Posted on 09/30/2007 11:52:27 AM PDT by snarks_when_bored
Hollywood bankrolls another anti-anti-terrorism dog...
Today I've seen repeated television ads for a new, as-yet-unrated movie called "Rendition" (the title tells you everything you need to know, of course). It stars Reese Witherspoon, Jake Gyllenhaal and Meryl Streep. From the ads, I deduce that lovely blonde Witherspoon is married to a strikingly handsome, swarthy guy—a total innocent, no doubt, who may belong to a purely peaceful religion. Apparently, this completely innocent swarthy fellow gets snatched by obviously evil U.S. government-types (Streep et. al.) who render him to a foreign country where he is held without charge and, most shockingly, not fed catered continental cuisine.
When the muhammad-obsessed, sharia-guided caliphate arrives, producers of this sort of tripe will doubtless be the first to be tossed off rooftops.
When will Nick Berg’s lifestory be told? It really is fascinating how he traveled America, bumped into Jose Padilla, logged Jose into his password protected laptop, and later traveled to Iraq where he was interviewed by Michael Moore’s film crew (absent Mike remained in American and never did GO to the country he evaluated), after which he was interviewed by US officials, releases and advised to get the hell out of there, and then was kidnapped and held hostage for awhile until the US media broke the story of Abu Ghraib, and then was murdered by the head of Al Qaeda’s Iraq agents in a videotape that was seen around the world.
Where is this story? I want to see it.
I wonder how the box office numbers look.
My guess is poor.
“Rendition” is being released to theatres on October 19th, 2007. I predict that it will bomb and be released to DVD a few weeks later, only to bomb there, too. Investors in such a piece of crap deserve the losses they’re going to experience.
Article published Oct 25, 2007
Audiences reject Iraq war at box office
October 25, 2007
By Christian Toto - It doesn't matter how many Oscar winners are in front of or behind the camera — audiences are proving to be conscientious objectors when it comes to this fall's surge of antiwar and anti-Bush films.
Both "In the Valley of Elah" and, more recently, "Rendition" drew minuscule crowds upon their release, which doesn't bode well for the ongoing stream of films critical of the Iraq war and the Bush administration's wider war on terror.
"Rendition," which features three Oscar winners in key roles, grossed $4.1 million over the weekend in 2,250 screens for a ninth-place finish. A re-release of "The Nightmare Before Christmas" beat it, and it's 14 years old.
"Rendition" follows an Egyptian-American who gets kidnapped by U.S. authorities who think he's a terrorist. Reese Witherspoon plays the man's wife, Meryl Streep dials up her dark side as the official who keeps his disappearance a secret and Alan Arkin is a senior senator with the power to influence the case. Meanwhile, the man is shipped off to an unnamed North African country, where he is tortured for information.
"Elah" boasts Tommy Lee Jones, Charlize Theron and Susan Sarandon, another Oscar-winning triumvirate, under professionally red-hot director Paul Haggis, who won his own Oscar for "Crash." Mr. Haggis' drama focuses on the disappearance of an Iraq war veteran upon his return home.
Beyond the fiction features, the anti-Iraq war documentary "No End in Sight" (box office: $1.4 million) couldn't capture the indie crowd, beating a swift retreat to DVD next Tuesday despite glowing reviews.
Brandon Gray, president and publisher of www.boxofficemojo.com, says audiences seek out movies for inspiration, for laughter and to be moved.
"Many of these recent dramas fail on all those fronts," Mr. Gray says. "They're too heavy handed in their presentation."
"Rendition" director Gavin Hood — who wrote and directed "Tsotsi," winner of the 2006 best foreign language film Oscar — has been quoted as saying he doesn't want his new film to preach. But audiences who can't figure out where he stands on the rendition policy must have dozed off after the opening credits.
The current crop of antiwar films simply don't offer new insights into the Iraq conflict, Mr. Gray says.
"You might hear this stuff from the commentators or on the Internet," he says. "It's not that interesting to see it fictionalized."
"The Kingdom," a more ambivalent film, which shows U.S. forces smiting a terrorist cell, has pulled in a more respectable $43 million (so far).
" 'The Kingdom' looked like 'CSI: Riyadh.' It danced around the issues," Mr. Gray says.
Hollywood shouldn't soft-pedal its beliefs, he argues.
"You really can't try to take on subject matter like this and appeal to all views at the same time," he says. "They act like they're saying something when they're actually not saying anything."
A film that took a principled stand, particularly against terrorism, might fare better with audiences, Mr. Gray says.
Films with bold perspectives also spark op-ed flurries which can lead to more ticket buyers, says Dan Vancini, movies editor with Amazon.com.
"Then, you'll get your audience in who already resonates with the message," Mr. Vancini says, though he adds such free publicity isn't always a good thing.
Such may be the strategy of splattermeister Brian De Palma, director of "Redacted." Scheduled for a December release, the low budget/no stars movie is based on real events involving American soldiers who raped a 14-year-old Iraqi girl, then killed her family. Mr. De Palma has been complaining publicly that disturbing photos, which run at the end of the film showing dead and dying Iraqis have, ironically, been redacted by the distributor, Magnolia Pictures. (The faces are blacked out for legal reasons, the studio says.) The Drudge Report picked up on the controversy — generally not bad for business.
Hollywood's antiwar drive continues Nov. 9 with "Lions for Lambs," in which Tom Cruise, Miss Streep and Robert Redford spar over matters of patriotism and war. And "Grace is Gone" follows a father (John Cusack, no shrinking violet when it comes to his anti-administration rhetoric off-screen) who can't bear to tell his children their soldier-mother died in Iraq.
Mr. Vancini predicts "Lambs" could fare well thanks to its starry cast.
"They have a word-of-mouth following," he says, particularly Mr. Cruise.
Mr. Gray remains skeptical, citing a lack of clarity from early peeks at the film.
" 'Lions' will be an interesting test," Mr. Gray says. "Is it simply them sitting in rooms giving speeches? That's what it looks like," he says.
Reese Witherspoon-Jake Gyllenhaal Romance Didn't Help 'Rendition'
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
By Roger Friedman
Reese-Jake Romance Didn't Help Movie
Movie star romances used to be the thing that made box office numbers soar. Think Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie in “Mr. and Mrs. Smith” or Jennifer Aniston and Vince Vaughn in “The Break-Up.”
Another great example: Tom Cruise and Penelope Cruz in “Vanilla Sky.”
These movies weren't Oscar-quality films, but the idea that the stars were fooling around off-camera made ticket sales pop.
Publicists have been using this gambit forever, often inventing relationships where there weren’t any just to get publicity.
Alas, the old formula ain’t workin’ for Gavin Hood’s thriller, “Rendition.” A rumored romance between stars Reese Witherspoon and Jake Gyllenhaal surfaced months ago. Everyone involved denied it. Indeed, it seemed from afar that maybe Reese and Jake were just part of a PR machine.
In any case, that should have raised the profile of "Rendition." It didn’t. With a strange title and a complicated plot, "Rendition" was hard to explain even to those who wanted to know more about it.
Then the movie opened on Oct. 19. The first weekend take was an anemic $4 million from 2,250 theaters. Ten days later, “Rendition” has $8 million in ticket sales.
It’s dead, and a total write-off for New Line, which not only has top money earners in Witherspoon and Gyllenhaal, but a pricey supporting cast in previous Oscar-winners Meryl Streep, Alan Arkin and in Gyllenhaal’s much admired actor brother-in-law, Peter Saarsgard.
Now here’s the rub: Reese and Jake are for real. As "Rendition" sinks into red ink, the couple is everywhere. They’re in all the supermarket tabloids as a confirmed couple. They’re photographed strolling amorously around Rome.
They’ve let the cat out of the bag. But it’s too late -- "Rendition" is over. By Thanksgiving, in three weeks, its theatrical run will end to make room for new movies. If it grosses $15 million, New Line execs will pop champagne to go with their Xanax.
So what went wrong? "Rendition" is about the CIA and torture, two things audiences don’t really want to know much about anyway unless there’s a big romantic subplot. If there isn’t one in the film, then there has to be off-screen.
But without confirmation, the Reese-Jake story lost momentum before the film opened. The irony of its veracity now is a good Hollywood laugh, except, of course, to the people who put up the money for “Rendition.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.