http://www.altfg.com/blog/film-festivals/chicago-in-beverly-hills/ thinking film Tue, 02 Dec 2008 02:01:20 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 http://www.altfg.com/blog/film-festivals/chicago-in-beverly-hills/#comment-45323 Marcus Tucker Thu, 20 Jul 2006 12:57:20 +0000 http://www.altfg.com/blog/archives/2006/07/19/chicago-in-beverly-hills/#comment-45323 Rene Zelleweger is like something right out of the 50's, the same in everything. The first initial role in Jerry Maguire showed lots of promise and so did another film she did with Meryl Streep and William Hurt but since her star turn she hasn't really progressed. Rob Marshall's Chicago is much more of a reflection of the time period in which it was made than the period that it was set in but it took so long to get the show on the road that the film actually making it to the screen was something of a marvel. It would have been different (good or bad) with Madonna or Michelle Phieffer in the role of Roxie (they were both attached at one point) and Zelleweger and Zeta Jones, although Jones fared a little better, seemed like stand ins. But Bebe Neworth or Jasmine Guy weren't big box office and with the film being a musical I think the went for stars rather than people who would have been better. Or maybe not, Madonna's box office record certainly didn't justify her role in Evita (which I thought she did well in, but I liked Swept Away too:) But I think the real issue I have with the Rob Marshall version was that they chose some of the most mannered performers in the industry for the lead roles. People who are the same in everything. And I mean damn near the whole cast, although I liked Latifah and thoughts she should have gotten Jone's Oscar. But Riley, Zelleweger, Zeta-Jones, Baranski, Taye Diggs, Lucy Liu, all people who are the same in everything that they do. Why? Rene Zelleweger is like something right out of the 50’s, the same in everything. The first initial role in Jerry Maguire showed lots of promise and so did another film she did with Meryl Streep and William Hurt but since her star turn she hasn’t really progressed. Rob Marshall’s Chicago is much more of a reflection of the time period in which it was made than the period that it was set in but it took so long to get the show on the road that the film actually making it to the screen was something of a marvel. It would have been different (good or bad) with Madonna or Michelle Phieffer in the role of Roxie (they were both attached at one point) and Zelleweger and Zeta Jones, although Jones fared a little better, seemed like stand ins. But Bebe Neworth or Jasmine Guy weren’t big box office and with the film being a musical I think the went for stars rather than people who would have been better. Or maybe not, Madonna’s box office record certainly didn’t justify her role in Evita (which I thought she did well in, but I liked Swept Away too:) But I think the real issue I have with the Rob Marshall version was that they chose some of the most mannered performers in the industry for the lead roles. People who are the same in everything. And I mean damn near the whole cast, although I liked Latifah and thoughts she should have gotten Jone’s Oscar. But Riley, Zelleweger, Zeta-Jones, Baranski, Taye Diggs, Lucy Liu, all people who are the same in everything that they do. Why?

]]>