a sinking feeling that the fall is going to be disappointing and we’ll wind up with only an average year. No P.T. Anderson or Spielberg or Spike Lee or Noam Baumbach or Gondry (though we do get Jonze and the Coens), Scorsese moving out to ’10, and another Rob Marshall musical that’s afraid to even actually be a musical… was it in EW where they talked about how some audiences apparently didn’t like the in-story singing in Dreamgirls, and Marshall, presumably with a straight face, explained that he figured out this amazing fix where, get this, the musical numbers are Nine are kinda just in DDL’s head?? Really, Marshall? You figured out that you’d just do the exact same cop-out lameness you did in Chicago? Ooh, can you stage every number on an ACTUAL STAGE again, too? Visionary!
Yeah, that ‘in-story singing’ really killed Dreamgirls at the box office. And if only all of the songs in Hairspray and Mama Mia had been hallucinations too, oh the money they would have made! That’s actually one of the big reasons I hated Chicago… if you’re going to be a musical, frickin BE a musical.
I KNOW! I guess they could argue that Chicago made more than Dreamgirls or Mamma Mia, but if we’re saying that it’s because it’s what “audiences” want, uh, I dunno, audiences seemed pretty amazingly pleased with Mamma Mia (even though I really disliked it). Chicago is full of those weird compromises: Marshall cuts it MTV-style, but puts the musical numbers mostly on bare, theater-style sets. I maintain Moulin Rouge is one of the only mainstream movie musicals of the past however many years that understood *and* wanted to push the form. All of the other really good ones — Everyone Says I Love You, Dancer in the Dark, Once — have been more indie-ish in some way.
Lex, the sentence in question is indeed gramatically correct, but your use of the word “it” was ambiguous. Better you should have restated the title you meant (or even just L,A) for greater clarity.
“Grammatically.” Oy, it’s too early for this.
Leah- This is for you.
I wasn’t sure where to post it: hopefully you’ll find it and enjoy the read.
It’s my annual “Toronto Broad Overview” piece.
Movieman
TORONTO, ONT.—It was deja vu all over again at the 34th Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF). The same themes kept repeating in movie after movie (dead children, bar mitzvahs and Julianne Moore seemed to be particularly favorite motifs this year), too many films played like variations on previous–and in most cases better–films and some of the titles even had a sing-songy similarity. Was “A Serious Man” the new Coen Brothers flick or Michael Douglas’ indie comeback vehicle? Did Colin Firth win his Best Actor award at the recently concluded Venice Film Festival for “A Single Man” or “Solitary Man”? And that was just in the first weekend. No wonder there were so many confused movie critics walking around in a cinepihiliac daze.
Every TIFF is a bit of an endurance test, and this year was no exception. You spend as much time queuing up for films as you do watching them since only “priority press” (the indefatigable Roger Ebert, Variety’s Todd McCarthy, kith and kin of TIFF chieftain Piers Handling, etc.) are guaranteed a seat. Sleep, nutrition and exercise are always the first casualties of the festival experience. And heaven forbid if you actually have to file copy while in town. Trust me, it’s not easy writing punchy, pithy prose on four hours sleep.
But like all veteran festgoers, and this was my 11th TIFF to date, you learn to persevere in the hope that the movies–the real reason you’re there, after all–will at least be good. Fortunately, this year’s lineup was pretty decent overall with few outright clunkers, unlike 2008’s sorry slate of cinematic underachievers.
The two films that left TIFF with the biggest awards season bounce were “Up in the Air,” the latest triumph by “Juno” director Jason Reitman starring Man of the Hour George Clooney, and the Oprah-sanctioned “Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push’ by Sapphire.” Reitman proved he’s the real deal with the buoyant and exhilarating “Air.” This decade’s “Jerry Maguire,” it’s a true zeitgeist statement that really speaks to the way we live now, how we got here and where we’re heading. Without sugarcoating or audience pandering, “Up in the Air” is also that increasing cinematic rarity: a Hollywood studio film that’s unapologetically and unmistakably grown-up. A Paramount release, “Air” hits theaters around Thanksgiving time.
Also opening in November is “Precious,” a remarkably accomplished sophomore outing by director Lee Daniels whose previous movie (“Shadowboxer”) laid a giant egg at TIFF four years ago. The story of a morbidly obese 16-year-old Harlem teenager (knockout screen newcomer Gabourney Sidibe) forced to deal with her second unwanted
pregnancy–her first baby was born with Down’s Syndrome–and an abusive mother (sitcom diva Mo’Nique in a fearless, take-no-prisoners performance that seems destined to win her the Best Supporting Actress Oscar next March) who’s battling formidable demons of her own, “Precious” is leavened with flights of magic realism as captivating as they are unexpected. Besides demonstrating oodles of visual flair, Daniels also proves to be a first-rate director of actors. He even manages to elicit terrific supporting turns from pop queen Mariah Carey and rocker Lenny Kravitz (both of whom are almost totally unrecognizable here).
For me, the revelation of the festival was fashion icon Tom Ford’s hotly anticipated writing/directing debut, “A Single Man.” Based on a novel by the late Christopher Isherwood, Ford’s masterpiece hearkens back to ’90s Queer Cinema classics like Todd Haynes’ “Poison” and Tom Kalin’s “Swoon.” The film describes an impactful day in the life of a gay college professor (Colin Firth) who’s contemplating suicide in the wake of his longtime companion’s death. This 1962-set film’s painstaking period recreation is “Mad Men” perfection, Firth delivers a career performance and Julianne Moore–in one of her three TIFF appearances–hasn’t been this great in years. The Weinstein Company acquired U.S. distribution rights to “Man” in an old-fashioned bidding war the morning after its sold-out North American premiere screening. They plan to open it at year’s end for–what else?–awards consideration.
“Micmacs,” the new movie by French director Jean-Pierre Jeunet, felt like a retrenchment of sorts–it’s a lot closer to Jeunet’s earlier works like “Delicatessen” and “City of Lost Children” than it is to the hyperbolic romanticism of “Amelie” or “Very Long Engagement.” That said, “Micmacs” (I have no idea what the title means either) is perfectly enjoyable, and the notoriously persnickety p/i audience seemed to love it. Yet I’d be lying if I said that I didn’t miss Jeunet muse Audrey Tautou. Like Michael Moore’s also-in-TIFF “Capitalism: A Love Story” (which fell apart for me in the final act), “Micmacs” will play to Jeunet’s pre-“Amelie” fanbase. But unlike, say, Moore’s “Fahrenheit 9/11”–or Jeunet’s two previous films–I don’t see it winning him any new admirers.
Two remakes, er, reimaginings got a lot of attention at TIFF. German New Wave veteran Werner Herzog’s “The Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call, New Orleans” has as little to do with Abel Ferrara’s 1992 cult classic “Bad Lieutenant” as favorite Toronto son Atom Egoyan’s “Chloe” has to Anne Fontaine’s “Nathalie” (TIFF 2002). Egoyan and Herzog borrow their source materials’ basic premise then pretty much make it up as they go along. Since Herzog is some kind of mad genius, I’ll politely assume that the flat, dingy TV lighting and berserk performances were deliberate (after all, berserk performances are a Herzog specialty). But you know that a movie is seriously bonkers when the dependably strange Brad Dourif comes across as the straightest character in the entire film.
Like “Nathalie,” Egoyan’s “Chloe” has such an irresistible premise–a middle-aged woman hires a beautiful call girl to seduce her husband whom she suspects of infidelity–that I wish he’d left well enough alone. The cast (Liam Neeson, Julianne Moore again and “Mamma Mia!”/”Big Love” ingenue Amanda Seyfried as the young seductress) is certainly up to the challenge, but Egoyan’s perverse decision to turn the climax into “Fatal Attraction Redux” left me shaking my head
The dead children I referred to earlier figured prominently in at least three TIFF titles. “Creation,” the fusty Charles Darwin biopic that opened the fest, stars real-life couple Paul Bettany and Jennifer Connelly as “Origin of Species” author Darwin and his wife Annie whose marriage is sorely tested after the death of their eldest daughter. The charisma-challenged Bettany and Connelly are both out-acted by an orangutan named Lucy who gives the film’s best performance. Danish enfant terrible Lars von Trier (“Breaking the Waves,” “Dogville”) unveiled his Cannes-premiered cause celebre “Antichrist” which deals with a couple (Willem Dafoe and Charlotte Gainsbourg) who express their grief over the accidental death of their only child in extraordinarily, uh, destructive ways. If a movie can be (artistically) sublime and utterly ridiculous (plot-wise) at the same time, von Trier’s latest provocation definitely fits the bill. Most of the audience at my press screening bailed when a talking fox–yes, a talking fox–appears and utters my favorite line of festival dialogue, “Chaos reigns.” Indeed.
The best movie to deal with that discomfiting subject was Don (“The Opposite of Sex,” “Happy Endings”) Roos’ “Love and Other Impossible Pursuits.” As a young wife and mother sent reeling by the SIDS-related death of her infant daughter, Nathalie Portman is so good–and so unmistakably womanly–that she may have finally shed her neurasthenic waif/nymphet image for good. Roos’ decision to leave his L.A. homebase for Manhattan proved to be a smart one. Besides being wonderfully warm, witty and beautifully acted (Roos rep player Lisa Kudrow is brilliant as the brittle ex-wife of Portman’s husband), “Impossible Pursuits” is the most handsomely shot New York movie in more than a decade. Shockingly, the film left Toronto sans distribution deal, despite being one of the most universally well-liked movies of the festival. Better luck at Sundance, Don.
Although no children are harmed in “Mother and Child,” Rodrigo Garcia’s superb ensemble piece beautifully captures the ineluctable bond between, well, mothers and their children with compassion, emotional acuity and some of the most heartrending performances of the year. Annette Bening, Naomi Watts, Samuel L. Jackson and Kerry Washington headline the film’s incredibly rich cast. Look for it sometime in 2010.
Bar mitzvahs were all the rage, too. Two of my favorite TIFF entries (1960s period piece “A Serious Man” by Joel and Ethan Coen and Todd Solondz’s “Life During Wartime”) used the Jewish rite-of-passage for entirely different thematic purposes. In “Man,” a middle-aged college professor (New York stage actor Michael Stuhlbarg) is abandoned by his wife on the eve of their son’s bar mitzvah. A 13-year-old-boy being mitzvahed in “Wartime” is just one of the many characters in indie stalwart Solondz’s unofficial sequel to his 1998 masterwork, “Happiness.” The fact that all of the original roles have been recast with different actors–including Allison Janney, Charlotte Rampling, Ally Sheedy and Ciaran Hinds–doesn’t make a lick of difference. Like the Coens, Solondoz (“Welcome to the Dollhouse,” “Palindromes”) is such a distinctive and bracingly original talent that you can I.D. his signature within the film’s opening frames.
Among the “haven’t-I-seen-you-somewhere-before?” class of TIFF also-rans, Michael Caine played a vigilante pensioner in the well-made, if highly implausible “Dirty Harry” manqu
aaaakkk, type’spawnofsatan’-pad just erased my comments twice! my third go at a reasonable facsimile, sigh:
epic post, movieman/milan! (a cool name to put to the distinctive style) thanks for that comprehensive, terrific round-up. lots of food for thought, SO MANY movies in there i very much want to see.
naturally i get my hopes up but as usual i can’t help but wonder how many of the more obscure flicks i want to see such as ‘goats’ and ‘the joneses’ and ‘pippa lee’ and ‘pursuits’ will actually see the light of day down here (or more accurately the dark of the cinema) and how many months/years i’ll have to wait if they do. i always have this gnawing suspicion that many of the flicks i’d really dig are the ones that never get wide distribution – but maybe that’s just me being paranoid. i guess there’s always the hope of DVD.
(weirdly, ‘the young victoria’ has been out here in ‘the colonies’ in cinemas for several weeks; i went with a gaggle of girls who are all about the historical costume dramas and they creamed their collective knickers for queen vic and albert, very well done. blunt never ceases to amaze me with her versatility, she’s got game)
“The charisma-challenged Bettany and Connelly are both out-acted by an orangutan named Lucy who gives the film’s best performance”
LOL, snap! that definitely needs to be quoted somewhere STAT
Glad you enjoyed the read, Leah.
And I definitely feel your pain about the interminable release delays for well-reviewed film festival titles. The situation is even worse these days due to every major, mini-major, specialty division and itsy-bitsy, boutique indie distributor’s financia woes.
So happy to hear that you liked “Young Victoria,” too. Didn’t Vic and Al make a sexy couple? The funny thing about their off-the-charts sizzle is that neither Emily Blunt nor Rupert Friend is exactly “hot” (at least not Keira/Orlando hot), and yet it’s their relative ordinariness–combined with wonderfully persuasive performances, of course–that turn you on. I can’t believe Friend is the same androgynous twerp who played opposite Michelle Pfeiffer in “Cheri” earlier this summer. Facial hair (and a better haircut) definitely make the man!
yes, i’ve only seen clips/trailers for ‘cheri’ but friend does look a completely different bloke from the pale, hairless boy/man in ‘cheri’ to the lusty prince in ‘victoria’ (i actually find blunt quite beautiful, but she certainly was in ‘plain’ mode as vic compared to, say, her small role as the lusty dancing vixen in ‘dan in real life’)
my mantra re: hoping and waiting for the good stuff to make it down here: patience is a virtue…patience is a virtue….