THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO news and tidbits

[JEC57]

Yup, feel the same. It might be VERY biased, but what can you do? I wouldn't like to see Rooney alone nominated either. Either both or none...sorry Rooney..

JEC, you always drive a hard bargin, but if Rooney were to hit it out of the park, she would deserve a nomination.
Sorry I wasn't paying attention to who was posting what, but 1 sentence says Daniel needs a hit other than Bond, and some say they hate to see him passed over, it's contradictry. IMO

It was me who said I hate to see him passed over in favour of actors who are not fit (artistically) to tie his shoe laces.

Someone else said a few posts back he needs a hit other than Bond....but I agree with that too.

He is in danger of being labelled (I think GG said this) as the actor whose only hit films he can open are Bond. He does need other kudos apart from Bond. I don't see anything contradictory in that, but I am maybe missing the point where you can see that as a contradiction. ( ....you gonna have to enlighten me! )

I make no secret of my preference that he should have stayed more local and European and true to his roots, and sometimes I curse the fact he took Bond.

But he did take it, and now that he is in the Hollyweird machine, he has to make the most of it to stay afloat. That does mean Oscars and Golden Globes, etc., because those help sell films.

It would a travesty if he works in this damned machine and the people pulling the strings do not recognise his superior talent which far outstrips people like Pitt, who has all the animation of a wet toothbrush.

And yes, where Daniel is concerned I always drive a hard bargain.

[Germangirl]

JEC, you always drive a hard bargin, but if Rooney were to hit it out of the park, she would deserve a nomination.
Sorry I wasn't paying attention to who was posting what, but 1 sentence says Daniel needs a hit other than Bond, and some say they hate to see him passed over, it's contradictry. IMO

It was me who said I hate to see him passed over in favour of actors who are not fit (artistically) to tie his shoe laces.

Someone else said a few posts back he needs a hit other than Bond....but I agree with that too.

He is in danger of being labelled (I think GG said this) as the actor whose only hit films he can open are Bond. He does need other kudos apart from Bond. I don't see anything contradictory in that, but I am maybe missing the point where you can see that as a contradiction. ( ....you gonna have to enlighten me! )

I make no secret of my preference that he should have stayed more local and European and true to his roots, and sometimes I curse the fact he took Bond.

But he did take it, and now that he is in the Hollyweird machine, he has to make the most of it to stay afloat. That does mean Oscars and Golden Globes, etc., because those help sell films.

It would a travesty if he works in this damned machine and the people pulling the strings do not recognise his superior talent which far outstrips people like Pitt, who has all the animation of a wet toothbrush.

And yes, where Daniel is concerned I always drive a hard bargain.

I can't see any contradiction either. Its the same - needing a hit film and wanting him to win an Oscar to raise his profile.
JEC, I think, H'wood proved, they see his talent, even giving him the Cowboy was such a proof to me and certainly such a coveted role like MB - they have noticed alright IMO. Not his fault, if things don't work out. Seems all the time, somebody else is messing it up for him. But yes, he could get labelled, but then, Nicole Kidman still gets jobs and she had flops forever until she got an Oscar nod last year. We know, all it needs is ONE hit film and you are back in biz - so as long as he IS doing films, he can do well for himself and hit the ball out of the parc again. My two...

[Elaine_Figgis]

The Oscar conversation brings Peter O'Toole to mind. He was nominated by 'The Academy' 8 times before getting an honorary one, after being robbed in 2003 for his role in Venus, losing to Forest Whitaker.

Wiki has a chart that I find rather interesting, comparing his roles to those that won.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_O%27Toole

I don't know if comparing DC and O'Toole is fair, since I believe O'Toole was considered a pretty boy/heart throb in his time similar to BP, but The Academy has always been a fickle popularity contest.

[honeyjes]

I think 7 of the 8 nominations he was up against are worthy contenders of both great actors and films, anyone of whom have more talent in their little finger than the likes of BP and Clooney have in their whole body. It also highlights the stark contrast between then and now as to what is now perceived as real talent.

[Elaine_Figgis]

I think 7 of the 8 nominations he was up against are worthy contenders of both great actors and films, anyone of whom have more talent in their little finger than the likes of BP and Clooney have in their whole body. It also highlights the stark contrast between then and now as to what is now perceived as real talent.

So very true. It's a shame really how the bar of talent has been lowered over the years.

[Germangirl]

There is an easy way out to say, its more of a popularity contest then a talent contest these days, but taking Forest Whittaker - who "robbed" DC of his Bafta at least, but surely this man was not popular in any way before nor after having won in 2003 or again in 2007. So - the line they draw is still rather unpredictable to me. To be fair, its not alwayas the public favourites, who win. This man here is the best example.

Also and I dont favour any of them, but to get to the position, where Clooney and Co are, you have had to do something right and - if nothing else - you have to acknowledge that. That it might be necessary to get there to entertain the world outside of making films is a whole different story though - one that is sad and one, that our man is never going to play.

I think, he has yet to find his niche, but will...right now (and I am quoting here someone) he is like a kid in a candy store and somewhat overwhelmed by what has been left at his door step. Once he comes to his "senses", it will be hard to beat him. I am sure of that...my two...

[khenton]

I think 7 of the 8 nominations he was up against are worthy contenders of both great actors and films, anyone of whom have more talent in their little finger than the likes of BP and Clooney have in their whole body. It also highlights the stark contrast between then and now as to what is now perceived as real talent.

So very true. It's a shame really how the bar of talent has been lowered over the years.

I so agree! I'm beginning to sound like my mother-- those actors e o'toole,etc. Had presence, distinctive voices and way better scripts!!!!
Not that I'm a Nostalgia kind of gal but things have changed and not for the artistic better. Everything has to be 'safe'. Drag! K

[tbossmc2000]

JEC, you always drive a hard bargin, but if Rooney were to hit it out of the park, she would deserve a nomination.
Sorry I wasn't paying attention to who was posting what, but 1 sentence says Daniel needs a hit other than Bond, and some say they hate to see him passed over, it's contradictry. IMO

It was me who said I hate to see him passed over in favour of actors who are not fit (artistically) to tie his shoe laces.

Someone else said a few posts back he needs a hit other than Bond....but I agree with that too.

He is in danger of being labelled (I think GG said this) as the actor whose only hit films he can open are Bond. He does need other kudos apart from Bond. I don't see anything contradictory in that, but I am maybe missing the point where you can see that as a contradiction. ( ....you gonna have to enlighten me! )

I make no secret of my preference that he should have stayed more local and European and true to his roots, and sometimes I curse the fact he took Bond.

But he did take it, and now that he is in the Hollyweird machine, he has to make the most of it to stay afloat. That does mean Oscars and Golden Globes, etc., because those help sell films.

It would a travesty if he works in this damned machine and the people pulling the strings do not recognise his superior talent which far outstrips people like Pitt, who has all the animation of a wet toothbrush.

And yes, where Daniel is concerned I always drive a hard bargain.

JEC, it was just a couple sentences that I thought were intersting. He needs a hit other than Bond, and hate for him to be looked over.
The acting insudtry is so cut throat, some actors do fantastic work for years and never reconized and then there are others that are nominated every year. Being reconized by your piers with accolades, ocsar statues and plaques is great.
Money, its all about money.
I'm not debating anyone's comments, I am just stating my opinion.

[Germangirl]

Guess, in the end its about what they want to get out of their career to call it successful and here they certainly differ.

[sf2la]

Im the odd person out on this one, I guess.
I think his talent is recognized as stated by GG with C&A and particularly Tattoo being the examples.
We don't know what roles he's been offered or contacted about and turned down because of schedule conflicts or disinterest. In retrospect he may have made a wrong choice. Maybe he's made great choices with what he's been offered. What movies could he have done instead of DH and C&A? We don't know. We know that he made the right decision to sign on with Fincher for Tattoo.

No one is holdin a gun to DC's head to make HW movies. He himself said, self-deprecating, of course) that if things don't work out, he can make small indie movies again*. He is wanting this, and it comes with a boatload of money.

I think we have to ask ourselves which parts could have/should have gone to DC but didn't. But don't forget, he has scheduling conflicts like everyone. He couldn't do another movie while filming another and can't while filming Bond.

I think his HW career is fine and progressing nicely. I didnt see Tree of Life, but I can't recall a BP or Clooney role where DC would have been better. I'm not a BP or Clooney fan but I do think he works great for some roles.

DC isnt going to get great parts in great movies all the time; no one gets that unless they act very sparingly. He is expected to be a great actor in his roles, and we agree he does that. Anyway, with Tattoo coming up and having delivered for C&A, I truly think he's very happy. There's a benefit for him not being a Clooney or Pitt - he can walk around some in NYC on his own.


*We know he's still interested in small budget films bc of his reference to The Wrestler.

[bumblebee]

Personally I think Bond is the zenith of where an actor like DC can go in Hollywood. How can you top that? Anything else is just gravy, and that was one of the risks he took in taking the part (that and the potential that CR might tank at the box office).

I personally don't mind if the Bond label sticks - how could it not, and JEC I completely understand that you do mind somewhat! He still has other castings available to him and I think we'll see what a fabulous choice he made soon with Tattoo. Somehow, however, because of the Bond 23 delay, I get the sense that he took on more roles than he possibly needed to and perhaps was slightly less picky than he might otherwise be. Kind of like the Oscar curse - win big once, get loads of roles thrown at you, and your talent becomes lost in drivel screenplays and two-a-penny roles.

I haven't seen C&A - I have no interest in it, it all seems to one dimensional and blockbusterish for my taste. I can get enough from the trailer and the screen caps on here.

But Tattoo - now that's another story - that looks like it's maturing nicely into pure Daniel - a combo of the edginess of Bond, the domestic mystery and claustrophobia of Enduring Love, the darkness of Sylvia, oh I could oo on....

[Germangirl]

But Tattoo - now that's another story - that looks like it's maturing nicely into pure Daniel - a combo of the edginess of Bond, the domestic mystery and claustrophobia of Enduring Love, the darkness of Sylvia, oh I could oo on....

Great way to put it..

[caramel]

Fincher Talks Dragon Tattoo With Empire: Lisbeth Salander is Not A Superhero

Rooney Mara and Daniel Craig cover Empire magazine. In this photo, Mara takes a subservient position to Craig (again), as opposed to the Swedish poster. Consider the power dynamics: squatting vs. being on one’s knees and standing vs. sitting.

Empire proudly takes credit as the only magazine allowed on set. What did David Fincher say about anti-hero Lisbeth Salander? Here’s a taste below:



“There were discussions early on where people were like, ‘She’s a superhero!’ And you go, ‘No, she’s not. Superheroes live in a world of good and evil, and she’s far more complex than a superhero. She’s been compromised. She’s been subjugated. She’s been marginalized. She’s been swept into the gutter and she’s had a part in it. She dresses like trash because she’s someone who has been betrayed and hurt so badly, by forces beyond her control, that she’s just decided to be refuse. She can sit anywhere she wants on the bus, because nobody wants to deal with her.”

http://blogs.indiewire.com/thompsononho ... um=twitter#

[calypso]

http://movies.yahoo.com/blogs/the-proje ... 35999.html
Could Daniel Craig Become a Liability to ‘Girl With the Dragon Tattoo’?

The American remake of "The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo" opens in just under three months, and while it's a high-profile event picture with a great trailer, commercially it's no slam-dunk. Sure, the Stieg Larsson books are popular, and director David Fincher is coming off "The Social Network," but this is a really dark thriller opening during a crowded holiday season. So having a big star sure helps. The problem is, that person's supposed to be Daniel Craig, and we're starting to worry that he may not be as big a star as we (and certainly Sony) thought.

Don't get us wrong: The man's James Bond, instrumental in helping to reboot a franchise that still made money but nobody took seriously anymore. "Casino Royale" changed that. But beyond that film and its not-so-great sequel, "Quantum of Solace," his track recordremains a bit iffy of late. "The Invasion" was a bomb. "The Golden Compass" was perceived to be a bomb but actually did really well overseas. "Defiance" was an award-seeker that came up empty. Now you come to this year. "Cowboys & Aliens" will probably cross $100 million, but the expectations were that it would do far better. As for "Dream House" ... well ... there's a very good chance it could sink like a stone this weekend. We know people like Craig as Bond. But do they like Craig as anybody else?

That's the question Sony is going to have to face as they promote "Dragon Tattoo," which recently got a lavish profile in the new issue of Empire. Some have complained that the advertizing has thus far made Rooney Mara's Lisbeth Salander character secondary or subservient to Craig's Mikael Blomkvist. Personally, we see that more of a question of star power than sexism: People know who Craig is, and they don't really know who Mara is. But that may end up being a double-edged sword for Sony. People recognize Craig, but if "Dream House" tanks it'll be yet another non-Bond film audiences haven't exactly flocked to see. Maybe it's time for Sony to let us get to know the girl in "The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo" a little better.

[Germangirl]

Exactly the kind of critisism, I knew would happen. And maybe its even right at this point, even though I absolutely believe, C&A would have been the hit, they expected, had it been a better film. Nothing to do with DC, but they always look for the easy way out.

I say, the prods knew, who is is and knew, he hadn't exactly blown away audiences apart from Bond ( well, apart from the die hard fans like us ) - so, nothing has changed. Obviously they hired, who they thought was best for the role and he never lets anybody down on this prospect. I really don't believe, they overestimated his star power. Why would they? Based on what?

On the other hand, I believe, people, who will go and see the film, will do it regardless, who the actors are. They want to find out about the new Lisbeth and how the film compares to the swedish version, so yes, maybe advertise Lisbeth a bit more. She IS the more interesting character and the one, people are going to see. When they find out, there is a great MB as well - even better.

I think, Tattoo is THE career defining film for him. God beware, it tanks..after opening Friday, word of mouth will make or break it. IF the film is good and they don't nail him on his non-existant accent, everything will be fine and his arse is save for the moment.


This is the headline, I wanna see after opening weekend:

Daniel Craig - born to be James Bond? That was yesterday. After the last weekend its clear, he was born to be Mikael Blomkvist