Showing posts with label michael winterbottom. Show all posts
Showing posts with label michael winterbottom. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 7, 2014

Return trip


To the extent that his eclectic career has given him any label at all, Michael Winterbottom is the guy who never repeats himself.

Until now, anyway.

The Trip to Italy, a sequel to 2011's Winterbottom-directed The Trip, seems like a particularly curious way for Winterbottom to finally bow to anything like conventional thinking.

The modest popularity of The Trip probably exceeded the even more modest popularity of most other films on Winterbottom's CV, but it also feels like one of Winterbottom's safer directing efforts. To be sure, it's no mere buddy comedy, as it delves into deeper issues of competitiveness, the male ego, aging, and fears of encroaching irrelevance. At heart, though, it's a comedy of mismatched buddies on a road trip.

I suppose The Trip is also one of the only movies Winterbottom has ever made that could even have a sequel, but I always figured that was kind of by design as well. Whether he's telling true-to-life war dramas (Welcome to Sarajevo, The Mighty Heart), science fiction romances (Code 46), historical epics (The Claim) or self-reflexive movies starring Steve Coogan (24-Hour Party People, Tristram Shandy: A Cock and Bull Story), Winterbottom has been steadfastly making movies that required no second chapter.

Again, until now.

But before I accuse this director of anything so hysterical as "selling out," I should note that Winterbottom likely has no control over how this film is being advertised. And The Trip to Italy's advertisements are probably the thing that concerns me most about the movie -- while also making me laugh, I shall admit. Then again, before getting involved in a sequel in the first place, one would have to know that it was going to be marketed in a certain way -- a way that runs contrary to Winterbottom eternally redefining himself.

Namely, the job of anyone selling a sequel is to remind audiences what they loved about the first movie. The trailers for The Trip to Italy follow that formula to a T.

Here are the things we see in this trailer, which I will reproduce from the memory of having seen it twice in the past month:

1) Rob Brydon doing an impersonation of, in this case, Al Pacino.

2) Steve Coogan belittling Brydon at every opportunity he gets.

3) Brydon doing his "small man trapped in a box" impersonation.

4) Coogan and Brydon sitting at various fancy-looking tables consuming yummy-looking food.

5) Coogan and Brydon riding around in a car.

And finally:

6) Coogan and Brydon dueling their Michael Caine impersonations.

Include the fact that the Pacino impersonation involves the self-aware mentioning of making a sequel, and you've even got a healthy dose of sequel irony in the trailer as well -- another common sequel trailer trick.

These moments are all callbacks to moments in the first movie that made us love that movie, for those of us who did love it. (I'd say I fall into the category of "liked it quite a bit.") They are even constructed in such a way that over the course of the trailer, they build toward what is arguably The Trip's most famous set piece, the dueling Caine impersonations.

Could this have been what Winterbottom had in mind when he decided to go back to the well, for the first time ever? Should it have been?

I think I may be making a bit of an empty argument here, because when you come right down to it, the trailer is effective, and I certainly plan on seeing the movie.

What I think I'm really grappling with is the idea of a respected creative talent letting me down on some level. I'm sure I've written plenty of pieces like this before, but the one that immediately pops to mind is my smackdown of Seth Gordon for moving into dumb comedies (Four Christmases, Horrible Bosses) after making one of my favorite documentaries of all time (The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters). If you want to read that piece, you can find it here.

Back when I got regular comments (oh, remember those days!), three commenters basically told me I was wrong to give Gordon a hard time. (Do they still think that after Identity Thief, though?) And so I may be wrong to give Winterbottom a hard time, too.

However, Winterbottom recently got a boost of additional praise from someone I know that made me put him on a slightly higher pedestal than I had before. I've always respected Winterbottom's diverse career and his prodigious output, but I had that put in perspective by someone who knows a lot more about these things than I do. I recently asked a director friend of mine, who has become a bit disenchanted with the film industry and his prospects within it, whose career he would most like to have. He was interested by the question, and didn't have to think long about the answer. He gave Winterbottom's name.

For my disenchanted friend, then, I hold Winterbottom to a higher standard, the standard of not being seduced into repeating himself or pigeonholing himself. If you want to take it to extremes, you could say that making a sequel is a good way to raise a creative white flag. I imagine this instinct is one of the main reasons David Fincher doesn't want to honor his commitment to make the next two Dragon Tattoo movies.

I guess it remains to be seen if Winterbottom slides into a state of complacency and starts churning out Trip sequels every two years. It seems unlikely, but stranger things have happened.

And if so, well ... I do enjoy listening to those guys bust out their Michael Caine.

Sunday, January 22, 2012

The battle for the biggest output


When a director releases two movies in quick succession, you tend to take notice. It usually says something about how prolific he or she is.

Not every director, mind you. Steven Spielberg had two movies come out a week apart in December, but they were his first two movies as director since the disaster known as Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull in 2008, so in that case it really was just an accident of timing.

With Steven Soderbergh, it's pure volume of cinematic output.

Soderbergh had a movie in September (Contagion, which I just watched last night) and now one in January (Haywire). He's clearly making them as fast as his body will allow. (Without the content itself suffering, apparently.) It's not the first such period of intense activity of his career, either. Remember, this was the guy who got nominated for best director for two different films in the year 2000 (Erin Brockovich and Traffic, the latter of which netted him the Oscar).

Soderbergh's frenzied moviemaking rate made me think of other directors who are constantly going behind the camera, and three other names immediately jumped to mind: Woody Allen, Clint Eastwood and Michael Winterbottom. Allen's and Eastwood's movies usually make headlines; Winterbottom's don't necessarily, because they're a bit more out of the mainstream. But these are three guys who are constantly delivering new features, presumably on or ahead of schedule, since that would be the only way for them to keep pace with themselves. True to form, each had a film in 2011 (Midnight in Paris, J. Edgar and The Trip).

So I thought it would be interesting to see who's truly the most prolific of the foursome, and I'd love to hear your suggestions for which others might belong in the conversation. (Current directors only, please -- that eliminates all the hacks who made four or five movies a year back in the studio system days.) I have my suspicions, but as I write this, I really don't know who will take the prize.

In order to do this, we'll need to examine each director's career, starting with the year that the least experienced director in the group released his first feature. We'll look at their filmographies from that moment onward, and may have to make some judgment calls if there are films whose status as a feature is borderline. For our purposes, documentaries are considered features because they run at feature length. Before we even start I know there's an asterisk with Winterbottom's The Trip, which was a TV series edited into a feature. However, you could argue that a TV series might take even longer to film than a feature, so Winterbottom should get credit for it and then some.

It turns out that the newest to the game is in fact Winterbottom, whose first theatrical feature was 1995's Butterfly Kiss. (Or 1995's Go Now -- I'm having a hard time telling which one was released first.) He'd made TV movies before then, but his first feature wasn't until 1995.

So starting with the release year 1995 and onward, here's how it looks for each of our contenders:

Michael Winterbottom

Butterfly Kiss (1995)
Go Now (1995)
Jude (1996)
Welcome to Sarajevo (1997)
I Want You (1998)
Wonderland (1999)
With or Without You (1999)
The Claim (2000)
24 Hour Party People (2002)
In This World (2003)
Code 46 (2003)
9 Songs (2004)
Tristram Shandy: A Cock and Bull Story (2006)
The Road to Guantanamo (2006)
A Mighty Heart (2007)
Genova (2007)
The Shock Doctrine (2009)
The Killer Inside Me (2010)
The Trip (2011)

That's 19 titles in 17 years, nine of which I've seen. It appears he has two movies due out in 2012, one of which premiered at last year's Toronto International Film Festival (Trishna), one of which is about scheduled to shoot (Bailout), I guess with the intention of getting released this year. But he loses out due to the timing of this post. (Sorry, I'm not counting the film festival premiere.)

Steven Soderbergh

The Underneath (1995)
Gray's Anatomy (1996)
Schizopolis (1996)
Out of Sight (1998)
The Limey (1999)
Erin Brockovich (2000)
Traffic (2000)
Ocean's Eleven (2001)
Full Frontal (2002)
Solaris (2002)
Ocean's Twelve (2004)
Bubble (2005)
The Good German (2006)
Ocean's Thirteen (2007)
Che Part 1 (2008)
Che Part 2 (2008)
The Girlfriend Experience (2009)
The Informant! (2009)
And Everything is Going Fine (2010)
Contagian (2011)
Haywire (2012)

And Soderbergh takes the lead with 21 films since 1995, 15 of which I've seen. I'm glad he didn't pull ahead of Winterbottom by only one, because I had to make the judgment call to split Che into two films. They were released that way, with separate admissions in most cases, and they contain over four hours of content in radically different styles. If that's not two movies, I don't know what is. (Though since they were filmed at the same time with the same crew, you could just as compellingly make the argument that they should be one film, if in this context you are quantifying a "film" as a distinct project in a distinct location that requires a certain amount of the director's undivided attention. So many ways to interpret the same information.) Incidentally, Soderbergh's Magic Mike is also expected later in 2012, with something called The Side Effects due in 2013.

Clint Eastwood
The Bridges of Madison County (1995)
Absolute Power (1997)
Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil (1997)
True Crime (1999)
Space Cowboys (2000)
Blood Work (2002)
Mystic River (2003)
Million Dollar Baby (2004)
Flags of Our Fathers (2006)
Letters from Iwo Jima (2006)
Changeling (2008)
Gran Torino (2008)
Invictus (2009)
Hereafter (2010)
J. Edgar (2011)

Well, Eastwood has let me down. I guess he has only been hugely prolific since 2008, releasing five films since the fall of that year. His 15 movies in 17 years -- 11 of which I've seen -- leave him at a pace of less than one a year. Still, not bad for an 81-year-old, especially when many of his films are painted on a huge canvas and seem to require a great deal of logistics. IMDB doesn't list a 2012 movie for him, so either someone charged with updating his page is slacking, or the man is finally giving his weary bones a short rest.

Woody Allen

Mighty Aphrodite (1995)
Everyone Says I Love You (1996)
Deconstructing Harry (1997)
Celebrity (1998)
Sweet and Lowdown (1999)
Small Time Crooks (2000)
The Curse of the Jade Scorpion (2001)
Hollywood Ending (2002)
Anything Else (2003)
Melinda and Melinda (2004)
Match Point (2005)
Scoop (2006)
Cassandra's Dream (2007)
Vicky Cristina Barcelona (2008)
Whatever Works (2009)
You Will Meet a Tall Dark Stranger (2010)
Midnight in Paris (2011)

My suspicion was that Woody would be the most prolific. That's why exercises like this are great. Turns out he's only third most prolific, with 17 movies in the 17 years, 13 of which I've seen. But Woody does get a special commendation for being the only one on this list to make at least one movie (exactly one) in every year since 1995. If I were going only by U.S. theatrical release dates, Cassandra's Dream was released in January of 2008, leaving him with two movies in 2008 and none in 2007. But it played a number of places around Europe in 2007 and is generally credited with that release year. And sure enough, Allen's 18th film in the last 18 years (Nero Fiddled) is due out later this year. If you want to know how far back this streak goes, you have to go all the way back to 1981 to find a year in which Allen did not direct a film.

So our champion is: Steven Soderbergh! The guy who inspired the topic in the first place.

Take a vacation, will you, Steven? You're making everyone else look bad.