Tag Archives: the innkeepers

Pat Healy on The Innkeepers, Paycheck Roles, Auteur Heroes, and the Indie DIY Film Community

Every performer must pay their dues, but with this week’s old school-flavored ghost pic The Innkeepers character actor Pat Healy cashes in over a decade of memorable supporting turns and guest spots for the spotlight at an auspicious moment in his career. Having popped up in a number of great films over the years ( Magnolia ! Ghost World ! Rescue Dawn !) Healy stars with Sara Paxton in the Ti West film as a sardonic desk clerk at the Yankee Pedlar Inn, where spooky happenings are afoot; meanwhile, Healy also earned writing credits on the award-winning In Treatment and recently took Sundance by storm with Craig Zobel’s controversial Compliance . And to think: It all began with the one-two punch of My Best Friend’s Wedding and Home Alone 3 … I want to start out by asking you something of great importance: Why is there no Wikipedia page for Pat Healy the actor? I don’t know! There’s one for Pat Healy – The MMA fighter? Yes, do you know of him? Pat “Bam Bam” Healy! There’s a competitive hurler with your name as well. I didn’t know that – that sounds like a vomiter. There’s a local newsman, there’s a New York Times… Are you acutely aware of these other Pat Healys in the world? I had become, since There’s Something About Mary in 1998, with Matt Dillon’s character. I was like, ‘I thought I was the only one!’ And for a long time, this might still be true because a lot of those guys are Patricks, I was the first Google one. Bam Bam might be surpassing me now, MMA is very popular. Did you somehow cross the Farrelly Brothers, years ago? No, the guy who works for them who was like a line producer guy and I think is a writer or director now too, in some way, because I remember he was making a movie at one point and I started getting calls from people like, ‘Hey, comin’ in to see you next week!’ And I was like, ‘I don’t know what the hell you’re talking about…’ But yeah, no one started one. I guess I am maybe not the greatest self-promoter, I’m getting more comfortable with it now. I’m not a reluctant star or anything like that, but maybe I was naïve early on about how all this stuff works, with publicists and all that kind of stuff. And you’re not anymore? I feel like now I’m doing the things I want to do because my career as a screenwriter is affording me to not have to just be a guest star on every dumb crime procedural show on TV. I can do the things I want to do which are the more interesting things, like working with Ti [West] or working with Craig Zobel again. Those are more significant roles in better films. I might make more money in the short term having a few scenes in Pearl Harbor and the residuals are good, but nobody’s offering me other jobs off of that, whereas this community of people, we all know each other or know of each other and know each other’s work. How did you get together with Ti for this film? Innkeepers came about because Ti and I were at the LA Film Festival in 2007, met briefly – he was there with Trigger Man , I was there with Great World of Sound , Craig’s movie. He saw it, and I was a huge fan of House of the Devil ; I’d just seen it and I got a call from Amy Seimetz, our mutual friend, and she said ‘He wants to use you in a movie.’ I was ready to say yes without ever reading it, but then I read it and it was great, it was a great part and everything. So it works out that way. It’s just better for me now, I can afford to do these films and I enjoy the work – and people end up seeing what I can actually do, as opposed to saying ‘He was in that.’ If it leads to more jobs in the long term, it’s a better living for me. What was your plan in the beginning when you started acting? When I was a kid, when I was a real little kid, my family were always into movies and one of my older brothers, Jim – he’s two years older than me – he and I were just into movies and seeing everything we could see, watching everything on television, getting all the books and all that kind of stuff. Interestingly enough, we both have the jobs we wanted as little kids: I’m making films and he’s in film restoration. He ran the George Eastman Archive for a long time in Rochester, New York and now runs the Cinematheque at UW Madison. He loves watching them and showing them and talking about them and I love making them. So I came into this loving movies, and acting was something I knew how to do from an early age, just being a ham and being a performer, doing theater; that was sort of my way in. Doing some professional theater opened the door in Chicago, where I’m from, to commercials, and movies came through town, TV shows… Speaking of which, can we talk about Home Alone 3 ? [Laughs] Home Alone 3 is my first real movie! I was hired on My Best Friend’s Wedding , that Julia Roberts movie, and I was actually hired to be in the opening scene of that movie as this waiter and I was in make-up and costume and everything, and they just rewrote the scene as we did it and never shot me. But I got my SAG card and I think maybe six months later I got [ Home Alone 3 ], which if you haven’t seen it… all the little kids have seen that one on video a million times and it’s a perennial residual earner because kids like it and it’s on at the holidays. I played the FBI agent who was behind the guy who had all the lines, but I think they kind of forgot about me for a while because I was on hold, which they never do now because they watch the budget so tightly, but I made a lot of money off of it because I was on hold for about five weeks even though I only shot five days on it. And residuals are based on the time you worked on it, so the residuals have stayed really good. You mentioned the creative community that brought you in touch with Ti, and in recent years maybe more than ever I’ve noticed all these ties between indie filmmakers in this community. Yeah, it’s really different now. I think the movement in a way sort of started in this current incarnation through David Gordon Green , who I met through my brother in 2000 after George Washington had premiered in Berlin; he fostered a real sort of community spirit. Certainly all those people he went to school with, like Danny McBride , Jody Hill, Paul Schneider and now Jeff Nichols – all these people are doing great things, and encouraged people like Joe Swanberg. And all the satellite people from Joe, who is somebody who’s just going out there and making this stuff on his own, doing a lot… Joe and Ti and Sophia Takal and Larry Levine, Andrew Bujalski, Bob Byington, there’s a whole Austin contingent – we all know each other, too, and even people like Michael Shannon , who is my friend, who I started in theater with in Chicago with, is working with Jeff a lot. Craig [Zobel] also went to school at North Carolina School of the Arts. In my mind, as someone who was around a little bit before that, it seemed to spur a new DIY movement and a sense of community because David is an extremely loyal person and all of those people have gotten opportunities, including myself, because of him. I think that his films as well as his spirit and his generosity have inspired this new generation. People bring up mumblecore and I think a lot of people can point to George Washington as the first movie in that genre, if you can include it – it’s certainly bigger and more ambitious. But there’s a real sense of community, especially at the festivals when you’re there and seeing each other. That’s frankly where a lot of the work comes from, too. People meet and decide to work on something together, or somebody sees someone in something… It’s intriguing to watch those connections interweave from the outside, watching this community grow with each project. Yeah – and somebody like Robert Longstreet, who David Green saw in a small movie called Ding-a-ling-Less many years ago, and David put Robert in a movie and he met all these people, and then last year Robert was in like 10 movies at Sundance! So it is great, and it’s also not just real young people, either. It’s people of all ages, like some of the actors in Compliance like Ann Dowd, a woman in her fifties who’s done a lot of theater work and she’s just staggeringly brilliant in the movie. I know a lot of people are going to see that and want to work with her. You saw that thing sort of happen with Melissa Leo a few years ago, and those are all people who are working but they go to these independent movies because they get to show what they can do, really, and really spread their wings. Then all of a sudden Hollywood comes calling once they either do a television series or do a good part in an independent movie. In this, in Innkeepers , and in Compliance and Great World of Sound , I get to show what I can do and people can see it and it comes back to me. So I love what’s going on now. It’s cool and I think it’s coming out of both social and economic factors, but it’s fostering a lot of great activity and a lot of production. With Innkeepers , it seems like the entire process of making this was very condensed. Why did you initially respond to the material? I loved House of the Devil and was just ready to do whatever. [ The Innkeepers ] was a horror movie but it had a really good central relationship in it, and there were some different colors to get to play – certainly a lightness in the character, I like that dry sense of humor and sensibility. You’re exceptionally good at that, actually. I think it’s my natural rhythm and I think maybe Ti saw that as much personally as he did in any work that I’ve done, with the exception of Great World of Sound which is heavier and more serious. But that comes naturally to me. I certainly liked the heartbreak of that character, the unrequited love aspect. Even the tragedy in his failings is utterly amusing. And the fact that it is very tragic and heartbreaking to play, and to sit in the audience and it’s very funny… because it’s that comedy of uncomfortability, like Albert Brooks or Ricky Gervais – that really reality-based ‘I’m so uncomfortable I have to laugh…’ I like that about it a lot, and I like that the scares and the tension came from the building of the relationships so that you actually care about these people. There are so many movies where in the third act it’s like where everything’s flying this way and that and you’re like, ‘Okay, that happened.’ Filming Innkeepers you all actually lived in the hotel, on top of which you and Sara Paxton only met right before shooting, yet you managed to strike a really great chemistry together. It was taking a big risk – it was like a 17-day shoot, living, working, and eating in the hotel, a weird place, and we met the day before. I knew very little about her, I think I saw Last House on the Left and that’s a much different part so I wasn’t really sure what to expect. She’s just a really buoyant, funny, fun, lovely person so my guard went down pretty quickly. Luckily the two of us really liked each other, and the movie’s pretty much shot in sequence so we just developed that relationship. But I think a lot of credit can go to Ti for creating that environment; it was cool to be in that weird environment in the hotel itself, and to be in the camp-like atmosphere of all living together, screwing around and joking and all that stuff. Ti recently wrote an open letter imploring people to pay to see and support small indie films, which made a lot of sense. Yeah, some people were surprised that that is the reality of things. Somebody I know had recently pirated an indie movie… Did you shame them? I did, and they gave me crap because it wasn’t playing anywhere near them and they really wanted to see it. I just thought, well, it didn’t make any money — maybe you couldn’t have seen it when it came out, but you can see it on Netflix or rent it or whatever. It’s not like I get a dollar if you watch it; I don’t get anything, really, though I might in the long run if it makes a lot of money on DVD. But like [Ti] said, the reason they keep making dumb movies is because we keep paying to see them, and then we don’t pay for the other ones. I feel like people know you even if they don’t realize they know you because of some of those bigger movies you were in, like Magnolia , Rescue Dawn , Ghost World . How do you look back on those films now? Even though I wasn’t in a position to choose what I wanted to do, I was fortunate enough to be working with people like Paul Thomas Anderson in Magnolia . That was something that was really exciting to me, I’d loved Boogie Nights and all that stuff. At that time – and I didn’t know what I had because I was 26 years old or something, and the sad thing is when I think about it he’s only a year older than me – but I think that I just naturally ended up in those things. I was a fan of Dan Clowes’s comics and Terry Zwigoff, who made Crumb , so I think I ended up in Ghost World because unconsciously my drive to be in those things made me work hard to get them. Or working with Herzog on Rescue Dawn … Did you just put a little something extra into those auditions? I guess I just really cared about those things, and there are so many that I don’t, and I get some of those too. But something like a Western with Andrew Dominik and Brad Pitt and all those people in Jesse James , I really want to do that. But I’m not conscious of it so there must be something that gets me into those rather than the other ones. There are actors’ careers that are built on parts I didn’t get. Now I think I’m a little older, and I’m writing and certainly making a living at that, and I can be a little pickier to a certain degree – though I can always use more money. But now I’m being cast in things I would choose to do, you know? Now that you’re screenwriting and directing, do you feel like you’ve picked up advice or lessons from the various auteurs you’ve worked with? All of them. Without a doubt. The main thing that I would say about all these people – Anderson, or Herzog, or Zwigoff, or Zobel, or Ti West – is a sense of leadership, a real devotion by their cast and crew, because of the kind of people they are. They’re not only masters who know what they’re doing, but they’re really great at revving you up. You like them and they really like and respect you and you feel support and freedom to do your best. That’s such a great quality in a director; you are the captain of a ship. You have to do your homework like you do as an actor, be prepared and show up and know what you’re going to do, but that’s the commonality among the people that I’ve worked with that do great things – they really know how to be leaders and to rally the troops. Were you not surprised, then, when Werner Herzog saved Joaquin Phoenix from that car crash? Nothing Werner does shocks me! He’s a really remarkable guy, and I think some of his life is cinema. He crafts these moments and certainly makes sure people know about them. But I just saw his most recent documentary, Into the Abyss , which is great, and he introduced it. Even the way he came out and framed the movie for the audience, sort of directing how people see the movie, really enhanced my enjoyment of that movie so much, so he’s even a master in that way. As is Paul Anderson too; he controls every aspect of it through the publicity and marketing and everything. So by this token, would you say Ti West has something in common with, say, Michael Bay? I mean, he might tell you that. [Smiles] But as with these guys, or with Kubrick or Polanski or Hitchcock – Ti’s really exacting, he writes and meticulously casts it, he shoots it and knows exactly how he wants it to look, and then he spends so much time in the editing, which he does himself. He’s meticulous and exacting in post with Jeff Grace, the composer, and Graham Reznick, the sound designer – and then going to the theater and making sure the specs are right, going through the poster design and all that stuff. That’s him. I think if you really want to see your vision through to the end… Terry Malick does that too, you’re sending note to the theater telling them how loud it should be played and all that stuff. It’s tiring, thankless work – but it matters to them, you know? Given all of this, what sort of writer/director do you want to be – what kind of projects do you see yourself creating? The things that I’ve written are dramatic but they all have an inherently bent sensibility to them, an offbeat humor that’s not broad but is sort of unusual. It’s sort of the way that I see things, I think. If I were to compare myself to someone, contemporary people like Alexander Payne comes to mind, or Hal Ashby or Michael Ritchie – those sort of satirical looks at everyday life. But I’m a kid of the ‘80s and ‘90s too, and I love the big action movies too. So those strange conventions find their way into some of the things I write, too. I just hope that whatever it is, and I know that whatever it is, I will be an auteur. I can’t do anything – I can’t do a performance on a crappy TV show, or write a script, or write a Tweet, that isn’t inherently me. I couldn’t if I tried, and if I did it’s like cardboard, it stinks, it’s bland. I’ve tried. It’s trusting what’s there, and whatever I end up making, good or bad, it’ll be a true expression of who I am. It’s taken me a long time to get to that place, but I feel like I’m in that place. For more with the makers of The Innkeepers check out the Movieline Interviews with Ti West and Sara Paxton . The Innkeepers is in select theaters this Friday. Follow Jen Yamato on Twitter . Follow Movieline on Twitter .

Read more from the original source:
Pat Healy on The Innkeepers, Paycheck Roles, Auteur Heroes, and the Indie DIY Film Community

The Artist, Tinker, Midnight in Paris: Stephanie’s Top 10 Movies of 2011

And so my most-favorite, least-favorite task of the year rolls around again. I never call it a “10 best” list — meaning the unequivocal 10 best films of the year — because I’m fully aware of how subjective it is. Yet as frustrating as it usually is to pull together just the right 10, I found the job surprisingly pleasurable this year. So many movies to love! How could this have happened? Let’s not even address the fact that two 3-D movies made it onto my list — that surprises me as much as anyone. The remarkable thing is that year after year, no matter how much samey-sameness Hollywood (or even so-called indie cinema, for that matter) seems to give us, there are always pictures that resonate, movies that stand apart as if to do so were their God-given right. This year was, I think, particularly rich, but again, no critic’s list can ever be the perfect definition of the year’s finest movies. Besides, all the fun lies in comparing and contrasting. That’s why I urge you to share your favorites with me, in the comments section. That’s one of the things I most look forward to each year. A note about the order: My top four movies are pretty much ranked in order of preference. But the remaining six are just a happy jumble — Drive could just as easily be Number 7 instead of Number 10, and Bill Cunningham: New York could have crept up to Number 6. And in the Honorable Mentions category, all bets are off. This is secretly, or perhaps not so secretly, my favorite part of compiling a year-end list. It’s the place I can revisit every movie of the past year that has somehow stuck with me, without having to make a case for alleged greatness. Because as I’ve said many times — and plenty of other people have said it before me — greatness so often happens in the margins. Here goes: The Artist — Michel Hazanavicius’ nearly silent black-and-white film (featuring the ultra-charming Jean Dujardin and Berenice Bejo) has inspired lots of rapture among critics, but also a great deal of harumphing that it’s nothing more than a trifle and says very little about silent film as an art form. But ideally, what, exactly, might it have said? Beyond offering such beauty and pleasure (as if that weren’t enough), Hazanavicius has reopened the world’s eyes to a long-gone mode of filmmaking. Sure, yes, of course, there are Keaton films, Griffith films, Murnau films that are better, and there are plenty of critics around to remind us of that. But when critics write chiefly for other critics — in other words, to show off how much they know — they forget that thousands of people who have never even seen a silent film will see and enjoy The Artist , and maybe seek out more of the great silents. Meanwhile, no one needs a badge of certification to “properly understand” silent film, or The Artist . Thank God. Melancholia — Lars von Trier’s meditation on serious depression is gorgeous to look at, deeply moody and atmospheric, and always in on its own grim little joke. The most rapturous, uplifting picture about the end of the world — or the end of a world — ever made. Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy — Over the past few weeks, Tomas Alfredson’s intricate John LeCarré adaptation has crept — kind of like a super-stealthy MI6 agent — from my Honorable Mentions section to the bottom of my 10-favorites list to somewhere very close to the top. The picture is sly, precise and deeply fulfilling. It also features Gary Oldman in one of the great performances of the year. Midnight in Paris — In the past 20 years I’ve liked bits and pieces of Woody Allen’s films (Scarlett Johansson’s brainy-cute journalism student in Scoop , the great Elaine May in Small Time Crooks ). But mostly, since Manhattan Murder Mystery , I’ve pretty much loathed them, and that includes the much-lauded Match Point . Which is why it gives me extra pleasure to have fallen in love with a Woody Allen film once again. Midnight in Paris reckons with the past as a real place, even as it worries about the limits of nostalgia. What happens if we don’t care about the past enough to carry it with us into the future? That’s the question Midnight in Paris worries over. It’s a movie about every yesterday we stand to lose as we’re busy making the leap, over and over again, between today and tomorrow. Jane Eyre — Cary Joji Fukunaga understands both the novel’s quintessential Englishness and the raw animal nature that drives it. Michael Fassbender, as Mr. Rochester, finds the character’s inherent, awkward warmth without mistaking it for anything so bland as mere niceness. And Mia Wasikowska’s Jane, physically just a slip of a thing, has carnal boldness to burn. Sex is threatening, as Charlotte Brontë knew, and Wasikowska and Fassbender make this particular dance look exceedingly dangerous. Le Havre — Finnish sadsack Aki Kaurismäki gives us a sort-of bookend to Melancholia , with an equally happy, albeit very different, ending. With this story of an aged Normandy shoeshine guy who takes a African refugee under his wing, even as he faces the loss of his possibly terminally ill wife, Kaurismäki takes the most generous attitude possible toward human nature. Being jaundiced about the world is easy — it takes relatively little energy to expect the worst from everyone. But it’s harder to allow for the possibility of surprise in the way people behave and treat one another, and the rewards are far greater. That’s what Kaurismäki captures in this unapologetically joyful picture. Bill Cunningham: New York — Richard Press’ glorious documentary isn’t just a movie about fashion or street photography or even just one pretty eccentric and fascinating guy, New York Times photo-columnist Bill Cunningham. It’s a picture that captures the vitality and myriad idiosyncrasies of New York. At one point in the film, Cunningham says plainly, “He who seeks beauty will find it.” Press’ movie shows Cunningham leading by example, urging us not just to look, but to really see. Pina — Wim Wenders’ 3-D documentary about choreographer Pina Bausch doesn’t demystify modern dance — it still seems pretty weird, which is as it should be. But Wenders opens up Bausch’s world in a way that beckons us close. This is less a strict documentary than a heartfelt — and visually gorgeous — celebration of Bausch’s work and her mode of working. Werner Herzog’s Cave of Forgotten Dreams — Herzog: What a weirdo! But he’s our weirdo, and with this stunning 3-D documentary about the Paleolithic drawings in France’s Chauvet Cave, he uses relatively new technology to burrow a little deeper, both literally and figuratively, into history — into the nature of mankind, even. At one point Herzog startles a sweet, serious French archaeologist by earnestly posing unanswerable questions about the artists who made these drawings so long ago: “Do they dream? Do they cry at night?” But of course, Herzog knows the answer — doesn’t everybody? Drive Nicolas Winding Refn’s winking existentialist portrait of a laconic getaway driver named, well, Driver (and played superbly by Ryan Gosling) could have been the best drive-in feature of 1975. As it is, it’s the best action movie of 2011. Honorable Mentions: Martin Scorsese’s Hugo , David Fincher’s The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo , William Monahan’s London Boulevard , Jim Sheridan’s Dream House , Tsui Hark’s Detective Dee and the Phantom Flame , Apitchatpong Weerasethakul’s Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives , Michael Winterbottom’s The Trip , Xavier Beauvois’ Of Gods & Men , Bennett Miller’s Moneyball , Steven Spielberg’s War Horse , Cindy Meehl’s Buck , Kelly Reichardt’s Meek’s Cutoff , Craig Brewer’s Footloose , Andrew Niccol’s In Time , Jake Kasdan’s Bad Teacher . Follow Stephanie Zacharek on Twitter . Follow Movieline on Twitter .

Read more from the original source:
The Artist, Tinker, Midnight in Paris: Stephanie’s Top 10 Movies of 2011

Watch Meryl Streep’s Friends Campaign For Her Oscar… During Her Kennedy Center Tribute

Last night, during the 34th Annual Kennedy Center Honors telecast, Meryl Streep ‘s friends feted the honoree in grand fashion. There were video montages introduced, touching anecdotes told, funny memories recounted, musical numbers performed and splits done in her honor –  by  Robert De Niro, Mike Nichols, Stanley Tucci, Emily Blunt, Kevin Kline, Anne Hathaway and Tracy Ullman (who co-starred with Streep in Plenty ). It was an epic ode to the actress’s “superhuman” onscreen ability — one, that after ten minutes of increasingly heaping praise, began to feel like one of the most elaborate Oscar campaigns to date. With just two months until the 84th Academy Awards, last night’s Kennedy Center Honors Meryl Streep-fest aired at a perfect time. The actress has just scored her Golden Globe nomination for her highly-anticipated performance in The Iron Lady and is already being called an Oscar frontrunner for her portrayal of Margaret Thatcher in a project that seems designed entirely for a Lead Actress Oscar win. Take a look at the 10+ minute CBS campaign below.

The Paperboy Poster With Zac Efron and Nicole Kidman: Journalism School Musical

There’ve been updates about The Paperboy ‘s casting for awhile, but only now do I realize the gravity of what’s occurring. Um, wow: Nicole Kidman and Zac Efron are sharing a screen! And John Cusack! And Matthew McConaughey, for the hell of it! And — what now? — Lee Daniels is directing! They should call this quaint tale Extra Precious: Based on the Cutie ‘Zac’ by Efron . Synopsis and impressive poster after the jump. Downright old-fashioned and sharp. Reminds me of Young Adult ‘s evocative cover in coloring and detail. From a distance, Mr. Efron’s cheeks look a tad more pregnant than they usually do. I know what you’re thinking, and let me assure you: I’m the father. The Paperboy concerns a reporter who returns to his hometown to save a man on death row, though he’s derailed by the romance he strikes up with the inmate’s lady friend. I have the feeling we won’t get a juicy character study worthy of Nicole Kidman’s involvement in this movie, and that sucks because I’m still reeling from Rabbit Hole . Still, I’m in for Zac Efron’s sacred facial architecture. He’s like a cathedral of tawny hotness. Paperboy Poster [GossipCop]

Bad Movies We Love: Diamonds Are Forever

Forty years ago this Friday, United Artists released Diamonds Are Forever — the seventh entry in the James Bond series, and one that dragged founding franchise star Sean Connery out of 007 retirement in the hopes of rinsing the bad taste that his replacement, George Lazenby, left in moviegoers’ mouths in the 1969 film On Her Majesty’s Secret Service . Connery succeeded, but only by making what remains arguably the silliest Bond film to date. Enfolding globetrotting jewel smugglers, reclusive Las Vegas casino barons, effete hit men, bikinied enforcers named after cartoons, lunar-landing conspiracy bait, cosmetically enhanced villain-doppelgangers, and more one-liners than a decade’s worth of White House Correspondents Dinners, Diamonds Are Forever is campier than a dome tent and almost as vacant. I vividly remember watching it on TV as a kid, figuring its geopolitical space-race intrigues and bedhopping exploits were over my 8-year-old head. Today, after recently catching up with it for the first time in nearly 30 years, I realize that it’s basically Tinker Tailor Soldier Why? — that there is no making sense of the plot, the characters, the gays, the straights, the overlapping interests or why any of it is worth so much subterfuge and many people dying in so many gruesome ways. There is only the luxuriant enjoyment of a quintessential Bad Movie We Love. It all starts with the vengeful Bond — whose new bride was killed at the end of OHMSS — tormenting a diverse array of associates who can lead him to his murderous archnemesis Ernst Stavro Blofeld. That much is clear. Note to self: Bikini-top strangulation is a hugely tasteful way to extract information from lithe, defenseless sunbathers. Actual line: “Speak up darling, I can’t hear you!” And Bond catches him just in time, what with all the plastic surgery Blofeld’s arranging for numbers of hapless decoys. You just know this is where Saddam Hussein got the idea for lookalike bodyguards. I hesitate to include the video below, if only because the dude in the mud bath deserves every penny of royalties he earned for what looks like a hugely unpleasant bit part. Or at least his kin does, if they even deign to acknowledge, “Yup — that’s paw, awright, gettin’ all mud-shit on and hosed off and re-drowned. Hold yer nose, paw!” Or how about the guy who gets the scalpel in the heart? Whatever. Let’s just be thankful that modern cosmetic surgery has moved out of the dank, bubbling tar-pit lairs of Diamonds Are Forever . Duchess of Alba Cayetana Fitz-James Stuart knows exactly what I’m talking about. From there Commander Bond is back to Britain, where payback is brushed aside for the moment and the details of his latest mission are laid out. Sort of: There are diamond mines in South Africa! And workers are smuggling jewels out! In their mouths! To dentists! Who in turn wind up exchanging the rocks during desert rendezvous with… these guys: That would be Mr. Kidd and Mr. Wint, played with stone-like conviction by Putter Smith and Bruce “Father of Crispin” Glover, respectively. They identify themselves only by name at first, but creep back into the action wherever diamonds are found. Are they sophisticated high-class criminals proving the British Intelligence theory that someone’s hoarding diamonds to create a depression? Not so much: They’re dry, they’re wry, they’re cold-blooded… but mostly they are just creepy lovers whose homosexuality and psychopathology appear to be conflated in the film’s only truly irredeemable streak of bad taste. It’s not just that Mr. Wint can’t abide Mr. Kidd paying pretty woman a compliment, as happens later in the film (“I must say, Miss Case seems quite attractive — for a lady!”). I mean, holy Christ , check out how they celebrate a double homicide: After that, it’s anybody’s guess. Sort of, anyway: There is the selflessly, thanklessly composed Wikipedia summary for the film, which lays out a succession of convolutions that track Bond from Amsterdam — where he poses as diamond smuggler Peter Franks and encounters Franks’s clothes-allergic peer Tiffany Case (Jill St. John, always my favorite Bond Girl after Eva Green. Well, and Maryam D’Abo, of course ) — to Los Angeles to Las Vegas. But only after Bond kills the real Peter Franks in a three-minute elevator fight and fatal fire-extinguisher blow — but not the way you might think. The diamonds are hidden inside Franks’s body, leading to Kidd and Wint’s attempt to cremate Bond, who is then saved by the wizened Sin City comic Shady Tree, who is in cahoots with the CIA, who meets his own regrettable demise at the hands of our gay assassins. Following? With comebacks like this, does it matter? Originally scripted by Richard Maibaum, Diamonds Are Forever received a near-total rewrite by Tom Mankiewicz — the son of Oscar-winner Joseph L. Mankiewicz — who was brought on to soup up a screenplay that would entice Connery to return as Bond. The results were not only a six-month stay on the project and a nearly 10-year stint with the Bond franchise, but a film with its tongue embedded so deep in its cheek it left a bruise. While steering the 007 franchise to the outer limits of levity, it also resulted in such extraordinary interludes as this one with craps maiden Plenty O’Toole: Let’s hear it for Lana “Sister of Natalie” Wood! She only solidifies her finest screen performance moments later with a topless defenestration into a pool from Bond’s hotel suite (“I’ve got friends in this toowwwwnnnn…”), but still: This is Connery and St John’s film. And it still makes no sense: Something about a reclusive billionaire hotel owner (Bond producer Albert Broccoli was inspired to include Willard Whyte after a dream in which his close friend Howard Hughes had a deadly double) with a top secret lab out in the desert, where Bond and Case achieve basically zero plot mobility but initiate consecutive car chases featuring both a lunar-stage moon buggy… … and and a ’71 Mustang, which… I mean… You really must watch it once and then play it back just to hear those vintage sound FX harmonize. It’s not like director Guy Hamilton purposely left off the score — that is the score: And you know what? For all the fancy driving throughout, I’m ultimately much fonder of the Clark County Sheriff, whose extraordinary perception (“There goes that son of a bitch and saboteur!”) and fearsome law-enforcement prowess deserve a nice long still-frame appreciation: And while there remains an hour more to this movie , you find yourself envisioning a glorious world where this head-cramping gaudiness and camp endure forever — where Bond scales all of the towers in Vegas, and where, inside those towers, he meets all of the cosmetically altered carbon copies of the douche who killed his wife, and that all of those baddies may disguise their voices as Blofeld does, and that you, too, may someday match his acumen after miraculously escaping from a tube buried in the Nevada desert: And, of course, where all the watchdogs in the world have been replaced by comely, backhanded commentaries on the Equal Rights Movement. Ahem . I’m no more certain of what happens in the rest of Diamonds Are Forever than I was decades ago — something about Blofeld stockpiling diamonds to build a killer satellite, which apparently doubles as an excuse for Bond to blow the shit out of a SPECTRE base disguised as an oil well off the coast of Mexico. But there is no mistaking what’s going on in the climactic showdown between Bond and Messrs. Wint and Kidd, which is to say: Beating Airplane! at its own sight-gag-and-sound-effect game nearly 10 years ahead of time. Happy anniversary, Diamonds Are Forever ! Bombe surprise for everyone! Follow S.T. VanAirsdale on Twitter . Follow Movieline on Twitter .

More here:
Bad Movies We Love: Diamonds Are Forever

Why Pay to Watch Indie Films? Let Innkeepers Director Ti West Explain

Some of you may be tempted to BitTorrent the latest new releases this week (Were you one of those Fast Five pirates ? Admit it, rascal!), but let indie filmmaker Ti West bend your ear with a personal plea as his latest film, the spooky ghost tale The Innkeepers , hits VOD on Friday (December 30). “It’s not the money,” he writes , admitting that he still hasn’t made a dime from his excellent 2009 film House of the Devil . Pay to see indie films like West’s, he argues, “because if the movie makes money… that’s tangible evidence of a paying audience out there for movies like mine. For independent films. For something different. Not just bland remakes/sequels or live action versions of comic books/cartoons/boardgames.” Hear, hear. West pours a good deal of real talk into his open letter, and not just for potential illegal movie downloaders; he also sheds light on the realities of life as a filmmaker in the arrangement he’s struck – retaining creative vision while ceding profits to someone else. I do not own the films, and by the time any profits would trickle down to little old me (writer/director/editor/producer) they would all have been mysteriously soaked up into vague expenses, random fees and outrageous overages. This is the nature of the business and I have come to accept it. As long as I don’t own my films – something I give up in exchange for someone with much deeper pockets affording me the budgets to make them – this is how it goes. It’s a trade off and I’m fine with it. That concession alone is maddening, and yet makes sad, practical sense. House of the Devil was West’s biggest film to date and made just $101,215 theatrically via Magnolia upon release. As someone who loved it I’d argue that number was woefully, undeservedly low; it was a film that made me instantly hope to see more from its director, to see where he’d go with a little more money and a bigger profile.  That chance came for me earlier this year when I caught the droll, spooky Innkeepers , and my fellow West watchers will get their chance to see it when it hits VOD this week a month ahead of its February 3 theatrical limited release. But if you need more convincing in favor of supporting films like this, whether you’re a potential pirate or an indie film lover on the fence about ticket prices, let’s go back to West: Every time you purchase something you are making a statement. You are creating physical evidence that something has value. If something has a high value, then it becomes in high demand. So if you make a concerted effort to support lesser-known, interesting and esoteric things (Art?) then you are helping make those lesser-known things more popular. I’m sure we can all agree that there are incredible movies made every year that never get the attention they deserve – That’s not the movies’ fault. That is our collective fault for not being proactive enough to GO OUT OF OUR WAY to support them. So yes, I want you to go out of your way and pay for my movie. Not because I’m greedy, but because if the movie makes money (whomever for) that’s tangible evidence of a paying audience out there for movies like mine. For independent films. For something different. Not just bland remakes/sequels or live action versions of comic books/cartoons/boardgames. This is a powerful time for the consumer. With a small platform release like ours (VOD/Theatrical) , it’s been made incredibly easy for you to support the film…You don’t even have to get out of bed. Think about what your dollars mean; they tell financiers to to keep funding outside-the-box movies so that you have more options than the latest fivequels/rom-coms/superhero movies/the dreck that folks like Katherine Heigl or Adam Sandler fart out year after year. And lastly: Where we choose to spend our money should reflect what matters to us and what we want to support. If independent film matters to you, then do me a solid and pay for the film instead of downloading it. It’s not a huge financial commitment, but it has a huge financial impact. I am not a corporation, I am not independently wealthy, I don’t come from a family of the industry…I’m just a regular dude who made a movie and wants to keep on making them. I can’t do that without your help, and it would be very much appreciated. Put it another way: More House of the Devil s/ Innkeepers and fewer Jack and Jill s or Green Lantern s is a future we would all appreciate and should aspire to. Make it so, people.

Slideshow: The 10 Biggest MPAA Debacles of 2010

Ah, another year, another series of enigmatic clues as to how the MPAA ratings board actually makes its decisions. And then an equal number of films try to challenge the mystifying organization to gain free publicity. 2010 was no exception, with a wide variety of contradictions, exceptions and just completely baffling decisions, and so in our grand year-end tradition, let’s take a look at the 10 biggest MPAA debacles of 2010.

View original post here:
Slideshow: The 10 Biggest MPAA Debacles of 2010

The 11 Most Anticipated Movies and TV Shows for 2011 — Brian’s Picks

As of this moment, almost every pick on my list of anticipated 2011 film and television projects is perfect. Every selection, in my mind, is exactly what I want it to be. Inevitably, some will disappoint (and some may not even come out this year), but that’s the beauty of anticipation; there’s no evidence against my unadulterated optimism! Yet. So as we finish counting up the disappointments and pleasant surprises of 2010, let’s savor this moment; nobody can prove us wrong if we want to believe that 2011 will be the most knockout year of all-time.

Continue reading here:
The 11 Most Anticipated Movies and TV Shows for 2011 — Brian’s Picks