It seems that Gilliam, along with his stars Matt Damon and Heath Ledger, wanted Samantha Morton, but Weinstein forced Lena Headey upon them on grounds that Morton wasn't "fuckable."
Charming, no? Ironically, perhaps, when I saw the movie last August, I said of it here:
The main thing I came away with is a desire to see more of one of the supporting players, Lena Headey, an actress whose face is new to me...she seems, inasmuch as you can tell, to have the chops to embody a better character than this one. But although she starts out well and strong, in the end the film forces her into a box.
Far be it from me to take the side of Harvey Weinstein over Terry Gilliam; I just agree Headey is a very attractive woman. But there can be virtually no argument that Morton has more, or at least more proven, "chops." And not to put too fine a point on it...I would.
Would she have saved the film? I'm inclined to think not; it had more problems than just the director and stars second choice being cast in a key role.
But this definitely leaves me anxious to read the book, which has so far been published just in the U.K.
1 comment:
I quite liked Lena Headey in Possession (which was based on A.S. Byatt's bestselling novel). I think she has a depth and a resonance you don't see often. That said, I always like Samantha Morton, too. Hrm.
Post a Comment