The Hot Blog

That musical will sucker you in every time Dave. Be careful, remember, remember, the Dreamgirls of December.

OK, I am the one who has to point out to David that that I Am Legend is based on a "major literary work"... that was filmed twice previously? And that, by the way, Forrest Gump and Jurassic Park were literary adaptations?

NIGHT AT THE MUSEUM is also based on a book...

Speaking of literary adaptations, wasn't ET an adaptation of a later section of some old book?

Anyway, I would agree with the point about AVATAR. The new trailer really ups the ante and obviously there are parallels drawn to contemporary issues.
But if ever there were a film that cannot be judged from its trailer, it is this. The final layer will come when we sit into its 3rd dimension.

Great column. But I'm puzzled that you can have 13 titles "90% locked" for a nomination in your chart.

Joe, I think DP used the word "original" in the sense of "not a remake or a sequel." After all, what IS original anymore? Everything's based on something; the honest ones (like Tarantino) just admit it. And I'm sure even more AVATAR progenitors will arise in the weeks ahead.

But Cadavra, I AM LEGEND was previously called THE OMEGA MAN with Charlton Heston so it should not qualify as an original as Joe quite rightly pointed out.

Also, based upon DP's parameters, if you include LEGEND, you could also include PASSION OF THE CHRIST. I don't see how its literary origins defined its eventual box office gross, as DP pointed out quite a few times, it was a box office anomaly.

But I will concede that we are splitting hairs with DP's original point, re: 'original' movies going past that 1/2 billion dollar mark worldwide. Not sure I buy into DP's assertion that it is already being touted as BP nominee, but he's an industry man, however my belief is that Jim Cameron notwithstanding, the Oscars very rarely look favorably on sci fi, and Batman, with all the gravitas of NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN and THE DEPARTED was overlooked because of the batsuit. It was not even nominated.

Avatar has a chance with 10 BP nominees, and then it may be battling for that spot with District 9. No way these two flicks get nominated in the same year, and having not seen Avatar yet, I can offer no informed opinion, however District 9 was great, and Avatar would need more than the 'wow' effect to compete. It's the story stupid. And Jim Cameron has been good at that too, so let the battle begin, AvP3, Avatar vs Prawn.

Mhmm, I can hardly wait to... :)

Mhmm, I can hardly wait to... :)

And bulldog: THE OMEGA MAN was preceded by THE LAST MAN ON EARTH starring Vincent Price, the first adaptation of I AM LEGEND.

Was Titanic "a sequel, animated or based on a major literary work"? I think it made more than $500M. And it won a couple of awards.

Well, Oddvark, you could argue that Titanic was a remake. That's a bit of a stretch, I think, but nitpickers might think otherwise. It's like The Thin Red Line -- there was a film version before Malick's adaptation, so, strictly speaking...

If two movies are based on the same historical event, is the most recent one a remake of the other? I wouldn't think so.

Wow, Guy... that is a BAD production error... thanks... and fixing...

Both versions of The Thin Red Line were based on the same novel, so I have no problem calling Malick's version a remake (even if it's perhaps more accurate to call it a new adaptation).

But I always thought Cameron's Titanic was an original story (as far as the protaganists and their personal story lines) whose setting happened to be the ill-fated voyage of the Titanic. Was there another filmed version of those characters' story? Or just other films set aboard the Titanic?

Also a typo in the Avatar comment in The List "could also CIME up Rings" (emphasis mine)

There are people still calling Nine a remake of 8 1/2, which is baffling.

why so baffled?..it's a musical adaptation of fellini's '8 1/2'....so, 'remake' vs. 're-imagining'....still seems like 'remake'....

Oddvark: Titanic (1943), Titantic (1953), A Night to Remember (1958), S.O.S. Titanic (1979) and Titanic (a 1996 TV-movie) all feature different fictional storylines loosely based on the same historical facts (and some real-life figures appear in most or all of them). So, yeah, I would think it's safe to say Cameron's Titanic is an original -- even though it may be telling that it wasn't nominated for either original or adapted screenplay. Maybe there was a split vote?

I would consider TITANIC a remake. Some characters may be different, but the event itself is what the movie is really about, not the romance and subplots. WEST SIDE STORY has different characters than ROMEO AND JULIET, but this doesn't alter the fact that it's a remake.

I don't know about that, I'd say that a 'remake' is when you basically make the same movie but with fresher technique. When you start to tell a different story with different characters, it's not a remake anymore, even if it happens to be set in the same time and place.

Agreed with Jeff, he wrote what I wanted to as I read the other comments.

And Joe: you're the first person I've read that thought Titanic's missing screenplay nomination didn't lead directly from it being the weak link in an otherwise top-notch production.

But from a practical standpoint-- Academy voters don't get to choose which category to vote for a script, don't they? I thought the Academy declares the category in which a script is eligible, especially if there's any ambiguity. (...but correct me if I'm wrong.)

Some characters may be different, but the event itself is what the movie is really about, not the romance and subplots.

So is PEARL HARBOR a remake of TORA TORA TORA or FROM HERE TO ETERNITY?

Er, Eric... I didn't say that the script's quality (or the lack thereof) wasn't one of the reasons it wasn't nominated. In fact, I'm not a terribly big fan of Titanic.

Anyone ever get hungry and then start looking at pics of food online? I don't have a lot to eat and also trying to diet, but sometimes I just google some tasty foods and it kind of makes me feel better.

Martin, you should check out Goodfellas. If I were ever hungry and graving some food, but not wanting to eat at the moment. I would watch Goodfellas.

That's funny you write that since whenever I put in GOODFELLAS, I have a giant spaghetti dinner right in front of me. Why does a bloody gangster movie make want to chow down on red sauce?

Sorry if I misread you there, Joe. I thought you were attributing it to the vote split.

Eric: Actually, I think the vote split did hurt its chances to a certain degree. You're right, the script was a howler. But, really, the bandwagon was rolling full speed ahead for Titanic that year. And despite the deficiencies of the script, I think it might have been nominated anyway had it been clearer whether it was original or adapted. Specifically: I'd be willing to bet money that if Cameron had said the book was based in part on some non-fiction title...

Some of the dialogue in Titanic is pretty bad, especially when it's coming out of the mouths of Billy Zane or Bill Paxton, but in terms of story structure and rising tension I think it's a successful script.

yeah, the script for 'titanic' isn't bad, it's a well-structured story that effectively builds tension and suspense - no mean feat considering we know what exactly what is going down, quite literally - but many people find the dialogue clunky, fair enough (i personally find the dialog akin to that of an extremely long saturday matinee serial, which i suspect is what cam was going for, tho not altogether successfully). no offence to anyone, i just have a pet peeve of people referring to dialog as if that were the entirely of a what makes a screenplay

This got me thinking about the Titanic script yesterday and I came to the same conclusion that Jeff did-- the underlying structure of the movie is really effective. It's like Cameron is an excellent storyteller-- he knows how set up all of the elements needed to pay off at the end-- but his characters are sometimes nothing more than that.

Like Leah says, dialog is only one element of screenwriting. Cameron is unlucky in that dialog, the easiest element for a casual viewer to "observe," is where he is at his weakest.

At the same time, Cameron's been pretty successful at writing cheesy, but very popular, one-liners.... which didn't help him much with TITANIC (a movie which doesn't really offer many opportunities for that), but might help him out with AVATAR.

i don't think cameron's dialog is his weak link at all (except arguably titanic's, his outside-the-square 'period drama'), it's hard-out populist hockum and damn proud of it; gung-ho, dramatic, at times touching, at times funny, at times annoying and funny (hudson my man), even iconic, and always unapologetically big jim. good on him

i must say i find it rather troublesome that JBD hasn't swooped in to smirk at me for drinkin' the 'kameron kool aid' or some such thing and then trumpet his boy mostow as the next coming of christ, what is this blog coming to for goodness sake? no fun

Someone get this woman in industrial-sized dild with JIMMY CAM's photo on the tip.

what a clever disguise! DP couldn't possibly see thu that one

Leah, this is YOUR fault.

oh yeah, i forgot. silly moi

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: