February 12, 2003

One hates to be the one pissing on the parade instead of throwing ticker tape, but I’m gagging on some of the bent reporting out there.

First things first.  The Hours is a Paramount movie that Miramax holds some foreign distribution rights to, attaching themselves by way of a contractual relationship with director Stephen Daldry.  The film was produced by Scott Rudin, not Harvey Weinstein.  The Oscar nominated score for the film would not be in the film if Weinstein had his way and, for people who like the movie, that score is key to the mood that makes the film.  Miramax publicity has not been in control of the Oscar campaign for the film on any level.  And you can be sure that any party for The Hours on Oscar night with be separate and apart from the Miramax extravaganza.

The Lord of The Rings was effectively put into turnaround by Miramax.  Weinstein didn’t want to make it as two films, much less three.  His intention was to fire Peter Jackson off the project, for which he held the rights, and to hire a new team to write and direct a single film.  The length had to be under 2 hours and the budget under $70 million.  But New Line’s Bob Shaye took on the project and encouraged Jackson, already a geek legend, to make a trilogy.  For his rights, Weinstein took a producing credit and a cut of the profits.  Six hours-plus of film, $250 million in production costs and over $1.7 billion in world wide grosses (and still growing) later, Miramax has earned more money, free and clear, on each of these films - that they didn’t finance, didn’t make, and never wanted to make - than they will earn on Gangs of New York, Chicago and Frida combined. 

Chicago is going to be a profitable film. But assuming that Chicago wins Best Picture, it will be the least profitable Best Picture winner of the last fifteen years, with the exception of one film… Miramax’s The English Patient.

Perhaps the most heinous comparison made on Oscar day was made by the New York Times’ Rick Lyman, who used the statistical anomaly of Miramax’s 40 nominations -- that add up only if you include the Paramount and New Line films -- to give voice to a comparison of Paramount’s spectacular 1974 schedule that led to 39 Oscar nominations in 1975.  Lyman doesn’t stay on the issue, but it struck me the way that voicing the name of God does in an orthodox synagogue. 

Shall we compare the two years? 

Paramount had the Shakespeare In Love-like Murder on the Orient Express, which garnered 6 nominations and a career-achievement award of sorts for Ingrid Bergman.  There was The Great Gatsby, which was nominated for and won two Oscars.  There was The Little Prince which, co-incidentally co-starring Bob Fosse, was nominated for two Oscars.  The studio also had a classic film that was snubbed by Oscar in The Longest Yard.  There was Alan J. Pakula’s Warren Beatty vehicle The Parallax View and the underrated Karel Reisz film, The Gambler.  They even had the film that would be a template for action films for decades to come, Death Wish. 

Pretty good year.  But I guess that Chicago, Gangs of New York and Frida could hold up against the group.  Add in Rings and The Hours and Miramax is really impressive in comparison.

Oh.  Did I mention the other three films on Paramount’s 1974 schedule?  Chinatown, The Conversation, and a little movie called The Godfather, Pt. II. 

Hmmm…

Do I even have to say it?

MORE STUFF:  There are three more inevitable stories that I would like to get ahead of before they get completely out of hand.  The first is the Year of The Woman absurdity.  If anything, the Oscar nominations debunk the idea that this was a great year for women.  Five of the 10 acting slots for women are filled by two films.  The sixth is filled by an actress, Julianne Moore, who is also nominated for one of those films.  Slots seven and eight are for performances best remembered for the sensuality and endowments of the two nominated actresses.  The final two slots went to previous Oscar winners Meryl Streep and Kathy Bates.  Great year for women! 

White Oleander flopped.  Secretary and Lovely & Amazing have been relegated to Independent Spirit Award status.  Jennifer Aniston and Susan Sarandon were forgotten.  And no one but the Ya Yas remembered their divine secrets when push came to shove. 

Last year’s Oscar winning actress filled out a mean bikini for Bond and will sport a new white wig in X-Men 2.  Hooray!  The highest grossing film with a female lead was My Big Fat Greek Wedding.  A fluke.  The next highest grosser was Lilo & Stitch.  Animation.  The Ring was #17 for the year and Sweet Home Alabama, the only film in the Top 20 that was really sold on the shoulders of a female lead was #18.  Get out the confetti.

The next issue is Brown as the next Black.  (A line so good that I had to steal it from myself.)  The Year of The Latino hype will soon begin.  Salma is the first Latina actress to be nominated for Best Actress.  Pedro and The Cuaron Bros. are in the hunt.  All very good and well.  Unfortunately, they are all going to lose and the hype will fade long before Academy members’ memory of Halle Berry’s bare bottom bouncing up and down next to Billy Bob Thornton’s visible scrotum.

Finally, there is The Return of The Musical.  First, Moulin Rouge brought back the musical, not Chicago.  All Chicago proved is that anyone can do it… that you don’t have to be a mad genius Aussie to make a wave. 

It’s going to be an interesting time and lots of companies are going to lose lots of money.  Traditionally, there is an assumption that period films are hard to sell.  But in musical theater, almost everything is period.  Moulin Rouge was period with a twist.  Chicago is period with a modern sensibility.  Victor/Victoria was a period film with a modern sensibility. 

Is Miramax’s next likely musical, Guys & Dolls, really going to fly in 2004?  There is some talk of modernizing it, but don’t expect the tightly wound rights holders to go for that.  (Sorry, Vin!)  Rob Marshall is off of Sweeney Todd, Russell Crowe has passed on it and Tim Burton, the perfect match, is long gone.  Into The Woods is a true theatrical conceit, reminiscent of the aforementioned The Little Prince in style, though with a much better book and score.  Meanwhile, Phantom of The Opera has been “about to happen” for a decade now.  Bye Bye Birdie has been done for TV in recent years.  And the Kevin Kline starrer about Cole Porter is sure to do a roaring $9.3 million at the domestic box office. 

(Note to John Horn: Musical theater performer Hugh Jackman was also tapped to be in Van Helsing.) 

READER OF THE DAY:  THE MON writes:  “Shouldn't the Academy Awards change its name to "The Annual Harvey Weinstein Hand Job"?  3 Miramax movies with Best Pic noms, plus "Two Towers" which Harvey exec. produced.  He was even able to squeeze a handful of nominations out for "Frida," a la "Cider House Rules" and "Chocolat" and the slew of Miramax's other undeserving Oscar contenders.

I'd have to say the worst nomination of the year goes to the screenplay nod for "Gangs of New York."  "Gangs'" nomination was pretty obligatory, but disgusting.  It's the epitome of the "too many chefs" cliché and was, well, a complete and utter mess.  That the movie worked on any level at all was completely in spite of the crappy, clunky, clichéd and unimaginative screenplay.  Paul Thomas Anderson's light, whimsical screenplay for "Punch-Drunk Love" would've been a much better fit in its slot.

I still don't really get why John C. Reilly and Queen Latifah deserve nods for their solid but standard "Chicago" perfs.

The saddest omissions include Dennis Quaid (Oscar missing out on the comeback story), Todd Haynes and "Far From Heaven" in general, and Steven Spielberg, Samantha Morton, and the technical crew behind "Minority Report."

The best noms would have to go to Almodovar's nominations for Director and Screenplay, and "Y Tu Mama Tambien's" screenplay nod as well.

Oh yeah, and about your "Alias" comment a few weeks ago, "Alias" and Jennifer Garner both rock.”

And CANADAVE writes:  “Did I hear that right...? No Best Director nom for Peter Jackson?!?!?!? The Academy Awards are a bogus sham, as disposable as the Grammies. Jackson's direction was phenomenal, and if there was any justice, he'd WIN the Oscar 9 years out of 10 with his movie. An utterly pathetic slap in the face to one of the most epic, complex, and technically innovative films in cinematic history. I suspect that means TTT has NO chance at Best Pic. I guess if you don't roll around the gutter with pigs like Harvey Weinstein, you might as well kiss your chances goodbye. But at least you retain your dignity.

I've heard that the average age of Academy voters is something like 65. Is that true? If it is, that means for every adult voter of, say, 40 years of age, that vote is nullified by a senile 90-year-old Norma Desmond wannabe. Are you ready for my close-up? If you're a 30 year old voter (ha! not bloody likely), prepare to have your votes cancelled by an equal number of deluded centenarians. It's like asking the Pope to vote on evolution or explain the significance of Jimi Hendrix.”

E ME:  What is the next trend you smell?