That’s what some industry insiders told me when the movie screened for international sales. That’s why there’s no US distribution yet, no US premiere date and there had been reshoots after 2 years the production finished, as Frears admitted recently.
Anybody can confirm this?
That's what I imagined. If the film found no distributor after two years, even with Stephen Frears behind it and a stellar American cast, it's probably a crap film. That's why Frears shot some scenes again and changed the title. At least he got a premiere at TIFF because if it was at Cannes or Venice the press would destroy it.
shareAgree with everything except the “stellar” cast: one of the reasons this movie has not the attention and buzz is that nobody in the cast is a star.
shareThere's no big star in it, that's true. Foster, Pace, O'Dowd...they have good films in their curriculums bit this is their first big dramatic film with major roles. On the other hand, even with really famous actors, it seems the issue here in with the script mostly, not the cast. Perhaps it could have attracted buyers with better names...but only this.
shareYes, the script could be the problem, but we also know that Frears is not consistent with the good work: sometimes he directs great films and sometimes he directs messes.
On related news about the US distributor: they did found a minor, almost embarrassing distributor for North America: eOne. They are known in the business for buying straight to VOD films, one example the Diana biopic with Naomi Watts: terrible stuff. So the fact that they couldn’t find a serious distributor for the US, and even having now they STILL have not a date for the theatrical release, is not a good sign and almost confirms the negative buzz about this movie since Cannes. They’ve been trying to sell it for two years now, changed the cut, did reshoots....and all the got was eOne. Too bad.
I saw that about eOne. Confirms it how bad The Program must be. I don't even know why Studiocanal is wasting its money by releasing it in big markets such as France and UK because it will certainly flop over there. Maybe Frears will try to save it at TIFF and LFF but it screams flop. Aftr theatrical release they might settle a VOD release and a Netflix streaming to earn some money.
I mean, shooting startedin late 2013, producers presented the film to buyers in many festivals in 2014, nothing happened. First bad sign. This year Cannes revealed the movie wouldn't be there because Frears had to do some re-shooting. Second bad sign. Now eOne acquired it. No salvation for this. I feel sorry for Foster and O'Dowd though, this was supposed to be a huge film for them...
I dunno man, O'Dowd is definitely a shaky actor, he's a comedian, he was in the IT Crowd, but it lacked good acting really, good jokes, good writing, but not brilliant actors
shareI like him. I'm sad cause this film was his first big role in a baity project but it was a huge bomb and it had poor reviews. I watched it recently and I think Foster and O'Dowd did a very good job but the rest...just awful. The script was really bad too.
shareThroughout the year, I was expecting this to be released some time in the fall. It kept getting mentioned on all the Oscar prediction sites as a Best Picture contender. Now it's coming to light that it's not even good enough to get a U.S. release date? Do these Oscar prognosticators ever do their homework?
shareThey think it's good because Frears is involved, he did it right after Philomena. But critics make their lists basedon names popularity, not quality. It's always fun to see their lists early the year and then in December...many things change.
shareDidn't hurt Grace of Monaco at the Emmys, where it is competing for Best TV Movie...
shareJust saw this at TIFF. Unenthusiastic crowds, especially for TIFF whose audiences usually give everything a standing ovation. A shame because it really wasn't that bad - and I had set the bar low for this.
Ben Foster was brilliant and totally believable as self-centred, charming Lance. He had his mannerisms spot on. Honourable mention goes to Jesse Plemons as Floyd Landis. He was great and I really felt for Landis (and I never did in real life). Chris O'Dowd was good with what he had, but I got the sense that his character was originally supposed to be the main character then took a backseat to Lance in editing. His investigation felt a little shoehorned into the narrative. It almost felt like Frears started making an "intrepid journalist" movie, but halfway through turned it into a straight-up "sports hero downfall" movie so neither quite succeeded. If he'd gone with one or the other, the movie could've been great.
As a cycling/TdF fan (but never actually a huge fan of Lance), I didn't learn anything new and wish they could've gone more in-depth into how Lance was really just emblematic of a larger problem in the sport. They mention the Festina scandal and that Ferari had other patients, but other than that if you came in knowing nothing about the sport, you would think only Lance/US Postal had such a sophisticated doping program. Ben Foster mentioned in an interview that he wanted people to see Lance in shades of grey, but Frears outright called Lance a "criminal" and a "liar," so the film lacked some nuance.
I think this almost needed to be a mini-series, to show how Lance's rise and fall over time. The movie felt rushed, and yet it dragged at the same time. Overall, there were some great moments (team bus scenes; Lance's cancer recovery; his scenes with Dr. Ferrari, the Andreus and Landis; the GORGEOUS cycling cinematography) but the movie as a whole lacked cohesion or something. Frears mentioned in his intro that this is a "heist" movie, but it lacked much tension or suspense. Again, the movie was worth seeing and I liked it, but I think Ben Foster's performance really helped elevate it.
Thanks for the review! I've read some critics and most of them have been mixed/negative. I think only The Guardian gave it four stars and that's it.
Foster seems pretty good in the film, O'Dowd too, but seeing the trailer I got the impression this would be another Diana, another movie that doesn't tell anything we didn't know already. And some characters seem quite stereotyped too. I read some reviews saying that Ferrari was very bizarre when it comes to appearance and accent (why did Frears hire a French guy to play him and not an Italian one?).
How was the crowd's reception? Standing ovation? Or nothing?
I love Guillaume Canet, but he was a bit over the top as Ferrari.
It was the weakest reception I've ever seen for a TIFF film, which surprised me. There were quite a few empty seats (even though the screening was supposedly sold out) and there was a perfunctory applause at the end. I've been to many TIFF screenings over the years and this is the first time the cast and crew haven't received a standing ovation (that I've seen) when they're actually there. TIFF crowds are known for giving EVERYTHING standing ovations! And most people left before the credits rolled**, also rare for TIFF. Maybe because it was an afternoon screening?
EDIT: Sorry, that should have read before the credits FINISHED rolling. No one walked out before the film ended. It wasn't THAT bad.
I find him awful but OK, opinions. I just found it weird Frears casting him when he could have just chosen an Italian to do that. His excusefor casting Canet was that he didn't find Italian actors who could speak English. I mean, really? His accent seems very distracting in The Program.
Wow, no standing ovation and people leaving the theatre before it ended? Not good. Now I can totally see this film flopping everywhere and that's why it got a bad distributor in US, with a Winter release. I feel sorry for O'Dowd and Foster but they'll have other roles in the future.
I don't think timing was the one to blame, I think it's Frears and Hodge themselves, who apparently didn't make a good film.
50% on Rotten Tomatoes.
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_program/?search=the%20program
I saw the film on its Sunday premiere and I can confirm the tepid applause, the lack of standing ovation and the general lack of interest for the whole cast. The theatre was half empty, as the red carpet fans were just a few. Foster in person gave me the impression of being a prick too much into himself: he acted like he’s already a huge movie star almost ignoring fans while half of the people there never heard about him. Sad.
As for the film all the predictions based on the rejection the film had while selling at Cannes where right on point. eOne passed the distribution rights to an even smaller arm of their entertainment holding: Momentum pictures. Small stuff, still no US release date, just the announcement it would be winter 2016. With means NO OSCAR chances.
The film got awful reviews from the main industry outlets in America: THR basically buried both the film and Foster’s performance and Variety said it was a tv movie and Jesse Plemons gave the best performance of the film. Europeans media outlets were more benevolent for two reasons: The Guardian is closely related with the production (remember Foster gave his shocking admission on PEDs to them with the clear purpose to get some headlines ahead of the TIFF premiere) and Studiocanal is France and UK based. Plus French loves this sport, they have the Tour of France and for them is a personal matter, what happened with Armstrong and the Tour.
Long story short: no surprise nobody wanted to buy this film for the US. Sad also that Foster’s performance felt like Charlize Prince or Jake Mazursky jumped on a bike: same character again and again for this guy. The Mechanic and Contraband’s characters also. His mannerisms as Armstrong were the only thing on point, but no heart, no nuance. Also: he should have spent some more time getting in shape to look like a pro cyclist instead of taking PEDs and tell the world about it for a woo effect and some awards attention.
yeap, I’m disappointed and mad.
That's sad. The film holds a poor 57% on RT, reviews at TIFF are quite negative or mixed. In France they are much better but mainly because of what you said and the fact that French actually hate Armstrong and a film that puts him as a villain is perfect for them.
I have to watch this to see what I think for real, I only saw the trailer and I hated it. Apparently US release date won't happen so soon or maybe ever but it will evetually come out on DVD or some streaming website. I wanna see the damage made! At least Frears will avoid Razzie nods.
I'm not mad but I'm extremely disappointed with how Frears apparently made such a satirical and stereotyped film, characters seem to come from a cirqus or something.
That's sad to hear. I really like Ben Foster and I wanted something good for him. I'm still going to check it out.
Erik Lehnsherr: You want society to accept you, but you can't even accept yourself.
In France reviews are much better, I think they liked better Frears despiction of Armstrong and how he presented his story.
shareI actually excepted and wanted to watch a more balanced and grey study on Armstrongs complexity. Instead the movie and Foster just presented him like an almost laughable villain that gives no choice to the audience other than to hate him. So unidimensional and boring and also the story is just a timeline of journalistic facts that are nothing new. There’s no story actually. There’s no insight into Armstrongs life or psyche. Boring and predictable.
shareFoster’s performance is plain cartoon villain. I hated it. All I saw was Charlie Prince riding a bike instead of a horse, same old character that Foster loves to play again and again, it’s getting old and boring. The best actor in the film is Jesse Plemons. He did so much with so little that was given to him and when I left the theatre I wished the film was about him. People around me at the TIFF premiere agreed as many critics too.
share