Cinema Hype

Ohhh, Internets. Don’t ever leave us again. As any good Daily Show viewer knows, you are a series of tubes, and obviously all this weather wreaks havoc with your sealant or something, but seriously. Not allowed, all this in-and-out.

And yet. Our proverbial forty days and forty nights (in the Moses sense, not the Josh Hartnett sense, and I know somebody out there was thinking it, so don’t lie) gave us plenty of time to ponder the ways in which art—as in, film—may or may not imitate this particular segment of our life. Namely: Why are there so few movies about the Internet?

You’d think that, since everybody’s making movies on the Internet, everybody might also be rushing to make movies about the Internet. It’s the newest thing, in the way that radio was the newest thing, and that TV was the newest thing; it’s the defining technology of the 21st century. If you’re William Gibson or Ray Bradbury, it’s going to submit us to its nefarious will anyway, so…where’s the filmic evidence? Are You’ve Got Mail and the beginning and the end of the Internet Film genre?

The consensus around CHHQ is that Internet movies are hard because, as we’ve all been warned, online interaction is a solitary thing, at least as far as the camera is concerned. You’ve Got Mail isn’t about instant messaging; it’s about Meg Ryan and Tom Hanks cavorting around New York City. Say what you will about the Internet bringing people together; a movie about instant messaging would be boring.

Am I wrong? Are Internet-themed movies all the rage among the cool kids, and I’m just too busy watching The Philadelphia Story over and over to notice? Is there some other reason that’s not springing to mind? Or is the Web just too isolating to make good cinema? Is this why nobody wants to make a movie about life at CH? I should’ve known.

Internet, movies, Internet movies, Meg Ryan, Tom Hanks, You’ve Got Mail, The Net

Do you ever get the sense that some actors win awards for who they are, and not necessarily for what they do?

In re-reading my last post, I realized that my thoughts on Cate Blanchett seemed a little…I don’t know, catty? And I don’t mean them to be; Blanchett’s obviously talented and consistent in her work. I’m not saying she doesn’t deserve to be nominated awards, or that she doesn’t deserve to win.

What bothers me is the proportion of number of performances to number of performances nominated for awards: Blanchett appeared in two movies in 2007 and was Oscar-nominated for both of them. And, you know, maybe she’s just that good. Maybe she deserves to win a major award for every time she shows up on camera. But consider the possibility that Academy voters choose her because she’s there and she’s Cate Blanchett, and what else are you going to do but nominate her?

Blanchett is, of course, not the only actor in this situation. She’s not even the only actor in this year’s Oscar field who gets nominated every time she leaves the house: the entire Best Actor category feels like a bit of a standardized ballot. Likewise, Jodie Foster and her series of increasingly unappealing Strong Female Movies and Meryl Streep for just being herself and being brilliant. They can’t help it. They have strong bodies of work, and tend to have won major awards before, and then they can’t not be on the list, either because Academy voters aren’t looking for alternatives, or because they somehow believe these actors will track them down and hit them over the head with their statuettes from previous years. Nobody at CH is willing to say which, though we have a healthy respect for those sharp little wings.

Anyway. What we really want to say is: Cate, it’s nothing personal. Couldn’t you just make something really bad? We won’t tell. And trust us, it’ll help your average.

Cate Blanchett, Jodie Foster, Meryl Streep, Oscar nominees, Academy Awards, Oscars

Looks like 2007 wasn’t such a great anti-war-movie year, after all.

The Academy Award nominations came out today, and in a year studded with dramas about war in Iraq, the Best Picture field contains one war movie and two films taking place in the desert, but neither is about war in the desert. Go figure.

No Country for Old Men and There Will Be Blood—which, at least they’re being honest with the title, right?—are at the top of the nominations list, with eight nominations each. Atonement and Michael Clayton, which nobody saw despite Intern George, got seven each, and Juno, which teaches us that movies can be funny and actually win awards, got four.

This year’s Best Actor and Best Actress categories are eye-rollingly predictable—it’s pretty obvious that people nominate Cate Blanchett just for getting up in the morning, which somehow becomes less charming every year, though I guess it’s not her fault—but the Supporting Actor and Supporting Actress fields should give us something to argue about for awhile. Javier Bardem vs. Philip Seymour Hoffman! It’s a character-actor rumble! And might Saoirse Ronan actually win for her spot-on performance in Atonement? One hopes, but again, there’s the Blanchett factor.

The ceremony—assuming it happens, of course, and that Jon Stewart doesn’t have to suffer through some horribly awkward press conference—is February 24, and CH will be blogging along. Come! Join us! We love company! And we’ll be even happier if our favorites win. In the mean time, expect plenty of Oscar gabbery.

Oscars, Academy Awards, No Country for Old Men, There Will Be Blood, Juno, Atonement, Cate Blanchett

Wow. Now here’s a particularly shocking piece of news:

Heath Ledger found dead in his SoHo apartment.

Ledger was considered one of the most promising young actors in Hollywood, having been nominated for an Academy Award for Brokeback Mountain (which he might actually have won, had Philip Seymour Hoffman’s Capote performance not been in the race as well) and cast as the Joker in this summer’s Batman movie, The Dark Knight.

Sad. He’ll be missed.

Heath Ledger, celebrity death

I just finished watching In Her Shoes, which I’d requisitioned from Netflix after finishing the book over New Year’s in the desert. Most of my deep thoughts on this movie fall somewhere in the “where can I get a wedding dress like that?” range, but there is one really very serious thing I’d like to talk about:

In what kind of universe is Mark Feuerstein not worthy of being a girl’s first choice?

I get that Simon Stein is a winner in the end, and that we’re supposed to believe that Rose is just too wrapped up in her own misery to notice. But do you look at this guy:

and think “Wow, he’s not really cute enough to get a date”? I just don’t think that’s a universe in which I can exist.

Mark Feuerstein, In Her Shoes, Toni Colette, Jennifer Weiner

I couldn’t do it, you guys. It was all just a shadow of its former self: no red carpet, no “this is like the Oscars only way less stuffy” comments, no Joan and Melissa Rivers asking inappropriate and possibly drunken questions on the red carpet. Just Mary Hart, a TelePrompter, and imaginary tumbleweeds drifting by in the background. I wanted to watch the announcement of the Golden Globe winners, but I couldn’t. The lack of sequins and organza was just too depressing.

A look through the nomination list—the actual awards—is actually pretty heartening: there were some Good Things (TM Martha) going on in 2007, on the big screen and the small. Atonement; Julie Christie (winning the most cliched field out of the bunch); Daniel Day-Lewis; Johnny Depp; Cate Blanchett; Sweeney Todd; No Country for Old Men; Ratatouille. Most of the winners aren’t that surprising (Blanchett wins, I think, just for existing at all), but they aren’t usually the only obvious choice, either. Who’s going to tell the
Coen brothers they don’t deserve a screenwriting award? Come on.

And so I say: three cheers for awards, for giving credit where credit is due, and for giving a few people recognition for a job they’re currently not allowed to do at a ceremony they can’t write for. Next year let’s let those writers get up onstage in their not-as-glamorous outfits (writers always look so bewildered at these things) and take a real bow, shall we? You can even invite Mary Hart if it’ll make you feel better.

Golden Globe Awards, Golden Globes, HPFA, Hollywood Foreign Press Association, Johnny Depp, Sweeney Todd, Atonement, Julie Christie, Coen brothers, No Country for Old Men, Daniel Day-Lewis, Javier Bardem, Cate Blanchett, Ratatouille, Mary Hart

When you’re a little kid, people like to tell you that two wrongs don’t make a right. They’re right, I suppose, if we’re doing moral math. I can’t think of a time when a wrong plus another wrong yielded a right, though I admit I don’t really go around classifying events as “wrongs” and “rights.” Sadly, now that I’m all grown up (heh), I’m also finding that I may have been lied to. Turns out that two rights may not add up to a right, either. For example:

Right #1: Julie and Julia, by Julie Powell. This is one of my favorite books of the past few years, something I picked up as light reading that somehow managed to attach itself to my psyche. It’s nonfiction: sometime around the turn of the century, a melodramatic, vegetarian executive assistant named Julie Powell decided, for no real reason, to cook all of the recipes in Julia Child’s Mastering the Art of French Cooking in a year, and keep a blog about it. The book deal came later, and what we get includes snippets of the blog, but mostly behind-the-scenes commentary from Powell’s tiny Brooklyn apartment. It’s funny and snarky, and there’s a whole chapter about aspic (which, when you think about it, is an endlessly hilarious word, not to mention concept), and it’s just…well, it’s great. It’s a Right.

Right #2: Amy Adams. I’m not sure whether I’ve given proper space to my recent affection for Adams. I loved her commitment to adorability in Enchanted—she might well have won the Golden Globe for her performance, had the show, you know, gone on—but I mostly like her because I look at her filmography and think that anyone who starts out with Drop Dead Gorgeous and gets broken up with on a booze cruise on The Office must be the kind of girl I’d like to hang out with. She is also a Right.

So why am I so wary about the recent news that Amy Adams is set to play Julie Powell in the film of Julie and Julia? I think it’s because, in my mind, Julie Powell may actually be the Anti-Adams. Or, rather, she’s the Anti-Adams-on-screen. She’s nerdy and moody and she and her husband like to eat pizza with jalapeno and bacon while watching Buffy. Her biggest celebrity crush is David Strathairn. Sometimes, she’s not very nice. Other times, she’s downright awful. She’s the kind of girl some of us turn out to be, once we realize that we won’t be making a profession of looking like a Disney princess, and so it stings a little to see the role played by someone who has made a profession of looking like a Disney princess. It’s the kind of casting that makes me excited for Adams, who could probably stand a job where she gets to be something other than 100% adorable (and, frankly, it kind of makes me like her even more), but it makes me a little sad for the rest of us, who hold out hope that sometimes just writing, or cooking, or writing about cooking, or doing whatever it is that we do, makes us a little bit of a supermodel/rockstar, even if we’re doing it in some tiny kitchen somewhere.

(On another note, though: Residual sadness aside, such a dream team! Adams, Meryl Streep, and Stanley Tucci; written by Nora Ephron! The heart, it pounds!)

Julie and Julia, Julie/Julia Project, Amy Adams, Julie Powell, Meryl Streep, Stanley Tucci, Nora Ephron

Check out the trailer here.

1. Somehow graphic novels tend to be—how can we put this politely?—altered by the Hollywood Machine. Diluted, maybe. One could say butchered, in some cases. Persepolis was written and directed by the author of the graphic novels, Marjane Satrapi.

2. There might be a better time for the American people to brush up on their Iranian history and culture, but I’m not sure when. Not to, you know, give anything away for the future. I’m just saying.

3. Persepolis is a graphic novel for people who don’t like graphic novels: not a super-power, sidekick, or busty heroine in sight. Instead, we get an outspoken adolescent in 1979 Tehran and her family and friends. That doesn’t sound so bad, does it? Try it! You’ll like it! Even Barnes & Noble shelves it under Biography. With pictures!

4. Catherine Deneuve and Chiara Mastroianni as Marjane and Mrs. Satrapi

5. It won the Jury Prize at Cannes last year, and most of Europe’s already seen it. Thousands of Belgians can’t be wrong!

See Persepolis today at your local art-house theater!

Persepolis, Persepolis movie, Marjane Satrapi

Bless my ears, what is that sound? Is that the glorious tolling of the dial tone? Is that the sun emerging from the clouds, or the benevolent light of Al Gore shining down on us?

It IS! The internet has come back!

It’s true: Internet at CHHQ was knocked out for nearly a week by the unfortunate combination of hurricane-force winds and pansy non-native eucalyptus trees (thanks, Australia). We had plenty of time–between washing our hair, organizing our shoelaces in reverse-rainbow order, and waiting for the Netflix-bearing mailman–to think about what we’d done and come up with a good list of movies we could have been writing about, had all things been connected.

And so we at CH would like to share the Hunker Down for the Storm Fantasy Film Festival. Enjoy!

Twister: It’s hard to know what’s better about this movie: the confluence of every character actor in Hollywood or the hilarious attempts to create romantic tension between Bill Paxton and Helen Hunt (because there’s a couple that belongs together, right?). Bad ’90s weather movie, blah blah blah. It’s great, and don’t let anybody tell you otherwise.

Hard Rain: Wow, robberies suck. Especially when it’s…raining really hard? I don’t know.

When the Levees Broke: A Requiem in Four Acts: Spike Lee on Hurricane Katrina. Heartbreaking, and might make weather-related complaining irrelevant.

The Perfect Storm: Bad weather can ruin your day, especially when you’re on a ship in the middle of the ocean. Another one to make all land-bound storms feel a little anticlimactic.

The Ice Storm: May or may not include an actual ice storm. But check out that indie-friendly cast! Drama can’t be far behind. And, uh, icicles. Emotional icicles. Yes! That’s it.

Glad to be back, everyone! Stay warm and dry, and safeguard your DSL. Trust me.

film festivals, fantasy film festivals, Twister, The Ice Storm, The Perfect Storm, When the Levees Broke, Hurrican Katrina, Hard Rain

Does anybody want to come fix the internets? Or, I don’t know, write a snotty letter to AT&T on my behalf? Or, uh, maybe it’s the weather deities? Anyway, internet access at CHHQ was knocked out by the crazy California storms last week and still hasn’t been restored. At which point, of course, Hollywood decided to fall apart on me.

More later! We’re not ignoring you, or anyone! The it’s just that winter, Al Gore, and the telecommunications industry are out to get us. We’ll be back full-tilt as soon as the dial tone is.

Happy New Year, CHers! The confetti’s been tossed, the champagne’s dripped all over the floor, and we’re looking at a stormy, gray January as we stare down our lists of resolutions (or in my case, “suggestions”). But never fear: with a new year comes a whole new crop of movies to anticipate, and things are looking positively spring-like for 2008.

Here, to start things off, is the Cinema Hype Top Five Most-Anticipated Movies of 2008:

1. Leatherheads

There is no way, in my humble but accurate opinion, that this movie can be anything but awesome. Intern George directing and starring! Renee Zellweger unscrunching her face for the first time since “you had me at hello!” And look how dreamy John Krasinski is. In the uniform, with his hair all slicked? Also, uh, football. Sure. We like sports movies. Count us in.

2. The Time Traveler’s Wife (No trailer available)

If this movie isn’t good, expect an uprising: cranky bookworms of the world, unite! On the other hand, how can it be bad? This story about a man who time-travels involuntarily and the woman he falls in love with feels like a good movie. Kleenex required, though.

3. Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day

Why does this trailer make me feel all fluttery inside? I’m not gonna lie: it might be Lee Pace with a tux and a British accent. But doesn’t it just look like fun? Snappy dialogue-ish, big-band, Amy Adams-as-ingenue fun? I want to hang out with this movie.

4. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (no trailer available)

Another chrono-ambulatory love story, this time based on the F. Scott Fitzgerald story of the same title. Brad Pitt stars as Benjamin Button, who’s born an old man and ages backwards. Unfortunately for everyone, he falls in love with a 30-year-old woman (Cate Blanchett). Sounds cool, no? And if all else fails, sign us up for a theme-DVD night (with The Time Traveler’s Wife and, I don’t know, Somewhere in Time? Oh, you know you love it. Don’t lie).

5. Get Smart

AHAHAHAHA. I’m so looking forward to this, to the point where I’m considering liking Anne Hathaway (as Agent 99). Strong words, no?

So that’s where we stand. What are your top movies for 2008?

Leatherheads, George Clooney, Renee Zellweger, John Krasinski, Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day, Frances McDormand, Amy Adams, Lee Pace, The Time Traveler’s Wife, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, Brad Pitt, Cate Blanchett, Get Smart, Steve Carell, Anne Hathaway, Top 5s, upcoming movies, trailers