A Day in the Life
This is just one day in the busy life of Anne Thompson during awards season:
Friday Night Cocktails and Docs
Friday I interviewed It’s Complicated writer-director Nancy Meyers by phone, Hurt Locker‘s Jeremy Renner by Flip Cam, and went to a Paramount Lovely Bones cocktail party at the Four Seasons. There I talked to Stanley Tucci and photographed him with Peter Jackson, who I will talk to later this weekend. Then I ran off to the International Documentary Awards, which were taking place at the same time as the first screening of Avatar (Arrggh) for the Hollywood Foreign Press. Word on the street at the IDA party: Avatar‘s a 141-minute movie with fab visual effects and adolescent story. I won’t see it until the 10th, alas.
Yours Truly COULD go and schmooze but life is a balancing act — I think of all of the awards bloggers or journalists, I am the only single parent in the group. My daughter is 11 and I sometimes drag her to screenings, and maybe I’ll bring her to a party but my options are to constantly hire a babysitter and spend maybe 50% of her free time with her, or skip the extras. I have always chosen to skip the extras. Most of the time it doesn’t bother me; I’m not really in this to meet artists or celebrities – but every once in a while I feel a little pang. In another time and place I might not have minded trailing after Thompson on this day.
On the other hand, I might preferred to sit with the HFPA watching Avatar.
Loyal says:
Saturday, December 5, 2009 at 9:51am
There’s a movie in there Sasha.
Single mother and master Oscar pundit meets a recently widowed neurotic Hollywood director. Opposites attract and a whirlwind romance ensues. But when she’s given the exclusive of a lifetime, will she run with it at the risk of losing her last chance at love?
We’ll call it “Embargoed Love.” Sandra Bullock could play you.
bambi says:
Saturday, December 5, 2009 at 9:53am
This is the news:
“Word on the street at the IDA party: Avatar‘s a 141-minute movie with fab visual effects and adolescent story. ”
Any tweets yet?
Antoinette says:
Saturday, December 5, 2009 at 9:54am
I think if you leave your kid at the fire station they’ll take them to the nuns or something. That’s what I’d do if “parenting” was coming between me and schmooshing. Let’s get real here.
btw, I had no idea who those people in the photo were at first. Then I said oh wait that’s Peter Jackson. Every time I see him in this skinny version I know he’s someone I’m supposed to know but I think he’s some writer or something. Eventually it clicks. Then I stared at Tucci for a while trying to flip through the bald file. lol
Sasha Stone says:
Saturday, December 5, 2009 at 10:00am
Antoinette – no chance. Being her mom, not to sound sappy or anything, is the singular best experience of my life. The Hollywood stuff? Not so much. I’ve always been in it for the movies.
Stephen Holt says:
Saturday, December 5, 2009 at 10:23am
You’re a wonderful, devoted mother who is also an artist and a great writer. That’s all a very beautiful thing to be.
Stephen Holt says:
Saturday, December 5, 2009 at 10:31am
“Word on the street at the IDA party: Avatar‘s a 141-minute movie with fab visual effects and adolescent story.”
That’s EXACTLY what I thought of it when I saw the 24 minute “preview” by accident several months. I thought, as I’ve written here before, “This is there ‘Best of’ reel? THIS is what they are showing? Even at 24 minutes, or whatever it was, the story was immensely puerile if not downright stupid.
Stunning visuals…but 2 1/12 with 3d glasses???? I got a head-ache from those darn glasses at 24 mins.
The fanboys will love it. The Sci-fi kids and geeks, but that’s IT.
It will NEVER make it’s $400 million back. FOUR HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS?!?!? I can’t imagine that much money…let alone that much money being spent on ONE movie…!!!
None of the first-annoucing awards-giving bodies were allowed to see, you know…and Anne Thompson is hinting at WHY.
I saw LOTR in it’s second installment in a 20 minute or so preview and EVERY SECOND of it was STUNNING!!! STUNNING!!! I’ll never forget seeing Gollum for the first time!!!WOW!!!
There was no equivalent thrill in “Avatar”. I didn’t get a thrill. I got a headache.
bambi says:
Saturday, December 5, 2009 at 10:35am
I don`t think that Fox wants Avatar for BP a smuch as they want their money back and some profit on the side. Which sounds tougher than getting BP.
Loyal says:
Saturday, December 5, 2009 at 10:39am
Stephen, this is the second time I’ve seen you mention the 24 minute preview? What was that exactly? Are you referring to Avatar Day?
bambi says:
Saturday, December 5, 2009 at 10:42am
hey, Stephen, you were right on the money about LB and Invictus being close to a bust. Well, at least LB seems to be while Invictus still has some support (NBR). I hope you are wrong about Avatar but I`m so scared now since you got it right before.
Hunter says:
Saturday, December 5, 2009 at 10:51am
Stephen Holt is a God Among Men.
bambi says:
Saturday, December 5, 2009 at 10:57am
Only if his sources said Holmes is the movie to beat which, jugging by the after-screening buzz, is all that is.
Hunter says:
Saturday, December 5, 2009 at 11:03am
Buzz on Holmes is pretty much the same from everyone: Ritchie’s best film ever, great fun, very funny, good mystery, fabulous sets and cinematography, Oscar-worthy score (best of the year) and terrific chemistry between Downey and Law.
bambi says:
Saturday, December 5, 2009 at 11:14am
That means the movie to beat in my book.
Lets face it, current crop of front-runners (UITA, HL and Precious) don`t have the winner oomph.
Ryan Adams says:
Saturday, December 5, 2009 at 11:29am
I do respectfully admire these insider reports, Hunter. Just wish our own ears could hear the dog-whistles yours do.
Hunter says:
Saturday, December 5, 2009 at 11:37am
It’s been screened a fair bit the past week, Ryan. It had two SAG screenings (that filled two theaters) Tuesday and Wednesday and it was screened for press on Thursday and Friday. It’s embargoed, though people at the SAG screenings have been Twittering it up a storm.
ORDINARY COW says:
Saturday, December 5, 2009 at 11:52am
Sasha, you can’t say this season is not EXCITING!!! OMG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hunter says:
Saturday, December 5, 2009 at 12:00pm
Here’s the first legit review, from John Rabe of Southern California Public Radio, who is a serious Holmes buff. No need for spoilers.
http://www.scpr.org/blogs/johnrabe/2009/12/05/jrblog-shmovie/
I am something of a Sherlock Holmes geek. Not as deeply involved as some, but I’m probably in the top percentile of all US citizens. I come by it honestly and by pedigree, my father, WT Rabe, having been a very active Sherlockian from at least the 1940s to his death in 1992.
So I was interested and a little worried about the upcoming movie “Sherlock Holmes,” directed by Guy Ritchie and starring Robert Downey, Jr., and Jude Law as Holmes and Watson. I was worried because Warner Brothers is hyping the movie thus:
In a dynamic new portrayal of Arthur Conan Doyle’s most famous characters, Sherlock Holmes sends Holmes and his stalwart partner Watson on their latest challenge. Revealing fighting skills as lethal as his legendary intellect, Holmes will battle as never before to bring down a new nemesis and unravel a deadly plot that could destroy the country.
Great, another “League of Extrordinary Gentlemen”-type film with a senseless plot, a bombastic score, lots of guys with little round tinted glasses, young actors with bad accents playing British dressup, with luxurious fabrics abounding.
I saw a preview of “Sherlock Holmes” last night on the Warner Brothers lot.
Overall, I was relieved and pleasantly surprised.
Both Holmes and Watson are rather more physical than is commonly understood from the Canon, and they spend a lot more time fighting baddies. But, one could say Watson was a former soldier in Doyle’s stories, and Holmes was an expert in “baritsu” and something of a boxer, so their being active is not illogical. Irene Adler is not quite the Victorian lady of the Canon … since she is an accomplished kickboxer and thief. That said, I’m rather tired of the Victorian ladies who are always fainting or screaming and letting themselves get tied to railroad tracks while the men have all the fun. No ladies scream in this movie.
Inspector Lestrade is very nicely played by Eddie Marsan (the driver’s ed teacher in “Happy-Go-Lucky” and the evil dude in “Hancock”), and he’s much less the bumbler than Doyle depicts him.
Speaking of bumblers, other movies have already corrected Nigel Bruce’s moronic Watson …
but Jude Law’s Watson is very nearly Holmes’ equal in most areas, and better in some. This is good because, as other commentators have pointed out, it makes no sense that a man like Holmes would hang out with the idiot that Doyle (and Bruce) make of Watson. In the new movie, Holmes and Watson have a very nice intimate relationship, much more like brothers than master and apprentice, which I also find refreshing.
The plot also takes some nice jabs at the Da Vinci Code movies, and there’s a very funny joke about a certain modern device.
For all the action and loud music, there are many nice subtleties in plot, script, acting, and the design of the film.
Using the Leonard Maltin BOMB-4 stars scale, I’d give it 3.5 stars.
- John
(Check out John’s weekly show Off-Ramp!)
Marshall says:
Saturday, December 5, 2009 at 12:03pm
What an inspiring post. I’m sure your daughter thanks you for your sacrifices. It is always daunting to have two jobs – parenthood and a career, the former being more important and never-ending. Because at the end of the day, as hard as it is for me to remind myself of this, these are just movies and the Oscars are just awards. There are other things that are just more important in life, and you seem to get that. What a lesson I can learn from you as I have to balance my studies and writing a blog (I know those are much less significant than a child, but I still found this post relevant).
Your have my respect and readership always,
Marshall
http://marshallandthemovies.com
P.S. – I even took the time to rewrite this post after it got erased somehow.
jennybee says:
Saturday, December 5, 2009 at 8:16pm
You’re doing a terrific job, Sasha. Go to the stuff that piques your interest when it doesn’t conflict with what’s more important. Raising and spending time with a bright young daughter is more important. It’s not like the blogosphere is going to suffer a dearth of coverage of these things when you miss them, and fun as they sound to us unconnected outsiders, I know it probably mostly feels like work when you’re on the ground doing it. That said, I have no doubt whatsoever that you have every bit as much right and cause to be there as anyone else.
I’m generally in awe of working single moms anyway, seeing as I’m married with no kids and barely managing to get half the things done I want to do. You rock, shmoozy cocktail parties with Clooney and the gang or not.
Hunter: That’s the first real buzz I’ve heard about Holmes. Nice to hear it from another Holmes afficionado. Sounds more promising than I’d been conditioning myself to expect.
Pierre de Plume says:
Sunday, December 6, 2009 at 1:11am
I like Loyal’s description of the fact-based Sasha story.
Glad to hear it’s not “Home Alone” at the Stone household!
Melissa Silverstein says:
Sunday, December 6, 2009 at 12:25pm
I second JennyBee. At the end of the day a party is just a party and now with the internet you can pretty much learn about anything without ever leaving your house.
Kudos on the work you do and for being honest about the choices people need to make in order to raise their families and also do good work.
katkat says:
Thursday, December 10, 2009 at 4:49pm
Kudos to Sasha for putting family over career, it’s way more important in the long run.
On another note, Avatar wll not be a blockbuster. Everyone outside of the fanboy/movie geek bubble thinks it looks stupid, and their marketing strategy of calling it the “greatest adventure film of all time” and ‘movie event of the decade” is backfiring big time. Most of the general population does not care about this movie, I’m sorry to say guys. Plot looks incredibly weak and hackneyed and it looks very cartoony.