Very different, a bit deeper, and somewhat provocative.
This an interesting interview between Natalie Portman and Jim Sheridan on film making and near the end of the interview more specifically about Brothers. Sheridan gives a lot of insight to his philosophy to making movies.
Around the 7 minute mark he talks about Jake in Brothers, and Jake's reluctance let go to get angry in the family dynamic, about Jake not wanting to go there, and how he thinks Jake didn't think it was cool. But I wondered this, that maybe it wasn't about to being cool, but afraid of tapping emotions that you can't rein back in on set, that too much would too open in the process, too vulnerable. Any thoughts?
More in the muddle of movie and emotions, we have long read about Jake challenging directors or disagreeing in the process, while all actors need to bring their viewpoint into their character or story do you think its different for the son of a director. Could it be that the understand the director's job differently because they have a different type of knowledge than other actors, is it because he thinks he could do it better himself, or could it be that director is the parental figure and it becomes a chance for Jake to exercise all those moment and challenges he can't otherwise? Despite the conflicts he still seem to hold the directors he tangles with with a level of respect that is similar to what a son has for a father.
I do wonder if his working relationship with Nicole Holofcener who directed Lovely & Amazing was different.
What do you think?
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
On the couch
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
35 comments:
The comments linked by Film Drunk in the last thread are hilarious.
yes, they were funny, but in a scary kinda way. wonder what regular folks think about the movie?
the discussion in today's post is very interesting.
i wonder - based on what you said - if jake has a rep as being difficult to work with? i wonder if that is interferring with him getting offers?
does he have a new project officially on yet? s.
I don't think he is difficult in the way of not performing or showing up that would make people reluctant to work with.
I think he does challenge artistically about the project. In some way I think directors while finding it difficult some days, also may find creative inspiration in it, because they are working with someone who is so invested in their performance. Jake doesn't seem like a bully to directors like some other actors have reps to be, but I think he is not intimated by them, and I think that might be part of core of some of the moments on set.
New project with Anne Hathaway is on, Anne confirmed it few weeks ago on The View. Filming planned for this fall.
Having watched Jake's DVD commentaries from his films, I have the impression Jake has a very strong desire to please and be liked to the point of masking his true self to do so, even beyond the bearding issue. Granted he knew a camera was on, but you can tell by others comments that he was always performing even when off camera. He's even admitted that he does not show the real Jake except to very few people. I find it odd that he is so needy, since he is obviously well loved by his family, but he also has talked about how hard it was to get their attention when he was a child.
I haven't listened to the interview yet, so I can't gauge the tone of the remarks, but I wonder that too Sienna. Or is this kind of interaction with directors common, and we just are not following other actors close enough to hear about it? Either way, it might not be taken as well coming from someone of Jake's status, as opposed to say an A-list star and/or someone who has been acting for decades.
From everything Jake has talked about in the past, he has always brought his own opinions into his characters and has never been shy about arguing with the directors about it.
He's been getting steady work for several years, so I don't think it's a problem. I tend to think it's more like Special said and the directors don't really mind because it shows that Jake is interested in making a good movie. And I would think it's a nice way to brainstorm how to do things if there's someone that disagrees with you every now and then.
I find it odd that he is so needy, since he is obviously well loved by his family, but he also has talked about how hard it was to get their attention when he was a child.
I always get the feeling that Jake had to constantly prove himself when he was younger because he and Maggie were expected to be good in order to get love from their parents, so I kind of understand his tendency to act in exactly the way he thinks the people want him to act.
Even now I don't think they're really all that supportive of his real life.
I think with Austin it's probably very different and he does love Jake unconditionally, which would also be a reason why Jake always looks so enamored with Austin and they've been together for so long.
I found this comment curious, as well. It's definitely not cool, but it does happen in life, people are human, and it is part of the movie's characters. I wondered if he just might be reluctant to go to that place too? Or just wanted to add his own inputAnyway, Brothers looks like quite the role for him, different. Tobey's character has quite a role as well. Can't wait to see!
Just read the comments at Film Drunk. They really are funny.
I think it's easier to show pain and sorrow than it is anger. Tapping that anger and showing it opens you to being rejected because people don't like who you are when you let anger take over you. I think that Jake might have been concerned to go that far, to be that person, a person he didn't even like himself.
Jake had no problem showing us some anger. Then again, we know he only likes the ones on Reeke's speed-dial.
Crowds may be wise, but they're not necessarily savvy. Witness this online poll, where the first 2,500 respondents have deemed Mario Lopez flamingly gay, while Kevin Spacey and Vin Diesel get loads of votes as straight.
Lopez might act in a Broadway musical and take off his shirt a lot, but that doesn't make him gay. At least they got Zachary Quinto, who doesn't keep his personal life much of a secret, correct. How about a do-over with just the people who got Spacey right? Or you can just have at it in the comments.
Gawker
".... if jake has a rep as being difficult to work with?"
Yes.
^^^ Based on what?
Dear More Than Friends:
Never said it was only about sex with Robsten. Just that people forget they are young, superhorny people. It's not going to be a boring Gyllenspoon-type courtship. Isn't that why we love them, and love them together? The fiery relationships are always the best.
My guess on Toothy Tile is Tom Cruise.
Dear Too Close for Comfort:
You're two B.V. guesses would seem spot-on, but unfortunately you're off just a tad on both.
Dear Ted:
With all the closeted gay actors in Hollywood, where do straight actresses find men?
—kLa, Atlanta
Dear All the Wrong Places:
The smart ones go for the behind-the-scenes guys. The dumb ones play along as beards.
Jake afraid of his anger in acting? I dunno. Look what happened in Jarhead with his tooth and that scene where he was going to beat his fellow actor up and they didn't speak for weeks.
May be Jake's like Rupert, his managers are telling him its because of the gay but its really because of his attitude. And remember, his one Oscar nommed part was from a director who let him take the reins and interpret. Maybe its gone to his head.
Hmm.. that list is weird. I mean, Adam Lambert is totally out, and i thought Jodie Foster was as well, so it's odd that they didn't get all the votes. I don't even know who some of those folks are, like Jason Mraz and Michael Cera. Of those i do know, i think it's odd that folks think John Travolta and Pierce Brosnan are gay. I've never gotten that vibe from them, or Will and Jada. I'm not an expert or claiming to know something anyone else doesn't, just saying i don't get that vibe.
RE: Pierce B vs Jake G. I see a lot of sims there - same basic look, tall dark and gorgeous. PB always struck me as being classy sexy, while JG is more casual, cute sexy. But still, to me, they kinda fit the same category. And PB has lots more mannerisms, etc, that one might possibly connect with urban metrosexual gay wtfe behavior, but STILL, i never think gay when i see him.
He's been married to the same woman for a long time and doesn't generate much press or gossip.
if it weren't for all the oh-so-boring photo-ops of J/R, i might be ready to think that they are the real deal, but there is just always some little detail that won't let me make the switch.
for instance: that picture of him hugging her on the set in DC: they both looked sweet and happy and content, but like they were hugging their bro/sis or even a teddy bear. they just don't give off a romantic vibe at all, imho.
did ya'll get a romantic vibe with him and Kr?
Coincidentally, Jake Gyllynhaal also answers to “Portman,” especially as it gets close to Fleet Week.
It’d be more believable if it were Jake Gyllenhaal fucking his wife’s brother.
When Tobey returns does he actually catch his broha and wife together? How awkward would that be? Walking in to see your brother getting plowed in the cornhole by a 12 inch black death-cock worn by the woman you married?!?!
I wonder if the incident doing Jarhead has made him reluctant to tap into that again.
The process that actor sometimes have to go through to get into the place they need to do a roll is something that alway fascinates me. What do you tap into to create some of these performances, sometimes it seems like it can be not just physically exhausting, but emotionally as well.
Jake can't be that difficult, even Fincher wants to work with Jake again. And Jake's never had any of this co-stars not do press for their movie because him and his behavior on set. Even Ruffalo who dressed down Jake a little is still friendly with Jake even a year after making Zodiac.
Now Kevin Smith, or Vince Vaughn can't say that about Ms. W.
*today's the day to get out there and do what I need to do because all the paps and people are interested in MJ*
I think one of the reason people think Pierce is because his wife is not some skinny little cookie cutter wife. This is second wife after losing his first wife to cancer. Kelly was slender when they married but now many would consider her to plus size. He has no problem with that at all, but Hollywood seems to.
*drives off in minivan with BT strapped in the back*
Sorry I got Pierce's wifes name wrong - its Keely Shaye Smith.
ROFLMAO "Jake".
Drive a mini van? You should've spent it with me shopping.
An actor's job is simple: learn the lines, show up to the set sober and not suck on camera.
It is the director's job to interpret the script, the entire production is under his/her purview, it's their ideas, their opinion, their vision that we, the audience, experience on screen. Their word on everything is, and should be, final. (Of course, some editors would vehemently disagree with this)
A professional actor will view their character through that director's lens, that is what they've been hired to do, after all, play a role within the parameters given. It is the consumate professional actor that is able to take the director's vision of the character's motivations and journey along with their own thoughts and ideas, melding the two into a solid performance.
And they will do this time and again, film after film, regardless of director or script, for they understand the actor's role, as an extension of the director's will.
(Now, a good director is one that provides a safe environment for the actor in which to experiment and stretch. A good director understands the process, and encourages it. Neither hamfisted and tyrannical with the actors, nor a push over to capricous whims, a good director chooses a destination, explains as they travel, and makes the entire trip successful for all.)
I am always reminded, when discussions of film acting arise, of something Sir Ian Holm once said on this subject. On each take, he tweaks his performance just slightly, changed readings, altered body language, a new subtext, all still within the script and role, but separate and different results for every take. Married to none in particular - all is good work in his eye - he does this in order to offer up a wide range from which to choose, turning the final product of the character over to director.
And right there is the best example of an actor.
That's me!
Not to be snarky, because i'm swearing off that, but still... i looked at the pic of reese shopping. does she have ANY sense of what looks good on her and what doesn't? yikes.
Reese doesn't even know how mismatched her fake bf looks with her, so how can you expect her to put clothes together?!
I wouldn't wear the Chin's outfits to a dogfight.
We got to expect some reeke soon. Tooooo long no Jed and Granny. Looks like Granny was out shopping. Look out something is up.
Flared nostrils of entitlement are my best accessory!
Thanks ME for the comments about actors, directors, and Sir Ian Holm.
The Mass. Attorney General is suing the U.S. over same-sex marriage benefits.
News
ME, that confirms what I would have thought about actors and directors. I am far more inclined to chose a movie based on the director than I am the actors in it.
Post a Comment