Not just any coal-mining region: it was shot mostly in and around Scranton PA. Barbara Loden and the bank robber were the only professional actors in the movie, everyone else was local, and most had never acted before. Grim, but pretty damn good if you like the verite approach,. I've met four people who were in it, plus a couple more who are related to people who were in it.
Why isn't this a real movie? And if you go to their page you can see extended scenes which are even funnier: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYEk8Gq4UWHr_vQkvmtbcCQ
'Sopranos' Creator Making Prequel Film - Deadline http://deadline.com/2018/03/david-c...he-many-saints-of-newark-new-line-1202319202/
We watched the new version of The Magnificent 7 last weekend, and while I appreciated the multicultural casting, having the Indian character be Comanche was pretty weird. At no point were they more than seven days' ride from Sacramento (so something like 250 miles max), which is an awfully long way from Comanche territory in SW Texas. So having Chisolm go right to speaking Comanche when the group encounters Red Harvest was amazing (especially with him sporting a Mohawk hairstyle from upstate New York) was interesting - that's a hell of a lucky guess. And then in the final battle, when Red Harvest encounters the evil Denali, he, too, is apparently Comanche - despite being based in Sacramento. EDIT: Okay, I learned something cool. Martin Sensmeier plays Red Harvest; he is a Tlingit/Koyukon-Athabascan from Alaska. He came to the set with long hair, then had to travel home for a funeral, which in keeping with custom required him to cut or shave his head, and the filmmakers then improvised the Mohawk. And apparently, the character being Comanche went over very well among members of that tribe.
I think they kind of missed a chance with this film. They managed to make the Seven more racially diverse, but no women among them and even the more active role Haley Bennett's character takes on seems more like an afterthought. The counter can't be "a female gunslinger would not have been realistic" when so much else about this movie is not realistic at all.
Happy 50th Birthday to 2001: A Space Odyssey! '2001: A Space Odyssey' Returns To Theaters In 70mm In May - CBS News https://www.cbsnews.com/news/2001-a-space-odyssey-returns-to-theatres-in-70mm/ Festival de Cannes 8-19 May 2018 http://www.festival-cannes.com/en/i...-the-50th-anniversary-of-2001-a-space-odyssey
I quite enjoyed it. It was decent, but no award winner. I recall there were rumors Hayley was supposedly going to be 1 of the 7, but I guess they didn't want to diversify that much. It's a shame it wasn't a hit. A nice action Western with 2 A-listers should have easily pulled $200 million worldwide.
Zack Snyder is planning to film Ayn Rand's The Fountainhead, which sounds like both a terrible idea and something perfect for Zack Snyder. https://www.polygon.com/2018/5/28/17403266/zack-snyder-the-fountainhead-adaptation-ayn-rand
The first thing I thought about when reading that news was this terrific review of "Batman vs. Superman: Dawn of Justice": http://www.filmfreakcentral.net/ffc/2016/03/batman-v-superman-dawn-of-justice.html
I saw a trailer a few months ago about a horror-style movie that seemed to be based very loosely on a Heaven's Gate style cult but in which the alien connection was presented as having some basis in reality. But I can't remember what it was called. Anyone here have a clue what I mean?
Nooooo clue. But I'd recommend searching for 2018 horror films. You might have to cross check maybe 10 films, but you'd come across it.
Thanks. I ended up finding it by stumbling upon this Guardian review of the movie: https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/jun/30/the-endless-review
Professor Discovers 'Lost' Stanley Kubrick Screenplay - Smithsonian https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smar...rs-lost-stanley-kubrick-screenplay-180969660/ In 1956, when he was still a relatively unknown director, Stanley Kubrick wrote a screenplay based on the novella "Burning Secret" by Austrian writer Stefan Zweig. The screenplay was never made into a movie, and at some point, it was lost; for many years, Kubrick scholars did not know if the director had even finished the script. But according to Yohana Desta of Vanity Fair, a film professor in Wales has discovered the missing screenplay—and coming in at more than 100 pages, it is nearly complete. Nathan Abrams, a professor at Bangor University, was alerted to the existence of the script after his book, Stanley Kubrick: New York Jewish Intellectual, was published earlier this year. The son of one of Kubrick’s “collaborators,” who would like to remain anonymous, contacted Abrams and invited him to view a copy of Burning Secret that he had in his possession. "Burning Secret" was adapted from Zweig’s work of the same name, an unsettling novella that follows a baron who befriends a 12-year-old boy in the hopes of seducing his married mother. Zweig’s story is set in an Austrian resort, and the mother and her son are Jewish. Kubrick’s adaptation transports the characters to the American South and elides references to their ethnicity—an intriguing decision, according to Abrams. The script is marked with a stamp from the script department at MGM studios. It’s not clear why Kubrick’s "Burning Secret" never made it to the big screen, but the BBC reports that the project may have been canceled because the director’s simultaneous work on "Paths of Glory" put him in breach of contract. It is also possible that the film, with its explorations of adultery, was simply too racy for studio executives in the 1950s. Whatever the case, Abrams is confident that the decision to axe the project came from the studio, not Kubrick.
There is a "random thoughts about film" thread. This random thought would be a good post for that thread.
Oscars Won't Televise All Awards Live, Adds 'Popular' Film Category - Hollywood Reporter https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/r...s-telecast-adds-popular-film-category-1133138 The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences' board of governors has approved several major changes to the tradition-bound Academy Awards ceremony's format in the hope of retaining the dwindling number of Oscars telecast viewers it still has and luring others back into the fold ahead of the 91st Academy Awards on Feb. 24, 2019. To address the concerns of those who find the show to be too long and boring (thanks largely to the current existence of 24 competitive awards, of which the general public only cares about a few), AMPAS President John Bailey and Academy CEO Dawn Hudson said in a letter to members that the board has "committed to producing an entertaining show in three hours." They explain that this will be achieved partly by "present[ing] select categories live, in the Dolby Theatre, during commercial breaks (categories to be determined)." Those categories will not be removed from the telecast; instead, "the winning moments will then be edited and aired later in the broadcast." At least as important, in terms of improving the ratings of the Oscars telecast for ABC, the Academy also said in its letter that it "will create a new category for outstanding achievement in popular film" in time for the 91st Oscars, adding that "[e]ligibility requirements and other key details will be forthcoming." Some will complain that adding such a category cheapens the prestige of the Oscars, making it more like the People's Choice Awards or MTV Movie & TV Awards. More than the length of the telecast or the name of the host, Oscar ratings have been shown to correlate with the popularity of the nominated films among the general public. And the gulf between what the public buys tickets to see and what the Academy nominates and awards has never been greater. If the popular film award is implemented in time for the 91st Oscars, then there is little doubt that ratings will improve, since blockbusters like Black Panther, Avengers: Infinity War, Deadpool 2, Mission: Impossible – Fallout, and Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again — and their fan-favorite stars — will be guaranteed a presence at the ceremony. (Black Panther already was expected to seriously contend for competitive nominations and awards, and the Academy confirms, "A single film is eligible for an Oscar in both categories — Outstanding Achievement in Popular Film and the Academy Award for Best Picture.") Historical note: The First Academy Awards Had Two Best Picture Categories, Too - Time http://time.com/5362713/academy-awards-new-film-category-history/
There have been various jokes and amusing observations made about this choice, one of which was the question which category "Gone with the Wind" should have gone into in the 1940 Oscars.
I guess they thought they solved this "problem" by expanding the Best Picture category to a maximum of 10 nominees. But, of course, none of those extra films added had any realistic chance of winning the big prize. They were only there for show, an attempt to prove the Academy was being inclusive of genres usually overlooked or being hip and up-to-date with current tastes.
Haven't they already done something like this by adding the animated feature category? It didn't help ratings then, and this won't help it now.
Oscars Put 'Most Popular' Category On Hold, Won't Be Part Of 2019 Ceremony - Deadline Hollywood https://deadline.com/2018/09/oscars-most-popular-film-category-scrapped-academy-board-1202458508/ Less than a month after announcing a plethora of changes to the annual Oscars ceremony, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences said today that one of them, a controversial new Most Popular Film category, will now not be a part of the 2019 show as had been planned. “The Academy recognized that implementing any new award nine months into the year creates challenges for films that have already been released,” said AMPAS on Thursday of the course change for the 91st Oscars, set for February 24, 2019. The organization also promised to seek “additional input” and further discussion” on the new category. So, with this tactical retreat raising the possibility that Black Panther will now be part of the traditional Best Picture slate in the increasingly ratings-challenged ABC broadcast, the Academy also laid out additional milestone dates for the 92nd Oscars in 2020. On August 8, when dropping the news of the Most Popular Film category, AMPAS also said it was moving up the 92nd Oscars more than a week to February 9, 2020. That move sent other awards-season staples like the guilds — including ceremonies from SAG-AFTRA, the PGA and DGA — scrambling to adjust their 2020 dates to accommodate the Academy’s move.
Mel Gibson to direct, co-write 'WIld Bunch' remake https://t.co/vDfVILfzRQ pic.twitter.com/QDTH1TU2GP— The Hollywood Reporter (@THR) September 24, 2018 Besides the obvious problems there are with Mel Gibson, this seems like a particularly bad idea. "The Wild Bunch" is a near perfect movie. From the very starting point of any remake, there is next to no chance of improving upon it, even discounting the other big problem which I discuss below. This problem is this: "The Wild Bunch" can be considered an American demarcation, a hinging moment if you will, in the Western mythos. There had been other American films who tried to deconstruct the genre, like "Ride the High Country" (not coincidentally also a movie Sam Peckinpah was involved in as a director). The spaghetti western genre had further hollowed out the (old-fashioned & American) totems of the genre. What Peckinpah wanted to do was to tie the story of the end of an era in the film itself (aging western outlaws reaching the end of the tracks) to the story of the end an era in terms of a certain type of western cinema. Hence why he cast so many veteran western actors, who had starred in the movies he was now announcing were over with as a cultural expression. Movies which at that point had dominated American cinemas for over half a century and through directors like John Ford and Howard Hawks had helped define the cinematic language. No such cultural framework exists today. You could not find an equivalent to William Holden, Ernest Borgnine, Robert Ryan, ... today. Remaking this movie as a decision betrays that the people responsible already partially do not understand or choose to ignore what the original film signified.