ZNAK SAGITE — više od fantastike — edicija, časopis, knjižara...

Pogledao sam BOOT CAMP Christiana Duguaya, courtesy of Ginger.

Iako spadam među verovatno najređi soj ljui koji cene Duguaya kao reditelja i dočekuju njegove filmove sa punom pažnjom, izuzev možda kanadskij i američkih televizijskih producenata, više nisam siguran koji bi bili eventualni parametri njegovog uspeha.

Naime, BOOT CAMP je film koji po svemu sudeći neće biti theatrical, a nema ni žanrovsku jednostavnost svojstvenu DTVu i čini mi se da će najbolju sudbinu imati na malom ekranu. Ova kontemplacija nema puno veze sa kvalitetom samog filma, koji je vrhunski, već naprosto sa mojim razmišljanjem kojim bi putem Duguay mogao doapeti do pozicije da potpisuje dela neke šire relevantnosti.

I BOOT CAMP pokazuje da Duguay ima vrhunski kvalitet i da donosi neodloljivu energiju, high production value i gloss svakom materijalu.

BOOT CAMP je ekspoze o Tough Love boot kampovima koji postoje još od sedamdesetih i kroz koje su prošle stotine hiljada mladih ljudi a nekih 40 je u njima ostavilo kosti.

Naravno, odmah na um padaju naslovi LORD OF FLIES, BATTLE ROYALE i BEACH, međutim, Duguay za razliku od njih svoju priču smešta u jednu sivu zonu. Niti su zatočena deca sasvim nevina, niti je čovek koji vodi kamp sasvim zao. Naravno da kako film odmiče, totalitarni eksces vođe kampa počinje da opravdava decu. No ipak, nu u jednom trenutku vaspioštač be prestaje da iskreno veruje da radi pravu stvar.

U tom smislu, iako se bavi već eksploatisanom temom i jednim velikim opštim mestom, BOOT CAMP se  ne zadržava previše na opštim mestima i ponaša se kao da zna da smo sve to već gledali.

Ko voli Milu Kunis, obradovaće se da ona u ovom filmu pokazuje grudi. Ko prati Peter Stormarea primetiće da njegov lik ponavlja zaposlenje iz HAPPY CAMPERSa. Ko analizira Duguaya, konstatovaće da režira k'o mladić, poletno, ambiciozno, dosta slično Peter Bergu u FRIDAY NIGHT LIGHTS, sa odličnim akcentima, uglovima kamere kojima nadoknađuje sterilnost ambijenata i uopšte uz upotrebu svih trikova koje jedan B-reditelj danas može da koristi kako bi unapredio neki materijal.

Otud se nadam da će Duguay uskoro imati priliku da se potpiše na nečemu što će prrivući veću pažnju.

* * ½ / * * * *

Hey, everyone. "Moriarty" here.

One of the best moments of the press weekend for SPEED RACER was sitting down opposite Joel Silver, my first interview with this producing legend.

I've loved as many of his films as I've hated over the years, but I've always loved Silver himself as a sort of giant personality, a kind we don't often see in producers. I'm fond of his cameo in ROGER RABBIT, for example, where he ribs his own press persona with his performance as the director yelling at poor Roger. I've had many meetings as a writer on projects at his company over the years, and they've even taken me into the studio a few times, but it's never worked out for me to get hired. But in all that time, I've never really spent any significant time talking to Silver directly, and so it was worth the drive to Long Beach on a Friday afternoon through crazy traffic to where Warner was using the Long Beach Grand Prix as the backdrop for their junket. I had twenty minutes with Silver all to myself in one of the many rooms Warner Bros. had commandeered at the conference center.

As we walked in, we talked about the screening the night before, where my son had gone completely apeshit for it. On the way out of the theater, Toshi was telling everyone how much he liked it, including Silver, who was standing by one of the doors. "I like the movie," he said as he walked by Silver, and the producer beamed down at him.

"Thank God," he replied as Toshi just kept walking.

I told Silver how much his reaction had made me laugh, and he told me he really was pleased to hear such an obviously unfiltered reaction from exactly his target audience.

Moriarty: It's crazy. This is the first time he's been hyped for a film, where he's nuts about the trailer and asks about it every day. This and WALL-E this summer are pretty much all he's about right now. It was strange, though... he knows the characters now, so when he ran into [John] Goodman at the end of it, he just sort of casually said, "Hey, Pops," and kept going. He just accepted him as real.

At what point did the Wachowskis know they were going to make this as a family film?


Joel Silver: Well, it came from them. They knew I had SPEED RACER, and we'd talked about it in the past when we'd get together and I... I hadn't looked at it in the while, and after we finished V, they called me one day and they said, uh, "What are you doing with that SPEED RACER thing?"

I said, "I'm struggling."

And they said, "Well, weeeeeee have an idea."

"Go for it." And the studio put up the dough and they went and made this five minute pre-viz of... it's really one race, and it's funny, because there are actually... we were discussing this a few days ago, but there are some shots that were in that pre-viz that made it through to the finished movie.


Moriarty: Really?


Joel Silver: Not exactly the way they were, but those precise ideas got through. So they sat with Dan Glass and John Gaeta, our team, and they created this pre-viz, which was, you know, kind of a composite of all the races. It was just to show me and the studio what they wanted to do.

So it took about six or eight weeks, and I remember, it was December of '06, and we showed it to everybody in a screening room on the lot, and the lights go down and the projector goes on and they watch this... race. And the lights go up, and... you know... they were kind of... there was... they were perplexed. And they said, you know, "Is it ROGER RABBIT? I mean, what is this? Is it live-action? Is it animation?"

And the Wachowskis said, "Well, the idea is that it's live-action anime."

"And that's... what, exactly?" (laughs) So they explained what their intention was, and the studio said, "Let's go for it."


Moriarty: Well, it is one of the most aggressively visual films I've seen in a long time, and about ten minutes in, my wife actually leaned over and said, "Is the whole thing going to look like this?" By the end of it, though, she found it all quite beautiful. I think it does take a few moments to sort of adjust to that world...


Joel: That's what happened when the first trailer came out. I mean, people... I mean, I was happy that Harry really got it and loved it. I think [he] referred to the clip as "chocolate-covered pussy juice," I think he said. Which, by the way, I was happy to see that he said he liked that... but there were a lot of people that didn't quite get it. "What is it exactly?" You know, what do you need? A couple of journalists I showed it to, they... which, by the way, they were very... one guy said, "Well, is CGI BETTER? What is wrong with the old kind of movie making?" These are older journalists, and it is hard to shake them of the golden age of CHINA SEAS, but... CHINA SEAS, by the way, if you look at that movie, which is a Clark Gable movie, they shot all the wide shots on the back lot, but they went back into the studio to shoot the close-ups. So they took... they took still... you know, er, rear projection, and they took close-ups on the stage. They could've shot the wide shots and the close-ups together [on location], but they felt they had more control on the close-ups on a soundstage.


Moriarty: I don't think it's necessarily that... it's not that you've broken a big technical barrier, that no one's shot a movie with similar ideas. I mean, this does go back to the golden age of Hollywood where you created the whole world, and I think that is what I really respect about it. It is a world that from the beginning to the end is very persuasive, and I like that it's sort of an alternate history, and you can see where it diverges from the real world. Um, I get the sense that they laid out a real history, like they know exactly where the steps were where they got from our reality to this one.


Joel: Sure.


Moriarty: Um, but I think its very childlike in the way it treats the racing and the physics. It's not that it disregards this reality, it just sets its own sort of rules. Um... was it a... was it difficult imparting that to the cast? Sort of what the tone of this world is gonna be because that's... it is sort of a leap for them.


Joel: Well, I mean, they... they... film makers like Larry and Andy, they know what they want. They go into the, the, into the day knowing what they want. I watched them in the visual effects review and they're, they have seen in their heads what they want it to look like, and they are directing the visual effects guy to give them what they want, so they knew the tone and they were really fans of the show. They liked the show...


Moriarty: Oh, it's obvious, too, it's obvious that they must really love the characters and the world and...


Joel: ... and they wanted to keep the tone, and the fun, and the aesthetic of the show and... and they wanted to make, again, a family movie. It is important that you like it as your son likes it. They want families to go together and love this picture. There are things in there that maybe older kids may not LOVE, but little kids would love, and things that little kids may not get and the older people would get, so they, it's kind of a mixture like that... but they kept the tone the way they wanted it, and that's... and, and, and when they cast the movie they got the people they felt would give them what they wanted. I mean they, they saw every young hot actor in Hollywood and they really felt that Emile was the guy. They felt that he was Speed. He, he was honest, and forthright, and ambitious, and he was... he had the wholesome quality that Speed had to have. And they felt, they felt that Christina looked like Trixie so... and and and John Goodman, and Susan Sarandon, and Matthew... and they really wanted them all to be the characters and they wanted them all to watch the show and see what it was...


Moriarty: I think that Matthew does some of his best work ever in this. He really... he is... the way he buys the reality of it, it reminds me of the best moments in THE MATRIX, where you get the sense that those actors love that world, and they love being in it, and they love playing with the toys of it.


Joel: They commit. They commit to it.


Moriarty: Matthew gives... I don't know if I've ever seen him so loose and funny... I felt...


Joel: He worked on the voice a lot. He wanted to get Racer X's voice, ya know? He wanted that authority that Racer X has, and he did it.


Moriarty: The film makers that I always enjoy you working with are the guys who I think you... you are the only person who protects them the right way, and it seems like there are some film makers that you really click with. I think the Wachowskis, you obviously have a great rapport with them. Um, I think Shane Black, the fact that now as a director you're really... you've enabled him to take that step... ummm...


Joel: He is writing another script right now for us.


Moriarty: ... his voice finally is, that's the Shane Black that we've loved on the page, and I finally felt like I saw that in a film. As a producer, is that your role when you find an artist that you love, to really support their voice and their vision?


Joel: Well my job as a producer is always to support the director, y'know? I, it's up to the director to make the movie, he has to make the movie. I mean, I like to be involved in these kind of giant movies that allow me to make a contribution, allows me to be involved in the process and, you know, do what I do, which is keep it all going. And there are problems on a movie every day, and my job is to kind of solve those problems, but I serve the director, and I have to get 'em what he needs and get everybody what they want and support their vision and, and, you know, I work with directors I believe can benefit from that relationship. And, uh, those have been the most successful movies that I've done.

And Larry and Andy, we've been together almost... for over 10 years now and I mean, I, I am so proud every day I work with them. I mean, they, they are consummate professionals. They understand... I mean, I sit with them and watch these effects reviews, and I don't know how they understand the systems, the process so well... they understand every aspect of color correcting, and density and focus, and focal length, and filters, and they understand everything, and they know what they want. You work with a lot of directors that DON'T understand that process at all, who look for help...


Moriarty: Right, or they will lean on a great supporting team or a tech team...


Joel: But, but these guys are as good as it gets.


Moriarty: I think what surprised me most is that they are funny...


Joel: ... very funny...


Moriarty: ... and we've never seen funny from them, really, in their films before. Uh, but some of the best stuff in this movie is... well, you guys found the right kid... I think Paulie Litt is the kid.


Joel: I mean, he is great, he is what Spritle was, y'know? And we're concerned if we do make more of them, that... you know... I don't know if you can find a kid who is the same age, and we have to move quickly if we want to see Paulie again...


Moriarty: Yeah, I know... but that was, I think, that's the area that normally, like... I think that there are some people who are going to be too cynical for the film. I think the film is really sincere and it's very sweet and, um... it seems like, especially right now, almost all of pop culture is kind of sarcastic and snarky, and, um, how conscious were the Wachowskis that they were making something that kind of stands apart from that?


Joel: They wanted to make a family movie. They wanted a movie that everybody would enjoy, and, look, we...


Moriarty: Even, like, Dreamworks... they make everything kind of sarcastic and one step removed, and make everything into a "hip" movie for kids...


Joel: ... but, but Pixar movies... THE INCREDIBLES and RATATOUILLE... those movies aren't that snarky and, like, they... I mean, you know, it was no mistake that Michael Giacchino came onboard...


Moriarty: ... awwww, his work is fantastic.


Joel: I mean, it's genius, and someone told me the whole score is online now...


Moriarty: It is. Yesterday, it premiered...


Joel: People are, like, loving it. I don't know why they put the whole score on...


Moriarty: It's more like a big sampling. I think it's like about an hour of music, an hour ten of music...


Joel: But it's so... it makes it all so... magical. The movie, I mean... he, that last reel, the end of that race when he goes into that music, it just takes... takes your breath away.


Moriarty: I really, I found it very emotional, the stuff they say about family, about watching your kids start to succeed and become what they want to be. There is real value in that, and I like how they portray it.


Joel: What I was saying before was... if I can finish what I was saying... is that some of these... yes, some of these, the more kind of, you know, teen-oriented or older movies tend to be very sarcastic, and tend to be, you know, um, you know, "wink wink nudge nudge," y'know, where we get the jokes. But the purpose of this movie was to interest my six year old, interest your three year old, as well as interest adults. So we had to make a movie wouldn't go over their heads, and I mean there are sometimes jokes... I remember in the first TOY STORY, where, you know, Don Rickles's character is "Ahhh, you hockey puck," and it really is a hockey puck...


Moriarty: Yeah.


Joel: There are things like that, that are designed for a different aesthetic, but primarily we are talking about a family movie that needs to have that warmth and that enveloping quality, and I think this movie has that.


Moriarty: Well I think there is a movie, in a lot of the, I mean, everything now seems to be a pre-existing property, seems to be a remake, or seems to be a reinvention or something. There seems to be a move with a lot of it that I feel is very calculated, that, like, they buy it because it has a lot of name recognition. This doesn't feel like that at all. This doesn't feel like, "Okay, SPEED RACER. This demographic likes it." The people who are most nostalgic for it are in their 40s...


Joel: Sure...


Moriarty: ... and kids just like it because of the innate thing of fast cars...


Joel: That's... that's the whole thing. I mean, Favereau told me the story, he was, um, working on IRON MAN, and Hasbro called him and said, "Is there a car in the movie?"

And he says, "No, it's IRON MAN. He's Iron Man."


Moriarty: He is the car. (laughing)


Joel: "But is there a car?"

And he says, "No, he's Iron Man. He flies around. He's Iron. Man."

And they said, "Well, could there be a car?"

So he says, "No, there is not a car."

So, when he told me the story, I said, "Well, I have a car." 'Cause kids like cars. Mattel...


Moriarty: The wall of Hot Wheels for this movie is AMAZING.


Joel: ... but, um, Mattel says their CARS... the Pixar CARS... was huge. Successful... huge... and this idea, this worked out because we were able to give the files of these cars, the computer files of these designs, to Mattel before we started the movie. I mean, they had them even before we started making the picture. So they were able to do a really aggressive, y'know, a program on this, on the Mach 5. They said "It is a white car with a red M, y'know? How do we feel about it?"

I said, "We're going to be fine." I walked into Toys'R'Us a few days ago, and you walk in and the entire place is just SPEED RACER. I never had... I mean, being a R-rated guy... I'd walk into Toys'R'Us and see THE LION KING or ENCHANTED or some big Disney movie. I'd never see one of our pictures, so to walk in there and see that, and they are telling me a lot of toys for movies, they come out nine weeks before and sit, and people are like "What's happening? These cars aren't moving."

And they are like "Wait till the movie opens."

This stuff is going off the shelves now, it's moving right now. It's already moving and they're like, "If this movie works and people go to see it and if it has the effect it seems to have, it will be a success for everyone."


Moriarty: When I told my friend, this guy who is actually older than me, when I told him that I'd seen the wall at the toy store, and the Mach 5 had a trunk that opens that you could put Spritle and Chim Chim in, he was like, "Okay... I'm buying one. I don't care... I HAVE to have that." Cause those are the logical toys they've never really done for SPEED RACER fans before.


Joel: As my son would say to me, because I gave my son the show to watch, "Are they gonna have Spritle and Chim Chim in the trunk?" Because he... and by the way, we put them in the trunk because there is one scene where he slams the trunk down with them still in it. You think, "OH MY GOD there is a kid in the trunk! You are leaving him in the Trunk?!" But I mean, that's the idea. The idea is to, is to take what we love about the show, use that, but then bring it to a whole new audience.


Moriarty: Now, I know that there are a few of these other properties... by the way, Devin from CHUD... I was talking to him, and he told me you confirmed that it looks like JUSTICE LEAGUE is done now... (transcribers note...yay!)


Joel: No. I just said that it seems to be...


Moriarty: ... it's, uhhh...


Joel: ... postponed.


Moriarty: That's one of those that... really... I hope that they get it right, rather than get it soon. Um, because these are... how long have you been attatched to SPEED RACER? I know Patrick Reed Johnson, I talked to him about it years and years ago, and he wasn't the only one who took a shot at it, certainly. It's been how long?


Joel: Almost 20 years.


Moriarty: That's amazing, and it feels like you finally found the perfect...


Joel: Look, we struggled with it a long time, and it really... until... y'know, I remember, I...


Moriarty: But you do that with properties. You stick by them, like SGT. ROCK. You have developed that for a long time now...


Joel: I'm going to make that. I'm going to make that very soon. With Guy Ritchie, I think.


Moriarty: Really?!


Joel: I hope so. Yeah, um, but, um, I remember at one point it got close. I mean, there were a lot of people attached to SPEED RACER over the years. Um, no real actors. They never got that close. I remember at one point some production designer was working on something for Julien Temple or somebody. They were designing a car that would cost a million dollars which, at that time, was a huge amount of money, and the car was all going to be chrome, and you could shoot it from any angle. You had to have special lenses. I don't even know what they were doing, but you know... but the idea of having SPEED RACER with a real car... it could never do what we want the car to do. I mean it couldn't do that "Car-Fu," as we are calling it...


Moriarty: That's so great.


Joel: ... and the reality of being able to do that, to let the car spin in the air and do all those things, and to see the tires re-inflate, and all that stuff that couldn't exist without the computer, and it couldn't be done until right now.


Moriarty: To wrap up because I know you've had a long day so far... um, I think for a while, a lot of people had an idea of what a Joel Silver film was. Especially, I think, defined by the action stuff you did in the '80s and the early '90s. Do you feel like you continue to redefine for yourself what a Joel Silver film is? 'Cause this is a totally different audience than you've ever had, and I think it could work. I think they will fall in love with this...


Joel: I mean, I hope so. I hope you are right. I hope you will project that to your vast audience of, uh, of readers and writers. Um, look, I, I, there are things that inspire me. There are things that I want to do. We are starting NINJA ASSASSIN in three weeks, y'know? I always wanted to do a movie like ENTER THE DRAGON. I always wanted to do a full martial arts movie. And since THE MATRIX, I've been pushing the guys, the Wachowski brothers, to do something like that because THE MATRIX had a lot of martial arts in it, but it was a much bigger movie, much bigger ideas, like the visual effects... but I want to do, like, a Bruce Lee movie, a really strong martial arts film. And we're starting that. I mean, Rain is going to be this incredible character. It's a Ninja movie, it's full martial arts. It's fantastic, and I've always wanted to do that kind of movie, and I've always talked about it. I've just never... I mean, I did ROMEO MUST DIE. I did some martial arts pictures, but never like what I am saying this will be like.

I have a lot of interests. I have a lot of things that excite me. So, you know, this ROCKNROLLA movie I just did with Guy Ritchie is fantastic. It is raw, it is funny, it is dark, it is great. It is great. And I liked his first movie, LOCK STOCK, and I liked SNATCH, and I think it's the best movie he's ever made. I've always wanted to do a movie with him. I mean, I still get excited about things. There are things I still want to do. I don't know if there is an imprint that I can say, "That is a movie that I made," but my contribution is in the movie, and I support the boys and it is their vision, you know?


Moriarty: Right.


Joel: But I think I am doing everything I can to make it as good as I can make it. So I got a lot of movies ahead of me. I've produced, I think, 55 movies in my life, and I want to keep going till I produce 55 more or whatever, and I wanna just have a lot of stories to tell, and I want to tell them.


Moriarty: I always tell my friends that one of the great geeks spots that you have to visit at some point when you're in Los Angeles is the waiting room of your office on the Warner lot, with the Predator and the Matrix stuff and all those posters, because it really is crazy when you stand there and you realize everything you've had your hands on over the years.


Joel: Well, I am happy that we can keep going. I've been doing this, I've been there for 22 years. I've been there for a long time, and I don't feel like it's been that long but... you figure the LETHAL WEAPON movies, the DIE HARD movies. PREDATOR. THE MATRIX. There is a lot of product we've done. I'm proud of everything I've done... I'm proud of them all, even the ones that didn't work. I'm proud of them, too, so...


Moriarty: I'm just glad to see you trying new things.


Joel: Sure.


Moriarty: ... because, uh, the nostalgia's fine, but I love that you are taking a chance on some things like this now.


Joel: And I love that you guys are aggressive with getting people to go to the movies and see what we are doing.

Ovo kao da sam ja birao:

SCOTT PILGRIM might have finally found his Ramona!
Ahoy, squirts! Quint here. Looks like Edgar Wright has found his leading lady for SCOTT PILGRIM in GRINDHOUSE cutie Mary Elizabeth Winstead.








I didn't care much for her in FINAL DESTINATION 3, but I liked the dopey innocence she brought to GRINDHOUSE. She's definitely pretty and can be spunky, which is what Ramona needs. And she looks like the human version of Bryan Lee O'Malley's manga-ish art.








She will be pined after by Michael Cera in the title role. Can't wait to see her in that cute little hair cut and the rollerskates! What do you folks think?

Speed Racer je baš žestoko (po svemu sudeći – nadasve zasluženo) usrao motku: za 2 nedelje, ukupno otplatio jedva 1/10 svojih troškova, tj. $24,367,000

šta misliš, dimbo, da li će ovaj šamar joel silver da oseti, i kako/koliko?
a bata i seka w?

Joelova producentska tajna je oduvek bila u tome što je uspevao da u ključnom trenutku nađe ljude koji će ga u kreativnom smislu učiniti neophodnim studiju Warner.

On je uvek imao sjajnu plejadu A-ljudi sa kojima radi tipa McTiernan, Donner, i odlične igrače s klupe tipa Tony Scott, Renny Harlin...

Joel je bio u sličnoj situaciji pre deset godina kada je njegova prethodna dobitna kombinacija Richard Donner-Mel Gibson počela da posustaje. Onda su ga 1999. na mapu vratili sibilinzi Wachowski. Oni su mu postali glavni krativni oslonac dok su sa klupe ulazili Andrzej Bartkowiak, Dominic Sena ili James McTiegue.

Očigledno se Joel sada nalazi u novoj 1998. godini. Koliko vidim ima ROCKNROLLAu in the can plus ima Guy Ritchiea attachovanog za bar još dva projekta, ako ne računamo zamišljene sequele ROCKNROLLAe. To je zanimljiv preokret. Čudno mi je da sada igra na njega.

U principu SPEED RACER nije tipičan Silverov film. Imaj na umu da je Joel imao recentni fijasko sa FRED CLAUSom David Dobkina koji je pakovan kao siguran hit na tragu WEDDING CRASHERSa. To je projekat koji bi se kao paralela mogao uporediti sa FATHERS DAYom Ivana Reitmana upravo u ono vreme kada je pre desetak godina bio u prethodnoj krizi. Silver nema sreće sa komedijama ma koliko da su sure fire hit u incepciji a i FC i FD su to bili.

Stoga, Joelu da bi se vratio na stari vrhunski nivo treba veliki akcioni hit, to je teren koji on najbolje poznaje.

Mozda bi to mogao biti NINJA ASSASSIN koji sibilinzi rade sa McTiegueom.

http://www.empireonline.com/features/photo/oliver_stone_w/default.asp?NID=22368

UK-distributor Optimum Releasing, has struck a multi-picture deal with Joel Silver's Dark Castle (which already has a relationship with Optimum parent Studio Canal).

The first title in the deal will be Dominic Sena's action thriller Whiteout. Based on the graphic novel, Kate Beckinsale stars in the story of a US marshall alone in Antarctica who has to investigate the continent's first murder.

Optimum's previous pick-ups of Cannes titles include Steven Soderbergh's two Che films, Matteo Garrone's Gomorra and Emir Kusturica's Maradona documentary.

The company's other forthcoming releases include Berlinale winner Elite Squad, Shane Meadows' Somerstown, Sundance hit doc American Teen, and the now-shoooting political satire In The Loop by Armando Iannucci starring James Gandolfini.

Washington, May 16: Cancer-stricken movie star Patrick Swayze is expected to reprise his role in the sequel to the hit 1991 film 'Point Break.' If his health allows, the 55-year-old star would be reliving his character of 'Bodhi' for the film, reports Contactmusic.  
 
 




According to The Sun, the sequel is due to be shot in Singapore and Indonesia, however, the cast for the movie is as yet unconfirmed.

Earlier this year, Swazye had confirmed that he was suffering from pancreatic cancer.

The 'Dirty Dancing' legend has reportedly readied his will, transferring his property worth millions to his wife of 32 years, Lisa Niemi.

Reprizirao sam CLOAK AND DAGGER Richarda Franklina, courtesy of Ginger.

Reč je o jednom od klasika mog detinjstva, briljantnoj integraciji špijunskog i dečjeg filma, sa obiljem citiranja Hitchcocka za odrasle, savršenim naslednikom u filmu MONSTER HOUSE Gil Kenana.

Franklin je pre svega, imao odličnu polaznu osnovu u izvanrednom scenariju Tom Hollanda, koji je ne samo jedan od ključnih scenarista osamdesetih već je i u nekoliko navrata pokazao kako ume da izvanredno integriše konvencije omladinskog filma sa tradicijama trilera i horora. U tom smislu naročito bih istakao Winnerov manje poznati film SCREAM FOR HELP.

U CLOAK AND DAGGER, Hollandov odličan, moderan koncpet u kome se starinska hitchcockocvska intriga meša sa klincima i novim tehnologijama biva realizovan u jednom pregnantnom hitchcockovskom maniru u kome se susreću ingeniozno osmišljeni mininalizam inscenacije u skladu sa svim konvencijama suspensea sa izlivima najmračnijih podsvesnih strahova.

Primer maestralno postavljene hitchcockovske scene je situacija u kolima kad se otkrije da su baba i deda negativci. To je stvarno majstorski postavljena i realizovana situacija, odličan rad kakav se retko sreće.

U tom smislu je šteta što CLOAK AND DAGGER još uvek nije uvršten u panteon klasika osamdesetih.

* * * * / * * * *

Pogledao sam WHAT HAPPENS IN VEGAS Tom Vaughna.

Ovaj film je prvobitno trebalo da režira srpski zet Julian Farino, muž Branke Katić, koji inače radi HBO serije. Međutim, na kraju je uzet drugi reditelj, vrlo sličan Farinu. Tom Vaughan je takođe britanski reditelj. Takođe je prošao HBO školu i nedavno sam gledao njegov coming-of-age film STARTER FOR TEN koji je imao svoje probleme.

WHAT HAPPENS IN VEGAS je znatno usavršenije delo. Dana Cox potpisuje jednu jasnu high concept romantičnu komediju sa elementima gross outa, a Vaughan je odlično realizuje sa sjajnim izborom glumaca i odličnim komičarskim tajmingom.

Kritika je osporila ovaj film kao ponavljanje formule i taj stav jasno nije bez osnova. Međutim, Vaughan je realizovao delo koje na superioran način ponavlja formulu i to ne bi smelo da mu se osporava.

Inače, krajnje curious detalj za ljubitelje srpskog filma jeste mali omaž HADESRFILDU kada AshtonKutcher skine vrata sa kupatila u stanu koji deli sa Cameron Diaz. Divan touch.

* * * / * * * *

LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) - Toward the end of Robert Zemeckis' 1988 animated/live action mystery "Who Framed Roger Rabbit," a distraught Roger confronts the aptly named Judge Doom, who, it has become clear, set the rabbit up for the murder of Toontown magnate Marvin Acme.

ADVERTISEMENT

"So you thought you could get away with it, didn't you?" Roger says. "Ha! We toons may act idiotic, but we're not stupid. We demand justice!"

Twenty years later, Gary Wolf, the science fiction author whose 1981 novel formed the loose basis of the hit movie, is still fighting his own crusade for cartoon justice -- or at least a pile of money from Disney, which released the film.

Unfortunately for Wolf, he hasn't been as successful as his hare-brained creation.

Mention the Wolf case to seasoned entertainment litigators and you'll hear either a groan or a chuckle depending on which side of the talent-vs.-studios battle the lawyer fights. The case already has spawned at least two significant judicial setbacks for profit participants trying to collect damages from studios. And just last week, a California court of appeal sent a portion of the case back to the trial court, illustrating the uphill and often unending battle facing talent who dare challenge studio accounting.

Like many authors, Wolf signed a 1983 option agreement that gave him 5% of "gross receipts" from Disney's exploitation of neurotic Roger, curvy Jessica Rabbit, cigar-chomping Baby Herman and the rest of his characters. The parties didn't bother to define "gross receipts" (hey, this was the early 1980s), and Wolf later claimed that he was owed millions for his share of everything from nonmonetary promotional partnerships with McDonalds to the value of Roger Rabbit "walk arounds" at Disney theme parks.

Strike 1 against Wolf came in 2003, when the court ruled that the right to collect contingent compensation from Disney doesn't create a "fiduciary" relationship with the studio. The limitation seems minor, but a breach of fiduciary duty lawsuit could entitle a participant like Wolf to punitive damages, which often are as much as 10 times the damages as a mere contract claim. Thanks in part to Wolf, that leverage largely has disappeared in profits cases.

"It's a major problem now," says Neville Johnson, a litigator who has brought accounting claims against studios. "It's not a good case for us."

Wolf seemingly recovered in 2004 when the same appeals court ruled that "gross receipts" might include the value of tens of millions of dollars worth of noncash promotional consideration. But then a 16-week trial ensued, and Wolf won just $180,000, far less than the $8 million he had sought.

Meanwhile, Disney's lawyers claimed that they discovered an oddity in the accounting statements: Wolf had been overpaid for 10 years, they argued. More appeals came, and on May 9 the court sent the case back to the trial court to figure out what, if anything, Wolf is owed.

When the dust in Toontown finally settles, it could be Wolf owing Disney money, not the other way around.

"Be careful what you wish for," warns Disney attorney Marty Katz. "When pressing for an accurate or more detailed accounting, a participant is just as likely to uncover an overpayment as an underpayment. Fairness is a two-way street."

Wolf still could get his payday, of course. His longtime lawyer, Larson Jaenicke, didn't return calls or e-mails, but it's no secret that "Hollywood accounting" is alive and well in the industry. In just the past year, juries in Los Angeles returned multimillion-dollar verdicts against Warner Bros. and NBC in favor of producer Alan Ladd Jr. and the creators of "Will & Grace," respectively. At the same time, a Writers Guild of America-backed bill in the California legislature aimed at protecting participants cleared its first hurdle in April.

As studio revenue streams have diversified and talent contracts have become dizzyingly complex, it's understandable that many profit participants believe they're getting screwed. But as Wolf's case shows, when it comes to studio accounting, "justice" might be as tough to define as it is to achieve.

"Why, the real meaning of the word probably hits you like a ton of bricks," Roger Rabbit says to Judge Doom in that climactic scene. Then, of course, Roger is buried by a falling ton of actual bricks.

Reuters/Hollywood Reporter

Eric Lively, Tony Todd and Gil Bellows have been cast in the "24" prequel.

The two-hour "24" prequel to the upcoming seventh season will feature Jack Bauer (Kiefer Sutherland) battling an international crisis in Africa while the U.S. ushers in a new president on Inauguration Day.

"L Word" alum Lively, brother of "Gossip Girl" star Blake Lively, will play the president's son.

Bellows, best known for his role on Fox's "Ally McBeal," will play a State Department officer ordered to serve Bauer with a subpoena to appear before the Senate.

Todd, who also will appear during Season 7, will play cruel African dictator Gen. Juma. Todd has been recurring on NBC's "Chuck" as CIA director Graham.

On the prequel, Lively, Todd and Bellows join previously cast Robert Carlyle.

Lively is managed by Untitled.

Quote from: "crippled_avenger"Lively is managed by Untitled.

Sta ovo znaci?

Kad je reč o Davidu Cronenbergu, povremene reprize njegovih filmova su okrepljujuće i poučno iskustvo, čak i onda kada se radi o njegovim promašajima. Iako nisam siguran šta bih mogao naučiti iz ponovnog gledanja HISTORY OF VIOLENCE, sigurno bi se tu nešto moglo naći. Naime, isto tako sam mislio za M.BUTTERFLY koji je u stvari prvi veliki Cronenbergov misstep u karijeri. Međutim, sad kad sam ga reprizirao došao sam do raznih uvida.

Pre svega, ja kao neko sklon pop izrazu, uopšte ne mislim da ima išta loše u ponavljanju formula. I čini mi se da je prva Cronenbergova greška bila u tome što je odlučio da M. BUTTERFLY ne radi u svom suštinski kliničkom (iza kamere) ali vrlo eksplicitnom (ispred kamere) maniru. Sasvim je jasna, a i racionalno opravdana, ideja da on u M. BUTTERFLY ne gradi priču na senzacionalizmu već da će njena snaga izbiti kroz najkonvencionalniji mogući pristup. U ovoj nameri nema ništa loše. Uostalom, izuzev stvari koje se dešavaju u samom kadru, skoro svi Cronenbergovi filmovi donose sasvim konvencionalan storytelling. U tom smislu, potencijalna subverzivnost romanse između francuskog diplomate i Kineza trandžiranog u opersku  divu mnogo veći potencijal sadrži ako bi se uradila u maniru arhaizirane melodrame tipa SAYONARA sa Marlon Brandom. Cronenberg je dakle naizgled mudro žrtvovao jedan od aduta nadajući se većem dobitku.

Zašto je dobitak izostao? Pa zato što je M. BUTTERFLY u suštini anti-cronenbergovski projekat koji toliko liči na Cronenberga da je i njega samog zavarao.

Cronenbergova osnovna karakteristika je apsolutno racionalan tretman iracionalnih postavki. Međutim, opredelivši se za melodramu kao žanr i određenu stilizaciju, pre svega oličpenu kroz sentimentalnost, Cronenberg se odrekao racionalnog tretmana ove iracionalne preiče.

Koliko god bio sposoban da nemoguće stvari učini uverljivim u ranijim filmovima, u M. BUTTERFLY je jednu moguću stvar učinio krajnje neuverljivom. Uostalom, svako uključivanje razuma u ovaj slučaj definitivno bi razbio svaku sentimentalnu auru ili bi je pak razgradio na drugim osnovama.

Odrekavši se razuma i prešavši u ravan sentimentalnosti, Cronenberg odjednom deluje šuplje, tromo i inferiorno u odnosu na druge manje vredne reditelje koji mnogo bolje vladaju sentimentalnošću.

Ipak, sama kontemplativnost ovog istinitog slučaja, čini da u skupu Cronenbergovih promašaja, M. BUTTERFLY stoji kao najdostojanstveniji, možda baš zato što je sentimentalnost generalno cenjenija na filmu od vigilantizmai gangsterizma.

Međutim, ukupno uzev u M. BUTTERFLY nalaze se slične greške u postupku kao u HISTORY OF VIOLENCE ili EASTERN PROMISES. No, M. BUTTERFLY je izašao u trenutku kada je kritika još imala snage da koriguje Cronenberga te se on posle ovog promašaja vratio u red, i isporučio svoje poslednje remek-delo CRASH. Nažalost, posle HISTORY OF VIOLENCE i EASTERN PROMISES, kritika je samo produbila Cronenbergove zablude.

* * / * * * *

Odlučio sam da za promenu malo repriziram evropske filmove koji mi se nisu dopali.

Za početak reprizirao sam Balabaonovljev O NAKAZAMA I LJUDIMA koji mi je bio upadljivo odvratan kad sam ga prvi put gledao, više se ni ne sećam gde, da li na Festivalu autorskog filma ili tako negde. Moram priznati da mi se na drugo gledanje nije popravio utisak.

Prvo šokira me da film traje devedesetak minuta pošto ostavlja utisak dvočasovnog filma. Balabanov je očigledno pokušao da maksimalno uspori temo, valjda u cilju referisanja na epohu nemog filma, uostalom ni u njegovim drugim filmovima, tempo nije jača strana, ali u tome porpilično promašuje stvar pošto su nemi filmovi zbog brzine snimanja i broja sličica u sekundi mahom uglavnom brži od savremenih filmova, a drugo nemi su, dok je Balabanovljev film krajnje verbalan.

Tako da taj sam koncept je više gimmick nego što ima neku funkcionalnost i moram priznati da meni to liči na neku Makavejevljevu liniju i neke slične susrete proučavanja ontologije filma, seksa i poltitike. Međutim, politika ovog filma je dosta mutna. Osim dekadencije visokih klasa i zamene uloga između sluga i gospodara do koje su dovele izopačene želje gospodara, neke ozbiljnije politike tu nema. Kad je reč o seksu, to su isto sve manje-više neka opšta mesta bez naročite eksplicitnosti prikaza, a opet i bez ozbiljnijeg emotivnog odjeka proisteklog iz odnosa među likovima.

Konačno, u svemu ovome nema neke dokumentarne težine, tako da na kraju sve ovo opstaje jedan prilično besciljan kuriozitet. Doduše, balabanovljeva ambicija da bude bizaran je za svaku pohvalu, tako da ovo nije jedan od onih besmislenih filmova za koje mislim da ne treba da postoje. Iako mu se nije dopao i ne nudi neku naročitu vrednost, ne osećam se oštećenim što sam ga dva puta pogledao.

* * / * * * *

U ciklusu repriziranja evropskih filmova koji mi se nisu dopali odgledao sam opet NOZ W WODZIE Romana Polanskog. Na prvo gledanje bio mi je nepodnošljiv ali sam imao više vremena za kontemplaciju.

Naime, na novo gledanje, ubeđen sam da je NOZ W WODZIE potpuno pogrešno pročitan film. Naime, dominantno čitanje ovog filma i glavni atribud  je to što je reč o svedenoj igri tri karaktera, snažnoj spihološkoj studiji i sl. Međutim, ovaj film je zapravo dokaz o superiornosti akcionog, avanturističkog i kriminalističkog filma. Sve ključne dramske situacije proističu iz sukoba junaka i njihove jedrilice sa prirodom, olujom i zločinom.

S druge strane, sve situacije bazirane na sukobu između karaktera, psihološkim nijansama i tenzijama nimalo ne funkcionišu. Dakle, u njemu je najslabije ono po čemu je najčuveniji. Iako, ne mogu da kažem ni da je avanturističko-kriminalistički segment naročito jak, činjenica je da je taj deo barem inspirativan pa ne čudi da su potom snimljeni slični ali znatno efektniji naslovi poput DEAD CALM Phil Noycea.

Kao mali disclaimer dodao bih da ovaj stav nisam napisao kako bih ikoga šokirao ili nervirao, provocirao i sl. Ovi utisci mi u stvari čak i ne deluju kao neko naročito otkriće. Kad sam gledao film činili su se sasvim očigledni.

* * ½ / * * * *

Dragi naši,

U petak 30. maja, od 22h u Šipražju, u poslednjoj sedmici pre zatvaranja zimske varijante ovog kuba, Žika i Cripple organizuju poslednji YU WAVE DERNEK

Njihovi alter egoi Paket Avdija i Bebek Dol odlučili su da razdruže DJ tim Selen Velen, i da ga ukinu. U petak će biti četvrti nastup ove ekipe, i ako je suditi po prethodna tri, ovaj će pored prizivanja duha Dražena Ričla, pevanja Prljavog kazališta na kolenima i air guitarovanje DJeva iza pulta doneti i posebnu emotivnu dimenziju oproštajnog nastupa.

Oni koji ostanu do kraja, biće počašćeni repro-materijalom koji su trošili ovi momci. Ne, nije to što mislite. Naprosto, poklonićemo publici nekoliko desetina audio CDova na kojima smo sačuvali svoju malu istoriju SFRJ popa i u potpunosti napraviti deobni bilans ove federacije.

Stoga, vidimo se u Šipražju u petak.

Quote from: "crippled_avenger"U ciklusu repriziranja evropskih filmova koji mi se nisu dopali odgledao sam opet NOZ W WODZIE Romana Polanskog. Na prvo gledanje bio mi je nepodnošljiv ali sam imao više vremena za kontemplaciju.

Naime, na novo gledanje, ubeđen sam da je NOZ W WODZIE potpuno pogrešno pročitan film. Naime, dominantno čitanje ovog filma i glavni atribud  je to što je reč o svedenoj igri tri karaktera, snažnoj spihološkoj studiji i sl. Međutim, ovaj film je zapravo dokaz o superiornosti akcionog, avanturističkog i kriminalističkog filma. Sve ključne dramske situacije proističu iz sukoba junaka i njihove jedrilice sa prirodom, olujom i zločinom.

S druge strane, sve situacije bazirane na sukobu između karaktera, psihološkim nijansama i tenzijama nimalo ne funkcionišu. Dakle, u njemu je najslabije ono po čemu je najčuveniji. Iako, ne mogu da kažem ni da je avanturističko-kriminalistički segment naročito jak, činjenica je da je taj deo barem inspirativan pa ne čudi da su potom snimljeni slični ali znatno efektniji naslovi poput DEAD CALM Phil Noycea.

Kao mali disclaimer dodao bih da ovaj stav nisam napisao kako bih ikoga šokirao ili nervirao, provocirao i sl. Ovi utisci mi u stvari čak i ne deluju kao neko naročito otkriće. Kad sam gledao film činili su se sasvim očigledni.

* * ½ / * * * *

Ili prevedeno,film je vise Skolimovski nego Polanski !!!

INDIANA je film u kome se ponovo vidi Spielbergov fušerski rad kada se okreće populističkim, žanrovskim projektima. Taman kad sam pomislio da se vratio u formu sa odličnim MUNICHom, on je snimio film koji po nivou ispod već prilično jadnog WAR OF THE WORLDS.

Reći da je scenario loš je undersatetement. Scenario Davida Koeppa je tekst kome fale neki obavezni delovi. Svi holivudski filmovi su manje više prepoznatljivi po tome što imaju početak, kraj i dva plotpointa između. Neki imaju bolja, neki lošija rešenja, ali u svakom ćeš to prepoznmati. INDIANA to nema. On nema plotpointe.

INDIANA samo počne i traje dok se neumitno ne završi.

Odnosi između likova ne postoje. Ne postoji nikava dinamika među njima a tobožnji preokreti tipa Shia je Fordov sin su flah i što je najgore od svega nisu dobro iskorišćeni čak ni u komične svrhe.

Ono po čemu su filmovi o Indiani poznati su i scene iznenadnih izdaja i sl. Ovde ima samo jdna i desi se na početku, sve do kraja ostaje status quo među likovima.

U čitavom filmu postoje možda dva uspela one-linera.

Misterija je napisana bukvalno kao u LAVIRINTU. Zagonetke su uvredljivo jednostavne a rešenja su nedostojna savremenog filma i potpuno proizvoljna. Međutim, čak i u LAVIRINTU Gaga Nikolić i Leka imaju dilemu hoće li skrenuti levo ili desno. U INDIANI takvih dilema nema. Kao i sam film tako i svi lavirinti imaju samo jedan smer.

Međutim, tek sada dolazimo do režije koja je kardinalna. Ako bi se poredio sa ranijim INDIANAma, ima scena koje su slične, međutim razlika je u tome što su u ono vreme to snimali sa pravim ljudima i to je scenama davalo čar. U četvrtom delu, specijalni efekti su preočigledni i sve akrobacije su potpuno neuverljive, pošto u nekim momentima, jasno vidimo da glumci nisu videli tu lokaciju ni na fotografiji.

U mnogim scenama, efekti su preočigledni.

Ono što iznenađuje jeste da pored nekih scena koje su underdirected, ima scena koje su baš heavyhanded. U tome se izdvaja tuča na groblju sa nekim neobjašnjivim bizarnim gimpovima koja je onako baš sramotno urađena.

Kada kažem underdirected daću primer. Kada posle potere koju smo inače u mnogo boljoj varijanti u DIE ANOTHER DAY, Indiana i Indidanina dinastija padaju niz vodopade u ruskom amfibijskom vozilu, njihov pada vidimo u totalu. Kamera nikada ne uđe u vozilo da vidimo borbu na život i smrt, kako to da nisu ispali iz vozila i sl.

Isto tako, u nekim scenama, fale najzanimljivije faze neke akcije, tipa skočili su, rez, pali su. Nema onog najuzbudljivijeg dela kad padaju. I sl.

Kad se sve uzme u obzir, novi INIDANA pre svega liči na LAVIRINT pošto se postavlja pitanje šta je u ovom filmu toliko dugo spremano i kakav su tobožnji visoki stndard Lucas i Spielberg decenijam pokušavali da dostignu, ukoliko smo na kraju završili sa ovim promašajem.

* 1/2 / * * * *

Pogledao sam ELECTRIC DREAMS Steve Barrona, courtesy of Ginger.

Reč je o fascinantnom filmu britanskog reditelja koji je prektično učinio muzičke spotove onim što su danas i što su počeli da bivaju početkom osamdesetih. Barron je jedan iz seeder generacije, mnogo pre nego što su Ficher i ekipa proslavili reditelje spotova. Pre ekipe formirane oko Propagande iz koje dolaze Fincher, Sena i sl. bili su Britanci poput Alana Parkera, Braće Scott, Adrian Lynea i Steve Barrona.

Barronov najveći filmski hit bio je TEENAGE MUTANT NINJA TURTLES i njegov holivudski opus je nezasluženo mali. On danas pretežno radi visokobudžetne bajke za Hallmark na smenu sa hermetičnim art filmovima pošto posle naslova kao što je CONEHEADS očigledno nije uspeo da funkcioniše u mejnstrimu.

Međutim, ELECTRIC DREAMS je autentično umetničko delo u pravom smislu te reči pošto je relevantan na ogromnom broju nivoa. Na bazičnom nivou, to je već dobrano oprobana ljubavna priča između momka, devojke i komopjutera koji isprva pomaže momku pa se onda i sam zaljubljuje. Pre svega zahvaljujući Barronovoj režiji i magnetizmu Virginie Madsen ova ljubavna priča uspeva da generiše i iščekivanje i emocije.

S druge strane, nijedna epoha kao osamdesete nije uspela da iskaža fascinaciju računarima i strah od njih. Danas su računari često tema filmova, međutim samo u devedesetim oni su imali gotovo bajkovite atribute, iako tehnika istovremeno i jeste i nije uspela da dostigne i prevaziđe ono što su autori anticipirali. U tom smislu, poput TERMINATORa, ELECTRIC DREAMS uspeva da sublimira dane potpune fascinacije računarima. U osamdesetim su računari po poslednji put imali svoj karakter.

Sama muzika u filmu je posebna priča. Naime, potpisao ju je Giorgio Moroder koji je radio skor za SCARFACE, a na soundtracku se može naći razni electro pop iz tog vremena. Međutim, i sama muzika se poigrava sa tim elementom kompjutera sukobljenog sa klasičnim instrumentima. Ako imamo u vidu da su osamdesete još uvek bile period kada je praktično elektronska muzika još uvek bila usko vezana za na napredak u tehnici (primer za to je fetišizam određenih modela sintisajzera u tome periodu, sličan fetišizaciji gitara u rokenrolu) Moroderov skor i ostale pesme odlično korespondiraju sa bazičnim konflitima u filmu.

U rediteljskom smislu, Barron koristi brojne trikove iz spotova. Međutim, to nisu stvari kojima će Fincherova i Bayova generacija definisati "spotovsku režiju", to je više jedan gotovo ejzenštajnovski pogled na vizuelno i na pripovedanje kao eventualno segment te vizuelnosti. Vizuuelnost ranih video klipova nije bila bazirana na tehničkoj napadnosti, brzim rezovima, već više na stvaranju jednog apartnog univerzuma unutar spota vezanog za temu pesme, bend, priču spota ili lokaciju na kojoj se dešava. Barron se služi tim sredstvima na odgovarajućim mestima u filmu i koristi ih kao produžetak klasičnih narativnih tehnika.

Barron sjajno postiže bajkovitu atmosferu unutar ove ljubavne priče, tako da maltene u njemu osamdesete izgledaju kao neka imaginarna decenija. Stoga ni ne čudi da se Barron i kasnije bavio bajkama, prelascima u neke iracionalne dimenzije i sl. Ja sam uvek imao veliko poštovanje prema autorima koji su uspevali da konstituišu ubedljive svetove u svojim filmovima bilo da su bazirani na realizmu ili bajkama a Barron je jedan od njih.

Kao jako zanimljiv film neblagoslovljen talentom velikih zvezda, ELECTRIC DREAMS je danas više curio nego mejnstrim ljubavni film što bi u suštini trebalo da bude.

* * * 1/2 / * * * *

North Korea fired short-range missiles off coast: report By Jon Herskovitz
Sat May 31, 12:54 AM ET



SEOUL (Reuters) - North Korea fired three short-range missiles off its west coast on Friday, the South's Yonhap news agency cited government officials as saying, on a day Pyongyang's media also launched a tirade of abuse at President Lee Myung-bak.

ADVERTISEMENT

"... it appears the firing of the missiles was part of a regular exercise to check the performance," Yonhap quoted an unnamed South Korean Defense Ministry as saying on Saturday.

A similar launch in March riled regional tensions and was seen by analysts as a display of anger at Washington and Lee's new conservative government in Seoul.

North Korea has more than 1,000 missiles, at least 800 of them ballistic, that can hit all of South Korea and most parts of Japan, experts have said. Its launches often coincide with periods of political tension.

In Singapore on Saturday on the sidelines of a regional security meting, South Korean Defense Minister Lee Sang-hee told reporters he could neither confirm nor deny reports of the missile tests.

South Korea usually tries to downplay short-range missile launches as part of regular North Korean military drills.

North Korea on Friday unleashed a torrent of insults at President Lee, who took office in February on a promise to cut the free flow of aid Pyongyang has seen under liberal presidents who ruled for 10 years before.

Its communist party newspaper Rodong Sinmun denounced the Lee government's policy of linking aid to progress North Korea makes in ending its nuclear weapons programs in international disarmament talks.

"(It) is a criminal move to cover up their true colors as sycophantic traitors keen on confrontation with the North, stem the trend of the times towards independent reunification and peace and prosperity and reduce the inter-Korean relations to a plaything of outside forces," the paper said.

Experts said North Korea has developed an arsenal of short-range missiles capable of attacking the capital Seoul, South Korean bases near their heavily armed border and U.S. troops stationed in South Korea to support the country's army.

Over the past few days, the chief U.S. and South Korean envoys in six-country talks aimed at ending the North's nuclear arms ambitions have met the North's chief envoy in Beijing.

North Korea missed an end of a 2007 deadline to provide a full accounting of its atomic arms program as called for in a six-way deal. If it makes the declaration, the impoverished state can receive aid and be removed from a U.S. terrorism blacklist.

(Additional reporting by Angela Moon; Editing by David Fox)

Žika i ja smo juče komisijski pogledali film DVOSTRUKI OBRUČ Nikole Tanhofera.

Reč je o vrlo zanimljivom filmu iz NOBa koji bi se mogao podvesti pod žanr akcionog trilera. Scenario je napisao Ivo Štivičić čiji sam BRISANI PROSTOR nedavno gledao i mogu reći da je Ivo potpuno neočekivano pravi majstor pisanja akcijaša sa teroristčkim elementom. Naime, Iva znamo iz nekih potpuno drugihb konteksta.

DVOSTRUKI OBRUČ govori o bekstvu komunističkog ilegalca koji je na poternici u NDH. Na mestu sastanka u nekoj krčmi biva prepoznat i lokalne ustaše odlučuju da ge zarobe. Međutim, da bi to uradili potrebna im je pomoć ljudi koje zanima isključivo novac.

Ilegalca sa poternice igra Severin Bijelić koji uspeva da nas ubedi zbog čega je on toliko bitan i daje svom inače pasivno postavljenom liku izvesnu težinu. Partizane iz njegove ekipe igraju Bata Živojinović i Boris Dvornik u jednom od svojih ranijih partnershipa. Boris Dvornik je mlad i izgleda fenomenalno, daleko od karikature u koju će se kasnije pretvoriti.

Međutim, što se glumaca tiče, show krade jedan od mojih omiljenih ex-yu glumaca Bert Sotlar, slovenački Trintignant i Heston u jednom, jedan od najupečatljivijih villaina jugoslovenskog filma koji je igrao dosta, a opet nedovoljno da se iskoristi njegov fenomenalan izgled i disciplinovan underplay, podvučen slovenačkim izgovorom srpskohrvatskog jezika. Naravno, daleko je Sotlar od autsajdera jugoslovenskog filma. On je ipak igrao dosta i bio je priznat glumac, međutim danas je prilično zaboravljen a takav tip glumca je gotovo istrebljen iz naših regionalnih kinematografija.

Štivičićev scenario nije ništa epohalno, međutim nudi jednu zaista dobro postavljenu hostage situaciju, vrlo je kameran i iako se bavi već dosta puta rabljenom temom nije dosadan. Što se samog formalnog sklada tiče, čini mi se da ga remeti uvod u kome se relativno brz smenjuju lokacije da bi praktično druga dva čina bila smeštena na jednom mestu što remeti protok vremena. Isto tako backstory Dvornikovog lika je redundantan pošto ni u jednom momentu ne zaigra to što je on novopridruženi član ekipe. Međutim, ovo su sad sve primedbe koje su ma koliko važne u suštini samo unapređivanje jednog vrlo solidnog scenarija, nastalog 1963. godine što mu samo daje na kvalitetu, imajući u vidu uzore kojima je Štivičić tada raspolagao.

Tanhoferova režija je vrlo disciplinovana sa dosta dobrih pokreta kamere koji su još uvek bili dosta ekskluzivni u tadašnjem jugoslovenskom filmu. Direktor fotografije bio je najčuveniji jugoslovenski DP Tomislav Pinter i po ovom filmu je jasno kako je kasnije izrastao u velikog maga. Akcione situacije su mahom solidno urađene na nivou inscenacije iako u pojedinim slučajevima glumci nisu dorasli zadacima koje pred njih postavlja Tanhofer.

DVOSTRUKI OBRUČ je NOB triler vredan pažnje koji treba nabaviti za svoju kolekciju.

* * * / * * * *

Daniel Waters on "Sex and Death 101"
Wednesday, April 2, 2008 | 10:25 AM

By Stephen Saito

For once, timing is in the favor of Daniel Waters, the prodigiously talented writer behind "Heathers" who admits to "taking forever to write a script." Waters's latest film, "Sex and Death 101," opens in theaters April 4th, but the dark comedy actually begins on April 2nd, when a playboy (Simon Baker) is accidentally e-mailed a list of all his future sexual conquests before dying. While a life of musical lap dances and "an embarrassment of bitches" await Baker's Mr. Roderick Blank, so does a sense of mortality and ennui.

It's a bit reassuring to see Waters's second directorial effort arrive in theaters a week after many pondered the disappearance of John Hughes, whose earnest '80s teen classics were redefined by Waters's sardonic satire of high school life. In the years since "Heathers" was released in 1989, Waters turned a development deal with producer Joel Silver in the early 1990s into perhaps the strangest and most subversive run of studio action movies ever ("Hudson Hawk," "The Adventures of Ford Fairlane" and "Demolition Man") before returning to teen territory with the underrated "Happy Campers" in 2002, a film he never intended to direct. That isn't the case with "Sex and Death 101," a film that bears Waters's trademark wit as well as his "Heathers" star Winona Ryder as a feminist death dealer named Death Nell. I recently sat down to Waters to discuss his reunion with Ryder, his writing process and how originality became a dirty word.

When you get a clever line in your head, is that something that lingers in your head long before it finds its way into the script?

I'll do anything to not write — like I won't open up my computer. I have to write everything by hand. I call it collecting acorns, writing these scribbles..."embarrassment of bitches!" It ends up collecting over time, and then when I sit down to actually start to put my little scraps of paper in order, I have this dialogue. To me, it's worth cooking the chili that much slower in order to get that extra flavor. I think it's funny that a lot of books about how to write a screenplay [teach] the importance of structure. That's like a book about horseback riding that says you need a horse. You shouldn't even start anything until you have the structure down. But these little individual bits [are] what's fun for me to write and makes [my movies] unique.

But unique can be used as a pejorative too. "It was unique. It was original." I find that people, especially in the world of independent film, like originality as long as it's an originality they're comfortable and familiar with. "What's this real originality thing going on?" "Wait, you have like five different tones. That's against the law."

How did this movie come together?

Obviously, it's a long journey, this 15 years away I call the "island of misfit toys" part of my life — I was working on bigger movies doing rewrites, and I ended up inadvertently being hired to put giraffes' heads on rhinoceroses' bodies. I had to force myself to break away from the studio films, which are kind of like having sex wearing 50 condoms. "Sex and Death 101" is this conscious thing of going back to the basics, to my Ralph Nader side where I open up the newspaper and say, well, as a consumer advocate, what movie's not out there that I'm not seeing? With "Heathers," it was like a high school movie that didn't end with them saying when you grow older, your heart dies... because your heart dies way before then. (laughs)

I wanted to do a movie about sexuality, because there was a realm in the '70s that I think is missing now. Independent films seem to be very punishing about sexuality — nobody seems to be enjoying themselves, it's like "Oh my God, I've had sex with my daughter!" or something like that. On the other end of the scale, you've got these immature ejaculation movies about boobies that have nothing to do with actual sex. Mainstream comedies don't even have sex. They just run after a cab at the end and the sex happens during the closing credits.

I wanted to go back to "Shampoo" and "Carnal Knowledge" and "Bob, Ted, Carol and Alice," popular movies that dealt with sexuality, but in a way that was still humorous. I liked the idea of that kind of movie, but it was important that I update the zeitgeist of it all. Back in the '60s and the '70s, the men were still playing offense and now, I think we're playing defense. The world has overwhelmed the typical male. The one realm of sexuality I didn't mention [is] Judd Apatow's. I think they're terrific films, but he's got a very comforting thesis that men are these sex-obsessed beasts, but if you just scratch the surface, they're warm and fuzzy inside. I've got a less popular dictum in my film that a man can be well-adjusted, mature, and remembers Valentine's Day and to complement your haircut, but you scratch the surface and he's still a sex-obsessed beast.

You have a great foil for your leading man in the character of Death Nell. Did you write the part for Winona Ryder?

When I started writing the script, she was going through her troubles, so I did think it was a great idea because people didn't know where she was coming from and I liked that. It dovetailed into the character quite nicely because it's a character that you think is one way, but is really another. I didn't want the man-eating Angelina Jolie femme fatale that would eat you up and spit you out. I wanted to have that threat out there looming, but then when you actually meet the character and there's this sweet wobbly human being playing it, you know there's no more femme fatale out there. It's like a role she's feebly trying to take on, just like he tries to take on his role of the guy that's got it all together.

Besides Ryder, how did you attract such a strong supporting cast?

It didn't hit me until I was actually filming that, except for Mindy [Cohn], there are no supporting characters in the movie. When an actress shows up on the set, she's the lead of the movie — it is almost like ten different movies, [each] with a new female lead, so they bring their A-game because they don't feel that they're scenery. Obviously, I made the movie before "Good Luck Chuck" [which has a similar premise about a womanizer] came out, but I knew there was going to be a movie like that, and I didn't want to make it. I didn't want that montage sequence, the dreary cavalcade of Maxim whores. I wanted it not to be a movie about a guy who just bam, bam, bam, fucks a lot of women, that the women are fucking him as much as he's fucking them.

Was it actually a conscious decision on your part to direct your own scripts at a certain point or did it just work out that way?

I was very obstinate about [it] — "Oh, don't worry. I'm not the guy that wants to direct" — when I was starting out, and it was great because I'd been so prepared that they always ignored the writer. But "Heathers" is one of the few movies where they put a spotlight on me and taped sparklers to me, so I was getting credit. It's funny that what you think is the most simple, littlest detail that you put in a script — and my scripts are very thick and dense — gets lost in translation, and it can be one stroke if the writer is also the director. I'm never going to be quite comfortable directing — I think I did a good job this time around. I had a $12 million film school course called "Happy Campers," but I still think the writing process and the editing process are the warm cave, and that directing is like me with a spear trying to kill a woolly mammoth. But it's exciting, and it is where the movie gets made, and so if you really want to be a filmmaker, you can't kid yourself that you're going to have this pristine [experience], because nothing goes through a gang bang more than a script, so it's just good to be there.

[Photos: Winona Ryder in "Sex and Death 101"; Daniel Waters, Simon Baker and Sophie Monk; Anchor Bay Entertainment, 2007]

"Sex and Death 101" opens in New York and Los Angeles on April 4th.

Pogledao sam MACHINE GIRL Noboru Iguchija, courtesy of Ginger.

Trejler za ovaj film je u svoje vreme privukao veliku pažnju Sagitaša. Ja sam bio skeptičan prema krajnjem ishodu i sada kad sam ga pogledao mogu reći da su na novu sadržaja moje slutnje bile na mestu ali da je Iguchi barem snimio relativno konzistentan low budget flick (čini mi se pre svega za izvoz).

Iako je i sam MACHINE GIRL pakleno referentan, meni je on znatno superiorniji od PLANET TERRORa Roberta Rodrigueza. Naime, Iguchi je koncipirao svoj film kao vrlo jasnu priču sa konzistentnim rediteljskim konceptom, likovima koji su sasvim u funkciji priče i blagom dozom japanskog fušeraja koja se takođe dosledno sprovodi kroz ceo film.

Iguchi od prvog sekunda filma nameće svoj redieljski koncept sa naivnoim melodramom, hipertrofiranim nasiljem i relativno minimalističkim kadriranjem, i od njega ne odstupa do kraja. Gledajuči dubbovanu verziju i glumačku podelu u kojoj se GLUMCI RAZLIKUJU, a priča se kreće unutar japanskih pop klišea poznatih Zapadu, rekao bih da je MACHINE GIRL film pravljen za izvoz što lično mogu samo da pozdravim pošto sve manje imam strpljenja za iscrpljujuće lokalne proizvode u kojima se teško razlikuju glumci i razumeju običaji.

Iguchi dakle ide peterjacksonovskim stopama, s tim što je naravno njegov film srazmerno manje pretenciozan od Jacksona i ne čini mi se na osnovu ovog naslova da Iguchi pretenduje da se izmakne izvan ovog miljea i produkcionog okvira.

Kad je reč o samim goodsima, film deliveruje. Fetišizovane uniforme japanskih učenica i latentno lezbejstvo su obavezna figura sukeban žanra i ovde su na šprvom mestu. Junakinji je oblačenje u školsku uniformu ključni deo osvete. Akcija je urađena na malom budžetu, ali vrlo dovitljivo i energično što je takođe karakteristično za Japance. Gore je urađeno pre svega na jednom komičnom tragu. Nema neke naročite težine i uverljivosti u tom goreu tako da je povremeno i tehnički neubedljiv no sasvim funkcioniše u kontekstu. Poor CGI je povremeno vidljiv ali je sasvim konzistentan sa tonom filma.

Pošto sam malo očekivao, mogu reći da sam zadovoljan onim što sam dobio. Ne očekujte KILL BILL, ali MACHINE GIRL svakako jeste bliži real dealu od PLANET TERRORa.

* * * / * * * *

Pogledao sam SEMI-PRO Kenta Altermana, courtesy of Ginger.

Nažalost, kada se konačno dotakao sporta koji volim (ne računajući KICKING AND SCREAMING) Ferrell je snimio verovatno najgoru od svojih sportskih komedija. Iako nisam veliki fan ni ranijih, SEMI-PRO je ipak uspeo da bude najmanje smešan.

Nažalost, mimo pokušaja da bude smešan, SEMI-PRO ne nudi apsolutno ništa. Dok većina komedija ipak ima ili neku ljubavnu priču ili neki drugi zaplet kao kičmu na koju se dodaje smeh, SEMI-PRO ima predvidljiv zaplet o sportskom rezultatu koji je između ostalog i istorijski poznat pošto Flint Tropics nisu ušli u NBA tako da samo neko ko ne zna apsolutno ništa o košarci može biti iznenađen ishodom, no priča je toliko klišetizirana da je teško naći toliki filmski neobrazovanog gledaoca koji bi u njoj mogao uživati.

Ovakar ishod filma me iznenađuje imajući u vidu da je scenario pisao Scot Armstrong, redovni saradnik Todd Philipsa. Međutim, ovo je Scotu već drugi solo promašaj posle HEARTBREAK KID koji je kudikamp ipak bio funkcionalniji film. Očigledno je da bez Todda, Scot nema kompas.

Kent Alterman je inače executive New Linea i ovo mu je prva režija. Međutim, to ne treba da čudi pošto su executivi New Linea uvek bili skloni autorstvu,. setimo se Bob Shayea, Jon Hessa ili Michaela De Luce. Nažalost, očigledno je Alterman mislio da se film sa Ferrellom snima sam od sebe, tako da ovde nema apsolutno nikakvog naročitog rediteljskog postupka, sve je svedeno na puku tehnički kompetentnu egzekuciju.

Kad je o glumcima reč, Woody Harrelson je jedini doneo nešto što liči na karakter. Nažalost njegov karakter je najbolje glumljen ali i najmanje zanimljiv. Will Ferrella to nažalost nije motivisalo da se iole odmakne od glupiranja tako da usled toga što Woody ipak glumi, njegov apsolutno glavni junak deluje još bleđe.

No, ipak je Woody tata komedije o basketu, setimo se WHITE MEN CAN'T JUMP.

Nažalost činjenica da je film smešten u Flint ne dobija neku veću pažnju, i gledaocima koji nisu upoznati sa backgroundom ovog mesta neće biti naročito znakovita.

Konačno, krajnja degradacija cele ideje ABA lige jste u tome što film tretira prelazak pojedinaca u NBA kao hepiend.

* 1/2 / * * * *

Reprizirao sam remek-delo Johna Frankenheimera BLACK SUNDAY, courtesy of Ginger.

Bio sam oduševljen ovim filmom kada sam ga prvi put gledao, i još više me je oduševio na reprizi.

Reč je o preteči onoga što možemo nazvati thinking man's akcijašem, filmova poput DIE HARD, THE KINGDOM i sl. U knjizi Roberta Harrisa Frankenheimer je našao sve elemente koji će se kasnije manje ili više ponavljati u thinking man's akcijašima, spoj političke i psihološke motivacije, odlično smišljenog zapleta i plana akcije, i konačno intenzivnog sukoba između junaka.

Doduše, još od samog otvaranja filma, BLACK SUNDAY barem što se mene tiče ne ostavlja dilemu za koga se navija. Ja sam navijao za odlično postavljene likove Palestinke i razočaranoig neurotičnog vijetnamskog veterana koji smišljaju ingeniozan plan kako da naprave prvi i najveći teroristički čin na tlu Amerike. Njihova motivacija nije samo politička već je i psihološki odlično fundirana kroz detalje koji ubedljivo objašnjavaju otkud toliko požrtvovanje u ispunjenju ovog plana. Takva ubedljiva motivacija je i u samoj knjizi.

Njihov plan je ingeniozan, napravljen je da se izvede skoro sasvim samostalno protivno željama ne samo neprijatelja, već i država-sponzora terorizma. Činjenica da u krajnjem ishodu plan, naravno, ne uspe, kako i dolikuje akcionom filmu, toliko je neistinito postavljena (ali to je konvencija žanra) da mi se čini kao da je i sam Frankenheimer bio na njihovoj strani kao i gledalac.

Dok je na strani likova terorista emotivna istinitost, motivacija pozitivaca i njihovi planovi dovedeni su do paroksizma. U tom smislu, BLACK SUNDAY me je unekoliko podsetio na KATHARINU BLUM Volkera Schlondorfa gde briljantno odglumljen lik Angele Winkler naprosto ostaje da postoji mimo scenarija koji u jednom trenutku počinje da robuje političkim i dramaturškim konstrukcijama. Isto je i sa likovima negativaca u ovom filmu, i njihovim planom. Naprosto, upravo zbog uverljivosti i patosa koji im je Frankenheimer dao, većina kontraakcija pozitivaca (uključujući i motivaciju MOSSADovog agenta baziranu na toime da su mu dva sina mrtva) deluju kao artificijelno dramaturško i ideološko rešenje, i čini mi se da gledalac posle gledanja ovog filma, u svesti ostaje sa jednim potpuno drugačijim filmom.

Uostalom, energija plota iz BLACK SUNDAYa je tolika da je Tom Clancy napisao roman SUM OF ALL FEARS koji proističe iz ideje šta bi bilo da je sličan plan uspeo i junaci ovog romana su motivisani filmom i knjigom BLACK SUNDAY. Clancy inače uopšte nije lucidan postmoderni pisac što dovoljno govori o ugrađenost ovog filma u tkivo američke pop kulture.

Frankenheimerova režija je bliska polu-dokumentarizmu, sa dosta pokreta kamere, kadrova koji nabacuju utiske o atmosferi. Ipak, sva ta masa polu-dokuemntarnih zahvata ukomponovana je u vrlo kontrolisanu akcionu celinu sa precizno postavljenim suspenseom. John A. Alonzo je briljantno uslikao film a pošto se druga polovina filma dešava u Majamiju, BLACK SUNDAY na neki način anticipira njegovu čuvenu fotografiju iz SCARFACEa. Ono što je naročito bitno jeste da film obiluje aerial shotovima uz minimalnu upotrebu specijalnih efekata. Iako ima i efekata koji su očekivano arhanični iz današnje vizure, kontekst u kome su upotrebljeni je toliko razvijen da njihova neveština ne smeta previše čak ni savremenom gledaocu. Međutim, na svu sreću, BLACK SUNDAY je zaista minuciozno snimljen film i po svemu prevazilazi većinu filmova svog vremena.

Bruce Dern i Marthe Keller su savršeni u glavnim ulogama i perverzni odnos ovih likova iz knjige nije razrađen u filmu ali je sugerisan. Robert Shaw uspeva da učini sve što može sa svojim dosta lažno motivisanim likom, i podseća nas da on ima možda jedan od najjačih žanrovskih opusa šezdesetih i sedemadesetih. Konačno, vrlo dragu ulogu teroriste ima i Bekim Fehmiu koji je u ovo vreme bio u svojoj holivudskoj fazi i BLACK SUNDAY je njegov verovatno najrelevantniji strani film, dok mu je THE ADVENTURERS Lewis Gilberta najveća uloga.

BLACK SUNDAY je jedan od velikih klasika sedamdesetih čije uticaje susrećemo u decenijama koje su usledile. Međutim, za razliku od mnogih uticajnih filmova koji su obesmišljeni nizom epigona, BLACK SUNDAY dan-danas stoji kao moćno delo.

* * * * / * * * *

http://dobanevinosti.blogspot.com/2008/06/poverljivo-iz-la.html

...brilliant and witty as always!

Već nekoliko godina Alex De La Iglesia pokušava da se odmakne od svojih nestašnih indie korena u španskoj žanrovskoj persiflaži. Međutim, čini se da što više pokušava da se primakne nekom mejnstrim  izrazu i rekonstruiše neke klasicističke forme, tobože na svoj način, sve je dalji od bilo kakve relevantnosti.

Najdalje od relevantnosti otišao je sa svojim novim filmom OXFORD MURDERS baziranom na romanu Enrique Martineza, inače prijatelja našeg književnika Vladimira Tasića. U ovom filmu Elijah Wood radi nešto slično kao u HOOLIGANSu, veštački biva importovan u britanski milje, s tim što lik gostujućeg studenta ima kudikamo više logike od nesrećnog navijača.

De La Iglesia je prvo promašio format svog praznofilmlja. Dva sata trajanja je zaista previše za priču ovih dimenzija i sadržaja. Film obiluje redunadantnim scenama koje su se mogle izbaciti u montaži i jako je čudno što nisu. Međutim, isto tako postoji niz scena koje su bitne za priče a krajnje su redundantne. I to je već problem. Ne samo da svaka scena ostavlja utisak kao da smo je već negde videli (mahom bolje izvedenu i sa više smisla) nego nijedna ne privlači pažnju da se isprati do kraja. Predvidljiv razvoj situacije se nadovezuje na krajnju konvencionalnost ziheraške režije.

Ako imamo u vidu da je ovaj film vrlo verbalan, a da De La Iglesia nije English speaker, i da ga verovatno uzbuđuje zvuk Hurtovog engleskog dovedenog do granice samoparodije, s tim što u tim dijalozima nema previše govorne radnje niti supstance, jasno je da imamo posla sa geekovskim eksperimentom koji je vrlo pošao po zlu.  Naime, ako je OXFORD MURDERS trebalo da bude De La Iglesijina ili barem savremena verzija vintage murder misterije smeštene na Oksford, onda bi bilo dobro da prevazilazi ili barem obogaćuje ili u krajnjoj liniji barem kvari dosadašnju vrlo bogatu tradiciju britanskog krimića.

Međutim, OXFORD MURDERS ostaje ravan, šupalj film. Ne znam koliko je za to kriv roman. Možda je roman dobar ali De La Iglesia i Guerchaverria nisu uspeli da nađu modus prenošenja njegove filozofske pozadine osim kroz dijalog koji je čak i najpovršnijim poznavaocima filozofije banalan, a zbog nedostatka emocije u sebi, onima koji ne znaju filozofiju verovatno suviše dalek i samim tim dosadan.

Konačno, gledalac uopšte nema nikakvu relaciju ni prema žrtvama ubistava. Nijedna od tih žrtava nije prikazana kao punokrvni karakter, a što je još važnije ni sami junaci se previše ne potresaju oko smrti već ih tretiraju kao, ne preterano interesantnu zagonetku.

OXFORD MURDERS tako postaje jedan isprazan i dosadan film što je De LA Iglesia, ruku na srce imao i ranije u svom opusu. Međutim, čini se da OXFORD MURDERS emituje i određenu pretencioznost apsolutno bez osnova.

Na tehničkom nivou, film povremeno iznenađuje aljkavošću dubbinga određeneih likova iako je uglavnom rađen sa engleskim glumcima na engleskoj lokaciji. Znamo da je španski film odavno po svom tehničkom mentalitetu blizak američkom filmu i tu nije ništa sporno. OXFORD MURDERS u spoju sa zvezdama koje ima deluje kao upmarket primer A- projekta. Film je odlično prošao u Španiji, gde ga je distribuirao tamošnji Warner Bros. Ipak, nisam siguran da će u ovom obliku i distributerskom aranžmanu izaći u Americi i kada. Da je snimio iole inventivniji i zanimljiviji film, De La Iglesia bi samo na bazi podele mogao da napravi posao u Americi. Međutim, Wood nije toliko zvezda da bi ovako mlak materijal mogao da dovede do nekog ozbiljnog rezultata.

Zanimljivo je da je prvi De La Iglesiin dodir sa američkim filmom bio PERDITA DURANGO koji je bio sasvim u njegovom fazonu, i nije uspeo da ga dovede do holivudskog debija (to je trebalo da bude FU MANCHU). Čini mi se da ni OXFORD MURDERS neće moći da ga ustali u Holivudu pošto u ovom filmu nema ničega što već nije masovno zastupljeno i na neki način i prevaziđeno u američkom filmu.

No, u krajnjoj liniji, iako ne pruža ono što želimo od De La Iglesie, a u krajnjoj liniji nije ni dobar film, očigledno je OXFORD MURDERS dovoljno pristojan da bude hit u Španiji, i da ne bude sasvim otpisan u umetničkom smislu zbog visokog tehničkog nivoa. Samim tim, on će dovesti De La Iglesiu u još povoljniju poziciju koju će nadam se bolje iskoristiti.

* ½ / * * * *

Quote from: "crippled_avenger"OXFORD MURDERS
* ½ / * * * *

slažem se sa ovim ocenama.
moj prikaz iglesijinog filma stoji ovde:
http://www.dejanognjanovic.com/index.php/FILMOVI-I-TV-/97-Sta-se-lepo-od-filmova-gleda.html

Interview: Oliver Stone  
Mike Goodridge
30 May 2008 00:00

 

"America has defined itself in the early 21st century as a cowboy state. George W Bush has hyperbolically expressed all the cowboy mentality the world holds of America."

So says Oliver Stone from Louisiana, three days before he starts shooting W, his serio-comic look at the 43rd president of the USA and one of the most controversial figures of our time.

Sold internationally by QED International, W looks at the president from the age of 20 to 58, after the start of the Iraq war. Although the time periods will be mixed up throughout the film, it is, says Stone, a "three-act film" starting with Bush as a young man "with a missed life", then his transformation and "an assertion of will which was amazingly powerful" as he emerged from his father's shadow, and finally his invasion of Iraq. "He achieved what his father did not by getting re-elected," says Stone. "What he does with that is the question."

Stone says the tone of the film is "ideally in the vein of Network or Dr Strangelove. I was a young man when I saw Dr Strangelove and it still stays with me. It took a very grim subject and turned it into a serio-comic story and it worked. So those would be great models for the movie to live by."

Stone and his writer Stanley Weiser developed the project in early 2007 and Weiser worked on the screenplay while Stone prepared Pinkville at United Artists (UA). But when UA pulled the plug on Pinkville, Stone immediately switched his attentions to W, securing Josh Brolin to play the title character in December.

"He is one of the great characters of this time and I think he has had enormous impact on the world and our generation as well as future generations," says Stone, who points out that Bush's popularity in America's heartland remains enormous.

"I am sitting in the Bible belt and frankly there is a lot more affection for him than you think. Americans voted for him in quite big numbers in both elections. As someone told me the other day: he liked Bush because he doesn't try to pretend and try to be something he isn't; he tells it like it is."


Casting the cabinet

Joining Brolin in the cast is a rich ensemble of well-known movie actors including Elizabeth Banks as Laura Bush, James Cromwell as George Bush Sr, Ellen Burstyn as Barbara Bush, Jeffrey Wright as Colin Powell, Thandie Newton as Condoleezza Rice, Scott Glenn as Donald Rumsfeld, Toby Jones as Karl Rove and Ioan Gruffudd as Tony Blair. Richard Dreyfuss is in talks to star as Dick Cheney.

"It's about his inner workings and his people," says Stone, who adds that Saddam Hussein is characterised in the movie "in a pretty funny way".

Meanwhile Stacy Keach plays a composite of evangelical ministers, including Billy Graham and Jim Robison, who influenced Bush in his conversion to Christianity.

"Richard Nixon very much invoked the silent majority and the friendship of Billy Graham, but Mr Bush has taken (religion) further than ever (into government) and so we have to dramatise that," says Stone. "We must on the surface take his conversion seriously. It is the centrepiece of his change. At the age of 40, he was a drinker and he changed quite radically over a period of four years, so something happened to him. Whether he became the same person on the other side of the coin is an interesting issue and I examine that too. Some of the characteristics, however, never disappeared such as the temperament, the anger and the impatience."

The film, however, won't be an intense three-hour drama like Stone's 1995 biopic of Richard Nixon. "It's not as psychologically heavy," says the director. "I don't perceive George Junior as troubled or as psychoanalytical as Richard Nixon although there is a remarkable similarity in their presidencies. Nixon was more ambitious in scope and time. This is more of a souffle. You have to laugh a little bit at (Bush's presidency) because there are so many sad things in this. It's tragicomedy."

Stone seems more blase than he was earlier in his career about criticism. He is determined to make films which attempt to understand events and people from this era.

"I am still trying to understand America myself," he says. "I was born the same year as Bush and we went to Yale at the same time. I am of his generation and these are questions that concern me. As you know from my body of work, I love this country, I love what it stands for and what it's done. At the same time I have been critical of many of its policies publicly and in my films and I've taken my share of heat for that. I have been so trashed for JFK, Nixon and others that I just pass on and say, OK, I am just going to do my perception of what happened. I am flitting through my time and all I can do really is to reflect what I see of that time."


Inside the president's mind

Assumptions are that Stone and Brolin will be critical and mocking of Bush, but Stone begs to differ, arguing the actor is putting aside any personal political differences in an attempt to understand the character.

"Josh is professional and is trying to understand how (Bush's) brain works," says Stone. "Whatever you say about him as a human being, he has had his share of problems and obstacles to overcome. In the south, one of the reasons they like him is for his sense of family and his commitment to his faith. Those factors make him a very decent human being in the eyes of many people. Tony Blair for one fell for him and liked him a lot. Blair was a very sophisticated man who had traveled the world and look what happened, he was a big fan of George Bush. In fact, he has since declared his Catholicism."

Meanwhile Stone is pleased that Lionsgate has picked up rights in North America (as well as UK and Australia) to the film after a unanimous rebuff from all the major studios.

"It's ultimately better for the film because they won't be as pressured or intimidated by the corporate concepts," he says. "It was always a very good script but people would rather not be bothered. It is easier not to be bothered: 'Why should I make it because I work for a giant corporation and maybe in three months' time someone is going to come down and nail me for it.' It's really sad. It's a risk-free environment now. It used to be an environment where the studio chiefs were bosses and made up their own mind."

Instead, producers Jon Kilik, Moritz Borman and Bill Block assembled a complex financing structure for the $25m film consisting of Block's QED, Australia's Omnilab Media, China-based Emperor Group, Thomas Sterchi's Condor Films and Hong Kong's Global Entertainment Group.

Lionsgate plans to release the film on October 17 to coincide with the last few months of Bush's presidency, and Stone is confident that international sales will be strong on the back of fascination with the controversial Bush.

"We will do better overseas than people think. You think he will be done in January. Bullshit. His influence will be felt for many years. We will never forget him. He is not going to be a forgotten president."

Pogledao sam najzad Kulenovićev film.

Ukoliko je A3 lišen humora, treba tek ovo da vidite. PJEVAJTE NEŠTO LJUBAVNO je maksimalno operisan od duhovitosti i jedno 20 minuta duži nego što bi trebalo. Isto tako problem nedostatka duhovitosti reflektovan je kroz odsustvo smeha u scenama koje su mahom tempirane da budu smešne, i onda na kraju ostaju porazno prazne.

Međutim, film nije nezanimljiv, kako zbog retkih uspelih momenata tako i zbog nekih stvari koje u njemu nisu uspele. Isto tako ima određenih paralela sa A3, koje su takođe zanimljive.

Naime, bazična premisa rokenrol vs. prodaja je slična kao u A3.

Isto tako, glavni junak dolazi iz disfunkcionalne porodice. Međutim, za razliku od disfunkcionalne porodice u A3 koja je komična, ovde je ta porodica izrazito tragična, i potpuno odstupa od žanra komedije kome ovaj film ipak inklinira.

Isto tako, kao i A3 i PJEVAJTE NEŠTO LJUBAVNO nosi u sebi izvesne političke elemente, pre svega u odnosu na miljee iz kojih dolaze ljubitelji određenih muzika. PJEVAJTE NEŠTO LJUBAVNO je u tom smislu zanimljiv jer je snimljen u društvu u kome Thompson preva na Maksimiru dok je Baja Mali Knindža čist pank u društvu u kome je nastao A3. Kada junaci Kulenovićevog filma diskutuju da li da sviraju Thompsona na svadbi pošto su mladoženjini stari "veliki Hrvati" sigurno ima veću provokativnost nego kada u A3 sveštenik SPC potegne pištolj kako bi raspleo film pošto je Srbija ipak znatno liberalnija.

Zadihanost junaka filma PJEVAJTE NEŠTO LJUBAVNO u navođenju efemernih rokenrol refrenci veća je nego u A3 koji ima čistiji sukob.

Međutim, piored ovih tematskih sličnosti, prva velika mana koju A3 i PJEVAJTE NEŠTO LJUBAVNO dele jeste slaba ljubavna priča oko koje bi sve trebalo da se vrti. Naime, mi u PJEVAJTE NEŠTO LJUBAVNO nikada ne shvatimo sve do samog finala da glavni junak zapravo voli tu devojku zbog koje će nastati čitav sukob, dok u A3 shvatamo da je voli ali pošto je igra Nada Macanković ne shvatamo zašto je voli. U oba slučaja ljubavna priča koja nije zaigrala dovodi do toga da film pored emocija izgubi i osnovne motivacije junaka i zamajce priče.

Oba filma priazuju savremene prestonice svojih država kao urbani pakao u kome vlada bezakonje, s tiom što PJEVAJTE NEŠTO LJUBAVNO u početku to koristi kao komediju da bi kasnije odjednom taj segment priče poprimio ozbiljne tragične razmere, i žanrovski potpuno dezoreijntisao film.

Neću eleaborirati šta se desi, i to ne zbog spoilera nego zato što će gledaoci ovog filma zaista biti istinski šokirani zaključenjem filma.

Sasvim je moguće da takva promena raspoloženja proističe i iz percepcije rokenrola. Dok je u A3 rokenrol pre vega percipiran kao pop kultura mladih, PJEVAJTE se nadovezuje na tradiciju Prljavog kazališta i njihovih naslednika Hladnog Piva koji u svojim pesmama imaju i intenzivniji socijalni komentar i likove otpadnika, tako da su se njihove estetike prelile u sam Kulenovićev film. Međutim, ako takve stvari mogu da funkcionišu u opusu Prljavog kazališta, od radosnih ska stvari, preko himni podeljenom gradu, momcima sa margine, pederima klozetarima, sentimentalnih ljubavnih pesma,a i i to sve na istoj ploči-kod Kulenovića je to jedan neprirodan spoj, sa kojim bi se teško izborio i talentovaniji reditelj.

Ja sam inače fan Kulenovićevog rada u BITANGAMA I PRINCEZAMA, i imao sam samo pozitivnu predrasudu prema njemu. Međutim, on je očigledno posle odličnog televizijskog rada sačuvao neke pogrešne percepcije da ih plasira na veliki ekran. Koliko god da su BITANGE I PRINCEZE vrlo disciplinovan i smislen pop izraz u TV formatu u kome se tačno znaju kapaciteti trivijalnih formi, toliko je Kulenović na velikom ekranu izgubio kompas i želeo previše, što je uostalom i karakteristično za reditelje debitante, što on, na neki način još uvek jeste.

Međutim, PJEVAJTE je film koji se elegantno mogao spasiti u montaži, tako da pored izvesnog potencijala koji Kulenović pokazuje ostaje gorak ukus jer se toliko dosledno insistiralo na pogrešnom pravcu.

U svakom slučaju, PJEVAJTE je mali, minoran, ali ipak zanimljiv urbani film, koji u supštini mnopgo više pripada beogradskoj školi filmmejkinga nego zagrebačkoj.

* * / * * * *

P.S. Film donosi i barem dva esencijalna YU WAVE momenta sa sviranjem Riblje Čorbe i Prljavog Kazališta.

TWICE in the last month visits to the Sony Pictures lot here went much the same way.

The normally efficient guards at the gate struggled with their computers. They were unable, on the first trip, to find a trace of the writer-producer Akiva Goldsman or, on the second, of the actor and director Peter Berg.

"Why aren't these people in the system?" snapped an exasperated young man in the booth on the second visit.

Actually, both Mr. Goldsman and Mr. Berg are in the system. Sort of.

Lately the two men are fixtures at Sony, where they have spent the breezy spring weeks in meeting rooms and darkened stages, wrangling the last round of work on a film, "Hancock," that will occupy thousands of America's movie screens over the July 4 weekend.

In a larger sense, however, the two are exactly what they seemed during those hang-ups at the studio gate: consummate insiders with just enough of the outsider about them to keep the Hollywood system on edge.

Both make big movies for big companies. "Hancock," with Will Smith — by some accounts the most valuable star in the world right now — will cost roughly $150 million to produce, and a similarly large amount to market worldwide.

Yet neither can resist the kind of movie that nudges a studio one step beyond its safety zone. "Mr. & Mrs. Smith," of which Mr. Goldsman was a producer, was a tale of love-struck assassins trying to kill each other; "The Kingdom," directed by Mr. Berg, was an unlikely action caper set in Saudi Arabia.

"Hancock" is probably two steps past safe. This time Mr. Smith, who shares a penchant for pushing the envelope (think of "Ali," undertaken when he was still an action-comedy star), plays a superhero who swills bourbon, hates his job and looks unnervingly like Mr. Berg, who was considerably bedraggled in the final weeks of work on his film. (According to Mr. Goldsman, Mr. Smith, on meeting Mr. Berg in one of his work-worn states, said: "Oh. Oh. He is Hancock.")

Along with, among others, Michael Mann, one of the producers of "Hancock," and James Lassiter, Mr. Smith's longtime producing partner, the two belong to what Mr. Goldsman likes to call a loose collective of like-minded filmmakers. By their own account they keep pushing an increasingly corporate entertainment industry to do what scares it a little — and not just stick to a summerful of sequels and animated sure shots.

"It is more difficult, and more necessary, at the same time," Mr. Mann said recently, speaking of the ticklish art of making movies that keep the system from boring itself, and the audience along with it.

So "Hancock," whether it succeeds or fails, will most likely be remembered for having forced Hollywood to reach a bit farther than it likes to go. That has happened in the past with unconventional hits like "Star Wars," "Titanic" and "The Sixth Sense," and with dozens of flops like "Last Action Hero" and "Heaven's Gate."

Eleven weeks before the release of "Hancock" Mr. Berg and company were still testing the creative boundaries. Their picture has a spot on the schedule filled last year by Paramount's toy-driven crowd-pleaser, "Transformers." As of mid-April, however, it had been twice to the ratings board and tagged each time with an R, not acceptable for a movie that must ultimately be rated PG-13 to reach its intended broad audience.

"We had statutory rape up until three weeks ago," Mr. Berg said, describing just one of the elements that has turned "Hancock" into an exercise in brinkmanship.

Sipping coffee in a studio kitchenette, having finally been allowed through the gate, three-day growth and worn Macalester Scots T-shirt notwithstanding, he spoke with a candor usually reserved for the retrospective DVD commentary.

The film, he said, remained surprisingly sexual, violent and true in spirit to an original script that was viewed as brilliant but unmakable when its creator, Vincent Ngo, first circulated it more than a decade ago under the title "Tonight, He Comes."

Keeping it that way became what Mr. Berg called "an epic game of chicken." The filmmakers, for instance, long ago conceded that their hero should not get drunk with a 12-year-old. But their concession was a bargaining chip, aimed at keeping a similar situation with a 17-year-old in the final version, which was still weeks from being locked as Mr. Berg spoke in April. Another touchy area, Mr. Berg said, involved flying, never mind driving, under the influence.

Asked about the process, Amy Pascal, Sony's co-chairwoman, took a chipper view. "Will Smith playing a superhero in a movie that's funny and has tons of action, that's not so hard," she said in a telephone interview.

Pressed a bit, however, Ms. Pascal acknowledged that "Hancock" does break some ground. "It's scary in that it goes farther than we've gone before," she said.

By Mr. Berg's lights the executives became comfortable with the film only recently. That occurred when they settled on a marketing approach that played down drama in favor of action and humor. In one of the trailer's highlights Mr. Smith heaves a beached whale out to sea and smashes a sailboat.

"The ad campaign for this movie is much friendlier than the film," Mr. Berg noted.

That Sony would stake its summer on an unusually alienated superhero — even the Batman of "The Dark Knight" does not sleep on a bus bench — owes much to its enduring relationship with Mr. Smith. Beginning with "Bad Boys" in 1995, he has made seven films with the studio, all of them successes. "Will Smith in anything makes it even better," Ms. Pascal said.

That Mr. Smith in turn would stake his platinum persona on such an unlikable (by design) character owes a great deal to Mr. Goldsman, who has made a career out of movies that are just subversive enough to let the biggest star feel he is sneaking past the studio gate.

The best of those films can look like sure bets in retrospect, but at the time they often were not. "A Beautiful Mind" had taxed Universal with its story of a schizophrenic mathematician. Yet Russell Crowe rode the role to an Academy Award nomination in 2002, and the movie won the Oscar for best picture and a writing Oscar for Mr. Goldsman.

Warner Brothers proved similarly skittish over its smash horror hit "I Am Legend," a movie that starred Mr. Smith, with Mr. Goldsman as both a writer and a producer.

"It's a silent movie, Will doesn't make a single joke, we kill a dog and then kill" the hero, Mr. Goldsman said, describing studio reservations about his version of the "Legend" script.

Almost as dapper as Mr. Berg is grizzled, Mr. Goldsman is at ease in a sport coat and delights in playing the cheerful provocateur. Over a Cobb salad in Sony's commissary, he recalled offering Mr. Ngo's far more difficult screenplay to Warner executives, who were then busy trying to revive their Superman franchise. As he remembered it, they said: "No. No. No, no, no."

Later he persuaded a college friend, Richard Saperstein, to acquire an option on the script for an independent company, Artisan Entertainment, where Mr. Saperstein was an executive. Mr. Mann, another friend, agreed to direct it, but at a crucial moment chose to do "Miami Vice" for Universal instead, though he remained a producer.

Artisan disappeared in a corporate shuffle. Vince Gilligan (the "X-Files" television series and the AMC series "Breaking Bad") and John August ("Big Fish") eventually did rewrites. First Jonathan Mostow ("Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines") and then Gabriele Muccino ("The Pursuit of Happyness") were expected to direct, before Mr. Berg finally took over.

(Mr. Ngo declined to be interviewed for this article. His agent said that Mr. Ngo, who was born in Vietnam, intends to build a school in that country with his money from "Hancock.")

Along the way Mr. Goldsman persuaded Mr. Smith to play the role and took the project once more to Warner — which again passed, allowing Ms. Pascal and Sony to step in.

"This is about why Superman can't get a date," Mr. Goldsman said, speaking of Warner's reluctance to make a movie that dares to parody one of its most enduring characters. Hancock, he explained, cannot spend the night with a woman he meets at a party. "The physical impracticalities of this, this is what we play with," he said.

The material is sufficiently risqué that Mr. Goldsman said he now believes the system — executives, agents, leery handlers — might have warned Mr. Smith away from it, had Mr. Goldsman not traded directly on a working friendship rooted in his earlier involvement with both "I Am Legend" and "I, Robot." (Mr. Smith did not respond to requests, through his publicist, to be interviewed for this article.)

It also helped that Mr. Goldsman is no stranger to Sony, confusion at the guard stand aside. He has adapted both "The Da Vinci Code" and its sequel, "Angels & Demons," for the studio and Imagine Entertainment.

Still, executives must be mindful of the risks into which Mr. Goldsman and his associates have drawn the company. It has its own superhero franchise to protect, in "Spider-Man," and a star who has made Sony a fortune when he has been inspirational, as in "The Pursuit of Happyness" in 2006, or lovable, as in "Hitch" a year earlier.

But the best ones are always a bit intimidating. "So was Jack Nicholson in 'As Good as It Gets,' " a Sony film for which he won an Oscar, Ms. Pascal said.

And, as Mr. Goldsman noted, the business still yearns, in its wary way, for life on the edge.

"Everybody knows that you want to break the box," he said. "It's just that the act of breaking the box is really frightening."

Pogledao sam SERIES 7: THE CONTENDERS Daniel Minahana.

Reč je o indie filmu, razvijenom u Sandance Labu koji tematizuje problem reality show programa. U tom smislu ovaj film je bio prilično svež 2001. godine kada ta tema još nije prežvakana, premda i tada je koncept televizijske emisije u kojoj se ljudi ubijaju međusobno bio već prežvakan kod Kinga i filmovima kao što su LE PRIX DU DANGER, RUNNING MAN i sl. Međutim, u ovom krugu prežvakavanja, Minahan na svojoj strani ima iskustvo postojanja reality emisija, pa u tom smislu on formalno postavlja svoj film kao jednu produženu epizodu reality showa, tj. u filmskom smislu mockumentary.

I koristeći takvo rešenje Minahan vešto uspeva da nadomesti sve nedostatke svog niskog budžeta, snimanja na elektronici, gerilskog rada na realnim lokacijama i sl.

Da je mockumentarna forma za njega samo poštapalica, potvrđuje scenario koji izuzev formalnog TV gimmicka ubrzo počinje da dobija obrise ozbiljne i ubedljive melodrame koja u drugoj polovini filma sasvim profunkcioniše.

Iako je paradoksalno ovaj indie film koji kritikuje našu realnost za samo sedam godina uspeo da postane blago datiran u odnosu na filmove koji su tretirali našu sadašnjost kao bajku, činjenica je da SERIES 7 stoji kao odličan primer mudro osmišljenog i precizno realizovanog indie showcasea koji je u Minahanovom slučaju rezultovao početkom rada na HBO serijama, što uopšte nije loša pozicija.

Ovakvi high concept filmovi koji unutar sebe nude odgovore na produkciona iskušenja trebalo bi da posluže kao uzor i srpskim rediteljima jer ovaj primer, između ostalih pokazuje kako kroz takav film može puno da se postgne.

* * * / * * * *

Pogledao sam BE KIND REWIND Michel Gondryja, courtesy of Ginger.

Nism gledao SCIENCE OF SLEEP, tako da ne znam koliku bi težinu imala moja izjava da mi je ovo najbolji Gondryjev film. Međutim, od svih koje sam gledao, ovo je film koji ima najveći emotivni odjek, uprkos tome što je reč o ciničnom istraživanju politika pop kulture, i iako su naslovi poput SPOTLESS MIND imali postavke sa većom emotivnom pregnantnošću.

Gondryjev rad na filmu smatram polovično uspešnim. Očigledno je da Gondry pokušava da u film unese neku oneobičenost koja mahom nema pokriće, i da koliko god je njegova ekscentričnost imala komercijalnu funkciju u muzičkim klipovima, ovde dobije neku hermetičnu dimenziju. Međutim, on u tome preteruje, mešajući bajkovite sižee i gotovo pozorišni minimalizam u inscenaciji dramksih scena. Sasvim je jasno da bi spajanja dve stilizacije bilo lobovanje, da hiperstiolizovan koncept spojen sa hiperstilizovanim rediteljskim konceptom može potpuno dotući film, međutim Gondryjev dramski pseudo-realizam takođe stoji kao neka vrsta intenzivne stilizacije, i promašuje na sasvim drugi način.

Ni u BE KIND REWIND Gondry objektivno nije uspeo da popravi svoje nedostatke. Međutim, posle DAVE CHAPPELLE'S BLOCK PARTY Gondry je ostao zaražen grassroots, community duhom, jednom emocijom prilično čestom na filmu, u "običnom" filmu, i donosi je u svoje novo ostvarenje. zahvaljujući tome BE KIND REWIND dobija jednu nepatvorenu emociju i konačno glealac ima nešto sa čime može da se identifikuje na neki način.

S druge strane, priča sa VHS kasetama, meni kao VHS entuzijasti nosi određenu težinu i nudi reformu nostalgije za decu osamdesetih i devedesetih. Kao što je CINEMA PARADISO, naravno dosta lažna elegija za bioskopom, tako hje BE KIND REWIND elegija za VHSom.

S druge srane naslovi koji se rimejkuju, predstavljaju film osamdesetih i devedesetih koje nezavisno od žanra, naknadne pameti, kvaliteta, sličnosti sa njegovom poetikom, Gondry tretira kao pozitivne kulturne artefakte, kao movie, dela koja mogu da mobilišu gledaoce, i što je još važnije inspirišu nastanak novih filmova.

Gondry jasno razdvaja dela od industrije što je naročito duhovito u sceni kada dođu pravnici da ih tuže u ime holivudskih studija jer su rimejkujući holivudske blokbastere oštetili industriju za tri milijarde dolara. Iako u suštini naravno ovo što rade junaci BE KIND REWIND nema veze sa piraterijom, prikaz njihove situacije i problema je najzad simpatično viđenje kršenja copyrighta kao društveno korisne aktivnosti.

Kad smo već kod korporacija, važno je naglasiti da je BE KIND REWIND jedan od poslednjih filmova koje je uradio New Line dok je još bio autonoman. U tom smislu, upravo ovako bizaran film pokazuje autentični duh ovog studija. Još je zanimlivije to što se u filmu dosta rimejkuju njihovi filmovi, izgubljeni lasici poput HAPPY CAMPERS, koji  najzad biva pomenut ili opskurni naslovi poput čuvenog MAN'S BEST FRIEND Johna Lafie

Naravno, u New Line univerzumu, BE KIND REWIND je na granici off projekta. New Line ga je radio u Americi i kanadi a Focus je eksploatisao ostatak sveta.

Iz srpske vizure, Gondry sa svojom reputacijom deluje gotovo dekadentno i licemerno u ovakvoj afirmaciji DIY koncepcije. Međutim, mislim da ovaj film nosi dosta enerije koju može preneti pre svega filmmejkerima.

Što se ostalih tiče, mislim da će njima nedostaci ovog filma biti upadljiviji i da će dominirati njihovim utiscima.

* * * / * * * *

Pogledao sam FUNNY GAMES US Michaela Hanekea, courtesy of Ginger.

Reći odmah u startu da je Haneke idiot bi bilo isto kao da su Michael Pitt i njegov jaran odmah ubili porodicu Naomi Watts. Onda ne bi imali film. Ovako treba malo produžiti torturu.

Pre svega, FUNNY GAMES je prilično dosledan rimejk austrijskog originala. Original mi je ostao u lošem sećanju kao jedan od onih filmova koji jako teško uopšte zadržavaju pažnju na ekranu, ali je na svojoj strani imao taj evropski art house šmek u tom smislu da je i tehnički i glumački izgledao kao nešto što ionako neće izaći na dobro.

Američki rimejk već od prvih kadrova sugeriše da nu za milimetar neće pokušavati da bude išta komunikativniji. Očigledno je Haneke kao i mnogi pre njega odlučio da ode u Ameriku i da sad on malo uči Amerikance tome kako se pravi film. U tom smislu FUNNY GAMES je njegov ARIZONA DREAM. Koliko je Kusturica u ARIZONA DREAMu želeo da na svoj način reinterpretira američki Zapad, toliko Haneke pokušava da reinterpretira nešto što je upravo zaostavština američkog filma, mada bi svakako tu mogli naći i neke tragove Polanskog.

I sad Haneke naravno prvo pokušava da se odmakne od svih konvencija kvalitetnog narativnog filma koje poznajemo. Dužine kadrova su atipične, ne bi li sugerisale bizaran rediteljski postupak. Mizanscen je pozorišni, i to više u maniru nekog arhaičnog pozorišta, sitnorealističkog pristupa, a kamera ga mahom statično beleži. Ne znam tačno koja namera stoji iza toga. Da li Haneke želi da nas uveri kako je ovo što se dešava pred nama zapravo stvarnost? Da ovo nisu Naomi Watts i Tim Roth već neki pravi ljudi? Ili, pak njega ta vrsta ontologije u stvai uopšte ne zanima i on želi da nas potakne na neku kontemplativnost svojstvenu pozorištu u kojoj ćemo mi lišeni ritmičkih stimulusa svojstvenih filmu nekako dublje doživeti tu situaciju?

Ovo bi sve bile časne namere da u komplikovanijoj dramskoj sceni, u kojoj su ipak potrebi akcenti, Haneke ne posegne za najkonvencionalnijim krupnim planovima i najfilmičnijim mogućim vidovima skretanja naše pažnje. Očigledno je da ni sam Haneke ne veruje u svoje stileme. I da nema ideju kako da u okviru tog koncepta reši neke probleme koje pred njega postavlja krajnje konvencionalno koncipiran scenario.

Međutim, ako je Haneke naprosto naišao na problem koji ne ume da reši pa posegao za konvencijom, kako tretirati suspense situaije koje su besramno realizovane u najboljem hitchcockovskom maniru, i što je još gore, postavljene sa najbednijom manipulativnom ambicijom. Tu pada u vodu čitava Hanekeova intelektualna ili hiper-realistička priča. U jednoj prilično dugoj deonici filma on apsolutno isključuje gledaočev mozak i traži da se uključe najzašećerenije emocije.

I onda kada vidimo da Haneke nije dosledan u svom konceptu i da je raspložen da manipuliše kao i većina holivudskih zanatlija, postavlja se pitanje zašto nas je onda smarao svim onim dugim, statičnim kadrovima, koja je bila njihova svrha.

Uz to, Naomi Watts nije dovoljno dobra glumica da bi u bilo kom trenutku prestala da bude Naomi Watts. Ona je uvek Naomi Watts sa glumom koja je trenirana za tradicionalni holivudski rediteljski postupak. Šta reći o Michael Pittu, čoveku za koga je odavno poznato da je go to guy kad treba da se igra neki psycho, a koji u ovom filmu igra upravo tu ulogu. Po glumačkoj podeli FUNNY GAMES je besramno generičan home invasion flick i sasvim sam siguran da bi ovakvu podelu za neki takav film okupio Joseph Ruben ili Curtis Hanson.

Ako uzmemo u obzir da je Naomi Watts producent filma, ne čudi što je žena u većem fokusu nego u izvornom filmu.

Nemam ništa protiv da autori rimejkuju svoje filmove. Naročito kada je situacija takva da u rimejku mogu da se izraze u nekom drugom kontekstu. Sam Haneke je i tumačio svoj FUNNY GAMES kao priču sa američkom korenima. Međutim, kada ju je doneo u Ameriku, samo se razotkrilo da njegovo foliranje u njihovom miljeu ne prolazi. Čak ni malograđanska kritika sklona podršci raznim oblicima jalovog iživljavanja nije prihvatila ovaj film.

* ½ / * * * *

JOHN MCTIERNAN:
AFFAIRS OF THE CROWN
By
Alex Simon

Editor's Note: This article originally appeared in the August 1999 issue of Venice Magazine.

John McTiernan was born January 8, 1951 in Albany, New York. The son of an attorney, the family moved to a rural farm community in upstate New York after his father became ill. McTiernan attended Exeter prep school during his high school years, and was admitted to Julliard with the intention of studying theater directing. While there, McTiernan quickly discovered that his true love was film and enrolled in an experimental film program at the State University of New York, later moving on to the American Film Institute for graduate school, where he studied under the tutelage of the great Czech director Jan Kadar.

After spending the next decade making a name for himself as a talented TV commercial director, McTiernan landed his feature debut with Nomads in 1986. The eerie supernatural thriller, his first collaboration with a young television actor named Pierce Brosnan, received mixed reviews and didn't burn up the box office, but McTiernan was singled out for his sure hand and distinctive directorial eye, enough so that producer Joel Silver recruited McTiernan to direct the blockbuster Predator (1987), the high-octane Arnold Schwarzenegger thriller that combined The Most Dangerous Game (1932) with Alien (1979), to create a box office smash that also helped solidify Schwarzenegger as a major box office draw. McTiernan became one of the hottest directors in Hollywood after his next feature, Die Hard (1988), reinvented the action-adventure genre and went on to become one of the most-imitated films in history, and helped to establish another action hero screen icon in Bruce Willis. McTiernan flexed his intellectual muscles and kept the explosions and gunfire to a minimum with his taut adaptation of Tom Clancy's The Hunt for Red October (1990). The Alec Baldwin-Sean Connery starrer, was a box office champ the year of its release and, many feel, remains the best of the three big screen Clancy adaptations. McTiernan made a more personal picture with Medicine Man, (1992), again teaming with Connery in the tale of a scientist in the Latin American rain forest. Although many regard The Last Action Hero (1993) as a major stumbling block in McTiernan's brilliant career, the film went on to gross over $100 million worldwide. McTiernan re-teamed with Bruce Willis for the third Die Hard installment, Die Hard: With a Vengeance in 1995, and re-established his box office clout in doing so.

McTiernan's latest film will undoubtedly be regarded as his finest work thus far. There are so many good things to say about McTiernan's remake of 1968's Steve McQueen classic The Thomas Crown Affair, that an entire sonnet could be composed to extol its virtues. Here's just a few: 1) It's made with intelligent adults in mind, not 15 year-old boys. 2) Rene Russo is living proof that a woman need not be a 22 year-old refugee from the WB network to burn up the screen with her sexuality 3) It's the only remake I can think of (since John Huston made the third, and definitive version of The Maltese Falcon in 1941) that is better than the original. Pierce Brosnan ably fills McQueen's shoes as the super cool, ultra rich Thomas Crown, who gets his kicks pulling daring heists in his spare time. Russo, in one of the most free-spirited displays of healthy sexuality in screen history, assumes Faye Dunaway's former role as insurance investigator Catherine Banning, who intends to catch Crown in the act, and instead finds herself caught up in an act all their own. Leave the kiddies at home and don't miss this smart, sexy winner. The MGM release is currently playing all over southern California.

In person, John McTiernan doesn't come across as a director of action heroes, or a man who has blown up glass skyscrapers to thrill the masses. McTiernan is a man who almost resembles a character out of Hemingway, a man's man whose speech style is both verbose and lean. Lean back and dig some of his verbosity.

Your version of The Thomas Crown Affair is one of the only remakes I've seen that surpasses the original.
John McTiernan: That's very kind, but part of making movies is the ability to capture the time in which they were made. I think the original was a product of its time (1968), so it's not fair to say that the original doesn't hold up by today's standards. The more something is a piece of its time, the it's going to date afterwards. So I think that to say the original is dated is almost a compliment to it. It says that it really captured the era in which it was made, which I think it did. It's funny, if you remade a movie in 1968 that was originally made in 1938, nobody would think twice, because you'd be spanning this chasm that made it another world. Maybe it's because there's such a huge population of baby boomers that still think of 1968 as being a fairly recent time that we don't feel that distance now. When you look at the original now, at the time it was so cutting-edge, and now that sort of high-style cinema verite, which today looks quite theatrical trying to give the illusion that it's real. I wanted to do a remake that wasn't quite a remake, but a compliment to the original, a bookend, a sequel...I don't know what the hell you'd call it. (laughs) I wanted to give a sense that this movie respected that one.

I think the best remakes are the ones that are re-imagined. Literal remakes have never worked.
No, they don't. You take a portion of the story and go with that, then it can work. No one thinks twice of doing Shakespeare productions every year. It's not "We're re-doing MacBeth," because (Shakespeare) is part of our landscape, so the idea that those plays keep getting renewed is perfectly normal. And I think that eventually, people will start doing that with movies, because there's enough of a history of movies now.

The other thing I liked about your film was the fact that it was made with adults in mind.
Yeah, but interestingly enough, we scored just as high with young men as we did with adults, and we figured out that it was the whole Mrs. Robinson thing, with young men having the hots for Rene.

Another great thing about this movie: it shows a woman who's in her 40's, who still incredibly sexy and very comfortable with it. It's not a 22 year-old lead actress with a 50 year-old leading man. That was very refreshing to see.
I didn't know that Rene was in her 40's until she started doing interviews about it, bragging about it! Her age is never an issue in the film, but she's making an issue of it now. I'd better stop her! (laughs)

But that's what 40-50 looks like nowadays. It's not like it was 20-30 years ago. People are staying youthful longer.
Yeah, that whole dynamic has changed. Now that time period of 45-50 is when a woman is at her hottest, I agree. There's a great line about that: "The most important sexual organ is the eight inches from here (indicates his ears) to here." It takes a while for that to develop. (laughs)

It was also nice to see Rene Russo playing a sexy, elegant woman, as opposed to a tomboy who happens to be sexy.
Yeah, that's true. Her whole persona prior to this was of a gorgeous woman who didn't care that she was gorgeous and just wanted to be one of the guys. Because I wanted to make a love story, and not a caper film, the audience had to fall in love with the characters, too. Both Rene and Pierce have this quality. Even when they've played bad guys, the audience can sense that somewhere in there is a good person, because they can see it in their eyes. You can't lie about that. There are many great actors, who are great-looking who can never play a lead because there's something in their eyes that makes they audience go "Well...I don't know if I trust him. I don't know that he represents me." That's one of the few aspects of this craft that's God-given and can't be learned. So I was looking for two people with whom the audience could have a secret with. For the first half of the film, they're both real crocodiles, very difficult to sidle up with. They're both dangerous people, but the audience has a secret where they just know "You know what, underneath that there's a really great guy, and underneath Rene's front there's a really sweet girl."

This is the second film you've done with Pierce. I've always felt that he was an underused actor, in the sense that many filmmakers rarely let him act, but just wanted him to stand there and look pretty.
They never knew how good he is, how smart he is. He's changed very little since I worked with him before, which is good. I think in many ways some of the (hardships and tragedies) he's endured over the past decade have helped to season him in a good way. He's not so boyish anymore, and I think as he gets older, he'll just become even more impressive. I kept beating up his make-up man on this saying 'Leave him alone! Quit trying to make him pretty. Let me see the age on his face. Let me see the hard edge around him.' He's just getting on the cusp of that now, just getting enough steel in his face, enough grit.

Remember how scary he was in his first role (The Long Good Friday, 1981)? It was his boyishness that made him scary (playing an IRA assassin).
God, he was great in that! Remember that last scene with him just staring at Bob Hoskins in that car?! He was brilliant in that film, and it was his the sweetness and boyishness of his face that made him so scary. There were people in my family who worked for Michael Collins back during the Troubles. One of my relatives had to disappear and come to the States. This man was the most deferential, wonderful man who had the warmest smile, and the reason he fled to the States is he dropped an egg basket full of hand grenades into the lap of a British General. I knew him as a very old man, but he was so sweet, and so polite...it was as if he wouldn't have stepped on a crack in the sidewalk, he led such a straight and narrow life. But that was where he came from.

Let's talk about where you came from.
My dad was a lawyer and became ill for quite some time, so my mother, sister and I moved back with her parents on a farm in upstate New York. I still live on a farm today, in Wyoming. I went to Exeter for prep school, which was quite terrifying for me. Here I was, this middle class kid, not very cosmopolitan, in this upper crust place, and it terrified me. I did well academically, but didn't fit in at all socially. I became intensely interested in film, so much so that I almost didn't go to college so I could make films. I went to Julliard, then to the State University of New York, which had an experimental film program going on. I was one of the only film students that wasn't stoned the whole time (laughs), so I ended up using most of the money and resources they offered. Then I went to the AFI after that.

Was there any one film that ignited your interest?
No, but I remember when I decided that that's what I was going to do. I went about it like it was reverse engineering. I knew that I had to go and learn what a movie was, not just my experience of going and watching a movie. So I went and sat in Truffaut's Day for Night (1972), watched it for three days straight, eight hours at a time and memorized it shot-for-shot. I got past the story, all the original and secondary experience, so I could study what it was that I was really watching. Film is really sort of a chain that's really linear. Yet when it's all strung together, it just sort of feels like an experience. It takes quite a while to be able to deconstruct that experience to figure out what you really saw.

Tell us about your experience at AFI.
One of the sort of perks there is they don't have grades, but they would take the person they felt was the most likely to succeed, and they'd give him or her to the filmmaker in residence as an assistant. So I worked for Jan Kadar, the great Czech filmmaker. If you read Hemingway, half of the information you get is in this style of how he tells you, his prose style. It's not literally the events he recounts, it's how he recounts them, which appears to be obsessively simple in nature. There's a hint to what people are thinking, but he doesn't go off into these vast internal monologues. That's what Jan's style was like. He used to make me sit down and learn movies shot-for-shot. And we'd watch films by some great masters, like Kubrick and Fellini and Jan would say "See! Look what he did wrong there! That's wrong! Do you understand why it's wrong?" And I'd say 'What's wrong with it? It's a nice shot.' "No, no," Jan would say, "visually, it's out of key." He had a whole sense that you had to approach filmmaking like you were composing a piece of music. It wasn't about making a translation from a literary source. To decide what the next note is in a piece of music, you don't think about the plot, or what it means, you think about: what does it sound like? Is it in the right rhythm, the right key? So the montage in a film needs to be in the same key, and if you're going to change key, you'd better transpose it into the other key, as if you were composing a concerto. In color and lighting also, there are visual melodies. It's weird because I'm sort of known as an "action guy," who gets 10,000 machine guns and blows things up. But I cut my teeth on very esoteric European films. Maybe what Paul Verhoeven (Robocop, Starship Troopers) and I did was to take the technology that the Europeans developed in the 60's and started applying it to mass market American movies. Paul has an expressive narrator in that his camera is an active, expressive person. I think it's a very angry, very fiery person. If you think about American films before the European influence in the 1960's, there was no active narrator. With a few exceptions, the camera just photographed the action and didn't really have a distinctive voice of its own.

Let's talk about some of your other films, starting with your first, Nomads. What was it like making the jump into features?
Well, I'd done a little feature called Tales of the 22nd Century that got me into AFI. I only did commercials to support myself, really, while I was in school. It was sort of a jump in the other direction, because I started making films, then moved into commercial directing. So going back to making a feature wasn't that big a jump, really.

I know you didn't go into Die Hard thinking you were going to re-invent the action-adventure genre. What were you aiming for?
I think to try to make a thriller that could be jacked up a notch with a great story underneath it. There were also a lot of technical things I was really anxious to do, like have a really active camera. When I broke into the business, the rule was that you weren't allowed to cut a moving camera shot into another moving camera shot. At the beginning of Red October, I had to fire an Academy Award-winning editor, because he literally didn't know how to cut the stuff. He didn't know how to deal with a moving camera and an active narrator.

With Red October were there different challenges filming an existing novel than from an original script?
No, in many ways it just makes it better. I enjoy working from a novel.

I really enjoyed Alec Baldwin's interpretation of Jack Ryan. What was it like working with him.
Terrific. He's tremendously intelligent, another good Irish-American kid. (laughs) We had a great time. He's fiery, and somewhere behind the fire is a worry about something, if you can find out what he's really worried about.

You opted not to do the second Die Hard, as well as the two Tom Clancy sequels. Why is that?
Well, they wanted to do Patriot Games, which had the villains as the Irish Republican Army. Both Alec and I, as Irish-Americans, were a bit uncomfortable with that, since it's our heritage. They had another script (Clear and Present Danger) that both Alec and I wanted to do, and for various reasons we decided not to. With Die Hard, I guess I just found myself bumping heads with Joel Silver a lot.

You've done two pictures with Sean Connery. What was he like to work with?
I knew I was doing alright with him when he began calling me 'boy.' That's sort of his mark of approval. At the end of the night he'd say "Good night, boy." (laughs) Sean loves movies, really knows a lot about them. And he really liked my style of working, the way I like to shoot. So it was very easy to work with him.

Medicine Man seems like it would have been a tremendously difficult shoot.
It was. We had all sorts of rigs mounted in the trees, all over the jungle. We probably spent three weeks working 125 feet above the forest floor.

What did you learn in making The Last Action Hero?
Well first of all, I learned the idiocy of releasing a film the week after Jurassic Park (laughs). And also that a studio will do anything do push a movie out, even if it's unfinished, which it was. It's largely unedited and large portions of it still appear exactly as it was when it left the camera. It wasn't ready yet. I don't know that I'll ever get the chance to go back to it. It's like having a model with an extra 20 pounds on her. There's a really neat movie in there. In order to get a sense of fun that was clear to the audience, it needed tightening, and it needed another month in editing to do that.

Any advice for first-time directors?
It's the same thing of how you get to Carnegie Hall: practice, practice, practice. (laughs) Also, I'd say get a hold of a video camera and just shoot as much as you can, of anything. If you have a script, get a couple actors together and shoot two pages from the script, then edit the footage on a really basic video editing program. It takes as long to develop a prose style on film as it does a prose style in writing, so it's crucial to practice whenever and however you can.

http://dobanevinosti.blogspot.com/2008/06/cin-city.html

Pogledao sam DEFINITELY MAYBE Adama Brooksa, courtesy of Ginger. Reč je o novoj Working Title romantičnoj komediji koju sam nestrpljivo čekao. Kritike su bile pozitivne i ovaj film je povremeno apostrofiran kao veliki povratak inteligentnog romcoma.

Iako je Working Title u žanru romantične komedije za klasu jača kuća od drugih produkcija, DEFINITELY MAYBE ne koristi previše to svojstvo i ovo je najpre američki film koji u sebi ima ponešto od duha Working Title klasika sa Hugh Grantom, ali je dosta i modernizovan i amerikanizovan kako bi se približio aktuelnim generacijama gledalaca.

U making ofu SHAUN OF THE DEAD Edgar Wright i Simon Pegg diskutuju o sceni koju su u filmu nazvali "The Richard Curtis momentom", i samo iz toga je evidentno koliko je Working Title važan ne samo za žanr već i za savremenu pop kulturu uopšte. Neki kritičarti kažu da ono što su Merchant i Ivory za prikaz stare Britanije, to su Bevan i Fellner za savremenu Britaniju.

U tom smislu, DEFINITELY MAYBE preuzima ozbiljnost i intrigantnost tema koje su svojstvene Working Title filmovima ali potom ih glumački i rediteljski do kraja amerikanizuje i pojednostavljuje. Nesumnjivo je zanimljivo to što je film smešten u politički milje jer glavni junak počinje kao energični član Demokratske stranke koji radi na Clintonovoj kampanji, i njegov lični raspad se povezuje sa krizama Clintonove administracije. Isto tako film postavlja pitanja o pojmu ambicije, životnih priorioteta, i likove u priličnoj meri drži u sivoj zoni. Međutim, sve to je nekako pojednostavljenije u odnosu na cinizam i inteligenciju koji imaju britanski Working Title proizvodi.

Konačno sam high concept na kome je film baziran dovodi do izvesne emotivne konfuzije. U jednom trenutku gledalac gubi emotivni osnov praćenja priče, tako da sam ishod postaje relativno proizvoljan. Siguran sam da različiti gledaoci imaju različite favorite. Ja sam očigledno najopštija ciljna grupa pa sam zadovoljan outcomeom koji neću spoilovati, ali sasvim sam siguran da poznajem ljude koji će navijati za ostvrarenje jedne druge romanse.

Iz ovih razloga, DEFINITELY MAYBE definitivno nije klasik, i ne dokazuje u punoj meri šta Working Title predstavlja u domenu romcoma. Međutim, sve ove primedbe ma koliko krupne ne osporavaju činjenicu da je reč o vešto realizovanom i komunikativnom filmu, koji uglavnom uspeva da opravda svoje pozamašno trajanje od 111 minuta. Kakav god da je u odnosu na Working Titleovu kinoteku, DEFINITELY MAYBE nesumnjivo jeste upmarket proizvod. U tom smislu, čudi me da ga Taramount neće distribuirati, ako imamo u vidu da u Srbiji romcomi imaju prilično stabilno tržište.

* * * / * * * *

Pogledao sam ZVIŽDUK U OSAM Save Mrmka.

Reč je o vrlo zanimljivom mjuziklu koji, sasvim očekivano ima dosta uticaja tadašnje televizije, što i ne čudi ako imamo u vidu ko je reditelj. Iako nije uspeo da snimi mjuzikl koji bi bio u ravni LJUBAVI I MODE a da ne govorimo o stranim uzorima, Mrmak definitivno jeste napravio važan i intrigantan film.

Ovaj film je važan zato što u glavnoj ulozi ima najvežu pevačku zvezdu svog vremena, a Darko Kraljić, kao jedan od najvažnijih kompozitora pop muzike, je napisao kultne pesme koje su ostale zabeležene. Samim ovim spojem, ZVIŽDUK U OSAM stoji kao bitan spomenik popularne kulture jedne zemlje koje više nema. Iako se zbog Mrmkovog TV pristupa ne moće reči da je ZVIŽDUK U OSAM bitan spomenik kinematografije koje više nema, on nije lišen filmske vrednosti koje ga čine važnim. Naime, u ZVIŽDUKU U OSAM koji jeste koncipiran kao pevačka revija postoje i neki vrlo seriozni, polemički tonovi na nivou priče, što je karakteristično za mjuzikle na vrhuncu razvitka žanra. Naravno, to nije razrađeno do kraja, i ZVIŽDUK U OSAM ne spada u vrhunac žanra, međutim, vrlo spontano mu stremi.

Upravo je taj segment intrigantan. Prvo film su pisali Mihić i Kozomara sa MM Langom, koga znamo i kao scenaristu Žikinog UBISTVA... Mihić i Kozomara su bili glavni oslonac Crnog talasa i zanimljivo je da su napisali film koji po žanru i profilu predstavlja sve ono što je Crni talas potom pokušao da ukloni iz jugoslovenskog filma. E sad, pre nego što se ZVIŽDUK U OSAM otpiše kao hack job, treba uzeti u obzir priču filma. Naime, film počinje scenom u kojoj službenik producenstke kuće odlazi da uzme kredit za snimanje filma. Kada se ispostavi da želi da producira dramu, biva odbijen i kažu mu da jedino žele da finansiraju komediju. Ovaj segment je u scenarističkom smislu urađen sa najvećom pažnjom. Čak, moglo bi se reći kao da je taj segment jedini i zanimao scenariste koji su očigledno želeli da njime ukažu na svoje probleme.

Kako drugačije objasniti dalji, vrlo zanimljiv razvoj zapleta, kada producenti odlučuju da scenario za dramu snime kao komediju, a onda se pisci ni ne potrude da uđu u tu vrlo uzbudljivu liniju priče u kojoj bi istražili da li je i kako moguće isti scenario čitati na suprotne načine.

Štaviše, ZVIŽDUK U OSAM vapi za rimejkom u kome bi neke od ovih grešaka bile ispravljenje a sjajne Kraljićeve pesme smeštene u zaokruženiji koncept.

Ispuštanje scenarija iz ruku karakteristično je za srpske muzičke filmove, SLATKO OD SNOVA i A3 su pravi primer, u kome su vrlo ambiciozno postavljeni scenariji destruirani u procesu realizacije. Ipak, vitalnost mjuzikla kao žanra ostavlja nadu da će to konačno nekada biti realizovano kako treba.

* * ½ / * * * *

Podvrgao sam se Shyamalanovoim novom filmu THE HAPPENING. Moram priznati da sam ga gledao iako mi nije na listi prioriteta pre svega zato što je bio jedini film u bioskopima koji nisam gledao, relativno me zanima i počinje posle utakmice.

I ovog puta u suštini Shyamalan radi jedno te isto. Uzima odličnu high concept ideju, pokušava da je umesto spektakla tretira kao intimnističku priču i onda polako prestaje da razdvaja važno od nevažnog, ideja se razvodnjava u pretencioznom a u suštini banalnom rediteljskom postupku i sve se zaključuje nekakvim krajem koji je u boljim njegovim filmovima šokantan a u slabijim, kao što je ovaj, čak i nije.

E sad, prednost THE HAPPENINGa je u tome što je loš ali nije previše dosadan. Isto tako, mislim da mi to što sam relativno iskusan gledalac ne remeti uživanje u filmovima ove vrste. Siguran sam da bi mi ovo bilo slabo čak i da je reč o prvom Shyamalanovom filmu koji gledam.

Isto tako high concept pozadina apokaliptične premise mi ne smeta pošto mi se čini da što sam stariji sve više uživam u blokbasterima tako da mi u ovom filmu ta zjapeća naivnost priče uopšte nije smetala, iako objektivno, zanatski smeta.

Da je ovaj film izašao pre LADY IN THE WATER, tipovao bih da će biti hit. U međuvremenu je Shyamalan demistifikovan i plašim se da THE HAPPENING može naići na snažan otpor i publike i kritike.

U tom smislu, biće zanimljivo ispratiti box office, naročito ako se ima u vidu da je nuđenje scenarija za ovaj film bilo jedan od Shyamalanovih veštih publicity stuntova i ljiudi iz Foxa će ispasti žešće naivni ako film bude težak promašaj što su naseli na njegovu foru.

Ocenu više film dobija zato što katastrofa pre svega zahvati zemlje koje su bombardovale Srbiju i priznale Kosovo.

* * /  * * * *

Jon Voight joins '24'
Will play the villain in the seventh season
By Nellie Andreeva

June 13, 2008, 01:00 AM


Jon Voight (Getty Images photo)

In his first series role in 40 years, Jon Voight has signed on for the upcoming seventh season of "24."

On the Emmy-winning Fox drama, Voight will play Jack Bauer's (Kiefer Sutherland) uber-nemesis who is pulling the strings behind next season's terrorist threat.

The character will be introduced during "24's" two-hour Season 7 prequel and will be featured heavily in the latter half of the season.

The prequel, now shooting on location in South Africa, is slated to air Nov. 23, with Season 7 of the Imagine TV/20th TV-produced series kicking off in January.

The tapping of Voight marks the first A-list villain casting on "24" since Season 1 when Dennis Hopper appeared in the final episodes as Serbian nationalist Victor Drazen.

Voight did several TV guest spots early in his career -- including a three-episode stint on "Gunsmoke" between 1966-69 -- until his movie career exploded with "Midnight Cowboy" in 1969.

A four-time Academy Award nominee, Voight won the best actor Oscar for 1978's "Coming Home." He recently reprised his role as Nicolas Cage's father in "National Treasure: Book of Secrets."

Voight is repped by CAA and manager Steven Paul.

posto je crippled_avenger gore pomenuo BE KIND REWIND, intruziracu sa svojim utiskom:
jos jedno blekdzekovsko smece, s prepoznatljivim trendovima.
prvi je scenario koji je zamisljen tako da podvuce bitne trenutke i poruku filma, odnosno da stvori utisak da nam film nesto govori o kinematografiji. jasta.
nevesto, usiljeno, podvucena mesta su spojena atrocioznim odnosima izmedju likova, nebuloznim situacijama, ne u smislu komike vec u smislu postovanja toka radnje i uopste variranja tona koji
bi trebalo da stvori atmosferu. reziser ne ume da razradi dobru pocetnu ideju. dzek blek je standardno dosadan, malo se krevelji, malo pevusi, nimalo je duhovit. ustaljeni sabloni politicke korektnosti su ojacani time sto je ovo u sustini standardni whitey kompleks film. od belog rezisera, ali ipak, gondry je radio sa opterecenim dejvom sapelom. druga dva lika tumace srebrni panter i mos def, potomak faraona. "kritika" korporacije je svedena na poruku "pa dobro, krivi smo, uhvatili su nas, jebiga mora tako".
preostali momenti se uglavnom svode na rasporedjivanje statista po boji i paznji da se ne uvredi niko osim belih djavola koji zele da sruse san dobrih crnaca.
povrh svega, film je dosadan. antipreporuka.

Pogledao sam film SAMI Lukasa Nole. Olako bih ovaj film mogao definisati kao hrvatsku KROJAČEVU TAJNU, ali hrvatska KROJAČEVA TAJNA se zove SVJETSKO ČUDOVIŠTE, i uopšte nije nezanimljiv film. U njemu čak igra i Šušljik.

SAMI su više kao hrvatski ODBAČEN. Intimistička, maltene duo drama, skoro bez dijaloga smeštena u postapokaliptični milje.

Iako Nola pokušava da se odmakne od jezika kojim komunicira savremeni narativni film, da radi bez dijaloga i bez priče sa obiljem melodramskih događaja i preokreta, na kraju je jasno da on itekako ima racionalnu postavku svega i da u suštini nije uspeo da konstruiše neki vlastiti, autentičan izraz.

SAMI su film koji želi da se izrazi kroz neku apartnost a zapravo su vrlo racionalan, odmeren, razumljiv film, koji upravo zbog prevelikog upliva racionalnosti i dramaturgije gubi na eksperimentalnom kredibilitetu. Upravo zbog nemoći da pronađe novi izraz, Nola završava sa filmom za koji i najdobronamerniji gledalac mora priznati da je nepodnošljivo dosadan.

Sporadično dobra snimateljska rešenja, koje ponekad bivaju pojeftinjena reklamdžijskim osvetljenjem, i duga scena seksa sa Ninom Violić (što podržava svaki dobronameran čovek) čini da u krajnjem zbiru ovaj film bude nešto što neću sasvim potisnuti.

Iako je film prepun artizma bez pokrića, ne može mu se osporiti da je u svojoj ambiciji barem radikalan i da izuzev prilično duge scene seksa sa Ninom Violić, ne pokušava da ponudi išta iole atraktivbno ili komunikativno.

* 1/2 / * * * *

Pogledao sam Louis Letterierovog HULKa.

I mogu reći da je film momački. Čim se angažuje pravi muškarac da snimi film, rezultati ne izostaju.

Pre svega, mislim da je u ovom filmu proradilo ono o čemu Marvelov filmski odsek stalno priča a to je da glumac koji nije zvezda već karakterni glumac iznese lik. Edward Norton je to uradio sa Bruce Bannerom koji zaista funkcioniše kao lik, i to ne jednoj ozbiljnoj, relativno realističnoj liniji tipa Bornovog identiteta i sl. Najvažnije od svega je da taj ton u principu ne opada tokom celog filma, i da je sve vrlo konzistentno što sa drugim ekranizacijama nije bio slučaj.

Ovde su delovi sa banerom zaista odlični i mnogo su suptilniji i veštiji nego kod Leeja koji je imao plemenitu nameru da istraži Hulkovu ljudskost ali je na kraju to sve pojeftinio.

Kad je reč o segmentu kada je Banner Hulk, urađen je jako dobro, performance capture je napredovao, ovaj Hulk je realističniji u fakturi kože i akcija je više fizička, sa više 80's kadriranja. Mnogo više efekata u kadrovima sa pokretima kamere, i nisu svi pokreti kamere veštački kao u SPIDER-MANu, već ih ima i jako dobrih.

E sad, u samim akcionim scenama postoje dva problema. Jedan je što je Hulk u suštini vrlo pribran. U ovom filmu, Hulk se više ponaša kao King Kong nego kao Hulk. Uopšte apsurdno je diskutovati o tome kako se Hulk ponaša i kakao bi trebalo da se ponaša, uzevši u obzir da je reč o imaginarnom, zelenom divu. Ko zapravo zna kako se stvarno Hulk ponaša? Međutim, sa razvojem emocija u Hulku i artikulacije pokreta, postavlja se pitanje zašto onda Banner toliko stremi ka samokontroli? On je u priličnoj meri već ima sudeći po ovom filmu.

E sad, na samom kraju filma, ostaje neki catch da u stvari tada Hulk počinje da indukuje napade kako bi ih kontrolisao, no to je već tema sledećeg filma.

Druga stvar je prosto sad već pitanje naše sposobnosti da percipiramo stvari koje su evidentno nemoguće. Naime, moram priznati da je fatum Hulka u tome što kada bi studio našao pravog zelenog džina i doveo ga da stvarno pravi sranja, mi bi mislili da je to specijalni efekat. Primer za to je Josif Tatić. Često ga vidim na TVu i pomislim kako je to najbolja Lakobrijina maska ikada.

Stoga, Hulk je zapravo nefilmičan lik pošto iza senzacionalnog potencijala zapravo imamo ozbiljan problem hronične neuverljivosti koja smeta filmovima.

S druge strane, iako je Angov film meni bezveze, HULK je zaista i+uspeo da inspiriša dva zanimljiva savremena filma.

Isto tako, važno je da letterier nije u radu na ovom filmu odustao od svojih obeležja. Stunt kooridnator je opet Cyruill rafaelli iz B13 tako da ima odličnih potera na nogama, skakanja po zgradama i sl. Mnogi akcioni delovi su garnirani emocijama i smešteni u funkciju melodrame u najboljem cameronovskom maniru. U par navrata ima odličnih off the wall akcionih rešenja, sličnih naslovima poput THE HOST, ali mahom se ipak drži proverenih holivudskih matrica.

U okvirima letnjeg filma, moglo bi se reći da HULJK ne nudi previše akcionih segmenata, međutim akcija je ravnomerno raspoređena i film nije dosadan pošto priča nudi sasim dovoljno uzbuđenja.

Evo najzad filma koji, što se mene tiče, počinje da ispunjava marvelova obećanja.


* * * /   * * * *

Quote from: "crippled_avenger"
Ovde su delovi sa banerom zaista odlični i mnogo su suptilniji i veštiji nego kod Leeja koji je imao plemenitu nameru da istraži Hulkovu ljudskost ali je na kraju to sve pojeftinio.

Da se razumemo, kod Stana Leeja je to bilo IZUZETNO naivno, ali treba imati na umu da je to bilo pre pola veka i da je on pisao jedno deset različitih strip serijala mesečno...

Quote from: "crippled_avenger"E sad, u samim akcionim scenama postoje dva problema. Jedan je što je Hulk u suštini vrlo pribran. U ovom filmu, Hulk se više ponaša kao King Kong nego kao Hulk. Uopšte apsurdno je diskutovati o tome kako se Hulk ponaša i kakao bi trebalo da se ponaša, uzevši u obzir da je reč o imaginarnom, zelenom divu. Ko zapravo zna kako se stvarno Hulk ponaša? Međutim, sa razvojem emocija u Hulku i artikulacije pokreta, postavlja se pitanje zašto onda Banner toliko stremi ka samokontroli? On je u priličnoj meri već ima sudeći po ovom filmu.

Ja, naravno nisam gledao film, a verovatno ću ga videti tek za dve-tri godine, ali valja se setiti da je Hulk već negde osamdesetih godina imao vrlo radikalne razvoje u ponašanju. Džekilhajdovska podvojenost je inako bila načeta još šezdesetih, a produbljena sedamdesetih. Već negde u sedamdestima si imao momente kada Banner može da kontroliše transformaciju. Posle su jedno vreme Hulk i Banner bili razdvojene ličnosti. U osamdesetima ga je, čini mi se Al Milgrom opet spojio i na određeno vreme vratio u sivu boju (kako je originalno bio kolorisan) i dao mu sasvim novu karakterizaciju. Banner je tada praktično sve vreme bio transformisan u Hulka i išao unaokolo pod imenom Joe Fixit, biznismen, baunser, kriminalac zlatna srca. Prilično neobičan preokret u karakterizaciji, ali ovo je potpuno in continuity.

Bill Mantlo je Banneru dao neke traume iz detinjstva kao podlogu za psihološki profil Hulka.

Kasnije, ga je Peter David još više zakomplikovao dajući Banneru jedan poprilično zajeban slučaj podele ličnosti, gde se pokazalo da nemaš jednog Hulka unutra nego nekoliko, to jest sivog (pametnog), zelenog (divljeg) i Bannera. Onda je sve to spojeno u jednu ličnost, posle borbe sa četvrtom ličnošću, aspektom krivice, pa smo na kraju dobili pametnog Hulka koji je skroz izbacio Bannera iz jednačine itd. itd.. Mislim, Marvelov kontinuitet je UVEK jako komplikovan, a kod Hulka je MEGA komplikovan.

Ali i u novijim vremenima, Hulk je prilično inteligentan. Greg Pak ga je u Planet Hulk napisao kao vrlo inteligentnog i kontrolisanog, a u World War Hulk jeste bio besan ali sa razlogom, i nije bio nekontrolisan...

Quote from: "crippled_avenger"Druga stvar je prosto sad već pitanje naše sposobnosti da percipiramo stvari koje su evidentno nemoguće. Naime, moram priznati da je fatum Hulka u tome što kada bi studio našao pravog zelenog džina i doveo ga da stvarno pravi sranja, mi bi mislili da je to specijalni efekat. Primer za to je Josif Tatić. Često ga vidim na TVu i pomislim kako je to najbolja Lakobrijina maska ikada.

Stoga, Hulk je zapravo nefilmičan lik pošto iza senzacionalnog potencijala zapravo imamo ozbiljan problem hronične neuverljivosti koja smeta filmovima.

Ovo je apsolutno tačna opservacija i moj generalni problem sa live action superhero filmovima...

Mehmete, hvala za pregled. Očigledno je da ne poznajem Marvela dovoljno tako da će imeni i svima nama ovaj pregled biti super za blefiranje kada budemo diskutovali o filmu.

Kad sam pomenuo nekontrolisanost Hulka, reč je o tome da Banner tvrdi da se ničeg ne seća iz situacije kad je Hulk. Stanje kad je Hulk opisuje kao stanje da mu je litar esida sipano u mozak. Dakle, svi smo mi pomalo Hulk.

I Banner se prema stanju hulkastosti ponaša kao da je to stanje koga se i sam plaši pošto ga uopšte ne kontroliše. E sad, ja ne znam da li je i inteligentnmi Hulk iz Marvela u tom fazonu, tj. da Banner ne zna da Hulk zna da se kontroliše. Jel to ta podvojena ličnost o kojoj si pričao?

U svakom slučaju, u ovom filmu taj koncept nije osvešćen.

Međutim, ovo su zaista kontemplacije koje ne smetaju samom filmu kao doživljaju i cela ova diskusije je meni još jedan dokaz da imamo posla sa odličnim filmom.

Još jedan mali disclaimer, pišući o Leeju, nisam mislio na Stana nego na Anga.

Ah... ja pomislio na Stana the Mana, naravno. Nije mi pao na pamet Ang...

Elem, da, pazi, imaj na umu da je Marvel sasvim nameran da filmovi imaju svoj kontinuitet koji ne mora da bude kompatibilan sa stripovskim, a može da koristi elemente iz njega. Recimo, Raimi je Spajdermenu dao organske web shootere (tj. dao mu je da u svom organizmu proizvodi mrežu) jer mu je to bilo udobnije nego da objašnjava kako je klinac u svom podrumu napravio hemijski i tehnološki proboj koji decenijama najmoćnije kompanije na svetu nisu mogle. Poslušno, web shooteri su ukinuti i u stripu i JMS je Spajdermenu i tamo dao mogućnost organske proizvodnje mreže. Ali, od zimus, posle velikog One More Day retkona, Spajdi ponovo ima mehaničke shootere...

Tako i sa Hulkom, sumnjam da su u filmu gledali da prepišu neku postojeću karakterizaciju Hulka, nego su smućkali po mao od svega, kako im je odgovaralo.

Ali u svakom slučaju, Banner gotovo sasvim konzistentno kroz svoju poluvekovnu historiju ne zna šta Hulk radi kad je Hulk.

Ja moram reci da se ne slazem sa onim gore crippledovim komentarom - ja mislim da bismo uvek znali sta je prava stvar a sta efekat. Najjezivije je to sto stvarnost izgleda kao low-budget efekat. Ili recima bake Weatherwax:

"Things that try to look like things often do look more like things than things themselves. Well known fact."

Pa to Cripple i kaže, more or less, odnosno da je ono što vidimo u Hulku u našem duhu uvek osuđeno da bude viđeno kao nemoguće jer znamo da je to specijalni efekat, pa je time ugrožena identifikacija, imerzivnost, emotivna uključenost i sve ostalo. Strip je zato zgodan medij za ovakve priče jer dopušta stilizaciju koja elegantnije iznosi metaforu, za razliku od igranog holivudskog filma koji je hteo-ne hteo mnogo više naturalistički medij i u kome ovakve metafore deluju nezgrapno. Da je Kenneth Anger recimo snimao Hulka 1955. godine or something, e tu bi već simbolika verovatno bila predstavljena na potentan način. Ali, ebiga, Hulk nije ni postojao tada a Anger se više bavio homoseksualnošću pre nego što se bacio na satanizam...