The Hot Blog

I got to interview Paul Feig last year. Great guy, and I'm a huge fan of Freaks & Geeks. I just don't think I want to see Unaccompanied Minors though.

It's a predictably lame kiddie flick... But it's not THAT lame. Rob Corddry has a couple of amusing moments, and the kid who plays Chris Rock on TV is pretty cool, too. Otherwise, it's little more than HOME ALONE meets THE BREAKFAST CLUB.

I've got my tickets for Apocalypto tonight at the Arclight Dome. Can't wait. I wouldn't be surprised if "The Holiday" takes the weekend, it looks like easily digestable junk, and this is the season when Americans consume a lot of easily digestable junk food. My special lady friend says it looks terrible...but she still wants to see it.

What boggles my mind is HOW IN THE HELL did that movie cost $120 MILLLION BONES??? For god's sake studios GROW SOME F-ING BALLS!!!

If Apocalypto does not make $20M, will Mel blame all the Jewish accountants for not tallying the ticket sales properly? He he. I didn't see him on Leno last night, was that worth a look?

"She's not my special lady, she's my fucking lady friend."

A reference I'm sure not lost on anyone visiting this site.

If I was in your neck of the woods. I'd be lining up for APOCALYPTO. A graphic Mayan drama by Gibson, I'm there; at least it's original.

BLOOD DIAMOND looks like something I'd purchase on DVD 3 months down the road and enjoy at home.I am not a big fan of action movies with political or social pretentions like BEYOND BORDERS, LORD OF WAR and the like. I prefer more sombre message movies that avoid the FUGITIVE and DEATH WISH theatrics such as THE CONSTANT GARDENER.

Anyone read Turan's (predictably) smug, superior, condescending, and squeamish review of APOCALYPTO in today's LA Times? The last paragraph is a marvel of arrogance and disrespect, basically blaming all of society's ills on Mel Gibson's penchant for violence in his films. It's understandable that there are many viewers and critics who at this point won't be able to look beyond the considerable baggage Gibson brings, and Turan indeed focuses more on just Gibson's film and not his recent trevails. But it's pretty obvious Turan has a huge chip on his shoulder-- not just about Mad Mel, but about violence and society and all that other pompous and presumptuous "WE don't need to see this stuff on screen" B.S. he brings to every review. Christ, I know 75-year-old WOMEN who aren't as squeamish and pissy about dark content as Old Man Turan.

At this point I'd rather they just assign all the A-list prestige movies (Turan would not dare review anything but!) to goofy ol' Kevin Thomas.

Gibson's a nutter with a movie cam. Perfect that AO Scott likens him to Herzog. This AO line couldn't be more apt:

"The brutality in “Apocalypto” is so relentless and extreme that it sometimes moves beyond horror into a kind of grotesque comedy..."

Seriously, that blood squib that sprays out of a Maya warriors head like that ol' geyser at Yellowstone is f*ckin' ridangulous. Terry Gilliam and John Cleese couldn't have staged that moment more hilariously.

Gibson was very uncomfortable on Leno. Sweating in his suit looking paranoid. Told the 'cow over the falls' story AGAIN. Blamed production delays on weather -- not drunken stupors in bed with the local senoritas.

I was intending to read the LAT reviews but this caught my eye first:

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/movies/la-me-sahara8dec08,0,1007601,full.story?coll=la-headlines-entnews

What. A. Frickin'. Mess. It explains a lot about the movie, though.

Geez, the guy clearly mistakes himself for Shakespeare, rather than a writer of pop adventure novels.

Lex, you nailed Turan.

"Seriously, that blood squib that sprays out of a Maya warriors head like that ol' geyser at Yellowstone is f*ckin' ridangulous. Terry Gilliam and John Cleese couldn't have staged that moment more hilariously."

I assume you've seen what massive head trauma does to the temporal artery, so your distain is grounded in some kind of reality, right?

Do I need to see Unaccompanied Minors in order to understand "aka Everyone Hates Home Alone"?
Because I'm not gonna do it. Wilmer Valderrama saying "Ay Caramba!" is a cherry on top of the crap sundae of those commercials.

Hopscotch, are you saying The Holiday cost $120m? Geez.

it sure did, it went something like $30M overbudget. Now with everyone of those four receiving their top asking price. that doesn't surprise me for it to be high. But over $100M is just ridiculous. My source on this is good too, for all you doubters.

Yeah, from the look of the trailers there's no reason it should have cost more than $60-70 total. I see that Something's Gotta Give made $266 worldwide, so they could end up making some profit, but that seems like a best-case scenario for these filmmakers.

That movie cost over $100 million!?!? WHAT THE FUCK!?!??! Who was the producer of that film? Le Chiffre!?!

So... in this Variety story questioning whether Mel's antics will turn off viewers:

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117955277.html?categoryid=13&cs=1

...they say the studio has tried to divert attention away from Mel's persona and tried to focus on the movie instead.

Uh... guys, MEL GIBSON IS IN THE FREAKING TV SPOTS FOR THE FILM. And he's not even in the movie...

http://www.movieweb.com/news/59/15959.php

Now either that's the worst job of hiding someone in history, or else somebody still thinks Mel's face can put asses in the seats.

A few words on Apocalypto...

1) The violence, while relentless is no where near as gory or over the top as many critics would have you believe. Much of it is shot discreetly; out of focus in the foreground as other things happen; or with quick cuts. Films such as The Departed, Lost Highway, Casino, Natural Born Killers, Kill Bill etc. are far more gory and graphic.

2) What makes the film so intense is that Gibson takes his story seriously. Unlike the 'joke violence' of Tarantino or the 'cool violence' of current Scorsese, Gibson does not hesitate to make you see violence for what it is. Quick, brutal and not at all cool or funny.

3) Visually, Gibson has progressed. This is a more sophisticated film then The Passion. With beautiful shots that show the lushness of the jungle and close-ups that let us see the details and lines on the actors faces, he has become a truly visual filmmaker with a real eye for angle and composition. The comparison to Herzog is appropriate.

4) The set piece at the temple, is stunning and unlike anything I have seen in current cinema. Thousands of real extras, not CG, give it the feel of a true epic. This is the real deal and this section alone is worth your ticket price.

5) There is a lot going on here in terms of decay of society. War and ecological damage is referenced...so is HIV, exploitation of women and sexuality and the culture of death. I think most crix would rather just say the film is only action then try to deal with what it actually says.

6) Horner's score of sounds and atmosphere's are truly a wonder as is Semler's cinematography. Best Digital film yet.

7) There is some juvenile humour at the beginning that could be seen as questionable but it is used to humanize the people. Show that they are similar to us. In that vein, it works.

8) This is a true accomplishment in cinema that puts many contemporary director's to shame.

Chill out, APOC cost 75 to 80 mil in frickin' Mexico with no stars. Sure visual effects add up and I don't know if that includes the director's salary, which could be anywhere from $1 and 20 mil or so.

http://www.calendarlive.com/movies/cl-ca-apocalypto3dec03,0,197783.story

Nicky, I think the point A.O. was making was that Gison ain't no Herzog, to wit, "When I first heard about this project, and later when I saw the early trailers, I halfway hoped that Mr. Gibson might turn out to be an American (or half-Australian) version of Werner Herzog, setting out into the jungle to explore the dark and tangled regions of human nature. Once you get past the costumes and the subtitles, though, the most striking thing about “Apocalypto” is how comfortably it sits within the conventions of mainstream moviemaking. It is not an obsessive opera like Mr. Herzog’s “Aguirre: The Wrath of God,” but rather a pop period epic in the manner of “Gladiator” or “Braveheart,” and as such less interested in historical or cultural authenticity than in imposing an accessible scheme on a faraway time and place."

NicolD - There are close to 400 VFX shots in Apocalypto and most are crowd replacements in the Maya city sequence. Check IMDB credits for the supes and houses that worked on it.

I would assume that Mel would probably be taking backend for this movie and not a quote in the millions.

Nicol (who only pops out of his hole on special occasions), I don't remember The Departed or Lost Highway as particularly gory. I know that several people get killed in The Departed, but I wouldn't call it 'cool' and I remember a guy who falls and lands on a table head-first, but I don't think that's on the same level as a heart getting ripped out of someone's chest - better to have compared it with Saving Private Ryan or Temple of Doom.

Of course, I will not see the movie until tonight, and I am very much looking forward to it.

My point, mc, 75-80 in Mexico, with no stars and no director's salary.

The guy who hits the table is in Lost Highway, I should have said. But Lynch's movies, while occasionally violent, are rarely gory.

T.Holly, we were not discussing the budget of Apocalypto, but rather The Holiday.

"Nicky..."

Quit writing like a little child...Just because Scott is being sarcastic does not mean I do not see fit to make the comparison.

Moonshine,

Fair enough...I did not intend to infer there were no CG shots (I wrote this fairly quickly), but certainly less than many films that aim to have this scope and certainly there were far more extras used then in many current 'epic' films.

Jeff...

Perhaps I should take lessons from you and stay by my computer 24/7 and comment on every single thing everyone says?

If you are the horror fan you claim to be, I'm sure you will agree this is no more gory then anything else of late. More visceral, more intense...but not really more gory.

Then again...because it is me...I'm sure you will not agree.

No, I agree with you about your first seven words in the above post.

It's not sarcasm Nicky, A.O. is making a point. Here it is again: "Gibson's Mayans might have sticks through their nose and looped earlobes, but they walk, talk (even in dialect), pose, gesture, and are filmed like any actor in any other Hollywood movie. One of Malick's many accomplishments with The New World was to make his natives different without turning them into alien Others or objects of exoticism: these people walked, moved, acted differently from the whites they encountered (who, to Malick's equal credit, walk, move, and act differently than whites do today). Imagination has to function alongside any surface "authenticity" in order to fully immerse us in some strange and distant environment - Gibson's technique in Apocalypto, on the other hand, would be equally valid for Lethal Weapon 5 (God forbid)." From --
http://blogs.indiewire.com/reverseshot/archives/011873.html

Nicol: I would quibble with a few points in your original posting, but I think overall you've written one of the more intelligent and perceptive postings about Apocalypto on this or any other blog I have read. To paraphrase Pauline Kael: This movie makes most other films released this past year seem as substantial as something you'd find on the end of a toothpick.

Joe, (Joey) you don't agree with this, right? It’ll never be known for sure if APOC “…doesn't do well at the box office or get nominated for any trophies… if it's a backlash over his anti-Jew rant or because the film… is barf-bag violent and has a lame plot.”

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/features/20061208-9999-lz1c08mel.html

Well, Tee-Hee, I clicked to the link you provided, and I saw this:

"Through Disney, a Latino marketing group asked actor-activist Edward James Olmos to come to Gibson's Icon Productions in Santa Monica for a private showing so Olmos could speak on the movie's behalf.

“I found it riveting. It's like going into a world we've never been,” says Olmos from the set of Battlestar Galactica in Vancouver, British Columbia. He points out he met Gibson only once, at the screening. And Olmos notes he himself is part Hungarian Jew and can't stomach intolerance.

“Mel's problem is his. I feel bad for Mel because he is really off-base. He's got to deal with his God. But judging the artistic endeavors of someone is different than judging the human being,” Olmos says.

That sounds about right to me.

That Olmos story is old PR news. I don't think you agree with the San Diego story because, in your opinion, it's one of the best movies of the year.

No, Tee-Hee, I usually don't agree with anything printed on the Copley News Wire, because it's been been rumored for years to be a CIA front. Your point?

From Tee-Hee. The Olmos story is made up, by the CIA? Where's your review, already, you think I have time to keep checking your site?

No, Tee Hee, I didn't say the Olmos story was made up. You claimed it is old news, remember? I am saying that I don't trust anything in the way of commentary on the Copley Wire. Excuse me: I must watch Law & Order now.

I really pissed him off.

And for no good reason.

"That movie cost over $100 million!?!? WHAT THE FUCK!?!??! Who was the producer of that film? Le Chiffre!?!"

LOL, Ed, you should trademark that line before everyone starts using it to describe every other ridiculously over-budget movie.

OK, if you're on the West Coast: An unusually good Law & Order tonight. Catch it if you can.

Now, Tee-Hee: Have you actually seen Apocalypto yet? Do you have anything to add to the discussion?

BTW: "That movie cost over $100 million!?!? WHAT THE FUCK!?!??! Who was the producer of that film? Le Chiffre!?!"

I think, ladies and gentlemen, we have a great put-down for the next several years. Ed, stand up for a round of applause!

Hear, hear!

OK, Blackcloud, I admit: You were the FIRST person to notice how genius that was. Can I please have your permission to be be acknowledged as the SECOND person to note: What a freakin' GREAT line?

What makes you think I've seen it, when all I've done is respond to and quote from reviews and articles? Where are all the opening night supporters, isn't word of mouth going to drive this thing?

Tee-Hee: You are an ass. Please do not ever address me again.

Now that I'm back from Apocalypto:
My take would fall somewhere in between Nicol's "this is a true accomplishment in cinema" and David Poland's "I have so little regard for this movie that I'm going to make fun of it and myself by running around shirtless in blue paint in my front yard".
Basically, it's an action movie, with a lot in common with Braveheart and Mad Max and The Patriot. It's a well-done action movie, and it's entertaining, but it doesn't have a whole lot to say, so preoccupied as it is with running and jumping and so on.

In response to Nicol, yes, I would agree that the gore has been overstated by the media, but no I would not agree that Mel Gibson's violence and gore exists for some higher moral purpose than it does for Scorsese or Tarantino et al. The cartoonish violence of Kill Bill and the somber violence of this movie exist for the same reason: to thrill their audiences. It is false to claim that the violence in this movie is 'not at all cool or funny'. I don't know where Nicol got that HIV was referenced somehow, or that the movie has anything substantial to say about exploitation of women and children beyond 'exploitation of women and children is bad'.

But it's entertaining and well-made and I liked the twist at the end, even if it was historically impossible, although the final scene was predictable and hokey - and shows where Gibson's true sentiments lay.

You guys really love Le Chiffre.

"OK, Blackcloud, I admit: You were the FIRST person to notice how genius that was. Can I please have your permission to be be acknowledged as the SECOND person to note: What a freakin' GREAT line?"

Joe, when a line is that great, the only thing that counts is to publicize it as much as possible. Who was first or second or third doesn't matter. We can be the co-discoverers. I'll share the accolades.

Nice analysis jeff. I pretty much agree with everything you said there. It's well-made and entertaining, but there is nothing to it and it's almost instantly forgettable.

I think there's more than 'nothing' to it, the middle section in the city is fairly interesting, but it's also clear that Gibson is mostly interested in the Mayan culture for the sake of spectacle and not as much for ethnography or a cultural exploration.

I wish there had been more time spent in the city.

Agree with your review and analysis, jeffmcm. I give it a hearty thumbs up with fewer reservations, because I was impressed by how Gibson was able to do something with this wacked out vision that was entertaining, unlike many other directors who've tried.

"LOL, Ed, you should trademark that line before everyone starts using it to describe every other ridiculously over-budget movie."

Ha ha... oh, thanks! That joke was such a throwaway (like most of the rest of my comments here ) that I didn't think anyone would get it... um... like the rest of my comments here. :)

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.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: