Cate Blanchett in Maison Margiela at the Rome Film Festival: fun drama?

13th Rome Film Fest - The House With A Clock In Its Walls - Premiere

Did you know that Cate Blanchett made a movie with Jack Black? For some reason, I want to believe that they had a ball together as they worked on The House with a Clock In Its Walls. That’s the film Cate was promoting in Rome late last week, at that Rome Film Festival. The movie has been out in America for weeks, but this was likely part of the European promotion for the film. Cate seems like the only one from The House with a Clock in Its Walls sent to Rome on promotion? She was probably there as part of her Armani contract too, although she did not actually wear Armani. Huh.

For the premiere, Cate wore this Maison Margiela gown, designed by John Galliano. Cate is an old-school fan of and believer in Galliano, and she stuck with him even when he was run out of Dior for his drunken hate speech. Say what you will about Galliano, but the man can still design the crap out of some couture. This gown is such DRAMA. I love it. I always love fashion more at the Rome Film Festival, for what it’s worth – the red carpet in Rome always makes clothes look more dramatic and enchanting. I’m also including photos of Cate at the photocall, wearing an Acne suit which is super-unflattering. Satin pleated pants, ick.

When in Rome, Cate was whether, at this point, straight actors need to stop playing LGBTQ roles in film and television. Cate thinks it’s fine:

“I will fight to the death for the right to suspend disbelief and play roles beyond my experience. Reality television and all that that entails had an extraordinary impact, a profound impact on the way we view the creation of character. I think it provides a lot of opportunity, but the downside of it is that we now, particularly in America, we expect and only expect people to make a profound connection to a character when it’s close to their experience.”

[From BBC]

I don’t think Cate’s argument is bad, per se – people should be able to suspend disbelief, and many people do suspend disbelief. But along with that comes the difficult realization that there are those in the audience who only find gay characters palatable or acceptable if the audience believes that it’s just a straight actor “pretending.” Not to mention the fact that no openly gay actor has ever won an Oscar for an acting performance. Suspension of disbelief or ingrained homophobia?

Anyway, here’s the trailer for Cate’s silly new movie:

13th Rome Film Fest - The House With A Clock In Its Walls - Premiere

13th Rome Film Fest

Photos courtesy of WENN.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

28 Responses to “Cate Blanchett in Maison Margiela at the Rome Film Festival: fun drama?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Maya says:

    This gorgeous woman never ages.

  2. Sydneygirl says:

    She’s got a point – actors ACT. I’m all for inclusiveness but lets not forget their actual job is creating stories that usually have nothing to do with their everyday lives , otherwise yeah its reality tv.

    • Betsy says:

      I would agree if Asian (Emma Stone) trans (Jared Leto) and openly gay (is it Jack Black in this movie?) got hired for other roles instead. They just don’t do get jobs or representation very much.

      • SM says:

        I agree with @Sydneygirl and with regards to the lack of representation overall, why lot talk about that and about the capable gay, asian, latino actors rather that “give gay roles to gays” it is disrespectful to them.

    • Alice says:

      Agree. As a performer, I don’t understand the concept of playing who you are (simplified for clarity). Acting is exactly the opposite. A good actor is called such for their ability to perform a role in such a way that the audience gets lost in the image not in the actor’s reality. The actor’s real self should not have any presence whatsoever. I object the attempts to enforce such so called inclusivity. This is not what the art of performing is about and this is not the right field. We perform. Pretend.

      • OriginalLala says:

        You’re all missing the point. It’s not about an actor’s ability to act, it’s about the fact that LGBTQ actors are only ever allowed/offered to play LGBTQ roles so yes there is pushback that cis actors shouldn’t take those roles. If Hollywood offered LGBTQ actors the same chances and roles as cis actors, we likely would not be having this conversation to the same degree

    • Mia4s says:

      It’s an argument that only works in a perfect world though. Ideally it should just be about acting, but the reality is LGBTQ and minority actors are not getting the same opportunities…and then straight white actors are also taking the opportunities they might have had.

      For example the controversy over Scarlett Johansson wanting to play a trans woman. I’d have no problem with it…if trans women were also up for roles like Black Widow, or as the starlet in Hail Caser. But they’re not. It’s not even that they auditioned for those roles too and Scarlet was the “best choice”. They’re not getting the audition, they’re not on the long list…hell they’re not on any list.

      • Marty says:

        Thank you! Cate’s argument only works in theory, and it is a theory because it sure as hell isn’t put into practice depending on your race and sexual orientation.

      • BB says:

        This. When the Scar Jo/transgender character thing went down I kept seeing people on Twitter ask why no one was upset that Cate Blanchett played Bob Dylan. Men are not at a disadvantage when it comes to booking roles. It’s not the same thing. I still don’t know if those people truly didn’t understand the difference or if they were just being intentionally obtuse.

  3. OriginalLala says:

    Her argument makes sense only if you don’t think about the fact that actors of colour and LGBTQ actors aren’t offered the same chances as white cis actors and often the only roles open to them are the few roles that reflect their specific experiences. For me anyways, it’s less about the acting per se and more about the representation because until all actors get the same offers as white cis actors, then no I disagree with Cate.

    • Clare says:

      I think a good example of this is the push back against the possibility of a black James Bond. Apparently it would go against the (fictional) character who was originally written as being white.

      If minorities (whether it be race, gender, whatever) can’t play characters that have been ‘originally’ imagined, then why are we being asked to shut up and accept members of the majority taking the FEW roles that exist for minorities to play?

  4. Maum says:

    Not very keen on the boob fan.

    Love the suit though.

  5. Londerland says:

    FFS, I love Cate but she totally misses the point – nobody is saying that actors can’t play roles that are beyond their own experience. The point is firstly that LGBTQ actors have long been pigeonholed and their roles limited (“I can’t buy this guy as a romantic hero, he’s gay” “I can’t buy this woman as a cis-het character, everyone knows she’s trans” as nauseam) so they simply don’t get the same opportunities as cis-het actors.

    Secondly, they then have to watch as countless cis-het actors rack up praise and awards and are garlanded for their bravery for playing LGBTQ characters, often veering into uninformed cliche and cheesy misperceptions because nobody even bothered to run the screenplay by any actual LGBTQ people.

    So, it’s okay to profit off the pathos of their experience, but actually employing them? Paying them for their valuable artistic and cultural contribution? Nah. Let Eddie Redmayne do it.

  6. Queenb says:

    Cate seriously. You got away with most of your dumb comments about Woody Allen. Kate Winslet shouldered most of the criticism. Just be happy about that and be grateful you got away with it. Dont make it even worse and remind people about your problematic opinions.

  7. Lala11_7 says:

    That argument will hold water for me as soon as I see gay/trans/minority folks getting a good amount of parts on the screen…behind the screen…etc….

    Until then…

    HECKY NAW!!!!

    And btw…when I hear the “default” code make this argument…I get a bit LIVID!!!! And Gawddess Cate (who I must admit…stock has fallen in my portfolio and THIS does not help) ain’t exempt from that stance

  8. Tanguerita says:

    I always wonder if these seemingly intelligent entitled white people like Blanchett are stupid on purpose or just plainly stupid? It’s almost painfully obvious the problem is so much bigger than acting.

  9. Steff says:

    I wish the argument was geared toward how queer actors don’t get jobs as straight people because they are out and the powers that be believe people will have a harder time viewing them as straight (just ask mansplainer extraordinaire Matt Damon), whereas it’s no issue for straight actors to play queer people. And that reality tv comment was a reach.

  10. Darla says:

    Her stupidity has completely ruined her for me.

    And look, here’s more of it. Zip it Cate.

    • Raven says:

      I don’t think its her stupidity, I think she honestly doesn’t care. The problems that the LGBT community and minorities face dose not effect her so she looks the other way. Just like Polanski and Woddy Allen both being child molesters didn’t/dosen’t effect her personally which is why she’s able to defend them and continues to work with them.

      Cate is happy to live inside of her little bubble and and doesn’t wish venture outside of it.

  11. Who ARE these people? says:

    Galliano said he loved Hitler and Jews should be gassed. It wasn’t the booze that put that into him, the same way the booze didn’t put it into Mel Gibson. Blanchett gets away with poor choices. Her support makes money for Galliano and sends the message that hate speech is acceptable. There are other talents out there but she doesn’t care. She wants the pretty dresses.

    I agree about the problem with shutting actors out of roles, too.

    She seems oblivious.

  12. Hikaru says:

    “there are those in the audience who only find gay characters palatable or acceptable if the audience believes that it’s just a straight actor “pretending”…

    And there are those who want gay actors to avoid gay roles because when an out gay person wants to play gay that’s “too gay” and “rubbing their gayness in our face”.

  13. Ren says:

    it should go both ways. Openly gay actors should be playing straight roles more and get credit for it. We need more Luke Evanses and more Neil Patrick Harrises 🙂

  14. JanetDR says:

    On a totally different topic, that was a very favorite book of mine, I recall it being very scary, but it’s been years. Dashing off to my young adult bookshelves to remedy that!