Unless you're making "Transformers 3" or "Iron Man 2," every movie in Hollywood
is a gamble in one way or another. But some gambles are more intriguing than
others, like the one Lionsgate just announced teaming Russell Crowe and Paul
Haggis. The two Oscar winners have joined forces on "The Next Three Days," a
Haggis-directed adaptation of the 2008 French film "Pour Elle" that begins
production in Pittsburgh in late September.

After all, both actor and filmmaker are considerable talents, but talents with
erratic track records. Crowe almost always delivers a strong performance--as he
did in such recent films as "American Gangster" and "3:10 to Yuma" (the latter
released by Lionsgate). But his last two films, "Body of Lies" and "State of
Play," were box-office duds. Haggis is one of Hollywood's go-to screenwriters,
having written Sony's latest Bond film, "Quantum of Solace." But since his best
picture Oscar win with "Crash" (also a Lionsgate film), he's struggled as a
filmmaker, directing the admirable-but-little-seen "In the Valley of Elah" and
creating "The Black Donnellys," a short-lived TV flop.

So it seemed intriguing to me to read that Lionsgate, which has largely been
focusing lately on genre thrillers and horror movies (along with its Tyler Perry
films), was willing to greenlight a movie that looked exactly like the kind of
picture that Hollywood studios shun these days: a serious character-driven
drama. After all, it was Haggis himself who called the picture an exploration of
the deeper themes of faith and belief, describing the deeper theme thusly:
"Would you save the woman you loved if you knew that by doing so, you would turn
into a man that a woman could no longer love?" (Sounds like something Graham
Greene might write.)

It sounds undeniably dramatically provocative. But is it commercial? Ask any
screenwriter: At most of today's studios, if you come in and pitch a film about
faith and belief, the production exec is most likely to respond by saying,
"Could the faith and belief part come after we got to see Megan Fox and Robert
Pattinson fight off a giant winged alien invader for about an hour?" So I called
up Lionsgate Motion Picture Group President Joe Drake, who tied to put the
latest studio deal in perspective.

I guess it should come as no surprise that he sees the film as more than just a
character-driven drama. "The movie really has a lot more going on than what you
read in Paul's description," Drake told me. "This is a great idea with a sticky
concept. It's a premise that really grabs you--how far will a guy go to get his
wife and family back again? We can't compete with studios by making $200-million
special-effects dramas, so what we're looking for are stories that are dramatic
and original, but also suspenseful. I like to think of this film as a thriller
with some great action in the third act, not just as a character drama."

But what about Russell Crowe? Is he still considered a movie star, at least by
Lionsgate? Keep reading:

The Lionsgate chief had nothing but kudos for Crowe. "First off, he's one of the
finest actors in the business," said Drake. "And I don't think anyone could
handle the role better than Russell. He's still a major league star, certainly
in this kind of movie."

Drake wouldn't divulge how much Crowe and Haggis are getting paid, though
sources close to the project say that neither man is getting his customary
up-front salary. It is likely that Lionsgate, like most studios today, did a
deal where the talent can participate in the film's profits after the studio has
recouped its production and marketing expenses.

"The most I can say is that this isn't a big-budget movie, but it's not a tiny
one either," said Drake. "It's appropriately budgeted for our time. The actors
will do fine. If the movie is successful, everyone will do well in the end. We
just look at this film as a great opportunity to work with some world-class
talent."


latimesblogs.latimes.com