Friday, 13 August 1999

WEEKEND PREVIEW

Now this will be a challenging weekend.

Bowfinger is probably the funniest movie of the summer. Eddie Murphy and Steve Martin should be able to open it. But once again, I wonder whether word has gotten out loudly and strongly enough about this movie. I laughed so hard I couldn't see parts of it, but not too many critics will probably want to admit that there are three comedic geniuses at work in one movie (Frank Oz - director, Steve Martin - writer, Eddie Murphy - actor x 2). We'll see. Detroit Rock City is going to be totally lost on the over-35 demographic, but yet, is a sweet reflection of the movies the boomer generation loved as kids. Will kids go to see it? Will adults go see it? Or will it get lost in the middle. We'll see. Brokedown Palace may be the toughest movie at all. Well, the toughest to take. (More on all three of the openers below.)

The hum in town is that we should expect a rough road for The Blair Witch Project, though The Sixth Sense continues to have good word-of-mouth. This weekend will also mark the challenge round for The Thomas Crown Affair. I don't know many people who didn't like this movie and we'll see whether they can get anyone under 40 to show up in the film's second outing. But the one holdover I pray you will see is Dick. I can't tell you what a wonderfully smart and carefully crafted film this is. Well, I can actually. It's a wonderfully smart and carefully crafted film. Roger Ebert hit the nail on the head last weekend when he compared it to Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead. I am a huge Stoppard fan and I understand that his movie of his play is dense and complex and kind of demands that you bring some knowledge of Hamlet to it to really get all the jokes. But it is remarkably fulfilling as you consume each bit of its fruit and taste its strong flavor that has come with time. Dick is the same way. You've seen All The Presidents Men and read all the analysis. Here's a movie that brilliantly deconstructs the absurdity of it all. Go.

THE GOOD: Bowfinger is a completely unexpected pleasure. Steve Martin's script synthesizes, for the first time in his career, the outright silliness of The Jerk with the dry wit of the too-dry-for-me L.A. Story. The story is simple. Bobby Bowfinger (Martin) wants to make a movie and he needs a major movie star. So they decide to stalk the uninterested star and include him in the film without his knowledge. They also need a look-alike for some shots, so they hire a mentally skewed guy named Jiff. Heather Graham is the girl with a heart of brass and a brain to match. Christine Baranski is the past-the-point-of-no-return former ingenue. Terrance Stamp is the cult leader. Jamie Kennedy is the guy with the keys to the studio warehouse. And Adam Alexi-Malle is the bookkeeper-turned-wannabe movie dude. That's all you need to know. Go see this film and discover all the quirks for yourself. As hard as Steve Martin's script slams Hollywood, this is also a movie about the love of making movies. Another great comedy.

THE BAD A**: I really liked Detroit Rock City. It's not a movie about brain surgery. It's a movie about a bunch of bored, pot-smoking, foul mouthed kids in search of the holy grail, the KISS concert. The jokes are broad. The motivations are venal. And the amount of thinking that goes into every decision is at a minimum. But the guys are just trying to break free and have a little fun. A fun idea for teens and a problem if you are already the President. But I digress... The performances are solid all across the line. Even the smaller roles are well played. And as I keep writing, the tone reminds me of Rock-N-Roll High School. When I first saw that film, I wasn't much of a Ramones fan, I wasn't a big fan of the drug humor and I didn't love the movie. But, like disco, it has become fond nostalgia for me (at 34!). And Detroit Rock City takes me back to that silliness. I mean, either you are going to love or hate a big dopey guy trying to abuse a smaller kid only to have to face up to the little kid's gigantic brother and the smaller kid's I-Am-Satan attitude and mouth. If you can go with that scene, you will probably enjoy the film, If you go, "I've seen this a million times and it is soooooo stupid," you can skip Detroit Rock City. I went along for the ride.

THE UGLY: I can't really count Brokedown Palace as one of the very worst films of the year. Part of it is that Claire Danes and Kate Beckinsale are good actresses and Claire manages to go almost the entire picture without crying, which I am really grateful for. (And for the record, I blame typecasting for Claire being the Crying Queen and not her.) The film is played earnestly, but it has some real howlers along the way. And worst of all, it never gets itself dirty. When you see the movie on cable in 2002 because there is just nothing else on, look for the moment when they get to the prison and Claire remarks about her haircut, "I've had worse." Well, there are people in L.A. who were paying $250 for that very haircut around the time they were shooting the movie. Likewise, there is a shot of a hole in the floor with cockroaches around it that is supposed to be the toilet that strikes fear into the hearts of the girls. But they never have to deal with the fact that they probably have cockroaches in the outhouse they end up using. And I hate to be grotesque, but do "feminine hygiene products" differ dramatically and unpleasantly in a Thai jail? Are there wide outbreaks of illness in a world where they clean the sleep area with a hose? If there are drugs available, how do they get them? Is this the only prison without physically abusive prisoners or guards. Lesbian rape anyone? I mean, you don't have to do all of this stuff and you don't have to make a graphic movie, but if you are stuck in hell, it can't play like a bad Girl Scout camping trip. Telling us over and over about how they are stuck forever isn't enough. Somebody buy these folks a copy of Kubler-Ross. Anger, denial, bargaining, depression, acceptance. Do it.

For more specifics and all the venue counts click on Box Office Extra.

THE CHAT: As you can tell, I enjoyed Detroit Rock City. So, next week, we have four chats with cast members. On Tuesday, starting at 8p EST/5p PST, the young couple in love from the film, first Melanie Lynskey and then in our second hour, Sam Huntington. On Wednesday, same Detroit Rock City time, same Detroit Rock City Yahoo! Chat room, Playmate of The Year and one-woman film studio Shannon Tweed and an hour later, the great Lin Shaye, who you may also remember from the films of two brothers named Farrelly. Lin won't be bringing Magda's breasts to the chat...I hope.

READERS OF THE DAY: There were many e-mails about who should write Hannibal, while it seems that Entertainment Weekly wrote that Mamet would be finished with the screenplay in two months. Not if he's shooting a movie, he won't be. One name was mentioned a lot more than any other. The first of those to mention him, gets the slot. From Paul: "He has proven himself capable of greatness in the genre. Get Andrew Kevin Walker (Seven, 8mm) to script Hannibal.

Also, there was this suggestion that actually killed two buttons with one stone. From JWL: "You've answered your own question on Hannibal in your column. While I have nothing against Mr. Scott, let Mr. Coppola write AND direct Hannibal. He's a great screenwriter and a visionary. Talk about a man who could take his own spin on this twisted tale. I'd pay twice to see Mr. Coppola get an A-level project with two great actors.

Here's another good perspective on the marketing of The Iron Giant, from PG-Not 13: "I wish to comment on your column today regarding The Iron Giant. Like you, I agree that America is hypocritical when it comes to quality family entertainment. What I would like to do is give another perspective regarding marketing toward families, and why Disney is so successful.

My wife and I own a children's clothing store on the west side of Los Angeles. As such, we attempt to market toward families and children given that is whom our target audience is. As far as the parents go, it is a very difficult audience to reach. Think about how busy you are, and you are single. Then think about how busy you would be if you had a partner whom you shared your life with. Then think about how busy you would be if you had to take care of one or more children who much of the time may demand most of your attention.

That doesn't leave you with a great deal of free time. In other words, chances are you aren't surfing the 'Net as much as today's teenagers are. You aren't reading the newspaper as much as you might have, if you even did before you had kids. What television you watch is what your kids watch, if you watch much TV these days. Even if you listen to the radio, most likely you want to listen to something calming. Chances are they aren't advertising The Iron Giant on the station you listen to.

Parents are very difficult people to market to, because they don't have much free time. Say what you want about Disney, but you know when one of their family films is out in the market place. Sure (there) were commercials for The Iron Giant, but it takes more than just throwing out some commercials. It takes a well thought out and integrated marketing plan. It also takes those that run a studio to truly believe in the project.

Say what you want about Prince of Egypt, but Katzenberg and DreamWorks had a plan and stuck with it. They were able to make do without a fast-food tie-in, because they had a tie-in with Wal-Mart, who is just as big. Why couldn't Warner Brothers do this? Because those at the top didn't believe enough in the film to go to the wall for it like Katzenberg did.

Today it is not enough to be just passionate about getting a film made, it is equally important to be passionate about selling it. Artisan showed that passion with Blair Witch as they did to a lesser extent last summer with Pi. Disney showed it with Tarzan as well as Inspector Gadget. Warners didn't show the same passion with The Iron Giant. Ultimately the blame needs to go to those at the top. (Perhaps if Chris Pula was still there things might have been different. How ironic it is that he is now over at Disney.)

And TK takes on the article on electronic cinema (THB 8/11): " The article by Dimitri Balachoff was interesting, but missed the mark on several points. Standard CRT tubes display something like the equivalent of 3.5 million points per second for TV and upwards of 55 million for computer monitors. The effect of electronic scanning is minimal because most of it is compensated for by the persistence of the phosphors in the face of the tube, not in the eye. In the case of the Texas Instruments DLP cinema projection system, the entire frame is presented essentially instantaneously, quite like a film projector but without the relatively long lamp extinction by a shutter.

More to the point, I would say the primary differences between a premium electronic and a film viewing experience are:

1) The electronic formats, especially direct to digital, do not show the same instabilities like jump, shudder and misalignment as a film projector. These show as fuzziness.
2) Film degrades rapidly with use, collecting scratches, hairs and dust.
3) Electronic formats taken from film are usually transformed from the native 24 fps of film which cause a number of visual defects. These can be seen in slow motion on a good VCR. The film advances to the next frame in the middle of a video frame, blending the two together. Especially apparent with fast moving objects.
4) Most importantly, film has a significantly greater dynamic range than even the best digital cameras or projectors. This means that film can accurately record more saturated colors and a greater grayscale range (contrast) than any digital system.

Conclusion: In the real world of cinema, the difference comes down to 'people are used to film so the sharp contrast with digital is an issue'. This is the same situation that arose during the transition from vinyl to CDs. Purists argued that the analog nature of vinyl gave it a nearly infinite dynamic range compared to digital CD. This theoretical difference was swamped by the real world of pips, pops, static, wow, flutter and scratches. I don't think many would give up the CD to return to that mess. In the end, most cinema goers will prefer the digital prevention because of the consistency and accuracy of the presentation. Every viewing will be a premiere with a virgin print."

E ME: What did you think of this weekend's movies? And what about the other stuff still in the market. I'm still getting so much mail about Eyes Wide Shut that I will probably have to do another special edition of the column to get them all in. What other films deserve such close attention?