In this morning’s roundup of movie news ‘n’ notes from around the web, it turns out that the prospective owner of Miramax doesn’t really want to make movies.
Construction mogul Ron Tutor talks to Alex Ben Block about his impending purchase of Miramax Films from Disney, to which he has personally pledged about $200 million of the $650-plus purchase price. He spends much of the conversation dealing with the sticky subject of his longtime movie-business partner David Bergstein, who’s currently embroiled in multiple lawsuits and bankruptcy proceedings. Bergstein, who began negotiations as a principal, has been shifted well into the background as the investment firm Colony Capital has become involved, and Tutor says his onetime friend will have no significant role in Miramax. Among Tutor’s more interesting quotes are a half-hearted acceptance of blame in the Bergstein mess – “whatever went wrong, I take responsibility, even though I wasn’t involved” – and the kind of statement of purpose that would have been unfathomable (and horrifying) to the Weinsteins when they founded Miramax way back when: “Am I excited about making movies? No. Will we have no alternative but to make a certain level of movies? The answer is yes because a library of this magnitude will require it.” (The Hollywood Reporter)
Focus Features has hit upon a different kind of marketing angle for the indie film “The Kids Are All Right,” says Eugene Hernandez – and the key is wine, which is consumed at several points in the movie. “The mainstream marketing for the specialty release … seems aimed at luring wine lovers,” says Hernandez, who points to a (doctored) promo photo of Annette Bening and Julianne Moore sharing a bottle of wine, a tie-in with the New York Times Wine Club, and a special slide show on the Focus site following the characters’s choice of wine in key scenes. No word yet on any Joni Mitchell-focused marketing efforts, though her music plays a more crucial role than any particular vintage … (Eugonline)
Who needs Armond White? David Edelstein writes a negative review of “Inception” in New York Magazine, saying the multi-layered dreamscape “manages to be clunky and confusing on four separate levels of reality.” And he doesn’t understand why all the other critics seem to like it, unless somebody has snuck into their dreams and planted the idea that “Inception” is a masterpiece. Interesting theory, that one. (New York Magazine)
Poor DreamWorks Animation, and Universal animation, and 20th Century Fox animation. Peter Martin writes about the “CGI elephant in the room” – i.e., Pixar, the company whose animated features are the standard against which every other studio’s animated films pale by comparison. The latest example, he says, is “Despicable Me,” “an exceedingly pleasant picture that’s funny and kindhearted” … “and features very good voice acting by Steve Carrell, Jason Segel, Russell Brand and others.” Martin wonders why everything has to be compared to Pixar … but then he concedes that comparison is an essential part of criticism, and ponders comparing “Toy Story 3” not to “Despicable Me,” but to “The Godfather”: “Is Woody a better head of household than Michael Corleone?” Yes, he is. (Cinematical)
Ben Barenholtz, the owner and operator of the ElginTheater in Manhattan and an exhibitor, distributor and producer of independent film, will be honored in October with the HIFF/indieWIRE Industry Toast at the 18th Hamptons International Film Festival on Long Island. indieWIRE has the details, and a bio of Barenholtz, from his groundbreaking programming of the Elgin to his work distributing the likes of “Eraserhead,” “Return of the Secaucus Seven” and “Blood Simple,” and serving as executive producer on “Miller’s Crossing” and “Requiem for a Dream.” (indieWIRE)
Patrick Goldstein looks at Tim Gray’s recent list of potential Oscar contenders and wonders why the Variety editor is going back into those perilous waters after the mess that happened last year with “Iron Cross.” (Gray mentioned it in his midyear Oscar roundup, a Variety ad salesman persuaded the filmmaker to buy $400,000 worth of ads, Variety panned the movie and the director sued.) If the exercise is not intended to be an ad-sales device, Goldstein wonders the point of a list “that basically includes every film that’s not a dumb studio comedy” and is “really just giving a wet kiss to every deluded film producer in the business.” In other words, the Gray list has a huge target audience. (The Big Picture)
