So, this is a fun batch of subjects, if I do say so myself. I'm not even going to spend a lot of time setting this up. Just follow the jump and debate, debate, debate!
First, Father of the Bride is going gay! I have so many thoughts on this, but I feel awful that my first thought is that the reasoning behind this reboot is just so tasteless. If you read the small article you'll see that the closing sentiment is this:
"I just hope it goes forward before gay stops trending…"
Now, I know that gay is trending, if that is how you want to put it, but is that really a reason to exploit it for box-office mojo or for critical attention? Isn't this kind of lessening the political importance of the matter and making it more of a plot piece than something integral to the fabric of society? Maybe I need the opinion of someone viewing it from the side of things, but really...isn't that statement a tad insulting? Being gay isn't like taking a selfie, right? It shouldn't trend. I just find the statement completely distasteful.
I also find the idea of the film to be a terrible one and and overdone, beaten down horse of a stereotype, so maybe that has fueled these feelings.
What do you think of the film idea itself and the statement addressed?
Moving onto something more entertaining, have you seen this snippet from Keira Knightley's interview on the Graham Norton Show?
First off, Knightley is absolute love. Like, I adore her so much. I find her charming and gracious and real and gorgeous and just so natural in everything. I know that she has very loud naysayers, but they can all go fuck themselves. Like, this young woman is just the real deal. Second, I really, truly, deeply want to work with Joe Wright now. Can I please wake up tomorrow and actor on the set of Pan just so that he can yell off color remarks at me?
And, for the record, that scene in Atonement is probably my favorite sex scene in any film I've ever seen.
How do you like Knightley's face?
LOL, have you heard that Steven Seagal is mad at Neeson getting action gigs? This makes me laugh so hard. He says, and I quote:
"Look at Liam Neeson. He can't fight, he's not an action guy at all and he's getting action movies now, so that should tell you something. He's a great dramatic actor, a great guy. Is he an action guy? No. Is he a great fighter, a great warrior? No. Let's be honest."
I'm sorry, but when did actually being able to fight make you a good actor? Shouldn't being a good actor make you a good actor? Like, Seagal's been coasting (or had coasted, since, well...look at him) on his technical athletic skills for so long without ever once being able to act. So, shouldn't he have become a professional fighter, since that's all he was good at? And stop bitching about these Expendables flicks and their mixed casts or their special effects. Have you looked in the mirror lately? I'm pretty sure that Neeson could kick your ass.
They can't all be Bruce Willis; you know, a good fighter AND a good actor.
What do you think? Is Seagal being a bitch? Who do you think balances out the fighting and the acting just right?
Ok, so now I'm going to talk about something closer to my heart; Todd Field's next movie! I'm not going to lie, he's been pissing me off. I've made it no secret that I consider In the Bedroom one of the best films of the aughts; of all time even! It is a five time Fisti Award winner (Picture/Director/Screenplay/Lead Actor/Supporting Actress) and Field instantly because this director that I couldn't wait to see more from. He made me wait FIVE FUCKING YEARS for Little Children, and while I really liked the film, it wasn't as awe inspiring as his debut and it left me humbly waiting for something more. He's put NOTHING out since then. He's had The Creed of Violence in pre-production forever now, has flirted with the idea of adapting Beautiful Ruins a while back, but since we've heard nothing, and now he's circling a Bowe Bergdahl movie project (which has also caught the eye of Katherine Bigalow).
PICK A PROJECT!!! I just want a movie from you already. I don't care which one of the three, but seriously, what the fuck have you been doing for eight years? You are NOT Terrence Malick. You can't get away with this shit yet. Even he's stepped up his game. If you want the world to remember who you are, you have to give us what we want.
What directors are you wishing would hurry up and make another movie?
And lastly, let's talk about Into the Woods. I personally read the script a while back, which has helped me in decided how to predict it for Oscars, but I have no familiarity with the source material, which has also made it a tad difficult to judge the reaction this will have with audiences and critics. That being said, this interview Stephen Sondheim sheds some light on what Disney is doing to his musical. I remember saying, after reading the script, that this was just too tamed up to make a real impact with voters. It seemed to corny, too light, and everyone kept throwing in my face that this was dark and serious and brooding and that I was misinterpreting the tone.
Suck it bitches, I was right! Disney has censored this story and NO, this is not the Into the Woods you know and love.
Yes, I've still been predicting this for some above the line noms (Picture and Supporting Actress), but this is based on hype, role and the expanded field. But, this confirmation on what I suspected only has me doubting this all the more.
What do you think about this project? Will it be a hit or a miss? How do you feel about Disney's censorship of the source material? Do they have a point, or are they ruining a classic?