MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Weekend Of Movies

See The Informant!
You made not love it the first time out. But like a Coens Bros movie, it will grow on you. It’s quite funny, smart, and surprising… and Damon would not be a bad candidate for an Oscar nod.
I’ve seen it twice and look forward to seeing it again. It’s a classic dramatic story, but this film is a comedy and it’s a comedy of expectations. But it is also about how people see themselves… and the humor comes from how they don’t see themselves.
Don’t see Jennifer’s Body
Karyn Kusama directed Girlfight in 2000 and the only feature she has done between that in this was Aeon Flux, which had its charms, but basically ate her alive. Girlfight was full of great energy, but not a ton of directing prowess. Kusama still shows promise, but she has to learn to do the job… and she has not.
Every performance in JB is just fine. Megan Fox shows that, away from the machines, may actually have a real actress in the Maxim bod. Seyfried, who is actually the star of the movie, does well. The boys are good. But while creepy good fun can be creepy good fun, Kusama just doesn’t know how to get it onto the screen.
Meanwhile Diablo Cody’s script is a parody of a Diablo Cody script. One can only wonder how she would rewrite the female genital mutilation scene in Antichrist… cutty cut, clit-o-me! Blech! Her script here proves to us just how skilled a director Jason Reitman is. If ice cream isn’t sweet enough for you (forget any food of substance) and all you want is the hot fudge and cherries, this script is for you. Me? I’m in a Diablo Coma.
Do see Bright Star… assuming you like Jane Campion. It is small. It is gentle. It lingers. But Abbie Cornish is a star and Campion wrings soul out even when it is unexpected.

Be Sociable, Share!

37 Responses to “Weekend Of Movies”

  1. jeffmcm says:

    Ugh, spoiler alert re: Antichrist.

  2. Guy Lodge says:

    What spoiler, Jeffmcm? You seriously hadn’t heard that “Antichrist” has a genital mutilation scene? I think you might be the only one out there. Hell, they’re practically MARKETING the film on that scene.
    No mention of “Disgrace,” Dave? I recall you really liking it out of Toronto 2008. It could use a column inch or two.

  3. jeffmcm says:

    Sort of yes, but I hadn’t been confronted with DP’s gleeful visualization of the details.
    And yes, there are people out there who are more ignorant than I (not too many, but still).

  4. gross, DP, the mention of genital mutilation made me wince. Uh, my period just started today. Thanks…

  5. I’m with Guy, why no mention of Disgrace? I know it’s probably only being shoved into a tiny arthouse in a suburb of NYC that nobody likes, but it’s a great movie with a GREAT John Malkovich performance.

  6. Although, just looking at Mojo now and they don’t list it. Those upstart distributors sure do know how to get the word out, don’t they?

  7. David Poland says:

    I didn’t realize it was opening until after I wrote this…
    http://www.mcnblogs.com/thehotblog/archives/2008/09/tiff_chasing.html

  8. EthanG says:

    See 35 Shots of Rum! Yes it is slow moving, like all of Denis’s films, and dialogue wise it’s the mirror opposite of “Inglourious Basterds.” But it’s a stomach punch of emotion, a film that builds tension through even its score. It’s also the best reviewed movie of 2009 (I doubt any film will top it) and deserves to be seen.

  9. EthanG says:

    Also, can you think of a more mis-marketed film than “Love Happens” this month? Any film with Jennifer Aniston and Aaron Eckhart deserves a decent title and a theatre count above 1,900, even if it sucks. This flick is going to struggle to take in $25 million, and Universal continues its winning ways.

  10. chris says:

    I think it’s refreshing that Universal is unleashing the thoroughly sucky “Love Happens” with an appropriately sucky title and campaign. Apparently, it was cheap to make, but it’ll still bomb and it will deserve it.

  11. jennab says:

    I’m going to see Informant! Surprised my teen son & his friends want to see it, too. Hope it does well for Soderbergh…sounded very dispirited after Che & Girlfriend…threatening to quit the biz in that Guardian interview…Love Happens looks like the crappiest movie EVER! Jennifer Aniston needs to take a long sabbatical, or get an edgy cable series.

  12. Josh Massey says:

    What is it about Diablo Cody that makes Roger Ebert go tingly? He hasn’t had this creepy a crush since Daphne Zuniga.

  13. jesse says:

    I like how when most movie critics are doing a completely predictable, dismissive Cody pile-on/backtrack/etc., it’s somehow considered weird and creepy that Ebert, uh, likes two of her two scripts so far. I mean, he loved Juno AND gave this movie three stars! He must really be over the moon. He’s way more in the bag for Alex Proyas, but since Proyas is a bloke I guess he’s safe from having the critical response to his work reduced to “aw, look who’s got a crush.”
    Jennifer’s Body may be lousy for all I know, but some of the more interesting critics out there — Ebert, A.O. Scott, Dana Stevens — went pretty positive on it.

  14. yancyskancy says:

    As MCN’s self-appointed proofreader, I’d like to point out that Scott Bakula’s last name is mistakenly rendered as “Pakula” in a headline on the home page.

  15. LYT says:

    Jennifer’s Body is for critics who can still let their libido lead them every once in a while. Ebert is one such.
    Me too.

  16. Chucky in Jersey says:

    Let’s see what’s in the megaplex …
    “From the director of ‘Ocean’s 11, 12 and 13’ …”
    whap-whap-whap (pistol-whipped 3 times)
    “From the Academy Award-winning writer of ‘Juno’ …”
    pop (kneecapping with a 9mm)
    whap (pistol-whipped again)
    “From Academy Award-winning director Jane Campion …”
    BLAM! (shotgun blast through heart)
    Given that nonsense I’d rather undergo waterboarding. Instead of the obvious losers you should search out “The September Issue” — it shows Anna Wintour is no Miranda Priestly.

  17. LYT says:

    Chucky – How about “From the stars of ‘The Evil Dead trilogy,’ ‘Smiley Face,’ ‘Dick in a Box’ and ‘The A*Team'”?
    That’d be CLOUDY WITH A CHANCE OF MEATBALLS. Surprisingly awesome movie.

  18. 555 says:

    Cloudy With a Chance of Awesomeness, indeed. Loved it.

  19. LexG says:

    What does it say about Poland’s beloved TWITTER EFFECT that that little Twitter box in the upper right is getting a new effusive tweet about Jennifer’s Body like every half-second? (And Informant! is getting one every five minutes.)
    I guess we’ll know in a couple hours when Nikki posts the Friday estimates… but just going by Twitter, did it have a 15 mil opening day?
    Or does it just mean Twitter is for the vocal, tweet-happy high school market that rushed out to see it, but no one else cared?
    For the record, I didn’t play my usual LEX WEEKEND PREDICTIONS OF GOLD with this one because I don’t want to overhype or undercut THE POWER OF THE FOX…
    But my gut feeling was that she’s too sexy for date couples to go, that groups of dudes DO NOT go to see “hot chick” movies en masse… so this would get most of its cash from giggling teen girls and gay dudes wanting to camp it up.

  20. LYT says:

    The gay dudes I know didn’t like it.

  21. Stella's Boy says:

    According to Nicki, estimates for the weekend:
    Cloudy – $30 million
    Informant! – $11 million
    Love – $9 million
    Jennifer – $7 million

  22. jeffmcm says:

    I saw Jennifer’s Body tonight in a 1/4 full Arclight show (ouch). It wasn’t very good, more or less as DP stated – it had potential as a concept, but man was the execution a failure: underdeveloped characters, poor linkages and motivations. And Kusama’s direction is pretty amateurish.
    In other news, I’m going to up my ante: Chucky, I’ve said before that you’re an idiot. With your most recent post, I’m going to say that you’re a total fucking idiot. Not only is your standard ‘name-checking’ concept stupid as always, but everyone I know who’s gone ahead and seen The September Issue calls it lame and poorly-made.

  23. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    The September Issue isn’t bad per se, but just… not that good. Would work perfectly as a DVD rental, but it doesn’t justify the exhorbinant amount it costs for an adult ticket these days. It just doesn’t do enough with its gand access to Anna Wintour.
    Who cares about movies though when my footy team just made the Grand Final! We are Geelong, the greatest team of all (sing it with me!)

  24. LYT says:

    Glad to see Cloudy estimated to win the weekend…based on marketing alone I would not have gone to see it.
    Only went because it was free to me. But very glad I did.

  25. yancyskancy says:

    I was interested in The September Issue until Chucky name-checked a fictional version of Anna Wintour.

  26. jennab says:

    I saw Informant! I was very disappointed! It was smug, no heart…worst. Score. Ever! Gimmicky and intrusive. What happened to the Soderbergh of Out of Sight, and even Brokovich?
    Damon for best actor? Only in a very sparse field of contenders and even then…he is blown off the screen by Scott Bakula’s effortless and authentic performance. Even Joel McHale was nicely understated!
    Okay, jeffmom, I am going to respectfully disagree on Sept Issue…here is my thought: reality TV has gotten us so used to amped up and contrived conflict, that when genuine conflict between two real people like Wintour and Coddington occurs, we want the big knock-down drag out that never happens, never would. I still found it enjoyable…wonderful afternoon matinee.

  27. jeffmcm says:

    Let me emphasize, I have not seen The September Issue myself, so it could in fact be amazing. The people I talked to who did see it said they thought the drama seemed muffled, as if Wintour had been allowed to determine the dramatic content of the film.

  28. The real problem with September Issue is that RJ Cutler had unlimited access to Anna Wintour and yet the one-on-one interviews are very sparse and not once does he ask her about her thoughts on many issues, the most predominant in my mind being what she thinks of being called a cold bitch when, if she were a man, she’d be praised.

  29. LexG says:

    I am going to see BRIGHT STAR and it is GOING TO RULE.
    Will keep you posted.
    CORNISH POWER. BOW.

  30. Chucky in Jersey says:

    Of course “Jennifer’s Body” is shite. Same for “The Informant!” Why else were they promoted that way?
    Props to jennab for telling the truth. Once jeffmcm stops beating on himself he’ll get the hint.

  31. Sam says:

    Chucky: It’s astonishing how delusional you are. jennab wasn’t echoing your sentiment. jennab saw the MOVIE and formed an opinion on it. You saw the MARKETING and formed an opinion on it.
    I would LOVE IT if there were some way to put you in a backwoods shack somewhere and completely cut you off from the outside world EXCEPT for a weekly shipment of DVDs. The DVDs would lack packaging, adverts, and previews. You’d get to watch the movies but not be exposed to any other media. After three months, you’d have to provide a one-sentence critical evaluation of each movie you saw.
    I have a sneaking suspicion you have absolutely no idea what to write.

  32. jeffmcm says:

    “Once jeffmcm stops beating on himself he’ll get the hint.”
    I don’t know what this means. Beating myself? Beating myself off? Neither makes sense in this context. Chucky, you have not earned the right to be a pompous ass to anyone because you’re not clear or smart enough.

  33. Chucky in Jersey says:

    OK, change “beating on himself” to “beating off”.

  34. jeffmcm says:

    Correction noted. For your next trick, please explain what the hell you’re EVER talking about.

  35. IOIOIOI says:

    Jeff: I have no idea if I figured him out or not, but check out this statement; “Of course ‘Jennifer’s Body’ is shite. Same for
    ‘The Informant!’. Why else were they promoted that way?”
    So it would seem that Chucky believes that films should be marketed on their own principles. If not they are not, then they are shit. This sort of thinking is ridiculous, but Chuckhole lives by his own code. Not matter how whacky the code may seem to the rest of us.

  36. LexG says:

    Whoa, just saw INFORMANT!, and Damon fucking NAILS this thing; Along with Sharlto Copley and Christoph Waltz, male performance of the year so far. Was he nominated for Mr. Ripley? (I’m not going to look it up.) Because this performance is every bit the equal to, if not better than, that one.
    I thought the early going was a deluge of uninvolving information and bizarre motivations, and Soderbergh’s approach was too cutesy and snide and episodic… but by the midway point I was hooked once everything starts coming into focus;
    MINOR SPOILER:
    Really good, smart movie, and can’t say enough about Damon keeping that guy so watchable and even sympathetic late in the game when we realize how bizarre the guy is.
    INFORMANT + JENNIFER’S BODY = Best weekend one-two punch of 2009. GOOD WEEKEND.

  37. He was not nominated for The Talented Mr. Ripley. He sure as hell ought to have been, and his omission was a bit of a shock at the time.

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

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” — 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 — 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 — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — 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 named—” “Yeah, sure — 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 I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s 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 didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — 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. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s 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