Thursday, August 31, 2006

So you thought Snakes on a Plane was supposed to be bad...

Material Girls, starring Hilary and Haylie Duff which opened on August 18th, has earned the dubious distinction of being the fastest film to ever reach the number one spot on IMDB.COM’s worst films list.
IMDB uses member votes to determine the viewer approval rating of films. Utilizing a simple one to ten scale and a nigh-incomprehensible logarithm, IMDB lists both the 250 highest rated films and the 100 lowest rated films.

With an approval rating of 1.6 and less than one thousand votes, Material Girls in its first week of release stole the not-at-all coveted worst film spot. Number two is the Movie Show 'favorite' Troll 2. Material Girls gained a couple hundred more votes in its second week of release, but maintained its 1.6 rating. Troll 2 sits at an approval rating of 1.8 with over three thousand votes.
The third through ninth IMDB worst films all have a 1.9 approval rating. It remains to be seen whether or not Material Girls can hold onto its number one spot when it makes the transition to DVD. Surely there aren’t going to be many people watching Troll 2 in the next few...well, ever.

What is even more interesting is the number of recent releases which have earned prominent spots on the bottom 100:

In July Little Man became the fastest film to enter the bottom 100. It became the 24th worst film on the day of its release.

The Tim Allen vehicle Zoom, released the week before Material Girls, is already number six.

Phat Girlz, released earlier this year, is rated number four. (And I thought making fun of the obese was Box Office gold.)

Five of the ten worst films have been released in the past five years. In fact, the number of bad films released each year seems to be climbing. Last year was a banner year for terrible films. Nine films last year reached the bottom 100, more than doubling 2004's four horrible movies.
So far seven films released this year have made it onto the bottom 100 list. In other words, roughly once a month this year one of the 100 worst films OF ALL TIME has been released. It is entirely possible that 2006 will top 2005's record.

However, I will leave you with some small hope. Despite the fact that so many recent films are making the bottom 100 list, there are many far worse films which are right now gathering dust in the backrooms of ancient video rental stores. Rest secure in the knowledge that it is impossible to gather viewer ratings on films that no one is watching.

-Props to Shoutwire for the collation of some of the above facts and figures.

Tuesday, August 29, 2006

In case you missed it...Brick!

Every film genre has its collection of cinematic devices which filmmakers use to frighten, thrill or woo viewers. The Horror film has its shower scene. The Romance has its falling in love montage. There are as many examples as there are film genres and in fact the easiest way to define a particular film genre is by listing the common devices used. Filmmakers employ these devices as if they were the wrenches and hammers of a handyman. Just as I would not expect to see the superintendent of my apartment building tighten a leaky faucet with a hammer, filmgoers do not expect to see an arming-of-the-hero sequence in a documentary.

These devices are occasionally used by filmmakers to manipulate viewers into a false sense of security by building expectations which the film then subverts. Million Dollar Baby hid its Family Drama behind an Against-All-Odds facade and wept with duped viewers all the way to the Academy Awards.

However, more often than not these devices are used to cobble together the many movies which fill the large gaps between genre defining classics. Every month the same four or five Movies-By-Numbers seem to open in theaters around the country. They have different titles and different actors but you can set your watch by their car chases or explosions of gore. These films turn the devices of their respective genres into cliches. As a fan of film–and genre films in particular–I have been disheartened by the shift towards the homogenized cliche-fest that the contemporary genre film has become.

Which is why I was so pleasantly surprised when I popped Brick into the DVD player. From the opening scene, wherein an attractive young girl lies dead in a drainage ditch while a battered young man stands crouched over her prone form, Brick carries viewers on a journey to all the familiar stops of the Detective story without ever allowing its cinematic elements to turn into cliches.

The film follows Brandon, played with equal parts mumble and explosion by 3rd Rock From the Sun’s Joseph Gordon Levitt, as he searches for the murderer of his troubled ex-girlfriend. First time writer/director Rian Johnson places the characters in a world whose only two adult characters have about a minute of film time each. The result is a kind of Neverland–except instead of characters who never want to grow up, these kids seem to have never been children in the first place. Instead of seedy back alleys the characters slink and stumble around the local High School whose Vice Principal, rendered impotent by bureaucracy and corruption, is the equivalent of the local Sheriff or Assistant D.A. of the Detective film. Instead of a warehouse by the docks the local Kingpin holds court in his mother’s basement. (She serves milk while the rival gangs decide whether or not to go to war.) The seductress is literally a high school drama queen.

The use of teenage characters in the place of adults might have struck viewers as gimmicky if it were the only remarkable element of the film. However, the stylized dialogue, while occasionally stretching verisimilitude, fills this fantasy world with characters who actually have something interesting to say. The banter is something the viewer enjoys rather than endures.
Detective films are often classified as Film Noir. The word ‘noir’ stems from the french word for black. Undeniably, the desired tone for the Detective film is a sense of dark hopelessness. While Brick occasionally makes use of heavy shadow to display its bleakness, the darkness in Brandon’s life is represented on screen as the empty landscape of a high school with virtually no students, a teenage wasteland whose darkness is the absence of any color or joy. With that in mind, I can’t help but wonder why it took so long for someone to place a Detective film in a High School.

If you missed Brick in theaters–which is highly likely considering the film did not play in Greensboro theaters–it is now available on DVD. You owe it to yourself to check it out.

Michael Moore on double duty.

I am the kind of person who respects most people's opinions (Unless you are one of those people who loved Alien Vs. Predator - I just think those people are retarded), but when several conservative writers and pundits attacked Fahrenheit 9/11 solely because the director was 'fat' - they didn't even see the film, mind you - I couldn't believe what I was hearing.

Well, it seems like Michael Moore is out to prove that fat people can work just as fast as anyone else, if not faster. While Sicko, Moore's idigtment of the nation's healthcare system, will be released this year at the Toronto Film Festival, parts of a second film entitled The Great '04 Slacker Uprising will be released as well. According to IMDBPro, Uprising will follow Moore during his '04 campus tour in an attempt to get George Bush thrown out of office - sounds like a heartbreaking tragedy to me.

Seriously though, parts of the film will be screened at Toronto this year as well. Sicko will be released for the general public sometime in 2007

P.S. - I know that the podcast of last Thursday's show is late, but it's honestly taking forever to UPLOAD (it's at 57% right now). Hopefully it will be ready by the time I am back from work.

Thursday, August 24, 2006

Tonight's Show (7-9 p.m.)

Why is Tom Cruise Homeless? What geek genre of cinema does South Park's Trey Parker and Matt Stone plan to make fun of next? Also, what two hilarious actors plan on watching Adam Sandler and Steve James get married? You can find the answer to these questions and more on The Movie Show, tonight @ 7-9 p.m.

Joe, Steve, and Mike also plan on reviewing Snakes on a Plane, this week's number one moive, and The Devil and Daniel Johnston. So tune it, listen, learn, and laugh as the gang digests a week's worth of movie releases and news.

Here are some other things tonight's show will include:

-A re-airing of last week's Daniel Johnston interview.

-Joe Scott's op-ed peice on why Snakes on a Plane is not a real cult movie.

-A whole slew of new-to-The Movie Show songs from films like The Crying Game, The Royal Tennenbaums, James Bond, A Dirty Shame, and Gremlins.

- Reader questions, fan mail, and much, much more!

If you live outside of Greensboro, or simply do not have a radio handy, you can click here between 7-9PM Eastern time and listen to us online.

Wednesday, August 23, 2006

I guess that means there will be no Mission Impossible 4

Tom Cruise is now homeless according to the Hollywood Reporter. Paramount Pictures, which was the star's filmmaking base of operations since making Top Gun in 1986, ended negotiations with Cruise's Cruise/Wagner productions.

What makes the split even more strange was a statement released to the Wall Street Journal by a Viacom executive. Chairman Sumner Redstone told the financial newspaper, "As much as we like [Cruise] personally, we thought it was wrong to renew the deal. His recent conduct has not been acceptable to Paramount."

Cruise/Wagner Productions say they will now work independently from any studios - making both high-concept and big-budgeted movies as well as smaller films funded by two private equities in L.A. and New York.

Now, I normally care nothing whatsoever about celebrity gossip. I mean as far as I am concerned, Tom Cruise can believe in aliens and jump on Oprah's couch until it breaks, and I will not care so long as he makes good movies. I honestly felt that was the case with M:I3 - the first film in the entire series that I liked.

But now it seems as though Cruise's lifestyle and gossip-mongering antics have gotten in the way of making films. And that, my friends, that is not excusable. He seriously needs to let America see his baby - even if it's crosseyed, covered in scabs, and has a rhino horn protruding from its skull, and while we are on the subject of his personal life, Cruise needs to let Katie Holmes run free. If she doesn't return to him, it simply was not meant to be, and then he needs to move on.

Cruise needs to get his personal equation under control (isn't that what Scientology is all about anyway?) before he finds himself starring on his own TV series in five years.

Then again, it may be too late.

You can read the entire Hollywood Reporter article here.

Coming to Greensboro this Friday!

That's right, people - Little Miss Sunshine will be at the Carousel Grande (Showtimes are 12:45pm |2:55pm |5:05pm |7:15pm |9:25pm |11:40pm). This is the one I have been dying to see. Maybe I will catch you there on Friday.

But that's not all. Two other movies will be coming out at the Carousel as well:

The simply titled Beerfest, from the people who made Super Troopers (1:00pm |3:10pm |5:20pm |7:30pm |9:45pm |12:00am).

and lastly...

Idlewild (12:10pm |2:25pm |4:50pm |7:15pm |9:40pm |12:00am).

I honestly want to see all of these film. Now. Which one would you choose?

Tuesday, August 22, 2006

Soderbergh says there will be no Ocean's 14.

'Nice Graphic', I know, I know.

Thank god. Dark Horizons ran a story on the Q&A Steven Soderbergh did for Ocean's Thirteen. Fortunately, during the interview, Soderbergh said that the third installment of the Danny Ocean series will be the last - for him anyway.

Soderbergh also said that his reasoning behind dumping yet another chunk of his life into the meandering series was because "George [Clooney] wanted to go out strong," before admitting that the second film was too complicated.

I enjoyed the first Ocean's film but missed the second one altogether. Maybe I was simply all heist movi-ed out at the time of its release (the fact that it was my former co-host Gu's worst movie of 2004 didn't help very much). Anyway, I kinda thought Soderbergh had better things to do with his time than spend the rest of his life making these movies, and it seems as though he agrees.

What do you think?

For more Ocean's Thirteen news, including information on Al Pacino's character, click here to read about the rest of Soderbergh's Q&A.

The Devil and Daniel Johnston

Dear Citizens of Greensboro,

My quest to bring The Devil and Daniel Johnston to the Triad has been a long, long endeavor. I have bugged many a publicity executive for Sony Pictures Classics as well as local theater owners, local film buyers, and the people who answer the phones for the Galaxy Cinema 6 in Cary, NC.

But as the film is finally released in Greensboro today at the Carolina Theatre in downtown, let's review the reasons why you should go and see it:

1.) The poster, with artwork by Daniel Johnston himself:
The Greatest Movie of the Year! WOO-HOO!

2.) The trailer for the film, one of the very best of the year:

3.) The more than positive review I wrote for GoTriad.

4.) And lastly, the telephone interview I conducted with Johnston himself over the telephone.

As far as I am concerned, you have no excuse not to see this film.

Joe Scott

P.S. For those of you who I met before seeing the film tonight, make sure to write your thoughts on the film in the comments section below.

RE: Reservoir Dogs: The Video Game

(Click above to see the trailer)

Quotes from the video game's trailer:

"What happened at the jewelry store?"

"Where did Mr. Pink stash the diamonds"

"Where did Nice Guy Eddie dump the getaway cars?"

"How did Mr. Blonde get the cop back to the warehouse?"

"How did Mr. Orange and Mr. White escape from the heist?

"What happened to Mr. Blue?"

"You decide!"

I have seen Reservoir Dogs nearly 20 times, and I never asked any of these questions. In the end, the only thing I wanted to know was who shot Nice Guy Eddie during the Mexican stand-off finale? That the video game trailer makers never considered that one of the questions to address - especially when it's one of the biggest mysteries in the film - is cause for minor concern.

For me, what made Reservoir Dogs work so well in the first place was that we didn't see all of the events that would have answered the questions above. Reservoir Dogs was heist movie that took place primarily between the scenes that typically are in a heist movie (i.e. the heist itself). When Lionsgate bought Artisan, I am sure this is one of the properties they were glad to acquire, and it looks as though they are putting it to work for them.

On the upside, a new 'GAS CAN' DVD edition of the film is on its way, and while I am not certain if there will be any new features (I mean, c'mon the 10th Anniversary edition was pretty tricked out), it will be packaged inside of a plastic gas can.

Maybe there will finally be a commentary from the director as well. I bet Quentin could tell us who shot Nice Guy Eddie, but I hear Tarrantino is reluctant to provide commentary for anything he directed. Anyway, maybe you can decide who killed Nice Guy Eddie for yourselves, in Italian!!!!

Saturday, August 19, 2006

Download last Thursday's show!

I know it's a day late, but ENJOY!

This episode of the Movie Show was jam-packed with news. We had stories on The Transformers: The Movie, Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer, the newest Batman film, and more.

We also talked about Rob Schneider's vow never to work with Mel Gibson after his drunken, Jew-bashing debacle, and made suggestions on who (or what, to be more precise) Gibson could use to replace the void that the, er 'talented' comedian may have left behind.

There is an interview with Daniel Johnston as well, and tons of great movie music. New to the show is the Nacho Libre song Religious Man by Mr. Loco (shite film, great song!).

Joe Scott Says, 'Fall into The Descent!'

When it comes to the scary movies that studios are ever so eager to pump out these days, there is something they forgot to learn: whenever audiences go to see them, they want to be, well, scared.

For a while now, it seems as though Hollywood misunderstood this desire. Audiences have been given movies with nothing but endless torture and heaping handfuls of fake-bloodied latex innards, rubbery brain matter, etc. Yes, we purchased tickets for these depraved films; yes, the fake guts and brains looked kinda real; and yes we did squirm, though not for the reason studios might have hoped. Movies like Hostel, Saw, and Saw II did not make me squirm because they were scary; the only reason we squirmed is because I were sickened by what I saw.
These movies are disgusting, and while there is an undeniable appeal within the human spirit to witness something gross, it certainly will not spark much repeat business. While many people drive slowly to stare the results of horrible car crashes, few people actually make a U-turn in order to go back and see them again (I would wager that the ones who do probably don’t see very many movies to begin with). It’s a cheap, view only once kind of deal, and that’s all she wrote – ‘Wham, splat, thank you ma’am!’

I was worried that horror filmmakers would never learn from their mistakes, that I would be doomed to a lifetime off mindless and dull wretch-fests (Hostel 2 or Saw III, anyone?). And honestly, I was almost ready to settle, to completely lower my expectations for a genre I love a great deal.

But then to my delight, director Neil Marshall changed everything.

Marshall is the director of The Descent, an English horror film about six women who go spelunking in a mysterious cave near Chattanooga, TN. Little do these women know, but a) the rocks in the cave tunnels shift to entrap them and b) there are horrible, Gollum-esque bat-monsters who eat anything with a pulse. IMDB lists these creatures as 'the crawlers’ and I was refreshed by how little I knew about them by the end of the film. So many genre movies seek to make the scary and unknown into the mundane and knowable via implausible monologues by brainy computer nerds played by Jeff Goldblum and actors of his ilk. Fortunately, if the cast of characters did have a horror-killing know it all, she at least had the good sense to shut the hell up.

Like all worthy horror films, The Descent succeeds not only by the horrors of its monsters, but by those within its human characters. To try and get out of the cave alive, the female protagonists find themselves doing terrible things for – and to – one another in order to survive. There is a scene of betrayal near the end of the film that was so gruesome, and yet completely understandable at the same time. Ultimately, The Descent is a case of situational ethics at its best.

Cinematographer Sam McGurdy may be responsible for most of the chills. McGurdy uses the limited sources of light one would find in a cave to create genuine tension; and when this horror machine gets rolling, he fills each canted frame with human skeletons and eerie red light.

Horror films move in trends. When one particular kind of movie appears to solicit rain from the box office skies, the rest of the studios will recreate that film’s elements ad nausea in an attempt to elicit the same effect. We have seen this happen with Japanese horror film remakes, American horror film remakes, and, lately, with large-budgeted torture porn. My only hope is that after the sizable success of The Descent, many mysterious, psychological, and well-shot copycats are soon to follow.

Thursday, August 17, 2006

Listen to tonight's show @ 7-9 p.m. ET!

Make sure to tune in to tonight's episode of The Movie Show on WUAG 103.1 FM.

Tonight's episode is especially, well, special, because we have an interview with musician/artist Daniel Johnston. While Johnston mostly talks about the upcoming film The Devil and Daniel Johnston, the conversation veers to his music, artwork, and comic book plans as well. We will also be giving away several pairs of tickets to this Tuesday's one-night only showing of The Devil and Daniel Johnston at the Carolina Theater in Greensboro.

Like always, we've got some major news which shall include the grim fate of Mike Judge's newest film, the casting for Wes Anderson's The Darjeeling Limited, and the announcement of yet another remake to a low budget horror classic. There will also be some great music

If you live outside of Greensboro, or simply do not have a radio handy, you can click here between 7-9PM Eastern time and listen to us online.

P.S. The updates on this site have been sparse as of late, but that's because I have been moving my equipment into a new apartment (problems with Road Runner internet service hasn't helped things either). But if there is something you would like to say about a movie (new, old or unreleased, for that matter), or the show in general, simply leave a message on the comments of this post. We will try to read all of the appropriate comments on the air.

What ever happened to that Clerks 2 commentary?

Earlier this summer, we reported on the radio about Kevin Smith's brilliant idea to release a large MP3 on iTunes of his director's commentary to coincide with the film's release. The plan was for fans to download the commentary, upload it to their iPods or other MP3 playing devices, and listen along while watching the film in theaters. Not only was this a very cool bone to throw to all of us movie geeks, but from a marketing standpoint, it was genius. Think about it, after seeing the movie once without the commentary, hardcore Kevin Smith fans (for which there are many) would be inclined to pay and see the movie again so they could watch it while Smith blasted jokes and anecdotes through their earbuds.

Well, the movie came out nearly a month ago, and the commentary track was never released. I had thought it might come out later during the theatrical run, only to forget about it altogether. Fortunately the folks at set the record straight.

No one at View Askew, iTunes, or the Weinstein Company had a problem with the planned commentary release. However, many theater owners (besides the AMC chain) expressed concerns that movie goers who didn't download the commentary would be distracted by those using electronic devices or laughing during a quiet scene because of a joke on the commentary. And so, this great idea that would have made movies a little more enjoyable for some was ultimately nixed.

This makes no sense to me. Theater owners have been scrambling and scrambling to get the audiences they are losing to home video. Mike Compton made an interesting point this morning that movie fans are simply leaving the theater, which is more of a social setting, in lieu of home theater because it is a more referential place to enjoy one's films. The purpose of the iPod commentary was to bring the reverence of DVD, HDVD, BlueRay, etc. and put it in theaters. It would have also created repeat business from many fans and resulted in no less an $1 million in added box office revenues. The movie has currently grossed $22,303,202 to date, and I seriously doubt that much of that came from people who were not already fans of Kevin Smith (a few Rosario Dawson lovers might have seeped in, but that's it).

While the rise of crystal clear 3D projection seems promising, it is becoming clear to me that there are many in the theatrical distribution world who simply do not want to make money.

What do you think?

Saturday, August 12, 2006

Pod Cast, Baby!

Click here for last Thursday's show! .

On it, you will find the latest news on Paul Giamatti, Halo: The Movie, John C. Riley, and reviews for Talladega Nights and Strangers With Candy. (and more)

As far as music goes, we got 'Goodbye Horses' from Silence of the Lambs, as well as music from other classic films. Check it out, B.

Tuesday, August 08, 2006

Bryan Singer fires back!

Aint-it-cool News ran an interview today with Bryan Singer who was at the San Diego Comicon two weeks ago. During the interview, Singer discusses the less than stellar response to the film by some of the internet community.

What's even more interesting is that AICN's Quint, the interviewer, came up with an interesting theory about the film's supposed flop status at the box office:

QUINT: I've also noticed this trend in box office that is pretty different from how things used to work. Back in the day, even great sequels usually didn't match, much less surpass, the box office of the original. Now, I'm noticing that box office on sequels tend to reflect more on the film that came before it. Look at the box office for the MATRIX sequels (RELOADED was huge, REVOLUTIONS was half as big) and LORD OF THE RINGS, with each successive film making more money than the one before it. The box office seems to be genuinely affected by the film that came before it. Look at PIRATES and X2...

BRYAN SINGER: And X3! Look at the opening of X3! Jesus!

And so, let us look at X3 and the rest of the X-Men films.

The original X-Men made a measly $157,299,717 at the domestic box-office.*

But then, X-Men 2: X-Men United followed the 'Quint-ological Curve Theory of Modern Box-Office Dynamics' by making more money than its predecessor with a $214,949,694 total.

You would guess that after making that much money in theaters, and losing its director, writers, composer, and editors, that the X-Men franchise would be set to fizzle out. Fox did - that's why they called the third X-Men film The Last Stand; they were wrong. X-Men 3 wasn't even a very good movie, but that didn't stop it from making even more money than its previous film with a total of $233,742,340. The movie even opened on fewer screens than X-2, and it still made more money.

So let's do a little math here. Superman Returns made $190,524,000 - and counting (considering that the last Superman film tanked with $15,681,020, I would say that this was a major resurrection of a dead in the water series). If its sequels had the same box-office percentage increase that the X-Men series did, Superman Returns 2 (for lack of a better title) would make $260,350,599. Mind you, it should follow the same curve, and make this much money, if not more since Singer promises all of the explosive event movie action that all the cry babies felt they were cheated out of.

And if Superman Returns 3 did just as well, it would make $283,112,560.

(* The fact that I placed the word 'measly' in front of an amount greater than the gross product of many small countries is a testament to the absurdity of modern Hollywood).

Superman Returns deserves its sequels (and team-ups with other DC characters Batman, the Flash, Wonder Woman, etc). There were a lot of interesting plot points that were set up in the movie that will be a joy to see unfurl on the big screen. It's unfortunate that the film wasn't as loved by many as it should have been. I just hope Warner Brothers stays on course, and realizes the potential they now hold in their hands.

To read the rest of Bryan Singer's interview, follow this link.

RE: Ask and ye shall receive.

In my previous article on the 2006 48-Hour Film Project Winners, I stated that I wished I could see Best Film winner Gi Ho Lo: The Legacy of Richard Long.

Well after reading an e-mail, I found out that I could:

Big Version

Smaller Version

And for those of you who are hardcore...

The i-Pod version.

So what do I think of the movie? Well, I am currently using the computer at my grandmother's house (it runs off of Windows ME if that's any indication of how old it is), and all I can get from the film so far is sound. I will certainly make a point to weigh in on the film at some point. I also plan on interviewing some of the folks who were involved on Thursday's program.

And the winners are...

I wrote this story for GoTriad! two weeks ago wherein I followed the adventures of Team Underexposed as they competed in Greensboro's 48-Hour Film Project (48HFP). For those of you who don't know, the 48HFP gives local filmmakers a chance to make a 7-minute film from script to screen in the span of two days.

Team Underexposed made a great little spy film, and judging by the other teams' films, I thought they were certain to win for Best Film. Well, I was right - almost. They won Best Film - 1st Runner Up, and a whole slew of technical and categorical awards (Best Use of Line of Dialogue, Best Sound Design, and Best Cinematography to be exact).

While having not seen the film that did win Best Picture (Gi Ho Lo: The Legend of Richard Long by Pure Energy Productions), I was kinda shocked by the results - especially since Team Underexposed won so many other categories. On that note, I am very interested in seeing Gi Hi Lo, considering all of the many capable films that it beat out.

Here is a list of all the winners:

Best Use of Character
“Izzie and Sophie’s Funnel Frenzy” by Sloppy Entertainment

Best Use of Prop
“The Little Ninja That Could” by The Jive Mechanics

Best Use of Line of Dialogue
“Gone To Ground” by Team Underexposed

Best Costumes
“Butterflies” by Good As A Mugg

Best Choreography
“Kill Tong Pao” by KVT

Best Special Effects
“Jade Dagger” by Green Pax

Best Graphics
“Cletus & the Beast” by The Macaroni Project

Best Musical Score
“Pursuit of Happiness” by Loose Ends

Best Sound Design
“Gone To Ground” by Team Underexposed

Best Cinematography
“Gone To Ground” by Team Underexposed

Best Editing
“Kill Tong Pao” by KVT

Best Writing
“Cletus & the Beast” by The Macaroni Project

Best Acting
“Moving On” by Team Because We Can

Best Directing
“Cletus & the Beast” by The Macaroni Project

Best Film – 1st Runner Up
“Gone To Ground” by Team Underexposed

“Gi Ho Lo: The Legend of Richard Long” by Pure Energy Productions

Audience Award Winner: Group A
“Cletus & the Beast” by The Macaroni Project

Audience Award Winner: Group B
“The Little Ninja That Could” by The Jive Mechanics

Audience Award Winner: Group C
“The Pursuit of Happiness” by Loose Ends

Congrats to all the winners and contestants. Color me excited for next year's competition.

Friday, August 04, 2006

Wes Anderson will re-team with Owen Wilson (though not in the way I had hoped for).

Production Weekly ran a scoop this week on the next live-action film by Wes Anderson. Anderson, who is currently at work on the stop-motion feature The Fantastic Mr. Fox, shall re-team with Owen Wilson on Darjeeling Limited.

Unfortunately, Wilson is not set to co-write Darjeeling with Anderson. Instead, Anderson will work with none other than Jason Schwartzman - a.k.a. Max Fischer himself - and Schwartzman's cousin Roman Coppola on the script; and for those of you who don't know, Coppola's claim to fame (besides being the least-known member of filmdom greatest auteur dynasty) was the little-seen indie film CQ (or 'Seek You'). I definitely recommend it if you haven't seen it yet.

Apparently, Darjeeling Limited is about a trio of brothers who travel through India. Wilson will play one of the brothers, and it might be safe to assume, since Owen has two brothers himself, that Luke and Andrew Wilson could be along for the ride as well.

This all sounds fine and dandy of course. I love Wes Anderson films. I watched the better three-fourths of them last weekend (I'll let you guess which one I omitted), but I am definitely disappointed that Anderson is not writing the script with Owen Wilson. When the two worked on scripts together, the end result was never less than brilliant; but when Wilson got too busy with his acting to help out on the type-writer, the end result was a lukewarm mixed bag.

In the end, I guess a Wes Anderson film without Owen Wilson co-writing the screenplay is better than no Wes Anderson film at all. Maybe.

What do you guys think?