Anatomy Of An Adaptation

Okay, it's not so much an 'anatomy' but NYT does have rundown of the adaptation of "Perfume: Story of a Murderer", the upcoming movie based on the novel by Patrick Suskind. Story is about a man who has an extraordinary sense of smell who seeks recognition by creating a perfume -- problem is he wants to make this perfume from a person -- literally. He plans on rendering the body of a virgin in order to make a perfume from her. NYT reports:

The book tells the story of Jean-Baptiste Grenouille, a young 18th-century Parisian born to lowly means but blessed with a preternatural sense of smell. He emits no body odor, a condition that he believes has made others ignore or dismiss him. Seeking to create a scent that will compel the world to esteem him, Grenouille, by then a journeyman perfumer, decides to kill virgins to obtain its components.

Oh, come on. That's a great premise for movie. The novel, first published in 1985 will be re-released this Tuesday. There is an excellent hi-def clip. I may actually go to the theater to see this one.

Complete NYT story

Letters From Iwo Jima

LAT covers "Letters From Iwo Jima" the companion to "Flags of Our Fathers" which tells the story of the Japanese defense of Iwo Jima during the U.S. invasion of that island.

Directed by a 76 year old Clint Eastwood, the pair of films are unique in that they compete against each other for an Oscar, and are distributed by different studios -- and are in two different languages. "I'm now a Japanese director who does not speak Japanese," Mr. Eastwood says.

This picture recreates the conditions the Japanese fought under -- living and dying in underground tunnels -- and the heroic effort of Lt. General Tadamichi Kuribayashi to hold the island against an overwhelming invasion. Eastwood says, "The great futility of war is explored in this picture." And, he goes on to say, "I just think you can say to a younger generation, here or anywhere, that there must be a better way to live than to send 18-year-olds to go die somewhere."

Eastwood doesn't hide his anger about war, calling the Bush administration 'naive' for 'traipsing' into Iraq thinking they could hand-deliver democracy to a country that may not have been ready to live with that system of government. He doesn't stop there; In regard to how the audience will react to 'Letters' he says, "And if they don't like it, what can they do to me? Call me an idiot? I just made it the way I thought. All I can do is put it on the screen. And if they don't like it, they can walk out and go across the hall to see 'Borat 2' or whatever."

"Flags of Our Fathers" won critical praise but did not do well at the box office. I believe this is because it was perceived as a 40s- or 50s-style Hollywood cheerleading exercise -- and some critics felt it was a bit melodramatic. "Letters From Iwo Jima" will probably not have that misinterpretation to deal with and should do better business. No matter what though, the importance of these films can't be denied. Eastwood's objectivity, especially coming so late in his career and considering his feelings about war in general, should make these two movies, taken together, one of best examinations of combat produced by Hollywood. Eastwood is just not the kind of director that utilizes cutesy dialogue or sanitized character arcs like those found in most movies, especially war movies from decades past.

When seeking permission to film on Iwo Jima, now a closed military base, Eastwood told Japanese officials and veterans what kind of movie he wanted to make. LAT reports:

"He told us he would not make a simple war movie," says Yoshitaka Shindo, Kuribayashi's grandson, who met with Eastwood to hear what Hollywood had in mind. "He said he would make a human drama about those who fought to protect their loved ones."

These two movies may be overdue. After the war the Japanese did not linger on their defeat, or review it for their children in school. The result is a blind spot in their history and a generation of Japanese who know little of their country's experience at Iwo Jima. According to LAT there has never been a Japanese movie about this battle. Of this Eastwood says, "None of my Japanese actors knew anything about Iwo Jima. You lose 21,000 people! To just ignore them. What would happen if we did that?"

"Letters From Iwo Jima" is doing great business in Japan in limited release and critics are praising this companion to "Flags of Our Fathers".

"I felt I had met my grandfather for the first time," Shindo said after watching the movie.

Complete story at LAT

Easy Listening

Here is some easy listening for Turkey Day. Bob Mondello runs down the yearend high-profile movies including "The Painted Veil", "The Good German", "Perfume: The Story of a Murderer", "Children of Men", Clint Eastwood's war duo "Flags or Our Fathers" and "Letters from Iwo Jima", "Dreamgirls", "Apocalypto", "The Pursuit of Happyness", and gobs more.

Bee Movie

Here's a chance to see what Jerry Seinfeld has been up to.

Children Of Men

Anne Thompson feels that Universal execs have 'already written off' "Children of Men", directed by Alfonso Cuaron and starring Clive Owen, Julianne Moore, and Michael Caine.

Thompson gives us the scoop from the premiere after-party, saying the movie "is a brilliant exercise in style, but it's another grim dystopian look at our future", and industry types in attendance were hinting that the movie is "a downer film that was going to lose money".

Hard to argue. The clips I've seen promise an intellectually engaging story, but one that's way out of place as a Christmas release, and way too expensive at a reported $70-90 million. Remember Spielberg's "Munich" from last year? It was a very heavy story, opened at X-mas and totally tanked at the box office -- and Cuaron and "Children of Men" are certainly lower profile than Spielberg and "Munich".

I don't know where all that money went (it's not apparent how they could have spent that much), and think the release date needs to be bumped -- but will buy this one on disc ASAP. The P.D. James book goes on my list, too (something tells me this story is better read than watched, anyway).

Here is an excerpt of Anne's rundown:

But what made the movie so frigging expensive? Clive Owen, Julianne Moore and Michael Caine don't cost so much. It's shot with amazing hand-held cameras and boasts some astonishing long action takes that took days to set up. The filmmakers shut down sections of London to shoot some of the street scenes. There are extras and tanks and pyrotechnics and enormous sets. It's still hard to imagine how the studio could justify spending so much on this movie. But in the long run, they could eke out some coin if this movie lasts in the culture the way Blade Runner or The Road Warrior did.

Well, if she says 'frigging', you know she's upset. I don't blame her. This movie could have been made for, say, 25% of the money they spent. Adjust the budget, release in February, and you might have a successful outing. If "Children of Men" gets the shit kicked out of it at the box office it certainly won't do smart/risky films any good. Now, I'm cussing... Oh, well. At least it'll be a fun disc to watch. Did I say fun? I meant...intellectually engaging.

Anne Thompson's complete rundown