Hollywood Babble On & On #317: Miscellaneous Movie Musings...

1. ASTEROIDS? WTF?

Producer Lorenzo di Bonaventura, is taking time off from carrying Paramount, to go to Universal to adapt a big screen live action version of the Atari video game Asteroids.

For those of you under 35 who don't remember Asteroids, you basically control a little trial, that flies around the screen, blasting strangely geometric "asteroids" with you mighty pixel cannon. Take a look at this picture to bask in its amazing eye-popping graphics.

Now I am not the type to think video game adaptations are all that great an idea, even when the games have a story, but I'm positively gobsmacked that someone thinks they can make a movie from the video game with even less narrative content than Pac-Man.

In fact, I think Universal got conned.

Face it, if you want to make a sci-fi action adventure with asteroids, slap together a script about rivalry among outer space miners, toss in a love interest, a disaster, and some pirates, aliens, or alien-pirates, after their booty, and call it Asteroids. It's just that easy.

There was no reason for them to go to Atari and spend good money to buy the movie rights to a game that's been mostly forgotten by even the people who made the high score screen. Asteroids is a common word, used all the time, and unless you're going to cast a bunch of geometric shapes, any story would be different from the complete non-story of the video game. But someone must have made one hell of a sales pitch, using terms like synergy, and paradigms, and other shit, and Universal fell for it like country rubes chugging snake oil.

I salute the people who sold Universal Asteroids as a movie, you truly are magnificent bastards.

2. HARVEY WEINSTEIN, CRITIC AT LARGE

Harvey Weinstein, the founder and destroyer of flailing failing indie TWC, recently posted his first official movie review at web-site The Daily Beast. Now if Harvey decides to keep doing movie reviews for a living, because he's certainly not making anything as a producer, he's going to need the sort of blurbs that will get his name onto movie posters again. So here are a few for him, gratis, because I know he's broke:

-"A brilliant independent movie, I could sit on it for years."

-"This film sucked so hard, I was looking for my name in the credits."

-"This is the sort of praiseworthy film I would crush with one of my multi-million dollar Oscar campaigns."

-"I passed on this script, so you know it must be good."

I hope you can find a use for them Harvey.

3. IN DEFENSE OF GWYNETH

Poor Gwyneth Paltrow, she's being attacked again for unfavorably comparing the USA, the nation of her birth, and the cradle of her career, to another country, this time Spain.

Well, I've decided to not attack Gwyneth for these statements. In fact, I think she has a good reason for making them.

This is a woman who has spent her life surrounded by rich people, and rich show-biz people. She has no idea what it's like for the people who live with incomes under seven figures, and it shows.

Her upbringing is the wealthy equivalent of being raised in the woods by inbred hillbillies who ain't got no knowing of dem dere folks who live in dem dere towns and cities and ain't got no hankerin' to learn about dem either. Except instead of a shack in a holler, it's a house in the Hamptons, or Beverly Hills, and the only Americans she knew who aren't rich are usually the servants, and they're only allowed to speak when spoken to, and even then it's strictly "Yes Mistress."

She's not a pretentious twat who hates her country, she only knows rich America. Blame them for the bad impression, not her for her ignorance.

Hollywood Babble On & On #316: When Smart Becomes Stupid & Stupid Becomes Smart

There was a time when Hollywood did very well with adult movies. I'm not talking about those "adult movies," I'm talking about movies for adults. The sort of films that don't rely on big explosions, and big special effects, including big cleavage, but instead were centered more on plot, dialogue, character, and often dealt with mature and intelligent themes and subject matter.

Nowadays it looks like most major studios avoid such films like the plague, preferring to have big robots smash each other to pieces for big bucks.

I think the blame can be divided two ways, 40% belongs to the audience, and 60% to Hollywood.

WHY IT'S THE AUDIENCE'S FAULT:

1. Demographics 20%: During the first "youthquake" that hit Hollywood in the 1950s independent producer Samuel Z. Arkoff estimated that the ideal target was the 19 year old American male, because he was the bellwether taste-maker at the time. Since then that has skewed younger and younger, and included the new phenom of "tweens."

These are the demographics that dominate audience buying habits. They either buy their own tickets, or decide the films that their parents can see, because they have a lock on the family's disposable income. Plus the younger viewers will go to see the same film again and again, putting a merely popular film into the realm of the blockbuster.

The problem is that if you want the true definition of an idiot with the attention span of a over-caffeinated gnat, it's a teenager. It's not a personal attack against them, all teens are idiots, I was an idiot when I was a teenager, so was you, and everyone you know. It's a scientific fact.

2. POOR URBAN PLANNING 10% & LAZINESS 10%: The days when you could walk down the street to your local neighbourhood theatre to see a flicker show do not exist for the average person. The bulk of people live in suburbs where it's just not easy to get anywhere, so going to a movie is no longer a casual thing, it's an event requiring a lot of logistical work. You have decide on a movie, find a theatre that's showing it, load up the car, find a parking space, which you probably have to pay for, stand in line at the Cineplex with a bunch of pimply little teenyboppers who are buying tickets to the PG film so they can sneak into the R rated movie next to yours, buy your ticket, buy your snacks, find a seat, etc...etc...

Most older folks think about all that and say: "Fuck it, I'll rent it from Netflix in a few months."

But they're not the only ones to blame....

WHY IT'S HOLLYWOOD'S FAULT:

1. SKYROCKETING COSTS 20%: The costs of making a film have been affected by an inflation unseen outside Zimbabwe. When you include the costs of distribution and marketing you could spend a minimum of $60-$100 million to release a "low budget" film.

Now this inflation is not a natural inflation, caused by the laws of supply and demand. It's an artificial inflation caused by poor business practices, but it's still making it extremely risky to make a film that doesn't have the potential to be a blockbuster.

2. OSCAR WHORING 20%: One of the worst things to have affected the Academy Awards was when Oscar movies became a genre onto themselves. At one time those films were called "prestige pics" and their purpose was to not only put bums in seats, but to win prizes and critical praise.

At some time in the 1990s, when Miramax began to dominate the Oscars, the shift started where putting bums in seats came in after the prizes and critical praise, and in many cases way after. After a while, lack of commercial success became a sign of Oscar worthiness, and you had films being made not to be enjoyed by the general audience, but by the narrow audience of Academy voters, who ironically, usually don't pay to see such films, preferring screeners given to them by producers.

I guess the best way to sum it up, is that Oscar films don't have to be good, because they're not being judged on if they're well made or not, but on whether they're important, and sincere enough to be worthy of an Oscar.

3. INABILITY TO ARGUE 20%: In places where everyone thinks alike people rapidly lose the ability to argue. In a social circle that includes a variety of opinions people say: "I disagree, and these are my points," which then get some counter points in return, and vice versa, until either one side wins, or they at least agree to disagree. However, toss disagreement into a milieu where the overwhelming majority agrees on just about everything, and suddenly things shift. The argument then goes: "I disagree, I may have points, but I'd rather impugn you and your motives as the main thrust of my case."

There is no place more wrapped up in group-think and conformity than Hollywood. Just do a survey of how they vote, and they tend to come overwhelming on one side of any issue.

It wasn't always like this. Hollywood was one big floating argument, especially during the early 1970s, the golden age of the mature political film. You had a more conservative "old guard" in a debate with the young whippersnappers who were coming out of New York television and later the first film schools. And these films took the form of a debate. Both sides would be presented in an intelligent and mature way. If the filmmaker had a political axe to grind, they at least tried to convince you, the viewer, that Nixon was evil, or that nuclear power was going to kill us all, with arguments.

Sadly, without the intellectual rigor that's born from constant debate, you see one side being passed on as angelic, and the other demonic, with no gray areas. If the villain, makes what could be construed as a valid political point, there is always included a "gotcha" moment where it's shown that he doesn't really believe any of it, he's just a posturing hypocrite. Because they believe that the audience is too stupid for a real debate with well rounded characters on both sides, and has to be spoon-fed that the filmmaker's side is good, and any other side is pure evil.

Of course such a stance is not going to win over the folks in flyover country who make films profitable, because they don't vote the way Hollywood does, and are considered part of the problem by Hollywood, and treated accordingly on screen.

These factors create what I call the Perfect Storm of Stupid. So called smart films get dumber, there's no profit in making dumb films smarter, because the target demographic isn't going to get it anyway, and audiences start to avoid the "smart" films because they come across as cliched as the "dumb" films, tedious in their self-righteousness, with an added soupcon of being insulting, not only to their intelligence, but also to their existence.

How can Hollywood pull itself out of the stupid spiral and start making films that make money without being dumber than dishwater?

Well, I may be a smug know it all, but even I have my limits, because it would take a complete shake-up of not only how Hollywood does business, but it's internal culture, as well, to make any sort of progress.

Paranoia

We live in an world of paranoia.Paranoia can be broadly described as an exaggerated distrust. In the past, paranoia used to give rise to legends and myths and also strengthened Man's faith in God. But in modern times, paranoia has taken on a new dimension. These days, all incidents are over-analysed and the worst scenario is always the most popular one. An Air France flight crashed in the

Patriotism

What makes one a patriot and what doesn't?Some time back, I was discussing government spending in Mauritius on a blog when someone told me that I should not worry about it since I don't contribute any money to the government coffers. The person was implying that it was none of my business since I was not living in Mauritius. This has happened to me too often. People tend to think of me as a

Gulaal: Movie Review

Cast: Kay Kay Menon, Raj Singh Chaudhary, Ayesha Mohan, Aditya Shrivastava, Piyush MishraMusic: Piyush MishraWriters: Anurag Kashyap, Raj Singh ChaudharyDirector: Anurag KashyapAfter Dev D, Anurag Kashyap comes back with a powerful political movie, Gulaal, which means red. Asusual, there are no Khans nor any Kapoors involved. The cast is lead by the fabulously talented Kay Kay Menon.Synopsis:

State of Play: Mini Movie Review

Cast: Russell Crowe, Ben Affleck, Rachel McAdams, Helen MirrenWriters: Matthew Michael Carnahan, Tony Gilroy, Billy Ray, Paul AbbottDirector: Kevin McdonaldSynopsis: A reporter is on a mission to uncover the truth and conspiracies when the personal assistant of his friend, a Congressman who is investigating a controversial deal with a military defence contractor dies. He will have to make sure

2009 Time 100 : Most Influential People in the World

Time Magazine recently published their yearly list of the 100 most influential people in the world.The list is divided into 5 distinct categories and there are no rankings. According to the managing Editor of the Time 100 (as the list is called),it is not a list of the hottest, most popular or most powerful people, but rather the most influential.Without further ado, here's the list, by category: