PDA

View Full Version : The Other Boleyn Girl


Adam
26-01-2006, 10:35 AM
I know there was rumours a while ago but it looks like it's happening now. It looks like a pretty good story, I might try and read the book, but how many of these time-set pieces is she planning on doing?

IMDB: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0467200/

PhoeniX
26-01-2006, 08:23 PM
Cool Anne Boleyn grew up in a castle near me, maybe they'll film it there....

Edward
27-01-2006, 07:07 PM
www.keiraweb.com

still a rumour at the moment i guess

Kirby
31-01-2006, 05:26 AM
OOOH i hope the rumors r true! YESSS :)

ralfsmith
14-02-2006, 05:11 PM
Oh its very interesting. Could you provide me more information ?

johntvery@operamail.com

johntvery@hotmail.com

Leonie
14-02-2006, 06:16 PM
Last I heard - from the online chat she had the other day - nothing is confirmed yet. Paul (Keiraweb (http://www.keiraweb.com)) interpreted that as Keira being on the shortlist for the role.

IMDB have it listed as 'announced', but IMDB have a habit of being wrong. We'll find out more when and if it happens I suppose :)

kingdumbass
15-02-2006, 09:16 AM
I was at the chat on goldderby.com with Keira last week, and she said it's NOT confirmed....

Edward
16-02-2006, 10:09 AM
meaning she is linked to it somehow, otherwise she would have said its a rumour? or she hasnt heard anything about it?

Idle
16-02-2006, 01:53 PM
meaning she is linked to it somehow, otherwise she would have said its a rumour? or she hasnt heard anything about it?
I've read the transcript of the chat available at keiraweb.com. She made two Anne Boleyn related comments.

The first was in response to the question "can you confirm the role of Anne Boleyn in the near future?"

No confirmation on Ann Boleyn

The second was a reply to "are you going to shoot The Other Boleyn Girl?"

The Other Boleyn Girl has not been scheduled


My interpretation of this:
The project does indeed exist and she has been in serious talks with the people behind it and it must still be at least somwhat likely that she'll end up playing Anne Boleyn. Also, the role she's up for is indeed Anne and not Mary.
The "has not been scheduled" bit must mean that it hasn't yet been decided when the movie is to be shot. Or perhaps it is not yet certain that it will be made at all.

The feeling I get from this is that the lack of confirmation has more to do with a lack of confirmation for the project as a whole than a lack of confirmation of her being cast as Anne if the project does indeed go ahead.

CollisionStar
17-02-2006, 05:26 AM
Hmm. I'm actually kind of sad to see this book being turned into a movie. Lately, so many good novels have been turned into really sub-par movies. I know, I know...movies are never as good as their novels, but lately it's been awful in my opinion.

I like Keira. I could never see her as Anne Boleyn.

EmotionSickness
22-06-2006, 12:07 AM
Well, it looks like the role of Anne is going to Natalie Portman instead, at least according to a recent issue of the Hollywood Bible (aka Variety). That'd be pretty interesting if Keira was cast as Mary, don't you think?

Hazzle
22-06-2006, 07:37 AM
Yes, because the last film with them both in was so entertaining.

EmotionSickness
22-06-2006, 09:22 PM
Yes, because the last film with them both in was so entertaining.

Touche. But even still...Keira and Natalie together on screen...bilateral dialogue this time. I'm not even gay and I think that'll be hot.

Hazzle
22-06-2006, 10:27 PM
Touche. But even still...Keira and Natalie together on screen...bilateral dialogue this time. I'm not even gay and I think that'll be hot.

Are you sure? Maybe you just haven't come out yet.

I must admit, it is pretty hot.

Sundance
22-06-2006, 10:33 PM
bilateral dialogue

Pun intended or unintended?

Hazzle
22-06-2006, 10:41 PM
Freudian slip Sundance.

Kelsey
23-06-2006, 01:15 AM
This movie is actually getting made? I haven't checked my mailbox for the latest Hollywood Reporter, but I haven't noticed it in any recent editions. I can't help but think of what it would look like onscreen whenever I read a book, and I had trouble picturing this storywise while reading this. It makes for a great book, but I have to say I'm against the production of a film....Keira and Natalie or not. Even though the book was uber-successful, I don't think the film would be outstandingly profitable. Too long, too epic-y...and women don't spend ten dollars to see epics with a female lead (at least not enough of them to be a huge box office success)

Hazzle
23-06-2006, 11:52 AM
Wouldn't P & P fall into that category Kels? Not sure about the exact figures but I'm sure it did alright at the Box Office. Maybe I'm wrong as I've not read this book and it may be nothing like P & P.

CountryTomboy91
20-07-2006, 12:30 AM
It's Natalie Portman!
Sorry!
Look on IMDB...

Hazzle
20-07-2006, 07:17 PM
Trusting IMDB is notoriously a bad idea. They're wrong quite often.

Digital_Ice
20-07-2006, 08:45 PM
imdb is like wikipedia, a fantastic resource.... but its made up of user submissions, so dont belive everything you read. plus its not "It's Natalie Portman!" it's "It might be Natalie Portman" hence the "in negotiations"

marilynka
20-07-2006, 08:56 PM
According to Variety Natalie Portman and Scarlett Johansson will play in this.

CountryTomboy91
20-07-2006, 09:31 PM
No, sorry. It IS Natalie Portman. Don't believe me? Check out www.natalieportman.com (http://www.natalieportman.com) and read around.

IMDB is good though.

They are right about alot of other stuff. Like They had Elizabeth Swann on there instead of Elizabeth Turner, for Dead Man's Chest, which is a mistake alot of other websites made.

Hazzle
21-07-2006, 12:43 AM
You should know that Paul from KKW and Keiraweb has often corrected IMDB's mistakes. Even things as simple and basic as her birthday.

In fact if you'd checked IMDB regularly you'd have seen that they listed her as Elizabeth Turner for a long time. Clearly someone informed them it was incorrect so it was altered.

CountryTomboy91
21-07-2006, 02:30 AM
Actually, I didn't know that KKW members have edited IMDB. I know it's not always reliable, etc. But it is a nice source, and has awesome discussion boards. Their information, while sometimes inaccurate, is nothing that couldn't be looked up elsewhere, such as wikipedia. However, I would like to point out, there is a secondary source as to the fact that Keira will NOT be in the other Boleyn Girl, and it is Natalie Portman. Browse around www.natalieportman.com (http://www.natalieportman.com) for a bit. It's there.
I too have corrected some IMDB mistakes, but it's nothing to get in a twist over.
Sorry bout that.

Hazzle
21-07-2006, 12:04 PM
Wiki's almost as unreliable as IMDB but it's an ok corroboration I suppose.

And back on topic, yes, it does seem several sources are stating it's Natalie Portman and Scarlett Johansson. It would make sense for Keira to have been in the frame given her work in period dramas (SJ did GWAPE. Had Nat actually done any period work? Cold Mountain is probably the closest she's come but it's not really "period").

Perhaps she couldn't do it? She's mentioned this "break" from films for a while so maybe she turned it down? Who knows? It does seem this thread should be closed though.

EmotionSickness
22-07-2006, 12:03 AM
Natalie Portman and Scarlet Johannson? Could they find another pair of actresses playing sisters that look any less alike?

kingdumbass
22-07-2006, 12:50 AM
I, too, have read plenty of articles about Keira planning to take a "break"....
That also makes me wonder if "The Best Times of Our Lives" is actually happening.

And by the way -- I was amused to see that they picked Scarlett Johansson. What a bad fucking choice.

Hazzle
22-07-2006, 12:52 AM
Natalie Portman and Scarlet Johannson? Could they find another pair of actresses playing sisters that look any less alike?

Could be worse. They could've cast Judi Dench and Halle Berry.

EmotionSickness
22-07-2006, 12:59 AM
I'm glad to see someone feels the same way about the casting of Scarlet. She's a good actress and she's hot, yeah, but there are so many other, more talented, more deserving actresses out there (not implying Keira in this instance necessarily) that the role could have gone to. She's so overrated. And a little dim.

The same could be said for Natalie (and most definitely Keira, as far as acting is concerned), but Natalie can act circles around both of them, so..yeah.

Pearl
22-07-2006, 03:24 AM
I'm not upset because Natalie is a GREAT actress and I know she'll be brilliant in this. Plus Scarlett is eye candy.

Swordsman
22-07-2006, 04:14 AM
Scarlett does have 'dem titties and i think she's a better actress than Natalie.

kingdumbass
22-07-2006, 05:34 AM
Scarlett is a grossly overrated actress....
The only thing she can do is recite her lines as though she's reading a cue card, and stand around looking like she just got finished crying. Blegh. She's OK, but gets too much credit. I'm just waiting for her to fuck up in a major way. Plus, her affiliation with Woody Allen annoys me.

I like Natalie Portman, but her attitude can piss me off sometimes. Little Miss PERFECT. Whateva!
:fencing:

Swordsman
22-07-2006, 05:59 AM
... Match Point was a damn fine movie, and Natalie Portman told me she wanted to fuck me...via SNL Digital Short.

CountryTomboy91
22-07-2006, 08:40 PM
I think Nat's a great actress, but Keira would have been better alongside her. I am not a very big fan of Scarlett at all....

I'm glad Nat's doing it, Keira's got other projects she's up to.

Hazzle
23-07-2006, 10:27 AM
Heh Dumbass...if that's your description of Scarlett I shudder to think how Keira compares. If Scarlett looks like she's reading from cue-cards, Keira looks like she's having her lines mouthed to her.

Scarlett is a far better actress. You've got it the wrong way round, it's clearly Keira who looks like she's reading off of an autocue, whereas with Scarlett it looks and feels instinctive. I think my own phrase on the SJW boards says it best: "With Keira you can see the cogs moving, with Scarlett it's seamless."

Oh, and Woody Allen's a fucking legend, and when he hand-picks you to work in his movies, you know you've arrived.

Keira isn't a patch on Scarlett. Although Natalie can out-act both of them.

kingdumbass
23-07-2006, 11:14 AM
Keira is a better actress than Scarlett....
ScarJo gives one sedated performance opposite an equally-sedated Bill Murray in Lost in Translation, and everyone thinks she's good. Bullshit. She gets worse and worse with each film. And Woody Allen is nothing but a washed up, middle-aged pervert. He should be in exile with Roman Polanski.

As for the "cogs turning" -- I view it the opposite way as you do. I can clearly see the self-awareness in Scarlett as she mangles each line. At least Knightley makes an effort.

You Brits appear to have a a different perception of good acting from us Americans (Knightley's most "seamless" performance, in Domino, seems to be universally derided in your country, whereas everyone I know here in the States was impressed with her in that film). Therefore, as an American, I propose that we trade you one Scarlett Johansson for one Keira Knightley. Keira can stay at my place until she finds suitable lodging. Don't worry -- I'll take good care of her, and I'll even allow that Rupert Friend guy visitation rights.

As for Natalie Portman -- like I said, I think she's good (the best actress out of the three), but something's got to be done about her attitude. I think it's partly her refusal to do a nude scene that bothers me. If you want to call yourself a real actor, you've got to be willing to COMMIT to the part, damnit! Besides, there are already topless sunbathing pics of Natalie all over the web, so I don't know what she's so paranoid about.

Plus, she's a vegan, which I find irritating.

Hazzle
23-07-2006, 07:24 PM
You so wong. You so wong I take that trade.

Roman Polanski? You mean the greatest living director today? I'm sure Woody Allen would be chuffed to be mentioned alongside such a great. I shudder to think who you class as a talented director.

Anyway, the mentally ill aren't allowed to vote, so your opinion isn't worth much.

CountryTomboy91
23-07-2006, 10:46 PM
Eurgh,
Scarlett.
Sorry to disagree Hazzle, but I find Scarlett to be a rather patchy actress. Keira was soooo brilliant in Pirates and Pride and Prejudice. The best in Domino. She amazes me every time I watch one of her films. Especially the Hole.

I think she and Nat would make a good team, like they (sort of) did in TPM. The Phantom Menace was a bit confusing at first, you couldn't really tell they were a team, but it would be great to see Nat and Keira alongside one another again, since both have greatly grown as actresses.

Too bad it's already Scarlett.

Hazzle
23-07-2006, 10:52 PM
Domino was a turdfest. It seems only Americans disagree (I hate to generalise but there ya go). It was typical Hollywood trash with guns and shit and totally failed to capture the underlying story. There was no human element to it whatsoever. Only people who enjoyed seeing more skin or like the "chicks with guns" formula rate that film.

Keira was poor in the first Pirates film, and I've not seen the second because of that. It was all Johnny Depp and Geoffrey Rush. Only die-hard Keira fans insist she was any good in it and it's so blatently a biased opinion. I've been disappointed by so many of her performances and not since BILB has she achieved any consistency. Pride was an excellent performance, but there's no doubt in my mind that Scarlett's performance in GWAPE eclipsed Keira's in P & P. Most fans of the book agree that she wasn't quite perfect for the role.

Thankfully I've got beyond the blinkered phase of being a fan (and yes, I still am a fan) and can see where she fails. She'd make a great stage actress because that dramatic style of acting that makes it so obvious she's acting is her forte. Some would class that as great acting, if they do, she's a great actress, but certainly not for film.

Film requires a subtlety, and the fact that, as Dumbass put it, Scarlett is so sedate in her films is actually PERFECT. Because real people are NORMAL, they're not actors and they don't behave like actors. SJ's strength is she acts like a normal person. It's instinctive. The mask never slips. If she's "patchy" it's because she's doesn't "grab" you with her "performance" but that's actually the mark of a skilled actor. A skilled actor makes it seem like they're not acting at all.

kingdumbass
24-07-2006, 05:25 AM
Didn't Polanski fuck a 13 year-old?

As for Domino -- whether or not the film itself was good is irrelevant. Keira's performace WAS good. The fact that Tony Scott was apparently on mushrooms while making the whole thing is not Keira's fault. She disappeared into the role, and there is no "Keira Knightley" evident in her performance. It was bold and energetic. I think a major reason why her acting in that movie is criticized so much is that people are familiar with how she behaves off-screen, and the contrast between the two is too much for them to swallow. I also blame Tony Scott for all of the film's problems, as does just about everyone else.

Regarding ScarJo's being "subtle"? Well, I notice that you think Natalie Portman is the best out of the three of them, and there's certainly nothing subtle about HER acting. Natalie gives the most emotionally-charged performances out of any young actress I can name, whereas Johansson is just sedated. She comes across as just plain lazy.

Oh, and I am not blatantly biased in my view of Keira Knightley's acting. I agree that she was pretty crappy in the first Pirates movie, although I fail to see what that has to do with the second one. I also happen to think that she was just plain bad in Love Actually. In The Jacket, she was ALMOST good, but she mangled a line in one scene towards the beginning, and it ruined the whole performance. So there's three bad Knightley efforts in my opinion. It should be noted, however, that in all three of them, she at least made an effort, which Johansson apparently never does.

To sum it all up, you're gay.

Hazzle
24-07-2006, 08:41 AM
Didn't Polanski fuck a 13 year-old?

And that's relevant to his directing how?

Keira's performace WAS good.

Nope. She was like a cardboard cut-out. It was so tangibly fake a performance, that's why she was so criticised. The contrast you point out was actually evident to anyone who watched the film, even those who know nothing of her off-screen. It came across through the performance that she was being something so far removed from her true self that shouldn't comprehend how someone like that would actually behave. That's why method actors draw on the reality of their experiences, because it leads to a better performance. You're wrong, that performance was as poor as POTC.

Regarding ScarJo's being "subtle"? Well, I notice that you think Natalie Portman is the best out of the three of them, and there's certainly nothing subtle about HER acting. Natalie gives the most emotionally-charged performances out of any young actress I can name, whereas Johansson is just sedated. She comes across as just plain lazy.

Difference in the films they work in. Natalie was immensely subtle in Garden State, because she needed to be. I'd entirely disagree about the subtlety of her acting. V for Vendetta aside, her emotions always feel natural on screen. If you didn't understand why SJ is so sedate in LIT you missed the premise of the film. Both her and Murray are at a crossroads in their lives, and as the film progresses both come out of the malaise that traps them. Keira hasn't felt "natural" since BILB. So you're just plain wrong.

It should be noted, however, that in all three of them, she at least made an effort, which Johansson apparently never does.

And there, ladies and gentleman, is the winner. Thank you for proving my very point. A good actor doesn't look like they "made an effort". If it's obvious you're trying too hard, then it's a bad performance. "Making an effort" is the worst thing an actor can do, and as such, you just proved SJ is the better actress. So in your own words, you're wrong. Thanks for finally admitting it.

Thank you and goodnight /me bows

kingdumbass
24-07-2006, 12:35 PM
So basically what you're saying is that Johansson can show up for a film, do nothing but stare blankly into space, reciting her lines in the the most bland manner possible, and letting the other performers all carry the entire thing, and THAT'S good acting?
Because that is exactly what she does in everything. She is thoroughly boring to watch, and I have yet to see her carry a film, something which Knightley HAS done (Pride and Prejudice).

hasselbrad
24-07-2006, 01:43 PM
That's why method actors draw on the reality of their experiences, because it leads to a better performance.

This makes me think of Sir Laurence Olivier and Dustin Hoffman. Hoffman looked terrible, like he'd been up for days on end, and Olivier asks him what was wrong. Hoffman told him that he was exhausted because he'd been up for days. Olivier asked him why and Hoffman said that the character he was playing had been several nights without sleep.
Olivier replies something to the tune of "dear boy, that's what acting is for."
As for Keira's acting ability, I think Pride & Prejudice and Dr. Zhivago answered that question. So many other roles she's played have been greatly influenced by the director and the kind of movie she's in. PoTC is a good example. If her acting seems a bit stilted, one must remember that it is a period piece. People were stilted. I think that corset serves as a powerful metaphor. Likewise, she's playing opposite Johnny Depp as Jack Sparrow. There isn't an actress, dead or alive, that could provide enough emotional weight on Jupiter to counterbalance that. Kingdumbass makes a good point about Domino. That film is completely over the top. That said, I thought she did pretty well considering the sort of character she was playing.
As for Scar Jo, I am anxious to see The Island. I want to see if she can pull off action like she has the quiet, indie film, full of pauses and sideways glances.

Hazzle
24-07-2006, 11:14 PM
Don't bother. The Island is awful.

I didn't say Keira can't act. Nothing of the sort. Just that she's not quite as good as some people would love to believe. She has some stellar performances, some average ones, and some stinkers, but I believe she's had less stinkers than SJ. This might come down to the volume of work each of them does or it might just come down to the fact that SJ is a better film actress.

Heh, that story about Sir Laurence Olivier demonstrates why you guys actually produce the better film actors whereas our great actors are more theatrically skilled. It's a distinctly different approach and I have more respect and admiration for the subtle more natural approach.

Heh Dumbass. Really? You should watch Ghost World. She definitely carries that. Your vitriol doesn't help either as it's plain to see that that's not what I said at all. The fact that SJ appears to be doing that on screen merely means she's putting in a good performance. It's simply that you like an actor to entertain, whereas I view film as an art form and true art is a reflection of life.

Your use of the word "performers" is interesting; it's a stage term and doesn't belong in films. Film actors are actors, their job is to do anyting but "perform". Any films in which people "perform" invariably fail to capture the visceral nature of emotions.

Dumbass, you having a short attention span doesn't equate to her being "boring", you're just amused by more simplistic things. Girl with a Pearl Earring was a lavish film that entirely eclipsed Pride. And SJ's performance was a key part of that. SJ was good in an excellent film. KK was better than her co-stars in a distinctly average one. I know which I'd class as better acting.

But let's agree to disagree. I know I'm right so I have no need to continue this ridiculous argument when the truth is in plain sight to anyone not blinkered by Keira obsession.

CountryTomboy91
25-07-2006, 12:53 AM
Thora Birch in Ghost World. Good Actress. I think she and Keira did wonderfully in The Hole.

Hazzle
25-07-2006, 01:40 AM
Thora Birch is shit. Was good in American Beauty but that's it.

Was terrible in Ghost World and awful in The Hole. I watched both as a Thora Birch fan and was more impressed by SJ and KK, hence becoming a fan of theirs.

kingdumbass
25-07-2006, 04:13 AM
I agree that Thora Birch is shit....
She gets by on the same one-note bullshit that once carried Christina Ricci and Wynona Ryder before they actually started to get good: being dark and moody. People confuse it with depth. It's just a cheap ruse.

And about "The Island" -- Scarlett's performance in that film was the same as it always is: wooden and half asleep. They could have just replaced her with a cardboard cutout, and dubbed in her lines later. The task of giving that film any personality whatsoever fell on the shoulders of the heroic Ewan McGregor (with a little help from Steve Buscemi).

Swordsman
25-07-2006, 06:42 AM
You saying Scarlett Johansson can't act and that Ewin McGregor is cool is like telling me Sonic Youth isn't awesome, it's just not true. Did you see Match Point? That was a quality film. Now i've never seen P&P because i'm a closet Keira fan and a dude. I think Johansson is better with emotions than Knightley, judging by the other films i've seen with Keira, and i guess P&P was the most emotional so i missed out on that. The only two movies i've liked with Portman have been Closer and Garden State, and her performance is good in both, especially GS, but i just think she's not subtle enough. Scarlett just tops them both.

Hazzle
25-07-2006, 08:13 AM
The task of giving that film any personality whatsoever fell on the shoulders of the heroic Ewan McGregor (with a little help from Steve Buscemi).

Heh. Ewan McGregor hasn't been good in a film since Black Hawk Down. Now I know to disregard your opinions on anything.

kingdumbass
25-07-2006, 09:59 AM
HOW DARE you speak that way about Obi Wan?!?
You're lucky I don't have a fucking light saber handy, and don't know where you live. Otherwise, you'd have 2 feet of purple electricity with a handle on the end sticking out of your ass.

And I've noticed that you Brits have a tendency to deride any of your young-ish, good-looking, actors the second they hit the big time, no matter what they do. They're ALL going to be the next big talent until they actually DO become the next big talent. Then, you start attacking them. Name one to whom this rule does not apply. I know we've talked about this before.

Hazzle
25-07-2006, 10:31 AM
Yes, that's because invariably superbly talented British people get arrogant and lose sight of their craft. It's the same in any field, sports, films, anything. The English particularly have no idea how to handle being good at things, and when they get even slightly good, they then think they've got immense talent.

You're wrong about it being when they "become the next big talent". It's when they THINK they've reached that because they're deluded arrogant pricks but the truth is they waste their talent by believing to be better than they are.

Ewan and Keira are perfect examples. Potential talents, then got wrapped up in "being famous" and lost sight of what got them there. We admire people who keep their feet on the ground and Brits rarely do.

But I can give you one example of someone who actually IS immensely talented, did make the big time, and isn't slagged off. Kate Winslet. Or Rachel Weisz for that matter. Both more talented than Keira. But both handling the hype better than her.

kingdumbass
25-07-2006, 10:53 AM
Both are substantially older....
And Rachael Weisz is not a household name.

Plus, if you look at Keira, she has not really done much, HERSELF, to indicate that she is not handling fame properly (at least, relatively speaking). I don't see her disgracing herself in any outlandish way. She doesn't get into petty feuds with other celebrities; she doesn't insult people; she doesn't hang out at every club and premiere with the likes of Paris Hilton; there are no credible stories of arrogant on-set behavior; she hasn't melted down and gone the Hollywood plastic surgery route; she hasn't been arrested, or been involved in sordid love triangles. The fact that we don't know much about what she's REALLY like, or what she actually does on her own time, indicates that she's trying to avoid the things you mentioned as much as reasonably possible.

In fact, the worst decision I've seen her make was simply wearing a bad dress to a premiere, and that could probably be attributed to her stylist, Rachael Zoe (a vile person, if you knew anything about her).

And what has Keira done to indicate that she thinks she's better than she really is? She's always pointing out her own shortcomings, and talking about how everything could end on a mument's notice (in fact, she seems almost fixated on the idea). I've read in multiple places that she doesn't even have a publicist. Seems to me as though she's making a conscious effort to ignore the bullshit hype, and lead a semi-normal, insolated life when the cameras aren't rolling.

In view of how shamefully sensationalistic the British media is, she comes across as relatively clean.

She probably gets too much publicity, but who's to say how much of it is intentional?

*PS -- I just noticed something really weird: No matter how many times I edit my message, my typo in the word, "mument" cannot be fixed. It repeatedly comes up with a U where an O should be. That is fucked up.

Hazzle
25-07-2006, 11:41 AM
Actually Dumbass I've not heard her say the "It could be all over tomorrow" line in ages. She's definitely believing her own hype and thinking she's a superstar these days. And the directors she's working with are only making it worse.

CountryTomboy91
25-07-2006, 06:31 PM
Scarlett is no good. Ewan McGregor was actually very awesome in Big Fish...

Hazzle
25-07-2006, 10:34 PM
Oh dear...

Digital_Ice
26-07-2006, 12:33 AM
big fish was no where near as big as it could have been.

kingdumbass
26-07-2006, 01:44 AM
Actually Dumbass I've not heard her say the "It could be all over tomorrow" line in ages. .

She just said it a few weeks ago during a Pirates 2 promotion interview....
The video was on Keiraweb.

Oh, and Hazzle -- here's the latest news on Scarlett Johansson:
http://www.scarlett-fan.com/index.php?subaction=showfull&id=1153833932&archive=&start_from=&ucat=3&

She's getting her own "signature series" of Reebok athletic shoes.

Reebok has signed a multi-year partnership with one of Hollywood's most captivating young actresses, Scarlett Johansson. The 21 year-old beauty has partnered with the brand to co-create Scarlett "Hearts" Rbk, a fashion-forward, athletic-inspired footwear and apparel signature collection debuting in spring 2007 at high-end department stores and boutiques around the world.

GASP! I thought she was a real actress not caught up in bullshit!

Mrs. Bale
26-07-2006, 12:22 PM
keira is much more beatifull than natalie portman, keira dont loke likes her, keira looks like winona ryder.
scarlet joahnson? blerghhh, i dont like of this girl:mad:

Hazzle
26-07-2006, 03:35 PM
She just said it a few weeks ago during a Pirates 2 promotion interview....
The video was on Keiraweb.

Actually having considered that more closely, it explains to me why she doesn't actually take the time to look at her weaker performances and try and improve as an actress. She takes such a short-term view of her career, which is why she takes on so many films and makes so many bad ones. If she would take more time off between films to analyse her weaknesses she'd improve.

That's what SJ does.

She's getting her own "signature series" of Reebok athletic shoes.

GASP! I thought she was a real actress not caught up in bullshit!

Celebrity in marketing opportunity shocker! Grow up, I never said anyone wasn't in it for the money. They all are. If anyone actually wanted to give Keira such an opportunity, she'd jump all over it.

It's silly arguing with you anyway, I give up. You're a blinkered fanboy and that's all there is to it. You probably think the sun rises in her arse and sets in her mouth.

kingdumbass
26-07-2006, 11:14 PM
I give up

Heh....

Swordsman
27-07-2006, 01:27 AM
GASP! I thought she was a real actress not caught up in bullshit!

So what's the difference between Scarlett designing some shoes and Keira being the new face of Chanel, or whatever. Isn't she the new face of some ridiculously huge company now? It seems to me that designing a shoe for lame ass Rbk is nothing to having your face plastered all over billboards and buses or other shit. She is still doing that thing right?

kingdumbass
27-07-2006, 01:48 AM
I was trying to illustrate that Scarlett is no better than Keira when it comes to remaining only focused on acting....
I certainly think that Keira's Chanel thing is lame...although it's still not QUITE as lame as having her own "signature series" of sneakers. Come on, now. What is Scarlett, her own name brand? Hazzle was the one yammering about actors and actresses getting too big for their britches. I was just pointing things out.

Also, it should be noted that even Kate Winslet did a Mastercard commercial just a year ago here in the States.

SEE?

CountryTomboy91
27-07-2006, 02:00 AM
Oh, my, Hazzle. When I read that last bit I laughed so hard....
I found this Keira avatar with her biting her lip and twisting her hair, and she's got this worried look on her face and it says "Oh, Crap. More Fanboys."
what you said made me think of that. :icon_redf

Swordsman
27-07-2006, 02:20 AM
...although it's still not QUITE as lame as having her own "signature series" of sneakers. Come on, now. What is Scarlett, her own name brand? Hazzle was the one yammering about actors and actresses getting too big for their britches. I was just pointing things out.

Also, it should be noted that even Kate Winslet did a Mastercard commercial just a year ago here in the States.

SEE?

I don't know man... it's pretty BAMF to have your own shoe. Wouldn't they be "getting to big for their britches" once they do a big major hollywood film? What's it matter what they do after they make that big movie. So what if someone says they'll give you a few extra million if you do a commercial or plaster your face everywhere or design a shoe. It really doesn't matter, they're already sellouts. Sellouts sounds overly bad to me but.... if you know a good synonym... replace "sellout" in your head.

Hazzle
27-07-2006, 07:59 AM
Hazzle was the one yammering about actors and actresses getting too big for their britches.

Actually, nowhere did I say that. You're paraphrasing to make it suit what you want to say. Which is why it's futile discussing anything with you until you grow some braincells.

Also, it should be noted that even Kate Winslet did a Mastercard commercial just a year ago here in the States.

SEE?

Which again, only deals with commercialism. Which wasn't what I was talking about. My point was about people thinking they'd "arrived". Thinking that they cannot improve anymore and are already at the zenith of their careers. This has nothing to do with commercialism.

But I truly do despair of you. I'd say "Get a girlfriend" but you already have one. I worry for her, I really do. Wonder what she says when you decide you want her to have plastic surgery to look like Keira, start talking "British" and drive on the "wrong" side of the road. Not to mention starving herself to get that special "boney" look.

kingdumbass
27-07-2006, 08:46 AM
You just become more of a moron with each post, don't you?
"Thinking they've arrived"??? It's obvious that Knightley keeps taking role after role with no break in between because she does NOT believe that she's truly "arrived", and lacks the courage to rest for a while. She thinks that if she does so, she'll lose her momentum, and the roles will dry up. And now she's so burned out, she looks like a coke head who's aged about ten years in less than five months. She wouldn't be cracking like that if she was so self-assured. It's my belief, however, that her OVERALL direction has been correct, and if (IF) she's smart enough, she'll pull herself together and come out just fine soon enough *(See the below attached link for an example of how Keira's managing better than your beloved Scarlett Johansson).

Furthermore, what has Keira done or said to indicate that she thinks she can't improve anymore? Hmm? Is your view on this matter based off any form of reality whatsoever? I would so dearly love an answer.

Your complaint earlier dealt with actors who hit it big, and stop focusing on what matters -- doing their jobs. If you're not talking about commercialism, then I would like an example of how that complaint applies to Knightley.

Can you back your argument with ANYTHING???

*Oh, and here's something from the IMDB news page:



Johansson Snubs 'Sound of Music'
Hollywood beauty Scarlett Johansson (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0424060/) turned down the lead role in a forthcoming Sir Andrew Lloyd Webber (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0515908/) stage production of The Sound Of Music - after auditioning for the part and gushing it was her dream role. The Lost In Translation (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0335266/) star was approached by the musical mogul about starring as Maria in the singing nun story and immediately agreed. She even gave an impromptu rendition of songs from the hit movie in front of a restaurant full of people to prove her singing credentials and obsession with the musical. However, the 21-year-old later snubbed the project and Lloyd Webber blames greedy managers for the sudden U-turn. He says, "We had a hysterical lunch which ended in the early hours of the morning. We were at the top of the Peninsula Hotel and she sang in front of everyone, which was fantastic. She can really sing. I said to her, 'Do you want to do Sound of Music?' She said 'yes'. We started planning things." But he adds, "Her people were not pro the idea. It became clear that it wasn't going to work because the demands became so ridiculous." Lloyd Webber claims managers and publicists for the starlet were dismayed by her low fees in comparison to lucrative movie work, and demanded she be accompanied by two minders backstage at all times. A spokesman for Johansson denies the demands, insisting, "(They) are extremely exaggerated. Her management team was simply asking for terms that an actress of her stature would ask for. The real reason why the negotiations stopped was the run of the play interfered with the production of one of the films she was slated to accomplish." The search for Maria has now turned into a UK reality TV hunt, with unknown actresses vying for role.

Swordsman
27-07-2006, 09:36 AM
You are fucking batshit insane. I don't know about everyone else, but i just felt like somenoe shouted at me.

Hazzle
27-07-2006, 10:12 AM
What Swords said. Chill out dude. It's that obsession that has us worried.

Your point that she takes every role coming out of insecurity is merely speculation and assumption. As, I will concede, is my point that she does it because she doesn't feel she needs to take time between films to try and improve. However there is no logical reason for me to exagerate her failings, as I want her to succeed. There is every reason for you to exagerate her successes. That there is the difference between a fan (like me) and a fanboy (like you).

People seem to believe that being a fan of something or someone means you can't criticise it. In fact that couldn't be further from the truth. It is entirely natural that if you care about something, and you don't like what's going on with that thing, you voice your concerns. It's part of being a fan. We grow to hate the things we love because we can see how much better than can be but they continually fail to achieve that zenith. We criticise in the hopes that somehow those failings will be recognised and rectified so that the thing we love can become great again. People who love absolutely unconditionally have got a screw loose.

My point about losing sight of their craft, if you'd actually bothered to read it in context, was in relation to the idea that a craftsman always seeks to attain perfection at what they do. My argument, thus, was that Keira doesn't, because she's happy to continue acting at the same level she is right now, which is by no means perfect. You disagree. Until you can back it up with facts, they're both opinions. You'll use numerous quotes, no doubt, but those only add to my argument. The "it could all be over tomorrow" mindset perfectly fits in with someone who thinks it's already arrived.

Honestly Dumbass, I despair of you. This has worryingly gotten far too personal for you.

kingdumbass
27-07-2006, 10:25 AM
People seem to believe that being a fan of something or someone means you can't criticise it.

Uhhh...I criticise her quite often, actually....
Your failure to notice that is how this argument got personal.

We started off with a simple discussion over the relative capabilities of Knightley and Johansson, and when backed into a corner, you resorted to the old "fanboy" defense.

But let's forget that, drop the hostility, and get back to the issue at hand:
You say "that Keira doesn't seek perfection at her craft, because she's happy to continue acting at the same level she is right now...."

And I say do you have any way of backing that statement up with facts of any sort? I maintain that she is hardly great, but continues to get better.

How about THIS -- if she sucks in "Silk", then I will admit that you're right.

Hazzle
27-07-2006, 10:53 AM
Uhhh...I criticise her quite often, actually....
Your failure to notice that is how this argument got personal.

Not when it comes to acting you haven't. Looks is easy, if you didn't criticise her for looking like a skeleton you'd be a sick freak. As it is you're just a freak.

We started off with a simple discussion over the relative capabilities of Knightley and Johansson, and when backed into a corner, you resorted to the old "fanboy" defense.

I was never backed into a corner. If I was I'd have resorted to "your momma" jokes.

But let's forget that, drop the hostility

Drop the hostility?! I didn't agree to that!

And I say do you have any way of backing that statement up with facts of any sort? I maintain that she is hardly great, but continues to get better.

Do you have any way of backing up your statement with facts of any sort? Read what I said. We're both speculating, only my speculation comes from an unblinkered standpoint. I maintain that she is hardly great and hasn't gotten better since Love Actually. She was average in King Arthur, poor in The Jacket and abysmal in Domino. I've not seen DMC because I've heard it's a shit film but I've yet to hear anyone praise her performance in it. You no doubt will now.

How about THIS -- if she sucks in "Silk", then I will admit that you're right.

Fair enough. Although "if she sucks" is a relative viewpoint. You thought she was good in Domino, I didn't. And if I end up saying she's shit in Silk you'll say it's bias.

kingdumbass
27-07-2006, 11:26 AM
Not when it comes to acting you haven't

Uh, didn't I just say in this thread that she was poor in the first Pirates movie, terrible in Love Actually, and bad in The Jacket?

I maintain that she is hardly great and hasn't gotten better since Love Actually.

What about Pride and Prejudice? You said earlier that she was "excellent" in that film.

I've not seen DMC because I've heard it's a shit film but I've yet to hear anyone praise her performance in it. You no doubt will now

Her performance in DMC was obviously better than in the first one, but not "praise"worthy. Why would it be? DMC is Johnny Depp's movie; Keira's only there to give Depp someone to interact with.

Fair enough. Although "if she sucks" is a relative viewpoint. You thought she was good in Domino, I didn't. And if I end up saying she's shit in Silk you'll say it's bias.

It should be much easier to state with confidence whether she is good or bad in Silk than in Domino. For one thing, Silk was not directed by a hack who drowns any substance his films might have with flashy editing and sound effects. Plus, it should be pretty clear what Keira's character in this one is all about, as it obviously will require some dramatic acting on her part.

Oh, and something else I'll tell you: I have looked for any kind of information on just how the filming of Silk went for Keira, and so far I have not heard anything good. Now, keep in mind my suspicions are based off unsubstantiated chatter, but it's entirely possible that she will be bad in this film. If she is, I will be the first to admit that you're right about all of this.

Hazzle
27-07-2006, 11:32 AM
Uh, didn't I just say in this thread that she was poor in the first Pirates movie, terrible in Love Actually, and bad in The Jacket?

Actually, I must admit, you did. Although I think you're wrong, she was excellent in Love Actually. She just didn't have to do much. What she did have to do she did well, she felt "real". I'd love to see her do more "girl next door" roles. If she can pull off a more subtle, subdued performance, I'd instantly change my opinion on her skill. I'll agree with the other two though.

What about Pride and Prejudice? You said earlier that she was "excellent" in that film.

This is what happens when you edit posts. I initially said "Apart from Pride and Prejudice she hasn't done a good film recently" but then went back and changed it. Whoops. But yes, I include P & P as an excellent performance. Although it should be easy for any English actress with a shred of talent to perform well in that. The adaptation was well made and it is one of the best books ever written (I don't like it personally, but that's a taste thing, not a quality one). Now if an American managed it I'd be impressed.

Anyway, I think (thank fuck) that we've reached an impasse. Perhaps the childish bickering can stop now ;) I think we've sufficiently bored everyone.

kingdumbass
27-07-2006, 11:52 AM
Fine, I think we're (kind of) understanding each other here....
Apart from some specific points, it actually almost looks as though, overall, we're basically in AGREEMENT on Keira's acting ability, as it stands at this point in time. Our disagreement is over how to view it beyond that.

I'm going to pin my conclusion regarding the talent of Keira Knightley on Silk. If she's bad, she's bad.

And just as a footnote -- what really pissed me off here was your implying that I'm such a fanboy that I'd change my woman to be like Keira Knightley. Jesus, man. If anything, it'd be the other way around. I'm only on this damn forum so much at the moment because my girl is currently away with her family for the week. I take far more interest in Miss Knightley's CAREER than I do in HER, as a person.

Hazzle
27-07-2006, 11:53 AM
Heh. Though it might be that. I was kidding man, I thought that was obvious.

kingdumbass
27-07-2006, 12:05 PM
I knew you were only saying that to get a rise out of me, but I still let it piss me off....
It's cool, though. This thing turned into an IMDB-style flamewar for no fucking reason.

I'd like to consider our argument "indefinitely suspended".

Hazzle
27-07-2006, 12:08 PM
Not to get a rise, as such, I thought it was funny :p

Meh, there was no flame/hostility from me dude.

Digital_Ice
27-07-2006, 02:20 PM
I'm sure this thread once had a topic...

Pearl
27-07-2006, 05:35 PM
Fuck. This is too much for my tiny brain to handle.

I do not know what the fuck is going on, but may I point out, so what if Scarlett wants to do clothes? She's branching out and becoming a desinger. It's much more difficult than just posing for pictures and looking pretty. Sure Keira can act and vogue for photo's, but I'd really like to see her do something creative besides just wear belts as bra's. I actually have to applaud Scarlett for trying various things with her career.

CountryTomboy91
27-07-2006, 10:20 PM
People seem to believe that being a fan of something or someone means you can't criticise it. - Hazzle



I agree, there, Hazzle. I have to say I wouldn't stand hearing anything bad about (this is going to sound random) Drew Barrymore. I have seriously been a huge fan of Drew Barrymore since I was three....
I wouldn't listen to anyone when they pointed out the fact that she took up drugs and drinking at nine, and was in rehab at thirteen.
I don't think she's a bad role model at all. She's actually overcome quite alot.
My point is that people can't stand to hear something (or someone) they admire or love criticized.
Nothing personal against Dumbass, of course, but I have a hard time believing that he has ever criticized Keira.... Part of being one such an adoring fan is admitting your role model, or object of your affection, makes mistakes just like the rest of us.
Keira is in fact human.

Hazzle
27-07-2006, 10:35 PM
I'm sure this thread once had a topic...

Yes but they've casted for this film already and Keira's not in it. :p It was always going to end up shitified in that scenario.

If I may be so bold as to make a suggestion, this thread had deviated so far that you could move this out of "Keira's Movies & Projects" and shift it into KK Discussion (as it's become about Keira's acting more generally). Or move into GD as the film itself has nothing to do with Keira anymore.

Not that I'm trying to justify us shitifying it or anything and I apologise profusely.

kingdumbass
27-07-2006, 10:35 PM
Nothing personal against Dumbass, of course, but I have a hard time believing that he has ever criticized Keira

Um, didn't you read this thread?
But fine -- here's a few criticisms, just to reiterate: she has been bad in multiple films; she's looked crappy for the past several months; and she's terrible at dressing herself.

Digital_Ice
27-07-2006, 11:54 PM
my point was not that it wasnt about keira, but that it was a bitchfest between you and dumbass... if its a thread about portman in this fil, talk about portman, go bitch on irc!

Hazzle
28-07-2006, 12:00 AM
It's a thread about Keira in this film though ;)

CountryTomboy91
28-07-2006, 11:43 PM
Um, didn't you read this thread?
But fine -- here's a few criticisms, just to reiterate: she has been bad in multiple films; she's looked crappy for the past several months; and she's terrible at dressing herself.

Whoops. Sorry, dumbass.
My apologies.... :icon_redf
But, I have to say, I agree with the dressing herself thing.
Lol.
Sorry.
And yes, this forum once had a topic.