Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

Roger Ebert on why “Entrapment” (1999) worked for him & the audience: "“Entrapment” (1999) is the very embodiment of a star vehicle: a movie with a preposterous plot, exotic locations, absurd action sequences, and so much chemistry between attractive actors that we don’t care. It stars Sean Connery and...

DannyDrinksWine's profile picture

DepressedBergman

237,570 subscribers

110,008 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

Kunst
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Shannon Elizabeth on how important "American Pie" (1999) was for her career & on how the Webcam scene was filmed: "If I hadn't done 'American Pie' (1999) and I hadn't done the role of Nadia and the n*d !ty that came along with it, I might not have a career today. I didn't really think about the fact that my character had n*d !ty. I was a struggling actress auditioning for everything I could, so when I got the role I was so excited to get it." On filming the Webcam scene, "It was a closed set and it was just me in this room and the boom guy above me. I was like, ‘This is so weird.’ It was square room they had built in the middle of a warehouse and we made everyone that didn’t need to be there leave set. That’s the main thing I remember, just me and the boom guy, and trying to make jokes with the directors and make light of it because if I wasn’t nervous maybe they wouldn’t be so nervous … I just tried to make it no big deal.” If this had come out after the MeToo movement, there would definitely be a problem. I think that it would have gone down differently.” ["Skin: A History Of N*d !ty In The Movie" (2020) & Shanon Elizabeth's interview with Lindsey Kupfer, Page Six, 2019] P.S: On this day, 27 years ago, "American Pie" (1999) premiered in Universal City, California, USA.
1:08

Sensitive content

Shannon Elizabeth on how important "American Pie" (1999) was for her career & on how the Webcam scene was filmed: "If I hadn't done 'American Pie' (1999) and I hadn't done the role of Nadia and the n*d !ty that came along with it, I might not have a career today. I didn't really think about the fact that my character had n*d !ty. I was a struggling actress auditioning for everything I could, so when I got the role I was so excited to get it." On filming the Webcam scene, "It was a closed set and it was just me in this room and the boom guy above me. I was like, ‘This is so weird.’ It was square room they had built in the middle of a warehouse and we made everyone that didn’t need to be there leave set. That’s the main thing I remember, just me and the boom guy, and trying to make jokes with the directors and make light of it because if I wasn’t nervous maybe they wouldn’t be so nervous … I just tried to make it no big deal.” If this had come out after the MeToo movement, there would definitely be a problem. I think that it would have gone down differently.” ["Skin: A History Of N*d !ty In The Movie" (2020) & Shanon Elizabeth's interview with Lindsey Kupfer, Page Six, 2019] P.S: On this day, 27 years ago, "American Pie" (1999) premiered in Universal City, California, USA.

DepressedBergman

2,179,375 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Sean Connery on the one thing that separates a great James Bond from a forgettable one: Reality. In a rare interview, Connery was asked to compare his portrayal of Bond with Roger Moore's. He didn't dodge the question. "I think it's just a different appetite, that's all," he said. Connery explained that his approach to Bond was always rooted in grounding the character, no matter how outlandish the situation: "I played Bond with the reality, credibility, and hopefully still accomplishing stunts and effects and what have you, but out of it some indigenous humor. Anything that happens is possible." In other words: The audience should never be winking at the screen. They should be believing it. He felt Moore inherited a different direction, one that had already begun drifting toward spectacle over substance by the time Diamonds Are Forever was released: "His is a sort of parody of the character, as it were, in that situation, so that you will go for the laugh or the humor at whatever the cost of the credibility or the reality." Neither approach was wrong. Both found their audiences. But Connery was clear about where the line sat for him. What's remarkable is how that philosophy carried across decades and actors. When Daniel Craig stepped into the role decades later, he returned the character to exactly the edge Connery had always described. Darker. More believable. The danger more real. Connery noticed: "The spectrum of actors, I mean from myself to Daniel Craig, who I thought was fantastic, marvelous." And when told Craig had studied Connery's films extensively before taking the role, his response was characteristically understated: "Well, I'm flattered. Well, I mean, it's there to see, and the danger element, I think he really gets it." Source: The South Bank Show
2:28

Sean Connery on the one thing that separates a great James Bond from a forgettable one: Reality. In a rare interview, Connery was asked to compare his portrayal of Bond with Roger Moore's. He didn't dodge the question. "I think it's just a different appetite, that's all," he said. Connery explained that his approach to Bond was always rooted in grounding the character, no matter how outlandish the situation: "I played Bond with the reality, credibility, and hopefully still accomplishing stunts and effects and what have you, but out of it some indigenous humor. Anything that happens is possible." In other words: The audience should never be winking at the screen. They should be believing it. He felt Moore inherited a different direction, one that had already begun drifting toward spectacle over substance by the time Diamonds Are Forever was released: "His is a sort of parody of the character, as it were, in that situation, so that you will go for the laugh or the humor at whatever the cost of the credibility or the reality." Neither approach was wrong. Both found their audiences. But Connery was clear about where the line sat for him. What's remarkable is how that philosophy carried across decades and actors. When Daniel Craig stepped into the role decades later, he returned the character to exactly the edge Connery had always described. Darker. More believable. The danger more real. Connery noticed: "The spectrum of actors, I mean from myself to Daniel Craig, who I thought was fantastic, marvelous." And when told Craig had studied Connery's films extensively before taking the role, his response was characteristically understated: "Well, I'm flattered. Well, I mean, it's there to see, and the danger element, I think he really gets it." Source: The South Bank Show

History Nerd

252,987 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

At first, Emmanuel Lubezki deemed the mission of filming the Car scene in "Children of Men" (2006) impossible. So Alfonso Cuarón dared him by saying he would do the scene in CGI. However, Lubezki felt it went against everything they were trying to do, especially the documentary-like feel of the movie. Lubezki took it as a challenge and the scene was completed in a single take. Lubezki said, “On 'Y Tu Mamá También' (2001), we started exploring shots that are longer, where the camera is moving around the actors and there are no cuts and you feel like you’re there. When Alfonso started talking to me about the scene in 'Children of Men' (2006), he said, ‘I would love to do it in one shot, and I have an idea: Why don’t we put the car on a stage and surround it with a green screen?’ Basically, to shoot it as a visual effect. For probably a week, I was thinking that way, until I realized it was absolutely the wrong way to do it. The rest of the movie was going to have a very naturalistic, almost documentary-like feel to it, and maybe the best way to shoot it was to really be in the car with the actors. At that time, we didn’t have much support for doing those very long scenes, because the other people around us were used to cutting and doing these scenes in a very Burbank way. They’d say, ‘Why bother? What a waste of effort.’ In reality, we could not shoot it more than two or three times, because the scene is so long and the choreography is so complex that it takes hours to reset between takes. So we did our first attempt, and when we said ‘Cut,’ we had achieved it on the first take, and the actors were screaming. They couldn’t believe it! I’ve never seen something like that, where they were shouting like little kids, ‘Yeah, we did it!’ The guy who was operating the crane? He was crying. It was that release of tension.” ("The Future is Now: Alfonso Cuarón’s ‘Children of Men’ Paints a Bleak Picture of a World Devoid of Humanity", Koraljka Suton, Cinephilia & Beyond) P.S: On this day, 20 years ago, "Children of Men" (2006) premiered at the Venice Film Festival, Italy.
1:31

At first, Emmanuel Lubezki deemed the mission of filming the Car scene in "Children of Men" (2006) impossible. So Alfonso Cuarón dared him by saying he would do the scene in CGI. However, Lubezki felt it went against everything they were trying to do, especially the documentary-like feel of the movie. Lubezki took it as a challenge and the scene was completed in a single take. Lubezki said, “On 'Y Tu Mamá También' (2001), we started exploring shots that are longer, where the camera is moving around the actors and there are no cuts and you feel like you’re there. When Alfonso started talking to me about the scene in 'Children of Men' (2006), he said, ‘I would love to do it in one shot, and I have an idea: Why don’t we put the car on a stage and surround it with a green screen?’ Basically, to shoot it as a visual effect. For probably a week, I was thinking that way, until I realized it was absolutely the wrong way to do it. The rest of the movie was going to have a very naturalistic, almost documentary-like feel to it, and maybe the best way to shoot it was to really be in the car with the actors. At that time, we didn’t have much support for doing those very long scenes, because the other people around us were used to cutting and doing these scenes in a very Burbank way. They’d say, ‘Why bother? What a waste of effort.’ In reality, we could not shoot it more than two or three times, because the scene is so long and the choreography is so complex that it takes hours to reset between takes. So we did our first attempt, and when we said ‘Cut,’ we had achieved it on the first take, and the actors were screaming. They couldn’t believe it! I’ve never seen something like that, where they were shouting like little kids, ‘Yeah, we did it!’ The guy who was operating the crane? He was crying. It was that release of tension.” ("The Future is Now: Alfonso Cuarón’s ‘Children of Men’ Paints a Bleak Picture of a World Devoid of Humanity", Koraljka Suton, Cinephilia & Beyond) P.S: On this day, 20 years ago, "Children of Men" (2006) premiered at the Venice Film Festival, Italy.

DepressedBergman

55,915 Aufrufe • vor 22 Tagen

Walter Hill on why the absence of big names made a huge difference to 'The Warriors' (1979): "One of the things that I was pleased about doing 'The Warriors' (1979) was that it didn’t lend itself to star casting. That at makes a big difference, especially when it comes to putting movies together timewise. We had free reign in casting the film. I told the studio that I wanted to do a movie with an all-black cast, but they would not go for that, and I think in the end they were right because the film becomes more universalized, more timeless, and a more magical world in that you have gangs who don’t look like what real gangs did. But at the same time there is a hint of social reality, so there’s a mix of social reality and fantasy. I think the interracial casting helped that. We were finding the movie." ('Walter Hill - The Cinema of Hollywood Maverick', Wayne Byrne, 2022) [P.S: On this day, 47 years ago, 'The Warriors' (1979) was released in Australia]
1:44

Walter Hill on why the absence of big names made a huge difference to 'The Warriors' (1979): "One of the things that I was pleased about doing 'The Warriors' (1979) was that it didn’t lend itself to star casting. That at makes a big difference, especially when it comes to putting movies together timewise. We had free reign in casting the film. I told the studio that I wanted to do a movie with an all-black cast, but they would not go for that, and I think in the end they were right because the film becomes more universalized, more timeless, and a more magical world in that you have gangs who don’t look like what real gangs did. But at the same time there is a hint of social reality, so there’s a mix of social reality and fantasy. I think the interracial casting helped that. We were finding the movie." ('Walter Hill - The Cinema of Hollywood Maverick', Wayne Byrne, 2022) [P.S: On this day, 47 years ago, 'The Warriors' (1979) was released in Australia]

DepressedBergman

80,178 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

🦊 the pictures that you saw actually got leaked, right? 🦊 it got leaked 🦊 i didn’t plan on showing you the pictures like that so when it first got leaked, honestly i felt really bad 🦊 me and the staff really thought so much about things like…we thought a lot about the release schedule and we made the release plan after literally putting our heart and soul into it 🦊 things like the news of me making a solo comeback, the date of the solo album and the pictures being leaked really disrupted our release plans 🦊 it made me feel really bad and uneasy 🦊 but this doesn’t really change the quality of my solo album and what i have to show so that’s really good, the songs are really good and the performances will be really good so this doesn’t cause a major disruption in that aspect but the main poster…the key visual of my album cover…if it hadn’t been disclosed like that, i was actually going to reveal it really late because i didn’t want you to look at those pictures and think…well looking at those pictures, you’ll think “is this yeonjun’s concept this time? is that the concept?” 🦊 i didn’t want to make you judge those things based on the pictures 🦊 like “he’s showing his body so is it a sexy concept? is it this concept?” how does i put this…i didn’t want people to judge it based on that 🦊 but anyway, i’m glad the fans liked it and it was good that it gained a lot of attention
3:34

🦊 the pictures that you saw actually got leaked, right? 🦊 it got leaked 🦊 i didn’t plan on showing you the pictures like that so when it first got leaked, honestly i felt really bad 🦊 me and the staff really thought so much about things like…we thought a lot about the release schedule and we made the release plan after literally putting our heart and soul into it 🦊 things like the news of me making a solo comeback, the date of the solo album and the pictures being leaked really disrupted our release plans 🦊 it made me feel really bad and uneasy 🦊 but this doesn’t really change the quality of my solo album and what i have to show so that’s really good, the songs are really good and the performances will be really good so this doesn’t cause a major disruption in that aspect but the main poster…the key visual of my album cover…if it hadn’t been disclosed like that, i was actually going to reveal it really late because i didn’t want you to look at those pictures and think…well looking at those pictures, you’ll think “is this yeonjun’s concept this time? is that the concept?” 🦊 i didn’t want to make you judge those things based on the pictures 🦊 like “he’s showing his body so is it a sexy concept? is it this concept?” how does i put this…i didn’t want people to judge it based on that 🦊 but anyway, i’m glad the fans liked it and it was good that it gained a lot of attention

💬

151,880 Aufrufe • vor 11 Monaten

David Cronenberg on why there isn't a sex scene in 'eXistenZ' (1999): "Each movie generates its own little biosphere, and has its own little ecology, and its climate, and you’re attuned to that more than anything else. So when people say, “Is there anything you wouldn’t show on film?” or, “Do you ever draw back?” I’m saying if I do, it’s only because of that biosphere: What is appropriate? What works within the ecology of that movie? So in one movie sex and blood would be very up-front, like 'Crash' (1996), because it’s sort of the subject of the movie, and in another movie, like 'The Dead Zone' (1983), it would not be appropriate. It just doesn’t work somehow; it would be disproportionate. So there’s no sex, really, in 'eXistenZ' (1999), except metaphorically. And there was an opportunity to have sex, to have sex scenes, and we were all willing to do that. But as the film evolved, you know, we just thought that would be wrong. It would take away from the metaphorical sex, which is more interesting, it has more resonance, and if you suddenly threw a real naked sex scene in the middle of it, it would not balance all that, almost invalidate it. So you wait, and the movie gradually tells you what it wants to be, and you have to sort of go along with that." (David Cronenberg's interview with Allen White, Film Threat, 1999)
1:46

David Cronenberg on why there isn't a sex scene in 'eXistenZ' (1999): "Each movie generates its own little biosphere, and has its own little ecology, and its climate, and you’re attuned to that more than anything else. So when people say, “Is there anything you wouldn’t show on film?” or, “Do you ever draw back?” I’m saying if I do, it’s only because of that biosphere: What is appropriate? What works within the ecology of that movie? So in one movie sex and blood would be very up-front, like 'Crash' (1996), because it’s sort of the subject of the movie, and in another movie, like 'The Dead Zone' (1983), it would not be appropriate. It just doesn’t work somehow; it would be disproportionate. So there’s no sex, really, in 'eXistenZ' (1999), except metaphorically. And there was an opportunity to have sex, to have sex scenes, and we were all willing to do that. But as the film evolved, you know, we just thought that would be wrong. It would take away from the metaphorical sex, which is more interesting, it has more resonance, and if you suddenly threw a real naked sex scene in the middle of it, it would not balance all that, almost invalidate it. So you wait, and the movie gradually tells you what it wants to be, and you have to sort of go along with that." (David Cronenberg's interview with Allen White, Film Threat, 1999)

DepressedBergman

96,012 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Bernardo Bertolucci on why 'Novecento' (1976) was very personal to him: "'Novecento' (1976) was a sort of monument to contradiction. I’m not afraid to say it. But it was also a communication with the audience. My earlier movies I didn’t care about the audience. I was much more arrogant before. The movie was a celebration of contradictions, there was a change “from contradiction to dialectic...” The audience doesn’t care about dialectic, about those things. They care about emotion. And in the end it’s the emotion that, God bless, cancels all this stuff. I feel abandoned as if the movie has abandoned me. Not me, the movie. I’ve been with it for four years. That’s long enough to be a marriage. And all that time it was so up and down, up and down. In 'Novecento', I faced my whole life in a way. I faced my adolescence, which is really very near me inside. To go straight ahead we must have a look back behind us. That’s why, when I finished 'Novecento' I got sick, I was sick for months, emotionally sick. Nobody knew. Because to me my adolescence used to be the lost paradise and I created again my adolescence, my childhood in 'Novecento' . And I created a copy of the lost paradise. And I lost it for the second time. Now I have really lost it. To let go of the movie was letting go of my childhood." (Bernardo Bertolucci's interview with Sally Quinn, 1977) P.S: On this day, 50 years ago, Novecento' (1976) premiered at the Cannes Film Festival, France.
2:01

Bernardo Bertolucci on why 'Novecento' (1976) was very personal to him: "'Novecento' (1976) was a sort of monument to contradiction. I’m not afraid to say it. But it was also a communication with the audience. My earlier movies I didn’t care about the audience. I was much more arrogant before. The movie was a celebration of contradictions, there was a change “from contradiction to dialectic...” The audience doesn’t care about dialectic, about those things. They care about emotion. And in the end it’s the emotion that, God bless, cancels all this stuff. I feel abandoned as if the movie has abandoned me. Not me, the movie. I’ve been with it for four years. That’s long enough to be a marriage. And all that time it was so up and down, up and down. In 'Novecento', I faced my whole life in a way. I faced my adolescence, which is really very near me inside. To go straight ahead we must have a look back behind us. That’s why, when I finished 'Novecento' I got sick, I was sick for months, emotionally sick. Nobody knew. Because to me my adolescence used to be the lost paradise and I created again my adolescence, my childhood in 'Novecento' . And I created a copy of the lost paradise. And I lost it for the second time. Now I have really lost it. To let go of the movie was letting go of my childhood." (Bernardo Bertolucci's interview with Sally Quinn, 1977) P.S: On this day, 50 years ago, Novecento' (1976) premiered at the Cannes Film Festival, France.

DepressedBergman

12,983 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Kristen Stewart says a studio cut her out of the Snow White sequel that made half a billion dollars because of slut shaming Howard: “That movie, the one with Charlize Theron-” Kristen: “Snow White and the Huntsman” Howard: “That f*cking movie made like a half a billion dollars. And then they didn’t ask you to be in the sequel” Kristen: “We lived in a different time then. You know what I mean? I feel like now, the slut shaming that went down was so absurd. And they should have put me in that movie. It would have been better. Not to be a d*ck” Howard: “You’re saying there was slut shaming of you?” Kristen: “Well, they didn’t put me in that movie ’cause I went through a highly publicized scandal. So they were scared of touching that” Howard: “That’s why they didn’t have you in the sequel. That was a dumb move” Kristen: “I think so” Howard: “Isn’t that wrong though, not to put you in a sequel ’cause you fell in love with the director?” Kristen: “I wouldn’t say that I fell in love with the director, but yeah, it was a weird thing, but it wasn’t that big of a deal. It literally wasn’t. The work is so much more important. What do you care?” “I just thought that movie, we could have made a great second one and we could have done it in a functional and healthy way. And then we didn’t ultimately do that, and that’s okay ’cause I did other stuff and it’s fine. But yeah, that was weird” Howard: “So you were blamed for not being in the second movie just because you had sex with somebody. That’s what you’re telling me” Kristen: “I did not f*ck him” Howard: “Oh, you didn’t f*ck him. Okay. So why not clear that up? Why not say that?” Kristen: “Well, who’s going to believe - it doesn’t matter. You make out with a dude in public. It definitely looks like you did” Howard: “So it was an innocent sort of thing. The media made it out to be a big deal” Kristen: “Yeah. I mean, look, it wasn’t innocent. That was a really hard period of my life. I was really young” Howard: “Well, it’s understandable. You’re a young woman. You were going out with Rob” Kristen: “Yeah. I didn’t really know how to deal with that. I made some mistakes” Howard: “Hey, guess what? Everybody does” Kristen: “And honestly, it’s no one’s business and people get over sh*t like that. It really is not a big deal” “And basically what I’m saying is the work to me genuinely was ignored in a really sort of frivolous, silly, petty way for a group of adult people who are supposed to be running studios and making films”
2:23

Kristen Stewart says a studio cut her out of the Snow White sequel that made half a billion dollars because of slut shaming Howard: “That movie, the one with Charlize Theron-” Kristen: “Snow White and the Huntsman” Howard: “That f*cking movie made like a half a billion dollars. And then they didn’t ask you to be in the sequel” Kristen: “We lived in a different time then. You know what I mean? I feel like now, the slut shaming that went down was so absurd. And they should have put me in that movie. It would have been better. Not to be a d*ck” Howard: “You’re saying there was slut shaming of you?” Kristen: “Well, they didn’t put me in that movie ’cause I went through a highly publicized scandal. So they were scared of touching that” Howard: “That’s why they didn’t have you in the sequel. That was a dumb move” Kristen: “I think so” Howard: “Isn’t that wrong though, not to put you in a sequel ’cause you fell in love with the director?” Kristen: “I wouldn’t say that I fell in love with the director, but yeah, it was a weird thing, but it wasn’t that big of a deal. It literally wasn’t. The work is so much more important. What do you care?” “I just thought that movie, we could have made a great second one and we could have done it in a functional and healthy way. And then we didn’t ultimately do that, and that’s okay ’cause I did other stuff and it’s fine. But yeah, that was weird” Howard: “So you were blamed for not being in the second movie just because you had sex with somebody. That’s what you’re telling me” Kristen: “I did not f*ck him” Howard: “Oh, you didn’t f*ck him. Okay. So why not clear that up? Why not say that?” Kristen: “Well, who’s going to believe - it doesn’t matter. You make out with a dude in public. It definitely looks like you did” Howard: “So it was an innocent sort of thing. The media made it out to be a big deal” Kristen: “Yeah. I mean, look, it wasn’t innocent. That was a really hard period of my life. I was really young” Howard: “Well, it’s understandable. You’re a young woman. You were going out with Rob” Kristen: “Yeah. I didn’t really know how to deal with that. I made some mistakes” Howard: “Hey, guess what? Everybody does” Kristen: “And honestly, it’s no one’s business and people get over sh*t like that. It really is not a big deal” “And basically what I’m saying is the work to me genuinely was ignored in a really sort of frivolous, silly, petty way for a group of adult people who are supposed to be running studios and making films”

sara

787,770 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Blake Edwards on the conditions he laid out before accepting to direct "A Shot in the Dark" (1964): "'A Shot in the Dark' (1964) is nothing like Marcel Archard’s play, that’s for a start. I was asked to save the situation. They had quite a bit of money involved in this project. Peter Sellers was threatening to pull out because he didn’t like the screenplay. He said that the only way he would continue with the project would be if I took it over. I said that the only way I could possibly take it over, under such emergency conditions, would be that I would not be obliged to do anything like Archard’s play because a) I didn’t like it, b) I thought it was not a motion picture and c) I wasn’t ready to make a movie at that point. So they asked me what I wanted to do because the picture had to start in something like four weeks. I said that if they wanted me to save them, I’d have to take something with which I was familiar to begin with. I was familiar with the character of Clouseau. I needed a detective, somebody to solve a murder. I couldn’t throw the whole thing out. I had to use the idea that the maid was accused of killing the chaffeur and this had to be solved. So I thought that Peter Sellers was just the natural thing and that now I was going to try to be as broad with the character as I could be. “How far can I go now in terms of Inspector Clouseau?” I wrote the screenplay and was on the stage in four weeks with it. Fortunately, it turned out to be a reasonably funny movie. It proved something for me—that if a gag is well-designed you can pull it off." (Blake Edwards' interview with Jean-Francois Hauduroy, Cahiers du cinéma, 1966) P.S: On this 62 years ago, "A Shot in the Dark" (1964) premiered in New York City, USA.
1:23

Blake Edwards on the conditions he laid out before accepting to direct "A Shot in the Dark" (1964): "'A Shot in the Dark' (1964) is nothing like Marcel Archard’s play, that’s for a start. I was asked to save the situation. They had quite a bit of money involved in this project. Peter Sellers was threatening to pull out because he didn’t like the screenplay. He said that the only way he would continue with the project would be if I took it over. I said that the only way I could possibly take it over, under such emergency conditions, would be that I would not be obliged to do anything like Archard’s play because a) I didn’t like it, b) I thought it was not a motion picture and c) I wasn’t ready to make a movie at that point. So they asked me what I wanted to do because the picture had to start in something like four weeks. I said that if they wanted me to save them, I’d have to take something with which I was familiar to begin with. I was familiar with the character of Clouseau. I needed a detective, somebody to solve a murder. I couldn’t throw the whole thing out. I had to use the idea that the maid was accused of killing the chaffeur and this had to be solved. So I thought that Peter Sellers was just the natural thing and that now I was going to try to be as broad with the character as I could be. “How far can I go now in terms of Inspector Clouseau?” I wrote the screenplay and was on the stage in four weeks with it. Fortunately, it turned out to be a reasonably funny movie. It proved something for me—that if a gag is well-designed you can pull it off." (Blake Edwards' interview with Jean-Francois Hauduroy, Cahiers du cinéma, 1966) P.S: On this 62 years ago, "A Shot in the Dark" (1964) premiered in New York City, USA.

DepressedBergman

20,460 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

"One of the biggest regrets of my career is the 1999 Gonzaga Elite Eight run, and people are like, 'How can you regret that?' The reason why I regret it is because it happened in my 2nd year as a head coach and I was naive thinking that this was normal... 25 years later I have a different perspective... I absolutely soaked up every minute today and I'm going to remember it for a lifetime. I just hope it's a long time I've got left to remember it."- Dan Monson
0:57

"One of the biggest regrets of my career is the 1999 Gonzaga Elite Eight run, and people are like, 'How can you regret that?' The reason why I regret it is because it happened in my 2nd year as a head coach and I was naive thinking that this was normal... 25 years later I have a different perspective... I absolutely soaked up every minute today and I'm going to remember it for a lifetime. I just hope it's a long time I've got left to remember it."- Dan Monson

Brenna Greene

1,575,957 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

Denis Villeneuve met Roger Deakins for the first time at the Academy Awards when he was nominated for "Incendies" (2010) & Roger Deakins for "True Grit" (2010). Deakins told Villeneuve that he loved "Incendies". Because of that, Deakins saw the older movies of Villeneuve. When Deakins was looking for a movie to work in, he got the script of "Prisoners" (2013) & had heard that Villeneuve was going to direct it. So, he immediately decided to work in the movie. Villeneuve said, "Deakins was looking for something to do and he said that when he read “Prisoners” he said, “I want to work with that director,” which is honestly the biggest compliment I’ve ever received. It was a dream for me to work with such a master. I never thought in my life or dared to dream that I’d make a movie with Roger Deakins one day. I think he was available at that period of time and he loved the script and he loved “Incendies” and we met and that was it. It was a very beautiful cinematic experience for me–I learned so much." Deakins wasn't very much a fan of the gothic elements in the movie and the genre, but he loved the script for its emphasis on character and performance. He felt that the dramatic success of "Prisoners" rests on the acting. Deakins said, "I heard Denis was doing this movie and got the script, which was dense and had a lot of characters, and, to be honest, Gothic elements that I thought went too far. I wasn’t interested in that genre, but it turned out that Denis wasn’t, either. We did end up shooting the script, but it was always his intention that the final cut of the film wouldn’t feature those elements.” P.S: On this day, 13 years ago, "Prisoners" (2013) premiered at the Telluride Film Festival, USA.
1:18

Denis Villeneuve met Roger Deakins for the first time at the Academy Awards when he was nominated for "Incendies" (2010) & Roger Deakins for "True Grit" (2010). Deakins told Villeneuve that he loved "Incendies". Because of that, Deakins saw the older movies of Villeneuve. When Deakins was looking for a movie to work in, he got the script of "Prisoners" (2013) & had heard that Villeneuve was going to direct it. So, he immediately decided to work in the movie. Villeneuve said, "Deakins was looking for something to do and he said that when he read “Prisoners” he said, “I want to work with that director,” which is honestly the biggest compliment I’ve ever received. It was a dream for me to work with such a master. I never thought in my life or dared to dream that I’d make a movie with Roger Deakins one day. I think he was available at that period of time and he loved the script and he loved “Incendies” and we met and that was it. It was a very beautiful cinematic experience for me–I learned so much." Deakins wasn't very much a fan of the gothic elements in the movie and the genre, but he loved the script for its emphasis on character and performance. He felt that the dramatic success of "Prisoners" rests on the acting. Deakins said, "I heard Denis was doing this movie and got the script, which was dense and had a lot of characters, and, to be honest, Gothic elements that I thought went too far. I wasn’t interested in that genre, but it turned out that Denis wasn’t, either. We did end up shooting the script, but it was always his intention that the final cut of the film wouldn’t feature those elements.” P.S: On this day, 13 years ago, "Prisoners" (2013) premiered at the Telluride Film Festival, USA.

DepressedBergman

22,013 Aufrufe • vor 25 Tagen

Roger Ebert gave a negative review of Mel Brooks's "Dracula: Dead and Loving It" (1995). One day, when Mel Brooks ran into Ebert, he said, "Listen, you, I made 21 movies. I’m very talented. I’ll live in history. I have a body of work. You only have a body.” Roger Ebert was saddened by the encounter as he was a big supporter of Mel Brooks' works from his debut. Ebert later wrote, "I was surprised he didn’t realize himself that 'Dracula: Dead and Loving It' (1995) just didn’t work. Yes, Brooks has put together a body of work and yes, a lot of it has made me laugh, but I would not be doing him a favor if I did not tell the truth."
1:31

Roger Ebert gave a negative review of Mel Brooks's "Dracula: Dead and Loving It" (1995). One day, when Mel Brooks ran into Ebert, he said, "Listen, you, I made 21 movies. I’m very talented. I’ll live in history. I have a body of work. You only have a body.” Roger Ebert was saddened by the encounter as he was a big supporter of Mel Brooks' works from his debut. Ebert later wrote, "I was surprised he didn’t realize himself that 'Dracula: Dead and Loving It' (1995) just didn’t work. Yes, Brooks has put together a body of work and yes, a lot of it has made me laugh, but I would not be doing him a favor if I did not tell the truth."

DepressedBergman

1,104,012 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Arteta on his role to re-energise the Arsenal team. 💪 “Certainly, when you lose a game, you have a lot of feelings because, especially, this group of players are so competitive and they seek for excellence and when you don't reach it, you ask yourself questions, and we did that. “But I think my role there as well is to bring optimism and reality about where we are, and yeah, our club has a long history. And to find a moment where, in February, we're in the position that we are, is very difficult to find. So guys, we are doing so many things so well, and let's focus mainly on that. And for sure, we want to improve, we want to be better in every area, but with that sense as well of self-confidence and conviction that we are in the right path. Anyone need to lift Arteta? “No, in these moments, no. Normally, I'm the opposite and when we are doing so well, I'm there with a stick to say, 'This is not good enough,' 'This is not good enough.' The other day, no, because I know how much they wanted the amount of games and the demands that we put on those players every day. “In those moments, they need to understand and feel that we are right behind them. I'm mainly responsible for that and they keep playing with that freedom, with that enjoyment, as I discussed the other day, and I make sure that that journey is beautiful because what is ahead is great and everybody has to be part of that but in a good sense and with good humor and with good optimism and looking forward to it.”
1:58

Arteta on his role to re-energise the Arsenal team. 💪 “Certainly, when you lose a game, you have a lot of feelings because, especially, this group of players are so competitive and they seek for excellence and when you don't reach it, you ask yourself questions, and we did that. “But I think my role there as well is to bring optimism and reality about where we are, and yeah, our club has a long history. And to find a moment where, in February, we're in the position that we are, is very difficult to find. So guys, we are doing so many things so well, and let's focus mainly on that. And for sure, we want to improve, we want to be better in every area, but with that sense as well of self-confidence and conviction that we are in the right path. Anyone need to lift Arteta? “No, in these moments, no. Normally, I'm the opposite and when we are doing so well, I'm there with a stick to say, 'This is not good enough,' 'This is not good enough.' The other day, no, because I know how much they wanted the amount of games and the demands that we put on those players every day. “In those moments, they need to understand and feel that we are right behind them. I'm mainly responsible for that and they keep playing with that freedom, with that enjoyment, as I discussed the other day, and I make sure that that journey is beautiful because what is ahead is great and everybody has to be part of that but in a good sense and with good humor and with good optimism and looking forward to it.”

Connor Humm

17,767 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

I didn’t think The King of Queens was going to be a big hit! Not because I didn’t love Kevin James or think he was great — we had instant chemistry. And not because I didn’t think the writers were great; they were amazing. But by the time I got cast in The King of Queens, I had filmed a ton of pilots and been cast in a bunch of TV shows that ultimately got canceled. So I had become cynical and just assumed it wouldn’t work out. It’s been 27 years since The King of Queens premiered, and it’s still one of the top-rated shows in syndication. We are so grateful for all of you.
1:13

I didn’t think The King of Queens was going to be a big hit! Not because I didn’t love Kevin James or think he was great — we had instant chemistry. And not because I didn’t think the writers were great; they were amazing. But by the time I got cast in The King of Queens, I had filmed a ton of pilots and been cast in a bunch of TV shows that ultimately got canceled. So I had become cynical and just assumed it wouldn’t work out. It’s been 27 years since The King of Queens premiered, and it’s still one of the top-rated shows in syndication. We are so grateful for all of you.

Leah Remini

956,932 Aufrufe • vor 11 Monaten

I love getting to know Secretary Rubio like this! Katie Miller asked him two questions: 1. Who do you think is the funniest in the whole cabinet? 2. Who’s your best friend in the administration? 1. First answer: "There’s I think there’s three finalists. I have to say three. So I think the VP is funny. Everybody’s got their own style. And I think the VP can be very funny. I think Bessent in his own way can be very funny. And I mean in his own way. He’s got a different type of way of presentation. And I think Bobby Kennedy is very funny. Bobby has some of the greatest stories you’ll ever hear. It’s unbelievable stories that he’ll tell and you listen to these stories. They’re like that didn’t really happen. Oh, no, but it did. The guy has lived an extraordinary life. Like I was, how is this not a movie? I mean it can’t even be a movie. It would have to be a miniseries because he has so many incredible stories and many of them are not just funny because they happen, but they’re just fascinating to me. But he can be funny too." 😂 2. Second answer: "So the best way to answer that question, I have a lot of people. So I’ve known JD the longest of anybody that’s on there because he was in there. He was in the Senate with me. But I even knew him before he was a senator and we had interacted on some policy stuff. And then the people I work with the closest on a daily basis because I just see them all the time repeatedly as you know, Pete Hegseth, obviously Scott Bessent we deal with a lot, and John Ratcliffe. That group and that team is constantly interacting with one another as well. So these are the people I’m the closest to because we work with the most." Secretary Rubio has a special type of personality, I love it!
1:23

I love getting to know Secretary Rubio like this! Katie Miller asked him two questions: 1. Who do you think is the funniest in the whole cabinet? 2. Who’s your best friend in the administration? 1. First answer: "There’s I think there’s three finalists. I have to say three. So I think the VP is funny. Everybody’s got their own style. And I think the VP can be very funny. I think Bessent in his own way can be very funny. And I mean in his own way. He’s got a different type of way of presentation. And I think Bobby Kennedy is very funny. Bobby has some of the greatest stories you’ll ever hear. It’s unbelievable stories that he’ll tell and you listen to these stories. They’re like that didn’t really happen. Oh, no, but it did. The guy has lived an extraordinary life. Like I was, how is this not a movie? I mean it can’t even be a movie. It would have to be a miniseries because he has so many incredible stories and many of them are not just funny because they happen, but they’re just fascinating to me. But he can be funny too." 😂 2. Second answer: "So the best way to answer that question, I have a lot of people. So I’ve known JD the longest of anybody that’s on there because he was in there. He was in the Senate with me. But I even knew him before he was a senator and we had interacted on some policy stuff. And then the people I work with the closest on a daily basis because I just see them all the time repeatedly as you know, Pete Hegseth, obviously Scott Bessent we deal with a lot, and John Ratcliffe. That group and that team is constantly interacting with one another as well. So these are the people I’m the closest to because we work with the most." Secretary Rubio has a special type of personality, I love it!

JJ🕊️

177,479 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Daniel Craig on how Mike Myers's "Austin Powers" movies f**ked the James Bond franchise: "Interviewer: How much of 'Skyfall' (2012) was a reaction to 'Quantum of Solace' (2008) or 'Casino Royale' (2006)? Craig: I am very, very keen that you can't make films in a reactionary way. You can't do it! There has been a lot of talk, from the beginning from 'Casino' into 'Quantum' because everyone has gone, "Where's the 'Bondness'? Where's all the old stuff?" I was given this chance by Barbara and Michael, which is the first of the books, and the conceit is we began again, but I couldn't come in and pretend to be James Bond, because everyone knows Bond as Pierce or Roger or Timothy or Sean. I couldn't come in and go, "Hmm, Martini," or whatever. It's not who I am, and how I kind of approach things. The truth of it is that I always had this plan in my head is that we got to make them and begin them again and bring all that back in, but it had to happen the way it did. I can't see it happening any other way. We had to destroy the myth because Mike Myers f**ked us - I am a huge Mike Myers fan, so don't get me wrong - but he kind of f**ked us; made it impossible to do the gags. What I am proudest of in 'Skyfall' is the lightness of touch we've been able to bring to back into it but not lose the drama and the action." (Daniel Craig's interview to MI6, 2014) P.S: On this day, 29 years ago, "Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery" (1999) premiered in Los Angeles, USA.
1:21

Daniel Craig on how Mike Myers's "Austin Powers" movies f**ked the James Bond franchise: "Interviewer: How much of 'Skyfall' (2012) was a reaction to 'Quantum of Solace' (2008) or 'Casino Royale' (2006)? Craig: I am very, very keen that you can't make films in a reactionary way. You can't do it! There has been a lot of talk, from the beginning from 'Casino' into 'Quantum' because everyone has gone, "Where's the 'Bondness'? Where's all the old stuff?" I was given this chance by Barbara and Michael, which is the first of the books, and the conceit is we began again, but I couldn't come in and pretend to be James Bond, because everyone knows Bond as Pierce or Roger or Timothy or Sean. I couldn't come in and go, "Hmm, Martini," or whatever. It's not who I am, and how I kind of approach things. The truth of it is that I always had this plan in my head is that we got to make them and begin them again and bring all that back in, but it had to happen the way it did. I can't see it happening any other way. We had to destroy the myth because Mike Myers f**ked us - I am a huge Mike Myers fan, so don't get me wrong - but he kind of f**ked us; made it impossible to do the gags. What I am proudest of in 'Skyfall' is the lightness of touch we've been able to bring to back into it but not lose the drama and the action." (Daniel Craig's interview to MI6, 2014) P.S: On this day, 29 years ago, "Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery" (1999) premiered in Los Angeles, USA.

DepressedBergman

915,179 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Gary Payton says he taught Kobe his secrets because Kobe asked him to teach him, despite knowing he would use that information against him for the rest of his career “Kobe was already different. He was a different kid. I was about 10 or 11 years into the NBA at the time, and Kobe didn’t have a fear of asking anybody how to get better.” “He came by me and was like, ‘Big bro, you be doing this and that. I really want to learn this because of you.’ When he said that, that took something in my heart. A kid with his ability, knowing where he was going, really wanted to learn, and he didn’t have an ego.” “I didn’t mind. I didn’t care about him knowing how to do it and stop it because if he knows it, it makes me better too. Because I gave him the game, now I’ve got to learn how to stop him. I’ve got to show him something else.” “It didn’t really bother me, and me and him got so tight. Especially when I went to the Lakers and was mentoring him, we got really, really tight.”
2:09

Gary Payton says he taught Kobe his secrets because Kobe asked him to teach him, despite knowing he would use that information against him for the rest of his career “Kobe was already different. He was a different kid. I was about 10 or 11 years into the NBA at the time, and Kobe didn’t have a fear of asking anybody how to get better.” “He came by me and was like, ‘Big bro, you be doing this and that. I really want to learn this because of you.’ When he said that, that took something in my heart. A kid with his ability, knowing where he was going, really wanted to learn, and he didn’t have an ego.” “I didn’t mind. I didn’t care about him knowing how to do it and stop it because if he knows it, it makes me better too. Because I gave him the game, now I’ve got to learn how to stop him. I’ve got to show him something else.” “It didn’t really bother me, and me and him got so tight. Especially when I went to the Lakers and was mentoring him, we got really, really tight.”

Josh Chambers

101,802 Aufrufe • vor 28 Tagen

This man was criticized for expecting a “thank you” for a good deed. He always saw the same man walking when he drove to work. He assumed the man was walking because he did not have any other means of transportation. He used his own money and bought the man an electric scooter, the man took the scooter and just silently walked away, no thank you or anything else at all. I don’t think that was too much to ask, a thank you goes a long way, otherwise it makes people look ungrateful. Back in college, I had a classmate that I always saw walking home after class. It didn’t matter whether it was raining or snowing, or hot out. Whenever I drove past him he always looked miserable and I could tell he didn’t like to walk all the time. In class I had asked him where he lived, and I found out it was on my way home so I offered to drop him off because it was really cold out and had snowed about a foot. He agreed and we chatted on the way home, nothing serious just pleasant conversation. I dropped him off and went on my way home. For me this was a one time thing, I only offered because how bad it was snowing. After class the next day, he walked with me and when I got to my car he got in. I didn’t agree or offer him a ride that day but he assumed that since I was ok with giving him a ride the day prior that I would be ok with it this day too. I didn’t say anything about it because at this point I didn’t care really. So the next day came and went, once again he walked with me to the car but that day was different. I wouldn’t be going his way because I had to work after class. So before I got to the car I said “I’ll see you tomorrow.” He looked dumbfounded and said aren’t you taking me home? I said no, I have to get to work. He then asked me how he would get home, and I told him the same way you always have. He then gave me excuses for why I was being a jerk because I was making him walk in the cold. I didn’t argue I just told him I helped him out when I could, but I wasn’t about to go out of my way because he didn’t have a car and besides I didn’t want to be late for work. He didn’t speak to me for the rest of the semester because of it, something tells me I was better off not offering to help in the first place.
4:05

This man was criticized for expecting a “thank you” for a good deed. He always saw the same man walking when he drove to work. He assumed the man was walking because he did not have any other means of transportation. He used his own money and bought the man an electric scooter, the man took the scooter and just silently walked away, no thank you or anything else at all. I don’t think that was too much to ask, a thank you goes a long way, otherwise it makes people look ungrateful. Back in college, I had a classmate that I always saw walking home after class. It didn’t matter whether it was raining or snowing, or hot out. Whenever I drove past him he always looked miserable and I could tell he didn’t like to walk all the time. In class I had asked him where he lived, and I found out it was on my way home so I offered to drop him off because it was really cold out and had snowed about a foot. He agreed and we chatted on the way home, nothing serious just pleasant conversation. I dropped him off and went on my way home. For me this was a one time thing, I only offered because how bad it was snowing. After class the next day, he walked with me and when I got to my car he got in. I didn’t agree or offer him a ride that day but he assumed that since I was ok with giving him a ride the day prior that I would be ok with it this day too. I didn’t say anything about it because at this point I didn’t care really. So the next day came and went, once again he walked with me to the car but that day was different. I wouldn’t be going his way because I had to work after class. So before I got to the car I said “I’ll see you tomorrow.” He looked dumbfounded and said aren’t you taking me home? I said no, I have to get to work. He then asked me how he would get home, and I told him the same way you always have. He then gave me excuses for why I was being a jerk because I was making him walk in the cold. I didn’t argue I just told him I helped him out when I could, but I wasn’t about to go out of my way because he didn’t have a car and besides I didn’t want to be late for work. He didn’t speak to me for the rest of the semester because of it, something tells me I was better off not offering to help in the first place.

SonnyBoy🇺🇸

37,380 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Emily Blunt talks about working with Steven Spielberg in "Disclosure Day": "I got a call from my agent saying Steven Spielberg wanted to meet me for his next movie. And I literally screamed. I met him in his office in Tribeca, and he pitched me a little bit of it. [...]. So, I mean, the big idea of it is that question that has sparked the fires of human imagination for years: Are we alone, or are we not alone? And if we aren't, why are the people in power hiding the truth from us? The movie is like a life-or-death race against time for those who believe the truth belongs to 8 billion people and those who believe that it doesn't and want to keep it secret. I'm sure you are now getting asked a lot about your own personal belief as to whether there are aliens or not. I think it would be arrogant for me to assume that we are alone."
2:57

Emily Blunt talks about working with Steven Spielberg in "Disclosure Day": "I got a call from my agent saying Steven Spielberg wanted to meet me for his next movie. And I literally screamed. I met him in his office in Tribeca, and he pitched me a little bit of it. [...]. So, I mean, the big idea of it is that question that has sparked the fires of human imagination for years: Are we alone, or are we not alone? And if we aren't, why are the people in power hiding the truth from us? The movie is like a life-or-death race against time for those who believe the truth belongs to 8 billion people and those who believe that it doesn't and want to keep it secret. I'm sure you are now getting asked a lot about your own personal belief as to whether there are aliens or not. I think it would be arrogant for me to assume that we are alone."

Emily Blunt Files 👽

306,221 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten