total recall remake

our ideas:

quaid - chiwetel ejiofor

cohaagen - john malkovich (or james cromwell)

melina - gina torres

laurie - eliza dushku

richter - freddy rodriguez

ETA: now we’re also considering michelle rodriguez for melina; jeremy renner for quaid.

my friend and i are sitting here trying to do dream casting for a total recall remake.

update to follow.

no, but seriously

quixotess:

so-treu:

this is where the cult of respectability is a proven failure. this is the moment where black folks can stop blaming working class black folk, loose women and young folk.

because if black women have been dressing proper and keeping our leg clothes and being “good role models”,

if after literally a cool hundred plus years white men still think black women are basically monsters, even without knowing us, and are still taking our name and our shit without so much as a fucking thank you?

can we acknowledge NOW, at this point in 2011, that no NAACP award or banquet or black girls rock special or church schedule or status as the preacher’s or professor’s or lawyer’s or doctor’s wife or full length skirts or socially-enforced chastity belt is going to make racism go away??

that images in times square of women with long nails with daisy dukes is NOT the cause of racism, but racist white people are?

that my v card status and marital status is NOT, i repeat NOT the linchpin upon which white supremacy turns?

can we acknowledge that acting “proper”, when the definition of “proper” is determined by folks who are NOT invested in our advancement but in fact are rather dedicated to prohibiting it, will NOT protect us, will not end supremacy?

SERIOUSLY. cause we as a people been on this “act right black women and everything will be alright” tip since Reconstruction and i think the fact that racism is still like, a *problem* or whatever should maybe give us a reason to be like, hey! maybe respectability ain’t got shit to do with it! so we can stop black black women for everything and put steve harvey out of a job YAAAAAAAAYYYY *throws sarcasm confetti about*

This post will go far

maybe respectability ain’t got shit to do with it.

lawdamercy.

Question: Why isn’t “character actress” a part of our vernacular?

femmefilms:

A.O. Scott and Manhola Dargis answer this question in their monthly column Q&A on Film- 

Q. After Stephen Tobolowsky’s great tribute in The Times to Maury Chaykin and other recently deceased character actors, I got to wondering: why isn’t “character actress” a part of our vernacular?

LeAnne Laux-Bachand

Seattle

SCOTT With all respect to the excellent and protean Mr. Tobolowsky, there are a lot of great supporting roles for women in the literature he cites — mostly handmaidens, mothers and wives, perhaps, but those putatively marginal parts are catnip to skilled character actresses, who have always been around but perhaps not given as much respect as their male counterparts. There are also, perennially, more roles for men than for women when it comes to filling out a story with co-workers, cousins, crazy neighbors, beat cops and so on.

But here are a few names to conjure with from the Hollywood past: Mercedes McCambridge, Margaret Hamilton (a k a the Wicked Witch of the West) and the great and ubiquitous Thelma Ritter. Today, off the top of my head, I’d mention Patricia Clarkson, newly minted Oscar winner Melissa Leo, the always splendid Catherine Keener,  Samantha Morton. Also Anne Heche (see “Cedar Rapids”). Kathy Baker. Grace Zabriskie. Actually, there might be a lot!

It’s a tricky category, of course. All of those performers are more than capable of carrying a movie as the lead (see: “Cairo Time,” for Ms. Clarkson, “Frozen River” for Ms. Leo and “Please Give” for Ms. Keener), but I guess what defines character actors is that they impress more by craft than charisma. And also that you always want to see more of them.

DARGIS The word actor is gender-neutral, yet while actress is part of the vernacular you’re right that “character actress” isn’t, perhaps because of some unease about women and eccentricity. I started investigating the origin of the term “character actress” and didn’t get far, but I did find a charming article on New York actors and actresses in the April 1879 issue of Scribner’s Monthly. Describing classes of characters in theater, J. Brander Matthews wrote that “in a very full company there would be a pair of ‘leading men,’ a ‘light comedian,’ an ‘old man,’ a couple of ‘low comedians,’ an actor of ‘character,’ or eccentric parts, a ‘heavy man,’ — the villain of the piece, — and a ‘walking gentleman.’ There would be a pair of ‘leading ladies,’ a ‘juvenile lead,’ an ‘ingénue,’ a ‘chamber-maid,’ an ‘old woman,’ — perhaps two.”

It may be that in 1879, shortly before the invention of cinema, it wasn’t seen as desirable (necessary or possible) for actresses to play eccentrics and deviate from the norm, especially since theater was regarded as a disreputable milieu, one for so-called loose women and prostitutes. According to the historian Tino Balio, by the 1930s there were four types of performers in Hollywood: supporting players who might work only a week; stock players, the largest group; featured players, who received credit; and stars, who received everything. By then, no matter what they were called, character actors and actresses like Andy Devine and Margaret Hamilton, with their distinctive voices, unforgettable faces and genius for stealing the show, were part of the system.

i’m treating myself to oysters for lunch

i’m treating myself to oysters for lunch i’m treating myself to oysters for lunch i’m treating myself to oysters for lunch i’m treating myself to oysters for lunch i’m treating myself to oysters for lunch i’m treating myself to oysters for lunch i’m treating myself to oysters for lunch i’m treating myself to oysters for lunch and you can’t stop me.