Cinema Hype

As usual, the rules: The first person to comment with the character, actor, and movie that contains that quote gets a special eyelash batting and a tailor-made Cinema Hype cheer, which might even rhyme.

Hint: Think “librarian.”

“What is thy wish?”
“I’m looking for some local b - what’d you say?”
“What is thy wish?”
“Um, local biography or history.”
“If thee will consult with my colleague in there.”
“Mm-hm. Dost thou have a washroom?”
[the librarian points]
“Thank thee.”

Aaaaaand, GO!

As usual, the rules: The first person to comment with the character, actor, and movie that contains that quote gets a special eyelash batting and a tailor-made Cinema Hype cheer, which might even rhyme.

This week’s special offering:

“We have enjoyed preparing many of your esoteric dishes. Your Monte Cristo sandwich is a current favorite among the adventurous.”

I have triumphed! Nobody guessed last week’s Quotation Sensation; I am therefore not obliged to try and rhyme “movie quotes” with anything but…um…”barley oats.”

Anyway, the answer to this quotation:

“He said if I ever left him, he would find out who I was living with and shoot them. Then, he’d shoot me, then himself.�
“Shit, he really loved you, didn’t he?�

is: Toni Collette and Rachel Griffiths in Muriel’s Wedding.

Better luck next time!

I win! I win!

We had some good guesses this week, but nobody quite got there, so I can keep my curly hair ribbons and perfectly white cheer shoes in the closet for now. Dude, I knew I should have been perkier in high school.

The correct answer was Anthony Anderson in last year’s Hustle and Flow.

Stay tuned for a brand-new Quotation Sensation on Friday.

Looking at the list of nominees for the Golden Globes back in December, I found myself focusing on the Best Supporting Actress in a Motion Picture category. Four of the five nominees were serious ack-tors, women who surely could have expected to win (Sorry, Beyonce! You understand, don’t you?). But I found myself disappointed. These women could play those roles in their sleep, I thought. The performances were strong, certainly: there was not a stinker in sight among Meryl Streep in The Devil Wears Prada, Renee Zellweger in Miss Potter, Annette Bening in Running with Scissors, and Toni Collette in Little Miss Sunshine. But when it comes to awards, how do we quantify a strong performance that isn’t an obviously transformative one?

It’s not that any of those actors phoned their performances in, or that they put less than the required amount of effort into their roles. I’m sure there was thought and emotional preparation that went into those performances, and according the HPFA, the resulting work was worthy of an award. But haven’t we seen Streep as villainous-but-vulnerable before? Does Zellweger have to work especially hard to be spirited (accent notwithstanding)? And does it matter? What should go into the equation for an award-winning performance–do the difficulty of the role and the talent of the actor be considered factors?

When a role is dramatically different from an actor’s usual persona–Charlize Theron in Monster, say–the extra challenge usually wins the actor brownie points, and maybe an awards-show victory. This is where the theory of “uglifying” for a role began, as beautiful women started taking physically unattractive roles and then watching their careers take off. If a role is clearly a stretch, a makes sense. It’s the less flashy, truly “supporting” roles that come into play here: What makes a performance good, if an actor isn’t required to use his or her full range?

What do you think, readers?

So, you’ve all recovered from Thanksgiving, right? You’ve eaten alllll the turkey, cleaned the candle wax off of the tablecloths, slept off the tryptophan coma, and gotten rid of any extremely large pumpkins you might have lying around (just my family? Really?). Good. Because guess what? As of yesterday, we’re so over that most autumnal of holidays, and we’re moving on to Christmas, whether you’re with us or not.

Here at CHHQ, I’ll be spending much of December with my DVD player as part of a Christmas film festival–comedies, dramas, classics, whatever. I’m not dissing Hanukkah or Kwanzaa here; it’s just that there are so many more Christmas films to contend with–if anybody feels strongly that I should sit through Eight Crazy Nights, now is the time to speak up, and I’ll add it to my list of possibilities. Anyway, the big question is: what to watch? If you’ve got a holiday movie I just can’t miss, let me know. Viewings and reviews begin next Friday, December 1.

I just saw a few minutes of Bubble Boy on Comedy Central, and after I finished wondering who thought a re-make of The Boy in the Plastic Bubble would be a great idea, I got to thinking about Jake Gyllenhaal. In 2001, Gyllenhaal was Mr. Up-and-Coming ACK-tor. He’d just wrapped Donnie Darko. So…can somebody explain to me what happened, here?

And while we’re talking about this, I’d like to propose a little competition. The perameters: Most serious (or self-serious) actor in the silliest/lamest/just-plain-worst role. GO.

Sometimes we at CH wonder if film studios will ever run out of old TV shows to re-make on the big screen. They’ve certainly burned through quite a few of the oldies but goodies, but eventually they’re going to be caught up and trying to re-make shows that are still on (we don’t recommend this). Still, it looks like they’re going to keep trying.

The fun of movie remakes lies, it seems, not in the plot or the characters, but in the art design and the casting: how close can the filmmakers get to re-creating the look and feel of the original show with current actors? Even if the re-make isn’t an exact copy–studios are realizing that the public has already seen the originals, and are starting to look for fresh takes on old shows–the public seems to love watching their favorite celebrities interpret roles that were originated by other actors long ago.

We at CH are not immune to this phenomenon. For instance, we hear that Steve Carell has been contracted to play Maxwell Smart in a 2008 adaptation of the TV show Get Smart, which we think is excellent casting work. We can’t wait to see who’s cast as Agent 99 (Marley Shelton? Morena Baccarin?), or to see Carell talking into a shoe. Hilarity will ensue, we’re sure.

In this spirit, a poll: Of the many (many, many) television shows that have been remade on the small screen, which are the best? Or are they all complete dreck? Note that continuations (Serenity, X-Files: Fight the Future) don’t count.

Since it’s October 29, I’m guessing there are plenty of people out there scrambling for last-minute Halloween costumes (personally, I’m smug and prepared). Thankfully, the movies are a perpetual source of excellent impersonation ideas–even if you never actually pull off your favorite costume ideas, there are always things you could be, if you had a professional seamstress and makeup artist following you around.

In that spirit, I thought the CH crew should share the costume-idea love: if you’re feeling inspired, tell us 1) how you’re dressing up this Halloween, if you’re dressing up, and 2) your favorite movie-inspired costume idea. If you can only furnish #2, that’s good enough for us, but we might call you a party pooper. We hope you don’t mind.

Anyway, I’ll start. On Tuesday, I’m going as Betty Crocker. As for my favorite movie-ish costumes, I’ve always wanted to dress as Velma from Scooby Doo.

Next?

Pirate Costumes Officially licensed Pirates of the Caribbean costumes available now at Halloween Express.

I woke up this morning with a raging sore throat, random temperature swings, and the feeling that all of my limbs are made of bean bags. My head feels, if I may say, like an orange on a toothpick. It’s unpleasant. But it does mean I’m spending the day under a quilt on the couch, and what else do I have to kill the time besides a few hours with my DVD player?

So, I ask you, readers: what are your favorite sick-day movies? If you had a day or two of forced down-time coupled with slightly reduced intellectual power and temporary narcolepsy, what would you watch?