Sundance: Part II

Great piece in the NYT today about Sundance from the actor's perspective, and more specifically from the people who keep cropping up in "indie" films. So, I found this interesting for a lot of reasons with the biggest one being that I do think of indie actors as having their pick of interesting material, and only picking projects they care about. I'm actually glad to find out that's not true, although the reality of it is driven by studios, profit margins, etc. which is not so great to think about. I like believing that Sundance is still a creative lab of sorts for writers, directors, and actors to try their hand at telling more compelling stories.

The article mentions the reputation of Sundance changing because of this:

"Further complicating matters, an ever growing number of Hollywood A-listers regard Sundance as a kind of boutique spa where they can order up an image makeover."

Truth be told the films that come out of here with the biggest buzz usually have the star factor going for them, but bottom line I think this article validates the work of Sundance in a way it hasn't been thought of in years.

Also, a sidebar response to my last post about the Oscars. I actually think the Cannes festival does a much better job of representing the best things happening in the film world. Past winners like Almodovar, Wong Kar Wai, and Michael Haneke have proven it. A quick look ahead to Cannes '07.

P.S.

Now that my wisdom about the Oscars has been doled out it's time to turn our attention to what's happening with movies right now. It seems like Sundance gets more reviews then the movies that premiere there.
For a good look at what's going down at Sundance check out indiewire where the bloggers are living the real dream.

Dreamgirls is out and a little flick with Steve Carell is in--How the Oscars got it right

Okay, so it's old news to a lot of us by now but the Oscar nominations this week were pretty interesting. Although it has already been written about pretty extensively I am excited that Dreamgirls didn't get any major nods. It is a movie I snoozed through the first thirty minutes of, and then had to witness audience cheering and clapping (a sensation I find oddly shameful) for the remaining couple of hours. It wasn't particularly innovative or thoughtful, and if anything it was calculated and inadequate in its attempt to cover an important period of time in broad historical strokes. So, even though my blogging wisdom told me that DG shouldn't be nominated I didn't expect the Oscar nominations to reflect that. More importantly I didn't expect them to acknowledge the best movies of the year as well as they did. I like the distribution they gave to a wide range of films--that's about how I would assess this year, and frankly it's a lot more interesting then a hands down frontrunner. Furthermore, I really like that Little Miss Sunshine got a big nomination because I think it is the most disarmingly clever film I've seen this year. It had a lot to say, and used a really discrete scenario to raise a lot of important questions.

As for why any of this matters (because we know movies don't need awards to validate them. i kid...i kid) I really believe that anytime the mainstream embraces a trend that is positive it's a good thing. In the grand scheme of things a nomination isn't so significant, but it does slowly chip away at studios desperate to push our pre-determined emotionally simple buttons.

Because in '07 we roll en espanol.

The three best movies of '06/'07 depending on the movie sophistication/distribution factor of your city? Volver, Babel, and Pan's Labyrinth. Okay, so I haven't seen the last one yet. Turns out my city is about a 5 on the movie rube/sophistication factor scale. Doesn't matter--all my instincts tell me (and by instincts I mean watching the trailer one too many times) it's going to be awesome. If you don't believe me check out what the NYT's carpetbagger blog has to say about it. For those of you too lazy to follow the link it says said movies are awesome.

P.S. Any guesses as to what this is a picture of?