Weekend, 2-3 December 2000

NEWS BY THE NUMBERS

You know how it sometimes seems impossible that I write six columns a week? Well, today it seems that way to me. I’m not going to make any dramatic excuses. I’ll just give you as much as I can in the limited time I have and thank you for your support.

Thumb Up... Butt: Traffic may be the best film of 2000, but it got its first big pan from a Washington staffer who apparently doesn’t have much tolerance for moral ambiguity. This comes from the Washington Post’s Reliable Sources column:

"Trying to generate buzz for his new movie about the U.S. drug war, Traffic, director Steven Soderbergh instead encountered a buzz saw -- in the form of Senate staffer Bill Olson -- when he screened the film Monday at Mazza Gallerie. Olson, a veteran of said combat as staff director of Iowa Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley’s Drug Caucus, walked out of the screening in disgust during a scene in which the drug-czar protagonist (played by Michael Douglas) stops a news conference to proclaim government enforcement efforts pointless, and asks: ‘How do you wage war on your own family?’ The departing Olson scolded the director: ‘Shame on you!’"

There’s one point on which Reliable Sources isn’t so reliable: that scene takes place at the end of the film, so at least this guy made it 98 percent of the way through.

Does Your Dewwwg Bite?: Mike Myers as Inspector Clouseau has gone "legit," with the story now hitting the trades on an official basis. This would be a risky move of epic proportions for the actor. For one thing, with Ivan Reitman directing, he surely will not have the control he so treasures. But more to the point, failing with a Dieter movie would hurt but wouldn’t be fatal. Failing with anything perceived as an imitation of the late, great Peter Sellers would have all the career-building charm of Car 54, Where Are You? (sole survivor: Rosie O’Donnell, and on TV, not acting).

Bark, Bark!: You know, I hate to sound like Harry Knowles, but Linda Cardellini is way too much of a babe to play Velma from Scooby-Doo. Maybe they are going after the lipstick lesbians, but Cardellini in knee-highs and a shag doesn’t have the same tonal qualities as the cartoon.

More for ME!!!: Want another reason why DreamWorks’ days as a three-headed monster may be numbered? Forbes put out its Top 500 Private Company list. DreamWorks is number 174, releasing 11 films. Lucasfilm is number 219... releasing nothing. In fact, Lucasfilm’s overhead for development, etc. is almost nothing. It’s a family company that does what it wants and is hugely successful. Just like Amblin used to be.

It’s a Small World after All: Disney just sold Infoseek Japan, the fourth largest Japanese portal, for $81 million. Why? Says Steve Bronstein, head of the company’s web efforts, "It was not core to our business." Meanwhile, they just dumped millions into a relaunch of the Go portal here in America. What does $81 million mean to Disney, especially when that Japanese portal has the market share they so desperately crave for Go here? The bottom line needs feeding. Stock prices... they rule even the Magic Kingdom.

Cutting Back Is Hard to Do: ifilm.com laid off 15 people -- almost 10 percent of their staff -- and they want us to believe it’s a positive move. Oy! It’s not easy out here these days. I should be more thankful for having any job, much less my job.

Same Old, Same Old: Claudia Eller’s Friday surprise was fairly reasonable this week, attacking (what else?) New Line for a weak year. And a weak year it has been. However, I would say that she’s missing the boat by suggesting that New Line is going back to the Ted Turner days of trying to make it as a tent-pole company. Lord of the Rings is a huge gamble. Town and Country is a two-year-old gamble. And there is no studio that wouldn’t gamble on Adam Sandler or the Rush Hour sequel. (The story earlier this week about MGM’s reliance on sequels... though dated... was more significant in examining that issue.) Also, when offering up duds for 2000, Eller fails to mention that three of the four (Bamboozled, Lost Souls, Price of Glory, and Turn It Up) were under $20 million and will turn a profit in ancillary markets and that Lost Souls was really a 1999 disaster, imported to 2000. Anyway, take a look if you like.

READER OF THE DAY: JJ Not Jonah Jameson -- "I agree with your ROTD from Friday (12/1). People have lost the ability to pay attention, and all films that aren’t whiz-bang, Bruckheimer action fests are criticized as too slow. About a month ago, I had family in town for my daughter’s first birthday. After we got her to bed, we decided to watch a movie. You have to realize this is a mix of young and old from the north and south, so I tried to pick something everyone would enjoy. I chose The Sting, knowing that the older folks would like it and that the younger people (myself included) would enjoy the novelty of the young Newman and Redford and then get sucked into the great story. After it was over, everyone agreed that it was a good, satisfying movie, but even the older folks said it seemed a little slow. I remember when I first saw The Sting. I was a kid (I’m only 28 now), but I remember it as clever and fast paced and wonderful. My favorite movies of the last several years include The Fisher King, L.A. Confidential, The Usual Suspects, Out of Sight, The Shawshank Redemption, and The Insider. All of these movies have been criticized as slow by either my closest friends or by critics I respect. What the hell is wrong with us?"

Not Quite a Partridge writes -- "You brought up a good point in yesterday’s THB (12/1) about the trailer for Cast Away, and it reminded me of something I wonder about. When I read people complaining that a trailer gives away too much of the third act (or anything), I wonder ‘How do they really know!?’ Unless, of course, they’ve seen the movie. But for someone who hasn’t seen the movie and is viewing the trailer, they don’t really know what’s in the movie. I always presume with certain directors (Zemeckis is one of them), that the movie is going to give me a lot more than I’ve seen in the trailer, including things I don’t even begin to suspect. So turn off the cynicism, people, and if you want to see a movie, go in with an open mind. Once you come out, you can complain all you want, legitimately.

"P.S.: Where (and why) do people come up with these names they use when they write in? Are most of your readers in some kind of weird witness-protection program? (Rhetorical question. I know why people do it.)"

E ME: Only readers printed in ROTD know the truth... I make up all the pseudonyms. Even when people give me one, I don't use it. Some, like Auntie EM, have basically become permanent. But some readers want to be known and some don't, so everyone, with few exceptions, gets a pseudonym. Some ask not to be printed, pseudonym or not, so they aren't. So, how do you like yours, NQAP?