jeff wells Tagged Articles at Cinematical

When it comes to sifting through all actors responsible for portraying the most powerful man on the planet, there's no shortage of options. John Travolta did a great Bill Clinton impersonation in Primary Colors and Timothy Bottoms delivered a near-perfect imitation of George W. Bush in both D.C. 9/11: Time of Crisis and That's My Bush! Neither one comes across as particularly flattering, so presidential nominee Barack Obama has chosen a safer bet: At a recent party in Los Angeles, Obama revealed that he prefers Jeff Bridges' conflicted commander-in-chief in The Contender. Granted, he may have said this simply to keep his audience happy -- in this case, Contender director Rod Lurie, one of the attendees who was willing to plop down $28,000 for the event. "'I just plugged your movie," Obama told Lurie, according to a report the director sent to Hollywood Elsewhere's Jeffrey Wells.

Still, when you're under the kind of intense scrutiny that Obama currently endures, Bridges actually seems like a pretty safe choice. Choose Anthony Hopkins in Nixon and it sounds like you're endorsing the bad guy. Choose Kevin Kline in Dave and you come across as disingenuous. Choose Peter Sellers in Dr. Strangelove and somebody will call you incompetent. Bridges, on the other hand, plays a fierce leader bound to his moral convictions. Of course, Obama also expressed sympathy over Lurie's short-lived television show Commander-in-Chief, which featured Geena Davis as the first woman president. Perhaps it's no coincidence that he and Hillary have publicly made amends.

If you thought leading a revolution was easy, try filming one. In The Huffington Post, Jeffrey Wells of Hollywood Elsewhere discusses Steven Soderbergh's two-part Che Guevara biopic, comprised of The Argentine and Guerilla. Despite earlier rumors to the contrary, it appears that both movies will definitely screen next month at the Cannes Film Festival, where Soderbergh was warmly welcomed last year for the premiere of Ocean's Thirteen. The reception of his latest project could be even more positive, but its distribution prospects are another story: As Wells explains, Soderbergh's project guarantees to offend some people for its apparent exclusion of Che's stint as the overlord at La Cabana fortress, where he ordered the execution of over 600 political prisoners. Add to that the heavy amount of Spanish dialog and the director's insistence that the two movies should be enjoyed as a four hour-plus package, and you've got enough red flags to send even the bravest U.S. distributors packing.

Wells, who read both scripts, analogizes the project to Lawrence of Arabia. "Hey, how about presenting the two films as a single, gargantuan Lawrence of Arabia-styled deal with an intermission, running between four or four and a half hours?" he suggests, perhaps somewhat tongue-in-cheek.

Jon Stewart had it right during the Oscars this year when he ironically geeked out over Lawrence of Arabia on an iPod. If most audiences can't appreciate that movie on the big screen now, why would they turn up for something like this?

Several people who have attended the first critic's screenings of Sweeney Todd -- a.k.a., not me -- are declaring themselves totally wowed, although they're all bending over backwards to respect an embargo. Jeff Wells at Hollywood-Elsewhere was so impressed by the film that he declared Tim Burton's decade-long decline to be now officially reversed. He also speculated that Sweeney Todd may be Burton's best film since 1988's Beetlejuice -- high praise, indeed. Wells even goes a little overboard, stating that "at times it melted me like a candle. I was lifted, moved. I was never not aroused." Okay, we get it Jeff -- the movie better live up to that embarrassing hyperbole.

Tom O'Neil at The Envelope starts his review thusly -- "'Sweeney Todd' is the best pic of 2007" -- pretty straightforward, no? "Everybody whose opinion I pooled after the screening tonight said they thought the movie and Johnny Depp were brilliant," he goes on to say. But like Wells, he thinks the film may see its Best Picture hopes held up by a childishly heavy focus on gore. There are apparently rivers of blood in this film, to the point that even some who enjoyed the film tremendously claimed to be turned off by that aspect.

David Poland joins the chorus of cheers, predicting that Depp will win the Best Actor award for his performance as the demon barber and saying that the film demands multiple viewings just to take it all in. Okay, you've twisted my arm -- I'll go see it.

Over at Hollywood Elsewhere (a frequent site of heated debates on issues like homosexuality and fatness versus thin-ness) Jeff Wells really pushed some buttons with a post about this New York Times piece on Hairspray star Nikki Blonsky by Monica Corcoran (note: login with a free account required to read it) in which Ms. Corcoran makes observations like, "To see Ms. Blonsky caper through "Hairspray," the musical adaptation of the John Waters camp classic, is to watch a Botero come to life as she wiggles her broad backside and flaps her ample arms." and "When plates of ribs and roast chicken arrived, she dug in with gusto." Golly gee, with those ample arms flapping in the breeze, however did she manage to even hold onto that plate of ribs, much less sign autographs for fans?

Wells doesn't actually weigh in (yeah, pun intended) with an opinion on Blonsky's proportions, but boy, oh, boy do his commenters get into it. This isn't the first time Wells and his readers have gotten into it on the issue of weight, but I find it interesting nonetheless that people are going after Blonsky for her weight (and I love all the concern about the poor girl's health) -- after all, the role of Tracy Turnblad calls for a "fat girl" -- that's kind of the whole point of the story, right? I mean, seriously ... imagine, if you will, if Adam Shankman had cast uber-skinny Keira Knightley as Tracy, and stuck her in a fat suit like they did with John Travolta in the film. Plenty of people are peeved also at the casting of Travolta in a fat suit instead of a real woman of larger proportions playing that role, by the by, even if the casting is a sort of homage to Harvey Fierstein and Divine.

I've not seen Hairspray yet, but by all the accounts I've read of the film, Blonsky's performance is pretty darn good -- how about discussing how she compares to Ricki Lake, or to any of the actresses who played Tracy on stage? Here's what I predict: Within a couple years, Blonsky's agent and PR people are going to convince her that she has to lose weight in order to continue having a career (after all, there are only so many roles for fat girls out there, right?) and we'll see a miraculous transformation ala Ricki Lake -- I can see the tabloid headlines now: "Former Fatty Nikki Blonsky: How I Stopped Eating Ribs With Gusto and Shed 50 Pounds!" Then she can start hanging out with Paris Hilton, get drunk at nightclubs, flash her crotch getting out of limos, and end up in rehab. Maybe then people will talk about her talent, and not her weight.

Time once again for our weekly Indie Film Blog Group Hug, wherein we check in with other film blogs around the internet to see what other folks are writing about. One of these days, I want to throw a big party at my house and have all the other film bloggers from around the world converge in my living room to wax eloquent about all things film-related over chips and salsa, taquitos and icy-cold margaritas. Wouldn't that be a blast? In the meantime, the Group Hug will have to suffice ...

Oh, and by the way, fellow cinephiles, if you have a film blog I don't know about (or even if you've previously submitted your blog and I haven't covered it in a while), drop me a line at kim(at)cinematical(dot)com to point me your way.

• Over on The Hot Blog, David Poland writes about whether it means anything that Fox pulled out of Comic-Con, and ponders the whole sticky-wicket issues of which critics get into sceenings when, which leads to a discussion of embargoes, which then gets into the whole kerfuffle surrounding the Baltimore Sun and NYT breaking embargo on the lastest (and last) Harry Potter tome. And somehow, he manages to tie it all together in a way that actually makes sense ...
• ... Meanwhile over at Hollywood Elsewhere, Poland's sometime-rival Jeff Wells commentates nicely (I think) on Poland's piece and offers up his own take on the whole Fox-pulls-out-of-Comic-Con-Does-That-Mean-The-Simpsons-Movie-sucks thing.
• Apparently everyone the Baltimore Sun and NYT have everyone thinking about all things Potter this week, as both Anne Thompson, Matt Dentler, and Karina Longworth ** (great minds thinking alike) have posts up about the Harry Potter embargo-breaking, too.
• Strange Culture is already thinking Oscars ... in July! That's right, RC is already positing that Roger Deakins will be nominated for an Oscar for cinematography -- and that's probably a pretty good guess. Any early bets on other Oscar noms?
• Indie Film Nation, which runs some nifty podcasts about all things indie, has a fascinating interview up with Richard Moore, the director of the Melbourne International Film Festival. Good stuff. While you're already over there, check out last week's interview with Goetz Weber, CEO and co-founder of inDPlay.
• Checking out what's going down over at Twitch, Kurt has a little post up {via just about everyone on the planet, so this is obviously old news to everyone but me -- figures) about the possibility that one of my favorite films ever, John Carpenter's They Live, might -- that's might -- be made into a series for the Sci-Fi channel. They live is great political satire wrapped up as a fun horror flick, and I agree with Kurt -- it's never been more relevant than it is now. Keep your fingers crossed -- if it does ever get made, that's one series that's getting set to record on my DVR, baby. Don't forget your special sunglasses ...

**Karina does indeed have a great mind, but that particular post was about Fox and Comic-Con, not Harry Potter. It's still a good post and worth reading, though. The moral of this story? Don't read 40 different film blogs while simultaneously writing a post and getting four kids ready to get out the door for swim lessons without double-checking that you've got it all right. Thanks for setting it straight, Karina. It's good to still have you around to keep us on our toes.

Over at Hollywood Elsewhere, there's been an interesting game of cat-and-mouse going on between Jeff Wells and Warner Brothers around Wells' early review of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. A couple days ago, Wells posted a "somewhat negative" review, which is not, in and of itself, a shocking development. A rep from Warner Brothers delivered a smackdown from on high to Wells, slapping him with the dreaded "your invitation to the screening clearly stated NO REVIEWS before opening day blah blah blah take it down or you'll never see another WB press screening until you're too old and decrepit to write negative crap about films."

Wells complied with WB's request and took the review down, but noted that the concept of an embargo was a little moot at that point anyhow, given that last Friday -- a full five days before the hotly anticipated Opening Day -- early reviews of the film were run by Variety's Todd McCarthy, The Hollywood Reporter's Kirk Honeycutt, Time's Richard Corliss, Rolling Stone's Peter Travers, New York Magazine's David Edelstein and Patrick Z. McGavin on Emmanual Levy's site. But who's counting? Apparently Wells is, at least, because just seven hours later, his own review was back up, with Wells noting in the comments in response to a reader that, while the embargo had not been lifted, with all these other reviews already out (42 pre-release date reviews as of now on Rotten Tomatoes, with a 74% "fresh" rating), he didn't feel the need to comply with WB and "hold his water."

Over at Hollywood Elsewhere, Jeff Wells continues poking the hornet's wasp with the proverbial stick by ragging on comedy Knocked Up as being unrealistic because a stoner dork like Seth Rogen's Ben would never, ever end up having sex with a hottie E! reporter like Katherine Heigl's Alison, much less having a long-term relationship with her just because an unintended pregnancy resulted from their night of passion.

Now, maybe it's because I live in the geek-heaven town of Seattle right now, but see enough dorky guys with hot wives/girlfriends schlepping around this town to find it hard to swallow Wells' argument. I think there are lots of young women, "hot" and otherwise, who would date a decent, genuinely kind and compassionate guy who looks like Rogen. Believe it or not, a lot of us have had more than enough of dating hottie boys who think they're doing you a favor by glancing in your general direction.

Personally, I'd have a harder time buying a successful young woman getting into a relationship with a guy Ben's age who's still living out his stoner youth, or even the idea that just because you fall into a drunken one-night stand with someone, you'd have enough in common to actually fall in love with them. The whole angle of whether a woman who looks like Alison would even have a one-night stand with a guy like Ben to begin with never occurred to me until I started seeing people get all fired up about the topic at Hollywood Elsewhere

I haven't caught Knocked Up yet, though it is on my short list of "films I'm not getting paid to review but want to see anyway." So those of you who have seen it, help me out a little here. If you've seen the film, did you find it unrealistic that Alison and Ben had a fling? And hey, all you female Cinematical readers out there -- would you sleep with a guy like Rogen?

As Erik noted earlier today, the Screen Actors Guild noms are out, and there are few surprises. I was a little surprised by what Jeff Wells at Hollywood Elsewhere had to say about Eddie Murphy's Best Supporting Actor nod for Dreamgirls, though (WARNING: There is a spoiler in his post, so be warned before you click over there):

"What could the Murphy nom be about? Because he sings well, drops his pants and [SPOILER DELETED]? I ve been told all along that the SAG rank-and-file regards Murphy as an asshole. Maybe it's the old animal-kingdom instinct of showing obeisance before power, because Murphy was King Shit in the '80s? I know this: Murphy isn't fit to shine Mark Wahlberg's shoes."

Oof. That seems a little harsh. I mean, I like Wahlberg well enough, he's a solid actor, but Murphy, when he's on, does his thing very well. Personally, I'm impressed, if nothing else, with Murphy's ability to continually reinvent his career and surprise his fans. I've not seen Dreamgirls yet, unfortunately, but from all reports he does a bang-up job and is deserving up a nom, if not the win. Chime in with your thoughts, readers -- especially if you've seen Dreamgirls and have thoughts on Murphy's performance. Is Wells spot-on in saying Murphy shouldn't be nominated? Or is he full of hot air?

Buzz is starting to swirl around Babel, which debuts next Tuesday at Cannes. The film, directed by Alejandro Gonzalez Innaritu (Amores Perros, 21 Grams) and scripted by Guillermo Ariagga, stars Brad Pitt, Cate Blanchett, and Gael Garcia Bernal, tells the stories of four characters linked by a single act of violence. If you've seen Innaritu's previous films, perhaps kinda know what to expect, and if you haven't, well, for shame, and hie thee to the nearest video rental facility. Jeff Well's over at Hollywood Elsewhere is either much,. much more important than us, or really well connected, or just damn lucky, because the man always gets access to the coolest scripts way before the rest of us mere mortals. So, natch, he's seen an early copy of the script for Babel, and he's quite positive about it.

Wells has a really good interview up with Innaritu on his site. Unfortunately, he didn't get to preview the film as part of the deal (apparently even his charisma has it's limits), but the interview is well worth a read. Check it out.