Angelina Jolie has a lengthy feature/interview in the Summer edition of the DGA Quarterly magazine. DGA standing for Directors’ Guild of America, obviously. The interview comes ahead of the November release of the third feature-film directed by Jolie, By the Sea, and the interview covers a lot, from her nervousness at approaching the director’s chair for In the Land of Blood and Honey, to making her little “art film” with Brad. You can read the full piece here. Some highlights:
The three films she’s chosen to direct: “It’s probably not an accident that the films that I care about happen to be about issues that matter to me, stories that I want to tell. If you’re going to spend two years of your life on something it has to matter to you, you have to be passionate about it.”
What she learned from her acting career: “Something I learned as an actor was which scenes needed to be rehearsed and which actors are good with rehearsal, which actors learn from it and which ones grow stale because they start to second-guess themselves…”
She’s not a one-take director like her friend Clint Eastwood. “I don’t do one take. But I don’t do many takes either—unless an actor wants them. But I’m very clear that I’ll be ready so they should be ready and we’re going to get this done.”
She likes a peaceful set: “I’m not somebody who wants to be on a set where there’s screaming and everyone feels under duress; you want to build a happy family. It was a day that wasn’t about the shot or how many we got or how long it took or the camera angles. It was about ‘What are we doing here? Are we here to feel something together and do something together?’ or ‘Is it just the technical thing that I want?’ I’m not that person. I think something great can happen when you bring the right people together and it’s a very special feeling. So I felt that on the first day and I was very excited.”
Her baggage as a celebrity & humanitarian: “I think people watch how you present yourself. If you come in and you’re there to roll up your sleeves and work hard, you’ve got a lot of ideas and you’re there to help solve problems, then you become that person to them.”
Directing Brad Pitt: “I’d be directing myself and him in a scene where we’re having a fight, and I’d be pulling out the parts [of him] that have an aggression toward me or when you’re frustrated with each other—it was very heavy. We kept joking that all of the crew felt like they were living in a house where the parents were fighting and you don’t know where to stand or where to look.”
Describing By the Sea: “It’s an art film, the kind of movie that I like to see but not something I’m usually cast in.”
She doesn’t want to do By the Sea-type films again: “We’re proud of ourselves for being brave enough to try it,” she says, adding that she and Pitt made it on their honeymoon. “I think By the Sea was the hardest film for me because it wasn’t [issue-driven]. It’s something I probably won’t do very much of.”
Her next film, Africa: “I’ve never worked with elephants and lions before and so I’ve been [doing research on] how to technically film the animals,” she says, and she’s been poring over the script with Leakey and his wife to make sure she tells the story right.
Gender & directing: She “doesn’t go to work thinking of gender…There are many female directors I’d love to work with. I don’t focus on the negative. I think about the other women [directors] and trying to find ways to work together, and focus on everything that is happening and imagine that it will continue and will grow.”
She never loved acting: “What surprised me about directing is how much I loved it and how happy I am to be on the set. I love coming to work in the morning. What I realized is that I never loved acting. I don’t love being in the hair and makeup chair. I don’t [love] being in costume. To me the strangest thing is that I’ve just spent the majority of my life in one aspect of this business, and because I was fortunate enough to become successful I never questioned whether I felt at home and found out later in life that I’m much happier directing.”
It’s a good piece and I can really feel a different energy coming off Angelina when she talks about directing. I tend to think she’s still learning how to be a better director – while I think Unbroken had some solid moments, the film might have been better served by a director who knew enough to make some bolder edits to the story and to pace the story so it wasn’t so dark and horrible for so long. I’m not saying she’s a hack. She’s not, at all. I’m just saying that she’s not really a great or good director yet. *sighs and turns in Brangeloonie Badge*
Photos courtesy of WENN, Entertainment Weekly.
It’s too bad all her films thus far have been incredibly dull. I expect more of the same from the one with Brad. Unbroken literally made me fall asleep, which is astounding considering what an incredible story it is. She sucked all the interesting out of it.
I agree she hasn’t made anything entertaining in years
Sorry! Posted at wrong comment.
does Kung Fu Panda count?
because Kung Fu Panda 1 and 2 were GREAT.
Have you seen In the Land of Blood and Honey? Def not dull!
I saw it with one of my best friends who actually was in Sarajevo during the war. She confirmed that the film was (unfortunately) extremely realistic.
Is fighting with your husband on set really directing?
She did the same thing to Brad.
I think the issue is that she was able to use her money and fame and become a “director,” and many other directors have to climb the ladder and learn and watch better directors, sometimes for years. She just jumped right in and has much to learn, and really, no one to teach her. I don’t know that this is a recipe for success.
Then I think there are those who are just gifted, like Spielberg. The man can tell a story and take your breath away.
And I’m glad she isn’t acting much anymore either. Never liked her in any movie. She just does nothing for me.
Those kids are just…….total perfection!!! WOW, just WOW
Agreed! 🙂
I think that Knox looks SO much like Brad did at his age … and so does Shiloh. I honestly think Knox and Shiloh look more like twins than Knox and Vivienne.
They are beautiful kids…growing up so fast.
Those kids are gorgeous, seriously.
When I was teaching there were so many people I have met over the years that came to the profession later; after doing other jobs for years. They had that want to educate children. So they left and did what was in their heart. She has stated this more and more over the years especially since the death of her mother. I think it is great that she has found this passion and is pursuing it. She doesn’t have to be a GREAT Director coming out.. She is learning like actors do and everyone in every other profession. I think she did a very good Job on Unbroken.. and the studio did the final cut of the film. So blame them.
I’m excited for her.. It has to be scary and thrilling all at once to step out in a new direction. And I like that she has the courage to do it.. Sadly as a woman coming from acting and her high profile.. she will get it more than others.
I’m not sure it’s a blame issue. Maybe the studio saw her version, thought it unmarketable, and had to put something together to distribute. Either way, not a great ad for her as a ‘director’. To me this actor/director transition without any type of education connected to directing is not a good foundation. Acting doesn’t really provide a total learning experience to direct. Both are two different professions.
my point was regarding the editing.. she probably doesn’t have final cut.. some people didn’t like the film.. and there are many people that did. And are still talking about it.
On one hand, James Cameron got The Terminator with little or even no experience. Granted, he was given a very small budget and they wanted some quick cash but look what the man has accomplished with it! So why not give a woman a chance who has been in the business for most of her life?
On the other hand, Cameron’s genius was obvious pretty much immediately after his debut which cannot be said of Jolie. I think because of her clout and likeability in the industry, she got more chances than she can handle. She went from a small film that wasn’t successful to a big budget vehicle which proved successful financially but it doesn’t seem like she has great directing chops (yet). Not many people would have been given that chance. She is decent though and she’s eager to learn which counts for a lot too.
AJ has been very honest in interviews about how she has been learning this new craft. She put her own money to work in her first film, even. She was even scrutinized in the Sony emails because she was giving her opinions in a filme where she’d work.
I can hardly think of another new director or actor-turned-director that has been analyzed like this, criticised like this.
I am glad that she is a woman getting work in HW. It is a masculine world. She is being given projects and with with bigger budgets, she must have something about her directing. No one, particularly her detractors are going to be happy about it.
I agree with EM, she could benefit from school, but I bet she gets the best advice she can get since she is in the business and can ask people directly, I bet she has had some mentors that we do not know about.
I still think that her Achilles heel is that she has not gone to film school to learn the craft of directing and this is apparent in her directing. Sure she has financed some of her projects, but I doubt she’ll get huge finance from other parties for her films. To date, the fruits of her directing, i.e. what’s on screen & box office, aren’t that impressive, considering the glut of directors out there who have made names for themselves. Unbroken could have been so much more, but she was unable to find that recipe, instead leaning more toward the negative [torture scenes, etc].
For a studio to do a final cut for an anticipated film, I can only imagine how bad the director’s vision was. Studios do that to salvage whatever material they have, to market the film.
It takes time to be the best or a great director. Everyone has to start from somewhere. With her passion for directing I’m sure she will improve and may end up being one of the best female director.
It’s do funny, on almost every Brad and Angelinas thread the first person to post is someone who is not a fan. I’m thinking these people have Brad and Angelina on alert on their computer just so they can post something negative.
You make it seem like it’s an apprenticeship, but it’s not, not when millions of dollars hang in the balance.
@EM …
There are many wonderful directors who didn’t go to film school and instead learned directing from acting, or attempting to be an actor. Here’s a short list, but there are plenty more:
Quentin Tarantino
Terry Gilliam
Mike Nichols
Ben Affleck
Christopher Nolan
Julie Taymor
Akira Kurosawa
Stanley Kubrick
John Waters
James Cameron
Robert Redford
Clint Eastwood
Kevin Kostner
Mel Gibson
Do you have the same argument for these directors as well? Or is it just Angie?
Let me break this down. There are only four on your list that are considered “great” directors.
Quentin Tarantino – has been a film buff FOREVER, studied film obsessively on his own
Mike Nichols – born a genius
Akira Kurosawa – a visionary
Stanley Kubrick – a visionary
Being “great” and being “famous” are not the same thing.
BNA FN – surely it is possible to critique a director’s work without having an opinion on them personally. I didn’t get from the posters giving (constructive) criticism about Jolie’s directorial skills that they think she is the devil incarnate?
@Meme …
There is nothing in my post that says ‘great’ … I said wonderful. Why so quick to pick a fight? My post was in response to someone who said Angie wouldn’t be a good director because she never learned how in film school. Well, I presented a list of ‘wonderful’ directors who never went to film school. Did that break it down enough for you?
Have a wonderful day. 🙂
I agree the lack of training is an issue. Even in this interview, she talks about caring more about cultivating a good vibe than the technical parts. Except the technical parts are incredibly important. But Unbroken was just way too big a film for a rookie director, regardless. If you don’t have the training, best to start smaller, hone your craft, and work your way up to bigger projects.
Did Robert Redford, Clint Eastwood or Kevin Kostner go to the film school for directing?
She, and many actors, I think, are the type of learners who learn by doing, jumping in to an environment. I don’t think she has that same learning style to go to school, learn the formula, work on 100 films as a support person, all based on a formula, and then maybe someday, build towards something great with all the elements mastered.
I think her films are interesting because they don’t follow a formula, but I hope she always stays close to a passion and personal connection, because that seems to be what carries her through in films like “Land of Milk and Honey.”
There are plenty of directors getting educated the traditional way, and she’s financing many of her own passion projects, so that’s her version of tuition, I guess.
Angelina may not ever be “great” but I think she’s always interesting, and these days, everything is so pre-packaged and dull.
It doesn’t matter how many hours I’m ina lecture hall, or how many pages of notes I take, or how long I watch someone…I cannot really learn something until I jump in and actually DO it myself. I have to be hands on, which can also be frustrating for me because I like to do things right the first time and not repeat. My motto is “Do it once and do it right! ” Hence a lot of chances I haven’t taken simply because I didn’t want to do it wrong and fail. So I have the utmost respect for her being willing to go into directing. She’s intelligent, passionate and willing to take risks, she will improve as she continues to do it.
No need to turn in your badge, Kaiser! Angelina’s not a GREAT director yet, but that doesn’t mean she doesn’t have the potential to be, so please be patient, she may surprise you one of these days!
It doesn’t matter how many hours I’m in a lecture hall, or how many pages of notes I take, or how long I watch someone…I cannot really learn something until I jump in and actually DO it myself. I have to be hands on, which can also be frustrating for me because I like to do things right the first time and not repeat. My motto is “Do it once and do it right! ” Hence a lot of chances I haven’t taken simply because I didn’t want to do it wrong and fail. So I have the utmost respect for her being willing to go into directing. She’s intelligent, passionate and willing to take risks, she will improve as she continues to do it.
No need to turn in your badge, Kaiser! Angelina’s not a GREAT director yet, but that doesn’t mean she doesn’t have the potential to be, so please be patient, she may surprise you one of these days!
Sorry for the double post – I only tried to edit my comment, not re-post!
I actually think that she is been given good projects for her level of experience, and she is still working and getting more movies to direct even as a newbie. That says something.
Two movies they have produced, the Blood and Honey war film , and By the Sea. Unbroken had a bigger budget, and probably this with wild animal is not a small gig.
I bet there are tons of directors that would want to work in HW with projects like this. Many, local and foreigners want an opportunity in HW.
after Gia wrapped,she briefly gave up acting because she felt that she had “nothing else to give”. She separated from Miller and moved to New York, where she took night classes at New York University to study directing and screenwriting.
In Hollywood it’s almost always the producer who has the final cut, so this is not something unique with Unbroken.
AJ went to NYU for directing for a year when she was young. I think she worked with her brother on some student films. She’s not had zero training.
That’s more formal schooling than other actor/directors (Ron Howard, Clint Eastwood, Kevin Costner) had.
I think she is a making of great director. Unbroken made me cry it was so moving. Its Angie the top of all tops so they are not gonna make it easy on her but what’s new. By the way I love her interviews and her description of things. Go her!
She has great potential definitely and I certainly admire her choice of films. Of all the actors trying to transition to directing I’d put money on her and Elizabeth Banks (I couldn’t even make it through the trailer for Chris Evans attempt. So terrible).
I don’t love being in the hair and makeup chair. I don’t [love] being in costume.
‘kay Angie, Maleficent and Cleo. The acting projects she is chasing require a huge demand to attention. Unlike The Tourist where she basically admitted she picked it for a sorta vacation like experience, these blockbuster films require a lot of attention and energy from her so why chase them? Especially Cleo. Why spend SO MUCH TIME on a project when acting is not your priority?
Imo, she does want that 1 film that is truly iconic and great both visually and narrative wise. Usually she has only one, never both. She’s ambitious but she’ll never admit to wanting something like that. Everything is really a mystery with her no matter how much she reveals.
Although she doesn’t love acting, she always gives it her best. I don’t see her as an actor who phones it in. Even in that Tourist turd, she cares about the character. To be at your best possible in the worst films show at least she was dedicated and ambitious. Many get higher paychecks and don’t put in the effort, mainly men to be honest. She reminds me of Tom Cruise that way, always giving 100%.
That’s what I’m wondering too. She seemed more than keen about Cleopatra in those leaked emails. I don’t get her intentions. She’s always saying that she doesn’t love acting, that she’s ready to retire from in front of the camera, but those leaked emails show that was pretty obsessed with the project.
I think that was to be her final film to go out on. She had stated it in several past interviews, so that’s probably why her focus was so strong on it.
She said she did Maleficent for her kids, specifically Shiloh. The message is strong & different for any sort of kids film- no damaging message about waiting for a dude to save you (i.e., almost EVERY romcom ever) the writer said Angie was all over that message & encouraged her to keep the message strong (the writer implied that others Disney?? wanted it sweeter. Cleo? Like ITLOBAH & Unbroken, it has a really strong message and is NOT the sex pot Cleo- the adapted script was written by Eric Roth who is also Pax’s godfather…Angie/Brad have talked about all this stuff
So in order for to send a message, she has to play the character? She can easily just produce, just like with Unbroken and ITLBOH, her kids will see the message that way.
All we heard recently is how she doesn’t love acting, how it was her mother’s choice etc. but she still wants to cast herself in big emotionally demanding roles?
She has the money and the clout to get these projects of the ground with another A-list actor yet she wants to be in these productions herself. Pascal said that they would have to kill Angie if they wanted to give the role to another actor despite the fact that nothing was official and Jolie didn’t even read the script nor could they find a director. Pascal also mentioned Jolie chewed her out on the phone when she was aware of what Rudin was trying to do. She wants an iconic role for herself but constantly says she doesn’t want to act anymore, she’s only telling a half truth. It’s clear she wants to act and use it to go out with a bang.
I bet the strong women she was / would be portraying had something to do with it. Maleficent was perfect for her, Cleopatra would have benefited for her, even if her looks were not historically “perfect”. She has a regal stance, and she would have been playing a savvy ruler. She could do that.
I remember seeing “Much ado about nothing” directed by Kenneth Branagh and Denzel Washingtong was the prince. It was perfect!
She is not saying she hated acting, but she is not a still person, so sating in the make up chair and waiting for instructions was not her cup of cake, but it was A LOT of easy money. Directing is challenging for her. I love how she is always thriving for more.
Like a lot of actors who try directing, she doesn’t have the credentials or skills to make a great movie. She’s not an exceptional actress either. She’s a huge star because she acted crazy when she was young and then hooked up with Brad Pitt and had a lot of kids. She’s tabloid famous.
No she is not. She was great in Gia, and Girls interrupted, but after she started taking too much blockbuster roles, in the same role: “the girl with a gun”. As an actress she could have had a more interesting career imo , as a director I don’t know.
I agree. She was always interesting, but she did so many lame films. Mr. and Mrs. Smith was also a good script, and that was the best thing she’d done since Girl Interrupted.
I love her in Gia. But in hindsight, having seen so many poor performances since then, I think she was playing a character in Gia that was close to who she was then, same with her role in Girl Interup.
Winning awards doesn’t mean you’re a great actor. Most of these awards are brought and paid for. I don’t think Gary Oldman has ever won an award. Does that make him a bad actor because his career is not defined by a little statue that says you’re the greatest in the business this year. Is Halle Berry, Kim Bassinger, Monique, JLaw and Mia Sorvino great actresses because they have won awards.
As for AJ playing herself I could never quite understand that argument. Unless we know her personally, how do we know she’s playing herself. She’s acting. I can understand if one said she plays each character in a similar way but the playing herself thing I don’t get.
Umm she received every single acting award before her so called crazy antics and getting together with Brad.
For one role which was how many years ago and she was basically playing herself. Do you know how many women have won Best Supporting Actress and gone on to a fairly unremarkable career? Halle Berry won a lot of awards, including Best Actress so is she a great actress?
Playing herself? I am not even going to dignify that vile comment.
PS: she was nominated for lots of awards for Changeling- any comments like she was playing herself?
@Maya…But she didn’t WIN any awards for Changeling did she? NOT A ONE. And yes, she was basically playing herself in Girl Interrupted. She acted all sorts of crazy when she was younger so playing crazy wasn’t a stretch.
She was nominated wasn’t she????
And I will never get how people claim Angelina was wild and behaved crazyli when in fact she never came out of clubs drunk, never did anything stupid during interviews, never went to jail, never attacked anyone etc.
Do you attack these famous people for their past and the roles they do/did – Robert D Junior, Drew Barrymore, Sean Penn, Mark walhberg etc. these people have assaulted others, takes drugs and gone to jail – aren’t they called crazy and are the roles they play?
Well, I think Angelina’s characters were reduced to the sultry archetype (sometimes with a gun, sometimes not) and that made some people think she’s a mediocre actress, when in fact, it’s convenient for Hollywood to put a label on an artist when they see it will sell. I don’t think she’s a great actress, but I also think the critics are a bit unfair to her. She’s way better than Scarlett Johansson, for example.
Jolie took an acting break after Gia and stated many times that character came too close. Gia was a drug addict and a lost person, same as Lisa (lost) and they followed in quick succession. Not a stretch to say she was typecast don’t you think?
*Sigh* Angelina’s first Golden Globe (BEFORE Gia) was for playing Cornelia Wallace, who was the first lady of Alabama and threw herself on her husband to try to keep him from getting shot. Mrs. Wallace was not a crazy person nor was Angelina ever the wife of a governor.
ETA: I would like to add that I have never thought of Angelina as “crazy” just more like lost and trying to find her place in the world.
Rubbish. You are clearly prejudiced against her and so you write absurd lies and rubbish but as much as you wish what you said about her reasons for her fame and her acting are true, you are simply making a fool of yourself.
I love idol worship. If someone doesn’t like Jolie, it’s ok to be rude to them??? Sheesh. Get a grip.
Jib it has nothing at all to do with ‘idol worship’ it’s about idol hatred presenting irrational arguments just for the sake of it.
@meme …
Again, Mike Nichols (the list is too long to post), Mel Gibson (Brave Heart), Kevin Kostner (Dances with Wolves), Ben Affleck (The Town, Gone, Girl), Quintin Tarantino (the list is too long to post), Robert Redford (Ordinary People, A River Runs Through it), and Clint Eastwood are actors who have directed incredible films.
I’m not trying to disprove your point at all – but just felt the need to point out while Ben Affleck starred in Gone, Girl, it was David Fincher who directed it.
I think Emma might be talking about “Gone, Baby Gone” which is an excellent movie. Testament to Ben’s directing and, for me, an admiration for Casey Affleck’s acting.
@BrandyAlexander ….
Sorry! *Tulip Garden is right … I meant “Gone, Baby, Gone. (Blush)
I don’t consider Robert Redford, Mel Gibson or Kevin Costner to be great directors. They may have a couple of wonderful films but seriously, who watches Dances With Wolves or Ordinary People any more? None of these people are up there with the likes of Hitchcock, Ford, Capra, Huston…
@Meme, who wrote: “I don’t consider Robert Redford, Mel Gibson or Kevin Costner to be great directors. They may have a couple of wonderful films but seriously, who watches Dances With Wolves or Ordinary People any more?”
LOL! Well, considering both films won Oscars for Best Picture, you’ve now just lost my attention. Please feel free to carry on without me.
Just because a movie win an Oscar for best picture doesn’t make it great. Citizen Kane didn’t win and it’s considered one of the greatest, if not the greatest, movie ever made. ET, Streetcar, Brokeback Mountain, Sunset Boulevard, Psycho, Taxi Driver, Vertigo, Mullholland Drive…all considered great movies did NOT win Best Picture Oscars.
@meme I agree with you completely. Winning an Oscar doesn’t prove that a film is good. Just the fact that the Academy – at least up until recently – consisted mainly of rich, old, white males goes to show how biased the voting probably is/was. Only time will tell which films are truly classic.
What I really found interesting about this piece was the portion where she talks about directing herself and Brad in a fight scene. How she “pulls out parts of him that have agression towards me.” That was very intriguing, to me, and I’d like to hear more about that.
Just a normal relationship, probably. Hahaha, what would be the trigger? I know that for my hubs is my nagging. muahahaha
Yeah, my guess is just “Think about when I do X and how it really irritates you. Go!” Any long-term couple could do that, ha ha.
She didnt say she dont act anymore. If she found something she wants to do she still will imo. Also saying I don’t love being on the make up chair or in costums doesn’t mean she won’t do that no more.
I’m still surprised she went down the route of directing. When she’s talked about choosing projects she always said she just chose a story she liked and the rest (script, director) didn’t matter (hence why she has so many mediocre and just plain bad films on her resume). She also used to say she never really watched movies and usually fell asleep or gave up part way through on the occasions she did watch them. Most actor-turned directors love film and have purposefully tried to work with the best/most interesting directors they could throughout their career. I’d get it if Brad went into directing.
I didn’t hate either of her films, but the direction could have been done by anyone, it was just directing by numbers. Even she doesn’t sound enthusiastic about her latest effort, but at least it seems like there’s scope for some more interesting choices to be made there. Even if they’re poor choices, at least they might be more interesting? Anyway, I don’t know, it just seems like a strange choice for someone who never seemed remotely passionate about film-making.
I really, really hope they change the name of the film she’s working on now. Calling it Africa is like making a film called The United States of America that’s set entirely in NY and revolves around a regional issue.
“Even she doesn’t sound enthusiastic about her latest effort”
yeah, I caught that, too…I wonder if maybe she thinks it’ll be a snoozer at the BO and is sort of “prepping” people for that? I mean, I know the superfans will see anything she’s in, but it doesn’t sound remotely interesting to me.
From what I’ve read of her, she even just picked acting projects for the physicality of them. She wasn’t an actor’s actor for sure. I actually thought she had great potential, because I thought she was excellent in Girl Interrupted and also very good in the Clint Eastwood movie she did, the Changeling.
Regarding her love of film and it being surprising she is into directing, I get where you are coming from, but it seems late in life she has discovered it. She may try to play catch up or those things you brought up may be hindrances. Although, she has been on enough sets to understand the ins and outs of filmmaking on set. Ben Affleck, who came into directing after being an actor also, from an early age, was consumed with movies and how they were made. Matt Damon said as young teens they would come out of movies they watched and Ben would want to then sit down and dissect how it was made and have discussions about the movie. His mindset was always that way. Another actor on the set of Gone Girl said Ben, even as a well-respected director now, was still like a student when not acting and over with David Fincher learning and soaking up how he directs a movie and his reasoning and choices for scenes, like a student of film right on set.
Angie’s out of left field decision to start directing may seem odd, but it’s clear it’s something she now feels strongly about and takes very seriously and throws herself into.
@Jessica, who wrote: “I really, really hope they change the name of the film she’s working on now. Calling it Africa is like making a film called The United States of America that’s set entirely in NY and revolves around a regional issue.”
The United States of America is made up of ‘States’ that form one Nation, whereas Africa is made of many Nations that form a continent. So part of your comparison should be between North America and Africa, as the United States is one of three Nations on the North American continent, yes? Ivory poaching is an ‘African’ problem as it takes place in multiple ‘African’ Nations on the Continent of Africa. The ivory comes from African elephants regardless of which African country they are in when the ivory is poached, just as we are Americans regardless of which Stare or region we hail from.
I thought Unbroken was fine, and it had a huge box office. So she has clout to get more movies made because of that. She doesn’t have the skill and talent that Ben Affleck does, which he showed right off the bat with Gone Baby Gone. I was shocked at what a great job he did with that movie and his strong screenplay he co-wrote with another person. His skill at pacing and building the arc to a movie in his directing was quite impressive right from the get-go. The Town was really a strong showing, especially given the fact he was acting in the movie also and taking on an extra burden. So he proved himself with his first two directing gigs right off the bat. He really understands where to take a movie and the pacing of it.
But I think Angie shows great promise as a director, because Unbroken was far better than a lot of crap I see from male directors that’s out there for viewing. It wasn’t a brilliant job as director, but it was very serviceable for sure. I enjoyed the movie well enough, but my sister and her daughter enjoyed it also. Her first movie not so good at all. Time will tell, but she seems dedicated to learning. Her next couple of projects will be important as far as seeing how her skill in directing is improving and developing. I have faith in her to at least develop into a consistently good director. Great remains to be seen.
@Jayna +1000
@Jayna…Well stated, and an on point, UNBIASED assessment.
Great comment Jayna, I also agree with you. Time will tell whether she improves.
Wonderful interview and clearly shows how Angelina is willing to admit she needs help and learning and then proceeds to try and learn from the best.
I loved the part about female directors and how she is not focused on the negative but instead tries to create opportunities to work with other female directors. Now that is a true feminist who tries to help other women in the make chauvinistic world of Hollywood directors.
I have a question for people here who attacks Angelina for not having a technical education. Do you or did you also attack Clint Eastwood, Kevin Costner, Ben Affleck, George Clooney, Mel Gibson, Ron Howard & Richard Attenborough?
Most of the actors turned directors don’t have technical backgrounds but are hailed great directors.
So it is only women who are judged unfairly or does it come down to the fact that it Angelina Jolie Pitt we are talking about?
PS: Africa is difinitely on the list and so is the Cambodia genocide movie. Cannot wait to see By The Sea – I am already itching to see the fight she talked about. These two can act and I have no doubt they will surprise people with this movie.
Do you or did you also attack Clint Eastwood, Kevin Costner, Ben Affleck, George Clooney, Mel Gibson, Ron Howard & Richard Attenborough?
But they can direct though, they have proved themselves over and over again and won awards for their efforts. They have a distinct vision and style too, I would be able to tell the difference between an Affleck movie and an Eastwood movie for sure. James Cameron made a hit from a film that wasn’t supposed to be a huge hit, he showed skill and vision right off the bat. He made money from nothing really. Why compare Jolie to people who were clearly talented and successful from the start? She is just not on their level and not because she’s a woman, but because she is not a great director. Maybe she will be in a decade or so.
And you conveniently leave out Chris Evans and Ryan Gosling who were PANNED by critics despite being way more successful than Jolie (acting wise) and also much more loved. It’s always easier for men but their product was so bad that critics had to dismiss them as directors. Critics always hope actors-turned-directors will fail.
At least Jolie’s critics are positive enough about her skills in order for her to be credible because if she was as bad as those two, she would have never gotten Unbroken. She gets a lot of goodwill, at the end of the day, not many people with her mediocre directing skills would be able to get the projects she gets.
This is a very well reasoned post. It was the same lines that I have been thinking along but couldn’t articulate as well as you have.
So, in sum, how is this a controversial statement of opinion?: While Angelina Jolie shows some promise as a director she isn’t nearly as skilled and effective as Eastwood, Costner, Afleck, etc. but, certainly, not as inept as Gosling or Evans.
I haven’t even seen Jolie’s, Gosling’s, or Evans’ directing efforts but your post seems to sum up the critical analysis of their films. Of course, I have seen efforts from the critically/finanically successful directors that you mentioned,maybe, because, as you stated, they have been around and proven themselves. Jolie may too one day, that day just isn’t here yet.
No one is attacking AJ for not having a technical education, they are stating an opinion. Why is it when people give an opinion about AJ ithat is different from yous it is automatically labeled an attack.
I think AJ is just ok at directing. She has much room for improvement something that will get better as she grows in this new position of being on the other side of the camera.
Of course no one is criticizing Eastwood, Costner or Affleck about not having a technical education. The first reason is this post is not about them. Secondly Angie is no Eastwood or Howard. Some people are more gifted at certain things than others and get it right out the gate. While others have to learn and perfect their craft. As for Affleck many people on C/B have said he’s a better director than actor.
Loving being a director is not the same as being good at it, and her two directing efforts to date were imo a bit too earnest and ultimately flat. She needs to pick small stories and focus on those to learn the trade and find her rhythm.
I’m looking forward to By The Sea though, if only to see how she and Brad work together on screen.
Agree. She certainly has talent, but, thus far, she’s bitten off more than she can chew. She needs to lay off the big, sweeping stories and issues, and focus on small, independent films, learn the technical aspects of her job. All of her movies would have benefitted greatly from better pacing and editing.
I am not a big fan of her but Unbroken was a solid movie and a very difficult one to Direct in the first place. Unbroken was well directed and well acted with amazing cinematography. The problem: Joel and Etan Coen script and the fact that even Laura Hillebrand struggled to create a character from Louis Z. There were so many extraordinary things that happened in his life that in the end you have an hard time to create a full character and link all those events. The adaptation should be done as a mini-series.
She’s so holier-than-thou, even about directing.
I didn’t get that in the least. It must be your bias showing through when reading the interview.
She is saying she fights for projects, needs advice on things so is not embarrassed about it but instead seeks out for advice from professionals – what is holier than thou about that?
If anything, she comes across as the exact opposite. So, I can only hope you are using sarcasm, because if not, I think you have a very ironic and strange definition on what constitutes and defines ‘holier-than-thou’.
It’s great to know she has found her true passion. She’s just starting and she has a lot of potential.
Something struck me right off the bat in this interview… and it was this comment:
“If you’re going to spend two years of your life on something it has to matter to you, you have to be passionate about it.”
As an aside, it just hit me (again) that some creatives – privileged in the extreme to be not only self-supporting, but wildly compensated in their chosen field – still never understand how this sort of statement can come across to people who do plenty of jobs & projects & things they are not passionate about… week in, week out, and sometimes for far longer than two years… just to get by, just to survive… often in the hopes of mere opportunity to find something better.
(I think there is a whole issue of ‘the privilege of passion’ that I guess I find more intriguing than the rest of this interview.)
I don’t question her commitment or her sentiment, and I admire that in any artist; but perhaps if she’d simply said “I” instead of all those “you”s to whom she does not know – it wouldn’t have struck me as so clueless and elitist. (I’m not on team anyone when it comes to this person. It was the “you” and the “have” that got me in this context.)
Very insightful comment. Like you I am neutral about Angelina Jolie and I have also been struck by comments like that from beautiful and fabulously wealthy creative people who have the luxury about being passionate about their “projects”. A&E doctors and nurses, to use an example, care deeply about their jobs, the people they help and the actually valuable jobs they do and they just get on with it.
I am Passionate about things too. They are just different than the ones Jolie can afford to be passionate about! For instance: paying my mortgage, taking a vacation (or staycation depending on finances), buying a new or (thrift store) semi-new outfit, and don’t get me started on eating. I adore eating!
Seriously, she and others, like Paltrow, just don’t live in our world. Their perspective, while maybe not skewed, is definitely of the privileged. Like Paltrow, I can’t get too worked up about it (well, depending on my mood). It’s what they, and others like them, know. That is their reality. Lucky them.
Oh brother. My eyes are about to roll right out of my head.
I admire her for turning her life around and dedicating herself to worthy causes,but come on.
Where are the pieces trashing Redford, Cosnter, Mel G and their “credentials “? It’s a wonder that ANY woman tries to break into a male dominated field, much less a woman who has already proven her talent & economic worth many times over- plus she has a rich husband- she should just shop & tan. If ANY man had directed Unbroken, it would have been hailed as genius- women tearing down women with no cause. Getting that project made was something no man was able to do, but since Angelina did it, she’s bad & didn’t go to film school. Was there this kind of irrational hate for Pitch Perfect bc a woman directed it? Donna Langley (head of Universal Studios) saw something amazing and beautiful as she watched ITLOBAH, so she gave Angelina the biggest non-animated budget ever given to a woman to make Unbroken – and Donna’s very smart move paid off very well for Universal.
Some of the comments are exactly what I expected the minute the story was posted. SADLY Not surprised..
That’s just Angelina haters come to force.
As you and many others have pointed out about the hypocrisy about other actors and even actresses turned directors never received this kind of verbal assault from people.
Why do you assume that anyone who says something in any way critical of her directorial abilities is a hater? I have not seen any evidence in the various posters’ comments that people are being critical because she is Angeline Jolie.
@Sunny D I don’t mind unbiased constructive criticism. But let’s be honest, see comment #8. Her personal life has nothing to do with her directing skills.
@sunny…
When you see the same names on every thread about her being negative.. that is a bit of a clue; one that is hard to deny.
I adore Angelina. I just hate when actors reach a point in their career,after making and commanding millions, start to bemoan the field.
There are millions of hope full talented people who never make it in this field.
And it’s disrespectful to the actors who worked in the field for years who make a decent living but not paid their worth.
If its so bad stick to independent indie movies and put the millions made into indie directors just starting out in the business. Fund indie scripts. Go to all the film school and look for young talent to mentor.
Oh, please. Such hyperbole. Just because someone thinks AJ basically sucks as a director doesn’t mean they hate her. You are making a huge leap there and seem so silly defending someone you don’t know and who would walk over your dead body.
Well said! People are so sexist and misogynistic, and it’s worse when it is from other women.
If Affleck can do it & get praised out the butt for doing a mediocre (& inaccurate) film like Argo, go for it Angie. Even though she is younger she has better acting “credentials” than BA or Mel G, but she is a GIRL, so she MUST be trashed. Maybe if Angie had Gigli on her resume she might get more respect- THAT’S a credential.
Jack of all trades master of none came to mind reading the article. She seems to want it all. just my opinion people.
when did wanting it all become a crime.
she wants to be a Director.. she is a director. I think she is doing just fine.
Its not a crime Lisa. I’ve as yet not seen any work of hers in the film industry where I think theres real talent. And she’s had plenty of opportunity. Maybe she’ll surprise me one day. She has the means….go for it!
Fireball , that’s funny you say that because A LOT of critics disagree with you. Those are then people we should listen to and judge movies based on sir critiques, no? Most critics always name Angelina as the best part of any movie she’s been in. When famous critic Pauline kale (spelling?) watched her in girl interrupted she compared her to marlin brando. But I guess fireball is right.
@LMAO, that is a slippery slope you’re on right now, saying that we should listen to what critics say. If that’s the case, Angie’s directing is definitely unimpressive since her 2 feature films so far didn’t get good reviews. I love Angie, but people are allowed to think she’s not great at directing yet, and even not love her acting.
I’m excited/nervous for By The Sea, crossing my fingers for it to be good. I would love to see Angelina prove herself as a good director and find a distinct voice that she hasn’t found yet.
This was a nice piece. The only part I wasnt a fan of is her saying that she mainly just wants to do films about world issues and humanitarian causes and ‘important’ things. I fear that she gets too caught up in sendinga message and loses the creative filmmaking aspect. Also, I like when actors/directors mix it up with some lighthearted things. We’ll see though.
You are kind of ignoring the fact that Affleck already had an Oscar for screenwriting before he started to direct.
For those crying sexism, the only recently active actor turned directors I find interesting are Sarah Polley, Richard Ayoade and Sofia Coppola. Gary Oldman’s Nil By Mouth is exceptional and I could see JGL eventually becoming very good if directing is something he really pursues.
Otherwise I just see hacks (Gibson, Howard, Costner, Eastwood) and a lot of mediocrity. Beatty was quite good (Dick Tracy was a disaster, but there were a lot of good/interesting directing choices hidden in the mess). Clooney has more of an eye than most, if he fully commits to directing as he gets older he may have a classic in him, but right now he’s over-indulgent and could choose better projects. Redford’s ok. Affleck’s serviceable but his real skill is picking the right projects. His Batman movie will be a good test of whether his directing holds up well. Penn is mediocre, Branaugh has become exceptionally mediocre. Russell Crowe’s recent effort literally put me to sleep. Kevin Spacey, Marlon Brando and Johnny Depp’s attempts were rightly savaged. Chris Evans is getting bad reviews right now.
It’s not a case of the men try directing and get plaudits while the women are dragged down. Most male actors turned directors have made at least one bad film and a couple of really average ones, and they’ve gotten their share of scathing reviews. A lot have made one bad film and never dared to make another. In the current era, none stand out as truly great directors.
Is it sexism or is it the fact that Angelina is with Brad Pitt- the man of many Angelina haters dreams? I think it’s a bit of both. I believe many people who are “hating” on her for wanting to learn directing skills, hate her because she seems to have it all & they really hate the fact that she has Brad Pitt. She can’t want to be a director because if she puts her mind to it she will accomplish her goal. If it’s any consolation I’m sure Brad cheats on her left and right and Judging by how she said she brought out the aggression in him during filming – he’s not perfect.
on the other hand some of it is sexism of angelinasim when they judge a movie before or without viewing it.even a critic was called out for critquing unbroken WITHOUT WATCHING THE MOVIE. I’m not sure what you would call that.
on the other hand some of it is sexism of angelinasim when they judge a movie before or without viewing it.even a critic was called out for critquing unbroken WITHOUT WATCHING THE MOVIE. I’m not sure what you would call that.
Doth protest way too much. There were legit outlets like who were saying she has a good chance for a Best Director and Best Film Oscar months before screenings. This was picked out by many gossips too and fans (on CB) alike. The hype was so high that people were shocked she didn’t even get one nom. Then fans bemoaned the hype when the reviews weren’t bad but not good either crying sexism and ‘hating on Angie’ when they themselves couldn’t wait to label the film as ‘great’ when not even out yet.
Criticism isn’t always negative. If you can’t take the bad then don’t use the good either but people love to cherry pick when it comes to Jolie. Most of the critique isn’t even bad, a lot of people are rooting for her (fans and critics). It’s sad that they are pressed like a panini because her mediocre talent isn’t praised to the high heavens and that she isn’t universally loved 24/7 . Maybe the critique is fair when you look at her directing efforts?
I think it’s sexism to say that people who don’t like AJ’s acting and directing are sexist – as if we women can only like or dislike another woman based on who she is sleeping with. It’s saying we are too shallow to see if the woman has talent.
I like your picks of interesting actor turned directors and I’m glad you cited Nil by mouth. Given your taste , check The war zone by Tim Roth. I’d like him to give another go at directing.
Sean Penn gets a pass for me in the directing department for the simple fact he let us admire Viggo Mortensen in hall his glory in The Indian Runner.
@ Kate I agree with you. In my opinion Angelina isn’t criticized as a director because she is a woman, it is simply because her directing skills aren’t outstanding. And that is not surprising, because – as you are pointing out – there are very FEW actors turned directors who are outstanding, it is just very rare. I do think the criticism of Angelina attracts attention because she herself attracts a lot of attention, and always has. In fact, one of her biggest talents – and also a big reason for her succes – is the way she has marketed herself as a star and that is not meant in a derogatory way. In fact it is a rare talent as well.
Speaking of By The Sea, it wasn’t among the announced TIFF titles today. More will be announced in the coming weeks, but most major ones should’ve been announced today. Tomorrow is the Venice festival lineup and hopefully it’ll be there. Otherwise, it seems like they’re hiding the film, and that’s never a good idea unless you really aren’t confident in it in terms of reviews
Universal other films Everest, Steve Jobs weren’t announced either so who knows.
Steve Jobs and Everest were both confirmed previously for other festivals though. By the Sea is the odd one out right now.
So if it doesn’t do a festival it is being hidden..
Most films go the festival route to create interest and buzz. I don’t think By the Sea needs that. There is interest because of the stars.
Thats not a good strategy if that’s what they’re doing. Angelina won’t have much time to promote in November she’ll be busy with preproduction and then beginning to film. And yes, keeping the film from being seen until it’s released is the definition of ‘hiding’ the movie from being viewed. For what reason I can only guess at but I would think that they would want to show off the film, and especially considering the situation with this Cambodia movie starting production in November, I can’t really think of a good reason why they wouldn’t want to. Movies with big stars are shown at film festivals all the time, including Brad and Angie’s other movies. I’m not trying to ‘attack’ anybody here, but I don’t really understand what they’re doing.
Most movies do heavy promotion the month before (magazine covers, etc). Interviews are maybe a week before or during the week of the release. Angelina said last year during an interview, how she loves to schedule everything. She’s a huge planner. I’m sure she and Brad have their schedules worked out. I don’t see them as hiding it if they aren’t at the festivals. Angie keeps implying that this is going to be a small intimate film. It probably doesn’t even have a huge production budget. They will promote it, but I don’t see them being here there and everywhere to do so. Maybe they’ll prove me wrong. Who knows 🙂
@Paige that’s my point. A small intimate film is exactly the type of film that would benefit from a festival showing. And if they were trying to create buzz based on the stars then they would need to be promoting it/themselves more than it seems like they’re going to. I would’ve thought they would’ve just had a festival screening, do the one press conference for it, and that’s that. It just seems weird not to show at a festival what seems like such a festival type movie. It doesn’t make any sense to me, but what do I know I guess.
“the film might have been better served by a director who knew enough to make some bolder edits to the story ”
Universal cut the movie. They declined to use her cut, which is said to be a lot darker and blatantly anti-war. With a family-friendly Christmas release date, Universal balked at her anti-war message and the violence in the film (would have been R for sure), and cut it to play to the faith-based crowd. I don’t think you can lay the editing faults at her door, since all of that happened over her head.
As a lover of certain kinds of art films, such as La Notte, I’m really looking forward to By the Sea – and really kind of dreading “Africa.”
I don’t get why first time/new directors take on these massive projects. Why not start small (most of the smart actor directors do this), with something less daunting and where you have more creative control. I get that she’s ambitious and wants to tell important stories, but you need to know your limits. Most directors learn to direct on the job in some ways, but they have studied technical aspects of directing in depth which actors merely observe and decide “That looks easy, I can do that!” Don’t get me wrong, some actors do have a natural talent for directing, but many of them are smart enough to start small, doing t.v. episodes and what not, and building towards film once they have some solid experience. And I find the whole “Acting is so unfulfilling now I’m a director” just typical luvvie b.s. You wouldn’t be a director at all if you weren’t a successful actor, something many peope strive for their whole lives and never achieve – stop being so entitled all the time stupid Hollywood brats.
So odd because I thought from the reviews that Unbroken wouldn’t be good but I actually thought it was pretty good. That movie made me realize how lucky I have it and I was just in awe of all the crap Louie delt with in his life.
I wholeheartedly agree with Kaiser. I am the kind of fan that always wants Angie to succeed but I can’t pretend either. I gave my opinion about Unbroken and then I shut up. I wont harp on but I wont join any choruses of false praise either. I hope By The Sea is something I can get behind and I also hope I see something special in the acting vein.
It’s so good to know there are other Angie fans out there like me who don’t automatically believe that everything she does is beyond reproach. The obsession some have with “haters” is frankly stupid. I honestly do not believe By The Sea will be any good even though I will see it. The movie will be opening in November but she’ll already be filming in Cambodia. Her modus operandi seems to be let me get my next film in the can before critics eviscerate my last one. I think she has too much going on in her life to be a credible director. It requires a single minded focus that I don’t think she has in her life. I wonder if she has someone else other than Brad that she uses as a sounding board. I sincerely hope so.
Count me in on that. I think she has a ways to go in terms of directing (though her desire to work hard and learn is very admirable). I am still waiting for more information, a trailer, something before I really form an opinion about how I think BTS will be, but there are certain things that are making me lose confidence such as the lack of festival announcements I talked about above and the way she talks about the film in this interview doesn’t exactly scream enthusiasm and confidence to me- maybe that part is just me. Just as I think that many have jumped the gun on this film being bad, I also think fans are ready with their excuses as to why the film won’t be tecieved well. That critics hate Angie etc. but I don’t think they do. Usually, her performances are praised in everything. It’s just the actual films she’s in that they don’t like. Basically, I think everyone needs to wait and see
To be a good director, you have to be a student of film, which AJ doesn’t seem to have had much interest in. And you have to understand story: plot, suspense, conflict, when to bring the aspects into the story, when to hold back. I don’t get the impression AJ was a great student of books either. And I mean good books, not crappy books.
She has been given the opportunity to direct because she is famous and rich, even using her own money, not because she has paid her dues in directing, starting as an assistant, and moving up. Yes, other actors have done the same, and some have been good and others bad. Reviews suggest AJ is mediocre at best. And please – her comment about having to be passionate about something when you spend two years on it – she’s approaching Goop territory here. Most of us go to work every day to pay the bills and have to live our passions in minutes, when we have all the hard stuff down. Really pretty clueless.
I know, I must hate her, be sexist, want to have sex with Brad Pitt (who is dirty and really gross nowadays, Yeech. Take a shower, wash your hair, Brad) because I don’t fall down and worship her. But it’s sexist to suggest I don’t like her work because I’m jealous – perhaps I’m an intelligent and thinking person who just finds her unimpressive. Nothing sexist about that. I find lots of men unimpressive also. 🙂 I think she should keep directing if she loves it but work smaller. Tell interesting, small stories, about people, not sweeping issues, stories like “The Bridges of Madison County,” get the best actors she can find. Learn the craft from the best, maybe assist a great director. That’s what I would do.
One million likes!
The reason why you come across as a ‘sexist hater’ is because the vast overwhelming majority of MALE directors are not students of film, either. At least AJ actually did some studies in film directing, most directors don’t.
If she doesn’t love acting then why does she do it. She makes this stupid quotes about wanting to quit for good and only direct for many years now and has still yet to follow through on that. Just stop commenting if you aren’t going to do it.
Sorry, wrong place.,
I haven’t seen the films she’s directed, so I can’t speak on her skills. I think it’s great to have a high profile female take on directing, but the amount of attention given to her because of her celebrity has to be to be frustrating to other directors trying to break out in the industry. I doubt many others have 2 released films (including one that was barely seen) and get a lengthy DGA magazine interview to discuss their upcoming projects.