Violent Delights

what's #2?

J-LawForever

That she's always right.

Violent Delights

okay, good to know.

J-LawForever

Yes. Now you know.

Violent Delights

Consider me informed.

J-LawForever

So you know the law now.

sunworshipper

Adam McKay To Direct Dick Cheney Movie At Paramount | Deadline

Well, ******. For someone who is supposed to be "Hollywood's most sought-after actress" and someone who hates not working, Jennifer is spending a whole lot of time in the prime of her career not shooting films. For the whole of 2016, she shoot 1 1/2 films. For 2017, Red Sparrow and what?

Zelda? Spielberg concentrating on other films, McKay is concentrating on other films, and every other project seems to be going nowhere. She supposed turned down Oceans's Eight and Widows for scheduling conflicts. She cancelled for RS?

TPF1138

Well, if McKay feels he needs to wait for the Theranos story to reach its climax before he turns it into a movie, then that seems entirely sensible to me.

Anyway, it's common for actors and actresses at Jennifer's level to shoot only one, maybe two, films in a year. I mean, I certainly want more from her too, but this really doesn't exercise me. It's just how the trade works.

Who knows anyway, she might have something else in the pipeline we don't yet know about. I'm even wondering, particularly given the confirmation in Vanity Fair that she was shadowing Lynsey Addario for research purposes, if It's What I Do might not be her next movie, and enter pre-production by the end of Summer next year...?

sunworshipper

The Theranos story seems to be in anti-climax to me. My understanding was that McKay's real interest was not the rise and fall of a woman so much as how even the venture capitalists fall prey to nepotism and the herd instinct and throw money at an idea with no solid basis.

Actors at Jennifer's level? Like who? Natalie Portman? 2015-2017, 2 films, 3 films, 3 films=8 total. Emma Stone: 3/3/2=9. Brie Larson: 3/1/4=8. Kristen Stewart: 3/4/1=8. Alicia Vikander: 4/2/3=9. Rooney Mara: 2/4/3=9. Jennifer Lawrence: 2/2/2.

She's young, very popular, critically acclaimed, her name can greenlight more projects than anyone else. And she says she want to work constantly. On indies which don't take long. She should be making 3-4 films a year.

Is the problem the idea that she's too big to play anything but the lead now?

Violent Delights

I don't think it's a problem for her, she'd take a supporting role if she thought it was better imo.

sunworshipper

Based upon what? Every project that she has been attached to in the last several years has been as a lead. She's turned down supporting or ensemble roles in Ocean's Eight and Widows. The Shu-Law picture is the only half-way exception (co-lead). She even backed out of a co-lead in The Rosie Project.

Not that I mind that. She's played a lot more leads than other actresses her age certainly and she's good enough to pull them off. I just wish she'd do some more Rosalyn Rosenfeld roles, too.

Maybe I just don't understand how much time she is spending developing projects. We haven't see any great results from that yet. Takes time, I guess. It will all be worth it if It's What I Do, Bad Blood, Zelda, and maybe Marita or The Dive work out. But none of them are a sure thing and probably most of them won't get made with her.

Yeah, I'm over-complaining. But I keep on seeing interesting projects getting delayed or cancelled. While she makes spaceship and spy films.

TPF1138

I agree with your assessment of where the film is likely to put its focus (though I think the rise and fall of Elizabeth Holmes is also very much integral) but, anti-climactic or not, we're still waiting to see what the final shape of this story is. So much of what went on is still unknown, or exists in the realm of conjecture. In fact many have been speculating as to whether they weren't being too hasty in seeming to rush towards production on the movie with the Theranos saga having only just entered its third act. If McKay hopes to make a film as comprehensive as The Big Short was, then he's best waiting until the dust settles.



I was thinking more along the lines of DiCaprio, Depp, Cruise, or Clooney who routinely shoot one, maybe two, movies, a year. That’s the level I think she’s at, and certainly the level she should be aiming to secure for herself. And yes, part of that is asking, ‘Is this a good project career-wise, at this stage’?

And you’re right, it’s also about only accepting lead roles for the foreseeable. The time will come when she’ll have established herself firmly enough as an actress around whom a movie is built (harder to do as a woman), that she’ll be in a position to take smaller roles in ensembles, or even supporting roles (if the fancy takes her), without it defining the shape and nature of her career. At the moment, it’s important she make it clear, that if studios want her on their docket they have to supply her with material that puts her in the lead, or gives her a certain degree of control.

Of course, a string of box office failures will change studio’s opinions of her, and not make it quite so important to them that she be on their docket, in which case the number of films she does, and the sizes of the roles she plays will shift. But it would be maddening to see her not seek to capitalise on current demand and perception of her, which is more akin to that of male actors (whether fair or not) in many respects, by making a concerted effort to build a career that looks more like that of men like DiCaprio (especially), Clooney, or Depp (in his heyday, I’d hasten to add), but hopefully still continues to offer the same diversity of character and range that she's managed so far (thanks, David O. Russell). There's a degree to which it's a high-wire act sure, but there's a net. She gets to keep making movies. It's just the circumstances that might change.

I do share your frustration though, believe me. I’d like there to be much more Jennifer Lawrence than we’re getting, and I'd like there to be greater certainty over what comes next. I’m also overeager for these projects she’s attached to, to move forward with greater pace, particularly the less obviously commercial, or more 'prestige' types. What I don’t share though, is your pessimism. This is how it goes. Project after project will get lined up. One or two will break the right way, and end up in front of cameras. Others will fall away entirely, and still more will appear out of nowhere, and happen very quickly.

She’s got a nice slate of potentials though, as well as a fun and dramatic looking spaceship movie, a sexy spy thriller to shoot next, and a significant role in the latest offering from a modern cinematic auteur already in the can. I really don’t see anything to worry about.

J-LawForever

Weird this is happening. Hopefully this isn't the start of a trend for her. Or against her should I say. You know how Hollywood can be. But maybe we're all just being paranoid over nothing. And she has other stuff lined up we don't know about.

is she still attached to do the Dive yet?

TPF1138

There really is nothing happening against her, and we'd do well to note that there was never any timeline applied to the production of Bad Blood. Any suggestion that it would shoot next year was largely speculative. This then, isn't a delay it is a writer/director making a decision about which of his gestating projects he should focus on first.

In fact, Deadline makes it clear the Cheney script came first anyway. So McKay choosing to do that next (particularly with the Theranos saga still ongoing) isn't that surprising. What's surprising is that that other script exists. At least from our perspective, obviously McKay's fully aware of what he's been working on.

sunworshipper

IIRC it was your speculation that it would shoot very quickly.