Well, the sinister professor of all things twisted and evil has taken time off from his depraved ramblings around the sin dens of old Hollywood with the HEAD GEEK long enough to file this typically complex report with Father Geek back here at AICN Headquarters in Austin. Very interesting... Very interesting indeed...
Moriarty's RUMBLINGS FROM THE LAB #20 Re:
Hey, all. "Moriarty" here. I know, I know... I
said I was taking November off. It's not my fault.
Just when I think I'm out, they PULL ME BACK IN!
HOO-HA! Pardon me... I just saw the ANY GIVEN SUNDAY
trailer again and I had the strangest compulsion to
begin chewing scenery. Since I'm still up to my ears
in the experiments that are taking up so much of the
time here at the Labs these days, let's get down to
brass tacks: how much for the ape?
Well, one of the bigger leaks of the week can be
credited to the guys over at http://movies.ign.com,
who seem to be doing a bang-up job for being such a
new site. Den Shewman scored a copy of David Mamet's
rejected screenplay for HANNIBAL and has run the first
major review of the piece. Sounds like they've kept
all the problems of the book without retaining any of
its strengths. No wonder Foster's making noises about
bailing out. She's got to be nervous about coming
back and destroying a character that still stands as
one of the most popular of the decade. I hope that
she and Hopkins stand their ground until someone
delivers something useable to them. When I come back
from my hiatus for real -- this column's just a
hiccup, one I'm sneaking in -- I'll take a look at the
script myself. I'm a big fan of some of Mamet's
screen writing -- THE VERDICT, THE UNTOUCHABLES, and
his own HOMICIDE leap to mind -- but I don't think
he's infallible. I don't necessarily think Steve
Zallian's the answer for that kind of film, though.
It reminds me of Frank Darabont in the six months
after the nominations for SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION.
Everyone in town offered him everything, and he
commented on one particular time, sitting in a meeting
in which some producers were offering him a bloody
serial killer piece with brutal, graphic murder
sequences, when he finally laughed out loud and asked
them what in SHAWSHANK made them think there was any
reason he'd be interested in that type of film. Just
because someone's great at one thing -- and Zallian is
indeed that -- there's no reason to think they're
right for every assignment. I hope Zallian can find
the human heart of HANNIBAL. It's obvious from the
amount of attention already focused on the still early
development process for the project, people want to
see Lechter and Starling again, as long as it's done
right.
I also have to give ign.com props for making me
insanely happy with one of their stories, in which
they outline the development and specs for a new
Playstation game called EVIL DEAD: ASHES TO ASHES.
Yes, folks, that's right... you're finally going to be
able to pick up the chainsaw in one hand, the shotgun
in the other, and get groovy on some wicked cabin
zombies. Bruce Campbell is providing the voice for
the game, recording all sorts of new material. Since
there's nothing but the vaguest of rumor about future
EVIL DEAD movies at this point, geeks like me will
probably rejoice at this announcement that promises
some respite for us hardcore addicts to the series.
THQ and Heavy Iron Studios have just become my
favorite new friends thanks to the promise of new Ash,
folks... as if the announcement of the McFarlane Toys
Ash figure wasn't already enough to make me cry from
joy.
Now let me follow up one last story that IGN ran
yesterday, since they only had part of it. Eric Roth
has been making sounds lately about writing a FORREST
GUMP sequel, making sounds about how Tom Hanks is part
of the development, and he's been making really coy
sounds lately about the subject of the sequel. All
that is true. Wanna know what it's going to be about?
Remember... you heard it here first. It's a spoiler,
too, so if you don't want to know... RUN, FORREST,
RUN!! Gump's little boy is going to pull a Jenny, and
Gump is going to be rocked to his very core and have
to turn to religion to help him figure out what's
happened. This will send him on a trip through all
the religions of the world, giving Hanks and
(presumably) Zemeckis a chance to make comment as they
jump from Catholicism to Judaism to Buddhism, along
with every other faith of the world. Can't wait to
see Gump in the sure to be hysterical snake handling
sequence.
Actually, all kidding aside, Roth and Hanks and
everyone else involved should be careful, since
they're evidently not allowed to discuss religion to
any serious degree. If they say the wrong thing about
Jesus, William Donahue and the Catholic League may
come down on them. If they say the wrong thing about
L. Ron Hubbard, they'll have Scientologists crawling
all over them. And if they're really not careful,
they could end up like Terrence McNally, who has now
joined Salman Rushdie in the dubious honor of having a
death fatwah issued against him by an Islamic
extremists group over his play CORPUS CHRISTI, which
just opened in London. I haven't seen McNally's play,
so I'm not going to comment on what I think of his
handling of a homosexual Jesus in the piece. I'm sure
it's more sensitive and thoughtful than the infamous
exploitation film HIM ("Why do you think he hung out
with 12 guys?") from the '70s, but of course, there's
no way McNally didn't know that the piece would cause
controversy when he wrote it. That doesn't mean
anyone has the right to kill him over the piece. I'm
so saddened when any attempt to bring any alternative
viewpoints into a discussion about religion, whether
in real life or in art, results in people ending up
further apart instead of closer together. It baffles
me how the whole puruit of faith -- an attempt to
understand one's relationship with mankind and the
eternal -- can result in hatred or violence. It does,
though. I couldn't even write a review for Luc
Besson's magnificent THE MESSENGER (a view I'll stand
behind even as other critics jump into a monkey pile
on it as the release date approaches) without being
bombarded by some truly twisted mail questioning my
background and my motives in discussing Joan and her
relationship with the Church.
I contend that it is literally impossible in this
day and age to write anything of any serious intent
regarding religion without causing outrage from
someone. When CORPUS CHRISTI opened in London,
members of Al-Muhajiroun -- a.k.a. The Defenders of
The Messenger Jesus -- handed out copies of the
fatwah, signed by Sheik Omar Bakri Muhammad, judge of
the Shari'ah Court of the U.K. Why take it to that
extreme? You don't like the play, you should be free
to stand outside and explain to people why. That's
the power of art, man. It challenges you, it dares
you to react. But the minute that protest becomes the
threat of violence, the threat of death... I can't
fully describe to you how sad that makes me.
Somewhere, some artist read that story about McNally,
and they reflected on something, some piece of theirs,
something that they may have already created or that
they might just be considering... and they had second
thoughts. They had doubts. They thought, "Is it
worth it?" I don't fault them. Who wants to invite
that into their life? It doesn't matter if the fatwah
against McNally ever comes to fruition; the one
against Rushdie didn't. In the end, the damage is
done. If even one artist doubts himself or muffles
himself or censors himself out of fear... then we're
all poorer for it.
Speaking of censorship, I'd like to address
something else quickly. Recently, ACCESS HOLLYWOOD
signed a deal with Hollywood Stock Exchange to produce
a Friday segment that predicts the weekend's
box-office. It's just more meaningless numbers being
spouted by more talking heads, exactly what television
doesn't need, but there's plenty of people who get
their rocks off playing HSX, so it seemed like a
decent idea for a regular segment. Instead, the
studios freaked out at the idea of someone on TV
playing the kind of "fantasy football" prediction
games that are so popular online. There was a lot of
threatening and posturing back and forth, and the fate
of the segment's now up in the air.
I'm not going to pretend like this is a "freedom of
the press" issue, since ACCESS HOLLYWOOD is not the
press. It's puff piece publicity machine press
release fluff, and that's exactly why people watch it.
That kind of shows lives and dies based on its
relationships with the studios. I mean, for
chrissakes, the name of the show is ACCESS HOLLYWOOD.
They are freakin' invited. Piss off the people you
work for and get uninvited, and the show doesn't
really work anymore. I think you'll see the show do
exactly what the studios want. If that means losing
the segment, it's gone. You'll hear a lot of noise
about how television's not ready for the Internet yet,
and how it's censorship. Nonsense. It's possible to
tell the truth about this industry online and on
television, but you have to do it without relying on
the old lines of communication and information. I
know there was a bit of hubbub here on the site and in
the press when USA TODAY ran their recent story about
Harry pitching the AICN TV show. Let me just weigh in
with this one thought about the plans that AICN has
for television: it's nothing anyone expects. It is
going to be genuinely thrilling to play with a whole
new medium and to try and create something that no one
else has done in terms of bringing you a unique
insight into the world of film. Harry's got some
great ideas up his sleeve, everyone. When he's ready
to share everything with you, I promise you'll get as
excited as I am.
I don't mean any disrespect, but what's up with
Lucasfilm right now? Are they feeling the pressure of
EPISODE II? Are they just hurting from the fan
backlash against EPISODE I? I hope that the various
sniping comments we've heard from Lucasfilm over the
last few weeks have been misquotations, but if they're
not, I'd like to suggest that they be the last such
public quotes made. First Ringbearer.org reported
that some Icelandic paper (which never did get named
by anyone) supposedly ran an interview with Lucas
where he bagged on Peter Jackson's upcoming LORD OF
THE RINGS project, subtly (and not so subtly)
suggesting that no FX company besides ILM could pull
off the pictures. I don't know... that just doesn't
sound like Lucas to me. It seems like poor
sportsmanship to start taking potshots at someone
else's movie that just happens to be opening at the
same time as one of yours -- RETURN OF THE KING versus
EPISODE II, if all works out correctly. I hope Rick
McCallum was more tactful than to actually call
MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE 2 a "disaster" when interviewed by
AUSTRALIAN INDEPENDENT FILMMAKERS MAGAZINE. The
interview is quoted by Mr. Showbiz in an piece about
how many of the smaller roles in the next two films
will be filled by Australians, introducing a whole new
accent into the STAR WARS universe. That's cool, and
I can get behind Lucas and McCallum in their decision
to go to Australia. I'll be honest... I want to
eventually relocate the Labs down under. I think it
would be amazing. There's a great film community
there, just ready to be worked. For years,
independent Australian films and New Zealand films
have been among the most interesting and consistent in
world cinema. I think it's very, very cool that
somewhere, right now, the first day of filming on Baz
Luhrmann's MOULIN ROUGE is underway. This could be a
glorious experiment, a full-blown musical that works
and reinvents the form, or it could be Luhrmann's ONE
FROM THE HEART. Either way, what a great and crazy
risk. I love that EPISODE II and III and MATRIX II
and III and LORD OF THE RINGS and so much more is
going to be all shot in this one corner of the world,
all at roughly the same time. There's going to be
such a fertile cross-polinization of talent and energy
that we're bound to get some wonderful things from it.
I'm personally praying that M:I2 is going to Woo at
his biggest and best. I'm not going to read the
script before the film comes out, and I'm not going to
be reading spoilers. If you feel like writing me
about the movie, don't. I'm waiting for that one. I
think it's poor form for Lucas to take shots at the
film. He was hammered with enough criticism for his
movie that he should be focused on the two films still
ahead of him. That's enough for anyone to concern
themselves with.
I had the distinct pleasure of reading an advance
copy of Bill Zehme's LOST IN THE FUNHOUSE: THE LIFE
AND MIND OF ANDY KAUFMAN this week. It's slow going
at first, but once it picks up and gets into Andy's
actual work, there is a wealth of material here that
I'd never heard or read anywhere. The book is filled
with personal memories of Andy from everyone who ever
met him, worked with him, or even saw him perform it
seems. It's meticulously researched, and it offers a
portrait of Andy that I had never seen. Between this,
Zmuda's book, and MAN ON THE MOON, it's just a
preposterously wonderful time to be a Kaufman fan.
Now if I could just track down a copy of THE TONY
CLIFTON STORY by Andy Kaufman and Bob Zmuda to read,
I'd die of bliss.
I assume all of you heard the enormously cool news
that Brad Bird has been signed to develop the feature
film version of CURIOUS GEORGE for Universal and
Imagine. I was never a giant fan of the idea of
bringing Curious George to life; big fan as a kid, and
there's a delicate nature to the stories that just
doesn't seem like it could survive the translation to
the screen. Well, with Brad aboard, I'm sold. I'm
there opening weekend. I have absolute faith now that
it will be a film that honors the spirit of the
original books. He's also the only person I'd ever
consider apt as a director for a CALVIN & HOBBES film
(another project I'm dead set against for reasons that
would take too long to explain here). I'm sure
Imagine was thrilled when THE IRON GIANT swept the
27th Annie Awards Saturday night. I was. I know the
film never broke $30 million at the box office, but
the animation community recognized the film with
fifteen major awards, including excellence in
character animation, effects animation, directing,
music, storyboarding, writing, theatrics, individual
voiceover and production design. Awesome. Absolutely
right on the money. Bird and his team have made a
film for the ages, one that will
be remembered far beyond this year's various brutal
box office skirmishes. Bird is the one who first
suggested to me this spring that we could set our
expectations higher with our filmmakers, and I've had
my expectations met time and time again this year with
films that have taken my breath away for one reason or
another.
I'm absolutely stone cold sure that you'll agree
with me when it comes to Tim Burton's triumphant
return to form SLEEPY HOLLOW. This is not a film; it
is a spell that Burton casts on the viewer, a child's
remembered version of a Hammer film. It is the SLEEPY
HOLLOW we all saw after the Irving book had been put
away, when we were trying to get to sleep. There are
moments of haunted beauty in the film, image after
unforgettable image, and the nighttime Horseman rides
are truly stunning. The sounds, the sight of the
Horseman in full gallop, sword or axe swinging -- god,
Tim's created a thing of beauty here. I'm wrestling
with whether or not I feel this is Burton's best work.
ED WOOD is amazing in a totally different way, and
comparing the films may be futile. This is the Burton
that I always hoped he would become. In his original
BATMAN, I thought one of the film's biggest weaknesses
was the mishandling of the action scenes. Burton
never really seemed to have the heart for it. Now,
though, he's found the heart, and he delivers some
astonishing kinetic sequences that really end up being
jarring, exhilarating. He's also finally found the
perfect balance between horror and humor, knowing just
when to tweak the audience this way or that.
Sitting in the Paramount theater tonight, Harry and
Robie and Segue all vanished. I had no sense of them.
I was transported by the film. It's magic from the
moment it begins. Even under the Paramount logo and
the Mandalay logo, there's that first hint of Elfman,
those first few creeping notes, and then the credits
begin, smoke against the darkness, leading us into the
first scene, the first ride, the beheading of Van
Garrett (Martin Landau). It's shocking, bloody,
genuinely scary. When we meet Ichabod Crane, it's
quick, his character etched in as we get a quick
glimpse at the world he lives in. It's just before
the millennium, at the dawn of the 19th Century. He's
a man of science, a man ahead of his time. He's
almost immediately dispatched to Sleepy Hollow by
Christopher Lee in a memorable, wicked little role,
and then the credits continue. It's beautiful,
propulsive, and it wastes no time in setting the mood,
in painting the picture. Burton and Emmanuel Lubezki
are a magnificent team, and if the film were ravishing
only as a visual confection, that would be more than
enough. It's that hypnotic.
That's not it, though; there's more... a lot more.
Tim's jammed this film so full of wonders that if I
try to list them all, I'll end up spoiling the whole
film for you. Jeffrey Jones, Miranda Richardson,
Michael Gough, Ian McDiarmid, Lisa Marie -- ESPECIALLY
Lisa Marie -- Michael Gambon, and even Casper Van Dien
all contribute memorable moments to the film. They've
all got great faces, and the film is spilling over
with character. In particular, though, let me praise
Christopher Walken for his feral work as the Hessian
Horseman, Christina Ricci for striking just the right
tone as Katrina, and Johnny Depp, who continues to
prove himself one of the most consistently fascinating
actors working. He is funny, dashing, goofy, daring,
and charismatic as Ichabod, but he never once lets you
catch him working at it. There's an effortless grace
to the performance, and Depp and Burton deliver
another classic character to the pantheon. Edward
Scissorhands, Ed Wood, and now Ichabod Crane -- I'd
say they just became my official favorite
actor/director team on the planet. I'm not sure what
it is that defines their chemistry, but it's
impossible to deny.
I'm genuinely baffled how anyone could walk out of
this film disappointed. It is such a fast-paced,
confident film, never misstepping, never erring in the
choices it makes. Tom Stoppard's uncredited rewrite
took the Headless Horseman of Andy Kevin Walker's
script and made him a little less Terminator, a little
more avenging ghost. It also managed to elevate the
film from an action-horror piece to a classic dark
fable. I think this film has a magnificent texture
that only Burton could have pulled off. He seems more
in touch with his gifts as an artist here than he ever
has been. Maybe it was the heartbreak of SUPERMAN,
but something seems to have changed him in some way,
and I'd say it's for the better. I've been a fan
since PEE WEE'S BIG ADVENTURE, but I've never been
blind to Tim's weaknesses. His films have always
seemed to be pleasing him than pleasing the
audience. That's not the case here at all. This film
never once takes the easy way out in any scene. If
there's a way to take it one step further, make it one
bit better, Tim does. He adds visual flourish to
every moment without once losing focus of a scene.
There's nothing here for the sake of style; it's all
in service of the witty script that balances its ghost
story and its mystery with aplomb. Stoppard's sure
hand -- the same hand that brought so much to both
BRAZIL and SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE -- haunts the film as
surely as the Horseman does.
I hope this movie does phenomenal business. It
deserves to. I hope it stands up to TWINE and TOY
STORY 2 and END OF DAYS and all the giant December
releases. I hope someone gets me a set of the
McFarlane toys for Christmas, since they are literally
the greatest movie toys of the year, and I will die if
I do not own them soon. I hope Tim Burton contines to
dazzle us now that he has reclaimed his place as one
of the finest fantasy filmmakers, now or ever.
Mainly, though, I just hope I get a chance to see the
film again about five more times opening weekend.
Tonight, Tuesday, Harry and I will be checking out
another major holiday release, and I'm genuinely dying
to know how it's going to be. This one's riskier than
the last few I've seen. I go into it with no
preconceptions. As always, I hope for the best. I'll
check in tomorrow to tell you what film it is and how
it was. Until then...
"Moriarty"out.
|