Interesting Article About Fur (some Details), from Fox news Options

[kiki]

thanks for the article. i don't particularly care if she's naked or not. i think that kind of limitless notion helps in understanding the character more instead of "oh nicole's naked again" or the like. plus, it fits with the dark mood reminiscent of and a nod to diane arbus' work. i can't wait for this! i just wish that article didn't spoil those details. it'd be nice to be shocked/surprised. and i agree, "birth" wasn't graphic. if it was, i can only imagine what one would call "irreversible" or those european art house films.

[adrian]

i can only imagine what one would call "irreversible" or those european art house films.   

Excellent movie, love how realistic it was.

[NMK612]

thanks romantic! i really cant wait to see this movie... nicole will be amazing as usual.

[In Theory]

I just happened to catch "Birth" on TV last night. I think the sex scene between Anna and her fiance may be considered graphic.

[adrian]

I just happened to catch "Birth" on TV last night.  I think the sex scene between Anna and her fiance may be considered graphic.

No, it may not

Not the right place to define "Graphic sex/nudity", but it certainly isn't some guy's butt and 2 seconds of Nicole's bare breast !! You must be very innocent to consider "Birth" so

This post has been edited by adrian: Sep 30 2006, 10:49 AM

[In Theory]

No, it may not 

Not the right place to define "Graphic sex/nudity", but it certainly isn't some guy's butt and 2 seconds of Nicole's bare breast !! You must be very innocent to consider "Birth" so

I didn't say I considered it graphic. I just said it may be considered so since somebody here brought it up.



back at ya fella

[adrian]

back at ya fella

No, here you go

[nathi]

definately I'm not taking my mom to see Fur with me.

I remember when she was watching Cold Moutain and she was like: "If I knew this movie had a scene like that ( the hot one ) I would never let you buy it" and I was like " Mom, come on, I'm 16". I didn't tell her I have Eyes Wide Shut.

thanks for the article romantic! I was expecting it after reading all those reviews.

[RedSatinDoll]

It is never about her being less "sexy" or "erotic" once she hit 40. But it is more the perception of people who -while we may think are being silly- are the ones who pay money to watch a film. Look at "Basic Instinc 2" by one of the biggest Icons of Erotica. 8 of each 10 negative reviews were nothing about the film itself, rather ridiculing Sharon's age in a manner that seemed very childish from some critics.

I can understand that you, being at the steps of 40 yourself, would not accept any implication that this would make you less sexually desirable by men, but this is not waht I'm saying! I'm watching movie viewers' perception of over 40 actresses as erotic figures and predict that Nicole, as smart as she is, will not put herself in a position to be exposed to such criticism, and I have always been good at predictions 
My view too. My best relation ever was with a 42 woman when I was 25. Security, maturity and enough experience to avoid any stupid behaviour or fall outs and of course this reflected itself on intimacy, taking it to levels like nothing I've experienced before. It only ended because society pressure was too big for us to handle.



P.S. when you make posts without any smilies I get the feeling that you want to punch me on the nose 

Punch that adorable buss? Oh goodness me no! I was simply answering a strong opinion with a strong opinion - we can certainly disagree and still respect one another, oui? (Besides, I am a pacifist, you know.)

Here you go:

This is indeed getting interesting but we're right back where we were some threads ago talking about the opportunities that over 40 actresses have and the impression of society - and critics -that their careers or that 'part' of their lives are over. Maybe not the exact discussion but still relevant.

I thought that I was going against the grain at the time thinking that the underpinnings of society still go against the woman over 40. I think we all agree it's a slanted view, but it still persists in one fashion or another. Nicole doesn't seem to be sweating it but it's still discussed as a milestone of sorts. I'd love to see her prove them wrong...she has plenty of fantastic roles left in her...whatever she so chooses.  Of course in my view, she need not prove anything... 

As I recall I was too much of a chicken to step in on that earlier thread, scarlett and I ought to apologize. I DO think you have a point about the women over 40 having a difficult time finding well-written roles (never mind lead roles). As an example, I was reading People Magazine this week, and it had an article about Karen Allen (Raiders of the Lost Ark, In the Bedroom); and she said she found more recently that when she tried for roles the casting directors wanted "a younger Karen Allen." (Interestingly, she went back to school, studied textiles and discovered a love of knitting, opened "Karen Allen Designs" in Great Barrington Massachusetts - a very pretty, touritsty area in the mountains - and has a shop selling her handmade custom knit sweaters, and has celebrity customers. So it IS possible to enjoy a second life after acting!)

The point remains, however, that there seems to be a "wall" up around actresses of a certain age, although I know skanky would disagree. Here's hoping Nicole and her collegues (Cate, Kate, Julianne, etc) can change that.

[adrian]

edit: well, I'm reading into the thread you are refering too right now and I might re-think some of that stuff!!

This post has been edited by adrian: Sep 30 2006, 12:25 PM

[kiki]

Punch that adorable buss? Oh goodness me no!  I was simply answering a strong opinion with a strong opinion - we can certainly disagree and still respect one another, oui? (Besides, I am a pacifist, you know.)

oh i love you guys! anyway,the sex scene in birth i thought had purpose. notice when she started telling him about the boy, his pace begins to increase and he took her hands (and controlled them). it's the insecurity of man and the nature of creatures (naked, in every sense of the word). it's not vulgar nor graphic - but all's relative.

[In Theory]

   

No, here you go

[RedSatinDoll]

edit: well, I'm reading into the thread you are refering too right now and I might re-think some of that stuff!!

Adrian, in my opinion those words are the mark of a mature human being!

  oh i love you guys! anyway,the sex scene in birth i thought had purpose. notice when she started telling him about the boy, his pace begins to increase and he took her hands (and controlled them). it's the insecurity of man and the nature of creatures (naked, in every sense of the word). it's not vulgar nor graphic - but all's relative. 

Now I've GOT to watch that film. Thanks for the detail, kiki - exactly the sort of thing that film critics ought to be watching for and don't.

[Nicole]

The article is very interesting. I cant wait to see this movie. I must say that I dont particular like nude/sex scenes in films. They make me a little uncomfortable. But I guess if it is part of telling a story, I am ok with that. For instance, EWS was cleverly done and I really enjoyed that movie. The sex scene between Nicole and Robert might be just like the one in EWS, we will have to wait and see. Anyways, I think the important thing is that the article mentioned that Nic is terrific in this role and I cant wait to see it. Even a Oscar buzz...hope Nicole wins another Oscar.

[adrian]

hope Nicole wins another Oscar.       

I'll repeat something I said exactly one year ago when we were hoping for a nod for Birth; since she did Dogville Nicole was marked with a big red X by the academy members. Even no more nominations.

I hope I'm proved wrong but anyway to hell with them and their politics, Nicole is the best actress in the history of cinema and we don't need them to tell us

[RedSatinDoll]

I'll repeat something I said exactly one year ago when we were hoping for a nod for Birth; since she did Dogville Nicole was marked with a big red X by the academy members. Even no more nominations.

I don't know if she was consciously marked with an X by the academy, adrian, but I agree with you that we don't need them to tell us how good she is.

She got her "crowning" (Oscar, Golden Globe, etc etc etc) for The Hours (and the The Others, etc), and since then there's been a bit of a critical backlash but no matter. She is still sought after and still one of the hardest working actors in the industry.

At any rate, very few people have been recipients of numerous Oscars for "Best Actor/Actress" and Nicole already got her's (which most likely is on her mum's mantel at the moment.) And she's got lots of other paperweights in her house. That she is sought after and working is far more important (and preferable to being critically lauded and awarded - and then disappearing from view.)

I have no problem with the notion that she mightn't get another one - she is forever "Academy Award-winner" whether she wins one or ten of them.

The Academy does not traditionally award "edgy" "weird" or "erotic"; there seems to be a comfort zone from which films and perfomances cannot stray if they want that little golden man. And you can still do everything "right" and not get one. C'est la vie.

I know a lot of early reviews and buzz have spoken favorably about Helen Mirren's performance as Queen Elizabeth II in "The Queen." Now I dare say I'm more fallable than you in these matters adrian but my gut tells me she'll be the one to beat this year - IF she can overcome the Academy's preference these past few years of going home with younger women. Certainly the other women whose names have been bandied as possible contenders this year are all worthy, and it wouldn't bother me to see it go with any of them. (Especially Mirren.) I'm a great believer in "sharing the wealth".

[Nicole]

I hope you are wrong Adrian and that Nicole wins the Oscar for the second time or at least get a nomination. Nicole is the best actress in my opinion. Do you mind me asking why do you think she was marked with a big red x adrian?

[adrian]

Do you mind me asking why do you think she was marked with a big red x adrian?

Have you seen Dogville and got what they were trying to say? This is one of the biggest anti-american films ever, and it does this with such a craftsmanship that its effect is unforgettable on the long term. An odd individual will tell you the film is about humanity and not the USA specifically, but just tell him that the trilogy is called U (Dogville), S (Manderlay), A (Washington). Let alone the end song "Young americans" with pictures of suffering Americans who are -in the director's view- like Grace were chewed and enslaved by America then spit on the sidewalks.

The academy is known to give the awards with poloitical motivations, like how after 9-11 they gave best actor and actress to two black people just because of it and how they denied an excellent movie like "Brokeback Mountain" the award and gave it to that meaningless mixture of "Magnolia" and "House of Sand and fog" called "Crash"!

This post has been edited by adrian: Oct 3 2006, 02:06 AM

[RedSatinDoll]

Have you seen Dogville and got what they were trying to say? This is one of the biggest anti-american films ever, and it does this with such a craftsmanship that its effect is unforgettable on the long term. An odd individual will tell you the film is about humanity and not the USA specifically, but just tell him that the triology is called U (Dogville), S (Manderlay), A (Washington).  Let alone the end song "Young americans" with pictures of suffering Americans who are -in the director's view- like Grace were chewed and enslaved by America then spit on the sidewalks.

The academy is known to give the awards with poloitical motivations, like how after 9-11 they gave best actor and actress to two black people just because of it and how they denied an excellent movie like "Brokeback Mountain" the award and gave it to that meaningless mixture of "Magnolia" and "House of Sand and fog" called "Crash"!

NOw, now, don't hold back on our account, adrian - tell us what you REALLY think!

I disagree somewhat with your sentence about "An odd individual will tell you that the film is about humanity and not the USA specifically..." Then I guess that makes me "an odd individual" - along with Glenn Kenny, who reviewed it for Premiere Magazine (March '04) here in the US, calling it von Trier's "first masterpiece":

" 'But is it anti-American?' That's the rap it got in Cannes, largely because of some comments von Trier made there, the kind of bait the filmmaker can't resist dangling before observers who are never going to get him - Jekyll or Hyde - anyway. For Dogville's end credits, Mr Hyde comes out to play and throws more chum in the water, offering a montage of disturbing photos depicting real poverty in real America, cheekily scored to a vintage pop hit. Weirdly enough, this cheap shot doesn't cheapen the film so much as throw another light on it - here is a case where von Trier's Jeykll and Hyde sides have a common cause...Dogville isn't so much Anywhere, USA as anywhere."

And as an american myself (U.S. citizen, born and raised) I agree largely with Mr Kenny's review. There was quite a bit more to it, of course. (The ending credits did not strike me personally as a "cheap shot" when I saw it - I was sitting there nodding my head in agreement - every lyric of "Young Americans" suddenly had new relevance in relation to the film, especially "Give every woman a sock on the jaw". I went with a friend who later said "I wish he'd left the enclosed studio" and I pointed out that von Trier did, in the form of the photo montage at the end.)

I do recall visiting the Dogville website far in advance of the film's release, reading interviews on the 'net with Mr. von Trier, etc and early on he talked about how his film was inspired partly by the more restrictive immigration interviews that had been recently been passed into law in Denmark. He spoke of that quite often in fact, before the film was released, and in more general terms of "man's humanity against man", the song "Pirate Jenny" from The Threepenny Opera, that touched upon such issues, etc. It was only after the film was first screened and the critics started howling "anti-American" that THAT became the exclusive focus.

And no doubt the "anti-american" charge made for better copy, more publicity and bigger headlines than an "anti-Danish immigration policies" tag would have. (In any case, the charge did not hurt Nicole's chances with the Academy that year - Dogville is the sort of film that hasn't got a chance of any sort with the Academy, period.)

I see how the film applies to US policies (have you ever read John Steinbeck's The Grapes of Wrath, adrian?) but watching it I could see how it could be applied to other times and places as well. In fact, I thought that was part of the purpose of the soundstage setting - the audience has to participate in the making of the film, connecting the dots and seeing the scene in their mind's eye, while at the same time implying that with a slight change of props and costumes this could have been done in another era, another country, etc.

And really for me the film is not so much about GOVERNMENT (in fact there is no "government" in the film except the law of mob - whoever has the most firepower wins) as about the indivdiuals - how each person wants to see themselves as good, but so easily casts other people as "other" and non-human to maintain their own comfort level and self-image. What the film said to me when all was said and done was that none of us are exempt from this - and no one gets out of here alive.

Forgive the digression. I'd best add a - I wouldn't want you to think I want to punch you! Believe me, I find these civilized conversations most stimulating.

This post has been edited by RedSatinDoll: Oct 3 2006, 02:04 AM

[adrian]

As usual, very well composed argument by the lovely Satine But maybe missing my point just a bit; yes, it applies to lots of people and lots of countires and the way they treated the poorer and less fortunate, but the director's intentions were to make a film that is 100% critical to a specific country, even if he later made some interviews with a different tune to east things on Lions Gate who took the missiong of distributing it in America. The USA tells you about his intentions,and this is why Nicole is being marked for it.

If you saw Manerlay, you'll see how my take is substantiated, if there was some "maybe" in Dogville, Manderlay makes it clear and visible that it can't be anywhere but America, the unique history of Afrian slavery, the real life rules that governed their lives up to the late 1920s and if not anything, the lynching pictures in the end song too. (Real lynching where a mob took two black people, cut off parts of their bodies then lynched and set them on fire!!)

The director's intent can't be missed, and intent is what they are marking the cast for. Wasn't it a hint that Nicole pulled out after the first part?

By the way, I'm trying to explain why I think this movie is hated, not that I agree with many of the stuff in it. Unlike the director I have read the history of nearly all the world and I know that injustice and unequality have been praciced everywhere and to degrees much worse than whatever he accuses america of doing!

Here is your Monday rose