speaking of fat girl, we watched “bridget jones: the edge of reason” last night. this is what i don’t get about these movies–and let me note that i quite enjoyed the first one: instead of getting a hollywood actress to put on a lot of weight for a role (which i guess, along with the accent, means she’s “acting”) why not just hire a talented actress who isn’t an anorexic to begin with? ditto for charlize theron in “monster”. i mean, it isn’t like the character’s weight is fluctuating in the film (as with de niro in “raging bull). yes, yes, i get how the box-office/star system nexus works.
this would not be a bad film to watch on a plane but there’s no reason to watch it under any other circumstances–i don’t know why we did.
other notes: hugh grant is so much better playing against type (see also “about a boy” and “an awfully big adventure”); what is the appeal of colin firth? now that clive owen is on the scene are there enough roles for the two of them and sean bean?
Ah, Colin Firth . . . my wife adores Mr. Firth (as does Mike’s). He strikes me as an intelligent character actor, romantic without being gushy, self-effacing and quietly handsome (and as far as I can remember he’s never appeared in a Merchant-Ivory film which is admirable). Nicola still watches the BBC Pride and Prejudice (he is the definitive Mr. Darcy I’m told), but then she’s British so I tread lightly. Interesting that Grant and Firth play rivals in the Bridget Jones films (a huge international franchise of a movie whose sequal grossed nearly 200 million outside America–would a chunky BBC fan fav pull off those numbers Arnab?) as they share similar talents and qualities. Perhaps Firth seems just a tad less out of reach than the taller more dashing Grant and that is what endears him to millions. I say rent Truly Madly Deeply.
consider the huge success also of something like “muriel’s wedding”. of course, toni collette seems to have lost a lot of weight since then.
don’t you think a brand like bridget jones needs a star to ensure success much less than a romantic comedy with nothing else preparing an audience for it? it could have been worse i suppose: the image of gwyneth paltrow in a fat suit comes to mind.
I have not seen either bridget jones movie–and honestly they are not present on my netflix cue–but I wonder if they are not the kind of movies that cultivate complicity with the “average viewer” (she’s aging, putting on weight,having work problems etc.)while still indulging in fulfilling conventional movie wish fantasies (yes, all the dashing men around you will find you attractive, despite your flaws–or even because of these supposed flaws). Problems aren’t problems but the magical pathway to happiness–because those without them are really generally inferior, despite their superficial advantages. The average figure then winds up getting all of the same conventional rewards as the glamorous figure. the masculine counterpart is the story of the average schlub who winds up doing great things–defeating bad guys, stopping crime, whatever–just by, you guessed it, “being himself!” how much indulgence should we have for these wish-fulfillment fantasies in the movies?
I wouldn’t be surprised if they didn’t go to Collette before the American (the risk, as I recall, was quite strong for Zellwegger; she was taking on an iconic British character and no one seemed to believe our little Texan could pull it off). Toni Collette is one of the best actors working on the planet, as far as I am concered, but she probably didn’t want the role as it might have been seen as a step backward for her career. The Bridget Jones film is an interesting phenonmenon; it was already in the black before its American premiere. The PR was minimal (was Zellwegger protecting her Oscar-winning persona) and it picked up around 50 million with mediocre reviews.