Saturday, April 17, 2010

It's takes a village....



....to build a kingdom and movie too.


That's one big group of people who will be celebrating when PoP premieres next month. And PoP's so big it need to PoP twice.


The UK Premiere of PoP will be in London on May 9th. And now we know the Hollywood premiere will be Monday May 17th and be very old Hollywood with at Grauman’s Chinese Theater. The premiere is a benefit for the American Film Institute.



Also as part of the benefit, the Mann Chinese 6 and El Capitan Theaters will present "A Cinematic Celebration of Jerry Bruckheimer," which will include screenings of Armageddon; National Treasure; Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl; and Top Gun. Each of the screenings will be introduced by an actor or filmmaker from that movie.

There's more and more pictures and information coming out about the massive undertaking making PoP was. Not only an epic on screen, but it must have been epic in just trying to coordinating that many people, animals, locations, and departments.

No wonder no one caught Jake's shirt open so much. ; )


Then again Mike Newell said Jake is a naughty boy.

In a featured in Entertainment Weekly's Summer Movie Preview, Newell and Jake both chat about PoP.

"Watching Jake rehearse his fight scenes was like watching ballet,"

"He's like a little Lord of Misrule," joked Newell referring to the traditional English jester. "It's great to have a hero doesn't take himself to seriously, and Jake's got a tremendous cheekiness to him. He's a naughty boy."

Think Jake's got it all over this guy but he could do the boots. : )

42 comments:

fun said...

I wonder if they'll have a POP mouse pad.

fun said...

I have a mousepad that I got at an aquarium. It has water (or glycerin?) in it with little fake sea creatures that swim around when I move the mouse on it. It would be cool if they made a mousepad for POP with ostriches, camels, horses and natives, maybe the dagger and the Prince of course, all moving around on a fluid swirling sand.

Special K said...

They should make a PoP pen. When you turn it upside down Dastan loses his shirt.

Methodical Muse said...

^ I'll take a life time supply, please.

Methodical Muse said...

Btw: Notice how in "A Conversation With The Prince" article, currently posted on WDW, Jake actually articulates in complete sentences. No babble. No lack of clarity. No jumbled clauses or lost direct objects. Fluid and lucid from beginning to end. Either someone took a hatchet to Jake's GQ interview, or maybe "Sybil" and not Benjamin is his real middle name.

ihj said...

Jake filming on the set of Source Code 4/14/10

c said...

That article in that gamers magazine. A conversation with the Prince sounds like a patchwork of actual Jake quotes and filler. No one toik a hatchet job to that interview "Metodical muse", just google Jake/interviews and you will see evidence of his babbling going way back.

I think in that case the gamers don't want Jake to come across like he has ADD

booooring said...

Don't you have anything else to do than spend all day talking about Jake supposedly having ADD, Jack?
No one's going to ask you if you know that from an insider source, cause everyone knows you have none. So you can stop now.

wake up said...

Check out Jake's previous interviews, including the GQ 2007 one. If anything, the gamers interview is a hatchet job. Check out his interview with Quint on AICN, classic babble.

He isn't dumb IMO but has trouble collecting his thougts.

Methodical Muse said...

But, don't forget that the GQ article is full of fillers and rehashed quotes as well, and still reads like a fourth grader put it together in several places. I'm not denying that Jake has some issues related to focusing and impulsiveness. Kind of part of his charm, actually, and certainly not unusal traits for a performer to possess. But, in TV interviews, he often is articulate, funny and can coherently talk about a variety of topics, without confusing the interviewer or the audience. I came across a 2005 YouTube video yesterday in which Jake is certainly physically fidgety, but his thoughts are powerful, moving and hardly lack sensitivity or coherency. Even more telling, he is wearing a necklace and he does not "absent-mindedly" touch that thing once. Those kind of neurotic behaviors are usually well established by the time someone is an adult. Odd that he suddenly felt the need to not only pull out that piece of jewelry, but does so in such an obvious way that the interviewer just had to ask him about it and include it in the article. Conveniently dispelling any suspicion that that there is a ring near his heart that might have more significance than Jake would like to reveal. Forgive my need to question what is beneath the surface. Actually, I think Jake would think less of us, if we just bought the PR line like some witless zombie. Take a look for yourself:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zusaIRvcezY

GLAAD said...

The 21st Annual GLAAD Media Awards will be held in Los Angeles on Saturday, April 17, 2010, starting at 4:30pm PT.

The GLAAD Media Awards recognize and honor media for their fair, accurate and inclusive representations of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community and the issues that affect their lives.

Red Carpet Live Broadcast

Special K said...

That is a great interview that Jake did back in 2005, it was shot when BBM was at the Venice Film Festival.

If you notice Jake tends to open up more to foreign press I think because they don't to make such a big deal about everything like they do here in the US.

I still think that Jake took those rings out on purpose to show that there were two rings on the chains, and that it didn't pass the review from him reps. Reading it again it said rings on both chains, and then only describes a ring and medal. Looking at that video from 2005 you see that Jake wears more than one thing on a chain. So I think that each chain had a ring on it and one had the medal with a ring on it. When I read that section I still see an edit in their were they cut out the other ring description.

Taking the rings out would have had the interviewer asking about them, and Jake trying to see if could at least get mention of them in. I think sometimes he tries when he doesn't have reps with him, to say and do things and see if it can get by all the control.

The word was that he had set up and interview where he said he was bisexual, around the time BBM came out. Was it in Details? That the writer had written it up and it was complete pulled apart after it got to his reps. And in the end it didn't really say anything.

Special K said...

Up until broke back Jake used to wear all kinds of jewelry sometimes all at the same time. A couple of changes with several things on them, the three pinky rings together, the ring on his thumb, and remember the bracelets?

It seems like all the jewelry he he wears comes from or has some connection to the people in his life. Maggie, Mom, etc. And that's why i think that he would be wearing the medal as something with Austin, and can see him having a ring that is shared with Austin on that same chain as another connection.

Methodical Muse said...

Hey, Special.

I think that each chain had a ring on it and one had the medal with a ring on it. When I read that section I still see an edit in their were they cut out the other ring description.

Agree, completely. Jake is indeed a daring and, I believe, fundamentally candid person. He has already done many things that make me think he likes to drop breadcrumbs and expects that those paying attention will put the pieces together. Regarding his possible desire to out himself as being bisexual, it's possible that the DETAILS magazine interview was where he planned to dip his toe into the murky pond, but I don't think he was intending to take the total leap, just yet. Although, I can't deny that Jake did express some pretty remarkable thoughts about his openness to how people might choose to view him:

"As for his sexual orientation, he says this: "You know, it's flattering when there's a rumor that says I'm bisexual. It means I can play more kinds of roles. I'm open to whatever people want to call me. I've never really been attracted to men sexually, but I don't think I would be afraid of it if it happened."

Of course, he then diluted his provocative assertion by supposedly telling the interviewer that he didn't think that Jack and Ennis were gay! Even adding that he related to the characters as a straight man. Don't forget that the last statement apparently even surprised James Shamus when the interviewer told him what Jake had said.

So one moment, Jake's fine with people thinking he's bisexual. Even seeing such a possibility as a positive opportunity for his career. The next instance, he wants to make sure people don't think he's even playing the part of a gay man. WTF?

Then again, such confusing polarities do point to an internal confusion that would not be noticeable in a well-adjusted straight man. So we are back to where we started. LOL.

m said...

I'm not surprised that the Jack is not gay comment shocked Shamus. Not many straight men visit Mexican male prostitutes when a couple of high altitude f---s a year wont do.

I've always thought Jake was all set to come out as gay, not bisexual, but the success of BBM and its award trajectory is what first caused him to wait. It would have taken attention away from the film at the time.

Love the description of Jake being the Lord of Misrule and a naughty boy. So true and he can't help but let that out. It's at big part of his charm.

I'm a bit behind on the most recent interviews. We've suddenly been noticing water oozing up from the floor in the laundry room and damn there appears to be a leak in the vicinity of the washer/dryer. I hope it does not cost a fortune. Plumbing problems are never cheap.

prairiegirl said...

Not many straight men visit Mexican male prostitutes when a couple of high altitude f---s a year wont do.


LOL. That's classic, m.

What goes through Jake's head sometimes? I swear.

prairiegirl said...

I need to hit the hay. I've been out all evening and I'm so close to finishing my story. It's hard to put the keyboard down, lol.

I'm so close. How close? Thisclose.

Methodical Muse said...

Love the description of Jake being the Lord of Misrule and a naughty boy. So true and he can't help but let that out. It's at big part of his charm.

His irrepressibility is indeed part of his allure. That untamed, "I'm ready for anything," spirit. Mischievous, yet robustly fun-loving. What's not to love about that?!

I just had some plumbing work done this afternoon and I couldn't believe how the guy tried to charge me for every little thing. When I asked if he wouldn't mind tightening the showerhead because I didn't have the right tool, he said he would do it if I bought his lunch! I wish you the best of luck and hope the leak is easily repaired.

d said...

What goes through Jake's head sometimes? I swear.

he displays signs of bipolar disorder

Been there - done that said...

Of course, he then diluted his provocative assertion by supposedly telling the interviewer that he didn't think that Jack and Ennis were gay! Even adding that he related to the characters as a straight man. Don't forget that the last statement apparently even surprised James Shamus when the interviewer told him what Jake had said.

Back to this again. When I went to see the movie I knew nothing about the short story BBM, or Annie P. This movie was not promoted as A Gay cowboy movie.
It was promoted as a movie about two men in the 60's who just happen to fall in love out of the uniqe circumstance they both were faced with. "Love is a Force of Nature" was the pitch for this movie, not "Two gay cowboys have a love affair for over two years. The promotion did not even illude to the idea that these two were gay, but about two straight men that found themselves in love with one another. So I can totally understand Jake's point with this movie and that the Jack and Ennis not being gay.
Now as I posted previously , the producers and the writer may have thought of them as being gay or knew what Annie's Idea of them was, and I'm sure it was gay, but they do, I assume have to play a part in the promoting and selling of this film. So it seems that Jake was dealing with it from the stand point of the pitch of the movie. I know the gay community will bash this idea and still consider any man dealing with another man as nothing but gay no matter if he's interest in the opposite sex also. That's all I'm gonna say about that!

I for one did not go to see BBM knowing it was about two gay cowboys in a long relationship, but two men who had very complex situations and lives. Two staight male strangers who met, became aquaintences, then close friends and just happened to fall in love with each other. This is how (I Think) Jake is explaining it.
I also thought that the sexual experience was the first for them both, but you realize that Jack had or seemed to have acted out on his sexual needs before meeting Ennis. The movie nor the book expounded on this though. I think the audience could easily see or come to see that for Ennis, this sexual experience with another man was new to him and he did not want to be with any other man.
So I don't understand the big fracas about Jake's statement. I don't see it at all.
I think the producers or the studios pulled a fast one. I do remember reading somewhere after seeing the movie, how fragile it was to promote it, and it had to be done the right way. Well it worked for me and I'm glad.

whut?! said...

the last statement apparently even surprised James Shamus

LOL. I don't remember that. Do you remember what Schamus said or a description of his expression? IIRC he's very gay friendly so it must have been a shock/hilarious for him to hear that from Jake of all people.

snort said...

couch fraus will twist anything to make JG look gay.

prairiegirl said...

I definitely know I read where Schamus said he was surprised by what Jake said.

I see your point, Been There etc. Very well presented.

I don't buy it at all, no. I went into the movie as well pretty much not knowing what to expect and well, most everyone here knows my personal story, there's no need to repeat all of that.

I agree that the FNIT would seem to be Ennis' first experience and perhaps it was Jack's. We don't know about Jack, it may have been judging by his age in the movie, at least that was probably his first experience with that particular sex act. But probably most people would agree at least that it was Ennis' first. That doesn't mean that Ennis never had those feelings towards another male before, though.

I think to try and spin it into that movie being about two straight men who happened to find this special, once in a lifetime bond with a member of the same sex but never would happen again is like trying to give permission to one self how this can happen. Like trying to say "Well, it would never happen again, though, so that makes it okay." Like it was a million to one shot.

Like m said, Jack had no problems denying who he was, where his desires lie because he went down to Mexico to seek his physical release.

And Ennis tried. A little. He tried to make it work with Cassie. But looking at Ennis trying to make it with Cassie on the dance floor is like watching Jake with Reese.

Their heart just isn't in it. Ennis knew who he was towards the end. That's why he was holed up in that trailer. Who's to say Ennis wouldn't have found another man somewhere down the line had the story continued. Jack was indeed the love of his life but that doesn't have anything to do with where Ennis really wanted to put his dick.

And that's how I saw it.

prairiegirl said...

LOL, not that Jake was trying to make it work with Reese.

Their performance just was totally flat. They couldn't even put their acting chops into a decent performance.

lol said...

snicker

not again said...

I know the gay community will bash this idea and still consider any man dealing with another man as nothing but gay no matter if he's interest in the opposite sex also. That's all I'm gonna say about that!

Why are you posting that ignorant bullshit again?

c said...

Why are you posting that ignorant bullshit again?

coz sofa frumps know nothing about gay men's lives, except what they write in their fanciful slash

d said...

Trolly, you are ignorant AND dumber than a bag of hammers.

c said...

gasbag, don't exert yourself too much typing more than 3 words. Doughnut break in 5 mins.

e said...

Stupid trolly, no need to waste time on you.

fu said...

I see it took you 5 mins to respond...brush the doughnut crumbs off your thunder thighs

FO said...

Trolly, you need new insults, you are stupid and boring.

know your trolls said...

Are talking to yourself again?

lol said...

Yes, you were too busy with your face in a dessert bowl

wonderful (not) said...

^^And to think this lovely little exchange won't be deleted. How nice.

silly trolls said...

what's got the trollys all in a twist? Ted must be going to gives us something really big.

bologna said...

Huh? Trolls troll all the time. It has nothing to do with Ted. Trolls do not have advance knowledge of what Jake or Ted is going to do.

lol said...

"bologna" lol. Food is always on the mind of the sofa frump

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Special K said...

No Anons.

Looks like people do want to talk to themselves.

? said...

No Anons, but obvious troll posts and insulting OMG posters is OK?

:) said...

hehe