Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Links to our threads on the documentaries Fahrenheit 911 (2004) and Where in the World Is Osama bin Laden? (2008).

Link to our thread on 'The Death of Osama bin Laden' (May 2011).

Link to our threads on Kathryn Bigelow's previous films Point Break (1991) and The Hurt Locker (2008). We don't seem to have any threads on the seven or eight other features that she has directed so far.

- - -

Joel Edgerton signs on for Kathryn Bigelow's Bin Laden movie

As "The Hurt Locker" team of Kathryn Bigelow and Mark Boal continue to work on their Osama bin Laden movie, they've signed up their first actor.

Australian Joel Edgerton will play a special operative in the picture, said two sources familiar with the project who asked not to be identified because they were not authorized to discuss it. The actor will be part of an ensemble of male commandos. . . .

Los Angeles Times, May 5

Edited by Peter T Chattaway

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...
  • Replies 78
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Downgrade Blues

The White House is also counting on the Kathryn Bigelow and Mark Boal big-screen version of the killing of Bin Laden to counter Obama’s growing reputation as ineffectual. The Sony film by the Oscar-winning pair who made “The Hurt Locker” will no doubt reflect the president’s cool, gutsy decision against shaky odds. Just as Obamaland was hoping, the movie is scheduled to open on Oct. 12, 2012 — perfectly timed to give a home-stretch boost to a campaign that has grown tougher.

The moviemakers are getting top-level access to the most classified mission in history from an administration that has tried to throw more people in jail for leaking classified information than the Bush administration.

It was clear that the White House had outsourced the job of manning up the president’s image to Hollywood when Boal got welcomed to the upper echelons of the White House and the Pentagon and showed up recently — to the surprise of some military officers — at a C.I.A. ceremony celebrating the hero Seals. . . .

Maureen Dowd, New York Times, August 6

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The White House is also counting on the Kathryn Bigelow and Mark Boal big-screen version of the killing of Bin Laden to counter Obama’s growing reputation as ineffectual. The Sony film by the Oscar-winning pair who made “The Hurt Locker” will no doubt reflect the president’s cool, gutsy decision against shaky odds. Just as Obamaland was hoping, the movie is scheduled to open on Oct. 12, 2012 — perfectly timed to give a home-stretch boost to a campaign that has grown tougher.

Opening on the same weekend as Bigelow's gritty film will be James Cameron's as-yet-untitled $300M special-effects extravaganza about a group of vicious, back-stabbing presidential candidates on a hostile planet getting picked off one by one by a noble predator. The cast includes Tim Robbins, Tina Fey, Bill Nunn, Andie MacDowell, Brian Cox, John Tuturro and Ian McKellen.

“I write because I don’t know what I think until I read what I say.” — Flannery O'Connor

Writing at the new Decent Films | Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like Maureen Dowd's column sparked a bit of a political furor.

- - -

Kathryn Bigelow Bin Laden Film Getting DC Scrutiny

BREAKING: New York-based congressman Peter King has called for an investigation into the Obama Administration's cooperation with the untitled movie that The Hurt Locker's Kathryn Bigelow and Mark Boal are making about Navy SEAL Team 6's hunt and eventual kill of 9/11 terror mastermind Osama bin Laden. The request came after a New York Times column by Maureen Dowd reporting that the film -- which was acquired at auction by Sony Pictures before a script was completed -- received cooperation and help in describing a mission that was classified. . . .

The White House has knocked down the notion that the filmmakers were getting tipped secrets, with a spokesman calling it "ridiculous" and saying the filmmakers got no preferential treatment. This all sounds like a steaming pile of partisan politics to me, but it certainly will get a lot of attention. The military has made a practice of cooperating on gung-ho pictures in the past, lending know-how and making military hardware available on movies ranging from Pearl Harbor to Top Gun. Few pols have complained until now.

There will be plenty of upcoming appeals for cooperation by military mission films taking shape, including the upcoming Pete Berg-directed Lone Survivor, a fact-based tale about heroic Navy SEALs who struggled to survive after their covert mission in Afghanistan was compromised and they were forced to fight their way out of an ambush by Taliban forces. And let's not forget about Act of Valor, a film completed about a Navy SEAL mission that featured a cast of actual Navy SEALs re-creating their exploits. That movie Relativity Media will release next President's Day weekend. So it doesn't seem like Bigelow and Boal are getting anything out of the ordinary. Divulging classified matter is a serious matter, but the film is a drama, not a documentary, and the facts behind the successful hunt of bin Laden have been widely reported by now. . . .

Mike Fleming, Deadline.com, August 10

Congressman calls for probe of Bigelow's Bin Laden movie

"I’m very concerned that any sensitive information could be disclosed in a movie," King said in a phone interview. "The procedures and operations that we used in this raid are very likely what we'll use in other raids. There’s no way a director would know what could be tipping off the enemy."

King also seems to be concerned about the possible political ramifications of the film, which is scheduled to arrive in theaters in October 2012.

"The fact that the movie is going to be released three weeks before election day, the people at the CIA told me they had no idea that this was the plan," he added. "They were never told it was gonna come out so close to election day."

King said he had spoken to members of the CIA who confirmed that the agency is working with the filmmakers. "There’s a division in the agency," King said. "Some wanted to cooperate, some didn’t." . . .

Los Angeles Times, August 10

Bin Laden Filmmakers Release Statement: Deny Film Is Partisan, Ignore Release Date

The filmmakers’ statement is below but, unfortunately (and incredibly), it doesn’t address the film’s release date, which is set for October 12th, 2012 –just a few weeks prior to the November 6th presidential election. This is THE elephant in the room and the likely reason no one involved with the film will address it is due to the fact that there’s no logical reason reason to release the film on that date unless you want to give Barack Obama a pre-election boost — a $50 to $75 million dollar in-kind political contribution. . . .

And the worst part is that the courage and sacrifice of the men and women who helped to bring down bin Laden is being intentionally and cynically exploited for partisan political purposes.

America and the people who protect her have waited ten years for a film about this war that takes our side and now that we might finally get one, it comes in the form of a Left-wing campaign commercial. . . .

John Nolte, Big Hollywood, August 10

'I'm NOT trying to get Obama re-elected': Hurt Locker director defends Bin Laden film after White House gives her access to Navy SEALs

Miss Bigelow made her support for Mr Obama no secret in 2008, while he was campaigning for president and she was promoting The Hurt Locker.

She told StarGlimpse.com: 'I hope and pray that U.S. forces will be withdrawn immediately from Iraq, and only one man is capable of doing that, that's Mr. Barack Obama.' . . .

Daily Mail, August 11

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

Jason Clarke Lands Kathryn Bigelow’s Bin Laden Film; Elite Cast Circling Other Roles

EXCLUSIVE: Jason Clarke is the first actor set for the Kathryn Bigelow-directed drama about the hunt for Osama Bin Laden for Sony Pictures and Megan Ellison’s Annapurna Pictures. An elite group of actors is being courted for the ensemble. I’m told that Clarke–who stars in the Ellison-produced The Wettest County in the World and is playing the gas station owner George Wilson in the Baz Luhrmann-directed The Great Gatsby–will play a terrorist hunter in service of the U.S. efforts to hunt Bin Laden. Also being discussed for roles are Tom Hardy (who also stars in Wettest County), Jennifer Ehle (Contagion), Guy Pearce (who starred in Bigelow’s The Hurt Locker), Idris Elba, Rooney Mara (upcoming Girl with the Dragon Tattoo) and Nina Arianda (Midnight In Paris). . . .

Mike Fleming, Deadline.com, November 10

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

Film About the Hunt for Bin Laden Leads to a Pentagon Investigation

Mark Boal and Kathryn Bigelow, the team behind a planned Hollywood film about the hunt for Osama bin Laden, were caught up this week in the kind of dispute that more often ensnares journalists. It happened when Representative Peter T. King, Republican of New York, disclosed on Thursday that the Pentagon was investigating whether the filmmakers — who collaborated on the Oscar-winning project “The Hurt Locker” — had improper access to classified material for the still untitled Bin Laden movie.

Mr. King also said that the Central Intelligence Agency had informed him that it was reviewing its guidelines on interaction with the entertainment industry. . . .

The investigation appears unlikely to affect the film’s production, expected to begin shortly, with Joel Edgerton and Jessica Chastain among its stars. A C.I.A. spokesman, Preston Golson, said the agency had worked in the past with writers and filmmakers with a goal of “an accurate portrayal of the men and women of the C.I.A., their vital mission and the commitment to public service that defines them.”

“And it is an absolute,” he continued, “that the protection of national security equities is an integral part of our mission.” . . .

But the investigation reveals the risks of an aggressively journalistic approach, once rare in the studio world. That approach has been pioneered lately by Mr. Boal — a writer and producer whose coming projects include one about Julian Assange of WikiLeaks — and by Sony Pictures, which last year surprised the movie world with “The Social Network,” a distinctly reportorial examination of Facebook’s founder, Mark Zuckerberg. . . .

New York Times, January 6

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 months later...

Judicial Watch Obtains DOD and CIA Records Detailing Meetings with bin Laden Raid Filmmakers

“These documents, which took nine months and a federal lawsuit to disgorge from the Obama administration, show that politically-connected film makers were giving extraordinary and secret access to bin Laden raid information, including the identity of a Seal Team Six leader,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “It is both ironic and hypocritical that the Obama administration stonewalled Judicial Watch’s pursuit of the bin Laden death photos, citing national security concerns, yet seemed willing to share intimate details regarding the raid to help Hollywood filmmakers release a movie ‘perfectly timed to give a home-stretch boost’ to the Obama campaign.”

Judicial Watch, May 22

Edited by Peter T Chattaway

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...

First reviews are coming in.

The Hollywood Reporter

But quite apart from its historical significance, at least the scene is here to provide a welcome catharsis, as at one time would not have been the case. The filmmakers initially embarked on this project before the Bin Laden raid took place, which would obviously have resulted in an entirely different sort of film, dramatically and philosophically; without a resolution, it could hardly have helped from being an existential tale of quite substantial dimensions.

As it has emerged instead, it could well be the most impressive film Bigelow has made, as well as possibly her most personal, as one keenly feels the drive of the filmmaker channeled through the intensity of Maya's character. The film's power steadily and relentlessly builds over its long course, to a point that is terrifically imposing and unshakable.

Chastain carries the film in a way she's never been asked to do before. Denied the opportunity to provide psychological and emotional details for Maya, she nonetheless creates a character that proves indelible and deeply felt. The entire cast works in a realistic vein to fine effect.

Variety

The film opens with audio of a terrified victim of the World Trade Center attack playing over a black screen and uses the emotional power that clip dredges up to fuel everything that follows.

The result is neither particularly entertaining nor especially artful, as the filmmakers take a lean, "All the President's Men"-style approach to dramatizing an investigation that took nearly a decade to bear fruit. But Boal has clearly constructed this as a more journalistic alternative to a generic gung-ho approach. The script's blood runs thick with observational detail and military jargon, skipping forward years at a time between scenes to focus on one of two types of incident.

The first concerns the slow but steady progress in Maya's (Jessica Chastain) investigation, which hinges on her conviction that any clues they can discover about bin Laden's courier will eventually lead them back to UBL (the military acronym for bin Laden) himself. The second type involves an ongoing series of terrorist attacks that continue to claim lives as long as bin Laden goes free (never mind that they will not stop once he's dead). Bigelow keeps her audience on its toes by alternating between the two, allowing virtually no room for subplots or superfluous character baggage beyond what's needed for the task at hand.

Formerly Baal_T'shuvah

"Everyone has the right to make an ass out of themselves. You just can't let the world judge you too much." - Maude 
Harold and Maude
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Has David Poland ever praised a film more highly than this one?

Bigelow & Boal are in a kind of sync that is rare in the history of cinema. Boal has raised the bar on the output of Bigelow’s master-level visual skill by giving her material to work with that is seriously challenging and meaningful. She’d make a great Bond movie, I suspect, but that was her earlier career. This is the stuff of Lean and Bolt.

...

Comparisons to All The President’s Men are completely valid. But an even stronger beating heart lies beneath this material.

...

There are some truly great performances by actresses this year. Marion Cotillard is a miracle in Rust & Bone. Jennifer Lawrence is going to be one of our great stars for years to come and her superstar turn in Silver Linings Playbook shows us why, beyond doubt. But Jessica Chastain turns the double trick… movie star stuff and the in-your-face character work… and her movie is a more overt heroic tale than either of the other films.

...

This is as fine a piece of filmmaking as you will see. And while many will prefer other types of films – and that doesn’t make them wrong, just with different taste – this film hits to all fields in a way that others just don’t even try for. There are a few “forever” films this year, starting – for me – with Amour. But when you run into a movie that has some real epic size, historic subject matter, thrills, a few great laughs, and boasts the skill set on display here… this is a different kind of collectable. Plus, you get three films for the price of one.

Can’t wait to see it again.

Edited by Overstreet

P.S.  I COULD BE WRONG.

 

Takin' 'er easy for all you sinners at lookingcloser.org. Also abiding at Facebook and Twitter.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sasha Stone:

Jessica Chastain gives far and away the best performance of the year by any actress, at least here in the US — internationally, she gets competition from Emannuelle Riva and Marion Cotillard. It helps that Bigelow and Boal designed the whole movie around her character, not framing her behind, depending on, flirting with any man but instead, holding her own. She’s the smartest one in the room, the most confident and the reason we ultimately “get” Bin Laden. Last year and this year, the Oscar best picture nominees have mostly centered around a male figure whose redemption is the most important thing in the film. Well, for once the opposite is true and it’s breathtaking.

P.S.  I COULD BE WRONG.

 

Takin' 'er easy for all you sinners at lookingcloser.org. Also abiding at Facebook and Twitter.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Link to the Alexandre Desplat score, which you can listen to online.

What's interesting about the first story below is that you can totally imagine the Jessica Chastain character behaving the way the real-life woman did.

- - -

Yes, she found bin Laden. But then she hit ‘reply all’

Employers will hire people they like over those who may be more competent at the job, according to a study published earlier this year. That’s a life lesson that apparently killed a promotion for the woman who achieved what may easily be considered the most impressive accomplishment of organization: she found Osama bin Laden.

The undercover thirtysomething analyst for the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency apparently has a prickly, if clearly dogged personality – think Carrie, the lead character played by Claire Danes on Homeland. As the Washington Post details , she was recognized for securing the location of the al-Qaeda leader. She received a cash bonus of an undisclosed amount and was “among a handful of employees” awarded the agency’s prestigious Distinguished Intelligence Medal.

But then she committed a poorly executed strategic move in terms of office politics: She hit “reply all” with a scathing e-mail declaring that the award should have been hers alone. The Post quotes a former CIA official saying that the thrust of her message was, “You guys tried to obstruct me. You fought me. Only I deserve the award.” . . .

As a few online commenters have observed, it’s reasonable to assume that what makes a brilliant, obsessive analyst may not be the same qualities that establish a good manager – though it’s not stated that the job was a management position, and the reason for the missed promotion isn’t known. There are also suggestions that the analyst might have ticked off her bosses because of contact with the filmmakers behind Zero Dark Thirty , based on the raid that the killed bin Laden. The movie features a female intelligence agent as the heroine, and this attention, the Post reports, caused “waves of envy through the agency’s ranks.” . . .

Globe and Mail, December 11

Jane Mayer vs Zero Dark Thirty

I really don’t want to go through every line of Jane Mayer’s inflammatory, inaccurate piece on ZD30. But it much like the many other flavors of inaccuracy and overhype we are seeing in many “thinking” outlets regarding the film. So I will. . . .

“It doesn’t include a single scene in which torture is questioned…”

False.

There is not a single scene of debate about the value and/or effectiveness of torture. But torture is question by behavior (Mayer will mock this later) and by the primary torturer, who is having some form of post-traumatic stress from doing this work and repeatedly in the film by clear arguments that much of the torture leads to worthless information – including the failure of the specific torture shown in the film to get the information they are trying to retrieve – or information coming out of torture sessions going back to “the terrorists” via lawyers.

If the argument is that ZD30 says they get critical info via torture, shouldn’t there be an acknowledgement that the torture in question fails completely before a nugget of information which is not the focus of their interrogation starts the ball rolling towards the courier? . . .

Mayer continues to list somewhat vague comments from politicians that are not specific about the film – since they haven’t seen it – before landing on Lindsey graham, who says, “I would argue that it’s not waterboarding that led to bin Laden’s demise. It was a lot of good intelligence-gathering from the Obama and Bush administrations, continuity of effort, holding people at Gitmo, putting the puzzle together over a long period of time—not torture.”

Gee… the movie says exactly the same thing. It never argues that waterboarding led directly to Obama’s demise. But torture is such a hot button issue that one scrap of info that was not being pursued by the interrogators until one of them had an idea about the courier, which leads to 30+ additional pieces of intel slowly gathered over years, until they finally find the person she started thinking about that day… that has now been reduced to “weatherboarding led directly to bin Laden’s death.” It’s stretching credulity. Did my first look at my wife’s smile the first time I saw her across a room lead to my 3-year-old son? Yes. Sure. But was it the lynchpin or an important moment in our history? No. Four or five days of smiles later, maybe you can make the argument. But it’s still rather dismissive of the reality of how a relationship develops and leads to something solid and permanent. . . .

David Poland, December 14

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

According to Box Office Mojo, it opens in five theatres December 19, i.e. this coming Wednesday, and then it goes wide January 11.

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't say there's anything ironic about it. Lots of films get limited releases in December and then get wide releases in January or February, and are "treated" as December releases for awards consideration. Zero Dark Thirty is just another of the many films that have been released that way.

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I'm new to all this, didn't realize that. I guess it just seems weird to me that movies that a wide audience won't see til after the fact are being considered as best picture nominees. Probably just me.

"The truth is you're the weak, and I'm the tyranny of evil men. But I'm tryin Ringo, I'm tryin real hard to be the shepherd." Pulp Fiction

Justin's Blog twitter Facebook Life Is Story

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, movies don't have to have a wide distribution *at all* in order to be nominated for Best Picture. (To pick an example at random, the 2009 nominee A Serious Man never played in more than 262 theatres; the typical wide release plays in *ten times* as many theatres.) Movies only have to show for at least a week in Los Angeles (and maybe New York) during the year in question in order to qualify for the award for that year.

Historically, this has meant that studios often save their "Oscar-worthy" films until the end of the year, sometimes releasing them in just a handful of theatres at the very end of December in order to qualify for the award, and then they roll them out to other theatres in January and February so that the awards buzz surrounding their films can do at least some of the marketing for them.

This has led to some interesting scenarios over the years. We had a big debate here several years ago when a 150-minute version of The New World got an extremely limited release in December 2005 to qualify for that year's Oscars (I saw it twice, at critics' screenings, myself), but then a 135-minute version went wide in January 2006 (and the original version wasn't released again at all except maybe as a bonus feature on some discs). Some people regarded it as a 2005 release, others as a 2006 release.

But the one-week rule has led to other oddities, too, like Crash, which played at festivals in 2004, winning an Oscar in 2006 as Best Picture of 2005 -- or The Hurt Locker, which played at festivals in 2008, winning an Oscar in 2010 as Best Picture of 2009. They played in festivals one year, then played for a week in L.A. the following year, and *then* won the Oscar when the ceremonies were held early the year after *that*.

"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

John McCain, and others, are not happy.

"We write to express our deep disappointment with the movie 'Zero Dark Thirty,'" the letter begins. "We believe the film is grossly inaccurate and misleading in its suggestion that torture resulted in information that led to the location of Usama bin Laden."

While acknowledging that the Kathryn Bigelow movie is a work of fiction, they note that the film bills itself as "based on first-hand accounts of actual events" and that, according to media reports, it was written with cooperation from the Central Intelligence Agency.

It's the side effects that save us.
--The National, "Graceless"
Twitter Blog

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, movies don't have to have a wide distribution *at all* in order to be nominated for Best Picture. (To pick an example at random, the 2009 nominee A Serious Man never played in more than 262 theatres; the typical wide release plays in *ten times* as many theatres.) Movies only have to show for at least a week in Los Angeles (and maybe New York) during the year in question in order to qualify for the award for that year.

Historically, this has meant that studios often save their "Oscar-worthy" films until the end of the year, sometimes releasing them in just a handful of theatres at the very end of December in order to qualify for the award, and then they roll them out to other theatres in January and February so that the awards buzz surrounding their films can do at least some of the marketing for them.

This has led to some interesting scenarios over the years. We had a big debate here several years ago when a 150-minute version of The New World got an extremely limited release in December 2005 to qualify for that year's Oscars (I saw it twice, at critics' screenings, myself), but then a 135-minute version went wide in January 2006 (and the original version wasn't released again at all except maybe as a bonus feature on some discs). Some people regarded it as a 2005 release, others as a 2006 release.

But the one-week rule has led to other oddities, too, like Crash, which played at festivals in 2004, winning an Oscar in 2006 as Best Picture of 2005 -- or The Hurt Locker, which played at festivals in 2008, winning an Oscar in 2010 as Best Picture of 2009. They played in festivals one year, then played for a week in L.A. the following year, and *then* won the Oscar when the ceremonies were held early the year after *that*.

I don't think I am alone, Justin, when I say I look forward to December thru February for the best films -- in the theater in December (mostly indie and art-house theaters), and then in January and February when many of the noms come out on DVD before the Oscars.

However, January and February are typically reserved for the "dogs" in the theater. Many films that studios do not believe in hit the theaters at the beginning of the year.

I've been looking forward to this one quite a bit. Posts like Tyler's just above add layers of intrigue.

Edited by Persona

In an interstellar burst, I am back to save the Universe.

Filmsweep by Persona. 2013 Film Journal. IlPersona.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen it and I believe this film is grossly inaccurate and misleading in its suggestion that CIA analysts like the one played by Mark Strong watch Alec Baldwin's tirade from Glengarry Glenn Ross several times before they walk into a room and reprimand a room full of high-level CIA agents.

Edited by Overstreet

P.S.  I COULD BE WRONG.

 

Takin' 'er easy for all you sinners at lookingcloser.org. Also abiding at Facebook and Twitter.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...