Wednesday, January 31, 2007
Also just checking in
Testing to see that my registration at gmail etc worked. Thanks, Mary, will be looking for an interesting topic to post and discuss.
Just checking in!
I don't have much to say but I wanted to check in that the new sign in worked.
I'll be back!
Sue
I'll be back!
Sue
Hey everyone!
Hi, Cathy (CGee) here.
This is my first post here and thanks for asking me, Mary!
By the look of the articles and subjects posted, we should be able to have some interesting discussions!
Cath
This is my first post here and thanks for asking me, Mary!
By the look of the articles and subjects posted, we should be able to have some interesting discussions!
Cath
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
Variety - Super Bowl
Films pass on Super Bowl
Only two studios lock down game time - By DADE HAYES, MICHAEL LEARMONTH
Less than a week before the Super Bowl, only two movie ads are confirmed for the game -- a steep decline from last year, when eight pricey plugs yielded decidedly mixed results.
Neither of the pics is a summer release; summer movies have historically used the winter showcase as a launch pad.
Time has not run out on inventory, and network and studio execs said a couple of studios are in talks with CBS over the last remaining fourth-quarter spots. Those positions are usually the least watched, especially in a lopsided contest.
Universal, Sony and Warner Bros. have deliberately avoided the Chicago-Indianapolis matchup, diverting those millions in potential spending to targeted primetime berths. With record ratings for "American Idol" as well as strong new series from "Grey's Anatomy" to "Heroes," TV has lately provided prime opportunities.
The two studios that have locked down game time are Lionsgate and Disney.
Lionsgate is advertising for the Terrence Howard-Bernie Mac pic "Pride," about an inner-city teacher who turns troubled kids into champion swimmers. Lionsgate is planning a wide bow March 23.
Disney is advertising for "Wild Hogs," a comedy starring John Travolta, Tim Allen and Martin Lawrence that launches March 2.
Paramount is sponsoring an hour of the six-hour pregame show, a promotion for its Eddie Murphy film "Norbit." Sony, which in past years has taken a pre-game spot, has done so again this year for "Ghost Rider." Both pics are launching in February, and pregame ad time is considerably cheaper than during the game.
Studios are not alone in pulling back. Blue-chip consumer product firms Procter & Gamble and Unilever are also reported to be taking a pass as traditional mainstays like soft drinks, snack foods and beer step up. Many companies see better value in less fishbowl-like environments, where the "game within a game" invites scrutiny not just from viewers but also from business partners.
Pressures can be more concentrated in Hollywood. "The biggest nightmare with Super Bowl spots is telling other producers why you aren't buying ads on the game for their movies," noted one studio marketing vet.
Film marketers' jitters reflect wider concerns about capturing eyeballs as ad dollars gradually shift toward the Web. The Super Bowl is perhaps the last bona fide communal campfire, but viewers are often at large parties when watching, and many are overly saturated with lavishly produced, 30-second spots and the accompanying Ad Bowl sweepstakes.
Plus, many major summer titles, especially those bowing in May, are new editions in well-established franchises, so generating awareness is the last concern. Would a 30-second enticement for "Spider-Man 3," "Shrek the Third" or "Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End" yield more B.O. or would it just raise that always-bedeviling level of expectations?
Rates for the game's fourth quarter are typically steeply discounted, and CBS is giving big discounts for the last remaining national spots, in some cases cutting nearly a million off the $2.6 million asking price.
"We're very happy where we are right now; we have a couple of units left, but we are going to be sold out by game time," said CBS exec veep of sports sales John Bogusz.
The shift this year is interesting in historic terms. A decade ago, "Independence Day" was the only film advertised on the game. Its theatrical launch was monstrous, leading seven studios to take ads the following year. Studio spending has remained at a high level ever since, with film trailing only beer as a category.
Time Warner and Disney have been the fourth- and fifth-biggest advertisers in the Super Bowl over the last 20 years, spending $63.4 million and $43.5 million, respectively, according to TNS Media Intelligence.
Since 1991, 87 pics have been advertised during the Super Bowl with mixed success.
In the last four years, all eight movies promoted during the game and released after Memorial Day broke in at No. 1, including "Cars" and "Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest."
The biggest winner last year may have been Sony's "Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby," a perfect fit for the male-skewing Super Bowl aud. Action pics "Mission: Impossible III" and "Poseidon" both ponied up. The former benefited from short-term reaction only to underperform for other reasons; "Poseidon," according to post-game focus groups, did not score well on the game and ultimately fizzled.
"The problem is, if you're not ready with your creative, you are left way too exposed," noted one gun-shy marketing consultant. He cited the now-classic example of 2003's "The Hulk" spot, which was avidly TiVo-ed and picked apart frame by frame by feverish film geeks. With an f/x-dependent film that typically gets locked only a few days before release, that can be too much attention too soon. The general consensus on the film's look was downbeat, and that made for a grueling trek toward opening weekend.
In addition to paid ad spots, CBS has big plans to promote its own schedule and talent before the game's estimated 95 million viewers.
"We look at it the same way our advertisers do; it's a huge showcase, and we pay close attention to every single second that goes into that game," said CBS marketing prexy George Schweitzer.
The network won't divulge its exact promotion plans, but the Monday premiere of the comedy "Rules of Engagement" will get special attention, as will the premiere of "Survivor" on Feb. 8. Also getting a promotional bump will be "The Amazing Race," which returns two weeks later.
After the game, CBS is airing an episode of "Criminal Minds" and, after local news, a special episode of "The Late Late Show With Craig Ferguson" live from Miami. Last year ABC used the Super Bowl lead-in to similarly promote "Grey's Anatomy" and "Jimmy Kimmel Live."
Katie Couric will also get a much-needed Super Bowl platform. The "Evening News" anchor will do a news feature during the pregame show. The net will also throw in some music-sports tie-ins to promote the Grammys airing the following week.
"We paid a lot of money and made an investment in the NFL for a lot of reasons," Schweitzer said. "We look forward to having a terrific game."
Only two studios lock down game time - By DADE HAYES, MICHAEL LEARMONTH
Less than a week before the Super Bowl, only two movie ads are confirmed for the game -- a steep decline from last year, when eight pricey plugs yielded decidedly mixed results.
Neither of the pics is a summer release; summer movies have historically used the winter showcase as a launch pad.
Time has not run out on inventory, and network and studio execs said a couple of studios are in talks with CBS over the last remaining fourth-quarter spots. Those positions are usually the least watched, especially in a lopsided contest.
Universal, Sony and Warner Bros. have deliberately avoided the Chicago-Indianapolis matchup, diverting those millions in potential spending to targeted primetime berths. With record ratings for "American Idol" as well as strong new series from "Grey's Anatomy" to "Heroes," TV has lately provided prime opportunities.
The two studios that have locked down game time are Lionsgate and Disney.
Lionsgate is advertising for the Terrence Howard-Bernie Mac pic "Pride," about an inner-city teacher who turns troubled kids into champion swimmers. Lionsgate is planning a wide bow March 23.
Disney is advertising for "Wild Hogs," a comedy starring John Travolta, Tim Allen and Martin Lawrence that launches March 2.
Paramount is sponsoring an hour of the six-hour pregame show, a promotion for its Eddie Murphy film "Norbit." Sony, which in past years has taken a pre-game spot, has done so again this year for "Ghost Rider." Both pics are launching in February, and pregame ad time is considerably cheaper than during the game.
Studios are not alone in pulling back. Blue-chip consumer product firms Procter & Gamble and Unilever are also reported to be taking a pass as traditional mainstays like soft drinks, snack foods and beer step up. Many companies see better value in less fishbowl-like environments, where the "game within a game" invites scrutiny not just from viewers but also from business partners.
Pressures can be more concentrated in Hollywood. "The biggest nightmare with Super Bowl spots is telling other producers why you aren't buying ads on the game for their movies," noted one studio marketing vet.
Film marketers' jitters reflect wider concerns about capturing eyeballs as ad dollars gradually shift toward the Web. The Super Bowl is perhaps the last bona fide communal campfire, but viewers are often at large parties when watching, and many are overly saturated with lavishly produced, 30-second spots and the accompanying Ad Bowl sweepstakes.
Plus, many major summer titles, especially those bowing in May, are new editions in well-established franchises, so generating awareness is the last concern. Would a 30-second enticement for "Spider-Man 3," "Shrek the Third" or "Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End" yield more B.O. or would it just raise that always-bedeviling level of expectations?
Rates for the game's fourth quarter are typically steeply discounted, and CBS is giving big discounts for the last remaining national spots, in some cases cutting nearly a million off the $2.6 million asking price.
"We're very happy where we are right now; we have a couple of units left, but we are going to be sold out by game time," said CBS exec veep of sports sales John Bogusz.
The shift this year is interesting in historic terms. A decade ago, "Independence Day" was the only film advertised on the game. Its theatrical launch was monstrous, leading seven studios to take ads the following year. Studio spending has remained at a high level ever since, with film trailing only beer as a category.
Time Warner and Disney have been the fourth- and fifth-biggest advertisers in the Super Bowl over the last 20 years, spending $63.4 million and $43.5 million, respectively, according to TNS Media Intelligence.
Since 1991, 87 pics have been advertised during the Super Bowl with mixed success.
In the last four years, all eight movies promoted during the game and released after Memorial Day broke in at No. 1, including "Cars" and "Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest."
The biggest winner last year may have been Sony's "Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby," a perfect fit for the male-skewing Super Bowl aud. Action pics "Mission: Impossible III" and "Poseidon" both ponied up. The former benefited from short-term reaction only to underperform for other reasons; "Poseidon," according to post-game focus groups, did not score well on the game and ultimately fizzled.
"The problem is, if you're not ready with your creative, you are left way too exposed," noted one gun-shy marketing consultant. He cited the now-classic example of 2003's "The Hulk" spot, which was avidly TiVo-ed and picked apart frame by frame by feverish film geeks. With an f/x-dependent film that typically gets locked only a few days before release, that can be too much attention too soon. The general consensus on the film's look was downbeat, and that made for a grueling trek toward opening weekend.
In addition to paid ad spots, CBS has big plans to promote its own schedule and talent before the game's estimated 95 million viewers.
"We look at it the same way our advertisers do; it's a huge showcase, and we pay close attention to every single second that goes into that game," said CBS marketing prexy George Schweitzer.
The network won't divulge its exact promotion plans, but the Monday premiere of the comedy "Rules of Engagement" will get special attention, as will the premiere of "Survivor" on Feb. 8. Also getting a promotional bump will be "The Amazing Race," which returns two weeks later.
After the game, CBS is airing an episode of "Criminal Minds" and, after local news, a special episode of "The Late Late Show With Craig Ferguson" live from Miami. Last year ABC used the Super Bowl lead-in to similarly promote "Grey's Anatomy" and "Jimmy Kimmel Live."
Katie Couric will also get a much-needed Super Bowl platform. The "Evening News" anchor will do a news feature during the pregame show. The net will also throw in some music-sports tie-ins to promote the Grammys airing the following week.
"We paid a lot of money and made an investment in the NFL for a lot of reasons," Schweitzer said. "We look forward to having a terrific game."
Monday, January 29, 2007
Wednesday, January 24, 2007
The NY Times 1-24-07
‘Dreamgirls’ Leads in Oscar Nominations but Is Snubbed for Best Picture
By DAVID CARR
BEVERLY HILLS, Calif., Jan. 23 — Everything went as planned for “Dreamgirls,” a perfectly confected Oscar machine. Great cast, showstoppers that stopped the show, and a wonderful back story in Jennifer Hudson, the washed-out “American Idol” turned movie star. And it was all propelled by hype-filled rollout, plenty of strong reviews and, finally, widespread belief that it was the favorite in the best-picture throwdown.
Everything continued to go as planned during the news conference at the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences here on Tuesday morning, with this crowd-pleasing costume musical racking up eight nominations. And then the best-picture category was announced: “Babel,” “The Departed,” “Little Miss Sunshine,” “The Queen” and “Letters From Iwo Jima.”
Wait. Are they nominating six this year? The hundreds of reporters in the auditorium were leaning heads together, making sure that they did not hear the name “Dreamgirls.”
They did not.
“Dreamgirls” had the most nominations for the day, eight, including a pair for its supporting players, Eddie Murphy and Ms. Hudson, but it will not be around for the war. It is the first film in many decades to have the most nominations and not be in the best-picture category.
The seven nominations for “Babel” prove that the academy is a sucker for a weave of ambitious filmmaking (multiple languages and stories are represented) and big stars in small roles. (Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett were in just one segment of the movie’s triptych.)
“Pan’s Labyrinth,” a Spanish-language film, received a half-dozen nominations, as did “The Queen,” in an array that was announced by Sid Ganis, president of the academy, and the actress Salma Hayek at 5:38 a.m Pacific time; it was planned to land in the middle of morning shows in the East.
Much of what happened was expected — Forest Whitaker and Helen Mirren, who played monarchs to very different effect — continued their stately walk to the podium, with nominations for best actor and best actress. (“I’m not going to win in a million years, and that’s absolutely fine,” said Kate Winslet, a fellow nominee in the actress category.)
Ms. Mirren said of her nomination: “It’s the mother lode. It’s the big mama of the whole thing. There’s nothing in the whole world like the Oscars.”
Mr. Whitaker described his excitement: “I’m stoked. I have to find the right word, and ‘stoked’ is O.K.,” he said, joining the ritual outpouring of gratitude and expectation.
Mr. Murphy, a seasoned veteran, and Ms. Hudson, an absolute beginner, were joined in the supporting categories by 10-year-old Abigail Breslin and Alan Arkin, 72, for their roles in “Little Miss Sunshine.” (It’s been 38 years since Mr. Arkin’s last nomination, for “The Heart Is a Lonely Hunter.” )
The supporting-actor category was notable for its eclecticism, with Jackie Earle Haley’s portrayal of a pedophile in “Little Children” being recognized, as was Rinko Kikuchi’s role in “Babel” as a deaf-mute Japanese girl with a lot on her mind. In total, out of 20 slots for acting awards, 5 black actors were nominated, 2 Latinas and a Japanese woman.
And in a year when the precursor awards have been all over the road, the movies came from all over the world. “Cinema is an international art form, and you can do it in any language the artist dreams about,” Mr. Ganis said after coming offstage. He pointed to Clint Eastwood’s vivid example in making two movies in two languages about the same war.
The academy, frequently criticized for being a prisoner of convention, ventured far and wide in search of films that represented the year’s most spectacular achievements. Tidy little movies like “Little Miss Sunshine” and “The Queen” were selected for best-picture nods, and two movies in which English is a second language — “Babel” and “Letters From Iwo Jima” — also made the cut, while “The Departed,” a big popcorn movie with a bloody, relentless end, was recognized as well.
Even “United 93,” a movie that made the unthinkable watchable, was given a significant nod when Paul Greengrass was nominated for best director. None of these movies had a built-in Oscar-winning apparatus — far from it, actually, but perhaps that was precisely the point.
Los Angeles is a place that worships success, but can be very punishing when it comes to striving for it. Paramount/DreamWorks learned as much, as it sought to position “Dreamgirls” as a favorite and succeeded; but something went wrong on the way to the podium. It most likely did not help that the movie, with its gorgeous songs and amazing costumes, was a tough sell to begin with among white males, a demographic that describes the majority of the academy’s 5,800 voting members.
The marketing of the film didn’t help, either. Regardless of what you have heard, “Dreamgirls” was a story that was about something, a particularly American story of success and redemption. Instead it was sold as a parade float, majestic and unstoppable. Behind that miscalculation, the basic blocking and tackling of an Oscar campaign fell short. The decision to send out screeners of the movie late was built on hubris — the same reason that Parmount/DreamWorks chose to charge $25 for early peeks at the movie — which suggested that it was an Important Film that must be seen on a big screen.
But the death of President Gerald Ford, combined with a national holiday, meant that most academy members did not get the film until Jan. 3, 10 days after they had received “Letters From Iwo Jima,” a movie that wasn’t even supposed to come out in 2006. That means that academy members saw the hype long before they saw “Dreamgirls” and had just 10 days to see it before they voted. (“Flags of Our Fathers,” another Paramount/Dreamworks project, this one from Mr. Eastwood and Steven Spielberg, came basted in Oscar juice and went nowhere.)
It made for a bad day at Paramount, although the studio’s chief, Brad Grey, was traveling and not taking calls, so no one can say for sure. The studio can find solace in “Babel,” a movie from its specialty division, Paramount Vantage, that did extremely well on Tuesday.
At Warner Brothers, things did not go as planned, either. It was thought early on that “Blood Diamond,” with its serious themes and star wattage from Leonardo DiCaprio, would be a durable contender. Mr. DiCaprio scored a best-actor nomination. But it was Warner’s “Departed” that landed in the thick of the best-picture race, and its director, a hardy unrequited perennial named Martin Scorsese, was also chosen. And the studio’s decision to release Mr. Eastwood’s “Letters From Iwo Jima” is looking pretty smart just about now.
Alan F. Horn, chief executive of Warner Brothers, said best-laid plans or not, he was thrilled for both directors, Mr. Scorsese and Mr. Eastwood — the face-off will reprise 2005, when “Million Dollar Baby” edged out “The Aviator” — and with the five nominations “Blood Diamond” received. (In one indication of “The Departed’s” underlying strength going forward, Mark Wahlberg was nominated in the supporting category for his profane, explosive depiction of a police official.)
“We ended up in a good place,” Mr. Horn said.
Now that the nominations have been settled, the battle for credits will begin. The academy handout listed the best-picture nominations of both “The Departed” and “Little Miss Sunshine” with “nominees to be determined.” The academy will have to decide which of the five producers of “Little Miss Sunshine” deserve a statue, and although Graham King is currently listed, for the purposes of the best-picture nomination, as the sole producer of Warner Brothers’ “Departed,” Mr. Grey, who packaged the movie as an agent before he came to Paramount, may yet have something to say about that. As murky as that seems, it can be said with certainty that it won’t be pretty.
And, going forward, the best-picture race was left without a clear favorite, which is great news for the academy. The voters love a contest, and ABC does, too, because television of all kinds thrives on suspense. With a new host, Ellen DeGeneres, and a collection of films that millions of people actually paid money to see, ABC is hoping on reversing a drop-off in viewership and certainly improving on last year’s 39 million viewers when the show comes up on Feb. 25.
Paula Schwartz contributed reporting for this article.
By DAVID CARR
BEVERLY HILLS, Calif., Jan. 23 — Everything went as planned for “Dreamgirls,” a perfectly confected Oscar machine. Great cast, showstoppers that stopped the show, and a wonderful back story in Jennifer Hudson, the washed-out “American Idol” turned movie star. And it was all propelled by hype-filled rollout, plenty of strong reviews and, finally, widespread belief that it was the favorite in the best-picture throwdown.
Everything continued to go as planned during the news conference at the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences here on Tuesday morning, with this crowd-pleasing costume musical racking up eight nominations. And then the best-picture category was announced: “Babel,” “The Departed,” “Little Miss Sunshine,” “The Queen” and “Letters From Iwo Jima.”
Wait. Are they nominating six this year? The hundreds of reporters in the auditorium were leaning heads together, making sure that they did not hear the name “Dreamgirls.”
They did not.
“Dreamgirls” had the most nominations for the day, eight, including a pair for its supporting players, Eddie Murphy and Ms. Hudson, but it will not be around for the war. It is the first film in many decades to have the most nominations and not be in the best-picture category.
The seven nominations for “Babel” prove that the academy is a sucker for a weave of ambitious filmmaking (multiple languages and stories are represented) and big stars in small roles. (Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett were in just one segment of the movie’s triptych.)
“Pan’s Labyrinth,” a Spanish-language film, received a half-dozen nominations, as did “The Queen,” in an array that was announced by Sid Ganis, president of the academy, and the actress Salma Hayek at 5:38 a.m Pacific time; it was planned to land in the middle of morning shows in the East.
Much of what happened was expected — Forest Whitaker and Helen Mirren, who played monarchs to very different effect — continued their stately walk to the podium, with nominations for best actor and best actress. (“I’m not going to win in a million years, and that’s absolutely fine,” said Kate Winslet, a fellow nominee in the actress category.)
Ms. Mirren said of her nomination: “It’s the mother lode. It’s the big mama of the whole thing. There’s nothing in the whole world like the Oscars.”
Mr. Whitaker described his excitement: “I’m stoked. I have to find the right word, and ‘stoked’ is O.K.,” he said, joining the ritual outpouring of gratitude and expectation.
Mr. Murphy, a seasoned veteran, and Ms. Hudson, an absolute beginner, were joined in the supporting categories by 10-year-old Abigail Breslin and Alan Arkin, 72, for their roles in “Little Miss Sunshine.” (It’s been 38 years since Mr. Arkin’s last nomination, for “The Heart Is a Lonely Hunter.” )
The supporting-actor category was notable for its eclecticism, with Jackie Earle Haley’s portrayal of a pedophile in “Little Children” being recognized, as was Rinko Kikuchi’s role in “Babel” as a deaf-mute Japanese girl with a lot on her mind. In total, out of 20 slots for acting awards, 5 black actors were nominated, 2 Latinas and a Japanese woman.
And in a year when the precursor awards have been all over the road, the movies came from all over the world. “Cinema is an international art form, and you can do it in any language the artist dreams about,” Mr. Ganis said after coming offstage. He pointed to Clint Eastwood’s vivid example in making two movies in two languages about the same war.
The academy, frequently criticized for being a prisoner of convention, ventured far and wide in search of films that represented the year’s most spectacular achievements. Tidy little movies like “Little Miss Sunshine” and “The Queen” were selected for best-picture nods, and two movies in which English is a second language — “Babel” and “Letters From Iwo Jima” — also made the cut, while “The Departed,” a big popcorn movie with a bloody, relentless end, was recognized as well.
Even “United 93,” a movie that made the unthinkable watchable, was given a significant nod when Paul Greengrass was nominated for best director. None of these movies had a built-in Oscar-winning apparatus — far from it, actually, but perhaps that was precisely the point.
Los Angeles is a place that worships success, but can be very punishing when it comes to striving for it. Paramount/DreamWorks learned as much, as it sought to position “Dreamgirls” as a favorite and succeeded; but something went wrong on the way to the podium. It most likely did not help that the movie, with its gorgeous songs and amazing costumes, was a tough sell to begin with among white males, a demographic that describes the majority of the academy’s 5,800 voting members.
The marketing of the film didn’t help, either. Regardless of what you have heard, “Dreamgirls” was a story that was about something, a particularly American story of success and redemption. Instead it was sold as a parade float, majestic and unstoppable. Behind that miscalculation, the basic blocking and tackling of an Oscar campaign fell short. The decision to send out screeners of the movie late was built on hubris — the same reason that Parmount/DreamWorks chose to charge $25 for early peeks at the movie — which suggested that it was an Important Film that must be seen on a big screen.
But the death of President Gerald Ford, combined with a national holiday, meant that most academy members did not get the film until Jan. 3, 10 days after they had received “Letters From Iwo Jima,” a movie that wasn’t even supposed to come out in 2006. That means that academy members saw the hype long before they saw “Dreamgirls” and had just 10 days to see it before they voted. (“Flags of Our Fathers,” another Paramount/Dreamworks project, this one from Mr. Eastwood and Steven Spielberg, came basted in Oscar juice and went nowhere.)
It made for a bad day at Paramount, although the studio’s chief, Brad Grey, was traveling and not taking calls, so no one can say for sure. The studio can find solace in “Babel,” a movie from its specialty division, Paramount Vantage, that did extremely well on Tuesday.
At Warner Brothers, things did not go as planned, either. It was thought early on that “Blood Diamond,” with its serious themes and star wattage from Leonardo DiCaprio, would be a durable contender. Mr. DiCaprio scored a best-actor nomination. But it was Warner’s “Departed” that landed in the thick of the best-picture race, and its director, a hardy unrequited perennial named Martin Scorsese, was also chosen. And the studio’s decision to release Mr. Eastwood’s “Letters From Iwo Jima” is looking pretty smart just about now.
Alan F. Horn, chief executive of Warner Brothers, said best-laid plans or not, he was thrilled for both directors, Mr. Scorsese and Mr. Eastwood — the face-off will reprise 2005, when “Million Dollar Baby” edged out “The Aviator” — and with the five nominations “Blood Diamond” received. (In one indication of “The Departed’s” underlying strength going forward, Mark Wahlberg was nominated in the supporting category for his profane, explosive depiction of a police official.)
“We ended up in a good place,” Mr. Horn said.
Now that the nominations have been settled, the battle for credits will begin. The academy handout listed the best-picture nominations of both “The Departed” and “Little Miss Sunshine” with “nominees to be determined.” The academy will have to decide which of the five producers of “Little Miss Sunshine” deserve a statue, and although Graham King is currently listed, for the purposes of the best-picture nomination, as the sole producer of Warner Brothers’ “Departed,” Mr. Grey, who packaged the movie as an agent before he came to Paramount, may yet have something to say about that. As murky as that seems, it can be said with certainty that it won’t be pretty.
And, going forward, the best-picture race was left without a clear favorite, which is great news for the academy. The voters love a contest, and ABC does, too, because television of all kinds thrives on suspense. With a new host, Ellen DeGeneres, and a collection of films that millions of people actually paid money to see, ABC is hoping on reversing a drop-off in viewership and certainly improving on last year’s 39 million viewers when the show comes up on Feb. 25.
Paula Schwartz contributed reporting for this article.
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
The LA Times
THE BIG PICTURE PATRICK GOLDSTEIN
Hollywood is seeing fans pull a power play
PATRICK GOLDSTEIN
January 23, 2007
HOLLYWOOD has always been full of Cinderella stories, so it wasn't exactly a shock to see Jennifer Hudson go from singing on a Disney cruise ship to showing up in a Vera Wang dress at the Golden Globes last week, where she took home a best supporting actress trophy. Now she's a shoo-in to wake up this morning with an Oscar nomination, quite a turnaround for someone who was ignominiously booted off "American Idol," with Simon Cowell telling her she was "out of her league."
If Hudson goes on to win a best supporting actress Oscar, it will be another landmark moment in the breakdown between our pop culture's major and minor leagues. If anything bridges the chasm between amateur and professional, between crass and class, it would be a performer bouncing from the raucous populism of "American Idol" to the solemn elitism of the Academy Awards.
Seen through the prism of what's happening on the Internet, "American Idol" is a classic example of user-generated content, being at its heart an event propelled by nonprofessional talent and a rabidly involved audience that has more of the shared community feeling of a Web phenomenon than a TV show.
Whether it's Hudson, lonelygirl15 or Jade Goody, the foul-mouthed ex-nurse who, thanks to her antics on "Celebrity Big Brother," is just as celebrated in England as Posh Spice, celebrity has been rudely down-marketed and democratized.
As Aaron Sorkin so eloquently put it the other day, complaining about the blogger influence on media coverage of his "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip" TV drama: "We live in the age of amateurs."
Sorkin may spend much of his show exploring the conflict between artists like himself and soulless media conglomerates, but in the new era of You Stardom, Sorkin and GE are in the same leaky boat. Just as the music industry saw its business crumble before its eyes as kids began sharing songs from unauthorized downloading services, media behemoths are scrambling to protect their content as it migrates to YouTube.com and other fan-driven video sites.
"Ultimately these big media companies are all wrestling with the same thing — the power is being taken out of their hands," says Jordan Levin, the onetime WB network chief who now helps run Generate, a production and management firm active in Internet projects. "This is an industry that for its entire history has imposed its model on consumers. They've always said, 'We'll tell you when you'll watch our TV show or see our movie.' But that's fundamentally changing. The whole structure of people who control content is being supplanted by the content users themselves."
For Web junkies like me, YouTube is a TV network unto itself. If I missed Bill O'Reilly's visit to "The Colbert Report," I can watch it on YouTube. It doesn't matter if I'm looking for something as frivolous as the cartoon rap "George Washington" or something as weighty as "Undercover Mosque," a riveting new documentary on Britain's Channel 4 about the radicalization of mosques in England. No one limits my choices. YouTube's content is shaped by enthusiasts, not a network programmer who thinks a clip would be a lot more relatable to women over 30 if only it had a likable next-door neighbor in it.
If you're running an old-school media company, it doesn't take a weatherman to see where the wind's blowing. In England last week, an unsigned band scored a Top 40 hit for the first time, all of its sales from digital downloads, mostly to kids using mobile phones. "We've got to get the creativity to stand up against user-created content, because that's what people are watching at my house," MGM chief Harry Sloan told Variety last fall. Describing his 17-year-old son's viewing habits, Sloan said that while the TV was on behind him, "he's got two screens in front of him, one connected to friends and the other to play World of Warcraft."
The day isn't far away when some studio executive, instead of buying a bestseller, will acquire the rights to a Web thriller that's become a lonelygirl-style phenomenon. "The problem for us will be that people are going to create a movie character on the Web and they'll own the content — we'll end up just renting it," says Sony Pictures chief Amy Pascal. "We'll buy the movie rights, but they'll own everything else. We haven't bought anything from YouTube yet, but it's going to happen. Trust me, when 'lonelygirl' was happening, everyone was asking, 'Is that a movie?' "
Media companies aren't willing to sit back and watch their content — and, more important, the advertising their content attracts — migrate to Internet rivals. One of the worst-guarded secrets in recent months involves the efforts of News Corp. and NBC Universal to create a website to distribute TV clips as a way of attracting the advertising that is now going to YouTube and other sources.
In the past, networks have tried to squash YouTube's access to their clips. Before the relaunch of the Viacom-owned iFilm site last fall, lawyers had YouTube take down thousands of clips from popular Viacom-owned Comedy Central shows, hoping to steer fans to iFilm or Comedy Central's site. Yet the morning after O'Reilly visited "The Colbert Report," YouTube was full of clips of the appearance.
At a site like iFilm, which specializes in packaging topical mass media events, whether it's the new "Spider-Man 3" trailer or coverage of the Rosie-Trump feud, the hope is to attract viewers by offering a more streamlined experience than YouTube, which is often a chaotic jumble of clips. "We're betting that people do want a guide to help show them what's cool," says iTunes chief Blair Harrison. "But we want to allow our community to do that, so that it's indistinguishable whether the content that's elevated on our site is from our staff or our active audience members."
But will this audience want a new kind of entertainment? Will the art created on the Web have a different aesthetic than the kind of storytelling forms we watch on TV and film? Internet enthusiasts think so. United Talent Agency digital media chief Brent Weinstein, who heads UTA's groundbreaking unit devoted to scouting online talent, is convinced that the Web's interactivity will usher in a new kind of shared creativity.
"We'll see a form that will exist specifically on the Internet," he says. "TV is very linear and passive. But because your computer can talk to other electronic devices, whether it's your mobile phone or your BlackBerry, it opens up a whole new world. And we'll see even more creative freedom, because these new platforms allow artists to bypass big media institutions and speak directly to consumers."
One of UTA's discoveries is a filmmaking collective called Big Fantastic that recently produced 80 episodes of a Web murder mystery called "Sam Has 7 Friends." Designed as a video podcast that ran in 90-second daily installments last fall, it had an irresistible hook: "Samantha Breslow had seven friends. On Dec. 15, one of them killed her." In keeping with the ethos of the Web, the story is slyly voyeuristic, exploiting our inexhaustible fascination with other people's lives. We are cast as eavesdroppers in Breslow's life, seeing her avoid her ex-boyfriend and quarrel with her agent — her character, of course, being an actress. (The episodes are available on iTunes or at http://www.Samhas7friends.com.)
The five members of Big Fantastic all have Hollywood day jobs, but they clearly believe in a Web-fueled form of storytelling. "Short and sweet is the way to go," says Chris Hampel, who worked as Michael Mann's assistant on "Collateral" and "Miami Vice." "Five minutes can feel like an eternity on the Internet. This was consciously geared for people who could watch the show in their office when they had 90 seconds between phone calls."
Hampel and his cohorts wrote for the medium, creating 90-second bits of drama. "Whatever was the most emotional thing that happened to Sam that day, we focused on that," he says. "We saw this as a soap opera with someone dying in the end. But no one has the patience to watch a whole soap opera anymore, so we just cut out all the fat."
Even their website is designed so all the information is on one home page. "Who wants to scroll?" says Hampel. "It's a bona fide way to lose people."
Because their story unfolded on the Web, they received instant feedback from message boards. The strongest reaction was inspired by Willie, Sam's ex-boyfriend. "People really loved him or hated him, so we wrote him into more episodes. Everything was immediate. We could shoot something one day and have it on the Net the next."
No one has yet stepped up to fund a new batch of shows, but the show's buzz earned the group meetings with various young studio executives. "We think this is the year people start jumping in the pool," says Hampel. "But at most of our meetings, people said, 'Come back and see us in a year. I get it, but my boss doesn't.' "
Hampel and his buddies shouldn't worry. In Hollywood, big changes are afoot. And the bosses are always the last to know.
Hollywood is seeing fans pull a power play
PATRICK GOLDSTEIN
January 23, 2007
HOLLYWOOD has always been full of Cinderella stories, so it wasn't exactly a shock to see Jennifer Hudson go from singing on a Disney cruise ship to showing up in a Vera Wang dress at the Golden Globes last week, where she took home a best supporting actress trophy. Now she's a shoo-in to wake up this morning with an Oscar nomination, quite a turnaround for someone who was ignominiously booted off "American Idol," with Simon Cowell telling her she was "out of her league."
If Hudson goes on to win a best supporting actress Oscar, it will be another landmark moment in the breakdown between our pop culture's major and minor leagues. If anything bridges the chasm between amateur and professional, between crass and class, it would be a performer bouncing from the raucous populism of "American Idol" to the solemn elitism of the Academy Awards.
Seen through the prism of what's happening on the Internet, "American Idol" is a classic example of user-generated content, being at its heart an event propelled by nonprofessional talent and a rabidly involved audience that has more of the shared community feeling of a Web phenomenon than a TV show.
Whether it's Hudson, lonelygirl15 or Jade Goody, the foul-mouthed ex-nurse who, thanks to her antics on "Celebrity Big Brother," is just as celebrated in England as Posh Spice, celebrity has been rudely down-marketed and democratized.
As Aaron Sorkin so eloquently put it the other day, complaining about the blogger influence on media coverage of his "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip" TV drama: "We live in the age of amateurs."
Sorkin may spend much of his show exploring the conflict between artists like himself and soulless media conglomerates, but in the new era of You Stardom, Sorkin and GE are in the same leaky boat. Just as the music industry saw its business crumble before its eyes as kids began sharing songs from unauthorized downloading services, media behemoths are scrambling to protect their content as it migrates to YouTube.com and other fan-driven video sites.
"Ultimately these big media companies are all wrestling with the same thing — the power is being taken out of their hands," says Jordan Levin, the onetime WB network chief who now helps run Generate, a production and management firm active in Internet projects. "This is an industry that for its entire history has imposed its model on consumers. They've always said, 'We'll tell you when you'll watch our TV show or see our movie.' But that's fundamentally changing. The whole structure of people who control content is being supplanted by the content users themselves."
For Web junkies like me, YouTube is a TV network unto itself. If I missed Bill O'Reilly's visit to "The Colbert Report," I can watch it on YouTube. It doesn't matter if I'm looking for something as frivolous as the cartoon rap "George Washington" or something as weighty as "Undercover Mosque," a riveting new documentary on Britain's Channel 4 about the radicalization of mosques in England. No one limits my choices. YouTube's content is shaped by enthusiasts, not a network programmer who thinks a clip would be a lot more relatable to women over 30 if only it had a likable next-door neighbor in it.
If you're running an old-school media company, it doesn't take a weatherman to see where the wind's blowing. In England last week, an unsigned band scored a Top 40 hit for the first time, all of its sales from digital downloads, mostly to kids using mobile phones. "We've got to get the creativity to stand up against user-created content, because that's what people are watching at my house," MGM chief Harry Sloan told Variety last fall. Describing his 17-year-old son's viewing habits, Sloan said that while the TV was on behind him, "he's got two screens in front of him, one connected to friends and the other to play World of Warcraft."
The day isn't far away when some studio executive, instead of buying a bestseller, will acquire the rights to a Web thriller that's become a lonelygirl-style phenomenon. "The problem for us will be that people are going to create a movie character on the Web and they'll own the content — we'll end up just renting it," says Sony Pictures chief Amy Pascal. "We'll buy the movie rights, but they'll own everything else. We haven't bought anything from YouTube yet, but it's going to happen. Trust me, when 'lonelygirl' was happening, everyone was asking, 'Is that a movie?' "
Media companies aren't willing to sit back and watch their content — and, more important, the advertising their content attracts — migrate to Internet rivals. One of the worst-guarded secrets in recent months involves the efforts of News Corp. and NBC Universal to create a website to distribute TV clips as a way of attracting the advertising that is now going to YouTube and other sources.
In the past, networks have tried to squash YouTube's access to their clips. Before the relaunch of the Viacom-owned iFilm site last fall, lawyers had YouTube take down thousands of clips from popular Viacom-owned Comedy Central shows, hoping to steer fans to iFilm or Comedy Central's site. Yet the morning after O'Reilly visited "The Colbert Report," YouTube was full of clips of the appearance.
At a site like iFilm, which specializes in packaging topical mass media events, whether it's the new "Spider-Man 3" trailer or coverage of the Rosie-Trump feud, the hope is to attract viewers by offering a more streamlined experience than YouTube, which is often a chaotic jumble of clips. "We're betting that people do want a guide to help show them what's cool," says iTunes chief Blair Harrison. "But we want to allow our community to do that, so that it's indistinguishable whether the content that's elevated on our site is from our staff or our active audience members."
But will this audience want a new kind of entertainment? Will the art created on the Web have a different aesthetic than the kind of storytelling forms we watch on TV and film? Internet enthusiasts think so. United Talent Agency digital media chief Brent Weinstein, who heads UTA's groundbreaking unit devoted to scouting online talent, is convinced that the Web's interactivity will usher in a new kind of shared creativity.
"We'll see a form that will exist specifically on the Internet," he says. "TV is very linear and passive. But because your computer can talk to other electronic devices, whether it's your mobile phone or your BlackBerry, it opens up a whole new world. And we'll see even more creative freedom, because these new platforms allow artists to bypass big media institutions and speak directly to consumers."
One of UTA's discoveries is a filmmaking collective called Big Fantastic that recently produced 80 episodes of a Web murder mystery called "Sam Has 7 Friends." Designed as a video podcast that ran in 90-second daily installments last fall, it had an irresistible hook: "Samantha Breslow had seven friends. On Dec. 15, one of them killed her." In keeping with the ethos of the Web, the story is slyly voyeuristic, exploiting our inexhaustible fascination with other people's lives. We are cast as eavesdroppers in Breslow's life, seeing her avoid her ex-boyfriend and quarrel with her agent — her character, of course, being an actress. (The episodes are available on iTunes or at http://www.Samhas7friends.com.)
The five members of Big Fantastic all have Hollywood day jobs, but they clearly believe in a Web-fueled form of storytelling. "Short and sweet is the way to go," says Chris Hampel, who worked as Michael Mann's assistant on "Collateral" and "Miami Vice." "Five minutes can feel like an eternity on the Internet. This was consciously geared for people who could watch the show in their office when they had 90 seconds between phone calls."
Hampel and his cohorts wrote for the medium, creating 90-second bits of drama. "Whatever was the most emotional thing that happened to Sam that day, we focused on that," he says. "We saw this as a soap opera with someone dying in the end. But no one has the patience to watch a whole soap opera anymore, so we just cut out all the fat."
Even their website is designed so all the information is on one home page. "Who wants to scroll?" says Hampel. "It's a bona fide way to lose people."
Because their story unfolded on the Web, they received instant feedback from message boards. The strongest reaction was inspired by Willie, Sam's ex-boyfriend. "People really loved him or hated him, so we wrote him into more episodes. Everything was immediate. We could shoot something one day and have it on the Net the next."
No one has yet stepped up to fund a new batch of shows, but the show's buzz earned the group meetings with various young studio executives. "We think this is the year people start jumping in the pool," says Hampel. "But at most of our meetings, people said, 'Come back and see us in a year. I get it, but my boss doesn't.' "
Hampel and his buddies shouldn't worry. In Hollywood, big changes are afoot. And the bosses are always the last to know.
Sunday, January 14, 2007
You must remember him...
The AFP:
You must remember him: 50th anniversary of Bogart's death Sun Jan 14, 4:30 AM ET
He was kind of short, not very handsome and spoke with a lisp. But half a century after his death, Humphrey Bogart still reigns as the revered embodiment of Hollywood toughness and cool.
No major events were scheduled Sunday to mark the 50th anniversary of Bogart's death from cancer at the age of 57. Officials at the Los Angeles cemetery where he is buried were unaware of any increase in visitors.
But the legend of arguably the most beloved actor in Hollywood history lives on, film experts say.
Whether it's as the world-weary private detective Sam Spade in "The Maltese Falcoln" or the cynical restaurant owner Rick in "Casablanca", Bogart's place in the cinematic pantheon remains untouchable.
"I stick my neck out for nobody," says Bogart in "Casablanca." In fact, his characters did just the opposite, always threatening to disappoint but invariably ending up doing the right thing.
And that's why we love him, say movie buffs.
"Bogart is the epitome of the guy who who says 'I stick my neck out for nobody' and then sticks his neck out for everybody," said Howard Suber, a film expert at UCLA in Los Angeles. "That goes to the heart of his appeal."
Bogart, who appeared in some 75 films, was named the American Film Institute's greatest male star of all time in 1999. Entertainment Weekly magazine dubbed him Hollywood's number one icon.
International actors from France's Jean-Paul Belmondo to India's Ashok Kumar readily admit they were influenced by the acting style and persona of "Bogie."
An unlikely achievement for a a rough-hewn New York-born actor whose looks were far from the classic lines of leading men of his day and whose face was partially paralyzed by a lip injury sustained in the Navy.
Oddly, this just added to his appeal.
"If you go to a party and you meet a bunch of people, and you meet someone who has an imperfection, you tend to remember them more," Suber said.
"They become more memorable because they're distinct. Because of his lip injury, Bogart had this distinct kind of snarl that was different to anything anyone had seen."
Bogart's distinct lack of physical grace made him a hero to generations of men who sought to identify with the rugged but vulnerable diamond-in-the-rough characters he played.
In his stage and screen hit "Play It Again, Sam," Woody Allen portrayed a nerdy and lovelorn film addict taking advice from Bogart until he learns to confront his imaginary mentor and stand on his own two feet.
"True, you're not too tall and kind of ugly, but what the hell. I'm short enough and ugly enough to succeed on my own," Allen says.
According to George Perry, co-author of "Bogie - A Celebration of the Life and Films of Humphrey Bogart", the straight-talking actor was a hero for his time.
In 1942's "Casablanca", Rick spoke for a generation of audiences grimly soldiering through the hardships of World War Two.
"The secret of Casablanca's success is that it came out at a point when so many people were making romantic sacrifices in their own lives," Perry said in a recent interview with a British newspaper.
"What Bogie was saying in that famous hill of beans speech -- that this thing is bigger than the problems of three little people -- is the kind of stuff that people were having to face up to every day."
Perry said the hard-drinking, chain-smoking Bogart, an incaranation of American individualism who "refused to be pushed around," would have been outraged by the country's current political climate.
"Freedoms are being removed quite adroitly in the name of fighting terrorism. This is something that Bogie would never have stood for; he would have protested bitterly," Perry said.
Bogart died on January 14, 1957. Here's looking at you, kid.
You must remember him: 50th anniversary of Bogart's death Sun Jan 14, 4:30 AM ET
He was kind of short, not very handsome and spoke with a lisp. But half a century after his death, Humphrey Bogart still reigns as the revered embodiment of Hollywood toughness and cool.
No major events were scheduled Sunday to mark the 50th anniversary of Bogart's death from cancer at the age of 57. Officials at the Los Angeles cemetery where he is buried were unaware of any increase in visitors.
But the legend of arguably the most beloved actor in Hollywood history lives on, film experts say.
Whether it's as the world-weary private detective Sam Spade in "The Maltese Falcoln" or the cynical restaurant owner Rick in "Casablanca", Bogart's place in the cinematic pantheon remains untouchable.
"I stick my neck out for nobody," says Bogart in "Casablanca." In fact, his characters did just the opposite, always threatening to disappoint but invariably ending up doing the right thing.
And that's why we love him, say movie buffs.
"Bogart is the epitome of the guy who who says 'I stick my neck out for nobody' and then sticks his neck out for everybody," said Howard Suber, a film expert at UCLA in Los Angeles. "That goes to the heart of his appeal."
Bogart, who appeared in some 75 films, was named the American Film Institute's greatest male star of all time in 1999. Entertainment Weekly magazine dubbed him Hollywood's number one icon.
International actors from France's Jean-Paul Belmondo to India's Ashok Kumar readily admit they were influenced by the acting style and persona of "Bogie."
An unlikely achievement for a a rough-hewn New York-born actor whose looks were far from the classic lines of leading men of his day and whose face was partially paralyzed by a lip injury sustained in the Navy.
Oddly, this just added to his appeal.
"If you go to a party and you meet a bunch of people, and you meet someone who has an imperfection, you tend to remember them more," Suber said.
"They become more memorable because they're distinct. Because of his lip injury, Bogart had this distinct kind of snarl that was different to anything anyone had seen."
Bogart's distinct lack of physical grace made him a hero to generations of men who sought to identify with the rugged but vulnerable diamond-in-the-rough characters he played.
In his stage and screen hit "Play It Again, Sam," Woody Allen portrayed a nerdy and lovelorn film addict taking advice from Bogart until he learns to confront his imaginary mentor and stand on his own two feet.
"True, you're not too tall and kind of ugly, but what the hell. I'm short enough and ugly enough to succeed on my own," Allen says.
According to George Perry, co-author of "Bogie - A Celebration of the Life and Films of Humphrey Bogart", the straight-talking actor was a hero for his time.
In 1942's "Casablanca", Rick spoke for a generation of audiences grimly soldiering through the hardships of World War Two.
"The secret of Casablanca's success is that it came out at a point when so many people were making romantic sacrifices in their own lives," Perry said in a recent interview with a British newspaper.
"What Bogie was saying in that famous hill of beans speech -- that this thing is bigger than the problems of three little people -- is the kind of stuff that people were having to face up to every day."
Perry said the hard-drinking, chain-smoking Bogart, an incaranation of American individualism who "refused to be pushed around," would have been outraged by the country's current political climate.
"Freedoms are being removed quite adroitly in the name of fighting terrorism. This is something that Bogie would never have stood for; he would have protested bitterly," Perry said.
Bogart died on January 14, 1957. Here's looking at you, kid.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
