It’s on! Responding to yesterday’s unveiling of the inaugural Movieline Soily Awards, an eagle-eyed commenter pointed out this brief note posted to the Golden Raspberry Awards official message board — a reply apparently from “Head RAZZberry” John Wilson himself: “Many a RAZZIE® imitator has come and gone during the 32 years we’ve been doing our awards. And looking over their category names and choices, I’ve gotta say the so-called ‘Soilys,’ [sic] with their fixation on excremental terminology and their categories with names few American publications would even touch (let alone publish) look likelier to join the ‘gone’ list than make the brief roster of our ‘competitors’ who’ve stood the test of time…” Wait — so is he saying that we’re not going to get the Shit-the-Bed Award written up in USA Today ? Who knew? Anyway, Wilson or his representative or whoever brings up a crucial element of the awards that we did omit: SOILIES® looks so much more dignified, no? We also seem to have forgotten to charge folks to vote . Oops. Next year! Read more about the 2012 Soilies here , and drop back by tomorrow for our Reader’s Choice launch! Follow S.T. VanAirsdale on Twitter . Follow Movieline on Twitter .
Everything went pretty much according to plan at the box office over the weekend: Scurrilous liberal plot The Lorax indoctrinated enough kids and families to reign over a second consecutive week, while Disney’s super-expensive sci-fi gamble John Carter settled somewhat anemically into second place. But it’s not all bad for our boy on Barsoom. Your Weekend Receipts are here. 1. Dr. Seuss’s The Lorax Gross: $39,100,000 ($121,950,000) Screens: 3,746 (PSA $10,438) Weeks: 2 (-44.3%) The year’s biggest hit to date achieved that distinction in nine days, as opposed to roughly three full weeks for the likes of Safe House and The Vow . And there was even one less hour this weekend. Summer is here! Break up The Lorax ! 2. John Carter Gross: $30,603,000 (new) Screens: 3,053 (PSA: $4,487) Weeks: 1 Right or wrong, the widely reported $250 million (at least) price tag will precede any and every conversation regarding John Carter as long as people are talking about John Carter . Which may be longer than the sluggish domestic gross implies — though not that much longer — if the rest of the world has anything to say about it: Andrew Stanton’s epic took in nearly $70 million abroad , including the fourth-highest debut ever in Russia. The takeaway remains relatively grim: No blockbuster status is foreseen, but at least the unprecedented write-down foreseen at Disney may not be that bad. Happy Monday? 3. Project X Gross: $11,550,000 ($40,125,000) Screens: 3,055 (PSA $3,781) Weeks: 2 (Change: -45.1%) Not a remarkable hold, but considering the competition both above and below it &mdash plus the long-ish tails of several of the year’s bigger releases to date — Warner Bros. will take it. The only question remaining: What’s the threshold to greenlight the sequel? 4. Silent House Gross: $7,010,000 (new) Screens: 2,124 (PSA $3,300) Weeks: 1 Here is a conversation sure to have ensued in roughly 750 theaters screening the very soft-performing Elizabeth Olsen thrller: Viewer 1: “That doesn’t look like Ryan Reynolds.” Viewer 2: “When does Denzel show up?” Viewer 1: “Are we in the right theater?” Viewer 3: “Shhhh!” [Throws popcorn] 5. Act of Valor Gross: $7,000,000 ($56,100,597) Screens: 2,952 (PSA $2,372) Weeks: 3 (Change: -48.4%) Slowly, inexorably, probably futilely, Relativity continues to push its Navy SEALs experiment toward $100 million theatrically. Look for a special St. Patrick’s Day weekend campaign pushing Act O’ Valor : “Erin go BLAM,” “Kiss me, I shot Osama bin Laden in the face,” etc. Or… not. [Figures via Box Office Mojo ] Follow S.T. VanAirsdale on Twitter . Follow Movieline on Twitter .
Avengers director Joss Whedon spent much of his weekend in Austin at SXSW pounding the pavement for The Cabin in the Woods (that is, when he wasn’t busy dancing into the wee hours of the night) but he also managed to mostly deflect the laser geek gaze of the bloggerati when it came to divulging information about his upcoming Marvel superhero pick. That said, he did offer up one huge clarification on a matter Avengers fans have been trying to root out via various clues and tea leaves: Who are the villains under Loki’s command? “I will say only this: It is not the Kree or the Skrulls,” said Whedon during his SXSW panel. “Those two aliens are Marvel mainstays and have enormous backstories. They have a big life of their own that just could not be contained in a film where I already had seven movie stars.” “The Skrulls — they can shape change. That’s a whole thing. I’ve already got Loki. He’s got magic. Once you got magic along with your Iron Man and your Black Widow — it’s a real juggling act.” He’s got a great point; Loki’s magic plus the appearance of alien races like the Kree and Skrull might feel a tad too fantastical for this Avengers outing. But wait, that’s not all! What else won’t The Avengers be/feature/include (via Collider )? • A too-short runtime: “My first cut was three hours long, and it’s now down to 2 hours and 15 minutes, and I’m extremely proud of that. I had always intended to go over two, under two and a half. There was no way a movie with this many great actors and this much epic scope was gonna clock in under two and not feel a little anemic. Somebody wasn’t gonna get their moment if that happened.” • An overlong runtime: “But at the same time, I get very angry that romantic comedies run over two hours long, it’s like ‘Guys, that’s not OK.’ More isn’t more. I don’t want anything in the movie that shouldn’t be.” • Nods at Whedon properties outside of the Marvel universe, which would be weirdly conspicuous anyway: “I am not a fan of referencing your own work when it’s in a different universe than what you’re doing. That, to me, is a wink at the audience and winking isn’t actually cool when you’re not, like, 10.” • That Jeff Beck cover of that one Stevie Wonder/Syreeta song “Cause We’ve Ended as Lovers,” which was too expensive to include in a Tony Stark scene. Stay tuned for more from SXSW .
Those NMA TV wizards have done it again: Watch as the Taiwanese animators offer their take on the in-progress South by Southwest Music, Film and Interactive festival (“If you’re watching this animation, that likely means you’re not at SXSW. You’re probably not even cool enough to go”). Tears, hippie DJs, 21 Jump Street , bands the rest of the world will hear about months from now… it’s all here! Okay, okay. SXSW isn’t quite as douchey as this video suggests — though the divide between the Interactive/Music folks and the Film attendees always feels like some sort of class division. But earlier today, I di d overhear the following while walking downtown: “What if pills could contain… ideas?” And also: “The thing is, I already have a green trucker hat!” Here’s hoping more notable SXSW ’12 events happen that warrant their own NMA video. Where’s Jake Gyllenhaal when you need him? [ NMA ] Catch up with Movieline’s ongoing coverage of SXSW Film and follow along on Twitter .
“Yes, because everybody’s giving me a ration about it. I wish they would have named it something else because I have a weird background and now people keep accusing me of being reincarnated.” I see. How about John Carter of Oklahoma? “Why are you calling? Oh. Well, he’s been dead for over 10 years.” [ Moviefone ]
Let’s see — after Russell Crowe , Christian Bale , Leonardo DiCaprio and now reportedly Tom Cruise , who’s left to consider to star opposite Beyoncé Knowles in Clint Eastwood’s long-planned, probably-never-gonna-happen Star is Born remake? George Clooney? Brad Pitt? Liam Neeson? Viggo Mortensen? Jean Dujardin? Philip Seymour Hoffman? Albert Brooks? Charlie Sheen? Matthew Broderick? Peter Dinklage? Richard Dreyfuss ? ( Too busy .) Ned Beatty? Danny McBride? Roberto Benigni? Peyton Manning? Who did I forget? [ Deadline ]
When it comes to frightening cinematic villains, this list will likely seem tame to hardcore horror film fanatics — those who revel in phantasmagoria. But to my mind, horror films are very rarely scary, usually hovering somewhere between slapstick and melodrama. What makes for a really scary character to me has little to do with those qualities most often found with the horror film ghoul, being a penchant for brutality, a supposedly fraught psychological profile, or any underpinning mysticism. Jason Voorhees of the Friday the 13th films, for instance, can boast all three. Yet, despite this, his appeal translates similarly to that of a clown: He proceeds with a certain inevitable performative gravity. Just as everyone knows that a clown will take a pratfall, we all know that Jason will make his kill. The fun is in just how the ax falls, if you’re into that sort of thing. Meanwhile, genuinely scary film characters don’t necessarily have to do anything. In fact, they’re more characterized by a sort of watchful unpredictability, or what they might do if given the chance, which could include pulling up a chair to warmly tell you about their day or, well, murdering you. This sort of lingering dread is different than suspense, which builds to a crisis. Here, the character’s presence — their mere existence — is the crisis. Though in many ways these nine film characters are not as obviously scary as your Jasons, Freddy Kruegers or Jigsaws et al., even the mention of some of them creeps me right out. Prince Prospero (Vincent Price) in The Masque of the Red Death Prospero represents the man of means, absolutely corrupted. He hypnotizes, tempts, and spreads death wherever he goes. In one scene he condemns some of his hapless subjects to die, relishing in the means of their execution. “Garrote them!” he says. In another scene, he casually mentions that he worships the devil. Visitor #1 (Grace Zabriskie) in Inland Empire This character’s profoundly strange appearance is short, but it makes a lasting impression. In the scene where Grace Zabriskie’s visitor calls on a character played by Laura Dern, she turns a fairly straightforward conversation between neighbors into a story about the nature of good and evil, with absolutely no provocation. The character is something straight out Grimm’s Fairy Tales , though even weirder, striking a stark contrast to the domestic setting, the home movie quality of the film, and especially Dern’s politely tense forbearance. Zabriskie is a great actor, often tapped to play characters on the brink, but this might be her best turn ever. (See the unembeddable clip here .) The Beast in Krull Evocative of the tentacled monsters of H.P. Lovecraft, the otherworldly villain of Krull surely qualifies as one of the scariest creatures of the sword-and-sorcery film genre. Plot-wise, the Beast has some vague prophecies attached, but no one seems to really know why or how it shows up from outer space to wreak havoc. Its immense form seems amphibious, but it appears shrouded in smoke and shoots lightning from his slimy, fish-like mouth. Most of Krull is total boilerplate, but the compelling fantasy imagery, especially as displayed in The Beast and the black-eyed Emerald Seer, make this film worth a look. Sid (Erik von Detten, voice) in Toy Story Why is Sid scary? Because he turns an otherwise cutely complicated world upside down. The Toy Story films don’t really get into the darker implications of the toy characters being subject to built-in obsolescence until the second film. Initially, the main conflict presents as a competition between Woody and Buzz for their owner’s favor, but Sid’s childish violence heightens the drama and foreshadows the darker material ahead. Frank (Henry Fonda) in Once Upon a Time in the West Like a lot of classic film villains, Frank seems to have no limits to how low he’ll go. He feels no moral qualms about murder or torture. What sets him apart is his almost provincial ambition to be a businessman. Eventually he realizes that he doesn’t have the entrepreneurial spirit, except where killing is involved. But the practicality initially motivating his cruelty both humanizes and demonizes him. Bruno Antony (Robert Walker) in Strangers on a Train The character who infamously offers to “trade murders” with a man he has never met in Alfred Hitchcock’s Strangers on a Train carries something of The Joker, something of Huckleberry Hound, and quite a lot of one of Hitchcock’s other parentally obsessed villains, Norman Bates. But Bruno Antony is scarier to me than Bates, in that he more readily moves in society, spreading his madness throughout the privileged class he inhabits. (This trailer is fan-made and admittedly kind of cheesy, but it has some good clips.) Mouse Alexander (Don Cheadle) in Devil in a Blue Dress Played expertly by Cheadle, Mouse Alexander is the ultimate blunt instrument. This film’s script would have allowed a cool-headed killer in Mouse, someone closer to, say, Mr. Blonde in Reservoir Dogs . But Cheadle highlights the innocence of the character, adding new layers. His mild irritation about the blood on his jacket in the scene below reveals how casually he regards violence, how confused he is without a gun in his hand. Harry Powell (Robert Mitchum) in The Night of the Hunter Much of the menace of Mitchum’s demented preacher is couched in the film being told from the perspective of children. Harry Powell’s religious talk might fool the grown-ups, but his would-be paternalism goes nowhere with the two young protagonists, who have him pegged from the start. The powerlessness of the children in a world inhabited by mad parental figures serves as the perfect contrast to Powell. And who can forget those “LOVE/HATE” tattoos? Alex (Alex Frost) in Elephant Director Gus Van Sant’s slow-paced, naturalistic take on the killings at Columbine High disturbed a lot of people. Alex is that disturbance, a wide-eyed victim of bullying who methodically plans a two-man military strike on his high school. Part Holden Caulfield, part Wilmer from The Maltese Falcon, this wounded, delusional character terrifies. Nathan Pensky is an associate editor at PopMatters and a contributor at Forbes , among various other outlets. He can be found on Tumblr and Twitter as well.
This is pretty much perfect: “since i am blamed whenever people don’t like it, but never praised when they do, and since most critics forget that they liked or hated something two years ago and cite it as a strength or weakness two years later, i’ve come to be philosophical about the show. if people don’t like the comic who hosts, they hate the show. if no comic hosts, they hate the show and demand that a comic be summoned. when he’s edgier, like chris rock, we get slammed. when he’s bland, like ellen, we get slammed. but a few things are clear. this is the oscars. they still mean something after 83 years, at least in the industry. unlike the mtv awards, their audience is not exclusively 9-18 year olds. unlike the golden globes, the voters are people who actually make movies, not pretend to be journalists. some things are simply inappropriate. it’s a dance every year to figure out what those are. every single line on the oscar show is negotiated. unless you’ve been there, you have no idea how it is put together. it’s like nothing else on earth. i’m writing a book about it, but i have to throw in my sexual escapades to make sure it sells.” [ Filmdrunk ] [Photo: Helga Esteb / Shutterstock.com ]
“‘Metallica has always been a huge part of my life, and it’s an incredible opportunity when we get to work with our heroes,’ said Antal. ‘We are going to harness the powerful and almighty energy of Metallica’s live shows, inject a narrative into it, and shoot it in 3-D to elevate the entire experience.'” Of course they are. Whatever, it can’t be any worse than Lulu . [Press release]
