“Ryan Kwanten talks new movie 'Red Hill,' 'True Blood,' (and why he can't talk 'True Blood') - Entertainment Weekly Online” plus 2 more |
- Ryan Kwanten talks new movie 'Red Hill,' 'True Blood,' (and why he can't talk 'True Blood') - Entertainment Weekly Online
- Ron Howard on 'The Dilemma's' gay joke: It stays in the movie - Los Angeles Times
- How do you keep audience engaged when movie plot is already well known? - Kansas City Star
Posted: 02 Nov 2010 10:04 AM PDT True Blood fans hoping to see more of Ryan Kwanten (with his native Australian accent and his shirt on), are in luck: This Friday, his new movie, the modern-day Western Red Hill, opens in New York, Los Angeles, and Austin, with additional markets to follow. Kwanten stars as a young police officer named Shane Cooper who relocates to the remote Aussie outpost Red Hill with his pregnant wife (Claire van der Boom) for a less stressful life. Cue Jimmy Conway (Tom E. Lewis), a convicted wife killer, escaping from prison on Shane's first day with one goal in mind: Swift revenge on those who put him away. There's a twist that Kwanten admits he didn't seem coming until late in the script: "I pride myself on picking those endings, and I did not pick it. I like to think that I'm remotely in the world of intelligent, so if I can make that mistake, I'm hoping other people could and it gets them actually thinking for a change at the end of a film, which would be nice." We caught up with Kwanten last week in New York, before news broke that he's set to star as Charles Manson in writer-director Scott Kosar's adaptation of the Ed Sanders' book The Family. (A rep for Kosar tells EW they're hoping to shoot in early July, after Kwanten wraps season 4 of True Blood, which begins production in early December.) We chatted with Kwanten about Red Hill, playing True Blood's Jason Stackhouse, and our burning question after reading his November 2010 Men's Heath cover story. (What alcohol does one drink to still perform well in a triathlon drunk?) ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY: Red Hill writer/director Patrick Hughes says he loves Westerns because there's no subtext to a bullet. There's right and there's wrong, and if you wronged someone, you're going to pay for it. Is that what drew you to the movie? The character Jason Stackhouse has a certain dichotomy to him, as well. He's more brawn than brains, and yet, every now and then, he'll say something almost brilliant in its truth and simplicity. I'm always surprised, and yet, it's happened enough now that I shouldn't be. Do you have a favorite of those kind of moments? I assume we'll be seeing that more of that in season 4, when Jason leads Crystal's kin in Hotshot. What can you tell me about season 4? When will you actually read the first script? I'd love to see more scenes between Jason and Eric (Alexander Skarsgard), who I think can be amused by Jason's Rambo-ness. Yeah. I don't know how he would have dealt with Jason. Okay, let's get to questions you can answer. I read in a 2009 Men's Health interview that you were on a bowling team. I've always wondered what your team name was, and what's your average. Excellent. What was it? You're no longer on the team? Your current Men's Health cover story mentions that you've shown up drunk to compete in a triathlon before. New burning question: What alcohol should one drink before competing in a triathlon? We've also read how when you first came to L.A., you convinced a hotel owner to let you stay three months, and you'd pay him at the end of that time. Is that a common story for young actors? No, I mean, I'm wondering if you have friends who did something similar. How did you think of that and make it work? Would you like to name the hotel? Follow: @EWMandiBierly Read more: This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service — if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read our FAQ page at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php This posting includes an audio/video/photo media file: Download Now |
Ron Howard on 'The Dilemma's' gay joke: It stays in the movie - Los Angeles Times Posted: 29 Oct 2010 06:30 PM PDT Comics have been making gay jokes for years, but perhaps none of them has caused as much of a stir as the quip uttered by Vince Vaughn when he made fun of an electric car by saying, "It's gay," in the trailer for the upcoming Ron Howard comedy, "The Dilemma." Coming just as the media was full of stories about taunts and attacks on gay teens that drove some to suicide, the joke hit a raw nerve. After CNN's Anderson Cooper publicly took issue with the trailer's joke, saying "we've got to do something to make those words unacceptable 'cause those words are hurting kids," a full-blown controversy erupted. Universal Pictures pulled the trailer, substituting a new one scrubbed of any gay humor. But that was three weeks ago, and this is now. Universal has confirmed to me that the joke is staying in the movie, which is slated for release in January. The decision is ultimately Howard's call, since he is a final-cut director, although my sources tell me that Howard sought advice from a variety of sources, not only from talent involved with the film but also from people at Universal and in the larger comedy community. I've already staked out my own opinion on the issue in a column I wrote several weeks ago. I concluded that "comedy is a lot like free speech--sometimes you have to hold your nose to support it." In other words, I'm not sure that I'm all that comfortable with most of the gay jokes I've heard, but once you start trying to make value judgments about one joke over another, you're on a slippery slope to the arid wasteland of political correctness. Howard recently asked if he could respond to a series of questions I'd raised when the news first broke about the controversy. He's provided answers to everything I initially wondered about, and even asked a few provocative questions of his own. He makes one particularly important point about an issue that was lost in all the hubbub, but applies to a lot of art that is viewed as offensive or controversial: Just because a character in a film says or does something wildly inappropriate doesn't necessarily mean that the filmmaker agrees with it. He explains why the joke stays in the film, as well as offers his take on the difference between sensitivity and censorship. Here's what Howard has to say: Patrick, I've been reading your posts about THE DILEMMA with a lot of interest. They're all good questions and I'm certainly not the person who has So why was the joke in the movie? Our lead character of Ronny Valentine has Was it in the script or was it a Vince Vaughn ad lib? Vince is a brilliant Did you think it wasn't offensive? I don't strip my films of everything Will comedy be neutered if everyone gets to complain about every And what do you have against electric cars anyway? Nothing! We have a Photo: Ron Howard at an Academy luncheon in 2009 honoring its Oscar nominees. Credit: Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times
This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service — if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read our FAQ page at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php This posting includes an audio/video/photo media file: Download Now |
How do you keep audience engaged when movie plot is already well known? - Kansas City Star Posted: 03 Nov 2010 12:01 AM PDT
By CHRISTOPHER BORRELLIChicago TribuneEarly on in "127 Hours," around hour 10 or so, James Franco, who has fallen into a canyon and stands awkwardly trapped with one arm beneath a boulder, pulls out a cheap pocket tool, a multiuse thingamajig with a particularly dull knife. He pokes tentatively at his right arm with the rounded edge. He never breaks the skin, though. Not yet, he doesn't. The audience recoils anyway. Which, in an odd way, feels reminiscent of the opening moments in "Secretariat": We hear Diane Lane's smooth, crisp voice reading from the Book of Job as we watch a magnificent animal being loaded into a starting gate, its ears twitching, its nostrils flaring. Which itself recalls, to a degree, a very different moment, early in "The Social Network": Jesse Eisenberg as Mark Zuckerberg sits with his lawyer across a table from his best friend and lawyer. Nobody is smiling. How do these scenes connect? Each hints at a future. Then there's "Fair Game," opening Friday, which, in a nutshell, is the Valerie-Plame-Joe-Wilson-leaked- CIA-spy-identity tale. Director Doug Liman makes a curious decision: Rather than telegraph many details of the outcome, an outcome we knew we would get before entering the theater, he takes the "All the President's Men" route and simply offers the story, piece by piece. Relatively speaking, compared with "Social Network," "127 Hours" or "Secretariat," "Fair Game" seems to play out in real time. And raises a question: How do movies based on real events wrestle with a preordained ending? - "Fair Game" (Nov. 5) What's the story? Plame-gate. The White House, in retaliation for a New York Times editorial written by Plame's husband that dismisses claims that Iraq was trying to buy uranium (which led to the "smoking gun in the shape of a mushroom cloud" thing), the White House leaks Valerie Plame's identity: CIA operative. Are the details well known? The details of the scandal, of course. Beyond that, not really. How does the film handle the audience's awareness of its inevitable ending? Doug Liman said the decision was made early on to do a lot of original reporting about Plame and "focus on the part of Valerie's story that wasn't known, the part that was still classified, and that became the bulk of the story. People forget, but she swore an oath, so when all this stuff happened, she could not talk about things. She could not say what she was doing on a day-to-day basis." He said he started with the outcome, then worked backward. "In terms of suspense, we shifted that to other crises, like the question of whether or not these Iraqi scientists will get out of the country. What we didn't want was a film full of things that everyone knows. I took that lesson from watching 'Green Zone' and Matt Damon running around going 'Where are the WMDs?' You're in the audience thinking, 'Yeah, there are no WMDs!' I think that was in the back of mind, as an example of what not to do." Is there ever a feeling that we'll get something other than the ending we're expecting? No, but then there are no winks at that ending either. - "The Social Network" (now playing) What's the story? Mark Zuckerberg creates Facebook. Or does he? Either way, the result is many lost friends and litigious Harvard classmates. Are the details well known? Yes, the vague outline. How does the film handle the audience's awareness of its inevitable ending? By being upfront. By framing Facebook's birth as a business thriller by way of a character sketch - a thriller less reliant on traditional Grisham-esque tension than an ever-present chance of betrayal and, perversely, a different kind of cliffhanger: How many friends will Zuckerberg be left with? The first moments are a hint, focusing on Zuckerberg's mean-spirited reaction to a breakup (suggesting there was little sociability left to lose). Screenwriter Aaron Sorkin and director David Fincher tinker with time, switching between Zuckerberg working on Facebook and the cold legalities that followed; Jesse Eisenberg's motor-mouth delivery feels like an act of foreshadowing, so glib and devoid of niceties that you just know harsh ramifications will be inevitable. They also tinker with the details, to great effect: "I dramatized the fact that there were conflicting stories," Sorkin told New York magazine - leaving the audience not with just an expected outcome but an argumentative one. Is there ever a feeling that we'll get something other than the ending we're expecting? If you really wondered, you must be on Friendster. - "127 Hours" (Friday) What's the story? In 2003, Aron Ralston, a young but experienced climber, fell into a canyon in Utah and was trapped beneath a boulder for more than five days with little water. He cut off his right arm to escape (and later wrote a memoir). Are the details well known? Somewhat. (And if you're not aware of Ralston's story, the film's marketing plays up its true-life angle.) How does the film handle the audience's awareness of its inevitable ending? The title screen, "127 Hours,' doesn't come up until the moment Ralston is trapped. Which creates a clock in your head. Also, there's a lot of foreshadowing - a dripping faucet, a last-minute grab of a second bottle of Gatorade - some of it subtle, some not so much. Christian Colson, who produced the film (and "Slumdog Millionaire") with director Danny Boyle, said they always thought that "if you could keep the audience constantly within the present tense, then you make the audience forget a bit. The guy's name is on the opening credits, so you look for other things to distract. We had this thing called storytelling by amplification, where tiny incidents carry disproportionate weight to how they would in a traditional story." The sun rising, for instance. Franco's attempt to reclaim a knife. The suspense is there; it's just not focused on his arm. "And if you read the book, we also had the benefit of information gathered in the three years that passed since the book." Is there ever a feeling that we'll get something other than the ending we're expecting? Frequently. Or at least, the feeling that perhaps it didn't play out exactly as you heard. "We tried to embed that in our approach," Colson said. The outlook is grim for a long while; even a quick moment early on when Franco tumbles from his bike, then laughs and takes a picture of himself on the ground feels as fatalistic as it is breezy. By forgetting the survival elements of the story for a while (and focusing on his life), the audience is now never quite sure when the climatic moment of release will happen." -"Secretariat" (now playing) What's the story? In 1973, 3-year old Secretariat wins the first Triple Crown in 25 years, setting records that remain unbroken. Are the details well known? Yes. (And our collective awareness of the history of uplifting sports movie does it no favors.) How does the film handle the audience's awareness of its inevitable ending? In two ways: No. 1, by shifting the story's focus to Diane Lane's Denver housewife, who inherits a fledgling horse, then lets her family relationships suffer (Indeed, the Preakness is mainly watched on a television with the family, lending a slightly unpredictable air to the outcome); No. 2, with races so involving the traditional mechanics of suspense simply take over. Director Randall Wallace, who also made "We Were Soldiers" and wrote "Braveheart," said he doesn't believe in "intellectualizing a situation or stepping outside of a moment and considering it from a distance but drawing the audience in by making it as much a primary experience as possible. I don't want them to watch Secretariat. I want them to be him. You don't want them in a space where they're intellectualizing and thinking, 'Yeah, I know what's going to happen.'" He also gives nearly every character (including the horse) a moment alone: "My father once said to me, 'People will remember almost nothing of what you say and only slightly more of what you do, but all their lives they will remember the way you made them feel.' I believe that applies here." Is there ever a feeling that we'll get something other than the ending we're expecting? The first scene quotes biblical prophesy. So, uh, no. Christopher Borrelli: cborrelli@tribune.com This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service — if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read our FAQ page at fivefilters.org/content-only/faq.php This posting includes an audio/video/photo media file: Download Now |
You are subscribed to email updates from Add Images to any RSS Feed To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 |
0 comments:
Post a Comment