kfw, on 08 April 2011 - 06:12 AM, said:
dirac, on 07 April 2011 - 03:58 PM, said:
I’m not sure what part of the “double” concept Sarah Lane doesn’t understand and I’m sorry she didn’t receive the degree of personal publicity she believes was her due, but I’m inclined to agree with abatt.
I haven't seen her ask for personal publicity, I've seen her object to her work being credited to Portman. It's one thing to agree to work behind the scenes so to speak. It's another to stay silent while people say you really didn't do very much work.
I think it goes even further than that. Natalie Portman won an oscar for her portrayal of a ballet dancer. A portrayal which included - in case anyone missed it - (the idea of) a magical transformation from standard issue 'pretty Hollywood actress' to the 'amazing ballet dancing pretty Hollywood actress'. At least it did in the (non ballet going) general public's perception. That transformation (however vaguely or not so vaguely insinuated) was, whether Portman and co admit it or not, a part of the magical appeal of the movie and it presumably helped (certainly didn't harm) her to get the Oscar. Or if she was going to get the oscar for it anyway
(I now, I know ... how cynical of me!) the backstory of 'becoming a ballet dancer' certainly helped to justify that award decision.
Maybe it doesn't matter that Sarah Lane danced all the dancing scenes and she should stop making such a fuss over it ... but if it really doesn't make any difference then why
didn't they credit Sarah Lane a bit more, why
didn't Natalie Portman acknowledge her existence and thank her for her contribution when accepting the award (after all, the Oscar was
for her acting only and not for Sarah's dancing, right?), why
did the FX company re-edit the FX reel to remove all the head swapping CGI techniques used, why
was Sarah Lane asked not to do interviews, and why
Natalie's refusal (in the video linked a few comments up) even now to just acknowledge Sarah's actual contribution, and why
the need for so much evading of the truth, resorting to that horrible kind of 'talking-randomly-with-an-air-of-sincerity-until-you-figure-everyone-has-forgotten-what-the-actual-question-was' speak which is so popular amongst sleazy politicians?
It seems clear that somehow
an illusion was created about Natalie's dancing contribution - not just in the movie but outside
of it too. And now that Sarah is coming forward and dispelling that illusion a bit by being truthful (which seems fair enough), they seem to be creating yet another illusion; this time of a crazy, hysterical, attention seeking, jealous, unprofessional dancer trying to 'spoil the show' (or similar phrase!) of a fellow artist just because she won an Oscar. Sour grapes and all that. Calling it a 'Ballet Battle' only reinforce that illusion and allows Portman's evasion of the truth to come across as justified dismissal of such amateurish whinging.
That's my assessment anyway FWIW!
Hollywood is a machine and it runs on and for money. The media and Hollywood are intimately linked and have a symbiotic relationship. One will always prop up the other. Always.
Therefore kudos (and extra bonus kudos) to Sarah for setting the record straight in such a dignified and professional way in the face of all of that.
As a side note, it's fascinating to see how the internet is something which definitely can
now compete with the Hollywood/ media PR machine. I predict the internet will continue to dispel many more myths and carefully crafted illusions regarding Hollywood in the future. I mean big shocking ones. The kind that will leave people stunned! We shall see.....
As for Portman and Lane, there is one way this whole epic saga
can be resolved once and for all.
A dance off of course!