Posted on 02/08/2011 1:07:38 PM PST by bruinbirdman
The first picture has been released of Meryl Streep playing Baroness Thatcher in The Iron Lady, the forthcoming Hollywood film about the former British prime minister's life.
The biopic, which also stars Jim Broadbent as Lady Thatcher's husband Sir Denis, began filming at the end of January.
It is being made by Pathe and Film4 and is directed by British director Phyllida Lloyd, who is best known for her theatre work.
Streep, one of the most successful actresses in Hollywood, was seen as one of the few women capable of convincingly playing Lady Thatcher.
However, producers faced concerns over how an American would be received playing the part, and suggestions that the role should have gone go to a British actress.
The film will focus mainly on the period immediately prior to the Falklands war. . . .
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
Tssss! Hottie.
I think she could pull it off I hope Meryl Streep don’t turn Maggie Thatcher into Faye Dunwway Joan Crawford character
She doesn’t look anything like her.
I thought she won 2. I’ll check.
“Streep has an uncanny ability for morphing accents of every type imaginable (check her out in her early films playing a Pole, a South African, etc)”
Accents are overrated. Like physical deformities, mental retardation, and general insanity, they’re showy shortcuts to praise. That is, for people (like me) who can’t tell the difference between average and exceptional immitations. Passable and awful ones, yes, the difference is glaring. But it’s not worth praise to be passable.
When a foreigner hits a spot-on impression of my native accent, that’s notable. I’m thinking now of Hugh Laurie as tv’s House, whom I would never have taken as British had I not been so informed. Since I’m not Polish or South African, I can’t say how well Streep did, except to say it was believable. Leave it to Poles and South Africans to sing her praises. From my perspective, it’s merely something I have to get past so as to appreciate the truly important aspects of performance. That’s why I call it “showy.”
She won for Sophie’s Choice and Kramer vs. Kramer. Been nominated about a bajillion times.
“Hugh Laurie as tv’s House, whom I would never have taken as British had I not been so informed”
That’s not quite true. You can hear it when he yells, sings, and talks fast. But the rest of the time it’s uncanny.
we knew you were a commie leftist pimp!
How dare somebody post an article you don’t like? You convinced me, Frantzie...I used to think you’re a jerk, and now I’m sure.
Anyway, I'm much more interested in how Baroness Thatcher's policies will be portrayed in the film.
I agree. Meryl Streep is perhaps the only actress who could pull off the role of Lady Thatcher, IF of course she had a script and a director worthy of the subject.
Which is exactly the point you make.
All the posts now pointing out the rubbish that is apparently the script have nothing to do with Streep’s acting ability (’she’s famous for doing accents’-—yes, like Olivier is famous for saying ‘To be or not to be,’ I guess).
It does unfortunately say a great deal about Streep’s lousy personal judgment and her idiotic politics as well.
Too bad. The Lady deserves more.
Who are 'we'?
The movie will be a ‘Saturday Night Live’ skit with a 100 million dollar budget.
Nice, really nice.
“With a firm grasp of Reagan’s story, Jarecki avoids the predictable and takes the long view on Reagan’s life and influence, while staying centered on him as a man of deep contradiction; an American whose patriotism paradoxically led him to impeachable acts, a liberal Democrat who came to define the modern conservative movement.”
I did see that documentary, and it wasn’t as bad as I might have expected. Which is to say it was obviously tilted and unfair, but not horribly so. The “long view” part was fine, I guess, as were various personal details. Which is to say they suggested his blame for the ‘08 meltdown, budget deficits, foreign interventionism, and vaguely what is wrong with modern America (mostly to do with...I don’t know what; greed, or something), but it didn’t cause my head to explode.
The talking head panel was unbalanced. Yeah, sure, it’s only natural for Ron Jr. and Edmund Morris to dominate the conversation. But the authors of “Tear Down This Myth,” “What’s the Matter With Kansas,” and “Way Out There In the Blue,” among others? Do I have to hear from them every two seconds? As for the other side, I remember James Baker and Pat Buchanon, of all people, a snatch or two of Michael Reagan, and of course Art Laffer as the sole defender of the Laffer Curve.
There was the usual cavalcade of gripes: McCarthyism; Big Business Toadyism; Goldwater was a loser-ism; Reagan didn’t free the hostages; Reagan was only popular because he got shot; Reaganomics was welfare for the rich; everything sucked in the 80s and he only got re-elected because the public was duped by his acting ability and avuncularity; the defense budget was hypocritical; we came so close to real arms control before stupid, impractical Star Wars ruined it; the Soviet Union didn’t need our help collapsing, thank you very much; AIDS killed bajillions in the shadows; Iran-Contra; he’s both too simple and too sly; etc.
Like I said, though, it wasn’t that bad. Which is to say I didn’t blow my top watching it.
Meryl Streep is a superb actress.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.