It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?
So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.
And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.
There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.
I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.
So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.
But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”
My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher
“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.
~ David Simon
Another Depp Inspiration?
Tough to see the movie and then think of MJ. Unless you are a huge MJ fan and have just this to look forward to now.
Back in the Dark Ages — i.e., mid-to-late 1960s — one of the comics on “Laugh-In” used to do a recurring sketch about a drunken kid-show host: “It’s Uncle Al, the kiddies’ pal!”
where in the movie does depp moonwalk or touch a little boy? i know, jesus juice could be code for the candy but thats it.
Hey Dave, thanks for making the reference to the link but I think those who are committed to their MJ fantasies are beyond help.
Depp is becoming a fascinating actor. People are trying to figure out his performances which is a sign he is striking some kind of chord with the public. It’s like a parlor game. I think we can put the Jackson theory to bed. Right?
Growing up in Dayton, a scant 60 miles away from Cincy, I grew up with Uncle Al as well (not to mention Skipper Ryle, Uncle Orrie & Nosey the Clown, and the great Bob Shreve). I can only say he seemed perfectly normal at the time, and you must remember that he was playing to little kids, and thus using an affected voice. Since Depp is from northern Kentucky, he undoubtedly did watch the show, but trying to make some sort of case vis-a-vis Jacko is really pushing it. There’s absolutely no threatening or creepy vibe off Uncle Al; he’s just a nice fella talking to small children at their level.
Now that one thinks of it, haven’t all of Depp’s characters for Burton been deathly pale? Perhaps not Ed Wood, although as I remember it everyone seemed to have the same skin tone except for the rare non-white character (such as Korla Pandit in his cameo; I only recognized him because I had read a piece about his having been a musical television sensation at the time when “Ed Wood” is set, and even in 1994 he looked damn good for his age, but that’s a separate topic).
Still haven’t seen “Charlie” because I’m waiting on my mom, but even from the TV spots I did not think Depp was really trying to do Jackson, although the parallels are distinct, but then as I think I said already, what he THINKS he’s doing and what he COMES OFF as doing can be very different things. Maybe I don’t know enough about Keith Richards to have spied the tics in “Pirates” (though once he’s shoulder to shoulder with Depp in the sequels it might beome more apparent to me), but he also said that one of his bases for his “Sleepy Hollow’ character was Roddy McDowall, and I neither hear it nor see it. I may be repeating myself here (I rarely look back at what I’ve typed locally), but I think Depp is fundamentally such an original actor that he may be thinking of a jumping-off point for his own reference, and it inevitably mutates into something that’s distinctly his own. As Mark says immediately above (nailing it in the process), Depp-watching is a bit like a parlor game, and indeed I can think of very few actors of his generation that I find myself wanting to think about and talk about as much. (I think I’d have been just as happy if he remained working in little pictures that hardly anybody saw, as long as he kept working steadily, but the idea that such a charmingly eccentric performer is now A-list truly does gladden the heart.)
The point is that he pieced elements of the character together… the Jacko thing is too simplistic.
Depp is too good an actor to just do MJ. Give me a little bit of credit.
It’s fair to say we will never fully know what was going through Johnny Depp’s head when he was deciding what to do with this character.
Completely aside from the whole MJ/WW thing, what’d be interesting to hear is why Depp specifically decided to use a mix of old kid’s-show hosts as inspiration. Wonka’s a guy that “hates kids”. I can see him creating a persona if it were to be used to further his candy empire, but the movie doesn’t really follow that train of thought. The Wonka we see, for all practical purposes, IS Wonka… not a created persona (we don’t, for example, see him “relaxing” from it once he and Charlie are alone).
It’s kinda like meeting Mr. Rogers or Pee-Wee herman but then realizing that this odd, childish personality is the real person.
The Long Winded Bastard is just that. We’re never going to hear who or what he used as inspirado. That’s why hes the actor.
This is becoming like when everyone bought that he based his Pirates character strictly on Keith Richards.
Look, I think your all forgetting something guys.
Jeff Wells looked at the issue brilliantly over at Hollywood Elsewhere.
Gene Wilder’s Willy Wonker was a stoic philopsher, a man who created the candy world empire because he saw ‘the pure imagination’ in the hearts of the children; and indeed so; he was not a bumbling child hater that Depp’s wonka is. He was a innovator, a wonderous symbol of genius kept away from the perils of greater society; who laughed at him from the outside. The shakespear quotes, the apt comic timing; the way he spoke to the children like adults – it was a joy to watch his inspired performance. It was a rare situation of taking a novel character and making the character greater than the overall sum of words.
Depp’s wonka is a stupid, idiotic sub creation of altering pop icons from various eras. Uncle Al? Captain Kangaroon? Michael Jackson? Ladies and Gentleman place your bets. But in all this, who really cares? The fact is, If Wonka is a moron,lampooning around with ghastly gesturing, white makeup and idiotic linguistic referencing, then how does this bode for the genius and pure imagination that Wonka deserves to instill to others?
Fact is: this is a wonka who has lost his course, became a recluse and issues none of the greatness of Wilders Wonka. Where Wilder ensued subtle charm and grace, Depp’s Wonka is a man lampooning the comedy of television entertainers. Now where is the sensibility in that!?!
Shame on you Tim Burton. Shame.
You obviously haven’t seen the film Jeff Wells. Who would have thought Wells would have hated it? I can’t believe that would happen.
Rooster, please don’t invoke Jeff Wells here. He had no interest and no idea about this movie. His only agenda is that ‘Wedding Crashers’ do well at the Box office.
As far as Wilder’s Wonka is concerned, ie “stoic philopsher, a man who created the candy world empire because he saw ‘the pure imagination'”..that is a lovely sentiment. However it doesn’t begin to explain how this paragon could arrange the demise of 4 children all the while smiling and making sarcastic quips….yes, there’s a psychopath here and its Wilder’s Wonka.
Jeff Wells, to a level of shame he can never comprehend, saw 30 minutes of the film before going on his endless ramapage.
Even I find it hard to believe that Jeff’s ego is so tiny that he would call himself brilliant, but I can’t imagine that any of his readers is enough of a sucker to do so either.
My guess is that Rooater hates Depp’s Wonka and is using Jeff as a way to…. hee hee… legitimize it.
Wells might just be the most self deluded “journalist” out there. Yes, I used quotes. His site is a pale comparison to MCN though.
Jeff Wells is still writing? Gee, how have I gotten by without reading him.
Luckyrooster: You obviously have strong feelings about the new movie. I would say that what Burton was going for was a new relationship between Wonka and Charlie, in which Charlie is in fact the adult who has to educate Wonka about the real meaning of life. Feel free to continue to bellow “shame” if you like, but at least try to understand the underlying motivations.
Your sharp barbs against Jeff shows that while it’s not nice to knock those in the discussion room; its okay to knock others outside of it. David, show some pride and some respect for your fellow compatriot.
Regardless of Wells opinion, it is my belief Wilder nailed the roll the 1st time around and to have Depp playing Wonka as a fool or a baffoon is an insult to the literay source and to the ‘remake’ ideology.
I have nothing against the visual palete that sculpts the film. It is mereley an uninspired attempt at foolish mimricky of the original film.
Now in my mind; was Wonka an Amercian or an Englishman? Depp should have played it with some spark; the kind of innovation we saw him use in POTC.
I’m a man of pure imagination and seeing Depp making fun of the character is an insult.
But that shouldn’t let you start insulting me; or your more of a bigot than the Jeff wells bashers.
Wilder did a great job the first time, but Depp’s performance is a valid artistic choice. I don’t know what the remake ideology is, but remakes always involve reinterpretation. The visuals of the new movie are a vast improvement over the relatively cheap look of the original, which had no particular look beyond a trendy late-60s style. And I don’t think Depp was making fun of the character, and I don’t think I was insulting you. If you think so, sorry. I just want to stop people from blindly ranting.
Hell, even the IMDb mentioned this Uncle Al character (which I mentioned the other day too *coughcough*) and when the IMDb is reporting this stuff we know it’s true.
But seriously, it WOULD make sense for Depp to take inspiration from a man he grew up watching but obviously never knew in real life and I spose he sort of may have imagined that this is what Uncle Al was like when he wasn’t hosting his show.
And Panda Bear, I thought it had just been decided what was going through his head?
Mark, he based his Capt. Jack Sparrow on Kieth Richards and Pepe Lepew, what’s your point?
Whoa, what the?
This is from the first WW/MJ thread:
“I don’t know whether to believe him. He is an actor after all. Then again everyone still buys he based his Captain Jack on Keith Richards.
Posted by: BluStealer at July 19, 2005 03:31 PM”
This is from this current thread:
“This is becoming like when everyone bought that he based his Pirates character strictly on Keith Richards.
Posted by: Mark at July 20, 2005 01:29 AM”
huh? Not only because I thought that sounded logical and made perfect sense, but also… what the?
so jeff wilder didn’t have any artistic choices on his wonka? have u ever seen a wilder film? open ur eyes.
Camel,
If you have a question for me just ask me. I have seen Pirates many, many times. It is on everyday on cable. And I like the movie. And I love Depp in it. But I really don’t see how he is Keith Richards in it. Depp is too good of an actor to do imitations.
After seeing Charlie again I have to say that I think Depp might sneak in another Oscar nom for it. I really have a feeling that he will.
There really haven’t been any great performances so far this year. At least from movies that have been out. Crowe cost himself a nod with his beating up the clerk thing.
MJ: no way. didn’t see it at all. Did, however, pick up a little Dr. Evil in the voice. I’ve already seen the film twice too. Burton’s best work in a while.
no one is gonna give credit to vin diesel for the pacifier? i find this hard to believe.
My man Vin D will win an Oscar someday. You just wait. He got talent to burn.
According to an item in TIME magazine’s People Page from earlier in the month, Depp said he based his look for the character, in part, on Vogue editor Anna Wintour. You be the judge:
http://tinyurl.com/dgapk
Basically, Depp has modeled this character on about 15 different people. From men to women.
if vin diesel wins an oscar stella will roll over in his grave.
I don’t care how many people Depp used to piece WW together, it works for me.
he made some good acting choices. no matter who he used for it.
Mark it down from me. Depp will get nominated for this. It is ten times better than his Neverland role and actually a much better movie too.
I wish Vin Diesel would burn his talent and save us all some trouble.
If his talent is all in his body and looks then it’s okay by me.
God keep giving him more.
Why all the hate vs my man Vin D? He just needs some better roles. You will all see after he does that Sidney Lumet film coming out this year.
You’re talking about the one they showed clips of at the Oscars this year? Dog Day Afternoon, Serpico, Network, and a movie with huge Vin Diesel as a lawyer with weird-looking scraggly hair?
I’m sorry to say it, but that movie looks ludicrous.
Saying it looks ludicrous after seeing one photo of it? A movie directed by a directing God? Yeah, you know what you’re talking about.
he’ll really earn that god title if he can direct a good movie and performance out of vin diesel.
Fair enough, it’s not good to jump to conclusions, but it was several clips, not one photo, and if you think Lumet is a directing God then tell us all what you thought of Gloria, Critical Care, or Night Falls on Manhattan.
Plus I think if you saw Diesel you’d agree it looks ludicrous.
There’s no way in HELL Depp is getting nominated for this film. Wherever it comes from, it still comes off as a bit of a caricature. And it’s clear from all the comments that it isn’t universally received well as a performance. Some people love it, some people feel “icky”. I’m sure Depp is 100% behind Burton and wasn’t sleepwalking through the film or just jerking around. But to me (and many others) he made some very poor choices in terms of how to play it. Whether the costume designer/make-up person has any blame here is something we don’t know at this point, but I’m sure the conception was part Burton and part Depp.
While it would have been pointless to play it exactly as Wilder had, one could still strike the same tone. And anyone who is a fan of the novel will tell you that Depp just doesn’t hit the mark here. It’s too weird to get any kind of academy or critical recognition. The best performance in my mind is by Deep Roy.
This might end up being a banner year for Depp and Burton, the Corpse Bride is in Sept. and maybe an animated Oscar nom is on the horizon. If Miramax releases The Libertine on schedule then Depp has another chance at Oscar.
Okay now that I’ve seen CATCF, Depp isn’t playing Michael Jackson at all. But from the TRAILER, it at least looked like Jackson to me. And I’m glad I’m not the only one who thought at one point, “Hey, WTF!, THAT’S DR. EVIL’S VOICE”
-> all bald actors should be banned from wearing wigs <- hi bruce willis, vin diesel(?)
I can see Johnny grabbing a nom for this. Seriously folks who thought he’d get one for the last 2? No one.
Well, what other male performance in 2005 has been Oscar worthy? Maybe we’ll see one this week with Terence Howard in Hustle and Flow. But it has been a weak year so far.
You people do realize that the largely nominated films aren’t coming out until the fall, right? In addition to Terence Howard and Russell Crowe (who could still be recognized, as he’s phenomenal in Cinderella Man despite the questionable success of the overall film), here’s an easy to read list of Willy Wonka’s competition:
Joaquin Phoenix in the Johnny Cash biopic
Viggo Mortensen in Cronenberg’s History of Violence
Jude Law & Sean Penn in All the King’s Men
George Clooney in Syriana (they would love to give this guy a nom)
Nathan Lane in The Producers
Colin Farell in Ask the Dust/The New World
Jake Gyllenhaal & Jamie Foxx in Jarhead
Jake Gyllenhaal & Heath Ledger (heartthrobs playing homos–isn’t it time for the academy to get on board?)
Bill Murray in Broken Flowers
Phillip Seymour Hoffman in Capote
Ben Kingsley as freaking FAGIN in Olver Twis
and Depp himself in The Libertine, which is supposedly among his best perfs to date.
As I said before, NO WAY IN HELL.
I think everyone realizes fall is the season for “oscar” quality movies. The point is there hasn’t been much early this year. Usually you have at least a few. This year none.
I would be a little careful with that “no way in hell” talk. I bet a few people said that after Pirates.
But is his performance in Charlie universally loved the way his performance in POTC was? Regardless of what people thought of the movie itself, it seems that everyone raved about Depp in Pirates. That doesn’t seem to be the case with Charlie. It seems that many aren’t enjoying his wacky performance much.
All we heard during and after filming of POTC was that Disney wanted to fire him because he was so weird and awful. He had to beg execs not to can him.
You folks do realize that it was David Poland himself who started this Johnny Depp/Michael Jackson thing, all by himself, on this very same blog months ago. And since, as we all know, every mover, shaker and taste-maker in showbiz reads Poland, they latched on to his “insight,” and recycled it as their own. It’s a little too late now, D-Po, to be crying foul. Unless, of course, your master plan was to lure your rivals into making a big mistake. Ah, you crafty mack daddy, you! High five! Colt 45 toast!
BTW: I’m going to be in the LA area this weeknd. Any of the girls in your stable still working the Hilton in Glendale? And do I still qualify for the special Hot Blog discount?
Dave Poland loves to spend all his time debunking. At least this is less tiresome than the slump thing.
As for Depp and the Oscars, the Disney execs may have been uncertain about his performance but it was mostly universally loved by critics and audiences. The same can’t be said for his Wonka (but I liked it).
I truly don’t see Depp getting a nomination for this. With Pirates Depp also had the “he’s due for a nomination” thing going for him.
And it’s NOT ACTUALLY that common to see anyone get 3 acting awards (especially in the lead I would assume) in a row. Especially someone such as Depp who they haven’t exactly been in love with for very long. He’s not like Crowe in the way that he was sort of a newcomer (for all you guys, not me!).
But, still, after 2003’s nominations ANYTHING is possible. Hell, at this current stage I’m predicting a female director nominee and an Asian Best Actress nominee. Crrraaazy.
before pirates what role did depp have that he deserved any award consideration? he wasn’t due for anything. only one he may have had a shot with was donnie brasco but when pacino doesn’t even get one for that? no shot.
I’m leaning towards thinking he has a great shot for a nomination. The Academy loves him. The movie is going to do well. And the performance is that good.
Even though the anti Wonka backlash really hasn’t kicked into full gear yet I think a guy like Depp will overcome that.
And he will make it 3 for 3. An impressive feat if he does it.
I would like to assume we’ll have some acting competition in the next six months for him. But this is Hollywood and you really never know whats going to happen.
It may be a down year.
These are the top actors in Jeffrey Wells column. His guesses for who will be there in the end. There is a Depp in there but not for Wonka.
Terrence Howard (Hustle & Flow); Matthew Broderick (The Producers); Viggo Mortensen (A History of Violence); Colin Farrell (Ask The Dust; The New World); Joaquin Phoenix (Walk The Line); Jake Gyllenhaal (Jarhead), Russell Crowe (Cinderella Man), Johnny Depp (The Libertine); Sean Penn (All The King’s Men); Eric Bana (Unititled Spielberg Munich Olympics Project).
a best actor list top heavy in a list star names.
Colin Farrell isn’t going to be nominated for any Oscars ever… Haven’t they figured out yet he’ll never be big in north america? At least Jamie Foxx is in Miami Vice (Foxx better get top billing)
And Gyllenhaal won’t be nominated for anything this year, no matter what he does.
saying colin farrel never be nominated for anything is being a tad short sighted. this is a guy who in three years became a 15 mill a movie star. and has now worked with stone, malick, mann, and spielberg. u may not like him but the guy has the talent.
How will Foxx get top billing when Farrel has the lead role of Crockett? If I remember the tv show right, Don Johnson was the lead.
I like Colin Farrel. And don’t get me started on how much I like Jake G. We’d have a war.
The gossip rags lately have been saying Foxx is unhappy on the set. He’s mad at Mann for catering to Farrel and him playing second fiddle. And he has no input on the script and can’t improvise like he did on Collateral.
Foxx improvised a lot on Collateral? I never got that impression. Didn’t take long for fame to go to Foxx’s head.
Supposedly, on the set he was allowed to come up with his own lines. To improvise the script. Michael Mann encouraged it. I guess hes not getting that treatment on Vice.
I think I just read Ray Pride give a huge rave to The Island. I have to reread to make sure what I read was right.
I’m not saying that’s incorrect, but I watched all of the extras on the Collateral DVD, and listened to Mann’s commentary, and I don’t remember anyone ever saying anything about Foxx improvising lines. But maybe I just missed that information. In the rehearsal footage between Foxx and Cruise on the DVD, the lines they recite are pretty much exactly what’s in the movie.
It was in the gossip article I read about his troubles now with Mann. He thought he’d have more room to manuever and apparently he has been shot down. I guess Mann keeps it tight when its his own words.
foxx has to realize this ain’t booty call anymore. hes in the big leagues now.
Must be the case Lester. He is quite the perfectionist. But I think he’s earned it. I’ll always give him the benefit of the doubt.
now michael mann is a director who i’d see whatever he cranks out. no matter what anyone says about it or how i think it is.
Same here bob. He’s my favorite director.
Michael Mann is one of the greatest modern directors, period.
There are many actors who think they can rewrite scripts–I’m not saying FOxx is doing that, but this is something I know that Mann doesn;t like–he is very very particular about every detail and I really doubt that he is allowing Farrell to improv and not Foxx. No way. WHile some directors encourage improv on a character, some don;t and the actors should respect who the director is, and adapt. Mann also doesn’t care if someone is A, B or C or DD list, the story is more important that any character.
Michael Mann is working at the top of his game. Even on supposed dumb action movies like Collateral. He does work best when he works from a script he has written. I think his talents are more fully on display.
After seeing “History of Viloence”, I’d say confidently that you can take Viggo off that list. He’s fine in the movie, really menacing in some parts, I loved Viggo in it. But the movie’s violence will turn off anyone over the age of 40. This movie earns its title. VIOLENT. and I don’t think that Academy crowed would go for it.
I saw Charlie a second time last night, and I still see a Jackson similarity. What’s the big deal if some people see this? There are REAL movie reviewing injustices out there.
As I think I’ve written somewhere, Joe… as yes, in the first paragraph about this issue in the posting a few before ths one… based on the ads and the first glimpses, yes, got the MJ thing… said teh MJ thing…
But after seeing the movie and asking the question throughout, no… no MJ, except in the broadest ways.
As for Lucky Rooster, if you aren’t Wells, you should be subbing for him. Your choices of words and writing cadences are very much like his.
And yes, it is ok to bash people off the blog… and even on the blog… as long as it is on topic. I made no reference to Jeffrey’s body, religion, family history, or sexual proclivities. Attacking a movie endlessly based on 30 minutes – though it is fair to say that he went in with a view and was not going to change it – is an immoral action for an alleged professional… period.
Yeah, but Dave — what about the hos in Glendale?
Thrice Leydonlo rocks on.
I think Leydon and Poland are hitting the Malt Liquor a little early in the day.
Lota: You write that in a tone that indicates…. disapproval.
as long as I don’t have to bail Poland/Leydon out of the drunk tank, no disapproval meant. Y’all can get cozy with your friend Mr. Ripple. Just don’t be shouting at LAPD “There is no slump sucka!”. They might misunderstand.
Don’t they have Customer feedback cards at press junkets where they have a little box you can check “how can we make our next gift bag better for you?”
you can write in the comments part “give us bond cards”.
I didn’t say I never liked Colin Farrell, but I don’t think he’s a star. He’s like Jude Law, a good actor, but he’s not a star… can either of them open a movie? I’ll say no. I bet more than half the people who saw S.W.A.T. couldn’t tell you Colin Farrell’s name.
If he’s getting 15 million $, he’s way overpaid. And if he’s getting more for Miami Vice than Jamie Foxx, that’s wrong. I’ve never seen an episode of Miami Vice, but why couldn’t they give Jamie Foxx the Don Johnson part and Farrell the Philip Michael Thomas part? I mean, why not? Race didn’t matter for the new Honeymooners. And Foxx is a bigger star than Farrell (most would agree, right?)
Lota: Ripple? Bah! I can’t speak for D-Po, but for me, it’s Mad Dog 20 20 or Thunderbird or nada. (Or, of course, Colt 45.)
Miami Vice.
it depends if the salary was negotiated before the Ray nomination/oscar win doesn’t it? Farrell got paid ~10M for ALexander, so he probably got more for Miami Vice–Farrell was touted in the ladies&gossip magazines long before FOxx won his oscar & got alot more press so pre-oscar when Miami was a done deal(I thought it was in Jan/Feb) probably Farrell got more offered at the time–but that may be wrong. If Night Train hasn;t gotten its hooks in Dave by now he can maybe answer that.
the budget for Ray was only around 40-45M.
Uh… no, Sky… I would say that both are borderline in terms of box office, but that Farrell has slightly more international muscle (which is to say, not that much at all).
Jamie Foxx has never even done something S.W.A.T. level.
This is not to say that Foxx won’t become a real draw… but for now, Ray is still the fluke… and only a $70 million fluke at that. He is overvalued and got more money for MV than he really deserves, in terms of drawing power… which is to say, Collateral, Ali and Any Given Sunday were hardly sold as Jamie Foxx movies and Ray was an Oscar push film about one of the world’s most belived figures… and that is the full list of his films that have opened over $10 million.
Foxx isn;t a star. He’s a second banana.
Foxx needs to fuck off and die okay?
I would say that Farrell is the bigger and better star. Farrell plays up his celebrity, Foxx seems to think he warrents it. I can easily see him becoming an awards winner. You must remember that he has only been around in a predominant placement since, what? 2000? 2001? And your Jude Law analogy wasn’t that good. Jude has 2 Academy Award nominations and like Farrell hasn’t exactly been around for decades.]
And Bob, I’m not saying that Depp had done anything that the Academy felt urged to nominate before Pirates but he had been around for nearly 20 years and had definitely proven his worth as an actor in their business. And to be honest, Pirates seems like another performance that normally wouldn’t have been taken seriously if, as i said, they probably didn’t feel like he had earned his stripes.
Well okay, internationally, farrell may be the bigger star for now, but a few years from now?
I don’t think he’ll last in that upper level for long. And Bob, yeah farrell has worked with stone, malick, mann, and spielberg, but matthew mcConaughey worked with spielberg, howard, and zemeckis over a few years too. He’s hot for now, but a few years from now? Nah.
A camel may never forget, but I did about jude law being nominated twice… I think naomi watts will have better chemistry with king kong than she did with jude law in I heart Huckabees. I like jude law, but, I don’t know how he can get nominated for anything… he’s not that much of an actor.
You may hate Foxx, Camel, but you agree that he can sing better than Don Johnson or Philip Michael Thomas or Colin Farrell? See? There is common ground.
What does that have to do with anything?
I’ve never heard those guys sing though so I can’t really say.