In a break with Oscar show tradition, the 2021 Oscar ceremony for 2020 films allowed a commercial promoting a coming movie to air:
Steven Spielberg's remake of the 1961 Best Picture Oscar winner West Side Story.
They got away with this commercial by having it introduced as part OF the Oscar ceremony. But still.
One commercial does not a full impression make, but I had one:
We hear the gripping opening bars of music that, in the 1961 version, took place from a helicopter looking straight down from a vertiginous height over NYC, in "70 mm SuperPanavision" or some such. Dizzying, epic vistas.
But the Spielberg puts those notes over static, street level, very grim and REALISTIC shots of NYC. (Today? Or period? I couldn't tell.)
The realism also seems to sound in the casting of actual teenagers AS teenagers, and with the ethnicity correct, this time(no Natalie Wood in brown-face).
All well and good, but I started to remember Van Sant's Psycho and this occurred to me:
Van Sant in 1998 could not recreate the ambiance of impact of Psycho from 1960...and Spielberg at a greater distance from roughly the same time(1961) may be delivering something "too old to be new" as well. Will the Bernstein-Sondheim songs MATTER so much in 2021 (has rap been added to the score? I dunno.)
That said, Spielberg even in his old age has considerable clout and demonstrable talent. He COULD pull it off.
I doubt it wins 10 Oscars, though.
I guess its a labor of love for the original. Like Van Sant's Psycho.
Kurosawa came pretty close with Rashomon (1950), Ikiru (1952) and Seven Samurai (1954), but stumbled with The Idiot (1951) which broke up the continuity.
I thought the WSS (2021) Trailer looked pretty good... Spielberg is at least trying to find/compose striking shots, something lots of modern directors seem to have given up on, and maybe he has some good visual ideas overall.
Of course, there's another big budget NY/Puerto Rican film coming out first (from the Hamilton Guy, Lin-Manuel Miranda, featuring Hamilton-y though-speak-singing): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0CL-ZSuCrQ
The music's just toy-town pop-music (sounds and feels a lot like Greatest Showman too) compared to Bernstein but the people may just like it more.
Kurosawa came pretty close with Rashomon (1950), Ikiru (1952) and Seven Samurai (1954), but stumbled with The Idiot (1951) which broke up the continuity.
---
Christomacin:
Is this post meant to be in response to a different thread? Your point here is well taken...I was wondering if this was in comparison to my remarks on Hitchcock's stunning "four in a row" of Vertigo, NXNW, Psycho, and The Birds. (I put this on the Marnie board.)
I thought the WSS (2021) Trailer looked pretty good... Spielberg is at least trying to find/compose striking shots, something lots of modern directors seem to have given up on, and maybe he has some good visual ideas overall.
---
Spielberg is interesting to me. He was the "genre blockbuster king" of the 70s and 80s....made a bit of a comeback in the 90's(Jurassic Park in his wheelhouse; Schindler's List on the serious side) and is evidently the most financially successful filmmaker in history. But in his "old age," he seems to be getting neglected. Scorsese stole his heat.
Still, from the beginning, he was always praised for his sense of visual composition and shots(kinda like that Hitchcock fellah) and I suppose that remains his strength today.
I suppose what I'm mainly wondering about is: will this new West Side Story -- with the same songs and score of 1961 -- hit as big in 2021? This was the commercial question about Van Sant's Psycho...and the answer was a resounding NO -- Van Sant's Psycho barely played two weeks in theaters.
--
Of course, there's another big budget NY/Puerto Rican film coming out first (from the Hamilton Guy, Lin-Manuel Miranda, featuring Hamilton-y though-speak-singing): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0CL-ZSuCrQ
The music's just toy-town pop-music (sounds and feels a lot like Greatest Showman too) compared to Bernstein but the people may just like it more.
---
The old "Hollywood undercutting game" -- like how in 1970, MASH the movie came out first and outshone the bigger Catch 22 of later that year? Maybe? But as you point out, the modern music may be more popular...but not as good.
Ah, technology. The trailer for Van Sant's Psycho couldn't match the trailer for Hitchcock's Psycho -- what with Hitchcock himself walking around and talking in the 1960 trailer -- but there ARE shot by shot match-ups of the two Psychos on you tube.
The old "Hollywood undercutting game" -- like how in 1970, MASH the movie came out first and outshone the bigger Catch 22 of later that year? Maybe? But as you point out, the modern music may be more popular...but not as good.
Yes! The people behind WSS 2021 and In The Heights 2021 must kind of *hate* each other at this point. It's an old, remarkable story the shared zeitgeist of ideas and technology at a time often leads to very similar (at least in outline) movies being green lit around the same then both racing to meet similar release dates. Strangelove/Fail Safe, Deep Impact/Armageddon. Volcano/Dante's Peak, The Illusionist/The Prestige, and lots more.
Netflix Taking Over News: something new on Netflix that looked like a hybrid of Wall-E and The Incredibles got some raves - The Mitchells vs The Machines - and I duly checked it out. It's quite good fun for the whole family with some interesting ideas, lots of good jokes, and especially excellent voicework from Olivia Coleman. Above all it's pretty damned impressive dropped out of nowhere on Netflix. I mean, blimey, Netflix really *are* almost certainly the second biggest movie studio now behind Disney's sprawling empire. Anyhow the lead character in The Mitchells vs The Machines is a teen girl, Katie, who makes movies starring her dog and her brother for youtube etc (one of the key, partially maddening features of the overall film is that it feels like it was in part shot and edited by Katie herself) and who is trying hard to get accepted to film school in LA. We see her scripted application to film school which includes images of her directorial Mount Rushmore: https://twitter.com/NetflixFilm/status/1388251826483449857/photo/1
Gerwig (Ladybird, Little Women), Celine Sciamma (Water Lillies, Portrait of a Lady on Fire), Lynne Ramsay (Morvern Callar, We Need To talk About Kevin,You Were Never Really There), Hal Ashby (Harold and Maude, Shampoo, Being There).
reply share
Could a current, awkward but hipster-wannabe, seemingly budding lesbian teen really have these as her heroes? I'm not sure (particularly given that Katie's own films seem more influenced by modern genre action directing styles), but it's an interesting idea nonetheless, and does suggest how we may at last have reached a true tipping point with how many plausibly inspiring and cool contemporary directors may be women (and among white male luminaries an Ashby can easily loom larger for a particular creative individual than a Hitchcock or a Spielberg or...). Note that one of Katie's Dog-Cop movies is called 'Dial B for Burger' so Hitch did get that nod at least.
Netflix Taking Over #2: The Woman In The Window starring Amy Adams w/ Julianne Moore and Gary Oldman and directed by Joe Wright (Atonement, Pride and Prejudice, etc.), is dropping exclusively on Netflix soon (May 14?): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_0GJg_Jnlo
Looks a bit overdone to me... but with its good cast (although it actually *hurts* to see Amy Adams' character so broken down!) and gender-flipped Rear Window/The Tenant vibe I *will* watch it if the reviews are even a little positive. Note that Adams has a junket-style interview floating around online, e.g., here https://www.smh.com.au/culture/movies/amy-adams-on-breaking-the-hitchcock-heroine-mould-in-her-latest-role-20210429-p57nc5.html
about how TWITW is her trying to 'break the Hitchcock heroine mould'. In the interview she claims to have been obsessed with/possessed by Novak's turn in Vertigo for years!
Netflix Taking Over #2: The Woman In The Window starring Amy Adams w/ Julianne Moore and Gary Oldman and directed by Joe Wright (Atonement, Pride and Prejudice, etc.), is dropping exclusively on Netflix soon (May 14?)
---
Way back before COVID hit, I went to movie theaters and I saw that trailer AT the movie theater and me and mine said, "hey, that looks pretty good -- Rear Windowish" (I daresay Rear Window paces Psycho as thriller inspiration..NXNW is too unique with the crop duster and Mount Rushmore and Vertigo has inspired some movies but never well enough.
On "Netflix" taking over , a couple of thoughts:
Tom Hanks gave a recent quote that makes basic common sense: when COVID is over, big budget movies that have to be shown on the big screen for maximum impact(and bucks) will be shown on the big screen before streaming...little indies may go to streaming and never GO to theaters. "Change is inevitable."
Fair enough. But I was wondering if Spielberg's outcome is inevitable: the Emmys and the Oscars merge to award movies seen ONLY on TV.
But what to do with the movies that DO go to theaters? Can't be the Oscars if they are only Marvel movies.
Netflix Taking Over #2: The Woman In The Window starring Amy Adams .... I *will* watch it if the reviews are even a little positive.
Uh-oh, the reviews are *terrible*... No way I'd leave the house/pay additional money to see something so marginal.... but since it's *there* at no additional cost to me on Netflix I'll *still* watch it (soon). Considered personally, I can say that quite a bit of what I end up watching on Netflix is sub-par films with some actress whom I like. Another new entry on Netflix this week is Melanie Laurent in a claustrophobic, French sci-fi, 'Oxygen'. I'll watch that too. A couple of weeks ago it was Anna Kendrick and Toni Collette in 'Stowaway', a true Twilight-Zone ep sci-fi somehow stretched out to 80+ minutes.
reply share
Uh-oh, the reviews are *terrible*... No way I'd leave the house/pay additional money to see something so marginal.... but since it's *there* at no additional cost to me on Netflix I'll *still* watch it (soon).
---
Its becoming a "hanging on fact" in the wake of the pandemic that movies like "The Woman in the Window" -- which some of us die-hard movie theater goers MIGHT have gone to see just to get out on a weekend -- are now appearing on Netflix and revealing their unworthiness in a very "easy to take, easy to reject" home TV setting.
I have several streaming services, and I notice that Netflix -- having made a big splash a couple of years ago with The Irishman -- has not really found anything of that gravitas or quality since. Most recently, I watched a Melissa McCarthy superhero spoof movie that, again...oh, MAYBE I would have gone to the theater, but...on TV...it just doesn't look worth it.
Meanwhile, HBO Max continues its "same month to theaters and here" deal with an Angie Jolie action movie this month. Which I will watch. It sounds passable (with a firejumper background.) But that Denzel mystery a few months ago was awful. Some of the world waits for "Suicide Squad" on HBO Max; I'm intrigued by Matrix IV -- but what I REALLY want to see is the Sopranos prequel. Irony, I WOULD have seen it in a theater, but now it will be back home on TV.
---
Considered personally, I can say that quite a bit of what I end up watching on Netflix is sub-par films with some actress whom I like.
---
Netflix and other streamers are providing much-needed work to "name stars" who have mansion mortgages to keep up. It feels like these stars will take ANYTHING -- remember that one with Sandra Bullock wearing a blindfold?
Another new entry on Netflix this week is Melanie Laurent in a claustrophobic, French sci-fi, 'Oxygen'.
---
That's one of those "one set" movies where the set is teeny tiny. I might watch.
---
I'll watch that too. A couple of weeks ago it was Anna Kendrick and Toni Collette in 'Stowaway', a true Twilight-Zone ep sci-fi somehow stretched out to 80+ minutes.
--
Hmm..I didn't see that one. Another problem with Netflix -- a movie can't really be built up over time and separated out. Recall how Hitchcock went a few weeks with "The Birds is Coming!" You can't really do that on Netflix.
When the pandemic is completely, fully, totally over I anticipate the movie theaters getting lots of movies...hopefully better movies. But certain changes have been made to lifestyle.
PS. I risked a movie theater again a few weeks ago to see "Nobody" with Bob Odenkirk(a longtime favorite of mine now a star thanks to Breaking Bad/Better Call Saul.) He plays a "middle aged John Wick" who reveals to his family that this schlumpy dad is..wait for it...a trained killer and spy. Its "John Wick meets True Lies The Equalizer Meets History of Violence" but...casting and twists make it work. It plays tough and real and Mr. Odenkirk puts himself through some really rough and gory fake fights. Recommended...for action fans.
The Woman In The Window (Quick review): Very stock, airport novel-level, post-Gone Girl, 'unreliable gal narrator' mystery. All characters in this feel very flat, like formulas or lists of character traits. The film's characters are, however, unusually unattractive and unlikeable, certainly compared to the characters in the films it explicitly references: Laura, Spellbound, Rear Window, etc. (Amy Adams's character falls asleep each night watching dvds/blu-rays of 1940s/1950s mysteries/noirs).
I felt a bit sorry for the actors. There were lots of loose ends in the screenplay and when the big ending reveal comes it feels like at least 10 other possibilities might have worked about equally as well, which is to say just kind of averagely. A central end-precipitating plot point involving a (very faint and distorted) reflection in a wine glass was pretty bizarre since 2 characters instantly agree on who the reflection is and agree that it upends everything we thought we knew. But *we* see what they see and there's no way such a positive ID can be made. 'Huh? Damnedest thing, but it could be anyone.' would be the only realistic response.
Disappointing, with none of the clever dialogue or subtexts of Gone Girl that's for sure. Some flashy camera tricks can't hide the thinness and the not-at-all-fun-ness of the underlying conception here. The Director Joe Wright has mainly worked on genuinely literary adaptations, e.g., of Jane Austen, Tolstoy, Ian McEwan (Atonement). Ha, no such luck here mate! You're in the airport-novel swamps with this one.
The old "Hollywood undercutting game" -- like how in 1970, MASH the movie came out first and outshone the bigger Catch 22 of later that year? Maybe? But as you point out, the modern music may be more popular...but not as good.
---
Yes! The people behind WSS 2021 and In The Heights 2021 must kind of *hate* each other at this point.
---
And one wonders...if Spielberg's WSS had met its original release date (Xmas 2020), it might have been first, and out of the way...clearing the way FOR In the Heights.
---
It's an old, remarkable story the shared zeitgeist of ideas and technology at a time often leads to very similar (at least in outline) movies being green lit around the same then both racing to meet similar release dates. Strangelove/Fail Safe, Deep Impact/Armageddon. Volcano/Dante's Peak, The Illusionist/The Prestige, and lots more
---
These situations fascinate me. Its possible that agents see scripts for one, and go hunting to buy a novel for another. Or "great minds think alike."
I recall Bruce Dern on Johnny Carson in 1977 promoting his new "terrorists fly blimp into the Super Bowl thriller" Black Sunday(my favorite of '77, natch) and Dern said, in that "Dernsie" snickering way (just this side of Jack Nicholson at the time):
Dern: Yeah, we were kinda feelin' good when Two Minute Warning flopped out there, y'know what I mean?
Two Minute Warning was a much cheaper Universal film from late 1976 that posited a psycho sniper at the Super Bowl. In the climax , he kills several mid-level stars, ruining their carefully built up little personal stories(David Janssen gets killed right when he decides to reconcile with wife Gena Rowlands; gambler Jack Klugman wins his football bet, so bookies won't kill him -- and then HE gets a sniper bullet. Etc.) And then the crowd panics and overruns the stadium.
A number of 1976 critics were disgusted by the "base" nature of Two Minute Warning and felt that it might inspire copy cat shooters. NBC refused to air the film, but they had a deal with Universal and Universal pitched: "let's add a half hour of new footage with TV actors and tell a new, non-violent story."
And so they did. For NBC, the psycho sniper became a non-lethal "decoy" sniper(firing into the air and into empty seats) to create a panic that would cover up an art museum robbery across the street. All of the star killings were removed...so they got happy endings.
Two-Minute Warning star Chuck Heston filmed a few scenes against a wall with a walkie talkie, saying "I think this sniper isn't a psycho...I think he's out to create a panic to cover up that art museum robbery across the street."
Terrible...but network TV was spared a movie about psychotic mass shootings...a few decades before that became the norm.
BTW, in his "star diary," Chuck writes this about a day working on Two-Minute Warning: "I spent the day shooting a very ordinary scene, but with Marty Balsam, who is NOT an ordinary actor."
...and then there was the time Fox had a book called The Tower, and Warners had a book called The Glass Inferno, and rather than competing , they COMBINED to make "The Towering Inferno."
With two studios as banks, the movie got:
Two superstars (McQueen and Newman)
Two directors (John Guillerman for "drama," Irwin Allen for action.)
Finally, there is some show biz reportage out there about how the virus movie "Outbreak" with Dustin Hoffman was in a development battle with a "monkey virus" movie that had Robert Redford and Jodie Foster attached. The Hoffman movie was made, the Redford movie was scrapped with one wag saying "honestly, the script devolved into scene after scene of the heroes shooting monkeys."
Kurosawa came pretty close with Rashomon (1950), Ikiru (1952) and Seven Samurai (1954), but stumbled with The Idiot (1951) which broke up the continuity.
---
Christomacin:
Is this post meant to be in response to a different thread? Your point here is well taken...I was wondering if this was in comparison to my remarks on Hitchcock's stunning "four in a row" of Vertigo, NXNW, Psycho, and The Birds. (I put this on the Marnie board.)
It might be entertaining, like yet another revival on stage of a historical musical, but there doesn't really seem to be much of an artistic point. It will get a lot of attention for a few months, and will be forgotten within a few years while the original is still regarded as a classic.