September 18, 2011
2011 Emmy predictions
Every year I look forward to the annual awards season – the Oscars, the Golden Globes, the guild awards, the Independent Spirit Awards and so on. But the Emmy Awards have always been very hit or miss for me. The same shows are nominated year after year, some critical favorites are often overlooked and there are so many repeat winners the night becomes boring. But this year, the combination of a few surprise nominees (like a best comedy nod for the brilliant “Parks and Recreation”) and a hilarious host in Jane Lynch have got me intrigued.
Here’s a look at which shows and stars will likely take home the Emmy gold Sunday night, who should win and who should have been nominated in the first place.
Best comedy
Glee
Parks and Recreation
The Office
Modern Family
30 Rock
The Big Bang Theory
Will win: Last year the best comedy battle was between “Glee” and “Modern Family.” But this year, last year’s winner “Modern Family” is the clear favorite. ABC’s signature ensemble comedy was consistently strong throughout its second season, while “Glee” was uneven at best.
Should win: “Parks and Recreation” is easily the best comedy on television right now. Its combination of loveable oddball characters, sharp dialogue and heart is pitch-perfect.
Should have been nominated: “Community,” “Cougar Town,” “It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia,” “How I Met Your Mother”
Best actor in a comedy
Matt LeBlanc, “Episodes”
Jim Parsons, “The Big Bang Theory”
Steve Carell, “The Office”
Johnny Galecki, “The Big Bang Theory”
Louis C.K., “Louie”
Alec Baldwin, “30 Rock”
Will win: Parsons unseated perennial winner Baldwin last year, and he’s riding fresh off a Golden Globe win earlier this year. Expect him to take home the trophy again Sunday.
Should win: Steve Carell has never won in all the years he’s been nominated for “The Office,” so it would be great to see him recognized for his last season as Michael Scott, a character he managed to make completely clueless yet oddly loveable at the same time.
Should have been nominated: Joel McHale, “Community”
Best actress in a comedy
Laura Linney, “The Big C”
Edie Falco, “Nurse Jackie”
Amy Poehler, “Parks and Recreation”
Melissa McCarthy, “Mike and Molly”
Martha Plimpton, “Raising Hope”
Tina Fey, “30 Rock”
Will win: The Emmys loved Falco’s dramatic work on “The Sopranos,” and they seem to love her comedy chops just as much. Though I wouldn’t completely count out McCarthy, who became comedy’s new It Girl this summer after her hilarious turn in “Bridesmaids.”
Should win: Poehler’s driven and overly optimistic Leslie Knope is the heart and soul of “Parks and Recreation”
Should have been nominated: Courteney Cox, “Cougar Town.” Honestly do the Emmys have some sort of grudge against Cox, the only “Friends” cast member to never be nominated?
Best supporting actor in a comedy
John Cryer, “Two and a Half Men”
Chris Colfer, “Glee”
Jesse Tyler Ferguson, “Modern Family”
Ed O’Neill, “Modern Family”
Eric Stonestreet, “Modern Family”
Ty Burell, “Modern Family”
Will win: It’s probably safe to say someone from “Modern Family” will win by default, and the victor will likely be last year’s winner, Stonestreet. Though it’s possible the four men of “Modern Family” could split the vote, and if so, Golden Globe winner Colfer could pull an upset.
Should win: All four “Modern Family” nominees are skilled comedians in their own right, but Burell’s lovable, daffy Phil Dunphy was a standout in season two.
Should have been nominated: The question with this category is who shouldn’t have been nominated. The most egregious snub is definitely Nick Offerman, aka Ron Freaking Swanson on “Parks and Recreation.” But other deserving actors include Jason Segel and Neil Patrick Harris of “How I Met Your Mother,” Danny Pudi of “Community,” Charlie Day of “It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia” and Adam Scott of “Parks and Recreation.”
Supporting actress in a comedy
Jane Lynch, “Glee”
Betty White, “Hot in Cleveland”
Julie Bowen, “Modern Family”
Kristen Wiig, ” Saturday Night Live”
Jane Krakowski, “30 Rock”
Sofia Vergara, “Modern Family”
Will win: Last year’s winner, Lynch, was one of the few consistently strong players in a lackluster season of “Glee,” and she got the chance to show her range beyond Sue Sylvester’s sarcastic quips toward the end of the season in an episode featuring her beloved sister’s funeral.
Should win: As much as I love Lynch, Bowen is brilliant as a high-strung mom striving for normalcy and perfection but succumbing to her wacky neuroses in spite of herself.
Should have been nominated: Busy Phillips, “Cougar Town;” Allison Brie, “Community;” Kaitlin Olson, “It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia”
Best drama
Boardwalk Empire
The Good Wife
Mad Men
Friday Night Lights
Dexter
Game of Thrones
Will win: It wouldn’t be the Emmys without a few repeat winners, and it’s likely one of those will be perennial favorite “Mad Men,” which took home the gold last year.
Should win: HBO’s engrossing, beautifully executed “Game of Thrones” deserves more recognition, but its status as a genre show means it may not appeal to a wide enough margin of Emmy voters to secure the win.
Should have been nominated: “The Walking Dead,” another brilliant genre show whose six-episode debut season aired so long ago its impact had likely faded from the forefront of voters’ minds by the time they cast their ballots.
Best actor in a drama
Steve Buscemi, “Boardwalk Empire”
Michael C. Hall, “Dexter”
Kyle Chandler, “Friday Night Lights”
Jon Hamm, “Mad Men”
Hugh Laurie, “House”
Timothy Olyphant, “Justified”
Will win: With three-time winner Bryan Cranston ineligible this year, it’s anyone’s game. Jon Hamm is a strong possibility, but the awards love for Steve Buscemi during the Golden Globes and Screen Actors Guild Awards point to the “Boardwalk Empire” lead as the front-runner.
Should win: Buscemi. The freshman HBO hit has a top-notch ensemble, but he’s the heart and soul of the show.
Should have been nominated: Sean “Why won’t Hollywood ever let me live?” Bean, “Game of Thrones”
Best actress in a drama
Elisabeth Moss, “Mad Men”
Connie Britton, “Friday Night Lights”
Mariska Hargitay, “Law and Order: SVU”
Mireille Enos, “The Killing”
Julianna Margulies, “The Good Wife”
Kathy Bates, “Harry’s Law”
Will win: This is probably one of the strongest categories of the night, but I’d give the edge to Margulies, especially with last year’s winner Kyra Sedgwick out of the running.
Should win: I honestly don’t watch any of these shows, but I’ve been a fan of Margulies since her “ER” days
Should have been nominated: Lauren Graham, “Parenthood”
Best supporting actor in a drama
John Slattery, “Mad Men”
Andre Braugher, “Men of a Certain Age”
Walton Goggins, “Justified”
Peter Dinklage, “Game of Thrones”
Josh Charles, “The Good Wife”
Alan Cumming, “The Good Wife”
Will win: Given Emmy voters’ passion for “Mad Men,” Slattery is definitely a contender. But throughout the run of the first season of “Game of Thrones,” Peter Dinklage garnered the most critical acclaim for his masterful performance as Tyrion Lannister.
Should win: Dinklage. If he doesn’t win, it will be the biggest snub of the night.
Should have been nominated: Denis O’Hare, “True Blood”
Best supporting actress in a drama
Kelly Macdonald, “Boardwalk Empire”
Christina Hendricks, “Mad Men”
Michelle Forbes, “The Killing”
Archie Panjabi, “The Good Wife”
Margo Martindale, “Justified”
Christine Baranski, “The Good Wife”
Will win: Archie Panjabi won last year so a repeat win for her is a possibility, but don’t count out “Boardwalk Empire” heroine Kelly Macdonald
Should win: Macdonald consistently shined throughout the transformation of her character from meek immigrant to the strong woman behind one of Atlantic City’s most powerful men.
Should have been nominated: Emilia Clarke, “Game of Thrones;” Deborah Ann Woll, “True Blood”
July 12, 2011
Farewell, Harry: A decade in the magical world of ‘Harry Potter’
For as long as I can remember, I’ve been in love with the world of reading. There’s something remarkable about getting lost in a good story and letting your imagination take control. But it wasn’t until 1999, when I was 11 years old, that a story resonated with me so deeply that it hasn’t left me since, and probably never will.
The summer before sixth grade, my mom bought me a copy of “Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone.” I wasn’t immediately interested in a story about a boy wizard, but she insisted several of her friends’ kids had raved about it and that I should give it a try. How right she was.
J.K. Rowling’s writing was immediately engaging, the vivid description transporting me into a rich, new world. I felt like I was there with Harry on his first trip to Diagon Alley, his first glimpse at the Great Hall, his first Quidditch match and his first confrontation with the dark wizard bent on destroying him. At 11, I was the same age as Harry when he received that fateful letter from Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. The skinny bespectacled boy and his goofy, red-headed sidekick Ron seemed like people I could be friends with, and I was instantly invested in their adventures. And perhaps most of all I felt a connection with their know-it-all pal Hermione, who with her intelligence, curiosity and insecurity reminded me so much of myself.
By the time school started in the fall, it seemed every one of my classmates had been captivated by the world of “Harry Potter.” I eagerly tore through “Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets” and “Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban.” My sixth grade teacher seemed so thrilled about how engrossed in reading her students had become that class discussion often turned to the series.
When “Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire” hit bookstore shelves, the series had exploded into a worldwide literary phenomenon. I pre-ordered the book months in advance and upon its arrival I clutched it like some long-awaited treasure and devoured it in days. My excitement and appreciation for the series never waned as I got older. If anything, it only grew stronger.
As Harry and his friends matured, so did I. As they experienced loss and love and the pains and pleasures of growing up, I experienced my own life changes. The characters were so layered, so flawed and so likeable that they only became more real to me. I was 19 when “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows” was released, and it felt strange enough then that the regular anticipation of discovering what came next in Harry’s journey was drawing to a close. But then, I thought at least there were still a few more movies to look forward to, a few more chances to see Harry’s world come to life. And now, that too is on the verge of ending.
When the film adaptation of “Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone” was released in 2001, I was in awe of the movie’s attention to detail, and of its faithfulness to Rowling’s incredible fiction. I relished the growth of the characters throughout each film, the story’s increasingly darker tone, the thrilling action and the emotional pull. For the cast and crew, whose talents grew stronger with each film, the “Harry Potter” series has clearly been a labor of love.
As I watch the trailer for “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part II,” my skin develops a trace of goosebumps and my eyes well up slightly with tears. This is the series I’ve loved for 12 years. These are the characters I’ve grown up with. And now this story of death and sacrifice, of love and friendship, of discovering oneself and the endless possibilities that lie beyond the protective walls of school, is truly over.
It’s a bittersweet moment for fans across the world, but I can’t help but feel my generation has a special connection to the boy who lived. For those of us that were around Harry’s age when the books initially soared to popularity and grew up with him, Ron and Hermione, the end of “Harry Potter” marks the end of our childhood. It’s a strange feeling, knowing that while there will continue to be other Potter-related ventures like the Wizarding World of Harry Potter theme park and the interactive Web site Pottermore, the anticipation of a new chapter of Harry’s story is truly over now.
These will be books I read in sequence repeatedly for the rest of my life, movies I constantly pop into my DVD player. And one day, when they’re old enough, I look forward to sharing Harry’s adventures with my own future children, and seeing the wonder and excitement in their eyes.
So as the “Harry Potter” series takes its final bow, I want to say thank you to Warner Brothers, the talented cast and incredible crew for bringing Harry’s adventures to life, and thank you J.K. Rowling for your vivid imagination, for your incredible gift of writing and for instilling in me a passion for reading and storytelling that helped define my childhood, my adolescence and my young adult life.
Thank you, Harry, for a truly magical journey.
April 17, 2011
Who should replace Steve Carell on ‘The Office’

Fans have known for months that Steve Carell would be leaving “The Office” by the end of the season. Carell will take his final bow April 28 as Michael Scott, the world’s most awkward and oblivious yet oddly lovable boss, finally gets his happy ending and moves away with his adorably zany fiancee Holly (Amy Ryan). But Thursday, fans got their first glimpse at what Dunder Mifflin could be like under new leadership with the debut of Will Ferrell as Deangelo Vickers.
It was originally reported that Ferrell’s stint as the manager of Dunder Mifflin-Scranton would only last four episodes, but comments he made at Comedy Central’s Comedy Awards fueled speculation that he might be Michael Scott’s permanent replacement. The full-time boss’ identity is being kept closely under wraps, but a full slate of guest stars has been announced for the season finale, which includes Ray Romano, James Spader, Catherine Tate, Will Arnett and original “Office” boss Ricky Gervais as potential candidates.
I’m sure NBC would be all for someone of Ferrell’s clout taking the reigns, but after his debut Thursday, I’m still not sure if he’s the right fit. Deangelo Vickers is definitely awkward, but in a less likable way than Michael. I think he meshes well with the cast though, and maybe after getting to know Deangelo a little better in the coming weeks I’ll find he fits right in. But there are still plenty of other actors I’d love to see considered for the role.
Portia de Rossi: The former “Arrested Development” star is my top pick for Dunder Mifflin’s new boss. A female boss could be a fresh change-of-pace for the show, and her time as the lone Bluth sister proved she’s game for anything. She can nail the kind of quirky character interaction that’s such a staple of “The Office,” and doesn’t shy away from physical comedy.
Will Arnett: He’s got Ricky Gervais’ seal of approval, and he’s definitely got mine. Arnett has the oblivious and awkward thing down, but in a different way than Michael. I think he could bring something fresh to the show without being a carbon copy of Gob Bluth, though he could contribute an illusion or two.
Alan Tudyk: The lovable “Firefly” vet has been absolutely hilarious in everything from “Dodgeball” to “Death at a Funeral” to Joss Whedon’s beloved sci-fi show. It’s about time the perennial supporting player became the center of attention, and I think he would gel quite smoothly with the Dunder Mifflin staff.
Michael Emerson: The resident baddie of “Lost” would be an interesting choice. He looks unassuming yet emanates fear, which could create a vibe very different than the office-is-a-family attitude Michael pushes. He was frightfully eerie on “Lost,” but I’d love to see him try his hand at comedy.
Craig Robinson: If “The Office” goes for an internal hire, Robinson’s Darryl could be a great leader. John Krasinski’s Jim or Rainn Wilson’s Dwight might seem like more obvious choices. But Jim’s stint as co-regional manager in Season 6 felt a little off, and Dwight’s eccentricity is better served in a supporting role than the central one. Darryl’s role has increased considerably since the beginning of the show, from working in the warehouse to a desk job in the main office. There have been a few hints this season that he wants to continue advancing in his career, so maybe he’ll wind up being the new World’s Best Boss.
April 10, 2011
Kevin Smith eying his exit from filmmaking
My latest from It’s Just Movies:
Kevin Smith is “so, like, sick of movies and s–t,” according to a recent interview with LA Weekly. The comedy director has announced he’ll quit film-making after his next movie, and he’s going out on his own terms.
Smith is currently winding down his “Red State” tour, which concludes today at the Wiltern Theater in Los Angeles. After the movie’s premiere at the Sundance Film Festival, Smith announced he would distribute it himself, starting with a nationwide tour including screenings and Q&A sessions.
On April 10, Smith will auction off props and costumes from some of his past films — including Ben Affleck’s wings from “Dogma” (shown below) and a cash register from “Clerks II” — at the Pasadena Convention Conference Center to help with distribution costs of the $4 million film. “Red State,” a horror flick about a Westboro Baptist Chuch-esque fundamentalist group starring Melissa Leo, Michael Parks, Stephen Root and Michael Angarano, will hit theaters Oct. 19.
Here is the official press release:
- Kevin Smith, writer/director of such films as Clerks, Chasing Amy, Dogma, Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back and the upcoming Red State is partnering with Propworx, Hollywood’s premier studio auction house to announce Kevin Smith Sells Out: The Official Askewniverse Garage Sale. The auction will commence on April 10, 2011 at 10:00am at the Pasadena Convention Center and will feature hundreds of props, costumes, comic art, and set pieces from Kevin’s catalog of films and projects. Kevin will also podcast live from the event, telling behind the scenes stories about the items.Most notable among the lots are the Bartleby’s Angel Wings and Torso Armor from Dogma. Worn by actor Ben Affleck during the final battle, the poseable, bloody angel wings measure 80” x 60”. Also on the auction block are amazing pieces of original comic art, including artwork from Green Arrow, Daredevil: The Man Without Fear, Bluntman & Chronic, Jay and Silent Bob, and Clerks.
Propworx will have everything on display at the auction in a museum-style setting, so fans can see every single lot that will be on the auction block. A full-color catalog is available, serving as a guide to the auction with photos and detailed descriptions of each item. For more information and to purchase the catalog, go to http://KevinSmith.Propworx.com.
In addition, items from the auction will be on display at the Red State screening and Q&A, the evening before the auction, in Los Angeles at the Wiltern Theatre on April 9, 2011. For more details and ticketing information for Kevin Smith’s all Red State Tour, go to http://www.CoopersDell.com.
“Ever since I saw Clerks while out on a date, I’ve wanted to thank Kevin in an appropriate way for his help that night. What better way to do this than to help him get his stuff out of his storage units and into the hands of his most passionate fans?” said Alec Peters, CEO of Propworx, and Kevin Smith’s 327th most passionate fan.
“As a prop-lovin’ movie geek, it is my distinct pleasure to unload these beloved props on other movie geeks with disposable income and a boner for all things Askew. And as much as I love the costumes and crap from all of our flicks, I’m selling these storied pieces of the View Askewniverse to help us self-distribute our new film Red State. In essence, I’ve gotta sell the past if I wanna pay for the future. If you’re a fan of anything we’ve ever done, I suggest getting a second job or a second mortgage – because there’s bound to be an actual piece of View Askew history you will need to own. Soar like an angel with the wings from DOGMA! Dress like a C.L.I.T. from JAY AND SILENT BOB STRIKE BACK! Own the painting of birds bought at a diner in CHASING AMY! Frame the pages of actual artwork from years of comic books I’ve written! But if nothing else, make sure you pick up the AWESOME hardcover auction catalog Propworx has put together: it’s like the View Askew Yearbook, packed with images of everything that’s up for sale on April 10 — when we’ll be doing JAY AND SILENT BOB GET OLD — live, during the auction, color-commentating on our selling-out!”
Following “Red State,” Smith said his last film will be “Hit Somebody,” a hockey movie featuring many of the “Red State” cast members. After that? “All I want to do is talk, talk, talk,” he told LA Weekly.
In his retirement from film, Smith will devote his time to speaking tours and expanding his Smodcast podcast to a two-hour daily Internet radio show. He also said he hopes to distribute other people’s movies under Smodcast Pictures, the name under which he’s distributing “Red State.” Plus, there’s his active Twitter account to attend to.
Frankly, I’m not that surprised Smith wants to exit film-making. He’s always been a fiercely independent filmmaker and seems to have grown weary of the structure of the film industry. He’s seemed way more invested in tweeting and Smodcasting for a while now, and I imagine his dedicated fan base would pay good money to see his speaking tours, if his successful “Red State” tour is any indication (the cheapest tickets are nearly $70).
What do you think? Are you sad to see Smith exit the film-making world, or do you think his talents are better suited elsewhere? Sound off in the comments section.
April 7, 2011
Warner Brothers and the MPAA pull “The Hangover Part II” trailer from theaters
The first full-length green band trailer for “The Hangover Part II” wasn’t green band enough, at least not in the eyes of the Motion Picture Association of America. Warner Brothers and the MPAA have apparently sent a letter to movie theaters across the country asking that they remove “The Hangover Part II” trailer from copies of the PG-13 Jake Gyllenhaal thriller “Source Code.”
The letter, which was obtained by Slashfilm, reads as follows:
“Warner Bros. and the M.P.A.A. have instructed all theatres to remove The Hangover Part II trailer #2 from Source Code and any other placements. These #2 trailers need to be DELETED FROM YOUR SERVER.” The letter also states the next trailer for “The Hangover Part II” will debut before the R-rated “Scream 4.”
Once the word got out, Warner Brothers issued a statement to The Hollywood Reporter, saying, “In our haste to meet the placement schedule for this trailer, we failed to properly vet the final version with the MPAA. We acted immediately to correct the mistake and removed the trailer from screens.” The online trailer will also reportedly be tweaked.
So it sounds like the MPAA may not have given the trailer the final seal of approval before it started playing before “Source Code.” What made this announcement so surprising was that there had been no controversy surrounding the trailer before its hasty removal. According to Entertainment Weekly, a source told them Warner Brothers hadn’t received a single complaint about it.
Warner Brothers hasn’t specified what exactly in the trailer the MPAA found offensive, but the only part I can think of is the bit at the end when Zach Galifianakis sticks a water bottle in a man’s sarong, the monkey bites it and Galifianakis says, “When a monkey nibbles on a wenis, it’s funny in any language.” Frankly, I don’t see how that’s any worse than sexualized programs like “Jersey Shore” that kids under 17 can see on TV or online whenever they like.
Pulling the “Hangover Part II” trailer isn’t the only recent example of the MPAA getting worked up over nothing. Last weekend, the Weinstein Company released an edited version of “The King’s Speech” to bring the rating down to PG-13. It was Harvey Weinstein’s choice to release an edited cut, but he shouldn’t have had to make that decision to begin with.
The MPAA slapped an R rating on the original cut for one string of expletives that contains a handful of F-bombs, uttered by Colin Firth during an exercise to help King George overcome his stutter. Deadline reported the only difference between the R-rated version and the PG-13 version is that all uses of the word “f–k” have been replaced by the word “s–t.” Everything else about the film is unchanged. Really? What a completely useless reason to give a movie an R-rating and bar a wider audience from seeing a truly beautiful, moving film in theaters.
What kills me is that it only seems to be language and sex that the MPAA has a real problem with. I know they wouldn’t give something with liberal amounts of blood and gore a PG-13, but overall they just don’t seem as phased by it. I have a feeling more kids and young teens would be disturbed by some of the dark, gritty material in the PG-13-rated “The Dark Knight” than a curse word or a penis joke.
Even in one of the trailers for “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows,” dead bodies are clearly visible strewn across the Hogwarts grounds as Harry and Voldemort battle. And those who have read the book know the death scale in the final film is going to be much worse than that brief clip. I’m not saying I think “Harry Potter” should receive an R rating, but it does beg the question, why is the depiction of mass death and destruction OK in a PG-13 movie, but Colin Firth dropping the F-bomb a couple of times is deemed incredibly distasteful?
What do you think? Was the trailer for “The Hangover Part II” really that offensive? Is the PG-13 cut of “The King’s Speech” in better taste? Are PG-13 movies becoming more violent? Sound off in the comments section, and check out the original “Hangover Part II” trailer below.
April 6, 2011
Director spotlight: Jason Reitman
I’m as passionate a movie lover as they come, but I’m from Greensboro, N.C. I don’t exactly have a ton of opportunities to go to film festivals and conventions or to meet my favorite actors, writers and directors. So imagine my delight – and by delight I mean overwhelming excitement – when I learned one of my favorite directors would be the keynote speaker at Wake Forest University’s Reynolda Film Festival in Winston-Salem.
With a famous comedy director for a father, Jason Reitman could have become another example of Hollywood nepotism. But with only three movies under his belt, he’s proving he’s not banking on his dad’s name to bring him success. The four-time Academy Award nominee (twice for directing, once for screenplay and once as a producer) has made a name for himself with “Thank You For Smoking,” “Juno” and “Up in the Air,” and the affable director gave fans some insight into his career and future projects during a 90-minute discussion and Q&A last weekend at Wake Forest’s Wait Chapel.
On growing up with the guy behind “Ghostbusters”
After addressing up front that yes, George Clooney is probably the most handsome man alive, Reitman gave the crowd some background about his childhood. Reitman’s father is comedy director Ivan Reitman, who was at the helm of films like “Ghostbusters,” “Stripes” and “Kindergarten Cop.” Reitman opened his speech recounting his days growing up known as “Jason (son of Ivan) Reitman,” but said growing up with a filmmaker for a father shaped who he is more than anything else.
From being on the set of “Animal House” when he was just 11 days old to his first kiss in “Kindergarten Cop,” he was constantly surrounded by the world of film.
“I found myself being directed by my father on how to kiss a girl,” Reitman said. “I’m making out with this girl and realizing, ‘This is kind of strange. She has to make out with me.’ It took me years to finally kiss another girl.”
Though filmmaking seemed a natural career path, Reitman decided to go pre-med in college because he was terrified of what people would think of him if he tried to become a director.
“I was well aware of how people thought of the children of famous people,” Reitman said. “Most likely you were a spoiled brat who had no talent and likely had an alcohol or drug problem.”
But his father convinced him that being scared wasn’t a good enough reason to not pursue his passion, and Reitman transitioned into filmmaking.
“My father became the first dad in Jewish history that said, ‘Don’t be a doctor. Be an artist!’”
Reitman’s first short film was a “kidney transplant comedy” called “Operation.” From there, he continued writing and directing short films until he got into the Sundance Film Festival. He made a few commercials, and turned down the chance to direct “Dude Where’s My Car” twice. And all the while, he was focused on bringing a book called “Thank You for Smoking” to the big screen.
The one movie he really wanted to make
Reitman’s agent asked him what kind of movies he wanted to make, and rather than answering with a genre, he replied that he wanted to make one movie, “Thank You for Smoking.”
“When I was 18, this woman, one of the smartest women I’ve ever met, gave me ‘Thank You for Smoking’ and said, ‘This book was meant for you.’ Strangely enough several years later she went to prison… but she was right. It was like love at first sight.”
Mel Gibson held the rights to the book at the time, which had spent years in development hell. One draft was a romantic comedy. A draft by “Pulp Fiction” writer Roger Avary was full of explosions. But Reitman brought it back to the heart of the book, a biting, hilarious satire about a slick tobacco lobbyist. Gibson called Reitman from his plane to tell him how much he loved it, but it wasn’t enough to get the film made.
“Nobody would make my movie. Everyone was like, ‘This is a great writing sample. You really should write more.’”
Many bad commercials later, he began adapting “Up in the Air.” A third of the way through, former PayPal COO David O. Sacks and a group of investors told Reitman they wanted to finance “Thank You for Smoking” and gave him $6 million to make the film.
“Nepotism kind of failed me. Some Internet dudes from Palo Alto started my film career.”
Reitman landed a stellar cast – Aaron Eckhart, J.K. Simmons, William H. Macy, Maria Bello, Rob Lowe, Katie Holmes. But he was most excited about working with Sam Elliot, an actor best known for his many cowboy roles. In one scene, Elliot’s character was required to pull a shotgun on Eckhart. But Elliot thought that was too excessive. He wanted a rifle instead.
“I asked if he needed anyone to show him how it works and he was like, ‘Um, no. It’s my gun.’ My first and last actor to bring his own rifle to set.”
‘A teen pregnancy comedy written by a former stripper from Minneapolis’
As editing was winding down on “Thank You for Smoking,” a friend of Reitman’s told him he had to read the script for “Juno,” by an unknown writer named Diablo Cody.
“He goes, ‘It’s a teen pregnancy comedy written by a former stripper from Minneapolis.’ Perfect! And it was one of the best scripts I’ve ever read. Beyond the quirkiness, it was original in every one of its storytelling decisions.”
But the people who owned the rights weren’t sold on Reitman at first and hired another director. Reitman went back to adapting “Up in the Air,” and about a year later found out the director had left the project. It was down to him and two other directors, and he got the job.
“I did something kind of unusual. I wanted to just say to the studio, ‘This is my cast.’ They wanted Jeff Bridges or Hugh Laurie to play the father. But I brought Ellen Page, Michael Cera, J.K. Simmons and Olivia Thirlby to a sound stage and shot 40 pages in one day with a black backdrop, edited it together, sent it to the studio and said ‘This is my cast.’ And they went for it.”
Reitman shot the film for $7 million, expecting it to play at a few film festivals. It went on to gross more than $230 million, and Reitman was nominated for an Oscar.
“It blew up in a way none of us expected. It gave me the kind of freedom I never thought I would get for decades to come.”
‘The hardest days of shooting I’ve ever done’
After the success of “Juno,” Reitman returned to adapting “Up in the Air.” In the years since he began work on the screenplay, Reitman changed as a writer, and America changed along with him.
“When I started writing ‘Up in the Air,’ we were in a tech boom, and by the time I finished the screenplay, we were in one of the worst recessions on record.”
Reitman was making a movie about firing people at a time when unemployment was on the rise and layoffs were a major fear for new and veteran employees alike. His father told him he had to find a way to address today’s economic struggles in the film because years down the road, it could be a film people turn to as a reflection of life in 2009.
“The worst-written scenes in the movie were the firing scenes. I didn’t have enough life experience to write these scenes correctly. I was talking to my casting director and she said, ‘Why don’t we just cast real people, people who have just lost their jobs.’”
Reitman and his creative team placed an ad saying they were making a documentary about job loss and were looking for people to interview. They set up a camera in small room and spoke to each person for 5-10 minutes about what they felt when they lost their jobs and what they wished they could have said.
“The days of shooting this were the hardest days of shooting I’ve ever done. I’ve seen some of the greatest actors struggle to be in the moment sometimes. And these people with no acting experience, the second they heard the words, their eyes glazed over. They said heartbreaking things, the kinds of things I would never be able to write.”
Reitman said “Up in the Air” might be the most personal film he’ll ever make, which made choosing a follow-up project all the more challenging.
Hostages and home-wreckers
Up next, Reitman will direct another adaptation. “Labor Day” is a coming of age story based on a novel by Joyce Maynard about a 13-year-old boy and his mother who willingly take an escaped convict looking for a place to hide into their home. Reitman wrote the script, and he said it will be the next film he directs.
But first to hit theaters will be “Young Adult,” another collaboration with Diablo Cody that Reitman recently completed. He said it may be the most unlikable film he’ll ever make, about a writer (Charlize Theron) who returns to her hometown intent on rekindling a relationship with her married high school sweetheart (Patrick Wilson).
“It’s not in a charming ‘Sweet Home Alabama’ kind of way but in a ‘Greenberg’ or ‘Rachel Getting Married’ kind of way. We had a screening of it recently and a girl in the focus group said, ‘I don’t know why Jason Reitman wants me to feel this way.’ So get ready for that fun! But don’t worry, ‘Juno’ is on DVD. You can always watch that afterward and feel good again.”
April 3, 2011
Welcome to the new Lights, Camera, Action
Since my freshman year of college, writing about arts and entertainment has been as natural as breathing. I started Lights, Camera, Action a few years ago as another outlet for writing about movies, in addition to my work at The Pendulum writing A&E news and reviews and co-hosting the Reel Talk podcast. So imagine my surprise when I realized it had been more than six months since my last post!
The transition from college student to full-time professional reporter distracted me I suppose, plus with a tighter wallet, going to a movie every week like I did at school has been next to impossible. With my additional freelance work for Go Triad and ItsJustMovies.com to quench my thirst for A&E writing, my personal blog fell by the wayside.
But I’ve missed Lights, Camera, Action in the months since I last updated, so I’ve decided to start fresh and re-launch it. You can still view the original blog over on Blogger. In the re-tooled WordPress version, you’ll find a variety of stories from reviews and opinion pieces to short reactions to the latest film news, rather than solely reviews like the Blogger version.
Up first, I’ll have a write-up of Academy Award-nominated director Jason Reitman’s (“Thank You For Smoking,” “Juno,” “Up in the Air”) keynote address from Wake Forest’s Reynolda Film Festival. Check back tomorrow for that report, and enjoy the new Lights, Camera, Action!
