free counter with statistics Nobody Puts Pajiba in a Corner | Pajiba - Scathing Reviews for Bitchy People

dirtydancing.jpg
Nobody Puts Pajiba in a Corner

The Weekly Trade Round-Up / The Pajiba Staff

Trade News | August 21, 2006 | Comments (24)


Item #1: Because Dan has grown weary of mocking Peter Jackson, he has passed the baton off to me, and I gladly announce that everyone’s favorite lovable hack has optioned Naomi Novick’s fantasy novel Temeraire as a possible directing project. Temeraire apparently reimagines the Napoleonic wars with an air force of fire-breathing dragons and the aviators who fly them. The story itself revolves around a British naval captain who discovers a dragon’s egg meant for Napoleon. After the egg hatches, the captain gives up his career to care for the dragon, which he names Temeraire. Jackson has also optioned for the screen Alice Sebold’s The Lovely Bones, a pretty decent novel about a 14-year-old girl who is raped and murdered and ends up following her family’s plight from Heaven. Word is that Jackson is considering meshing the two stories to create a bloated, 17-hour epic about a bearded director who is raped by a dragon for bastardizing all of the decent adaptation possibilities in Hollywood. The film, tentatively titled Go the Fuck Away, Peter Jackson, is the first in an expected series of movies to be filmed perpetually and released every six months for the rest of our lives. — Dustin Rowles

Item #2: Got a double-header in religious news for you: 20th Century Fox unveiled this week a new home video label called FoxFaith, which will release DVDs aimed at Christians with low entertainment standards. It will distribute six to 12 films a year theatrically through a deal with Woodland Hills, California-based The Bigger Picture. Easily the best quote on the subject, and one that’s 100 percent real, is this gem from a Fox spokesman: “We saw an opportunity to fill a need in an underserved market.” Not kidding. That’s the actual quote. That could be the nicest way I’ve ever heard a PR person say, “We saw an opportunity to shamelessly market to the kind of affluent conservatives that will storm the box office when we tell them to. Hey, God sells.” The first film on the list is Love’s Abiding Joy, directed by — wait for it — Michael Landon, Jr. Talk about answered prayers.

Next up: You know how pretty much every trailer has the green screen at the beginning that says “The following preview has been approved for all audiences” in giant white Big Brothery letters? Every now and then a trailer will start off with a red screen warning of its adult content. Known as redband trailers, they’re another way the MPAA can hurt films and prevent them from being advertised, since redband trailers can only be shown before films rated R or NC-17 (and it’s not like you’re gonna see one of those in the theaters, but anyway). Well, the MPAA has given a redband rating to the trailer for Deliver Us from Evil, a documentary about the child molestation scandals in the Catholic Church; mmm, family fun. In response, Lionsgate will send the film out without a rating, so look for it to disappear quickly from the indie theater near you. — Daniel Carlson

Item #3: You know, in a world full of all sorts of problems — natural disasters, a Middle East crisis, the death of Anna Nicole’s son, Pete Doherty’s drug problems — it’s so good to know that God and Satan — the eternal forces of good and evil — have cleared their calendars to fight over a woman named Lucy. Or at least that’s the concept for David Hubbard’s latest comedy, God, the Devil, and Lucy, about God and the Devil’s decision to come down to Earth and compete for the love of a woman named Lucy, because, you know, God digs chicks. Under the God/Devil pact, neither will be able to use their supernatural powers, and the first to make Lucy say “I love you” apparently wins all the souls of humanity. I’d offer the casting directors a few options for Lucy, but I think we all know that they’ll cast Scarlett Johansson in the end — they always do. — DR

Item #4: Fresh off following Bryan Singer around, writer Mike Dougherty (X2, Superman Returns) will make his directorial debut with Trick ‘r Treat, a horror film that will interweave four separate storylines. One of them involves a high school principal who moonlights as a serial killer. There’s no cast in place yet, but that isn’t stopping the trades from needlessly gushing about Dougherty’s cred, namely that he was actually born on Halloween, which if you ask me is like a guy born on Christmas thinking he’s the Messiah; the logic ain’t exactly strong. Then again, all Dougherty needs to do is hire Dennis Haskins to play the knife-wielding school administrator and this project will soar. — DC

Item #5: For those of you who are good little TV whores (if you’re not, shame on you) and/or who read the TV Whore regularly (and if you don’t, double shame on you with a cherry on top), you may remember the Thursday-night fracas that took place during the networks’ May upfronts — ABC announced it was putting its ratings dog “Grey’s Anatomy” on Thursdays at 9 p.m., against reigning champ “C.S.I.” and much-ballyhooed freshman “Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip.” NBC quickly tucked its tail and moved “Studio 60” to Monday nights (where it premiered this week with rather decent ratings). Well, as is typically the case, Fox saw the other networks having fun and decided to get into it, albeit a little late. It now seems that they are considering moving the “American Idol” behemoth to Thursday nights, and possibly into that same 9 p.m. time slot. No word yet on whether this is all to back a new Fox special: “When Networks Attack.” — Seth Freilich

Item #6: In the box-office round up, the studios suffered another shellacking over the weekend, as Gridiron Gang was the number one film with a meager $14 million gross — clearly, the fact that The Rock did not remove his shirt affected the total take. In at number two, The Black Dahlia barely cleared the $10 million hurdle, and apparently Jeremy — and myself — were the only two people in America who didn’t actually abhor the film. The animated feature Everyone’s Hero grossed around $6 million to come in third, and The Covenant clung to the fourth spot with $4.7 million. And, at number five, The Last Kiss eked out a paltry $4.6 million, though it appears that most folks couldn’t put aside their distaste of Zach Braff long enough to focus their hatred where it really belonged: Paul Haggis, who has all the writing talent of Leno’s cue-card boy.

And what do we have for you this weekend? First up, Jackass: Number Two featuring Johnny Knoxville, who — judging by his latest Letterman appearance — has clearly had his testicles electroshocked a few too many times; seriously, the guy can barely string a sentence together anymore. We also have Flyboys, which has been advertised pretty heavily on the site of late, making it all the more fun to hate. Jet Li brings us Fearless, another one of those martial arts flicks, this one about the founder of the Jin Wu Sports Federation, if that means anything to you. Also up, All the King’s Men, a movie we’re trying very hard to reserve judgment about. If we can, we’re also going to review Project Greenlight’s last winner, Feast mostly for our own morbid curiosity. And, yes: We will also be reviewing The Science of Sleep this weekend. So, you know: Giddyup. — DR


Here a Pilot, There a Pilot, Everywhere a Pilot Pilot (Part the Third) | Factotum



Comments

Dayum! I was born on Halloween as well. Guess I missed my calling of making crappy horror flicks. After all, if that's all it takes...

Now all I need is a producer, and some actors...

Oh, and a script. I guess. Then again...

Posted by: UncleJR at September 21, 2006 7:34 AM

I didn't revile The Black Dahlia. In fact, I kind of liked it. I just think that people went in looking for a cut and dried police procedural and when the movie didn't talk or show the murder until about a half hour in they were completely thrown off.

Posted by: Chris W. at September 21, 2006 10:07 AM

Haven't we already established that the Devil is gay?

Jackass will probably be the BO winner this weekend with just under $15 million man it sucks to open in Septmeber- these grosses suck.

Posted by: Peter at September 21, 2006 10:09 AM

I'm looking forward to Jackass #2...there's no way they can screw it up. It's nothing but painful laughter at dumb stunts.

Posted by: bebemiqui at September 21, 2006 10:18 AM

"Temeraire apparently reimagines the Napoleanic wars with an air force of fire-breathing dragons and the aviators who fly them."

Seriously? This isn't a joke premise of a movie, like, inside another movie. Like in "In and Out" when Glenn Close reads out the Oscar Nominees for that year and they are "Paul Newman for "Coot", Clint Eastwood for "Codger", Michael Douglas for "Primary Urges" and Steven Seagal for "Snowball in Hell".

Question #2: will thus suck more/less than "Reign of Fire"?

Posted by: kevin at September 21, 2006 10:27 AM

"Question #2: will thus suck more/less than "Reign of Fire"?"

That depends. Will the dragons make natural napalm with their nasal passages? Also, how is that the only thing I remember from that movie, apart from, you know, Christian Bale?

"I'd offer the casting directors a few options for Lucy, but I think we all know that they'll cast Scarlett Johansson in the end -- they always do."

I love it. Will she be able to pout, shover her boobs up to her teeth, open her mouth a lot, and shout "YOU LOOK LIKE THAT DEVIL GUY" *or* "YOU LOOK LIKE THAT BEARDED SANDAL-WEARING FISH-AND-LOAF DISTRIBUTING GUY!" during the film?

Posted by: em at September 21, 2006 11:21 AM

re: #1: Peter Jackson and "lovely bones." Pardon me while i slit my wrists with the shards of the coffee cup i just dropped in horror. Is there no good in the world...?
re: #3: I didn't know God was a lesbian.

Posted by: kirsten at September 21, 2006 11:43 AM

Not to be a dick, but the book isn't called "Temeraire", its called His Majesty's Dragon. The dragon's name is Temeraire. And the book is very good, if you like that type of thing.

Which probably means Peter Jackson will just f*ck it up.

Posted by: TJ at September 21, 2006 12:27 PM

Dragons in the Napolionic Wars? The best soldier in the world could only manage three musket shots a minute (and only the most accurate rifles could hit a target farther than 500 yards away, or something like that). Artillery of that era wasn't even accurate enough to be lethal unless it was fired at a huge mass of men. There was no way they could shoot down a flying animal without firing every gun in the army at it, even if the animal couldn't fight back.

What I'm getting at is how do they account for those disparancies in the book? I would just read it but if someone knows I'd rather they just tell me.

Also, what makes Peter Jackson a hack? I'm not saying its wrong, I just don't think I know what a 'hack' is.

Posted by: Matt 2.0 at September 21, 2006 1:04 PM

Jesus, where did all the Peter Jackson hatred come from? Did I miss a meeting? I personally loved the LOTR movies, and Dead Alive, and Heavenly Creatures, and even the Frighteners was clever. Fine, so we didn't all like King Kong - why does this lead to him being so reviled? I'm genuinely puzzled.

Jackass 2 - I'm going to be sick. I've NEVER liked those guys. And don't tell me I don't "get it". I love dumb humor, and honestly, I love seeing a guy get knocked in the ballbag as much as the next guy. But Knoxville and his crew of cretins are just irritating.

And tell me God, the Devil and Lucy is begging to star Adam Sandler and Jim Carrey. We must not let this happen. We must stop them before they kill again.

Posted by: TK at September 21, 2006 1:15 PM

And Matt 2.0 - let me get this straight - you're concerned as to how they're going to accurately depict the firearm technology.

But you're totally fine with a movie about dragons during the Napoleonic wars.

This is why people drive me crazy. Just enjoy it for what it is.

Posted by: TK at September 21, 2006 1:17 PM

Jesus, where did all the Peter Jackson hatred come from? Did I miss a meeting? I personally loved the LOTR movies, and Dead Alive, and Heavenly Creatures, and even the Frighteners was clever. Fine, so we didn't all like King Kong - why does this lead to him being so reviled? I'm genuinely puzzled.

I'm wondering about this as well. Seems like just about anyone who's fairly popular is a hack these days. Which is fine, I suppose, since everyone is entitled to their opinions. And quite often I agree. But having indie cred doesn't make one better, just lower paid and less well known among the masses.

Posted by: Daphne at September 21, 2006 1:38 PM

And tell me God, the Devil and Lucy is begging to star Adam Sandler and Jim Carrey. We must not let this happen. We must stop them before they kill again.

Aah, go ahead and let them. The whole premise sounds like a throwaway movie to me, so why not let the face-pullers have it? Maybe Parker Posey could play Lucy, and then the movie could go down in history for the Face-Pulling Trinity.

...As for the Peter Jackson hate, I don't know either. 'Heavenly Creatures' was genius and the 'LOTR' trilogy was also fantastic (how soon we forget!). Film directors generally tell other people's stories, and Jackson does this very well. We may not like the stories he chooses to translate into film (The Lovely Bones seems like a very weird choice for him), but I'll be interested in seeing whatever he does.

I HATE and DETEST "alternative history" stories like this dragon crap, but I'll probably watch it eventually to see what Jackson does with it.

Posted by: Jerce at September 21, 2006 3:39 PM

Word is that Jackson is considering meshing the two stories to create a bloated, 17-hour epic about a bearded director who is raped by a dragon for bastardizing all of the decent adaptation possibilities in Hollywood. The film, tentatively titled Go the Fuck Away, Peter Jackson, is the first in an expected series of movies to be filmed perpetually and released every six months for the rest of our lives.

I love you guys.

Posted by: Meryl at September 21, 2006 7:01 PM

The minute this page loaded up the theme song from "Dirty Dancing" came on! Coincidence? Possibly, but I thought it was kinda cool.

I must say, this Jackass thing is kind of wearing, but I think that they deserve every dollar that they get. I mean how else can they afford to pay for the medical bills in order to go out completely destroy themselves for our entertainment.

Jerce, might I ask what is wrong with Alternate History? It is a wonderful subject, although many past experiences have led us to believe otherwise. That is why I suggest picking up books by Harry Turtledove and others in order to get a true perspective on the genre. Although, speaking of Mr. Turtledove, he did pen the Darkness series which currently stands at 6 books. I bet Petey could get a few movies out of that series. It also includes dragons as an air force and behemoths as living tanks. A very cool WWII allegory, if I do say so myself.

Posted by: ScarletKnight at September 21, 2006 8:58 PM

Good God TK, lighten the hell up. I was just asking a question.

Posted by: Matt 2.0 at September 21, 2006 9:14 PM

So is this Peter Jackson thing the same thing as the Zach Braff thing? Just another symptom of the ultimate disposable society? Anyone here who launches against Peter Jackson is denying that they saw every single one of the LOTR, and bought the DVDs, and everyone here is too much of an internet geek for that not to be the truth. So why the hate? Methinks its possibly just familarity breeding contempt, in which case its just no more then bitchy snarking.

Posted by: Clay at September 21, 2006 9:46 PM

Why are so many female film characters named Lucy? There aren't any real people named Lucy. I hate constantly having "Lucy" foisted upon me as the height of hipster appellation.

Posted by: Nancy at September 21, 2006 10:34 PM

Jackson's gonna do "The Lovely Bones", eh? Weird, but I'll go see it. Couldn't stomach the book, but in someone else's hands, it could be truly dreadful. It kind of sounds like he's going back to his "Heavenly Creatures" roots. The books I'd really love Jackson to film are Clive Barker's "The Great and Secret Show" and "Everville." I think he could really go to town with the mutants. You've got to admit he's good at mutants and nasty creatures. Personally, I think maybe the Jackson backlash has a LOT to do with "King Kong", combined with his massive weight loss, and possibly a touch of "LOTR" fatigue with all the DVDs and extras and stuff. Maybe it's me, but "King Kong" confirmed my theory that Jackson has a LOT of trouble just ENDING a movie. "KK" just went ON and ON. And in "ROTK", did we REALLY need to see Sean Astin get married at the end? Talk about a romantic subplot tacked on! Not to mention the "pillow fight"... But hell, I've still not written him off completely yet.

Posted by: Vivian Girl at September 22, 2006 12:27 AM

Jerce, might I ask what is wrong with Alternate History?

It's a matter of taste, of course; but I just find it dull and unimaginative. I've tried a few but never found one that didn't irritate me...I've read Turtledove, or tried to, anyway: turgid, tiresome. A matter of taste, as I said. To be fair, good books in any genre are rare; maybe the "good" Alternate History novel hasn't been written yet.

The idea of Napoleonic dragons makes my sinuses ache.

Alternate presents, now, that's a different kettle. Read Philip K. Dick's The Man In the High Castle (and pray that no one in Hollywood ever tries to adapt it into a movie).

Posted by: Jerce at September 22, 2006 8:30 AM

Matt 2.0 - I might have over done it. I was trying for sarcastic and came off wiith bitchy. I apologize. But my question stands - if the premise is fundamentally fantastical, why get bogged down in the technicalities?

As for PJ, I'm standing by him. Sure, Kong dragged a bit (and apparently with the new DVD, will drag even more), but I adored the LOTR movies, and pretty much everything else he's done. He gets a pass from me.

Posted by: TK at September 22, 2006 8:56 AM

You know, I didn't know PJ did "Heavenly Creatures", one of my absolute favorite movies of all time. I've never seen LOTR, but I've heard they're at the very least masterful.

I'm curious to see what somebody does with "The Lovely Bones." I read the book on one of the many occasions when I'm getting on Metro North to go home and pop into Hudson News and say "Oh, the only books they sell here are chick lit - what ELSE am I supposed to read?", all the while being psyche to have an excuse to read the book (y'all New Yorkers know what I'm talkin' about). I found the heaven stuff really treacly and unnecessary, but I did enjoy seeing how her family handled their absolute worst nightmare. I'm also drawn to the story because I grew up in the 70s/80s when there were such kidnapping/molestation scares.

Posted by: Samantha T at September 22, 2006 10:59 AM

Anyone here who launches against Peter Jackson is denying that they saw every single one of the LOTR, and bought the DVDs, and everyone here is too much of an internet geek for that not to be the truth.

This is patently not true. I was so profoundly disappointed with Fellowship of the Ring that I never bothered to see the rest of them.


So why the hate?

It isn't hate so much as disgust. The LOTR books sold something like eleventy-squintillion copies since they were published and are almost continuously in print. In other words, they're popular. Since they are popular, there is a built-in audience for a movie version. With that in mind, why f*** with the material? IMO, Jackson was either arrogant enough to believe he could tell the story better than Tolkein himself, or he thinks the audience wouldn't have any idea what was going on unless he added a lot of extraneous nonsense- probably both.


For the record: My grade for LOTR
Casting = B-.
Visuals = A.
Unnecessary plot changes = F-.
Unnecessary character changes = F.
Use of CGI = C.

Posted by: wenchmaster at September 22, 2006 6:50 PM

"With that in mind, why f*** with the material?"

Well, personally, I wouldn't really need (or want) to see Tom Bombadil cracking poems at Frodo 30 minutes into the film, and, if I the LOTR play is any measure, the Scouring of the Shire bit is another unnecessary and silly plot point that was better left unused in the film.

I don't think you can say that the CGI in the film is worse than something like, oh, let's say A Sound Of Thunder, and if you do, you're lying.

I have no idea about unnecessary plot changes, because what I saw was relatively faithful to the book.

Posted by: crazyrabbits at September 26, 2006 10:32 PM