andPOP - Pop Culture With Substance

It’s safe to say Valentino is considered an emperor to fashion lovers. Even those of us who don’t know the difference in colour between fuchsia and magenta (myself included) can appreciate a man whose successful career in the fashion industry has lasted over 45 years.

Directed and produced by Matt Tyrnauer, Special Correspondent for Vanity Fair magazine, “Valentino: The Last Emperor” gives viewers a candid look at one of the most famous fashion designers, Valentino Clemente Ludovico Garavani (aka Valentino).

One of the first things the famed Italian designer says in the film is “I love beauty, it’s not my fault.” And who can blame him? It turns out Valentino was inspired to become a designer by the stars of the silver screen. After seeing movies starring Hollywood leading ladies like Judy Garland, he set out to make clothes for women. So it would only seem fitting for the designer of the stars to get his own flick on the big screen – and it doesn’t disappoint. READ MORE »

Ben Stiller’s “Tropic Thunder” rolled over “The House Bunny” and “Death Race”, finishing off in the No. 1 spot for the second weekend in the row.

According to E! News, “Tropic Thunder” made an estimated $16.1 million, bringing its total gross to $65.7 million. “The House Bunny” came in second place by debuting with $15.1 million and Jason Statham’s “Death Race” opened in third with $12.4 million.

Although “The Dark Knight” failed to break any more records, the movie finished in the No. 4 spot with $10.3 million, bringing the domestic total to $489.2 million in just six weeks.

“Mamma Mia!” broke a record by becoming the highest-grossing movie-musical of all time. The movie made a total of $124.5 million in over six weeks, beating out “Hairspray” which brought in $119 million in the same time span.

There were no reports of giant vampire bunnies rampaging through Hollywood, but it was still a pretty scary Easter weekend at the box office.

Reuters reports that Sunday studio estimates have put horror movie spoof Scary Movie 4 at $41 million, setting a new Easter record. The previous champion was Panic Room, which bowed at $30 million in 2002.

Although it’s no franchise high (it’s behind 2003’s Scary Movie 3 and the 2000 original), distributor Weinstein Co. is pleased. “We’re really elated with this opening,” said Steve Bunnell, chairman of distribution. He added that plans are afoot for a fifth movie, which is truly frightening news.

Disney’s The Wild failed to excite audiences, however. The animated comedy opened in fourth place with $9.6 million. Perhaps critics found it to be too similar to DreamWorks’ 2005 hit Madagascar.

Previous champion Ice Age: The Meltdown, the first blockbuster of 2006, fell to #2 with $20 million, taking its total to $147 million.

The Rob Schneider baseball comedy The Benchwarmers slipped one place to #3 with $10 million.

Meanwhile, Fox Searchlight tripled the theatre count of Thank You For Smoking and was rewarded when the acclaimed satire jumped two places to #8 with $4.5 million.

What exactly is a movie in your mind? Let us see if we can get on the same page here. When you think of your mom, does a picture come to mind? You bettcha she does, why you ask? It is kind of like this, when you think of a person or a time in your life that you would consider great a mental picture comes to mind.

Why it?s proven that the mind works in pictures, when someone says something to you, the mind immediately moves to bring the picture to mind, good or bad it doesn?t matter, the pictures will be there. Now how do we go about making and bringing the movies in your mind, positive and not the alternative?

It has proven that for you to change the picture, you must first get the picture you want to see. How do we go about it? For lasting change to take place we must start to see a new picture every night you need to put the picture you want to see, for thirty straight days. That is the point we it becomes habit.

Now once you start to see results, you may want to change the picture in your mind to something else. Now you may need to do matinees on the one movie you have achieved that you want maintain, you must meditate on that picture five days a month to keep that picture in your mind, fresh and keep up with the right picture?

Now let?s not forget about the new movie, you are spending to much time contemplating and receiving that or whatever it is that you want, remember it takes thirty days to create a new habit. When that habit gets started, you only need to spend 5 times a month one the victory to keep the movie to be a positive one.

Now in the long run you won?t have to go over all the movies in your mind, every day to achieve you may need to see the movie once a month when it really becomes entrenched in your mind. So do not think that you are going to be spending your whole life trying to get that perfect picture in your mind.

Once a movie becomes second nature the subcontinent will take over and this will keep the movie in your mind functioning in the proper, time, speed and it will know when to exactly extract what movie and when to extract it. Remember you are the director and you can create any movie that you want, this is totally up to you. Yes you must first see the new picture for at least 30 days for it to become a habit and then just five matinees, playing in the months to come and when they reach your subcontinent them will become automatic and this is where the real change takes place.

So we can basically can revolutionize our life?s by seeing movies in out mind just follow the simple plans that I have laid out to you in the words above and in thirty days you will see results and the moir? time you put into thinking about the picture, the faster the results will come.

Most people avoid thinking as much as they can, they would rather go to work be told what to do and not think at all, well guess what you are going to get? That is right you are going to be told what to do all the time and you will shy away from the movies that you need to change things. Now if you will take some time in concentrated effort for thirty days you will see some really positive results, so se the movies in your mind!

About The Author

Listen to Arthur Buchanan on the Mike Litman Show!
http://freesuccessaudios.com/Artlive.mp3 THIS LINK WORKS, LISTEN TODAY!

By: Arthur Buchanan

Sundance is hanging on to its indie cred.

Reuters reports that the film festival wants to downplay the glitz and glamour this year after criticism that the attendance of too many Hollywood stars have made Sundance too commercial.

The Sundance Film Festival, backed by Robert Redford’s Sundance Institute, is the top venue for independent filmmakers to showcase their work. Held in Park City, Utah, the 10-day event begins today, with 120 movies lined up.

Festival director Geoff Gilmore wants small films to be able to find the right distributors. “I’ve always cared about expanding the market, not catering to it,” he said.

However, the promise of low-budget, high-quality movies with famous actors has lured many a studio to Sundance. Successful films from last year’s festival include March of the Penguins and The Squid and the Whale.

One of the most anticipated titles is the beauty pageant spoof Little Miss Sunshine, starring Steve Carell. The opening-night film Friends With Money also packs considerable star power, with Jennifer Aniston and Frances McDormand toplining the comic drama.

Other films generating buzz include Michel (Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind) Gondry’s The Science of Sleep, the turn-of-the-last-century thriller The Illusionist with Edward Norton, and Winona Ryder’s comeback movie The Darwin Awards.

There are also plenty of controversial political documentaries to provoke discussion. Among them are two films about the Iraq war.

Normally I don?t go out on New Year?s Eve.

I?m not a big drinker, I?m not a big partier, and I don?t much care for drunk people with “an excuse to party” as New Year?s Eve is so often described.

Normally, my habit is to put a movie on at about 11:15 p.m. and be happily past midnight by the time the credits roll.

However this year, for various reasons, I was persuaded to go to a jazz club called The Rex in downtown Toronto. My uncle and his girlfriend were in from out of town, and wanted to dance, dance, dance the night away. My father was conscripted to take them out, and I was invited so that my father wouldn?t be a third wheel.

Not wanting to be the only person in our party under 50, I brought my girlfriend along (sorry ladies, I?m taken,) and we went out for New Year?s Eve.

My girlfriend (Manda) and I were supposed to meet my father, uncle, and my uncle?s girlfriend there at ten o?clock. We arrived at 10:15 and couldn?t find them anywhere.

What we found instead was a bar where at first glance, the youngest person on the place was 30, and the average age of those on the dance floor was probably closer to 45.

As it turned out, the youngest person in the place was a little girl who couldn?t have been older than six. I could only assume she was a regular there, because shortly before midnight, I saw her behind the bar pouring herself a glass of what I hope was orange juice.

Manda and I stood around waiting for probably half an hour, watching what had to be, without a doubt, the worst dancing I have ever seen.

The band was pretty good; the lead singer, who also played saxophone, was incredible. But they played these ?70s and ?80s dance hits that really got the 45 year olds going, to the point where they looked something like a cross between a 1950s high school dance, and a room full of people having seizures.

Manda and I picked out a spot where we could watch the door, which also gave us a good vantage of the dance floor, and proceeded to wait, and discuss which 45-year-old was the worst dancer.

Manda had a beer and decided she wanted to get me to dance; I hadn?t had anything to drink yet, and was having none of it.

Truth be told, by 10:45 we were thinking about leaving.

Manda isn?t really a New Year?s type either, and if the others weren?t gong to show up, we weren?t staying.

Then they showed up and things got worse. They ordered their drinks, and suddenly I found myself with four people pressuring me to dance. I gave up and ordered a beer; I was probably going to have to dance, but it would never happen if I was completely sober.

Midnight rolled around, and I was sufficiently buzzed that I had been dancing with Manda for the last fifteen minutes.

We counted down, all eyes on the TV which was tuned to Citytv and the party going on in Nathan Phillips Square.

We shouted “Happy New Year” and I kissed Manda. I took a sip of the really cheap champagne that the servers were handing out.

Then we went back to dancing.

At this point I know what you?re asking yourself: Was my uncle a good dancer? No, he was easily the worst dancer in the place, and his amusingly terrible dancing was what saved the whole evening for me, and actually made it fun.

I know what you?re actually asking yourself: What the hell does all of this have to do with movies? Well, at about 12:05, the Citytv coverage of the New Year?s celebration ended. I looked up from dancing, and on the screen was Edward Norton with a gun in his mouth.

Because it was muted, it took me a couple of minutes to figure out what it was. Citytv was playing Fight Club.

Suddenly the whole evening took on a surreal quality. Of all the movies for them to play, Fight Club seems to be one of the least fitting for New Year?s Eve. I mean, it?s a great movie and all; it just doesn?t really fit with the mood of the night.

We left just before 1:00a.m.; we didn?t even stay long enough to see Edward Norton punch Brad Pitt in the ear.

The moral of the story is threefold:
1) Don?t spend New Year?s Eve at The Rex if you?re under 40.
2) Don?t try to drag me out next year
3) And finally, go rent Fight Club, that movie is totally awesome.

On the one hand, I hate to let down my faithful readers, but this column will be published on Boxing Day, and that means that I have to write it on Christmas Eve, or Christmas Day.

I probably could have spun something together anyway ? a review of The Family Stone, or The Ringer, or something else that came out recently ? but I?ve been dragged to a farm in the middle of nowhere, and I?m sort of cut off from the movie theatres.

When we arrived, the house smelled like death, because a mouse had died a week ago, and nature had taken its course. Briefly, I considered doing column on the rotten movies of 2005, but there are just too many of them, and too little time.

So, instead, I?m going to briefly talk about a few movies that I would have liked to talk about in the last few months, but for one reason or another, I didn?t.

And if you?re not satisfied, then get off my back you ungrateful so-and-so, I should be sipping eggnog and kissing under the mistletoe, and instead I?m writing for you, so just be thankful for whatever I give you!

Okay, first up is Rent/The Producers, two top-notch musical adaptations that were released in the past couple of months. Rent is a heart-wrenching story about bohemians living in New York, struggling to make a living, find someone to love, and deal with the HIV/AIDS epidemic.

The Producers, on the other hand, is a comedy about two unscrupulous Broadway producers who try to make a fortune on an abominable musical called ?Springtime For Hitler? (complete with a chorus line of Nazi stormtroopers doing kicks in fishnet stockings.)

What these two have in common is that they?re both excellent adaptations of stage musicals for the big screen. And while I realize I?m usually pretty dismissive of adaptations, these two for whatever reason avoided all of the pitfalls, and were excellent. The best way to describe how this was achieved is by saying that the makers of both of these films didn?t find themselves drawn in by the so-called ?magic of film.? Each one was made in such a way that it was basically shot like a Broadway musical, except with the most kickass set any Broadway director could hope for.

Without spending a whole column talking about these two, I will say that they are both worth seeing, and if there hadn?t been other equally important things coming out at the same time, I would have written a whole column about each of them

Next up is Harry Potter and The Goblet of Fire. I will confess right at the outset that I am writing about this movie without having seen it. J.K. Rowling (the author of the Harry Potter series) and I are on bad terms right now. I loved her work until I read the fifth book in the series, Harry Potter and The Order of the Phoenix; I hated that one so much that I swore myself off the Harry Potter series altogether.

I really can?t say anything about The Goblet of Fire. I?m simply mentioning it because I would have liked to see it, especially since several reviewers who I respect have said good things about it.

I really only point it out because on a list of movies I would have liked to talk about, but didn?t, it is definitely one I should mention.

Finally, I absolutely must mention Crash. When I first saw this movie, a few months ago, I was blown away. The movie is a bunch of disparate stories in Los Angeles, all somehow connected, and all dealing with the intricacies of racism.

Among others, the movie stars Brendan Frasier, Matt Dillon, Sandra Bullock and Don Cheadle. At the time, without seeing any of the other Oscar contenders, I called Cheadle to win best actor.

While this is seeming less likely, since Jake Gyllenhaal has starred in a whole slough of Oscar potentials, and a couple of other candidates have since made Cheadle less likely, but here?s my logic:
Cheadle should have won last year for his performance in Hotel Rwanda, but got passed over in favour of Jamie Foxx for Ray. Also, his performance in Crash is good enough to justify the win anyway.

I?m still laying my money on Cheadle, but Gyllenhaal may get it, I?ll probably be hedging my bets by the time the Oscars come around.

Anyway, that?s all for this week, come back next week for my look ahead to 2006.

Harry Potter moved over for a lion, a witch and a wardrobe this weekend.

Disney scored a much-hoped-for box office hit as The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe debuted at $67.1 million, the second-biggest December opening ever, reports EW.com.

The movie, based on C.S. Lewis’ children’s fantasy, fell short of the $72.6 million record left by The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, but it managed to surpass the first two films in the trilogy. It is also the third biggest opening of 2005 so far.

Reuters reports that Disney has high hopes for a Narnia franchise that can reinforce its reputation for top family movies.

“This is one of those movies that’s playing to everybody, and everybody is loving it,” said Chuck Viane, Disney distribution chief.

The political thriller Syriana expanded into more theatres and climbed to second place with $12 million, says Comingsoon.net. In third place, Harry Potter added $10.3 million to his Goblet of Fire, for a total of $244.1 million.

Meanwhile, Aeon Flux did a belly flop, dropping 63.5% in its second weekend to sixth place.

In limited release, Ang Lee’s Brokeback Mountain made $545,000 from just five theatres – the ninth highest per theatre average ever for a film.

Get out your binoculars and start considering your bets – the Oscar race is on.

The Los Angeles Film Critics Association and the Broadcast Film Critics Association have respectively announced winners and nominees, Reuters reports.

The LAFCA declared Ang Lee’s Brokeback Mountain the best picture of 2005, and also honoured Lee as best director.

Capote was also a multiple winner, with Philip Seymour Hoffman picking up a best actor award for the title role and Catherine Keener being named best supporting actress. Writer Dan Futterman also tied for best screenplay with Noah Baumbach of The Squid and the Whale.

The most surprising win went to Vera Farmiga as best actress for her performance in indie film Down to the Bone, so remember her name. The movie, directed by Debra Granik, won a special jury prize at the Sundance Film Festival.

William Hurt’s short appearance in A History of Violence garnered him a best supporting actor nod.

The awards noticeably neglected big-budget studio films, because although movies like King Kong, Memoirs of a Geisha and Munich did receive votes, none came close to the final playoffs, so to speak.

The LAFCA also hands out a New Generation award, which goes to a newcomer in cinema. This year’s breakout actor is Terrence Howard, who was also recognized by the Broadcast Film Critics Association with a best actor nomination for his starring role in Hustle & Flow, a supporting actor nomination for Crash, and a best song nomination for performing the title song in Hustle.

Brokeback Mountain dominated the 11th annual Critics’ Choice Awards, which are voted on by the BFCA. The movie received eight nominations including best picture, best director, best actor (Heath Ledger), best supporting actor (Jake Gyllenhaal) and best supporting actress (Michelle Williams).

Paul Haggis’ Crash, also a best picture nominee, received six nominations. Walk the Line, Capote and Cinderella Man each got four.

You can see the rest of the nominees at http://www.bfca.org/NomineesWinners.asp before winners are announced on January 9.

The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe opened this weekend and I think it?s safe to say that is? going to be the big movie to see over the holiday season for a few reasons.

First of all, it?s a great kid?s movie, with magical creatures, fantastic worlds, and epic battles with virtually no blood.

At the same time, while it is a kid?s movie, it?s great for adults to watch as well, (kind of like The Incredibles, or Harry Potter.)

But most importantly, this is going to be a big movie to see this year because as far as I?m concerned, it?s one of the best films that?s been made this year.

Without gushing about it, Narnia is one of the best fantasy movies I have ever seen.

The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe, adapted from the children?s book by C.S. Lewis of the same name, which has been a classic for more than fifty years.

The story follows four children who find a gateway to a magical world in the back of a wardrobe at their uncle?s house.

They find themselves thrust into a world of centaurs and talking horses, prophecies and magic and massive battles between good and evil.

The story is so good that it was already adapted into a movie once by the BBC back in the ?80s, but it was a low budget affair, and never achieved much mainstream popularity.

This time around, on the other hand, it seems like no expense was spared ? and the production budget of $150 million seems to confirm that.

However, it wouldn?t be fair to say that the money was wasted. Andrew Adamson was recruited to direct it, fresh off his twin successes of Shrek, and Shrek 2.

And while not everyone liked Shrek, it did win an Academy Award for Best Animated Feature, and anyone who can win an Oscar on their first feature film is OK by me.

The other notable member of the production team was WETA, the visual effects firm who racked up four Oscars for their work on the three Lord of the Rings movies.

I can only imagine how daunting the task for Adamson was when the movie started pre-production. As the saying goes, ?never work with children or animals,? but all four lead characters are children, and most of the supporting cast is talking animals ? computer generated animals at that.

That being said, Adamson did a stellar job, and somehow found four of the best young actors I have ever seen to play the four children who are the main characters.

The one factor which could change Narnia from a universally loved masterpiece, into a more controversial territory is the Christian overtones which people will undoubtedly find.

In the novel, C.S. Lewis thinly veils the Christian allegory; Aslan the lion, who is the King of Narnia, is killed on a mountaintop to save someone else, and then resurrected at dawn the next day.

Even that, though, is downplayed. The same events take place in the movie, but they aren?t played up with the same emphasis on symbolism and morality.

All in all, The Chronicles of Narnia is a top notch film for anyone and everyone. It is a perfect adaptation, remaining faithful to the book while still making the most out of the medium of film. It is also a testament to Adamson?s skill as a director, how well the film was shot, and edited.

The final thing to say about this movie is that I think we can all be thankful for once about Hollywood?s tendency towards sequels. I cannot wait for the next installment of what will surely become the Narnia franchise; I just hope it?s every bit as good as the first one.