Hit Me: "Requiem for a Dream" (10th Anniversary!)

In the "Hit Me With Your Best Shot" series we choose our favorite images from motion pictures. Next Wednesday we're looking at Fellini's La Dolce Vita (1960) in glorious black & white. Today's topic is Darren Aronofsky's haunting addiction drama... in full color.

"If this is red, I wanna know what's orange?"

Requiem for a Dream (2000)

10th Anniversary Appreciation

Requiem for a Dream warns us continually about the addictive power of drugs, dreams, and dieting... but who will warn us about the addictive properties of Requiem for a Dream? The movie is, in its own teeth-grinding way, as hard to kick as Sara Goldfarb's (Ellen Burstyn) diet pills or the harder stuff her only son Harry (Jared Leto) ingests. But I realized something during my umpteenth view that I haven't quite processed before. I rarely watch the whole movie. When the characters get high in Requiem there's often a long slow fade to white to end the scene. My fade to white is the centerpiece monologue, one of the most brilliantly shot and performed monologues ever. After it, I can't take anymore.

Ellen Burstyn is such a quivering ball of despair, held together by willfully hand-stitched delusion... "I like thinking about the red dress... and the television." Jared Leto's aftershock moment in the cab afterwards, from weeping baby to instantly stoned man, is a pitch-perfect exit scene. Aside from two brilliant performances, the cinematography by Matthew Libatique is masterful. The whites are always too white in Requiem; it's not just dope that's making them snowblind. It's a harsh world out there. Also note the sickly green light of the interior Goldfarb apartment. The outside world will swallow you up but you're no safer inside.

But for "Best Shot" let us applaud the split screen. Darren Aronofsky isn't the only contemporary filmmaker who uses the split screen but the practicioners are few. It's a surprisingly versatile technique which can reference additional artforms, show narrative parallels, provide style/eye candy, offer character P.O.V. or heighten the tension of some impending moment both images foretell. In this film, Aronofsky is mostly using it for P.O.V. purposes (Sara staring at the fridge) or as a visual metaphor for disconnectedness.

In one of the best scenes, Harry and Marion (Jared Leto and Jennfier Connelly, both giving the finest performances of their careers) do pillow talk. The images and the the dialogue convey both eroticism and emotional intimacy but the slightly out of sync eyelines and timing (note that the images aren't completely in sync since hands reach faces before arms move and the like) convey that something is broken. Their love may well be real but they're so far removed from their own realities that the connection is inherently false.

Harry: Hey, you know something? I always thought you were the most beautiful girl I ever seen.

Marion: Really?

Harry: Ever since I first saw you.

Marion: That's nice Harry. Makes me feel really good. You know other people have told me that before and it was meaningless.

Harry: Why is -- You thought they were pulling your leg?
Marion: No, no, not like that. I mean... I don't know or even care if they were. From them it was just meaningless, you know? You say it and I hear it. I really hear it.

Harry: You know somebody like you could really make things all right for me.

Marion: You think?

Heartbreaking.

And one more. In a moment of true inspiration shortly afterwards, Aronofsky reminds us of this same self-medicated disconnection in what looks like a split screen but isn't.

Sara has just begun to grind her teeth and retreats to the bathroom mirror to investigate this new development. The diet drugs have kicked in and after a closeup of her shifting jaw, this image. She's not losing weight. She's losing her self.

*

*

"Be Excited. Be Be Excited"
Best Shot Participants

• Nick's Flick Picks   .....purple in the morning
• Brown Okinawa Assault ...blue in the afternoon
• Movies Kick Ass ........orange in the evening
• Stale Popcorn  ...and green at night.
• My New Plaid Pants  ... purple in the morning
  (it's a ritual, see? Just keep repeating it.)
  

 Previously on "Hit Me With Your Best Shot"

• Angels in America (2003)
• X-Men (2000)
• Showgirls (1995)
• Bring It On (2000)
• Black Narcissus (1946)
• A Face in the Crowd (1957)
• Pandora's Box (1929)
• Se7en (1995) 

Related Reading

• Top 15 Movies of the Aughts
• Desperately Apeing Jennifer Connelly
• Top 10 Characters of the Aughts

Lev @ TIFF: "What's Wrong With Virginia", "Never Let Me Go"

Lev, checking back in. Early mornings and late nights have prevented me from fulfilling my Film Experience duties, so capsule reviews will serve the purposes best. Starting with . . .

The Illusionist which is an achievement in many ways. What makes it so remarkable is its focus on every day sadness. Whereas most animation relies on comedy to engage, Chomet transmits his ideas through small gestures and simple, delicate drama, foregoing laughs for emotion. Every character, plot point, musical cue and lush painting is working in favour of this sadness without ever forcing it or revelling in it; It's a simple story evoked with impassioned feeling . A-

Dustin Lance Black's What's Wrong With Virginia? attempts numerous forays into the group psyche of town and religion but fails. Inconsistency is the word here; Characters come and go, narration is shoved in from different perspectives for no apparent reason. Jennifer Connelly is stuck doing her best Holly Hunter impression, approximating Wanda Holloway without being realistically nuts or even funny. Black, the Director, seems to have little idea how build through composition or montage, but that doesn't excuse Black, the writer, from starting his film with the end. C-

[Editor's Note: Apparently Virginia? is getting critically knocked around quite a lot at the festival. Movie|Line interviewed Dustin Lance Black about the unpleasant response. Good interview]

Predicated upon the intriguing idea of redheads as a discriminated minority, Romain Gavras' Our Day Will Come is an uneven mixture of bold filmmaking and bad decisions. The film stars Vincent Cassel as a psychologist and Olivier Barthélémy as a bullied teen. Clearly the work of a first time director, Gavras has strong ideas that don't always seem thought out as well one would like. Particular moments seem needlessly mean-spirited giving the film a cruel edge that it isn't always justified. Still, it's heady, compelling filmmaking that shouldn't go unnoticed. B-

Of the films mentioned here, Never Let Me Go surely requires the least introduction. Much has been made about plot particulars but they hardly seem worth noting; The sci-fi elements are rooted to a present reality and explained without much fuss which allows the characters to move to the forefront. There's no dwelling on its high-concept premise so it's just one step away from other high-end British productions (not that this is to its detriment). Romanek's form has improved, but the persistent score and unnecessary narration often feel perfunctory. It's the power of the story and performances, particularly Andrew Garfield who takes every gesture and line and tilts it into something unique and devastating, that make Never Let Me Go so emotionally satisfying. B


I'll be back as soon as possible, hopefully with notes on Of Gods And Men, Meek's Cutoff, Blue Valentine and Uncle Boonmee.

We Can't Wait: WHAT'S WRONG WITH VIRGINIA

Craig here with the next "We Can't Wait. Summer and Beyond" post.

What's Wrong with Virginia
Directed by: Dustin Lance Black
Starring: Jennifer Connelly, Ed Harris, Emma Roberts, Amy Madigan

Jennifer Connelly on set in Michigan

Synopsis: A drama in which a psychologically disturbed woman (Connelly) who has engaged in a 20-year illicit love affair with a sheriff (Harris), who is running for the state senate, is tested when her son begins a relationship with his daughter (Roberts).
Brought to you by: Killer Films and TicTock Studios (producers Scott J. Brooks, Hopwood DePree and Christine Vachon)
Expected release date: TBA (late 2010)

Director/Screenwriter Dustin Lance Black working out Virginia's problems

Dustin Lance Black, who last year won an Original Screenplay Oscar for Gus Van Sant's Milk, directs his second feature, which stars Connelly and Harris - who are here appearing in their fourth film together, after Waking the Dead, Pollock and A Beautiful Mind. Connelly may just be on target for her second Oscar nomination next year (and possible win?), that is if it gets a timely release; its credentials (see above) suggest Oscar could well be all over it. And it's apparently being prepped for a premiere at this year's Cannes, too. Van Sant is exec-producing with none other than Lisa Simpson! (Yeardley Smith, who also has a supporting role). Killer Films' Vachon (Far from Heaven, Boys Don't Cry, I Shot Andy Warhol and a whole host of other superb, leftfield gems) has the edgy smarts to make this drama an unmissable awards contender. This all sounds like a bit of an eclectic team all told - and if it's as intriguing and tantalising as it promises, then I'll be excited to see if it all goes right for Virginia.

So, who wants to know what's wrong with Virginia?

"We Can't Wait: Summer and Beyond"
The "orphan" picks Nathaniel (Burlesque), JA (Love and Other Drugs), Jose (You Will Meet a Tall Dark Stranger), Craig (What's Wrong With Virginia?), Robert (True Grit) and Dave (Brighton Rock); Team Film Experience Countdown #12 It's Kind of a Funny Story, #11 Sex & the City 2, #10 Scott Pilgrim vs the World, #9 Somewhere, #8 The Kids Are All Right, #7 The Illusionist, #6 Toy Story 3, #5 Inception, #4 Rabbit Hole, #3 Never Let Me Go, #2 Black Swan and #1 The Tree of Life.

The Formation of Filmography in Paul Bettany.

Jose here.




To celebrate Darwin Day (yeah I know, it's a new holiday for me too) I took in a viewing of Creation, Jon Amiel's film where Paul Bettany stars as legendary scientist Charles Darwin and Jennifer Connelly plays his wife.

Remember a time when both him and Connelly were awards prospects for this movie? And how it all fell apart in Toronto, sending the poor film to a late January release-the Glacial Age of the cinematic planet-where it has earned exactly $148,742 (did anyone else see it?).

Before getting into debates whether the movie is good or not (it's not by the way) my mind drifted somewhere else and I began to ponder on something that interested me more: the evolution of Paul Bettany's career.

Let's take a peek:

2001 - A Knight's Tale and A Beautiful Mind
Scene stealing as Geoffrey Chaucer in the former and fascinating as an imaginary friend in the Oscar winning biopic Mind, his career began to show promise of great supporting parts.

2003 - Master and Commander: the Far Side of the World and Dogville
He played sense to Russell Crowe's sensibility in the critically acclaimed Master, his character there, if you ask me, does much more in a few scenes to evoke Darwinian passion within reason than all of Creation does in two hours, he also gave up a serial killer role in Red Dragon to play another troubled intellectual in Lars von Trier's controversial work of art (where he was second best, after Nicole Kidman of course). Oh he also married Jennifer Connelly this year. (Did he peak in 03?)

2004-2006 - Wimbledon, Firewall and The DaVinci Code
He really wanted to play a psycho serial killer apparently and did so re-teaming with Ron Howard in the blockbuster DaVinci Code.

2008-2010 - Iron Man, Inkheart, The Young Victoria, Creation, and Legion
He was in one of the decade's most surprising blockbusters but only doing voice work (he's Robert Downey Jr.'s robotic assistant) and kept on playing small roles in an array of bad fantasy epics, tiresome costume dramas and polished his abs to play another spiritual figure in Legion.

But other than the promise of being one of the most exciting actors in the world he has practically become extinct. What do you think is going on with his career? Can he pick up where he left almost ten years ago?

Re: Creation

Dave here, with a bit of a sneak peek of sorts. Conveniently enough, news came today that Charles Darwin biopic Creation, which had been said to be without a distributor, has been picked up by Newmarket for a December release in the US - a company that, as everyone and their mother has already pointed out, is most famous for releasing The Passion of the Christ. A December release suggests they're going for the awards on this one - but hold your horses. The British release date was today, and, like a good little film scholar, I went along to the first screening at my cinema to check it out.

Of course awards don't necessarily equal quality all of the time, and vice versa, so for all I know Creation could still be in with some kind of shot, but on initial impressions it looks doubtful. It's a competent, polished production, but that's about the best I can say for it. It's a bit dry. It's generally unilluminating. It's slightly cloying. Most of all, it seems rather misguided. It was no surprise to learn, as the credits rolled up, that it was based on a book called 'Annie's Box' by Randal Keyes (Darwin's great-great grandson). For the film, posited in the trailers as mainly a religion versus evolution debate filtered through Darwin and his wife Emma, is actually mainly concerned with the spectre of the Darwins' dead daughter Annie. This adds very little to the subject at hand, and the only thing that stops this dominating aspect of the film from being a complete disaster is the charming performance from young Martha West (daughter of The Wire's Dominic West, trivia fiends).

Ariane Sherine's recent article in The Guardian points out the film's Hollywoodized flaws but is ultimately full of praise for the fact that it "contains one of the most robust defences of atheism and agnosticism ever to appear in a mainstream film". It has to be said that the parts of the film that draw most strongly on this are the film's more interesting passages. Jennifer Connelly, as ever, has little to do but cry and look pained (please, for the love of Darwin, someone give her something different to do), and Sherine perhaps goes a bit too far when she suggests that "Emma is a complex yet ultimately sympathetic God-botherer", but the struggle between Emma and her husband still provides the more intriguing drama here. Not hard, since the effect of Darwin's work on the society it was released into isn't explored at all (the film sticks closely to the Darwin family), and even the work itself is just about skimmed-over. It's a film that tackles both religion and perhaps the most important scientific document ever written, but without really looking them in the face. In the grand old Hollywood tradition, it's easier, and less controversial, to filter it through slightly histrionic familial drama. Throughout, there's that niggling thought that the topic should be tackled with more guts, more impact. But, in the end, they need it to sell.

But enough ranting against the industry. This is an Oscar-obsessive's blog, so my final words will be on that subject. Beyond Christopher Young's immensely classical score (so much so I wondered if it weren't simply selections from the 19th Century), I'd say any hopes here rest with Paul Bettany. He's really quite good, and it's fantastic to see him back in a role that demands from him, and, moreover, that he delivers in. Darwin's struggle between a lingering faith, his love for his religious wife and his conviction in his revolutionary work seems more delicately painted thanks to Bettany's subtle, shifting performance. You understand Darwin, you like him, and most importantly you sympathize with his dilemma - and this is from a person coming at it as probably more of an atheist than Darwin himself was. Bettany's natural chemistry with real-life spouse Connelly, and the charming rapport with Martha West, make the drama believable, and the time passes in a pleasant way, but there's nothing remarkable, nothing memorable about this. It just exists.

5 From 'Txt Critic' at TIFF: Antichrist, Jennifer's Body, Creation, The Trotsky and The Informant!

My texting friend who you've heard from a few times, exiting screenings with sudden opinions flying from his fingertips, just got back from Toronto. Yes, everyone was there but you and I. Txt Critic was only there half the time but saw as many films as I did last time and I stayed for the whole damn thing. They must have kept his eyes open with toothpicks like something out of A Clockwork Orange, only more voluntary-like. Here's part 1 of his capsule takes...

on Antichrist

This is the rare case where I think having the entire film spoiled for me prior to seeing it was actually a good thing. Ever since Cannes, I’d heard explicit reports -- ad nauseam -- of all the “shocking” content, and aghast reactions, on behalf of Lars Von Trier’s latest. It's about a couple’s ... let’s say ‘unconventional’... response to the death of their toddler. While it’s not generally a good thing to have prominent sequences described to you before you see a film, here, having heard all the descriptions of [semi spoilers ahead] scenes involving self-inflicted mutilation, scissors, talking animals, etc. [/end spoilers] allowed me to look beyond the artifice and see the film for its emotional content, and Von Trier’s warped, fascinating ideas. Whether you’ve been spoiled or not, it’s a film that only gets richer upon repeat viewings, and gets more and more interesting the more you discuss it. (B+)

on Jennifer's Body

Okay, so clearly I’m alone on this one. I thought this Diablo Cody scripted horror comedy was a lot of fun. It’s not scary in the least but there’s an awful lot of funny dialogue, knowing silliness, good gore (for those who like that stuff) and a soullessness from Megan Fox that's actually appropriate for once. To top it off, the proceedings are imbued with a playfulness that toys with (and subverts) teen movie conventions (including some startlingly upfront sexuality), and is clearly made by someone with a passion for horror films.


It’s not a great movie but it’s also not a retread. I wish people would back off a bit in regards to attacking Ms. Cody; I get that when an (arguably) not-great screenplay wins an Oscar it’s an affront to film aficionados, but shouldn’t she get some credit purely on the basis of following up an Oscar win with a horror flick, let alone a fairly smart, entertaining one? (B)

on Creation

There were times during this 100 minute ordeal that I actually started to wish that Charles Darwin (played here by Paul Bettany) had never been born so I wouldn’t have had to sit through this movie inspired by his life. I exaggerate but this is really one slog of a film, more dull and interminable than even a straightforward biopic might have been. Focused almost entirely on (a) Darwin’s decision to publish "The Origin of Species" in the face of his wife’s (Jennifer Connelly) religiosity, and (b) the Darwin's reaction to the death of their child, Creation offers almost nothing of substance about Darwin’s actual ideas, nor the complexities of his character or emotions. It’s mostly just the renowned central figure weeping over his dead daughter and going on numerous doctors’ visits for his long list of ailments. The title is misleading as it seems to imply too much focus on his originally controversial ideas. While this is the kind of tedious, inert historical drama that used to be catnip for the Academy, I can’t see many staying awake all the way through to see anything worth rewarding. (C-)

on The Trotsky

At long last, a star vehicle for the gawky Jay Baruchel best known for headlining “Undeclared” and bit parts in Tropic Thunder and Knocked Up. Writer-director Jacob Tierney casts the Canadian native in the role of the Leon, a high school senior who considers himself the reincarnation of the titular figure. Leon seems deadset on fighting every supposed authority figure he can (he stages a hunger strike at his father’s factory in the opening sequence). Mixing Trotsky/Stalin/etcetera in-jokes with broad sweeping Napoleon Dynamite quirk and power to the disenfranchised story beats, the film may have a limited audience (the plethora of Montreal jokes makes it unclear how it would be received outside of Canada). But it’s frequently funny and manages to not drag even though it’s too long (nearly two hours) for its somewhat thin premise. Schneider shows legitimate directorial finesse. (B)

on The Informant!

Despite the starring presence of Matt Damon and a heavily-marketed nationwide release by Warner Bros., this supremely entertaining 'based on a true story' project -- the latest from Steven Soderbergh -- is a much odder (and also more delightful) film than I was a expecting, and not simply for playing what is essentially a thriller premise as a jaunty comedy. While it’s more strangely amusing and witty than laugh-out-loud funny, Soderbergh makes a boatload of strange decisions (such as shooting this 90s-set story in a style of a 70s throwback, and utilizing a Marvin Hamlisch score that seems better suited for a Doris Day vehicle) that, almost inexplicably, work perfectly. They all contribute towards creating an experience that may throw some people, but is sure to engender itself as a DVD favorite for those who like their eccentric quirk at a lower volume. The story itself only gets more compelling as it unravels, slowly eking out details that reveal why the filmmaker felt comedy was the more suitable genre for the material. It's all sold by an utterly fantastic performance , at once broad and understated, by Matt Damon. He appears in every scene and he certainly deserves -- and in this weak year, just might get -- an Oscar nomination. (A-)

So there you have it. A lot to consider. And that's only about a day's worth of screenings. When he closes his eyes, he's probably still seeing shadows of flickering images.
*

9 Minutes on "9"

Katey and I got a little slap-happy when we were shooting this video. We tried to squeeze too much in to one day. And now weeks later (things have been crazy) I'm 4 days too late to capitalize on the 9 minutes on 9 which opened on 9/9/09. Ah well...

I feel a teensy bad that we were hard on this since we both hope to see a second feature from Shane Acker, the mastermind of this one. His visual imagination is commendable and I did really enjoy the Oscar nominated short back in 2005. The film made a strong $10 million this weekend so maybe he'll get that second feature. Oh sure, "strong" and $10 million don't often get mentioned in the same sentence and the experts are calling that gross "passable". But I, with my enviable complete ignorance of box office statistics, think it's strong for a hard to market movie that wasn't ubiquitously advertised. So there.

"9" Review (Katey & Nathaniel)
by nathanielr

Did you see it?
*

Red Carpet: Venice, Toronto and Tilda x 7

Which stars have been out and about this past week? Whole galaxies of them. I've collected a few randomly for this edition of the red carpet lineup. It's but a tiny fraction of the luminaries since we're now in the thick of festival season. Telluride is behind us, Venice wraps today, and Toronto just kicked off. And that's just the big ones.


Nicholas Hoult and Julianne Moore hit Venice for the premiere of A Single Man (see previous post). An Education's Carey Mulligan, quickly emerging as the one to beat for Best Actress, is going to be fought over fiercely when it comes to dressing for the Oscars, just watch. She wore this Prada 09 Fall/Winter collection piece for her film's Toronto premiere. Oscar winner Jennifer Connelly and her perpetually Oscar snubbed husband Paul Bettany were also in Toronto promoting the Charles Darwin biography / marital drama Creation.

Finally, Venice had the cast of the sci-fi drama Mr. Nobody starring Jared Leto as a 120 year-old man. And, what do you know, Sarah Polley came. Polley sightings are exciting since she's not exactly a red carpet staple. But --and it feels so weird to say this given my actress predilections -- I'd rather she get back behind the camera very soon as a writer/director. Away From Her was just fine filmmaking.

What else ya got, Sarah?

Little Know Fact: In late May of 1960 all of the world's major film festivals met for a wild orgy at Cannes. Just as La Dolce Vita was handed the Palme D'Or, Tilda Swinton was conceived. Cannes herself, heavy with child, fled to England and gave birth to Tilda not five months later (everything happens quickly at festivals). It's totally true! For Tilda is the film festival anthropomorphized: the rush of celebrity, the discovery of the exotic, the air of the international and the thrill of the avant garde. Festivals just don't feel complete without her, do they?

She was all over Venice last week (I've repurposed the photos from Zimbio). Witness...

Tilda's Venice palette: baggy black (a la 07 Oscars), earth tones, white.

I wonder if she'll show up in Toronto? While in Venice, she was promoting Lo Sono L'Amore, an Italian drama. Longtime Swintonites should note that a reunion with her Teknolust director is currently in development. It's called Gene to the Fourth and the actress would play a woman seeking eternal life through scientific experiments. But first, and as early as April, Swinton is set to go before the cameras as Die Blutgräfin (The Blood Countess). Yes, that's the same vampiric Hungarian role that Julie Delpy played in the unreleased film The Countess, a film I'm starting to feel I'll never have the opportunity to see.
*

USB

I've never thought of Rocky Balboa and David Cronenberg in the same sentence before but I think Cronenberg would appreciate these Rocky style USB ports (pictured left) which Loyal K*N*G points us to. I get that this is supposed to be geeky fun but I'm alarmed that we're plugging these boxers into the ports by their crotches!?! What will they think of next? It feels kinda dirty/twisted "long live the new flesh" to me.

I almost mistook this one to your left for Bruce Lee since Sly Stallone's sporting that Kill Bill / Enter the Dragon color scheme. Which movie character would you like to plug into your USB port?

Jennifer Connelly from Requiem for a Dream literally just popped into my brain while typing that last sentence. That's so w-r-o-n-g. My deepest apologies. I shan't photoshop it up for you. That would be even wronger [sic].

Ooh, I know what I want...

Signatures: "Career Counseling" Edition

Adam of Club Silencio here with another look at my favorite actresses and their distinguishing claims to fame.

Fans of my "Signatures" series (crickets) should know I've made quite the non-career of summing up my favorite actresses in broad, minimizing strokes here at Film Experience. Well it didn't start here, folks! Pre-"Signatures" I made a couple posts that all but summed up the "Signature" splendors of stars Jodie Foster and Jennifer Connelly. It struck me that these were relevant now to the series since Jodie's consistently found whispering in quiet, enclosed areas, while Jennifer's usually found on the edge of a pier. You have to love career consistency.


So follow these main links for some early "Signatures" from these stunning but somber starlets. Think something like A&E's Biography meets... A&E's Intervention? All that history with a hefty dose of concern.

Signatures: Jodie Foster

The star of Inside Man is an indoor woman. Normally I'd call Jodie a brave one... if she wasn't agoraphobic or locked in her panic room. Jodie has a history of being holed up in confined spaces -- be it prison cells, basements, airplanes, tunnels, and spacecrafts specially designed to contact her own subconscious. Lately much of this is due to her being repeatedly (and sparsely) drawn to tight-knit thrillers that play on claustrophobic conflict. On-screen Jodie's presence is a breath of fresh air, but she's also desperately in need of one.

Signatures: Jennifer Connelly

Even when they're on uppers, Jennifer Connelly's characters can be total downers. Who can blame them with all that career drama? She started her talented but tragic filmography with her only friend a fruit fly, then onto college overrun by white supremacists, ass-to-ass with a heroin habit, several children nearly drowned, a messy marriage to a schizo mathematician... Then to find out he's just not that into you! Poor, poor, pier-bound Jennifer.


Let's have an intervention for Jodie and Jennifer in the comments. Remember, it's all said with love.

Kiss Her She's Irish

Happy St Patrick's Day


From three of the most successful Irish actresses (not a lot of Irish actresses seem to make a massive silver screen mark) to hit Hollywood: fascinating Anjelica Huston, endearing Maureen O'Hara and the goddess Greer Garson.


Contemporary actresses of varying degrees of Irishness that must be kissed today: Kathy Bates, Fiona Shaw, Rose McGowan, Jennifer Connelly, Allyson Hannigan (Willow), Kristen Bell (Veronica), Heather Graham and Janeane Garofalo. Did I forget anyone? Hollywood likes Irish men much more. Too many to list!

To read previous posts on any of these actresses, click the labels below
*

Vanity Fair's Hollywood ~ Episode 10 (2004)

Missed previous episodes? See: 1995 , 1996, 1997, 1998 , 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005

With the annual Vanity Fair "Hollywood" issue about to debut for 2009 -- I'm guessing we see the new cover in less than two weeks (UPDATE: the new cover has been leaked and Vanity Fair has chucked their traditional photo shoot *sniffle* for the millionth magazine cover featuring President Obama), let's briefly return to our Vanity Fair retrospectives. "Send in the Gowns" was the title of 2004's photo shoot and they returned to the first year's game plan of glamour girls. The cover was more crowded though, bringing us an unlucky 13. But who was this cover unlucky for?


Maybe all of them, with the exception of Maggie Gyllenhaal (hurrah) and Hilary Swank (known affectionately around these parts as Beelzebub), who was just 11 months away from her second Oscar. Vanity Fair had gotten less daring in their cover selections as the year's passed (at least in terms of fresh "they'll be famous!" proclamations), but many of these careers had arguably peaked and were headed downhill.

Strange coincidence: 23% of these women are starring in He's Just Not That Into You

Julianne Moore was 43 at the time. She had been on the first "Hollywood" edition in spring '95 (before anyone had seen [Safe]) and got a deserved promotion. In the 9 years between the covers she'd gone from gorgeous up and coming redhead to a famously talented familiar actress as well as an Oscar nom' magnet. Unfortunately, round about this time as her fame and price kept escalating, she stopped wowing. 2004 brought her her only solo film-carrying "hit" in the traditional sense (The Forgotten) but it also brought stinkers like Laws of Attraction and films that no one even knows exist like Marie and Bruce (the only Moore film I haven't managed to get my eyes on). She's been misfiring both critically and box office wise since though she did have small roles in two acclaimed films Children of Men and I'm Not There.

This past year's double Moore dip, Savage Grace and Blindness (FB Body of Work nomination), reminded us that she's a unique and formidable dramatic actress... when she's not trying to be a romantic comedienne or action heroine. Next: She has three films in the can for 2009: the lead in a thriller (uh oh -- not playing to her strengths!) called Shelter, and supporting roles in the dramas The Private Lives of Pippa Lee and fashion god Tom Ford's filmmaking debut A Single Man.

Jennifer Connelly was 33 newly married to fine actor Paul Bettany and had just starred in a hit that everybody thought of as a flop (Hulk) and an Oscar misfire of sorts (House of Sand and Fog) but she was still considered a major get. Only she wouldn't be got. So to speak. She took only co-lead or supporting roles that didn't do much for her in Oscar Bait projects that didn't hook any statues (Little Children, Reservation Road, Blood Diamond) and now she's doing CGI flicks (The Day the Earth Stood Still and Inkheart). Is there a second wind to this career? And if there is, doesn't it need to come very soon? Next: He's Just Not That Into You and then Creation, a Charles Darwin biopic where she and her husband will play the Darwins.

Gwyneth Paltrow, 31, was still arguably suffering from the Oscar Curse -- that messy career period that can follow an Oscar win (which she won for Shakespeare in Love, discussed at length right here). The Royal Tenenbaums and Sylvia had reminded that she had plenty of acting skill but something about the career wasn't taking with Oscar or the public. Did she not care enough? She was a newlywed when this cover hit (to Coldplay's Chris Martin) and already pregnant with their first child, though she wasn't yet showing (she's pictured right, a few months later). Her acting career definitely went on the back burner. She's had 7 films released since this cover debuted and only one true leading role among them (Proof). She's now far more of a celebrity than an actress. The fame part stuck. Next: Two Lovers is inching it's way into view. King Lear and Iron Man 2 are coming for 2010.

Naomi Watts, 35, had recently moved out from under that 'Nicole Kidman's best friend' tag and into her own celebrity. The fresh Oscar nomination for 21 Grams (due in no small part to the Mulholland Dr lead in we're sure) went a long way towards that. She was still dating Heath Ledger, who came with her to the Oscars, but their relationship was about to end. (Thank god she convinced him to take Brokeback Mountain first!). In 2004 she had two heavy dramas and one comedy (the brilliant I Heart Huckabees) on the way. She chased those with the massive King Kong. Ever the multi-tasker since stardom hit she's still busy busy busy despite being a new mom. Next: Mother and Child for actress-loving director Rodrigo García and possibly Need with Nicole Kidman. That would be their first movie together since the charming Australian romance Flirting in 1991.

Salma Hayek, 37, still had residual heat from the success of Frida in late 2002. She had broken up with Ed Norton and was dating Josh Lucas but her movie career was about to collapse. Flops like Ask the Dust, Lonely Hearts and After the Sunset were all on the way. A savvy star she's stayed in the game by seguewaying to television production, bringing the big hit Ugly Betty to ABC and doing guest work (30 Rock). Next: "Madame Truska" in Universal's Cirque Du Freak opening in time for Halloween

Jennifer Aniston had just celebrated her 35th birthday, and her career was coming to the crossroads. She was finishing up her last season on TV's mega hit "Friends" and her marriage to Brad Pitt was also close to wrapping (though we didn't know it at the time). They divorced in late 2005 shortly before her first two post TV stardom movies (Derailed and Rumor Has It) opened. Her feature career has been middling peppered with the occasional high concept hit but she's forever ubiquitous in the media thanks to that decade in our living rooms as "Rachel" and her gossip-drenched marriage and split from Mr. Pitt. Next: the star studded romantic comedy He's Just Not That Into You

Kirsten Dunst, almost 22, was about to dump Jake Gyllenhaal (my theory as to one of the reasons people hate her so), Eternal Sunshine was playing (she does not get enough credit for her wistful funny turn in that film) and Spider-Man 2 was about to open. She was extremely famous / busy. It's been a bumpy ride since with rehab, a misunderstood star vehicle (Marie Antoinette), internet backlash and flops outside of those webslinging blockbusters. Next: All Good Things, the narrative feature debut of documentarian Andrew Jarecki (Capturing the Friedmans) opens this summer. Possibly Spider-Man 4 after that. Don't do it Kiki! Save yourself

Diane Lane, who had been famous since she was only 14 had just turned 39. She had seen her lengthy career hit a new peak with an Oscar nomination for Unfaithful in 2002 which she followed with another minor hit Under the Tuscan Sun. She was about to marry Josh Brolin whose career was still a couple years away from supersizing. More films were lining up for Lane but things aren't as rosy now since none have really matched that Unfaithful triumph and some (Kill Shot and Fierce People) had trouble even getting into theaters. Next: nothing announced.

Lucy Liu, 35, had just given the performance of her career in Kill Bill but then... that tends to happen to people when they star in Quentin Tarantino movies, doesn't it? Liu had always toggled between features and TV and she kept doing so. She's never left wanting for work but no great successes since. Next: nothing announced since her last two televisions series Lipstick Mafia and Dirty Sexy Money were both cancelled.

Hilary Swank in '04. Photographed by Stephen Meisel for Calvin Klein (photo source)

Hilary Swank, nearing 30, was on this cover because she had a frankly amazing agent. I kid, I kid. Her career post 1999 Oscar had been unremarkable. The Core was her last release prior to this cover but 2004 was looking big for her on paper (a respectable TV movie Iron Jawed Angels and a Clint Eastwood picture Million Dollar Baby -discussed here) and looks weren't deceiving. She won another Oscar for the latter and promptly returned to doing what she does: random disposable projects of multiple genres. Next: Two Oscar hopefuls for 2009 and in both of them she plays the title character. There's Amelia, a biopic in which she plays the famous aviatrix and Betty Ann Waters an Erin Brockovich style working mother turned legal eagle drama.

Alison Lohman, 24, was just off of a few high profile gigs (Big Fish, White Oleander and Matchstick Men) but her follow ups were very low profile. Tell me, have you seen: The Big White, Where the Truth Lies, Things We Lost in the Fire or Flicka? Next: Two thrillers one called simply Game leans scifi, the other Drag Me to Hell is auteur Sam Raimi's return to the horror genre. That might be something to look forward to but can it raise Lohman's profile back to early 2004 levels?

Scarlett Johansson, all of 19 years old, had just become the movies hottest young star. Offscreen she was a dynamo in the Young Hollywood scene --vaguely around this time she moved from dating Jared Leto to a fairly lengthy romance with Josh Hartnett. Onscreen she was a fresh sensation. Girl with a Pearl Earring and Lost in Translation had both opened to enviable acclaim for the young starlet and an awards run, too (though Oscar passed). When this cover was shot she was a critics darling, a paparazzi treasure and very much in demand by both auteurs and corporations (her endorsement side career might be as profitable as her film career by now). She's been super busy these past 4 years with numerous films, marrying Ryan Reynolds and that fledgling recording career. But is it quantity over quality. A lot of people are beginning to think so. Next: He's Just Not That Into You

Maggie Gyllenhaal, 27 at the time, had become ubiquitous around 2002 appearing in critical hits like Adaptation and Secretary. She and Jake her brother ascended in very close succession. The next year or so was less eventful cinematically for Maggie but two years after this cover hit she was all over the screens again delivering you-can't-look-away performances in films ranging from World Trade Center (blech) to Stranger Than Fiction to Sherrybaby and off screen she was having her first child with Peter Sarsgaard. Oscar still hasn't taken a liking to Maggie but few would argue that she isn't one of the most impressive actresses of her generation. Next: Crazy Heart a drama with Colin Farrel and Away We Go a comedy for director Sam Mendes.

PLEASE NOTE: If you'd like to read more about any of these stars, click the names in the labels section below.

*
median age: 32. Julianne Moore was the mamma (isn't she always?) and ScarJo the baby.
noticeably absent: Who else was topical around 2003/2004? Let's see... Halle Berry was about to screw up her career with Catwoman, Angelina Jolie (who has never been on one of these "Hollywood" covers) had a bunch of movies about to come out, Emmy Rossum was just off of Mystic River and about to co-star in two epics, Kate Beckinsale had had a minor hit with Underworld and was chasing it with another supernatural flick before co-starring in Martin Scorsese's The Aviator.
collective Oscar noms before this cover: 10 nominations (40% of those for Julianne) and 3 winners (her front cover co-stars Connelly & Paltrow and then Swank in the backfold)
collective Oscar noms after this cover: only one but she won (Hilary Swank)
fame levels in 2009, according to famousr, from most to least: Jennifer Aniston, Gwyneth Paltrow, Hilary Swank, Kirsten Dunst, Scarlett Johansson, Lucy Liu, Salma Hayek, Julianne Moore, Naomi Watts, Jennifer Connelly, Diane Lane, Maggie Gyllenhaal and Alison Lohman
previous episodes of 'VFH': 1995 ,1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005.
*

In All Probability...

Neither of them will ever top this.
*

Red Carpet Lineup

I decided that my red carpet series needed a new look. So I've adjusted slightly. I'm guessing I like doing it more than you like seeing it but whatevs. I blog for me. Me! Me! Me! So with my perplexing obsession with celebrity heighth in mind (I'm not a macrophile in my civilian life. I swear) I've coopted The Usual Suspects poster. Partially because I like to showcase actresses who most blogs who feature celebrity photos ignore. So... get it? It's tagline humor: "you've got to look beyond the usual suspects" No? Anyone? I blog for me. Me! Me! Me!

Anyway the blogs that showcase all the red carpet photos are obsessed with people like Phoebe Price, Heidi Montag and Kim Kardashian and honestly I don't even know who those people are. My brain is too filled with real actors to make room for these people, whoever they may be and whatever they may do. I don't need to know.

Here we go. On the carpets this week...


Saffron Burrows (or 'Mrs. Fiona Shaw' as I like to call her) is a tall drink of water and quite a looker. Fiona is a lucky crazy lady. Thespians Ruby Dee & Sissy Spacek I've grouped together. They're both so tiny. First person to guess why I've placed them side by side earns my immediate respect and may choose the banner motif next week. But one question: Is Sissy Spacek training for a roll in Kill Bill Vol. 3? What is that ka-ra-té outfit about? It's better not to ask what Sally Kirkland is "about" but merely to enjoy her flamboyance and her death's grip on her own peculiar celebrity. It's been 21 years since her one and only Oscar nomination (for Anna) and she still works the red carpet circuit like a tireless coke-fueled 21 year old starlet. It's like she's always looking for work and will be noticed. Naturally I love her. Kristin Chenowith is not even 5 foot tall! All that cuteness and those huge multi-octave pipes are packed into but 59 inches. And like I mentioned some time ago live-blogging, I love that she always wears huge bows like she's offering herself up as gift. It's astute self analysis, non?

Meanwhile Reese Witherspoon and Jennifer Connelly are like "This line-up is too C-List for us. We're outta here." But Jennifer, honey, what have you done for us lately?
____ Reese, you're free to go.
*