BOP Daily News
January 24, 2006
The spirit of BOP News lives on in
This is So Last Week,
our pop culture week-in-review,
presented in a pleasing quiz form.
|
We thought we'd continue BOP's theme week, and with boobies already being taken, a few tales being told out of school about directors seemed...OK, not the next best thing, but a thing. Sort of.
|
|
|
|
|
Our first tidbit considers the damage that can be done to a young director's sense of perspective when too much feature-film success comes too quickly. Sam Mendes, who won a slew of praise - not to mention an Oscar - for his maiden silver screen outing, American Beauty, followed by an even bigger slew of praise - albeit with fewer Oscars - for his follow-up, Road to Perdition, is in a high dudgeon over the Stateside reception of his latest flick, Jarhead. The off-beat war film neither garnered great critical praise nor set the box office afire, and Mendes places the blame squarely on...the viewing audience, who according to the director are unable to comprehend a war flick that isn't one-sided. European audiences have apparently responded more to Mendes' liking, as he holds up the reactions of EU moviegoers as an example of how US audiences, in his opinion, should have reacted. Mendes, who may have been channeling some of the American reviewers, likened his film to the works of Beckett and Sartre, whereas US moviegoers, he believes, were expecting Oliver Stone. Mendes also believes audiences on the Continent are more accustomed to absurdist war movies, while moviegoers in the States aren't. Something that will come as a surprise to fans of Dr Strangelove, we're sure. Mendes does, in fact, have something in common with Oliver Stone's war movies, in that his defense of his film doesn't place the blame closer to where the problem may be; starting, for instance, with the person behind the camera. In a related story, Oliver Stone has begun work on a film that tells the story of an upstart director who tries to ingratiate himself to a veteran filmmaker in order to gain access to the established lenser's inner circle and pass information along to the CIA.
|
|
|
|
Our next directorial newsflash concerns legendary marathon-length helmer Terrence Malick, whose latest gluteus maximus-endurance test-masquerading-as-a-movie, The New World, opened recently to the sound of crickets. Seems Malick wasn't pleased with the original cut released to theatres, and recalled the film for more editing nine days after it had been released. Way to instill confidence in the studio suits and distributors there, Terry. Malick apparently decided his retelling of the John Smith/Pocahontas legend needed a bit of trimming to improve it, and so took 17 minutes off the original flick. Of course, this still leaves the film with a two hour-plus running time, but Malick seems to think that this version truly encapsulates his vision. A vision that, like most of Malick's flicks, involves a Byzantine plot and so many characters you can't even tell the players with a score card, but at least the director is happy. And based on box office for the film, seems he's the only one. Maybe if they gave away a doughnut cushion with every ticket purchase...
|
|
|
|
|
And another charter member of the Confusing/Completely Absent Plot and Too Many Characters Club, Robert Altman, is the subject of the next item. Seems Altman's been around long enough that it's time for the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences to give him one of their special honorary Oscars at this year's ceremony. Altman, who has been nominated five times but has never won an Oscar, will be celebrated, according to the Academy, for "a career that has repeatedly reinvented the art form and inspired filmmakers and audiences alike." If by "inspired" he means "completely confusing the audience so they hopefully won't notice he peaked with 'M*A*S*H'", we tend to agree. Altman is said to already be hard at work on his acceptance speech, which the Academy has scheduled to start at Hour Three of the telecast, and be finished a week from the following Sunday.
|
|
|
|
And finally we have a story about a director where someone else is acting the jackass. George Clooney, who is making quite a name for himself by taking on sensitive projects that might not otherwise get made without his star power, and then having the audacity to make films the audience can actually understand, made a joke during his acceptance speech for his Best Supporting Actor Golden Globe win that has someone's knickers in a twist. The joke was about Jack Abramoff, the lobbyist who is currently embroiled in a money-for-votes scandal that may yet end the careers of a goodly number of politicians. Clooney pointed out that it was rather thoughtless of Abramoff's parents to name him Jack when his last name ended in off, and thought it was "no wonder the guy's screwed up." Well, just so happened Jack's daddy, Frank, was watching the awards from his palatial home in Palm Springs, and he didn't take kindly to Clooney's remarks. So incensed is the senior Abramoff that he fired off a letter to Clooney via his local newspaper. Frank called Clooney's remarks a "glib and ridiculous attack" on Sonny Boy, and felt that Clooney brought "shame and dishonor on (himself) and (his) profession" by his "obscene query" as to Ma and Pa Abramoff's naming choice. While we understand that parents have a hard time believing their children could possibly do anything wrong, it's also rather apparent that Frank Abramoff has been wearing not only those proverbial rose-colored specs but also blinders when it comes to the activities Jack's been up to. Then again, if anyone knows about bringing shame and dishonor on a profession, it would be the Abramoffs.
|
|
|
|
"I will not be made a fool of! Do you hear me?"
Previous edition's quote: Buffy the Vampire Slayer
Box Office Prophets offers quality, reliable news about the entertainment industry. BOP is also entertaining. To that end, please be advised that some content in this column is intended to be humorous and should not be considered factual.
|
|
|
|
