Why Harry Potter Is NOT Getting A Best Picture Nomination!

This is going to hurt me to say it, more than it will hurt you to read it, but it must be said: "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part II" is NOT going to be one of the ten nominees for Best Picture!  I know its not a done deal until the nominations are actually announced, but its so close to a done deal its worth dealing with now rather than later.  We had a brief flirt with the idea that it could get in (even Entertainment Weekly and Awards Daily briefly considered the possibility), but now its time to climb off that cloud and face the reality.  To understand why we flirted with this idea and why it's not going to happen.  First of all, there was that opening weekend.  Never before had we gotten such a strong opening that made so much money.  The Academy respects money and success.

However, even though "The Dark Knight" and "Shrek 2" are in the top ten biggest money makers of all time, neither one got a Best Picture nomination.  Movies like this tend to have a better Oscar chance when the film has legs.  It sends a strong message to the Academy that the film is being watched, re-watched, and is being recommended to everyone.  This movie, frankly, dropped like a brick the second weekend.  It stuck around for a few weeks, but there were no real legs and no momentum at all.  That suggests that the fans - and ONLY the fans - really went to see this!  Considering that the Academy has yet to award any of the films a single award in the past eleven years, I think its safe to say there aren't as many fans in the Academy as we'd like to think there are.

Also folks, this is not only the 8th film in the franchise, its the second part of a two part film.  This film is hostile to newcomers.  It makes little to no sense if you haven't been watching it all this time, and even if it does make sense you don't get the emotional depth from the film without having committed to the previous films.  I know "The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King" swept several years ago, but even that movie is somewhat friendly to newcomers.  This one...isn't.  I'm sorry, but its not.  I know I gave the film a five star review, but before you bring that I up I want to mention the note at the bottom of the review that said the star grade was variable at best, and that whether you had seen the previous films or not could significantly alter the grade for someone.

Finally, there are just some better movies coming out.  "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part II" may be a very good movie, but is it better than "The Tree of Life," "Drive," or even "Bridesmaids?"  Probably not (though again, its a matter of personal opinion).  With upcoming films like "The Artist," "The Idles of March," and "Moneyball" getting rave reviews, do you really think the Academy is going to remember a film to a series they've largely ignored?  I feel there's more I could say (and you Potter fans are likely to debate me to death in the comments section below), but it's a sad fact we have to get used to: "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part II" is not getting a Best Picture nomination.  And the sooner we can accept that, the sooner we can move on.

Back In Game: The State of the Race

Well, more than a year after I stopped updating this blog I thought I would never return to it. To be honest, I almost deleted this blog because I felt it was just taking up space.  Well, a recent book project I'm working on (which I'll discuss more about in a few days) sort of jolted me back to this blog, and I realized that this blog still may have some usefulness to it.  So how do I make my grand return?  Why, but discussing the state of the race.  And there are three films I want to focus on.  The first two are the closest things to locks on a Best Picture nomination, with a third that sounds like a sure thing on paper (but a long shot in practice).  The first is Terrence Malick's very polarizing "The Tree of Life."  Though praised by many (including myself) as a masterpiece that must been seen to be believed, it never-the-less has not caught on with the public.

They don't get it.  They wonder what the point of it is.  The non-linear structure confuses them.  I think most people go in expecting a story and don't realize that "The Tree of Life" is a movie more about ideas than what happens to the characters on screen.  I know that sounds strange, but that's pretty much what it is.  Despite it clearly being the best film of the year so far, this is the same Academy who awarded "The King's Speech" (a good movie by the way) a Best Picture nomination over the more ambitious "The Social Network."  Why?  Hard to tell, but there was a lot of talk that most members of the Academy didn't even know what Facebook was.  If THAT was a problem, I see "The Tree of Life" having a much steeper climb!  The other movie that seems like a good bet right now is Woody Allen's "Midnight In Paris."  Ironically, this is the polar opposite of "The Tree of Life."

This is a movie that is story driven, has well defined characters, and have a journey and destination in mind.  That fact that it's popular AND smart makes this a good bet even if the coming months should bring us more ambitious films!  Part me is still a little cynical of the idea that the Academy would nominate this for Best Picture when they couldn't bring themselves to nominate "Match Point" for anything other than it's screenplay, but with the Best Picture number that could be anywhere between five to ten films...well, anythings possible.  And then we have...

..."Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part II."  None of the Harry Potter films have won Best Picture.  None of the Harry Potter films have won any Oscars.  Most of the movies are critically mixed.  But "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part II" could change all that.  It's opened to the best reviews of the franchise.  It's got some of the best reviews of the year.  They match up (if not pass) the previous ten years Best Picture winners.  Not to mention audiences around the world are eating it up to the point where it could potentially make more money than "The Dark Knight" and "Avatar."  If this was any other movie, it would be automatically considered a strong Best Picture nominee (if not winner).  Since it's Harry Potter though, we're just going to have to wait and see if the Academy follows the audiences cheers.

With so little competition nobody knows anything yet.  Well, actually, I do know one thing: For the first time I can think of, Pixar has absolutely no chance of being nominated in Best Animated Feature.  That may make that race at least a little more interesting.

Sequel To 'The Dark Knight' Officially Announced

From Box Office Mojo comes the announcement that will set the geek world aflame (and on Free Comic Book Day too):

In one of the most anticipated announcements in recent memory, Warner Bros. officially set a date this morning for the follow-up to The Dark Knight. Tentatively known as Batman 3, the movie will debut July 20, 2012 in conventional and IMAX theaters, almost exactly four years after The Dark Knight opened to record-breaking numbers.

Read Rest of Article

'Inception' Goes IMAX

IMAX has scored another mature film: Chrisopher Nolan's follow-up to the cirtically acclaimed (but not by the Oscars) film "The Dark Knight."  That movie is "Inception," starring Leonardio DiCaprio, and the film has a budget someone could only get by making the second highest grossing film of all time.  This new film is a science fiction film.  You can see the trailer below.  I have to admit that I'm impressed with IMAX.  Though movies like this, "Where The Wild Things Are," and "Avatar" are helping make IMAX a legitimate experience for people who love more then documentaries and 3D family films.

More Inception Info

5 to 10 (What A Way To Make A Living)

Today the Academy made a startling announcement: the number of films eligeble for Best Picture will be bumped up form 5 to 10. There will still be 5 nominees in all the other categories, but 10 films will now be up for Best Picture, the first time since 1943. No doubt this is in response to "The Dark Knight" and "Wall-E" just barely not making the top five last year. The Academy received a lot of flack for that and deservingly so. Chances are they are doing this to hopefully get the publics latest critical darling, "Up," into the Best Picture race. This still might not happen as Academy voters could still vote for more 'Oscar friendly' films that are of lesser quality. Movies like "The Soloist" may not be great films, but since that movie is more in line with the Academies tastes we could be looking at more mediocrity getting nominated.

If that happens you can be sure the Academy will get Hell from the public. But before we jump all over the cons lets look at some of the pros:

1. Movies like "Up," "Watchmen," and even "Star Trek" have decent shots at getting into the Best Picture race. There's no telling whether they will or not, but they have a shot.


2. The Best Director award may be forced to stand seperate from the Picture category. Seriously, I know the director is important, but just because you made one of the best films of the year does NOT mean you are a great director! "The Queen" was one of my favorite films of 2006, and even I wouldn't say Stephen Frears direction was anything special.


3. Foreign films, animated films, and even documentaries have a better shot at getting Academy recognition that is normally overlooked in favor of more "dramatic" fare.


4. Now with 10 nominees, studios have more freedom to spread out their Oscar over the year.

I'll talk about the cons in another post, but for now I feel this is great news. I can't wait to see how this plays out next year when it's time to announce the nominees.

Watching Oscar Potential For "Watchmen"

Before we begin folks I want to say that yes, this is a long shot. The chance of "Watchmen" getting Oscar nominations outside of the technical categories seems like a bit of a stretch at this point. It may even be too early to call that, seeing that the critics mostly disliked the film. But then, didn't the critics dislike "The Reader" as well? Oh yeah, forgot, it's that whole holocaust/sex thing. Buy hey, it's a new year, and considering this is the year the Writers Strike really effects then that gives "Watchmen" a bit of an advantage. "The Dark Knight" snub could either enforce the snub or work to the films advantage of a nomination. The Academy's reputation for being out of touch with the public still stings, so this film could get nominated on principle alone. But it's not just this years nominations I feel "Watchmen" has a decent shot at a nomination: It's really good.

Masterful even. This is a movie that has the same scope of "Gladiator" but with all the heart and brains that film was missing. Plus it's promising to be a huge blockbuster, it has great acting, some of the top critics are calling it a masterpiece...really folks, it might have a shot. That said I'm not going to jump all over the bandwagon just yet. It IS early in the year, and during the first four months of the year any movie can be great so long as it doesn't outright suck. Still, I feel somewhere inside that "Watchmen" is something to watch. "The Dark Knight" came so close to the top prize, and so people will be holding this film over the Academy's head all year round. A nomination will likely be in the cards. A win is another thing all together.

Snyder On Batman Rumor

When cornered at a "Watchmen" promotional event Zach Snyder, who was rumored to be a back-up director for the sequel to "The Dark Knight" should Chris Nolan passes on the project, had this to say...

So there you have it, it's just a rumor after all. Course I had my suspicions about this news from the beginning. Warner Bros. will be taking their time making the next Batman film. The last time they fast tracked a superhero film they got "Batman & Robin," and God knows they don't want to go THERE again!

Me To Sony: Give Up On UMD

Some of you may be familiar with Sony's UMD format, but in case you aren't here's the general gist of it: The format, which stands for Universal Media Disk, was supposed to be one of the main selling features for Sony's handheld console the PSP (Playstation Portable), and for the first couple of years studios released movies on UMD day-and-date with the DVD. Problem is the format never really caught on, and soon only Sony themselves were really the only ones still supporting the format. It's been my opinion since I heard of the format that it was a lousy idea. An optical disk format that only worked on a handheld format but cost the same as a DVD which could be used on most optical disk platforms? Why would I bother? Well, apparently Sony still considers UMD to be important to their lineup.

Nevermind that the format was undermined right from the start by portable DVD players, but in the age of BluRay do we really want to watch epic movies like "Braveheart," "The Dark Knight," and "300" on a nine inch screen? My advice to Sony is to just give it up. Right now they have an online rental store for the PSP where people can rent a movie for a few dollars and watch them on the system. Sony should persue that instead and cut their losses with PSP. Will they? Not likely, but it's nice to think so.

Nolan To Pass On Batman 3?

Now before anyone freaks out about that headline keep this in mind: Yes, Nolan still has a gentleman's agreement with Warner Bros. to do the sequel to "The Dark Knight." He is currently writing the script for the third installment while he is preparing to shoot his first non-superhero film in awhile, "Inception." Part of the agreement Warner Bros. had with funding Nolan's new film is that he return for a third Batman film. Deals change though, and while I'm sure Nolan wouldn't simply pass up the third film before completing the trilogy he had in mind, just in case he does decide that he's had enough of the superhero world Warner Bros. has a backup: Zack Snyder, director of "300" and the upcoming "Watchmen" film.

This was reported by IGN who is hit or miss when it comes to these rumors, so don't start freaking out yet (or starting a petition that most likely wouldn't work anyway), this is just a rumor at the moment. It does make me wonder what a third Batman film would look like without Nolan though. Chances are the on-set locations would be replaced with green screen effects, and the villains would be even more out-of-this-world then usual. But even if this comes to pass keep in mind the silver lining: Even if Nolan doesn't direct there's a pretty solid chance his script will still be used with minor only minor changes made.

Full List of 2008 Winners

Well the show is over and now it's time to wipe the sidebar clean and move on with predicting next years nominees. Time flies when doing awards predictions, but the sad reality is this thing never stops. At the end of the journey it's as if a book has been written, and one has nothing left to do but to start all over again. I've already wiped the sidebar clean and added a few early predictions from films I've seen, and those predictions will morph and shift over the course of the year. Before completely moving on though, lets look at this years winners one more time:

BEST PICTURE

'Slumdog Millionaire' (Fox Searchlight) A Celador Films Production, Christian Colson, producer

LEAD ACTOR

Sean Penn in 'Milk' (Focus Features)

LEAD ACTRESS

Kate Winslet in 'The Reader' (The Weinstein Company)

DIRECTOR

Danny Boyle for 'Slumdog Millionaire' (Fox Searchlight)

FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM

'Departures' -- Japan (Regent Releasing) A Departures Film Partners production

SUPPORTING ACTOR

Heath Ledger in 'The Dark Knight' (Warner Bros)

SUPPORTING ACTRESS

Penelope Cruz in 'Vicky Cristina Barcelona' (The Weinstein Company)

ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY

Dustin Lance Black for 'Milk' (Focus Features)

ADAPTED SCREENPLAY

Simon Beaufoy for 'Slumdog Millionaire' (Fox Searchlight)

ANIMATED FEATURE

Andrew Stanton for 'WALL-E' (Walt Disney)

ANIMATED SHORT FILM

Kunio Kato for 'La Maison en Petits Cubes' (A Robot Communications Production)

ART DIRECTION

Donald Graham Burt for art direction and Victor J. Zolfo for set decoration on 'The Curious Case of Benjamin Button' (Paramount and Warner Bros)

COSTUME DESIGN

Michael O’Connor for 'The Duchess' (Paramount Vantage, Pathe and BBC Films)

MAKEUP

Greg Cannom for 'The Curious Case of Benjamin Button' (Paramount and Warner Bros)

CINEMATOGRAPHY

Anthony Dod Mantle for 'Slumdog Millionaire' (Fox Searchlight)

LIVE ACTION SHORT FIRM

Jochen Alexander Freydank for 'Spielzeugland (Toyland)', a Mephisto Film production

DOCUMENTARY FEATURE

James Marsh and Simon Chinn for 'Man on Wire' (Magnolia Pictures) A Wall to Wall production

DOCUMENTARY SHORT

Megan Mylan for 'Smile Pinki', a Principle production

VISUAL EFFECTS

Eric Barba, Steve Preeg, Burt Dalton and Craig Barron for 'The Curious Case of Benjamin Button' (Paramount and Warner

Bros)

SOUND EDITING

Richard King for 'The Dark Knight' (Warner Bros)

SOUND MIXING

Ian Tapp, Richard Pryke and Resul Pookutty for 'Slumdog Millionaire' (Fox Searchlight)

FILM EDITING

Chris Dickens for 'Slumdog Millionaire' (Fox Searchlight)

ORIGINAL SCORE

A.R. Rahman for 'Slumdog Millionaire' (Fox Searchlight)

ORIGINAL SONG

'Jai Ho' from 'Slumdog Millionaire' (Fox Searchlight), music by A.R. Rahman, lyrics by Gulzar

'Slumdog' Wins Best Picture

As you may have heard "Slumdog Millionaire" is our latest Best Picture winner. It also had almost a complete sweep, winning everything except Best Sound Editing ("The Dark Knight") and their other Best Song nomination (which was never going to happen unless they tied with themselves). Full list of winners with commentary later.

Oscar Winners Leaked?

According to this site they have been. Here's the list:

• Actor in a leading role: Mickey Rourke
• Actor in a supporting role: Heath Ledger
• Actress in a leading role: Kate Winslet
• Actress in a supporting role: Amy Adams
• Animated Feature Film: Wall-E
• Art Direction: The Dark Knight
• Cinematography: Slumdog Millionaire
• Costume Design: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
• Directing: Slumdog Millionaire
• Documentary feature: Man on Wire
• Documentary short: The Conscience of Nhem En
• Film editing: Milk
• Foreign language film: Departures
• Makeup: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
• Music (Score): Defiance
• Music (Song): Down to Earth (Wall-E)
• Best Picture: Slumdog Millionaire
• Short film (animated): Presto
• Short film (live action): Auf Der Strecke (On The Line)
• Sound editing: Wall-E
• Sound mixing: The Dark Knight
• Visual effects: Iron Man
• Writing (Adapted screenplay): The Reader
• Writing (Original screenplay): In Bruges

Well...it's an interesting list. On one hand it sounds pretty reasonable. On the other hand there are some strange listings on it. Most of the acting categories are going as according to plan...but Amy Adams? Well, okay, I'm not going to rule her out yet. Yeah it's the weakest performance of the three, but she obviously has enough love to get a nomination for a role like that, and the strong support for Penelope Cruz and Viola Davis could certainly split the vote. The thing that sticks out for this is the screenplays. It seems a bit weird that "The Reader" would get Best Adapted Screenplay when "Slumdog Millionaire" is winning everything. But I think the one that stands out is "In Brudges" winning Best Original Screenplay. For starters "Milk" is the sole nomination in this category that has a Best Picture nomination, and that usually results in a win. It could split it's vote with "Wall-E," but it feels like such a long shot.

I also find it odd that "The Dark Knight" and "Wall-E" share sound awards, seeing that the sound awards usually both go to the same film. Not to mention the Academy is VERY protective of the results, and chances are this is more of an educated guess then anything! So my opinion is that I wouldn't use this as a betting guide...that said, these upsets seem at the very least logical, so if this list does prove to be legit then we are looking at at least a few upsets.

Peter Gabriel Pulls Out of Oscar

Nikki Finke over at Deadline Hollywood reports that Peter Gabriel will NOT be performing his Oscar-nominated song "Down To Earth" from "Wall-E" at the Oscars this year! This is the result of the producers trying once again to getting the show down to less then three hours. Unless the Academy starts giving away less awards this is not going to happen. You know it and I know it. In a letter to the Academy Gabriel says:

"I was delighted when "Down to Earth" was nominated for an Oscar. I was also pleased to have been asked to perform the song in the Oscar ceremony. However, in recent discussions with the Producers, it became clear that despite there being only three nominees, only 60-65 seconds was being offered, and that was also in a medley of the three songs. I don't feel that is sufficient time to do the song justice, and have decided to withdraw from performing.

I fully respect and look forward to the Producers' right to revamp the show. Even though song writers are small players in the film making process, they are just as committed and work just as hard as the rest of the team and I regret that this new version of the ceremony is being created, in part, at their expense."

I still very much look forward to attending the ceremony."

I'm sorry to see that we won't see Pete singing the song. Part of me also wonders if this choice could hurt the songs chances of winning the gold. Regardless, this is bad news for the Academy who is already faced with the possability of the worst rated Oscar telecast in years. No Dark Knight, no Peter Gabriel, no Bruce Springsteen, no Miley Cyrus, no "Wall-E" (kind of)...it's getting to be a mess folks. This is going to be one interesting year to see if the Academy can pull themselves out of this mess.

The 81st Academy Awards: Will They Watch?

Now that we've (mostly) gotten "The Dark Knight" snub out of our system, it's time to ask a burning question: Will people watch the Oscars this year? I'd like to be positive, I really would, but I think the answer is going to be a loud 'no.' In fact, I think this is going to be the poorest ratings for the Oscars in ten years (if not twenty). And this goes beyond "The Dark Knight." While that movie would have helped ratings, there were a few other things that would have helped. Not nominating songs from "The Wrestler" and "Bolt" cost the Academy two performers that would likely draw crowds: Bruce Spriengstein and Miley Cyrus. Yeah, I'm kind of glad that the Academy didn't vote for the "Bolt" song, but it's going to be really difficult to get people to watch a show when the performers consist of Peter Gabriel and a bunch of Indian singers doing Bollywood style dance numbers. And if Pete calls in sick, then we are in even more trouble.

"Wall-E" would help the ratings much. For starters, everyone knows it's going to win. Secondly, the Best Animated Film category hasn't helped draw in kids to watch the show much. After that what have you got? The actors? Well, that could help, but nobody cares about actors who win awards for films they haven't seen. Hugh Jackman might entertain people, but no matter how good a job he does if the ratings tank then the Academy will start pointing their finger at him for being the reason. Seeing as how only "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" has been a blockbuster, these movies will not draw in the audience. In short, I think this is the last year we'll see the Oscars on ABC. Next year the show will likely move to HBO, Showtime, or TNT. It's airing will be up for auction, and if the nominees next year prove to be films that don't attract audiences, I can imagine the buying price being very low.

Now, more then ever, the ratings of the Academy Awards will be most interesting. It will effect whether or not the show is commercially viable anymore. The fact that the movies getting nominations haven't gotten much of a boost from the awards speaks volumes. In short, this is going to be one rough year for the Academy. May God have mercy on their souls.

Now For Something A Little Different

I discovered this article through a Digg It link, and while I disagree with it on some points, it does make some arguments on why the heat for the lack of Best Picture nomination for "The Dark Knight" should subside:

Besides, what does it matter to any of you whether or not the films YOU like get nominated? It doesn’t depreciate the film and shouldn’t de-value your enjoyment of it. Look back to the year 2000. Gladiator won Best Picture, while Traffic, Erin Brockovich, Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, and Chocolat were nominated alongside it. Do you know which movie is most memorable and has stuck with me since? Almost Famous. Dances with Wolves won Best Picture for 1990, yet Goodfellas is regarded by many as one of the greatest films of all time.

Does this mean that the Academy got it wrong? No. It just means the voters went a different way than the public. The Academy Awards are not a democracy of the people; it’s an organization of professionals patting each other on the back and peers recognizing peers for their achievements. Helen Hunt received an Oscar for being annoying in an above-average romantic comedy. Nicole Kidman got one for putting on a fake nose. Likewise, Charlize Theron was mesmerizing in Monster and Daniel Day Lewis gave a bravura, towering performance worth every accolade in There Will Be Blood. Sometimes their awards are pretty dubious; sometimes they f*cking nail it. But what it really boils down to is: The Oscars are essentially meaningless.

I think mentioning "Wall-E" would have been nice, but then, that might have undermined the whole argument. Whether I think "The Reader" should be nominated or not, I have to admit some great points were made here. A definite must-read.

YouTube Reactions To Oscar Nominees

I knew that the internet would be up in a blaze over the snubbing of "The Dark Knight" and "Wall-E" for "The Reader," but it looks like people aren't just reacting, they are reacting with a vengeance. Here are some random YouTube videos I picked up:

It's just going to get worse from here on out folks.

A Dark Day For Oscar

"A Dark Day For Oscar"

By Kevin T. Rodriguez

Today is indeed a dark, dark day for the Academy Awards. After years of being the scorn of public ridicule for being “out of touch” with movie goers and “old fashioned,” the Academy had two chances to prove that they were still an awards show above all else. That they, despite getting a nomination wrong here and there, could still recognize artistic quality when they saw it. This year two movies defined 2008: “Wall-E” and “The Dark Knight.” Now “Wall-E” was always a long shot for the Best Picture race, but it can at least fall back on the Best Animated Film category and revel in it’s Best Original Screenplay nomination. “The Dark Knight” though...that’s a whole different story. Hailed as a contemporary masterpiece, the second highest grossing film of all time, and one of the most critically acclaimed blockbusters since “The Lord of the Rings,” “The Dark Knight” seemed poised for greatest.

Read More...

Tapley To Academy: This Years Nominees Are A 'Tragedy'

Kristopher Tapley of In Contention.com has written a critical piece of the AMPAS choices for Best Picture nominations. Here's my favorite bit of the article:

This all brings us to the elephant in the room: “The Reader” was the film to steal the Bat’s thunder, not “Gran Torino” like I expected, not “WALL-E” as others had hoped. And I think we all knew it was coming once Stephen Daldry’s name was called. A pornographic account of a sympathetic Nazi, rushed through post-production and ultimately a sloppy piece of drama, rightly abandoned by its initial producer at a crucial time on the basis of principle on one hand, politics on the other — this is one of the Academy’s five Best Pictures of the year.

These people should have their cards taken away. This member-for-life shit has to go because you end up with crotchety fools that have no idea what good cinema is, let alone a care about how their organization’s choices will be looked upon in the future. Years from now, “The Reader” will be a blip on the map of film obscurity. “The Dark Knight” will live on in infamy as one of the year’s titans, both a popular blockbuster and a critically acclaimed work of art.

What an absolute tragedy.

I have to say I'm in agreement with him 100% here. I was in too much shock yesterday to voice my opinion on the nominations, so that's why you'll get them today instead. Stay tuned.

Mark Harris's Oscar Predictions

Mark Harris, author of the excellent Oscar book "Pictures at a Revolution," has given his two cents on the Oscar nominations. He feels "Slumdog Millionaire" and "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" are locks. Says "Frost/Nixon" and "Milk" aren't as locked as we might think, and he feels either "The Dark Knight" or "Wall-E" will take that final slot:

Only six more hours to go...

This May The 'Angles & Demons' Fight

Though Ron Howard is currently enjoying lots of pre-Oscar love for his latest film "Frost/Nixon," many are quick to forget that he directed last summers turkey "The Da Vinci Code." The movie was very poorly received with harsh reviews and public scorn (though it was still a box off success, so he wasn't hurt too much from the hate). Now that "Frost/Nixon" has restored his reputation, Howard is diligently working on the Da Vinci sequel "Angels & Demons." Now the book was actually released before "The Da Vinci Code," so it should be a prequel, but Howard has decided to make it a sequel instead. Makes sense I guess: If there are any connectign events in the books I can't see them. Now, I liked "The Da Vinci Code" book. Keep in mind I said liked and not loved. The movie was a dissapointment but, eh, oh well. It was a good but not great book anyway. "Angels & Demons" on the other hand IS a great book!

Full of suspense, intrique, and a conflict that actually does incourage debate that's worth talking about, "Angels & Demons" has the chance to be the compelling blockbuster "The Da Vinci Code" wasn't. And I'm talking about "The Dark Knight" compelling. Thing is, we won't know whether the film lives up to expectations until May, and I'm wondering how the public is going to react to this film. While 'Da Vinci' was easy to write off beause it was a silly adventure story in the first place, 'Angels' is a far more realistic tale, one that does ask some hard questions and purposfully doesn't answer them. The book was a thinking mans adventure, and I know Hollywood has trouble with that kind of thing. They'd rather the movie be easily disposible, and they hate controversy.

"The Da Vinci Code" had pre-release controversy that quickly faded when the film was released and people got to see that they were complaining about nothing. "Angels & Demons" is likely to have the opposite effect: It will be released to minor outcry that will likely grow with time. Once that happens time will tell whether that helps the films box office and awards potential. Right now though, I'm just hoping Howard does this adaptation justice.