When the recent announcement came that Dennis Quaid and Julianne Moore had been cast as Bill and Hillary Clinton, respectively, in The Special Relationship, Peter Morgan’s third film involving the Premiership of Tony Blair (played once again by Michael Sheen, who previously portrayed the former British Prime Minister in the Morgan-scripted films The Deal and The Queen), many of us began wondering if Monica Lewinsky would appear as a character, and if so, who would play her. Anne Thompson even provided an hilariously implicit visual aid for why Anne Hathaway would be great for the part.

Unfortunately, it’s been revealed that Lewinsky will only be included in the made-for-HBO film via archival footage. But that isn’t going to stop us from imagining who should have been cast in Morgan’s film had he decided to focus more directly on the Lewinsky scandal. Because we’d all much rather see that film, right? And although a low-budget depiction of the affair, titled The Blue Dress, is already in the works, it certainly won’t be as much fun as a high-profile picture featuring big stars as the infamous figures involved with the scandal.

So, we’ve cast the second-term Clinton movie we’d prefer be made. And as always we welcome you to suggest your own casting ideas — whether to substitute for those we’ve selected or to play characters we’ve forgotten — in the comments.
…Read more

Yesterday, for the second time in two weeks, In Contention’s Kristopher Tapley confessed to being done with 2008 and noted a bunch of anticipated 2009 films. These aren’t necessarily titles he’s looking forward to seeing, though; it’s basically a preliminary jump on next year’s Oscar season. Because apparently this year’s Academy Awards are all but handed out, the winners properly predicted and expected, and now it’s time to think about what will be up for what in 2010. Those titles Tapley lists are Rob Marshall’s Nine, Peter Jackson’s Lovely Bones, Michael Mann’s Public Enemies, Clint Eastwood’s “Mandela“ (formerly The Human Factor), Richard Curtis’ The Boat That Rocked, Scott Cooper’s Crazy Heart and the latest from Terrence Malick (The Tree of Life), Steven Soderbergh (The Informant), Paul Greengrass (Green Zone), Martin Scorsese (Shutter Island) and James Cameron (Avatar).

Oh, and then Jeff Wells had to go and hint that Spielberg’s Lincoln is likely to arrive by year’s end. What and who else is being foreseen as nominated this time next year? Check out the links after the jump.

…Read more

It’s been almost two weeks and Hancock has grossed almost $350 million, so it’s time to start the academic discussions — with spoilers, of course (anyone who wants to avoid knowing the “twists” should discontinue reading now). Maybe it’s just the film scholar in me, but I have been desiring a good analysis of the film’s allegorical meaning since viewing the less-than-perfect superhero movie last week. While others may feel that the movie is hardly worth reading into (especially over-reading, as I’ve always felt my M.O. to be) or that it’s too obvious that the first half is really about the role of the U.S. as a superpower, I’m nevertheless eager to figure it out.

Basically, I’ve been wracking my brain trying to understand where the allegory goes, or was meant to go, once Charlize Theron’s character is introduced as Hancock’s super-powered wife. Does she somehow fit in with or in response to Hancock’s representation of America (the patriotic name, the eagle emblem on his uniform, etc.)? I’m still at a loss, but I’ve come up with 5 possibilities (some a lot less likely than others) for what screenwriters Vincent Ngo and Vince Gilligan intended for her character to be.

1. The United Kingdom - So sue me if part of my reasoning is inspired by Theron’s role on Arrested Development, in which she also seemed to be harboring a secret from beau Jason Bateman (if only Hancock had stolen Jeffrey Tambor from Hellboy II, it could have been considered a reunion), but if Hancock represents America, then Mary (Theron) is some other superpower, right? I don’t recall any hints that she signifies the Soviet Union, so she must be a stand-in for the British. Is her desire to be a housewife representative of a desire by the British to no longer be a world-stomping empire? Is Mary’s defending of the French boy a nod to Britain-France relations in contrast to U.S.-France? But then is the movie also saying that the UK and the U.S. are less powerful when united together? History would say otherwise.
   …Read more

I’ve been on the fence about Hancock from the beginning. Sure, it’s a Will Smith blockbuster and it co-stars Jason Bateman, both typically prime selling points for me, but it also seems a bit one-note and silly. Upon first hearing about the concept of a drunken has-been superhero, I immediately thought about drunken Superman in Superman III. After seeing the teaser trailer, I felt the exaggerated special effects (including the rather funny whale toss) were a little too over the top.

Now comes a full trailer (Quicktime version here) that reveals a lot more action and a lot more plot points. The former seems to have everyone on the Internet suddenly more excited about the movie. But what about those new story reveals? Aside from the usual problem of giving too much away, the trailer exposes the overdone concept of a world without its under-appreciated hero(es) — think Ghostbusters, any one of a thousand comic book titles (the hero is in jail, or half-defeated, or in an alternate state such as in Superman III) — and makes it seem as though screenwriters Vincent Ngo and Vince Gilligan based the rest of the movie around that single, simple recycled idea.

…Read more