Here’s the trailer of a new film that covers a week Marilyn Monroe spent in England called “My Week with Marylin.” Michelle Williams plays Marilyn and this is the kind of role that could define her career. In many ways, Williams really captures Marilyn’s look, perhaps better than other actresses that have attempted the role. She’s getting a lot of buzz for her portrayal of the iconic actress. The movie is out later this month and everyone will get the chance to weigh in on her performance.

But just looking at the trailer you can see that Williams brings considerable talent to the role.

It’s also an interesting angle on Marilyn as it covers her time in England. This is a less well-known chapter in her life so it can offer a new take on the story. England is always a great setting for any film, and it changes the whole backdrop for this particular character. It will also spark renewed interest in travel to England as movies can move popular culture and remind people of places they want to see. London is always high on everyone’s list but we may see increases in interest in other parts of the country as people search for Brighton hotels or Cardiff hotels. All of England has always been a draw for Americans, and seeing the ultimate American icon and sex symbol on the big screen in England can only add to the romance of the UK.

It will be interesting to see how the film does. So far the reception has been good, and maybe we’ll see Michelle Williams at the Oscars!

Everyone has taken that soul-sucking job in order to pay the bills. And while we proles may tease them for living the glamorous life, actors probably take that job more often than anyone, since they never know when the next job is going to come. (Case in point: Michael Madsen told us that he categorizes the movies he’s made as “good,” “bad,” and “unwatchable.”) Putting this theory to the test, we scoured the filmographies of this year’s nominees in the acting categories, looking for movie titles that screamed ‘bad idea.,’ and we were not disappointed with what we found. Jesse Eisenberg, for example, did a TV movie called “Lightning: Fire from the Sky,” which will be the main feature at our next Bad Movie night. Here are ten other films that this year’s candidates would probably prefer remained unseen.

Colin Firth (Best Actor, “The King’s Speech”)

Movie: Femme Fatale (1991)
IMDb rating: 4.6
The plot: An English artist-turned park ranger falls for and marries a stranger, only for her to disappear days later. As he learns more about his wife, he gets deeper and deeper into the Los Angeles underworld looking for clues that will lead him to her.
Firth’s character: Joe Prince, the aforementioned artist/ranger.
How bad is it?: You may not see the ending coming, but that is about the only thing this movie has going for it. Armed with one of the most awkward love scenes we’ve seen in ages, this movie does not gel on any level, using mental illness as a means of providing psychological depth, not to mention Acting!, with that last word ideally spoken like Jon Lovitz. Firth is actually passable here, given the material, and Danny Trejo pops up as a tattoo artist. But you can bet that when someone assembles a clip show of Firth’s finest moments, this movie will not make the cut.

To read the rest of the article, click here.

As Anne Thompson reminds us, this is a weekend when, unlike the usual rather steep decline of ongoing films, we’ll see very small drops or, especially for family films, significant increases. The Box Office Mojo weekend chart, bears that out.

With no major new releases, “Little Fockers” suffered a 14.7% decline, which would be fantastic almost any other weekend, netting an estimated $26.3 million for Universal. That would be somewhat more impressive had the film not cost a ridiculous $100 million. On the other hand, after two weeks, it’s earned back that amount plus some change. Not bad for a movie that probably has the worst reviews of any recent major hit. (Among “top critics,” only funny guy Glenn Kenny failed to drub the movie with a review that double-damns with the faintest possible praise.)

Nipping at its heels, and perhaps very likely to be the more profitable film over time, was the Coen Brothers’ typically excellent first true-western, “True Grit.” Nikki Finke points out that Friday, New Year’s Eve, “Grit” actually earned a bit more than “Fockers.” I guess we can attribute that to the superior movie-going taste of the nation’s wallflowers. (What night did we see this again?) Still, the total estimated take was $24.5 million for Paramount. On the other hand, the price tag was a mere $38 million.Add to all of that a probable slate of Oscar nominations (though I doubt more than one or two wins) good word of mouth — the second week drop was a beyond miniscule 1.7% — and the proven ability of the Coens’ to make films that people continue watching decades later, and you’ve got one case of a studio being amply rewarded for taking a chance on an old school western. Westerns are, of course, deader than a doornail. The exception is when somebody makes a good one.

UPDATE: I failed to mention previously that, at over $86 million already generated by “True Grit,” this is also apparently by far the most successful Coen Brothers films so far by quite a lot. For comparison, “No Country for Old Men” made $76 million and change for its entire run, including a “Best Picture” Oscar win. Better yet, “True Grit” has an ending that won’t leave a significant portion of the audience angry or dissatisfied, so this film should have really significant legs. I doubt they’ll make another western any time soon, but if the Coens want to make “Truly Grittier,” no studio head would stop them.

Another Jeff Bridges showpiece, “Tron: Legacy,” held on fairly well in week 3 with a small 4.4% drop and a weekend estimated total of $18.3 million for Disney. It’s still about $30 million shy of making back its $170 budget, though I’m sure that’s just a week or two away. Still, this is no unalloyed coup. Guess I’m not the only person who wonders why the original “Tron” is even discussed today as anything other than a technological advance.

The New Year’s weekend was an overall bummer. It was down 26% compared to New Year’s 20010, and the year as a whole saw movie receipts declining very slightly. Anne Thompson says it went from $10.6 million to $10.5 million. She added that the real issue is not that seemingly tiny increase. It’s obscured by increasing ticket prices for 3D and other films, but that overall attendance declined by a “whopping” 5%, according to Thompson. I think we can attribute that to a stagnant economy, improving home entertainment options, and the inability of the industry to bring back the long-lost ability to turn movies into events worth getting out of the house for. Call me a complete and utter lunatic, but avoiding the insanely obviously cookie-cutter storylines and characterizations of most movies today might also help slightly.

Still, there was good news this week for a number of family films and Oscar hopefuls too numerous to mention. It also wasn’t bad for the two limited releases which came out last Wednesday. Both were rather downbeat films dealing with relationships unhappy, happy, and non-existent. “Blue Valentine,” with Ryan Gosling and Michelle Williams as a married couple on their way to a break-up, emerged victorious from it’s battle to avoid a bookings-killing NC-17 with an R-rating and scored the best per-screen average of the holiday weekend, $45,000 in four theaters for a weekend estimated total of $180,000.

Meanwhile, “Another Year,” which I’ve been covering, started the New Year in, I’m guessing, reasonably OK fashion with $20,000 in six theaters for a total of $120,000. A film about a happy couple and they’re incredibly miserable friends and family members, a likely and definitely well-deserved Oscar nomination for Lesley Manville is the very low budget’s film’s hope for real profitability.

* Robert Rodriguez and the other makers of  the modestly budgeted “Machete” got a nasty surprise from the Texas Film Commission, which appears to be reneging on $1.7 million in tax rebates. As reported by the Wall Street Journal, It has something to do with a law against providing the incentives to films portraying Texas and/or Texans negatively. Every film portrays people negatively. This reeks of political selectivity, probably related to the film’s deliberately nonpartisan lampooning of anti-immigrant hysteria and demagogic politicians. “Machete” goes out of its way to avoid naming the evil politician played by Robert De Niro as a member of either party, in fact.

If Texas doesn’t change it’s tune, and fast, I agree for once with the L.A. Times‘ Patrick Goldstein and seriously hope nobody from outside the state shoots a single foot of film in Texas until such time as the state seeks to elect non-mouthbreathers to statewide office. They have, indeed, fucked with the wrong Mexican.

* Alleged flaming communist eco-extremist and actual blowhard James Cameron is working on a possible series of “immersive” 3D films built around Cirque du Soleil with writer/director Andrew Adamson (“Shrek”). Though Nikki Finke in her “toldja” piece merely reprinted a vaguely written, woolly press release. The L.A. Times actually got them to describe the project in a coherent way. The first movie will be a pastiche of all the shows currently playing in Las Vegas with some kind of linking device. More films may follow though what they’ll be, who the heck knows.

* While we’re on the topic of Cameron, the true meaning of “avatard.”

* A bit of news I missed from earlier this week. While all the complaining in the world couldn’t reverse the widely ridiculed R-ratings given to “The King’s Speech” and “Made in Dagenham,” Harvey Weinstein worked his famed pre-Oscar magic on the potentially commercially ruinous NC-17 given to the drama “Blue Valentine,” reportedly for a single charged sex scene featuring a married couple played by Ryan “Hey Girl” Gosling and Michelle Williams. After much industry criticism, the likely Oscar nominee has been talked down to an R.

* Matt Damon is “circling” “Elysium,” the new film from South African “District 9” whiz Neil Blomkamp. “District 9” star Sharlto Copley is already on board, but almost nothing else is known about the movie. Are we even so sure it’s going to be science fiction of some sort?

* You may have heard that the mystery of who killed the widely liked and respected publicist Ronni Chasen, and why, has been mostly solved. Nikki Finke presents a series of mostly very logical questions by a reporter named Allison Hope Weiner that makes it seem unclear whether it really has.

After listening to the details of the press conference, one of my police sources familiar with the investigation questioned the credibility of the investigation and quipped, “If I’m murdered and you find my body in Beverly Hills, please drag my body to LAPD. Even if you have to leave a bloody trail.”

Ouch. Quick, someone call Axel Foley.

* Indiewire has a new editor.

* You’d think he’d be on top of the world right now, but Jessie Eisenberg is going from playing a baby billionaire to collecting “Free Samples.”

* I think pretty highly of James L. Brooks but, Jeebus H. Christofolis, the budget of his upcoming romantic comedy, “How Do You Know,” turns out to be $120 million, says The Hollywood Reporter. Remember, this is a movie where people just talk and kiss and stuff, set in New York, not outer Mongolia during an ice age. They don’t part the Red Sea or fight off hordes of alien invaders or flee the destruction of the planet. Of course, $27 million of that is the salary for Reese Witherspoon and Jack Nicholson, with Owen Wilson, Paul Rudd (getting a mere pittance of $3 million), and Brooks himself all having very nice pay days. All told, the major talent were paid a routinely absurd $50 million .

Subtracting those enormous sums, that still means that Brooks made a $70 million dollar film about people talking in offices and very nice apartments, even if he did reshoot significant portions of the movie. I simply don’t know how you justify that. Also, with that kind of money being spent, you’d think they would at least spring for a question mark cost for the title. (Via Film Drunk.)

* Apparently what the world needs now is a “Clash of the Titans” sequel.

* In an over-the-top stupid moment sure to make “The Daily Show,” CNN used a clip from the most notorious moment of “Dumb and Dumber” — you know the one — to illustrate a story about a man suffering from a truly painful and debilitating illness of the digestive tract. Stupid and stupider.

* Guess what this year’s top movie moneymaker from Fox is? Ready. “Knight and Day,” says Mike Fleming. Yeah, I don’t know anyone who liked it either. I guess we can’t count out Tomcat, or Cameron Diaz, just yet.

There aren’t many producers around these days whose name can help sell a movie or TV show, but Gale Anne Hurd is the rare exception. Probably best known as one of the co-creators of “The Terminator” franchise, Hurd has been an important player in numerous mega- or merely major productions, including both “Hulk” and “The Incredible Hulk,” “The Abyss,” “Armageddon,” “The Punisher,” and the underrated 1999 comedy “Dick,” which starred Dan Hedaya as Richard Milhous Nixon and a young Kirsten Dunst and Michelle Williams as a couple of teenagers who wind up bringing down a presidency.

Clearly one of the more hands-on producers around, Hurd is pleasant and businesslike when talking to a member of the show-biz press, but clearly has the gumption to deal with the biggest and most difficult of personalities, which is how I segue into the obligatory mention of the fact that she spent the part of the late eighties and early nineties being married to first James Cameron and then Brian De Palma. Moreover, she began her career working for one the most fascinating and effective producers in the history of the medium, Roger Corman, but more of that in the interview.

Still, nothing she’s done is quite like her current project, the zombie horror drama and comic book adaptation, “The Walking Dead.” The AMC television series, adapted from a series of acclaimed comics by Robert Kirkman primarily by writer-director Frank Darabont (“The Shawshank Redemption,” “The Green Mile,” “The Mist”) is currently receiving maximum exposure on the web. The publicity train was only just getting started when I spoke to Ms. Hurd at a mammoth new San Diego hotel adjacent to the Comic-Con festivities last summer.

I had typed my questions on my laptop, which I was afraid might be a little off-putting. So, after a quick greeting, I tried to explain why.

Premium Hollywood: I’m using this because I couldn’t find paper.

Gale Anne Hurd: No worries. You know, it’s much greener.

PH: Is it really? I guess so. Anyhow, you’re one of the people I requested, because I’m a kind of a big movie geek.

GAH: Good!

PH: You’re kind of an important person in recent film history — let’s go back to the beginning. You were a P.A. [production assistant] on movies like “Humanoids from the Deep”…

GAH: I was a PA on “Humanoids from the Deep”….

PH: …”Rock and Roll High School,” “Alligator”…

GAH: I actually worked up to Second A.D. [assistant director] on “Alligator.” I got a promotion.

PH: You were a fast rising person, but you were part of the Golden Age of Roger Corman films, actually the second golden age, I guess.

GAH: I wasn’t there with the Scorseses, Demmes, Coppolas.

PH: That would actually be the third golden age, then, because if you count the movies Corman made mostly himself [in the 50s and 60s], and then there was the 70s group and the 80s.

GAH: [Laughs.] I fell in love with, I saw his films at the drive-in when I was growing up, especially the Edgar Allen Poe adaptations that I loved.

PH: Those were wonderful. So, what do you think that experience with Corman taught you about the kind of sort of high-class [by which I meant “big budget] producing you do now?

GAH: If you look at the films that he made, the tent-pole summer films of now are versions of what he was doing, with bigger stars, although when you consider that Jack Nicholson started his career with Roger Corman…I’ve got a bigger sandbox to play in, but I’m just as much a fan now as I was then. I come to Comic-Con even when I don’t have a panel or a project to promote.

PH: Really.

GAH: This is so much fun for me. I’ve already been over, checked out the hall, [been] comic book girl and checked out my friends at the various booths.

PH: What are your favorite comics right now?

GAH: Well, obviously, I love “The Walking Dead.” I’ve got one, actually, that I’ve launched, “The Scourge” written by Scott Lobdell and artwork by Eric Battle, which is from Aspen Comics, I’m very excited about that. There’s also the new adaptation of Phillip K. Dick, “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?” [the novel that was the extremely loose basis/inspiration for Ridley Scott‘s “Blade Runner”]

PH: I didn’t know they were doing that — you probably know more about comics these days than me. That sounds interesting.

GAH: Very cool.

PH: Maybe they’ll decide to make a movie of it again. [Laughing]

GAH: It’s interesting when you think about it.

PH: Maybe they’ll do the actual book. Now, I’m famously squeamish. The most popular blog post I ever wrote was me getting myself drunk to watch the original “Dawn of the Dead” after putting it off for over 20 years. Approximately how many drinks will it take me to get through a typical episode of “The Walking Dead”?

GAH: It depends on what makes you squeamish. We should probably have some sort of alert so that when the character drama is interrupted by something a bit gory, you can avert your eyes. AMC has not given us the kind of restrictions that I think that the fans were afraid of.

PH: The gorehounds are going to be happy.

GAH: I think you’ve actually got some of the stills that are out there [in the hall]

PH: I actually don’t think I’ve seen anything.

GAH: I’ll take you next door and there’s something I want to show you that will give you an idea. You know, it is the zombie genre.

PH: No, I understand. You’ve got to have a little bit of that.

GAH: You don’t want to make it seem like it’s got the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval for all ages, but it’s not what we’re focusing on. Because this is on AMC. It’s story. It’s character. But it is a zombie apocalypse. Although we call them “walkers,” people will know them as zombies and we have to be true to the genre.

PH: And with zombies comes zombie apocalypse. You’ve actually worked on a number of movies with apocalyptic themes.

GAH: I have.

PH: Even in the title, “Armageddon,” “Judgment Day.” Why do you think that’s obviously such an appealing concept? I was watching “The Mist” [written and directed by Frank Darabont] last night. The end of the world seems to be such a popular sub-sub genre. Why do you think that is?

GAH: Regardless of your religious or ethnic origin, all traditions of the human experience deal with some sort of end of time, end of days. What people disagree on is what happens after that or what’s causing it. With [“The Walking Dead”] it enables us to not have a natural disaster but the aftereffects are such that you’ve got a small band of humans dealing with the exigencies of survival.

PH: I’m not too familiar with the comic book — actually I’m not familiar at all with it — but I imagine there’s the usual group dynamics in these things where sometimes the people are the bigger threat than the monsters.

GAH: You can predict what the zombies are after; you can’t always predict human behavior.

PH: Was “The Mist” — like I said, I just watched it last night — was that directly related to how Frank Darabont ended up on this project?

GAH: No. You know Frank is also an enormous genre fan. I think this may be his twentieth Comic-Con. He’s been a fan of Robert Kirkman’s work since the very first issue. It’s issue 75 at this point. In fact, it was at last year’s Comic-Con that Frank and I sat down with Robert and said, “We want to take this to AMC.” Who would’ve thought that a year later we’d be here, in the middle of shooting episode 4?

PH: I understand Mr. Kirkman’s very excited about it and wants it to last 27 seasons. [Laughing.]

GAH: At least! He told us he’s got 250 issues mapped out.

PH: So how closely are you following the [story] of the comic?

GAH: We’re not slavishly following it. It’s a different medium to begin with. We have the opportunity to explore characters in a way that a comic book is limited. It’s limited in the number of panels that you’ve got. The amount of dialogue. So, we’re able to dig deeper there. And Robert was very, very upfront saying “I don’t want all of the fans of the comic book to be able to predict exactly where it’s going.” So, we change it up. In fact, the episode we’re shooting right now…which is the fourth episode, Robert Kirkman wrote.

PH: How was he in handling that transition [from comic book to film writing]? Had he done any screenwriting before?

GAH: No. First of all, he was involved from the very beginning as an executive producer. In the meetings, talking about where the arc of the six episodes would take us by the end of the season. He worked very closely with Frank and the writer’s room. In fact, he was in the writer’s room and he’s been on set.

PH: AMC is really developing an interesting, very eclectic pattern. They started with “Mad Men” and “Breaking Bad“…

GAH: And “Rubicon.” But the interesting thing is they’re going to have a block of programming in October called “Fear Fest” which is a collection of the best of the genre and we’ll be premiering during that block, so it’s actually perfect.

PH: So, they’ll schedule you right after showing “Night of the Living Dead”?

GAH: I don’t know. That’s up to them. But we’re in good hands. [Note: The movie preceding “The Walking Dead” premiere turns out to be Zack Snyder’s 2004 remake of “Dawn of the Dead”]

PH: I understand that, in terms of the rules of your zombie universe, you’re following the ones set up in [George Romero’s] original “Night of the Living Dead.”

GAH: Our zombies are not Usain Bolt. They’re not world record sprinters. They’re dead, they’re not moving as fast as when they were alive.

PH: “They’re dead. They’re all messed up.” Right. So, looking at the history of all these zombie movies, what do you think is going to be the contribution of “The Walking Dead” to the genre?

GAH: The great news is we have at least six hours starting out to explore the characters and this world. If we continue we’ll have 13 hours next years [Note: AMC has already renewed the show, so they will.] No one’s ever gone as in-depth as we’re able to in any kind of zombie series in the United States. We want it to be great television as well as something where the fans of Robert Kirkman’s comic book will say that it’s also a great adaptation.