Monday, 16 April 2001

THE SCHIZOPHRENIC:  Regular readers know I have some reservations about the Wall Street Journal’s Tom King.  And so, I wasn’t all that surprised when I saw the laughable headline that the Wall Street Journal was saying that Russell Crowe might not make the $20 million club because of his "surliness." 

Uh, no.

First, the article resurrects the absurd notion that winning the Best Actor Oscar was going to have something to do with Crowe hitting the $20 million payday level.  Not the case.  $20 million, or $15 million for that matter, which is what he’s being paid on A Beautiful Mind, is never about prestige.  It’s about the bottom line.  Russell Crowe starred in Gladiator, so now he is being considered a movie opener, despite the soft start for Proof of Life.  If A Beautiful Mind opens to $20 million or more, look for Russell Crowe to go to $20 million, regardless of his attitude.  For one thing, the film is a drama and if he can open a drama huge, he is in Julia territory as a star.  If he had signed for an action film, like Gladiator 2, instead, he would already be at $20 million.

If you want to know how silly this story is, notice that there is not a single quote - not even a background quote - from anyone who agrees with the hypothesis of the piece. 

But then, King runs right into one of the most interesting stories of the moment.  I first brought it up in THB when I saw the Driven standees at ShoWest that have Estella Warren front and center.  That situation has gotten "worse" as Stallone has become the lost star of this film, barely appearing in print ads or TV spots.  The focus is completely on Estella Warren and Kip Purdue and Gina Gershon’s hips.  Even Burt Reynolds seems to get more play that Stallone.  And it’s not as though Warren or Perdue or any of the other attractive young players in the film have ever opened ANY movie!  What does research at Warner Bros. have to be saying that they are dumping their star from sight?

Well, King explores a bit and gets a few answers.  The studio and producer Elie Samaha, who grabbed Stallone’s script off the trash pile it had been on for years, take the position that this is a teen sell and that Stallone understands and consents.  Very good of him. 

But again ... the tough question ... is Stallone now so out that he’s going to hurt an action film?   Samaha’s relationship with Warner Bros. has been one where he gives the studio all the advertising dollars unless there is some other agreement?  Was this part of a deal to get fuller coverage by the studio?  And what of Eye See You, the Stallone action drama that was supposed to come out this year in America after failing all over the world?  If Driven doesn’t rev up, it could be Stallone’s first direct-to-cable film.  That would be ugly.

If you subscribe to the WSJ, you can read the full Tom King column here.

HAPPY TRAILERS TO YOU:  I saw the trailer for the John Cusack/Kate Beckinsale film, Serendipity.   Looks like it could be a fun romantic flick.  But three separate people around me remarked to people with them that they had seen the entire movie in the trailer.  And indeed, they may well have.   The film is Peter Chelsom’s follow up to the long delayed Town & Country and knowing him, it is probably a richer stew than the trailer lets us know.  But this trailer could make up more than a few minds that it can wait for video.

BIG LIST O’ QUOTES:  It’s back - and likely to be the last List until I return from the film festivals of the next two weeks.

BAD AD WATCH:  Columbia’s ballsy decision to build their entire campaign for A Knight’s Tale around Heath Ledger is an interesting one.  After all, he hasn’t opened a single film yet - not even a small one.  So their absolute embrace is a powerful message of belief. 

And so were Peter Travers’ comments about the film that I saw on television, a full month before the film is due in theaters.   What can I tell you?  There was something oddly creepy about seeing a TV spot built on quotes from a major outlet a full month early.  Travers is still behind Roger Ebert in the pull quote count, Though they are tied with 10 actual quotes, Ebert’s thumb has been "quoted" in yet five more ads.  But Travers seems to be working hard to catch up. 

READER OF THE DAY:  JJ fixes my failure of Friday:  "Dave: Haven't seen "Josie," and I only caught a few seconds of DuJour footage from the flick, but I believe the black member of the group is Donald Faison of Clueless, Felicity, Remember the Titans, etc."  (David Note:  this is correct.)

And a couple of writers are represented by this e-mail from D.C.:  "What are you doing, passing on  pronouncements about the quality of Moulin Rouge, or any other film, based on an 11-minute compilation reel provided to you by the studio? This is a ridiculous and pointless enterprise, about as useful as reviewing a movie based on its trailer. Your excitement and feverish anticipation has gotten the best of you. Take your oxygen tank, breathe deep and wait until you see the whole movie, as released to the public, just like everyone else, before you decide this is a great film. Otherwise, you're just masturbating, not writing. And by the way, I hope it is a successful attempt to revive the form of a Hollywood musical. But enthusiasm about Moulin Rouge coming from anyone who regards Luhrmann's disastrous stab at Shakespeare as wonderful filmmaking doesn't do anything to get me excited. I'd rather see Jurassic Park III."

E ME:  Did you like the films this weekend?  Are you worried for Sly?  And whose quote would you prefer, Roger or Peters?