Michael Fassbender

TPF may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, and others

#1,788
In regard to the film, I think it is about three product launches and the backstage drama before they occurred. But as one of the leaked emails revealed (I can't find it now), the script features a limited number of characters and claustrophobic settings. It actually sounds like something that would be a good play.
If I were Michael, I wouldn't want to be in it now that he knows Sorkin dissed him, but he also knows that Boyle went to bat for him, so possibly feels some sort of obligation. It's a tough situation.
And in regard to Boyle, I'd really like to see the two of them work together--in something else.
 
#1,789
That does not sound like a film a lot of people are going to want to see. Indeed it sounds like Oscar bait - one that actors and directors etc will lurrrrrve :hbeat:, and maybe some of the "art" crowd (I like a great indie myself but this sounds....dry).

That said it's hard to make a judgement on this kind of film because the details are so bareboned.

Michael is certainly a good enough actor to carry it off (bar the always present probs with accent) and it could be a tour de force for him if it's done right. But getting a really big crowd in it see it? I just don't think that's going to happen.
 
#1,791
bhb2014 said:
Do you think he's still there shooting something for TLBO? But he'll probably be in UK soon to spend some time with his family. I hope he rests because 2015 will be extremely busy for him, like 2014 ten times Lol
Click to expand...

i think he is there doing whatever he does to enjoy himself. The movie is in post production. Since I've been following him, if he's nominated, he attends BIFA, BAFTA etc. that's why I was surprised he didn't attend. His costar attended. i think he's hiding again.
 
Last edited:
#1,794
By resting I meant he's not working, he's enjoying himself, whether he's laying down on a bed or having fun ;) He does attend events when he's nominated but he didn't attend BIFA last weekend, I missed him there =(
 
#1,795
Following the whole Sony email hack ... it's interesting to see how Hollywood makes decisions. And how much ego is involved. Even more than I thought. Sorkin seems to be a big arsehole (and if he thinks no one cares about MF, I haven't heard of him before The Newsroom either).
I mean I knew it but it's actually really saddening to see that today's filmmaking decisions aren't foremost based on talent but rather what old, white-haired producers think the audience wants to see and what brings the most money for them. Those people are so far removed from reality, how are they supposed to make a reality-based film? This is why they try to go through with this Jobs movie. They think people actually want to see it. They spend so much money on sh*tty movies so when actually really good scripts land on their table they don't have any left for them.
 
#1,796
jlactofree said:
I think Michael is considered a risk because of The Counselor.
Click to expand...
jlactofree said:
I would like Michael to dabble in TV again and indies.
Manymajor stars are doing both, increasing their awareness and following/starpower. Like Benedict Cumberbatch. Mr Sherlock.
Click to expand...

The Counselor wasn't sold like a Fassbender's film. It was promoted like a film with Fassbender,Pitt,Cruz,Bardem and Diaz. Even posters made this clear. Actually Cruz'sand Fassbender's roles were the most lackluster. The Counselor is already on many cult films lists but I understand why it's not for everyone. It's some kind of hybrid,leaning towards arthouse territory,while people thought to see a blockbuster thriller,after all the misleading trailers.

I agree about his career and I don't think his intent to mix indies,auteur films and things like Prometheus or Xmen is changed. His ability to disappear in every role,not being overexposed and always in the public eye are all things that help him as an actor. When I watch films with people like Pitt,Cruise,even Di Caprio, I often just see them playing themselves.A tv project would beinteresting too. McQueen is filming Codes of Conduct for HBO.I'm curious to see it.

Singra said:
TSN wasn't starless, Fincher was the movie's real star, he also has the power to get the cast he wants.. not every director is as fortunate. I actually thought Cruise would have been better for the role... he has the intensity, the weirdly hollow personality and physically he could pass more for Jobs than I feel Fassbender could. Cruise is intense in a very American way and Jobs is a quintessentially American character, Fassbender's intensity reads slightly differently... to me anyway.
Click to expand...

The film's real star is the script,in my opinion. Fincher made the best of it.Sorkin was a highly regarded writer ,of course,but he was not what he's nowwithin the industry. Fincher is a great director and I'm sure he cast thepersons he thought were right for their roles (even Timberlake),but nobody has always carte blanche (budget issues,etc..).
My point is that TSN suceeded even without big names because of its subject,becauseit could appeal to a younger audience. My concern about this Jobs film is that,despite the brilliant script,it could appear uninteresting and its target is not well-defined. There's no big name who can change it,IMO.
I hope I'm wrong,but I don't like him for the role either. I think that the accent in so many dialogue-heavy scenes could be a problem for many non-American actors,not only for him. I think Michael made a good work in 12YAS (he was better than Cumberbatch IMO),in fact I've seen many praising him . In Shame his character was Irish,so I don't see any problem, and his Irish accent in the last Xmen FC's scenes:p was due to reshoots. But obviously he needs more time for this kind of film. Maybe Cruise would have been an interesting choice. Boyle said he was a commercial name,evidently that's the way he's perceived within the industry and Cruise can't guarantee a commercial success anymore,so probably their needs would have not fitted either. I still don't know if Sorkin thought he was right for the role or wanted just some buzz for Cruise-serious actor again..These people don't seem to know what kind of actor they need,honestly.
 
Last edited:
#1,797
karma70 said:
To me it seems like Pascalwas staling and did'nt want to make the movie. First by makeing it difficultfor them to hire Fincher, and then by not making an effort to finance it whenFassbender was cast. If you read the e-mails it is clear that it's Rudin whomakes a deal with Universal and ask Pascal to release the film. He knew itwould never be made at Sony and sold it to Universal. My guessis that Danny Boyle now will make a small-budget film. Foucising on the script itself and the quality of the actors, instead of on big stars.
Click to expand...
Sorkin was pushing for Cruise. Sony didn't want to pay Fincher ,let alone FincherAND Cruise.. At the end Pascal agreed about Fassbender,but clearly she didn'twant to make the movie,with or without Bale\Cruise\etc.. All the problems about the impossibility to free up Sorkin because Angelina Jolie wanted him for Cleopatra were just excuses. When things went really bad between them,Rudin made the deal with Universal.

FreeSpirit71 said:
That does not sound like a film alot of people are going to want to see. Indeed it sounds like Oscar bait - onethat actors and directors etc will lurrrrrve, andmaybe some of the "art" crowd (I like a great indie myself but thissounds....dry).
Thatsaid it's hard to make a judgement on this kind of film because the details areso bareboned.
Michaelis certainly a good enough actor to carry it off (bar the always present probswith accent) and it could be a tour de force for him if it's done right.But getting a reallybig crowd in it see it? I just don't think that's going to happen.
Click to expand...
In my opinion it was never meant to be a BO draw,like a Bond film. Now all seems "more"than it actually is,because of the speculation and the big egos involved..
These people are more interested in the buzz (e.g. when Sorkin was pushing for Cruise in a serious roleagain),awards bait,critical acclaim side of the film.. I think this is the reason why Sorkin changed his mind about Michael.
It'snot going to happen,whoever is involved in it,in my opinion.
 
#1,798
bhb2014 said:
By resting I meant he's not working, he's enjoying himself, whether he's laying down on a bed or having fun ;) He does attend events when he's nominated but he didn't attend BIFA last weekend, I missed him there =(
Click to expand...
Resting can mean many things for him.. :pHowever he's still in Australia.
From TLBO set
 

Attachments

  • tumblr_nggsud9a641teu7pjo1_500.jpg
    tumblr_nggsud9a641teu7pjo1_500.jpg
    51.9 KB · Views: 652
#1,800
Sorkin is an over-rated writer. He strings together cliches. This mash-up is funny. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S78RzZr3IwI
Click to expand...

This mash-up is amazing! It's interesting to see how different actors deliver the same lines in different shows.
It's interesting, too, that Sorkin himself is coming under some scrutiny as this goes on; perhaps one should be careful before dissing someone, even if you think it's private.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top