Dream House - news and tidbits

calypso · Post by **calypso** » Tue Nov 17, 2009 4:01 pm

@shinangovani reports you could be seeing a lot more of Daniel Craig around Toronto this winter - Bond can come warm us up anytime!
1 minute ago from TweetDeck

Germangirl · Post by **Germangirl** » Wed Nov 18, 2009 7:07 am

I think this pretty much sums it up what people, who care to have thoughts about this film, think. Lets hope, it turns out to be a “more than the eye meets” movie, but they will still have a hard time to get audiences exccited about it IMO..but however it will turn out - for me DC always makes at least an interesting choice with scripts that "can" turn out to be good films. His only film with a weak plot for me unfortunately is FOAF, but his friendship with Bailley probably blinded his eyes for that aspect.

Warming up T.O. winter
Shoot lures Bond-alicious Daniel Craig to Toronto
Shinan Govani, National Post Published: Tuesday, November 17, 2009
In between his stagey duel to the death, currently on Broadway with Hugh Jackman and his no-pressure leap into Bond Numero 23, Daniel Craig has plans to winter ... in Toronto!
Trying not to put too much of a type into his cast, the new-millennium 007 is confirmed to be here, come January, to put the psychological into a thriller, courtesy of renowned director Jim Sheridan. Craig, who's been particularly proficient in the flip-flop between his secret service gig and cut-loose other roles, will star in something called The Dream House.
As far as his poker hand goes, though, none of the hunk's non-Bond endeavours have come anywhere close to his steady Blond Bonde franchise-work -- think: The Golden Compass, Defiance, The Invasion -- so there is some inevitable guesswork on his latest stab.
Film geeks and blog mongerers are giving full points to his choice of director (Academy Award-winner Sheridan did My Left Foot and In the Name of the Father), but are perplexed by the generic-ness of the new movie's plot-pivot.
One summed up the ellipsis-friendly story thusly: " Dream House is about a man (Craig) who moves his family to the perfect house in a small idyllic town only to realize that the house is ... haunted ... by the former occupants ... who were ... murdered ... there."
Let me guess: There's. More. Than. Meets. The. Eye.
What could have attracted the tasteful and tasty Daniel to this Stephen King-ish set-up? Could the 1-2-3 plot sum-up be purposely deceiving, amazing plots and twists hidden up Sheridan's irish sleeves?
Or might the wise ol' Sheridan have further lost his way since setting up shop a few years ago -- also in Toronto --on the 50 Cent-starring Get Rich or Die Tryin'?
We don't know, but we wonder and worry in alternating spasms. Stay tuned to this space.

honeyjes · Post by **honeyjes** » Wed Nov 18, 2009 8:16 am

Daniel Craig: If, say, I get a film with hate, tears and anger when I am nowhere even close to that level of emotion at that moment, then I will not do it. Films take a big chunk out of me. It's as simple as that. I put everything I can into it. So my choices are completely personal

I think the above explains why and how he chooses his roles. The minute he starts evaluating a film on how much money it will make, and his star rating, is the minute he'll lose his edge and give up acting.

Germangirl · Post by **Germangirl** » Wed Nov 18, 2009 8:39 am

honeyjes wrote:Daniel Craig: If, say, I get a film with hate, tears and anger when I am nowhere even close to that level of emotion at that moment, then I will not do it. Films take a big chunk out of me. It's as simple as that. I put everything I can into it. So my choices are completely personal

I think the above explains why and how he chooses his roles. The minute he starts evaluating a film on how much money it will make, and his star rating, is the minute he'll lose his edge and give up acting.

I know that and don´t think, I said something that didn´t respect that, but I also see, that he is on a different level now as compared to his pre Bond profile. He will become more and more known as an actor with a huge talent, which makes him interesting for every good/"I always wanted to work with" director and producer, BUT if his films can´t pull in audiences, all his acting abilities will fail to get him those projects and directors, he is getting used to have on his doorsteps now.
Being Bond is a highly dangerous place to be, in the way that All of the other Bond actors has been marked as having only fairly successful films apart from Bond. And this is the challenge that Bond is – to proof he can make it with non Bond projects, too. If not, her will be branded the same way as they all are, and his talent will be forgotten…
Its not fair, but that´s the way it is and he´s said, that, of course, he wants as many people to see his films as possible, which is only normal and he will be as disappointed as anybody would be, if they don´t turn out to be successful in that prospective, if for no other reason then that he believes in his projects and the message they transport.

Of course, its always a gamble - ASR was such a gamble and gladly, he succeeded with that. You win some, you loose some, but a real winner filmwise would serve him well at this time.
So – I do think, wishing this film will be successful and really be more of a psychological thriller than a horror movie (to which audiences don´t seem to be overly attracted anymore) is understandable IMO...

honeyjes · Post by **honeyjes** » Wed Nov 18, 2009 10:00 pm

I know what your saying, but Daniel is a risk taker and likes challenges otherwise we would not have seen him in:

Some Voices
Love is the Devil
The Mother
Infamous
Bond
Defiance
A Steady Rain to name but a few.

After Our Friends in the North, people were clambering for him, but he walked away, and continued to forge his own path. I don't think the fact that he is now considered an A lister will and should make him choose roles that will keep him in the spotlight. As far as I can tell he was fine pre Bond, he's fine now and he'll be OK post Bond.

As for the other Bond careers, Sean Connery has made a fair few distinguishable films and has won an Oscar, Lazenby squandered his potential, Moore treated acting as a pleasurable pastime, Dalton was never in it for the glory, Brosnan pretty much traded on his looks and is now only coming into his own. Daniel is a throwback to the old school of his craft meaning more than being flavour of the month.

I think we do him a disservice in thinking that unless he makes a big movie he'll soon be forgotten. The Likes of Mendes and Spielberg look beyond the norm and someone like Daniel will always be on their radar. T
he likes of Duvall, Pacino, Di Nero, Penn, Streep, Houston, Dench, Mirren et al all have a couple of things in common and that’s talent and longevity, with careers primarily built on sheer hard work and dedication to their crafts. Their films rarely break box office records, but their name being attached to projects adds kudos, prestige and appeal to many people and I think Daniels name is or will be amongst these.

It’s the likes of Pattinsons, Efrons, Culkins, Richards, Dunsts, who seem to be quickly forgotten once they stop being teen friendly.

Germangirl · Post by **Germangirl** » Wed Nov 18, 2009 10:16 pm

I hear you, too

and even though I cannot disagree with what you are saying, I feel, where we seem to differ is that an actor needs a successful film as opposed to just artistically great films once in a while to stay in demand. The ones you chose to list are mostly Oscar winning actors/actresses and that does count also. I would wish him a mix of Moneymakers - artsy, critically acclaimed films small or large - and some Awards to go with it.

Laredo · Post by **Laredo** » Wed Nov 18, 2009 11:54 pm

Connery made lots of films some money makers . Moore did more before he was Bond in movies and as the Saint . Brosnen has done many films but no money makers( except Mama Mia ) or films of oscar caliber. Dalton did more films before Bond small parts in big oscar films .

tbossmc2000 · Post by **tbossmc2000** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 12:06 am

I have a question. In interviews Daniel has done he has said; When I go into a viedo store I take my old movies and hide them.
Which movies was he referring to?
I have hard him say that more than once.
A starving actor does a lot of things in the beginning just to get exposure, pardon the pun. He is a risk taker, that is what makes him what he is today. Yes he is in a different leauge now and has to play with the big players.
All of you are ture fans knowing him from the beginning and able to see some of his work that we in the US have not been about to see.
Thanks to this site we have been able to see some of his early work and I am greatful for that.
This is so much fun debating over a super star.
I LOVE IT>

Laredo · Post by **Laredo** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 12:41 am

I would hide THE YOUNG INDY JONES .

honeyjes · Post by **honeyjes** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 12:53 am

Germangirl wrote:I hear you, too and even though I cannot disagree with what you are saying, I feel, where we seem to differ is that an actor needs a successful film as opposed to just artistically great films once in a while to stay in demand. The ones you chose to list are mostly Oscar winning actors/actresses and that does count also. I would wish him a mix of Moneymakers - artsy, critically acclaimed films small or large - and some Awards to go with it.

Oscar winners they may be but their respective films weren’t a given for success. As with ASR for instance there were many questioning why Daniel and Hugh would want to even read the script because it was another cop story and we all now know that outcome. Same play different actors and the play could just as easily have been a failure.

With some critics writing off Dream House to me just seems lame the full cast hasn’t even been announced yet, and with nothing concrete to really go on it would seem their prematurlel extrapolating a dud. We have 24/7 access to all genres so to suggest horror is stale seems a bit disingenuous to me, I’d personally rather watch this than another CGI, ear splitting, crash, bang, wallop Terminator, GI Joe, Transformers, Wizards and Vampire film which seems to be all the rage at the moment

tbossmc2000 · Post by **tbossmc2000** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 2:35 am

Look how long it took us to find anything out about ASR, we were all going nuts. Then the shell opened and things started spilling out and we went crazy with information. It will happen.
IMO

Cyanaurora · Post by **Cyanaurora** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 3:03 am

honeyjes wrote:
Germangirl wrote:

With some critics writing off Dream House to me just seems lame the full cast hasn’t even been announced yet, and with nothing concrete to really go on it would seem their prematurlel extrapolating a dud. We have 24/7 access to all genres so to suggest horror is stale seems a bit disingenuous to me, I’d personally rather watch this than another CGI, ear splitting, crash, bang, wallop Terminator, GI Joe, Transformers, Wizards and Vampire film which seems to be all the rage at the moment
I totally agree! I can't stand the CGI crap that is being sold as movies these days, like 2012. I want a plot, I know I'm weird.

tbossmc2000 · Post by **tbossmc2000** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 3:14 am

I agree, I like a plot. Enough shoot um up bang bang.
Can't wait to go see Blindside. That will be a good movie.

Flower · Post by **Flower** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 3:58 am

[/quote] I totally agree! I can't stand the CGI crap that is being sold as movies these days, like 2012. I want a plot, I know I'm weird.[/quote]

I agree too! From the previews I thought 2012 was going to be a total bust. I even felt bad for John Cusack because I like him and he's had so many bad movies lately (anyone see War, Inc.?). Anyway, looks like cusak is doing just fine now that the movie is HUGE. Who knew?

Germangirl · Post by **Germangirl** » Thu Nov 19, 2009 6:34 am

honeyjes wrote:
Germangirl wrote:I hear you, too and even though I cannot disagree with what you are saying, I feel, where we seem to differ is that an actor needs a successful film as opposed to just artistically great films once in a while to stay in demand. The ones you chose to list are mostly Oscar winning actors/actresses and that does count also. I would wish him a mix of Moneymakers - artsy, critically acclaimed films small or large - and some Awards to go with it.
Oscar winners they may be but their respective films weren’t a given for success. As with ASR for instance there were many questioning why Daniel and Hugh would want to even read the script because it was another cop story and we all now know that outcome. Same play different actors and the play could just as easily have been a failure.

With some critics writing off Dream House to me just seems lame the full cast hasn’t even been announced yet, and with nothing concrete to really go on it would seem their prematurlel extrapolating a dud. We have 24/7 access to all genres so to suggest horror is stale seems a bit disingenuous to me, I’d personally rather watch this than another CGI, ear splitting, crash, bang, wallop Terminator, GI Joe, Transformers, Wizards and Vampire film which seems to be all the rage at the moment

Lets just hope, Dream House will be well revceived on all levels.

ASR was a risk taken and turned out well. I am not and never have spoken out AGAINST taking risks, all I am saying is, that those risks need to - just like Rain - be successful ever so often.
He will not change his attitude in picking his films, even if it would mean to not remain what we call A-list but I also feel, that even Daniel wouldn´t want to go back to second league (if we say he was pre Bond).

So - maybe we can agree (not that we absolutely need to

) that we wish him luck with his risky films and that he can maintain the position, he himself wants to be in. Remember the LC Q&A, where he says "I want everything". He is almost there now and even with the unloved parts of fame, he loves the opportunities it gives him and staying an A-lister will be the chance to be risky on the highest possible level.