Jimmy Stewart talked to Parkinson in 1973 about why It’s A Wonderful Life was the favourite of his films. You can watch more of the interview here –https://t.co/C6Qrd4dj9P pic.twitter.com/5mMRUmoiRb

— BBC Archive (@BBCArchive) December 25, 2019

* The big story today is that a lot of people have sussed out the the 23rd James Bond movie is, according to the possibly not-so-super reliable UK tabloid “canned.” Obviously, the same fiscal black hole at the once mighty MGM that is screwing things up royally for “The Hobbit” is also at least delaying the latest entry in what has to be the longest-running franchise in movie history.

He may be a bit emotional, but it’s hard to disagree with the passion of Harry Knowles on this, while Kevin Jagernauth provides some necessary background to the story. I agree that it’s a bummer this is happening during the era of Daniel Craig. As far as I’m concerned, Craig is easily the best Bond since Connery.

* There’s been a bit of a debate on Facebook about the appropriateness of some people’s more humorous/snarky reactions to the news that Lindsay Lohan is going back to jail for ninety days for parole violations. I’m of two or three minds on this, but I think the bottom line is that of course these things are tragedy but that, as we all know, comedy is tragedy in longshot. Also, I think some of the derision is based on Lohan’s reputation for not always acting like a particularly gracious person, to put it mildly, and also her getting some unusually open criticism from some highly venerated costars.

Of course, being nice to people isn’t always easy to do when you stoned out of your mind and being a good coworker is all that much harder. On the other hand, there’s never an excuse to be cruel and Hollywood has plenty of schadenfreude already. In fact, I’d like to call a permanent moratorium on it.

I will say that Robert Downey, Jr. — despite being quite well liked in Hollywood and one of the best actors of his generation — took his share of lumps from late night comics and others for his years long drug related problems. Whether or not it’s right to make fun of Lohan for her troubles, practically speaking, she would be well-advised to develop a thicker skin and a sense of humor about all of it the way Downey did, assuming she can stay alive of course.

In any case, her speech to the court was a good one. Aside from staying clean and sober, what she really needs to do when she gets out is to knock everyone’s socks off with some really good performances.

* I can almost feel the cinephile backlash building as it eventually did — to a limited degree — for “The Dark Knight,” but the early — somewhat geek heavy — reviews for “Inception” are looking extremely good. You might expect someone like AICN’s Mr. Beaks to have a cineorgasm over the film from geekdom’s favorite director, but the geek friendly but nevertheless discerning and cinephile-esque Anne Thompson dares to call it a “Kubrickian masterpiece.” I like Nolan’s films overall quite a bit, but he’s lost me before (“The Prestige” did nothing for me) and I don’t really consider him a great even in the making, but we’ll just have to see.

* The pulse-pounding women-in-prison spectacle of all time, “Sugarboxx,” which includes yours truly as a featured extra who meets an unpleasant end at the hand of rampaging female convicts and features exactly one line co-written by me with auteur Cody Jarrett, is available on demand on several cable systems including — though not limited to — Time Warner, Cox Cable, Bright House Networks and Charter Cable for just a couple more weeks — and then, that’s it, at least for now. I’m going to start reminding you about this again, so be prepared.

* Speaking of movies made for budgets that wouldn’t cover the coffee budget on a standard Hollywood film, Anne Thompson has a much needed update on Insurge, the micro-budget division that Paramount set up some time ago, with the idea of giving out $100,000 for edgy projects. There have been some roadblocks because the unions and guilds won’t stand for Paramount trying to get all the perks of being an impoverished indie producer, which I think is only fair. Still, doing a lot more films for vastly smaller budgets is a great idea and I hope they figure this thing out.

* Memo to Nikki Finke: The recent college grad son of a powerful and respected Hollywood player gets a job in the mailroom of a management company and it’s news? On the other hand, I’m glad Sam Grey is a Preston Sturges fan. Way to get on my good side. And, yes, I’m convinced Hollywood would be a better place and make better movies if more people would watch films made before 1980. Or 1960. Or 1940. Or…

* Returning to the topic of “Inception,” Joseph Gordon-Levitt is apparently the film’s action-star in terms of having to do some pretty complicated and apparently quite painful stunts. This Details profile cover story, which got e-mailed to me by someone there, makes him sound like somewhere between a blissed out cartoon character, a pot-appreciative Jimmy Stewart, and an interesting, manic, guy who gleefully subjected himself to all kinds of punishment while working on Nolan’s film. Also, apparently he likes to be called “Joe,” which, as a Bob, and never a Robert, I can appreciate.

]]> https://www.premiumhollywood.com/2009/12/25/part-of-my-favorite-scene-from-its-a-wonderful-life/ Fri, 25 Dec 2009 20:00:01 +0000 https://www.premiumhollywood.com/?p=18205 I still think is the greatest of all American Christmas films. Do I even need to tell you the title?

Here we see young Hardesty beating Spielberg to the punch and doing his own version of a key scene from the first movie version of Mary Chase’s sweet-natured comedy. (Especially if you’ve never seen the original, you may want to reverse the order of these clips for yourself. I keep changing my mind about which I should place first.)

And now the original. (Note: This clip is on the long side. The part that young Mr. Hardesty recreates starts at about 2:29, but you may want to watch all of it, because Stewart is kind of great.)

* The word has arrived of Steven Spielberg‘s new project, it’s a remake of a particular favorite of mine, Mary Chase’s terrific play “Harvey,” best known for the solid 1950 film version starring Jimmy Stewart in one of his best roles. (He reprised the part for TV in 1972.) Nikki Finke mentions Tom Hanks‘ name for the plum lead role of Elwood P. Dowd, a grown man who believes his best buddy and constant companion is an invisible 6’6″ rabbit. I’ve also seen Will Smith‘s name floated for it (he’s maybe a bit young for the part, still), but any number of actors could take this one on in fine fashion. It’s also possible Hanks might be a bit leery about stepping into a role so closely associated with the actor he’s most often compared to, but therein may lie the challenge, too. Jeffrey Wells inveighs against the project, in the usual terms. I think it’s fine, as long as Spielberg and writer Jonathon Tropper bring something new and worthwhile of their own to this version.

One interesting aspect here is the way that our present age is in some respects more puritanical than America in 1950, particularly as it relates to drinking. Most modern viewers would likely regard Elwood Dowd as an alcoholic today. (In the old days, I remember that TV Guide referred to him as a “gentle tippler.”) Will Spielberg and Tropper try to send Elwood to rehab? I say, no, no, no. Also, I sure hope Wells is wrong about the CGI Harvey. That would pretty much eliminate the whole point of the tale. This is not “Roger Rabbit.”

* I’m a bit late on this, but the planned remake of the Michael Curtiz-directed Errol Flynn swashbuckler — or, to be more kind, the new adaptation of the 1922 Rafael Sabatini novel of derring-do on the high seas — should really be called “Captain Blood in Outer Space” now. By the way, the 1935 “Captain Blood” was actually the second version of the tale to be made in Hollywood. Damn remakes.

* One way to avoid the whole “remakes bad” thing is to use a movie that hardly anyone in your target audience has seen. The French spy thriller, “Anthony Zimmer,” may be available through Netflix, but it there are only three reviews posted of the 2005 film on Rotten Tomatoes, which means it likely only showed in the U.S. at festivals and the like. When the new version, renamed “The Tourist,” comes out with Charlize Theron and Sam Worthington, will anyone remember “Zimmer”?

* Anne Thompson has some thoughts on the general timidity of Hollywood. She’s not wrong, particularly when it comes to the endless recycling of once-hot properties, but — at the risk of repeating myself — I really do think that most of the complaining is off-base to the extent that there’s really nothing new under the sun and that even “Hamlet” and “Romeo and Juliet” were essentially remakes the very first time they ever appeared on an Elizabethan stage. When remakes are good (say, “3:10 to Yuma“) no one complains, though too many forget the original. When remakes are bad (“The Wicker Man“, which was worse than bad, actually), well, the fault is not in the idea of remakes but in what the filmmaker decided to do with the material.