|
Post by meowencrazy on Jul 16, 2009 2:09:33 GMT -5
According to me, his best movies were TRT and Idiocracy...I wanna see him in Mike Judge-y films and I really, really want him to go back to Wes movies... Richie Tenenbaum...I don't think he has done better than that...
|
|
|
Post by lonegazer on Jul 16, 2009 4:35:50 GMT -5
I liked those films too but I also love the fact that Luke's acted in quite a wide variety of films, from kids films (Hoot) to adult films (Middle Men). I wish Luke would be offered more roles nowadays in mainstream films instead of these parts being given to some wooden actor who's currently flavour of the year!
I'm still waiting for Tenure and Middle Men to be released although as time goes by I'm not too hopeful that Tenure will get a big release. I think Middle Men's more the type of film that will be shown but I think of it more as a post-summer release.
|
|
floot
Archer Avenue Resident
Posts: 356
|
Post by floot on Aug 24, 2009 19:10:23 GMT -5
I've just been re-reading the "Shopaholic" books by Sophie Kinsella - I thought before and I think again that Luke Wilson would be fab as Luke Brandon. Bit weird finding out that he's not in the role as (even though he's not British and I'm not a particular fan - I like him, but not to a level where I'd call myself a fan) I just think he'd be perfect for the role. Missed opportunity IMO, whoever cast it!!
Read the books with him in mind - he fits the role beautifully somehow.
|
|
|
Post by texasgal on Aug 24, 2009 19:32:14 GMT -5
Floot, that's interesting to know. I'm not familiar with that author or those books but I know exactly what you mean when you read a book and can picture a certain actor playing that part. Kinda brings that book and that character to life.
I sure wish we'd see more of Luke on screen. (You can interpret that sentence any way you like #devilchili# ). Luke has proved his versatile talent vis-a-vis roles like Henry Poole and Vacancy at one end of the spectrum and Idiocracy and Old School at the other. Why doesn't Hollywood wake up!?
Maybe it's the general recession and that maybe Luke is particular about the parts he accepts that's keeping him off-screen more than I'd like.
|
|
floot
Archer Avenue Resident
Posts: 356
|
Post by floot on Aug 24, 2009 19:48:22 GMT -5
I sure wish we'd see more of Luke on screen. (You can interpret that sentence any way you like #devilchili# ). They are not my favourite series of books, but I love the central relationship of them which is between the Shopaholic of the title and the aforesaid Luke. I guess it may be at least partly because the character's called Luke which always makes one's brain find associations with other Lukes - but the character is quite tall, dark and goodlooking (snap) and he's a character who in the first instance appears quite serious and work-oriented, but then you discover he's got quite a wicked sense of humour underneath the seriousness, (and a crinkly eyed smile - nice ) something I've seen Luke play exceptionally well. He also comes off, in the book, as a little older and (at least superficially) more sorted, a kind of solid character, another thing LW is great at. Every time I read the book I can clearly picture him in the role. Just looked at a cast list and I did read it right before, they've cast Hugh Dancy... I've got nothing against him, but for me he just doesn't naturally have the qualities of Luke Brandon. *sigh* It's a two edged sword isn't it when your favourite actors are choosy about roles - on the one hand, you want them to get good roles and stuff, on the other, you just want them to be in *everything* Hollywood sadly has a bit of a habit of weird casting choices, I guess. Shame the fans don't have an insider, honestly, I watch some films and think that most real movie fans would do a better job casting than some of the casting folks
|
|
|
Post by texasgal on Aug 24, 2009 20:07:02 GMT -5
Yes, that's true what you say at the end, about what odd casting choices Hollywood makes sometimes. I'm thinking in particular of Entrapment with Sean Connery and Catherine Zeta-Jones. I mean, I like Sean Connery (who wouldn't?) and Catherine Z-J, but to cast them together? The age difference was just a little too much for me. Seemed more perverted than romantic. ;D
I hope Hollywood is finally waking up to that fact and casting actors more age-appropriate together, such as Jennifer Aniston & Owen Wilson in Marley And Me. I mean, they really got it right there: Owen & Jen are the same age!
But I know what you're talking about extends beyond the age issue. Age appropriateness is just one small factor in good casting. And there's also the issue of the right actors each being available at the same time.
|
|
|
Post by tinalouise on Aug 24, 2009 23:27:33 GMT -5
I pretty much have a feeling, and I am not being critical, that he could really care less.
Acting was an opportunity that was pretty much handed to him. I doubt it would have been anything he would have pursued on his own.
He doesn't really try to be at any hot spots. He gets irritated when his picture is taken or a camera is following him. He does not dress to impress. I don't think he lobbies or goes after any parts. I think he peruses what is offered to him and just picks what is interesting. It is a good way to make a living and to leave him be to do the things he really likes, like golf.
I think Owen is the one who really likes the business, but I feel that Luke and Andrew don't really care. Like I said, that is not a bad thing, but people get on him about some of the roles he has accepted... Well hey. It brings in a great paycheck, so who cares?
|
|
|
Post by iluvtexas on Aug 25, 2009 1:50:35 GMT -5
[that he could really care less. Acting was an opportunity that was pretty much handed to him. I doubt it would have been anything he would have pursued on his own. [/color] I disagree I think Luke is completely interested and devoted to the art of acting especially in movies. I do not think it is something he does just for the paycheck nor do I agree that he had it handed to him. Sure he received a break that does not come along everyday, but he transformed that first break in the movies into a marvelous career. You don't do that if you don't enjoy it....I would imagine it is hard work that you need to be dedicated to. For goodness sakes he wrote TWBS and directed it with his brother Andrew. I do not believe he did that just to have something to do to fill up his day....or for the paycheck... What I do agree with you on is that he does not fall into the "Hollywood" stereotype lifestyle and that it appears he does not like to live in the public spotlight. Good For Him for not letting the preconceived "Hollywood lifestyle" go to his head and change the things he values. In fact Good For All the Wilson Boys for not letting the preconceived "Hollywood" lifestyle go to their heads and change the things they value. I also think Owen and Andrew enjoy the art of making movies but they too do not fall into the "Hollywood" stereotype lifestyle nor do they seem to enjoy living in the spotlight either.
|
|
floot
Archer Avenue Resident
Posts: 356
|
Post by floot on Aug 25, 2009 4:14:17 GMT -5
Yes, that's true what you say at the end, about what odd casting choices Hollywood makes sometimes. I'm thinking in particular of Entrapment with Sean Connery and Catherine Zeta-Jones. I mean, I like Sean Connery (who wouldn't?) and Catherine Z-J, but to cast them together? The age difference was just a little too much for me. Seemed more perverted than romantic. Haven't seen that one! I think a big age difference can work but sometimes it just doesn't, and yet they cast that way anyway because they want two big names NOT because it's always necessarily the right choice, or at least that's how it seems. Not even always the age disparity that is the issue but just wrong ages or wrong people for roles... I recently started watching (and I use started on purpose!) Captain Corelli's Mandolin, and though it's been years since I read the book, Nick Cage was so palpably nothing like Corelli in the book... he was too old, but it wasn't even that, he was just totally lacking in charisma and attraction; so in the book it's totally believable that the girl would fall in love with him, (despite the fact that he's a member of the occupying forces), but in the film they lack chemistry, he's too old and not attractive enough, and when they first kiss my reaction was not "awww" but "ugh". Some older actors have the sheer charisma that allows you to ignore quite a big age disparity and believe in a relationship, but that one - for me, it just didn't work! I hope Hollywood is finally waking up to that fact and casting actors more age-appropriate together, such as Jennifer Aniston & Owen Wilson in Marley And Me. I mean, they really got it right there: Owen & Jen are the same age! Also they have chemistry, that's obvious even having only seen the trailers so far. It's also good to see Hollywood casting a couple of people who have actually got some life experience in those roles - I mean, not that either of them really looks 40, they could both pass for younger, but at least someone has had the sense not to try and cast a couple of 20 year olds just because they're young and cute, which has happened a little too often in the past! I think Hollywood are finally starting to take note of casting age-appropriate just from a character point of view, rather than just casting an actor either because they are young and pretty or because they are a big name. There's so much value and weight in some older actors' repertoire because they have that maturity and experience, and I think it's good that, I think, that is starting to be noticed and used. But I guess it's a slow process and it takes time when the casting people are used to thinking a certain way. Anyway, excuse me for waffling, lol, I didn't mean for the post to get this long. Oh - I don't feel in a position to comment on the brothers' various commitment to the industry, but I do agree my impression is that none of them is entirely comfortable in the spotlight. I find it pretty endearing
|
|
|
Post by texasgal on Aug 25, 2009 6:12:21 GMT -5
I think Catherine Z-J and Sean Connery had good chemistry together. But, like you say, it wasn't a matter of Awww for me. It was a matter of Ick. Next to her, he looked so much older.
I think Hollywood casts young people in roles that may or may not be age-appropriate for them because most people who go to the cinema are - I think? - between 18 and 25? Even if that statistic is true (which I'm not sure I accept), Hollywood is forgetting the dvd audience.
At the moment I can think of just one example where I didn't feel the actor fit the part they were playing because of some factor other than age. Back in the 1980's there was a movie-for-TV about St. Paul. Anthony Hopkins was St. Paul. Now, Anthony Hopkins is a fantastic actor, no doubt about it. But the way he portrayed St. Paul wasn't at all the way I imagine St. Paul really was. (And I'm not even Christian). ;D
As for the Wilson's careers, I partly agree. The way their careers began was mostly due to luck and knowing the right people. But I feel that unless they really wanted to pursue careers in acting and had put some effort into it, their acting would have reflected that ambivalence and would have been so mediocre that I don't think they would still be in the business nor be as successful as they are. And, like Iluvtexas says, I'm glad they don't dress to impress nor appear at hot spots to be seen.
|
|
|
Post by lonegazer on Aug 25, 2009 12:49:07 GMT -5
I think the majority of actors want to work most of the time, doing a mixture of acting parts they enjoy combined with 'paying the bills' parts. Luke spoke last year about why he accepts certain parts and I quote him below. I remember Michael Caine used to respond similarly when he was often asked why he accepts so many bad films and he would say something like he never turns work down because he doesn't like to not work, and you never know if you're going to get offered another part, which I can fully understand especially as you get older.
Q: Come on, you`ve been in a lot of movies, even if not all of them have been hits. What do you look for in a role?
A: My agent has said to me, `Look, you`ve got to start reading the scripts before you say yes to a part. Promise me you`ll start doing that.` But when Robert Mitchum died I remember reading his filmography. He had done like 175 movies. I just thought, `This is not a guy that was sitting around saying, `Should I do that? I`ve already played a guy like that?` I have a hard time saying no. [/b]
|
|
floot
Archer Avenue Resident
Posts: 356
|
Post by floot on Aug 25, 2009 12:52:18 GMT -5
I think Hollywood casts young people in roles that may or may not be age-appropriate for them because most people who go to the cinema are - I think? - between 18 and 25? Yes, I'm sure that's their rationale. Even if that statistic is true (which I'm not sure I accept), Hollywood is forgetting the dvd audience. Exactly. It also fosters a kind of mediocrity, where what you look like (or your popularity) is soooo much more important than your talent, and that is a sad situation - I mean, you don't have to look too far to find films that have suffered hugely from that (and not just in Hollywood, by a long shot). At least there are clearly some imaginative directors and so on in Hollywood and elsewhere who don't or won't kowtow - it could be worse, I'm sure. I'm quite grateful, as a Brit, that as a nation we do seem to have a tendency to gravitate towards the quirky at least as much as the beautiful. Quite apart from the selfish truth that I *like* quirky *grin*, I think it probably gives (especially in a relatively tiny country like the UK) more chance for the less-than-physically-perfect to rise to the top on talent alone. I guess film, theatre and TV are all on a smaller scale here, which in some ways can be beneficial. I'm curious about what the US film industry is like away from Hollywood, or is that a contradiction in terms? I know movies are filmed all over the country, but is all/most of the power in the industry in Hollywood these days, or is there a lot of indie stuff going on? I just realised that I honestly don't know begin to know the answer to that Am I waffling? Bit tired, not at all sure I'm making sense... ... Been reading more of the Shopaholic books and wishing more and more that they had asked Luke, he would have been SO good in that role *sigh*
|
|
|
Post by texasgal on Aug 25, 2009 16:03:17 GMT -5
Well, of course, the biggest money spent (and probably made) in the U.S. film industry centers in Hollywood. (Actually, our film industry began in New Jersey but quickly moved to Hollywood when it was discovered you could make movies all year 'round in Cal as opposed to NJ where they have winter!). There is a healthy film industry in Austin which, of course, we all know about. Michigan is trying to grow a film industry there too, offering lots of tax breaks to lure film-makers. Michigan is still trying to transition from manufacturing to other industries. They have unemployed skilled labor there who are being trained to design and construct movie sets.
I believe there's indie stuff going on everywhere. John Waters films in as unlikely a place as Baltimore, for instance. (No offense to Baltimorans - it's a great city. Been there to know).
As for quirky, well, like Wes Anderson and others have said you wouldn't have much of a story without a quirky character and some pain, would you? Who wants to read a story or watch a movie about perfectly "normal" people who have no foibles or conflict at all in their lives. Where is the story in that? Would be awfully boring to read/watch. In fact, has such a story ever been written/filmed?
|
|
|
Post by tinalouise on Aug 25, 2009 19:35:12 GMT -5
Maybe you are right iluvtexas, I forgot about Wendell Baker... So maybe he takes iffy roles sometimes for a paycheck (which is not a bad thing) so he can do what he wants, like make his own movies. And golf.
|
|
|
Post by startip on Aug 26, 2009 0:18:52 GMT -5
You know, Oregon has had several films shot here as well. Something was shot in Portland just had something filmed with Brendan Fraser. Meryl Streep filmed part of the River Wild here. Animal house was filmed up north a bit, I think in Cottage Grove area, Fire in the Sky was filmed in Oakland, and lets not for get Calvin Marshall which seems never will be released, was filmed in Ashland and Medford. As for the age thing, that has always creeped me out too. That was always something my mom noticed as well. It's OK if it pertains to the story, but otherwise, ew! I do recall Luke talking about always working, he could be more selective about what he does though. He has branched out and done a lot more serious stuff lately, but I have to admit, I really liked his roll in Idiocracy!!!
|
|