|
Post by futuretrunks on Oct 31, 2020 21:54:08 GMT
Good God - While I agree that Kidman could afford (figuratively and literally) to be more selective in her film projects, I strongly disagree with the idea that television is a "lesser" medium - particularly in this post- Sopranos, post- Sex and the City world. Even back in '94, Anjelica Huston turned down Polanski's Death and the Maiden for the chance to play Calamity Jane on television's Buffalo Girls. The precedent is there for women choosing television over film (when they really don't have to) simply because the parts are more interesting to them. Just like the precedent is there for actors and actresses choosing supporting parts over leading parts because the parts are more interesting to them. That doesn't mean that actors wouldn't generally prefer playing interesting leading roles over interesting supporting roles. Even Anjelica Huston, who you cited, explicitly stated that the reason she switched to Television was because there weren't enough interesting roles in Film for women and that Television was treating women better. It's more a case of being forced out of Film due to a dearth of opportunities than someone at the top of Hollywood opting to do Television over Film. Like I said, I am not criticizing her for it and I think it is pretty savvy of Kidman to be doing more Television, but let's be realistic. I think even you would agree that if she was getting the opportunities of someone like Jennifer Lawrence, she wouldn't be doing as much Television. In other words, she is no Queen of Film, which is why she is trying her hand at becoming the Queen of TV. I think that's a bit over-the-top. Jennifer Lawrence just got a movie with some big names and a director with some heat, but Sofia Coppola, Campion, and Park Chan Wook are some significant names. Lawrence's career basically cratered because she couldn't secure a meaningful gig from a non-O. Russell director who wasn't a journeyman or intent on making a fiasco (Aronofsky). McKay and Sorrentino and the Neugebauer movie might right that ship, but we'll have to see.
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Oct 31, 2020 22:25:43 GMT
I think that's a bit over-the-top. Jennifer Lawrence just got a movie with some big names and a director with some heat, but Sofia Coppola, Campion, and Park Chan Wook are some significant names. Lawrence's career basically cratered because she couldn't secure a meaningful gig from a non-O. Russell director who wasn't a journeyman or intent on making a fiasco (Aronofsky). McKay and Sorrentino and the Neugebauer movie might right that ship, but we'll have to see. It seems to me like you're trying really hard to discount all the promising opportunities Lawrence has had just to make the claim that she hasn't had promising opportunities. In just the past 5 years, Lawrence has had: 1. Joy - An acting vehicle the likes of which are exceedingly rare for actresses. Most actresses would be lucky to have one such vehicle over their entire careers, where they get to be the front-and-center lead of a movie by a highly acclaimed director and with a supporting cast that includes Robert De Niro and Bradley Cooper. 2. Passengers - A $150M science fiction movie from a freshly Oscar-nominated director where, again, she gets to be the top-billed lead. You don't get handed those everyday. 3. Mother! - A drama for another acclaimed director where she is once again the top-billed lead. 4. Red Sparrow - A $70M action thriller with a director she's had a working relationship with, where she gets to be the top-billed lead. 5. Don't Look Up (Upcoming) - A lead role alongside DiCaprio for a highly acclaimed director, with Streep and Blanchett in the supporting cast. 6. Mob Girl (Upcoming) - A lead role for another highly acclaimed director in Sorrentino. None of her recent movies really worked out as expected for her, though Joy did fetch her an Oscar nomination, but to act like she hasn't had good opportunities, on paper, is really disingenuous. Regardless of how they turned out, she is getting offered lead roles from acclaimed directors on a consistent basis. And I don't think anybody would dispute that she's had a much better time in the 2010s than Kidman. Once again, this is not a diss on Kidman in anyway. It is just a statement of fact.
|
|
|
Post by futuretrunks on Oct 31, 2020 22:38:59 GMT
I think that's a bit over-the-top. Jennifer Lawrence just got a movie with some big names and a director with some heat, but Sofia Coppola, Campion, and Park Chan Wook are some significant names. Lawrence's career basically cratered because she couldn't secure a meaningful gig from a non-O. Russell director who wasn't a journeyman or intent on making a fiasco (Aronofsky). McKay and Sorrentino and the Neugebauer movie might right that ship, but we'll have to see. It seems to me like you're trying really hard to discount all the promising opportunities Lawrence has had just to make the claim that she hasn't had promising opportunities. In just the past 5 years, Lawrence has had: 1. Joy - An acting vehicle the likes of which are exceedingly rare for actresses. Most actresses would be lucky to have one such vehicle over their entire careers, where they get to be the front-and-center lead of a movie by a highly acclaimed director and with a supporting cast that includes Robert De Niro and Bradley Cooper. 2. Passengers - A $150M science fiction movie from a freshly Oscar-nominated director where, again, she gets to be the top-billed lead. You don't get handed those everyday. 3. Mother! - A drama for another acclaimed director where she is once again the top-billed lead. 4. Red Sparrow - A $70M action thriller with a director she's had a working relationship with, where she gets to be the top-billed lead. 5. Don't Look Up - A lead role alongside DiCaprio for a highly acclaimed director, with Streep and Blanchett in the supporting cast. None of her recent movies really worked out as expected for her, though Joy did fetch her an Oscar nomination, but to act like she hasn't had good opportunities, on paper, is really disingenuous. Regardless of how they turned out, she is getting offered lead roles from acclaimed directors on a consistent basis. And I don't think anybody would dispute that she's had a much better time in the 2010s than Kidman. Once again, this is not a diss on Kidman in anyway. It is just a statement of fact. It's fair to think that those were good opportunities, but I don't personally agree. I really like O. Russell as a director, but Joy's script was a mess and easily O. Russell's worst. Passengers had a lousy script (that I commented on well before production took place), and Tyldum is/was a hack. Someone getting a Best Director nomination isn't proof of competency; I thought The Imitation Game was lousy and Headhunters bafflingly overrated, so I just never would have gotten in business with that script and director. mother! again has a ridiculous script. Red Sparrow is sheer mediocrity; it's like Leo having done a second Luhrmann film because he's friends with Luhrmann; Gatsby is hardly a highlight of his career. Francis Lawrence seems like a decent dude, but his feature films are unspectacular; he's much more skilled at music videos. If I were Jennifer Lawrence's brother trying to steer her career into greatness, I would have vehemently advised her not to do any of those 4 films excepting significant re-writes to Joy (because O. Russell is a typically a good writer/director).
|
|
Good God
Badass
Posts: 1,633
Likes: 1,937
|
Post by Good God on Oct 31, 2020 22:48:03 GMT
It's fair to think that those were good opportunities, but I don't personally agree. I really like O. Russell as a director, but Joy's script was a mess and easily O. Russell's worst. Passengers had a lousy script (that I commented on well before production took place), and Tyldum is/was a hack. Someone getting a Best Director nomination isn't proof of competency; I thought The Imitation Game was lousy and Headhunters bafflingly overrated, so I just never would have gotten in business with that script and director. mother! again has a ridiculous script. Red Sparrow is sheer mediocrity; it's like Leo having done a second Luhrmann film because he's friends with Luhrmann; Gatsby is hardly a highlight of his career. Francis Lawrence seems like a decent dude, but his feature films are unspectacular; he's much more skilled at music videos. If I were Jennifer Lawrence's brother trying to steer her career into greatness, I would have vehemently advised her not to do any of those 4 films excepting significant re-writes to Joy (because O. Russell is a typically a good writer/director). Hey, I don't necessarily disagree, but I'm just being objective here. I think DOR is insanely overrated and that McKay is a hack, but I can't deny that they're both highly acclaimed directors that a lot of actors would love to work with. So while I'm with you that Lawrence is not a particularly good project-picker, I think it's hard to argue that she doesn't get better opportunities than pretty much any actress alive.
|
|