MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

Lunch With… Amy Adams

From a pregnant oddball savant in her Oscar-nominated turn in Junebug to the cartoon turned into a real world “princess” (not literally) in Enchanted, Amy Adams has managed to keep her head down and the ego in check. Here’s a chance to spend some time, discussing her latest film, her choices, her aspirations, and why you are not likely to see her sprawled across Defamer with a NSFW tag anytime soon.

The conversation

Be Sociable, Share!

12 Responses to “Lunch With… Amy Adams”

  1. Me says:

    I think Amy Adams is amazing, from Junebug to her small turn as Jim’s first girlfriend on The Office, but I have some serious questions about her choices of late. Hopefully her return to indies in the next year or so should help.

  2. Ju-osh says:

    Fantastic interview, Dave — and you too, Ms. Adams!

  3. Hopscotch says:

    I LOVE HER!!!!!

  4. LexG says:

    Amy Adams is absolutely great, and I loved Junebug. I’m also wondering if she doesn’t come equipped with some indescribable Viagra-esque power that emnates from the silver screen and turns professional movie critics into smitten hormonal schoolboys.
    In every mention of Junebug, I remember good ol’ Roger practically levitating with gushing praise for her; In their review of Enchanted the other day, I actually worried Roeper and Phillips might break into a spontaneous circle-jerk. It reminded me of that old SNL skit mocking the hyperbole employed in critic-blurb Sopranos ads.
    I mean, she’s lovely and talented, but every mainstream critic’s review is so smitten, so feverish, it’s almost uncomfortable: AMYADAMS AMYADAMS OMG I LOVE AMY ADAMS SHE’S SO EFFERVESCENT AMYAMYAMYAMYAMY MARRY ME!! LOL!
    I rarely see this level of boner-waving when the tweed-wearing crix of the world review the new Alba, the new Brewster, the new Biel, even the new Portman. They’re all just as beautiful and stunning, but I’ve never seen Roeper and Co-Host HOPPING UP AND DOWN ON THEIR AISLE SEATS, MOUTHS FOAMING to find new ways of describing their beauty and talent.

  5. lazarus says:

    Is it just me, or is DP’s shirt unbuttoned one notch lower, and the hair toussled a little more Rhett Butler-esque? And where the hell is this? When the camera’s on her, it seems like she’s sitting in the Cloud City lounge, and then you look like you’re slumming in some cheap apartment.
    You charmer, you. I think she was just about to swoon…

  6. Rob says:

    “They’re all just as beautiful and stunning,”
    Yeah, but they all kind of suck. Critics tend to lose it over actresses that are hot AND can act the paint off the walls.

  7. bipedalist says:

    Lex G, I noticed that too – boy are you right on the money about that. But the funny thing is I once saw Amy Adams in a Baja Fresh and she was so unbelievably normal looking like not extraordinary at all. But she’s become so much a male fantasy in Enchanted – changing and existing, really, only to please her man. And she’s so non-threatening, so innocent – she’s Julia Roberts in Pretty Woman.

  8. jeffmcm says:

    Agreed, Amy Adams is to 2007 as Rachel McAdams was to 2005.

  9. lazarus says:

    The difference, Sasha, is that Amy Adams didn’t have to play a prostitute to earn her first Oscar nom, and won’t have to play a scantily-clad do-gooder to get her first win.
    And jeff, I’m not sure if you’re making a joke about DP’s crushes, or just saying she’s the next “it” girl in general, but I think AA’s got a bit more talent than her predecessor.

  10. TMJ says:

    How selfish of David to not let his chest hair ask a question.

  11. She and Isla Fisher need to be cast as sisters in something. Because, seriously!

  12. bipedalist says:

    Laz, so what? What is ultimately the difference between Julia “playing a prostitute” and Amy Adams playing a princess? Not all that much. These are happily ever after stories featuring girls who are dumb but charming. I think they’re “cute” moviess. Our comments were not about the movies or even the actresses but how the male critics were fawning over Adams….thassall.

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