This is the thread where we anticipate Jason Schwartzman as Louis XVI

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

from imdb:

Sofia Coppola has won approval from the French government to film scenes for her biopic Marie-Antoinette in the palace of Versailles, the French daily Le Parisien reported today (Tuesday). The newspaper said that production of the film, which stars Kirsten Dunst in the title role and Jason Schwartzman as her husband, Louis XVI, began in Paris last week and is due to be completed in 11 weeks. Filming at the palace has been closed to the press, according to the French wire service, Agence France Presse, which did not indicate whether the palace had also been closed to tourists.

― miccio (miccio), Wednesday, 16 March 2005 01:20 (twenty years ago)

Well this sounds terrible.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Wednesday, 16 March 2005 01:27 (twenty years ago)

only if by terrible you mean TERRIBLE.

― mark p (Mark P), Wednesday, 16 March 2005 01:28 (twenty years ago)

well i'm all for it surprise surprise

― jones (actual), Wednesday, 16 March 2005 01:29 (twenty years ago)

what the hell? this could be good, could be horrendous. I'm not entirely sold On Sofia's "skills". Either way, I'll probably see it.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Wednesday, 16 March 2005 01:32 (twenty years ago)

I'm hoping the Dunst-Coppola magic works again. I'll blame Lost in Translation on Scarlett Johansson having no personality whatsoever.

― milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Wednesday, 16 March 2005 01:33 (twenty years ago)

you think they'll do that biz where they speak in english but with french accents? I sure hope so.

― miccio (miccio), Wednesday, 16 March 2005 01:34 (twenty years ago)

so is this film going to make marie-antoinette a sympathetic character? (in keeping with dunst taking sympathetic leading-lady roles of late.) that would be interesting.

"let them eat cake--- psych! just kididng."

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Wednesday, 16 March 2005 01:34 (twenty years ago)

Jason Schwartzman should pull a Mark McGrath and cohost an evening entertainment roundup. He should stop acting in pictures.

― andy --, Wednesday, 16 March 2005 01:43 (twenty years ago)

i like it when he's in movies, he's always hamming it up poorly so i kind of feel like i'm a close friend of his just going to the movie to support him. since he's so obviously not an actual professional actor (or is he?).

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Wednesday, 16 March 2005 01:46 (twenty years ago)

I am truly astounded. (More by the idea of 'the guy who saved Latin' playing a dumpy watchmaker.)

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 16 March 2005 01:46 (twenty years ago)

"oh, there's jason! isn't it cute, him acting with the real actors, in a real moovie and stuff!"

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Wednesday, 16 March 2005 01:46 (twenty years ago)

They should go the Moulin Rouge/A Knight's Tale distance and have him playing drums in a band while being crowned or some crap like that.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 16 March 2005 01:47 (twenty years ago)

They should just redo the last act from History Of The World Part I. "Jump the queen" + Kristen Dunst = one ticket purchased by me.

― miccio (miccio), Wednesday, 16 March 2005 01:49 (twenty years ago)

The comic image of the political father of 1786-92 was steadily eroded not only by the force of political circumstances but also by an increasing number of engravings that were devoted to denigrating the royal family (see figure 8). In these prints we see the hope of the good father disappointed and the father now being rejected. The mother too is being rejected and held in some way accountable for the failure of the father, as in the pornographic engraving of the
king impotent in bed with Marie-Antoinette (see figure 9). The text below the print blames Louis for his lack of vigor but also accuses the queen of being too lascivious. A fundamentally new family romance of politics could take shape only if both the romance of patriarchal kingship and that of the king as good father were destroyed. All possibilitv of reconciliation with the father is implicitly denied in such prints, and the distance between father and sons is obliterated as the king becomes an animal, lower even than his human subjects, or a pathetic ordinary man incapable of establishing his own succession.

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Wednesday, 16 March 2005 01:49 (twenty years ago)

oh no

― 57 7th (calstars), Wednesday, 16 March 2005 01:57 (twenty years ago)

i am SO for this movie!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 16 March 2005 02:21 (twenty years ago)

I'm over Jason Schwartzman. Come to think of it, he was a total creep in Rushmore. I used to think he was adorable.

― Sara Sherr, Wednesday, 16 March 2005 02:32 (twenty years ago)

louis xvi was kind of notoriously non-adorable tho

― jones (actual), Wednesday, 16 March 2005 02:54 (twenty years ago)

I hope they show him getting guillotined.

― tokyo rosemary (rosemary), Wednesday, 16 March 2005 04:38 (twenty years ago)

ten months pass...

inspired?

http://www.sonypictures.com/movies/marieantoinette/index.html

People are asking whether New Order have anything to do with eating cake. I would ask whether Strauss has anything to do with space stations. There's also this precedent

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B000002LGS.01._SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg

― *That* Guy, Wednesday, 1 February 2006 18:57 (twenty years ago)

GREAT trailer.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 1 February 2006 19:02 (twenty years ago)

It is indeed excellent. There's a Quicktime version with less compressed video and, crucially, sound. This pleases me.

http://progressive.stream.aol.com//aol/us/moviefone/movies/2005/marieantoinette_023756/marieantoinette_trlr_01_fhywet_dl.mov

― Mike W (caek), Wednesday, 1 February 2006 19:20 (twenty years ago)

less sound?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 1 February 2006 19:27 (twenty years ago)

Oh.. that. It's been around for months. You guys got me excited for a second... I though a REAL trailer with dialogue and stuff surfaced. Oh well.

This movie is set to come out on my birthday, I'm really excited for it.

― The Brainwasher (Twilight), Wednesday, 1 February 2006 19:29 (twenty years ago)

s1ocki: Less compressed sound. The one on the Sony site sounds like its playing in a bathtub.

Brainwasher: Yeah, it was on the Apple site in lovely full screen resolution last year, but has been taken for some reason.

― Mike W (caek), Wednesday, 1 February 2006 19:38 (twenty years ago)

at last, a barry lyndon for daddys girls

― Yawn (Wintermute), Wednesday, 1 February 2006 19:59 (twenty years ago)

ok suzy

― s1ocki (slutsky), Wednesday, 1 February 2006 20:00 (twenty years ago)

so is this film going to make marie-antoinette a sympathetic character? (in keeping with dunst taking sympathetic leading-lady roles of late.) that would be interesting.
"let them eat cake--- psych! just kididng."

-- Amateur(ist) (amateurist@gmail.com), March 16th, 2005.

from what i've read it is indeed going to make 'im 'an 'er sympathetic!

roman is the talented one.

― The Man Without Shadow (Enrique), Thursday, 2 February 2006 09:41 (twenty years ago)

they better show the beheading

― latebloomer (latebloomer), Thursday, 2 February 2006 10:03 (twenty years ago)

If I wanted to see a sympathetic portrait of aristo scum I'd watch Blue Peter.

― The Man in the Iron-On Mask (noodle vague), Thursday, 2 February 2006 11:48 (twenty years ago)

right kids?

― The Man Without Shadow (Enrique), Thursday, 2 February 2006 11:53 (twenty years ago)

i think coppala is interesting, she made a movie i loved, and a movie i hated--but both were gorgeous, and this is so easy to film so its prettier then fuck...i dont know how i feel about this

― Anthony Easton, Thursday, 2 February 2006 11:59 (twenty years ago)

Maybe Mel Gibson should make a 2 hour movie of the executions as a companion-piece.

― The Man in the Iron-On Mask (noodle vague), Thursday, 2 February 2006 12:02 (twenty years ago)

maybe orlando bloomps will cameo as the marquis de sade.

― The Man Without Shadow (Enrique), Thursday, 2 February 2006 12:03 (twenty years ago)

It's based on an Antonia Fraser book! I wouldn't bet on as great an adaptation as The Virgin Suicides, but who knows.

Also encouraging: Judy Davis, Rip Torn, Steve Coogan, Marianne Faithfull in the cast.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 2 February 2006 14:55 (twenty years ago)

rip torn as jefferson.

― The Man Without Shadow (Enrique), Thursday, 2 February 2006 15:01 (twenty years ago)

As Louis XV... at this point Rip could only play the deathbed Jefferson.

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 2 February 2006 15:09 (twenty years ago)

at last, a barry lyndon for daddys girls

OTM + roffles

― elmo, patron saint of nausea (allocryptic), Thursday, 2 February 2006 15:21 (twenty years ago)

or a scratching post for sexists?

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 2 February 2006 15:25 (twenty years ago)

It's still all about Norma Shearer in the end.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 2 February 2006 15:56 (twenty years ago)

Wait a minute, wait a minute. Are slock1, Dr Morbius and I all excited about the same thing? Fuckin' end times.

― TOMBOT, Thursday, 2 February 2006 16:05 (twenty years ago)

hahaha

― The Man Without Shadow (Enrique), Thursday, 2 February 2006 16:05 (twenty years ago)

ROMAN is the more talented one?? have you SEEN his movie?

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 2 February 2006 17:11 (twenty years ago)

yeah cq was some bullshit

― geoff (gcannon), Thursday, 2 February 2006 18:02 (twenty years ago)

it was really, really awful. except that one scene in the airport with harry dean stanton

― s1ocki (slutsky), Thursday, 2 February 2006 18:10 (twenty years ago)

Tom, slock1 and I are on board with Munich, join the party!

(I've taped all the Alan Partridge BBC America has shown but haven't watched em yet.)

― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 2 February 2006 18:20 (twenty years ago)

seven months pass...

I started posting on the other thread, but maybe this one is more appropriate... I'll repost here.

― Elvis Telecom (Chris Barrus), Thursday, 28 September 2006 06:35 (nineteen years ago)

I saw this tonight at the Variety screening/Q&A at the Arclight. Still trying to process what I saw...

It's visually stunning, but tempered by lots of back zooming as described in the other thread. Not surprisingly, it'll have a lock on a costuming Oscar and probably a nod for cinematography.

On the other hand... It spectacularly jump the tracks at the two-thirds mark, fast-forwarding through to the end without much of a conclusion. I get the feeling that the Jaime Reid typography and the Gang Of Four opening are only there because Coppola thought they were cool, not as any tangible thread to draw together the disparate elements of political/class disconnection which are scattered about. The Paris Hilton connection noted above is glaringly obvious, but there's no follow through. At the 90 minute mark, I was thinking "could we FINALLY have some angry mobs?"

The soundtrack was very well matched and not intrusive at all... Fave part was a ginormous masquerade ball set to "Hong Kong Garden."

― Elvis Telecom (Chris Barrus), Thursday, 28 September 2006 06:36 (nineteen years ago)

Two things which bugged the hell out of me...

There's one montage scene in which a Converse sneaker is very obvious. Someone asked Coppola about it at the Q&A afterward and she blamed it on Roman, adding (unconvincingly) "Roman said to think of the Ken Russell film Listzomania which has non-period stuff in it."

Also, there's a very obvious reference to a famous painting of Napoleon - only the painting in question didn't exist until well after Louis XVI's time.

― Elvis Telecom (Chris Barrus), Thursday, 28 September 2006 06:42 (nineteen years ago)

And why exactly was Molly Shannon in this?

― Elvis Telecom (Chris Barrus), Thursday, 28 September 2006 06:44 (nineteen years ago)

they better show the beheading

They don't. The movie ends with the fall of Versailles.

― Elvis Telecom (Chris Barrus), Thursday, 28 September 2006 06:50 (nineteen years ago)

"Roman said to think of the Ken Russell film Listzomania which has non-period stuff in it."

is this better or worse than lisztomania (which i wanna say that i love except it's impossible to sit through the whole way)?

― service comedy (Jody Beth Rosen), Thursday, 28 September 2006 06:50 (nineteen years ago)

is this better or worse than lisztomania

Neither really. Lisztomania is manic. The Scarlet Empress is serious and gothic. Queen Margot is trashy and ridiculous. This movie falls somewhere in the middle of all of that and is just, well, austere.

― Elvis Telecom (Chris Barrus), Thursday, 28 September 2006 06:53 (nineteen years ago)

One plus: the Kevin Shields remixes of Bow Wow Wow and a couple others (couldn't read the credits fast enough), sounded fanfreakingtastic at the Arclight.

― Elvis Telecom (Chris Barrus), Thursday, 28 September 2006 06:55 (nineteen years ago)

I thought Virgin Suicides was all surface with not much explanation, so no surprise if this one is too. And I didn't find Lost in Translation was that original either, unlike some folks seemed to think. Coppola is obviously talented, but she needs to come up with more, I dunno, content for her films.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Thursday, 28 September 2006 07:04 (nineteen years ago)

all of her movies try to make you feel sorry for privledged hotties.

― chaki (chaki), Thursday, 28 September 2006 07:09 (nineteen years ago)

what's wrong with that?

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Thursday, 28 September 2006 07:21 (nineteen years ago)

shit sucks.

― chaki (chaki), Thursday, 28 September 2006 07:23 (nineteen years ago)

Kinda hard to identify with that... "Oh, you poor dear, you're living in a hotel room in Tokyo, all expenses paid, you can roam around Buddhist temples and karaoke bars all day, but somehow you still feel empty and your boyfriend is kinda absent. So sad!"

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Thursday, 28 September 2006 07:23 (nineteen years ago)

The problem is, I guess, that most of the people who end up directing films in Hollywood are upper or middle class, and upper class ennui can be extremely annoying for poor people with a whole different set of problems.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Thursday, 28 September 2006 07:26 (nineteen years ago)

It's kinda like those pop records where millionaire pop stars complain aboit the curse of celebrity. Do they actually expect their fans to identify with that?

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Thursday, 28 September 2006 07:29 (nineteen years ago)

"Oh, you poor dear, you're living in a hotel room in ~~Tokyo~~ Helsinki, all expenses paid, you can roam around Buddhist temples and karaoke bars all day, but somehow you still feel empty and your boyfriend is kinda absent. So sad!"

Fixed.

― Leopold Boom! (noodle vague), Thursday, 28 September 2006 07:30 (nineteen years ago)

Huh?

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Thursday, 28 September 2006 07:32 (nineteen years ago)

It's kinda like those pop records where millionaire pop stars complain aboit the curse of celebrity. Do they actually expect their fans to identify with that?

i don't identify, but being famous sounds utterly horrible, so i can deal with their complaints about that. being rich however...

― service comedy (Jody Beth Rosen), Thursday, 28 September 2006 07:33 (nineteen years ago)

yes if only all those rich hollywood producers would only make films about REAL ISSUES like the plight of the downtrodden! i bet it'd end world hunger!

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Thursday, 28 September 2006 07:36 (nineteen years ago)

why do film critics think citizen kane is such a great movie? how am i supposed to relate to some rich white jerk who's all upset just cos he can't find his sled?

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Thursday, 28 September 2006 07:40 (nineteen years ago)

More movies about housework!

― Leopold Boom! (noodle vague), Thursday, 28 September 2006 07:42 (nineteen years ago)

orson welles made alot of movies about alot of different things. all her movies are about sad rich hotties.

― chaki (chaki), Thursday, 28 September 2006 07:44 (nineteen years ago)

im just stating a fact i dont know why you gotta get all butthurt about it. maybe you need to wash your pussy.

― chaki (chaki), Thursday, 28 September 2006 07:45 (nineteen years ago)

I was with ya until "Tuomas" chipped in.

― Leopold Boom! (noodle vague), Thursday, 28 September 2006 07:49 (nineteen years ago)

i just wanted to say butthurt and wash your pussy i wasnt really posting to anyone in paticular.

― chaki (chaki), Thursday, 28 September 2006 07:52 (nineteen years ago)

i'm not mad about it, i just hate when people dislike a movie or something and go "and it's about rich people, too! why should i care about rich people's problems?" well, why should you care about ANYONE in a movie? it's just a movie!

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Thursday, 28 September 2006 08:01 (nineteen years ago)

"why should i watch ghostbusters? of what possible relevance could the problems of these 'ghostbusters' be to a non-ghostbuster such as myself?"

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Thursday, 28 September 2006 08:01 (nineteen years ago)

I didn't say you shouldn't care about rich people, I was just trying to say I find it hard to identify with problems only rich people have, like upper class ennui. Citizen Kane is great 'cause it has a lot more in it than upper-class ennui. Even LIT is about more than that, it's a perfectly okay film, I was just exaggerating to make a point.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Thursday, 28 September 2006 08:06 (nineteen years ago)

I.e. there are a lot of problems most people share, and you can make movies about them, but don't expect me to relate to issues that only bother the well-off.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Thursday, 28 September 2006 08:08 (nineteen years ago)

chaki otm, tuomas is overdoing it though.

― EARLY-90S MAN (Enrique), Thursday, 28 September 2006 08:09 (nineteen years ago)

I'm a long way from upper class, and I got ennui in spades.

― Leopold Boom! (noodle vague), Thursday, 28 September 2006 08:09 (nineteen years ago)

don't expect me to relate to issues that only bother the uneducated
don't expect me to relate to issues that only bother the poor
don't expect me to relate to issues that only bother the black
don't expect me to relate to issues that only bother the gay
don't expect me to relate to issues that only bother the women
don't expect me to relate to issues that only bother the non-english
don't expect me to relate to issues that only bother the people in olden times
don't expect me to relate to issues that only bother the people in the future
don't expect me to relate to issues that only bother the people in invented worlds

― EARLY-90S MAN (Enrique), Thursday, 28 September 2006 08:11 (nineteen years ago)

don't expect me to relate to issues that only bother the cartoon rabbits

― Leopold Boom! (noodle vague), Thursday, 28 September 2006 08:13 (nineteen years ago)

Enrique, your point is kinda weak. The better-off should care about the issues have-nots exactly because they are better off. It's called conscience, but that isn't the same as identification, since it usually is one-direction. And there aren't any fantasy or sci-fi flicks that wouldn't relate to our world.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Thursday, 28 September 2006 08:25 (nineteen years ago)

http://img15.imgspot.com/u/06/270/05/image61159435351.jpg

― Leopold Boom! (noodle vague), Thursday, 28 September 2006 08:27 (nineteen years ago)

???

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Thursday, 28 September 2006 08:31 (nineteen years ago)

The better-off should care about the issues have-nots exactly because they are better off. It's called conscience, but that isn't the same as identification, since it usually is one-direction. And there aren't any fantasy or sci-fi flicks that wouldn't relate to our world.

-- Tuomas (lixnix...), September 28th, 2006.

it doesn't matter if the better-off care or not, really; that won't do very much to change the structure of society. but even if i agree that they should care -- that's true enough IRL, but it's not an aesthetic criterion. you can't have a conscience toward fictional characters, and you don't need to identify with them to like a film.

― EARLY-90S MAN (Enrique), Thursday, 28 September 2006 08:35 (nineteen years ago)

you can't have a conscience toward fictional characters

You can't?

you don't need to identify with them to like a film.

This I agree with. However, my point was relating to certain issues, not necessarily characters. I can relate to films that call for social equality, because I think it's an important thing. However, I don't think problems of the rich are important enough to identify with.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Thursday, 28 September 2006 08:42 (nineteen years ago)

I don't think problems of cartoon rabbits are important enough to identify with.

― Leopold Boom! (noodle vague), Thursday, 28 September 2006 08:43 (nineteen years ago)

Well, that's your problem.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Thursday, 28 September 2006 08:44 (nineteen years ago)

I don't think problems of the rich are important enough to identify with.

-- Tuomas (lixnix...), September 28th, 2006.

some of the "problems" that rich people have, like the inevitability of death, loneliness, despair, the transience of love and the impossibility of true communication, are common to every1 lol.

― EARLY-90S MAN (Enrique), Thursday, 28 September 2006 08:46 (nineteen years ago)

Yes, that's why I was speaking about issues only the rich have. Read my previous posts. Of course there are universal problems all people share.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Thursday, 28 September 2006 08:52 (nineteen years ago)

Head to the mothahuggin hands.

― Leopold Boom! (noodle vague), Thursday, 28 September 2006 08:54 (nineteen years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.