Choosing the ideal release date for a movie is far from an exact science. In the case of certain films, though, a release date can become 
a shrewdly publicized, locked-in no-brainer. The Saw films, for instance, always open around Halloween (generally the week before), and for a few years there, the notion that Will Smith “owned” July 4 was inflated into a clever “patriotic” marketing ploy. (That’s part of what made him the biggest movie star in the world.) Smaller films tend to be less holiday-based, but it certainly seemed a deft move when Focus Features announced that Taking Woodstock, Ang Lee’s offbeat dramatic comedy about the creation of those three days of peace, love, music, and mud, would be released on Friday, August 14, the weekend of the festival’s 40th anniversary. The timing was perfect, right?
Evidently not. About a month ago, Focus decided to push the release date of Taking Woodstock back two weeks. It’s now opening today, then going semi-wide this weekend, on August 28. (Here’s my review.)
I have great respect for the executives at Focus, so I hope they’ll forgive me if I ask: What were they smoking? I’m guessing that they thought they could “build” on the enthusiasm for the Woodstock anniversary, that coming out a bit later would only heighten the film’s presence, allowing it to stand apart from the rest of the Woodstock hoopla. But my sense is that this year’s attempt by the media to take stock of Woodstock barely lasted 72 hours — more like 72 minutes. There was an obligatory, faded-tie-dye roteness to much of the coverage, and my instinct is that Focus would have done better to strike a couple of weeks ago, while the 1969 boomer-nostalgia machine was still hot. This weekend, of course, will tell the tale.
***
On another front, the Weinstein Company has done a spectacular job of releasing Inglourious Basterds, snatching itself from the jaws of financial calamity in the process. For the first time in a long time, everything has clicked in tandem for Harvey and Bob Weinstein: the film’s late-summer release date, the brilliant quasi-sleight-of-hand of deploying a 20-second clip of Brad Pitt to make it look as if he lords it over the entire movie (in all fairness, he sort of does — despite his moderate screen time), and Quentin Tarantino going on every talk show to wheel out that same, damn, market-tested anecdote about how he and Brad split five bottles of rosé from Brangelina’s French vineyard on the night that he convinced Pitt to do the film. Actually, Quentin was quite hilarious on The Tonight Show last night, where he explained to Conan that, since he makes a practice of addressing actors on the set by their character names, he had to give direction to the actor playing Hitler by politely calling him “Mein Führer.”
To top it all off for the Weinsteins, they very cannily scheduled the release of Rob Zombie’s Halloween II for this Friday, just one week after Inglourious. If the Zombie film hits (and how could it really miss?), the company isn’t just making money. It’s making an announcement: that the Weinstein mojo is back.
As a film critic myself, I wish I had your job at a large, well-respected magazine: Never have to double check or do research. What a life!
Wow, what a douche.
It’s snobby people like that that make me not want to step into the entertainment/journalism field.
Adam Keleman, you sound like a douchebag.
Wow. Remind me never to read your reviews, Adam.
I enjoy your peices on Woodstock, as I am a cousin of Max Yasgur. I am curious to know if you could be interested in the only children’s book about Woodstock. Max Said Yes! The Woodstock Story by Abigail Yasgur and Joseph Lipner, with illistrations by Barbara Mendes. Visit it and if you want to talk about it give me a jingle or email me. Go to http://www.maxsaidyes.com
Voicing dissatisfaction with the current slate of film critics and their lazy writing does not make a douche. I pointed out an inaccuracy in the page and the page was then corrected. Maybe the older critics should watch their back as clearly there are substitutes waiting in the wings (such as me and a whole lot of younger folks struggling to find paying work). You try to be an up-and-comer these days; it’s difficult.
Sure, but even you are likely to make a mistake someday, and likely, someone will correct it. Gleiberman isn’t a lazy writer, actually I think he’s a pretty fantastic writer. There are plenty of terrible film critics whose jobs I’d love to have, too. Maybe spread your crankiness on Rolling Stone’s film pages if you want to talk about lazy writers. Just sayin.
I think he’s right. I saw the movie last night and it was like, who cares?
This is the welcome page for the dentaldoctor.us Association web site.