Hollywood News top ten movie stars (using term loosely perhaps? Tina Fey?) to emerge from SNLPeel Slowly What's that a poster for? Can you guess which movies these Polish movie posters are selling?
Jon Hamm Mad Men Season 4 now filming. Yayyyyy
<--- Did you see that Russell Crowe got his star on the Walk of Fame this week? It's so random, the timing I mean, when stars receive theirs. A listers and D listers alike get them in surprising time frames. You'd think they'd tie this in with the release of Robin Hood (Cannes opening night film -- see the whole lineup) but in fact, it happened just as Tenderness arrives on DVD. No, I'd never heard of that either. Crowe in a straight to DVD release? What's that about? Maybe it did get theatrical release somewhere but it's rare that something with a star that high profile slips by unnoticed.
Cinema Blend Rachel Weisz as Jackie Kennedy. Oscar #2?
Rope of Silicon Martin Scorsese to make The Invention of Hugo Cabret as a 3D film
Roger Ebert kicks Kick-Ass 's ass. I love that he wrote this
Posts
16 comments:
Rachel Weisz as Jackie is exciting, though my mind still reels that she has a FIRST Oscar. Not just the wrong category, but I didn't even think Tessa Quayle was too great a performance. Serviceable, but not of the quality I expect from Supporting Actress (then again, it's only been perfection since 2007, so what do I know?).
Is that coming out the same year as the RFK movie with Matt Damon? What is going on?
i dont understand how roger ebert's review of kick-ass can be called a review when he only focused on hit girl when really that's just one part of the movie, and not even the main character at that. did the fact that a little girl kicking ass really upset him so much that he gave it one star? dude, chill out. its a teen movie. how do you give the movie Knowing 4 stars and this 1? this "review" just bothers me, i think its cause that if hit girl was older hed give this film (probably) 4 stars cause thats pretty much the only problem he pointed out. checking a lot of his rating really make me question his taste.
Ebert likes Tarantino films and they also have a lot of violence with no remorse. Just like 12 year olds kill people in real life so do adults and it's never funny. If you didn't like this movie because of the violence, then I really don't see how you could enjoy Tarantino films.
Why am I not surprised Nathaniel hasn't talked about Sigourney Weaver's comments about The Hurt Locker??
anon -- i haven't even heard Sigourney Weaver's comments about the Hurt Locker.
A Jackie O biopic just seems so unnecessary.
By the way, I read in the article sidebar that Kirsten Dunst is to star in Von Trier's new film. Hmm...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/film-news/7592630/Sigourney-Weaver-James-Cameron-lost-Oscar-because-he-doesnt-have-breasts.html
Fuck yeah to the Kiki/von Trier news.
-Jason
I love mi Kiki! I hope she pulls and incredible performance(well that is usually the case with Von trier ladies)
@ Poppy
I wouldn't take Ebert's star rating seriously. Even he admitted that he doesn't and has a skewed system.
Rachel Weisz as Jackie O will be interesting because that might be the film that gets Aronofsky arrested if Black Swan doesn't work out.
The Kirsten Dunst/Von Trier news is exciting. I'm curious to see how this works out since she took Penelope's place.
I must respectfully disagree with Ebert. It would have been out of character for Big Daddy to have had a talk with Hit Girl about the seriousness of death. He was training her to be ruthless, not be compromised with feelings.
As for Moretz, her mother was with her during the shooting of every scene and she knew what she was doing.
As for the six year olds that might watch this. That's not my fault or the movie's. That's bad parenting.
Roger Ebert has a unique way of reviewing films. When I read this, I was reminded of his critique of The Lovely Bones, where he didn't focus on the garish cinematography, the overbearing direction, the bonkers performances, or the horribly miscalculated tone, but rather singled out a very specific moral issue he had with the film.
It's an interesting point of view, and it's making me more interested in how I'll react to Kick-Ass.
I like the idea of Weisz as Jackie O, but honestly, 'movie' Jackie O belongs to Jeanne Tripplehorn in Grey Gardens. A+ to whoever casted her.
and i always trust Ebert's reviews. i don't read them too much because he tends to give ALOT of the movie away, but i always think he's spot on. He has a different way of reviewing, but it's one that i totally understand.
Derreck: Even on Blue Velvet? Brazil? Heathers? Ebert isn't really a fan of dangerous cinema and presenting children or teens as killers bothers him. To him, the age of Vincent Vega makes it okay to find Pulp Fiction funny, while the age of Jason Dean makes it not okay to find Heathers funny. So I kind of expected this negative review.
Volvagia -- but Heathers is a brilliant satire of teen cliques and the life or death heightening of teen angst. Did Ebert really object to that at the time? If so he missed the point.
I'm just having trouble seeing what Kick-Ass is a satire of and if it's not a satire why is the idea of a pre-teen killer funny or cool to audiences?
I would have had a lot less problems with it if it'd stuck to a gonzo comic tone and not tried to bring any moral values in at all. But it did so it didn't work for me.
Post a Comment