Sasha Stone has been around the Oscar scene since 1999. Almost everything on this website is her fault.
Better late than never! Barbie was placed in Adapted at the Oscars but is in the Original Screenplay category here,...
Read moreThe Academy should take a bow this morning for bringing back the Oscars, restoring them to their former glory in...
Read moreThe Golden Globes went off well enough this past year that CBS has signed a five-year deal with the Globes...
Read more
Millennium*
@Jerry
I don’t understand the comparison to The Social Network. Zuckerberg, presumably, received oral sex once. The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo’s major thematic element is sex. The villain is a serial rapist. Salander’s main antagonist is her rapist. But still, despite the dour attitude towards sex, in some aspects, there are moments when it shown to be liberating — like all of Salander’s consensual sex, which she enjoys and it isn’t treated as taboo and Salander isn’t treated as a whore. If The Social Network had major sexual themes — other than Zuckerberg getting laid once — I would understand your argument.
As it stands, Salander is the reason Millenium is a popular series. Without her, those books would be another disposable mystery series. She is the center of each promotional shot. And I don’t know if Blomkvist’s sexuality is important other than that he sleeps with a lot of women. Salander sleeps with many men, as well as women, but there’s more to her sexuality. Salander, to a degree, by videotaping her rape, uses her body as a sort of submissive weapon. Like I previously mentioned, I think this still accurately portrays Salander’s simultaneous sexual vulnerability and aggression. And there’s nothing under Blomkvist’s clothes other than a naked man. Salander has many piercings and tattoos. The title describes her naked body.
It’s called The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, not The Blomkvist with No Tattoos. Of course she’s going to be front and center; she’s the most interesting thing about this series.
And I’m not disagreeing that Hollywood’s advertising is not sexist, but I don’t think this is a case of that. People seem to be overly perturbed by the candid depiction of Salander. Blomkvist is dull. I’d certainly make Salander the most memorable and focused part of my advertisements as well.
@Rex S. When you find me the naked pictures of Daniel Craig as Blomkvist in promotional material you would have a point. But the don’t exist do they? Despite the fact that HE too is a sexual being and in fact had more sexual partners than even Lisbeth. It’s just the same old sexist advertising done by Hollywood. Lisbeth’s two most important values were her sharp mind and her computer hacking skills.
Tell me were there any promo posters of Jesse Eisenberg naked to show how great he was with computers in the social network? How about in speedos? I mean he had sex and was a brilliant mind so why no nudie promo shots or magazine spreads?
@Jerry
I do not need to re-read the books. What is being implied in this discussion is that it is completely outlandish that Lisbeth should be topless. One of the main aspects of the books, I’ve gathered, is the juxtaposition of the affirming and detrimental natures of sex. It can be something very worthwhile and liberating, and it can be something destructive and horrifying. I think this picture captures the vulnerable, horrifying and, yes, sexy aspects of Salander’s character. She has inhibitions about her body, sure, but she’s often naked, and just because she’s self-conscious does not mean others don’t find her attractive, which they clearly do. And what I was arguing was not that she wasn’t self-conscious but the quote — “Ironic, that in the film, she will be constantly trying to avert those lustful gazes…” — is inaccurate because a character who undergoes breast augmentation clearly wants people to be attracted to her.
Basically, we all have inhibitions about our bodies, but Salander is a very often naked character. And this is just a promotional shot; at the end of the day, it doesn’t speak to the film itself or Mara’s characterization. I’m only mean to get across that people are making a big fuss over something that really is not a big deal, and that, in my opinion, does not at all sacrifice the spirit of Salander.
Why is it so unbelievable that she would be topless? In fact, it would be nearly impossible to see the eponymous dragon tattoo unless she was topless or wearing something quite revealing. And if you reread my comment, you’ll see that I not only argued that she was a sexual person but she wants to be viewed, and is viewed by many characters, as a desirable woman.
For reference here is the Fincher interview (with The Hollywood Reporter in February this year). The naked promotion is his idea. http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/david-fincher-complex-mind-social-95704
@Rex S.: no one is saying that Lisbeth is not a sexual creature. She likes sex but she is not the one to be OBJECTIFIED. Two different things. A woman can be sexual without her wanting to be objectified for other’s pleasure. The current promotion of Lisbeth Salander with Rooney Mara being topless in every picture for the MALE GAZE is not what Lisbeth was about. She got naked on her own terms not to please others. This promos does nothing but objectify her and try to sell her as some cheap RAP VIDEO GIRL. If you read the books then I’m sure you paid attention to when she repeatedly says she is uncomfortable with her own body. Before getting naked with Blomkvist she has to get her nerve up because she hates showing off her body the first time to a sexual partner. She ends up getting breast implants in the second book because of body insecurity issues. Yes she walks naked in her own apartment by herself but she has obvious self-image problems. If you missed that you need to go and re-read.
If we are going to go there why not go there with Blomkvist? He is sleeping with anything that moves and always naked in bed. He has NO problems with his body and showing it off. Yet NONE of Daniel Craig’s photoshoots have him naked. Not even a topless picture or a bare arm, he is usually fully dressed in a suit or a sweater. In the movie poster he has THREE layers of clothing. A mean THREE layers is overkill.
The problem is that the Lisbeth Salander character is being treated the same way Hollywood treats EVERY other female character. They objectify them so young men will be tempted to see their movie. Every movie poster you look at has the male actor fully dressed and the female actor in a bikini or body-hugging dress showing some cleavage and ass. That’s the only way Hollywood thinks they can sell women. For the Dragon Tattoo movie, Sony thinks young men won’t see a movie starring a feminist icon if they don’t show them some tits. THAT is what that promotion poster is all about. And Yes Fincher knows about it because it was his idea. His first interview about the movie was him saying he wanted a picture of Rooney Mara with bare breasts on a movie poster. Period. Google it.
@Julia
I completely agree — and many characters in the book pine/fantasize over her (Armansky, Bjurman & Blomkvist, among others). I don’t get why people are making her seem asexual.
[Salander] is not the hot girl they can objectify and fantasize about, she’s in the end the girl who takes revenge on her middle age white rapist.
Every woman can be objectified and Salander is someone the original author gave a lot of completely normal “sexy” attributes. She is an attractive, bisexual, charismatic, smart goth girl who does not expect you to call her the morning after. I would argue that once you get used to her get-up, it will be easy to fantasize about her.
Even her revenge will be likely to be categorized as justified and understandable, which in turn makes it badass rather than off-putting. I’m not saying the critics will take to Salander, especially Mara’s Salander, like a fish to water. But I think it is strange to believe that she is impervious to objectification.
Also, by “Mara,” I meant Lisbeth. Looks like I’ve fallen into the category of not being able to distinguish Lisbeth from Mara. Oops!
Why is everyone insisting Mara is not a sexual character? I just started The Girl Who Played with Fire, and she’s naked about every other chapter. She also uninhibitedly enjoys sex, so this quote: “Ironic, that in the film, she will be constantly trying to avert those lustful gazes which the film-makers want her to get through the marketing campaign,” is completely inaccurate. What about her relationship with Blomkvist? Her relationship with Mimmi? Her relationship with the boy on Grenada in TGWPWF? Especially with Blomkvist, Salander longs for him to see her as a desirable woman. AND in the sequel (SPOILER) she gets breast implants! So stop arguing that she is not a sex symbol. She can be a strong female character who enjoys sex and being sexy.
Right. Maybe I attach to much significance to these pictures. Maybe I should only blame Mara (and/or her puppeteers)? I stated that much in a previous post: I wonder what Fincher thinks about this? He is a master of visual style, so I bet he averts his eyes, as you put it.
And of course, I can see your point: Why let an ad campaign or a photo shoot diminish the actual experience of a movie? True. The problem for me is a personal matter: I, personally, feel that this is a cash cow project and I’ve felt that all along. But I still recognize Fincher as a master and I want him to deliver, because when he does he is absolutely stunning. I’m personally invested in this man’s oeuvre, you know. So when shoots like this one (and all of the other Mara has been consistently up to since late last year) makes the whole project seem like some vain attempt at a goth chic horror thing instead of a work of art, it troubles me. It troubles me because deep down I want this movie, and the man behind it, to succeed.
Hope that somehow explains my concern about this. I get why you don’t care.
Somehow related to the other post (the critical reception of Shame) I wonder how middle aged white males, critics or AMPAS voters, will react to Lisbeth Salander. She’s not the hot girl they can objectify and fantasize about, she’s in the end the girl who takes revenge on her middle age white rapist. So I guess it’s closer to being bitten while getting a bj.
^
This deserves a Tweet spotlight. I’ll handle that.
(1/2)
(2/2)
Tero I didn’t say nudity I said nakedness, which is a state of undress
Ryan, I strongly disagree with you. How could I agree with you for the one reason you put forth: that this kind of marketing has been going on for decades in Hollywood? So fucking what? I couldn’t care less.
The fact of this (and that’s what makes it so goddamn dishonest) is that the photo shoot is so very clearly alluding to the Salander character and yet at the same time it has nothing to do with the actual character, the storyline etc. It’s very simple and therein lies the problem.
And the artful symbolism of the picture (that you refers to)? Come on! It’s so fucking cheap: Overtly pretentious in its calculated mix up of sex, blood, goth and death. It’s almost hilariously bad. Just like all the other promotional stuff Mara’s been doing.
And the artful symbolism of the picture (that you refers to)? Come on! It’s so fucking cheap: Overtly pretentious in its calculated mix up of sex, blood, goth and death. It’s almost hilariously bad. Just like all the other promotional stuff Mara’s been doing.
then don’t look at it them.
avert your eyes.
I don’t blame the movie.
I don’t blame Fincher.*
I don’t even had any bad feelings about what Rooney Mara chooses to do. I’m not her mother, I’m not her boyfriend.
*(it’s either out of his hands, or else done with his blessing — so either way, I’m not gonna try to be his morality/taste police)
I think the photos are fantastic, so we post them.
Sorry they offend you, but lots of other people like them. We can’t please everybody. And neither can Rooney.
julian the emperor — another thing that does not bother me is that you have a different opinion and want to express it. That’s what the comments are for. We disagree, and that’s fine. I understand how you feel, and now you understand how I feel. That’s what a discussion is for. Neither of us is trying to force the other to change our personal perceptions.
Thousands of people are going to think this photo is great. (including, obviously, Rooney Mara, the photographer, the photo editor, and the editor of the magazine in which they appeared.) Thousands of others will not be too wild about them. I don’t really understand the anger though.
It’s not really such a libelous travesty, is it? Lisbeth Salander, she’s not going to file a lawsuit, right? If Stieg Larsson were alive, would he approve? Who knows? in fact, who cares? He’s not the boss of me.
@Scott: The Salander character, if Fincher and Mara stick with the blueprint in the books, is an incredibly positive and affirming female character, the likes of which I don’t think we have ever seen onscreen. Despite all the truly bad things that happen to her from childhood on, her loyalty to those she cares about is rivalled only by her exceptional intelligence and even greater bravery in the face of adversity. It will be a rough ride (the film), but I’m expecting something iconic to come out of it. This is no damsel in distress.
I have grown to like the US title, but the original title is more telling, for sure. ‘Men Who Hate Women’.
I’m so excited for this film! It just looks awesome and such a cool film. I hope it gets some BP buzz, though I doubt it. It looks great, though, and I feel it will make my lineup.
Now, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close will be a very very very divisive film. I’ve heard some people loved it and others hated it. To be honest with you, both trailers looked absolutely awful, in my opinion. Max von Sydow was the only good part.
Now, Potter’s campaign should focus on the technical categories, because it can be included in, like, all of them, especially with this strong campaign and highly positive reviews from both critics and audiences. Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close is more of a ‘traditional’ Best Picture contender. And don’t forget that Potter had had screenings since July. There have been loads of them throughout the year. Extremely Loud had none and they all started this Friday, so it’s logical that they try to focus on it right now. If it isn’t received well, they’ll return to Potter. Otherwise, they’ll focus on EL&IC in the Best Picture, Directing, Supp.Actor, Supp.Actress, Screenplay, Editing categories and on Potter in Cinematography, Screenplay, Editing, Visuals, Sound, Score, Makeup, Costumes, Art Direction etc., and they’ll try to make both of them score as many nominees possible.
I still think that Extremely Loud will not do well, though. It looks like a Lovely Bones case to me.
@Scott: there will be at least a couple of very graphic brutal rape scenes and yes the subject matter is violence against women. So rape, murder, multilation of women. It might be a good topic to talk about depending on your date and assuming that she has never been a victim herself ( the movie might trigger flashbacks) However if you don’t know each other well, taking her to this as a first date might freak her out. You should probably see it by yourself the first time then decide if it’s first date material.
I don’t see nudity here, I see blood.
I should clarify…of a sexual nature. I’m not usually one to look for symbolism or whatever but her nakedness in this photo might be symbolic of the women who are raped…or idk, is she raped herself as well?
And these stats are just disgusting…
“Around the world at least one woman in every three has been beaten, coerced into sex, or otherwise abused in her lifetime. Most often the abuser is a member of her own family.” 10
“Physical violence is estimated to occur in 4 to 6 million intimate relationships each year in the United States.” 17
“Nearly one in every three adult women experiences at least one physical assault by a partner during adulthood. Approximately four million American women experience a serious assault by an intimate partner during a 12-month period.” 2
“It is estimated that 2 million to 4 million US women are assaulted by a domestic partner every year. Twelve million women (25% of the female population) will be abused in their lifetime. Up to 35% of women and 22% of men presenting to the emergency department have experienced domestic violence.” 12
I do think that the marketing has been more sleaze oriented than most prestigious productions. The first trailer had Mara’s nipples. Then the poster. I mean jeez, when was the last time we had a topless poster.
Lisbeth’s image has been sexualized to the zenith. Ironic, that in the film, she will be constantly trying to avert those lustful gazes which the film-makers want her to get through the marketing campaign.
Yikes…seriously Jerry? Gosh, I don’t know about this film then. I love a good mystery thriller (which is what I got from the trailer) but violence against women is real touchy for me…
http://www.cosforums.com/showpost.php?p=5403166&postcount=175
Might help to know where this image comes from because without knowing better the common sense explanation is it’s from some magazine promoting the film and they want to get across it’s going to be gory and sexual.
Might help to know where this image comes from because without knowing better the common sense explanation is it’s from some magazine promoting the film and they want to get across it’s going to be gory and sexual.
That’s a bingo.
I’m not sure when or where this photo shoot took place, but I’ve seen the photos around for a few weeks. A couple of days ago, Tero gave us this link:
http://www.episodi.fi/nain-syntyi-episodin-the-girl-with-the-dragon-tattoo-kansi-16663/
Correction: the movie is about men who get off on raping and murdering young women. The original name of the series is Men Who Hate Women.
Scott,
If a guy took me to this movie on a first date, I would sneak to the rest room to call a friend for a ride after the movie. Dragon Tattoo is all about raping and murdering young women. She might think you get off on stuff like that.
I agree with others, enough of Rooney as Lisbeth naked for every photo shoot. I don’t see Daniel Craig with nude magazine shots pretending to be Bloomkvist. Can’t they just give us ONE female character to love without sexing her up? So annoying.
it goes against the integrity of her character
Rooney Mara is a movie actress. When she is in the film THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO then she needs to “act like” this Lisbeth person. When she is outside of the film, that means real life where normal people live, she can do whatever she wants. At this point in time what she probably wants is to promote her film so that it will be a success. That means that she will appear in magazines and on television as herself, Rooney Mara, an actress promoting her work. I have not seen the film. When I look at this picture I see Rooney Mara with some red stuff on her hands. This tells me nothing about the film and nothing about her character. This just keeps reminding me of the actress. If people start to like her after seeing so much of her maybe they will see the film just for that reason. That’s the whole point of promotion.
When people promote their movies around the world they do any number of silly things that someone thinks is interesting. For example, Ralph Fiennes was on Late Night with Jimmy Fallon the other night promoting Coriolanus and he nearly fought himself, meaning there were two Ralph Fienneses. Should I take that to mean Harry Potter missed two horcruxes? Of course not. The world of movie characters and actors promoting their films are two completely different worlds. They do not intersect. If Ralph had dressed as Voldemort when he played pictionary on that same show it would not have meant that the Dark Lord is alive and well and really into party games.
Come on. The blurring of the lines is getting creepy in here.
Pierre de Plume, absolutely right.
Thanks, Antoinette. Great explanation.
Thing is, these kind of promotional high-concept fashion shoots have been around for decades. Maybe not as wild as they are today in the Age of Gaga but definitely some bold photographic statements.
This isn’t Scarlett O’Hara as a noir femme fatale waiting for Nosferatu. It’s just a dramatically staged pose with no relation to any event in Gone with the Wind whatsoever. Shot by Clarence Sinclair Bull, who transformed standard publicity shots into celebrity glamour portraits.
Radically edgy for his day.
http://twitpic.com/7rrc8d/full
Judging from the controversy on this thread alone, it looks like the photo is working!
why is she always fucking naked?
@akdf – “so it’s not sexual that a topless girl with the top of her hand dirty ? lets put it all over the schools then and see how people react.” That schoolkids get boners when they see naked people is an unavoidable fact. Are you saying no person should ever be topless or naked in a photo?
By the same token, give this picture to a 16 year old computer nerd and see if he “salivates.” I can think of 100 adjectives to describe this picture and none of them would be “sexy.”
But again, photo shoots in costume have little to do with actual characters in movies.
so it’s not sexual that a topless girl with the top of her hand dirty ? lets put it all over the schools then and see how people react.
Saying that Mara is not pretending to be Lisbeth in these photos is a bit absurd too–no one said these are scenes out of the book. That they aren’t, in fact, is part of the problem.
how the advertisers are constantly choosing to sell/promote this film, is so obviously aimed at 16 year old computer nerds to salivate over the sexy goth. it goes against the integrity of her character.
I dont buy that you said this is how Mara is dressing for her personal life, or that it is a fashion style she has adopted (that would be the coincidence of the century). More likely she is on the promo tour and is handed down strict instructions to keep in step with their campaign
I don’t think anyone in their right mind will be misled into thinking Lisbeth Salander is going to be running around topless solving crimes in Sweden, do you?
WHAT?! I thought they always solved crimes that way in Sweden. In fact I thought they did everything that way there. Unless I’ve been watching the wrong Swedish movies. They looked like docs. They always had lots of hand-held photography… and bad editing. Hmm….
The “current” frontrunner, THE ARTIST, is very Oscar-baity. But NO QUESTION that if EL & IC is any good–or way beyond good– AMPAS loves a cathartic reference to American History (Platoon for example) if it’s any good–and if enough time but not too much time has passed. So EL and IC will scream BP EXTREMELY LOUD if it’s INCREDIBLY CLOSE to sensational.
I guess I was in a mood for puns. Oh well.
@phantom Thanks a lot!!
I’d rather see a screencap. I’m not quite sure why the character keeps appearing in fashion mags.
Mara is really hot as Lisbeth, but how is this pic sexual? It’s more violent than anything.
But at the same time I understand how our media works…sex sells (so long as it doesn’t cross certain boundaries)
Speaking of, had never seen those Jennifer Lawrence images…WOW, sometimes bikini shots are even more tantalizing then full nudity.
I just can’t get excited for this film like everyone else is. I love David Fincher, but for some reason all I can feel is just apathy for it. Which is sad, because I’m sure it’ll be good.
Well I haven’t read the book or seen the original movie and so while I didn’t necessarily jump to the conclusion that there is a scene EXACTLY like this in Fincher’s film it does seem like a promotional image for the film, portraying the sort of tone and material present.
Macy
Here, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close has an 82 at the moment :
http://www.criticschoice.com/search?s=extremely+loud
WOW, Sasha. I am awaiting your Dragon Tattoo review with baited breath. You’ve been teasing us for DAYS with intimations on your opinion. Embargo or no embargo, I think we know that all signs point toward a major rave. Your writing impresses me when you discuss something you like. But when you get onto something you LOVE? Watch out, Hemingway. Tee minus 3 days!
I want to like this but I don’t for some reason. I think it’s because I’m tired of all the marketing and am just ready to see the damn film already! The anticipation for me has hit its peak and now I’m coming down off it and just getting annoyed. CAN I JUST SEE THIS FILM PLEASE!! Before I don’t care anymore…
And THIS: “The makeup and clothes DO NOT make the character live offscreen..
The character ONLY exists in the movie.
I hate to shout, but jeez.”
Thank you, s!
If I can only find one person per day to agree with me, I won’t feel like I’m beating my head against the wall.
I agree, Ryan, although she IS in costume here. But obviously, Lisbeth wouldn’t pose for ANY photoshoot to promote a movie or be in a movie that depicts her getting raped. It’s fuckin make-believe, people! You’re exactly right here: “She is now only posing for artful photography that might try to symbolically relate to the film in expressionist terms. (figuratively speaking, Lisbeth had a bloody situation on her hands. It’s symbolic.”
Gabe, I am sorry. I have to strongly disagree. Why do you think she is posing as Lisbeth when YOU KNOW that Lisbeth never went around topless with bloody hands.
Let me ask you:
Who is this?
Is that (A) Meryl Streep?
Or is it (B) Sister Aloysius Beauvier?
Correct answer is (A) Meryl Streep
and here’s the proof:
because that scene IS NOT IN THE MOVIE, right?
Now who is this?
(A) Daniel Day Lewis?
or (B) Abraham Lincoln?
Please don’t try to tell me that’s Lincoln just because DDL’s FACE looks exactly like Lincoln.
The makeup and clothes DO NOT make the character live offscreen.
The character ONLY EXISTS IN THE MOVIE.
I hate to shout, but jeez.
“Unfortunately Incredibly Loud and Extremely Close is picking up steam…it has risen to the 80′s on the BFCA site. So maybe Potter won’t be WB’s only horse after all…”
@Scott Not trying to campaign for ‘Potter’, but I checked the website of the BFCA, and I couldn’t find ELAIC being rated. Could you please tell me exactly where the BFCA rating for ELAIC is given?
Honestly speaking, I think ELAIC has a much better chance at the Oscars than ‘Potter’. And it looks like WB has (kind of) accepted that too. If you check the FYC sites of ELAIC and ‘Potter’, HP has only two more (official) screenings left (there weren’t too many to begin with), whereas ELAIC has loads of screenings for the awards. Also, I noticed that not even a single ‘Potter’ campaign ad states that it was named in NBR’s list of Top Films of 2011. I mean, if you get such an accolade, you would obviously flaunt it. But not ‘Potter’, hmmm…it’s going to be an interesting campaign for sure.
Oh, Fake Roger, one more thing : I REALLY hope you are not a fanatic HP-fan who simply wants ELIC to fail so WB will focus solely on your fave. If that were the case, you would embarass yourself AND HP-fans all over the world.
julian the emperor
I see your point, I just think the Acacemy won’t feel the urge to award Payne in the best director-category when 1) they’ve already given him an Oscar 2) they can give him another one in the same category this year. And even if the Academy DID want to award him for ‘The Descendants’, the great danger of split votes can result zero wins, as it did several times in the past.
“Roger Ebert”
Considering there is still a strict embargo, you are clearly a fake…or at least it seems highly unlikely that a popular veteran critic like Ebert would break a crucial embargo just to TRASH the film. Hopefully Sasha or Ryan will change your name to “Fake Roger Ebert” or “Just Roger” and I also hope your comment will stay…you have every right to state your highly arguable opinion (that is, IF you’ve seen it…btw, where did you see the film that only started screening a few days ago ?), but you do NOT have the right to do it under a respected film critic’s name.
If you look at the comments. Roger Ebert is isn’t actually Roger Ebert.
“The movie is over, This is NOT Lisbeth Salander in this photo. That’s Rooney Mara, posing with a grisly concept that photographer wanted to shoot. A photographer who has nothing whatsoever to do with Fincher’s film.”
That doesn’t compute. Rooney Mara IS posing as her character. Your comparison to Lawrence is irrelevant. She’s posing in a men’s magazine that has the same photo shoot concept for just about every one of their models. Bikini? Check. Cleavage? Check. Long, flowing hair? Check. Why would Ree Dolly come into play? If that were true– check out a less male-oriented magazine and MAYBE she would have dressed up as her character. What then? Mara has blood on her hands, is topless, and is sporting the EXACT same makeup/hair as Salander. I don’t think it’s unfair to infer that she’s posing as Lisbeth Salander. The concept doesn’t have to be laid out by Fincher… a photographer can surely take on that task and emulate the look Mara has going on in the film.
Anyway, Mara doesn’t have the looks or personality that Lawrence has, so lets not compare the two 😉
Dear Producers,
Don’t screen it if you’re gonna put an embargo on reviews.
Sincerely,
U. S. A.
Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close was HIGHLY OFFENSIVE and just horrible.
Oh, and I forgot Hugo…! That further complicates things for the Spielberg vehicle!!
Phantom: I don’t know about this. Who say that Payne couldn’t be considered a “top 2 bd contender”?? The man is a big name by now. I think Sideways and the seven-year-wait has turned him into one of the truly great, original and most anticipated names in the business. I mean, compared to Hazanavicius, he sure is a name. And don’t you think it would be reasonable to assume that the academy would want to reward Payne before rewarding for example Scorsese again?
Alas, I don’t think it’s about the name (Hooper won last year…), it is more about the type of film. And, true, The Descendants is not your typical Oscar-winning movie.
So, sure, if Daldry delivers, he is in a very favorable position: a heart-tugging emotional juggernaut of a movie, acclaimed director (with the famous/infamous 3/3 record), acclaimed actors (Hanks, Bullock, Von Sydow that speak to a large family-oriented demographic).
At this point, imo, War Horse looks like the movie who could be shut out of this years’ bunch of bp contenders, assuming both Daldry and Fincher is in. I think there is three secure spots besides these two: The Descendants, The Artist and The Help (almost a lock). And Moneyball and Tree Of Life, even Midnight In Paris and Drive, probably has more ardent supporters than War Horse.
Ahhhh, the more I look at this picture, the more annoyed I get!
Man, this has NOTHING whatsoever to do with Lisbeth Salander, the character! This has EVERYTHING to do with Mara’s attempt at reaching an audience through quirky posing (God knows, she’s been a “willing victim” in that sense the last year or so; appearing in numerous ad campaigns in advance of the movie!) and some crude puppeteer’s ill-judged attempt at maximum exposure on behalf of the young (clueless?) woman. Jesus.
I would so like to hear Fincher bash this.
Ahhhh, the more I look at this picture, the more annoyed I get!
Man, this has NOTHING whatsoever to do with Lisbeth Salander, the character!
julian the emperor, I’m annoyed by this reaction, but I’ll try to explain how I see it in the gentlest terms, ok?
People please need to try to realize that Lisbeth Salander only exists in the movie.
Outside the 160 minutes of Fincher’s film, Rooney Mara ceases to be Lisbeth, don’t you agree? She is simply Rooney Mara, actress — who may still have the same hairstyle as she did in the movie — but that’s it. The End. The movie is over.
She is now only posing for artful photography that might try to symbolically relate to the film in expressionist terms. (figuratively speaking, Lisbeth had a bloody situation on her hands. It’s symbolic.
I don’t think anyone in their right mind will be misled into thinking Lisbeth Salander is going to be running around topless solving crimes in Sweden, do you?
That is not Lisbeth Salander in the photo you’re upset about. How do we know? Because we know the story. We know there is no scene in any of the books where Lisbeth is nude in an all-white room, with bloody hands. We know there’s no scene like that. It’s just an edgy fashion photo to attract publicity attention with a striking image.
Please take a look at Jennifer Lawrence appearing in Esquire at the same time Winter’s Bone was in theaters.
http://coedmagazine.com/2011/02/11/21-photos-jennifer-lawrence-gives-us-a-winters-bone-in-her-esquire-photo-shoot/
I’ve read the book. Trust me, there is No Scene in Winter’s Bone in which Ree Dolly runs around in a bikini in the Ozarks in the dead of winter.
So it doesn’t annoy me at all that the actress Jennifer Lawrence is posing for a magazine as part of the publicity campaign for Winter’s Bone.
Honestly, do you want to know the truth? I think it would be fuckin weird as hell for Jennifer Lawrence to show up in the pages of Esquire all bundled up in a shabby coat and dirty boots. Don’t you agree?
Why should everything an actress does outside a movie have to directly reflect the character she is playing in her current film? Did any of us complain when Meryl Streep appeared in magazines NOT wearing a nun’s habit for 5 months? Wouldn’t it be bizarre to expect her to stay faithful the character’s attributes for months after Doubt finished filming?
The movie is over, This is NOT Lisbeth Salander in this photo. That’s Rooney Mara, posing for a grisly concept that a photographer wanted to shoot. A photographer who has nothing whatsoever to do with Fincher’s film.
As an olive branch, I’m going to offer you another photo of Jennifer Lawrence,
http://www.magxone.com/uploads/2010/09/Jennifer-Lawrence-Esquire-UK-3.jpg
please think about whether this is Ree Dolly or Jennifer Lawrence.
Not sure what you’re trying to say Ryan. If this means anything I know she likes classic movies because stuff had to be expressed through acting…like sexual expression couldn’t just be accomplished through the shedding of clothes.
I’m not sure how she feels about the excessive violence in American movies, but that’s something I’m more squirmy about obviously.
@R – Nothing sexual about this picture, but OK.
@julian – What ad campaign isn’t “cheap and hollow, style over substance?” Tis kind of the nature of advertising. I dunno — I think the pictures are fun.
Thank you, Sasha, I’ve been waiting for some kind of confirmation because I have been considering the Daldry-film the frontrunner for months, simply based on a hunch, and it was rather frustrating without one tiny shread of early word. I guess the question is, IF Daldry pulls off the unprecedented 4/4, could the Academy STILL opt to make him wait ? I don’t think so…unless the Academy will be cool enough to embrace ‘Dragon Tatoo’, then it’s Fincher’s to lose. It pays off to be the previous year’s runner-up…just ask Colin Firth !
By the way, I LOVE how unpredictable this season looks like for now : on-paper-frontrunner The Artist might be hurt by the new rule that will probably help the “name” directors’films; on-paper-runner-up Hugo has the reviews, but Scorsese won only a few years ago AND the film HAS TO make some serious money (it cost 150-170M), otherwise it will be considered a flop, even if it IS one of the year’s best; the Descendants-Midnight in Paris duo’s biggest obstacle might be that films don’t win without top2-bd contenders, and the directors probably won’t be considered for the win, only the nod, because both will face split votes with themselves (they are up for their screenplays, as well and the Academy often opts to make the director-screenwriters settle for a script win)…and THAT is the moment, when the Overdue-Duo could make a big splash : last year’s supposed frontrunner-turned-gracious runner-up AND the man who has been nominated for every single directing achievement of his film career.
R: I don’t know if it is a shameful campaign, exactly, but it is close to tasteless, for sure. I wonder what Fincher himself thinks of this really cheap marketing effort!?
Huh, this is interesting trivia…
Trivia
When the casting process started, the role was originally offered to Natalie Portman but she declined due to exhaustion. Scarlett Johansson was also considered but David Fincher considered her too sexy. Jennifer Lawrence was considered too, but she was rejected because she was too tall. Finally, Rooney Mara was cast.
I’d say all 3 are too “sexy”, lol…and couldn’t really see any of them in this sort of role, though Natalie Portman did play a goth girl in Leon when she was like 12. Would have been interesting to see how she would handle it now.
“I agree that it’s probably going to give The Artist some major BP heat.” God I wish you were talking about the Girl with the Dragon tattoo when you said this!
Also, I don’t think it’s fair to say “any cool girl” because what you think is cool, other people might not agree. I wasn’t as big on the books as other people. I probably won’t like it.
Kane, Sasha was responding to an inquiry about EL&IC
Sasha, I highly doubt it will gain BP heat. I doubt Mara will be nominated. I’m with Tapley on this.
It looks Gaga-esque. I see what they did there. Smart move.
More oversexualizing…this is a really shameful ad campaign, isnt she supposed to be a sad disturbed character and not some sex object?
And of course it’s Fincher and he’s yet to make a bad film yet (well other then Aliens 3 I guess, which I haven’t seen)
Yeah, goth isn’t really my style Julian…but the story seems interesting and the trailer intrigued me.
Unfortunately Incredibly Loud and Extremely Close is picking up steam…it has risen to the 80’s on the BFCA site. So maybe Potter won’t be WB’s only horse after all…
Now, that’s the kind of a picture that is just grotesque and it doesn’t really do the film any good, does it? Making it seem like some artful horror flick. I think Mara has done a LOT of promotion/photo shoots for this film, ALL of them accentuating some overtly stylish goth-thematics. It’s cheap and hollow. Style over substance.
I want to see the movie, sure, and I like the things I’m hearing from Fincher in interviews lately (maybe it is more than a money grabber, after all?), but all the cheap/chic Mara gimmicks? No way!
Um, even if she’s a Christian? It sounds like there’s a lot of sexual content as well. As should be clear from my comment in the Shame post this doesn’t bother me but it might bother her…
Um, even if she’s a Christian? It sounds like there’s a lot of sexual content as well.
https://www.awardsdaily.com/2011/11/fincher-on-the-oscars-and-dragon-tattoo-too-much-anal-rape/
I’m not trying to imply that Christians can’t handle a little anal rape. But sooner or later you’ll need to find out how much is too much for her.
Great, I can’t wait for the film AND your review. When can you write about Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close ? Can you give a one-word-hint whether it’s good/great or not ?
I can’t write about it. Can’t tweet about it. I can say this: I agree that it’s probably going to give The Artist some major BP heat. Unlike any other film this year it has “importance” with 9/11. It’s undeniably moving. When I read Eric Roth’s script I was just a soggy mess. It’s a moving story, no doubt about it. The movie I can’t talk about. But can it win Best Picture? Oh yeah.
eww, that’s disturbing. I was thinking about going to see this with a girl I’m interested in but not I’m thinking that might not be such a good idea. Now this might sound like a crazy idea to begin with seeing as it’s probably not at all a date movie lol, but I should mention that she is a film/theatre major…
Oh Scott, you should take her. Any cool girl will like this movie. If she’s turned off by it, run.