Me : Hi, Pat. Read your review on Marilyn. I'm a huge fan of Allison and was hoping to catch her in the Marilyn. It'll be strange to hear her spouting profanities.
You wrote it was "surprisingly boring for a film with so much sex appeal and risky business." Don't want to beat around the bush. Just wishing what of kind of sex appeal you're referring to? Does Allison perform topless/sex scenes?
I know I come across like a perv but will much appreciate it if you take the time to reply. Thanks.
Patrick Mullen : Hi, I don't mind you asking. Allison doesn't appear topless (side view maybe?). There's a lot of beating around the bush and innuendo, but then nothing actually happens. Cheers,
-Pat
_________________________________________________
Brian de Palma’s ‘Passion’ An Erotic Thriller With A Hint Of Giallo!
by MrDisgusting
It’s easy for a trailer to ber misleading, but Brian de Palma’s Passion looks incredibly dark for an erotic thriller. Rachel McAdams (Sherlock Holmes) and Prometheus‘s Noomi Rapace both star (and appear to get it on), as does Karoline Herfurth and Paul Anderson
The pic, premiering at next month’s Toronto International Film Festival, is described as an erotic thriller in the tradition of Dressed To Kill and Basic Instinct.,
“It tells the story of a deadly power struggle between two women in the dog-eat-dog world of international business. Christine possesses the natural elegance and casual ease associated with one who has a healthy relationship with money and power. Innocent, lovely and easily exploited, her admiring protégé, Isabelle, is full of cutting-edge ideas that Christine has no qualms about stealing. They’re on the same team, after all… But when Isabelle falls into bed with one of Christine’s lovers, war breaks out.”
_________________________________________________
Roger Corman on 'Attack of the 50 Ft. Cheerleader,' the Benefit of Budgetary Restraints and Why the Internet's the Next Home for Indie Film
Roger Corman should need no introduction. Without him, independent film in the United States would be an entirely different entity, if it would even exist at all. As a director, he was responsible for a classic series of Edgar Allan Poe adaptations in the early 1960s, among many, many others. As a producer he gave early-career breaks to some of the most storied names in American cinema: Coppola, Scorsese, Bogdanovich, Sayles, Demme. And, above all, Corman maintained a steadfast commitment to making fun, profitable pictures, of which he has made literally hundreds over the course of his career, now in its seventh decade. His latest film as a producer stars Jena Sims as aspiring college cheerleader Cassie Stratford who, you know, grows to a giant size after taking an experimental performance-enhancing drug, and premieres on Epix this Saturday, August 25th at 10pm. Indiewire caught up with Corman on a recent afternoon for a chat about this most recent project, his career in general, and matters philosophic.
The idea was originally Epix's, and I had worked with a friend of mine who had produced the original "Attack of the 50 Foot Woman." I had designed the ad, which is sort of a classic -- it's in the Museum of Modern Art's permanent collection -- so they knew I had some connection with that, and I'm just on good terms with them.
They just asked me if I would like to make it. I said yes, for two reasons: one, I thought it would be a fun project, and it was, and secondarily, I had never worked in 3D before. I thought there's so much going this way in the industry, I'd better find out and this would give me a chance to learn. So the picture worked out very well on both bases.
It's a kind of picture that at the same time it feels very modern, it feels in the best ways like a throwback, in terms of it being the kind of T-and-A comedy from the 70s and 80s, was that a conscious decision to bring back that kind of aesthetic?
Yes, we were aware of the changes in the film industry, and also the successful films we had made some time ago, and we felt we would bring back a little bit. It wasn't a major event, but we felt we would bring back a little bit of the flavor of that, which would add a little interest to the film.
The picture seemed as though as it was made for a fairly modest budget, which is something your work has been known for. Is it strictly a practical choice, or are there some aesthetic benefits to working within modest means? It's primarily a practical choice. We had a deal with Epix, we knew exactly how much money they were giving us. We retained the foreign rights, so it was just sort of a calculation as to what sort of budget, putting all these factors together, should "Cheerleader" represent.
Do you feel, though, that working within restrictions like that is a boon to creativity in any way? How do restrictions like that affect the choices you would make as a producer or director as opposed to having unlimited resources at your disposal?
Sometimes it's just a problem. But sometimes, as you say, you come up with something creative instead of a lot of money. There are ways to solve problems in picture-making that are creative. Matter of fact, I can go all the way back a long time ago -- I made "Machine-Gun Kelly," around 1959 or something like that, the first film that starred Charlie Bronson.
I was shooting on the backlot at Warner Bros, which had a period feel. There was no interior of a bank, and he was robbing a number of banks. And I didn't have money to build an extra set. So what I did, I put a flat inside the door and put shadows—I had everybody act in front of a camera which was rigged with lighting on these flats, so you saw the whole robbery take place in silhouette instead of actually inside the bank, which I would have done if I'd had more money.
I got a lot of critical attention for the interesting and creative way I shot that bank robbery.
Those were accomplished primarily by computer graphics, and there was a problem there, which is each computer graphic creation cost a certain amount of money. So that when you start up with the creation of the 50-foot woman, then you can ride with that all the way through the rest of the picture. But if you're going to show individual size changes, it costs a great deal of money for something that's only on the screen only 10 or 20 seconds, so we did cheat a bit on those intermediate sizes in order to get to the full size right away.
When exactly did you make the transition into doing more TV? What happened is this, and this is simply something beyond my control: I did my first film around 1955. Every picture I made got a full theatrical release, even my first little film which I shot in six days on a budget of $12,000 plus some deferments, which probably brought it up to around $30,000. It was a very little film but it got a full theatrical release.
Starting about 20 years ago, around 1990, the major studios began to dominate more and more of the theatrical releases and the independents got less and less time. And I'd say within that 10-year period, from the early 90s to the early 00s, was a major transition for independents, in which each year we saw our share of theatrical grosses or playing time diminish until around the year 2000, when we simply abandoned, closed our theatrical distribution arm.There just was no, and is no, theatrical distribution for low-budget independent films except for an occasional film like "Paranormal Activity." Every now and then one will come up. You can't make, as we used to, 10 or 15 pictures a year and assume that all will go theatrically. We would hope that one or two would go theatrically, and the odds on that are just not good. So we moved from theatrical, plus television and everything else, to DVD, and DVD picked up the slack for a long time, until about a year or so ago when DVD started to decline, and we started to move to cable television.
That was around the time you started to make the SyFy original programming like "Sharktopus"?
Yes. Exactly.
Having transitioned to where you are now, do you feel that this is business-wise where your production is going to remain for the time being, with the kind of pictures that you've been making?
Yes, “for the time being” is the correct phrase. Because these are bad times for independents. Theatrical is essentially gone, DVD is declining, there are still sources of income, foreign is much stronger than it used to be, but I'm a strong believer that eventually we'll be on the internet. Really, fully on the internet. And good times will come back. [laughs]
Was there any of the scale of the decline of independent distribution in the '90s that you've had to deal with before? Or was that so major that it overshadowed the other obstacles you've faced before?
[That] really overshadowed everything. It was a major, major change in distribution. It changed the pattern that had existed since I started making films.
A lot of directors who've got their start working on films you've produced have credited you with instilling in them a respect for the practical aspects of filmmaking. To tie it to what we're talking about, "Attack of the 50 Ft. Cheerleader" is a movie that's very direct. It's about a 50 foot cheerleader who attacks, and it doesn't deviate from that, and it's an engine of entertainment. Is that a priority when you're producing for a director?
First and foremost there is simply the technique of directing: planning out shots, pre-production planning, which is a major element for me, various things I've learned as a director, what you do on the set, and so forth. A lot of it is simply practical, pragmatic filmmaking. But there is some attention paid to the creative side as well, so I try to make it as well-rounded a couple of sessions as I can.
You first have to know practically how you make a picture before you start to bring the creative elements in. It's the same thing as, say, you as a writer, you have to learn the craft before or as you go along, and you bring the creative or artistic elements into it.
What influence do you feel you've had, if any, over the way that pictures are made? What sort of stamp do you feel you've left on the history of the medium?
My stamp will be light. I have no illusions that I've been a giant in filmmaking. But I think I've helped to build and support the independent end of motion pictures. To bring that up in opposition to the majors. When I first started, almost everything was a major studio. There were small independent companies but there were very few, they were unimportant. By the end of the '60s, even during the '60s, the independents became much stronger and more able to compete with the majors and be a more coherent form of filmmaking.
Roger Corman And His Scream Queens Talk 'Attack Of The 50 Foot Cheerleader'
Moviefone
The film is about young cheerleading-hopeful Cassie Stratton (Jena Sims), who's so desperate to excel at the sport she subjects herself to a radical new drug that is supposed to increase her athletic abilities. Naturally, it all goes disastrously wrong and Cassie grows to gigantic proportions. If that wasn't bad enough, her mean girl rival, Brittany (Olivia Alexander), steals the formula, and as sure as the sun rises, we've got a topless 3D fight between two gigantic cheerleaders on our hands. (Honestly, there is nothing we could say to follow that, but somehow Moviefone has to try.)
We had the opportunity to speak with Corman and his two cheerleader stars on what it means to make a cult movie and revealed their unique casting choices for an updated "Rock 'n' Roll High School."
Is this one of those movies that starts with a title, and then you figure everything else out after that?
Corman: Yes [Laughs].
When you hear that title, what’s your first thought?
Sims: "Attack Of The 50 Foot Woman."
Alexander: I just thought it was going to be a crazy good time, like something I wanted to be apart of.
Roger, I assume it’s old hat for you at this point.
Corman: A little bit. For some reason in this type of picture, any time you see a scientist working on a new serum at the start of a picture, you know that serum is going to go wrong and there are going to be disastrous results.
I can't believe that this is your first 3D movie.
Corman: Well I was thinking of it in the late 1950s when I first started making films, and Bill Castle and a couple of other guys made 3D pictures. It was in vogue for awhile and then it faded because the pictures weren’t very good. Essentially it was brought back by one man, Jim Cameron. “Avatar” was such a good film that it resurrected the whole concept of 3D. “Attack of the 50 Foot Cheerleader” weirdly enough is made for television. Epix asked me to make it in 3D which I thought was strange for television, but their research indicates that 3D on television in two or three years is going to be very important.
As audience members, what kind of shelf do you think this new wave of 3D will have?
Sims: I think it’s going to stick around because everything is evolving; they're making more fashionable glasses to wear, they’re making 3D TV’s more available. I think it’s here to stay.
Alexander: I think it’s about enhancing a certain type of film. And I think that if it’s not going to enhance the storytelling portion of it, then it’s gimmicky. But I think in some films it’s an experience, and I think with ours especially we worked really hard to make it 3D. We shot it in Real 3D. It’s not converted in post. I think little things like that make the difference in the long run.
Corman: I’ve read analyses of the box office and the pictures that are converted gross significantly less than the true 3D pictures. That’s going to separate the wheat from the chaff.
Considering your prolificness, what do you make of the typical Hollywood budget?
Corman: You can take one of our graduates, Jim Cameron, and when he made “Titanic” it was the most expensive picture ever made. When he made “Avatar” he broke his own record and made the most expensive picture ever made. I believe the money was not wasted. In both “Titanic” and “Avatar” you can look at the screen and you can see the spectacular quality of the film. So if Jim spends 100 million or 200 million, it’s all there on the screen. What bothers me is when somebody spends 90 million and it’s two people walking around a room. Then I say what happened to the movie?
When I hear the name Roger Corman, a phrase that immediately pops into my head is "Cult Cinema." What does it mean to be associated with that phrase?
Sims: It means someone’s going to dress up as me for Halloween.
Alexander: It’s a time and a place in your life and you always remember it; that film is in your heart, you know? I think you are ingrained much, much deeper into people’s lives than just, “Oh something I’m going to watch on a Saturday night.” It’s something that they're passionate about, it’s something they want more of.
Sims: They watch it ten times.
Corman: I think a cult film is a film that is somewhat separate from the mainstream. It’s a film that has something different that appeals very strongly to a small group of people. The equivalent of a cult religion. There are all the mainstream religions and there’s a cult religion that offers something specific that is different from the mainstream.
Horror can be a real mixed bag in terms of opportunities for actresses. What kind of expectations do you have as a leading lady in a horror film?
Alexander: I think that most of the actresses that I look up to started as Scream Queens. And I think it’s a great place to start. It’s a genre where people become your fan and they stay your fan forever, and I would only hope that for the both of us.
Sims: It’s kind of a rite of passage. I thought for sure somebody was going to die, but nobody did [Laughs].
Alexander: I found it really empowering to play a giant, and I found even the nudity in the film to be very liberating. It was scary, but to be in a really uncomfortable position, especially as an actress, is when you’re doing interesting work. This kind of film and sexplotation films and horror films, all of those sub-genres really do worship women. And I think people that don’t see that and think they’re bad for women are wrong. And I studied women’s studies -- so what! [Laughs]
Corman: It's a difficult question to answer, but I think the films stand for themselves. When I started my company New World in the '70s, the first picture was “The Student Nurses.” It had a fleeting bit of nudity but it was the story of three nurses. The writer wrote the story of all three and in each one, the girl's boyfriend came to the rescue and solved the problem. I said "No, each girl solves her own problem, not her boyfriend." And I think that’s been key to the success of the films that we’ve made.One female-driven movie of yours is "Rock 'n' Roll High School." I know that Howard Stern has supposedly had the rights for a remake, but if you had the opportunity to make “Rock 'n' Roll High School” now, who would you put in place of The Ramones?
Corman: I don’t know enough about music. At one time I picked all the music for every film. But the day came when I didn’t know who the hot pop and rock acts were. So I just said to the young people in the office, “You tell me, I will then listen to their music, but you guys are going to pick it.”
Sims: I say One Direction. They’re more wholesome, but they would bring a crowd.
Olivia: I don’t know if you could ever top The Ramones. That “rebelness" -- I don’t see any rock bands doing that kind of stuff nowadays. Sorry.
"Attack of the 50 Foot Cheerleader 3D" premieres on August 25 on EPIX HD.
_________________________________________________
Salma Hayek : "Vogue" Germany Magazine [September]2012
_________________________________________________
Why Lena Dunham is always nakedBy Margarita Buenaventura
If there’s one thing I hate while I’m out shopping, it’s hearing the “F” word.
You know: “free size.”
It’s been pretty clear to me early on that I am living in a country that is borderline hostile to females who have inherited the height and girth of barely traceable ancestors from the West through clothing meant to fit into the petite Asian archetype.
Just to paint the picture as objectively as I can, I’m gonna go ahead and say that at 5’6”, and I am taller than the average Filipina. When you see me in person, you could even say I look like a Coke bottle. The 1.5-liter variety, that is.
Buying clothes is more than a little bit frustrating. When I find something nice, it is usually made to fit a fetus. And when something is made in my size, it seems to have the magical ability to make me look a beluga whale. A pregnant beluga whale.
Life isn’t very kind to young girls who put their bras to good use. I remember going to a Hong Kong night market one summer and saw a top hanging in a stall manned by an irate woman who said, “Don’t buy, it’s not going to fit you!” when I had just asked her how much it was. How can one not be even slightly self-loathing when the world is littered with people who make you feel grotesque for looking “less than ideal”?
It is this sort of thinking that clings to your consciousness: anyone who will look ridiculous on the runway or in a badly written fashion blog is relegated to the bench of girls with a full stock of inner beauty.
While no empirical evidence can support this claim, I think that’s also why I felt that Lena Dunham personally victimized me by taking her clothes off for the entire world to see.
If you’re a guy, you’re probably wondering why a naked chick on TV is such a bad thing, and if you’re a girl you’d think, “Hey, if I looked half as good as she does, I’d probably be naked all the time, too!” But if you were familiar with Dunham, the woman behind the film Tiny Furniture and the series Girls, you’d understand why we might have a problem with those statements.
You’d understand because Lena Dunham isn’t what a person would typically call hot, and if you saw her naked — even just once — you probably wouldn’t think she looked good. You could plunk her down in a fruit bowl and she would not look the least bit out of place. Why? Because she’s a pear. She’s a walking pear.
Dunham’s naked body has the most polarizing effect on me, to be honest. On one hand, I admire her bravery to flaunt the off-kilter ratio between her chest and her hips. It’s the stuff of an angry feminist’s wildest fantasies. But then the whole naked thing just happens so often that most of the time I’m starting to think she just has mental myopia.
Not that this is any excuse for my brashness, but I’m not the only one who thinks so. I’m just a statistic in the scores of people from all over the world who have published articles, stories, and open letters about Lena Dunham and her proclivity to show off body parts that start with a B. It’s just as much discussed as her characters’ self-centeredness or the general decadence present in her work. In fact, her naked body is such a distinctive persona that I am this close to making an IMDB account for it.
But now the question begs to be answered: why does she do it? Perhaps for catharsis. Maybe it could even be a socio-political statement. Or maybe it’s because like Britney Spears shaving off her hair in 2007, Lena Dunham gets naked in front of the camera just because she can.
I, of course, cannot personally confirm this unless we become Twitter buddies/roommates, but in trying to answer why Dunham is so fond of nudity, I am plagued by a thought that I could give an answer to: considering all the flaws on my own person that I am very much aware of, why does her naked body bother me so much?
Dunham seems to offset her hang-ups with her body by making quips about it (such as calling herself a “fat baby angel”) but then orchestrates her fictional universe by surrounding her onscreen alter-egos with an ensemble that is almost always ready to swear under oath that she is hot, beautiful, or “1960s porn star”-worthy.
It’s the greatest bipolar love story. She loves and hates herself enough to be tortured and beguiled at the same time. That’s what bothers me — that she makes me uncomfortable by reminding me that we are just messed up as she is.
Then again, how can you not love her for that? (See, I told you: polarizing.) I wouldn’t go so far as to call her a beacon of hope, but Lena Dunham’s naked body could just be a sign of the changing times, when traditional perspectives on beauty are constantly challenged in mainstream media. Dunham may not be the “voice of a generation,” but her body might just be its very awkward mascot.
Thanks to her, I’ve gotten better at coming to terms with the fact that I’ll never be a size zero. I’m trying to be less obsessive and more attune to dressing myself what I really want to wear. So what if I look like a beluga whale? At least I’m cute.
_________________________________________________
17 Seconds To Sophie
The dynamic duo Bill and Carol Cote made a baby and made a short time-lapse documentation of baby Sophie's growth. Recently, I wanted to show this 1 minute film to a friend, but couldn't find any website still hosting it. So I've reposted it here, without the consent or permission of any of the Cotes. My apologies if this is not in line with their wishes.
IMDB info at imdb.com/title/tt0206522
_________________________________________________
This first official look at the remake of Carrie is bloody good
CARRIE is coming, and true to our hope she's as bloody as can be.
Thanks to Entertainment Weekly we now have our first clear and concrete look at Chloë Grace Moretz in the title role and Julianne Moore as her mother, with smaller sidebar pictures that help to compare the two to the original portrayals of Sissy Spacek and Piper Laurie. Both are rather iconic images to take on with a first showing, but there's something to be said for getting them out of the way right at the start.
Plot recap: The quiet suburb of Chamberlain, Maine is home to the deeply religious and conservative Margaret White and her daughter Carrie. Carrie is a sweet but meek outcast whom Margaret has sheltered from society. Gym teacher Miss Desjardin tries in vain to protect Carrie from local mean girls led by the popular and haughty Chris Hargenson, but only Chris' best friend, Sue Snell, regrets their actions. In an effort to make amends, Sue asks her boyfriend, high school heartthrob Tommy Ross, to take Carrie to prom. Pushed to the limit by her peers at the dance, Carrie unleashes telekinetic havoc.
| Extra Tidbit: | Moretz has had this to say of her take on the character: "Carrie's completely different from me. It's an out-of-body thing: I'm becoming a totally different person for it. We're really looking into Carrie's mind this time. It's going to be more psychological: more Black Swan." |
|---|
Why Isn't Kristen Bell a Bigger Movie Star?
There's a line in "Crazy Stupid Love" where Steve Carell's lovesick character wistfully refers to his wife Julianne Moore as that "perfect blend of sexy and cute." Add "hilarious" to the equation and the description is precisely what makes Kristen Bell such an irresistibly charming performer.However, despite her winning charisma, she isn't nearly as big a star as we imagined she'd become when she was melting fanboys' hearts on her painfully short-lived girl-detective series, "Veronica Mars."
Bell, 32, headlines the action-comedy "Hit and Run" in a role specifically written for her by her on- and off-screen love, comedian Dax Shepard. Although the action comedy has received mixed reviews, one thing most critics agree on is just how genuinely awesome Bell is as a goodie-two-shoes conflict resolution professor with a bad-boy gearhead boyfriend (Shepard).
So why isn't Bell on a Reese Witherspoon or Emma Stone level of fame, and what does she have to do to get on Hollywood's A-list where we feel she belongs?
"I don't think she's gotten a major role — aside from 'Veronica Mars,' which obviously wasn't major enough — that really speaks to her talents," says Jen Chaney of the Washington Post's Celebritology. "I feel like Bell suffers from the Anna Faris problem — she's a very pretty actress who has the potential to sparkle in comedies but doesn't seem to find the roles that push her to the next level."
2. More Comedy Please: Clearly Bell has proven her comedic chops, but somehow she hasn't gotten the kind of cred that Mila Kunis and Emma Stone have — a reputation that lands those ladies a variety of funny lady parts."I would like to see her flex her comedic muscles more often, like in a good teen comedy like 'Easy A' or in a good romantic comedy like 'Crazy Stupid Love.' No, it's not a coincidence that both movies I mentioned are Emma Stone specials; Bell and Stone have a lot of similarities in the lovely and just-plain-likable categories," says Kara Warner of MTV News.
3. Join Prestige Ensembles: There's nothing wrong with producing and starring in a labor of love like "Hit and Run," and obviously Shepard has a keen eye for highlighting what makes his fiancee a genuine joy to watch on screen. But Bell should get on the radar of a respected auteur so she can join some festival opening, award-worthy ensembles.
"Bell also is a dramatically trained actress. Some supporting turns in films helmed by actorly directors — a Clint Eastwood or a Paul Thomas Anderson, someone who routinely gets good performances from his or her casts — would also be a great boost for her," Chaney says. "She doesn't have that one film on her resume yet that gives her the clout she needs to get some of those kinds of roles."
Warner adds that Joss Whedon would make a good collaborator to highlight Bell's smart-ass, kick-ass qualities. "I think she'd be great in anything written/directed by Joss Whedon. I'm not talking superheroes necessarily, but if anyone knows how to work with and write for smart, independent, witty women, it's Whedon."Bell is so supremely likable she manages to endear audiences even when she's being bitchy, and that's a difficult feat. She can play sassy, sweet, whip-smart and slightly intimidating but never overwhelmingly so, like Angelina Jolie or Charlize Theron. "You're a little bit in awe of and afraid of her, but you also really just want her to be your best friend," Doll explains.
And while we don't expect to be added to Bell's speed dial any time soon, we do fully expect her to land a film role as suited to her as her breakout performance in "Veronica Mars." Hopefully, it'll be sooner rather than later.
411mania Interviews : Meghan Markle (Suits)
You may recognize Meghan Markle from her multi-episode stints on Fringe or and 90210 or for guest spots on Castle, The League, and CSI: Miami, but chances are you know her for her current – and breakout – role as Rachel Zane on the hit USA legal drama Suits.
Al Norton: This may seem like a random question but it will make sense in a minute; do you watch Army Wives?
Meghan Markle: I do not.
Al Norton: Well you took part in my 300th column a few weeks back and said Models Inc. was the show you'd most like to see come back for another season and Sally Pressman, one of the leads on Army Wives, said the same thing.
Meghan Markle: No way (laughing)! Are you serious? That's amazing! Besides myself and (USA PR director) Amanda Cary I don't know anyone else who watched Models Inc. but now I do.
Al Norton: I don't talk to a lot of actors who worked in US Embassies before getting into acting.
Meghan Markle: A different kind of politics indeed, right?
Al Norton: You had the duel major in college of Theater and International Relations but when you graduated and went to work did you think you had left the acting behind you?
Meghan Markle: I always loved acting. I always loved the entertainment industry. If you grow up in a coal mining town perhaps you get into coal mining and I grew in LA, surrounded by the business. I spent a lot of time on set and it wasn't just the acting, it was the feeling of being on a team and being part of a production. I also hated the idea of being a girl from LA who goes and becomes an actress as it's such a cliché so, as you said, I had the double major. I started working at the US Embassy in Argentina during my senior year in college and what started as an internship turned into this epic experience for me, turning 21 while working there and having this big office and an apartment and being in a motorcade with Paul O'Neill, who was our Secretary of Treasury at the time. All of those were pretty fantastic things that happened for me then.
Interestingly, much like my character Rachel on the show, I don't test well and I couldn't pass the Foreign Service exam to save my life. I came home for the holidays and a friend of mine gave a manager a student film I had done and he called me the next day and said, "you're going to make money and I want to take 10%. I think you should stay in LA." I guess I had always wanted that as an option and I thought, "maybe this is my shot." I'm very lucky that it's working out.
Al Norton: Have you met with USA executives about selling that early part of your life as a series?
Meghan Markle: I have not but I should absolutely pitch it to Bonnie Hammer (laughing). I've got good tales to tell.
Al Norton: Sometime you talk to someone and hear that getting a role was a long and arduous process with all sorts of testing and readings and other times you might get it as soon as you leave the room; what was it like for you to land the part of Rachel?
Meghan Markle: The process was pretty lengthy but not as bad as it can be. Sometimes it can go on for months, with tons of waiting. I initially auditioned for the producers and directors in the end of August and left that read feeling like I had done the worst audition of my entire life. I remember calling my agent and saying, "I was off book, I was distracted, I don't know what happened. I love this project, I have to get back in the room" and my agent was very clear with me and said, "look, my job is to get you in the room and then your job is to do your job once you're in there. Get your head back in the game, I'm not going to call them about this again, and you're going to go on to your other audition tomorrow."
I thought this was a wake up call for opportunities lost but we didn't realize all the wheels were spinning behind the scenes and that they didn't think I was terrible but in fact thought I was pretty great. They called me later that week and asked me to test. When I found out Patrick (J. Adams) was playing Mike Ross I felt much more confident about the test because he and I had done a pilot together for ABC with Catherine O'Hara about five years ago and in that show we were cast very similarly – my character was a very wealthy girl, his character was rough around the edges, and there was a crush – and I knew that TV saw us a certain way, that we had really good on-screen chemistry.
During my test I read with him and at that point it was between myself and one other girl and it was maybe a week and a half later I got the call saying I got the part, at which point I screamed and cried and did all the requisite celebratory things.
Al Norton: So if you do a reading and think you were terrible but it turns out they liked you, does that make you rethink your choices, the way you evaluate yourself?
Meghan Markle: Right? I think more than anything I have a tendency to go with my gut. Rachel, I just connected to her right off the page; I see the words and I knew, "I know how Rachel would say this" because it's similar to how I would say it. My reaction when I left that audition wasn't so much, "oh my god, I'm a bad actor" it was more that because I am a perfectionist I always work off book and I worked off book for that and I came away thinking that I hadn't made enough eye contact and I stuttered over a certain line. It wasn't so much the delivery as it was the lack of preparedness that I stressed about. By the time I did the test I delivered it the same way but I felt so much better about it.
That's an interesting question because as actors we're our own worst critics and will reexamine our work till the cows come home but typically that first go round is what people respond to, or don't.
Al Norton: What did you see in Rachel that made you think, "I can work with that, I can play that"?
Meghan Markle: I just loved how intelligent and sassy she was. Rachel doesn't have a lot in the pilot episode but in her first moment when she meets Mike Ross, I immediately went, "oh, I love this girl." She was so confident without being bitchy. When I talked about it later with Aaron Korsh, who created the show, I told him my biggest concern early on was that she would come across as abrasive or bitchy. What he shared with me was that most actresses came into that read delivering those lines in a way that she wasn't likeable and for me what I connected with was her as a strong, confident, and sassy woman who has been so jaded by these hot shot associates who come in that she can't help but assume Mike is going to be just like them but that in all of that she's likeable. I certainly think that as last season and this season have progressed you are getting to see who she really is and I just love the vulnerability, the drive, and I love that she's flawed; she's so much fun to play.
Al Norton: And it seems like this year you've gotten to work with much more of the cast.
Meghan Markle: I have! We just had the table read for episode 211 yesterday and in the rewrite they put in a scene with myself with Gina (Torres) and that's the first one-on-one scene with Rachel and Jessica, so that I really look forward to. Episode 213 will have a lot of Rachel – Harvey interaction and I haven't had a lot of work with Gabriel (Macht) so that will be great, too. It's been a slow burn as they've given Rachel a relationship outside of Mike Ross but once they opened up her friendship with Donna and of course her budding new rapport with Louis Litt it's been great since I love working with these people on and off screen.
Al Norton: You mentioned Louis; to me the show has jumped from good to great in season two and one of the main reasons is that Rick Hoffman has gotten such a major chance to shine.
Meghan Markle: Hasn't he? I am so happy for him and so proud of him. Rick is like my big brother and such a tremendous talent. On a lot of sets you hope that you at least get along with everyone and here we've struck gold in the fact that we don't just get along but we all love each other, to the point that I'm not just killing time in my trailer in between scenes, I'd rather sit on set and watch Rick work because he's so good and I want to be there when he's done to clap and tell him that.
Al Norton: At the risk of sounding unprofessional, the episode at the ballet…you in that dress; I don't think anyone's looked better on TV this year.
Meghan Markle: Oh my gosh, thank you. That is so nice. I haven't watched that episode but…thank you. I'm blushing.
Al Norton: How big is that set you work on? The law firm seems huge.
Meghan Markle: Isn't it amazing? Over the hiatus between seasons one and two they put a lot of work into expanding out studio. We know have over three stages. We still do the exterior of the firm in downtown Toronto and sometimes fly to New York for exteriors as well but yes, they built out Rachel's office, Mike's cubicle, the courtroom…We have our own little compound across from Covert Affairs; it's a USA party over there.
Al Norton: USA has a tremendous skill in the way the mask cities and make you think that everything is filmed on location.
Meghan Markle: I totally agree. I am so proud to be working with them for so many reasons. They just make the best choices and as you said, they do amazing with the blue sky programming and make you wonder, "how is this not New York?" Even the backdrops they use. Rebecca Schull, who played Mike's Grandmother, when she was there the last time she looked at one of the backdrops and said, "I tell you I'm from New York, I've lived in New York my whole life, and I don't believe that's not NewYork." It's pretty remarkable what they do and a testament to how talented the crew is.
Al Norton: What do you watch on TV?
Meghan Markle: My favorite show right now is The Newsroom. I am just in love with it and I have been a fan of Emily Mortimer's for many years, since Lovely and Amazing. Other than that we work 17 hour days so there's not tons of time to catch up on TV but the show I'm most looking forward to is Homeland. I have the most massive girl crush on Claire Danes and will probably make a huge embarrassment of myself the day that I meet her and bow down. I like Breaking Bad. My number one favorite show of all time is still Jeopardy.
Al Norton: Do you get tired of people asking you about Deal or No Deal (Markle did multiple episodes of the show as one of the briefcase girls)?
Meghan Marklet: Yes. I do, I absolutely do (laughing). I'm enjoying this interview so much that I'll tell you that I'm just like anyone else and I take a job to pay the bills. I don't mean to belittle that experience because for many of those girls who are models, that was what they wanted to be doing. I've never been a model, that is not my thing, but I looked at it like I was an actress playing a model instead of an actress waiting tables to pay the bills. I held a briefcase and am grateful for the opportunity because it definitely helped me get into different auditions and then once I got the type of job I was looking for I left good old Deal and traded in those very uncomfortable shoes for something new.
Al Norton: I've never understood the criticism of actors for taking a job. People will ask, "why did they take that part?" and my response is, "I'm pretty sure they took it because it was offered to them and that's how they make a living."
Meghan Markle: Yes, I'm pretty sure they said yes to that because they wanted to eat. Truly, there is no shame in having done Deal. It's funny because it now creates this misconception that I was a model and this was something I was doing.
Al Norton: Your Wikipedia page and every single bio of you on the web I found said you were a model.
Meghan Markle: Isn't that crazy? It's the funniest thing because at a photo shoot I'm the one who doesn't know what to do. I got a note at one that told me to think less, which was challenging for me but I gave it a shot (lauging).
Al Norton: What can you tell me about the mid-season finale (airing tonight at 10pm)?
Meghan Markle: It's a pretty intense episode. I don't know how much I can reveal to you other than saying Mike and Rachel continue to get closer and all the stuff happening with who's running the firm comes to a head. I will say that jaws will drop at the end of the episode; the closing scene is a heartbreaker. I was talking with one of the writers and she said she watched the closing scene of the episode three times and each time was like, "nooooo." If that isn't a tease I don't know what is.
Don't miss the mid-season finale of Suits, tonight at 10pm on USA.
_________________________________________________
Serinda Swan : 18 for 18 Charity Event in Hollywood [August]2012
_________________________________________________
Do What You're Told and Go See 'Compliance'
by Max Evry
Will you shut up and do what you're told?
That's the central question everyone who sees Craig Zobel's "Compliance" will be asking themselves after they leave the theater. Some will fancy themselves educated and willful enough to overcome even the most insistent authority figure, laughing the film's protagonists off as rubes, while others will be insulted to even consider themselves to potentially be so easily led astray. And some perhaps simply won't like what the answer might be.
Will you please just SHUT UP and do what you're TOLD?
The movie poses this query to Sandra (Ann Dowd), the manager of an Ohio branch of Chick-Wich, a fast food joint not unlike another controversial fried chicken chain that's been in the news recently. Sandra is a mostly amiable middle-aged boss dealing with the stresses of a particularly trying Friday rush as she manages her skeleton crew of sassy teenage employees, including register girl Becky (Dreama Walker).When Sandra gets a phone call from Officer Daniels (a chilling Pat Healy) saying that he has witnesses testifying that Becky stole money from a customer, the harried manager hauls Becky into her office, going through the girl's purse and personal items and finding nothing. The officer is unrelenting, though, and convinces Sandra and other employees that it's in this girl's best interest to strip search Becky in the most degrading way possible.
But that's just the beginning, as Officer Daniels goes through the full rotation of Chick-Wich employees to keep tabs on Becky, or worse … all without anyone ever questioning whether this man they've been on the phone with for hours is a real policeman. (HINT: He's not.)
Whether or not our minds are so malleable as to abandon our moral barometer at the first hint of an authority figure telling us what to do is a question famously posed by Yale psychologist Stanley Milgram during his obedience experiments in the early 1960s. He had test subjects administering electric shocks to another "subject" (not actually) at the behest of a learned-looking man in a labcoat. While some refused to continue administering the shocks at a certain point, a vast majority of subjects did, some with little hesitation.
Written and directed by Craig Zobel ("Great World of Sound"), a longtime associate of David Gordon Green (a producer on "Compliance"), has crafted a deceptively simple film that depicts a scenario that actually occurred in 30 U.S. states 70 times over the course of a decade. The strip search prank call scam targeted fast food chains like McDonald's in rural areas, and those questioning how the people in the film could be so gullible need only look at those numbers.
Character actress Ann Dowd ("Freaks and Geeks") is incredible, instilling just the right balance of naivety in Sandra that our heart breaks knowing that she thinks she's doing the right thing for all involved when she's really the devil's puppet. Dreama Walker's depiction of Becky's gradual dehumanization is tragic, with one shot of her vacant eyes towards the end of the film conveying a victim who's had every shred of dignity taken from her.
The MVP of this show has to be Pat Healy, who mimics the cadence of cop talk over the phone so well you may occasionally lapse into believing that he's the real deal, too. Expect to see Healy playing a range of insidious characters in higher profile films very soon.
Now you've read this piece, you know the facts and hopefully you'll take the time to see this riveting, thought-provoking movie — but we have to ask you one last time because we're not sure if you're up to this:
WILL YOU SHUT UP AND DO WHAT YOU'RE TOLD?
MOVIE REVIEW: 'Compliance' is unsettling as well as illuminating
by Al Alexander
If ever there was a movie born to make you squirm – and I mean that in a good way, I think – it’s “Compliance,” a fact-based allegory about the dangers of always doing what you’re told. Like all of us, Becky, a kind but slightly irresponsible teenager, was taught from an early age to respectfully obey authority, be it a parent, a teacher, a boss or a police officer. But as the horrors of Nazi Germany and the sex scandals at Penn State and the Vatican have taught us, blindly submitting to an alleged superior can be devastating. And so it is for Becky, who is about to become a sad victim of a cruel hoax. When the perky poultry peddler arrives for work on a busy Friday night at a suburban Ohio fast-food restaurant, she has no idea she’s about to be subjected to hours of unwarranted humiliation and a sexual assault unwittingly abetted by her boss, an eager-to-please middle-aged woman with no mind of her own. In other words, the perfect accomplice for a sicko who phones up the Chickwich claiming to be a cop on the trail of a suspected thief. That would be Becky (Dreama Walker), who the unseen caller, an Officer Daniels, accuses of stealing cash from a customer’s purse. Daniels (voiced by a genuinely creepy Pat Healy) tells Becky’s manager, Sandra (Ann Dowd), that he’s tied up at the station, and asks her to help him carry out his investigation, which she eagerly agrees to do.
What ensues is beyond disturbing, as the “officer’s” requests grow more bizarre, and Becky and Sandra’s resistance to the caller’s demands fade faster than the morality of all involved. Before the night is over, lives will be destroyed while common sense takes an inopportune holiday. As we watch these appalling events methodically unfold without question, it’s easy to sit in judgment of the participants and what we perceive to be their collective stupidity. In other words, writer-director Craig Zobel has us just where he wants us. Not only does he make it impossible to look away, he dares us to ask ourselves what we would do if we were in the same situation. And the answers may make you even more uncomfortable than the scenario compellingly playing out on screen.
That’s quite a trick on Zobel’s part. And the less you know about the real-life case, which transpired in 2004 at a McDonald’s near Louisville, Ky., the more unsettling “Compliance” becomes. Some might even find it too tough to take, and those folks would not be alone, given the impassioned responses – both pro and con – “Compliance” has elicited since its controversial premiere at Sundance in January. But to walk away is to deny the film’s pertinent message about yielding to authority without question. It’s the kind of thinking that led to such atrocities as Abu Ghraib, My Lai and, worst of all, the horrors of Hitler. Yes, the film is titillating in a sick sort of way, but it never loses sight of its goal to persuade us to be more aware, more questioning of our leaders and institutions, from politicians to priests to, in this case, the police.
It also draws warranted attention to Walker and Dowd, two incredibly brave actresses who bare their souls and, in the case of Walker, her body, freely and openly. No easy task given the darkness of the places both are asked to go. And that willingness takes “Compliance” to such a height of realism that it makes you increasingly uneasy, which is a good thing, particularly in an era when we so willingly sacrifice our rights to privacy in order to board an airliner, or even enter a sporting event. Who knows, maybe the next time you’re asked to do something discomforting, you’ll dare to ask, why?
COMPLIANCE (Not rated but contains nudity, sexual situations and language.) Cast includes Dreama Walker, Ann Dowd and Pat Healy. Written and directed by Craig Zobel. At Kendall Square, Cambridge. 3.5 stars out of 4
_________________________________________________
Watch Comedian Paul Scheer Audition For Fifty Shades of Grey
I love The League's Paul Scheer, and after seeing his audition for Fifty Shades of Grey, I love him all the more. Scheer is a comedian, so of course, this is a silly parody of an audition where Scheer says some pretty hilarious stuff about Christian Grey and gets worked up about the writing and what it all means. Guess we'll have to add Scheer to our list of actors who could be in the Fifty Shades of Grey movie.
_________________________________________________
Commercials Director Adam Berg To Helm 'Videodrome' Remake That No One Wants
by
Given that it was just a couple of weeks ago that the $125 million remake of "Total Recall" opened to only a few million dollars more than what Paul Verhoeven's original made in 1990, one would have thought that studios might be shying away from the idea of redos, especially of auteur-driven sci-fi movies from the 1980s and 1990s. Have they actually learned anything? Don't be ridiculous. The next one to through the remake sausage grinder is, of all things, a new take on David Cronenberg's "Videodrome," a film recently named by critics as the 202nd best of all time in the Sight and Sound poll.Universal Pictures have had the reworking in the pipeline since 2009, hiring 'Transformers 3 and 4' writer Ehren Kruger to pen a script, but unfortunately, they seem to be serious about the whole thing, as Deadline have revealed that the company has hired Swedish commercials and music video director Adam Berg to helm the remake. Berg started off with music video work for acts like A-Ha, The Cardigans and Graham Coxon, but really came to Hollywood's attention a few years back with a short called "Carousel," which told the story of a "The Dark Knight"-style bank robbery through one seemingly unbroken take frozen in time. That two-minute film (watch below) saw Berg courted for Fox's "Deadpool" movie with Ryan Reynolds, although ultimately another first timer, Tim Miller, got the job (though it remains to be seen if that film will even be made). As such, this would be Berg's first film.
The 1983 original, which stars James Woods and Debbie Harry, follows a Toronto cable CEO who discovers a secret broadcast signal that's capable of causing hallucinations, but according to Deadline, the script "modernizes" the concept with nano-technology and turns the story into "a large-scale sci-fi action thriller." Say, doesn't that game-plan sound familiar? Here's how we imagine the conversation went down over at Universal:
Universal Executive 1: So, you know how Sony are probably going to lose, like, $100 million because they took Paul Verhoeven's batshit-crazy "Total Recall," stripped out all the weird bits and turned into into a generic action movie that somehow cost $200 million?
Universal Executive 2: Yeah?
Universal Executive 1: Why don't we do the exact same thing, but with David Cronenberg's "Videodrome?"
Universal Executive 2: Awesome, that's a great idea. (They high five) Can we hire a first-time filmmaker, like we did on "47 Ronin," a movie that went wildly over budget, and is now undergoing extensive reshoots?
Universal Executive 1: Of course we can! (They high five again) Say, is this cocaine making you feel weird?
Of course, maybe Adam Berg will turn out to be a visionary, the next Spike Jonze, and come up with a take that's worthy of the original. But given that his calling card was a direct steal from Dominic Sena's "Swordfish," of all fucking things, and that he's working from a script by a writer whose finest hour so far is "Skeleton Key," we highly doubt it. Assuming the film makes it to production, "Videodrome" will be lowering Comcast's stock price some time in 2014.
_________________________________________________
Documentary :
Rated X: A Journey Through Porn (1999)
This is the story of director Dag Yngvesson's journey to find out about the porn industry which had fascinated him ever since he saw his first movie as a teenager. The quest to find out what the business was like begins when he realizes that he was living only 10 miles from the industries center in the San Fernando Valley in California. Not knowing what to do or where to start he calls up William Margold who had starred in the first film he saw (he found his name in the phone book and just called him). Margold, still in the business (having begun in 1969 and continuing on in one form or another) invites Dag over, and it isn't long before Dag is going down the rabbit hole into the middle of the world of adult films.
The film is arranged more or less to follow the director down the rabbit hole. We watch as he meets people in the industry, many of whom will not talk to him without having their face somehow obscured (indeed the director of one film threatens to kill him if he films his face since his parents don't know what he does.) We see how the films are made and distributed. We see some good people and some sleazy people (The casting agent who insists on sleeping with all the girls on the spot on film is a major slime-ball). Mostly we see lots of people doing a job, that just happens to be having or filming sex. Its not particularly erotic, it just sort of is.
The fact that it just sort of is is really nice. This is neither the "porn is bad" histrionics that films like Not a Love Story, a different film called Rated X from many years ago, Gregory Darks Fallen Angels or anything anti-industry forces ever produced like some of the bad TV movies, nor is it a smutty "this can be fun" that films like Screwed, Boogie Nights or the Ron Jeremy biography make it out to be.
Quoted from http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0310044/
_________________________________________________
