This topic contains 16 replies, has 8 voices, and was last updated by Anonymous 11 months, 4 weeks ago.
27 Apr 2012 at 12:02 pm #1086
“When Jackson was making a filmed version of the play “The Sunset Limited,” with Tommy Lee Jones, the play’s author, Cormac McCarthy, complained about his line readings. Jackson said: “It sounds better my way. I’m not trying to make this fucking worse!”
27 Apr 2012 at 1:39 pm #1088
Hee hee! And crazy long article…I’m going to finish it after I finish watching “Burlesque” Cher is awesome!
27 Apr 2012 at 1:49 pm #1089
p.s. I don’t know if I ever posted about seeing the movie “The Sunset Limited” on HBO…but I LOVED it! I thought both actors were incredible.
03 May 2012 at 7:00 pm #1114
I read the whole blame article, a waste of time, and little to nothing about the context of the Jackson-Cormac conflict over a line. Jackson looks to be on some kind of ego trip to which the NYT overly coddles. Jones might’ve got his butt in a crack trying to mediate between the two.
BobbyKnoxvilleQuote13 May 2012 at 8:00 am #1205
Peculiar. Mayhap Jackson is full of it. I mayhave stated this already but – to me – SamJack’s turn as Black was the only thing he’s done since Jules that’s been worthy of praise. I’m a bit puzzled as to where he gets such a high opinion of himself that he could behave in such a manner. I mean, this is the cat who acted in Snakes on a Plane and Die Hard 3. Am I wrong? This is Cormac McCarthy we’re talking about Sam. I guess he wasn’t a fan of the book.
Jackson has some genuine skill but I’ll be damned if I’ve seen pictures other than Pulp Fiction and Sunset Limited where its on display. I confess a lack of interest in The Avengers and other similar comic book fare.
Now I’m really trying to think of when I’ve seen old Sammy give another good performance? Menace II Society?
13 May 2012 at 8:53 am #1207
Okay okay, I apologize for posting such drivel. It was done in humor but, I agree, it’s a long article with pretty much nothing worthy in it. Jackson has diluted whatever brilliance he might have with over exposure, seems like he’s in every other so-so film that comes out anymore, with more or less the same mannerisms (antics?) applied over and over. I liked the HBO version, thought Jackson was good in a couple of spots but not over all. I always thought Michael Clark Duncan was made for the role of Black. In “Black Snake Moan” however, Jackson actually dug a little bit deep.
The whole star system, with a very few actors in practically every major role, is getting pretty sickening, especially in the age of the 1%. Then again, it’s hard to think of anyone better suited to keep a pair of hunting cheetas than Angelina Jolie.
13 May 2012 at 9:01 am #1208
He was even on the Golf Channel recently doing a sit-down chat with Feherty. Apparently the Tour was in New Orleans that week and Jackson, a stellar amateur golfer with a 5 handicap, was in town shooting a Pulp Western with Tarantino. Said he took the Snakes role soley because he dug the title.
GlassQuote15 May 2012 at 10:28 am #1251
leedriver: Then again, it’s hard to think of anyone better suited to keep a pair of hunting cheetas than Angelina Jolie.
I really like your avatar of the Lemon peeler. Looks like a good piece of equipment.
Nah, not me. I’ve always found Vangelina Jolie to be a sickening bore. It can’t act. Yes, I know people think she’s beautiful with those lips and philanthropy but it’s always failed to impress me. I am disgusted by the vainglorious “charity” of these “stars”. Sean Penn, an actor I have given high praise to on more than several occasions comes across like a real goofball to me with his Haitian quest. A kind of rumsoaked confidence man.
Personally I couldn’t care less about his philanthropy. The causes of these people are tiresome and predictable. Why not hand out food to the homeless catamites in downtown Los Angeles? They are hungry and in need, no? It’s all lost on me I’m afraid.
However, I am not even remotely interested in The Counselor at this point. If it makes Cormac’s family some money while exploiting the media I’m all for it but I probably won’t visit a cinema for it.
You are right about the star system – a bore, a constant screeching whine.
Unknowns are more interesting. I’d rather see non actors cast in leading roles the way Bresson used his models.
What WOULD interest me, you might ask? Angelina Jolie being pursued by a pair of leopards across a thorn choked terrain littered with vipers. That I would pay to see. Better still, Angleina Jolie being stalked by Salvador and Nile Monitors in Southern Florida.
Note to Rick, if this ever happens down there I want photographs and by Golly Gophers I WILL pay in FLAX!
17 May 2012 at 11:50 am #1283
I suggest you take a look at “A Mighty Heart.” Otherwise I pretty much agree, though there’s something about her that’s very feline. She’s the first actress comes to mind I’m afraid, in regards to sporting a brace of hunting cheetas. If you had the resources of a Sean Penn or a Jolie, or say a Clooney, what would you lend support to then, and how would you do it so some critic like yourself wouldn’t gag on it?
18 May 2012 at 10:23 am #1284
If I was a man of means, and not just a mean man, I would probably give money to poor, uneducated crackers. They seem more hated than other groups. I can’t think of anyone, save perhaps James Agee and Erskine Caldwell, who has ever given a damn about them.
I would support the SPCA as well probably. Maybe help some of the veterans since their government doesn’t give a shit about them.
The thing about me is, if I was in Sean Penn’s position I wouldn’t opt to publicize my charity. Obviously in some cases, like the work Clooney has done in Sudan, talking about this stuff is integral to gaining further support of the cause. Maybe there is a balance to strike in dealing with these things. To someone in my position much of it reeks of entertainment publicity. I’m pretty tired of causes and crusades at this point. It all seems ludicrous and futile.
But I doubt any philanthropist should give any thought whatsoever to what critics think. Listening to critics is foolish – in my estimation.
18 May 2012 at 10:50 am #1285
It doesn’t bother me that famous people do charity work. And I think its a lose lose situation because they are so famous…people will know when they do philanthropy because they are followed every where they go. I don’t think they do it for publicity…and even if they do….it is none of our concern. The concern of someone elses spiritual path and charity work is not for us to judge. The universe will judge it…or not. If theres a god and god cares about whether we do do volunteer work and philanthropy then surely its not the business of other humans?
I’d rather see famous people…even bitter extremists like Rush Limbaugh or Bill O Reilly do charity work…even if its for publicity because the benefits are the same regardless.
So what if someone wants attention by doing volunteer work? At least the work is being done and a family might benefit. It doesn’t make bitter extrememists or left wing liberals any “nicer” it just shows they are trying to do something thoughtful….and I don’t care if Vanity Fair or The National Enquirer writes about their philanthropy.
Doing service is doing service and the karma and/or material benefits are not our business. We’re not writing “The Ledger of Good Works” for God…if there is such a ledger or if there is a god.
Ultimately volunteer work is a personal decision for all of us. It doesn’t take wealth to do volunteer work. It doesn’t take health or knowledge or money, or “spare time” to do volunteer work. It takes just getting out there and doing it.
Who cares if someone doing volunteer work is a movie star in Hollywood or a working class guy in Texas or a McCarthy fan living in Chicago? The world can use an extra pair of hands serving food or donating food or clothes or helping a community vertical garden for the homeless…just get out there regardless of ones ego profile!
18 May 2012 at 11:00 am #1287
- This reply was modified 1 year ago by Candy Minx.
And for the record…I wish Jolie was doing The Counselor. I love her. Her acting in Girl Interrupted, her performances in Laura Croft, Gia, Hackers and Life Or Something Like it are some of my favourite female roles. I think she is a fantastic actor.
I also love George Clooney, Sean Penn (and all of his roles!!!) .
18 May 2012 at 1:01 pm #1289
I have never understood the point of criticising people who want to do sonething good. If it isn’t sincere, then it isn’t good. Simple.
cantonaQuote19 May 2012 at 8:48 am #1292
A few years ago Mark Zuckerberg gave $100mil to the Newark NJ schools. He didn’t even go to school there. He was trying to show the 1% this is how you do it but it didn’t work. Swiftboating turned out to be the more attractive investment. Let Jules go off on that.
23 May 2012 at 2:39 pm #1326
I thought Jackson was very good in “The Sunset Limited”. I liked him in “Black Snake Moan”, too. I guess the guy can bring it when cast as a bumpkin philosopher.
Angelina Jolie turned my head in “The Changeling”. I mean, not in the usual way, but turned my head as a quality actress. She can indeed bring it, but it doesn’t pay the bills like the big action movies. “Wanted” is a favorite of mine, too.
Honestly I can’t understand why these top actors do so many voiceovers in animated movies. Must pay well. For me, it completely distracts from an otherwise good show. I just sit there thinking “Oh, that donkey is Eddie Murphy with a harlem accent, or that panda is wiseass Jack Black, and that Betty Rubble character has the annoying voice of Rosie O’Donnell. But I have to say that Angelina has a wonderful voice that doesn’t overly distract from the character.
I once read that Samuel Jackson was the hardest working actor of the decade 1990-1999. Which means he did a very high volume of movies, good or bad. An continued to in the following decade. And when the most sought after leading man in movies is a black man (not to mention Denzel and Will Smith), guys like Danny Glover that claim Hollywood is racist can shut the hell up. He’s just not good enough.
26 May 2012 at 3:24 pm #1349
Aw, come on, Bronco. Your reasoning up there is just…lame.
You read once that Jackson was the hardest working actor in Hollywood in the 90s, and that somehow translates to him being the most sought after leading man in Hollywood, and proves Hollywood isn’t racist?
For starters: Of those 90s parts Jackson played, how many were the leading male role? By my count, two or three. What if a long list of white actors worked less in the 90s but were paid more and received more attention? Who’s allowed to “work hardest” won’t get you too far.
Something suspect in you charging after Glover with such dull knives. Sharpen ‘em up a bit, at least.
willeyQuote30 May 2012 at 2:28 am #1406
Sorry Willey, I tend to not be verbose enough for some folks to follow. You do draw some strange inferences from what I said. Forget it.
If Glover isn’t himself the dullest knife in Hollywood, he will do until the dullest knife gets there. He’s the one that sees the world through his own racialist lens. He’s really quite the sad sack.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.