Sunday, January 18, 2009

'Slumdog' Sweeps the Globes



Slumdog Millionaire was the movie of the night at last Sunday's Golden Globe Awards. The picture pulled a clean sweep, claiming wins in each of the four categories for which it was nominated, including Best Picture of the Year. This showing places Slumdog in front runner position for the top prize at this year's Academy Awards.

There were few surprises at last week's awards. Mickey Rourke claimed an upset victory over Sean Penn (nominated for Milk) as Best Actor in a Drama for The Wrestler. The most jaw-dropping moment came when Kate Winslet made Golden Globe history by winning both acting prizes for which she was nominated. Collecting her Best Supporting Actress accolade for The Reader, the British actress quipped, "I have a habit of not winning things." She later claimed the Best Actress in a Drama Award for Revolutionary Road.

Demi Moore delivered the emotional high point of the ceremony when she announced Heath Ledger as Best Supporting Actor for his acclaimed role as The Joker in The Dark Knight. Director Christopher Nolan took to the stage to accept the award as the audience rose to its feet for a standing ovation. After thanking the Hollywood Foreign Press Association, Nolan said that he felt "an awful mixture of sadness and incredible pride." A clip of Ledger's performance played on a projection screen in rememberance of the late actor.

In an honor carried over from last year's cancelled ceremony, Steven Spielberg was presented with the Cecil B. DeMille Award for "outstanding contributions to the entertainment field". After a heartfelt introduction given by old friend and fellow director Martin Scorsese, Spielberg paid tribute to the name for whom the award is named. Recounting the time his father took him to see The Greatest Show on Earth in 1952, Spielberg compared the path of his career to recreating the film's astounding train crash scene in his living room as a boy.

"I think what was on my mind when I was risking losing my Lionel train set was me thinking, 'Am I going to get away with this?' That anxiety has been haunting me throughout my entire movie career. Whenever I've tried to tell a risky story, whether it's about sharks or dinosaurs or about aliens or about history, I'll always be thinking, 'Am I going to get away with this?'"

The HFPA's official website has a complete list of winners here.

Sunday, January 11, 2009

Gearing Up for the Globes



Tonight, the Hollywood Foreign Press Association honors the best achievements in film and television at the 66th annual Golden Globe Awards. Broadcast live from the Beverly Hilton Hotel, the upcoming ceremony will be a return to traditional festivities after last year's writers strike led to the 65th Awards being relegated to a half-hour press conference. The atmosphere is pure excitement, as nominees have already begun to appear on the red carpet.

A simple glance at this year's list of nominees proves that 2008 was a stellar year for cinema. Though Hollywood will never duplicate, much less surpass, 1939 in terms of sheer greatness, last year brought some of the most compelling, humorous, and inspiring films of the decade.

Among those nominated in the Best Dramatic Film category are: The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, adapted from an F. Scott Fitzgerald short story about a man who ages in reverse; Frost/Nixon, Ron Howard's gripping recreation of David Frost's televised 1977 interviews with the titular former president; The Reader, an adaptation of Bernard Schlink's novel; Revolutionary Road, which chronicles the troubled marriage of Frank and April Wheeler (played Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet, in their first on-screen pairing since Titanic) in 1950s Connecticut; and Slumdog Millionaire, the acclaimed story of a Mumbai man who wins the Hindi edition of Who Wants to Be a Millionaire, only to be accused of cheating thereafter. Button, Frost/Nixon, and Doubt share a three-way tie for the most nominations at five apiece.

Though Slumdog Millionaire is only nominated in four categories, it could very well pull a clean sweep tonight. Since I blogged about the film winning the top prize at the Toronto International Film Festival back in September, Slumdog Millionaire has steadily gathered awards season momentum, with its most recent set of accolades coming last Thursday at the 14th Annual Critics Choice Awards. Last year's terrorist attacks in Mumbai also brought the film recognition, albeit unforeseen. If Slumdog Millionaire is selected for the top award tonight, the win will thrust the film into the front runner position for Best Picture at the 81st Academy Awards. (East Indian culture may very well see a surge in popularity in America.)

As for my predictions in each category, here they are:

Best Picture - Drama: Slumdog Millionaire
Best Actress - Drama: Meryl Streep, Doubt
Best Actor - Drama: Sean Penn, Milk
Best Picture - Comedy/Musical: In Bruges
Best Actress - Comedy/Musical: Sally Hawkins, Happy-Go-Lucky
Best Actor - Comedy/Musical: Colin Farrell, In Bruges
Best Supporting Actress: Penelope Cruz, Vicky Cristina Barcelona
Best Supporting Actor: Heath Ledger, The Dark Knight
Best Animated Feature Film: Wall-E
Best Foreign Language Film: Waltz With Bashir
Best Director: Danny Boyle, Slumdog Millionaire
Best Screenplay: Simon Beaufoy, Slumdog Millionaire
Best Original Score: A.R. Rahman, Slumdog Millionaire
Best Original Song: "Down to Earth" by Peter Gabriel and Thomas Newman, Wall-E
Best Television Series - Drama: Mad Men
Best Actress, TV Series - Drama: January Jones, Mad Men
Best Actor, TV Series - Drama: Jon Hamm, Mad Men
Best Television Series - Comedy/Musical: 30 Rock
Best Actress, TV Series - Comedy/Musical: Tina Fey, 30 Rock
Best Actor, TV Series - Comedy/Musical: Alec Baldwin, 30 Rock
Best Mini-Series or Motion Picture Made for Television: John Adams
Best Actress in a Mini-Series or TVM: Laura Linney, John Adams
Best Actor in a Mini-Series or TVM: Paul Giamatti, John Adams
Best Supporting Actress in a Mini-Series or TVM: Laura Dern, Recount
Best Supporting Actor in a Mini-Series or TVM: Tom Wilkinson, John Adams

Who do you think take home a Golden Globe tonight? Leave your predictions in a comment below. Look sharp for a recap post tomorrow.

Saturday, October 4, 2008

Farewell to an Icon


When Jamie Foxx appeared on The Oprah Winfrey Show in October of 2004, he recalled his experience shooting Collateral earlier that year. Though Foxx had worked with big name stars like Will Smith and Al Pacino before, working alongside Tom Cruise was no less daunting. While filming a particularly difficult scene, Cruise sensed that Foxx was getting down on himself and took him aside. "Don't worry about getting it right the first time," he said. "If you feel an instinct, follow through on it. If it works, we'll keep it. If not, try again. Just trust yourself and go for it." As soon as he heard those words, Jamie's tension left him and he found what Dustin Hoffman calls the rhythm of the character. Hit by a thunderbolt of inspiration, Foxx got out of his own way and amazed everyone else on the set with the dynamics he brought to every take.

At the end of this breakthrough shooting day, Foxx approached Cruise and thanked him for the advice. Curious, he asked Cruise why he thought to extend him such consideration. Smiling fondly, Cruise replied, "About 20 years ago, Paul Newman told me the same thing while we were making The Color of Money. One day, you're going to work with an actor who needs a little help. When you do, remember to pass it on."



It is a testament to Paul Newman's generosity that the tradition has stuck. Newman died at the age of 83 on September 26th at his home in Westport, Connecticut, after a valiant battle with lung cancer. He leaves a legacy of more than 50 films and paramount contributions to the theater, politics, and charity.

After Navy service in World War II, he studied economics at Kenyon College before switching his academic emphasis to speech. Summer stock performances followed, and after completing drama studies at Yale, he auditioned for and was accepted to the training ground for the finest acting talent of his generation, the Actors Studio. Success on Broadway followed, and it wasn't long before he pointed his career west to Hollywood.

His film debut came with 1954's The Silver Chalice, a poorly received costume drama based on Thomas B. Costain's novel. Ashamed of his performance, Newman would go on to call the film "the worst motion picture produced during the 1950s". (He later took out a full-page ad in The Los Angeles Times apologizing for appearing in the film when it was broadcast on television in 1966.) He quickly established himself as a formidable leading man, however, in Somebody Up There Likes Me, a biopic based on the life of middleweight boxing champion Rocky Graziano.

In 1958, he earned his first of nine competitive acting Oscar nominations for Cat on a Hot Tin Roof. Cast opposite a radiant Elizabeth Taylor in a solid production of Tennessee Williams' Pulitzer Prize-winning play, Newman brought a brooding intensity, smoldering sexuality, and emotional electricity to his role as the alcoholic former football star Brick Pollitt. Though the screenwriters were forced to tone down some of the controversial elements of Williams' play -- mainly, Brick's homosexuality -- Newman etched a portrayal that stands alongside Brando's best work as Method acting at its finest.



A second Oscar nomination came in 1961 for his fine-tuned work as the scheming pool shark Eddie Felson in The Hustler. On a hot streak, Newman became one of the most in-demand actors of the day, appearing in such hits as Exodus, Paris Blues, and Sweet Bird of Youth. The success continued with his most critically praised performance up to that time in Hud. The story of a callous, womanizing son of a Texas cattle rancher adapted from Larry McMurtry's novel Horseman, Pass By brought him his third Oscar nomination in five years.

Then in 1967, Newman gave what many consider the finest performance of his career in Cool Hand Luke. Portraying a World War II veteran sentenced to hard labor on a chain gang, he solidified his screen persona as the consummate antihero and won a new generation of fans with the classic line of dialogue, "What we've got here is a failure to communicate." It was that most inspired class of acting, that which sees the actor completely vanishing within the character. The role would bring him a fourth Academy Award nomination for Best Actor.

1968 found Newman venturing behind the camera for the first of five time with Rachel, Rachel. Working from an adaptation of Margaret Laurence's novel -- and with wife Joanne Woodward in the lead role -- Newman lovingly brought the story of a 35-year-old schoolteacher living with her mother to the screen. Critics were unanimous in their praise of Newman's first outing behind the camera. Though he was honored by the Hollywood Foreign Press Association with a Golden Globe for Best Director, he fell short of a directing nomination with the Academy but did snag a nod for producing. Woodward was also nominated for Best Actress, but neither won.

After appearing in Hombre, Winning (the film responsible for his love of auto racing), and The Secret of Harry Frigg, Newman found his biggest commercial success -- along with the beginning of a fruitful collaboration and treasured friendship with Robert Redford -- in Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid in 1969. Like Bonnie and Clyde before it, the picture painted a sympathetic portrait of two legendary outlaws as a timely statement against the establishment. Due to the beautiful location photography, the catchy contemporary music, and the unbeatable chemistry between the two leads, the film went on to gross over $100 million worldwide and earned nine Academy Award nominations, four of which resulted in wins. Though Newman was overlooked, his performance as the idealistic Butch Cassidy remains a quintessential entry in his canon.



The 1970s saw Newman on a commercial hot streak with him taking roles in such box office hits as The Towering Inferno, The Drowning Pool (a reprise of his private eye role in Harper), Slap Shot, and The Sting, his second and final collaboration with Redford. The hugely popular story of two con artists caught up in a high-stakes card game in Depression era Chicago won seven Academy Awards including Best Picture of 1973. Though Newman again found himself omitted from the Best Actor shortlist, his status as a major star continued to grow.

After earning a fifth Academy Award nomination for playing a wrongly investigated liquor distributor in Absence of Malice, Newman found the perfect career transitional role in Sidney Lumet's The Verdict. Playing an alcoholic Boston attorney whose best years are behind him, Newman gave what many critics consider the finest performance of his career in a riveting story of personal and professional redemption. Come awards season, he found himself in the running for the Best Actor prize for the sixth time, but lost to Ben Kingsley for Gandhi.

Then in 1986, 25 years after he first played Eddie Felson, Newman returned to the screen as the fast-talking pool pro in The Color of Money. Directed by Martin Scorsese, the film dovetailed seamlessly with The Hustler, thanks to a streetwise screenplay by Richard Price and the wise casting of Tom Cruise as a rising star on the billiards circuit. Though critical reception to the film was mixed, Newman's performance was singled out as the shining centerpiece of a mediocre production. The Academy agreed, and after receiving a lucky seventh nomination for Best Actor, Paul finally won his overdue trophy. He later admitted that he'd stopped caring about winning an Oscar, comparing the effort to spending years pursuing a beautiful woman. Joking to the press, he quipped, "Finally, she relents and you say, 'I'm terribly sorry. I'm tired.'"

Performances in Fat Man and Little Boy and Blaze (both 1989) followed, as well as a surprisingly out-of-canvas turn as the starchy patriarch in Merchant and Ivory's adaptation of Mr. & Mrs. Bridge. Though overshadowed by wife and costar Woodward, he brought a stern restraint to his work that was unlike anything he had ever revealed before. Four years later, he teamed with Robert Benton for Nobody's Fool, a masterfully drawn character study about a man who has made a lifetime of bad decisions. In the leading role of Sully Sullivan, Newman rendered a textbook definition of acting subtlety and earned his ninth Academy Award nomination in the process.

Maintaining a steady work load in his seventies, he turned in solid work in the mediocre vehicles Twilight, Message in a Bottle, and Where the Money Is before snagging a plum supporting role opposite Tom Hanks in 2002's Road to Perdition. As elderly Depression era crime boss John Rooney, Newman blended the fiery passion of his early work with the restraint of age for a consummate final screen appearance. For his efforts, he received his tenth Oscar nomination.

With his last film behind him, Newman brought his career to a dignified close with television work: playing the stage manager in Our Town for Showtime in 2003 and portraying Ed Harris' cantankerous father in Empire Falls for HBO in 2005, winning the Emmy for the latter. The following year, he provided the voice of Doc Hudson in the Disney Pixar animated feature Cars.

When visited from beginning to end, Paul Newman's career resembles a museum of classic paintings. His approach was refined and artful. Though he never made staggering physical transformations like Robert De Niro's in Raging Bull, the way he embodied his characters is unquestionable. When sitting for his 1994 chat with James Lipton on Inside the Actors Studio, Newman said, "For me, acting is like drudging through a river." Like a master in any arena, he never let the effort show.

In spite of his love of acting, Newman made his proudest accomplishment not for celebrity but for charity. In 1982, he launched Newman's Own, a food company that has raised over $250,000,000 for humanitarian causes. The endeavor began when a friend complimented him on his homemade salad dressing being good enough to sell. (As an aside, the best-kept secret of Italian-American households is that Newman's Own spaghetti sauce finds a home in every pantry. Under any other cirumstances, stocking pasta products bearing a non-Italian's name would be a sin, but in the case of an honorary paisan like Paul Newman, an exception must be made. Who can resist that smiling face on the label?) In a 2005 interview with AARP magazine, Newman expressed more pride in his charity work than in his acting. "I hope the [Hole in the Wall Gang] camps last longer than the films."

In his personal life, Newman enjoyed a 50-year marriage to Joanne Woodward. The couple had three daughters, Lissy, Nell, and Clea. He also had two daughters, Stephanie and Susan, from his first marriage to Jackie Witte. His son, Scott, died of a drug overdose in 1978. In keeping with his resilient manner, he converted his grief into giving by starting a drug center in his name.

Paul Newman was much more than an actor. A contributor in every respect, he dedicated his life to being the best in every field he explored. He made his mark and the world is a better place because of it. To honor Newman's wishes, keep his dream alive by making a donation to The Hole in the Wall Gang today.

There is no choice of words, no matter how carefully assembled, that could justly summate the greatness of Paul Newman's career. Instead, here is a moment from the film responsible for what I consider his best performance. This scene gets me every time I watch it.


Saturday, September 27, 2008

RIP, Paul Newman


1925-2008


Screen legend Paul Newman has died after fighting a valiant battle with cancer. He was 83 years old. Read the ABC breaking news story here.

Though Newman's passing was expected following reports of his wishes to die at home after grueling rounds of chemotherapy in the hospital, the news still comes as a huge loss to the world of movies. A full tribute blog will follow.

Monday, September 15, 2008

The Case Against Ratings



In the world of moviemaking, events that give film scholars an opportunity to editorialize occur nearly every day. When I first started this blog, I knew it would be but a matter of time before something happened in the film industry that gave me probable cause to opine about censorship. Last week, I followed a link to a story on AVClub posted on IMDB that sent my senses reeling. Read the story and decide for yourself as to whether or not it makes sense.

Before I comment on the issue at hand, I wish to disclose my bearing of mind toward freedom of expression. As a fervent First Amendment supporter, I believe that, with few exceptions, neither the government nor private enterprise has any right to suppress freedom of expression. Instances I consider exceptions to this rule include, but are not limited to, child pornography, snuff films, shouting "fire" in a crowded theater, falsely accusing someone of committing a crime, and picketing funerals. Any person responsible for committing these acts deserves punishment on the basis of violating laws that protect individual rights.

That being said, why did the MPAA's handling of the poster for Zack and Miri Make a Porno boost my blood pressure? The same reason I objected to the government's reaction to the Janet Jackson Super Bowl wardrobe malfunction. At the time, the major networks ran parental advisory disclaimers when airing the story on the evening news, but gave no such consideration when they showed the latest military combat footage from Iraq. Mere titillation, it seems, is less offensive than actual violence. Now, the MPAA wants us to join them in their objection to a pair of suggestively placed heads on the poster advertising Kevin Smith's upcoming comedy. When the film hits theaters next month, American audiences will have to settle for a different poster showing stick figures while Canadian audiences will see the original poster in theater lobbies. Perhaps it's the MPAA's own petty way of getting back at Kevin Smith following their appeal of the film's original 'NC-17' rating to 'R'. One wonders if the MPAA would have raised any objections to the poster had it showed appendages or splattered blood.

This decision leads me to ask an important question: do we really need movie ratings anymore? More to the point, did we need them to begin with? Social conservatives argue that MPAA decisions reflect a tolerant -- if not permissive -- response to provocative content in comparison to the Will Hays Production Code, but anyone who knows anything about American film history knows that that isn't saying much.

From its inception in 1966, the association has promoted itself as a reliable resource for moviegoers, especially parents. In codifying film ratings to the scale currently in use, the MPAA created a convenient, easy-to-understand system that helps viewers make quick decisions as to the films they want to see. While the idea reflects innovation, the system is not without its drawbacks. A grouping of alphanumeric characters may tell you that a film is offensive (at least to the body who applied the rating), but it doesn't tell you why. True, the rating card may read "rated R for violence, nudity, and sexual situations", but that's as specific as said descriptions get. How much of the film's running time accounts for these offenses? How many scenes feature bare buttocks, drug use, or spurting arteries? An accountable group would make these statistics (not to mention the identities of its members) public, but their actions send a clear message: just trust our judgment; you don't need to know how we work.

The 'NC-17' (formerly 'X') rating represents the group's most disingenuous tactic. This scarlet letter classification is designed, so the movie cops claim, to protect children from the worst of the worst in cinema: pornography. While keeping intense depictions of violent and sexual acts out of children's hands is a good idea, these decisions need to be made by parents and no one else. What, then, is the actual reason for shackling films into this pillory? Why, to cripple the box office potential of films the association wants to see fail, of course. Watch Kimberly Peirce's interview footage in This Film Is Not Yet Rated for a firsthand account of this malicious practice. In Kirby Dick's fascinating documentary, Peirce revealed that Boys Don't Cry initially received an 'NC-17' rating from the MPAA, which was later appealed to an 'R' after a number of sex scenes were trimmed. The group had no qualms with the graphic violence in the film; just the sex. It sounds like someone isn't exactly dealing from the top of the deck. Metaphorically speaking, the MPAA is standing at the jukebox and they expect the industry to dance to the tune. In other words, if directors expect their films to enjoy the benefits of advertising and theatrical release, they have to play by the MPAA's rules. If this isn't an abject bully tactic, I would certainly like to know what is.

The MPAA, like any other censor board, uses the ratings system to impose their morality on the public. If the God-fearing members of the MPAA object to a certain film, you know it must be bad. Wouldn't it be nice if we all reacted to raunchy flicks the way they do? What the MPAA fails to realize is that, while some attitudes are universal, morality is a subjective creature. This is not to say that morality changes from day to day, as the late Tony Snow once said on Real Time with Bill Maher, but that it often varies from person to person. With regard to movies, not everyone shares the same thoughts and feelings on sex, violence, or depictions of these acts in films. One man's poison is another man's popcorn. A fair system would let a film's content speak for itself (more on that later) and then let the public decide whether it succeeds or fails. But obviously, this approach is out of the question.

Does this mean that I enjoy every act I see depicted in films? Absolutely not. Though I consider myself a tolerant viewer, there have been times when I have grown uneasy while watching a film. The masturbation scene in Gus Van Zant's abominable remake of Psycho, the final fifteen seconds of Boogie Nights, and the disgusting Kinky Kelly sequence in Clerks II were all gratuitous. Still, in spite of my displeasure, I support the artist's right to include these scenes in their films, and I would never take action aimed at preventing such films from being released. Rather than organize a boycott, a tactic I have always found ineffective, I would give the films little or no attention. Otherwise, why give a movie you want to see go down in flames free publicity? In the words of Evelyn Beatrice Hall, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

The strongest criticism I have of the MPAA ratings system is its inconsistency. While growing up, I can recall seeing movies with a 'PG-13' rating that featured at least one character getting shot, bared breasts, and no less than two F-bombs being dropped in the course of two hours. On the other hand, I can recall seeing films that had but one mention of the dreaded F-word get slapped with an 'R' rating. These decisions raise a number of questions: Were the people who rated the 'PG-13' films the same ones who rated the 'R' films? If so, what specifically led to their rulings? Are the qualifiers for ratings (assuming specific ones exist) subject to change? Did the members see the films in their entirety? Or did they just watch the trailer? While we may never know the answers to these questions, one fact with which not even the staunchest of conservative film raters can argue is that some viewers are less tolerant than others and in turn, will be more likely to set their ratings phasers to 'R' or 'NC-17' whenever they see or hear something on screen that causes them discomfort. The MPAA allegedly staffs its body of raters with a diverse sample of adults that represents the population at large. Even if such a feat were possible, how does the association handle a disagreement over a given film? While I'm on the subject, why does the MPAA insist on shrouding the identities and voting records of its members in secrecy? Not even the Supreme Court operates in that fashion, and they're a far more important voting body.

How do we solve this problem, then? I propose an alternative to our current film ratings protocol: a content disclosure system. Using every medium of movie advertising, I would publish a list of statistics in place of a simple letter or alphanumeric combination. (e.g., 75 mentions of the F-word, 3 instances of full frontal female nudity, 25 instances of violent killings, 2 scenes involving drug use) A system like this would help parents make an informed decision as to whether or not they would feel comfortable allowing their children to watch a particular movie, much less watch a movie themselves. One objection some may raise to this proposal would no doubt criticize the amount of time and effort required to examine the statistics. The best response I have to this opposition is a question. When a good parent shops at a supermarket, do they pile food into the cart without a second thought or do they stop to read the nutritional information first? Should advertisers worry about the amount of time they would have to buy for fitting statistics in a trailer, the amount of time needed would be but an extra three to five seconds. Now that I think of it, what's wrong with displaying those statistics in a black bar at the bottom of the screen à la CNN headline crawls while the trailer plays? An announcer's voice or a separate title card could then wrap up the trailer by instructing the audience to visit the MPAA web site for a full list of the film's statistics. Though there is no such thing as pure objectivity, raw data in the form of mathematical or scientific results arrived at via rational processes is the closest we can come to this ideal. After all, numbers -- unlike people -- never lie. A system like this would save parents from having to preview a film for their children, and would reveal potentially objectionable scenes without spoiling key plot points. Once potential viewers have this data on hand, they can apply their own ratings. Anyone opposed to a system like this is too scared and lazy to think independently, and wants everyone else to have that comfort, too.

If the MPAA won't change its ways, it would be nice if they lightened up. But I'm not holding my breath. As long as they're allowed to conduct their business the way they do, it's only a matter of time before those self-appointed morality cops find another stimulus to activate the panic center in their brains and sound the alarm in kind. The true pornographers in this or any society are not those who have sex on camera, but those who think they can tell the populace which works among music, film, radio, television, and literature are acceptable for consumption, and then have the gall to unilaterally censor such material based on their own moral convictions. Contrary to the beliefs held by crusading xenophobes, catching sight of certain images or hearing certain words will not turn a person into a drug dealer, a serial killer, a terrorist, or a pedophile. To paraphrase what Tom Braden once said on CNN's Crossfire, "Each of us has a personal responsibility [to decide what we want to see and listen to], and that's as far as it can go."

Do you agree with the MPAA ratings system? Would you like to see it changed, if not abrogated altogether? Whatever your opinion, please leave your comments. When you do, be assured that, so long as you don't circumvent the law, I will not censor your words.

Sunday, September 14, 2008

'Slumdog Millionaire' Wins Top Prize in Toronto



Slumdog Millionaire, the story of a poor East Indian teen who wins the jackpot on his native country's edition of Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?, has won the Cadillac People's Choice Award at the 33rd Toronto International Film Festival. The gong was presented yesterday to director Danny Boyle, whose previous films include Trainspotting and 28 Days Later. The Canadian Press has a decent recap here.

The win boosts the likelihood that Millionaire will show up on the Academy's radar. Two previous recipient of TIFF's top prize, Chariots of Fire and American Beauty, went on to win Best Picture at the Oscars. Eastern Promises, last year's winner, went on to earn Viggo Mortensen an overdue acting nomination.

Slumdog Millionaire opens in limited release on November 28th.

Wednesday, September 3, 2008

A Sonorous Voice Goes Silent

1940-2008


The film and television industries have lost one of their biggest fixtures. Don LaFontaine, the voice actor responsible for more than 5,000 movie trailers, has died at the age of 68. Read the AP story here.

Though he wasn't the first talent to record a trailer for a feature film, LaFontaine qualifies as a pioneer in my book. Before voice actors, movie trailers had a melodramatic aroma about them. This was characterized by wipes between scenes, sappy scores, and giant letters that flew at you from out of nowhere. (e.g., COMING SOON! THE SUSPENSE! THE ADVENTURE! RONALD COLMAN AS YOU'VE NEVER SEEN HIM BEFORE!) Those trailers still have a nostalgic charm, but they fail to transport you to another world the way Don's voice could.

That all changed in 1964, when LaFontaine wrote a trailer script for the forgettable western Gunfighters of Casa Grande, originally to be read by a voice actor. The actor failed to show up, leaving LaFontaine to read the spot on his own. It was the first movie trailer he ever voiced and the rest, as the old saying goes, is history.

What made LaFontaine unique was his versatility. Most voice over actors, not unlike most live actors, tend to find one comfort zone and stay within it. With effortless ease, LaFontaine continually tested his own boundaries, providing the ideal vocal milieu for virtually every film genre. Whether speaking in an ominous bass range for a science fiction thriller or growling like a chainsaw for a horror movie, LaFontaine had an unteachable gift of conveying emotion in a matter of seconds.

Equally impressive was his work ethic. When not making appearances at conventions or giving interviews, LaFontaine was standing in front of a microphone, recording as many as 35 spots a day from his home studio. His fax machine was continuously spitting out scripts for him to record until the day he died, no doubt.

Those who knew and worked with LaFontaine recall his affable personality. "I've been there to watch that [talent] grow over the years," fellow voice actor Paul Pape said in an interview. "His ego has not grown."

His amiable side also showed when he argued in favor of more movie trailer voiceover work for women. How refreshing it would be to hear feminine voices introduce upcoming movies. If the smoky sex appeal of Stevie Nicks can pave the way for gold records and Grammys, why not let female voice actors record movie trailers? A woman's touch would be perfect for romantic dramas and comedies, and even animated features.

LaFontaine leaves a legacy that has inspired generations of actors to pursue careers in the voice industry. The world still has talented voice actors to narrate movie trailers, but no one can ever replace that unmistakable voice of God. Don may be gone, but his contribution to the movies will remain with us for as long as the seventh art survives.