But what about when they have to fake throwing up ― especially if it’s a closeup?
Sure, there’s the tried and tested ”‘puking’ into a bag” method. But for those full-throated, chum-bucket scenes that make us feel queasy ourselves ― yeah, for that you’re going to need some disgusting goop and a way to, err, expel it.
Advertisement
How’s fake vomit made?
Speaking to Movie Insider, special effects artists at NYSPFX revealed their recipe for vomit changes according to the scene ― thicker, gloopier vomit “used a combination of potato leek and split pea soup.”
But you can also add things like noodles for “squiggly” bits as well as frozen berries and tomato paste.
These are then “thrown up” via a pump ― and because the pumps are “made for liquid, not vomit, thick, pasty, substances,″ the Movie Insider interview revealed.
So, they place the thicker substances at the top of the tube ― so that the thinner liquid acts as a “propellant” to push it out.
Advertisement
What’s that about a tube?
You might have noticed that the goriest on-screen vomit scenes are usually shot in profile.
That’s because the end of the tube is sometimes taped to one side of an actor’s face for added realism ― other scenes sneak the tube up an actor’s sleeve and tape it to their wrist, so they can fake vomit while pretending to cover their mouths.
For true puke purists, though, it can get gorier.
Speaking on Hot Ones, Sydney Sweeney revealed that during her Euphoria hot tub throw-up scene, “They had to get a pump, and they had this pipe that they just taped and hid on my body. And then they CGI’d it out up my neck and then there was a horse bit that I had to put in my mouth. So during that scene, they’re filling my mouth with throw up.”
She added, “And then I opened my mouth, and it just started shooting out my mouth. It was the most disgusting thing I ever experienced.”
It doesn’t matter whether you’re into soaps, gore, rom-coms, or dramas; rare is the telly lover who’s managed to avoid seeing the on-screen death of their favourite character.
And if you’ve watched a show with a particularly high character kill-off rate, like Game of Thrones, you’ve likely witnessed post-battle scenes that’d make Napoleon feel queasy.
Advertisement
But once you’ve got past why your beloved character has gone to Hollywood Heaven, the question of just how actors manage to lay so convincingly still for so long during the corpse shots comes up.
Luckily, Marina Hyde, co-host of behind-the-scenes podcast The Rest Is Entertainment, has answers for us.
Which are?
Marina spoke to a producer about forensic pathology prior to the podcast and learned that yep, people do cast corpses.
She explained that “some people do freak out” when playing corpses, and not everyone can lay still enough for long enough to get a good shot, “so you have to audition [for corpse roles] by lying still.”
Advertisement
Ever with perfect corpse casting, though, shots used to not linger on the chest because it’s very hard not to show the rise and fall of breath.
“But now ― this is like one of the big routine instances of VFX ― they can capture it at rest (the chest) at one moment, then they layer that still in the rest of the footage.
“For those ones where there’s an open-eye corpse, the VFX is particularly useful,” Marina added.
Her co-host Richard Osman said, “Essentially there are some actors who are very very good at being still, and now they cheat the ‘not breathing’ elements.”
Woah.
I know! A Reddit thread asking people who had played dead on-screen to share their experiences also provides some gory insight.
“I was on an episode of Chicago Fire as a featured extra. I was in a rubble scene after a marathon bombing,” site user Citrous_Oyster wrote.
Advertisement
“The camera was on a crane facing down on the file and I was laying on my back across the rubble. I was instructed to try and hold my breath as long as I could or take short breaths. I was in a yellow jacket so it also hid some of my breathing which helped,” they shared.
“I work in post-production and can confirm I have removed breaths from actors playing dead. Not particularly complicated generally,” Redditor Jewel-jones added.
The elevator doors opened to reveal a woman who also appeared to be in her mid-20s. Pausing for her to step out, I noticed that she was wearing a button pinned on her shirt. It read, “Be kind to me. I’m grieving.”
As she moved past me, I wanted to stop her. I wanted to reach out with a gesture or words that would capture her attention. I wanted to let her know that I understood, to explain that my mom had died earlier that year, to tell her that I knew what it was to grieve. But before I had the chance, she was walking across the lobby and through the building’s automatic doors, so I stepped into the elevator, thinking about the loss I always carried with me and wondering what it felt like for her to carry a loss too.
Advertisement
At that time, my grief was still so fresh and so heavy. It was still hard to put it into words, to make others understand, and, as the elevator rose, I remember envying that stranger’s button, the way she so easily communicated to the rest of the world that her world had been forever changed. I needed to be able to do that, to help others to see my grief. I didn’t know if it would lessen the weight of it, but I thought that it might make it feel less consuming. Maybe it would help me process what the rest of my life would look like without my mom in it. Maybe doing so would be able to make me feel less alone.
Dan Levy’s new Netflix film, Good Grief, which he wrote, produced, directed and stars in, does all of the things that I wished I could have done for myself back then; it makes grief tangible.
The movie opens as if it’s a holiday film instead of a drama. Ella Fitzgerald’s Sleigh Ride plays as the first shot, a beautiful London townhouse decorated for Christmas and filled with people, appears on the screen. Inside, Marc (Dan Levy) is talking to his friend Thomas (Himesh Patel). It quickly becomes evident through Thomas’ simultaneously entertaining and self-deprecating story that he is dating someone awful, and he asks Marc, “Are there any decent men in this city?” Before Marc can respond, Thomas tells him that he can’t have an opinion because Marc’s “hot, wealthy husband is about to lead a singalong by a roaring fire.”
Advertisement
What follows is The Before, a glimpse of the joyful and colourful life Marc shares with his hot, wealthy husband, Oliver (Luke Evans). There’s laughing and friendship and very nice clothes and a beautiful home and the freedom that exists when you’re married and childless and have exorbitant wealth. But as the singalong begins, as everyone sings “Every day will be like a holiday / When my baby, when my baby comes home,” it foreshadows what the rest of the movie will explore, what happens to Marc and his two closest friends when his baby can’t come home.
Without knowing the fate of Oliver, this seemingly perfect scene could function as the beginning of a cozy Christmas movie, but there are clues that this life, this party, is not only a “shimmering success,” as Oliver calls it, but also a flickering façade. Without giving away the plot, it’s enough to say that the dialogue and actions of the characters are brilliantly written to reveal the discord underlying the charmed life they appear to lead. Dan Levy’s writing and directing set the stage for a complicated grief.
In a movie with grief in the title, it spoils nothing to reveal that The Before becomes The After when Oliver leaves the party in a cab to go to Paris for work. The cab makes it only a block before he’s killed in a car crash. All of this takes place in the first nine minutes of the film in a scene that ends with Marc running toward the sirens he heard from inside his apartment and the flashing blue lights he saw out the window. As he runs down the street toward the accident, the viewer is left looking out the window. The music stops, the image fades and the title “Good Grief” appears on the screen.
This is when The After begins. The next scene opens without music as Marc lies in bed with his eyes closed. His world is deprived of colour. His face is in shadow. As the somber score slowly begins to play, he opens his eyes. What follows in the next 80 minutes is a realistic and intimate portrayal of the messiness of grief that takes place in a highly stylised world (the cinematography, sets, and costumes are beautiful).
From attending the funeral to dealing with the legal and financial logistics of someone being gone to entering a new season (in this case spring) that the person you love will never see and bemoaning the exhaustion and physical toll of grieving while questioning when it’s necessary to stop mourning and start living (in this case dating again), Good Grief portrays absence and the void it creates. This part of the movie, while short, feels weighty and reminds me of Joan Didion’s The Year of Magical Thinking, which chronicles the year after the sudden death of her husband, writer John Gregory Dunne. In the final pages of the memoir, at the end of that first year, she writes, “I also know that if we are to live ourselves there comes a point at which we must relinquish the dead, let them go, keep them dead.”
Advertisement
“What follows in the next 80 minutes is a realistic and intimate portrayal of the messiness of grief that takes place in a highly stylized world (the cinematography, sets, and costumes are beautiful).”
For many, that anniversary is that point. Marc’s friend Sophie (Ruth Negga) says as much at the end of the 14-minute sequence. It’s December again, and she encourages Marc to go out to a party instead of staying at home with a bag of takeout.
“We have been here for you whenever you’ve needed us for almost a year now. We built you the nest, and we sat on you for a year. It’s time to hatch.”
The bulk of the movie takes place after this scene. Marc invites his two best friends, Thomas and Sophie, to Paris, and the pace of the movie slows down to capture the days immediately surrounding the anniversary of Oliver’s death.
Advertisement
This is where the movie gets messy. This is where the complications foreshadowed in the opening scene come to light and where Marc’s grief transforms from a private experience imbued with Didion-like magical thinking to a lived experience with long-term ramifications.
After my mom died, I learned that the transformative power of grief is not only personal but also relational. My mom’s death changed me as much as it did my relationships with the people around me. The closer I was to those people, like my husband, brother and best friends, the more those relationships shifted. This often-unexplored aspect of grief is what I found to be the most cathartic feature of Levy’s movie, and it was especially realistic because it highlighted the characters’ flaws, their imperfections becoming even more noticeable and relatable as they struggled through their grief.
While the film is about Marc’s individual grief, the section of the movie in Paris shows the way that loss ripples outward, complicating his relationship with his best friends, who are facing their own “messy secrets and hard truths.”
I don’t want to spoil what those complications are or where it leads them, but, as someone who also lost a loved one at Christmastime (my mom died 10 days before Christmas), I was grateful for the experience of bearing witness to Marc’s and his friends’ journey out of magical thinking and into the world, especially at a time of year when the rest of the world is bright and festive and joyful.
In a recent interview with NPR, Levy said the movie ”came from my own confusion around feelings of grief and what it all meant and whether I was honouring the people that I was mourning appropriately. In my case, it was my grandmother. And then five days before I wrote the screenplay, my dog of 10 years passed away, and so it was a very raw and confusing time. I couldn’t speak the feelings. I could only write them, and the feelings in it were the only way I could kind of make sense of my own.”
Advertisement
In the immediate aftermath of my mom’s death, I don’t think I would have been ready to watch a movie like Good Grief, but now, five years later, I’m thankful for the honest, raw messiness of it. The film captures both the confusion and isolation of what it feels like to grieve and how that grief can become hope, how there can be a goodness that occurs when we let the dead be dead, even when the relief of doing so becomes its own type of pain and loss.
In the movie, Levy compares that loss to an ulcer in one’s heart that never goes away, and it doesn’t. We always carry our grief with us, but, as his movie shows, it can be transformed into something better, something good.
If you’re expecting a funny, Schitt’s Creek-esque take on grief, this is not the movie for you. But if you are grieving and want to feel like someone out there understands what you’re going through, you can stream Good Grief now on Netflix.
You may have heard of the 2024 movie Argylle, starring the likes of Henry Cavill, Dua Lipa, Samuel L. Jackson and Bryce Dallas Howard, but have you also heard about the wild fan theory linking the film to global superstar Taylor Swift?
Swifties have flooded social media to perpetuate a theory that the singer-songwriter is in fact the author behind the novel of the same name, which supposedly inspired the film.
Advertisement
As you might imagine, it’s a convoluted theory with many clues and links, so let’s break it down a little bit, shall we?
Who is Elly Conway, the author of Argylle and the protagonist in the film?
Elly Conway is a never-before-heard-of author whose debut novel was turned into a movie before it was even published – not exactly a common trajectory for a first time writer.
This has led to many commentators speculating that either: Conway isn’t real, and the book that has been released today is the book from the film, likely written by a ghost writer. Or, Conway is a pseudonym for a very famous person who would’ve been able to secure a movie deal on whatever they wrote.
Advertisement
Swift is currently the favourite for a whole host of reasons, which range from sort of credible to quite a reach, but other contenders including Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling, who has published under a pen name in the past.
Why do people think Elly Conway is Taylor Swift?
Seemingly, the first person to talk about this theory is TikTok user @JessiSwiftTok, who shared her theory on 21st October 2023. In the video – which has received nearly 1 million views – she points to the cat backpack Conway wears, which appears in the trailer and on promotional artwork for the film, as something Swift herself often uses to carry around her own cats.
Another parallel between Conway, played by Bryce Dallas Howard, and Swift is their looks. As @JessiSwiftTok explains, at the end of Swift’s famous All Too Well short film, the star portrays herself as a redheaded author with a very similar appearance to that of Dallas Howard in the film.
Other clues include several pictures of Swift in the same bejewelled pattern used in the Argylle film posters, a picture of Swift on her tour in a Conway Studios jumper and lots of date synchronicities that are honestly beyond my comprehension as a casual Swiftie.
Advertisement
Will we ever know who Elly Conway really is?
It’s uncertain whether we will ever know the true identity behind Conway, but since she is supposedly going to write three more books in the Argylle series, this saga could extend far into the future.
While some contend that this Conway-Swift theory is actually a clever marketing ploy by the studio behind the movie, others believe the parallels between Conway and Swift are too glaring ignore.
Indeed, Swift has been known to use a pseudonym before – hello Nils Sjöberg – but so far the Cruel Summer singer hasn’t confirmed anything. One thing I’ll say is if it turns out to be J.K. again, we’re gonna be pissed!
Argylle is scheduled to release in cinemas worldwide on 2nd February.
Speaking to Graham Norton on his self-titled chat show recently, Hollywood star Julia Roberts shared that the original screenplay for Pretty Woman was very different than the movie we all know and love.
Graham said that the movie was “much darker” in its original form ― and having heard Julia’s description of it, I have to agree.
Advertisement
“I auditioned for this movie that was called 3000,” the Erin Brockovich actor told Graham. The name referred to the amount of money the movie’s main character paid a sex worker ― “and she was a drug addict,” Julia explained.
“The movie ended by him pulling down a side street in Los Angeles, and they have a fight, and he just says, ‘Get out’ and he kind of throws her out the car, throws the money on her, and drives away. The end,” she added.
In fact, former studio executive Jeffrey Katzenberg has previously said that Julia’s character died of an overdose at the end of the initial script. Oof.
So, how did we end up with the film we know and love today?
“The company that was making it folded, and the movie disappeared and I was crushed,” Julia told Graham. “And the next thing I knew, they said, ‘Disney picked up this film… and Garry Marshall is going to direct it.’”
Advertisement
Disney, which is known for feelgood and child-friendly movies, was hardly likely to produce the script as-was ― and at that point in his career, Garry had worked on shows like The Fonz And The Happy Days Gang and Mork & Mindy.
So naturally, Julia was a little surprised by the pairing. “I was like, ‘oh, of course, this makes perfect sense to me,’” she sarcastically said of the change in director and producers.
“I went in to meet Garry, and he told me all the ways he was gonna change this and make it funny,” she shared with Graham.
In fact, she revealed some changes were so last-minute that they were, as Graham puts it, “kind of writing [the movie] as they were filming.”
“We would break at lunch at maybe 10:15 in the morning because we were out of pages,” Julia said. “We would just kind of, make it up ― Garry would do things like this… ‘Uhhh ― be funny! Action!’,” she added.
Advertisement
People were pretty surprised
“Imagine signing on to play a drug-addicted [sex worker] in a dark drama, then the producers tell you the film’s retooled into a rom-com with Disney money,” one commenter said in response to a YouTube short of the interview.
“That original ending sounds a lot more realistic,” another (rather depressingly) added.
“OMG! I loooove hearing about how movies and songs get made. The creative journey is filled with surprises!” yet another person shared.
If you haven’t seen Chicken Run’s recent-to-Netflix sequel, Dawn of the Nugget, I’d advise you to fix that ASAP. The movie’s earned an 83% audience score on review site RottenTomatoes, and having seen it myself recently, I get the hype.
The film focuses on the daughter of the original Chicken Run’s Ginger and her adventures on the mainland, away from the chicken haven her revolutionary parents have helped to establish.
Advertisement
But one detail in the film completely escaped my notice on the first watch; in fact, it wasn’t until I watched TikToker Luke Poulton’s video on the topic that I spotted it.
In one scene, where the chickens who have escaped the evil Tweedy’s farm in the first film are assembled behind leaves, the movie pans out to reveal all the birds at once.
But, after sharing his shocked face, Luke zoomed his camera into the background of the scene, revealing that Aardman had snuck Feathers McGraw ― the villainous penguin from Wallace and Gromit ― into the fray.
People had thoughts
“Feathers McGraw is always just around the corner,” one commenter said.
“Does this imply Feathers McGraw was in the chicken farm?” another asked (personally, I think he’s just a big believer in avian liberation).
Advertisement
“He is so back in the next [Wallace and Gromit], mark my words,” yet another commenter said. I’d believe it.
Dawn of the Nugget was 23 years in the making
I can understand a little better why the crew put so much effort into the details of the movie after learning it took 23 years to make.
That’s because the technology, budget, and scale needed for the sequel ― which was far, far more intense than the single-set Chicken Run ― was out of reach for Aardman until recently.
In fact, the film’s animation supervisor, Ian Whitlock, pointed out that an establishing shot of the chicken’s safe haven island at the start of the film took “over six months to complete from the initial brief to preparing and shooting” because the set was so enormous.
Ah, Aardman ― never change.
You can watch Chicken Run: Dawn of the Nugget on Netflix in the UK.
Timothée Chalamet is opening up about the attempted “Barbie” cameo that never made it to movie screens.
The “Wonka” actor, in an interview on “The Tonight Show,” said there was an idea for him and his “Lady Bird” co-star Saoirse Ronan to appear in the latest Greta Gerwig-directed film.
Advertisement
“I don’t know what the cameo would have been, I think I would have been one of the rejected Kens or Barbies,” Chalamet told Jimmy Fallon.
“Not Allan, but something — maybe there was a reject French one along the way,” he added, referring to the character played by Michael Cera.
Chalamet added that he got to see Gerwig and the “Barbie” set, which was built by the time that he finished filming for “Wonka.”
","type":"video","meta":{"author":"The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon","author_url":"https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-Th83bH_thdKZDJCrn88g","cache_age":86400,"description":"Timothée Chalamet talks about playing basketball in New York City with Adam Sandler, discusses designing a Wonka shoe with Nike and reveals that he and Saoirse Ronan were supposed to make a Barbie cameo for Greta Gerwig.\n\nThe Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon. Stream now on Peacock: https://bit.ly/3gZJaNy\n\nSubscribe NOW to The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon: http://bit.ly/1nwT1aN\n \nWatch The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon Weeknights 11:35ET/10:35c\n \nGet more The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon: https://www.nbc.com/the-tonight-show\n \nJIMMY FALLON ON SOCIAL\nFollow Jimmy: http://Twitter.com/JimmyFallon\nLike Jimmy: https://Facebook.com/JimmyFallon\nFollow Jimmy: https://www.instagram.com/jimmyfallon/\nFollow Jimmy on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@jimmyfallon\n\nTHE TONIGHT SHOW ON SOCIAL\nFollow The Tonight Show: http://Twitter.com/FallonTonight\nLike The Tonight Show: https://Facebook.com/FallonTonight\nFollow The Tonight Show: https://www.instagram.com/fallontonight/\nThe Tonight Show TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@fallontonight\nTonight Show Tumblr: http://fallontonight.tumblr.com\n \nThe Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon features hilarious highlights from the show, including comedy sketches, music parodies, celebrity interviews, ridiculous games, and, of course, Jimmy’s Thank You Notes and hashtags! You’ll also find behind the scenes videos and other great web exclusives.\n \nGET MORE NBC\nNBC YouTube: http://bit.ly/1dM1qBH\nLike NBC: http://Facebook.com/NBC\nFollow NBC: http://Twitter.com/NBC\nNBC Instagram: http://instagram.com/nbctv\nNBC Tumblr: http://nbctv.tumblr.com/\n \nTimothée Chalamet on Wonka and the Barbie Cameo with Saoirse Ronan That Never Happened (Extended)\nhttp://www.youtube.com/fallontonight\n\n#FallonTonight \n#TimothéeChalamet\n#JimmyFallon","options":{"_cc_load_policy":{"label":"Closed captions","value":false},"_end":{"label":"End on","placeholder":"ex.: 11, 1m10s","value":""},"_start":{"label":"Start from","placeholder":"ex.: 11, 1m10s","value":""},"click_to_play":{"label":"Hold load & play until clicked","value":false}},"provider_name":"YouTube","thumbnail_height":720,"thumbnail_url":"https://i.ytimg.com/vi/jSoXp6wHNk8/maxresdefault.jpg","thumbnail_width":1280,"title":"Timothée Chalamet on Wonka and the Barbie Cameo with Saoirse Ronan That Never Happened (Extended)","type":"video","url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSoXp6wHNk8","version":"1.0"},"flags":[],"enhancements":{},"fullBleed":false,"options":{"theme":"news","device":"desktop","editionInfo":{"id":"uk","name":"U.K.","link":"https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk","locale":"en_GB"},"originalEdition":"uk","slideshowAd":{"scriptTags":[],"otherHtml":""},"slideshowEndCard":{"scriptTags":[],"otherHtml":""},"isMapi":false,"isAmp":false,"isVideoEntry":false,"isEntry":true,"isMt":false,"entryId":"657c778be4b0e142c0bd76f5","entryPermalink":"https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/timothee-chalamet-names-character-he-wishes-he-got-to-play-in-barbie-movie_uk_657c778be4b0e142c0bd76f5","entryTagsList":"movies,greta-gerwig,timothee-chalamet,barbie-movie,@goodnews,@us_huffpost_now,@widget-imported","sectionSlug":"entertainment","deptSlug":null,"sectionRedirectUrl":null,"subcategories":"","isWide":false,"headerOverride":null,"noVideoAds":false,"disableFloat":false,"isNative":false,"commercialVideo":{"provider":"custom","site_and_category":"uk.entertainment","package":null},"isHighline":false,"vidibleConfigValues":{"cid":"60afc140cf94592c45d7390c","disabledWithMapiEntries":false,"overrides":{"all":"60b8e525cdd90620331baaf4"},"whitelisted":["56c5f12ee4b03a39c93c9439","56c6056ee4b01f2b7e1b5f35","59bfee7f9e451049f87f550b","5acccbaac269d609ef44c529","570278d2e4b070ff77b98217","57027b4be4b070ff77b98d5c","56fe95c4e4b0041c4242016b","570279cfe4b06d08e3629954","5ba9e8821c2e65639162ccf1","5bcd9904821576674bc55ced","5d076ca127f25f504327c72e","5b35266b158f855373e28256","5ebac2e8abddfb04f877dff2","60b8e525cdd90620331baaf4","60b64354b171b7444beaff4d","60d0d8e09340d7032ad0fb1a","60d0d90f9340d7032ad0fbeb","60d0d9949340d7032ad0fed3","60d0d9f99340d7032ad10113","60d0daa69340d7032ad104cf","60d0de02b627221e9d819408"],"playlists":{"default":"57bc306888d2ff1a7f6b5579","news":"56c6dbcee4b04edee8beb49c","politics":"56c6dbcee4b04edee8beb49c","entertainment":"56c6e7f2e4b0983aa64c60fc","tech":"56c6f70ae4b043c5bdcaebf9","parents":"56cc65c2e4b0239099455b42","lifestyle":"56cc66a9e4b01f81ef94e98c"},"playerUpdates":{"56c6056ee4b01f2b7e1b5f35":"60b8e525cdd90620331baaf4","56c5f12ee4b03a39c93c9439":"60d0d8e09340d7032ad0fb1a","59bfee7f9e451049f87f550b":"60d0d90f9340d7032ad0fbeb","5acccbaac269d609ef44c529":"60d0d9949340d7032ad0fed3","5bcd9904821576674bc55ced":"60d0d9f99340d7032ad10113","5d076ca127f25f504327c72e":"60d0daa69340d7032ad104cf","5ebac2e8abddfb04f877dff2":"60d0de02b627221e9d819408"}},"connatixConfigValues":{"defaultPlayer":"8b034f64-513c-4987-b16f-42d6008f7feb","clickToPlayPlayer":"5a777b9b-81fe-41a6-8302-59e9953ee8a2","videoPagePlayer":"19654b65-409c-4b38-90db-80cbdea02cf4"},"customAmpComponents":[],"ampAssetsUrl":"https://amp.assets.huffpost.com","videoTraits":null,"positionInUnitCounts":{"buzz_head":{"count":0},"buzz_body":{"count":0},"buzz_bottom":{"count":0}},"positionInSubUnitCounts":{"article_body":{"count":13},"blog_summary":{"count":0},"before_you_go_slideshow":{"count":0}},"connatixCountsHelper":{"count":1},"buzzfeedTracking":{"context_page_id":"657c778be4b0e142c0bd76f5","context_page_type":"buzz","destination":"huffpost","mode":"desktop","page_edition":"en-uk"},"tags":[{"name":"Movies","slug":"movies","links":{"relativeLink":"news/movies","permalink":"https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/news/movies","mobileWebLink":"https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/news/movies"},"relegenceSubjectId":981358,"url":"https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/news/movies/"},{"name":"Greta Gerwig","slug":"greta-gerwig","links":{"relativeLink":"news/greta-gerwig","permalink":"https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/news/greta-gerwig","mobileWebLink":"https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/news/greta-gerwig"},"relegenceId":2798076,"url":"https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/news/greta-gerwig/"},{"name":"timothee chalamet","slug":"timothee-chalamet","links":{"relativeLink":"news/timothee-chalamet","permalink":"https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/news/timothee-chalamet","mobileWebLink":"https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/news/timothee-chalamet"},"url":"https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/news/timothee-chalamet/"},{"name":"barbie movie","slug":"barbie-movie","links":{"relativeLink":"news/barbie-movie","permalink":"https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/news/barbie-movie","mobileWebLink":"https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/news/barbie-movie"},"url":"https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/news/barbie-movie/"}],"isLiveblogLive":null,"cetUnit":"buzz_body","bodyAds":["
She noted that Ronan had a scheduling conflict that prevented her from taking on the cameo, seemingly a reference to the actor producing and starring in “The Outrun.”
“Both of them couldn’t do it and I was so annoyed. But I love them so much,” she told CinemaBlend.
“But it felt like doing something without my children. I mean, I’m not their mom, but I sort of feel like their mom.”
Gerwig’s “Barbie,” which made over $1.4 billion at the box office this year, scooped up nine nominations at the upcoming Golden Globe Awards while the film also received a record-breaking 18 nominations at the Critics’ Choice Movie Awards.
Sentimentality has never had a place in pop culture, which has always evolved at warped speed. Audiences today have a lot of options on what to watch, listen to, and read, and how to do so — too many, as some have said. Then there’s Hollywood’s constant, foolhardy task of peddling remakes of older films to fit the current social mores, in a race to be on the right side of history.
The surplus of art is so excessive that storytellers like Taika Waititi have resigned themselves to the belief that new content coming out now will be antiquated in as soon as a decade or two.
Advertisement
“No one’s going to remember us,” he told The Hollywood Reporter. “What’s the name of the director of Casablanca? Arguably one of the greatest films of all time. No one knows his name. Let’s just live, make some movies. They’ll be obsolete and irrelevant in 15 or 20 years.”
That’s bleak as hell. Though, sadly, not far from the truth. (And, if you’re wondering, Michael Curtiz directed Casablanca.)
Still, this begs an important question. What is to become of the practice of re-releasing and restoring older offerings like Park Chan-wook’s 2003 thriller Oldboy, returning to cinemas this August, or 1997’s Titanic, which had its re-outing in January, so that they do stay relevant or can at least be studied and challenged?
How can re-releases thrive when some apparently feel these films no longer have significance?
Advertisement
This also comes to mind as we step into the summer season. Disney is celebrating its 100th anniversary by re-releasing eight of its classic films for two-week limited runs at cinemas from July to October.
Cities like New York host screenings of older films as fun outdoor events, and venues such as the Metrograph continue to curate and screen a robust variety of re-released and mostly restored vintage cinema.
Those coming up at the New York City cinema include director Roger Vadim’s 1968 comedy Barbarella, Sidney Lumet’s 1973 drama Serpico and Ridley Scott’s 1982 action film Blade Runner.
But with greater attention and promotions around remakes and reimaginings than ever, like this year’s The Little Mermaid, Teen Wolf: The Movie, White Men Can’t Jump and the upcoming The Color Purple, it’s a wonder how the older counterparts can sustain interest. That’s particularly concerning when re-releases get far less marketing and reach fewer audiences.
Alexander Olch, founder of the Metrograph, isn’t especially concerned about competing with popular remakes, or even the presumed fading importance of showing re-releases and newly restored older films. Arthouse cinemas like his, he said, thrive by attracting a variety of audiences interested in both older and contemporary classics as well as unique filmmaking.
Advertisement
“There will never be a shortage of excitement around authenticity,” Olch told me over the phone. “So, the original of any idea is always going to be fascinating and of interest to, in our opinions, quite a large audience.”
He believes that watching an original film is the gateway to appreciating subsequent material.
“The interesting thing about watching the original is that it really is the cornerstone of any exploration of that idea — whether you’re looking at other work by that same filmmaker, by those same actors or artists, or potential remakes later on in time,” he said.
That’s fair. But re-releases still have to fit inside the Hollywood business model of making money. While they can’t be expected to compete with remakes at the box office (though recent re-releases of titles like Jaws and Titanic did quite well), it’s easy to presume that remakes’ overwhelming success could overshadow the efforts of a re-release.
Olch said there are more re-releases that defy that assumption than we may think, and that could be dependent on several factors, including the film itself. For instance, director Andrzej Żuławski’s 1981 horror “Possession” was a huge hit at Metrograph, both at the cinema and on its website. Much of that is due to the built-in fan base around the title itself.
Advertisement
“Part of the reason it had such excitement is that many people had seen the film and they just wanted to see it again, which is a particular kind of interest and that ended up being a huge hit,” Olch said. “That’s just a film that invites repeat viewings and has a particularly avid fan base.”
But where do re-releases fit in today’s fast-paced culture?
It’s also worth pointing out that the cost to re-release a film is far less than bringing a new remake to cinemas, in part because studios don’t have to worry about hiring a cast and crew.
Script supervisor Jennifer Carriere brought this up when we jumped on a separate call about the role of re-releases in today’s remake market.
“Consider that there are not those same production dollars going into re-releasing a classic film,” she said. “So, there is a cost benefit to re-releasing something without having to set aside another tens of millions of dollars to create something new. It’s something that already exists.”
Advertisement
So, when you think about it that way, continuing to re-release films is in the studios’ favour, making them a relatively lower financial risk that has the potential for a worthy return. It’s reliable. But whether reliable is good enough for some green-hungry studios remains debatable.
There’s another aspect of this: If you have a winning programming strategy, like at the Metrograph, you figure out a way to make some of these new remakes work to the advantage of a classic film re-release. For example, Olch’s team is sometimes inspired to pursue screening certain films because their forthcoming remakes could amplify excitement around the original version.
Carriere agreed that re-releases can play an important role in today’s remake culture. “It could be something that is laying the groundwork for a remake in the future, and they want to strengthen the fan base and even test the waters in terms of interest,” she explained.
But that doesn’t mean saturating the market.
“I just think it’s part of the risk,” Carriere continued. “But you do have to diversify when it comes to your content. So, you can’t have all remakes.”
And with original intellectual properties, “there is a place for re-releasing historic filmmaking pieces and getting audiences excited,” she added.
Advertisement
That balance and even the overwhelming number of remakes today, Olch said, “does not bear on what’s sitting in the archive.” But he also conceded it’s impossible not to consider the saturation of art and content that is current.
“Everything is so here and now that the opposite starts to become inevitably interesting,” Olch added, “which is something that is authentic that existed 10, 20, 30, 50 years ago that has a respect and a following of critics, or audiences, or filmmakers or artists.”
Something, he concluded, that even filmmakers today reference as art that has moved them.
But moviegoers’ interest in exploring older titles still seems rather niche. Audiences often lack a curiosity to explore deeper film history, even as specialty theatres curate older films around new pop culture dialogues.
These cinemas, including Metrograph and others across the nation and the world, also offer artist callbacks and film series to introduce — and reintroduce — viewers to older content. And if audiences are unable to attend in person, some offer online viewing platforms that movie lovers can explore.
Advertisement
There’s also a whole other platform where older films can be found and, arguably most easily, accessed: streaming platforms.
How streaming classic films keeps film history alive.
In the same places where hits like “Succession, Yellowjackets and The Bear are streamed, films such as 1989’s The Little Mermaid and 1985’s The Color Purple and Teen Wolf, as well as older classics including 1953’s Roman Holiday and 1963’s The Birds, can also be viewed.
“Turner Classic Movies has been a fixture in my life for as long as I can remember,” actor Ryan Reynolds tweeted. “It’s a holy corner of film history — and a living, breathing library for an entire art form.”
Filmmakers Steven Spielberg, Martin Scorsese, and Paul Thomas Anderson will also help guide programming and curation.
As passionate and necessary as that conversation has been, classics, particularly on streamers, are still largely overshadowed amid the flurry of excitement many audiences have about the most current title streaming.
That’s even true when it’s something bad, like The Idol. Many people refuse to explore the larger library on these platforms.
Even Carriere admitted to that. “Genuinely, I’m thinking about it myself, and it doesn’t even occur to me to go dig up older things,” she said. “I tend to just look at whatever is trending based on my preferences, and the streaming service itself tells me what that is.”
Advertisement
A lot of people share this habit. As Carriere mentioned, doing a little exploration on a streaming platform takes extra time out of your day and adds another task to it — a fun task, but a task nonetheless. That extra time should be worth it to explore your own interests beyond what is recommended.
Sadly, though, in today’s fast-paced culture, many social media chats underscore how everything new is cool. Even if it’s not actually cool, it’s still new.
Beyond many viewers’ general lack of curiosity, Carriere puts the onus on streamers. They don’t recommend older films to subscribers in the way they do the newer content.
Free platforms like Tubi, which is one of the best online platforms on which to watch classic movies apart from Criterion, a paid streamer exclusively dedicated to the archive, tend to do this a little better.
Advertisement
But paid platforms like Max, which also has a treasure trove of older work due to its TCM partnership, rarely promote classics, even if you frequently watch those titles. And the fear is that those films might become even more buried as the platform continues to roll out changes.
“Because it’s such a competitive landscape between the streaming platforms, they probably want to push and promote those things that are most likely to keep the subscribers subscribed,” Carriere said.
But if so many subscribers are only interested in what they’re told is interesting on the platform, the algorithm is counterintuitive.
That’s where the balance can come in, though. Not everything that appears on a streamer’s homepage has to be what is current, but rather it could also show films that are new to the platform — which should include the classics. This could help establish a routine of watching older films in tandem with their newer counterparts.
Advertisement
It could also build excitement around re-releases that shouldn’t have to shoulder that responsibility on their own. When the sentiment around original filmmaking is widely dismissive, it creates a challenge.
“So, while they do have these huge libraries of older content available, [unless] you explore the older content, I don’t see how they’re going to promote the older stuff, knowing that the vast majority of the audience is looking for the most recent releases above all,” Carriere said.
Streamers don’t seem confident they’re going to perform well and are not interested enough to test them out. But really, it’s difficult to gauge performance when streamers rarely share viewership numbers, good or bad.
There’s also the concern over whether an older work “holds up” to today’s cultural standards, which could dictate whether something is promoted or even available on a streaming service and certainly whether it’s brought to the big screen again.
Advertisement
But that sometimes calls for discernment rather than dismissal, for the sake of film literacy in a landscape where audiences sometimes don’t even realise when a movie is a remake.
“I do think that there is a preserving film history aspect to it,” Carriere said. “We are building on a history of filmmaking, even though we don’t want to lean into celebrating regressive storytelling. But there is a place for preserving the film history and introducing classics to new audiences.”
The way we reexamine classic films deserves a discussion.
And focus groups, as Carriere suggested, could also help with determining whether a film should re-enter the cultural sphere in 2023. There’s obviously no need for something like, say, 1915’s The Birth Of A Nation to repopulate today — though, that shouldn’t have emerged in 1915 either.
“Studios have to be careful about this and make sure that they’re vetting and testing and talking to [people] to decide whether or not it’s worthwhile to release something for fear of putting something out into the world that just doesn’t need to be seen or heard anymore,” she added.
Advertisement
True. Though it’s also worth distinguishing that not everything old is problematic, and not everything problematic is old. While today’s culture is quick to thoughtfully assess problematic contemporary works, it seems less interested in reexamining uncomfortable art from yesteryear with as much nuance. That doesn’t bode well for future re-releases.
But that concern could be challenged as the Writers Guild of America strike wages on, and audiences are faced with significantly fewer options in newer content — while the once-recent titles become a part of the archive just as quickly as they appeared. Will re-releases and archival titles on streamers get a viewership boost and/or stronger promotional strategies? That’s hard to predict.
Beyond that remains the issue of films being considered obsolete in a decade’s time. That sentiment means remakes are bound to happen, and whether they draw attention to the original film’s supplemental re-release or streaming availability doesn’t seem to be a priority for film studios that are shoveling out countless marketing dollars on the update.
Most of the streamers aren’t doing more to promote the archives either. So, the question of relevance persists, even when it’s something as recent as Oldboy or Titanic.
Advertisement
“To think that a performance is outdated in only a few years’ time is kind of a depressing thought,” Carriere said. “It would be nice if we could find ways to celebrate properties and performances and scripts and continue to keep them relevant.”
But she ultimately thinks that is a bit idealistic. “That’s just kind of going to be tougher to do, the shorter people’s attention spans become and the more competition for attention there is,” she continued. “That’s just part of the way in which our world is evolving. Yesterday’s news is yesterday very quickly.”
Shouldn’t we be more concerned about that? It’s not just that remakes of older films are dominating the conversation around the older film itself. It’s also that the rapidly evolving cultural landscape doesn’t allow much space for the archives to thrive on most mediums.
But Olch said audiences that are interested in experiencing these original films again, or even for the first time, usually seek out the opportunity to do so. And those who aren’t, well, don’t. Not everything is going to be for everyone and at all times. But we should still find a way to acknowledge and examine them while they are available, and often at our own fingertips.
“On a metaphysical level, I think all artists — we’re all building sandcastles and one day [they] are going to be washed away,” he said. “But the fun of it is to walk down the beach and admire everyone’s sandcastles while they’re standing.”
Advertisement
That sense of finiteness is where the work of re-releases becomes especially urgent, though.
“The nice thing about restorations is, in some ways,” Olch said, “it sort of holds the waves back a little longer before washing over the sandcastles.”
Collecting roles in beloved franchises like infinity stones, Margot Robbie is set to star in and produce an upcoming Ocean’s Eleven prequel.
On the heels of major buzz surrounding her roles in Barbie and a Pirates Of The Caribbean spinoff, Margot will team up once again with Bombshell director Jay Roach for a new entry in the blockbuster heist franchise, according to The Hollywood Reporter.
Advertisement
No additional details about the Warner Bros. film have been released, except that the project will be an “original Ocean’s Eleven that is set in Europe in the 1960s” with a script from Carrie Solomon.
The film is still currently in development and has not been officially greenlighted by the studio, per the outlet, which notes that the “goal is to begin production spring 2023”.
Advertisement
Loosely inspired by the 1960 Rat Pack movie of the same name, Ocean’s Eleven hit cinemas in 2001 with director Steven Soderbergh at the helm and a megawatt cast including George Clooney, Matt Damon, Brad Pitt and Julia Roberts.
The film’s critical and commercial success paved the way for two more sequels from Soderbergh and a female-fronted spinoff Ocean’s 8 in 2018, which starred Sandra Bullock as the sister to Clooney’s character, Danny Ocean.
Advertisement
In total, the franchise has grossed over $1 billion at the global box office, becoming a jewel in the Warner Bros. film slate.
As for Margot, she has a slew of high-profile projects on the horizon.
In addition to starring in Gerwig’s Barbie, which she is also producing under her banner LuckyChap, the Oscar nominee is set to appear in David O’Russell’s period drama Amsterdam, as well as Damien Chazell’s Babylon alongside former Ocean’s cast member Brad Pitt.
HuffPost is part of Oath. Oath and our partners need your consent to access your device and use your data (including location) to understand your interests, and provide and measure personalised ads. Oath will also provide you with personalised ads on partner products. Learn more.
How Oath and our partners bring you better ad experiences
To give you a better overall experience, we want to provide relevant ads that are more useful to you. For example, when you search for a film, we use your search information and location to show the most relevant cinemas near you. We also use this information to show you ads for similar films you may like in the future. Like Oath, our partners may also show you ads that they think match your interests.