Links: Hollywood covers, Superbowl ads, Liam Neeson troubles
Tuesday, February 5, 2019 at 12:17PM A big collection of provocative links for you since we haven't had a hot second to look around the web lately...
I had this cover on my wall for at least a couple of years.
This Week's Must Read
• Vanity Fair an oral history of the very first "Hollywood Cover." Love love love this. Especially that you get a full spectrum of non-prudish feeling about the lingerie. Yes, yes, it was sexist and a double standard that the women were like this and the next year the men were fully clothed. On the other hand, can we stop being so sex-negative about people looking sexy or showing skin? It seems we're over correcting of late and everyone is always shaming people for enjoying the sight of human bodies. There is nothing inherently demeaning about being naked or dressing in sexy clothing... unless you don't want to be doing it ! There would be nothing wrong with having a group of men on a magazine cover like this if they were also willing. Linda Fiorentino reveals she volunteered to go topless and Sarah Jessica Parker considered the shoot empowering. Of course not everyone was as comfortable. Sandra Bullock says...
I knew I did not want to be in my underwear. I was like ‘Dear God, give me the longest thing that’s left.’ My little outfit was really tight, it was like one long Spanx. I was a rebel from the ankles down.
Haha. I had forgotten that she was the only one who was barefoot. But even she recalls the day with some fondness, adding...
The fact that we were the first is pretty badass. It was nice to have connections with women when we were so isolated from each other. The only time we saw each other was when we were at the same audition. Now in our industry you can sense that things have gotten safer and calmer. You don’t feel so nervous stepping into a room with other women. Now you see them make beelines for each other to connect. And we were there when it all started on the cover of a magazine, that day, that time.
Randomness
• Vanity Fair 25 most influential movie scenes. Our friend Katey worked on this one right before her maternity leave and she's very proud of it so check it out.
• Zimbio Brie Larson shares new action footage from Captain Marvel
• Playbill Rising star Corey Hawkins (who was so great in his cameo in BlacKkKlansman last year) joins the cast of the film version of In the Heights. Let's hope this means he can sing?
• Awards Daily the state of the Best Picture race. Interesting piece but I think Sasha, like everyone, is very short-sighted when they assume Netflix is ONLY a force for good. As soon as you have all the power, you almost always do ill. Right now, in February 2019, people view Netflix as artist friendly, a place where directors are given carte blanche and thus a force for good in the cinema. But that cannot STAY true. It never does when money is involved. And Netflix has already proven with their business strategies and licensing and bending of the rules, that they are very anti-cinema outside of their own interests. Right now their interests happen to be the respect of working with prestigious directors and winning Oscars but this won't last forever once they've conquered that mountain, it might not even last much longer than 2019 if Roma sweeps and they have nothing else to prove and every filmmaker hoping to sign with them (who they surely won't treat as well as Cuarón who had something new to offer them.)
Superbowl Stuff
• i09 The new Avengers: Endgame commercial that aired during the Superbowl. Looks like the surviving superheroes need some therapy.
• Adweek best 5 ads from Superbowl Sunday
• Vulture ranks the halftime shows of the Superbowl over the past 26 years. This reads like a convincing ranking but in truth we rarely watch (I think I've seen 3 of these in full? I usually only see a few clips later) so perhaps you'll have a different reaction?
The World Is Terrible
• Vanity Fair Allison Janney admits to being heartbroken that she's not being asked to present Best Supporting Actor this year, as is tradition.
• TFE... in case you missed our rant about all the terrible decisions the Oscars have been making of late.
• GQ the horrific racist/homophobic actor on Jussee Smollett (Empire) in Chicago
• Independent Liam Neeson is in hot water for this interview in which he reveals disturbing racist fantasy from his past while trying to get serious about the content of his new movie Cold Pursuit. Surely this was not the right place for it. A more appropriate place might have been a therapist office and not a junket... and also, while you're there maybe work through why you keep agreeing to star in all these violent fantasies. Careers of talented actors were not meant to be this one dimensional, Liam. How many violent vengeance fantasies has he made now since Taken (2008)? It seems there's at least one every year.
• Good Morning America Naturally since that interview was published, he's had to address it publicly to try and quell the outrage. I'm of two minds about this. On the one hand I think NOT addressing your inner demons is very unhealthy so the public climate around dealing with toxic thought patterns is sometimes toxic itself -- how can people ever evolve or become better people if they can't admit to flaws, even severe hateful ones? I can't speak to racism as a white person but I know that I'd much rather, for instance, see people publicly admit to their homophobia and work through it than see people not dealing with it at all. But again... maybe do it in therapy or with friends or peers or even through your art... just probably not with journalists!
Happy News
• Playbill Colman Domingo (currently onscreen in If Beale Street Could Talk) will be one of the honorees this year at Vineyard Theatre's annual gala
• Variety Madonna will be honored at the 30th Annual GLAAD Media Awards for her dedication to the LGBTQ community. Great choice. She has been such an advocate for queer people, looooong before it was socially easy and cool to be that. She surely lost fans over it at the beginning.
Reader Comments (78)
One of the best parts of the Oscars is seeing the previous year’s winners, so it’s really disappointing that Janney and co. Won’t be presenting. It ruins the “welcome to the club” and the “oh yeah I liked him in” that vibe.
Also, the 25 scenes list is excellent and has some inspired picks. But, the one big omission is 12 years a slave - still one of our most daring and truthful films. Seeing Solomon bodies shake as he was almost hanged to death was jarring and brutal, and a moment of screen “violence” that, I think, reshaped how violence was used on screen.
Seriously everyone, if you want a fun read, click on that Vanity Fair tag, then scroll back to read Nathaniel's article on the 2012 cover and read all the comments predicting who would be first to Oscar and who would become a bigger star. Nathaniel, I love your coverage of the annual Hollywood Issue. I am eagerly awaiting your analysis of this year's cover AND last year's! Heck, I bet you could recycle your old posts from the blogspot site and just do a little updating and we would all comment like crazy! I loved those posts, especially for your breakdown of how many Oscars there were at the time and how many have been won since. Thanks for all your hard work on this site!
People are so overeacting on the Liam Neesan thing.
A close friend of his was raped by a black man and he roamed the streets with the fantasy of beating a black man to a pulp. It was a long time ago and he says he is ashamed of the story and horrified by his actions. Get over it.
Annony-
You are one sick bastard
Void -- I'm sick of reading your posts about how much you hate people and telling them to fuck off. Seriously, go see a therapist.
These comments are everything!!!
This is such a fun read!!!
Was waiting for /3rtful, and that isn't snark. Always interested on his take on any racism issues, whatever the opinion.
Maybe the presentations might be like 2009 when past winners spoke about the individual nominees, or something equally cool. (Very likely not though)
I mean, Gary Oldman is trash, but people still make excuses to like and award him.
Aw Nathaniel does disappoint at times. I mean, there are always 10 or sometimes more movies that are quality enough to contend for the title of Best Picture each year. The expansion to 10, harkening back to the old days, was the best thing the Academy did in years. Pedants and weirdoes who value stats cried about the move from 5, but we had some great nominees that were clealy in the 5-10 spot, and much better films by many people's taste and account. If anything the sliding scale 5-10 is lame. We've probably missed out on a few pleasant surprises that would have been the 9-10 spot the last few years.
Nathaniel has strange pathalogical benefit of doubtitis sometimes, he can't concede that the industry all but pressured the women to pose in those sort of outfits. They look amazing and badass, nobody (worth listening to) is slutshaming women owning their sexuality, but, like Sandy's comments about her outfit, there is a level of coercion and pressure that you're turning a blind eye to, for what reason, we do not know.
To be fair to Nathaniel, he hasn't once hid behind his trademark deflection "respectability politics" for when somebody provided constructive criticism, reasonable suggestions for proactive measures to address things he harps on against, or to avoid valid criticisms of mansplaining or black and whiting gray areas.
I guess we can be thankful for that.
Thanks for the blog.........
This Liam Neeson "fantasy" is how we got Emmit Till's and Trayvon Martin's murder. This fantasy that any Black boy or man is a treat. I wasn't watching his film anyway but definitely not supporting him in the future. And before people scream censorship, I am not Liam's mom; I do not have to support his career. The fact that he chose to tell this story to help sell his trash revenge film just shows how clueless/unexamined he is and the ability that stright white men have to fantasize about and condone violence towards people of color.
I didn't post the comment above, and as a longtime reader here I doubt /3rtful posted the above comment as well.
Did it ever occur to you that there is more than 1 person named Suzanne in the world? *gasp*
The second "anonny" comment wasn't from me, either. So I think (the real) Suzanne is onto something.
this very last comment wasn't from me. what is going on?
Ah mansplaining -- the easiest way to shame someone with a penis who has an opinion. I get that it's a real thing and I've seen men do it and I have caught myself doing it from time to time (oops!). But I would argue that this is not actually that (unless you are of the opinion that any man having a discussion about anything where there are differences of opinion is mansplaning in which case, to quote sarah paulson in CAROL "i can't help you with that". Maybe muzzle all men?)
Foolishly (I'll admit that!) I didn't quite think it would be unpopular to point out this article because I was actually surprised myself at how positive the quotes were after a few years of the media grafting this prostitution-like experience retroactively onto these women. BOLD CONCEPT: People should respect women's choices, even if they don't approve of them. Did Annie Leibovitz coerce Demi Moore into posing nude twice on Vanity Fair once when she was pregnant in 1991? I'm quite sure that people in 2019 would want to shame her about that now but at the time there was a lot of discourse that women found it inspiring, the refusal to no longer be sexual being once you're a mother.
There is so much body shaming in the world (sigh). These past few years have been strange. In some ways we are addressing and expelling this shame as a collective (there's so much good work being done/ conversation being had about how standards of beauty are too rigid and hurtful -- skin color, body shape, impossible ideals as damaging, etcetera...at least in terms of women's bodies. Men are increasingly expected to look like superheroes) and yet at the same time, there is so much shaming about people being sexual or dressing immodestly happening at the same time. I personally find it disorienting. If you think it's all great, I'm happy for you but please respect that it's disorienting from this perspective as someone who grew up in a very conservative environment where women were expected to be very modest and often blamed for men's sexuality (hi, so many world religions. I see you!)
Kudos to Jennifer Jason Leigh who found a way to hide her body and still pull focus to herself. After all, she was the only "veteran" and knew better. never made choices that exploited her sexuality in spite of being the most naked of all mainstream actresses in the history of film! Seriously, I might have seen her breasts in over 15 movies. She never allowed herself to become a "sex symbol". Why? Because she knew she had the talent to back up her choices and if she did disrobe a lot, it was because her characters had that raw quality about them and sexuality was just an extension of that. In 1995 she had Dolores Clairborne and Georgia, two undeniable performances. My point is, the other actresses who are so exposed did so to draw attention to their sex appeal because no matter how talented some of them are (and 6 of them are really talented), unlike Leigh, they were using their sex appeal to make a name for themselves. No judgement here. People make whatever choices they want based on many variables and circumstances. But Leigh, ironically in the lowest position, really rises above them all in how she let her work speak for itself. Not the easiest way, but the most commendable.
shawshank -- yeah, those were really fun to do... but obviously i have to avoid VF covers now because they're very triggering for people.
Jamie -- interesting point about Leigh.
My read on the Vanity Cover thing? I think both sides of the conversation are talking about different things or ignoring what the others is saying.
It's true that the comments from the ladies involved were mostly positive and people (Americans specifically) need to be more sex positive. But it's ALSO true that women ARE put under immense pressure to be MORE SEXY than what they might otherwise have chosen for themselves in a vacuum and certainly more so than men. These women could very well have had a great experience overall, but again this did not happen in a cultural vacuum and perhaps their reclamation of this cover is just one of a million ways women have to constantly adjust to the pressure of a misogynistic culture.
Anyways... all of that to say... more men in scantily clad clothing on covers please.
I still want someone who mattered in 1994 to explain how Dolores Claiborne escaped all major awards attention.
Oh please- images are place on covers to sell magazines- sex sells- so that's the reason the women are in their underwear- does everything have to be anti sex now? Yes we should have cover in which leading men could pose shirtless- I mean we get plenty on that inside Vanity Fair- see any article on Hemsworth, or Pratt.
Here is Jennifer Jason Leigh talking to Letterman extensively about that cover:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtbr_zjLmik
LOL - keep digging that hole Nathaniel.
Yes, but no one is body shaming. No one is shaming their bodies or calling them too fat or too thin. It is a fact though that back then people wouldn't even think about asking men to be in their underwear ( they wouldn't ask them now either, not for the cover of VF) and that the women hadn't being asked beforehand if they are comfortable with the lingerie theme. Of course, they weren't forced or anything and they weren't traumatized but they had to think about things that respected male actors never think. Moreover, I am not anti-sex or a puritan because I don't like people's bodies to be looked upon constantly only as a sexual thing (no matter the body). Even the fact that you equate a naked woman or a man with sex is problematic. Your body has many functions and sex is just one of them. BTW, I don't like the cover not because of the nudity ( which is none really) but because it's all over the place.