New York Times

Netflix acquires rights to Kodachrome: a movie about the final days of the iconic film

Photo courtesy Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF)

Netflix has acquired the rights to Kodachrome, an upcoming Jason Sudeikis movie about the last days of the Kodachrome film era. The news was first reported by Deadline, who is claiming that Netflix paid $4 million for the rights and plans a widespread theatrical release that could cover theaters in major regions around the world—including the US, UK, Canada, and Japan.

Kodachrome the movie revolves around a father and son on a road trip to get to one of Kodak’s photo processing labs before it closes down forever. The screenplay was inspired by a New York Times article about the last lab in the world that was processing the now-iconic film stock; in the movie, the characters are racing against time to try and get four rolls developed before it’s too late.

True to the film’s theme, Kodachrome was shot on film, not digital, and features the acting talents of Jason Sudeikis, Ed Harris, and Elizabeth Olsen. Here’s hoping it comes to a theatre near you… and pays proper tribute to the analog legend.

→ continue…

From:: DPreview

6 Reasons Why “Inherent Vice” Is Criminally Underrated

By Hrvoje Galić

“I don’t know what I just saw.”

– “Doc” Sportello

“Inherent Vice” is the 2014 film by the wunderkind Paul Thomas Anderson; it is based on the novel of the same name by acclaimed postmodernist author Thomas Pynchon. Jean-François Lyotard famously defined postmodernism as an “incredulity towards metanarratives,” meaning that the narratives that gave meaning to political, ethical (etc.) concepts in the past are simply no longer credible.

In the New York Times article on Pynchon’s novel, the author says: “The private eyes of classic American noir dwell in a moral shadow land somewhere between order and anarchy, principle and pragmatism. They’re too unruly to be cops and too decent to be crooks, leaving them no natural allies on either side but attracting enemies from both.”

Pynchon is a writer who is “notoriously” reclusive; only a few photographs have been taken of him. He started publishing in the late 1950s and early 1960s and that fact is crucial for understanding “Inherent Vice”.

Anderson’s film follows that idea in the spirit of Pynchon’s novel; the film is not easily ‘digestible’, to say the least. The film seemingly follows the tradition of stoner films like “The Big Lebowski”, but it is also very different than that particular type of film.

When the viewer watches it, they should ask themselves: “Who can I ‘trust’?” The answer is – no one. Not the narrator, not the characters who even don’t trust themselves, not even the director who seems to ‘play’ with the viewer, making him believe what is not, and the other way around.

This may look stark, but it surely is not. It is what gives this film a spell-binding attraction, but also incurs the loss of popularity among the viewers. The film gained a rating of only 6.7/10 on IMDb. This article will try to present the arguments as → continue…

From:: Taste Of Cinema