MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

Images Of Marie

The funny thing about all the Marie Antoinette clamor is that it sounds like Ms. Coppola delivered exactly the movie she promised and intented. The trailer tends to confirm this. The question is whether there are many people who will value a movie about a spoiled brat… especially when Ms. Coppola shows her so much love.
It’s all sounding a little Spanglish to me. But we shall soon see…
In the meanwhile, these two images seem to me to be the key to the film.

Be Sociable, Share!

27 Responses to “Images Of Marie”

  1. mutinyco says:

    Dave…uh…I think this post is more self-revelatory than you realize…

  2. Blackcloud says:

    This movie will either be really good, or really, really bad. I don’t think it will be in that mushy mediocre middle.

  3. David Poland says:

    Apparently you haven’t read the reviews, Mut

  4. Richard Nash says:

    What were people expecting from Sophia Coppola anyway? Did they not see VIRGIN SUICIDES and LOST IN TRANSLATION?

  5. mutinyco says:

    Pretty sure I did. Wasn’t I making some kind of argument in the picture’s defense a few threads down?…

  6. mutinyco says:

    A new marketing study by Sony has determined that if all of the lonely, horny people in this country went to see this film in the theater, it would beat the inflation-adjusted gross of Gone With the Wind.

  7. jeffmcm says:

    So it’s going to be a period Lost in Translation? That’s fine, but from what I’ve seen the style and tone are chaotic. But that’s just from the trailer.

  8. RoyBatty says:

    I’ll say this for the second pic – I haven’t wanted to bone Dunst before now. The whole little-girl-from-INTERVIEW-WITH-A-VAMPIRE thing made it too much like pedophilia. But this pic pretty much erased that.

  9. brack says:

    I’ve always wanted to (bone her), but she’s my age.

  10. Martin S says:

    Can someone tell me how this movie is not the embodiment of over-induglence on behalf of Coppola? I understand auteurship, but who’s the audience?
    The time period has never been successful for a movie. And Dunst – The woman has no box office draw, whatsoever. Wimbledon, Elizabethtown, Mona Lisa Smile…what’s her last non-Spidey hit? Bring It On? She’s a total product of befriending the right people. And who is this Schwartzman dude to take the male lead? Another Coppola?
    Why aren’t people talking about her career in being jeopardy like they are about Richard Kelly?

  11. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    Because unlike Kelly’s first feature, Coppola’s don’t live purely a cult items. They are well-loved award winning films. I absolutely LOVE Donnie Darko too btw.
    Plus, the negative reviews for Southland Tales and for Marie-Antoinette have different focus’. For Kelly’s the focus is on his inability to, well, make a movie that makes sense and so forth. The negative reactions for Coppola’s film tend to be negative because Sofia didn’t make a traditional biopic, but instead (as Dave mentioned) made the exact movie she intended to make.
    From all accounts, she made a movie about a typical teenager… except this one was the queen of France and grew up in the 1700s. I don’t think Sofia was trying to make a Hollywood Oscar-bait biopic.
    Plus, many of the people getting riled up about Marie are French, and it doesn’t surprise me that the french are the ones getting the most antsy about an Americans highly-stylised reinterpretation of French history.

  12. Crow T Robot says:

    Sophia Coppola trashing?
    Oh can I play!
    Really, the director making a serious, thoughtful, well crafted film about the subject would have been the real shocker. This is just everybody catching up to what I’ve been saying about this space cadet for years now. After all, Sophia Coppola IS the Sophia Coppola of directors.
    Welcome to the party.
    As for Richard Kelly… I’d rather see the worst Bay/Ratner double feature than a remake of Citizen Kane by that dork. Are we serious about giving this “filmmaker” print space? Does any fan of Donnie Darko NOT own a Godsmack album?
    How can anyone be surprised that these films will likely suck balls?
    Sorry, I’m on a geek tear this week.

  13. palmtree says:

    “I understand auteurship, but who’s the audience?”
    The people who liked Lost in Translation (she did win an Oscar for it). The people who like the quirky movies of PT and Wes Andersons (Schwartzman is eternally Rushmore) and David Russell. Did you realize that Royal Tenenbaums grossed $52 m domestic? Lost in Translation did $44 m domestic and over $100 m worldwide.
    No doubt this movie will also have cache with those who value the music on the soundtrack. Though we’ve seen the mess a big budget can wreak on this kind of filmmaker (The Life Aquatic), it’s still a must see…if only to see how bad it is.

  14. Wrecktum says:

    Kenneth Turan gave the movie praise today on NPR. I think the film, upon release, will have its advocates and Coppola will escape the savaging that some are speculating about.

  15. jeffmcm says:

    Hey, why tear into Richard Kelly? It sounds like he made the movie he intended to make. (By which I mean, just because a filmmaker is capable of realizing their vision, doesn’t mean that their vision was good to begin with.) I don’t know how a couple of weird song choices and going handheld makes Marie-A. ‘highly stylized’ either.
    Oh, I love Donnie Darko and do not own a Godsmack album.

  16. ManWithNoName says:

    Not only do I love Donnie Darko, but I have absolutely no idea who or what Godsmack is!

  17. David Poland says:

    Can you imagine anyhting worse than a film that is offering a 20something sensibility being praised by Ken Turan?

  18. Wrecktum says:

    I think I should get a chance to see the film before I can respond to that, Poland.

  19. Crow T Robot says:

    I side with the French here. Can you imagine a Czech filmmaker making a story about Betsy Ross featuring an overbearing polka music soundtrack?

  20. Martin S says:

    K-Camel’s post makes sense and Crow could well be ahead of the curve on Sophia, but Palm, you’re missing a factor to the films you listed – Male leads with audience capital.
    Rushmore and Translation – Bill Murray. The guy has pull because he never squandered it. Tennenbaums – Murray, The Wilsons, Stiller. Schwartzman may be Rushmore, but who the hell is going to realize it’s him in Marie? The guy has zero recognition. If Sophia was banking on MTV, she would have been better off grabbing Jason Biggs.
    I’ve seen the Baz Romeo & Juliet comparison, but that movie had Danes coming off of My So-Called Life and Leo from Gilbert Grape. To me, it looks like the bar for Sophia moves because a lot of the press have invested in her as a being the female answer to the Anderson’s, Spike Jonze, or whatever neo-auteur in play. I think Penny Woolcock and Julie Taymor are lightyears better, but when the name’s Coppola…

  21. James Leer says:

    But Martin S, why should you give a shit whether Kirsten Dunst can open a movie or not? Are you thinking like a studio executive or a film fan?
    I kind of hope neither, because Jason Biggs? So over.

  22. jeffmcm says:

    Jason Biggs was last seen as the fourth lead in Disney’s Eight Below. Over sounds about right.

  23. Blackcloud says:

    I have a rule about historical movies–if it’s good, I don’t care how cruddy the history is. But if it’s bad, I’ll show it no quarter for getting the history wrong. I’m interested a little because of “Lost in Translation,” but mostly because eighteenth-century France is what I study, and am curious to see Sofia Coppola’s vision of *my* time period.

  24. palmtree says:

    “Schwartzman may be Rushmore, but who the hell is going to realize it’s him in Marie?”
    He’s a bit more well known than that. With Rushmore, Huckabees, and Shopgirl, he’s kind of an indie film god. And he also wrote the theme for the O.C.

  25. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:

    “Does any fan of Donnie Darko NOT own a Godsmack album?”
    i love Donnie but who the hell are Godsmack?
    On Jason Schwartzmann, I’m definitely a fan after the last two years. He was ace in Shopgirl and I Heart Huckabees (I’m not a fan of Rushmore in general). And I adore me some Kirsten – she’s actually a good actress if you pay attention. Virgin Suicides, Bring It On, crazy/beautiful, The Cat’s Meow..
    The reason people want Sofia to succeed is because finally a female director has come along that could carve a real name for herself in popular culture. She was nominated for Best Director (let’s face it – at the moment, unless a Mira Nair or Jane Campion pulls something truly ASTONISHING out of their arse, Sofia is the best we got for a female to win Best Director at the Oscars), she has a definable style, and she’s young and hollywood royalty. And the soundtracks to her films are A+. Can’t wait to hear what goodies she’s gonna give us for her Marie-Antoinette soundtrack.
    And lastly, if people are going to bash Sofia can they at least have the curtesy to spell her name correctly. SOFIA. Not Sophia. Get it right and then proceed.

  26. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:
    Well well well, what do we have here? Even Roger seems to have changed his opinion already.

  27. Hopscotch says:

    I have a very love/hate relationship with Ms. Dunst. I’ve enjoyed her in some films, and completely despised her in others (Elizabethtown front and center). but one of the movies I really liked her in was The Virgin Suicides, so I’m curious what this has going for it. I like the trailer.
    I’m one of the few that like and respect Darko…but that’s about it. This director has had some serious smoke blown up his ass in the years since, based on some interviews I’ve read with him, and I’m not putting Southland Tales on my want to see list. I just read “The Mind of the Modern Moviemaker” and I found Kelly to be kind of a dick. The worst in that book though, is Luke Greenfield (The Animal, Girl Next Door) HUGE DICK.

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

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