Friday, September 2, 2011

Will the Weinsteins still push Madonna's W.E. for Oscar consideration after it bombed in Venice?

Deadline has the news:

The signs are always the same when any studio knows it has a bomb. Executives won’t commit any opinion to email. Instead, phone calls from them pledging to “explain everything” are promised but never come. The suits deny up and down any truth to the inevitable leaks about a troubled shoot or creative friction or bad buzz. But when the studio is financially on-the-fence The Weinstein Co, and the film is Madonna’s first feature-length directorial effort W.E. about Walllis Simpson, and its debut is at the unforgiving Venice Film festival which has panned far bigger and more influential big names in filmdom, then not even the PR maestro Harvey Weinstein can downplay crushingly lousy reaction and reviews.

Fact is that the international press and its U.S. counterparts are having a field day killing Madonna’s movie in what can only be seen as the latest “Death In Venice”. Or maybe the more accurate way of saying this is “Death By Venice”. The Times of London claimed madonna had made an inadvertent comedy “screamingly, inadverdently funny in parts [that] had ‘em rolling in the aisles at Venice” The Guardian review was truly vicious under the headline, “Madonna’s jaw-dropping take on the story of Wallis Simpson is a primped and simpering folly, preening and fatally mishandled”. Only the Daily Mail gave it a thumbs-up. But my guess that probably has more to do with that newspaper’s long and troubled history with Madonna who in 2009 won a multimillion dollar lawsuit again the Daily Mail and whose legal reps have been threatening the paper repeatedly of more to come because of its nearly always negative coverage of her.

In fact, The Weinstein Co in June was strenuously denying the British tabloid’s article pronouncing W.E. a mess after detailing a secret NY test screening that reportedly left Harvey “thunderous and sour”. His minions claimed that the audience loved the picture and so did Weinstein, who had made Truth or Dare with Madonna and enjoyed a critical and financial success. The studio confirmed the pair had been working on W.E. for some time before that test screening but wouldn’t confirm or deny reports that Harv was re-editing the picture to make it more commercially viable. That’s something he’s done to only mixed success in the past — earning him the nickname “Harvey Scissorhands”.

I do think The Weinstein Co was masochistic not only to send Madonna’s oeuvre to the film festival but also schedule it during the coming Oscar corridor. The good news is that Madonna’s movie cost less than $35M and all of it shows up on the big screen. Even Madonna’s many detractors said the film looks beautiful even if superficial story-wise. The bad news isFthat The Weinstein Company already announced a major distribution commitment to release W.E. on December 9th in New York and Los Angeles, then expand to additional markets in December, with wide release anticipated by mid-January. At the time of the announcement, Harvey gave the film a rave: “Madonna beautifully interweaves past and present in W.E. It’s a very smart film, and a stunning feature directorial debut. I’m incredibly excited about this movie and I wanted to give it a prominent release date.” And it was Harv who decided to hold back W.E. from the Cannes Film Festival and send it instead to Venice.

Now the terrible reviews couldn’t be coming at a worse time for the Weinstein Co. It’s had two major box office disappointments in a row, and a possible third coming this weekend with its Dimension Films’ Shark Night 3D. I don’t know how The Weinstein Co is going to stay on track with its reorganized finances if Dimension films keep bombing like Spy Kids 4 (which opened to a weak $12M weekend from 3,295 theaters) and TWC pics underperforming like Our Idiot Brother (which made only $5.7M from 2,555 locations obviously hurt by Hurricane Irene but also dead last of the trio of new films releasing).

As for Madonna’s narrative, it was co-written by her and her pal Alek Keshishian (In Bed With Madonna), produced by her and another of her pals Kris Thykier. But the production also saw exit producer David Parfitt (Harv’s Shakespeare In Love which stole the Best Picture Oscar from Steven Spielberg’s far more worthy Saving Private Ryan) and casting director Nina Gold and actor Ewan McGregor and actresses Vera Farmiga and Margo Stilley. It plays up the somewhat fabled romance, and ignores the more tawdry reality, between American Wallis Simpson and Britain’s King Edward VIII, who famously gave up his throne to marry the woman he loved. More than six decades later, their story enthralls a young woman who thinks she sees in their devotion a stark contrast to her own unhappy marriage – and an example to follow as she searches for the meaning of true love. If that sounds treacly story-wise, reviewers thought it was.

I predict that The Weinstein Co will wind up just dumping W.E. into North American theaters, put little marketing push behind it after the first weekend, and instead focus on the real Oscar possibles which the studio has this year. It’s more the rule than the exception for Harv to throw his Fall fillms against the wall, see which stick with critics and audiences, and then focus on those few and abandon the others. Potentially, he’s got Academy Award contenders in the black-and-white silent film The Artist that he bought right before the Cannes Film Festival and became a rave on the Croisette. He’s got Iron Lady with Meryl Streep playing British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and also bought at Cannes. And the John Hillcoat-directed The Wettest County In The World expected to be platformed for Oscar and released in early 2012. The Weinstein Co also will push Michelle Williams for her turn as Marilyn Monroe in My Week With Marilyn. And so on.

-Joey's Two Cents: Cross one film off your contenders list, I suppose...thoughts?


  1. I say wait until Butter (which is another Weinstein Company film) does at Toronto and then make a decision.

  2. Was it ever really a contender? I guess Riseborough had somewhat of a shot but I don't think it was every truly in play.

  3. It was chatted about, but it was never a BIG one, no.

  4. That article is somewhat overblown, it got mixed reviews, they weren't all scathing and negative. But I think it's also true that those naysayers had made their mind up before they saw it and were going to bash it cause it was the Madonna movie. Predictably the press have had a field day with this.

    And yes, it was never really a contender. Weinstein buying it was a good sign, but this is essentially a directorial debut, how high can expectations be. I hoped Riseborough would get more praise, but things about it bothered me like the cheesy copying of Sofia Coppola's anarchronistic use of a pop song, most worrying of all Madonna writing the script and not hiring a better scribe, plus the sympathetic portrayal of Nazi sympathizers.

    As a hardcore Madonna fan, even I was never enamoured with her past dalliances with celluloid, but I'm still looking forward to this. Directing is what she's always done - just not in film till now! :D

  5. Yes and no. There aren't any positive reviews really out there...but I do agree that you have to keep in mind what Deadline is.