| 7 Day Film Series Starts Saturday 16 October guardian.co.uk |
Timberlake lights up Fincher's Facebook film R&B pop star gives a career-best acting perfomance in The Social Network, though don't ask him to poke you, he prefers sending postcardsHe used to call it his "hobby". Many of us might read, play football or fish, but for Justin Timberlake, Grammy-winning, multi-platinum pop star, his hobby was acting in Hollywood movies. He couldn't just stick to golf (though he's good at that, too).The self-deprecating description was probably sensible, taking the pressure of expectation off his appearances in films as varied as indie sizzler Black Snake Moan to animated cash cow Shrek The Third. After all, the one-time Disney kid could have expected to see his screen ambitions dismissed as a Mickey Mouse endeavour, although you wouldn't want to mention this to his face. Not because – as with previous singer-actors, from Frank Sinatra to Mark Wahlberg – you'd be worried about getting a smack but because, well, he's just so damn nice."Hey, how's it going? I'm Justin." He strolls over and shakes hands, on location for his latest movie, The Social Network. He doesn't know a journalist is on set, just spots an unfamiliar face, talking with the crew, and decides to say hello. Diva, he ain't.Segueing from the teenybopper frenzy of boyband 'NSync to fully fledged solo stardom – 17m records sold and counting, plus a successful producing career – he has never lost the aura of being wholesome. Even ripping off Janet Jackson's top at the Superbowl in 2004 – the so-called "wardrobe malfunction" – didn't tarnish this. He's polite, well-dressed, and he's nice to his mom, Lynn Harless, whose management company plays on his name: Just-In Time Entertainment.His past squeezes include Cameron Diaz and fellow Mickey Mouse Club alumnus Britney Spears, but Mom recently gushed publicly about his currently girlfriend, A-Team star Jessica Biel, who pops along during shooting to watch Timberlake act under direction from David Fincher. Working with cinema's Prince Of Darkness (Seven, Zodiac) is definitely a step up for the Prince of Pop. "David is without doubt one of my film-making heroes," says Timberlake. "I think Fight Club is a perfect movie, a perfect movie. I've taken this very seriously, getting to work with such a great talent, you know?" The result is his best performance, by a distance, in a film Rolling Stone praised as, "The movie of the year that also brilliantly defines the decade." With a script by The West Wing's Aaron Sorkin, based on the story of the creation of Facebook, The Social Network is a zeitgeist-nailing, heavyweight Oscar-favourite. And it cements a suspicion that has been growing for some time: Justin Timberlake really is, like, a proper actor.There's a delicious irony in his casting, too: he's playing Sean Parker, the man whose co-creation of free, peer-to-peer download site Napster shook the music industry in 1999. The movie has proved controversial, with arguments over how true it is in showing Parker befriending Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg (Jesse Eisenberg) and driving a wedge between him and his best friend and chief investor Eduardo Saverin (Andrew Garfield). The truth, though, is slippery. Take Parker's story, recounted to Vanity Fair, of meeting Timberlake at a club: "He said he wanted to get to know me, but I said, 'That isn't going to help you play the part Sorkin has written. That character really isn't me.'"'I ran into him in New York and spoke to him for probably no longer than three minutes, but he was really nice' Timberlake on meeting the man he plays, Napster co-founder Sean ParkerIn contrast, Timberlake says he hadn't even been cast at that point. "It had sort of gotten blasted out across the internet that the movie was being made," he says. "And it had been speculated that I was being cast, but it wasn't official. It was an interesting time. I ran into him in New York and spoke to him for probably no longer than three minutes, but he was really nice. I kind of wished that I would have met him later, because I would have had more to talk about, but it was sort of a serendipitous thing. We just said hello and he wished us all the best of luck, though I couldn't actually accept it because I wasn't officially cast yet!" He repeats his positive point (naturally): "He seemed like a really nice guy."Timberlake snared Fincher's attention through his supporting part in Alpha Dog and guest stints on Saturday Night Live, which showed him to be "fearless". The director also saw a quality in Timberlake that stemmed from his musical day job. "You know, the script describes Parker as sort of Sinatra-like," says Fincher, "and we had a lot of really talented actors come in to read for this, because it's a fun part, and a lot of people had the chops. But Sean Parker, for our movie – I don't know what he's like in real life – has to be one of those guys who knows, 'If I take you and I introduce you to this person, what comes of it is this thing where I can take credit.' You know what I mean? So Justin's experiences as a record producer – how he perceives talent, where it can go, what it can do for him – he just innately understood that."Timberlake still had to go through a rigorous auditioning process before he was cast, a contrast, perhaps, to his dominant position in pop. "To be honest as a musician I've fought for everything I've ever gotten as well, so they're actually very similar," he says, with just a trace of defensiveness. "I find that there is always someone who is sort of around to tell you that you should be doing something a different way, but the difference here is it's David Fincher and I trust every instinct he has. So the process of making this film, versus having the responsibility of putting together a project like a record or a tour, was actually less weighty. It was a lot easier to give up and submit."You put yourself in his hands," the 29-year-old continues, drifting into an American football metaphor. "We're not quarterbacks, you know, we're not forwards, we're linebackers and it's like, 'Do the play this way, now do the play this way, now do the play this way!' That's sort of the quick – actually, really shitty – analogy, that I could give. But it really is like that. I think we all respect David so much that, you know, you sort of just want to please him."Late at night, his on screen scene completed, Timberlake remains to read off-camera lines to Eisenberg. In a baseball cap, blue jeans, Technics T-shirt and thick-rimmed glasses, he's stylishly understated – keeping his head down, working hard. There's something reassuringly retro about him. Though there are various adoring tributes on Facebook, Timberlake is not on the site; his tastes in communication run a little more old-school."Postcards are good," he smiles. "Postcards are like the original text messages." He's having plenty of chance to send them, with a state-hopping shooting schedule. Comedy Bad Teacher, co-starring Cameron Diaz, is in the can, romcom Friends With Benefits is shooting now, and upcoming he has an untitled sci-fi drama from Andrew Niccol, writer of The Truman Show. Timberlake isn't abandoning his other career, but it seems the demands of movie studios could keep him out of the music one for a while. He knows, though, that questions about his next album, his next tour, will always be there, whatever he's working on. "On this, I taught some of the grips how to dance a little bit!" he laughs. He's not serious. Except about the acting.Justin TimberlakeR&BPop and rockDavid FincherFacebookguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds guardian.co.uk |
Drivetime special: Faster v Drive Angry There's only one way to decide which of these two near-identical car films to see: a head-to-head drag race. With trailersWatch the trailer for Faster.Watch the trailer for Drive Angry.Two films. Two cars. Two guns. Two monumental acting talents. Two stupid titles. Two catchphrases: "Do you smell what the Rock is cooking?" and "Wha! Wha! Not the bees! Not the bees! Arrrgh! My eyes! My eyes! Arrrgh! Arrrghurbhb!". In short, two planet-sized piles of amazing.That's right: Dwayne "the Rock" Johnson and Nicolas Cage both have films coming out soon – Faster and Drive Angry, respectively. The problem seems to be that they appear to be identical. Faster is a violent action movie about a gun-toting, car-loving badass with a girl on his arm and vengeance on his mind. Drive Angry is ... the same. You won't want to see both of them – you're not mental, after all – so which should get your vote? There's only one way to find out: a head-to-head drag race on the deserted industrial estate of Flick Teaser.Most badass faceFaster.Drive Angry.A tough one. By combing a brow furrow with a technically perfect south London-style lip bite, Dwayne Johnson is clearly marking his territory here as a badass not to be trifled with. On the other hand, Nicolas Cage has gone for broke with a more laconic half-beard/sunglasses/quizzical puppy head-tilt combo, and the gamble has paid off in spades. Points to Cage.Best carFaster.Drive Angry.At first glance this might seem like a slightly pointless category, since the cars in Faster and Drive Angry are both Chevrolet Chevelles. But they're not identical. Note that Johnson's car has four headlights while Cage's only has one, that Johnson's car has white stripes while Cage's has black and that Johnson's car is on an empty road while Cage's car is blasting through a barrier past two exploding cars and is also being driven by Nicolas bloody Cage. Absolutely no contest. Cage wins again.Best gunFaster.Drive Angry.Johnson's gun: your common or garden revolver, the kind most often used by cowboys and the weirdo from school whose grandfather was in the war. Cage's gun: a shotgun with at least four barrels more than anybody could possibly want. Terrifying.Best baddieFaster.Drive Angry.Here's where Drive Angry loses its first point. Its baddie is played by William Fichtner, better known as the pervert from Date Night. But Faster has pulled off a real coup by casting Billy Bob Thornton, one of the all-time great villains both on screen and in real life. He's so much of a villain that not even his bandmates can stand the sight of him. Drive Angry, you've just been outmanoeuvred.Best stuntFaster.Drive Angry.Again, on the surface it seems like there isn't much to separate the two films here: aside from the angle and the amount of fire involved, they're both basically just flying cars. However, it's important to remember that Drive Angry is a 3D film and Faster isn't. So when you watch Faster at the cinema you'll just see a hunk of metal whizzing off the top of the screen. But Drive Angry's 3D technology will ensure that the car is physically pushed right into your skull, and then flames will incinerate what remains of your head, and when he finally crawls out of the wreckage you'll be able to see every crease and dent in Nicolas Cage's needlessly stereoscopic face in more freakishly intricate detail than you'd ever imagined possible. That's better, right? Right?Most badass face, round twoFaster.Drive Angry.Once again, Nicolas Cage comes out on top. Why? Imagine the noise that should accompany each image here. Dwayne Johnson, cocking his fist with such ferocity that his face has gone all blurry, looks like he's going for a "GRRRR!" or maybe a "HNGGGG!". But Nicolas Cage? It looks like he's telepathically transmitting a deafening high-pitched squeal – one of those squeals that reduces buildings to rubble and makes grown men drop to their knees snivelling – purely by the power of his immense mind alone. Truly, he is the most badass of them all. Faster stalls; Drive Angry is just a dustcloud in the distance.Nicolas CageAction and adventureStuart Heritageguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds guardian.co.uk |
Selma Blair signs up for WW1 medical drama Selma Blair has signed up to play a World War I medic in ‘Four Saints’. feeds.breakingnews.ie |
How is the BFI suddenly able to take over from the UKFC? The BFI is assuming most of the UKFC's functions, Ed Vaizey revealed today, six months after the Tory minister declared the organisations incompatibleTwo weeks after the general election, the new culture minister Ed Vaizey called off the proposed merger between the UK Film Council (UKFC) and the British Film Institute which had been under negotiation for months.The reason, he said, was that the UKFC's industrial mission and the BFI's charitable remit weren't in any way compatible.But then in July, his boss, the culture secretary, Jeremy Hunt, decided to abolish the UKFC anyway, on a day when Vaizey was out of the office, and landed Vaizey with the headache of working out what should happen next.Today, six months after cancelling the merger as a bad idea, Vaizey has revealed that BFI will take over most of the UKFC's functions after all, apart from the job of attracting foreign productions to shoot in Britain, which will go to Film London.So what has changed? Only the politics.Vaizey sugared the announcement by confirming that lottery funding for film would grow from £27m this year to around £43m by 2014. The BFI chairman, Greg Dyke, said overhead savings would enable the production fund to increase from £15m to £18m next year. The tax credit for UK-based production, worth over £100m a year, will be maintainedThe Department of Culture, Media and Sport and the BFI will also lead a fresh review of how to build a "more sustainable British film industry".Ironically, that was the original mandate of the UKFC when it was set up a decade ago. But the word "sustainable" was later quietly dropped when it became apparent how difficult that was to achieve. Yet the BFI, a far less worldly organisation, is now being asked to step back in where the UKFC feared to tread.For this to work, it will require a radical transformation of the BFI, an organisation already creaking under the pressure of its own budget cuts. From being a charity with a curatorial mission to preserve the national film archive and deliver cultural services to the public, it will become a strategic agency to boost the film industry and hand out lottery funds to film-makers.That was exactly what the BFI originally argued that it wasn't cut out to do. But that was when it saw the proposed merger as a hostile takeover bid by the UKFC's management. With the UKFC out of the way, the BFI can now set about reshaping itself on its own terms.Vaizey says the BFI will "very shortly" announce plans to reform its governance and management structures, to create "a more direct and open relationship" between the government and the film industry. As a charity governed by royal charter, the BFI is currently less answerable to the government than the UKFC was. Unlike the UKFC, the BFI appoints its own board, and its books are not subject to the same standards of public scrutiny.If the BFI is going to become an official distributor of lottery funds, that will place a whole new burden of financial and legal accountability upon the organisation. At the UKFC, around 15 of the 73 staff were wholly dedicated to that role. The BFI will need to add a layer of bureaucracy to replicate that. Whether that genuinely results in net cost savings remains to be seen.To avoid this necessity, Vaizey seriously considered the option of using the existing lottery infrastructure of Arts Council England, and sub-contracting the management of the money to the BFI. But this solution was ultimately vetoed by Hunt.The BFI previously argued that its charitable status meant that in the event of combining with the UKFC, it would still be legally required to give priority to its own cultural operations over any external partnerships with the film industry. Now the BFI will have to learn quickly how to hand out money to other people.A big question is whether the BFI will continue the UKFC's policy of using lottery funds to invest in films aimed at wide audiences, such as The King's Speech, StreetDance and Horrid Henry, or whether it will focus exclusively on the cultural end of the spectrum, such as Terence Davies's Deep Blue Sea and Gillian Wearing's Self Made. Producers are lobbying to keep any lottery recoupment from their films to reinvest in future projects, but if the BFI only decides to back experimental art films, this won't be worth much.Dyke says the BFI will "strike a balance between cultural and commercial" and he admits this will mean "a major transformation" for the Institute, which in the past has been notoriously resistant to reform. The coming months will reveal whether the BFI is finally ready to embrace such change. The consequences for the film industry, however, will take years to emerge.BFIUK Film CouncilArts fundingArts policyEd VaizeyAdam Dawtreyguardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds guardian.co.uk |