Past Deadline

The Front Page: April 30, 2008

By Randee Dawn

"Iron Man": The film that keeps giving. Another thing that had occurred to me at the screening the other night was that by the time we've reached "Iron Man" levels in the superhero genre, we're a long way from the iconic trifecta of Batman/Superman/Spider-Man. And still a good distance from X-Men -- even though "Iron Man" is a good film.

Borys Kit seems to be on the same level: He provides a long list of films coming out this summer that involve superhero characters. Marvel Studios' Kevin Feige insists it's "not a fad," that "it's the new archetype for the summer blockbuster," but as Universal's Donna Langley points out, "Only so many of them are going to overperform, and the others are going to do OK."

I'm not much of a comic book geek, but it does seem that at some point we're going to end up with a feature film about "The Marxman," whose superhero abilities include always remembering to lower the toilet seat when he's done in the can. The thing is, and it takes no great genius to figure this out, most superhero films allow audiences to indulge in classic -- to borrow a word from Feige -- archetypes of gender (while non-superhero films largely have to adhere to the more modern egalitarian notion that sometimes the women can take care of their own problems), among other things. I liked "Iron Man," and cringed when as per usual, The Girl in High Heels has to be saved yet again. It must get so boring to have to write scripts where you can't rehash versions of the Perils of Pauline, I'm sure, but you'd think the creative minds behind the scripts could come up with something more original.

Oh, and they come with easy serialization possibilities and built-in audiences. So you can keep replaying the same story again and again, this time with a little more angst, probably with a little less return, probably with a little more merchandising. Who can lose? Don't get me started.

Hey, something shiny over here as I step off the soapbox: Radiohead has told Mimi Turner that their "In Rainbows" price option download system was a "one-off response to a particular situation." The "honesty box" option for fans to pick their price to download the album -- and some folks paid nothing -- hasn't exactly been labeled a success, but it sure got the band a lot of free publicity. Still, don't expect to see it again. And meanwhile, clips notes that Coldplay's free download offering of "Violet" jammed their Web site on Tuesday. "Last.fm said it had been tracking listens of the track and put the figure at 10,000 in the first five hours of release -- a rate of one play every two seconds," says clips. (The album will get a regular release on May 6.)

The Front Page: April 29, 2008

By Randee Dawn

It did occur to me on the way home from an "Iron Man" screening and party last night (excellent crab cakes, by the way) that if things ever really do get tough, at least I'd have free popcorn and appetizers to carry me through ... and possibly the spare swag bag with cosmetics and a candle. But as Gregg Kilday points out today, Hollywood has, for the most part, soldiered on in good times and bad — though it's never quite that black and white. "In the past four decades, there have been seven recession years in this country, and boxoffice climbed strongly in five of those years," NATO's John Fithian told Kilday, citing the long-held belief that even if you can't afford milk, you gotta get entertained, so movies are considered a cheap option.

But these days, to what? Kilday points out that "Hollywood was not immune to the Depression at all" and a chart indicates that during 1932, studio profits were showing losses of $55.7 million. (These days, that's practically an indie movie budget, but you know what we mean.) "Nobody is predicting that the current economy is about to plunge over a Depression-era cliff," says Kilday. "But last week, market research company NPD Group reported that 37% of Americans expect to spend less on entertainment products and devices in 2008 than they did in 2007.... Let's wait a minute before we strike up the band."

Well, someone's spending, and it looks like A&E is the one who's flush these days, putting another $50 million into their development slate, according to Paul J. Gough's article. "Over the last few years, we have seen all of our development and our investments bring extraordinary results," A&E's Abbe Raven notes. What does this mean? More reality at the former Arts and Entertainment network (which for many years has been more "entertainment" than "arts"). They've announced three unscripted series and one scripted series -- and even the History Channel is not immune, announcing new series, including one produced by Mark Burnett. Does this mean we're going to start stranding famous historical characters on a desert island and vote them off at tribal council?

Under the radar but on the screen: Is the best athlete a jockey?

By Barry Garron

For those who follow horse racing, the name Laffit Pincay Jr. is legend. For the rest of us, it's Laffit who?

Jim Wilson, best known as Kevin Costner's production partner, argues that Laffit, 61, regarded by many as the greatest jockey of all time, should also be regarded as one of the best, if not the best, athlete ever.

He makes the case in a two-hour documentary that will air at 4 p.m. Friday on FSN and also May 17. The film also is available on DVD (pictured here).

For those of us who are largely ignorant of the Sport of Kings, the idea of a rider as athlete, much less one of the greatest athletes ever, seems a stretch. How athletic do you have to be to ride a horse for two and a half minutes?

Very, it turns out. For one thing, jockeys don't sit on horses. They crouch over them, which itself takes a lot of stamina. They get the feel of the horse, learn when and how to urge it on and extend its neck enough to sometimes be the margin of victory. Laffit's physical conditioning was on a par with the most disciplined athletes in any sport.

Panama-born Laffit, who loved baseball and was considered by some too big to ride, surpassed Bill Shoemaker's win total of 8,833 and kept on going. He rode for 39 years, well into his 50s; the average career of a jockey is five years. He retired with 9,530 victories (the record only lasted about a year when it was broken in 2006 by Russell Baze). Still, many claim he was as good a rider on his last day as he was in the middle of a career that saw victories at just about every great racing venue.

Wilson produced, directed and edited "Laffit: All About Winning." He interviewed trainers, celebrity owners (Dick Van Patten, Burt Bacharach) and other jockeys. He delves into Laffit's personal life, including the suicide of his first wife and the time his horse jumped an inside rail and landed on him.

There's footage of many of his races. Lots and lots and lots of footage. For someone who isn't a horse racing enthusiast, probably too much footage. But that's about the only flaw worth mentioning in this otherwise solid tribute to an unassuming and dedicated sportsman and, yes, maybe one of the greatest athletes ever.

No need to apologize, Miley. We understand.

By Barry Garron

It pained me to hear that Miley Cyrus, tween superstar and hero of Disney Channel's "Hannah Montana," had apologized for the photo she posed for in the June issue of Vanity Fair. I wanted to reach out, put my arms around her (in a consoling way, of course) and say, "Miley, it wasn't your fault. You have nothing to be sorry for."

The picture (left) was taken by photographer Annie Liebovitz who is famous for her controversial cover shots of a nude John Lennon and Yoko Ono and a very pregnant Demi Moore. This time, Liebovitz snared another celebrity into her wide angle web. Before Miley could even know what was happening, she was showing off her naked back and clutching a blanket in front to preserve a shred of her modesty.

"Unfortunately," said a statement from the Disney Channel, "as the article suggests, a situation was created to deliberately manipulate a 15-year-old in order to sell magazines."

Sadly, a few cynics scoffed. Wrote one visitor to the USA Today web site, "It's almost as bad as a multinational corporation manipulating a 15-year-old to sell CD's, movies, concert tickets, toys and merchandise."

But, really, how could young Miley realize she was entrusting her wholesome image to a prurient smut peddler? All she knew was that the magazine was paying her $1 million to look straight ahead and smile. Who could guess that they would want something, well, attention-getting? These days, that's just snapshot money.

And, yes, it is true that Miley's mother and father were both there, plus a few other members of her entourage. Vanity Fair said none of them objected to the shot. This only means that not only did the magazine take advantage of Miley but she might also be a victim of child neglect.

Liebovitz offered this explanation for the perverted pose: "Miley and I looked at fashion photographs together and we discussed the picture in that context before we shot it." Sure, pass the buck. Like there was any chance Miley could resist. As the easy-to-manipulate 15-year-old recalled, "(Liebovitz is) so cute. She gets this puppy-dog look and you're like, 'OK.' "

In the end, though, Miley is the one who suffers. After working so hard to cultivate a puritanical, impossibly wholesome, implausibly religious image -- and overcoming Internet photos to the contrary (right) -- she now has to beg forgiveness from all those people who are offended by the site of a bare back.

"I feel so embarrassed. I never intended for any of this to happen," she said."I apologize to my fans who I care so deeply about."

No, no, Miley. Don't even think such a thing. It's not your fault that society and parents and evil photographers let you down. Let's just pray it never happens again.

The Front Page: April 28, 2008

By Randee Dawn

Right, so be honest: Does this redesign make my butt look big?

But seriously: What do you think? What about the content? What about the new Very Serious masthead (no more italic swirls for us, thank you very much)? What about the almost-perfect alliterative headline "Pinched Pipeline Plagues Showtime"? (If only that had been for PBS!) File it below, don't just share it with your significant others. There may not be another forum for it.

Anyway, once you're beyond the superficial niceties of THR's new layout, there's the contents. For those six or seven of you still unsure over the future of "Scrubs," James Hibberd reports today that a deal to move the series over to ABC -- which is the "worst-kept secret in Hollywood" -- has now been completed. If that comes as a surprise, you're not alone -- as Hibberd notes, it's all passed under the radar. "At the conclusion of what was the comedy's third-to-last episode on NBC on Thursday, viewers were simply urged to check out the show's interactive features on NBC.com. The usual array of creator and cast interviews that usually accompany the final episodes of a concluding series are likewise largely absent." And, the "long-pending deal for ABC to pick up 18 episodes of 'Scrubs' for next season is effectively ... done."

Now, you wouldn't expect NBC to set up road signs indicating that if you want to follow the show, turn left at the dial, but considering the series history on the network -- and how it kept the at one time sagging "must see Thursday" schedule afloat -- you'd think there'd be more of a farewell party. This just feels like sour grapes. Or, more accurately, dirty bandages.

Elsewhere, as in over here in rainy New York (expect flooding! Wear your duck boots!), the Tribeca Film Festival is well underway and making the industry folks happier this year than ever, according to Steven Zeitchik and Gregg Goldstein: "Tribeca's decision to group screenings led to a less frazzled mood. And the year-round industry office led to innovations like reserved seating for buyers.... The moves are part of the fest's goal to build its credibility within the entertainment business as it has among consumers."

The Front Page: April 25, 2008

By Randee Dawn

A friendly warning: Avoid absinthe on a work night. Avoiding getting home at 2 in the morning is also warranted, but probably less of an issue. That said, I'm prying open my bleary eyes today to scan the issue....

And learn that Rupert Murdoch really is the Master of the Universe. Brooks Boliek's analysis of Murdoch's move to encroach even further on New York's media world is fairly disillusioning, unless of course you're Murdoch himself: "In the topsy-turvy world of media regulation, Murdoch or any other media baron can own a TV station and then buy a newspaper in the same market, and there's not much federal regulators can do about it directly." The FCC is hobbled, the government all the way back to Ronald Reagan has done everything it can to make it easier for media monopolies, and for the most part, readers and audiences don't seem to know enough details to consider protesting. Nice work, Undermining Geniuses! Also: An accompanying chart indicates that according to the Project for Excellence in Journalism, since Murdoch took over the Wall Street Journal, health and medicine and environmental coverage have all dropped. You might be willing to shrug that one off -- after all, it's the Wall Street Journal, right? They cover ... um, business! But business coverage at WSJ "has been halved, falling from 30% of the editorial newshole to 14%."

Newshole?

Excellent.

"You newshole!" I'm buying it.

Now, how do we stop Murdoch from buying anything else?

Meanwhile, there's at least one nice rise to superpower-dom that happened in New York yesterday: ThinkFilm's Mark Urman, who pretty much is the company to most in the industry, finally got upped to president role, according to Gregg Goldstein's article. "Urman said the company plans to continue as it has, adding some in-house productions and taking on some bigger projects while adjusting its release slate to suit the changing independent film marketplace," Goldstein writes. So, congrats to Mark and keep telling it like it is!

The Front Page: April 24, 2008

By Randee Dawn

For anyone harboring the perception that writing for the trades is some kind of flashy job full of premieres, hamburger phones and free drinks ... well, it is that. But it also requires nerves of steel and brass -- well, you know, brass. You've got pushy publicists and crazy actors and demanding executives -- and when you decide to get some of them in a room all at the same time, well, that calls for something above and beyond the call of duty. So if you don't see much in the way of posting from Past Deadline's Ray Richmond, think of him kindly this week: Tuesday he held a roundtable for one of our upcoming Emmy Watch issues with Minnie Driver, Felicity Huffman, Jenna Fischer, Tichina Arnold, Kyra Sedgwick, Calista Flockhart and Brooke Shields. And today, having survived that, Ray will be jumping into a different fray with Alec Baldwin, Ted Danson, Bryan Cranston, David Spade, Blair Underwood, Neil Patrick Harris, Rainn Wilson, David Duchovny and Mark Harmon. Ah, we hardly knew ye, Ray.

Assuming he survives, look for those roundtable Q&As in mid-June.

But on to the here and now with today's issue, in which James Hibberd calls for a doctor. Kind of: Basically, he notes that "in the weeks since CBS' Monday lineup broke the fall scripted series drought" most returning shows across the dial have "suffered double-digit decreases." It doesn't paint a pretty picture leading up to May sweeps. ABC's Jeff Bader sees the silver lining: "My guess is that many people weren't aware the shows were back, but their DVR's picked them up," he says, in the fervent hope that once DVR ratings come through in a few weeks the numbers won't look so bad. There's everything to blame from the strike to daylight savings time for the drop, but all eyes are focused on the doctors return -- that is, the "Grey's Anatomy" doctors -- to fix things. Me, I'm looking out for only one medical expert, who returns Monday: Dr. Greg House.

Elsewhere, on a second perfect day here in New York, Tribeca begins screenings apace -- and according to Gregg Goldstein's piece, has a growing budget and a recommitted founding sponsor in AmEx: "AmEx's renewed pact is welcome news for Tribeca," he writes. "In its first six editions, the founding sponsor picked up 20% of Tribeca's budget, which has multiplied three to four times since the inaugural 2002 fest to hit an estimated $13 million last year." Goldstein also reports that David Bowie, Whoopi Goldberg and Molly Shannon are three of the 31 judges overseeing Tribeca's competitive categories.

The Front Page: April 23, 2008

By Randee Dawn

Admit it: On the whole you'd rather be in Tribeca right now. Wouldn't you? I mean, it's a perfect 80 degree day here in NYC, blue skies and breezes blowing the petals off the trees -- ideal weather for ... um, going inside dark rooms and watching movies!

Well, like it or not, the Tribeca Film Festival is back in town, kicking off tonight with Universal's "Baby Mama," according to Steven Zeitchik and Gregg Goldstein's article, pointing out that several fest titles are ripe for picking. TFF isn't officially a market, but it sure would like to get the reputation as one. Along with that daily piece is the major TFF feature further in, also penned by Goldstein, who must be having Tribeca coming out his ears at this stage. Last year, as he notes, was one big "kvetch fest" for the event, with everyone complaining about higher ticket prices, too many movies, and the fact that many of them were being screened nowhere near Tribeca. Well, having this year's event located further south -- and closer to THR's offices -- is a godsend for us; now let's see how it works out for the organizers and attendees. Personally, I'm looking forward to Thursday night's Tribeca Drive-In "Thriller" event, billed as being the "world's largest zombie disco," in which audience members are going to do the Thriller dance. But can we do it better than Filipino prisoners? That's the real question.

For those of you disinterested in film festivals, maybe film awards will grab your attention: Gregg Kilday reports that the Golden Globes are going to be airing January 11 of next year. In a way, it's perfect timing: The New Years' hangovers will have faded in time to be replaced with ones of Globular proportions. January 11, notes Kilday, is the earliest date ever for a Globe ceremony.

Historic implications follow Bush's 'Deal'

By Barry Garron

Monday's taped guest appearance by President Bush on NBC's "Deal or No Deal" must have sent historians scrambling for the record books and yet few stories caught the real significance of this event ... or its consequences.

James Hibberd, writing in The Reporter, duly reported that the show, was not exactly a ratings success. Not only did "Deal" match its all-time ratings low for a Monday night, it was down 27% from the prior season average.

But ratings barely hint at the historical importance of the occasion. Just as in 1960 when John F. Kennedy and Richard M. Nixon became the pioneers of presidential debates, President Bush became the first U.S. president ever to publicly root for a contestant in a show featuring briefcases and a staircase of models.

(The contestant was Capt. Joseph Kobes, who served three tours of duty in Iraq. Following Bush's encouragement, he passed up a deal to take $144,000 and later accepted $26,000. It's probably not the outcome Bush was hoping for but, then again, you could say the same thing about many of Bush's Iraqi policies.)

Considering the drop in ratings and Capt. Kobes' winnings, the appearance may dash plans for more Bush appearances in the future.

Stuck in limbo for now are these White House plans on other networks:

Fox: Bush was to appear as a guest student on "Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader?" although advisers worried whether this was the best way to rebut assumptions that the president was not very bright.

CBS: Bush was penciled in for a cameo as the "Cold Case" crew reopened the file of a former college student in New England who evaded charges of drunk driving and cocaine use.

ABC: Playing an official of the Interior Department, Bush explains the need to increase logging in federal forests on "Men in Trees."

CW: In a very special episode of "Aliens in America," Bush measures the Wisconsin town with the Pakistani exchange student for its own security fence.

For now, the best we can expect is that, at the next presidential press conference, some reporter asks Bush if more network appearances are in the works. "Mr. President, deal or no deal?"

The Front Page: April 22, 2008

By Randee Dawn

Have you kissed the dirt today? Hugged a sand dune? Cut down your neighbors' redwoods to make room for your solar panels? If not, then you haven't done your Earth Day duty yet, so make sure you fit that into your day. Maybe not that last part, though.

Hey, I'm encouraged: Saving the environment is cool as well as vitally necessary, and it's hard to argue with the "more eco than thou" attitude being adopted by advertisers and in Hollywood, where there's always one more status symbol worth attaining. Today, THR's very green edition features a special "Green Hollywood" section, led off with Stephen Galloway's article on whether studios are doing all they can to be green. On the one hand, Warner Bros. has seven full-time employees who're in charge of picking up and donating recyclable materials. On the other, noted a UCLA report two years ago, "With a few notable and inspiring exceptions, environmental considerations are not high on the agenda in the film and television industry." But that study has drawn fire -- even with environmentalists -- for using old data. Galloway has a ton of fascinating facts, and the Web site link over here features celebrities' green ideas, so surf on over and check it out -- it's emission free!

Carolyn Giardina reports today that Disney isn't just going back to nature for show — it's making shows out of going back to nature. With Disneynature, she reports, the company will "produce nature documentaries for theatrical release." I seem to remember Disney doing this way back when; some of the docs I saw in elementary school were definitely Disney-made, especially the wonderful undersea adventures. "We love balancing heritage and innovation, and Disneynature is a perfect example of this," says Disney's Robert Iger, referencing those very same films I recall, which were called Disney's "True-Life Adventures" and produced between 1948-60. (Clearly they were a bit, um, old by the time I saw them in school.)