Edward Norton's Frida Role

[chrisfarrar]

hey, I was just wondering, is norton's role in frida extremely small?

[bboisvert]

Originally posted by chrisfarrar
hey, I was just wondering, is norton's unit in frida extremely small?

Well, I wouldn't say extremely. But, it's pretty short... yes.

[Jackskeleton]

short indeed

[weargle]

Hey, check out the unit on that guy! Whooooooooooaaaa!

[jmj713]

I wouldn't say small. He rewrote the screenplay, uncredited.

[Pants]

Originally posted by jmj713
I wouldn't say small. He rewrote the screenplay, uncredited. I hope that's a joke, if it's not that guy's out of control

[darkflounder]

He's the guy that's banging Frida.

Oh, that's in real life, nevermind.

(I am SO jealous of him!!)

[karnblack]

Originally posted by Pants
I hope that's a joke, if it's not that guy's out of control

Not a joke. Julie Taymor confirms it on the AFI Q&A on the DVD.

[Sessa17]

I usually hate when people do this, but b/c I've had it done to me when my topics are relevant. I'm going to do it here. . .

Why is this in the DVD talk forum. Shouldn't it be in the movie forum. This question doesn't have anything to do w/ DVDs.

[Jackskeleton]

Jennifer Lopez was considered to play the role of Frida Kahlo.


Madonna, who is a fan of Frida and owns some of her work, was reportedly keen to play the role.
Thank god she didn't get the role

Edward Norton did an uncredited rewrite of the script.


Salma Hayek did some of the paintings in the movie.


The whole film was digitally color corrected at 2K resolution.

[elise]

I think I read awhile back that Salma Hayek stepped up production because Jennifer Lopez was thinking about doing her own Kahlo film. I'm glad she decided to save herself the embarrassment of letting Hayek do a proper film.

[vaddarstepp]

Originally posted by elise
I think I read awhile back that Salma Hayek stepped up production because Jennifer Lopez was thinking about doing her own Kahlo film. I'm glad she decided to save herself the embarrassment of letting Hayek do a proper film.


Whoa wa! Love to see Lopez as the Frida!!!!!!!!!

http://www.bellalopez.com/images/magazines/usweeklyaug.12.02-3.jpg

[Jackskeleton]

Why? J-lo from the block would have ruined Frida's name if she played her.

[ProjectMayhem]

Originally posted by Jackskeleton
Why? J-lo from the block would have ruined Frida's name if she played her.

No doubt about that...

Salma was perfect...

I still haven't picked up the DVD. I must!

[vaddarstepp]

Originally posted by Jackskeleton
Why? J-lo from the block would have ruined Frida's name if she played her.

Salma's definitely cool and stuff. But J-Lo was born for that role! Maybe later down the line.

[Hokeyboy]

Salma's definitely cool and stuff. But J-Lo was born for that role! Maybe later down the line.I'm a little strapped this week... they got any dime bags of what you're smoking? ;)

[Jackskeleton]

Originally posted by vaddarstepp
Salma's definitely cool and stuff. But J-Lo was born for that role! Maybe later down the line.


:lol: :lol: :lol: How the hell was she born for the role? this isn't like Patrick Stewart being born to play Pro. Xavier. J-lo looks nothing like her and hell she's not even from the same place as Frida. Maybe she was born to play Selena, but she shouldn't be allowed to ruin frida's story.

[chrisfarrar]

Ok, Is this movie worth a blind buy? What are the extra features like?

[DWilson]

The supplements are extensive and pretty much tell you everything you ever wanted to know about the movie. The only thing its missing is actual documentary material (there are some brief printed notes) on the "real" Frida Kahlo. There are 30-40 minute interviews with both Julie Taymor and Salma Hayek, as well as featurettes on the production design and the special effects. That being said, you're reaction to the supplement will depend on your reaction to the film. I thought the filmmaking was impressive, but, overall, it was a fairly standard "bio-pic", -one of those "who I screwed and who screwed me" stories, livened up by a terrific cast and Taymor's unusual visual flourishes. As I rented the disc, I tried to watch all of the supplement in one night, and it started to get tiresome...

[Gallant Pig]

The script could have been better. They were going to have someone write it (or rewrite it) but that person got busy with another project and Taymor wanted a rewrite so Norton stepped in. That cameo was pure cheese too. I wish Taymor would have had something better to work with.

Anyone remember the guy who was going to rewrite it?

[Richard Malloy]

Salma's definitely cool and stuff. But J-Lo was born for that role! Maybe later down the line.
Are you insane?


Ok, Is this movie worth a blind buy? What are the extra features like?
I was a bit let-down. I liked Taymor's first film well enough (didn't love it), and on the basis of that I was expecting a highly experimental narrative structure with brilliant flights of hallucinatory imagery. What I got was a completely by-the-book, conventional bio-pic with only one or two brilliant flights of hallucinatory imagery. It's not quite hagiographic, but she definitely smoothed over the rough edges to make this as palatable as possible to a wide audience. If you go in expecting an artfilm, or an unflinching in-depth portrait, you'll be as disappointed as I.

Not strictly commercial, but mostly.

[Richard Malloy]

And the sex scenes are as unsexy as any in Hollywood these days. If you're buying it for the hot sexiness, you'll be deeply disappointed. Some nude Salma, yes, but I was left unmoved (if you know what I mean).

Try "Sex and Lucia" for hot latin lovin'.

[mcarver]

I would assume that Norton's rewrite went uncredited due to the guild's practice of calculating what percentage of the script was actually written by whom. Norton's rewrite more than likely didn't give him the percentage needed to get credit.

[brizz]

I wasn't expecting much, but was thoroughly impressed with this film....Hayek was amazingly good. J Lo? You've got to be kidding.

If I remember correctly, Taymor said that she and Norton did the rewrite together....and while his role was small, he was good, and there wasn't really another one for him unless he wanted to don tons of make-up and try and play Trotsky - the movie takes place in Mexico after all :)

[vaddarstepp]

Originally posted by Richard Malloy
And the sex scenes are as unsexy as any in Hollywood these days. If you're buying it for the hot sexiness, you'll be deeply disappointed. Some nude Salma, yes, but I was left unmoved (if you know what I mean).

Try "Sex and Lucia" for hot latin lovin'.

J. Lo would have added a bit of sensuosity to the role. As we've often seen in movies, you don't have to be from the same town as the character in order to get INTO the character. Take Renee Zelwegger as Bridget Jones. She was great and did the job better than any Briitsh girl could have ever done. Its all about the love of the role, and I think J-Lo would have put a little more effort into the role thank Salma did. I was left dissatisfied with the performance.

[Richard Malloy]

It wasn't Salma's performance so much as the airless tableaux of the way the sex scenes were shot. It was self-consciously sensual, like maniquins carefully made-up and posed in sexy positions... generated absolutely no heat.

And that could be said for just about every scene. All the drama seemed ginned-up and fake, and the characters merely present to mouth platitudes and expositives. For all the purported revolutionary zeal and smash-the-bourgeous sensibility, the film came off like a Hallmark presentation.

[Jericho]

As stated previously, J-Lo been considered for the role as imdb lists I believe is incorrect. She had the idea of her own Frida project, but I doubt think anyone but Salma was ever considered for the title role since it was her project (she produced it). Ed Norton's appearance was likely done just to help boost the star power. Of the names on the front, four of them (Ashley Judd, Antonio Banderas, Edward Norton, and Geoffrey Rush) are barely in the film. But their name may help a few other people see the film that otherwise wouldn't.

[Hokeyboy]

What was Norton's role? He was Salma's fluffer.

Damn him.

And Ms. Hayek has more "senuousity" [sic] in a single hocked loogie than J-Lo will ever have in her entire overrated tukhas.

[BJacks]

Norton talked about the rewrite on Inside The Actor's Studio. He said most of what's there on the screen is directly from his pen. He also wasn't happy about not being credited.

[Sierra Disc]

I didn't catch the credits, but who was Antonio Banderas supposed to be? Anyone important? I found his "cameo" and Norton's rather distracting, although Geoffrey Rush and Ashley Judd did just fine in their small roles. As others have said, a good movie, not a great one. I too was kind of hoping Taymor would let loose with the kind of creative imagery and stylistic touches she showed in "Titus," which I really loved. It felt a little 'by the book' to me, but not a waste of time by any means.

[Gallant Pig]

Originally posted by Richard Malloy
It wasn't Salma's performance so much as the airless tableaux of the way the sex scenes were shot. It was self-consciously sensual, like maniquins carefully made-up and posed in sexy positions... generated absolutely no heat.

And that could be said for just about every scene. All the drama seemed ginned-up and fake, and the characters merely present to mouth platitudes and expositives. For all the purported revolutionary zeal and smash-the-bourgeous sensibility, the film came off like a Hallmark presentation.

Hey Richard, did you enjoy the cameo from Diego Luna? If I recall correctly, you were a big fan of his from Y Tu Mama... Maybe I'm think of Gael Garcia tho.

[Heat]

I believe that J. Lo could have played the part convincingly, though I though Selma Hayek did a great job.

This movie had 14 producers...

This is a very nice movie, definately worth a rental. And speaking of Selma Hayek, she has a couple of very nice assets, if you know what I mean.

If you are interested in seeing what Frida Kahlo looked like in real life, check out this link:

http://www.honmex.com/eros/frida/photos.html

And one of her more famous paintings (I believe the name is “The Two Fridas”):

http://www.banrep.gov.co/blaavirtual/letra-c/cucli/imagen/kahlo.jpg

Frida was an interesting woman, and this movie has great acting by Selma Hayek and Alfred Molina (who plays Diego Rivera).