Chapter 570 570 Stupid Choice

"Different Sky" as expected became the focus of coverage of major newspapers and media the next day, and the group of reporters who attended the premiere immediately raised their eyebrows. As Hugo expected, the focus of the news was all on Hugo. Among them, Hugo and Uma's air-to-air shouting became the focus of hype again, and both of them were about to appear in "Pulp Fiction", which made this topic hot. Very.

However, Paramount Pictures is obviously also very well-connected. Although the focus of the media has been misplaced, almost all reports have deliberately mentioned that Hugo specially attended the premiere to cheer for his friend Leonardo, "A different sky. "The exposure index has soared, and it has also attracted the attention of many viewers.

At the same time, Miramax's early publicity also took the opportunity to fully launch, and the news officially confirmed by the "Pulp Fiction" crew attracted a lot of attention.

There are many topics worth discussing in "Pulp Fiction". Hugo and Uma's first cooperation since "no longer dating" is obviously full of expected tension. However, due to the friendly signal released by Uma, the media generally Guess how likely it is that the two will reunite.

Quentin Tarantino, since his debut "Reservoir Dogs" won a lot of acclaim, what level will he contribute to his second work? You must know that after the first shot, the success or failure of the second work often maintains the director's future development prospects. Whether it is a short-lived or a real thing, the second work can obviously give people a glimpse of many clues.

Bruce Willis can also be seen in the cast, and people will not forget the rivalry between Hugo and Bruce, and Hugo is also rumored to be working with Bruce's wife Demi Moore during "The Righteous Sea" Now that it's Hugo and Bruce's turn to work together, what will happen to the situation?

However, compared to these intriguing topics, a professional film review in The New York Times sparked a more heated discussion. As the largest daily newspaper in the United States, although the "New York Times" is not an industry media such as "Variety" and "The Hollywood Reporter", its influence is unmatched by any media.

In the 1940s and 1960s, the "New York Times" film review had an unparalleled influence on the entire United States. At that time, the "New York Times" film review hosted by Bosley-Crowther reached its peak. In his heyday, it was impossible for a film not to make his annual top ten list to win an Oscar, and a foreign language film without his approval would hardly be a box office success in the United States, and in those years, except for Los Angeles, New York Outside local city newspapers, they don't even dare to publish their own professional film reviews until they have seen the "New York Times" film review.

This shows the glory of the "New York Times" at that time.

However, Posley was too rigid and too old to change, and faced with such an epoch-making work as "Bonnie. And. Clyde", he could not accept such a change, and finally had to call it a curtain call.

After that, Hollywood's emphasis on the first week's box office gradually increased, which also gradually weakened the importance of less time-sensitive film reviews. In the 1970s, the American film review industry entered a prosperous era, and everyone could speak. The strict system is gone forever. In addition to the large daily newspapers such as the "New York Times" and "Los Angeles Times", industry magazines such as "Variety" and "The Hollywood Reporter" have won the qualifications to write film reviews in the first place, and even have priority over them. A large daily newspaper, which has also completely changed the development of the entire film review industry.

Of course, even so, today's "New York Times" is still considered as a media with decisive opinions on movie box office and word of mouth along with "Los Angeles Times", "Variety Show" and "Hollywood Reporter", among which "New York Times" is more because With a long history and a wide readership, it has a very deep influence.

Unlike other newspapers, the New York Times, which is based in New York, represents the pride of cultural strength on the East Coast, so they always take a harsher approach to Hollywood productions—or, strictly speaking, those of Greater Los Angeles origin. eyes.

This article by Armond - Canby (Armond. Canby) apparently set off a storm in the United States, Armond is the "New York Times" chief film critic, he also continued the newspaper's lineage The New York ancestry and the cultural ancestry of the East Coast have continued the cultural struggle between the East and the West of the United States.

"It would be another wrong choice by Hugo Lancaster, not like a 'Hudson's Falcon' type error, but a horrific error in all its aspects that could be catastrophic.

After dedicating four masterpieces in a row, Lancaster has gradually become the most eye-catching baby boomer actor in Hollywood at present. His appearance advantages have been brought into full play in terms of acting skills. Unlike Cruise, who is bound by his appearance, Lancaster has made full use of his appearance in 'Sleepless in the Sea of ​​Righteousness', 'Sleepless in Seattle', and 'Schindler's List', turning the disadvantage of this vase image into an amazing advantage, And then contributed to the amazing performance.

I have to admit that Lancaster already has the potential to achieve greatness. Look at his opponents: Pacino, Nicholson, obviously, Lancaster is on the way.

But now, Lancaster has apparently made the habitual mistake of the Dead Poets Society again, choosing a work that does not suit him from any point of view.

First of all, from the perspective of the actors themselves, Quentin Tarantino is not a director suitable for Lancaster.

It can be seen from Tarantino's debut "Reservoir Dogs" that he is a very good director, but he is also a director with a very strong personal style. In Tarantino's works, the personal style has already overridden the performance of the actors. The success of 'Reservoir Dogs' lies not in how much the actors played, but in the fact that Tarantino gave the story enough character, it could even be said , 'Reservoir Dogs' will not affect the success of the work even if a group of actors are changed. Actors are just simple pawns in Tarantino's hands. From this point of view, Tarantino is an excellent director, but only limited to the action of 'directing', it cannot give the actors more vitality.

In other words, Tarantino's work is really outstanding in the two aspects of directing and screenwriting, and the space for actors to play is very limited.

Lancaster is an excellent actor, he is constantly breaking through himself now, in a stage of rapid improvement in his acting skills, and a director like Tarantino should obviously not be his partner. If this cooperation is placed after last year's 'Righteous Sea Heroes', or a year later, it may achieve Tarantino and Lancaster at the same time, but now, 'Schindler's List' is brilliant After that, it just swamped Lancaster's casting talent.

After four breakthroughs, Lancaster is now at a critical juncture where the choice of 'Pulp Fiction' was clearly a stupid and bad choice. Acting breakthrough aside, 'Pulp Fiction' would not be a good choice for Lancaster as a normal film.

As an actor who can earn $10 million, or even hit the $15 million mark, Lancaster chose an independent work that cost $8 million, and only paid $250,000 It's already a category of friendship acting, but is this really the right choice?

When Lancaster finally relied on the accumulation of four works to leave the negative impact of the Raspberry Award behind, and now chooses an independent film at a juncture that will hopefully go further? Is this risk worth it, is this risk right, is this risk sane?

Maybe Lancaster lost himself in the world of rock and roll, wish he could wake up and end this deadly and horrific mistake before it started. "

Almond analyzed Hugo's choice from both business and professional perspectives. Obviously, he completely disagrees with Hugo's choice, and believes that this will be the beginning of another terrible reincarnation.

Indeed, in the eyes of many industry professionals, it seems incredible that Hugo can now choose to join the 10 million salary club, but he chose 300,000 US dollars. The salary is not the core factor, it is just a measure. Everyone thinks that Hugo is now at a rising point in his career, but he is not advancing but retreating, which is really baffling.

If "Pulp Fiction" fails - as an independent film this is almost a certainty, the probability is even more than 80%, then Hugo's previous momentum accumulated by relying on four films will be in vain, perhaps no more than It's even worse after the Raspberry Awards, but it's going to be a lot harder to get into the $10 million pay club again.

It is really interesting to take a risk on one's own business and make a choice that everyone does not understand. Almond believes that if Hugo chose "Pulp Fiction" earlier or later, then there is still a trace to follow. After all, independent films also have good works, but they are placed on "Schindler's List". After winning the glory, it is really stunned.

After the "New York Times" comment came out, it was recognized by nearly two-thirds of the media. Although everyone had great expectations for Quentin's new work, no one could agree with Hugo's choice. Professional media, as well as industry practitioners, including brokers, find this absurd. Many people agree with Amond's statement, and feel that Hugo is destroying his own career. Towards destruction? Opportunities like this don't come often.

Joseph originally thought that he would applaud when he saw this comment from the "New York Times", because Amond had completely spoken his heart, but unexpectedly, Joseph not only did not gloat, but did not even have any joy at all. It is the heart that is occupied by a deep worry: a stupid choice, is it really so?

Joseph let out a long sigh of relief, tried his best to cheer him up, and then told himself, believe in Hugo, believe in Hugo's choice, believe that Hugo will create another miracle again, and believe that Hugo will take practical actions to the media. Answers to questions and ridicule.