The film's been a long time in the making; as this pungent New York Observer article from 2005 notes, Paul Giamatti was at one time considering playing Cianci. Guess John Adams felt like a better fit. A recent blog entry from the Providence Journal, where Stanton has won a Pulitzer for his investigative journalism, mentions that Nic Cage and Russell Crowe were in consideration too. I don't know -- looking at those pics above proves that no one may wear Buddy's hair as well as Platt.
Also, director Brian DePalma has signed on to direct "The Boston Stranglers," based on Susan Kelly's 1996 non-fiction book that claimed that Albert DeSalvo was not the man who murdered 13 Boston-area women between 1962 and 1964 -- or at least not the only man (thus the title). No cast or start date has been set. Think DePalma will be able to replicate the terse Joe Friday-meets-the Hub vibe of Richard Fleischer's 1968 "The Boston Strangler," starring Tony Curtis (see below)? He can't do any worse than "The Black Dahlia" or "Redacted."
He goes by "Night," but it's hard to dispute his sunny disposition. Just a few minutes into a conversation with M. Night Shyamalan in a New York City hotel room yesterday, it was obvious to me that the director has managed to occupy such a unique niche in the Hollywood landscape because he's immediately likable. Of course, a little movie released in 1999 called The Sixth Sense didn't hurt, either.
After landing two Oscar nominations and international acclaim for his masterful ghost story, Shyamalan continued to market himself as a brand. Since then, the results have been mixed. Signs was an indisputable hit. Unbreakable has its supporters. Lady in the Water? Not so much. But that failure hasn't prevented the filmmaker from dealing with audacious material: His latest movie, The Happening, finds a married couple (Mark Wahlberg and Zooey Deschanel) thrust into a world where people inexplicably become suicidal after getting struck by an ominous, unseen toxin. Forces of evil usually remain unseen in Shyamalan's films, and The Happening is no exception to that rule. I spoke to the 37-year-old Philadelphia resident about the personal philosophies guiding his career choices, the polarized reactions to his work, and what the future will bring.
As you Iron Man fans know, the number one question everyone's been throwing at Favreau and Robert Downey Jr. has centered on which storyline we might see in Iron Man 2. The popular consensus was the famous Demon in a Bottle storyline, where poor Tony Stark hits rock bottom in his battle with alcoholism.
But that storyline might actually be in jeopardy due to another summer superhero movie: Hancock. Favreau told Collider, "The comic book fans might see Demon in a Bottle as a fresh story line but I haven't seen Hancock yet. From what I've seen it seems there is a lot of imagery that seems to be shared. Him flying through billboards and things. The idea of the hero whose biggest enemy is himself, and him fighting through his demons, you want to come at the audience with something fresh. You don't want to feel like you are echoing something that somebody else is doing." Hopefully, Hancock will keep clear of Stark's territory, and we might end up with that fresh storyline after all. Pop on over to Collider to read the rest of the interview.
Oh, but we're not done! Earlier today, Erik shared the news that Favreau was being very vocal on MySpace regarding the Iron Man 2 release date and how there needed to be more time to create a successful sequel. He mentioned that perhaps Iron Man should take the three-year route, like Nolan's Batman films. Then, IESB dropped the bomb that the reason Marvel hadn't signed Favreau yet was because he wanted more money and they didn't feel he deserved it. Apparently, Marvel's David Maisel thinks an Iron Man sequel would kill with or without Favreau. Read more about that here.
At a USC forum last Saturday, a writer asked whether it was worth considering product integration when writing a script. She said her project would lend itself really well to a major brand like Starbucks.
I told her that I’d often heard plans of trying to bring advertisers in on the ground floor of a movie, but that it never seemed to work out. The gap between commercials and big-screen entertainment was just too wide.
In a surprise undercard to McCain-Obama, the flap started last month at Cannes when Spike Lee pointed out that neither of Clint Eastwood's two Iwo Jima movies -- "The Flags of Our Fathers" and "Letters from Iwo Jima" -- featured black actors. Lee made his comments while promoting "Miracle at St. Anna," (pictured above) his own upcoming WWII drama about the all-black 92nd "Buffalo" Infantry Division and the four of its soldiers who save a boy in a Tuscan village. Lee's observation set off a firestorm that's still burning. Eastwood himself responded in a very interesting interview published Friday in the British newspaper The Guardian. ?The story is ?Flags of Our Fathers,? the famous flag-raising picture, and they didn?t do that,? Eastwood said. ?If I go ahead and put an African-American actor in there, they?d say, ?This guy?s lost his mind.??
Now the controversy's focal point is Eastwood's insistence that "a guy like him should shut his face." Lee, in turn, responded with a comment published on ABCNEWS.com. "First of all, the man is not my father and we're not on a plantation either," he said. "He's a great director. He makes his films, I make my films. The thing about it though, I didn't personally attack him. And a comment like 'a guy like that should shut his face' -- come on Clint, come on. He sounds like an angry old man right there."
The argument between these two is a lot less ridiculous than it seems. Some observers want to frame the disagreement, unfairly, as a matter of Lee's envy with Eastwood's Oscar success. What's being debated is the factual record as refracted through the movies. Where's the line separating historical accuracy from artistic license? Eastwood's defense of his casting makes sense: Where in his films would these omitted black soldiers go? In bit parts, most likely. But Lee's greater issue, while aimed at Eastwood's movies, is really about the movies themselves: Why haven't black soldiers figured into more WWII films. "St. Anna" could work as both a rebuke and the beginning of some larger, necessary expansion.
What's really incredible to me in that Guardian interview is how animatedly aggravated Eastwood sounds. It's been a while since we've seen that Clint in a movie. He's miffed about Lee in a way that underscores an interesting difference in perception.
In 1999's "True Crime" Eastwood directed himself as a disgraced reporter redeemed by his efforts to get a black guy (Isaiah Washington) off death row. The movie is about Eastwood's character more than it is Washington's and at some point he tells one character that none of this business has anything to do with race. Eastwood's stance in that film sounds defensively full of hubris. He could hear what the black characters were saying to him. He just didn't buy it.
It'd be terrific if some of this fight about race made into Eastwood's planned next movie about how Nelson Mandela parlayed South Africa's victory in the 1995 Rugby World Cup to promote national unity.
For a few weeks now, a grainy video has been circling the Internet of an office worker going absolutely insane. It originated on Break.com, and I've included it after the jump for your critical enjoyment.
Those fearing that their cubicle neighbor might engage in similar hysterics can breathe easy -- it was all a sly bit of viral marketing from Timur Bekmambetov for Wanted. He revealed the stunt over on his personal blog, where he allegedly had a good laugh at the gullibility of the West. I'm not seeing any geographic mockery here, so quite possibly he took that down.
I Served the King of England - Trailer Jan Dítì (Ivan Barnev) is short in height, but high in ambition. To put it bluntly, the young provincial waiter wants to become a millionaire. And he knows just how to do it: by hearing everything, seeing everything, and creating opportunities at every turn. Armed with this knowledge and an irrepressible wish to please, he soon leaves his first place of employment, a pub, for a luxury brothel and, finally moving onto an elegant Art Nouveau Prague restaurant. But by the late 1930s, things are changing: Hitler has taken the Sudetenland region and is breaking apart Czechoslovakia. Jan falls in love with Líza (Julia Jentsch), a Sudeten German proud of her Aryan blood. They marry, and soon after Líza is sent to serve on the Polish front, while Jan remains behind to serve as a nurse in a Nazi SS Research Hospital, but when she returns, she has a fortune in rare stamps that Jews had ‘left behind’ … After Líza’s less than heroic death, Jan sells the stamps and becomes … a millionaire. But he only has three years to enjoy his fortune: the new Communist regime puts him behind bars for 15 years, one for each of his millions… Upon his release from jail, Jan is sent to live in a decrepit border town. Here Jan reflects on the events that have shaped his life – and to reflect on what might have happened if he had played a different role in these events. Directed by: Jiri Menzel Starring: Ivan Barnev, Oldrich Kaiser, Julia Jentsch
A bunch of interesting questions have backed up in the queue, so let’s see how many we can get through while waiting for the new iPhone to be announced.
I’m currently outlining a spec feature, 98% of which takes place at the Superbowl. I’m on the fence about proceeding, however, because a few creative executives I’ve pitched the idea to were concerned about 1) the production costs and 2) the need to secure the NFL’s approval. One of the execs did say, however, if the NFL took to the script and got involved it would be a potential dealmaker.
While the production costs aren’t as much of a concern for me (given that those particular naysayers hadn’t gotten past the logline), the seeming make-or-break nature of the NFL’s involvement is a bit daunting. Before I take the plunge from outline to first draft, do you think it’s worth the risk?
– Patrick Los Angeles
Yes. If you believe in the story and the characters, go for it. If a producer or executive likes your script, she’ll be smart enough to the realize that the NFL of it all can be figured out. 1
At a USC workshop this weekend, a student asked me about writing a spec Alien vs. Predator. I gave him roughly the same advice — if you think you can write a kick-ass version of it, don’t let the potential unmake-ability of it deter you. My caveat to him was that in the case of AVP, it’s a really tired franchise, so you’re starting with a significant enthusiasm gap. Better to make your own mythology.
I’m about to re-write a script that I’ve been working on for a little while now. It’s a small character road trip drama in the spirit of 1970s American films (e.g. “Five Easy Pieces”, “Coming Home”, “Sugarland Express” — though not all films referenced there are road trip movies). This is my do or die draft — if it’s no good, then I will abandon it. But I’m hoping that some of your advice will help me avoid that outcome.
My concern is that too many of the scenes right now are overly reliant on dialog and I don’t want to tread into unnecessary exposition. At the same time, I want to be able to reveal character and backstory (and obviously, dialog plays a huge part in that). Do you have any general pointers on how to balance scenes (or sequences) of relatively quiet character moments, with the overall dramatic push that’s necessary to maintain tension? I want to make sure that both aspects remain compelling.
N.S. Los Angeles
There’s nothing wrong with dialogue scenes if they’re moving the story ahead, or enjoyable enough on their own merits. But I suspect you’re finding that a lot of your dialogue scenes are telling us backstory about your characters, and the thing is, we just don’t care.
That’s hard to hear, but you need to hear it: except for crucial, story-twisting revelations, we simply don’t need to know more about who your characters were before they walked on screen.
So before you start that next draft, take a red pen to any chunk of dialogue that isn’t about what’s happening now. Be brutal. I suspect you’ll find that you have a lack of action and some unclear goals that were hiding behind the chatter.
The movies you cited, along with more recent ones like Lost in Translation, Sideways and Little Miss Sunshine, are all good examples of movies that are talky without ever becoming expositional. Characters talk about what they want, what they fear, but they never dwell on what happened. And each movie finds moments to be quiet. Long stretches of each film play as montage, letting the characters do things without commenting on them.
Let’s say you’re working on a script that’s based on a musician. He’s a fictional musician, so you’ve never heard anything this guy’s produced. As the story unfolds, we watch him build up his song. Is it okay to include the song? Or would that just kill everything and shut the reader down? I guess what I’m asking is, do you include lyrics or just leave them out and hype him like he’s as great as the supporting cast says he is?
– James
Give us lyrics. You’ll want to abbreviate a bit — cut out chorus repetitions, for starters. But it feels like too much of a tease to omit the words altogether.
Often, when I am diligently working on a script, or close to being finished on a script, I find my mind and writing meandering to other ideas. For instance, I’ve written several drafts on a thoughtful spy movie and have an extensive set of notes (from peer review) I plan to implement. Instead of completing the script, I spend time thinking and making notes on new ideas — a drinking road trip film and a sentimental father-son story.
Is this a natural way for new and good ideas to develop or am I merely avoiding “finishing” a project for fear it will suck? Not being a professional, yet, I’m not bound by deadline to turn something in…but how does a disciplined, professional, writer deal with this issue of…distraction?
– Greg
The script you haven’t written is always better than the one you’re staring at, cursor blinking, its flaws so obvious that you can’t believe you ever started writing it. That doesn’t change over the course of a career. You will always want to be writing something else.
Look at your spy movie, and ask yourself, “If this script had just landed on my desk, would I be excited enough by the possibilities to do this rewrite?” If the answer is no, feel free to investigate one of your other projects.
Granted, there are times you’ll really need to force yourself to finish a new draft. For instance, if you’re getting paid, or if you’ve promised a draft to someone whose opinion matters. And don’t mistake pragmatism for laziness: If something is difficult but do-able, do it. Not only will you improve the script, but you’ll learn something in the process.
The time to move on is when reaching the “best version” of your script ceases to be interesting to you.
On the other hand, if she doesn’t like your script, the NFL factor is an easy explanation for why she’s passing. Which saves face for everyone. ↩
Good news, Patrick Swayze fans -- he's one step closer to kicking cancer to the curb. Variety reports that the dirty dancer's pilot show about an unorthodox FBI agent, The Beast, has been picked up by A&E and that it will still star Swayze. Everything was up in the air when it was announced that he was fighting pancreatic cancer, but now insiders have told Variety that the actor's doctors have given him the thumbs up to continue working, just a few weeks after he announced that he was responding well to treatment.
Shooting the series should keep him pretty busy, but I wonder what this means for the rumor that Swayze would return to the world of Point Break for a sequel, should his health allow it. Will we be getting more Bodhi? I wasn't too keen on the idea in May, but it would be better than some other films that could try to grab him, like, say, that wretched Donnie Darko sequel that's in the works.
Wow. Give America a CGI family film they can get behind and they will come. Either despite or because of the fact that it has the exact same storyline as every other CGI family film, "Kung Fu Panda" whaled on the competition this weekend and waddled off with $60 million. "You Don't Mess with the Zohan" also did very, very well -- $40 million -- and the two new movies combined to give the overall US BO a solid and needed 33% boost over the same weekend last year.
DId the East Coast heat wave have something to do with this? Undoubtedly: If your entire family's tongues are dragging on the ground from humidity, the all-American response is take 'em to the movies, and "Kung Fu" fits the bill for ages zygote on up. ("Zohan" for kids? I don' theenk so. That much raunch -- funny raunch, but raunch -- buckles the edges of an R rating. Personally, as a father, I draw the line at Lainie Kazan's naked tokhes. But that's just me.)
In non-new studio fare, "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" is settling into a graceful retirement period: 50% off the previous week's take and with a fine $253 million overall gross. "Sex and the City" plummeted 63% in its second week, as the core audience had already been there, done that. The iron man of early summer 2008 appears to be "Iron Man," which is still doing strongly in its 6th week of release -- No. 6 overall, with a still robust $2,500 per theater average at just under 3,000 theaters (compare that with "Prince Caspian," in its 4th week, with $1,800 PTA at just over 3,000 theaters).
One nice surprise is holding steady at #11 on the chart: the itty-bitty but absurdly satisfying indie drama "The Visitor," starring character actor Richard Jenkins in a rare and welcome leading role. Directed by Tom McCarthy ("The Station Agent"), the film cracked the Top Ten for three weeks in late May and is still pulling in two grand per theater its ninth week in release (compare to $844 for "Baby Mama"). Nice guys do occasionally finish first, or close enough for horseshoes. Are you listening, Hollywood? Hello? Anyone?
Speaking of per-theater-averages, the foreign language Oscar nominee from Kazakhstan, "Mongol," opened at 5 theaters over the weekend and made $26,600 at each. Bodes well for the film's roll-out (it comes to Boston June 20) and for fans of old-fashioned epic filmmaking.
As you Iron Man fans know, the number one question everyone's been throwing at Favreau and Robert Downey Jr. has centered on which storyline we might see in Iron Man 2. The popular consensus was the famous Demon in a Bottle storyline, where poor Tony Stark hits rock bottom in his battle with alcoholism. 
For a few weeks now, a grainy video has been circling the Internet of an office worker going absolutely insane. It originated on 
I’m currently outlining a spec feature, 98% of which takes place at the Superbowl. I’m on the fence about proceeding, however, because a few creative executives I’ve pitched the idea to were concerned about 1) the production costs and 2) the need to secure the NFL’s approval. One of the execs did say, however, if the NFL took to the script and got involved it would be a potential dealmaker. 
Good news, 
