 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
24.91.201.174
In Reply to: Re: There is no "Kutcher." The name is Mr. Demi Moore. He'd have posted by jamesgarvin on October 3, 2006 at 11:35:44:
IMDB shows here in three roles in 2006 (one in post production) and two in 2007 (both in post-production. I thought she was great in "A Few Good men" and "The Juror".
Follow Ups:
I too enjoyed both those films, and thought she was good (I also liked her in Passion of Mind, and, for other various asundry other reasons, most of which are deviant, her performance in Striptease). A Few Good Men was released in 1992, and The Juror in 1996, both predating her relationship with Kutcher. From 2001 through 2005, dates which I intenionally limited my comments to, and the years in which she and Kutcher were together, she has done one film, Charlie's Angels, which was dreadful, and an episode of Will and Grace. One film in four years does not a bankable star make. Consequently, it would appear she has little pull relative to her own career, much less Kutcher's. I think the better argument can be made that Kutcher's has more clout to help Moore than vice versa.I have not seen her films from 2006, which is why I did not included them. "Half Light" was filmed in 2004, released in 2006, which tells me that the filmmakers could not find a distributor, not a good sign. I cannot find where it did any business in the U.S. "Bobby" was her other 2006 release, and I have read some comments regarding it, but her role in that film appears to be rather small. However, it is not scheduled to be release here until November. Ironically, Kutcher's name appears above her's in the credits.
I think the point, though, is valid, which is that the current state of her film career is not enough to provide much help to Kutcher.
Mr. Moore landed this role on his own, you should run to see "All the King's Men."
You'll love it, especially Penn's "performance."
.
"Except for the point, the still point, there would be no dance, and there is only the dance. " T.S. Eliot
You are joking, right? She "produced" Austin Power's Goldmember, along with ten other producers. She "produced" The Spy Who Shagged Me, along with nine other producers. In the last fifteen years she has "produced" seven films. It is a long standing joke in Hollywood that all one must do to obtain a producer's credit is to cough up cash - sort of like a carrot so donors can get their names on the screen. The Academy is now limiting the number of "producers" that can appear on stage during the awards ceremony because the stage was filled with "producers" who did nothing for the film.Researching is well and good. Analysis is the key. If you are relying on her "producing" as the basis for your argument, then you need to analyze your "research" more. Her career was in the skids before she met Kutcher, and it is still barely above a pulse, whereas his, for better or worse, is significantly higher. And you should note that she has not produced a single film for Kutcher. Kutcher has produced two films and six television series in the last three years. He seems to be the more prolific "producer", since that seems to mean something to you.
Perhaps spending less time reading the tabloids in the check out line would be beneficial.
occasional tidbit they set-up.
Demi is a multi-millionaire (having been the highest paid actress in Hollywood for many years) and is very well-connected. She is on wonderful terms with her ex and Brucie has very good contacts, as well.
Mr. Demi Moore is moving ahead on his merits? You're kidding, right?
Please, go see his films. Any of them. Twice. Hell, buy them and repeatedly watch them and then post about his "talent."
No, Demi ain't the greatest producer but she has far and away enough clout to get Mr. Moore the second-hand leaving of others.
"Demi is a multi-millionaire (having been the highest paid actress in Hollywood for many years) and is very well-connected."Really? She is is very well connected, and yet cannot break the curse of the middle aged actress? Yea, that is power. But she CAN unlock doors for her talentless boytoy which she cannot open for herself? Or, are you suggesting that she would rather act in the drivel is reduced to acting in today? I see the conversation now with director X:
D.M.: Remember me? I did Charlie's Angels last year.
D.X: Yeah, I remember you. You had that bit part in that pathetic movie.D.M. Well, I could use my fame, fortune, and connections on myself, but I would rather act in those silly films and help my squeeze. Maybe you have heard of him, Ashton Kutcher
D.X. Yeah, he does that Punk'd on MTV. My kids love him. But c'mon, he has no talent as an actor. I can't sell him. We'll loose money. The studio won't let me hire him.
D.M. But I'm Demi Moore. I did those movies in the 90's which made money. I was hot. If you don't hire him, I'll never work for you again. Heck, I even produced the Austin Powers movies. Some people think that Mike Myers made those films successful. Huh! It was me, the Producer. I mean, if you do not hire Ashton baby, no more Charlie's Angels, no more Striptease. Now, what do you say to that?
D.X. Well, since you put it like that, we'll loose money on a talentless actor to keep from upsetting you, Demi. I mean, where would the studio be without you?
"Mr. Demi Moore is moving ahead on his merits? You're kidding, right?"
Well, I never wrote any such thing. I guess it depends on your definition of his "merits." Is he a great actor? No. Not yet. I suspect he is "getting ahead" on his looks, charisma, and appeal to the demographic which is most important to the studios - none of which has anything to do with Demi Moore.
Comparable actresses: Meg Ryan is one year older than Moore, and has six films in the last six years. Nicole Kidman is less than five years younger, and has thirteen films in the last six years. Jodie Foster is the same age, and has five films in the last six years. Joan Allen is six years older, and has eight films in the last six years. Angela Bassett is four years older, and has nine films in the last six years. Virginia Madsen is one year older, and has nine films in the last six years. Sandra Bullock is less than two years younger, and has eleven films in the last six years. Mary Louise-Parker is less than two years younger, and has six films in the last six years. Sarah Jessica Parker is less than 2 1/2 years younger, and has five films in the last six years. Kyra Sedgewick is less than three years younger, and has nine films in the last six years. Gina Gershon is three months older and has eleven films in the last six years. Need I continue? If Moore has "power", what the heck do these women have? Instead of simply writing that Moore has power, perhaps you can produce some concrete examples. Speculation need not apply.
Kutcher films, which I have seen: (1) Guess Who - not recommended, though he was serviceable, (2) The Butterfly Effect - Better film than it had any right to be, given the ground has been tread before. I felt he did a very good job, (3) My Boss's Daughter. Next (4) Just Married. Next (5) Dude, Where's My Car. Really next (6) Reindeer Games, and (7) Down to You - small roles.
"Guess Who" grossed 67 million domestically, The Butterfly Effect grossed 57 million. Moore? Passion of Mind grossed 769K domestically. That is right. It did not crack a mill. Half Light? It cracked 28K in Brazil, whatever that meand. Pure power. Why do studios hire Kutcher? Because he sells tickets. On yeah, I forgot. With those Millions Moore has, she must be buying a lot of tickets - to Kutcher's films.
At least she is a smart producer. Producing films for Mike Myers rather than for herself. Seems like she knows a good versus a bad bet.
z
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
