That’s Jeremy Renner in the bomb suit

Ray Pride reports on the filming of Oscar favorite “The Hurt Locker” (just out on DVD) at Movie City Indie:

There are scenes inside the blast suit and simply crossing the frame where the character feels fully fleshed out, I tell [director Kathryn Bigelow and writer Mark Boal] during an abbreviated interview in Chicago last July. As a past collaborator of Bigelow’s, the writer-director Walter Hill liked to insist, character is revealed through action. [Lead actor Jeremy] Renner reveals character with every bit of his body. “I know! And he’s in a bomb suit, no less,” she laughs. “It was so hot,” Boal adds, “it was hard for Jeremy to be in that bomb suit all of the time. The thing weighs like 85 pounds, it’s a real bomb suit. Naturally, you’re like, well maybe we can get a stunt guy to do some of this walking stuff and save Jeremy so he doesn’t die. The sets are really long and he’s walking up and down, we thought, shit, what if he gets heatstroke? He’d had heatstroke before. It’s what 100 degrees outside? We tried, I probably grabbed every white guy in Jordan to audition for [Bigelow]: actor, non-actor, soldier, worked at the U. N., whatever.”

“They studied his gait,” she says, “they’d watch his walk. Couldn’t do it.” “We couldn’t get a double,” Boal continues. “Just put on the suit, walk down the street, that was the job.” “Every single time, it was Jeremy,” she says. “I tried it, everybody tried it!” “There’s that kind of almost jauntiness to his gait, and cadence, that was unreplicatable. It was also part of that character.”

December 14, 2012

King of the mash-ups

“Life’s a laugh and death’s a joke it’s true. / You’ll see it’s all a show, / Keep ’em laughing as you go. / Just remember that the last laugh is on you…”

“For life is quite absurd / And death’s the final word. / You must always face the curtain with a bow. / Forget about your sin. / Give the audience a grin. / Enjoy it. It’s your last chance, anyhow…”

Over at a film odyssey (check out that beautiful logo!), movie blogger and “Fight Club” Opening Shots contributor Robert Humanick mashes up two movie mash-ups from YouTube, both set to Eric Idle’s uplifting, send-’em-out-whistling curtain number from the great “Monty Python’s Life of Brian”: “Always Look on the Bright Side of Life.” The first cuts footage from Mike Judge’s “Office Space” to the tune, providing encouragement to disheartened cubicle gnomes with martyr complexes the world over.

The other uses footage of Idle singing the song in “Life of Brian,” intercut with gruesome footage from Mel Gibson’s “The Passion of the Christ.” Either way, it’s a revelation.

December 14, 2012

An unforgivable lapse into tabloid sensationalism (in song)

View image Mug shot: July 24, 2007.

HEADLINE; “Lohan defends herself after arrest

AP, LOS ANGELES (July 24, 2007) — Lindsay Lohan says she’s innocent.

The 21-year-old actress was arrested and released on bail for investigation of misdemeanor driving under the influence and with a suspended license, and felony cocaine possession, early Tuesday in Santa Monica, less than two weeks after completing her second trip to rehab.

“I am innocent … did not do drugs they’re not mine. I was almost hit by my assistant Tarin’s mom I appreciate everyone giving me my privacy,” Lohan wrote in an e-mail to “Access Hollywood” host Billy Bush, the show reported on its Web site Tuesday night.

Police found cocaine in one of Lohan’s pockets during a pre-booking search, Sgt. Shane Talbot said. Police initially said Lohan was also being booked for investigation of transporting a narcotic but later said she was not.

Police received a 911 call from the mother of Lohan’s former personal assistant saying that Lohan was chasing her in an SUV, said Lt. Alex Padilla. The assistant had quit hours before, he said.

Authorities found Lohan and the woman in a “heated debate” in the parking lot of Santa Monica’s Civic Auditorium at about 1:30 a.m.

Lohan’s arrest comes as she still faces DUI allegations connected to a Memorial Day weekend hit-and-run crash in Beverly Hills. The actress completed more than six weeks in rehab less than two weeks ago, and had checked into a recovery clinic in January.

She had worn an alcohol-monitoring ankle bracelet since her July 13 release from rehab and was tested daily to support her sobriety, her attorney, Blair Berk, said. She said Lohan had relapsed and was receiving medical care at an undisclosed location. Lohan’s publicist, Leslie Sloane Zelnik, had no comment.

This story moved me to write a song, to the tune of “Unforgettable”:

Uninsurable, that’s what you are

Always crashing in your fancy car

Tabloid photos, so embarrassing

Flash your breasts when you’re out Paris-ing

Media whore is a role you adore, but you’re

Unemployable for picture work

Unprofessional, and quite a jerk

Keep the cast and crew awaiting you

And you wonder why they’re hating you

Fear next year, you’re carbon-dating your career

Unreliable, and more each day

Less than “adequite” in every way

Stanwyck wore an anklet to seduce

Not to monitor her booze abuse

You’re a boor, a poor excuse for loose, too

Uninsurable, in Calvin Klein

Unendurable, no sign of spine

Famous for your notoriety

Not ability, insobriety

Pie-eyed claims of future piety, pooh!

Uninsurable, such a cliché

Scourge of SAG, Double-, and Triple-A

Liquored-up but not Anonymous

“Lindsay” has become synonymous

With pathetic DUI arrests, eeww…

See also: Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Denials Go Better Without Coke

December 14, 2012

VIFF: Memories of murder… (?)

Opening shot of the year: The acoustic guitar music plays over a company logo at the head of the film, before the movie proper. A woman in a purple brocade jacket and a blue skirt walks through a field of tall, brown grass. Percussion enters the picture — or the soundtrack. She looks us in the eye, and dances. (Bong Joon-ho’s “Mother”)

Final shot of the year: In a group of people photographed through a pair of thick, smoked-glass doors, only the title character appears out of focus. (Lucrecia Martel’s “The Headless Woman”)

December 14, 2012

Chaz has news on Roger’s recovery

Roger Ebert directs the show at the 2006 Overlooked Film Festival.

Roger Ebert’s wife Chaz sent an update on his recovery for publication on RogerEbert.com. Chaz writes:

Roger was making good progress and was ready to go to his next phase of treatment, which would have been physical therapy to regain his strength. Well last night Roger had minor surgery, so today, as you can imagine, he feels a bit less cheerful. The doctors remain optimistic about his recovery, however, and say that the physical therapy will be delayed for only a few days.

As I said before, the most frustrating aspect is that his progress is not always linear. But the doctors told us right from the start to expect this non-linear recovery. They said that there will bumps in the road along the way that seem like setbacks, and then he will reach a point where he will make a rapid recovery. Darn that surgery! Please excuse me if I don’t sound like my usual cheerleader self, but if you had seen him last week, even yesterday, when he was doing so well. We were secretly back to using his computer. He wanted to surprise everyone with messages.

Her full letter is here.

December 14, 2012

Walking down to The Wire

If, like me, you were spellbound by each season’s opening credits for “The Wire,” you must see the short film analyses of them by critics Andrew Dignan, Kevin B. Lee and Matt Zoller Seitz at Moving Image Source (published by the Museum of the Moving Image). Using the actual footage, along with still frames and zooms (aka “the Ken Burns effect”), these short films examine the credits in critical detail, treating them as short movies unto themselves. Which is exactly what they are. Each season of “The Wire” introduced a new opening montage (cut to various recordings of Tom Waits’ “Way Down in the Hole”) to set the scene. (Also see the Opening Shot essay for “The Wire.”)

December 14, 2012

Brian De Palma and The Pink Dahlia

An attempted “Chinatown” shot from “The Black Dahlia.”

I’ve been holding back my thoughts about Brian De Palma’s “The Black Dahlia” since I saw it at the end of July, and now (especially after ten days at the Toronto Film Festival) those thoughts are more distant and disorganized than ever. I had intended to review the movie for RogerEbert.com, but that proved to be nigh impossible — I’ve just been too busy with Toronto and other stuff, and I found the movie rather flat and ininspiring, so I didn’t feel passionately motivated to write about it. (I’m still in Toronto as I write this.)

So, I’m going to offer just a few general comments (including some mild spoilers about particular shots and sequences), and then I’d very much like to hear your comments about the movie.

As I think back on the film, I’m surprised to find that the predominant color I associate with it is a rosy pink. Not black. Not blood red. But a mild color that Vilmos Zsigmond has used in his peculiar pastel palette for the film. That’s not what I expected of a De Palma film of James Ellroy’s “The Black Dahlia,” but there it is. And somehow that characterizes what I think is wrong with the movie: After the first hour or so, which seems like a good set-up for a De Palma extravaganza, it grows pale and indistinct. From the start it’s too controlled, rarely risky or dangerous. By the end, lots of people are getting shot (in pretty unimaginative ways for De Palma), just so it seems the filmmaker can hurry up and get the movie over with. Things fall apart. I didn’t feel like De Palma cared about the picture anymore at this point, and so neither did I. You can feel the filmmaker losing interest in his own movie.

December 14, 2012

Mr. Lynch Comes to Washington

If you have to ask what “Inland Empire” is about, you haven’t read the poster.

David Lynch returned to the Great Pacific Northwest Wednesday night for two screenings of his three-hour “Inland Empire” (at 7:30 and midnight), bringing with him to Seattle a fresh, hot shipment of David Lynch Coffee. That’s good coffee! (Packaging tagline — from “Inland Empire,” it turns out: “It’s all in the beans, and I’m just full of beans.”) Just a few blocks away, in the Pike Place Market, was a little shop where I used to get my beans, when I first became a serious coffee-drinker in college. It’s still there, and it’s still called Starbuck’s, but I hear there are more of them now.

I went to the early show. (When it was 9:45 I probably thought it was after midnight.) Lynch began by introducing a cellist who performed a brief improvisational piece “to set a mood.” Then Lynch read a short verse:

We are like the spider.

We weave our life and then move along in it.

We are like the dreamer who dreams and then lives in the dream.

This is true for the entire universe.

— Upanishads

And then “Inland Empire” hit the big Cinerama screen (in the theater where I saw “2001: A Space Odyssey” in its original release, when I was 10). I won’t say much more about the movie now (I just finished a longer piece that will run next week), but the local crowd went wild when a lumberjack appeared. We live in the land of “Twin Peaks” here, you know. Lynch spent some of his formative years growing up in Spokane, on the other side of the Cascades, in what Washingtonians refer to as the Inland Empire (though most people associate the term with California).

After the movie, Lynch took questions from the audience. Most of them were pretty lame (as is usually the case at these sorts of events), but nothing fazed Lynch, who was gentle, gracious and folksy. He was most passionate when talking about finding “the idea” for whatever he was trying to create, and working and working to realize it. With actors, he said, he likes to bring them in for a rehearsal of one scene — any scene. (This process is shown in an early scene in “Inland Empire,” which was reportedly filmed over the space of a couple years without any finished script. Lynch would shoot when he decided he had an idea for something he wanted to shoot.) The actors would read it and, “if it wasn’t perfect” — and Lynch admitted it rarely is, the first time through — they would talk. Then rehearse some more. Then talk some more. And so on until he felt they’d brought the scene around to where it was serving “the idea.”

He spoke similarly of music and sound, which he feels are — or should be — inseparable from the images. (Lynch did the sound design and wrote some music for “Inland Empire,” but credits composer Angelo Badalamenti with introducing him to “the world of music.”) He finds or writes or creates the music first, and then spends a lot of time and effort and experimentation getting the sounds and images to combine catalytically.

Lynch was enthusiastic about his experience shooting with a small digital camera (the Sony PD-150), and said he began using it to make shorts for his web site. After he’d made a few, he started thinking about them in terms of a larger framework story, and by then he was “already locked into” the digital format. He said he loved the freedom it allowed him (wait till you see the close-ups he goes for — he coulda poked somebody’s eye out!). Sure, he said, this format (it’s NOT high-definition like, say, “Miami Vice”) doesn’t have the quality of film, but it has its own qualities, its own textures. And, Lynch said, it was so easy to push and to tweak at will to get the effects he wanted. Best of all, he didn’t have to stop the actors to re-load the camera after every ten minutes of exposed film. He could keep things going for 40 minutes (sometimes shooting with three cameras simultaneously), which he thought allowed for interesting things to happen that might not have happened otherwise.

A questioner noted that characters in David Lynch movies are often subjected to great anguish and trauma. He asked Lynch what was the worst he’d ever been hurt — physically, the fellow clarified. After a long pause, Lynch told a story about his childhood in Spokane. His family was visiting another family, and they had a punching-bag snowman with sand in the bottom. Another boy hit the snowman, which knocked over young David, who gashed his head on the moulding around the doorway. Lynch said he remembers being adamant about not wanting to get stitches, but doesn’t recall what happened.

Someone observed that Laura Dern uses a touch-tone phone in “Inland Empire,” perhaps the first non-rotary telephone in the Lynch oevre. Lynch suggested that, perhaps, with this movie, he was slowly moving into the 20th century. Or did he say 21st?

Lynch’s new book is called “Catching the Big Fish: Meditation, Consciousness, and Creativity.” He said the first step in the creative process for him was letting go of negativity, which then allowed creativity to flow in. Somebody asked if “Inland Empire” was itself a big fish.

“‘Inland Empire’ is a whale,” said Lynch, “with a lot of smaller fish swimming around inside it.”

One woman posed the most succinct question of the evening: “What is the movie about?” (This, it should be pointed out, was after she’d just seen it.)

Lynch said: “It’s on the poster.”

(Updated with the actual Upanishads verse 1/23/07.)

December 14, 2012

Ich bin ein TV-phile

I don’t watch too much television, but I definitely read too much on the Internet. I know this because just last week I read something about television and now I can’t remember where I read it.* The writer was mock-complaining that TV isn’t as mindless and undemanding a leisure activity as it used to be, ever since “The Sopranos.” What with “The Wire” and “Mad Men” and “Deadwood” and “Breaking Bad” and “Dexter” and other non-old-network series, you actually have to pay attention to watch TV these days. (If you remember reading something along those lines, please send me the link.) No more just leaving the set on whenever you’re home in order to drown out the voices. These shows require as much concentration (and more memory and commitment) than most feature films — or perhaps (a closer comparison) modern novels.

A New York Times essay by A.O. Scott last weekend asked: “Are Films Bad, or Is TV Just Better?” Yes, it’s a false dilemma (what does the quality of one have to do with the quality of the other?), but it’s the kind of headline that catches the notice of the knee-jerk TV haters who are still stuck in the three-network “vast wasteland” of 1961. Scott wrote:

December 14, 2012

George Lucas: Give it up

Ever since 1977, George Lucas has been talking about making those “small, personal” movies he’s always dreamed of making. You know, like “Revenge of the Sith.” He did direct a small, personal movie in 1973, it was called “American Graffiti,” and it is his most impressive directorial achievement. Since then, it’s been nothing but “Star Wars” and “Indiana Jones” (with the occasional executive producing jobs on fantasies and friends’ movies, just to lend his name to them).

At MSN Movies I have a small, personal essay that should win me lots of friends. My thesis is that, after the 22-year gap between “Star Wars” and “The Phantom Menace,” Lucas has shown that the “Star Wars” universe is his most personal project. And yet he’s still talking about directing those “little movies.” I say: Don’t bother:

December 14, 2012

A top top 10: 10 critics, 10 best(s) — and why

Ten contributors to MSN Movies cast their ballots for the best films of 2008, unaware of what anyone else would pick. A simple point scale was used to weight the choices. And the result is one of the more surprisingly satisfying year-end consensus-mixes I’ve seen so far. Yeah, I’m one of the participants, and six of my top choices wound up on the aggregate list, but still…

Best of all, each title is accompanied by a micro-mini-essay by one of the critics. It ain’t easy compressing one’s appreciation into nuggets of less than 250 words, but the effort can occasionally yield its own rewards…

MSN Movies Top 10 (bottom to top):(titles link to individual blurbs)

10. Slumdog Millionaire

9. Wendy and Lucy

8. WALL-E

7. Pineapple Express

6. The Dark Knight

December 14, 2012

‘Breaking and Entering’ (It’s a metaphor)

View image So, Jude Law says to Robin Wright Penn: “Maybe that’s why I like metaphors.”

My review of Anthony Minghella’s “Breaking and Entering” is in the Chicago Sun-Times and on RogerEbert.com:

The title of Anthony Minghella’s dour “Breaking and Entering” is a metaphor. How do we know this? Well, for one thing, there’s a burglary right at the start.

And the central character himself, Will Francis (Jude Law), demonstrates a fondness for metaphors in his dialogue. He’s so fond of them that he even tells us he is fond of them in a climactic speech: “I don’t even know how to be honest anymore. Maybe that’s why I like metaphors.” Then he goes on to describe a metaphor, where a circle represents his family, but it’s also an enclosure or a cage, and he wants to feel comfortable in it but sometimes he feels trapped in it and sometimes he feels excluded from it. […]

In the press notes, Jude Law spells it out: “The argument is: Is it worse to steal somebody’s computer or is it worse to steal somebody’s heart?” That’s not even a decent metaphor (although, to be fair, the film is not about organ theft). It’s simply an algebraic formulation: a > b or b > a, where “a” is “computer,” “b” is “heart” and the nature of the relationship is “worse”?

Expressed in those terms, “Breaking and Entering” Full review at RogerEbert.com

December 14, 2012

Monty Python season

Rarely has an American political candidate triggered so many associations with a famed British comedy troupe of stage, screen, television and phonograph recordings:

“I used to think that Michael Palin was the funniest Palin on earth…. [Sarah Palin] is like a nice-looking parrot, because the parrot speaks beautifully and kinda says ‘Aw, shucks,’ every now and again, but doesn’t really have any understanding of the meaning of the words that it is producing, even though it’s producing them very accurately…. I mean, Monty Python could have written this.”

— John Cleese, co-founder of Monty Python’s Flying Circus (Clip here.)

(See above. Monty Python did.)

“But Palin is as ridiculous as the competitors from Monty Python’s Upperclass Twit of the Year competition, jumping over hurdles that are nothing more than a stack of matchbooks.”

— Anne Lamott, Salon.com

“Cue marching band music and a big cartoon foot. US Vice-Presidential candidate Sarah Palin, hackers have revealed, has used a Yahoo! free webmail account to talk government business with aides.”

— David Winder, ITwire

“As Monty Python used to say, ‘No one expects the Spanish Inquisition’ — which is another way of saying that no one expects the unexpected.”

— Mark J. Penn, Politico

So many times over the last nine years (especially the last nine years) I have watched politicians on television and thought of John Cleese. No so much of the parrot sketch (to which he also alludes in the quotation above) but of another beloved Python bit he did…

December 14, 2012

Palin 2012

This is has been the script co-written by Sarah Palin & William Kristol (uncredited) all along. And once again John McCain played his part in the scenario, opposite the real Palin (Tina Fey’s) on “Saturday Night Live.” The 2012 Palin rallies (no mention of McCain) are already being held in places like Florida. As I said in my earlier piece, what started out as the “Mrs. Smith Goes to Washington” political narrative has now become “All About Eve” — the rogue diva backstabbing the soon-to-be-washed-up old vet. Does McCain know he’s been cast in the Bette Davis role?

Hang on, Republicans, it’s gonna be a bumpy four years…

December 14, 2012

Bump and Grindhouse

View image Angie polishes Ponce’s pole in “Pretty Maids All in a Row.”

View image “Revenge” is a dish best served hot!

Dennis Cozzalio at Sergio Leone and the Infield Fly Rule reports on Quentin Tarantino’s Grindhouse 2007 Festival at my former neighborhood rep house, the New Beverly Cinema (right by El Coyote!) in Los Angeles. Dennis includes an ebullient assessment of “Revenge of the Cheerleaders” (1976), a giddy teen sexploitation movie I have been very fond of since I showed in my college student film series. Writes Dennis:

There is no curriculum at the “morally compromised” Aloha High School, only figures of authority to disregard or blatantly undermine— these cheerleaders and the rest of the Aloha student body make Riff Randall and her crowd look like straight-A honor society members. The girls and boys only want to have fun, which translates into a heady brew of screwing, playing basketball, cheering, robbing students at a thug-happy rival high school of their drugs (during class!) and riding around in a cherry red 1955 Buick convertible with the top down, and their tops off, of course. (The nudity is democratic too—there’s more than a flash of full frontal male twiggery on view here, including Hasselhoff, though his Boner status, based on this evidence, is overinflated.)

It’s been a long time since I’ve encountered such a relentlessly likable feel-good-at-all-costs vibe in any movie, let alone one as low-rent as this one. Tarantino said in a recent interview, referring to discovering treasures in the world of exploitation movies, that not only do you have to drink a lot of milk to get to the cream, with exploitation fare you have to drink a lot of curdled milk to get to the milk. And that’s what “Revenge of the Cheerleaders” felt like to me Sunday night—the reward for having slogged through a lot of similar comedies that had the sex and nudity but none of the zip and tang and spirit this one has in buckets.

And there’s so much more. Dennis also writes about Angie Dickinson and Rock Hudson in “Pretty Maids All in a Row,” and other grist for the grindhouse…

December 14, 2012

Hecklers as critics, critics as hecklers and comics as critics

Psychologists say that depression is rage turned inward. Stand-up comedy, on the other hand, is rage turned back outward again. (I believe George Carlin had a routine about the use of violent metaphors directed at the audience in comedy: “Knock ’em dead!” “I killed!”) In the documentary “Heckler” (now on Showtime and DVD) comedian Jamie Kennedy, as himself, plays both roles with ferocious intensity. The movie is his revenge fantasy against anyone who has ever heckled him on stage, or written a negative review… or, perhaps, slighted him in on the playground or at a party or over the phone or online.

“Heckler” (I accidentally called it “Harangue” just now) is an 80-minute howl of fury and anguish in which Kennedy and a host of other well-known and not-well-known showbiz people tell oft-told tales of triumphant comebacks and humiliating disasters, freely venting their spleens at those who have spoken unkindly of them. At first the bile is aimed at hecklers in club audiences (with some particularly nasty invective for loudmouthed drunken women), then it shifts to “critics” — broadly defined as anybody who says something negative about a figure whose work appears before a paying public. Some of the critics are actually interested in analysis; some are just insult comics who are using the Internet as their open mic. It gets pretty ugly, but it’s fascinating — because the comics, the critics and the hecklers are so much alike that it’s no wonder each finds the others so infuriating.

December 14, 2012
subscribe icon

The best movie reviews, in your inbox