web
counter
 

rainn.jpg
Yankee Swap is like Machiavelli Meets… Pajiba!

The Pajiba Trade Round-Up / Pajiba Staff

Trade News | November 29, 2006 | Comments (40)


Item #1: So, get this: Rainn Wilson has been tapped to not only write the screenplay for but also star in Bonzai Shadowhands, which will be directed by Jason Reitman (Thank You for Smoking). Fox Searchlight has picked up the comedy, and though plot details are sketchy, it is known that the film will be about a once-great ninja now living a life of mediocrity. On first blush, the concept sounds bewildering — Reitman clearly has some talent for dark satire, but Wilson could never be taken seriously as a ninja fighter. It smacks, initially, of a feature-length version of a bad “SNL” skit run amok, with Wilson parading out an iteration of his Dwight Schrute character and stumbling into victory as a ninja fighter much like he did as a motivational speaker on the “The Office.” But both he and Reitman are seemingly too smart to stoop to that level. Obviously, I have no idea what direction he and Reitman intend to take, but it occurred to me that the concept would work brilliantly if, and only if, Wilson’s ninja fighter were a modern-day version of Don Quixote, living in Des Moines. After years of social isolation and hundreds of hours of watching Satsuo Yamamoto films, a delusional Wilson would conclude that he, himself, was a once great martial arts warrior. He would procure his Sancho Panza (a video store clerk, played by Paul Giamatti) and seek out his Dulcinea (Zooey Deschanel), who would be an attendant at a local suburban arcade. Wilson, of course, would defeat other ninja warriors, who are actually holograms in a 3-D video game (the Windmills!). Oh man … if Reitman doesn’t do this, somebody give me a call — there really aren’t enough modern-day Quixotes in today’s multiplexes. Where are the Query Letters I Love (2) Folks to proffer analysis? — Dustin Rowles

Item #2: As someone who grew up on the rerun television adventures of Maxwell Smart but also grew out of them a long time ago, I find myself in a curious position when it comes to the big-screen adaptation of “Get Smart,” which ran on NBC and later CBS from 1965-1970. I want the film to be somewhat respectful of the original series, but I also want the film to tank drastically. Radically. Horribly. I want it to make the Hindenburg look like a good day at the park. Modern adaptations of classic shows either pervert the original premise by juxtaposing conflicting time periods (The Brady Bunch Movie, Starsky & Hutch) or they simply erase all but the basest similarities (The Dukes of Hazzard). Aside from The Fugitive, there hasn’t been a good cinematic update of a classic TV show, and Get Smart looks to be no exception: Despite the stellar casting choice of Steve Carell in the lead, it’s being reported that Anne Hathaway is close to signing on as Agent 99. If Hathaway’s work in The Princess Diaries and Havoc is any indication, Get Smart could be a heartwarming look at gritty drug-fueled urban sex. Regardless, I’m curious to see what happens to the Cone of Silence. — Daniel Carlson

Item #3: I’m going to try to withhold my distaste for Peter Jackson while covering this — so far as I’m concerned, he’s made two decent films — The Frighteners and the outrageously hysterical Meet the Feebles — otherwise he’s a special-effects genius with no discernible talent for storytelling on an emotional level (making him a directorial Halfling). But depending on what report you read, he’s either in or out as the director of The Hobbit. Last week, reports suggested that New Line Cinema dumped Jackson, on account of his lawsuit alleging that the studio withheld royalties. This week, however, the producer Saul Zaentz — who owns the rights to Tolkien’s works — said that he will bring Peter back next year, after the rights revert to his production company. During the week-long interim, speculation brewed that Sam Raimi — an infinitely better director, even if you don’t count the Spider-Man franchise — was set to take over the LOTR prequel. Personally — not that the fanboys and girls out there give a shit what a Coen-brothers-lovin’ disbeliever thinks — I was a much bigger fan of The Hobbit than any of the almost insufferable chase-fight-run LOTR books, so it’d actually be nice to have a fresh perspective on the superior installment. Of course, at this point, I’d almost take Robert Smigel at the helm and David L. Lander (TV’s Squiggy!) as Bilbo if it meant a movie without a Sisyphean running time. — DR

Item #4: Remember when Pierce Brosnan did that totally awesome thing that was in no way related to spies or private investigators? Yeah, neither does he. After “Remington Steele” and a series of increasingly dumb James Bond films, Brosnan took a role as a lonely hitman in The Matador to prove he could play against type, a decision he apparently regrets. This week it was announced that Brosnan will once again play a spy in New Line’s Spy vs. Stu, in which Brosnan will attempt to woo away the girlfriend of an average gomer, who will presumably be played by, I dunno, Will Ferrell. Or David Koechner. Or a chimp. — DC

Item #5: While I’m still a touch of a comic-book geek, I was a major one back in the ’90s. And many of my favorite comics at the time were put out by Vertigo, an imprint of DC (think of it like the heyday of the Miramax/Disney relationship). Well, now comes word that one of the old Vertigo comics is going to be turned into an HBO show. Preacher was about a small-town priest traveling the country to find God, so that he could give God shit for apparently quitting His job. And the priest is joined on his travels by an ex-girlfriend. And an Irish vampire. Oh, and the priest has been possessed by a half-angel/half-demon kinda thing. The series was mature and funny and dark, and delved into various political and religious themes. Which makes it sound like a great fit for HBO, particularly when one learns that the original creators are exec-producing the show. But then one gets to wondering whether the it’s-not-TV network will be able to learn from the mistakes of “Carnivale” and make a winner out of this. And then one looks into the man set to write the pilot, one Mark Steven Johnson. Which is when one learns that Mr. Johnson is responsible for such other comic adaptations as Daredevil, Elektra, and the impending Ghost Rider, i.e., debacle, uber-debacle, and impending crapfest. So, yeah, my excitement is more than a little tempered, and at this point I’m expecting that at least one future review of the show will describe it as “Holy Shit.” — Seth Freilich

Item #6: Over the long holiday weekend, Happy Feet held the top position, while Casino Royale came in a close second, as both films are set to cross $100 million this week. Déjà Vu performed respectably, earning upward of $30 million over the five days, despite an Alanis Morissette-level understanding of the term. Somehow, there were also $16 million worth of people in this country willing to see Deck the Halls, though I suspect there was a minor uptick in DWI arrests last weekend (I’m guessing we know what Tracy Morgan was watching over the holiday). Bobby opened at number nine, which makes some sense — most people who have any interest in Bobby Kennedy would have none in Lindsay Lohan/Sharon Stone, and vice versa, canceling out all demographics except for sorority girls with majors in American history. The Fountain also stunk it up at the box office, and I wonder if part of its problem was just an awful marketing campaign. Finally, the Tenacious D flick absolutely bombed, raking in a paltry $5 million, most of which came from people who recently came out of seven-year comas.

Just three new releases this weekend, as holdovers compete for most audiences. Judging by films on tap, they shouldn’t have much competition: The Nativity Story is the big new release, on 2,800 screens, so we’ll see how the Virgin Mary holds up against James Bond. Van Wilder: The Rise of Taj hits 2,000 screens; for some ungodly reason, someone thought it was a brilliant idea to produce a sequel to Van Wilder, without freakin’ Van Wilder (Ryan Reynolds), thinking — I suppose — that there’s a lot of value in a failed four-year-old title (granted, Reynolds brought a lot of appeal the otherwise horrid original). Finally, now that Thanksgiving has passed, the studios are once again comfortable introducing a film chockfull of attractive beachgoers getting the Hostel treatment, as Fox Atomic’s Turistas bows on 1,500 screens. Mmm, leftovers. — DR









Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance



Pajiba Love 11/29/06 | Pajiba Love 11/30/06









Comments

Dustin Rowles, why are you trying to kill me?

I can't even begin to address your comments about the LOTR novels. Yes, The Hobbit was the easier read, but what of it? No, I told myself I wouldn't do this. I will address Peter Jackson though.

As an admirer of Tolkein's other work as well, I developed a distaste for Jackson's series almost immediately. Much of this was due to his casting choices and his treatment of the first film, which I found to be abhorrent. The following films didn't get much better, although RotK had its moments. But I think your point about Jackson being a special effects genius with no noticable inclination toward telling a decent story is right on the money. If I'd had to listen to Elijah Wood cry about how hard everything was one more time, I think I would have screamed. I hated him in the role of Frodo, and Viggo Mortenson was no shining star either. The fact of the matter is, having seen most of his films, that Jackson, God bless him, has no ability to direct actors. Look at Ian McKellan and Ian Holm. I thought both were fantastic in their respective roles, but they're fantastic actors in their own right. But an actor like Wood, who I don't think is very good to start with, needs the supervision of someone who either knows the craft or knows what actors need to connect. Unfortunately for this franchise, I think Jackson falls into neither category.

This franchise, such as it is, needed a more subtle touch. And while I don't think Raimi is it, there's got to be a director out there that could have brought this series to its true glory.

Posted by: Smokin at November 30, 2006 9:03 AM

And no Dustin, Smigel is NOT the answer!

:)

Posted by: Smokin at November 30, 2006 9:05 AM

"...I was a much bigger fan of The Hobbit than any of the almost insufferable chase-fight-run LOTR books..."
I have to agree with you on this point, though I disagree with you on Jackson. I enjoy everything he's made, with the exception of Bad Taste. Of course, this is coming from someone who happens to like all of the Tolkien animated adaptations, including the roto-scoped one. I even own the soundtrack to The Hobbit on vinyl.

Posted by: Samuel Erikson at November 30, 2006 9:17 AM

LOTR is sooooo much better then the hobbit (which is a great book). i'm excited to get some new blood for the prequel.

Posted by: urs at November 30, 2006 9:31 AM

Do we really need a to make LOTR prequel, I'll summarize it and save you some money:

He finds a ring.

Now, Pierce Brosnan's work in The Matador was excellent in my opinion. It's a shame that the public didn't support the film.

Preacher COULD be good, IF, it goes somewhere I'm still trying to recover from my Carnivale experience, as in, WTF was that all about?

And finally the less said about Lohan/Stone and the Van Wilder sequel WITHOUT van Wilder the better.

Posted by: BarbaboSlim at November 30, 2006 10:11 AM

Seth: FYI - heyday • noun (one's heyday) the period of one's greatest success, activity, or vigour. -- ORIGIN originally an exclamation of joy or surprise. (http://www.askoxford.com)

and Dustin: References to Alanis Morissette (one "r" and two "s"s) and Ryan Reynolds in separate but adjacent paragraphs? coincidental? ironic? Freudian? Quixotic? a variation on Canadian or dead?

By the way, I also thought Jackson's LOTR trilogy was brilliant eye candy and faithful enough to the story so that I could get really annoyed with the fangeeks who objected to every little discrepancy - a kind of "What do you expect, it's only a movie" attitude. But I guess I usually have low expectations for film adaptations of novels. I don't expect my favorite books to translate perfectly to the big screen, I'm happy if an adaptation is reasonably entertaining.

I think the Harry Potter and Batman movies also showed us that we can expect varying degrees of success from sequels when directors or even leading actors play musical chairs, and still let the studios rake in blockbuster profits from lackluster productions. Of course, the Matrix sequels proved that continuity does not necessarily breed quality; there's no substitute for good story-telling. I say, let's turn The Hobbit over to Charlie Kaufman and Spike Jonze and see what happens when Bilbo travels through the looking-glass.

Publisher's Note: Thanks for the edits, Sanity. And you are totally right: Jonze and Kaufman would absolutely rule Middle Earth.

Posted by: Sanity Clause at November 30, 2006 10:41 AM

[i]Preacher[/i] is going to be handled by the same halfwit who did [i]Daredevil[/i] and [i]Elektra[/i]?

I am now sad. Very sad. I always thought this would be a great project for HBO, but this is like Santa promises to get you a pony this Christmas, and then you find one under the tree, vivisected.

Posted by: Wednesday at November 30, 2006 10:41 AM

Dustin:

I have brought your query over to Query Letters I Love 2 for analysis. You are well on your way!

Posted by: Pete at November 30, 2006 10:53 AM

And that would be found at http://qlil2.blogspot.com

Publisher's Note: Much obliged, Pete. I've always wanted to have an idea shredded apart by the QLIL folks -- Mustang Sally, Taffy Doublewide, cinekat: Spew the *twee* bile.

Posted by: Pete at November 30, 2006 10:55 AM

Wait, I may be hallucinating due to heat exhaustion (they should REALLY turn down the heat in my office), but didn't Jackson also direct Heavenly Creatures? I saw that a few years ago, and I was totally surpirsed by the amount of depth, and subtley. I think you can take all of Peter Jackson's other work and use it as an alternative to traditional sleep aids, but Heavenly Creatures was quite something...painful and lovely (of course that may be my massive Kate Winslet girl-crush talking).

Posted by: redkitten at November 30, 2006 10:57 AM

Item #2 reminds me of Bewitched.

Posted by: The Stew at November 30, 2006 11:19 AM

Having never read the Hobbit or the LOTR books (despite my 9 year old daughter's continuous harrassment)I had no pre-conceived notion as to casting. But that's the problem with turning great books into movies--you are always disappointed.

My suggestion--if you really love the book, don't see the movie! Heartbreak every time.

But Peter Jackson does have the Lucas-esqe nack for great effects at the cost of dialogue and direction.

Posted by: wsapnin at November 30, 2006 11:47 AM

Wait, give Brosnan some credit for Lawnmower Man and Evelyn. Both out of character, both brilliant acting turns. If you haven't seen Evelyn, rent it today (yes, it's one that pulls at heartstrings, but he could never have done the Matador without first proving how grungy he could get in this role). And surely, he can coast for at least a few months on the excellence of Matador?

Posted by: Siobhan at November 30, 2006 12:26 PM

No new Hobbit adaptation can match the glory of a Vulcan hairdo... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XC73PHdQX04

It's my favorite adaptation of the story by far. Partly because it's under 2 minutes and partly because it reminds me of an old gum commercial. And partly because drugs were blatantly involved.

Posted by: Tracy at November 30, 2006 12:37 PM

Redkitten, you took the words out of my mouth. "Heavenly Creatures" is so goddamned good.

Posted by: Samantha T at November 30, 2006 1:02 PM

Can a film's running time really be sisyphean? Sitting through the film might be, but the runtime itself isn't a task ...

Posted by: j. at November 30, 2006 1:10 PM

Preacher...into a TV show...WHY DOES THAT MORON HAVE TO BE WRITING IT?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? excuse me while I go cry in a corner for what could have been...

Posted by: Joe at November 30, 2006 2:11 PM

Preacher?! I'm amazed! HBO has balls!

Posted by: Sunsneezer at November 30, 2006 2:13 PM

Again with the Peter Jackson hate. I must respectfully disagree. I love everything he's done, though I haven't seen Bad Taste. I thought Heavenly Creatures was beautiful and stirring, Dead Alive was hysterical, The Frighteners was clever and cool, LOTR was vast, sweeping, moving and fun, and King Kong had the best of what a summer action movie should have. Maybe I have lower standards, maybe I'm more able to "become a kid again" (to use an utterly godawful and cloying phrase). But I love his work. Maybe he suffers from too much success - it seems like everyone LOVED Fellowship, and as the movies continued to come out and rake in more money, people began hating him. I dunno. I don't care. I can't wait for the Hobbit.

Posted by: TK at November 30, 2006 2:22 PM

I heard a few years ago that they were shopping Preacher around for a feature length...? I'm excited to hear that they're doing it in the HBO (hopefully 1 hour) series format. This was my favorite comic series and I still pick it up and start reading from the beginning from time to time.

Posted by: Ernesto at November 30, 2006 6:35 PM

Ernesto, they were shopping Preacher a couple years ago with James Marsden attached to play Jesse Custer. Thank christ that didn't happen. Any turd would be better than that turd.

Posted by: Dirty at November 30, 2006 7:15 PM

HBO ok-ing Mark Steven Johnson (who is proof that there IS such a thing as being too much of a comics fan) reinforces my opinion that they just don't get comics. The SPAWN cartoon was a snoozefest, AND they passed on Brian Bendis' GOLDFISH.

Posted by: Ben at November 30, 2006 9:46 PM

Peter Jackson. Truly, the Emperor has no clothes.

Posted by: SpiceLux at November 30, 2006 11:24 PM

I liked Daredevil and Bad Taste, so obviously I have must have no intelligence or taste at all. I've enjoyed all of Jackson's and Johnson's movies so far and am perfectly willing to see whatever else they come up with. Preacher as a comic series was like most of Ennis's work, pretentious and trite simultaneously. I have no idea what Johnson will do with it, but no matter what his plan is, it will be an improvement over the original.

Posted by: Adam C at December 1, 2006 1:24 AM

I'm in the prefers-the hobbit-to-LOTR camp as well. LOTR dragged for me, and beleive me, I read it when i was young and impressionable and surrounded by people who sung its praises. I really tried to see the glory but, just couldn't get there.
ah well. I thought the frighteners was great, but the LOTR movie series dragged as much as the books. No hope for the Hobbit here :(

Posted by: sleeper at December 1, 2006 1:26 AM

I'm still surprised that Dustin thinks Spider-Man 1 was in any way a good film. (Well...maybe visually. But then the Green Goblin helmet ruins that.)

Spider-Man 2, beautiful genius with all of Raimi's playfulness and dark touches. 1? Worse than Attack of the Clones.

Posted by: Shadowen at December 1, 2006 2:00 AM

Dustin, the reviews (including mine) are coming in over at QLIL2, but I'd like to add one thing here: if you name the Zooey Deschanel character "Sandy Vagina," then I will totally go see your movie.

Posted by: Mustang Sally at December 1, 2006 12:13 PM

Tracy - you made my day with the Leonard Nimoy video! I found that song on napster ages ago, but to see the live version was the perfect Friday entertainment.

I'm a big fan of the Hobbit, but I don't think the animated version can be improved on.

Posted by: Alarmjaguar at December 1, 2006 2:24 PM

I'm not even going to discuss Carnivale. I suppose I must be one of the few who really "got" (and totally got INTO) that show. I don't think I'd ever been truly pissed over a cancellation until that one. I've literally gotten to the point that I'm afraid to pick up a new show that I don't think will make it past the first season or two. Carnivale ended with so many unanswered questions, which if fine for "The Lady or the Tiger" but not for a series with the twists and turns and "what the fucks" that Carnivale had.

Moving on...

I totally dig the Preacher comics, and the prospect of James Marsden playing Custer gave me the fucking bubble-guts. HBO has the balls to do this one--and to do it properly. It won't be easy in our uber-right-wing, fun-Nazi society. Angels screwing demons? A man who speaks with the voice of God? A character named (appropriately) Ass Face? The storylines were violent, gritty and often blasphemous. But HBO has the balls. Too bad that the whole project will be fucked up by a hack whose comic-to-film escapades are as mangled and botched as a goldfish in a blender.

Go ahead and dig a grave beside Carnivale. I'm not sure this one will even make it past the pilot.

Posted by: superedna at December 2, 2006 12:20 AM

I don't mean to be entirely soul-less and start some sort of flame war...

But James Marsden isn't that bad...

Posted by: She With No Name at December 2, 2006 3:16 PM

Indeed, he's not bad at all.

Posted by: BarbaboSlim at December 2, 2006 7:13 PM

Just want to throw my love behind 'Heavenly Creatures' along with others - This is Peter Jackson's best film, in my opinion. It always breaks my heart when conversations about Jackson exclude it. LOTR was so-so, but 'Heavenly Creatures' was great.

Posted by: stacy at December 3, 2006 10:48 AM

Agreed on James Marsden. He's not that bad. Hell, he was better than Brandon Routh was in Superman Returns. And that may not be saying much, given that Brandon mainly stood around looking pretty, but you get what I sayin'.

That being said, given what I've learned about this Preacher comic in the comments, I'm not sure he can pull off a role like that.

Posted by: Daphne at December 3, 2006 12:58 PM

The Hobbit was infinitely better than the LOTR trilogy.. Once again, you prove your status as a wise and wonderful man.

Too bad about Brosnan -- I thought The Matador was brilliant. (And, by the by, he played a spy in that one, too.)

Peter Jackson cannot write. But he does have a flair for spectacle -- which is another reason I'd be happy to seehim NOT direct The Hobbit.

Anne Hathaway as Agent 99??? That's fucking insane.

Posted by: Maryscott O'Connor at December 3, 2006 5:29 PM

Um... Heavenly Creatures anyone? Jackson can definitely do the emotional part of filmmaking. helloooo

Posted by: Nathaniel R at December 4, 2006 12:44 PM

*"once again", in the brosnan entry. you put "one again".

-your friendly neighborhood editrix

Posted by: abbey road at December 4, 2006 12:57 PM

Adam C-

You do indeed have no taste.

Posted by: Eddy Newandyke at December 5, 2006 12:19 PM

Wow. I hated the Hobbit. It turned me completely off Tolkien with its boringness and its annoying characters. When they released the Lord of the Rings, I refused to see it on general principal because the Hobbit had made me hate Tolkien so much that I didn't want to do anything that would contribute to his estate. But then my husband rented the Lord of the Rings. I was so shocked at how not boring it was that I actually put aside my Tolkien hatred and was able to enjoy the subsequent two (althought, number three really could have used better editing I mean there were at least 8 different places where the movie could have ended and no one would have felt like they missed anything.)

As for the rest. Thank Goodness there are others here who are more familiar with Jackson's work. Heavenly Creatures showed a perfect mastery of keeping a balance between a powerful character driven story and really crazy out there special effects.

I've loved Melanie Lynski ever since and look for any opportunity to catch her in something no matter how small the role is.

Posted by: cmoody at December 5, 2006 4:04 PM

Wow- I get to plug the Matador twice in one day?!? First, (and kind of off-topicly) in the Bond thread, and now here?
I agree with the original review- it is a movie that could have been even better, but I loved Brosnan and Kinnear and the whole premise of the story. I hope my beloved Pierce brings that same skill to the new movie- but it sounds kind of like hoping Uma Thurman brings her Kill Bill excellence to My Super-Ex. Prolly not gonna happen. Drats.
(and by the way, the remake of the Thomas Crown Affair is one of the few remakes that, in my opinion, far exceeds the original)

Posted by: Go Big Red at December 6, 2006 1:58 PM

Wow. I really need to disagree on the LOTR account...Peter Jackson definitely can direct actors; I thought the movies were well-written and acted. And yes, by the end, I feel like he just threw all attempts at good movie-pacing out the window and became a little too indulgent, but who could blame him? By then he had crazy amounts of money and enough fans to do whatever he wanted, which was to have a crazy long end-of-the-franchise send-off. I'll forgive him that.

And I still don't understand why anyone thinks the Spiderman movies were that good...it's some of the weakest dialogue and the slowest, most painful deliveries (ahem Kirsten and Toby) I've ever seen. Made LOTR seem quick-paced...but that won't stop me from seeing Spiderman 3 the first week it hits theaters (Venom kicks major ass).

Posted by: thelizard at December 9, 2006 2:06 AM