Jolie to play widow of journalist Daniel Pearl
Actress Angelina Jolie will star in a movie as the widow of murdered Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, trade paper Daily Variety reported in its Thursday edition. . . .
English filmmaker Michael Winterbottom, famed for such war-based films as "Welcome to Sarajevo" and "The Road to Guantanamo," will direct. . . .
Reuters, July 13
- - -
Hmmm, what ever happened to "famed for such Thomas Hardy-based films as Jude and The Claim"? Or "famed for such weird, post-modern, Steve Coogan-starring films as 24 Hour Party People and Tristram Shandy: A Cock and Bull Story"?
Full Version: A Mighty Heart
Pakistan may allow film on slain journalist Pearl
Pakistan may consider granting permission for the shooting of a film about slain U.S. reporter Daniel Pearl, an official said on Thursday. Police last month detained crew members who were shooting for the movie "A Mighty Heart" near the hotel in the southern city of Karachi from where the Wall Street Journal reporter was abducted in early 2002. . . . Officials said the Karachi shoot had been stopped because filming permission had not been granted. "They didn't apply for permission. They just came in without any permission and started shooting. This is not the way," the home secretary of the southern province of Sindh, Gholam Mohtaram, told Reuters. Karachi is the capital of Sindh. "They made ordinary people wear police uniforms and started shooting, which was objectionable." Mohtaram said the government would consider permission for shooting if request was made "through proper channels." . . .
Reuters, September 14
Pakistan may consider granting permission for the shooting of a film about slain U.S. reporter Daniel Pearl, an official said on Thursday. Police last month detained crew members who were shooting for the movie "A Mighty Heart" near the hotel in the southern city of Karachi from where the Wall Street Journal reporter was abducted in early 2002. . . . Officials said the Karachi shoot had been stopped because filming permission had not been granted. "They didn't apply for permission. They just came in without any permission and started shooting. This is not the way," the home secretary of the southern province of Sindh, Gholam Mohtaram, told Reuters. Karachi is the capital of Sindh. "They made ordinary people wear police uniforms and started shooting, which was objectionable." Mohtaram said the government would consider permission for shooting if request was made "through proper channels." . . .
Reuters, September 14
QUOTE(Peter T Chattaway @ Sep 15 2006, 07:02 AM) [snapback]126783[/snapback]
Officials said the Karachi shoot had been stopped because filming permission had not been granted. "They didn't apply for permission. They just came in without any permission and started shooting. This is not the way," the home secretary of the southern province of Sindh, Gholam Mohtaram, told Reuters. Karachi is the capital of Sindh. "They made ordinary people wear police uniforms and started shooting, which was objectionable." Mohtaram said the government would consider permission for shooting if request was made "through proper channels." . . .
Hmm. Doesn't quite seem the way to go about it in the current international context. I wonder if Winterbottom is one of those people who really don't care what other people might think. Or maybe, after The Road to Guantanamo, he thought he could do anything he liked there.
QUOTE
Hmmm, what ever happened to "famed for such Thomas Hardy-based films as Jude and The Claim"? Or "famed for such weird, post-modern, Steve Coogan-starring films as 24 Hour Party People and Tristram Shandy: A Cock and Bull Story"?
Or even 'famed for such controversially explicit but reportedly dull-as-ditchwater films as 9 Songs.
I didn't get to see A Cock and Bull Story until it was on DVD and then only watched it reluctantly. Yes it was weird and postmodern, but I found it to be enjoyable and quite cleverly-constructed fun. I have a feeling Sterne might have approved.
Tony Watkins wrote:
: Or even 'famed for such controversially explicit but reportedly dull-as-ditchwater films as 9 Songs.
Well, we'd need a second film to justify the use of the plural.
: Or even 'famed for such controversially explicit but reportedly dull-as-ditchwater films as 9 Songs.
Well, we'd need a second film to justify the use of the plural.
QUOTE(Peter T Chattaway @ Sep 15 2006, 11:40 AM) [snapback]126793[/snapback]
Tony Watkins wrote:
: Or even 'famed for such controversially explicit but reportedly dull-as-ditchwater films as 9 Songs.
Well, we'd need a second film to justify the use of the plural.
That's very true. And we'll just have to hope that we don't get one.
There is a screening in LA next Thursday (day before opening) followed by a panel discussion ("Building Unity in Today's World") sponsored by Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), Progressive Christians Uniting, and Paramount Vantage; and supported by Interfaith Communities United for Justice and Peace, Pax Christi Los Angeles, and Cafe Intifada. Panelists will include Producer Dede Gardner; Co-producer Brad Pitt; Hussam Ayloush, Ex. Dir of CAIR-LA; Rabbi Haim Beliak, Founder of Jews on First (is that about Shawn Green?); and the Rev. Peter Laarman, Ex. Dir of Progressive Christians Uniting. Moderated by Diane Winston, Knight Chair in Media and Religion at USC.
I've RSVP'd.
A strange thing from IMDB. It currently shows 320 ratings, of which 41.6% are 10, 30.9% are 1. Somehow I don't trust the reliablity of the rating.
Aside: this now makes 3 screenings and an interview next week. This is beginning to feel like a job.
I've RSVP'd.
A strange thing from IMDB. It currently shows 320 ratings, of which 41.6% are 10, 30.9% are 1. Somehow I don't trust the reliablity of the rating.
Aside: this now makes 3 screenings and an interview next week. This is beginning to feel like a job.
This discussion topic has been renamed to match its subject work.
When starting a new topic, wherever possible, please name your title the same as the movie/book/album/play/work that it discusses. This makes searches easier and is necessary to support our rating system.
If necessary, to distinguish identically titled works, please append the work's release year in parenthesis.
Please send me a personal message if you have any questions.
When starting a new topic, wherever possible, please name your title the same as the movie/book/album/play/work that it discusses. This makes searches easier and is necessary to support our rating system.
If necessary, to distinguish identically titled works, please append the work's release year in parenthesis.
Please send me a personal message if you have any questions.
Darrel Manson wrote:
: There is a screening in LA next Thursday (day before opening) followed by a panel discussion . . .
I just got the Grace Hill Media invite too, which I thought was interesting, considering there are no noticeably Christian characters in the film -- just a Jewish victim of terrorism, his Buddhist wife, and lots and lots of Muslims.
Incidentally, I'd have to say I agree with Lisa Schwarzbaum that Jolie's sheer star power -- and the fact that you are always aware that this is a PERFORMANCE -- works against the film. The other day my wife happened to take United 93 out of the library, and the bits that I saw, I was impressed once again by the film's sheer naturalism. A Mighty Heart seems to aim for a similar aesthetic, but the casting gets in the way.
: There is a screening in LA next Thursday (day before opening) followed by a panel discussion . . .
I just got the Grace Hill Media invite too, which I thought was interesting, considering there are no noticeably Christian characters in the film -- just a Jewish victim of terrorism, his Buddhist wife, and lots and lots of Muslims.
Incidentally, I'd have to say I agree with Lisa Schwarzbaum that Jolie's sheer star power -- and the fact that you are always aware that this is a PERFORMANCE -- works against the film. The other day my wife happened to take United 93 out of the library, and the bits that I saw, I was impressed once again by the film's sheer naturalism. A Mighty Heart seems to aim for a similar aesthetic, but the casting gets in the way.
Where 'Heart' goes, controversy follows
Controversy continued to dog "A Mighty Heart" on the eve of its bigscreen bow, as pic drew fire over a screening designed to promote religious tolerance. . . . However, a Jewish activist decried the leanings of several of the participants, likening CAIR's involvement to "David Duke co-sponsoring 'Schindler's List.'" . . .
Variety, June 21
Controversy continued to dog "A Mighty Heart" on the eve of its bigscreen bow, as pic drew fire over a screening designed to promote religious tolerance. . . . However, a Jewish activist decried the leanings of several of the participants, likening CAIR's involvement to "David Duke co-sponsoring 'Schindler's List.'" . . .
Variety, June 21
Don't forget to rate this work by clicking "Rating", above, selecting a rating, and clicking "Rate". When five users have submitted a rating, the group rating will be displayed.
For guidance on selecting or understanding ratings, please click here.
For guidance on selecting or understanding ratings, please click here.
This wants to be The Important Movie of the year. Maybe it is, maybe not. Winterbottom does nice work here in making the events of the story more of the subplot for the personal study of Mariane Pearl and the sense of cooperation between people and peoples that serves as the theme of the film. At times I thought it seemed a bit cold (in part because Mariane, as portrayed here, is so stoic through much of the ordeal).
Religious aspects are present, but not central to the film. There is one spot where we see a load of people doing their prayers at a mosque followed by a shot of Mariane saying her prayer at her shrine at home, but that it the most pronounced. Also in flashback to wedding, there is note of Buddhism and it's understandings, and the trappings of Jewish wedding (complete with very poignant reasons for breaking the glass). It does reflect an understanding that religious differences need not divide.
To be sure, it is is deemed to be T.I.M. of the year, it will be well represented at awards time. If it doesn't establish itself as such, it may be easily forgotten.
Religious aspects are present, but not central to the film. There is one spot where we see a load of people doing their prayers at a mosque followed by a shot of Mariane saying her prayer at her shrine at home, but that it the most pronounced. Also in flashback to wedding, there is note of Buddhism and it's understandings, and the trappings of Jewish wedding (complete with very poignant reasons for breaking the glass). It does reflect an understanding that religious differences need not divide.
To be sure, it is is deemed to be T.I.M. of the year, it will be well represented at awards time. If it doesn't establish itself as such, it may be easily forgotten.
FWIW, my review.
Darrel Manson wrote:
: Also in flashback to wedding, there is note of Buddhism and it's understandings, and the trappings of Jewish wedding (complete with very poignant reasons for breaking the glass).
Are those reasons accurate, though? My understanding was that the breaking of the glass symbolizes the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem. (A quick bit of Googling turns up this: "A glass is now placed on the floor, and the chatan shatters it with his foot. This act serves as an expression of sadness at the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem, and identifies the couple with the spiritual and national destiny of the Jewish people. A Jew, even at the moment of greatest rejoicing, is always mindful of the Psalmist's injunction to set Jerusalem above my highest joy. Others explain that this is the last time the groom gets to put his foot down.")
Without meaning to disrespect anyone, Christian or Jewish, the reasons we hear in the film for the breaking of the glass sounded to me an awful lot like a Jewish variation on the liberal, non-historical interpretations of scripture or the sacraments that we sometimes hear in Christian circles. So I guess, to the extent that the more liberal Jews do offer the reasons for the breaking of the glass that we hear in the film, the film may indeed be accurate.
Darrel Manson wrote:
: Also in flashback to wedding, there is note of Buddhism and it's understandings, and the trappings of Jewish wedding (complete with very poignant reasons for breaking the glass).
Are those reasons accurate, though? My understanding was that the breaking of the glass symbolizes the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem. (A quick bit of Googling turns up this: "A glass is now placed on the floor, and the chatan shatters it with his foot. This act serves as an expression of sadness at the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem, and identifies the couple with the spiritual and national destiny of the Jewish people. A Jew, even at the moment of greatest rejoicing, is always mindful of the Psalmist's injunction to set Jerusalem above my highest joy. Others explain that this is the last time the groom gets to put his foot down.")
Without meaning to disrespect anyone, Christian or Jewish, the reasons we hear in the film for the breaking of the glass sounded to me an awful lot like a Jewish variation on the liberal, non-historical interpretations of scripture or the sacraments that we sometimes hear in Christian circles. So I guess, to the extent that the more liberal Jews do offer the reasons for the breaking of the glass that we hear in the film, the film may indeed be accurate.
yeah, it was the first time I'd heard those interpretations of breaking the glass as well. But since Pearl isn't portrayed as a religious Jew, it could be that he was at home with a more liberal understanding of traditions. Keep in mind it was an interfaith service, something anathema to some Jews.
Very true, that had occurred to me too. My apologies if I was straining at a gnat, there.
Film critic suffers fatal 'Heart' attack
Add another chapter to the sturm und drang surrounding "A Mighty Heart": Thursday night a film critic's heart gave out before a promotional screening at the ArcLight. Anderson Jones, a former critic for E online, CNN Headline News and TNT's Roughcut, suffered a major coronary at the theater and died shortly after.
Variety, June 22
Add another chapter to the sturm und drang surrounding "A Mighty Heart": Thursday night a film critic's heart gave out before a promotional screening at the ArcLight. Anderson Jones, a former critic for E online, CNN Headline News and TNT's Roughcut, suffered a major coronary at the theater and died shortly after.
Variety, June 22
Funny coincidence. I was discussing with someone whether my review should have completely avoided any reference to the baggage that Jolie brings to this film via her offscreen persona -- the celebrity gossip, as it were (I think I refrained from getting bogged down in that, but I didn't think I could avoid alluding to it entirely; feel free to disagree with me on either of those counts, though). As we were discussing this, I vaguely remembered that Roger Ebert had referred to Jolie's offscreen persona in his review of Beyond Borders. And so I went and dug up Ebert's review of that film. And look at these opening sentences:
Anyway, it is an interesting question whether an actor's non-actorly pursuits ought to be taken into account in a film review -- either to hold back one's criticism, as in the case of Ebert's Beyond Borders review, or to hold back one's praise, as in the case of my A Mighty Heart review.
"Beyond Borders" has good intentions and wants to call attention to the plight of refugees, but what a clueless vulgarization it makes of its worthy motives. Of course there's more than one way to send a message, and maybe this movie will affect audiences that wouldn't see or understand a more truthful portrait of refugees, like Michael Winterbottom's recent "In This World." The movie stars Angelina Jolie, who is personally involved in efforts to help refugees and isn't simply dining out on a fashionable cause. . . .Funny to see Jolie and Winterbottom juxtaposed -- indeed, contrasted -- a few years before they actually COLLABORATED on this film.
Anyway, it is an interesting question whether an actor's non-actorly pursuits ought to be taken into account in a film review -- either to hold back one's criticism, as in the case of Ebert's Beyond Borders review, or to hold back one's praise, as in the case of my A Mighty Heart review.
Well, while you're asking whether you should or shouldn't discuss Jolie's celebrity in a review...
I give you Anthony Lane's "review" of A Mighty Heart.
Here's just the beginning:
I give you Anthony Lane's "review" of A Mighty Heart.
Here's just the beginning:
QUOTE
How do you solve a problem like Angelina? Ms. Jolie is now more of a brand than a person, and she comes in six flavors:
1. The celebrity. Angelina Jolie is so famous that when she looks in the mirror her reflection asks for an autograph. The only publication in this country yet to feature her on its cover is The American Numismatic Magazine, and even that will change the moment she bends down to pick up a nickel.
2. The sexpot. In this she is unchallenged, and yet her timing is off by fifty years. When it comes to channelling her carnal appeal, no current film director has a clue; the guy she needs is Frank Tashlin, who guided Jayne Mansfield through “The Girl Can’t Help It” (1956) and “Will Success Spoil Rock Hunter?” (1957), and whose eyeballs, if confronted with Jolie in the flesh, would pop out on cartoon springs and bob around.
3. The Brad handler. She took one look at the world’s most widely desired man and scooped him up with no more ado than a Parisian grande dame tucking a Chihuahua into her clutch bag.
4. The mother. Official estimates as to how many children Jolie now possesses, and from how many continents, change on a weekly basis. When not giving birth herself, she likes to order in. How this has affected Mr. Pitt is unclear, but his expression is sometimes that of a man who stepped out to hail a cab and got run over by a fleet of trucks.
5. The world saver. Jolie is a Goodwill Ambassador for the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. Her father, Jon Voight, told the Biography Channel that “she’s developed into one of our great humanitarians.” This was clearly on the minds of political leaders when they met Jolie at a summit of the World Economic Forum in Davos two years ago. Half of them offered their entire foreign-aid budget for a chance to fetch her a mai tai.
6. Oh yes, the actress. This last talent, so often neglected, is displayed in her new film, “A Mighty Heart,” and without it the legend of Angelina Jolie would be little more than a vaporous joke.
The movie, directed by Michael Winterbottom, lies about as far from the trials of Lara Croft as is cinematically possible.
1. The celebrity. Angelina Jolie is so famous that when she looks in the mirror her reflection asks for an autograph. The only publication in this country yet to feature her on its cover is The American Numismatic Magazine, and even that will change the moment she bends down to pick up a nickel.
2. The sexpot. In this she is unchallenged, and yet her timing is off by fifty years. When it comes to channelling her carnal appeal, no current film director has a clue; the guy she needs is Frank Tashlin, who guided Jayne Mansfield through “The Girl Can’t Help It” (1956) and “Will Success Spoil Rock Hunter?” (1957), and whose eyeballs, if confronted with Jolie in the flesh, would pop out on cartoon springs and bob around.
3. The Brad handler. She took one look at the world’s most widely desired man and scooped him up with no more ado than a Parisian grande dame tucking a Chihuahua into her clutch bag.
4. The mother. Official estimates as to how many children Jolie now possesses, and from how many continents, change on a weekly basis. When not giving birth herself, she likes to order in. How this has affected Mr. Pitt is unclear, but his expression is sometimes that of a man who stepped out to hail a cab and got run over by a fleet of trucks.
5. The world saver. Jolie is a Goodwill Ambassador for the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. Her father, Jon Voight, told the Biography Channel that “she’s developed into one of our great humanitarians.” This was clearly on the minds of political leaders when they met Jolie at a summit of the World Economic Forum in Davos two years ago. Half of them offered their entire foreign-aid budget for a chance to fetch her a mai tai.
6. Oh yes, the actress. This last talent, so often neglected, is displayed in her new film, “A Mighty Heart,” and without it the legend of Angelina Jolie would be little more than a vaporous joke.
The movie, directed by Michael Winterbottom, lies about as far from the trials of Lara Croft as is cinematically possible.
Heh, yeah, I'd seen that one.
Perhaps (or not) it should be noted that the credits announced that this was a carbon-neutral film - likely the new badge of honor for liberal leaning films.
Paramount tries 'Heart' surgery
"A Mighty Heart" is still beating. Paramount Vantage has come up with a new game plan for the pic after a weak opening and a steep decline in the second frame, cutting back the number of screens from 1,350 to 651 beginning this weekend. Idea is to keep the film, starring Angelina Jolie, alive in urban and other key markets with the goal of a longer box office run -- a key advantage of a more limited play. It's basically a retroactive platform release and a variation on a theme played by other studios recently. Both 20th Century Fox with "Borat" last fall and the Weinstein Co. with "Sicko" last month decided to cut back on the number of screens shortly in advance of the films' launches. . . .
Variety, July 5
Back to Focus
Moral relativism and A Mighty Heart.
Judea Pearl (father of Daniel Pearl), The New Republic, June 3 (portions excerpted here)
"A Mighty Heart" is still beating. Paramount Vantage has come up with a new game plan for the pic after a weak opening and a steep decline in the second frame, cutting back the number of screens from 1,350 to 651 beginning this weekend. Idea is to keep the film, starring Angelina Jolie, alive in urban and other key markets with the goal of a longer box office run -- a key advantage of a more limited play. It's basically a retroactive platform release and a variation on a theme played by other studios recently. Both 20th Century Fox with "Borat" last fall and the Weinstein Co. with "Sicko" last month decided to cut back on the number of screens shortly in advance of the films' launches. . . .
Variety, July 5
Back to Focus
Moral relativism and A Mighty Heart.
Judea Pearl (father of Daniel Pearl), The New Republic, June 3 (portions excerpted here)
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.