Friday, July 13, 2007

now playing 07/13

all links go to trailers

L I M I T E D

Hula Girls This was Japan's Oscar entry last year
Interview Sienna Miller (left) and Steve Buscemi play talking heads in this indie. I don't know how to phrase this heavily qualified question but re Sienna: Isn't she now the most famous actress in the world to have worked consistently whilst never deriving any portion of her fame from her actual film work? I'm genuinely curious. I don't think she's a bad actress but the fame level is really high considering...
My Best Friend Daniel Auteuil in a French comedy about a businessman who discovers he has no friends. I like Auteuil but my Francophilia is heavily drama based. Comedy is another story though I should note that the first French movie I ever saw was Les Comperes in 1984 with Gerard Depardieu and I thought it was rilllly funny (at the time)

Talk to Me Don Cheadle (Hotel Rwanda) takes on another true story, this time it's lighter: the story of "Petey" Greene Jr, a DJ and social activist in DC. Is it wrong that when I see him going for laughs in period garb all I can think about is his sad but comic character beats in Boogie Nights --god, he's so good in that one.
Time (right) Kim Ki-Duk's (3-Iron, spring summer fall winter and spring) intriguing looking tale of a desperate woman, plastic surgery, and the evolution of romantic relationships

W I D E

Captivity [no link on purpose] I'm so sick of hearing about this movie. I don't wanna say another word except this. I laughed at this line on Reel Fanatic "I had originally intended to list the 100 or so things I'd rather do with Elisha Cuthbert than torture and abuse her..." hee

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix I get confused by the public hysteria over this series. I understand why people love it having read two of the books... but I don't understand the L-O-V-E. I found the first book super fun and the second exactly like the first so why continue? --this conversation is brought to you by 2001 it's 2007 I'll shut up now --here's my point/question: the accompanying fervor for Daniel Radcliffe (Harry) and Emma Watson (Hermione) offscreen...? Huh!? They haven't made other movies. They're completely unterrible in the roles but neither are they exactly [ahem] Oscar worthy --it's easy to imagine dozens of other young actors being just as good or better. So... yeah... no. don't get it. I can only assume it's like television fame: you're super famous but only in connection with your character and as soon as you're off the air the fame evaporates into "he was in that television show!" which is a vaguely eternal but unhysteric fame and far more comprehensible to the non fan.

I'm probably only talking about this because I'm still just freaked out by how awful Daniel looks in that new Details photo shoot. He's suddenly like an ugly mutated version of Elijah Wood at his freakiest looking. When did that happen? Who approved that shot?

29 comments:

rose said...

I'm not afraid to admit that I'm 21 years old and I CANNOT WAIT for Deathly Hallows.

Harry Potter is love.

Aaron said...

"Intriguing-looking tale" is a really good euphemism for "there's a shirtless man on the poster".

I support this.

J.D. said...

That's right, they're not unterrible. Actually they're all quite good as time goes on, especially Dan in this one. It's certainly a "wow" movie on all fields, especially technically. It's amazing actually. And Imelda Staunton... HOLY CRAP (nightmares...) I'm rambling.

And that's a very good question: Have any people actually seen Sienna on screen? Anyone?

Sam said...

A prime example of a man who can carry off leather and skin: Viggo Mortensen.

A prime example of a man who cannot carry off leather and skin: Daniel Radcliffe and any other newly post-pubscent child star.

Leather is like spandex. It's a privilege, not a right.

NATHANIEL R said...

hee

rural juror said...

that photoshoot is awful..scary even.

Anonymous said...

Nat, you should seriously try reading the other books in the series. I'm not that fond of the films though.

Julia said...

Eh, I've never gotten into the Harry Potter books (or movies, for that matter). I read them to kids when I was a nanny, but I never quite understood the big hoopla.

Although, it is always a good thing to get kids excited about books. Can't really find fault in that.

Su said...

Nathaniel, does it help to know I genuinely love the series, but never really liked (and never reread) the first two books?
I agree, you should give Prisoner of Azkaban a chance.
About the actors' fame though, I'm completely with you. They're ok... considering all those great adult thesps though, I can't be too impressed.
...and now I'm trying to forget about that horrifying photo...

Anonymous said...

Julia,

I never understood the hoopla about a lot of things ( The Chronicles of Narnia, Paris Hilton etc). People just have different tastes

adam k. said...

Yes, Sienna's fame is perplexing. But really, I don't think THAT many people know who she is. Jude Law's personal life is nowhere near as closely followed as Brangelina's, for example.

re: Harry Potter, I think it's just a case of the thing snowballing into something big that everyone could share, and people like that. If something hits a sweet spot, as any "really fun" book is likely to do is this literarily challenged age, especially if it can appeal to both kids and adults, then people will want to keep going with it as long as they can. People yearn for that kind of pop cultural connection, and it's cool that it's happening with books. That's kind of rare, really.

And yeah, the photo is scary. Just a really weird face he making, plus of course the leather. But he has really nice blue eyes.

Kurtis11 said...

First and foremost, I must say that I gasped with delight when I saw Gael, Michelle AND Sigourney perched nicely above your blog...
As for Sienna Miller, I'm still not sure what to make of her as an actress. However, I do believe that close quarters and relatively simple locales in films, when done right, usually make for some really interesting narratives.

adam k. said...

YES, beautiful new banner. Where did you get that gorgeous picture of Gael? And who is that man fourth from the left?

Marius said...

Yeah, love the new banner. Gael looks great in that picture!

lylee said...

I'm with anonymous 1 and Su on the HP books...Please give books 3-6 a chance! (or at least book 3) Absolutely agree with your assessments of the first two - book 1 is entertaining but lightweight, and book 2 is just more of the same. BUT Rowling really raises the game in Prisoner of Azkaban (in fact, it's still my favorite of the series) and every book from that through 6 is seriously obsession-inducing.

I've never been that much into the movies either, though I still feel compelled to see them...Hope springs eternal, I guess.

Anonymous said...

Eh, I don't give a damn about "Harry Potter", so I'm off to see "Sicko" and "La Vie En Rose" instead. Hope they're not sold out! Ha.

Anonymous said...

Having now seen the movie: Imelda Staunton... the kind of movie-stealing performance that may just sneak her some possible Supporting Actress buzz in the right circumstances?

Not sure how the international reviews are shaping up, but she's getting raves across the board in the UK.

Rob

rural juror said...

Imelda was one of the standouts of the film (her and the girl who played Luna, Evanna Lynch), but I don't see a nomination coming. However, it really ought to get some nods for it's spectacular art direction.

Brooke Cloudbuster said...

Despite enjoying the books and the films to some degree, I still can't wait until it's all over. It's getting a little ridiculous. In 2010, when the last film has come out (presumably) I'll be so, so happy.

Regarding Time; very good, very creepy.

kin said...

1. Agree that you should try book 3-5 at least. While 1 and 2 are similar in structure and tone, I think 3-5 all have something different from the previous entry. Order of Phoenix is pretty much completely different from Sorcerer's Stone, especially in tone.

2. I thought Watson is pretty solid in the whole series.

3. When you mentioned the TV stars fame thing, the first name that pop up is Sarah Michelle Gellar. Sorry.

4. That Details magazine photo was disturbing.

Arkaan said...

1. Don't get me started on Harry Potter. There's nothing outrageously awful about the series (books or movies, really), but I hate going to bookstores and seeing all the Potter decorations and shit.

2. In defense of Radcliffe as an actor, he did do Equus in London, and was consistently singled out as the best thing about the show.

3. kin's right about Sarah, Nate. Sorry.

WickedScorp said...

ORDER OF THE PHOENIX : A handful of standout moments (especially look forward to the final battle scene) amidst a whole lot of dull, heavy-handed, weak and cobbled storytelling. Dreadful cinematography reminiscent of AZKABAN; heavy blue saturation leaves the film visually dank and depressing to look at. Standout performances by several newcomers to the series, most notably Evanna Lynch as Luna, Imelda Staunton as Umbridge and Helena Bonham Carter as Bellatrix who steals the movie for the too few minutes she appears. The regulars are phoning it in this time out. Overall, very disappointing, especially following the absolutely amazing GOBLET OF FIRE. Director David Yates is to return for HALF-BLOOD PRINCE, a move I would be very happy to see quashed in favor of a return from Mike Newell. Wishful thinking.

steve said...

Have to kinda agree about SMG, although I think in "The Body" she showed that, with the right director, she could have the chops to transfer to the movies.

Fingers crossed.

Anonymous said...

Okay, just saw Order of the Phoenix ..very dissappointing..Imelda is a standout. I mean they cut soo much of the plot out. Order of the Phoenix is my favorite of the series, but this movie did it no justice.

rural juror said...

Nate, I'm so sorry the Potter Nazis have invaded your comments to whine about stuff being cut in an adaptaion.

Arabella said...

Radcliffe a hunk? Sure, he's charming, bright, very gutsy, great interview, but...no. It's one thing to be the hottest guy of Hogwarts (not that he is--they totally tried to ugly up that Neville kid with a combover and padding), but let's see how he fares in another two or three years. Then he'll have to swim in the big pond with all the other emerging 21-year-old actors from around the world, some of whom will be able to rock the leather daddy vest at a tender age. The acting thing seems to be working out for him now, which is good, since the whole Sexiest Man Alive angle is a bit iffy.

There is the funniest picture floating around of Emma Watson seeing the Details photos for the first time and looking completely flabbergasted!

Deborah said...

I've seen Sienna Miller on-screen, but that's because I've seen LAYER CAKE, and that's entirely because of the James Bond connection (although it's good).

I'm hooked on the Harry Potter books but I lost interest in the movies. That said, Radcliffe's tiny bit of chest hair FREAKS ME OUT.

amir_uk said...

Everyone should go and see Mon meilleur ami (My Best Friend). Auteuil is on top form and Chereau has crafted just a lovely, lovely little film.

Kamikaze Camel said...

My Best Friend is the new Patrice Leconte, if that changes anyone's minds. Patrice is well liked.

In regards to Sienna, I like her. I think she can be a good actress (if the movie wasn't so problematic and wasn't released on Dec 31, I'm sure the Weinsteins could've spun an Oscar nod for Miller in Factory Girl), but I just don't know why tabloids care about her? As someone else mentioned, I doubt many Americans even know who she is, let alone whether she called Pittsburgh "Shitsburgh" or whatever.

In regards to Harry Potter, I've never read the books, but the movie of The Prisoner of Azkaban is amazing and would be in my top 10 for 2004 if I was in the right mood (and it was a very strong year). The first two I don't like at all and the last one was alright. Haven't seen the new one, but from what I've heard it all very "get a move on to the seventh, already!"