Film Web Blog

Patrick Walsh
Filed under: Drama, Casting, Scripts & Screenwriting, Newsstand

In my review of Dan in Real Life on Friday, I mentioned what an excellent writer I find Peter Hedges to be. He wrote my favorite novel, What’s Eating Gilbert Grape, as well as the screenplay for the Johnny Depp adaptation. He co-wrote About a Boy, and wrote and directed Pieces of April. All great stuff. Dan is the weakest of that lot, but still an entertaining film. It seems other people are fans of Hedges as well, he’s just been signed to write and direct Everything Changes, an adaptation of the Jonathan Trapper book of the same name. Hedges was hired to adapt the book, and loved it so much he opted to direct as well.

According to The Hollywood Reporter, the story focuses on “a man on the verge of marrying the perfect girl when he undergoes a life crisis as he faces feelings for his recently deceased best friend’s wife and also deals with the sudden arrival of his womanizing, estranged father.” Did you follow all of that? The film will most likely star Tobey Maguire, who will also co-produce with Wendy Finerman (Forrest Gump). It will be good to see Maguire back in non-Spider-Man roles, his vicious performance in the otherwise limp The Good German reminded me how good he can be. Have any of you read Everything Changes? Thoughts?

Tags: everything changes, EverythingChanges, peter hedges, PeterHedges, spiderman, tobey maguire, TobeyMaguire

Source: feeds.cinematical.com

Patrick Walsh
Filed under: Sci-Fi & Fantasy, Casting, Celebrities and Controversy, Fandom, Comic/Superhero/Geek, Remakes and Sequels

CNN is reporting that William Shatner is upset at not being asked to appear in J.J. Abrams’ new Star Trek film. Adding insult to injury, the original Spock (Leonard Nimoy) is on board. I guess you could say the Shat has hit the fan. “I couldn’t believe it. I’m not in the movie at all. Leonard, God bless his heart, is in, but not me,” says Shatner. “I thought, what a decision to make, since it obviously is a decision not to make use of the popularity I have to ensure the movie has good box office. It didn’t seem to be a wise business decision.” I think Shatner may be overestimating his box office popularity here, but I certainly think that if you’re going to have Nimoy, you need to have Shatner. No?

Director Abrams originally had said Shatner would likely play a role, but the pair had a couple of meetings that led to nothing. Chris Pine (Smokin’ Aces) is playing the young Captain Kirk. Heroes’ Zachary Quinto is playing the young Spock, and we don’t know much about Nimoy’s role in the movie other than that “there’s going to be a sense of guidance in this film and beyond.” Shatner says simply, “Having been in on the creation of it, I was hoping to be in on the re-creation.” I think the guy’s got a point. If I had to guess, perhaps Abrams is trying to make a serious, non-jokey Trek film, and the presence of Shatner would upset that balance? Shatner has become more of a comedic figure these days, with his work on Boston Legal and appearances like his Comedy Central Roast. What do you guys think?

Tags: chris pine, ChrisPine, jj abrams, JjAbrams, leonard nimoy, LeonardNimoy, star trek, StarTrek, william shatner, WilliamShatner, zachary quinto, ZacharyQuinto

Source: feeds.cinematical.com

Christopher Campbell
Filed under: Comedy, Horror, Universal, Retro Cinema

I’m no horror buff, but I do love the zombies. Well, I love the idea of zombies. I’m not really that interested in watching all the low-budget zombie movies, all the Italian zombie movies, or all the non-Romero Living Dead movies. But it’s funny, I was looking over Ryan’s recent Cinematical Seven of reasons he doesn’t care for zombie movies, and it dually serves as my own list of reasons I like zombie movies. Or at least those zombie movies that apply. Primarily, I like zombie movies for the first reason: the symbolism.

Shaun of the Dead may be a comedic zombie movie, and it may not have any political undertones or serious social commentary, as do Romero’s films and other prominent examples of the genre, but it does permit a scholarly subtext reading nonetheless. And because I’m a scholarly sort of gent (or maybe really I just like to over-analyze everything), I’m going to take this opportunity to look at this deeper level of the movie. Sure, I could just write about why I think the movie is one of the most hilarious I’ve ever seen, but that would be boring; plus, I respect that some people don’t have the same sense of humor as me.

Shaun’s symbolism comes in the form of the romantic story. The movie, often referred to as a “rom zom com” (romantic zombie comedy), actually serves as a sort of cinematic relationship guide, comically instructing us about dealing with commitment issues. Look at the order in which the members of Shaun’s party are killed (killed dead, not undead): #1: his stepfather (Bill Nighy); #2: his mum (Penelope Wilton); #3: the other guy who loves his girl (the underrated Dylan Moran, who must be seen in Run Fatboy Run); #4: his roommate (Peter Serafinowicz); and finally, #5: his immature best friend (Nick Frost). These are the people that have to die in order for Shaun (Simon Pegg) to devote his full attention to Liz (Kate Ashfield). In real, non-lethal terms, they are the people Shaun has to let go of before he can fully connect in a relationship.
Who hasn’t had to deal with one or more of these examples when in love? I don’t want to get all psychological about it, especially with the mama’s boy stuff, but certainly everybody has had that good friend who has to be compromised somewhat because he or she poses a threat to the relationship. The interesting thing is that Ed doesn’t actually have to die, whereas the rest of the threats do. The roommate one is a little less obvious than the others, in the sense that he’s just representational of the bachelor pad. And there’s probably other characters that can also be considered in the order, such as the bartender, who personifies Shaun’s penchant for hanging out in a bar and drinking too much.

Okay, so maybe you don’t appreciate the academic dissection approach to the film, but the level is there to think about if you want to. The script is also filled with other gems that similarly involve close attention, yet aren’t as analytically nerdy. Much of these bits of genius are revealed in the film’s DVD commentary, such as the many references to Romero and Raimi and others. The most genius line, though, is the foreshadowing drinking plan of “a Bloody Mary first thing, a bite at the King’s Head, a couple at the Little Princess, stagger back here and bang … back at the bar for shots.” It cleverly plots out the events of the rest of the movie. Also, it’s great how, whether intentional or not, Shaun’s stepfather, Philip, evokes the Black Knight from Monty Python and the Holy Grail when insisting that his bite is not that bad (”I ran it under a cold tap”).

Of course, there’s also simple slapstick comedy like when Shaun slips on the blood in the market. And there’s plenty of gross, bloody gore, too. If there weren’t a subtext I would surely enjoy the movie for the surface comedy and horror alone. I might even want to watch it a million times, as I do now. But the symbolism and depth of the movie make me appreciate it as a masterpiece.

Tags: bill nighy, BillNighy, cinematical, dylan moran, DylanMoran, film, george romero, GeorgeRomero, Halloween2007, kate ashfield, KateAshfield, monty python and the holy grail, MontyPythonAndTheHolyGrail, movie, nick frost, NickFrost, run fatboy run, RunFatboyRun, sam raimi, SamRaimi, shaun of the dead, ShaunOfTheDead, simon pegg, SimonPegg

Source: feeds.cinematical.com

Patrick Walsh
Filed under: Horror, Thrillers, New Releases, Mystery & Suspense, Lionsgate Films, Fandom, Interviews, Comic/Superhero/Geek, Remakes and Sequels

If it’s Halloween, it must be Saw. And it is. So it must be. Cinematical attended a press junket this week for Saw IV. It consisted of three interviews, with reporters from various outlets throwing out questions. The first was with Jigsaw himself, Tobin Bell (phoning in because he lives in Malibu, so wish him and his family well). The second was with Lyriq Bent (Rigg), Scott Patterson (Agent Strahm), and franchise producer Mark Burg. The third was with Costas Mandylor (Hoffman), Betsy Russell (Jill — Mrs. Jigsaw), and franchise producer Oren Koules. Lionsgate hadn’t screened the movie for critics (or even the actors!) as of this junket, as the representatives are extremely secretive about its plot, particularly a final twist. All we know is, despite having seemingly died at the end of Saw III, Jigsaw is back. Oh yes, and we know that there will be blood. Lotsa blood. We discussed what makes the franchise so popular, the phrase “torture porn,” and the future of the Saw series.

Can you tell us what attracted you to the role yet again?

Tobin Bell: He’s a big character. There could be nothing better for an actor than to have an opportunity to play a role where the character is sort of a multi-faceted guy. I mean, he is a scientist and a very well read guy and a man of conviction and passionate about what he does. There is something Shakespearean about him in a way. And there is a lot more story to be told. I feel like the Saw story doesn’t play out in a linear way. It doesn’t happen in sequence, necessarily. Whenever you have the opportunity to develop a guy like this, it’s a blessing. It’s what actors become actors for.

It’s interesting to hear you talk about the thought process that goes into creating his back-story. Because if you ask an audience after they see a Saw film, they were there for the gore. They want to see someone’s guts spill out on the floor. Are you rationalizing the character for yourself? Or do you really care about the characters in these films?

TB: I think that anybody who goes to one of these films wants to care about the characters. I think you can accomplish the same thing in the horror genre that you can accomplish in any other genre, whether it’s a period piece, or a romantic comedy. I think there is an opportunity in a drama of any kind for the viewer to get involved with the characters. If you sell out completely on that, and I think that is what the horror genre has done for many years, people will not think of it very highly as a genre. Many genre films of the fifties and sixties were interested in the special effects, or interested in the scare factor, or the sci-fi factor. Jacob’s Ladder is a very smart, well-crafted script. It is very scary. The Dead Zone with Christopher Walken. On its face, you have a man that looks at things and lights them on fire with his eyes. Look at the film. Christopher Walken draws you in. He makes you care about him. That’s what makes the film work.

Halloween is coming up. Have you seen people dressed up as Jigsaw or Billy?

TB: I saw it last year. I saw several kids dressed up as Billy. I would always go over and say hello. They were somewhat speechless when I did that. A couple of them probably haven’t even seen the movie. They got the mask, and they liked the mask. One of them looked like he was about ten years old. I’m convinced that he had not seen the film. But he had on a little tuxedo, and a little white shirt, and a little red bow tie, and a Billy mask. Everyone seemed to know who he was, too. They would say, “Oh, that’s Billy the puppet.” I think with the passage of every Saw film, more and more Billy costumes are going to be out there. I think the pig masks are going to be out there this year also.

Are there other things that you know about Jigsaw that haven’t been in any of the Saw films yet?

TB: Yeah. You guys said that you have not seen IV. So, I just don’t want to give anything away as far as your experience with the fourth film. I can tell you that the tricycle that has appeared in all four Saw films has a very simple and human explanation to it. I hope that in V and VI, we will both understand and have a window into that. The origins of Billy will come with a meaning of that. You will see with IV, that we have started to enter into that area. I think there is some marvelous storyline left to be told. Everyone has seen Billy since the beginning. But, what is that? And why? These things that you don’t think about. They just have their affect on you. Billy has a certain effect, and the tricycle has a certain effect when it enters the scene. But its origins are interesting. I’m interested in showing what those origins are. Do you remember the scene in Saw III, where you saw the moments right before I laid down on the floor in Saw? There was a brief moment with Amanda and I. I think fans are really interested in knowing what the origins of very specific moments are. Especially Saw fans. They are into the details. They just are. I am always impressed with that.

Why have we not been allowed to see the film?

Mark Burg: We’ve been so secretive about the ending of Saw IV, because we think it’s that good. Having produced all the movies, this is far and away my favorite of the four. I think it’s the best of the four, the story’s the best, the characters are more developed, and three quarters of the people at Lionsgate haven’t seen the end of the movie. Even the actors, when we shot it, unless they were in the end scene — even then we shot two different endings so that nobody really knows the ending.

Did you know ahead of time that you were going to do six of these?

MB: We started out wanting to make one good movie, and when it worked we were like “Maybe we can do a second, and maybe we can do a third.” And now this is the only time we started developing story ideas before a movie came out. And we have a really good take for where we want to go with the next one. My goal is to have another Saw movie next year, but if the script doesn’t come together, then we won’t.

Is there any kind of box office catastrophe that could prevent a Saw V from being made?

MB: Yeah, if nobody turns out on Friday night, then we’ll say “Guess what? Nobody likes our movies anymore, maybe we shouldn’t do it.” But I don’t think that’s gonna happen.

Do you feel a sense of responsibility for adding to the level of acceptance of violence in society today?

Lyric Bent: From a thespian’s point of view, I try not to judge my characters. I think this franchise actually has a lot of positive things that it to brings to our attention, that people maybe don’t look at because of the genre, which I think is a big mistake. I think there’s a message in there that’s profound, and that people can walk away from it with a positive look upon life. If you want to take the bad, you gotta take the good as well.

Scott Patterson: Maybe you’re not asking the right question. Maybe the right question to ask is “Why do people go to horror films?” Mark and Oren have figured it out, it’s a very simple formula. You ratchet up the tension in such a way that throughout a two hour experience, people get several opportunities to feel relieved. That’s what a horror film is. People get addicted to that relief. They’re not there to feel the tension, they’re there to feel relieved. That’s what a horror film is. Intellectually, we could be aware that people are only coming to see the traps, and the blood and the gore, but that’s not for us to judge. We’re in a dramatic piece.

What do you think of the phrase “torture porn?”

MB: I don’t look at our movies as “torture porn.” I look at our movies as, here’s a guy who is going to people and saying “You don’t appreciate life. Look at how good you have it. Look at all the good things that you’re just throwing away. You got a wife, you got kids, you got a family. Do the right thing.” And we always give people a way out. It’s not like we’re just torturing them to kill them like I think some other films have…We think it’s on a different level than Hostel.

What criteria do you look for in a director to carry on this franchise?

David Hackl, who has been the production designer on the last three pictures, he’s gonna direct Saw V. He’s really the person who has been coming up with all the traps, and he’s done some second unit directing on some of the Saw movies, so he’s well situated to be that person.

Is it true they’re shooting V and VI back to back?

MB: It was an idea of ours, to try and keep the cast together. It’s not out of the question, but it’s going to be really hard for us to get the screenplay for Saw VI where we want it to be in order to be able to do that.

Betsy, what is your relationship with Jigsaw in the film?

Betsy Russell: I’m his love interest. I can say that, right? Our story does explain a lot of his story. He is a complicated character, and you do learn a lot about him through me.

There is no definitive ending for films anymore. There’s always a director’s cut…

Oren Koules: Yeah, but our director’s cut is really to get the best movie. Its not about leaving people hanging for more. Our director’s cut is basically more of an MPAA problem than anything else. Our director’s cuts aren’t different logic. The MPAA is tough for us…Basically, we have to give them an “R” and an “Unrated.” But the Unrated is just what we didn’t get away with, with the MPAA. It’s stupid. You are with a fifty year old housewife from Reseda arguing about how many times someone can get hit in the head. And that’s the truth. I don’t want to say too much, because it will cost us next year. When they do a press conference at Sundance talking about Saw, it kind of opens the door for debate.

How do you categorize this film? We’ve had an ongoing debate on whether it’s “torture porn” or…

OK: You know what? What was Se7en? It was a psychological thriller. And that’s what this is. You had freakin’ Gwyneth Paltrow’s head in a box at the end of the movie…Watch the movie again. That has more brutal stuff than we ever did. Fincher will be the first to tell you. When we bought Saw I, we though we were making a little twisted version of Se7en. If you think of the deadly sins, and where those people were when they went through that journey. Think of the sins, and think about what those scenes were. We tried to make that movie. If you go back and watch that movie, it’s no different from our movie. But because Fincher did it and Brad Pitt was in it and Gwyneth Paltrow got her head chopped off, it’s a thriller. I’m serious. If you tell kids that it’s a thriller, they wont go. I don’t understand the whole “torture porn” thing. That’s something Nikki Finke and a bunch of reporters made up…If you read what people like about our films, you’ll see that they like the cleverness. They like the traps. They like Jigsaw. We pour over what people like, because that’s how we develop our projects. Nobody is saying they love the blood. Do we have fun with it? Yeah. But you don’t see some guy just chopping arms off and limbs flying, and blood spurting. We really try to use logic and cleverness. And a lot of “what if?” And I think “what if” is scarier than seeing someone’s arm chopped off.

BR: The movie is whatever you want to call it. Whatever gets the adrenaline pumping. Is that what porn does?

Costas Mandylor: When I first saw I and II, isn’t it about redemption, and repenting? Sins, and things like that. The people are trapped. What gets you to the point of the trap? You find out that somebody is a pervert. A needle is going to be stuck into his eye if he doesn’t dig the key out of his head. Does anybody ever talk about that? About people redeeming themselves, and how far are you willing to go? What gets them to the torture? It can’t just be about chopping off an arm.

Saw IV opens in theaters today.

Tags: betsy russell, BetsyRussell, costas mandylor, CostasMandylor, david hackl, DavidHackl, jigsaw, lyriq bent, LyriqBent, mark burg, MarkBurg, oren koules, OrenKoules, saw, saw II, saw III, saw IV, SawIi, SawIii, SawIv, scott patterson, ScottPatterson, tobin bell, TobinBell, torture porn, TorturePorn

Source: feeds.cinematical.com

Patrick Walsh
Filed under: Horror, Thrillers, New Releases, Mystery & Suspense, Lionsgate Films, Theatrical Reviews

Outside of the Baby Geniuses pictures, I can’t think of a more joyless, humorless, lifeless movie series than the Saw films. I watched the previous three alone at home, and each just sucked the life right out of me. But since I’d be seeing Saw IV with an audience, I expected to finally understand why people love these grisly flicks so much. I thought I’d hear yelling, cheering, people shouting “Gross!”. I thought it would be fun. But the crowd remained completely silent until the credits rolled. Then everyone quietly got up, quietly walked to the doors, and quietly headed for their cars. How has this become the most successful horror franchise of all time?

Jigsaw is dead, and the film opens with his naked corpse laid out on a slab. Yes folks, I don’t know why this hasn’t been mentioned more in the marketing, but you do get to see 65 year-old Tobin Bell’s genitals. That oughta sell some more tickets! What follows is an autopsy scene so astonishingly graphic that I removed the organ donor sticker from my driver’s license. Seriously, if you had trouble with the brain surgery sequence in Saw III, get to Saw IV 15 minutes late. A new cassette recording is found in Jigsaw’s stomach, and the games begin all over again. Two FBI profilers (played by Scott Patterson and Athena Karkanis) join Detective Hoffman (Costas Mandylor) to put together the Jigsaw puzzle (nice little play on words there, if I don’t say so myself). SWAT Commander Rigg (Lyriq Bent) is abducted and has 90 minutes to overcome the usual series of traps and save an ex-New Kid on the Block (Donnie Wahlberg). In other words, it’s exactly like the other Saw flicks.

The Saw series does have one major strength in Bell, who is seen here (fully clothed) in flashback. No matter how ludicrous things get in the movies around him, Bell always commands your attention. In Saw IV, we learn a lot about his back story, and he makes those scenes a lot more interesting than they deserve to be. Aside from Bell, the makers of Saw always seem to conduct nationwide searches for the blandest actors imaginable. Saw IV is certainly no exception. It’s a “who’s who” of “who cares.” Bent can barely muster the energy to say his lines audibly. Mandylor does a lot of grunting. Former scream queen Betsy Russell adds nothing in what should have been a revelatory role as Jigsaw’s wife. Patterson (a long way from Gilmore Girls) fares a little better, at least he appears to know he’s in a movie.

Darren Lynn Bousman directs, as he did the previous two entries. It is time for some new, ahem, blood. The guy shoots every single scene in the same dark, dank, murky style, and clearly doesn’t have a way with actors. Though it’s hard to blame actors when the screenplay is as utterly ridonkulous as Saw IV’s. Written by Patrick Melton and Marcus Dunstan (Feast), it seems the script was made up on the spot. And considering a new Saw is rushed out once a year, it probably was. The events of this film overlap with the events of Saw III in ways that never really add up. We see characters from the previous film walking around in this one, characters from this film walking around in that one, and the story just keeps doubling back on itself until you half expect Marty McFly to come strolling into frame. The plot has more gaping holes than an orgy in a donut factory.

But you don’t care about that, do you? You really want to know about the traps. I will say that nothing here made me gag like the pig scene in Saw III. That will be a comfort to some of you, and a disappointment to others. The opening trap sequence is genuinely exciting, creative, and refreshing. It’s not someone sitting in a chair yelling, it’s a full-on action sequence. Two men, one with his eyes sewn shut and the other with his mouth sewn shut, are chained to opposite sides of a device. The “eyes wide shut” gentleman has the key to their freedom attached to the back of his neck, but is unaware. They have weapons, and they fight to the finish. The sequence got me really charged up, but the feeling didn’t last. Everything else trap-wise is more of the same, people sitting and screaming as they get scalped or stabbed or ripped apart. There is nothing as creative or disturbing here as in the previous films.

And I know you’ve heard that there’s a mind-blowing twist to be had in Saw IV. Like Public Enemy said, “Don’t believe the hype.” The original had a really neat ending, I’ll give you that. The twist in Saw IV is one of those utterly random “surprises” that is forced upon the film for no other reason than the desire to have a surprise. Like everything that came before it, the finale doesn’t make a lot of sense.

What can I tell you? If you liked the other movies in the series, you’ll probably like Saw IV. As for me, I wish I had Saw something else.

Tags: cinematical, saw, saw II, saw III, saw IV, saw IV review, SawIv, tobin bell

Source: feeds.cinematical.com

Kevin Kelly
Filed under: Independent, New Releases, Warner Independent Pictures, Contests, Cinematical Indie

Do you live in the Los Angeles area? Are you interested in seeing a free movie and hobnobbing with celebrities at a reception afterwards? Plus with the added benefit of it all being for a good cause? Well, then you’ve come to the right place.

Cinematical, along with Warner Independent Pictures, is giving away ten pairs of tickets to the World Premiere of Darfur Now, starring and co-produced by Don Cheadle, this coming Tuesday, October 30th at the Directors Guild of America. The film starts at 7:30pm, and you’ll be able to watch the arrivals on the red carpet, and attend the exclusive reception afterwards. We’ll be giving these tickets away to ten random commenters, but please be aware that you need to live near enough to Los Angeles to get there on your own nickel by Tuesday.

Check out the details about the film (including the trailer) and the giveaway after the break.

Gallery: Darfur Now

Darfur Now is a story of hope in the midst of one of humanity’s darkest hours – a call to action for people everywhere to end the catastrophe unfolding in Darfur, Sudan. In this documentary, the struggles and achievements of six different individuals from inside Darfur and around the world bring to light the tragedy in Sudan and show how the actions of one person can make a difference to millions.

Written and directed by Ted Braun, the film explores the Darfur conflict through the first-hand experiences of Don Cheadle, Hejewa Adam, Pablo Recalde, Ahmed Mohammed Abakar, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, and Adam Sterling. Executive Produced by Jeff Skoll, Diane Weyermann, Omar Amanat, Matt Palmieri, Gary Greenebaum and Dean Schramm. Produced by Cathy Schulman, Don Cheadle and Mark Jonathan Harris. Co-Produced by Lenore Zerman, Line Produced by Jacqueline Frank.

• To enter, please leave one comment stating why you and a friend would like to attend the premiere on Tuesday, October 30th at the Directors Guild Theater in Los Angeles.
• Please make sure you have an active and valid email address in the email field when leaving your comment.
• You may only enter once.
• Comments must be made no later that midnight Eastern time on Monday, October 29th.
• Cinematical will randomly choose ten commenters, and tickets will be held under your name at the theater.
• Winners will receive two tickets (valued at roughly $30 apiece) that admits them plus one guest to the premiere and reception for Darfur Now.
• Click here for official rules.

Tags: Darfur Now, DarfurNow, Don Cheadle, DonCheadle

Source: feeds.cinematical.com

Erik Davis
Filed under: Comedy, Drama, Distribution, Exhibition, Fox Searchlight, Newsstand, Cinematical Indie

One of the most talked-about films of the fall (due to its popular run on the festival circuit) is Jason Reitman’s Juno. I’ve heard from several different people that it’s “this year’s Little Miss Sunshine,” and I have yet to meet one person who did not like it. With lots and lots of buzz, Fox Searchlight has decided to push Juno’s release date up a bit to capitalize on all the good word, deciding to send their baby out into the world on December 5 (in NY and LA only, before tacking on additional theaters across the country in the weeks to follow). The film was originally set to arrive in limited release on December 14. For those of you who are dying to see Juno, and do not live in either NY or LA, fear not — Searchlight has set up a number of free promotional screenings in several different cities.

Ah, but if you live in NYC, and want to take advantage of those free promotional screenings, your sh*t out of luck — they’re all booked. Seriously, I took a look at the list and every other screening across the country is open except the four or so screenings in NYC. What gives? Do people in NYC just watch more movies than everyone else? And are they hipper to the stuff that’s free? Who knows, and perhaps Searchlight will add a few more screenings in the Big Apple. Directed by Jason Reitman (Thank You for Smoking) Juno stars Ellen Page as a teenager who’s accidentally knocked up by her awkward best friend (Michael Cera), and subsequently decides to give the child away to an adorable-looking married couple (Jason Bateman and Jennifer Garner). For more on the film, and to check out the trailer, head on over to Juno’s official website.

Tags: cinematical, ellen page, fox searchlight, jason bateman, jennifer garner, juno, michael cera

Source: feeds.cinematical.com

Kevin Polowy
Filed under: Horror, Lionsgate Films, Celebrities and Controversy, Fandom, Interviews, ComicCon

“Oh yes there will be blood,” and considering the annual profits being raked in by the Saw series, there might very well be blood every October for the rest of time. Regardless of your feelings toward them, there’s no denying these folks have gotten the formula down cold for budget filmmaking that yields fattening returns. Of course it helps that the movies are mostly starless (no offense, Donnie Wahlberg), with the sole exception of Tobin Bell, a character actor who’s appeared on roughly 40 percent of all the world’s television shows and has become famous as the face of the franchise. It’s no wonder that his character Jigsaw, the diabolical madman who teaches people how to appreciate life just in time for them to die, is back for Saw IV despite meeting a grisly end in the last chapter. We visited with Bell in his lair (OK, hotel suite), where he told us about interactions with fans and the time he read his young son the Saw script as a bedtime story. Well, sort of.

Cinematical: Do you get recognized much for your playing Jigsaw?

Tobin Bell: Oh yeah sure. But you know, I’m always amazed… I took my 11-year-old to an oceanography camp and these girls came over to me, and my son was like “Oh here we go, Dad,” because they had been looking. They were like, “You’re the guy, aren’t you?” And I said, “Well, maybe.” They said, “He is, he’s the guy on Charmed!” They were like 13, and Charmed was their favorite show and I did one episode of Charmed as this blind guy. Sometimes people will say “You’re the guy on Stargate.” Or, “I loved you on Seinfeld.” So I get recognized depending on where I am. Saw is a particularly popular film with 14-30 year olds, so I’ll be at a playground and meet six or 10 skateboarders who just wanna talk about Saw. They don’t want to talk about Seinfeld but they are just very excited about Saw. I’m always psyched about that because seeing something that engenders as much enthusiasm amongst young people as Saw does is a very interesting experience.

Cinematical: What do you think drives that fascination with ‘Saw’?

TB: I remember meeting a girl in New York some years ago and she went to horror films all the time. She was very reserved, very presentable, a personal assistant type, extremely articulate, very well educated. She went to horror films and I asked her, “Why do you go to horror films?” Because I never personally was drawn to being frightened in the theater. She said it’s because it’s such a visceral experience. It’s not something you can intellectualize. You can’t control it. So she liked that. That always stuck with me. When I sit in the theaters and watch the Saw films and watch the audiences’ reaction, it’s true. You can’t control what your body does. Like the last moment of Saw 1 when I get up off the floor, it induced this sort of universal reaction that people had to this moment. It was like “Ahh!,” and their little asses came right off their seats in that moment. Their bodies would rise out of the chair. And there are other moments like that.

Cinematical: Has your son seen any of the Saw films?

TB: No, he has read some of the scripts. He hasn’t read any recent scripts, but when he was 8 or 9 I read him the first couple of pages of Saw 1; and it reveals that it’s dark in the room, the lights go on, the fluorescent harsh light, the guy comes out of the tub… He was fascinated. He totally got the situation and all of a sudden he realizes he’s locked in this thing and there is another guy locked on the other end. I don’t know how far he got. I think he fell asleep. We were just reading the first two or three pages. He hasn’t seen any of the movies nor has he asked me to see any of the movies. As a matter of fact, when the trailer runs on TV, he’s like “Okayyy.” I’ve talked to kids his age whose parents let them see the film. And they come and say, “Hey I saw the film, is there going to be another one?” And I say, “Well, weren’t you scared?” And they say, “Ehhh.” I thoroughly don’t think the films are appropriate for kids but it’s up to the parents to decide based on who their kid is, and how tightly the kid’s head is screwed on.

Cinematical: At what age do you think you would show it to your son?

TB: It would probably be when he asked. But I see no reason, because he’s seen me in lots of other things but the movies for some kids are probably outside the realm of possibility. Some people are drawn to them, maybe for the reason that my friend in New York was. That’s not to say I don’t watch horror movies and thrillers, like Jacob’s Ladder, which is a very smart and intelligent film. I watched The Descent. It was very well done, very frightening. I liked the pacing of it. I really liked how they introduced the characters first. I’m a character and relationship guy and even with the Saw films it’s special-effects people’s jobs to create these scary things. It’s not my job. My job is to bring some sense of humanity to the character, no matter how evil he may be. The script is going to take me there. I mean John Kramer [Jigsaw] was a kid once.

Cinematical: What do you make of all the fuss over so-called “torture porn”?

TB: I’ve heard that several times. You know, they are going to come up with phrases for whatever, the horror resurgence is into its sixth or seventh year so there’s been some time. It’s like fashion. New words and phrases come up. We call it hip culture talk. Do I understand it? Sure. Do I think there is some merit in it? Yeah I do. Look at Hostel. You don’t have to go see it. Don’t go see it. Don’t let your kids go see it. If you wanna go see it, it’s a free country, go see it. Anything that exists on the human pallete, is from my point of view, fair game for artists to portray. You don’t have to go see it if you don’t want to, so don’t go. I’m more concerned about the real porn. I don’t mean porn-porn. I’m talking about the violence, the real violence, the real poverty, the real way that we approach many problems that we have in this world, in this country. That’s porn in my point of view because we aren’t using all of our resources to approach it in a smart way. So I’m not worried about artistic or factious porn, or torture porn.

Tags: cinematical, halloween2007, saw IV, tobin bell interview

Source: feeds.cinematical.com

Sex, lies and videotape: Sienna Miller in Interview

Interview, Steve Buscemi’s American remake of the late Theo Van Gogh’s Dutch original, sees battle-hardened war correspondent Buscemi sent off to interview soap opera star Sienna Miller, an assignment he deems far beneath him. Despite their instantaneous dislike for one another, circumstances see to it that they end up spending the evening together back at her apartment. Various Pinterish power games, conquests and submissions ensue, during which one’s never quite sure whether they’re about to tear each other’s throats out and leave each other for dead, or tear each other’s clothes off and turn the place into some pan-sexual R&D lab.

I dream of interviews like that. Never happens, though, more’s the pity.The days of PR people letting you meet some major monarch of the marquee under anything but the most controlled of circumstances are lost to history now. Time was, until the late-70s, when a star’s agent or manager - never a publicist - would simply call up Esquire or Playboy, and say, “I can let you have three days in Hawaii with Steve McQueen”. And it wasn’t beyond the realm of possibility that you’d might find yourself a week later, at four in the morning on Oahu, drunkenly careening down some lava-floe in a beat-up pickup truck with four naked teenage girls bouncing around in the back screaming their heads off for more cocaine, and McQueen muttering, “Not a word about this to Ali, okay pardner?”

Or you’d get a gig following Lee Marvin or some other drunken war hero, and when you returned a week later, you’d need a month to get the gin out of your system, along with dim recollections of an eight-state binge with stops for marlin-fishing, wrought-iron blowtorch sculpture, terrifying Pacific war flashbacks related at four in the morning in an empty restaurant with the waiters too scared to evict their famous, intoxicated customer, and then waking up on an eastbound flight with no memory of boarding it. Back then you could go to any battlefield in Vietnam, and celebrity journalism offered equally foolish and life-threatening full access.

All gone, that sort of thing, sadly. Much like the Pentagon with war correspondents, the studios have honed things to such a degree that you’re unlikely ever to encounter an interesting situation or hear an enlightening remark or a discouraging word from their charges. One or two of them - Jeff Bridges, William H Macy, Malcolm McDowell among them - can actually transcend all this bullshit, but these days you’re more likely to have to wait in line in a soulless hotel anteroom, feeling like a client in a brothel, before being led into another room where the megastar awaits, looking to resume the analogy, like a harrowed hooker who’s accidentally double-booked Fleet Week and the Republican Convention, and now has to pay the pimpish piper.

Don’t raise this analogy with them, by the way. I’ve tried it for laffs. None have ever resulted.

· This article appears in today’s edition of the Guide.