Posted: Sat Aug 18, 2007 5:41 pm
Yep.
The more I look at the picture, I think Kris Kristofferson.flyonthewall2983 wrote:Gere looks like a hobo.
It's not really a biopic in any traditional sense, with the actors not necessarily playing Dylan, but playing aspects of his personality. I don't think that a physical resemblance is at all necessary for what Haynes is trying to do, but it remains to be seen whether or not it will work.flyonthewall2983 wrote:From that picture, Julianne has a really striking resemblance to Joan you don't see too often in bio-pics. I have to say though, the only two actors of the six that come close to resembling Dylan are Blanchett and Whishaw (whom I never heard of, btw). Bale looks like Harrison Ford in American Graffiti and Gere looks like a hobo.
Todd's trying for something else. This isn't about Dylan "himself" so much as it is about the worlds he travelled though. Todd told me the film will be "The secret history of the 60's.""Val Kilmer looked nothing like Jim Morrison when he played him, but he seemed to definitely channel (at least in part) the frenetic energy he had when he was on the stage."
Harvey Weinstein and Barmy's archenemies at The New York Times have stepped in to refute his silliness.Barmy wrote:In New York it's being released at Film Forum, of all places, which means it's basically being dumped.
Mr. Weinstein said there was “not a chanceâ€
Far be it from me to agree with Barmy about anything, but I'd have to think long and hard about who I trust less in this situation: Harvey Weinstein or the New York Times. This looks like a classic bit of PR smoke and mirrors. I think it's notable that the director was unavailable to promote his own movie and that the article's main source was Harvey Scissorhands. Does anyone else think that the quote from Karen Cooper is a little odd? "We tried this once before and it didn't work."Jeff wrote:Harvey Weinstein and Barmy's archenemies at The New York Times have stepped in to refute his silliness.
I have no doubt that Weinstein is very concerned about how he is going to market this decidedly odd film, and maybe they haven't figured out who the audience is yet (it's me). When Weinstein publicly declares, however, that the film will play in "100 cities, at least" and that he intends to push Blanchett for an Academy Award it does something to refute the notion that they're "dumping it."fred wrote:Far be it from me to agree with Barmy about anything, but I'd have to think long and hard about who I trust less in this situation: Harvey Weinstein or the New York Times. This looks like a classic bit of PR smoke and mirrors. I think it's notable that the director was unavailable to promote his own movie and that the article's main source was Harvey Scissorhands.
Moreover, there is no way the Weinsteins aren't going to try and milk the lucractive "musical biopic" angle for as many awards as possible, no matter how unconventional.Jeff wrote:I have no doubt that Weinstein is very concerned about how he is going to market this decidedly odd film, and maybe they haven't figured out who the audience is yet (it's me). When Weinstein publicly declares, however, that the film will play in "100 cities, at least" and that he intends to push Blanchett for an Academy Award it does something to refute the notion that they're "dumping it."
None of the actors is playing a literal version of Dylan. They're signposts to aspects of the 60's reflected in his life and work."I do think though the black young man, Marcus Carl Franklin, is playing Dylan's "Woody" phase."
Reverse Shot wrote:It's late out here at Telluride, and no real time for a full considered review of what is sure to be one of the year's most remarkable movies. Not to be all David Poland about things, but what Haynes has accomplished here is so ingenious, intelligent, unique, and wholly entertaining that it's unfair to other filmmakers. I left the theatre shaking and stammering, wanting to make out with everyone involved (sans Harvey) and if I'd been offered the opportunity, I would have walked right back in and seen it again.
Expect a lot more on I'm Not There from Reverse Shot in the weeks to come.
Indiewire wrote:I saw three movies today at the Telluride Film Festival and without a doubt the one to write home about is Todd Haynes' "I'm Not There." A portrait with aspects of Haynes' "Superstar" and "Velvet Goldmine", the film is a downright cinematic spectacle that may leave many people surprised (and even a few a bit confused). The festival calls the enthralling film, which Haynes dedicated to his longtime editor Jim Lyons, an "essay-poem on Bob Dylan." But "I'm Not There" defies adequate description, often densley evoking 1960s cinema through stunning photography and an exceptional, eclectic soundtrack. I started to take notes during the screening, but about one-third of the way in I ended up simply writing in my notebook, "Just see it."
Surprisingly, the words "Bob Dylan" are never spoken in the film and one older couple said at the screening tonight, "I thought this was a movie about Bob Dylan." After the screening, I lingered in the lobby and witnessed both Ken Burns (pictured below with Haynes) and Laura Linney each gushing to Todd separately about the movie. And at the "Margot at the Wedding" showing following "I'm Not There", Noah Baumbach (while introducing his own movie on stage) mentioned how much he liked Haynes' film.
Just see it.
Spout wrote:I've never seen a film that manipulated my heart and mind so deftly, often in a single shot or line. I'll be very disappointed if Cate Blanchett doesn't pick up an Oscar for this, and I'm rooting for Todd Haynes for both the best screenplay and best director prizes. Is that an objective opinion? Of course not. I have an irrational crush on this movie.
As Little as Possible wrote:I'm Not There is a chase movie, and it plays like the lovechild of Cameron Crowe (the music worshipper) and David Lynch (master of splintering the psyche).
No one in the movie plays a character named Bob Dylan, but they all play physical and/or emotional representations of Dylan. Christian Bale plays a folk music hero, Heath Ledger plays the actor who plays the folk music hero in a film, Cate Blanchett plays a folk music hero who goes "electric" and alienates his fan base. Richard Gere plays Billy the Kid. Ben Whishaw plays a "poet" named Arthur Rimbaud who is under interrogation. The overly charismatic preteen Marcus Carl Franklin plays a boy named Woody Guthrie who's trainhopping away from a troubled childhood.
All these characters add up to the essence of Dylan as he changed over his career, and they are all running from something. In this way, I'm Not There is a chase movie. It's about men who are constantly trying to outrun fame, the media, conformity, themselves, their loves, the law and so on. They are trying to excuse themselves from their current reality. Look at the title.
Blanchett arrives late and owns the movie. She and Bale play the pre- and post-electric Dylan, but Blanchett is the axis on which the film spins. She is a joy to watch. She looks and acts like Dylan. There is little artifice. It is fascinating. Why did Todd Haynes want a woman in the part? I don't know. But it works as a ballsy experiment, and Blanchett proves she can pull off absolutely anything.