Sigh… I miss Kate Winslet’s old face, I really do. I saw this Ladies Home Journal cover staring out at me at the gym, and I was like, “Damn it, Kate! STOP.” In my opinion, it was a really bad eye job that is still “settling in.” Plus Botox. Plus lies. Anyway, she covers the March issue of LHJ… for some reason…? Is she promoting a new project or is she just promoting the 3D re-release of Titanic? Who knows. In the LHJ interview, she talks about her charity work, but in another new interview, she discussed the Titanic 3D experience:
On the Titanic re-release: “A whole new generation is going to get to experience the film. It’s very exciting that I can actually sit with them — together — and we can all watch it in a movie theater. That is going to be quite amazing, actually.” Winslet says she’s already seen 17 minutes of 3-D footage, which she deems “extraordinary.”
Watching her old self (and her old face): “I was literally like, ‘Oh my God, make it stop! Is that me? Oh my God, that’s me. Block my ears, somebody! Somebody club out my senses. Make it f-cking stop!'”
She doesn’t think she was a good actress back then: While her costar Leonardo DiCaprio “looks so young and so skinny,” in the 1997 blockbuster, Winslet, 36, admits she’s “slightly freaked out” about seeing her 21-year-old self onscreen again. “I’m sure I wasn’t really a very good actress. Seriously, we are talking about something that happened 15 years ago. It is a very long time ago. I’ve learned so much, and I’ve changed as a person so much since then. It is really quite weird. Can you imagine anything stranger? It’s going to be like famous all over again, Titanic all over again!”
Her Golden Hat Foundation, which raises money/awareness about autism. “[The biggest misunderstanding is] that they are not capable of understanding anything, that they are completely locked in their own worlds and aren’t paying attention to anything around them or that they are disinterested. Even those closest to them sometimes believe that. And so often that proves not to be the case.”
Teaching her kids about giving back: “They get a little allowance every week, and they are given an opportunity to match what we put in the family charity box each week. They always put in part of their allowance, so I think their awareness of giving is present.”
[From Celebrity Chatta & Us Weekly]
I’m not sure what I think about Kate disrespecting her old films like that – she got her first Oscar nomination for my favorite film of hers, Sense & Sensibility, and she was only, like, 19 or 20 years old then. And you know what? I think she might have even been a better actress back then. When was the last time you saw a current Kate Winslet film and walked out thinking “Kate Winslet is awesome, she nailed that.” Don’t say The Reader. While she was fine in The Reader (not Oscar-worthy, but fine), that movie was terrible. What else do you have? Little Children? Maybe. But I tend to think Kate will always be beloved as an actress because of her early roles in S&S and Titanic. She was simply a more “natural” actress back then. She was fresh and different and interesting to watch. Not so much any more.
Photos courtesy of LHJ and production stills of ‘Titanic’.
Not friends with famous people … Hmmm interesting
No kidding. Richard Branson immediately jumps to mind… does he not count as famous?
She was lovely in S&S. At present she’s just all around annoying to me.
I don’t think she’s disrespecting her earlier roles as she’s being hard on herself – as all artists are (actors/singers etc) are about their craft.
I understand that some actors won’t even watch their own movies…it’s that bad. my sister who’s a writer refuses to read her earlier articles… despite what anyone else says she thinks she was an awful writer.
That’s how I took it as well. She’s critical of her looks and acting, like someone looking at old pictures of themselves and cringing.
ITA
Exactly. It’s a deceptive headline. Why is it that when she says it she’s disrespectful, but when other people say it they’re just being humble about how they started out?
totally agree too – she didn’t say anything bad about the movie itself, only about her own acting.
ditto.
I agree, this article twists her words…she’s just being hard on herself. Nevertheless, I think she deserved the Oscar for playing Rose…it was a star-making role on the level of Vivien Leigh in Gone with the Wind.
Exactly, she was not disrespecting the films she was just being selfconcious about herself.
I totaly agree. She was NOT disrespecting her work but merely says she is more of a better actress today then back then. She is critiquing herself only.
Co-sign
Oh, come now! Kate in The Reader was a far superior performance to most of what gets you a Best Actress Oscar these days. Julia Roberts? Sandra Bullock?! Reese Witherspoon?!!
But I’m not convinced by her “all-natural” argument either.
I don’t care about whether she’s all natural or not and I wish she didn’t feel compelled to defend it. We are so hard on women. We criticize them for showing signs of aging and lambast them for doing something about it. There’s no winning.
I really like this comment, no human being is perfect but for women – especially celebrity women it is a bit of a hopeless trap.
I can get talkin about the ones who are rude, arrogant, destructive – your Rooney Mara’s, Beyonce’s and Lindsey Lohan’s, but when you see posts like this you do see the negative side to it.
One girl gets grilled for her eyebrows being too natural, another woman gets judged for her plastic surgery (which I’m not entirely positive she did get). What exactly is the correct answer? Modify yourself to my liking but not too much and if you do admit it immediately or your a traitor?
@Lithe: Whether she’s had a breast implant imbedded in her forehead or buttock fat injected in her lips is irrelevant – it’s that she did an interview about how she was so above cosmetic procedures, yet appears to have had one or two herself!
It’s the lies that make baby Jesus cry…
She has become SO pretentious and full of herself.
Not only watching her is not interesting anymore but for me, it’s even painful and a reason to boycott a movie.
And I can’t get past that she is a Polanski defender either.
i know, the polanski thing was/is so disgusting that it totally taints her.
RP just ruins het for me. She has children for God’s sake. She’s can’t even use the excuse that she needed to work with him to survive in this industry or some shit. She’s already successful.
And I thought she was awesome in Heavenly Creatures.
That is an incredible film, and you’re right — she was amazing in it.
I just keep looking at the pics from now vs. Titanic and I’m really finding it hard to believe that’s the same person.
I’d never noticed how much work she’d had done because she’s been doing it so subtly over the years. Yikes.
I LOVED S&S, she was great in it. Haven’t liked her as much since then. Her entire face, especially her nose, were so much better back then, pretty and natural.
…She’s not disrespecting her earlier work at all. She’s saying what most of us say about anything we do when we were younger “I was so young then. I thought I knew it all. I wasn’t very good.” etc.
I’m guessing Kate’s on the shit list now where everything she says will be misrepresented and insinuated to be her being arrogant.
Personally I think any real life pics of Kate make the idea of Botox or and eye job hilarious, not shopped magazine spreads, no offense but she has a TON of natural eye wrinkles. So that’s one thing I imagine you’re ticked off at her for.
Kate’s not the same, in any way. I miss being in love with her, like in Heavenly Creatures or S&S. Hollywood does this to everyone, it’s inevitable.
I remember seeing her in Heavenly Creatures way way back when it first came out in New Zealand and knew immediately she was special. That is the role that I most remember to this date.
That being said, she was brilliant in Revolutionary Road. I know the book well, and she embodied that character. That being said, it was a difficult film to watch and not many people did (it tells the story of marriage imploding). I thought her performance in RR far surpassed the Reader.
My other favorite – Eternal Sunshine.
That being said, she has made some WTF choices like, The Life of David Gale…not to mention that guy with the bizarre name she is currently dating…
She was electrifying in Heavenly Creatures. She was the best part of Titanic (better than Leo) and was incredible in S&S. That said – I haven’t seen a thing she’s made recently. It all sounds too grim, honestly. Wait – I saw the Holiday. That was pleasant, if utterly forgettable.
She didn’t disrespect her films. She was being self-deprecating about seeing her young self on screen. It was self-consciousness about her acting at that age. I don’t see how you got that she was disrespecting her old films out of what she said. It was pretty clear.
^^ this.
also the endless question headlines “gorgeous or fug?” etc.
but thank you, writers, for ditching “cray cray”!
Exactly. This isn’t Rooney Mara territory. She is putting herself down not her film.
Just to echo what some other posters said above, HEAVENLY CREATURES is an awesome movie! I think it was Peter Jackson’s first film and she’s amazing in it!!
So sorry to be this person, but Peter Jackson’s first film was Bad Taste. And then there were some other splatter comedies plus Meet the Feebles before he bacame a respectable film-maker. 🙂
You’re right about her in Heavenly Creatures though.
No problem, I should have googled it! You’re right HC was his first “respectable” project.
I just saw Titanic (for the umpteenth hundred time) the other day, it’s been on HBO this month. I really like her better with the red hair.
I’m probably alone here but I hate Titanic and always thought Leo and Kate made a bad couple. I know they’re the same age but she looks a lot older than him in that movie imo.
not alone, I could not stand that movie. It was agony, sitting there for so long.
I hated Rose.
But I did like her in S&S, but they may have more to do with Emma Thompson and Hugh Grant. It probably did.
No, it definitely did.
Alan Rickman made that film for me.
Loved Kate in “Jude”
You’re not alone. I hated it and everything about it. The only positive I’ve got is that without it, we wouldn’t have had the joy of the French and Saunders Titanic spoof!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8EowN95sjnQ
But I like Kate a lot as an actress and would just like to echo what Jessica@10 said earlier re the deceptive headlines. Very annoying.
YES! God, Titanic is terrible. Saw it once in the theater, never again. The highlight was Victor Newman. 🙂
You mean Victor Garber?
CG means Eric Braeden, I believe. He is Victor Newman on Y&R. God, I hate that I know that.
Yeah, Eric Braeden. My grandma has watched Y&R for my entire life, so I’m well acquainted with his work. I was sitting in the theater and he came on the screen and I sat bolt upright and practically shrieked, “OMG it’s Victor Newman!” All the people around me gave me dirty looks but like I said, he was the highlight. 🙂
I totally agree, I remember getting bored during the film and Leo always looked like a poorly fed teenager in the arms of a full grown woman
My favorite films of her are S&S and ESOTSM. She was wonderful in those movies. Other than that, I am not that impressed by her acting and I don’t think she does a good American accent. I am not surprised that she is not friendly with her peers and I highly doubt she is “friends” with regular moms at the playground.
There is not ONE role that this woman has EVER done that she hasn’t NAILED DOWN BELOW THE GROUND!!! And I have seen every….single…one of them…
I don’t know if she’s done something to her face…I truly can’t tell…all I know is that when she comes to play, she throws down!
“I’m not sure what I think about Kate disrespecting her old films like that”
Kaiser, I love your articles, but now I have to disagree. She wasn’t talking about her MOVIES, she was talking about her OWN ACTING. She has every right to do that, even if she was nominated to Oscar for those roles. That’s humble and self-deprecating.
In my opinion she’s overreacting, she was an awesome young actress, and her presence and acting were fresh and mesmerizing in her early roles. She may have overacted sometimes, but it’s hard to tell since her characters in S&S and Titanic were drama queens anyway.
Nowadays I find her movie choices boring and I’m not that crazy about her acting, either. She’s good, but she doesn’t touch my heart anymore. (Oh, that sounds cheesy.) And I miss the cool redhead Kate, too.
completely agree with Kaiser’s comments – S%S and Heavenly Creatures were Oscar performances to me. The Reader was not (though the book and the author are fascinating). She has been Hollywoodified, which means dumbed down, and it shows. Sorry Kate – but there is time to come back.
I see her comments more as false modesty than disrespecting the early work. What’s she suppossed to say, “god, I was effing amazing even back then?” she could have been a little less self-effacing though, it comes off a tad imsimcere.
She has definitely gotten a nose job and has been messing with her face in some way , cause her skin’s too tight now. She was so pretty back in the day though, she didn’t need a nose job.
She WAS terrible in that movie. But what can you do with lines like:
“You see people.”
“I see YOU.”
I too, would want my senses clubbed out.
She’s not disrespecting her films. If she were doing that, she would have said, “They weren’t very good movies/roles”, not, “I wasn’t a very good actress”.
She’s judging her own contribution to those films. And in her opinion, her craft/skills as an actress have improved with time & experience.
I don’t agree that she wasn’t a good actress back then – my favorite performance of hers is Heavenly Creatures. But you can definitely see her already impressive skills deepening & refining themselves as she goes from HC, to S&S, to Iris, etc.
It’s true that she doesn’t play as many interesting roles now – in the 90s, she was doing 2-3 meaty parts/year….But neither does Cate Blanchett, to name another terrific actress who used to regularly take on great parts.
That doesn’t mean Blanchett or Winslet have diminished as actresses. Nor are they like Reese Witherspoon, who decided to switch from Election/Freeway-type parts to more mainstream fare.
Most likely, they’re significantly older now, highly respected but not huge box office draws, & simply don’t have as big a buffet of roles to choose from anymore.
And no, she’s no longer “fresh & different” (i.e. adjectives typically reserved for newly-discovered youthful talent). 30-somethings who have been famous for over 15 years can’t really be either – we get used to them, and their originality no longer has the shock of the new.
Which is fine – instead, they can aspire to being mature, legendary talents. Unlike many of their peers, they both strike me as having the best odds for a Mirren/Streep-esque career, in terms of length, and the talent & desire to keep playing challenging, varied roles well into old age. Winslet’s most recent parts – Carnage, Mildred Pierce, RR, etc. – indicate that she still prioritizes interesting projects over more popular fare that could earn her a lot more $$$.
what do you expect her to say? She was much of a better actress 15 years ago and she been gradually sucking ever since?
And i thought the reader was a really great movie.
But not many people can say ‘Jack! I’m flying Jack!’ with a straight face though. I will forever love titanic.
I can’t see that she’s done anything. I really can’t.
It saddens me that Kate defends Polanski. I will never purchase her work again. And I do love her as an actress. I have just about every film she has ever made before 2006.
The Holiday and Hideous Kinky being two of my favs, her acting is flawless. She is excellent. The Reader was excellent.
In no way did she Rooney her interview. There is a difference between judging yourself as opposed to bashing the project as a whole. Kate has always been gracious about her past projects and seemingly grateful for the opportunities given to her.
If only she would reconsider her Polanski stance, I could love her again.
Laura, you can miss me with your arguments. I am asurvivor of molestation. If I sign up to work with a person who was publicly and admittedly involved with someone in such a scandal who NEVER paid for his crime and really didn’t even seem remorseful, then I am defending and supporting him.
I don’t care how brilliant he is, his personal life overshadows that because of what he did. Would you say the same thing about OJ (who was found not guilty based on reasonable doubt but who is still treated as a criminal in the eye of the public)? Would you say the same thing about Sandusky? Because that’s pretty much what Joe Paterno did and we see how well that worked out for him.
So please don’t try to act like she is so great for separating her professional views from her moralistic ones. The fact that she could hang around someone like that because she WANTED to work with him says it all to me. She is a sympathizer.
I don’t care how brilliant the Unibomber was, you wouldn’t catch me trying to be under his tutelage. Sickening.
@ TheOriginalVictoria, I am also a ‘survivor of molestation’, as you put it, twice actually, and I can definitely understand the Polansky situation. The truth is that we are dealing with one single incident and the case against Polansky was a messed up affair from the very beginning. He had sex with a minor, that’s for sure, but the question is whether it was rape. Eh. From what I gather, the purported victim has put it behind her and wants the whole thing forgotten. In the end, that’s what matters.
I understand what you are trying to say, but whether it was a single incident or not, whether the survivor has moved on or not, and whether it was consensual or not, she was still 13 and as an adult he knew he was wrong and did it anyway. Then he fled the country and never really paid for his crime. He continues to be revered by many in Hollyhell and has been allowed to have a career. If that was an average joe who did that or even a minority at the time this occurred, there would have been a witch hunt.
As someone who has to pay for these people to be rich, I cannot sleep at night knowing I’ve bought something from someone who is co-signing that type of fuckery, and especially in dealing with my own issues. I just don’t see how anyone could and then be on a soap box about other equally important issues that effect our society. This is one of the main reasons why I stopped going to the movies and rarely purchase music or films. I am trying really hard to ween myself away from Hollywood entertainment.
@TheOriginalVictoria You need to let go of the ‘if only he wasn’t famous’ card. Rape is notorious for going unreported and unpunished. In the UK where I live there’s always a good deal of public debate on this topic. So yeah, doubt there would have been a witch hunt if Polansky was an ordinary Joe. Nodoby would care if he was an ordinary Joe is more likely.
The fact that it was a one off matters. As does the fact that the incident happened not too long after Sharon Tate and their unborn baby were slaughtered. To me it makes a difference if we are dealing with a, let’s face it, very disturbed man who made a mistake, or a woman hating serial rapist.
Erm, I’m from England as well. And I promise you, a guy who drugged and then raped a 13 year old girl while she was so out of it she could hardly move? After manipulating her into visiting him alone? Not gonna get forgotten about, by the police or courts at least.
Rape is usually hard to prove due to the nature of the crime, and when 2 adults dispute consent in circumstances where it’s one person’s word against another’s, you have a problem. The courts demand a criminal standard of “beyond reasonable doubt” and that’s higher than balance of probablities, and when the evidence is only 2 people’s word, a 2/3 aquittal rate (which is what it is, once a case gets as far as a jury) is not very surprising. But this was not such a case – it was the drug-assisted anal and vaginal rape of a virgin child. And what happened with Sharon Tate, and his previous character, would be taken into account when sentencing – as would any understanding of quite what he’d done, and any evidence of remorse – but it would be completely irrelevant when determining innocence or guilt.
He’s evaded justice from the earliest opportunity, and lied and lied about what he did. He’s never once taken responsibility, never done anything but whine about how it isn’t fair and he’s a victim and she consented and why is he so persecuted? That does not constitute remorse and rehabilitation.
And he isn’t someone who “made a mistake”. The premeditated, intentional rape of a child is not “a mistake”. It’s an atrocity.
No YOU need to let go of the “he only did it once” card.
Do you have like Stockholm’s Syndrome or something? I never said this man hated women. But just because he’s not a serial rapist doesn’t excuse him from being be a rapist period. I’m glad Kate put that info up as I didn’t remember all the details but I do remember that drugs were involved.
How can you try to defend someone based on a very horrible tragedy that occurred? If we all just when bat shit crazy and fucked minors or killed a person over grief, would there be any one left on earth? You can definitely not bring that argument with this discussion because it’s weak and since you’re a survivor of molestation, I can only say I’m shocked.
As you live in the UK (and I am currently in London as well) you can’t speak for other countries but I see the way the whole situation between that Lord’s son who had sex with a minor (but at the age of consent) was treated and how the public reacted. Many people didn’t seem so fond of that ruling either.
This was not a young teenage man with a messed up child hood and history of sexual abuse in his own life this was a man. It doesn’t matter why he did it, he did it, and fled the country and doesn’t want to pay for his crime. Then had a whole other family in the process. That’s disgusting.
If he made restitution and spoke out and seemed remorseful for what he did and sought therapy, and did the time for his crime, the world would view his “one off” act as something that he could be forgiven for. But he hasn’t done that.
Your cavalier attitude is the reason why it DOES matter that he is famous because all his little powerful Hollywood cronies have this same attitude and are helping him and it sucks.
There are consequences for breaking the law and it’s not right that he hasn’t had to meet them yet when other’s maybe in his same situation HAS. And on top of all of that he gets to make films and live a comfortable life.
People like Kate Winslet with daughters of their own, should know better. How she could work with him and then look her daughter in the eyes everyday frightens me.
@TheOriginalVictoria, Please see further up for my reply. For some reason it wasn’t posted below your post. Thanks.
@Ida, no thank you. I think you’re reasoning is vile and I don’t want to see any other trash you write on this matter.
You can defend it all you want. Good luck.
I’m sorry to be so blunt, but your posts on this subject are extremely creepy. Just realizing that someone thinks this way makes my skin crawl.
That was directed to Ida, btw
That’s what his camp have said for years, but unfortunately for him, the Grand Jury Testimony was released about ten years ago. It paints a very decisive and extremely bleak picture.
He told a 13 year old girl he could get her into the movies and asked her to come to his place to talk about it. He then gave her a glass of champagne with qaaludes (date rape drug) dissolved in it and stripped her. He raped her vaginally and anally – she’d been a virgin before.
Those are the facts. It was not “only” a paedophile grooming a child. It was a full-on, drug facilitated, premeditated rape of a child. Hence why Emma Thompson agreed to sign the petition, thinking it was merely age-related etc etc, and then had her name removed once she was apprised of those facts.
He’s never served his time or paid his debt to society. I’m so sorry his victim had to cope with all the publicity and I’m glad that she found peace through forgiving him. But there’s a reason it is the PEOPLE vrs X in criminal cases – this wasn’t a civil suit. Crimes like this one are so serious that the penalties and judgements must be set by society, for society. He’s an unrepentant child rapist who has been on the run and lying about his crime for 30 years. Sorry, but the victim having made her peace is psychologically essential for her, but not a literal get-out-of-jail for him. Crimes are assessed and judged by severity, not attitude of the victim, or you’d have complete inconsistency in sentencing. It DOES matter what he did, whatever the victim now feels – apart from anything else, what message does it send when a child rapist gets away with it and people say, “oh, but he’s such a good film-maker!” Though then again, Chris Brown is still serving his sentence (5 years probation) so has not yet paid his debt to society either… and the Grammys don’t appear to give a brass farthing. Women and crimes against them seem to matter less than crimes against people of colour, for some reason. To my mind, they are of equivalence. And this isn’t hate speak; it’s hateful acts, which seemingly are just forgotten about because the perpetrators are talented. No. That’s wrong.
Kate Winslet has a ten year old daughter. I don’t care what she does to her face, though lying about Real Women as she does it is a bit much, but her husband has just dumped her for a younger model so I give slack there. Condoning a child rapist? Not so much.
“If only she would reconsider her Polanski stance, I could love her again.”
I feel this about SO many celebrities, including Tilda Swinton & Martin Scorsese. While it was stupid to sign that “Free Polanski” petition w/o being informed, I respect Emma Thompson for reconsidering her position & removing her name when she read up on the case.
I absolutely agree with you on all points. Especially about Hideous Kinky – she was incredible. I can still see her storming out of her room, screaming, going after the woman who took her trousers. She was perfect.
She is beautiful and talented .
Meh, IDK. I like her, I think she looks great and I don’t think she was disrespecting anything, ala Rooney Mara. I think her quotes are rather endearing and I pretty much agree with her. Of course she has grown and changed as an actress. As she says, it’s been fifteen years.
I still think she was disrespecting her early work by saying that she wasn’t a good actress back then – when really, her early films are what most people love the most.
Seems to have a dead and bored air about her now..
I thought she was fantastic in The Holiday, even though it wasn’t an Oscar-worthy film. Just loved her character Iris.
She was good in Heavenly Creatures. Now she tends to overact like she’s baiting an Oscar. She has theater-itis.
Kate’s actually better when she’s playing an American (Eternal Sunshine, Revolutionary Road, Little Children).
Count me in the group that hates Titanic. Dreadful movie.
Kate was fabulous in Revolutionary Road. That is the film in which she deserved the Oscar. She also was great in Eternal Sunshine. Nevertheless, she will always be Marianne for me in Sense and Sensibility.
Her worst work: The Holiday. Horrible film, horrible performance, and she was horribly miscast. In a word: horrible.
And I still contend if she has had work done, it has been fairly minor. She has lost a lot of weight since she first came on the scene. Her face just isn’t as full as it was in Titanic, Sense and Sensibility, etc.
One person was commenting under multiple nicks here, and their comments were deleted. It’s fine to disagree, but when you post as multiple people it’s a ban, as is written in bold above when you comment.
Heavenly Creatures was the bomb. That and Sense and Sensibility are still her best work (although I love Little Children). The eye work is so obvious in these pics. But yeah I agree she’s not dissing anyone but her old self which I kind of understand even if its just fake modesty.
She hardly resembles herself in younger days. Something about this woman rubs me the wrong way. I just don’t care a rats ass about her.
Does anyone else sort of feel like she has hit an early midlife crisis and kind of just gone off the rails somehow? I mean, it seems like she used to be this stellar talent, who was humble and who had a decent sense of herself, and who was a positive role model for women when it came to body image and mother/career balance.
And now she’s hitting the botox (at the least), cycling through men, trashing things she used to respect, and just being strange?
Makes me sad.
Nah she was criticizing herself not the work. I think everybody does that.
GAWD I still want that dress from Titanic!
She’s so full of sh!t (lying about the work she’s done on her face; lying about having a c-section; hugging and kissing Polanski like he’s such a great fellow; lying about not wearing makeup in her hideous commercial; etc.) that I really can’t stand her anymore. It’s too bad because I used to like her. Now I just want her to go away where I’ll never have to see her distorted Madonna-face again.
hahaha when she says she’s friends with other mums on the playground it makes me think of that part in Little Children when all the other moms are judging her because she forgot to bring a snack for her kids.
Kate seemed to be attempting to be modest as she usually does in her acceptance speeches and interviews. I don’t know if it’s an act or genuine, but I think that’s what she was going for. There is a lot to learn in her business from the age of 21 to her current 36 and I think she was just saying that she has learned more with experience and age.
I do agree though, she hasn’t have a really good movie in a really long time.
Watched Carnage and it was just ok. I wouldn’t tell anyone that they have to watch it, or would I sit through it again. The laughs they meant for the audience were more like, hardy har hars
Well, I’m halfway through Mildred Pierce and though I’m enjoying it overall, Winslet’s about my least favorite part.
She always puts other women down for their personal choice of plastic surgery and seems to want to come across as natural and down to earth….but when someone always has to talk about it, it appears they are trying to convince people they are that way. She hangs out with “moms” and not famous people…really? Moms are the back bone of society! All her pictures in magazines are so photo shopped and stretched out to make her look slimmer. There is something about her that isn’t right.
to those who just can’t bear her anymore…why do you read and comment on articles about her?
“The Reader” horrible? What are you on??
That film was excellent!
Kate wasn’t really disrespecting her past work. She was only one of the factors that made those films great. Lost of actors can’t even watch themselves in films. Legendary actors have said that they thought they stank sometimes. Would it satisfy you if she said she though she was the shit?
No point in trying to change the writer’s opinion. Kate hasn’t really done anything wrong – but the writer is biased against her. She just doesn’t like her. That’s OK. Can’t like everyone.
I gotta agree with the others. She was just being humble and saying she’s learned alot. What would you rather she had said “I was awesome”. Err there’s no way not to sound like a douchebag.
I loved her in Sense and Sensibility and Heavenly Creatures (watch it people, it’s a great little movie) but I can’t say I find her at all interesting anymore so I’m going to say that I agree with the article.
I love her earlier work and I used to like and respect her. (Like AJ I go back and forth about whether I think she’s been tweaked. I’m leaning towards yes for both) Nowadays, I find her insincere and pretentious but I agree with others who say she was NOT disrespecting her earlier work. Everyone thinks their earlier work is rubbish, even if it’s not.
Now that I’ve defended her on that score. “I’m not friends with famous people, I’m friends with mums on the playground” I really hope that comment was taken out of context, otherwise BITCH PLEASE!
I’m not sure about the face tweaking – I thought she might have done and then I saw one of those spreads from 2005-2012 in InStyle where they show a heap of red carpet pics – her face looked pretty much the same in all of them. I just think it’s so hard to tell when magazines are photoshopped. I reckon she does Botox etc though.
God, I will never understand your disdain for this woman.
Besides the nonsense surgery-peddling, she talked about her acting, not her old movies, and her acting is hers to ‘disrespect.
Anyway, the interview was charming and I laughed at her mortification; I can imagine how odd that must have felt to watch. Very exciting that they get to relive all of this over again!
And you obviously need to watch Eternal Sunshine of the Spotlesss Mind.
angel, I totally forgot about that movie, it was wonderful. She was really great in it for sure.
Okay, I take it back. i guess I only thought the reader was over-hyped and that whole hollywoodification of her really stems from that awful movie. And sorry, she was not good in it. In fairness, the role was plastic so not her fault really. But I get annoyed when all this annointing goes on for crap and I know it is really for all the past work, but it still bugs me.
@TheOriginalVictoria
1. My point about the awareness campaigns in the UK, as I stated in my post, is that rape cases in general are notorious for not resulting in punishment. That’s it. No need to get carried away and read to much into what I said…erm, wrote.
2. I don’t have any kind of syndrome. It is completely vile that you have to resort to such language to make a damn simple point. That it doesn’t make a difference at all to you whether we’re dealing with a serial rapist, someone who clearly hates women, or someone who’s undergone a horrendous trauma and had a terrible lapse in judgement.
As for the trial:
1. At the time of the trial the GIRL’s attorney agreed to a plea bargain with Polanksy in which every charge other than sexual relations with a minor would be dropped.
2. Polanksy was never meant to go to jail. The original understanding had been that he would be put on probation and it was the prosecuting attorneys that had recommended probation.
3. The judge changed his mind, deciding that Polanksy should serve jail time and/or be deported during Polaknsky’s psych. evaluation which lasted one month.
4. The GIRL has stated the following about the judge: “He didn’t care what happened to me, and he didn’t care what happened to Polanski. He was orchestrating some little show . . . ”
5. The girl’s attorney has stated that Polanski “was supposed to be treated fairly, and he clearly was not.”
6. The prosecuting attorney has stated “I’m not surprised that Polanski left under those circumstances,” and, “it was going to be a real circus.”
7. The girl has stated that the media, reporters, the court, and the judge have caused her way more damage than “anything Roman Polanski has ever done.”
8. Polansky has publicly stated that she, i.e. the girl “…is a double victim: My victim, and a victim of the press.”