THE
SUNDANCE KIDS: HOW THE MAVERICKS TOOK BACK HOLLYWOOD
AUTHOR: JAMES MOTTRAM
PUBLISHER: FABER AND FABER
480 Pages
$24
By DANNY GRAYDON
Variety, 5/21/06
Treading
much the same ground as Peter Biskind's weighty assessment of the
rise of independent film via Miramax and Robert Redford's Sundance
film fest, "Down and Dirty Pictures," James Mottram's
similarly epic study focuses on the entirely acceptable notion that
the generation of filmmakers who emerged in the wake of Steven Soderbergh's
seminal 1989 triumph at Sundance with "sex, lies & videotape"
has since fostered a new Golden Age akin to the early '70s triumphs
of Altman, Coppola, Scorsese et al who made up the so-called "New
Hollywood."
Certainly, Mottram, a London-based film writer, has a wealth of
evidence to push his argument: indie helmers like Soderbergh, Tarantino,
Wes Anderson, Sofia Coppola, Spike Jonze, P.T. Anderson, David Fincher
and Alexander Payne are producing films with high artistic cachet
as well as box office muscle, projects that entice (and occasionally
revitalize) mainstream stars and find great favor with auds and
critics alike.
Beginning and ending with Soderbergh -- perhaps the most accomplished
of the new mavericks -- Mottram's coverage, alternately thematic
and historic, benefits hugely from the impressive array of original
interviews with key players, most notably Soderbergh, whose perspective,
as someone who goes back and forth between the mainstream and indie
environments, is a vital one. However, Mottram's formulaic assessments
of films, along with a critical style that lacks bite and occasionally,
in the case of Tarantino, is somewhat fawning, detracts from what
is otherwise a compelling story of challenging, determined filmmaking.
One overarching problem bedevils the book: the perhaps too-bold
claim of the subtitle. Have these vigorous talents actually taken
Hollywood back? Clearly, Mottram would love this to be so, but his
interviewees' wearied -- and obvious -- observations that Hollywood's
zealous deification of the almighty dollar and tendency to favor
synergistic activity over artistic cachet contradicts that premise.
Indeed, by the closing chapter Mottram questions whether the mavericks
really did take back Hollywood, or whether it was "more a case
of being allowed entrance again after years in the wilderness."
Re-admitted or forcibly returned, the new mavericks show few signs
of losing steam, showing a considerable adeptness at utilizing the
Hollywood machine without being crushed by it. Given the production
environment in which they have to operate, that is still a mightily
impressive achievement.
TO
READ REVIEWS OF "AVA GARDNER: 'LOVE IS NOTHING'" AND "THE
CURSE OF VILMA VALENTINE," CLICK HERE;
FOR REVIEWS OF BOOKS DEALING WITH M. NIGHT SHYAMALAN, PATRICIA NEAL
AND MACAULAY CULKIN, CLICK HERE.
|