Not many people care to admit it, but Hollywood is run by fear. Fear is an emotion generated by things that are not known or understood, and in the movie business, no one ever knows what's going to happen. (William Goldman was right when he said, "Nobody Knows Anything.") All those accountants, producers, publicists, entertainment TV shows, ad campaigns, etc. are all an attempt to get a handle on the unknown, an attempt to control the uncontrollable. Anything can happen. The world's biggest movie star can jump up and down on a couch and suddenly become a weirdo outcast. Or the star of a dismal turkey like Showgirls can turn around and find herself cast in a Woody Allen film. This fear, in essence, is why so many movies are so bad. The more investors and business people try to control their investment, the more they clamp down on it, and the more it gets smothered.

See, movies can live and breathe like an organic life form, but they have to have a chance. If brave producers step back and let the movie come to life in the hands of a genuine artist, they could wind up with something extraordinary like Joel and Ethan Coen's No Country for Old Men (229 screens), a film that somehow pleased critics both highbrow and middlebrow, won a handful of Oscars and has nearly grossed $75 million. This film has already entered the cultural canon as a classic of cinema. More or less the same can be said of Paul Thomas Anderson's There Will Be Blood (224 screens), which, having lost the Oscar for Best Picture, is now in a position of being an underrated underdog. But those are exceptions to the rule. No one is immune to the fear: a few years back the Coen Brothers teamed up with sleazy producer Brian Grazer, of all people, and came up with their first dud, Intolerable Cruelty.

The stars must have aligned in a whole new way in the DVD universe, because we have an exceptional number of interesting indie release this week. My top pick is Simon Rumley's The Living and the Dead, which my colleague Scott Weinberg described as "bizarre, chilling and strangely hypnotic." As he wrote in his review, it "isn't a 'horror movie' in the most traditional sense, but is a thoroughly disturbing experience all the same. And by 'disturbing,' I mean: Really twisted, unique and fascinating to puzzle through." The DVD from TLA Releasing includes a "making of" feature, trailers and a stills gallery.

Eve of Understanding stars Rebecca Lowman as Donna, a woman who embarks on a road trip to deliver notes and knick-knacks to a motley crew of people at the behest of her recently-deceased mother. When she saw it at AFI Dallas last year, Cinematical's Kim Voynar wrote that first-time director Alyson Shelton "largely succeeds in what she's trying to get across, largely because Lowman's strong performance keeps us interested in Donna and what happens to her even in the film's weaker spots." The DVD from Vanguard Cinema includes two "featurettes," photo gallery and "director's statement."

At first glance, the screenwriter who gave the world Troy wouldn't seem like the natural choice to adapt a literary novel of childhood joy and adult challenges. But David Benioff isn't just the writer behind brawny action films like Troy and the upcoming Wolverine: Origins; he's also a novelist, who adapted his own book for Spike Lee's brilliant, overlooked 25th Hour. After screening The Kite Runner at the closing night of the Mill Valley Film Festival, Benioff spoke with a roundtable of journalists in San Francisco about collaborating with novelist Khaled Hosseini, the challenge posed by certain cultural differences and the combination of brute force and finesse required to fit an epic novel onto film. Cinematical's questions are indicated.

I guess I'll start with the obvious question, which is: Given that this is a film about a culture completely different from our own, how instrumental was it having (author Khaled Hosseini) on-hand to support you?

David Benioff: It was a great help, and I think I got really lucky, because I've had friends working on adaptations where the relationship between the screenwriter and the novelist is ... tense. And sometimes you have a writer who writes a book and sells the film rights and says "Thank you for the money ..." and just doesn't want to be involved -- and sometimes they want to be so involved -- I can think of examples, like the Sahara guy. (Clive Cussler).

But in this case, Khaled (Hosseini) was both very supportive, but very understanding that the movie was going to be very separate from the book. And he was a great resource; I mean, I could do as much research as I wanted and read books about Afghan history and so on, but I'm not from there, I'm not a Muslim, I didn't grow up in Kabul ... and to be able to call Khaled or e-mail him -- it was mostly a lot of late night e-mails -- and then to wake up in the morning and to have a response from him, a very detailed response from him, explaining what the movie theaters were like in Kabul in the '70s, or what the protocol would have been in a certain situation ... it was a great resource. It was incredibly helpful, and I think it made the script much better than it would have been otherwise.

Cinematical: Obviously, you have a very good relationship with Mr. Hosseini -- and this is not asking you to speak ill of the book -- but what in the book made you roll your eyes, thinking "God, I don't know how you bring this to the screen?"

DB: I don't know if there's a moment, particularly, or just the length of certain sections. For me, when I was reading the book, I was completely captivated by the childhood scenes in Kabul and then felt maybe a slight loss of momentum in the American scenes. You know, many of the (American) scenes I actually love -- and many of them are in the movie -- but I felt like I had to compress that. There's no way to keep as much of the early childhood stuff as we did keep from the book and keep as much of the American things without the movie veering into (a length of) three hours and 30 minutes.

So for me, it was really compressing the American scenes in the center section there, and a lot of compression at the end; at the end of the book, after the climactic fight with the Assef in the Taliban compound and they flee into Pakistan -- then a whole other plot starts, where they're trying to deal with immigration, and dealing with an INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) official, and that was never in the script. It was really a decision partly because of time, and partly because I felt like once we had the climax, having another 45 minutes of story time post-climax ... I felt like I would be wriggling in my seat. It just felt like, structurally, it would be a mistake.

Born in Afghanistan in 1965, Khaled Hosseini left in 1976 as his family was relocated to Paris as part of his father's work for the diplomatic service. It was fortunate timing; while preparing to return to Kabul in 1980, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan plunged the nation into decades of chaos some would suggest it has yet to emerge from. Gaining political asylum in America, Hosseini's family moved to San Jose, California; after attending medical school, Hosseini worked as doctor in Los Angeles -- and wrote his first novel. Not only was The Kite Runner published, but it was on the New York Times best-seller list for over two years, and eventually printed in over 42 languages. Now, after years of development and no small share of controversy, The Kite Runner has come to the silver screen; after screening the film for the closing night of the 30th annual Mill Valley Film Festival, Hosseini spoke with a roundtable of journalists in San Francisco about the challenges of adaptation, the genesis and possible fallout of the film's controversial scene of sexual assault and his own memories of Afghanistan. Cinematical's questions are indicated.

Cinematical: What did you learn about the process of movie making going through this experience?

I underestimated the sheer amount of labor it takes to shoot the seemingly simplest scene, just the amount of work that goes just into setting up a scene and how each member of the team has to do their job exactly right, otherwise the whole thing falls apart. It's very labor intensive. It's also very monotonous. It's exciting in a way, but -- you're doing the same thing over and over and over again. So there's a sense of monotony. I underestimated how exhausting it was. The hours are very long and physically it's very demanding. I don't know how some of these guys do it for 10, 20, 30 years, especially the crew. It's a lot of hard work.

How involved were you in the process?

I was kind of a cultural consultant, a story consultant. Maybe the best way to illustrate it is with an example; I went to L.A. and sat in an office with the producers and we looked at hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of pictures that a scout had taken around the world. And they wanted me to kind of chime in and say if there was any locale that could be used to as stand in for 1970s Kabul. And we looked at Turkey and Tunisia, Morocco and India, Pakistan, but western China, the minute those pictures started coming up, I said, 'This place.' So they went out there and the Afghans who have seen the film are startled at the resemblance.

So that kind of thing – questions about dress, about food, about the way a home is decorated, a variety of things of that nature. But I didn't write the screenplay. Obviously, David (Benioff) did. I read the screenplay and we all kind of chimed in our ideas and David wrote another draft, but really it's his creation.

How do you feel the film captures Amir's betrayal of Hassan, the scene where the boy is attacked? From the work you had do creating that scene, how do you feel about seeing it on screen?

I think the scene was shot tastefully. I think in other hands, it could have really been exploitative, kind of graphic, and I don't think there's any need for that. When the boy walks out of the alley and you see the droplets of blood in the snow, I always feel this incredible moment in the audience where they go, 'Oh!' Suddenly, it elevates the film to another level. The stakes are raised at that moment. It's really a devastating moment.

Slant Magazine has put out its twin top ten lists for this year, and while I have some serious concerns about those lists -- they couldn't find room for Paul Verhoeven's masterpiece even in the honorable mention category! -- their superlatives boxes are some of the funniest I've seen anywhere. Here's a few of my favorites from their list: Most Homoerotic Use of a Computer goes to 300. Worst Performance By an Inanimate Object goes to Titus Welliver's mustache in Gone, Baby, Gone. I have to agree with that one. Worst Use of CGI goes to Jack Nicholson's skydiving scene in The Bucket List. And my absolute personal favorite of them all: Dramatic Climax Best Suited for a WWE Storyline goes to The Kite Runner. If you haven't seen it, you'll know exactly what that means when you do.

By the way, I've noticed that Slant has also jumped on the bandwagon of delivering high, if left-handed praise for the Aqua Teen Hunger Force movie. In his original review, Ed Gonzalez said the movie was "so completely and violently divorced from any normal concept of narrative thinking it becomes Dadaesque." Now, the Slant duo have given the film a prominent mention in their year-end wrap-up for its "avant-garde insanity." I recently heard about another well-known critic who is seriously mulling the possibility of including Aqua Teen in his top ten list for the year. When he told me, I honestly thought he was joking but now I see it's not just him. Although it never occurred to me before, now I think I actually have to see this movie. It sounds like I'm missing out on something.

Coming Soon has a new interview with Daniel Craig, and he's talking Bond 22. The script is done, and filming is expected to start very soon to avoid conflict with a possible Screen Actors Guild strike (different from the WGA strike -- ay caramba!). Craig confirms that Bond 22 immediately follows the events of Casino Royale, and praises director Marc Forster, saying, "If you look at Forster's current body of work, that in itself makes me very excited. If you look at Monster's Ball, Finding Neverland, and then Kite Runner, which is just stunning, it's such a diverse look at the world, I'd want us to have that. Marc is very solid."

You Ian Fleming fans might be disappointed with one tidbit from the interview -- Craig says the new script isn't based on Fleming's work at all: "There's nothing left, as far as I know." As for Craig's controversial mention of adding Roger Moore-style "humor" to the new Bond, Craig insists he was "lying," and adds "I'm not going to shy away from the fact that occasionally there should be humor. I just don't like gags. I don't like written gags. That's not the way I've ever liked working and I don't think that's funny myself." And Craig fans can rest easy, he says he's totally game for another Bond, as well as a sequel to the soon-to-be-released and surprisingly controversial The Golden Compass. There is no Compass sequel script yet, but there is an outline Craig says is "pretty good." Just pretty good? Show us a little enthusiasm there, DC! The Golden Compass releases December 7th, Bond 22 on November 7th, 2008.

Once again it's time to complain about the Academy's foreign film rules and point out the great films ineligible and/or disqualified from being nominated in the category. The Hollywood Reporter has a surprisingly long article about the annual controversy, in which the trade lays out everything you wanted to ever know about the Oscar for "Best Foreign-Language Film." Basically, the usual complaint is that such an award can't always truly honor the best foreign-language film, only the best foreign-language film that falls within certain guidelines.

Some of this year's obvious exclusions are Ang Lee's Lust Caution, which was denied submission by Taiwan because the film is hardly representative of the country's film industry, and Julian Schnabel's The Diving Bell and the Butterfly, which was passed over by its potential submitter, France, in favor of Persepolis (as was La Vie en Rose), which could have settled just fine with being an Animated Feature nominee. Other disappointments include The Band Visit, which was denied for having too much English dialogue, and The Kite Runner, which can't be submitted by Afghanistan because it was directed by Marc Forster, a Swiss-American, and featured an international crew. Afghanistan ended up with no submission, while Israel had to quickly substitute The Band Visit with Beaufort and Taiwan had to replace Lust Caution with Island Etude.

Last year, the Academy retooled some of the restrictions for its foreign-language category, although now it appears they could use some more tweaking. Also, I would like them to retroactively honor excluded films of the past, which they could do in some way without revoking the Oscars it has handed out (except the one for Tsotsi -- that one was really undeserved, and I'll say it again and again).

The record 63 films eligible for the foreign-language Oscar were announced last month by the Academy, and Cinematical's Eric D. Snider comments on that list here.

Later this month, Edward Burns' Purple Violets will be available exclusively on iTunes. You won't see it in theaters, or on DVD or anywhere else -- at least for awhile. Did you know this? I've written about it, and maybe you read that previous post, but if you're not a regular reader of movie news and/or blogs, would you know about the landmark event? I haven't seen any ads anywhere, nor have I even seen mention on the main iTunes page. When I search Purple Violets on the iTunes store, it only gives me the soundtrack -- not even a mention that the film will soon be offered.

So, how is Purple Violets being marketed? I have no idea, which is sad because there's a new bit of information that could be used to advertise to its target demographic. The film was awarded the top prize at the Savannah Film Festival, winning best narrative feature this past Saturday. Certainly this honor will appeal to indie film enthusiasts, no? Sure, the festival isn't the biggest or most prestigious, but the award would still look good on an ad for the film. If only it had one.

Other winners in Savannah included The First Saturday in May and The Singing Revolution, which tied for the documentary award, and Bill Plympton's Shuteye Hotel, which won best animation. First Saturday also picked up a producer award for co-directors/producers John Hennegan and Brad Hennegan and Singing Revolution also won the jury prize. Screenwriter David Benioff, whose adaptation The Kite Runner was screened at the fest, was honored with a non-competition award for Outstanding Achievement in Cinema.

There's no doubting Steven Zaillian's talents as a writer. He won an adapted screenplay Oscar for Schindler's List and also was nominated for Gangs of New York and Awakenings. As a director, too, he's had his share of accolades. Remember Searching for Bobby Fischer? Not bad at all. But considering he last gave us the long-delayed, much-condemned remake of All the King's Men, he has a lot to prove with his next go behind the camera. According to Variety, he's announced his follow-up, and it's a project that will be judged with extra scrutiny since it happens to be an adaptation of one of this year's most popular books. Zaillian will write and direct the screen version of Khaled Hosseini's A Thousand Splendid Suns. Maybe you heard of it; the novel only held the top spot on the New York Times Bestseller List for most of the summer. Personally, I noticed more people reading Hosseini's previous (and debut) novel, The Kite Runner, but still, it's clear the author is the Dan Brown of 2007.

A Thousand Splendid Suns tells the story of two Afghan women married to the same man and their alliance against their abusive husband. It also covers the last three decades of Afghan history, through the Soviet invasion, the civil war and the Taliban rule. It was so highly anticipated after the success of The Kite Runner, that producer Scott Rudin picked up the rights five months before it was even released. It should be pointed out that Rudin produced Zaillian's first two directorial works, Bobby Fischer and A Civil Action, but did not produce All the King's Men. The movie version of The Kite Runner, which was directed by Marc Forster (Finding Neverland) and will be in theaters in November, should be good enough to also build interest for Zaillian's version of A Thousand Splendid Suns. Meanwhile, Zaillian's latest script-work (rewriting himself) will be on display in November's American Gangster, from director Ridley Scott, who also helmed Zaillian's much-panned adaptation of Hannibal.

These days, the global community is all the rage. We talk to people on the other side of the earth through our keyboards, and now cinema is increasingly looking to blur the lines between nations and films. Numerous countries will now pitch in on a single film, directors will come together for huge collaborations and even big-name US directors, like Clint Eastwood and Woody Allen have been jumping out of their comfort zones on international, foreign-language projects. Yet the Oscars have yet to catch up, which is a shame, considering all of the great collaborations these days.

Anne Thompson blogged the other day about two notable foreign films that won't be entering the foreign race for the Academy Awards. One is The Kite Runner, based on the Khaled Hosseini novel, a dramatic tear-jerker about a man from Afghanistan who lives in the US and returns home to help his childhood friend years after they were separated by war. The other is Julien Schnabel's The Diving Bell and the Butterfly, a French film that details the true story of Jean-Dominique Bauby, an editor who suffered a stroke that paralyzed everything but his right eyelid. Bauby, with only one lid, had relayed his story, and that is what the film is based on. (James Rocchi raved about the film here from Cannes.)

Obviously, both are powerful stories, and definitely the sort of drama the Academy should be jumping for. Unfortunately, as Thompson explains, they are seen as American productions with foreign elements: "The Academy rules dictate that two out of three categories -- writer, director and producer -- must be from the submitting country." With all of the American fare sure to be on the list, that leaves out productions like these. What should they do to compensate for these films potentially caught in limbo? Should the Academy add an award for best international collaboration? Should they make a best US, and then best overall film, cutting out the foreign category? What say you?