Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10
The Small Screen / Re: What shows are you watching?
« Last post by Jeremy Blackman on February 19, 2018, 10:54:33 PM »
The Joel McHale Show with Joel McHale... on Netflix. Which I believe is one of their first weekly shows.

It's basically identical to The Soup, but slightly better. I bet it has most of the same writers, too. I'm on board.
Paul Thomas Anderson / Re: Phantom Thread
« Last post by Lewton on February 19, 2018, 10:22:05 PM »
This conversation reminds me that I recently came across a YouTube video of Tony Kushner, circa Lincoln, mentioning that DDL "is a great writer in his own right," or something along those lines. This, along with recent reports that DDL has been taking meetings in the interest of possibly producing some films, makes me wonder if he will ever try his hand at writing his own movie.

I do hope PTA convinces him to come back so that DDL and Joaquin Phoenix can play brothers or something, but if not, then I'm hoping whatever he does next will still be something artistic that will be put out for public consideration. Day-Lewis behind the camera, or putting pen to paper in some capacity, sounds very interesting to me and there are reasons to believe he'd excel at either one of those challenges.
DVD Talk / Re: Random DVD and Blu-ray announcements
« Last post by Ravi on February 19, 2018, 08:29:06 PM »!/Early-Women-Filmmakers-An-International-Anthology/p/80085513/category=20414531

May 9, 2017

Early Women Filmmakers: An International Anthology

More women worked in film during its first two decades than at any time since. Unfortunately, many early women filmmakers have been largely written out of film history, their contributions undervalued. This necessary and timely collection highlights the work of 14 of early cinema’s most innovative and influential women directors, re-writing and celebrating their rightful place in film history.

International in scope, this groundbreaking collection features over 10 hours of material, comprised of 25 films spanning 1902-1943, including many rare titles not widely available until now, from shorts to feature films, live-action to animation, commercial narratives to experimental works. Directors include Alice Guy Blaché, Lois Weber, Mabel Normand, Madeline Brandeis, Germaine Dulac, Olga Preobrazhenskaia, Marie-Louise Iribe, Lotte Reiniger, Claire Parker, Mrs. Wallace Reid (Dorothy Davenport), Leni Riefenstahl, Mary Ellen Bute, Dorothy Arzner, and Maya Deren.

These women were technically and stylistically innovative, pushing the boundaries of narrative, aesthetics, and genre. Going back to the beginning of cinema, this collection makes visible the tremendous directorial contributions women made all around the world. Beautifully restored in high definition, Early Women Filmmakers features new scores by Sergei Dreznin, Frederick Hodges, Tamar Muskal, Judith Rosenberg, and Rodney Sauer and the Mont Alto Motion Picture Orchestra.

This anthology is dedicated to the memory of David Shepard (1940-2017), without whom these films – along with countless others – would simply not have been made available in such beautifully-restored editions. The collection represents one of David’s final produced works, completed in collaboration with several film archives, including the French National Center for Cinematography and the Moving Image (CNC), the Film Studies Center at the University of Chicago, and the Library of Congress.

Bonus Materials Include:

Booklet Essay: By film scholar and Women Film Pioneers Project Manager Kate Saccone.
Audio Commentary: For Lois Weber’s The Blot by author, professor, and expert on women and early film culture Shelley Stamp, courtesy of Milestone Film and Video.

Complete list of films
Paul Thomas Anderson / Re: Phantom Thread
« Last post by Shughes on February 19, 2018, 07:21:17 PM »
I feel like it's more likely that DDL's contribution was all just part of their collaboration - in a similar way that Producers will develop a script or story with a director - they are not writing the film and nor should they get a writing credit but rather putting the work in as part of their existing role. Film is a collaborative medium. I (can only) imagine that DDL embraced having such an input and that the collaboration was so open - people like to affect change and make a difference. PTA discussed a similar working process on TWBB which was also surprising to hear, but really great.
This Year In Film / Re: Surfer
« Last post by jenkins on February 19, 2018, 06:54:29 PM »
he thanks Phil and i think everyone had a good night but oh i don't know about this movie's future --

Simon Barrett, The screenwriter of Blair Witch just watched his first movie in 18 months, so of course he wrote about the experience for Talkhouse:

Opening narration informs us that Surfer had a bad surfing accident and is now scared to surf, so he just fishes all day to be near the ocean. One day while fishing, he sees a man drowning, causing Surfer to cut his fishing line, run out into the water, run back to shore, then run back out into the water and save the man.

The man Surfer rescued turns out to be his father, Jack. Surfer is confused because he was under the impression that his father died “in a war.” Jack confirms that this is accurate, he is dead, and tells Surfer to feel his hand, shouting that it feels like “hard jelly.” He explains that he asked God to help him return to the mortal realm to give his son advice, and yells, “God made me out of squid and electricity.” That matter resolved, Jack gives his son advice in a lengthy oceanside monologue featuring a 12-minute continuous shot, during which Jack proclaims, “There’s always a whale crying somewhere in the ocean,” and at one point screams, “I am living in an iron maiden of pain, boy!” This causes Surfer to shrug uncomfortably and look at the ground, as if vaguely worried that some of his friends from school might walk by and see him. Anyway, the gist of the whole speech is that Surfer needs to confront his fear.

To move things forward, Jack forces Surfer to look at a dead whale, then tells him to go to an address and ask the man there, Banks, for money to go surfing. Once at this location, Surfer finds that it is a secret military hospital where, in a shocking twist, his father is a patient, alive but brain damaged. Banks, a military doctor, tells Surfer that Jack was an elite, government-trained assassin who, on his last mission, swam through shark-infested waters in order to attach a bomb to a boat. However, Jack was caught in the explosion and has been semi-comatose ever since. After a scene of hypnotically repetitive dialogue, Banks gives Surfer money to go surfing and Surfer goes surfing.

Narratively, this is the end of the film; however, we see Surfer surf, go surfing again, then surf some more. Roughly about half of Surfer’s 96 minute runtime is comprised of home movie and vacation footage of Surfer surfing. Sage Burke, to his credit, seems to be quite good at surfing, which is I suppose why his father decided to make a film about that. You will have time to contemplate this extensively.

At the screening I attended, Doug Burke was present for a Q&A, although his son was not. Doug cheerfully noted that Sage “won’t get anywhere near this theater,” and said that his now 16-year-old son told him, “I just can’t handle that right now.” Reportedly 11 years in the making, Surfer was conceived as a silent film, then transformed into something more like a narrative when Doug Burke decided to rekindle his longtime love of method acting.

Other key information delivered at the Q&A was that Doug Burke’s original cut of the film was 6½ hours long, at which time he asked the movie’s editor to help him shorten it, and the score was composed by Doug watching the final edit and humming along to it, then recording his humming and giving it to a composer. We all had many more questions. At one point in the film, Jack tells Surfer that Surfer was saved by the spirit of a sea lion, which is is never referenced again, causing me to genuinely think I imagined it. I asked about this, and Doug Burke’s reply was helpfully recorded for posterity by Jason Eisener in the video below:

Paul Thomas Anderson / Re: Phantom Thread
« Last post by wilberfan on February 19, 2018, 06:14:21 PM »
I've wondered about this since the first post-screening Q&A.  Everything I've heard since makes it sound (to my ear) like DDL helped shape the story and was involved to the point that I've never understood why PTA gets sole screening writing credit on this film.  Contrast that to the story we were presented with of him writing Magnolia by himself in Macy's (Vermont?) cabin (with the snake outside as incentive).  But here, too, I'm not familiar with WGA rules that might dictate who's considered responsible for what in terms of actual screen credit.
Paul Thomas Anderson / Re: Phantom Thread
« Last post by Lewton on February 19, 2018, 06:00:04 PM »
Seems to me that DDL would get a story by credit at most.

That was my initial thought, as well, but it's still hard to say. If PTA arrived with the basic bones of the thing -- the general gist, even if they didn't decide on the dressmaker aspect until later -- and Day-Lewis supplemented it through good research, then perhaps that doesn't warrant a "story by" credit?

Keep in mind, of course, that I have absolutely no idea what I'm talking about.
Paul Thomas Anderson / Re: Phantom Thread
« Last post by Jeremy Blackman on February 19, 2018, 05:48:28 PM »
Seems to me that DDL would get a story by credit at most. Didn't PTA describe them walking around and discussing the concept? I don't think they were handing the pen back and forth or anything like that. PTA also tends to emphasize the efforts of his collaborators when talking about the process, so his words should be viewed with that in mind.
Paul Thomas Anderson / Re: Phantom Thread
« Last post by Lewton on February 19, 2018, 05:28:29 PM »
The Cinema Scope review of the film (don't read it if you're totally avoiding spoilers) includes this line:

Quote from:
A large debt is owed to Daniel Day-Lewis, an actor who inspires some of Anderson’s best instincts and who co-wrote the screenplay, but apparently begged out of sharing screen credit.

Is this just speculation on the writer's part, or does it have some basis in an interview or something? Day-Lewis begged to be uncredited?

As far as I understand, DDL contributed research, but didn't do any of the actual writing. He also helped PTA reorient the dialogue so that it sounded authentically British (Manville did something similar during production). So, he researched and advised on the script, but that doesn't technically qualify as writing, right? I'm not sure if this has something to do with WGA rules about what does or doesn't constitute a co-writer credit.

I'm just trying to get a more accurate idea of the preproduction process. This particular point has been a bit foggy -- for me, anyway -- since the beginning.
2017 In Film / Film Stars Don't Die In Liverpool
« Last post by Something Spanish on February 19, 2018, 12:24:42 PM »

Checked this one out for the two leads, who both didn't disappoint, and because I had recently read Ebert's review for In A Lonely Place where he writes a brief summary of Gloria Graham's affair with the son of her then husband Nicholas Ray, an interesting little Hollywood fact I was not aware of. The story is pretty routine, one that deals with a situation taking place in the present (early 80's) yet interlaces (pretty seamlessly) scenes from the past to further illuminate the history of the story's main relationship. Benning is good as always, capturing the flair of a B&W starlet, and Jamie Bell does his thing (his stedicam walks were actually a highlight), but what really kept me in the game were the little strokes of authenticity, using footage from Graham's Oscar win and a clip from an old film.This is nothing new, but nothing new done well.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10
DMCA & Copyright | Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy