james woods Tagged Articles at Cinematical

First things first: No, Kristen Stewart is not going to be a slightly over-aged American Girl from the famous doll series, following in the footsteps of Abigail Breslin. (Thank God -- how weird would that be?) Now, with that out of the way: Coming Soon reports that during a talk with James Woods on the Straw Dogs set, the actor mentioned a passion project he's been working on -- and Stewart is the focus of his cinematic attentions.

Woods is planning to direct a film called An American Girl, with the Twilight star in the lead role. He approached her "before she was famous," professing that this was her movie, and he wouldn't make it with anyone but her. She read the script, and "has been urgently wanting to get the movie made." The Tim Metcalfe and Sean McCarthy story follows a self-destructive young woman who has turned from the swimming and diving champion of her high school to a wild child busy with booze and drugs. After a sexual tryst gets caught on a cell phone and ruins her reputation, she joins the Marines and starts to find her own inner values. She enters the Linus Program, learns Arabic, and heads overseas to work with Muslim women. (There are more details through the C.S. link.)

Woods says: "It's a phenomenal story and a slam-dunk Oscar for her." At the very least, it'd be another great step toward fighting type-casting as her Twilight stint wraps up. But what do you think? Can you imagine Stewart clutching that little, oft-desired little naked statue?

Some more cast members have been revealed for Rod Lurie's "re-imagining" of Sam Peckinpah's controversial '70s thriller Straw Dogs, which is good because it just started filming in Shreveport, LA. Like, yesterday. James Woods (one of my favorite creeps) has joined the cast, as have Willa Holland and Dominic Purcell; however, there's no real info on who they will be playing, as the three leads have already been cast.

Kate Bosworth is taking on the complicated character of Amy Sumner, who was played by Susan George in the original; James Marsden is her husband, David, originally played by Dustin Hoffman, and Alexander Skarsgård is her ex-boyfriend Charlie, Susan's ex and the ringleader of the escalating violence against the couple.

In Lurie's version, the Sumners relocate to Amy's hometown in Mississippi instead of Cornwall, and David is a screenwriter from Los Angeles rather than a milquetoast mathematician. I'm very curious to see how Lurie plans to handle the ambiguities of the original, especially the rape scene that had many critics leveling charges of misogyny against Peckinpah.

Did this movie really need a "re-imagining?" Can we please think of a new term of directors and writers who take pre-existing characters and put them in almost the same circumstances but in different locations? How will the cast hold up to the original? And let's not forget the iconic poster from the original -- that will be hard to top.

For some reason best left to psychologists, there are people who are attracted to what I call ... sex creeps. This type of character goes beyond what is called jolie-laide in women, a term that directly translates to pretty-ugly, although is generally used to describe "unconventional" beauty. There's no real correlation between the jolie-laide and the sex creep. No, the sex creep is attractive but prone to certain, shall we say, peccadilloes that go beyond the pale -- dating blow-up dolls, crashing cars to get off, dabbling in experimental gynecology. These guys all slime their ways between the lines.

In any case, here are seven of my favorite sex creeps. You might also notice there's a certain director who shows up a few times on the list -- he's an honorary sex creep as well. I hope he takes his title in the complimentary manner in which it's given.

In today's requisite edition of "Nothing Is Sacred" news, it looks like David Cronenberg's cult classic, Videodrome, is the next remake to come a-callin'. Ehren Kruger, writer of the remake of The Ring, is penning this update to "modernize the concept, infuse it with the possibilities of nano-technology and blow it up into a large-scale sci-fi action thriller," according to Variety.

Okay, at the very least, there's quite the opportunity for some nifty and nasty effects work, but beyond that, I can't help but feel that today's potential for satire may be outweighed by today's potential for the grotesque. And reading the phrase "large-scale" almost makes me want to pop in the low-budget widespread panic of The Signal instead.

But let's play devil's advocate here: who would you cast in the anti-hero role that James Woods originated in '83? I'd bet that either Patrick Wilson or Sam Rockwell could pull it off -- aw, hell, if they really just throw up their hands at some point, Nicolas Cage could be fun...

You may have heard that spoof veteran David Zucker's newest project, An American Carol, is a takedown of Michael Moore. You can now have a look at the trailer, online at Yahoo!. And then you can riddle me this: Does An American Carol look like a clever parody of Moore's documentaries, or just a partisan attack on the filmmaker? Or, put another way, is the clip of Bill O'Reilly slapping around Kevin Farley's "Michael Malone" a commentary on the rivalry between the two, or right-wing wish fulfillment? One thing to note before answering is that O'Reilly appears in the film himself, while Moore does not.

Moore is obviously fair game; I've enjoyed his films, and sympathize with (some of) his politics, but I'd eagerly watch a skillful spoof of the pudgy, faux-working-class provocateur. I think parts of the trailer are pretty funny ("Here I am on the island paradise Cuba!"). But if the point is just to pile on the guy, with a rah-rah patriotic, stop-hating-America message at the end, then I'm significantly less interested.

The thing is, the trailer really doesn't make clear what's going on. On one hand, prominent conservatives like O'Reilly and James Woods appear to deliver literal and figurative blows. On the other, "Michael Malone" gets accused of being a slaveowner, which sounds more like a parody of conservative attacks on Moore than of Moore himself. And is Trace Adkins poking fun at his image here, or is he for real?

We know that Zucker is himself conservative, and that the movie is political -- which is fine. But is it political in an incisive, worthwhile way, or in the brainless beatdown mode of Ann Coulter et al? What do you think?

I was somewhat surprised by Surf's Up, which is better than you might think from the trailers. It's very much a movie for children, without much to capture the interest of adults, but there are so many subpar movies for kids these days that it's refreshing to see one that entertains in an almost classic fashion. The filmmakers behind Surf's Up were obviously aiming for a timeless family movie, something kids 10 years in the future could watch and still enjoy, although by then the animation might be considered dated in some way.

The structure of the narrative is the only real pop-culture reference -- it's shot in faux-documentary style, like The Office, and the beginning is obviously meant to recall March of the Penguins in a few ways. (In fact, the film is funnier than the few minutes I lasted through Farce of the Penguins.) The offscreen filmmakers interviewing the penguins are voiced by Surf's Up's directors, Ash Brannon and Chris Buck. The pre-credit sequence, which features "vintage" footage of penguin surfing legend Big Z and home movies of the main character, is done beautifully with some clever graphics and was my favorite part of the film.

With only three feature films, Sofia Coppola has already roused supersize portions of both praise and disdain. I am firmly planted in the former camp; Coppola's Lost in Translation (2003), is the best American movie I've seen since the year 2000. It's only too easy to explain the latter camp: Americans have never been too fond of women in powerful positions, and because of her obvious connections her detractors believe that she doesn't deserve her position. To many, she's just "daddy's little girl," and is only allowed to play on the big boys' field because of his guidance and protection.

There are even rumors that Sofia's brother Roman (her second unit director) actually directed her movies, which is ludicrous given that Roman's own directorial debut, CQ (2002), is nowhere near as good as Sofia's three films (which also includes last year's misunderstood Marie Antoinette). Historically, women directors have had difficult times sustaining long careers in Hollywood. If they lose any money, they suffer the consequences, whereas men can spend and lose ten times as much without fearing for their jobs.

Even more difficult to explain and defend is that Coppola is not really a natural born storyteller like her father. But this is not necessarily a bad thing. It's a mistake to consider cinema as merely an agent for storytelling; it has so many other possibilities. And, indeed, filmmakers like Orson Welles, Ingmar Bergman, Luis Bunuel, Federico Fellini, Mario Bava, Monte Hellman, Robert Bresson, David Lynch, Jim Jarmusch, F.W. Murnau, Hou Hsiao-hsien and many others are likewise not necessarily praised or beloved for their ability to tell a clear, concise story. That skill is not required for one to be considered a great cinema artist.

I was a little surprised when Happy Feet turned out to be one of the big box office success stories this year. Sure, everyone likes a family film, especially right around the holidays, but I thought Bond would have definitely beat up on those penguins. I guess it goes to show you never can tell, huh?

I think Sony is hoping you forget all about those adorable dancing birds by the time their new animated penguin film hits screens this summer -- or that your love for animated penguins is at an all-time high. Banking on the idea that if you enjoyed dancing penguins, you are going to love surfing penguins, Sony has launched the official site for Surf's Up. The story focuses on the unlikely premise that penguins were the originators of surfing, and the film is a mockumentary about a historic surfing competition held on Pen Gu Island. Of course, there will be plenty of family friendly messages about winning, accepting differences, etc..., mixed in with a slew of wisecracks. Voices in the film include Jeff Bridges, Zooey Deschanel, Jon Heder, Michael McKean and James Woods. The website has a link to the trailer, a wallpaper download and a "live" web cam of Pen Gu Island. If you have little ones in your life, I'm sure you will be seeing this movie, whether you like it or not. But, since I don't, I think I'm might have to pass.

[via JoBlo.net]

(Little bits of) the week in gossip, for your viewing pleasure.

• Denis Leary and Lenny Clarke -- both massive Red Sox fans -- got to spend some time in the NESN broadcast booth this week, watching the Sox lose to the Tigers. During their visit, Clarke and Leary discovered, much to their surprise (and overflowing pride), that Sox first baseman Kevin Youkilis is Jewish. That, combined with a great defensive play by Youk shortly after the revelation, led to a massive explosion of hilarity primarily focused on, yes, poor Mel Gibson. (You can hear the audio at the link; the video keeps getting yanked down.)

• Early in the week, the ever-reliable New York Daily News reported that, contrary to popular opinion, Tom Cruise has been crazy for years. Word is that back in the heady, I'm a Flawless Superstar! days of the early 1990s, Tom got it into his head that he needed to spend some quality time with one Joe DiMaggio, an impulse that any baseball fan can respect and understand. The problem, however, is that Joe D. wasn't having it -- he was completely uninterested in talking to Cruise, so Mav did the logical thing, and started lurking around at DiMaggio's signing events and, um, outside the places the man was trying to eat. How did old-man Joe deal with it? "This guy is following me around everywhere I go. Next time, I'm going to call the cops." Nice.
  

• James Woods, who spends most of his time trying to convince me that my affection for him is appallingly misguided, actually corrected his most recent disaster this week, albeit a bit late: He dumped Ashley Madison, his infant girlfriend (Ok, actually she's 20. But when you're 60? 20 is an infant.) after she reportedly acted like a fame whore (No!) at the funeral of Woods' brother. Try to read this description without thinking of the worst kind of 16-year-old girl: In addition to showing up in a tiny miniskirt and smoking non-stop, Madison reportedly spent the funeral figuring out "the amount of magazines she was in ... Jimmy was on his knees with tears staining his shirt, and she was showing pictures of herself." Gee, and I'm sure he expected so much more when he hooked up with a chick fully 1/3 of his age.

At a press event for his upcoming TV drama Shark over the weekend, James Woods was asked why he thought so many movie stars were turning up on the small screen. Though we, sadly, don't get invited to press junkets for TV shows, Ray Richmond of The Hollywood Reporter was there and took the time to transcribe Wood's typically intelligent, manic response.

Like Richmond, I adore Woods and his willingness to speak his mind; it's incredibly refreshing to find someone like that in an industry that's so carefully controlled. Though I happen to disagree with his politics, which often drive his opinions, I think he tends to be worth listening to. Basically, Woods is sick of what Hollywood is making right now. But he's not talk about Little Man, and the other things that we all think are crap. Instead, he's annoyed by award-winners like Brokeback Mountain, Transamerica and Capote, which he describes as having "sort of the same tenor and tone." More specifically, Woods believes that there's "not ... as much breadth to the imagination in the movies these days. They are very careful. Movies seem to be scared, whereas television seems to be like a teenager feeling his or her oats ... Television is more sophisticated, more dynamic, more gut-wrenching to me today than the movies." Take that, filmmaking world.

Now, granted, this is a guy busy promoting a TV series (the pilot of which which he calls "The best thing I've read in 10 years, period"), who certainly could be seen as having a very specific reason to talk down film and talk up the quality of television. What do you guys think? Does he have a point, or is he just getting attention for his current gig by talking down Hollywood?