William Friedkin Tagged Articles at Cinematical

Looks like it's time for me to brush up on my French. The first trailer for the Coco Chanel biopic, Coco, Avant Chanel (or Coco, Before Chanel) has just hit the web, but the bad news is: the trailer is in French. But even if you don't speak French, you aren't missing too much; between my high school French and the helpful folks at Popwatch, I can tell you that there is talk of destiny, love, and a little pouting, but, c'mon, this is a movie about Chanel; isn't it all about the clothes anyway?

Audrey Tautou stars as the fashion icon (and say what you want, the lady certainly has that Coco 'ennui' down pat in the poster), and the film was loosely based on Edmonde Charles-Roux's book, L'Irrégulière: Ou, Mon Itinéraire Chanel. The book was adapted for the screen by Christopher Hampton (Dangerous Liaisons) and Anne Fontaine (who also directs). Joining in on all that fabulousness are Alessandro Nivola as Arthur "Boy" Capel and Benoît Poelvoorde as one of Chanel's lovers, Balsan. Nivola is an American born actor who had to learn French to play the dashing polo player who was said to have inspired Chanel's 'menswear look'.

Watch the trailer after the jump...

Many people think that a movie needs to avoid an R-rating in order to become a blockbuster. Most recent top earners have followed that dictum, with only four R-rated movies among last year's top 25 at the box office. Zack Snyder's 300 was a defiant exception in 2007, earning more than $456 million worldwide, and clearing the way for Snyder's R-rated dream project, Watchmen. Its content advisory warns / promises: "Strong graphic violence, sexuality, nudity and language." Can such an R-rated superhero movie become a blockbuster today, especially in the wake of PG-13 smashes like The Dark Knight and Iron Man?

If the history of the movies has taught us anything, it's that people will flock to see films that they really, really want to see, no matter the rating. As evidence, here are seven R-rated films with strong, adult content that may have made some folks blanch -- but it didn't keep the flicks from becoming blockbusters.

Basic Instinct
Paul Verhoeven's thriller has it all: sex, violence, profanity, and very adult themes. The most notorious shot features Sharon Stone's, er, legs, but the flick also includes male and female nudity, intense sex scenes, stabbing, blood spattering, dozens of profanities, and relentless sexual innuendos. But it's not just a sensationalist button-pusher. Indeed, Basic Instinct lives up to its title in its dogged, sometimes earnest exploration of the basest desires known to man or woman. It may have tittilated, but it also made you think long after the credits rolled.

Right across the street from my apartment sits a nice, fat, corporate-owned video rental store that I rarely visit. It's conveniently located and if I rent older releases I can keep them for a week, but I've simply fallen out of the habit of renting in person. Online rentals are even more convenient, and if I'm patient, most US releases come to video on demand and eventually premium cable. I could admit that I'm just too lazy to schlep across the street to return my rentals, but I'd rather imagine that I'm trying to stay on the cutting edge.

Recently, though, I ventured into the store. Based solely on its premise, I was predisposed to like Yo-Yo Girl Cop: Japanese schoolgirl recruited as a secret agent for a government organization armed only with a yo-yo. It sounds an entertaining action flick; sadly, director Kenta Fukasaku, son of the late, great Kinji Fukasaku, sucks all the joy out of the concept. The action is shot in the fashionable, quick cut, crazy angle, handheld style, but without any grace or distinguishing rhythm. That's typical of the entire picture, which stitches sequences together without any style, wit, or originality, to diminishing and wearisome effect. The DVD includes a 40-minute "making of" feature that is informative and makes me curious to see the original films and TV show.

Paul Verhoeven's Black Book was just as good as everyone has been saying, including our own Ryan Stewart and Christopher Campbell: a rollicking, humanistic Nazi adventure thriller that sizzles right up until it goes off the rails to deliver a heavy-handed message about man's inhumanity to man (as if the preceding two hours hadn't already made that apparent). I'm sorry I missed it on the big screen, though. Carice VanHouten is stunning.

William Friedkin's Bug was even better than I expected from reading Jette Kernion's review; a mesmerizing descent into madness that I resisted initially. It's so powerfully cohesive, though, and features such amazing, award-caliber performances from Michael Shannon and Ashley Judd that my objections melted away. Friedkin is especially forthcoming about his strengths and weaknesses as a filmmaker in an interview on the DVD, which helped make my trip across the street surprisingly worthwhile.

Paul Verhoeven in his native land, making an independent movie about a hot naked woman and Nazis? That's got to be my pick of the week. Of course, this being Verhoeven, he subverts expectations, at least according to the critics, and produces a film with a serious intent in mind. And the result was so good it prompted Cinematical's Ryan Stewart to declare it "the best film of 2007 so far" when he reviewed it in April. I'm talking about Black Book, Paul Verhoeven's "sweeping war epic ... following a Jewish girl on the run in Nazi-occupied Holland." Sony Pictures' DVD features an audio commentary by Verhoeven, who is usually entertaining on yak tracks, and a "making of" feature.

William Friedkin's films have been generally derided for many years -- pretty much everything since The Exorcist in 1973 -- though, personally, I have a soft spot for the failed Sorcerer, really love To Live and Die in L.A., and am glad that Cruising has recently received some critical reevaluation. Though it didn't make much of a ripple at the box office, Bug seems to be a comeback of sorts for him. Our own Jette Kernion wrote: "Bug blends paranoia, trust and love into a riveting story, driven by intense characters." She also commented very favorably on the "incredible" performances, especially the one by by Michael Shannon, but also those by Ashley Judd and Harry Connick, Jr. The Lionsgate DVD includes both a commentary by director Friedkin and a discussion with him.

If you're looking for something a bit further out of the mainstream, Ten Canoes sounds like the best bet. The critics were pretty well united in their praise. Stephen Holden of The New York Times said it "interweaves two versions of the same story, one filmed in black and white and set a thousand years ago, and an even older one, filmed in color and set in a mythic, prehistoric past." The Palm Pictures DVD sounds like it's worth a rental.

Also out are two comedies: mockumentary Chalk (about high school teachers) and Jake Kasdan's The TV Set (about a television pilot). Several friends of mine -- and many festival audiences -- thought Chalk was hilarious, while The TV Set has received mixed response. Perhaps the respective subjects will help you decide if you'll want to check those out.

My personal DVD picks this week are the new editions of Lewis Teague's Alligator (scripted by indie filmmaker John Sayles), John Boorman's Deliverance (which is shockingly indie, even though it was released by a major Hollywood studio in 1972) and William Friedkin's Cruising (c'mon! Al Pacino in gay bars chasing a serial killer? That would definitely be an indie today.). But if you're looking for sometime a little more recent, here are three titles that received (mostly) positive reviews from our Cinematical critics.

Everyone's favorite Danish provocateur, Lars von Trier, made a "refreshing change" with The Boss of it All, according to our own Ryan Stewart. He said the director "turns his attention back to his own side of the Atlantic and finds his faith in humanity just as lacking, and his comic timing as sharp as its ever been." He felt the film "is absolutely a worthy entry in the von Trier canon and a reminder of the natural directing skill that he possesses."

Kim Voynar saw Francois Veber's comedy The Valet at AFI Dallas and enjoyed it. She noted that the plot was "a tad predictable" but "the film is genuinely funny, and at times the laughter from the packed house was so loud I was grateful for the subtitles so I could keep up." On the other hand, Nick Schager did not laugh so much: "This lack of any dynamic energy, any hysterical verve, is what ultimately dooms The Valet's attempts at innocuous whimsy." Sony's DVD includes an audio commentary by the director.

Zoo is a documentary that tackles "the difficult task of exploring the death of a man who had sex with a horse," as Kim Voynar wrote in her Sundance review. That may be enough for you to decide if you want to rent it, but Kim expounded at length if you'd like to know more. The DVD from ThinkFilm includes an audio commentary by writer/director Robinson Devor and writer Charles Mudede.

One consumer warning, I'm afraid. As I've written before, Thai horror film The Victim looks gorgeous, but its unimaginative use of horror movie conventions (loud! bang!!) and "twists" that are telegraphed far in advance quickly become tiresome.

William Friedkin's controversial 1980 film Cruising is making the rounds of a few selected theaters this week before Warner Home Video releases it September 18 in a new deluxe DVD. Mr. Friedkin took a moment to sit down with Cinematical to discuss the film and the mysteries of life.

Cinematical: Are you fairly confident that Cruising will be accepted today, or will there still be some controversy?

William Friedkin: I have no idea. The times are different. At the time we made and released it, it was the first small steps of gay liberation. They had just begun to make gains to get recognition, have some political clout. Prior to that time, they had none. They were an oppressed minority. And Cruising of course was not what you would choose as the best foot forward for a bourgeoning political movement. And there were a lot of people in the gay community who were conscious of that and they protested it, but in doing so, they probably brought more attention to it than it might have gotten.

Just prior to its DVD release on September 18, Warner Bros. will re-release William Friedkin's Cruising (1980) in selected theaters across the country, including the Castro in San Francisco. If it plays well there, the film will have come full circle, having begun its life sputtering amidst howling controversy. Few films have been as reviled; the gay community protested it during its production, critics hated it and audiences stayed away. I first looked at Cruising back in the 1980s on VHS and likewise found it repulsive. But looking at it again years later in a cleaned-up transfer, with some big city experience and some knowledge of Friedkin's work gave me a whole new perspective. Not to mention that just about every Friedkin film except The French Connection (1971) and The Exorcist (1973) has been misunderstood in its own time. And, ironically, Friedkin insists that even The Exorcist has been misunderstood, since he never considered it a horror film.

If I had to make my top ten list for 2007 right now, there would be a lot of movies up for consideration, but there are only two that would be immediately added to the list: Paul Verhoeven's Black Book and William Friedkin's Bug. Even though it didn't find success at the box-office -- it opened against Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End -- Bug is a splendidly-acted little horror-drama about the perils of paranoia and the effects that lonliness and isolation can have on a person's judgement. It also contains one of the best performances Ashley Judd has given in years, without question. If you missed it in theaters like most people, then you should really give it a chance when it arrives on DVD on September 25th. The specs of the DVD have recently been released, along with the cover art seen here.

There's not going to be an avalanche of extras on the DVD, but there will be an audio commentary by Friedkin, along with two featurettes. One is called Bug: An Introduction and the other is A Discussion with William Friedkin, which I guess is exactly what it sounds like. I think they could have gotten a little more creative than this-- I'd like to see some extras that compare and contrast the stage production with the film, and maybe some interviews with Tracy Letts, the writer of both the play and the script. Oh well -- guess you can't have everything, right?

One of the most disheartening experiences as a critic is when you adore and praise a movie that nobody else likes. In your defense, you start to haul out words like "misunderstood" or "underrated," or -- in extreme cases -- claiming that everyone else on the planet didn't "get it." Almost as bad is when some stupid movie that you absolutely hated becomes a giant hit, often supported by the unqualified praise of all the other critics.

The thing is, I can cook up a perfectly valid reason for every one of my favorite movies that fail as well as for all those bad movies that become huge. It's useless, of course. Not only does this not change a thing, but also it assumes that a giant audience filled with thousands of people has one, easily defined psyche. But just for fun, let me explain a few recent hits and misses.

The cast and director of Bug recently assembled at a Manhattan hotel to answer some questions about the new horror-drama, which I saw and praised on this site. Ashley Judd and Michael Shannon star as two small-town Midwestern people whose lives intersect one night at her trailer-park home and the match-up creates a sort of perfect storm of paranoia, discomfort, and ultimately, terror. She fuels his pre-existing fears about being followed by a shadowy government agency, while he perversely fills for her a deep-seated need to be taken seriously and to be listened to. It's hard to explain the movie any more specifically than that -- you have to see it. William Friedkin had the press eating out of his hand, photographers wasted everyone's time by insisting on, like, ten minutes of posed photos, and Judd talked a lot about her process of mental preparation. Here is a sampling of the various questions and answers asked by all the assembled journalists -- enjoy.

Ashley Judd

Was it an easy decision, for you to sign on for this one?

AJ: It was very easy for me to decide to do Bug. Billy had been good enough to send the script to my agent. Bug also had in common a producer who was producing Come Early Morning, which was the film I shot right before Bug. So there was a streamline simplicity to the process. Of course, Billy's wife was my mentor early in my career, provided my big break in Hollywood, so it seemed like there were a lot of auspicious things that were coming together around the script.

I really loved Billy's response to Michael. He was very clear and impassioned and firm that Michael was the actor for the film, as he had been unabashedly the actor for the play. I was really impressed with how Billy was just not willing to negotiate around that, and helped me be very comfortable talking with the financier of the film about how Michael was also who I would want to play with in the movie, so there was a lot that I really liked. There was a good backbone and positive energy surrounding the project, and my agent, when she sent the script to me to read, she said 'you might not want to go there' and immediately that intrigued me. I don't think she was intentionally using reverse psychology, but that's the affect it had and I think I became willing to take the part on before I had in fact read it. There's a part of me that gets really competitive with my own creativity, like 'Oh, you think I can't do that? Really ... '

Did you feel you were coming to the part at a disadvantage, with your co-star having done the play?

AJ: I felt I was at a real advantage, because Michael clearly knew the material inside and out, had a very well-developed and evolved relationship with the material. Billy had seen it, he responded so passionately, and we began acquiring the rights, and there was a tremendous and respect there, and I felt I was able to just slipstream in there.