March 19, 2018 at 10:09 am #1202515699
I know it’s all about costume, hair, make-up, and the smart angle of her face, but she really does invoke Judy Garland in that picture.March 19, 2018 at 10:25 am #1202515714
She’ll be dynamite in the role, there’s not a question about that. The question is will the movie be another Diana/Grace or will it be the comeback she deserves. The film needs to be intelligent, piercingly thought-provoking and deeply human while also being smashingly entertaining with a touch of classy camp. I’m carefully optimistic, given that the director has some prestigious theatrical projects under his belt.March 19, 2018 at 10:35 am #1202515721
I actually enjoyed the Diana bio pic for some reason. Don’t ask me why because I don’t really know. Maybe I liked the way it told that old story and showed Diana’s isolation, desperation for human connection, and how she played the media at times and how they played her. It showed a different side to Diana than the poor victim we often get. I’m not saying it was a great movie or anything, but I liked it.
Grace, on the other hand, despite a performance from Kidman that actually won me over despite me thinking she looked NOTHING like Grace Kelly, felt like a waste of time to me. And what sort of character was Parker Posey playing? Also what was with that moral of THAT story? Keep a playground for rich elites and don’t force them to pay into the community. Well, I guess it could be shaped as an autonomous principality fighting for its freedom from the bully that is France…even if it means to be free to be a playground for the rich and famous.
I think given the above, Judy Garland’s story, especially in her last days that this movie is set in, is just a cut above the other two women’s stories really and it’s just more cinematic and interesting to watch. I think that in of itself bodes well for this project if we’re only comparing to Grace and Diana.
March 19, 2018 at 10:35 am #1202515722
- This reply was modified 3 months ago by SHT L.
Whoa. Striking first photo. Make that comeback, Zelly!March 19, 2018 at 11:13 am #1202515740
Naysayers will have a field day with this. No matter, Zellweger may have fallen from the fickle graces of the upper echelon of Hollywood, but I have a feeling she wouldn’t do this if she couldn’t pull it off. And if it’s even a passable performance, though I’m hoping it’s much, much more, she’ll have one of the best comebacks in film history…with the Bridget Jones’s Baby‘s $200+ million worldwide box office to boot.March 19, 2018 at 12:18 pm #1202515800
It is a really good picture.March 19, 2018 at 12:46 pm #1202515816
Indeed.March 19, 2018 at 1:06 pm #1202515832
Perfect role for revenge for not winning for Chicago.March 19, 2018 at 1:55 pm #1202515849
I really do hope they dub Judy’s singing in this film because it would not be Judy without Judy’s voice. If Angela Bassett can get an Oscar nomination while being dubbed by Tina Turner for the singing portion of the role, then there’s no reason why Renee can’t do the same. What I mean is that the dubbing would not be a detriment.March 22, 2018 at 9:03 pm #1202517938
Issa transformation! I’m rooting for her!March 23, 2018 at 1:13 pm #1202518305
^^^Yes, that’s him! Playing Garland’s fifth and final husband, Mickey Deans.March 23, 2018 at 6:30 pm #1202518384
I really do hope they dub Judy’s singing in this film because it would not be Judy without Judy’s voice. If Angela Bassett can get an Oscar nomination while being dubbed by Tina Turner for the singing portion of the role, then there’s no reason why Renee can’t do the same. What I mean is that the dubbing would not be a detriment.
Or shee could pull a Sissy Spacek Coal Miner’s daughter here….
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.