(That's Meryl and Amy)

We not gonna discuss Julie and Julia at all, huh?

Y'all can sit up and cyse up big mouth-ass Heigl, but ignore the fact that The GOAT done opened up yet another dumbass-looking movie, making that respectable bread, huh?

(3 Summers in a row, btw)

And don't get me started on The GOAT in Training... she better than Heigl in just about every conceivable way (acting, looks, acting, the way she don't sell out her writers and crews, acting)...

But y'all wanna cyse up big mouth. Typical.
________________________________________________________________________

And act better too

Plus she open movies just as well as trout face Heigl
________________________________________________________________________

.

For the record, Idt Heigl is hot either & her acting skills leave much to be desired.

Heigl may be a yatch and all that...that's why there's grudgefucking

http://images.google.com/images?q=amy+adams

amy's a great actor but is pretty much standard-issue non-descript-white-girl lookswise

heigl is borderline maxim-hot

http://www.katherineheigl.ws/katherine-heigl-boobs.jpg

http://celebrityandworld.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/katherine-heigl.jpg

http://www.bartcop.com/heigl-01.jpg

http://s63.photobucket.com/albums/h153/vngallery3/Katherine_Heigl/Katherine_Heigl9.jpg

http://www.tvpredictions.com/hotterheigl.jpg



cmon

________________________________________________________________________

but who's counting? do your thing tho

>(acting, looks, acting, the way she don't sell out her writers and crews, acting).


Hrm... unless basic mathematics has changed, I see the word "acting" listed 3 times, and the word "looks" listed... once...

Super Deflection FAIL
________________________________________________________________________

good edit tho

Awesome.

EDIT: Super.
________________________________________________________________________

one time, three times, it don't matter -- you stated an opinion on Heigl's looks (twice including your answer to dula), some people agreed, others didn't, that's the way the board works.

but since you carrying on and trying to make it all GD up in here (yeah, I saw the edit)...lemme continue.

I knew you'd be the one getting huffy on some trivial joint like this. that's how your simp ass posts -- pre-defensive, waiting for somebody to disagree, then triple-editing your one sentence, corny as fuck replies that nobody laughs at. acting like you don't care, but you do.

so thanks for reminding me why I usually don't reply to your dumb shit. go ahead and delete this reply if you want (hell, I would if this was modding this board).

Now you can kindly get the fuck outta the post, chief.
________________________________________________________________________

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0iZOmjLrFMs

________________________________________________________________________
"I am a rewriter. I rewrite a number of times. Imaginative richness is born in rewriting." - Bernard Malamud

wtf?

As in, "Better actor, absolutely, but better in the looks department? Cmon, fam."

EDIT (zOMG) - that would have saved about 6 posts and also saved someone from making an ass of themselves here (not me)...
________________________________________________________________________
"I am a rewriter. I rewrite a number of times. Imaginative richness is born in rewriting." - Bernard Malamud

you: cmon amy better. better acting, better looks, less of a cunt.

me: you think amy looks better?

^^^i mean, do i have to explicitly state that i don't disagree w/ the other 2 things you said? isn't that the only reasonable assumption from the way i replied?

I already answered the fuckin' question.

The time for deflections has ended, slim.
________________________________________________________________________
"I am a rewriter. I rewrite a number of times. Imaginative richness is born in rewriting." - Bernard Malamud

A+ material
A+ agenda
C- Impact though

Apparently they spend waaaaaay more time on Julia than the book did, and they cast Amy Adams to try to "nicen up" a kinda bitchy character, with mixed results.

I'm seeing it tomorrow.

Behemoth of a woman who worked for the CIA and makes some mean food....I can get down with that.


"Jack of all trades, master of none, though ofttimes better than master of one"-Anonymous


The sharpest sword is a word spoken in wrath;the deadliest poison is covetousness;the fiercest fire is hatred; the darkest night is ignorance.-The Buddha

I thought the book by Julie focused on cooking the 500+ meals and the Julia portion focused on her life in France.

So what book are you talking about if there isn't one book that focused on both Julie Powell and Julia Child?

I think a lot of her book focused more on her own issues and in the movie, almost everything revolved around her love for Julia.

about her movie three weeks ago, discussing how she "won" for opening another shitty high-concept romantic comedy

Yet as The GOAT continues making summer hits AND bringing the Oscar heat, now it's tumbleweeds around this bitch...
________________________________________________________________________

holy shit.

I think more so then any other A list actor, she generally enjoys the work she's doing, be it Oscar bait or chick-flicks, and it comes off on screen. There's nothing she could be cast in that I would find unbelievable.

And Amy Adams I have had my eye on since Enchanted.

I was concerned abt him not liking it because it is a chick flick
But he laughed a lot
He knows how much I love food shows and I think "Julie" showed him why I feel how I do about food
I give it a B+

Meryl Streep is fucking great.
She kills it with the julia-isms. Every time she makes an "ooo" kind of sound, it's charming/hilarious.

Tucci is great too.

Streep as Julia is so much better than every other aspect of the film, however.

________________________________________________________________________

Glad to know I can still make people upset with my "corny" posting style

Talk about claiming not to care

No edits, btw
________________________________________________________________________

From the Los Angeles Times

>CRITIC'S NOTEBOOK

That Amy Adams touch

She eats up sweetheart roles but her true genius is revealed in stormy characters ('Julie & Julia,' 'Junebug') that set off intense sparks.

By Betsy Sharkey FILM CRITIC

August 11, 2009

Amy Adams has a smile that plays big, taking over her face, then the room, then everyone in it. It's as if the world is suddenly bathed in sunshine. That's why it's hard to imagine anyone else as the dipped-in-happiness princess of "Enchanted," a cartoon character come to life, who sings and sews her way into Patrick Dempsey's heart.

But as wonderful as that super-saturated optimism can be, and as much as Hollywood suits and moviegoers alike prefer her in those roles, she is even more interesting to watch as someone who's been hurt, betrayed by life or circumstance or someone else. Those finely textured performances have a way of surprising you, so unexpected do they feel, so unlike the lightness of her comedy.

It's when she comes undone that I love Adams most. She paints a thousand colors on that dark canvas: bruising pain, profound empathy, infinite compassion, infinite need. There is an interior steeliness to her darker work -- a sharp intake of breath as she brushes her broken bits under the rug, a flash of lightning in stormy eyes, and you know she will, in a Scarlett O'Hara-as-God-is-her-witness-way, carry on.

The nuance Adams brings to those moments will ultimately go a long way in defining her still-developing career. (She turns 35 this month but she plays much younger). Consider "Julie & Julia," the great French bake-off that opened over the weekend that costars Adams, though Meryl Streep's Julia Child effortlessly whips egg whites and everyone and everything else into a fluffy meringue. While Streep has been butter-cream frosted in praise -- and rightfully so -- the reception to Adams as Julie has been something closer to frosty.

Yet if you take a close look at Adams in the film, you'll discover another carefully calibrated performance. Everything about her character is as it should be: self-involved, often superficial, often insecure, sometimes petty and with a "poor me" attitude that is very unappetizing when her day job is assisting the victims of the 9/11 World Trade Center collapse.

Her Julie Powell is a not-quite-30 Manhattan office drone who spends a year cooking through Child's "Mastering the Art of French Cooking" in a desperate bid to flavor her own bland life. She was never supposed to step out of Child's shadow, even when success comes.

Adams understands that. From the slump in her shoulders to the serious shear of her hair, she allows herself to shrink into someone smaller on screen than she's ever been. At times it's as if the camera is searching for her, which rarely happens, since the camera fell in love with her ages ago.

It's quite simple, really -- if Adams has to choose between the character and our affection, she'll go for the character every time. She's a lot more than America's sweetheart.


Eyes have it

What I've come to believe is that Adams is a character actor blessed and cursed with a youthfully angelic face, leaving her the sizable task of layering meaning into performances that will, by necessity, reside inside porcelain perfection with a pert nose and a not quite grown-up voice.

All might be lost, or at least the potential for a broad artistic sweep to her career, if not for her eyes. An inky, indigo blue, they are a hopeless gossip, eager to let slip all the secrets hiding inside. When she throws them wide open, which she does with a sort of fierce intensity, the emotion you are witness to is unmitigated, raw and real. You understand why writer-director John Patrick Shanley would look at her and see the novice nun he envisioned for "Doubt," a Madonna untouched, her piety and belief about to be shaken to the core.

Adams commits absolutely to whatever role she's taken on, it's a glimmer in the bouncy cheerleading afterthought she was in 1999 in her first film, "Drop Dead Gorgeous," which starred a long list of other young actresses that were expected to outshine her, including Kirsten Dunst and Brittany Murphy. As Amelia Earhart earlier this year in the silliness of "Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian," Adams evoked an old-style glamour; in jodhpurs and a bob, she became Amelia, feisty and formidable and comically adorable.

Despite expectations, her breakthrough did not come as the innocent who falls for Leo DiCaprio's con artist in Steven Spielberg's "Catch Me If You Can" in 2002. There she was largely overlooked despite a nuanced performance of absolute love betrayed. The devastating final image of her is on an airport curb, Feds at the ready with arrest warrants for her ex-lover in hand. There stands little girl lost, crushed as much by the Judas role she finds herself in as any betrayal by DiCaprio's con.


'Junebug' leap

It was not until the 2005 indie film "Junebug" that the actress finally caught everyone's attention. An Oscar nomination came just as she was about to give up on Hollywood and head back to the stage.

"Junebug," though, was a revelation; a close-up of just what Adams might be capable of as she delivered a tour de force of battered optimism and endless need with a fractured smile and a Southern drawl.

It was supposed to be Embeth Davidtz's movie in her role as the sophisticated art dealer who travels south to woo a reclusive artist and squeeze in a first visit to her in-laws. And her arrival does indeed set things in motion and keeps upending the equilibrium of this barely middle-class family. But from the moment a barefoot and pregnant Ashley runs out of the house to embrace her new sister-in-law, it becomes, without question, Adams' film.

There are countless moments in "Junebug" when Adams' performance breaks your heart. The easy one to choose is in the hours after she's lost the baby she had nicknamed Junebug. But my favorite is of Adams playing beauty parlor, painting Davidtz's fingernails a bright red as she chatters on about her life, the baby, her very small dreams. In that scene we realize just how completely Ashley understands the great divide between her life and Davidtz's. All the ways in which she tries to make the words, "I'm fine. . . . I'm fine" gain purchase, a bowed head, a quick glance, a quivering smile.


A dark turn

On the horizon for Adams is "Leap Year," a romantic comedy that has her running off to Ireland, and the new David O. Russell drama, "The Fighter," which follows the Rocky-like rise of boxer "Irish" Mickey Ward played by Mark Wahlberg, with Christian Bale as the once drug-addled half-brother who guides him.

But the one I'm most looking for is in that netherworld of development -- "Daughter of the Queen of Sheba" with Lasse Hallström set to direct. It's an adaptation of Jacki Lyden's disturbing and deeply moving memoir about surviving her mother's descent into manic depression. A shadowy place where Adams can breathe in the darkness and come undone.
________________________________________________________________________
"I am a rewriter. I rewrite a number of times. Imaginative richness is born in rewriting." - Bernard Malamud

The "Julie" part, not so much.

yall didnt try and name other woman and say streep wasn't the GOAT. i havent seen J&J, but all her roles are chosen with such precision and acted to unparralled levels. reall ywho is fuckin with her. as for amy i dont know, but workin on two films now with maryl can't be hurting her

She should definitely get a Golden Globe nom. She was a joy to watch.

It was a fun albeit slight movie. There's not really much going on but I thoroughly enjoyed myself.

(SPOILER)

The fact that Child didn't like the blog is kind of a downer. Apparently she thought it was a stunt and didn't consider Powell a serious cook which is kind of true, but that's also kind of the point of her book, no? Cooking for the every woman?

Let me preface by saying that I work at a movie theatre,
so while I haven't sat down and watched it straight through,
I have, as of today, seen the entire thing.
Most of it multiple times.

That being said:
This is not a bad movie.
It is, in fact, a very well made movie.
But that doesn't mean I care one way or another about seeing it again.

Nora Ephron did a good job. The script is good, the directing is good.
Amy Adams did a good job. She is normal, and doesn't make you completely hate this narcissistic and obsessed woman, which would be very easy to do.
Julie's husband was also effective and normal.
But that's the problem - everything felt a little too real. The say that theater is life under a microscope. If that is true, Nora pulled in way too close. The ONLY thing she focused on was Julie's obsession with Julia and it really made her seem like a loon. But a loon that you work with.
Note to all future film-writers: blogs are not a good subject for a movie.

The Julia part, however, is much better. Meryl was excellent at making a cartoon character seem like a real woman, and Stanley Tucci, as always, was great.
Her struggles were much more palpable than Julie's because it felt like she was actually trying to achieve something.

If I wanted to read into this movie,
the obvious parallel would be to see how women have progressed in terms of their own standards of accomplishment. The only problem is that it doesn't feel as if Julie really accomplished anything. She was successful, that is true, but her level of heartache and effort as compared to Julia's seemed miniscule.
Maybe that's a problem with our society, but it comes off as a problem in the movie.
Ephron does an excellent job intertwining Julie and Julia's lives,
but at the end of the day I still wished it had been a Julia Child biopic.

At the end of the movie I felt like nothing had been done,
that the story had gone nowhere.
It EASILY could be trimmed,
as some of the troubles they each go through become a bit repetitive,
but making it shorter wouldn't have made it much better.

At the end of the day,
the movie had all the right ingredients,
but the final product just didn't taste great.

And yes,
I did end with a food metaphor.