Popcorn 'N Roses

Bugged Thoughts...about the inexplicable failure of SPEED RACER

For those of you who may have missed it on this past weekend's edition of Subject:CINEMA, I was absolutely APPALLED and utterly gastiflabbered by the seemingly overwhelming number of negative reviews for the film SPEED RACER. I named it not only one of the best films of the year but OF ALL TIME, giving it 5 stars and naming it my new number one pantheon film, knocking the much revered HERO to #2 and WRISTCUTTERS: A LOVE STORY to #3.

OH MY GOD, what HAPPENED?

WHY did this movie totally TANK at the boxoffice?

I just do NOT understand the hatred the reviewers showed for this absolutely fantastic, fun blast of a movie. It is perhaps the most visually stunning movie of all time, its incredible CGI work absolutely unbelievable (and NOTHING like TRON, as so many reviews tried to hang on it). The score is fantastic. And the performances, from Emile Hirsch as Speed all the way down through the fantastic supporting cast including John Goodman, Susan Sarandon, Matthew Fox, Roger Allam, Rain, Kick Gurry, Paulie Litt, and Christina Ricci, are all DYNAMITE!  The plot is simple, sweet, and to the point, and SO VERY OBVIOUS I don't know WHY most reviewers can't seem to find it. And more to the point, both times I saw it last weekend, it seemed to me that EVERY SINGLE PERSON in the whole theater - kids, adults, grandparents, parents, college students, teenagers, EVERYBODY -  absolutely LOVED IT!  Where is the hatred coming from?

No, actually, that first statement in the last paragraph is WRONG. I DO Know why a good deal of reviewers hate it - because they know that it takes square aim at EVERYTHING that is their livelyhood - corporate greed, power, success, corruption - all of which are rampant in both industries - Hollywood AND The Media. And they want to look like they couldn't possibly support such things as (GASP!) FAMILY VALUES! And the idea that GOOD triumphs over EVIL.  We all know Hollywood prefers it when EVIL wins these days...look at movies over the past several years and you'll figure out what I mean...

Well, NOW is your chance to show the reviewers out there - AND THE STUDIOS - what the public REALLY THINKS.

I'm coming to you to ask you to help save SPEED RACER from undeserved premature extinction...and boost chances for a possible sequel down the road (if Emile is willing...he dropped his agent this week; hopefully it wasn't because of Speed Racer, because that would be wrong...).

Here's how we're gonna do it.

1) Make time and GO SEE IT this weekend - at least once, but if you really love it like we did, go a couple of times - and if you've already seen it, SEE IT AGAIN!!! SKIP whatever else you were planning to see this weekend (except PRINCE CASPIAN if you're planning on seeing it) and use the bucks to see something worth the money like SR and not some goofy, gawd-awful comedy or horror film. Above all else, we want to make sure that despite the studios, the trades, and practically everyone else giving up on it way way WAAAAAY too quickly,  and despite the bad reviews, that word of mouth will make sure it STAYS in the TOP 3 This weekend - if everyone gets it together, and goes with their friends to see this movie (which is the kind of fun movie that families and friends will LOVE seeing together) we CAN stay at #3 behind Caspian and Iron Man...and maybe we can even beat one of them...great word of mouth has saved other great movies that the critics (and the fanboy haters) have unfairly maligned..and we can DO IT AGAIN!!!

2) Broadcast how much you liked it (assuming that, like Kim and especially like me, you will love it) on EVERY FRIGGIN' WEBSITE you have - MySpace, Facebook, Digg, and whereever else you're webbing at, and tell people to GO SEE IT!

3) Spread the word everywhere else - let people know that if they miss this movie in the theater they'll regret it because while fantastic on the big screen, the effects will be lost in many ways when it comes to DVD this fall, BluRay or no BluRay

4)If you have a local newspaper that gave SR a negative review and you don't agree with the reviewer, let them know by sending them an email or snail mail and telling them so in a polite businesslike manner

5)And most importantly, LET WARNER BROTHERS STUDIOS Know! Go to http://warnerbrothers.com and check for contact info and let them know in NO UNCERTAIN TERMS (but POLITELY!) that they'll be making a big mistake if they give up on it so soon...

Let's ALL come together - Speed Racer fans, anime fans, Wachowski brothers fans, Emile Hirsch fans - and help Speed Racer get the weekend IT DAMN WELL DESERVES at the box office - and make it a hit that WB will be sorry they gave up on so soon...

Bugged Thoughts...about the CLOVERFIELD DVD

Sorry we've been away with this for the past couple of weeks...as most of you know, things have been a real BEAR this past two weeks...

Anyway, back to Bugged Thoughts...

As everyone who knows me, or who listens to Subject:CINEMA, or reads PNR knows, CLOVERFIELD was one of my favorite movies so far this year. The innovative first person camera story of a monster on the rampage in New York was FAR BETTER than Roland Emmerich's gawd-awful version of Godzilla ten years ago. With JJ Abrams as producer and writer, and Matt Reeves directing, CLOVERFIELD was one of the most critically acclaimed films of the year so far, and deservedly so.

The DVD came out last week...and I have to say i'm SEVERELY disappointed.

Don't get me wrong..the movie is STILL GREAT (no matter WHAT incorrect opinions my friends and my other half may harbor...heh heh heh), and so are the extras on the behind the scenes stuff. I've seen the Best Buy exclusive disc of material as well, and it's pretty cool.

It's not what is there on the DVD, but what ISN'T there...

The term "viral marketing" was tailor-made for the way Paramount and Abrams rolled CLOVERFIELD out. The untitled teaser for the film that appeared with TRANSFORMERS last summer was the first taste. The movie had only been shooting for 10 days when they showed that clip, and it really got people talking.

Then, several months of buildup, and the appearance of some really intriguing websites...none of which directly mentioned the movie, but which insiders started to leak out(with the usually secrecy-intent Abrams leading the way) were related to the "untitled" movie.

By the time January rolled around, these websites had taken on a life of their own as Abrams watchers began obsessing about what the movie was all about.

There is video on line of a disaster happening at an oil platform owned by a Japanese company called Taguruato, who had been plagued by an environmental group called TIDO Wave for sometime for their drilling policies. This video, which is news footage of the disastrous collapse of the Chuai Ridge platform, is available in a number of different languages. Taguruato also owned a number of subsidiary companies, one of which was the makers of a popular frozen drink called "Slusho!", whose main "secret ingredient" was something found in a very cold part of the ocean bottom.

There were over half a dozen seemingly unrelated sites, many with original video and pictures.

But sadly, NONE Of these have been included in the dvd release.

I admit it - Abrams and Reeves have me hooked - i've become a regular visitor to the various CLOVERFIELD sites (which continue to operate) checking out the latest discoveries by other fans, and trying to get a handle on the sequel (rumored to soon be shooting with an eye on a March 2009 release date). And while a link to the official site of this info (http://www.cloverfieldfiles.com) has been included if you watch the DVD on a computer, there's nothing yet there besides behind the scenes stuff that was not included on the DVD. Great stuff, but NOTHING on the related backstory of Taguruato or the oil rig collapse, or even "Slusho!" (which I now have just ordered a tee shirt for, so I guess that makes me officially obsessed with this movie).

It would have been nice to have included all the extra stuff, and maybe a few clues to more stuff which led to sequel-related materials, but I guess we'll have to make do...RATS...

All I know is that if JJ Abrams plans this same kind of thing for the release of STAR TREK, we've got a LOT of great stuff coming...

UPDATE: Apparently, some of the video mentioned above is included on the disc as a hidden Easter Egg...i'll let you know if I can find it or not...

More Bugged Thoughts later this week...

Bugged Thoughts...about multiple DVD releases...and greed...

Like many other film fans out there, we're amassing quite a collection of DVDs. I'm usually in line to pick the ones I can't wait for up on opening day. Come next Tuesday, i'll be heading for my local Borders or Newbury Comics for Juno and The Final Season, and next Tuesday week for Cloverfield.

But once you're at the store to get them...that's turning into quite an adventure.

Why?

Because chances are good there will be several different DVD's out with different configurations, that's why.

First you have to check and make sure that the DVD you're getting is widescreen, unless you like the fullscreen ones (why ANYONE these days would still prefer the fullscreen ones I have no idea...heh heh heh...)

Then, you have to check which disc you're buying. Sure it's easy enough to find the TITLE, but finding the right grouping...well, now that's ANOTHER matter entirely...

Let me use a fictional movie as an example...and believe me, sadly this is more real than fiction...

I want to go to the store - lets say it's a big box mart of some kind - to pick up the movie Metalhead.

I walk in the store, and chances are good i'm gonna find FIVE OR SIX DIFFERENT VERSIONS of the same damn movie!

Let's see...there's the single-disc bare-bones DVD, for $17.99 on sale.

Then there's the two-disc version with some behind the scenes extras for $24.99 on sale

But Wait...there's the two disc, "Special Edition" version, with different extras and both widescreen and fullscreen versions of the movie for $27.99 on sale

And lookatthis...there's the Store Exclusive edition with a third bonus disc of interviews and stuff from the Metalhead website and a lenticular cover photo for $34.99

And don't forget, there's also the Fullscreen single disc edition, the full screen double disc version..you get the idea.

And now, there's the Blu-ray edition for $42.99...

AARRRRRGGGGGHHHHHHHH!

Why do the studios have to be so darn greedy?

I think it's highly unfair to have to buy the same damn movie three or four times to get all the features. It stinks that the studios to this to consumers. There should be just TWO versions of each type of movie - A cheaper, barebones single disc for those who aren't interested in extras, and a special edition with ALL THE EXTRAS - and maybe both aspect ratios of the film -  for a slightly higher price.  THAT'S IT!!!

Two different special editions and a store specific edition - this is getting really annoying, and I won't put up with it now, or EVER. The only time I have EVER bent into this was when BestBuy shipped me the WRONG edition of the Across The Universe soundtrack CD, and I waited too long to return it, so I had to buy the double disc later.

I DO NOT do this with DVD's and never will...

Wait a minute, I tell a small Lie....I found a "Blockbuster"-exclusive edition of Lords Of Dogtown which had an extra disc and did buy it...through E-bay for about 1/5 the original price. And it turns out I had the supposedly "exclusive" stuff already...having downloaded it from the LOD website...so I wasted my money in the long run and will NEVER do it again.

I think it's high time the consumers start putting their foot down with this practice. I'm really DREADING the Cloverfield release, for although only one "official" version has been announced, I know of at least three different retailers that are already advertising "store exclusive" versions of the discs, which means the fans get screwed AGAIN...

We need to start sending a message to the studios that we're MAD AS HELL AND WE'RE NOT GONNA TAKE IT ANYMORE!

(Gee, that sounds familiar...where have I heard that before? Can't think of it...)

It's BAD ENOUGH that the studios stopped including those informative little booklets with the DVDs around 2005 or so, because those were really nice to have.  But i've learned to live with no booklets - and you can usually find what you're looking for that was in said booklets by going to the website for the movie in question.

But this constant shilling for money by the studios by offering different versions with different extras? This crap has to STOP NOW!

Don't get me wrong here - i'm NOT complaining about special extended versions, anniversary issue reissue discs, or the excellent Criterion Collection types of releases here. These are fine, often come several years down the road, and often are worth getting for the enhanced quality and treasure trove of previously unknown or unavailable extras. What I'm addressing here are the same day (or within six month) releases of the same movie with no extra footage and a variety of extras that very from disc to disc.

If there's a new cut of the movie involved, such as with Peter Jackson's Lord Of The Rings trilogy, that's cool with me up to a point. The point for that particular series was the releases of the combo packs in 2005 where both the theatrical version and the extended version were put on one disc and coded to pull up the different versions when each was selected. Did we REALLY need those? No.

I think we should start voting with our pockets, and force the studios and the stores to knock it off. You do that by buying ONLY the two configurations mentioned above, and then writing the studios and stores and telling them that you saw the other editions but won't pay to buy the film twice just for additional extras, but you would have paid a couple bucks more for all the extras in ONE SET. Sooner or later, they'll get the idea...if it's not filling their coffers, they won't do it anymore...

Ok, well, obviously, it's HOLLYWOOD STUDIOS...of COURSE they'll keep doing it...but they'll lose money every time they do...and eventually they WILL have no choice but to listen to consumers wishes...

Well...I can DREAM, Can't I?  Sheesh!

Bugged Thoughts...about the Print/Internet schism...

Over the last week or so, several articles about the recent spate of film critic firings or retirements have been making the rounds. These articles have all been lamenting the loss of PRINT film critics in some of the most influential papers in the country. Much has been made of the fact that the Village Voice cut its film critic staff in half a couple of weeks ago.

Today, Variety's Anne Thompson chimed in on the crisis thusly:

Over the years, critics helped audiences appreciate the likes of Orson Welles' "Citizen Kane," Alfred Hitchcock's "Psycho," Stanley Kubrick's "2001: A Space Odyssey," Arthur Penn's "Bonnie and Clyde," Bernardo Bertolucci's "Last Tango in Paris," Brian De Palma's "Dressed to Kill," Robert Altman's "The Player," the Coens' "No Country for Old Men" and Paul Thomas Anderson's "There Will Be Blood." Where would we have been without them? It will soon be up to Pajiba or Cinematical Indie to influence readers to seek out small releases once heralded by critics.

Once again, the print critic is implying that the internet critic is less legitimate than themselves.

Can't we all just get along?

Why must print critics, and the entire movie industry, treat internet critics as though their criticisms are less important? Why does Ms Thompson (of whose weekly column I am a huge fan) insist on implying that it's not good that readers seek out Cinematical Indie or Pajiba (or PNR, IFS, or some other internet critic) over the opinions in the print newspapers?

I just don't get it. Why are our opinions not every bit as valid as, say, the fantastic A.O. Scott of The New York Times or Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun-Times? Didn't they have to start somewhere also?

And it isn't just the print journalists, either.

It's the studios themselves.

Over the past three years, I have worked myself crazy trying to get Popcorn N Roses accepted as a legitimate media outlet by the Hollywood studios. We are accredited members of the International Press Association, and members of several other media groups. Yet because we're on the internet, many studios consider us unworthy of being included for press screenings and screeners. I can't even get most of the major studios to accept us as part of their press group that is able to access information, press kits and photos for upcoming features from the internet.

SOME indie companies have been very willing to work with us - and for that, we're forever grateful. Filmmakers also consider us to be a legitimate source of publicity, which is why we've been quoted on a number of movie release sites, and even on the DVD cover for a recent release. We were even good enough to be accepted as a contributor to Movie City News' end of year critics roundup in 2007.

So why are the studios so reticent to cooperate with sites like ours?

In a word, paranoia. It all springs from their fear of piracy.

And yet, by denying us the materials and access to what we need to do our elected jobs, the studios only screw themselves. Indie filmmakers know this - they know that word of mouth, and good press coverage on independent websites, can help their movies get noticed. That's why so many indie filmmakers have been very good to internet writers like myself and to podcasts like Subject:CINEMA - they know we can be counted on to give an honest assessment of the product, and also spread the word about their films.

The Mumblecore movement could NEVER have taken off the way it did without the JOINT help of the print media and the internet press. If it had just been one or the other, it would have fizzled out very quickly. But because indie filmmakers like the Duplass brothers, Joe Swanburg, and Aaron Katz have worked both sides - print and internet - they have huge fans on both sides of the journalism tree. And they know that both are important.

It's a shame that the Hollywood studios, and the majority of the print media, can't grasp this fact. We're here because we love film, and want to help, not to harm. And the one percent of people out there who DO pirate films are not the majority of sites and writers.

It's time for print journalists to quit slagging on internet journalists, time for the studios to give internet journalists the legitimacy they work hard for and deserve to have, and stop playing favorites.

If the print industry and the movie industry keep trying to make enemies of the internet, they'll both end up on the slag heap...just like the once thriving now completely and utterly morally and financially bankrupt music and record industry.

And it DOESN'T HAVE TO BE THAT WAY. But it is bound to happen, so long as the industry continues to shoot itself in the foot.

(Ann's entire Variety article is at
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117983482.html?categoryid=2508&cs=1 and well worth the read!)

Bugged Thoughts...about DVD cover artwork...

Welcome to the first of what (I hope) will be a new weekly column on things that just BUG me about this movie industry that we all love...and hopefully it will be entertaining to read...

So let's get started...

I've got a gripe to bring up to everyone else...wanna see if everyone else agrees with me...or if I'm just way way WAAAAAAAY too anal when it comes to this kind of thing...

I just have ONE SIMPLE QUESTION -

Why is it that when a movie is released to DVD, the studios releasing the movie always feel a need to change the artwork for the DVD cover?

Especially when what they choose doesn't even come close to the artwork on the movie posters?

I can think of three recent examples which just get under my skin.

First, there's The King Of Kong. Its movie poster was fantastic, an awesome piece of pseudo-neon 1980's stylized artwork with sketches of Billy Mitchell and Steve Wiebe and was absolutely fantastic.

When the movie hit DVD, that glorious artwork was nowhere to be seen. Instead of this retro-inspired graphic, we got a long shot of the back end of someone (presumably Steve Wiebe) sitting in front of a Donkey Kong arcade game. The wonderful blues and oranges of the original poster was gone, replaced by this boring and static shot.

What was worse was that the DVD came with "Alternative Artwork" stickered all over the case, saying there was great alternative cover art for the movie on the flipside of the showing artwork. Naturally, I thought it was the original art, but NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO...it's another piece of artwork, which while nice is STILL not the original art that was on the movie poster.

The second example is the wonderful indie film Fierce People. This little movie had a visually cool release poster, stylized like a portrait family tree, with the movie's star Anton Yelchin in the foreground, looking up and around at the other portraits on the tree, and surrounded by portraits of costars Donald Sutherland, Diane Lane, Kristin Stewart, and Chris Evans, among others.

When the DVD was released in February, not only had the artwork been completely ditched, what was worse is that the incredibly yawn-inducing static photo of co-stars Donald Sutherland and Diane Lane IS the whole DVD cover. It's NOT even shots or scenes from the movie - it's a FREAKING PUBLICITY STILL!!! And it's not really indicitive of the movie's contents, since although they DO get the  billing (let's hear it for seniority!), they really both play more supporting than leading roles. And the TRUE star of the movie, Anton Yelchin, is NOWHERE to be seen - in fact he's NOT EVEN MENTIONED on the front cover.

But the one that really gets me - although it has it's reasons - is the cover for the just-released on DVD Wristcutters: A Love Story.

The cover photo, featuring Patrick Fugit and Shannon Sossomon, was obviously a recent shot because Patrick didn't cut his hair until about a year AFTER Wristcutters was shot. But i'll forgive them that - it's NOT how Zia, Fugit's character, appears in the movie, but its tolerable.

In this case, I can't blame them for not using the movie's artwork, which was a dark poster with a single symbol and the stylized title on it.  It's a cool poster, but I can see why it wouldn't necessarily work as a DVD cover without adding maybe a few pictures or something. I don't remember that signpost on the DVD cover from the movie either, but I find two or three new visual items every time I watch the film -  it's very "Airplane" that way.

But what REALLY Got me was the shot on the back cover. You see the three stars - Fugit, Sossoman, and Shea Whigham - inside of a car sitting on top of a forklift.  OK, that's a very cute image. And YES, it does play into a scene in the movie. But call me a nitpicker if you like (Ok, you're a nitpicker), but it's NOT RIGHT!  Or as Mythbusters' Adam Savage might say, It's "Wrongity Wrong Wrong"!

WHy is that, you may ask, dear reader?

Ok, you asked for it...(heh heh heh)

Number one - The shot clearly shows the forklift on the right (passenger) side of the car. In the scene from the movie, it was on the left (driver's) side of the car - if it was on the passenger side, Zia (Fugit) wouldn't have been able to open the car door, and promptly fall out of the car (which was raised up by a couple of mechanics while he and Eugene (Whigham) were sleeping in the car), because the forklift would have been in the way...

Number two - The car in the shot on the DVD's back cover is this kind of lemon yellow - in the movie, Eugene's car is ORANGE...and not the same model, either, if i'm not mistaken...

Number three - Mikal (Sossoman) could NOT have been in the car with Zia and Eugene when the forklift incident happened... because they HADN'T EVEN MET HER YET - she isn't introduced until the FOLLOWING scene...

Ok, I admit it - i've officially turned into a Wristcutters-version of a fanboy, but i'm SORRY - that one little picture bugs the HELL out of me because some (supposedly) smart marketing executive somewhere didn't bother to do ANY research, and probably hasn't even SEEN what was arguably the BEST MOVIE OF 2007 and didn't CARE how one little mistake could SO upset one of the movie's biggest supporters, and trigger a little rant that the supporter has been contemplating for sometime but didn't really have the time to do it....oh, excuse me...did I say that out loud?

Come on, that scene that they TRIED to depict was hilarious, but at LEAST take the time to depict it correctly...

More Bugged Thoughts next week...