Here are some photos of Angelina Jolie out and about yesterday in NYC. The photos of Angelina in the grey prairie skirt & jacket (with Garrett Hedlund) are from the day, when they did a luncheon at MoMA. The photos of Jolie in a black sack-coat are from the evening screen of Unbroken at MoMA. I don’t know if it’s Angelina’s makeup, but lately she’s been looking really exhausted. It’s not that she looks “bad” or that she’s suddenly become unphotogenic or anything. She just looks like she needs to sleep for a week. It’s also possible that she’s sore from that car accident earlier this week.
Anyway, this is the first week where critics are finally getting to see Unbroken and publish their reviews. So far, the reaction has been… good. Solidly appreciative, at times very positive. Vulture had a great write-up about what Unbroken does for the Oscar field – Vulture says that Unbroken will likely get a Best Picture nomination, but it will be a steeper climb for Angelina to get a Best Director nomination, much less a win. Vulture also says that Miyavi will probably end up with a Supporting Actor nomination because he’s already charming everyone on the campaign circuit. Interestingly enough, Vulture says that Unbroken will probably get an editing nomination. Which should be interesting, because the studio likely recut it without Angelina’s input. I think Unbroken is going to be a contender (the NBR thinks so too), but I agree, some of the categories are going to be harder to break into than others.
Last thing… Aussie actor Jai Courtney has a supporting part in the film, and he was being interviewed on Kiis FM’s Kyle & Jackie O show. They asked him about working with Angelina as a director, and he said: “She just has this command.” He told a story about Angelina walking onto the hot, baking set with 300 extras and “Everyone was getting very restless and she just walked out to have a chat to everyone and it was like… they’d never seen two hundred men shut up and stand still.”
Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet, WENN, Pacific Coast News.
The reviews are rather mixed. It got 60 percent on rotten tomatoes.
“It got” on Rotten Tomatoes is not correct. The movie is “at 60%” on RT. As critics publish their review the number changes. As of this morning, there are only 10 reviews. This is one of those movies where public opinion, not critics, will determine success.
The reviews are very mixed. I read several so far but most of them say the film is good but could be a lot better. I don’t think she will get a nom for directing but she may get one for best picture. And her lead actor may get a nom if there is room in that category.
No matter what the reviews say, I want to see it because I could not put the book down. It is such an incredible story.
The reviews so far count for very little.
It’s too early and there are too few critics submitting reviews so far.
Not until the movie has been out at least 2 days will RT ratings mean anything. The public reviews can mean a lot.
And AJ is one of those people that can bring out undeserved praise and criticism just by her name. There’s a strong bias.
It’s worth noting Cameron’s 94% fresh rating bs and numerous times critics have given poor reviews to films that were huge hits and considered great films.
The book was amazing and i’m better the film does very well.
She’s flying all over the place promoting the film. I’m exhausted just thinking about it!
seriously…I said essentially the same thing. she does look exhausted, and it’s “well-earned” exhaustion.
when she’s done with all of this, it’s back to work editing/whatever else on the movie she made with Pitt. girlfriend needs a vacation where all she does is eat and drink wine.
ETA: that “prairie” outfit is heinous, but I LOVE her black shoes and the coat! GAH, they’re both awesome.
Yuppers, I need that coat in my life and now!
how many of those wool things did Versace made for her? it’s like she bought all the pieces in the collection!
but they look hella warm though.
i tried googling it but couldn’t find this wool collection (maybe my bad searching skills). or are they made specifically for her (like her Malangeli Loubs)
The gray ensemble is horrific — schoolmarm on top and wtf on the bottom. Are those super wide pants? And the colors really wash her out.
But she looks great in the black, I love the skinny black pants, retro-chic and flattering.
I think Vulture’s take on the film makes sense.
“schoolmarm on top and wtf on the bottom”
lmao…yeah, that gray outfit is terrible. but I love the other one, too!
I assume her kids made that outfit because I can’t image any other reason to wear it.
If she gets a nom it’s only because she’s Angelina Jolie. The reviews have been mixed so far.
I’m generally cynical of awards and it doesnt help that the award buzz for Unbroken began during filming no less. So yeah, I think she’ll pick up a directors nom even though she hasnt earned it.
I like Angelina and I like her commitment to this film. She has put a lot into this film and is selling it hard. However the reviews have been good not great and not all positive.
This has been a great year in film though so I really hope Angelina doesn’t take the spot of a director who has done better/more interesting work this year. For example, Linklater for Boyhood, or Inarritu for Birdman(both of which were innovative, interesting, and wonderful films). I would love to see Chazelle get a nod for Whiplash(one of the most electric, compelling films I saw this fall). And since the Academy is both stuffy and sexist I don’t see them nominating two women and based on early reviews I would love to see Ava DuVemay get a nod for Selma.
This is all moot because she will get a nomination anyway because she is a huge star who critics like, and she is making a passion project. But since the Oscars have more to do with campaigning and star power than merit, I expect Angelina to garner a nomination.
This is only the second feature that she has directed though, right?
“Good, not great” is arguably still indicative of success.
I feel like her fans will settle for nothing less than “OH MY GOD THIS IS THE BEST-DIRECTED MOVIE OF ALL TIME!!!” from the critics and audience alike, when the reality is that directing is incredibly difficult and even the best directors of all time have had flops and been criticized at some point in their careers.
@Kitten I meat when compared to the other potential nominees. Those films(barring Selma which I haven’t seen just read early reviews) are great and I think that makes those directors more deserving of a nomination
I’m not saying she is a bad director, she is still learning and growing. She has done well so far. I just don’t think it is fair to reward her for a solid effort because she is learning and a big star compared with better directorial efforts this year. That’s all.
Apologies, Sunny. My comment was meant to expound upon what you said, not to contradict it in any way.
I completely agree with you 100%
RE: it being only the second feature she’s directed…
I finally saw a trailer for this last night, and it started off with “from Director Angelina Jolie…” which just seemed strange to me since (yeah, she’s the director but…) she’s only done two films, and the voice-over guy said it like he was saying “Martin Scorsese” or “Steven Spielberg”. it was like “you know if it’s being directed by Jolie it’ll be FABULOUS” type of presentation.
and the trailer seemed to be…how shall I say…”all over the place”…I mean, it just seemed like there was no continuity to the story. I realize that it was the trailer and not the film, but it just seemed weird. I wanted to see the movie and now that I’ve seen the trailer, I’m like “meh” on it. it seemed very much like whoever edited the trailer was going for the oscar-baity moments of the film and not the story itself. ETA: it seemed like they showed a 2-second clip of each era of his life, but not in order, and only the SUPER DRAMATIC MEANINGFUL parts.
Yeah, the trailer makes it look like an overwrought Oscar-baity movie but I doubt Jolie has much control over that. The best part of the trailer for me is O’ Connell 🙂
@Kitten
I hoped that she would be nominated (and have a critically and financially successful movie) simply because I see the idea of Angelina becoming a director as something that will push for a lot more change in Hollywood. I mean, yes, there are hundreds of other female directors, some of whom are probably a whole lot more talented than Angelina, and other established male directors. But with Angelina, it’s different. She’s a movie star who’s turning to directing, and, I think, showing younger women (who love her–a lot of my friends/casual acquaintances like her) that to be in Hollywood, you don’t always have to be an actress/beautiful. That you can create something.
I think that if she is nominated for any major awards, and her movie IS a hit (financially-that’s the bottom line), that more and more studios will turn to females to direct. I was shocked when I read that there weren’t any women on the list of potential directors, when Angelina came into the picture–that she had to fight for it. I felt (I don’t know if it’s true), that if it had been a male movie star, of the same caliber, that there wouldn’t have been as much issues in getting to direct.
Basically I think that the more we support her, and other women directors, the better studios’ll be about hiring women. That’s why I was so excited for her and Elizabeth Banks to direct. I think they’re the kind of women that make directing ‘cool’ for young people (like me–I didn’t really know much of anything about movie making process until recently).
And beyond that–I think it opens an interesting discussion. If Angelina’s movie IS mediocre/not deserving of a nomination, and she does get nominated, is that any worse than a male director being nominated for a mediocre film? Especially if that director ‘shut out’ a more talented director? I’ve never really heard that argument.
Also–I don’t really get the sense (from reviews) that the movie is bad. I think it’s very polarizing–just like its director. I’ve read multiple/conflicting reasons as to why they don’t like the movie–which I found odd.
Directors branch doesnt care if she is Angelina Jolie. they snubbed Ben Affleck and have snubbed many other. there are only what 10 reviews up. they may go down or they may go up, who knows. Stephen Daldry got a director nod for the Reader and that had mixed reviews. He isnt more famous than Affleck
Lol the only reason this project is being hyped is because of her. People were calling a Best Director nom before it even came out.
@BNS, who wrote: “Lol the only reason this project is being hyped is because of her.”
Really? I thought the (film) project was being hyped because its based upon a bestselling book, much like “Twilight’ and “The Hunger Games.” The project would have been hyped regardless of which directed ended up with it, especially with Mr. Zamperini passing away this past summer. Am I wrong in this?
@ Emma – the JP Lover
It’s not about right or wrong, it’s all opinion. I disagree with you. I don’t think this project would be getting this much attention if it had been directed by just another director. Everything that Angelina is a part of gets a massive amount of attention from the media because she’s, well, Angelina Jolie. There’s nothing wrong with that since Hollywood has always been political, but if she goes to the Oscars it’s because they want her on the guest list, not because she made a film worthy of being there. That’s my opinion and I’m sticking to it.
@BNS It may be your opinion that she is not worthy of any awards for this film but your opinion means nothing unless you’ve actually seen the film and have some basis for it. Otherwise it’s all just gossip isn’t it?
@bns
“If she goes to the Oscars it’s because they want her on the guest list, not because she made a film worthy of being there” I just want to know what makes Unbroken unworthy of being nominated for an Oscar? Who decided that or is it just personal opinion because the final verdict for this film hasn’t even come in yet. I think that’s really up to the committee to decide. It’s discrediting the film before it even started. If it good, it’s good. If it’s bad it’s bad. It’s too soon to decide what place Angelina and everyone else from the cast of Unbroken has during award season. It just seems like bias and personal opinion.
@Jessica
“It just seems like bias and personal opinion.”
I literally said above that it was my opinion.
Why is she dresses up like a governess in Dowtown Abbey? Why can’t she dress “serious” without being so extreme it ends up looking cartoony? On second viewing – horrors – are those wide legged PANTS???
I am saying this tongue-in-cheek of course, but I think that it should be considered to be a crime against humanity when people who are as good-looking as she is dress badly!!! I have seen this more than once in my life and it is, unacceptable. That grey outfit, ugh!! Couldn’t her husband have said to her, are you sure that you want to wear that honey?? I know that she is going for mature and serious but my God woman, you can be thought of in that way and still look good, you don’t need to wear a bolt of fabric!!! Sheesh.
I KNOW! This drives me insane, her style is SO OLD and does not look comfortable at all, completely OLD FASHIONED and Drab! Ugh!!!!
Her style is old, but it actually does look very comfortable…..
But who in the world do these designers think this stuff looks good on? I think if the jacket OR the skirt had been fitted (one or the other), then it would’ve been a good look. But I like that she’s not going for movie star glamour…..
What a sweet picture of Garrett and his grandmother
I scrolled back up to see if he was really with his grams. HA HA HA!!
I read the gray outfit is from the new Duggar line.LOL
I don’t really care about fashion so Angie’s sacks and lack of bright colors don’t phase me.
On the topic of films in general I always find it odd when a film gets nominated but the director doesn’t.
Botox. Botox. She looks waxy.
I have never seen a skirt suit like that, so odd. I think she looks f-cking gorgeous in the black outfit, and I get why most of the time lately she doesn’t vamp it up for red carpets. I get the impression that she most of the time doesn’t even feel like being regarded for her sex appeal anymore. As a woman who electively had her breasts removed for health reasons, even though it in no way hindered her beauty, she probably had to face down the culturally imposed necessity of women to be slaves to their physical appearance and move beyond it from within. She certainty didn’t and likely couldn’t shed her actual physical beauty and sex appeal, but she herself likely no longer prizes it or feels the need to emphasize it. This is a woman confident in herself as a human being instead of feeling the need to be seen as a sexy human being. Whereas the world regards her as exceptional for her beauty and then also lauds all her personal accomplishments as some kind of bonus (“worlds most beautiful humanitarian actress,” “sexy philanthropic actress” etc) she no longer strives to maintain that prefix to her humanity. But her face is just so unnaturally perfect that it will be hard for the rest of us to do the same, myself included.
You’ve thought about this a lot, huh?
I think it is natural for all human beings to struggle with aging, and losing their health and beauty. I would think it would be even more of a struggle for someone who was once as beautiful as Angelina Jolie. I don’t agree that she’s above it or super human AT ALL. Some of the loooong statements made here assuming the way celebs think and feel are utterly absurd (but super amusing though so thanks for the entertainment).
@Shila Trolling ? You can easily watch videos on YouTube of her talking. This video is a perfect example.
http://m.youtube.com/?#/watch?v=PcloyrNfExg
The reviews have been mixed but more on the positive side and I haven’t seen a negative review so that’s good. I think it’s still too early to call. Even if she gets nominated her chances of winning are slim as a female director, it’s just the way it goes. I’m rooting for her either way.
It’ll be a crime if she gets nominated instead of the female director of Selma.
i think the buzz has been that .both. will be nominated, making it the first time two women directors are ever nominated in the same year.
granted that this was before the Unbroken premiere, and now they aren’t too sure whether both will make it, considering the limited slots. but some critics still maintain that this historic occasion is still a possibility.
Selma is already a lock, btw. (at least according to THR and OscarDerby, or some such.)
Would it be a crime if Ava ,the director of Selma, is nominated and a more deserving male director isn’t nominated?
“Would it be a crime if Ava ,the director of Selma, is nominated and a more deserving male director isn’t nominated?”
No.
No film is a lock at the moment. Remember Argo?
@Jenny
Well you are just being bias. If someone else is more deserving it doesn’t matter if you like a certain artist work. I can see Selma being nominated but I don’t see it winning big after TYAS last year. Maybe they will prove me wrong but the Oscars has a rather checkered past.
That long gray skirt is f’n horrifying. Is it just a giant piece of wool sewn together? It makes me literally cringe. Not even a sisterwife would touch that.
Cue the haters, dislikers starting to claim that the only reason Angelina will get a Directir nomination us because she is Angelina Jolie – wife of the biggest male star in world, her popularity and humanitarian work. These are same people who once claimed Angelina didn’t direct this movie at all because she didn’t have a tan line.
How about support a fellow female who is trying to break into the men’s only club? She could be nominated because of her talent and not her popularity. Shame that we live in a world where females cannot be appreciated for their own accomplishments and instead say it’s because of their male partners, parents, friends etc.
Did you guys say the same thing when Kathryn Bigelow not only got nominated but also won? It was not because of her talent but because of the fact she was married to the well known and powerful director James Cameron?
Same with Sophia Coppola – that the only reason she got the movies is because she is the daughter of the legendary FF Coppola?
This movie is getting raving tweets from people who have actually seen the movie. Most critics are favourable giving good to grear reviews. As for the Rotten T score – they are still waiting for around 30 more reviews to be uploaded. The score can change either way.
As someone else mentioned – some of the critics are biased because they dislike Angelina personally and also already has placed their bets on Ava D to get nominated for best Director. They don’t care if Unbroken is brilliant or not – they will attack it. They are not even caring about the fact that for the first time ever two females can be nominated. That’s how pathetic they are and their reviews are worthless because they are biased. They never went to see the movie with a clean slate and clear mind. They were prejudiced from the beginning.
“Same with Sophia Coppola – that the only reason she got the movies is because she is the daughter of the legendary FF Coppola?”
Maybe you don’t remember but absolutely EVERYONE said that about Sophia when she first started directing. But eventually, she proved herself through her imaginative and meticulous directorial style.
Even if her movies weren’t always a critical success, it’s undeniable that she has a unique directorial vision and talent to boot.
Haha, it’s different for me. Besides Lost in Translation, I haven’t liked anything else she put out.
Understandable but that’s because she has a very polarizing style, yet that’s what sets her apart from the average director.
I don’t know if it’s her style that I don’t like, but it’s just that her films weren’t very interesting. Nothing really sucked me into them–like I wouldn’t go rushing to see it them again. I think they’re perfectly okay, but sort of bland. And I actively hated The Bling Ring–my sister made me watch it with her, and I wanted to die.
I agree VC. Her movies just weren’t good.
She’s (imo) like Stell McCartney of the cinema world. Famous father and name. Not that great, but a few good things here and there. And name, social connections get the better of some critics and give her good reviews. I always considered Ebert to be a personal fan of hers because he liked her family so much.
Omg, I hate the Bling Ring! I don’t think I’ve seen anything else from SC but I know Lost in Translation is an ‘iconic’ film. So I can’t really compare but The Bling Ring is utter crap. One of the most useless films I ever saw. It seemed like one long montage of stealing and trying out clothes. Like a bad popvideo 😀 And Watson was horrible. All-around a terrible film, still can’t get over it. My friend loved it to bits.
Sophia Coppola was torn to shreds (still is regularly) and Bigelow’s Oscar is side-eyed because James Cameron hustled so much for her behind the scenes.
Honestly, I don’t think it’s a sexism thing. People expected Ben Affleck and George Clooney to fail miserably at directing. Jack Nicholson, Marlon Brando and Johnny Depp’s efforts were unfairly derided.
Everyone’s a H8TER for having an opinion!!!! 😉
Angie looks beautiful in the black ensemble but I miss seeing her hair down.
Also, I give her props for casting Hedlund and O’Connell, two of the sexiest (and talented) dudes out there, in her movie.
Reviews look mixed but I give her credit for being brave enough to continue directing-it is a very challenging and difficult job.
Kitten, I love the way you think. I will love her for forever and ever for introducing me to Jack O’Connell. He is so sexy it’s ridiculous. And he’s MY AGE. Wtf? That doesn’t happen for me. I generally find men/actors in their early thirties and on extremely attractive.
Yeah he’s something special-that kid has chops too, so the sexiness is just icing on the cake.
How heavily-involved was Jolie in the casting process?
@Virgilia, looking forward to the Celebitchy Ballplayers invite to your wedding!
he’s very charming in his interviews, and his accent is so fetching. he reminds me a bit of Michael Caine (the twinkling eye bit), when i’m not reminded of my shy-but-hellraiser nephews (in terms of body language–all polite and scrubbed well when introduced at the door, but two seconds into the treshhold, goodnatured roughhousing began and untold vases were sacrificed to the gods of youth. took his punishments well but there’s always something restless inside waiting for the next game of indoor kickball)
oh god i feel so old.
@lower-case deb
Ooh, girl, don’t even get me started. Now, Liam’ll always be my #1 man. Period. Unfortunately, he is not a male Herbert the Pervert (first time I’ll ever admit this *sob*), so I probably don’t have much of a chance with him. So I will console myself with Jackie boy. He’s just so naughty…he’s got that look in his eye. Very cheeky. I love it.
And deb, you need to introduce me to one of your ‘shy but hellraiser’ nephews…..the tallest one, haha. Are they Irish?? Seriously, I’ve found out that I have a strong inclincation towards Irish guys–my sperm donor is Irish. I want to make ginger babies!
and Kitten has to be invited to my wedding to Jack because she knows the good stuff…..can’t have substandard pot brownies 😉
@kitten
Angelina was the one that cast Jack and Miyavi.. she had to fight for both of them.
I like how much respect they all seem to have for her and how highly they all speak about her. . I find that very impressive
It’s adorable that some people still think the Oscar nominations are merit-based in any way. I miss the days when I could think the same. It’s the campaigning and people voting who their friends are voting for. Will she get nominated? Maybe. Reviews do seem mixed. But they nominated Extemely Loud and Incredibly Close with a RT score of 43%. Behold the power of Bullock and Hanks! It’s all so silly.
Exactly. The Oscars are a f*cking joke.
Very true
Let me break it down even further.
Directors without an Oscar: Alfred Hitchcock, Stanley Kubrick, Robert Altman, Charlie Chaplin
Directors with an Oscar: Mel Gibson, Kevin Costner, Warren Beatty.
Oscars are a game and a joke…period.
Spot on Mia4S. It’s a popularity contest, and very rarely is the winner based on merit.
No offence to Jolie, but from the reviews the film doesn’t sound great. If she get a nom, it’s a pat on the head. If she wins, it’s just vaguely insulting.
I’ll still watch it though, the story interests me and I’m curious.
Agree with all. Oscars are a joke.
the people saying Angie will get a directing nod because of who she is, are you serious, her celeb status harms her more than helps her. They didnt even nominate Ben Affleck and went for two less known directors over him. What makes you think Angelina will have an easier time.
Yeah, and I’m gonna say it–her movie is probably a LOT better than Argo. I’m still mad that it won Best Picture. When I saw it, I was like WHAT? It wasn’t bad, per se, but there wasn’t really anything interesting about the movie. It was not the movie of the year–which is really..odd because it was a really cool story. It had all of the right elements, but in the end, it was just kind of ‘meh’.
I appreciate that she is desperate for an Oscar. But……does she have to look over 60 years old to impress the old members of the Academy? And yes the Academy is a joke.
Do you say desperate to male directors as well? I thought not.
Um…..yes Ben Affleck and Brad Pitt were also desperate. Sad to watch.
Wrong. If she was desperate she’d be promoting it a lot lot more. If anything, she is under-promoting it. There is someone else who is beyond desperate for an Oscar nom though.
I agree. Some people are in denial just because they like ANgelina, but she didn’t do a fanatic job on the film and the reviews are disappointing. And yes, she did put on a very needy and desperate Oscar campaign. This movie was hyped up as a Oscar Contender for atleast 2 years in advance and every time Unbroken got mentioned, they would always put ” Oscar, Oscar, Oscar” in everything related to it. No other director ever did that.
That has got to be the most heinous outfit I’ve seen her wear to date! Plus her hair is beginning to morf into Princess Anne territory. As for reviews or awards……who cares? Either you like the movie or you don’t. Unbroken was a great book so I’ll watch the movie regardless of how well it does.
I think it is fair to say it was a difficult and technical directing job even for a “man”. Or more correctly for an experienced director. The story sat for over 50 years for a reason. Even the Coens said they were glad someone else was shooting it. And by all counts she did a really good job directing it. So some critics have issues with certain aspects but agree overall it is a good movie and she proved herself as a director? Sure, it could just be worth a nod on merit.
One of the most technically difficult and high budget movies ever given to a female director? (if I hear the word epic again I’ll hurl). Not just a coup for women directors but a major coup for women directors getting high budget, difficult movies. And that is why I would love to see it earn some award recognition.
People here are in denial because the film didn’t get great reviews like author said it did. Jolie’s effort of directing was praised, but they all said she still needs to learn a lot about directing. She is not Steven Spielberg yet. The script writing, the direction, the plot were said to be nothing special. The Telegraph, Gaurdian, , Forbes, Indiewire, Vareity and other reviwers all gave it mediocre reviews. The film was called misleading as a Oscar contender by some critics. Sorry but I don’t think she will end up getting a Best Director or Best Picture nom or win. It has a 55% rating on RT now.
I always thought the Oscar Buzz surrounding it was all hype. I can’t believe people are claiming the mediocre reviews are due to sexism. No, maybe she didn’t do a good job on the film. Its not sexism, just how being a director works and directors are always heavily criticized for their work. That’s how the game works. Ridly Scott is an example of a director right now getting a ton of criticism for exodus, Chriptopher Nolan didn’t get good reviews for Intersteller either. Why should Jolie’s film be treated any differently?