Hey, remember that film that received so much hype and controversy only to be released with a whimper and a lot of negative reviews? I'm talking about Death of a President, a non-comedic mockumentary focused on the (fictional) assassination of George W. Bush. I thought it was a terrible movie, and not because I thought it was tasteless. I actually thought the idea was interesting; I just didn't think it was executed well in the style in which it was done. But plenty of others, including my friends and colleagues, liked the darn thing. It even played for a few months (mostly on Saturday nights) at the Pioneer Theater here in New York. Most astonishing, though, is the fact that it won an Emmy Award the other night. Actually, it was an International Emmy, for Best TV Movie/Mini-Series.

I didn't even know the International Emmys existed until the other night. I was walking down a Manhattan street and saw all these people in tuxedos walking up the red carpet to the ceremony. I didn't recognize anyone, but now, for all I know, one of the monkey-suited gents I walked past was DOAP filmmaker Gabriel Range. Not that I would have told him I disliked his movie -- once he had the statue in hand he wouldn't have cared what I thought anyway. Still, Robert DeNiro was apparently at the event, presenting a special award to Al Gore. Others who not only attended but also won include British actor Jim Broadbent, Dutch actor Pierre Bokma, French actress Muriel Robin and Stephen Fry, who features in the Best Documentary-winner Stephen Fry: The Secret Life of the Manic Depressive.

In this day and age you can do anything with special effects. But can you do it well? I believe that you can, but Hollywood doesn't seem to be in agreement with my belief. Studios continue to put out movies with special effects that disappoint, and I think it is disrespectful to audiences. Either figure it out, or leave it out. Every time I see a bad effect in a movie, I know it could have been done better, or more imaginatively, and it frustrates the heck out of me. The worst is when I see a bad effect in a movie with mostly great effects, such as in The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King.

A visual effect doesn't have to be great or even realistic as long as it works with the story and is believable -- I'll take Harryhausen or Henson over most of the CGI attempts lately. Unfortunately, Hollywood seems to half-heartedly strive for greatness and realism with every movie, and more often than not it fails to achieve either. In my thirty years I've seen some terrible visual effects, some only terrible in retrospect, some only terrible in perspective with what else has been done. I'm not usually surprised by bad effects, though, because I've developed a cynicism about effects, particularly about CGI, that causes me to expect the worst. Nonetheless, I've picked seven movies that did actually surprise me -- a lot.

1. King Kong (2005)

In The Return of the King, Peter Jackson has some bad effects shots, but at least they're just shots. In his next film, King Kong, he has bad effects sequences. And as with The Return of the King, they are all the more apparent and all the more frustrating because there are actually some great effects shots and sequences in King Kong (it did deserve the Oscar). The worst example in Kong is the dinosaur stampede. At first the sequence is tolerable because the dinos are rendered beautifully and the weak green-screen compositing is not any worse than what many of us grew up with. But as the sequence progresses, the interaction between the actors and the computer-generated dinos looks too fake, too much like something made long ago, before computers were even used. Both the part on the cliff and the part where the animals fall over each other are sloppy and unacceptable. It is a completely ironic sequence, too, since it begins with an exchange about movies looking real. At least someone thought to score the thing sped up with "Yakkety Sax" or it wouldn't be completely useless.

Newmarket Films has built a tasty reputation by producing and/or distributing such intelligent offerings as The Prestige, God Grew Tired of Us and Death of a President. Their latest endeavor is no less challenging: according to Variety, they have acquired the screen rights to Michelle Richmond's novel The Year of Fog. Richmond's second book has garnered praise as a literary page-turner since its publication at the end of March.

it relates the story of a photographer named Abby and her fiancé Jake. Abby takes Jake's six-year-old daughter to Ocean Beach in San Francisco one day, looks away momentarily to snap a picture, and when she looks back the little girl is gone. As a review in the San Francisco Chronicle reveals, "each reacts according to personal nature, abandoning any semblance of normalcy in the process. Jake's a teacher, a planner, and he throws himself into organizing a storefront volunteer group that keeps him frenetically busy. Abby, a loner, takes off on her own, spending long hours at the beach and in increasingly unsavory neighborhoods." As the search for the little girl continues, the toll upon both Abby and Jake mounts. The only real question mark that has been raised by readers at Amazon.com is about the ending, but beware of possible spoilers if you venture forth.

The Denver Post review said: "A good part of what makes The Year of Fog compulsively readable is the voice of its narrator." That's the challenge that's been set before Semi Chellas, who has been hired to convert that narrative voice into cinematic terms. She's a veteran writer for Canadian television (The Eleventh Hour, Dead Aviators), though this appears to be her first adaptation of a novel. Have any of you read the book? Would it make a good film? Or is this a story best left to the printed page?

The controversial fake doc Death of a President came and went in America, where it earned only half a million bucks at the box office (it is still running every weekend at NYC's Pioneer Theater, if you're still interested), but it is still making its way around the globe. It will open this Friday in Italy, though on 30% fewer screens than originally planned. Lucky Red, which is distributing the film there claims that some exhibitors have bailed on their booking in order to avoid trouble. In addition to the cancellations, Lucky Red is also dealing with the fact that its ads for the film, which features a tombstone with President Bush's name inscribed, are disappearing all over Rome. Apparently people are tearing the posters down either for a souvenir or to protest (I say the former is more likely).

The main issue for exhibitors actually has little to do with protests regarding George Bush. In fact, the cancellations seem to be out of respect less for our current President than for their former prime minster, Aldo Moro, who was assassinated in 1978. It turns out that Lucky Red accidentally and coincidentally scheduled the release of DoaP on the 29th anniversary of Moro's kidnapping by the terrorist group The Red Brigades (they killed him nearly two months later). Of course, exhibitors should have been looking for an excuse to get out of their bookings anyway since the movie is not very good and it hasn't been performing well in other markets. After bans from theater chains may have helped DoaP flop in America, it can be expected that the same will happen in Italy.

There aren't any plans for an official sequel to The Passion of the Christ (unofficial is another story), but one Bible publisher is producing what seems to be a related product. This October, Nelson Bibles will release a 25-hour audiobook of the New King James Version complete with a star-studded cast, including Jim Caviezel as the voice of Jesus.

The rest of the Passion cast has been substituted with other big names, and there doesn't seem to be any affiliation with Newmarket Films or Mel Gibson, but obviously Nelson is using the connection to its advantage. Otherwise the real appeal of the audiobook, entitled The Word of Promise: New Testament, should be Terrence Stamp, who provides the voice of God, and Richard Dreyfuss, who plays Moses.

There will be a follow-up (or, should I say prequel?) to the audiobook that will be based on the Old Testament, and Stamp and Dreyfuss will return in their respective parts. Unfortunately, Caviezel's role will not be included. Neither will the parts played by Marisa Tomei, Lou Diamond Phillips, Kimberly Williams, Ernie Hudson, John Heard or Luke Perry (try to imagine Judas with Dylan McKay's sideburns).

Controversy doesn't always sell, and Newmarket Films found this out the hard way over the weekend with its dismal receipts from Death of a President. The faux doc grossed only $282,000 from the 143 theaters it played at in the U.S. and Canada, and its per-screen average was only $1,970. Compare that with the much better Shut Up & Sing, which also opened over the weekend with appeal to the Bush-hating crowd; it played in only four theaters for a per-screen average of $12,525. Plus, if we look at NYC's box office, which is a better gauge for small films like DoaP and SU&S, the latter made $21,159 (in two theaters), while the former made less than half that, at $9,043 (in three theaters).

Considering the $1 million that Newmarket reportedly paid for the film, the take is very disappointing. Still, there is a good chance that even moviegoers turned off from the subject matter will be more curious in the privacy of their own homes, and the distributor should make its money back through DVD and TV sales. But the numbers should show that such awareness does not always mean anticipation. The same was true last summer with the opening gross for Snakes on a Plane (coincidentally, DoaP rhymes with SoaP).

More on Death of a President:

Netscape Video: Death of a President

TIFF Review: Death of a President

Death of a President: There's No Publicity Like No Publicity

Death of a President -- in the U.S.?

Netscape's Karina Longworth sat down with Death of a President director Gabriel Range, and has intertwined the interview with her own thoughts and criticisms of the faux documentary and the controversial buzz surrounding it. The most important point addressed in the video is probably the fact that the film is actually the opposite of anti-Bush. Karina even goes so far as to say it is, "definitely sympathetic," in its treatment of the president and, "it manages to truly humanize him," turning him into a "misunderstood hero."

You can watch the video right here, or go to Netscape and download it.

More on DOAP:

Cinematical Buzz Reviews: Death of a President

Death of a President: There's No Publicity Like No Publicity

Canadians Want You to See Death of a President

(The following review ran during Cinematical's coverage of The Toronto International Film Festival; with Death of a President bowing today in limited release, we're glad to share it with you again.)

Occasionally, on the festival circuit, there's a movie that garners significant press before it even opens, and mainstream press at that. The controversy could be political, artistic or any one of a number of things. This year at Toronto, the as-yet-unseen-but-buzzed-about buzz flick was Death of a President -- a British mockumentary promising a look at a hypothetical 2007 assassination of George W. Bush, 43rd President of the United States. Coyly listed in the program guides as D.O.A.P., the film's mere existence and outline caused a controversy, and incited strong feelings from both the Right-wing blogosphere and Kevin Costner (raising the question of which of those is actually less relevant). Political filmmaking about what-ifs is nothing new, nor are mock-docs about politically charged realities. C.S.A: The Confederate States of and It Happened Here both come to mind, as well as much of the work of Peter Watkins. Death of a President, it seemed, might be the newest entry into the field. Or public outrage over its essential plot might make the film disappear, a casualty of a just-declared War on Premises. ...

Movie marketing's a bit of a chess game for a lower-budget indie -- you want to always make tactical choices between advertising (which you pay for) and publicity (which you don't). For a great demonstration of this phenomenon, check out this press release from Newmarket films who picked up shock mock doc Death of a President at Toronto about how they are shocked, shocked that NPR and CNN won't run ads for the film.

Of course, this is the best of both worlds, as the Movie City News point out in their pithy headline -- now Newmarket doesn't have to pay money it probably doesn't have to run ads it can't afford ... and they'll benefit from some nice, juicy controversy. I think my favorite weasel-words in the press release come courtesy of Newmarket co-founder Chris Ball: "As everyone who has actually seen the movie agrees, Death of a President is the opposite of a call for violence – it's a powerfully cautionary tale about the pernicious effects of violence. ..." Take this the right way, Mr. Ball, but I don't think that a cautionary subtext about the pernicious effects of violence is what people go see DOAP for, anymore than they're watching porn for the safe sex message when the condoms come out. And also, let's not forget there's a fine distinction between censorship (which, to me, has always meant the government actively banning something) and the legitimate decision of a business to not accept an advertisement. Are NPR and CNN within their rights, in your eyes ... and will you go see Death of a President when it opens?

(Click here for Cinematical's Toronto Film Festival review of Death of a President.)

Two more films that premiered in Toronto this week have acquired U.S. distribution: ...So Goes the Nation and, perhaps surprisingly, Death of a President. IFC bought the North American distribution rights to ...So Goes the Nation, a documentary about the American electoral process with a focus on Ohio during the 2004 Presidential campaign. IFC hopes to release the film before U.S. midterm elections this fall through its First Take arm, which simultaneously releases movies in theaters and on cable-on-demand channels.

Newmarket took a chance and grabbed the U.S. distribution rights to Death of a President (aka DOAP), one of the more controversial films screening at TIFF this year. The mock-documentary narrative portrays a future in which President George W. Bush is assassinated, and manipulates live-action footage to make the fictional events look plausible. It seemed highly doubtful that any U.S. distributor would be interested in the film, which was produced by Channel 4 in the UK. Newmarket is probably used to controversy, having distributed The Passion of the Christ. I'll be interested to see what kind of release the film will have, and how amenable theaters will be about showing the film.