The Hot Blog

I feel fairly confident that INTO THE WILD's going to do decent to good business, and maybe even better than that. I was at Half-Price Books (a local used bookstore) and all the housewives were scrambling for copies of the book. i was surprised, actually, at the interest. I myself finished the book last week, and the film is probably my most anticipated movie right now. The Oprah episode on the film has boosted awareness pretty much across the board. I see it tomorrow, hopefully (unfortunately I'm not in NY/LA).

I think it'll make the Final five, unless it turns out to be a disaster, and all the reports I'm hearing say that's far from the case.

Have you seen it yet, DP? If you posted about it, sorry.

Interesting list, I just wish that there was more than one movie that hasn't been released yet.

I mean, more than one movie that had already been released.

I have posted minimally about it. I saw it a month ago and have been waiting to see it again to write about it in depth.

It's very friendly to a lot of the potential audience. There are a few issues, but hooking into the audience is the challenge. Anne Thompson is already reporting - presumably based on a report by an opposing consultant - a weak Academy screening. But we have heard that about many films.

I too think the film could build into a phenom. But we'll see. On the same tip, is No Country For Old Men the next Fargo or too dark for "them." Lots of questions to answer this year and only time will answer most of them.

If the chart is composed of a good cross section of people who create the conventional wisdom, then by definition the picks have to be conventional, don't they?

"Is John Travolta a Lead Actor, Supporting Actor, or Supporting Actress?"

If Linda Hunt can win for Supporting Actress for playing a man in "The Year of Living Dangerously" 25 years ago, surely we should have put this kind of snark to bed during the first Reagan administration.

Oh please!

It may (or may not) be a bad joke, but it hardly constitutes a 20 year old wound.

The day that Atonement wins the Best Picture Oscar is the same day that I will watch Hostel. Never gonna happen!

Do you know if any of the other critics have seen Lars & The Real Girl and The Savages? The lack of support for both films is quite puzzling esp. given their glowing reviews.

ED NOTE - INTO THE WILD SPOILER!!!

Anne Thompson reported that the Academy had a weak response based on what....mild applause? When was the last time you attended a screening where people clapped loudly after the slow, agonizing death of a 20 year old? I'd wonder about THAT audience.

Gah! Give a spoiler warning please!

I can't wait to see No Country For Old Men. I am a big fan of the book and feel that Cormac McCarthy is a master. I have faith in the Coens and hearing the word from film festivals it sounds like they did the book justice. I would love to see the Coens getting Academy recognition again.

ED NOTE - INTO THE WILD SPOILER!!!

"When was the last time you attended a screening where people clapped loudly after the slow, agonizing death of a 20 year old? I'd wonder about THAT audience."

Askijeffmcm. I'll bet him and the rest of the Hostel II crowd would love that.

I was already sold on this movie, Lazarus.
I'd rather be called part of the Cabin Fever crowd, though. It's a better movie.

ED NOTE - INTO THE WILD SPOILER!!!

Lazarus, jeffmcm would not be able to clap at the end of "the slow, agonizing death of a 20 year old" as he would only have one hand free.

Lazarus, you let in the troll. Thanks a lot.

Please DO be careful about spoiler warnings... I won't always be here to clean up within the hour...

Sorry, DP It's hard to remember if I'm on the Ruin Every Ending For Every Film I Talk About blog or this one.

In defense of Lazarus: This is a pretty well known story. I think most people will go into Into the Wild knowing it won't turn out well.

LOL, now it sounds like (SPOILERS) the end of Into the Wild is a scene of me masturbating.
Granted, I haven't seen it yet, so maybe it is.

jeffmcm, this is getting way too Meta for me.

Just don't sit behind me at the Arclight.

Only if they are going to do mediocre numbers at the box office, Joe.

Did they sell more than 1 million copies of the book? 2 milion? 3 million? We're up to a $25 million gross...

David, with all due respect: Are you joking? This incident already was fairly well known to folks who read anything other than movie-oriented websites and entertainment sections of newspapers long before the nonfiction book appeared. Hell, it's so well know that Amazon.com actually began its descritpion of the book like this:

"'God, he was a smart kid...' So why did Christopher McCandless trade a bright future--a college education, material comfort, uncommon ability and charm--for death by starvation in an abandoned bus in the woods of Alaska? This is the question that Jon Krakauer's book tries to answer. While it doesn't—cannot—answer the question with certainty, Into the Wild does shed considerable light along the way."

Er, of course, that should read: "Hell, it's so well KNOWN that..."

to suggest that a 'spoiler alert' is necessary for this film is just ridiculous......
my question is: 'despite the performance of hirsch, will academy members embrace such a thoughtless, selfish asshole character as mccandless and nominate any part of the film for an award?'.....

to suggest that a 'spoiler alert' is necessary for this film is just ridiculous......
my question is: 'despite the performance of hirsch, will academy members embrace such a thoughtless, selfish asshole character as mccandless and nominate any part of the film for an award?'.....

Obviously I haven't seen the movie, but the Academy's approval of a movie and their approval of its lead character are two different things. For example, The Godfather movies.

Waterbucket, I'm sure you said the opposite thing about Brokeback Mountain, right? No way it could lose? Yeah. Why on earth can't Atonement win? And if you say "too British" then I will laugh.

The fate of McCandless was described in the blurbs of the edition of Into The Wild I read (I had already read the original "Outdoor" Magazine piece so there was nothing to spoil anyway). None of this hampered my enjoyment of the book. I'm not sure why movies somehow need special treatment. If the success of a true story like this hinges on not knowing the fate of the protaganist than Penn hasn't done his job as a filmmaker.

Maybe I'm full of shit. Did anyone see The Perfect Storm and not know how it was going to end? Did people get mad about spoilers for that film too? Are people going to get up in arms if I spill the beans that Tom Cruise fails in his assassination attempt on Hitler in the upcoming Valkyrie?

Nobody has any idea what The Academy will do. They have a long time fill out their ballots and if Sean Penn is showing up on lists far and wide, including the DGA's, you can bet that will be a heavy hitter. Perception is everything; it's not JUST about the movie when it comes to nominees. Penn's film will not be judged in isolation - it will be a tribute to HIM AS A DIRECTOR for having made (what they consider to be ) a really good movie. There is a history and pattern of this type of thing. The movie is really beautiful, really sad and the truth about it is that you like Emile Hirsch as McCandless. But I believe the thing about it makes the difference is Penn. Directed by some nobody and it would go as far as the Spirit Awards.

Spoiler alert for this film? You gotta be fucking kidding. I feel badly for the person who goes into the movie not knowing how it all turns out; they're going to be really pissed off.

I gotta tell you... about half the people I know who saw the film in LA or at Toronto didn't know what the ending was. Vantage certainly doesn't want to advertise it.

And I am amazed that you guys continue not to post SPOILER before writing what you were already asked to add a Spoiler warning to. Isn't that a little disrespectful of the rights of others to be in the dark?

And yes, I am completely serious. It is stunningly myopic to believe that EVERYONE knows about Chris McCandless' story going in. They are not selling a biopic. They are selling a road movie.

And yes again... a lot of people saw The Perfect Storm without knowing the end. There are people who didn't know the story of All The Kings Men. There are people who won't have read Cormac McCarthy. There are people who expect a different outcome to The Diving Bell & The Bitterfly, even after the first hour.

Spoiler warnings are not about YOU. They are about others. They are such a minor courtesy that you should be using them, even if you think someone who doesn't know is an idiot. And if you want to discuss the fact that people should know, you can do it without giving away the spoiler... even though each of you seemed to do just that, almost on purpose.

Wow, I gotta disagree with this Spoiler alert drivel. It's a true story that was a huge best seller. And every single review is gonna give away the ending of the film. And yes, the book gave away the ending on it's back cover.

Complaining about spoiler alerts for this film is just inane. You might as well complain that someone gave away the ending to PASSION OF THE CHRIST, or The 300.

When it's fiction I have sympathy, but when it's a widely reported true story, it just doesn't hold water.

And tip-toeing around this stuff to save people living in a closet from knowing what everybody else already knows...sorry, if they get uptight about it, they need to protect themselves and not surf movie blogs. Thinking they are not gonna see a spoiler when they do that is like turning on ESPN when you've TiVo-ed the game and don't want to hear the score before you watch it. It's your own dang fault.

There's a big difference between the Bible and some Jon Kracauer book that most people have never heard of before, true story or not. I was joking earlier when I posted about spoilers - I already knew the character didn't make it - but the texture of the ending, the details and so on, are what any moviegoer wants to experience with a fresh slate, and which can easily be destroyed by carelessness.

There's a big difference between the Bible and some Jon Kracauer book that most people have never heard of before, true story or not. I was joking earlier when I posted about spoilers - I already knew the character didn't make it - but the texture of the ending, the details and so on, are what any moviegoer wants to experience with a fresh slate, and which can easily be destroyed by carelessness.

Sorry about double post.

Oddly enough, this debate reminds me of Looking for Mr. Goodbar…

WARNING: I AM ABOUT TO POST A SPOILER FOR A THIRTY-YEAR-OLD MOVIE. OK?

… in that, even though the book was a work of fiction, it was inspired by a fairly infamous real-life murder in NYC. Indeed, the book actually begins with the cross-examination of the killer – and the original cover jacket art represented the lead character’s dead body, in her bed, partially covered with a sheet. (Mind you, knowing all of this beforehand doesn’t make the ending of the book any less shocking.) But when the book was filmed, writer-director Richard Brooks did away with the novel’s prologue, so that the final murder might surprise anyone who hadn’t read the book. (Holy Christ! They killed Diane Keaton!) For reasons I won’t bore anyone with 30 years after the fact, I thought this change was a cheat, if not a misreading of the novelist’s intent. But when the time came for me to review the movie, I found myself torn: How can I criticize Brooks’ alteration without, well, spoiling the surprise for people who hadn’t read the book? I finally decided to come down on the side of caution, if only because, even though the book was a best-seller, and even though it was based on a notorious real-life case, I might ruin the movie for some audiences.

I would argue Looking for Mr. Goodbar is not entirely similar to Into the Wild, a movie based directly on real-life events that have already received ample media coverage. On the other hand, it’s like my favorite college professor once warned me: You have to remember that some people don’t know how Hamlet ends.

I'm reminded of the the shock and sadness of a girl I knew in high school when she saw La Bamba. She was anguished that Ritchie Valens died at the end.

I still say it's dumb for Into the Wild. And it's not about me; the McCandless story is all over the web, all over TV. Seriously. the bait and switch has always bummed me out as a movie-goer - and I think knowing how this one ends going in makes the experience richer entirely.

Tning is... it shouldn't be your call.

And I will give myself up on this one... when I saw the film in August, I hadn't read the book. I had read Into Thin Air, but not this one. The name Chris McCandliss was familiar, but in no specific way. I go out of my way to avoid knowing what I am walking into when a movie is coming out. And I had no idea.

And I think it is fair to say that I am probably as well read (or close) and probably more web news aware than anyone in here.

I am glad I didn't know because I experienced the story as the movie wished me to experience it. I didn't know Krakauer's version or about any controversy, etc. It just wasn't on my radar.

Yes, it is crazy to get worked up about the end of Star Wars: Episode 3... Darth Vader must happen. Or The Passion of The Christ. But this book is not The Bible or Star Wars or even Harry Potter... and I don't want to know what the ends of those movies are ahead of time either.

I think most folks that visit this blog are aware of the ending of Into the Wild by now. However, this wasn't an Into the Wild thread, it's an awards thread. So if someone just cruised along here and wanted to hear what people thought of the potential nominees and then got Into the Wild spoiled for them, then that sucks. Not everyone is as plugged in as some of us are; some people don't devote as much time to movies as we all do.

Personally I have yet to see Into the Wild and I'm still psyched to see it, even though I knew the ending months ago. I'm of the belief that it should be about the journey, not the destination, but not everyone agrees with me.

Okay well i just saw the latest ad for Into the Wild and they are absolutely selling it as a thriller or at least something potentially upsetting, which I think is a good call. Surefire way to kill this movie is to sell it wrong.

No, David, you are not more web news aware than anyone who comes in here. Maybe more entertainment news aware, but not more news aware. Sorry, I know you will accuse me again of being condescending, but it's quite obvious that simply isn't true. You have just revealed as much in your posting.

Yes, Joe... Into The Wild is the definition of modern news awareness.

I'm not aware of anything related to Into the Wild except the bare essentials (Penn, Hirsch, that old dude from TV, apparently it's quite good). Is there are reason why I should already know everything about it including how it ends?

Here is the original 2006 story announcing that Sean Penn would direct "Into the Wild."

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117937284.html?categoryid=13&cs=1

Here is Scott Weinberg's contemporaneous story:

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/news/1646294/

And Coming Soon:

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=13015

Here is a June 2006 Ropes of Silcon casting story:

http://www.ropeofsilicon.com/news.php?id=4040

I could list more, but you get the picture: The info about "Into the Wild" that some claim qualifies as a spoiler has been out there for more than a year on websites that many (if not most) people on this site frequent (or write for). If you walk into the movie without knowing how it turns out -- well, sorry, I don't think you qualify as "web news aware."

I'm usually a big supporter of spoiler warnings but there needs to be a common consensus of what constitutes a spoiler in the first place. I know some people who would consider virtually any plot point about a movie a spoiler and if everyone followed that rule the film blogs would be awash in spoiler warnings. My personal take it that I'm all for posting spoilers for fiction works but I think the line gets really hazy when you're discussing non-fiction works.

Spoilers for Into the Wild

My real question is the larger issue of why a movie like Into the Wild even feels the need to sell the film as a mystery. The original title to the Krakauer magazine article was "Death of an Innocent" and I double checked my copy of the book and it says right on the front cover that his decomposed body is found 4 months later. I agree with DP that it's a call that's ultimately not mine but it makes me wonder about Penn's approach to the material and the desperateness of marketers.

Are people really THAT STUPID that they would be reading these comments, see Krazy Eyes spoiler alert and click off the page? Who would be that dumb? A little common sense here please! And I think that not knowing the story about Chris Mccandless, yes, does mean you aren't news aware and does mean you need to know the true story BEFORE you see the movie. You know why? BECAUSE IT'S TRUE! Historical events should be told and talked about and people should be made aware of them; they are important. Do I give a rat's ass if some baby wants to protect their otherwise ignorant state of being?

Have we really handed over our innate right as storytellers to movie marketers? Maybe there are pre-teen boys on this blog but aren't the majority thinking adults?

I hope that when it's time for Charlie Wilson's War people don't start whining about spoilers. When I heard about Munich the first thing I did was google the real story. We live in an age where information is mostly free and with a few select words into a search engine you have all of the info you need. This is not a spoiler - it's education. It's information. Fucking hell.

Sasha, I don't really think Chris McCandless' story is really on the same level, news-wise and history-wise, as Munich. The Munich Olympics are an important part of history (and even if you did know about what happened at those Olympics, the ending of the FILM could not be known in advance) while Into the Wild is about one guy. I agree with you that most people should probably know about this and I doubt it would affect their enjoyment, but some people don't and all you have to do is take that into consideration. As for myself, I don't care about the ending of any movie being spoiled in terms of what happens plot-wise, but I don't want to know HOW things happen. It bothers me when people talk about Into the Wild, without a spoiler warning, and start talking about what kind of shot is used and the music, etc. I can deal with knowing what happens, I just don't want the how spoiled.

I think we've all become a bunch of babies. Sorry, but it's true. I am all for a spoiler alert for a movie like There will be Blood or No Country for Old Men, absolutely. But not a true story.

Bipedalist, even a movie based on a true story is going to be altered for the purposes of dramatization. We all know what happened in the Munich olympics but since that happens at the beginning of the movie you'd feel ripped off if somebody told you what happens in the final act, right?
This shouldn't be controversial. It's a matter of basic courtesy.

>>>>And I think it is fair to say that I am probably as well read (or close) and probably more web news aware than anyone in here.

Are you serious when you write things like this?

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: