NGalitzine
Heir Apparent
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2007
- Messages
- 5,276
- City
- Toronto (ON) & London (UK)
- Country
- Canada
Madonna should never be allowed onto a film set, either in front of or behind the camera.
"W.E" (2012) - Film produced by Madonna on the Abdication of Edward VIII
- Thread starter Lumutqueen
- Start date
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2009
- Messages
- 41,713
- City
- An Iarmhí
- Country
- Ireland
She should know by know to stick to her day job!
Boris
Heir Presumptive
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2004
- Messages
- 2,202
- City
- Los Angeles
- Country
- United States
Is the topic headline here "Madonna Bashing" or "W.E - A film"?
I always find bashing without wit rather annoying.
IMO the movie was good entertainment, visually quite appealing, with structural problems which often arise in films which tell parallel stories and one of them in flashback - "Julie and Julia" comes to mind, for example.
While Wallis Simpson's portrayal in "The King's Speech" was nothing but a caricature, this film is certainly biased and paints a too romantic picture of her, which takes away from a story which would have been far more interesting with a more ambiguous Wallis.
The parallel modern story and its heroine fall a bit flat which is almost inevitable (again, the same in "Julie and Julia"), but IMO the movie, while no masterpiece, isn't bad at all.
It would have been most fascinating to see how posts and opinions would have turned out here if the credits read 'A film by Jane Doe', instead of Madonna - very different, I should think.
I always find bashing without wit rather annoying.
IMO the movie was good entertainment, visually quite appealing, with structural problems which often arise in films which tell parallel stories and one of them in flashback - "Julie and Julia" comes to mind, for example.
While Wallis Simpson's portrayal in "The King's Speech" was nothing but a caricature, this film is certainly biased and paints a too romantic picture of her, which takes away from a story which would have been far more interesting with a more ambiguous Wallis.
The parallel modern story and its heroine fall a bit flat which is almost inevitable (again, the same in "Julie and Julia"), but IMO the movie, while no masterpiece, isn't bad at all.
It would have been most fascinating to see how posts and opinions would have turned out here if the credits read 'A film by Jane Doe', instead of Madonna - very different, I should think.
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2011
- Messages
- 4,180
- City
- Boston
- Country
- United States
No, I'm pretty certain I would have still found the film trite and ridiculous.
Believe it or not, I like Madonna. I root for her, and I was hoping this project would be a success. It wasn't- it was an ambitious failure, but it was a failure.
Believe it or not, I like Madonna. I root for her, and I was hoping this project would be a success. It wasn't- it was an ambitious failure, but it was a failure.
XeniaCasaraghi
Heir Apparent
- Joined
- May 15, 2011
- Messages
- 3,761
- City
- Texas
- Country
- United States
I do wish she would have directed the movie under a pseudonym, Hollywood would have been much kinder to it if it wasn't attached to Madonna. Did the Julia Child movie have the two women moving across decades and speaking with each other? I did feel that technique sometimes worker but sometimes it failed. One thing I found interesting is she had David listening to his family bashing him and his father preferring Albert be King,
Similar threads
