Amber and Boyd for Dsquared2

June 19th, 2008

Supermodel Amber Valetta and our favorite model/artist Boyd Holbrook in the latest DSquared2 campaign shot by Steven Meisel. Theme? Punk/ska redone for the 00’s. A departure from the recent multi group shots, the powerful campaign is a visual match to their simple and boldly graphic site. Visit Dsquared2 to see other pics.

Ph: Steven Meisel for DSquared2, FW08, photo from Dsquared2 website

Ph: Steven Meisel for DSquared2, FW08, photo from Dsquared2 website

Ph: Steven Meisel for DSquared2, FW08, photo from Dsquared2 website

Ph: Steven Meisel for DSquared2, FW08, photo from Dsquared2 website

Fan Rant: The Big Screen Needs More Gore Vidal

June 19th, 2008

Filed under: ,



I am Myra Breckinridge whom no man will ever possess. Clad only in garter belt and one dress shield, I held off the entire elite of the Trobriand Islanders, a race who possess no words for "why" or "because." Wielding a stone axe, I broke the arms, the limbs, the balls of their finest warriors, my beauty blinding them, as it does all men, unmanning them in the way that King Kong was reduced to mere simian whimper by beauteous Fay Wray whom I resemble left three-quarter profile if the key light is no more than five feet high during the close shot.

The above is the opening to Myra Breckinridge, which instantly sucked me into the world of Gore Vidal. I was a teen bored with the literature at school, as well as the fluff young-adult horror I was reading in my spare time, when I somehow stumbled on his book. Vidal's words were a beacon of light. Sure, there is more to Myra than rabid, powerful, and Amazonian femininity, but that was irrelevant because Vidal's novel was a gateway into the world beyond rural suburban life -- women with power, intelligence mixed with pulp, a crumbling gender barrier, Hollywood, and the vast world beyond cows and K-Mart.

Continue reading Fan Rant: The Big Screen Needs More Gore Vidal

Permalink | Email this | Comments

Further final thoughts on Sydney Pollack

June 19th, 2008

eyes-wide-shut.jpg

Lovely article here on the late actor/director's linchpin performance in Kubrick's "Eyes Wide Shut," written by David Schwartz for the Museum of the Moving Image's Moving Image Source website.

From the article: "The power of Kubrick's direction?and Pollack's performance?in the billiard scene comes from the contrast between Cruise's understated (and underrated) performance as Bill, and Pollack's blustery, mannered style. Cruise, the biggest box office star of his time, is brilliant in an uncharacteristic role; his character is passive, naïve, insecure, introverted, and unhinged. Ziegler is the opposite. Everything with him is show and surface; his power is derived from his understanding and command of how the world works. This is a man with no need for introspection.

"Yet if we were to come away believing that Ziegler has all the answers, the scene?and the film?would lose its remarkable ambiguity. For the scene to work?as it does?it must pretend to be explanatory while raising more questions than it answers. What Pollack does so commandingly is create the impression that every hesitation, every smile, every gesture by Ziegler is calculated and artificial, while at the same time making him so charming and convincing that everything also feels genuine. Ziegler seems to be lying and telling the truth at the same time, and Kubrick has no interest in resolving this tension."

"Eyes Wide Shut" has always had its quixotic defenders, but Schwartz is the first writer to make me want to actually see the film again.

Are we sure he didn’t watch one 120-hour Bollywood movie?

June 19th, 2008

This just in from The Birmingham Star:

Mathura, June 17 : Ashish Sharma of Uttar Pradesh's Mathura city attempted an unusual feat to break a world record of watching films non-stop for the longest time.

During his marathon movie-watching attempt, Ashish watched 48 Bollywood films for over 120 hours and ended his feat on Monday here. He started at 11:08 a.m (IST) on June 11 and ended up at 8:12 p.m. (IST) on Monday (June 16).

Sharma surpassed the previous record of 117 hours and four minutes set by Claudia Wavra of Germany.

Ravi Shankar Godara, a Guinness Record holder, confirmed Sharma making the record.

Godara set the Guinness Record on May 20, 2007 for memorizing most birthdays in two minutes and got the eligibility of participating in any Guinness World Record event attempt and observe it.

"The record was first made by Claudia Wavra from Germany for 117 hours and four minutes and Ashish was supposed to break it. He started on June 11,2008 and followed the stated rules and regulations of the Guinness Book of World Records as provided to me," said Ravi Shankar Godara.

Ravi Shankar Godara also said that the longest movies watching marathon record breaker was duly checked by a doctor after every four hours.

The conditions also stipulated that the duration of each movie should not be less than 90 minutes and the participant can have rest for 10 minutes after each film.

Ashish, however, said that his attempt to enter the Guinness World Records was to bring the name of his native place Mathura into record books.

"I saw a book of the Guinness Book of World Records in a library in Nehru Place market of New Delhi. After studying it I felt there was no mention of Mathura in such a book of records. So, I decided to do something that will place Mathura in the record book," he said.

Ashish, however, will be issued the world record title one month later after scrutiny of his data, statements of witnesses, CDs and DVDs.

The Last Mistress – Film Clip – The Lies

June 19th, 2008
  The Last Mistress - Film Clip - The Lies
THE LAST MISTRESS marks the monumental pairing of cinema’s premiere provocateur, director Catherine Breillat (ROMANCE, FAT GIRL) with the most fearless and explosive actor of our generation, Asia Argento (MARIE ANTOINETTE, BOARDING GATE). A penniless rogue, Ryno de Marigny (newcomer Fu-ad Aît Aattou), shocks 19th century France with his engagement to the virginal gem of the aristocracy, Hermangarde (Roxane Mesquida of FAT GIRL). As lurid speculations of Ryno’s ten year affair with the carnal Vellini (Argento) manifest, a supremely erotic and wickedly humorous depiction of human lust is revealed - overriding the brittle facade of nobility and reverence. Bolstered by Breillat’s mastery of the medium and Argento’s commanding performance, THE LAST MISTRESS is a highly entertaining yet incredibly provocative film that has resulted in unanimous praise from audiences and critics across the world.
Directed by: Catherine Breillat
Starring: Asia Argento, Fu’ad Ait Aattou, Roxane Mesquida, Claude Sarraute, Yolande Moreau

The Last Mistress – Film Clip – Prison

June 19th, 2008
  The Last Mistress - Film Clip - Prison
THE LAST MISTRESS marks the monumental pairing of cinema’s premiere provocateur, director Catherine Breillat (ROMANCE, FAT GIRL) with the most fearless and explosive actor of our generation, Asia Argento (MARIE ANTOINETTE, BOARDING GATE). A penniless rogue, Ryno de Marigny (newcomer Fu-ad Aît Aattou), shocks 19th century France with his engagement to the virginal gem of the aristocracy, Hermangarde (Roxane Mesquida of FAT GIRL). As lurid speculations of Ryno’s ten year affair with the carnal Vellini (Argento) manifest, a supremely erotic and wickedly humorous depiction of human lust is revealed - overriding the brittle facade of nobility and reverence. Bolstered by Breillat’s mastery of the medium and Argento’s commanding performance, THE LAST MISTRESS is a highly entertaining yet incredibly provocative film that has resulted in unanimous praise from audiences and critics across the world.
Directed by: Catherine Breillat
Starring: Asia Argento, Fu’ad Ait Aattou, Roxane Mesquida, Claude Sarraute, Yolande Moreau

Me sick

June 18th, 2008

Having a cold in the age of the internet gives you none of the TV-watching, bed-resting benefits. You’re typing and clicking just a little more slowly than usual.

Discuss: How Much Honesty Do You Want From Hollywood?

June 18th, 2008

Filed under: ,



I've always been a fan of honest assessments in interviews -- I'm talking about those fleeting moments when an actor, actress, director, or anyone else in film backs out of the marketing machine for a second and speaks about their work honestly. It drives me up a wall when I see a talented person lather a bad movie/role in platitudes as if we won't figure out that they're lying. Sure, they have to help buzz for their projects, but sometimes a spade is just a spade.

Katherine Heigl has ticked off many recently for removing her name from Emmy contention because she doesn't feel the material she was given on Grey's Anatomy was worthy of consideration. It may be a bit too truthful, but isn't it accurate? Her character arc isn't the stuff of Emmy nominations. We complain when actors are given nods they didn't really deserve, but are equally put off when someone pulls their name out of the running for that reason. Or, is it just because she admitted it publicly? Or, that she's been very honest before? I wasn't entirely thrilled with the portrayals in Knocked Up, and was relieved that she admitted so herself, even if the film has given her a lot of success.

Continue reading Discuss: How Much Honesty Do You Want From Hollywood?

Permalink | Email this | Comments

‘Hounddog’ Gets New Release Date & Weird Marketing Campaign

June 18th, 2008

Filed under: , , ,

It's been so long since we discussed Hounddog that it seemed like the film had already come and gone without a whisper. Not quite. The infamous Dakota Fanning movie that caused many waves for a controversial rape scene was planning to hit theaters on July 15. Now a new press release says the film will hit theaters starting September 5, where they are hoping to get the surprisingly high gross of $15 million before hitting shelves on DVD on January 20, 2009.

But that's not all. The company says that along with cross-promotion with other titles, it will "be supported with national television and radio ads, a consumer sweepstakes, and in-store merchandising." Defamer has mused about a whole Simpsons/7-11 approach with "Hounddog Sex Shacks," but the snark is not that big of a jump.

Whether warranted or not, the film has ruffled the feathers of many people, and it seems surprising that sweepstakes and in-store merchandising are being thrown into the mix. Hell, push aside the unrest and just think about the initial response. When Kim reviewed it from Sundance way back when, she said: "Hounddog is also one of the least likeable films I've seen here at Sundance -- and not, as you might expect, merely because it has a scene of the young actress being violently raped."

How far will they take it? We'll have to wait and see.

Permalink | Email this | Comments

How to cut pages

June 18th, 2008

One page of screenplay translates to one minute of movie. Since most movies are a little under two hours long, most screenplays should be a little less than 120 pages.

That’s an absurd oversimplification, of course.

One page of a battle sequence might run four minutes of screen time, while a page of dialogue banter might zip by in 30 seconds. No matter. The rule of thumb might as well be the rule of law: any script over 120 pages is automatically suspect. If you hand someone a 121-page script, the first note they will give you is, “It’s a little long.” In fact, some studios will refuse to take delivery of a script over 120 pages (and thus refuse to pay).

So you need to be under 120.1

Which usually means you need to cut.

Before we look at how to do that, let’s address a few things you should never do when trying to cut pages, no matter how tempting.

  • Don’t adjust line spacing. Final Draft lets you tighten the line spacing, squeezing an extra line or two per page. Don’t. Not only is it obvious, but it makes your script that much harder to read.

  • Don’t tweak margins. With the exception of Widow Control (see below), you should never touch the default margins: an inch top, bottom and right, an inch-and-a-half on the left. 2

  • Don’t mess with the font. Screenplays are 12-pt Courier. If you try a different size, or a different face, your reader will notice and become suspicious.

All of these dont’s could be summarized thusly: Don’t cheat. Because we really will notice, and we’ll begin reading your script with a bias against it.

There are two kinds of trims we’ll be making: actual cuts and perceived cuts. Actual cuts mean you’re taking stuff out, be it a few lines, scenes or sequences. Perceived cuts are craftier. You’re editing with with specific intention of making the pages break differently, thus pulling the end of the script up. Perceived cuts don’t really make the script shorter. They just make it seem shorter, like a fat man wearing stripes.

Fair warning: Many of these suggestions will seem borderline-OCD. But if you’ve spent months writing a script, why not spend one hour making it look and read better?

Cutting a page or two

At this length, perceived cuts will probably get you where you need to be. (That said, always look for bigger, actual cuts. Remember, 117 pages is even better than 120.)

Practice Widow Control. Widows are those little fragments, generally a word or two, which hog a line to themselves. You find them both in action and dialogue.

  • HOFFMAN
  • Oh, I agree. He’s quite the catch, for a fisherman. Caught myself trolling more than once.
  • If you pull the right-hand margin of that dialogue block very, very slightly to the right, you can often make that last word jump up to the previous line. Done right, it’s invisible, and reads better.

    I generally don’t try to kill widows in action lines unless I have to. The ragged whitespace helps break up the page. But it’s always worth checking whether two very short paragraphs could be joined together.3

    Watch out for invisible orphans. Orphans are short lines that dangle by themselves at the top of page. You rarely see them these days, because by default, most screenwriting programs will force an extra line or two across the page break to avoid them.4

    Here’s the downside: every time the program does this, your script just got a line or two longer. So anytime you see a short bit of action at the top of the page, see if there’s an alternate way to write it that can make it jump back to the previous page.

    Nix the CUT TO:’s. Screenwriters have different philosophies when it comes to CUT TO. Some use it at the end of every scene. Some never use it at all. I split the difference, using it when I need to signal to the reader that we’re either moving to something completely new story-wise, or jumping ahead in time.

    But when I’m looking to trim a page or two, I often find I can sacrifice a few CUT TO’s and TRANSITION TO’s. So weigh each one.

    Cutting five to ten pages

    At this level, you’re beyond the reach of perceived cuts. You’re going to have to take things out. Here are the places to look.

    Remove unnecessary set-ups. When writing a first act, your instinct is to make sure that everything is really well set up. You have a scene to introduce your hero, another to introduce his mom, a third to establish that he’s nice to kittens. Start cutting. We need to know much less about your characters than you think. The faster we can get to story, the better.

    Get out of scenes earlier. Look at every scene, and ask what the earliest point is you could cut to the next scene. You’ll likely find a lot of tails to trim.

    Don’t let characters recap. Characters should never need to explain something that we as the audience already know. It’s a complete waste of time and space. So if it’s really important that Bob know what Sarah saw in the old mill — a scene we just watched — try to make that explanation happen off-screen.

    For example, if a scene starts…

  • BOB
  • Are you sure it was blood?
  • …we can safely surmise he’s gotten the necessary details.

    Trim third-act bloat. As we cross page 100 in our scripts, that finish line become so appealing that we often race to be done. The writing suffers. Because it’s easier to explain something in three exchanges of dialogue than one, we don’t try to be efficient. So you need to look at that last section with the same critical eyes that read those first 20 pages 100 times, and bring it up to the same level. The end result will almost always be tighter, and shorter.

    Cutting ten or more pages

    Entire sequences are going to need to go away. This happens more than you’d think. For the first Charlie’s Angels, we had a meeting at 5 p.m. on a Friday afternoon in which the president of the studio yanked ten pages out of the middle of the script. There was nothing wrong with those scenes, but we couldn’t afford to shoot them. So I was given until Monday morning to make the movie work without them.

    Be your own studio boss. Be savage. Always err on taking out too much, because you’ll likely have to write new material to address some of what’s been removed.

    The most brutal example I can think of from my own experience was my never-sold (but often retitled) zombie western. I cut 75 pages out of the first draft — basically, everything that didn’t support the two key ideas of Zombie Western. By clear-cutting, I could make room for new set pieces that fit much better with the movie I was trying to make.

    Once you start thinking big-picture, you realize it’s often easier to cut fifteen pages than five. You ask questions like, “What if there was no Incan pyramid, and we went straight to Morocco?” or “What if instead of seeing the argument, reconciliation and breakup, it was just a time cut?”

    Smart restructuring of events can often do the work for you. A project I’m just finishing has several occasions in which the action needs to slide forward several weeks, with characters’ relationships significantly changed. That’s hard to do with straight cutting — you expect to see all the pieces in the middle. But by focussing on something else for a scene or two — a different character in a different situation — I’m able to come back with time jumped and characters altered.

    Look: It’s hard to cut a big chunk of your script, something that may have taken weeks to write. So don’t just hit “delete.” Cut and paste it into a new document, save it, and allow yourself the fiction of believing that in some future script, you’ll be able to use some of it. You won’t, but it will make it less painful.


    1. But! But! you say. In the Library, both Big Fish and Go are more than 120 pages. I’m not claiming that longer scripts aren’t shot. I’m saying that if you go over the 120 page line, you have to be doubly sure there’s no moment that feels padded, because the reader is going in with the subconscious goal of cutting something. Go is 126 pages, but it’s packed solid. Big Fish meanders, but those detours end up paying off in the conclusion.
    2. Page numbers, scene numbers, “more” and “continued” are exceptions.
    3. I try to keep paragraphs of action and scene description between two and six lines.
    4. While I rag on the program, Final Draft is smart enough to break lines at the period, so sentences always stay intact. It’s a small thing, but it really helps the read. Other programs may do it now, too.