You are here: Home / Archives for Commentary

Peck and Hitchcock: A Retrospective

April 5, 2012 By 15 Comments

I have been graciously invited by Ruth at Flixchatter to participate in her celebration of what would have been Gregory Peck’s 96th birthday. Be sure to check out her piece Beauty is Forever: Happy Birthday, Mr. Gregory Peck!

Also make sure to visit her site to read the posts from the others who have contributed to this celebration!

Here, below, is my celebratory entry:

As many fans of Alfred Hitchcock know, whether in front of or behind the camera, once Hitch found someone he liked, they usually became a constant collaborator.

When it came to music, there was Bernard Herrmann.

When it came to continuity and editing, his wife, Alma Reville.

In the area of writing, there was John Michael Hayes.

And then there were the ‘icy blondes’ of course – Ingrid Bergman, Tippi Hedren and Grace Kelly, to name a few.

As far as leading men are concerned, there was James Stewart, Cary Grant, and our birthday boy, Mr. Gregory Peck, who starred in two of Hitchcock’s films: the 1945 classic Spellbound and 1947′s The Paradine Case.

For my money, Spellbound is the far superior film; in this film, Hitchcock utilizes Peck’s dignified everyman status to great effect. He plays Dr. Edwardes, a young doctor on assignment to a mental institution. But soon we discover that all is not what it appears. Hitchcock uses this as an opportunity to delve into the complexities of the human mind (the subject of psychoanalysis being of great interest to Hitchcock). His co-star in the film is Ingrid Bergman playing Dr. Petersen, who helps Dr. Edwardes (and the audience) unravel the mystery at the center of the story.

A highlight of the film is the infamous dream sequence, with elements conceived and designed by the famous surrealist Salavdor Dalí.

At the time of its release, Spellbound was a runaway critical and commercial hit.

 

Unfortunately, Peck and Hitchcock’s second collaboration received mixed reviews and was not generally as well received. The Paradine Case is the seventh and final film that Hitchcock directed for producer David O. Selznick.

It is a courtroom drama in which we see Peck’s character, barrister Anthony Keene fall in love with his client, the beautiful and mysterious Madame Paradine (played by actress Alida Valli). She is on trial for the murder of her husband.

Often seen as one of the “Hitchcock films one ought to not bother watching” it is an effectively made film that shows what lengths the protagonist will go to let this woman he is so drawn to escape a murder charge – Keene puts his reputation, career and marriage at stake.

One reason I feel many dismiss The Paradine Case is that it does not have the characteristic ‘Hitchcockian’ levels of intrigue and suspense that audiences were getting used to from the director by now. I suspect that if any other director’s name appeared at the opening credits, the reception would have been a bit more forgiving. That said, if you are looking for a film in the vein of Spellbound or Notorious (1946), this is not the film.

 

Fast-forward 16 years after The Paradine Case wrapped and take a look at the photo below; Peck and Hitchcock are posed together on the set of Hitch’s latest production, The Birds (1963). While I did not find much in my research that indicated a particularly strong life-long friendship between the two, this photograph is a testament (in my eyes at least) of a partnership that produced a mutual respect between the men.

 

Filed Under: Commentary Tagged With: ,

Profile of The Pelham Picture House

April 4, 2012 By 10 Comments

The Pelham Picture House (on the New York State Register of Historic Places) previously operated as a movie theater (starting in 1921). Eighty years later, in 2001, plans were in motion to demolish the building to make way for a retail bank. Putting community spirit into action, Pelham citizens set forth to create the nonprofit organization, Pelham Picture House Preservation, to preserve the theater. Eventually, the organization purchased the theater.

Since then the mission of the newly named The Picture House Regional Film Center (a.k.a. The Picture House) – has been to serve as a regional center showcasing independent cinema as well as serving the community with learning programs focused on the world of cinema.

Last year, The Picture House celebrated its 90th birthday with a renovated and restored theater.

I recently had the honor to sit down and talk about the Picture House’s past present and future with the Director of Programming, Ilya Tovbis; here are a few highlights of our conversation from February of this year.

 

An art house film-lover’s alternative to NYC

One thing that immediately came to mind when I was preparing for the interview was to ask Ilya the following question:

Does The Picture House’s proximity to Manhattan help or hinder the center’s goals?

I guess I should not have been surprised to learn that in fact it helps, particularly as it is a great alternative for those (like myself) who reside in Westchester County. The number of independent art house cinemas in the area is sparse to say the very least and while my closeness to the city does not make it a hardship to go to NYC’s numerous art house theaters, for many of my neighbors that live in the central and northern sections of Westchester, this presents more of a challenge. By having an art-house film center ‘in their backyard,’ they have the opportunity chance to see a film they may have otherwise had to wait for its home video release.

The Picture House really does have the best of both worlds. While it provides the above-mentioned service to film lovers who live outside of the city, the relative closeness to the city allows them to get some book film personalities with this unique selling point: in less than 30 minute journey from central Manhattan, they can discuss their projects with a new audience and increase their reach. As one example, last year, I had the pleasure visiting The Picture House to see the feature Hanna, followed by a Q&A session with the film’s director, Joe Wright.

 

Striking the right balance

When asked about the ‘product mix’ of the film center, Mr. Tovbis stated that The Picture House’s main focus is on exhibiting independent, art house and international films. By featuring these films, he sees what The Picture House as a great alternative to the multiplex.

Here are just a few examples of some of what The Picture House’s has to offer (some descriptions taken directly from the website):

  • Classic Essentials: a showcase of repertory/classic cinema; examples include Annie Hall and Double Indemnity, which will be shown this month.
  • Education Programs: Creatively-driven film education and appreciation programs for children and adults alike
  • TopDocs: A series of leading documentaries from around the world, hot off the festival circuit, and often played as previews prior to their theatrical release.
  • An Evening With …: Featuring renowned film artists in conversation with established film critics.
  • Music & Film: A showcase of films about music, frequently followed by a live performance component. (very popular program)
  • … and other special events

In terms of the sequencing and scheduling of these special events, Tovbis’ goal is to have about 6-8 per month.

 

Spreading one’s wings

This programming will obviously require more than just the muscle of The Picture House. One thing that Tovbis mentioned during our conversation is that in broadening the scope of The Picture House’s offerings, the prospect of cross-collaboration becomes more relevant and vital. A lot of independent cinemas often work with film institutes as a means for distributing films that may otherwise be a challenge to acquire on one’s own. This is a great boost for both organizations and aids in increasing the profile of films that often get overlooked in the mainstream.

 

There are challenges, of course

As an art house/independent theater and film center, there are a host of challenges. This is especially true in an economic climate that, while slowly recovering, still has a long way to go. As a result, funding will always be somewhat of an issue. In addition to foundational support, the bulk of funds used to keep The Picture House going are collected through sustainable patronage, namely through regular visitors purchasing a Picture House membership. As with all non-profits, there are a host of benefits to be had depending on one’s level of patronage.

Spreading news about what the film center does by word of mouth is also key to making sure that it remains a viable resource in the greater New York City area. On a personal note, I was born and raised one town over from The Picture House and only became aware of all the great stuff that was on offer within the past few years. So spreading the word within the community is something that Tovbis is acutely aware of and hopes to accomplish along with his other duties.

In the end, Tovbis sees The Picture House as a great service to the community; in his words, film is a populist medium, one of the most accessible forms of art.

For more information about The Picture House, visit http://www.thepicturehouse.org, or follow news and events on their Facebook and Twitter accounts.

 

Filed Under: Commentary Tagged With: , , ,

Revisiting “Out of Africa”

March 29, 2012 By 10 Comments

For this latest installment of commemorating the 100th anniversary of Universal Studios is Sydney Pollack’s 1985 romantic drama Out of Africa starring Robert Redford and Meryl Streep.

This was always a film that I thought was “too grown up for me,” it being a proper adult film and all. So it was several years before I mustered up the resources to catch it.

Based on actual events, Out of Africa is the account of Danish writer Karen Blixen’s (pen name: Isak Dinesen, portrayed by Streep) life in Kenya from her loveless marriage to the philandering Baron Bror von Blixen (portrayed in the film by Klaus Maria Brandauer) to her friendship and romantic relationship with game hunter Denys Finch Hatton (Redford).

As to my personal response to the film, I think the critical consensus provided by Rotten Tomatoes says it all:

Though lensed with stunning cinematography and featuring a pair of winning performances from Meryl Streep and Robert Redford, Out of Africa suffers from excessive length and glacial pacing.

EXACTLY, could not have said it better myself. The film is absolutely beautiful and breathtaking and greatly benefits from a sweeping soundtrack from legendary composer John Barry. I addition, I really connected with the title performances.

But in the end, watching the film was a tedious experience. With a running time of 161 minutes, there were moments I thought about switching it off but reconsidered in the hope that the action (as it were) would eventually pick up.

One thing that may have been picked up in your reading of this piece is that I describe Redford’s character as “British.” Robert Redford? British? Alas, he does not don a British accent in the film although at least from my perspective, it is greatly implied that Denys is of British extraction.

One final note: I guess it is worth mentioning that one of the most memorable scenes in the film is the moment Redford washes Streep’s hair along the riverside. This is one of those moments that I never fully understood the romantic significance of. Let me know what you think (as a bonus, the clip gives a hint of Streep’s Danish accent):

AWARDS AND RECOGNITION

This film had awards lobbed at it. Let’s start with the Academy Awards – Out of Africa received 11 nods and won 7, including:

  • Best Picture
  • Best Director
  • Best Art Direction
  • Best Cinematography
  • Best Adapted Screenplay
  • Best Original Score
  • Best Sound
The film also won 3 Golden Globes.

FUN FACT: Another of Karen Blixen’s noted works, Babette’s Feast, was turned into an Academy-Award winning film of its own.

Filed Under: Commentary Tagged With: , , , ,

An Unforgettable Theater Experience

March 15, 2012 By 6 Comments

Up to this point, I can gladly say that I have had relatively normal movie going experiences. Of course has been the occasional person on the mobile phone getting called out, the odd person complaining as I eat my potato chips (yes I know a clear violation of the Kermodian Code of Conduct), or the film stopping, mercifully to be rescued and restarted to everyone’s satisfaction.

But alas, I would have to say this past Saturday’s screening of Friends With Kids really took the cake.

As soon as I arrived at the theater I should have known I was in for something ‘special.’ Having pre-purchased my ticket, I confidently walked up to the kiosk to pick it up. Swipe #1  - nothing happened. And on it went until the point that the machine no longer would accept the card I purchased my ticket with. Oh well, I guess I have to get on line. In a break from what was to follow, this step was seamless; I had my confirmation number at the ready and immediately got my ticket.

So up to the theater I went, my ‘movie buddy’ waiting for me. After doing the usual chitchat during which we caught up on each other’s lives, the previews started rolling. Not a problem … that is until a group of three women decided they would demonstrate to all of us that they had that cool flashlight app on their smartphone. I turned to my friend and raised a quizzical brow. Eventually they find a group of three seats together. Then THEY start talking at a volume usually reserved for those outside, like in a park or something. Not cool. But all went (relatively) silent when the film started. YEAH!

As we get a little deeper into the film, I think, “Okay, this might not be as bad as expect …” Then, about 30-45 minutes into the film, it just stops! OH NO! What just happened?

People run out of the theater to alert multiplex staff. A few moments later, the sound of fire engines  – a patron tells our side of the theater that there is a fire drill and that we all have to leave the theater. Unconvinced, my friend and me remain in our seats until we hear ‘official’ word.

A little while later, the folks who left the theater start trickling back in. One person in particular, forgot where she was sitting; as she walked past rows of seats and stopped in front of my friend and me and said to us, “I think you are sitting in my seat.” Already frustrated and confused, I let out an audible, “Uh uh, try again.” So she kept it moving and \stopped at the next row and said the said thing. The response from the woman sitting in what she thought was ‘her’ seat was, “Well, miss if you wanted to have the same seat, you shouldn’t have left in the first place.” SNAP! My pal and I just sat there, smiling.

Now at this point, there still is no movie or information from the staff about what is going on. Finally after what felt like an eternity, someone from the theater comes in saying that this was a false alarm and that the projectors were booting up again. Furthermore, the film will restart in about 5 minutes. And to top it off, for the inconvenience caused, we each received a re-entry voucher to be used at a later date. RESULT – NOT.

Another eternity passes and the movie has yet to recommence. Confusion is the state of the moment – staff and patron alike are shuffling in and out of the theater trying to get some word, any word about what is really going on. A frustrated set of folks decides they have had enough and walk out, demanding their money back. My friend and me choose to hang back and avoid what can only be described as pandemonium outside the theater (every screen in the cinema is experiencing the same problem).

Then, without warning, the movie continues – without sound; then the screen goes blank (again). A young man (apparently he worked there) comes into the theater and tells us that the 4:50 PM show is cancelled. To add to the confusion, a fellow patron who has a view of the projection booth alerts everyone that they should NOT leave, according to the person in the projection booth.

I get up and leave the theater (less than 50 of us in the screening at this point) and ask the member of what is going on. Then the film starts up again. Still no sound. More back and forth. I go back into the theater to join my friend who is still as patient as can be. I am about ready to leave. A couple walks in saying that they do not know why we are in the theater, because Salmon Fishing in the Yemen is showing in a few minutes. This, if true, would not surprise me at all given the events of the past hour. Thankfully, it was not true and the Salmon folks walked out of our screen and presumably to the correct one.

Now a thought has FINALLY entered my mind … why am I here? I am starting to think (wisely) that an early-ish dinner is preferable to this circus. Just as that thought enters my head – PICTURE AND SOUND! Woot! Woot! I settle back into ‘my’ seat and me and my friend, along with 30 or so resolute moviegoers, settle in for the remainder of the film.

Based on this experience and my willingness to endure to finish a film I really did not like, must say something about the completionist in me. It also says I was unwilling to pay or use my re-entry pass to finish what I had started.

RANT OVER!

 

Filed Under: Commentary Tagged With: , ,

Revisiting “Pillow Talk”

February 15, 2012 By 8 Comments

As part of my continuing series looking back at some of Universal Studios’ 100 year old back catalog, I will now focus on the 1959 romantic comedy Pillow Talk.

Here’s the setup: Jan Morrow (Doris Day), is a very successful interior designer who shares a Manhattan party line (look it up, folks) with equally successful Broadway composer, man-about-town and all around ladies’ man, Brad Allen (Rock Hudson). Much to Jan’s irritation, Brad is constantly engaged on the line and in a funny sequence, we hear the little ditty he sings to each of his paramours by simply swapping out their respective names in the lyrics.

As if that were not annoying enough, she has to bat away the advances of one of her clients, the wealthy Jonathan Forbes (Tony Randall). Jonathan, not knowing that there is a connection between the two, turns to his dear friend Brad airing his grievances about Jan. Brad, of course, recognizes the name and proceeds to prod his buddy to tell him more. In a phrase, he likes what he hears. In fact he is so intrigued that he attempts (unsuccessfully) to make amends with Jan, with obvious designs of seducing her, eventually. But having failed in his efforts he is left with no other recourse. Or so we are lead to think.

Later that evening, the pair just happen to be at the same nightspot. Brad hears her name, sees her (finally). But knowing that he cannot approach her as Brad Allen, he adopts the identity of Rex Stetson – Texas cattleman. The stage is set for an all-out battle of the sexes that does not necessarily go as planned, but is fun to watch.

As far as the acting is concerned, I think you get as much as one would expect from Rock Hudson and Doris Day, which is more than fine. It should be noted that Day’s acting ability often took a back seat to her dual role of ‘American Sweetheart’ and her chart-topping success as a vocalist (which is a shame). On the other side, Rock Hudson gets to turn on his Texan drawl and essentially play two characters: the debonair Manhattanite Brad and the Southern gentleman Rex. I did not think about this until I started writing up this piece, but to be able to pull off such a feat without boring your audience requires some skill. To modern audiences, Rock Hudson the actor may be easily dismissed as that guy from those 1950s romantic comedies and kitschy melodramas, but in this role there is at least evidence of solid acting bona fides (see John Frankenheimer’s Seconds for further proof). The pair’s chemistry is spot-on, and the film’s success would lead to two more films (Lover Come Back and Send Me No Flowers) and produce a lifelong friendship off-screen.

A couple of my favorite words in the acting credit rolls are THELMA RITTER. Here she plays Jan’s interfering, boozy housekeeper, Alma. For those familiar with Ritter’s work, you know well that her pithy delivery alone is worth the price of admission. She serves as the audience’s way in – and says what many of us in the audience are probably thinking.

In the role of Hudson’s second fiddle Jonathan, Tony Randall is equally affable, if not a bit annoying at times. Just the way he is supposed to be!

Pillow Talk also heavily relied on the split-screen technique, as opposed cutting to Hudson and Day separately, during their party line ‘interactions.’

And no Doris Day feature would be complete without her pleasant voice singing the signature tune:

Pillow Talk Lobby Card

The writing is witty and at times a bit saucy. And the cynics among us may be tempted (but should not, at least on first viewing) to pick apart every word of innuendo that comes out of Hudson’s mouth; in particular there is one scene when, in Brad’s efforts to court Jan, he essentially emasculates himself while on the phone with her. This, in fact, is a common theme of films (principally rom-coms) during this time. It is but one of several elements of Pillow Talk (including the aforementioned split screen) that Peyton Reed spoofs in 2003′s Down With Love, starring Renée Zellwegger and Ewan MacGregor.

 

FUN FACT (Courtesy of Wikipedia): The director, Michael Gordon is the maternal grandfather of actor Joseph Gordon-Levitt. This film marked Gordon’s return to feature film production, following his blacklist during the infamous and controversial HUAC (House Un-American Activities Committee) period.

In a world where we are offered a buffet of poorly executed, totally vapid confection and told it is a romantic comedy, I say take a look at Pillow Talk to see how it should be done.

Filed Under: Classics, Commentary Tagged With: , , ,

Spotlight On Sam Riley

February 9, 2012 By 6 Comments
SAM RILEY

D.O.B. 8 January 1980
Leeds, West Yorkshire, England
Profession: Actor, Musician

 

American audiences may not know Sam Riley, but that may soon change. This year, he is leading a cast in the big screen adaptation of Jack Kerouac’s On the Road, directed by internationally renowned director Walter Salles and executive produced by Francis Ford Coppola. The cast includes Kristen Stewart, Amy Adams, Kirsten Dunst and Viggo Mortensen.Riley first garnered attention with his portrayal of Joy Division’s Ian Curtis in the 2007 biopic Control (directed by Anton Corbijn). The performance earned him several plaudits, including the following wins:

  • British Independent Film Award
  • Chicago International Film Festival
  • Edinburgh International Film Festival
  • Empire Award (Best Newcomer)
  • London Film Critics Circle Award (British Breakthrough of the Year – Acting)

He also received nods by the British Independent Film Award, the London Film Critics Circle Award and notably, the BAFTA, for their Rising Star Award. If you have not seen Control, I highly recommend it, even as someone who had not heard of Ian Curtis or Joy Division prior to seeing the film.  Check out the trailer below:

Another featured role would come last year when he starred in writer/director Rowan Joffe’s Brighton Rock.

While On The Road looks like it will potentially be Riley’s breakthrough Hollywood performance in 2012, he has another film from an acclaimed director in the can. Neil Jordan’s mother-daughter vampire flick Byzantium is also scheduled for a 2012 release.

With all this potential, it is no wonder that I selected him for my HFL squad!

Filed Under: Commentary Tagged With:

Revisiting The Sting (*)

February 8, 2012 By 10 Comments

The release of 1973′s The Sting reunites Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid‘s director (George Roy Hill) and the lead actors (Paul Newman and Robert Redford). It was a different decade in a different locale (Midwest versus the Southwest and Bolivia) but the result is the same – absolutely sublime entertainment.

Set in Depression-era Illinois (Joliet and Chicago), the action starts with Johnny Hooker (Redford) and his partners in crime Luther Coleman (Robert Earl Jones, James’ dad) and Joe Erie unwittingly and inadvertently running a scam on gangster Doyle Lonnegan (Robert Shaw), bilking him out of a large sum of money. Lonnegan’s henchmen track the grifters down and Luther is murdered. Upon finding out his friend’s fate, Hooker books it to Chicago in search for Henry Gondorff (Paul Newman), who Luther had earlier recommended Hooker seek out if he wanted to learn from the best in the long con.

Hooker vows to avenge Luther’s death; he tracks down and enlists the help Gondorff, who is a little down on his luck when Redford’s character first meets him. After some urging, Gondorff decides to take him up on his offer and under his wing; the wheels are now set in motion for setting up the large-scale con known as ‘the wire’.

He assembles a group of various con men to stage the elaborate trap for Lonnegan. Add to the mix, coppers and federal agents who are hot on the trail of our ‘heroes,’ and what you have is a wonderfully paced caper that entertains and amuses, with various twists and turns at every corner.

As much as the film is memorable for the acting and camaraderie between the lead actors, it is the music, notably for the use of the Scott Joplin ragtime composition, “The Entertainer,” that always sticks with me.

Check out the trailer:

At the time of the film’s release, The Sting was universally well received, receiving 10 Oscar™ nods and winning 7, including awards for Best Picture and Best Director for 1973. Over thirty years later it entered the Library of Congress’ National Film Registry.
(*) In celebration of Universal Studios’ centennial, I am taking a look back into their catalog to select and discuss a few of my favorite films. The Sting is the first of this series.

 

Filed Under: Commentary Tagged With: , ,

Spotlight on Anthony Mackie

February 3, 2012 By 9 Comments
 

ANTHONY MACKIE

D.O.B.  23 September 1979, New Orleans, LA

 

EDUCATION: New Orleans Center for Creative Arts, North Carolina School of the Arts, The Julliard School

A little more love never hurt anyone, right? I was debating whether to put the ‘spotlight’ on Mr. Mackie, as his career now seems to gaining a little more steam in recent years several years of treading the boards.

A star of stage and screen, the Julliard-trained Anthony Mackie‘s feature film début was in 2002 in the Eminem project 8 Mile, followed by a lead role in the 2003 independent film Brother to Brother; for the latter role he received an Independent Spirit Award nomination for ‘Best Debut Performance.’

ANTHONY MACKIE stars in MAN ON A LEDGE

He first caught my notice in Spike Lee’s She Hate Me (2004), in which he played a man who resorts to an unconventional means of generating income. According to his CV, also in 2004, Mackie had small roles in Jonathan Demme’s remake of The Manchurian Candidate, and Clint Eastwood’s Million Dollar Baby.

2005 saw only one film credit – the forgettable teaming of Samuel L Jackson and Eugene Levy in The Man.

The following year notable roles included appearances in We Are Marshall and the critically acclaimed Half-Nelson, co-starring Ryan Gosling.

Over the past 5 years, his roles have increased not only in frequency but also profile: Eagle Eye, best-picture of 2009 The Hurt Locker, Notorious [the biopic Notorious, playing rapper Tupac Shakur], The Adjustment Bureau (with Matt Damon and Emily Blunt), Real Steel (with Hugh Jackson) and the comedy What’s Your Number?.

I wanted to highlight one release during this period: in 2010, he starred in the drama set in the 1970′s Night Catches Us, which also stars Kerry Washington. But by briefly reading the synopsis, it looks kind of interesting.

This year, he already has one film in release (Man on a Ledge), one film in the can (the lead in Bolden!, based on the life of New Orleans cornetist and jazz musician Buddy Bolden), and two more on the horizon – Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter and The Gangster Squad, co-starring Ryan Gosling, Emma Stone, Sean Penn and Josh Brolin.

Phew! In putting this list together, I see that it is quite impressive – Mr. Mackie sure has crafted a very diverse career for himself – and I have not even mentioned the stage work!

I guess the next step is a few more standout lead roles. If Bolden! or any of these 2012 releases prove very successful, that may very well be what puts him over the top.

 

 

Filed Under: Commentary Tagged With:

Spotlight on Rashida Jones

January 26, 2012 By 10 Comments
RASHIDA LEAH JONES
D.O.B. February 25, 1976, Los Angeles, California
Education: Harvard University
 rashida jones, Andy Samberg

Rashida Jones first gained my notice in the 2004 Channel 4 (UK) series NY-LON, which aired here in the States on BBC America. Her co-star in the series was another unknown – Stephen Moyer, who would later find fame on the HBO hit series True Blood.

Since then, Jones, the scion of pop music impresario Quincy Jones and The Mod Squad‘s Peggy Lipton, she certainly has not relied on her Hollywood pedigree to pave her path to success. After completing her undergraduate studies at Harvard University, she started off small, including featured roles in shows such as Freaks and Geeks. For two years, she was a series regular on Boston Public. She even appeared in a couple of sketches of The Chappelle Show during its all too brief run.

A breakthrough came in 2006 when she played regular Karen Filippeli on the NBC sitcom The Office. This must have captured the attention of NBC execs and in 2009 led to a lead role in Parks and Recreation. In the same year, she played Paul Rudd’s intended in I Love You, Man. In 2010, she had a slightly more dramatic turn in the award-winning The Social Network. Last year’s film highlights include Our Idiot Brother and The Muppets.

Most recently (this week to be exact) she has been making waves at the Sundance Film Festival. Her film, Celeste and Jesse Forever, just got picked up for distribution and is being hailed as one of the breakouts of the festival. Not only is she starring in the film (with Andy Samberg), but she also co-wrote and is a producer on the project.

Rashida Jones, Andy Samberg

Rashida Jones, Andy Samberg in "Celeste and Jesse Forever"

She has definitely built a solid comedic career for herself. Here’s hoping that she has continued success including a career as a comedy writer. A lot will depend on the mass response to Celeste and Jesse. Goodness knows we need more witty people producing material for the masses.

UPDATE (2.03.2012): I stumbled upon a great article in American Jewish Life magazine, profiling Ms. Jones from 5 years ago. Enjoy!

Filed Under: Commentary Tagged With:

Spotlight on Ruth Wilson

January 19, 2012 By 8 Comments

RUTH WILSON

D.O.B. 13 January 1982 in Ashford, Surrey, England

Education: University of Nottingham, London Academy of Music and Dramatic Art

 

 

Ruth Wilson first caught my attention in the 2006 BBC production of Jane Eyre, for which she received Golden Globe and BAFTA nominations. Since then, the former model’s credits have principally been on the London stage or television.

In addition to Jane Eyre, she was also a featured performer in the drama Small Island, an adaptation of the Andrea Levy novel of the same name. American audiences may recognize her from the AMC television miniseries The Prisoner, starring Jim Caviezel and Sir Ian McKellan. More recently she appeared as psychotic killer/sidekick Alice Morgan opposite Idris Elba’s Luther in the critically acclaimed series, Luther.

Her work on stage includes performances in Tennessee Williams’ A Streetcar Named Desire (as Stella, winner of 2010 Olivier Award for Best Actress), Through a Glass Darkly (as Karin) and Eugene O’Neill’s Anna Christie (as Anna Christie, co-starring Jude Law).

The movie industry has taken notice of this talented young woman. This year, she will feature in Joe Wright’s Anna Karenina, which stars Keira Knightley and Jude Law and in 2013 she will be in Gore Verbinski’s The Lone Ranger starring Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter.

Here’s hoping that her career goes from strength to strength.

Filed Under: Commentary Tagged With: ,