Tuesday, December 18, 2007


Per Variety:

Pitt in talks to star in 'Tree of Life'; Sean Penn to co-star in Malick drama


Brad Pitt is in talks to climb into "Tree of Life," a drama Terrence Malick wrote and will direct.
River Road is financing, and Bill Pohlad is producing with Sarah Green ("The New World") and Grant Hill. Pitt, who recently ankled the Universal Pictures drama "State of Play," would replace Heath Ledger, who was skedded to star with Sean Penn in the Malick-directed drama, which begins production in the spring. Though Penn is booked to play the title character in the Gus Van Sant-directed "Harvey Milk," he's still expected to play a supporting role in "Tree of Life." Penn has an allegiance to River Road's Pohlad, who co-financed with Paramount Vantage the Penn-directed "Into the Wild."No deals have been made with Pitt or Penn. Pitt would have earned $20 million against gross to star in "State of Play," but he'll likely sign on to "Tree of Life" for nearly no upfront money.

In a word--unfuckingbelievable.


Breedlove said...

Jesus Christ. This is incredible news...I tend to choose my favorite actors more by taste in projects than pure acting ability. Brad Pitt, who is a good actor, is my favorite actor and has been since I was in high school, just because I consistently love the choices he makes. This is just incredible news...my favorite actor and arguably my favorite director...this is like Scorcese/Nicholson or PTA/Daniel Day Lewis. Pitt has a lot of integrity, I just admire his choices so much. God I love movies. Start my day by hearing this, now I'm gonna go see The Diving Bell and The Butterfly, and polish it off with Harold Pinter's The Homecoming on Broadway. Helluva day.

Breedlove said...

p.s. So Heath Ledger turns down No Country For Old Men and now bails on the lead in a Malick film? This guy's an idiot.

Actionman said...

F-me Breedlove, sounds like quite a day indeed!

I agree with you on Pitt--he's been one of my favorites since high school, largely due to his eclectic choices and the directors he's decided to work with. Clearly, someone with his power has total control over his career, and for the most part, I've loved his performances and the films he's been in. Jesse James was quite possibly his finest work on the big screen; his work in Seven is also excellent.

I have been working on my Diving Bell review, will be up before the end of the week. I will say--watch out...it's an emotionally rich experience.

And don't diss Ledger; he himself has moved in interesting ways. Monster's Ball, Brokeback Mountain, I'm Not There, Lords of Dogtown, and now the new Gilliam...and not to mention is turn as the Joker in Chris Nolan's The Dark Knight. He's gonna NAIL that part, I can feel it. I didn't know he turned down No Country for Old Men...interesting...I take it he was up for the Brolin role...? Scheduling plays a big part in what movies an actor can and can't fit into their rotation so don't hold it against him quite yet. When he starts doing pure crap then I will worry.

Breedlove said...

I like Heath Ledger. He's done a lot of good work...very talented actor. I have to admit that he lost some points with me when I heard he turned down Brolin's role. I get the scheduling thing, but I don't think he would have had a major conflict off the top of my head...small part in I'm Not There...when the Coens offer you the lead, you take it and schedule around that. But you're right, he's doing some good stuff. Two other quick things: I'm still watching Pirates 3 and while I dig the eye candy and the perfs, the story is nearly impossible to follow. There are like 20 different characters, all double crossing each other, I could not figure out what the hell was going on. Mulholland Drive made more sense. They made the story WAY too complicated. Secondly, have you seen I Am Legend yet, Oh Action Maestro?

Actionman said...

I was not aware that Ledger turned down the Coens...if that's true, then yes, you're right, he should be caned Michael Fay-style for not working with them on that masterpiece.

I agree that the Pirates trilogy was way too convoluted, but the eye candy was so big and sexy and the general air of the films so fun and exuberant, that I didn't really care. It's a pirate movie. Pirates, by nature, double and triple and quadruple crossed each other, and while I am not making excuses for the screenwriter's inability to coherently explain their entire story, the good far outweighed the bad for me in that series of films. I loved when they went to Davy Jones' locker in the the third film; it's like Stan Brakhage meets Jerry Bruckheimer. And the climactic battle is fucking extraordinary.

Have not seen I am Legend...plan on seeing it this weekend or over my vacation next week. I was initially hesitant in seeing it, based on some terrible reviews, but the critical notices evened out a bit, and the buzz I hear from friends is solid enough to make me go see it. I am not looking forward to the shitty-CGI last 30 minutes (so I have been told...) but the first two-thirds sound cool and creepy. I will let you know what I think.

Biff said...

Actionman, please stop making excuses for the crappy Pirates trilogy. Eye candy my bunghole. The trilogy is a sham, a travesty....an overrated, convoluted piece-of-monkey-spunk. Thanks and have a nice day.

Actionman said...

please only contribute to the thread if you have something honest and real to say.