« Sunday B.O. | Main | Why... »

August 01, 2005

Dreamz Unchanged

The Sunday Telegraph in London misreported a story on the Universal production of American Dreamz, written and directed by Paul Weitz, saying that the film’s producers were “reconsidering the script after the London attacks because it involves suicide bombers attempting to assassinate the American president.”

In fact, the film is in production on the Universal backlot and continues on without changes even though the studio and the filmmakers understand the sensitivity coming from shell-shocked London.

Paul Weitz, reached on Sunday, commented without any waffling, "The article in The Daily Telegraph was unfortunately -- although I'm sure not maliciously -- inaccurate in that the plot of my film has not changed, nor is a change being contemplated. The film is a comic examination of our cultural obsessions and how they can anesthetize us to the actual issues of our day."

American Dreamz is scheduled for release next year.

Posted by poland at August 1, 2005 06:12 AM

Comments

Welllll...they better rewrite something becuz they spelled "dreams" wrong.

Posted by: Don at August 1, 2005 06:40 AM

er, I hope that was sarcastic Don!

Posted by: KamikazeCamel at August 1, 2005 09:31 AM

Do these guys just stick the word "American" on everything they make?

Posted by: PastePotPete [TypeKey Profile Page] at August 1, 2005 10:59 AM

the have a great ad/marketing dept there. so creative.

Posted by: bicycle bob [TypeKey Profile Page] at August 1, 2005 03:15 PM

Funnier still, that this film has Dreamz spelt that way. Due to the now cancelled NBC hour-long. Apparently, the 'z', would help the kids tell them apart.

Posted by: Rory at August 1, 2005 03:53 PM

American Dreamz

...and Dennis Quaid plays a bumbling, simpleton American president...

...and the film will most likely bomb (pardon the pun)...

...and the makers will blame an unenlightened American public who can't take 'sophisticated humour'...

...and Hollywood will greenlight another to coincide with what will then be the 5th fawning film in a three year period about 'Che'.

'Cause he fought for the people dontchknow!

Damn...is this tripe really ALL Hollywood has to offer. Is there no one down there who will offer a contrary P.O.V.?

Posted by: Nicol D. at August 1, 2005 03:56 PM

Come on Nicol. Dont you want to be able to say someone about this film; "They try to blow up Dennis Quaid real good!" Speaking of Quaid, does he have one character associated with him and his career? Why he does not have his own hour-long drama at this point remains a mystery.

Posted by: Rory at August 1, 2005 04:49 PM

Come on Nicol. Dont you want to be able to say someone about this film; "They try to blow up Dennis Quaid real good!" Speaking of Quaid, does he have one character associated with him and his career? Why he does not have his own hour-long drama at this point remains a mystery.

Posted by: Rory at August 1, 2005 04:51 PM

Uhhh...oops?

Posted by: Rory at August 1, 2005 04:51 PM

Enlightened convo.

Posted by: Bruce at August 1, 2005 04:52 PM

nicol, i'm sure you enjoyed stealth and the island too.

Posted by: stjohn at August 1, 2005 04:56 PM

"...and Dennis Quaid plays a bumbling, simpleton American president..."
"Is there no one down there who will offer a contrary P.O.V.?"

Contrary to what? Considering your comments about Che too, you seem to be implying a political slant to "American Dreamz." When you read the words "bumbling" and "simpleton" and "American president," do you automatically think of a certain American president and therefore believe the character must be based on him? Well that's your bias, not the bias of the filmmakers.

It's a "black comedy," according to the Sunday Telegraph story, and the first movie I thought of when I read that was "Dr. Strangelove." Would you like a "contrary POV" on that movie too (especially on that "we'll meet again" ending)?

I'm glad the filmmakers have the backbone to not change anything. V For Vendetta shouldn't be changed either.

Posted by: sky_capitan [TypeKey Profile Page] at August 1, 2005 06:00 PM

What is with all the hate for Dennis Quaid? He is no Randy Q but he is damn good.

Posted by: BluStealer [TypeKey Profile Page] at August 1, 2005 06:29 PM

Give me Randy over Dennis ever day of the week and twice and Sunday.

Posted by: Josh at August 1, 2005 06:55 PM

"I'm glad the filmmakers have the backbone to not change anything. V For Vendetta shouldn't be changed either. "

Uhhhh, making films with bumbling American president's during a Repub presidency and V's obvious subtext of America as a fascist theocratic state shows no backbone whatsoever. If it showed backbone they wouldn't have got financing for it.

Quite the opposite in fact...both films betray a simplistic b&w level of thinking on contempory politics. Sad thing is...I can say this quite comfortably without reading a page of the script or seeing a foot of film. That would require benefit of the doubt...something Hollywood has long but given up on.

As far as your thinking about Dr. Strangelove...
Maybe I'm 'ol fashioned but methinks the Weitz brothers are no where near in the same league as Stanley Kubrick.

It would be more appropriate to say it brings to mind a film out about a decade ago that most have forgotten called 'Dave'. Not Strangelove.

Similarly Kubrick's views were complex and not easily digestable. Depicting GW on film as a simpleton nowadays just gets you a better table a Spago.

When simpleton rockstars, filmakers and actors glean onto a particular worldview, my natural incination is to assume the opposing view is the more complex. If international politics in the mid-east are so simple they can be fully digested and understood by the likes of Green Day then what have we been fighting for all these years. No...for Hollywood to call GW simple...now that's what I call irony.

Vendetta looks like a simple minded film seen through the lens of people who get their world view from comic-books...which is exactly what it is.

Posted by: Nicol D at August 2, 2005 11:56 AM

uh...you confused me, Nicol D, with your comments about V for Vendetta. I believe sky_capitan referenced V for Vendetta because of the recent terrorist bombings in London.

V for Vendetta is set in London and posits a fascist state in the UK. As far as I know, which I am happy to admit is only the trailer and what I've read online, I don't know the original comic, it has nothing to do with the US.

So yeah, putting out a film about a terrorist/freedom fighter set in the UK after the recent ratcheting up of terrorism there, yeah I think it's pretty ballsy.

Posted by: nudel at August 2, 2005 12:38 PM

Nudel,

I said the subtext would be America...not the text which is quite clearly set in London. Similarly, look at the trailer again...are the large red crosses behind Hurt not supposed to at least make us think of a certain American president and his faith? The fact that they juxtaposed Bush's image with Hitler in Reloaded is a testament to the type of simplistic pop politico thinking level they operate at.

Also...let's not confuse naive, stupid ignorance with ballsy. The Washowski's will be fetted and make millions by convincing youngsters that "...like hey...being a terrorist is like being a comic book hero y'know. Cool"

Ballsy would be to make something that appeals to someone more than just a pimply faced college student and ginned up on too much Foucault and Michael Moore.

Similarly...you give your own bias away when you confuse the words "terrorist" and "freedom fighter". I am not a relativist. The two are not interchangeable and each word/phrase has a distinct meaning.

I defend their right to make it...I just wish they did too.

Posted by: Nicol D at August 2, 2005 01:19 PM

ur not defending their right to make it. the soldiers in the field are. the soldier that so many of u dump on are giving u the privilege of making films. maybe u should say thanks sometimes. would be nice.

Posted by: bicycle bob [TypeKey Profile Page] at August 2, 2005 02:31 PM

nicely put bob. nicol, why don't you wait and see both films. until that point you really have no idea how rither film will play out.

Posted by: stjohn at August 2, 2005 05:32 PM

"nicol, why don't you wait and see both films. until that point you really have no idea how rither film will play out."


st. john,

With all due respect...only someone who just started watching movies in 1990 would make this comment.

It's about ideology and consistency. But then again maybe I'm an anomaly. I was able to predict the ending of Million Dollar Baby as soon as I saw the early trailer released last fall. Egg me on and I'll tell you how I did it.

I've spent the bulk of my life watching films in darkened cinemas and modern day Hollywood has lost all benefit of the doubt.

The past few years when taken against the bulk of Hollywood history has been flat out pathetic. Art has been replaced with propaganda and a genuine curiosity for human nature has been replaced with an obsession with the banal and perverse.

I wish it werent't true...but deep down, you know this to be correct.

Posted by: Nicol D at August 2, 2005 06:33 PM

Hold on everyone. Nicol is psychic. Don't push him or he will ruin the ending to Titanic.

Posted by: Bruce at August 2, 2005 06:37 PM

Nicol is what they call a prententious person. Nothing is as good as it was back in the day. Did your father or your grandpa lug it to school six miles a day thru the snow?

Posted by: Josh at August 2, 2005 07:34 PM

Nicol D said:

"V's obvious subtext of America as a fascist theocratic state shows no backbone whatsoever."

Obvious to you, maybe. Are you saying that Alan Moore, the Brit who is responsible for the storyline of V for Vendetta, wrote his comic in the 1980s to have an obvious 'America in the 2000s' subtext?

You might want to wait for the film before you decide if its message is really (quoting again):

"...like hey...being a terrorist is like being a comic book hero y'know. Cool"

Oh, I forgot...you don't need to wait to see a film because you already know the subtext and the ending.

That must be very nice for you.

Posted by: nudel at August 3, 2005 02:32 AM

Ha.

Posted by: Panda Bear at August 3, 2005 03:27 AM

Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)


Remember me?