26 May 2000

THE UGLY: What happens when your shark movie goes $30 million over budget, rising to $110 million, and then grosses around $130 million worldwide? That is the question chasing the once invincible Renny Harlin after Deep Blue Sea disappointed at Warner Bros. on all sorts of levels. Harlin has been forced back to his roots, seeking a resurrection, Hollywood style. The idea of reteaming with Cliffhanger hero Sylvester Stallone may seem like a reward. But Harlin will be having the reunion under the watchful/cheap eye of Elie Samaha. And Stallone isn't exactly slaying them anymore, at least not in America. His last five starring films all failed to break the $60 million domestically. And while Stallone is still a big man overseas, there won't be much gravy there since that's where Samaha will raise the money for the movie via pre-sells. Stallone is hoping that his remake of Get Carter catches fire here in the fall. But right now, he needs Harlin as much as Harlin needs him.

In other Harlin news, Renny is talking about directing a Jackie Chan picture for New Line. Nothing wrong with Chan, especially with Shanghai Noon coming. But until now, Chan has worked, in America, with near novice directors, making careers for Brett Ratner and now, Tom Dey. Harlin would be the first established director to take on chop socky with Chan. It seems like a great move for Harlin. If he can make the most successful Chan film ever, on a budget, by expanding the scope (the film, Nosebleed, is set at the World Trade Center), he will be a master of the universe again. But in the meantime, it's a long way back up that hill.

JUST WONDERING: What enormous-ly popular Web personality has been flown into L.A. to see two summer movies at Sony sitting with the head of the studio while writing about how hard it was to get into the screenings? And why is this person threatening to sue anyone who dares to suggest that such red carpet treatment (which he receives primarily based on well spread lies about the popularity of his Web site) could skew his site's treatment of the films of those who kiss his posterior? And when the same said personality appears on TV tonight, will he thank his new, high-powered agent from a major Hollywood agency for the booking? Or will he continue to pretend he's an outsider so that no one can assail his many conflicts of interest, though he continues to complain that others (like myself) are in an advantaged position, even though we freely admit our relationships while he hides his?

And please note, I have no problem with this person succeeding, frankly, based on lies. If the studios are too disinterested to find out the truth, they deserve what they get. But I hate the lies told to his readers and I hate the lies thrown in the direction of others to get people off the scent of the truth about the most compromised Web "outsider" I know.

BAD AD WATCH: I almost feel sorry for Disney, having to reach so deep into the pit o' reviews to get pull quotes from Ruby Lee Gamble from The Cleveland News-Herald (not that I have any reason to dislike or disrespect the critic) and the Newsweek magazine feature story that isn't even criticism. At least DreamWorks has stopped using the misleading pull from the Entertainment Weekly summer preview for Road Trip. I guess we'll know what Paramount has had to pull for M:I2 on Monday. It's gonna be a looooong summer.

READER OF THE DAY: The Pizza Man writes: "Apropos the apathetic riddle, "Why do movies suck?"... Why limit such smug logic to the movies? I'm desperate to gleam, "Why do groceries suck?"

My local supermarket stocks the shelves with thousands of products I find unappetizing. There's a repugnant amount of Velveeta, but no Camembert in sight. Rows of boxed Merlot, but not a drop of Flaccianello. Somebody out there must have a hankering for Pizza Pockets, but it sure ain't me.

Here's the simple solution to my sarcastic quandary: Rather than taunt the folks who prefer Cool-Whip over whipped-cream, I visit a specialty grocery. Rather than gripe about bad-taste, I accept the economics of the situation and search a little harder for what I want.

If somebody doesn't like what's on Disney's shelf, maybe they should try the Japanese animé aisle. Sick of big-budget Hollywood action?...Try a Hong Kong sampler. Tired of sappy American romances?...Why not toss some French flavor into your cart. Dislike the nationally-distributed domestic brands?...No room for subtitles in your diet? Fine. Plenty of independent microbrews out there too. You just gotta scan the aisles more carefully to find 'em. Maybe try a different store altogether.

It's not a matter of movies sucking. It's a matter of what consumers are paying to swallow."

And this from Jack: "Here's a few good writer movies:
Naked Lunch
Reds
The TV version of "Jake's Women"
About five minutes of Wes Craven's New Nightmare
Deconstructing Harry
Barton Fink
George Lucas in Love
The Monty Python sketch about Thomas Hardy
Bits and pieces of The Whole Wide World (whenever D'Onofrio was "in the zone" talking about Conan)
Murder By Death
and the screenwriter's nightmare classic, The Harvest
But that's just recent stuff.

And Not Crystal writes: "Four come to mind: Misery, Romancing the Stone, Sunset Boulevard, and The Lost Weekend."

Finally, this from the Peyote King: "Kindness is praiseworthy, but your whole/hog swallowing of M: I2 is as unfortunate as it is surprising. I went to the 12:45 show at the Mann Westwood. The crowd whooped and hollered in anticipation. And then the movie started. Derisive laughter kicked in about a third of the way through, usually at yet another miserable Towne line of dialogue, sometimes at one of Woo's strike-a-pose camera/character compositions. The movie ended to almost total silence, save the headpounding score, and the lobby was filled with weary/complaining moviegoers. 'That sucked' was the order of the day. Though there was one 'Well, it was about what I expected.' The latter was the closest I heard to a compliment during this admittedly non-scientific sampling.

But back to 'That sucked.' Let me count the ways. Robert Towne -- who should stop smoking what he's smoking OR who should resume smoking what he stopped smoking -- has managed to compose almost every major element of the script through outright theft. Basic emotional/plot dynamic from Notorious. Check. Speeding autos in high places as character point from To Catch A Thief. Check. Heroic/romantic vow from Last of the Mohicans. Check. Not to mention those elements (oh, those masks) that he simply recycled from the original. Checkmate.

Now there's nothing wrong with a little creative borrowing -- it's almost inevitable in this sort of enterprise -- but there is a cynicism in the movie that is finally overpowering, and not even John Woo's usual stunt mastery can overcome it. (And let's face it, Woo is fast approaching the point where the old tricks are starting to feel, well, old.)

Add to that the almost complete lack of chemistry between Newton and Cruise (save for that meet-cute scene, you're right about that), the howler lines that litter the script, the fact that this M: I movie has more to do with James Bond tropes than anything in the original series, and the absence of anything/anyone resembling a compelling villain, and...

Come back Brian DePalma, all is forgiven."

E ME: Well, what do you think? And what do you think of the rest of the weekend's fare? It's gonna be a hot one. Wear sunscreen.