|
|
Post by lizap on Jan 23, 2009 22:23:03 GMT
I've just watched this for the first time. I remember catching the beginning of it years ago on TV and not caring for it, and did not realize Rufus was in it. I can now fully understand why Hollywood typed him as an aristocratic villain -- he did too good a job with this role!
I actually have mixed feelings about it, given that I hate the fact that Hollywood continues to cast him as a jerk (Holiday, and even in John Adams he was the only ignoble Founder) and am one who is not crazy about this film and don't feel the worth of the role balances out what seems to have been its overly influential effect on his career path. Right about now I would like to know just who is responsible for casting him in 11th Hour, and send them flowers and an effusive note of thanks for giving him a path out of that sort of typecasting.
It's especially frustrating to read comments about how Rufus is so eminently suitable as a villain, when one is acquainted with his wonderful early performances in romantic and sympathetic roles (thinking Middlemarch, A Man of No Importance and Dark City)! People are missing so much when they think of him only as a nasty!
|
|
|
|
Post by tipou on Jan 23, 2009 23:59:10 GMT
well... it was said that he had tired quite rapidly of being typecast as a victorian romantic as well! any typecast is certainly restrictive... that is why many famous actors, typecast as heroes, dream to play the baddie one day...
i beleive a good actor is able to play them all, lovestruck romantics, good doctors, heroes AND villains. if rufus was forever going to play the likes of dr. hood, i would be very much frustrated indeed.
i personnally do not beleive that he is "suitable" to play a villain - i think this would be insulting for any actor - but i do beleive that he is "good" as playing one, just as he is good at playing the romantic lead in IASL, the wacko earl in TOTS, the kind king in T&I or most of the types he impersonated so far. this is one impressive range!!!!
remember, it takes a great actor to make a convincing villain. or, as my mom would say, the devil himself is often very handsome, otherwise, why would anyone be attracted to him? i just loved him in "a knight's tale", because, at the same time we were booing him with a passion, we just could not get our eyes off him!!! ahhhh... the beauty of danger....
but dont ask hollywood moguls to be too imaginative. they are conservative businessmen who think in terms of profit. they want their brad pitts to be the good guys, otherwise, they are less bankable!!! but many brad pitts want their chance to be darth vader or the boston strangler...
hollywood producers are working in a creative world, but they fear true creativity. thank god, rufus is no hollywood player by definition. he might get there one day, but it will be on his own terms. which is probably why he is so devoted to independant cinema, the field that ennabled him to show his true potential as an artist.
god bless this head on his shoulders.
IMHO only, of course.
|
|
|
|
Post by rueful on Jan 24, 2009 0:30:39 GMT
Rufus is far more appealing to me in A Knight's Tale than Heath Ledger, but that's partly my age talking. William seems very sweet, but just a boy, while Adhemar is quite definitely a man. A man with some very rotten qualities, to be sure, but Rufus as always manages to impart some humanity to him. (So I'm basically agreeing with you, tipou, that he plays a good baddie--because most real people, even bad ones, have many shades, and he always embodies multifaceted personalities.) And the sex appeal may have a little to do with it too.
As I've only seen the film in bits and pieces on the internet and tv, I've never seen the "topless" scene (which name would probably horrify Mr Sewell) except in the still on the previous page. I guess it's only in certain versions. When exactly in the movie does it come in (so I can keep my eye out, just for scientific reasons of course)?
|
|
|
|
Post by tipou on Jan 24, 2009 0:42:11 GMT
the topless scene (maybe mr. sewell would hate the name, but then it IS a scene lacking a top, so you are scientifically correct) happens right before the world championship. it is there that - while, unfortunately donning a top, he learns about the humble origins of william, and decides to have him followed, which ends up in william's arrestation for impersonating a nobleman.
and, yes, adhemar is definitely A MAN, as can be witnessed - for scientifical purpose, of course - in said topless scene.
|
|
|
|
Post by rueful on Jan 24, 2009 0:49:52 GMT
Thank you for helping me in my scientific quest. I have always said life is a journey of discovery.
Any version I've seen seems to omit that part and just shows him already having followed William (through some genius thatcher-tracking gene he has, I guess).
I guess I'll have to seek elsewhere. After all, would Hood give up without a fight? Oh, sorry, another show./
|
|
|
|
Post by tipou on Jan 24, 2009 1:01:58 GMT
i am so glad to find another scientific mind here. most of the girls say they admire rufus, but really, they are only after his body. sad but true.
so, dear fellow researcher, have you checked the "what's with the hair?" thread in the "other rufus stuff" section?
you will see what kind of groupies we have to deal with here. GE2 even had a great time torpedoing my scientific analysis for the sheer fun of it.
but you will have magnificent samples of our favourite research subject (rufus photos) to drool... sorry, to reflect on.
|
|
|
|
Post by peach on Jan 24, 2009 1:54:30 GMT
Science research, I don't think so, we all know why you've been on this board, and let me tell you ladies, it aint science. I think you've got Ruf on the brain just like the rest of us crazies, I mean fans. But you keep telling yourselves that it's mere science that brought you here and I've got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.
You've been found out, so stop denying it, you'll feel better in the morning.
|
|
|
|
Post by tipou on Jan 24, 2009 2:08:22 GMT
how much does this bridge cost anyway? lots of people keep trying to sell it to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by rueful on Jan 24, 2009 3:20:39 GMT
I insist that it is science, with a heavy emphasis on anatomy, biology, and chemistry!
|
|
|
|
Post by GreenEyesToo on Jan 24, 2009 15:06:51 GMT
GE2 even had a great time torpedoing my scientific analysis for the sheer fun of it. Not at all! All theories need to be tested, and yours...well, just didn't cut the mustard!  |
|
|
|
Post by tipou on Jan 24, 2009 17:20:47 GMT
my new theory is one that you will not be able to argue with:
RUFUS SEWELL IS HOT.
|
|
|
|
Post by singingbarmanfan on Jan 24, 2009 17:41:07 GMT
...and even in John Adams he was the only ignoble Founder) Ignoble?  Hamilton has always been one of my favorite founding fathers, even before Rufus portrayed him in "John Adams" Now,Thomas Jefferson, I never really had him in high regard. He "talked the talk" but never "walked the walk" if you know what I mean. Sorry, this is A Knight's Tale thread, I sorta got off topic there, but I just want people to know that there ARE some Hamilton fans out there  |
|
|
|
Post by tipou on Jan 24, 2009 18:04:13 GMT
...and even in John Adams he was the only ignoble Founder) Sorry, this is A Knight's Tale thread, I sorta got off topic there, but I just want people to know that there ARE some Hamilton fans out there hey, sing, dont apologize. aren't these threads all a big pretext to emit more or less guitly thoughts  about the Green-Eyed Wonder?  being eclectic is not a fault, last time i checked !!  |
|
|
|
Post by lizap on Jan 24, 2009 18:33:20 GMT
Ignoble? Hamilton has always been one of my favorite founding fathers, even before Rufus portrayed him in "John Adams" Sorry to continue with the OT! I confess to not knowing all that much about Hamilton historically, but from the movie's perspective I thought he was portrayed as a much lesser man than either Adams or Jefferson (the villain in Adams' life, if you will). |
|
|
|
Post by peach on Jan 24, 2009 22:02:21 GMT
sing, there is in fact an Alexander Hamilton appreciation site, to which I am a member. he was also my favorite of the founding fathers. As you said Mr Jefferson did ineed talk the talk but it generally stopped there. Hamilton IMHO, has never gotten the recognition he so clearly deserves. I've read to autobiographies on the man as well as The Federalist, very interesting reading especially those in his own words.
Welcome aboard this site.
And BTW TP, the bridge has been bought and sold so many times over the years, that it's price ahs gone upexponentially, what's that addage, if you have to ask how much.....
No science about your theory, I'll add my two cents, he's sexy as hell.
|
|
Hamilton has always been one of my favorite founding fathers, even before Rufus portrayed him in "John Adams" 
about the Green-Eyed Wonder? 