The Bentfootes in New York City
So this movie I wrote and co-directed is going to be playing at the fabulous Walter Reade theater in swanky Lincoln Center this weekend. If you live in New York, this is the place to be this weekend.
The Bentfootes is a mockumentary about a family of American choreographers who, generation after generation, tried, and utterly failed, to leave their mark on the landscape of dance. It is both a scathing satire of the dance world and a touching tribute to, you guessed it, the unstoppable will of the human spirit.
For
fans, the movie stars James Urbaniak as a man trying to put together an evening of these dances. For New York dance-world denizens, it co-stars (and was dreamed-up by) Kriota Willberg as the choreographer whom Urbaniak slowly drives crazy in the process of putting this show together. For Indie Comics fans, it features extensive graphics designed by master cartoonist
.
Showtimes are Saturday, Jan 5 at 4:00pm and Sunday, Jan 6 at 8:30. And yes, your humble correspondent will be there to introduce the movie and accept free dinners.
For more information, I direct you to the Dance On Camera website. For those who want to know who the heck Kriota Willberg is, I direct you to her fancy-schmancy website. And for those interested in the art of film scoring, I direct you to the movie’s extrarordinary composer Carmen Borgia’s article on the scoring of the movie.
Coen Bros: Intolerable Cruelty
THE LITTLE MAN: For the first and (so far) last time, the Coens have chosen to make a movie about a protagonist who is not seeking to improve his station in life. Rather, Miles Massey is a master of the universe, at the peak of his career, loaded with cash (he employs a man to “wax his jet”), loved by his underlings, feared and respected by his peers.
Because Miles has everything, the plot of Intolerable Cruelty must involve him losing everything in the pursuit of — what’s this? — love.
This is, of course, the Coens first and (so far) only romantic comedy, and there are aspects of it that work very well indeed. Miles Massey is a swell creation and George Clooney plays the part in a way that not only recalls Cary Grant, but actually sustains the comparison. A movie star for the ages, this George Clooney fellow is, he’s going places, mark my words.
Metablog
So I’ve been doing this blog for a couple of years now, and apart from a couple of stern-voiced, persistent individuals, I have little clear understanding of who’s reading it, or why.
So now is your chance to come forward and declare yourself. Who are you, what do you do, what brought you here, why do you come back, what do you like best, what do you like least, all that stuff.
In other words, if you will, complete this sentence:
Hi! I’m _____ and I read Todd Alcott’s blog mostly for:
His offbeat, idosyncratic movie analysis
His authoritative posts about writing
His cute stories about his kids
His insider’s view of the soul-grinding Hollyood machine
His inexplicable promotion of the career of James Urbaniak
His unqualified judgments of music
His obsession with certain specimens of pop-culture detritus
Or perhaps it’s his Star Wars slash fiction.
This goes double for you anonymous lurkers.
My many thanks to you in this, the year of the United States’ deliverance from Bush II.
Well whaddaya know —
— an editorial in the New York Times I agree with.
Oscar Dead Pool



Oscar prediction has become far too easy — at least around my house anyway. I just ask Mrs. James
, who hardly ever sees any of the movies and is always 100% accurate in her predictions. (Her technique: “I just pick the one that seems most obvious.”)
(My prediction for this year: Alvin and the Chipmunks in a walk.)
So the only real excitement in the Oscar-cast comes from guessing who will be the last celebrity mentioned on the Celebrity Death Roll three-quarters of the way through the show.
Here, we have three top-rank, obvious choices. Ingmar Bergman is the greatest director of all time, but Deborah Kerr is a genuine old-time movie star, and an American to boot. Will Antonioni take away some of Bergman’s heat by being another world-class foreign-film director, who died on the same day as Bergman?
Will Jane Wyman prove a spoiler to Kerr, since she was, after all, once married to Ronald Reagan? If so, what if they cancel each other out, allowing Anna Nicole Smith to squeak past?
Or will Jack Valenti wield his extraordinary influence, even from beyond the grave, and take all?
Will Kurt Vonnegut and Norman Mailer be mentioned? Plenty of movies (mostly bad) were made from their novels. If so, which will be mentioned first? If they’re mentioned, does thatmean they have to include Ira Levin, or for that matter Sidney Sheldon?
Will Merv Griffin make the list, and what about Toms Snyder and Poston? Or will they lump Tom Poston together with Charles Nelson Reilly and Kitty Carlisle Hart in a kind of “game show trifecta” moment?
I assume that Brad Delp (singer for Boston) and Eric von Schmidt (folk singer) won’t be mentioned, but what about Luciano Pavorotti? He made a movie once.
Or will the Academy, in a bow to the younger set, include the lolrus?
As for me, my money is on Dick Wilson, who, through his indelible portrayal of a haunted grocery-store manager with a unique fetish, taught a generation of Americans about the importance of squeezable toilet paper.
Cute kids update
SAM (6): I was wearing my Fancy-Schmancy Ultra Limited Edition Secret Stash In-house Promo Venture Bros shirt today, which attracted Sam’s interest.
SAM: Who’s that?
DAD: This? This is — [dramatic voice] — The Monarch!
(no response)
DAD: He’s a bad guy.
SAM: I can see that!
Meanwhile, KIT (4), has taken it upon herself to put together a new lineup of The Beatles:
To those who believe that Ringo is irreplaceable, here is your answer: Ringo is replaceable, if he is replaced with BATMAN FROM THE FUTURE and A SHARK ON A POSTAL DELIVERY TRUCK.



Bush on the Plame affair:
“And if there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is. And if the person has violated law, the person will be taken care of. … I don’t know of anybody in my administration who leaked classified information. If somebody did leak classified information, I’d like to know it, and we’ll take the appropriate action.”
And yet, gosh, it turns out: Bush Authorized Plamegate Leak
Bush on the assassination of Benazir Bhutto:
“The United States strongly condemns this cowardly act by murderous extremists who are trying to undermine Pakistan’s democracy. Those who committed this crime must be brought to justice.”
And we have learned by now that the only possible way to discern truth from the mouth of Bush is to take what he says and state it in the exact opposite.
(So the above quote could be translated as: “I strongly applaud this brave act by life-loving centrists who are trying to sustain Pakistan’s brutal dictatorship. Those who committed this great deed must be made exempt from the rule of law.”)
Only possible conclusion: Bush ordered the assassination of Bhutto.
(Well, at least he got the “murderous extremists” part right — that’s the most succinct description of his administration I’ve read yet.)
In a Lonely Place
Bogart with a beautiful woman, Barton with a mosquito — sounds about right.
What says Christmas better than a dark, sweaty noir about a has-been Hollywood screenwriter who may or may not be a vicious killer?
I don’t know what forces prevented me from watching Nicholas Ray’s 1950 masterpiece of paranoia, heartache and broken dreams, but I’m glad I finally got around to it. And about two-thirds of the way through, it struck me that In a Lonely Place would make a smashing double feature with the Coen Bros’ Barton Fink.
The parallels between the two movies are too many to be mere coincidence. In some cases, the Coens have kept elements of Ray’s movie intact, in other cases they’ve ingeniously inverted them.
Both Dix and Barton consider themselves superior beings in the Dostoyevskian sense, and their sense of superiority gets each of them into drunken brawls. Dix fights with six or seven different guys over the course of Lonely, while Barton confines his brawling to one USO dance. Both Dix and Barton have drunken has-been friends: Dix has his “thespian” pal Charlie Waterman, the kind of actor who goes around intoning Shakespeare in plummy tones while wearing a top coat and carrying a cane, Barton has the Faulkneresque W.P. Mayhew.
And both land in trouble with the police. In Lonely, Dix is too depressed to read the novel he’s supposed to adapt, so he asks a hat-check girl who’s read it to come over to his house and tell him the story. Similarly, Barton Fink, desperate for inspiration, calls Mayhew’s secretary, lover and de facto ghostwriter Audrey Taylor to come over to his place to help him prepare for his pitch meeting. In each case, the poor woman winds up dead, the victim of a brutal murder — Lonely makes its killing the inciting incident while Barton, in true Coen form, makes its murder the end-of-second-act twist. And, in each case, it’s not necessarily clear that the screenwriter is entirely innocent of the murder.
In each movie, the murder of the woman is, largely, beside the point of the story. In Lonely it’s a jumping-off point for the filmmakers to examine the precepts, dreams and flaws of Hollywood; Barton does all that and then goes someplace much stranger. It both expands upon the themes of Lonely, pulling in World War II and the Holocaust, but also makes the story more intimate, burrowing inside Barton’s head, so to speak. In each case, the screenwriters’ struggles with their unworkable screenplays are given much more weight than any murder investigation.
In a final inversion, the producers in the two movies have wildly different reactions to the screenwriters’ final efforts. I’d say more but it would be telling.
Lonely is also, of course, a love story, which, I’dhave to say, Barton is not. It’s a very unhappy love story, which I suppose any movie about a screenwriter in Hollywood would have to be. Dix meets and falls in love with Laurel, the woman who lives across the courtyard from him, partly because she provides an alibi for his whereabouts during the murder. Later, we find that she provided the alibi as an excuse to get to know Dix. This, for me, immediately threw suspicion on Laurel as the killer: no intelligent actress in Hollywood would think she could advance her career by making a pass at a screenwriter.
For more on Barton Fink, I direct you to this analysis. (I can’t believe I didn’t get the fire/water symbolism — it’s not like it’s not referenced in practically every scene.)
