Roger Ebert Talks to the Wachowskis
October 6, 2008
Somehow I missed this on Thursday, but apparently so did everyone else, since I didn’t see it linked anywhere. Roger Ebert was hanging out at a post-production studio in Chicago, watching the restored new print of The Godfather, when he was unexpectedly joined by Larry and Andy Wachowski, the famously inaccessible duo behind The Matrix, Speed Racer, and (people forget) Bound. Afterward, he got a opportunity to chat with them — not in a conventional interview setting, complete with a hovering publicist (the brothers don’t do that, remember?), but over a beer.
Ebert was impressed with the “zillionaires”: “Nice people. Friendly. No Hollywood attitude.” He writes that “[t]he blogosphere paints them as mysterious recluses, which might add to the legend but doesn’t match the reality.” But their being nice and friendly doesn’t make them any less mysterious and reclusive: I’d wager that Ebert only ran the piece because of their reputation for not giving interviews or talking to anyone in the press.
Anyway, it’s really interesting to “hear” them talk, though they mostly talk about the difficulties of keeping a moving 35 mm shot in focus and the brilliance of Coppola’s Godfather shot selection. It’s funny how keeping silent for a while will make such brief, mundane snippets into objects of arcane fascination. (Though since I think the Wachowskis are pretty formidable visual artists themselves, I find their perspective on that sort of thing interesting in its own right.)
Roger Ebert Talks to the Wachowskis
October 5, 2008
Somehow I missed this on Thursday, but apparently so did everyone else, since I didn’t see it linked anywhere. Roger Ebert was hanging out at a post-production studio in Chicago, watching the restored new print of The Godfather, when he was unexpectedly joined by Larry and Andy Wachowski, the famously inaccessible duo behind The Matrix, Speed Racer, and (people forget) Bound. Afterward, he got a chance to chat with them — not in a conventional interview setting, complete with a hovering publicist (the brothers don’t do that, remember?), but over a beer.
Ebert was impressed with the “zillionaires”: “Nice people. Friendly. No Hollywood attitude.” He writes that “[t]he blogosphere paints them as mysterious recluses, which might add to the legend but doesn’t match the reality.” But their being nice and friendly doesn’t make them any less mysterious and reclusive: I’d wager that Ebert only ran the piece because of their reputation for not giving interviews or speaking to anyone in the press.
Anyway, it’s really interesting to “hear” them speak, though they mostly speak about the difficulties of keeping a moving 35 mm shot in focus and the brilliance of Coppola’s Godfather shot selection. It’s funny how keeping silent for a while will make such brief, mundane snippets into objects of arcane fascination. (Though since I think the Wachowskis are pretty formidable visual artists themselves, I find their perspective on that sort of thing interesting in its own right.)
Frey’s ‘A Million Little Pieces’ Finally Gets the Motion picture Treatment
October 4, 2008
Okay, for this story I need you to try to remember something that happened, like, two years ago. Can you do that for me? Can you take your brain back that far, or do we need to call in McFly and the Doc? Anyway, remember all the hoopla surrounding James Frey’s very popular book A Million Tiny Pieces? How Oprah used the so-called “memoir” to re-launch her book club, and how it turned into this massive success — so much so that Warner Bros. desperately wanted to make a film out of it — and how it later came out that Frey made up a good portion of the book … and then Oprah smacked him around on Television … and then the film went bye bye. Remember?
Well, that’s what happened — and now, two years after the fact, comes a film called A Million Little Pieces, based on the book by James Frey and directed by Nigel Tomm. And no, it’s not being developed — it’s actually done … in the can … and available on DVD. Who’s in it, you ask? Well, unlike the previous in-development adaptation, you’re not going to see stars like Jake Gyllenhaal, Orlando Bloom, Josh Hartnett or Ryan Gosling (all of whom were interested in starring in the other flick). Nope, this one, according to its tagline, is — wait for it — “70 minutes and 41 seconds of pure turquoise screen. Nothing more, nothing less.” On a budget of $345. Ahem. Confused?
Keep reading …
EXCLUSIVE: Internal Memo from Disney RE: Beverly Hills Chihuahua
October 3, 2008
***Note: The above “memo” is not real, it is a work of fiction and it is not to be taken seriously.***
Not ten minutes after this scintillating story hit the wire, I encountered this similar item on my very own desktop. Read on to see how the motion picture marketing machine really works:
———————————
From: Enrico Palazzo, Digital Marketing, Disney
To: Equally Deluded Colleagues
Attached is an updated report on online buzz around the new Beverly Hills Chihuahua assets:
This Week in Protests: Blind People Dislike ‘Blindness’
October 2, 2008
.jpg)
Those folks with plans to see Fernando Meirelles’ Blindness this weekend may find themselves blinded by … protesters? That’s because activists from the National Federation of the Blind were pretty ticked off after learning the premise behind the flick: that, essentially, a blindness epidemic strikes leading most folks to go completely apesh*t on one another. It would probably be in poor taste to criticize the group for not seeing the film before they protested against it, however I should point out that this all came about after seven NFB staffers watched the movie (three of which were sighted) at a screening.
The NFB claim the movie is offensive, and that it “portrays blind people as monsters …” A spokesman for the organization added, “We face a 70 percent unemployment rate and other social problems because people don’t think we have the ability to do anything, and this motion picture is not going to help … at all.” See, I tend to disagree. First of all, people who aren’t smart enough to realize that it’s a motion picture deserve to be repeatedly kicked in the head by a one-armed monkey on steroids. Second of all, if an entire city full of citizens suddenly became blind and couldn’t see a thing, you bet your ass people would freak out — after all, how could they keep up with this season of Dancing with the Stars if they’re blind!?
The NFB plan to protest at 75 theaters across the country this Friday, carrying signs that read: “I’m not an actor. But I play a blind person in real life.” Where do you stand on all this?
This Week in Protests: Blind People Dislike ‘Blindness’
October 1, 2008
Those folks with plans to see Fernando Meirelles’ Blindness this weekend may find themselves blinded by … protesters? That’s because activists from the National Federation of the Blind were pretty ticked off after learning the premise behind the flick: that, essentially, a blindness epidemic strikes leading most folks to go completely apesh*t on one another. It would probably be in poor taste to criticize the group for not seeing the film before they protested against it, however I should point out that this all came about after seven NFB staffers watched the motion picture (three of which were sighted) at a screening.
The NFB claim the motion picture is offensive, and that it “portrays blind people as monsters …” A spokesman for the organization added, “We face a 70 percent unemployment rate and other social problems because people don’t think we have the ability to do anything, and this movie is not going to help … at all.” See, I tend to disagree. First of all, people who aren’t smart enough to realize that it’s a movie deserve to be repeatedly kicked in the head by a one-armed monkey on steroids. Second of all, if an entire city full of citizens suddenly became blind and couldn’t see a thing, you bet your ass people would freak out — after all, how could they keep up with this season of Dancing with the Stars if they’re blind!?
The NFB plan to protest at 75 theaters across the country this Friday, carrying signs that read: “I’m not an actor. But I play a blind person in real life.” Where do you stand on all this?
Review: Religulous
September 30, 2008
(We’re re-posting our review of Religulous from the Toronto Film Festival to coincide with the film’s theatrical release this week)
By: James Rocchi
I contend we’re both atheists; I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you’ll understand why I dismiss yours. — Stephen F. Roberts
Interview: ‘Miracle at St. Anna’ Director Spike Lee
September 30, 2008
In Miracle at St. Anna, four African-American soldiers are trapped behind enemy lines in Italy near the end of World War II; caught between indifferent leadership and hostile troops, the four fight to survive — and protect the Italian villagers they’ve come to know during their exile. Director Spike Lee spoke with Cinematical from New York about the challenges of film financing in modern Hollywood (”it’s hard to get stuff made today that’s not superhero, comic-book, Television show, sequel stuff. …”), shooting in an 800-year-old Italian town (” … all we’d to do was take down the satellite dishes …”) and the challenges his new film faces (” … historically, women don’t run to see, or even walk to see, or even crawl to see World War II films …”), The Wire (”‘Omar’s Coming!’”), sequel possibilities for Inside Man and more.
Lee even touched on politics and race in the here-and-now: “I’m optimistic. We’re going to have a Black president. The 44th President of the United Says is going to be a Black man … I think this is a definite indication of how far America has moved in how it views race. …”
Cinematical: I was very curious if you could talk a little bit about the genesis of what brought you specifically to Miracle at St. Anna as a film?
Interview: ‘Miracle at St. Anna’ Director Spike Lee
September 29, 2008
Filed under: Drama, New Releases, Disney, Celebrities and Controversy, New in Theaters, Politics, Interviews, Toronto International Film Festival, War
In Miracle at St. Anna, four African-American soldiers are trapped behind enemy lines in Italy near the end of World War II; caught between indifferent leadership and hostile troops, the four fight to survive — and protect the Italian villagers they’ve come to know during their exile. Director Spike Lee spoke with Cinematical from New York about the challenges of film financing in modern Hollywood (”it’s hard to get stuff made this day that’s not superhero, comic-book, TV show, sequel stuff. …”), shooting in an 800-year-old Italian town (” … all we had to do was take down the satellite dishes …”) and the challenges his new film faces (” … historically, women do not run to see, or even walk to see, or even crawl to see World War II films …”), The Wire (”‘Omar’s Coming!’”), sequel possibilities for Inside Man and more.
Review: Miracle at St. Anna
September 28, 2008
Filed under: Drama, Disney, Theatrical Reviews, Celebrities and Controversy, War
(With Miracle at St. Anna opening this week, we at Cinematical are re-running our review from the 2008 Toronto International Film Festival.)
By James Rocchi
