I agree with you, sumi. I think Judd would be awful, and if SB pulled it off I'd have been surprised.
Swank was a lock.
I'm now picturing Queen Latifah in the role, which is making me giggle.
Jayne: Captain, can you stop her from bein' cheerful, please? Mal: I don't believe there is a power in the 'verse that can stop Kaylee from being cheerful. Sometimes you just wanna duct tape her mouth and dump her in the hold for a month.
'Serenity'
Buffista Movies 3: Panned and Scanned
A place to talk about movies--Old and new, good and bad, high art and high cheese. It's the place to place your kittens on the award winners, gossip about upcoming fims and discuss DVD releases and extras. Spoiler policy: White font all plot-related discussion until a movie's been in wide release two weeks, and keep the major HSQ in white font until two weeks after the video/DVD release.
§ ita § - Mar 07, 2005 6:30:01 am PST #9713 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Vonnie K - Mar 07, 2005 7:22:34 am PST #9714 of 10001
Kiss me, my girl, before I'm sick.
Judd did play a 'white-trash' role before, and played it well ("Ruby in Paradise") but then she's gone all refined and delicate (but "spunky"!). Can't see her in the Maggie role in MDB AT ALL.
The thing with Swank is, she's very good at the kind of role she does (downtrodden but strong-willed) but I don't think she has much of a range. Apparently she's now making a movie in which she plays a 40's femme fatale, and try as I may, I can't picture her slinking around on screen exuding calculated sex apeal.
DavidS - Mar 07, 2005 8:00:20 am PST #9715 of 10001
"Look, son, if it's good enough for Shirley Bassey, it's good enough for you."
Apparently she's now making a movie in which she plays a 40's femme fatale, and try as I may, I can't picture her slinking around on screen exuding calculated sex apeal.
She did a bunch of roles like this after Boys Don't Cry and none of them really worked. 18th century period dramas and such. She's too raw-boned.
P.M. Marc - Mar 07, 2005 8:01:14 am PST #9716 of 10001
So come, my friends, be not afraid/We are so lightly here/It is in love that we are made; In love we disappear
The thing with Swank is, she's very good at the kind of role she does (downtrodden but strong-willed) but I don't think she has much of a range.
I'd tend to agree. In anything else, she's more wooden than a lumberyard.
sumi - Mar 07, 2005 8:02:43 am PST #9717 of 10001
Art Crawl!!!
Is it wrong of me to say that I think that she would be good in nitty-gritty women of the dust-bowl, pioneer woman roles?
§ ita § - Mar 07, 2005 8:05:35 am PST #9718 of 10001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Whatserface Plain and Tall?
Lee - Mar 07, 2005 8:14:19 am PST #9719 of 10001
The feeling you get when your brain finally lets your heart get in its pants.
Whatserface Plain and Tall?
Sarah.
Kathy A - Mar 07, 2005 8:15:56 am PST #9720 of 10001
We're very stretchy. - Connie Neil
If her career tanks, she'd do well in Hallmark/Lifetime movies-of-the-week based on Lavyrle Spencer books (mostly set in the Depression, featuring dirt-poor but hardworking women looking for love).
DebetEsse - Mar 07, 2005 8:17:53 am PST #9721 of 10001
Woe to the fucking wicked.
She could make a really nice Alexandra if they ever do another O! Pioneers.
Nutty - Mar 07, 2005 8:18:13 am PST #9722 of 10001
"Mister Spock is on his fanny, sir. Reports heavy damage."
She's too raw-boned.
She's also quite a bit too skinny to be a proper 40s siren, no? Need something to fill out that bullet bra, and the idealized cheekbone did not have a hollow below it in those days.
I don't know a thing about her acting, but her looks are very distinctive, and not in any of the several "classic Hollywood" ways.