Cinematical

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

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

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

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

Ever since McG was announced as director of Terminator Salvation, he's taken on this rather endearing, apologetic, puppy-dog attitude, assuring fans that he takes the franchise seriously, and even apologizing for the absurdity of his trade name. It would have worked much better on me had I not sat through We Are Marshall, but it does make me want to give the guy the benefit of the doubt, especially given how badly I want this sequel to be good.

The filmmaker's newest gambit: showing us just how seriously he takes the Terminator franchise. Just how seriously? So seriously, he says, that he distributed copies of Cormac McCarthy's arty, ultra-depressing The Road to his cast, hoping that the novel would help the actors understand the "existential detachment" that comes with living in a post-apocalyptic environment. MTV has a bit more from the director.

I wrote a column on The Road a while back; it's a powerful, upsetting novel, pretty un-Terminator-like in its depiction of an empty, decidedly cyborg-free post-apocalypse. It's hard to take seriously the notion that an entry in the Terminator franchise -- a PG-13 entry at that -- could really draw much inspiration from that book (which is, of course, getting its own bona-fide adaptation later this year), but again: it's endearing, and a bit heartening, to see McG trying so hard.

In a weekend glutted with new releases battling the aftershocks of The Dark Knight earthquake, Tropic Thunder debuted below expectations -- but well enough to steal the top spot from The Dark Knight in that film's 5th weekend. The R-rated comedy's $26 million weekend and $37 million 5-day was roughly on par with Pineapple Express' performance the previous weekend, but I think Tropic Thunder was predicted to have broader appeal. In retrospect, the advertising may have emphasized the film's inside-baseball aspects a bit too much.

Star Wars: The Clone Wars did okay in third place with $15 million -- weak for a purported Star Wars film, but not bad for a Saturday morning cartoon. The woeful Mirrors took in a relatively paltry $11 million, a wuss-out signaled by the 11th hour press screening cancellation. Contrast The Strangers, the summer's other major R-rated, non-Shyamalan horror film, which debuted to almost twice as much despite not having as nifty a high-concept.

The Dark Knight, meanwhile, continues to edge toward $500 million. Its 5-weekend total stands at $471 million, enough to top Star Wars' unadjusted numbers. Titanic still looks out of reach, even setting aside the apples-and-oranges aspect of comparing a 1997 release to a 2008 one.

Pineapple Express fell 57% in its second weekend, putting $100 million out of reach. On the other hand, Mamma Mia! continues to be popular, suffering drops of around 20% each week thanks to good word-of-mouth and likely repeat viewings.

Woody Allen's Vicky Cristina Barcelona came in at #10, with $3.7 million on 700 screens, Woody's second-best opening ever. Two spots below that, the poorly-reviewed 3-D spectacle Fly Me to the Moon made $2 million on 450 screens.

The full estimates after the jump.

Some people hereabouts are psyched for Twilight. Others have set their sights on Quantum of Solace. As you may have noticed, I am currently obsessed with Outlander, the bizarre upcoming genre flick that pits 9th Century Vikings against a malevolent alien invader. Nothing about the film itself is ultra-promising, as I've mentioned before, but I'm so enamored of the concept that I can't help but be excited about the idea of it, if nothing else.

Last month we got a trailer for the movie. Now we have a two-minute clip, which you can view above. In it, the friendly alien, played by Jim Caviezel, is interrogated by a Viking chieftain named Wulfric (Jack Huston). The "outlander" tries to convince Wulfric that he was merely hunting dragons, when in fact we all know that he was hunting a badass monster from outer space!! The clip is pretty much of the goofy caliber I expected, though Caviezel doesn't cut a particularly extraterrestrial figure. Maybe that'll be part of the fun.

I am counting the days until the release of the "Sci-Fi Viking Epic" -- which is hard, since it doesn't have an American release date. On the other hand, if you're in Berlin on August 19th and 20th, you can catch Outlander at the German Fantasy Filmfest. Do let me know how it is.

The cover for the spiffy new movie edition of F. Scott Fitzgerald's The Curious Case of Benjamin Button reads: "the inspiration for the upcoming major motion picture." Anyone who reads the famous 1922 short story, about a man who is mysteriously born a septuagenarian and begins to age backwards, will immediately realize that it can't be any more than that. My copy is about fifty small, large-print pages, and it takes no more than twenty minutes to read. There are only about four characters of any note, and each of their relationships is bitter and hollow; the whole thing is a quick, moody burst of melancholy, a high concept on which Fitzgerald had no interest in lingering.

The anxiously awaited movie is directed by David Fincher – his follow-up to Zodiac -- and written by Eric Roth (the IMDb doesn't list a credit for Fitzgerald), whose resume includes Forrest Gump, The Insider, and Munich. Compared to the source material, the film has virtually a cast of thousands. Benjamin's love interest is renamed Daisy – the story's "Hildegarde" just doesn't have the same ring to it – and is played by Cate Blanchett. "Daisy age 6" is played by Elle Fanning (a.k.a. Little Dakota), though it's hard to imagine what use the film will have for a Daisy age 6: do she and Benjamin now meet while the latter is an "old man" and she a toddler? President Theodore Roosevelt shows up, for some reason. And, at least according to this Ain't It Cool test screening review, the current incarnation of the movie clocks in at three hours.

As is usually the case when people and groups make a lot of noise over a film's perceived offensiveness, I suspect all the ruckus over a planned boycott of Tropic Thunder over its perceived treatment of people with mental disabilities has only served to give it additional publicity. Nonetheless, organizations such as The Arc are going ahead with plans to call for a boycott of the film. Slate has found the organization's instruction sheet for putting together protests of Tropic Thunder, a six-page bulletin suggesting techniques and talking points for mentally disabled self-advocates and supporters. Sample talking point: "Movies and media, like the movie Tropic Thunder, encourage disrespect of people with intellectual disabilities. We want that to stop!"

The whole thing is an interesting read. Ordinarily I'd say they haven't seen the film, but the organization claims that its leaders have had a chance to watch it and have concluded that "the film's depiction of people with intellectual disabilities is derogatory and demeaning." In that case, they've missed the point spectacularly. As others have argued, the film targets not the mentally disabled but Hollywood's infantile treatment of same. Simple Jack is a clever, incisive parody. And I say that as someone who thinks Tropic Thunder as a whole is pretty weak.

UPDATE: Cinematical has been given this brand new still from the film, which shows Cruise without the eye patch.

MGM seems to be trying to reverse the effects of the doomsaying that circulated about Tom Cruise and Bryan Singer's Hitler-assassination-attempt thriller Valkyrie in the spring, culminating in the announcement that the movie was moving from December 2008 to President's Day 2009. That was received as a surrender, a sure sign that the studio had no confidence in the film and was doing damage control by moving it out of harm's way. Now, following some successful test screenings, MGM has reversed itself and is moving Valkyrie back into the heart of Oscar season: December 26, 2008. Apparently, though, the studio still doesn't think it has awards potential, and is making the move because it thinks Valkyrie will do well in the Christmastime marketplace.

I'm sure positive test screenings did have a lot to do with MGM's decision, but I think it's a smart move because it's great spin control. The press loves to read the tea leaves of studio behavior, and will see this as a major vote of confidence. I suspect the buzz on Valkyrie will seriously improve now that it is no longer the subject of what was perceived as a February dump.

For my part, I don't care about Tom Cruise or his silly eyepatch, but I have a lot of trust in Bryan Singer. The man can make a good mainstream thriller, and I don't see why Valkyrie should be any exception. I think a lot of the "bad buzz" (such as Roger Friedman randomly attacking the film) is just Cruise-bashing, which may be justified but probably shouldn't extend to his movies.

Robert Jordan's The Wheel of Time is one of those sprawling, elaborate fantasy book series that is only read by enormous dorks. In other words, people like me. Yes, I've read all 11 novels (plus the prequel novella) and nearly 10,000 pages. Many fans abandoned the series after book 5 or 6, when it became apparent that the plot was in a holding pattern while the number of notable characters approached three digits. Not me. The naysayers were right, to a point, but the world Jordan created was so rich, so interesting that I simply loved going back, even if nothing much was happening. Jordan swore that book 12 would be the last, but died before he could finish it; another fantasy writer has been tapped to complete it from Jordan's extensive notes.

The series has been optioned several times, with an eye toward movies or television miniseries. Nothing ever came of it -- the books are so long, the plots so intricate, the cast of characters so enormous, that each attempt hit a logistical wall. Now, Universal has staked a claim, shelling out seven figures for the rights to the series. Logically, they plan to start with the first book, The Eye of the World.

Good luck. It's hard for fans to get excited for something like this, because what we love about the series -- the vastness and incredible detail of the world Jordan creates -- is so unlikely to make it to the screen. I do hope to actually see a film adaptation at some point (I'm awfully curious to see what they'll do), but I have a feeling this might go the way of the previous attempts. If they're hoping for a Lord of the Rings-caliber franchise, the pressure will be on the eventual screenwriter to adapt the novels in a compelling and accessible way. Trust me: it'll be really, really hard.

Lars Von Trier has been talking up his psychological thriller/horror film Antichrist since two years ago, at one point claiming to be too depressed to get it off the ground. But good news for those who've been curious to see what Von Trier would do with a genre film: Antichrist begins shooting this month, with Willem Dafoe and Charlotte Gainsbourg in the lead roles. As previously announced, they play a couple who retreat to a cabin in the woods after losing a child, and run into some "terrifying occurrences." Von Trier co-wrote the screenplay with Anders Thomas Jensen, a remarkably prolific Danish screenwriter who's had a hand in some of the most prominent films to come out of that country, including Brothers and The King is Alive. He also co-wrote the forthcoming The Duchess, starring Keira Knightley.

I doubt, somehow, that Von Trier is going to come up with something that resembles what we think of as a horror film, or a psychological thriller. Anyone who saw his idea of a comedy knows what I'm talking about. I'm hit-and-miss on Von Trier in general -- loved Dancer in the Dark, viscerally disliked Dogville -- but always intrigued enough to keep watching. I can only hope the Antichrist will actually show up in Antichrist; Von Trier's take on Satan is definitely something I'd pay to see.

Holy crap! Holy crap. I don't get too many occasions to truly geek out -- go all giddy with excitement, rationality be damned -- but this is one of them. I may have previously mentioned my abiding love for Rian Johnson's Brick: my favorite film of 2005 and one of my favorites of the decade. I was already beyond psyched for The Brothers Bloom, Johnson's 2008 con man follow-up; pre-release buzz has been solid to great. I'm itching to declare the talented writer-director the Next Big Thing: someone with the cleverness of Tarantino and the chops of Fincher, but more heart. It's a little premature right now, but I'll get back to you after I watch Bloom.

Anyway, if I love something more than Brick, it's intelligent science-fiction. And lo: IGN reports that Rian Johnson's next project will be a film called Looper, a dark, violent, time travel-themed sci-fi story in the vein of Philip K. Dick. Johnson compares it to the first Terminator: relatively small-scale, character-driven sci-fi with time travel used as a plot device. That's all the details he gave on the plot, but I'm not sure how a project could be more tailored to my current obsessions and sensibilities.

The Brothers Bloom is supposed to come out on October 24th; I'm holding out hope that it will also make an appearance at the Toronto International Film Festival in September. You can see the trailer here.