Les Misérables *½

Director: Tom Hooper
Cast: Hugh Jackman, Russell Crowe, Anne Hathaway
Amanda Seyfried, Eddie Redmayne, Helena Bonham Carter, Sacha Baron Cohen
Samantha Barks, Aaron Tveit

Based on the eponymous musical by Alain Boublil and Claude-Michel Schönberg (itself an adaptation of the famous novel by Victor Hugo) Les Misérables is a story about revenge, injustice and doomed love...or at least that's what one gathers it's supposed to be about, considering how bloated and lacking in feeling this adaptation is. The film opens with an impressive shot as the camera rises from under the ocean and we watch a group of prisoners raise a ship in the galleys. Among them is Jean Valjean (Jackman), a man about to be released who has been in prison for two decades for stealing a loaf of bread. Keeping a close eye on Valjean is inspector Javert (Crowe) who reminds him he must respect his parole. Immediately a dynamic of abuser and abused is established and we know that Javert will make Valjean's life a living hell.

Yet the problem is that we know this only by default. Les Misérables is one of the most celebrated works of literature in history and people from all ages have come to know it even if they're not fully aware of it (The Fugitive anyone?) but director Tom Hooper depends so much on the audience's knowledge of the novel/musical that he pretty much forgets to make a "movie" to go with the story. Before we know it, we're back with a clean shaven Valjean who has changed his name and become mayor of a small town (how? Why? We never know). His peaceful existence is suddenly threatened when Javert is appointed as guard in his town. This Roadrunner/Coyote dynamic goes on during the rest of the film as life keeps putting Javert in the reformed Valjean's way even when he's trying to do nothing but good. Among his greatest deeds is the adoption of Cosette, the daughter of doomed grisette Fantine (Hathaway), perhaps the most miserable of them all, who dies after selling her hair, contracting an unnamed disease (*cough* TB *cough*) and killing it with a rendition of "I Dreamed a Dream".

The plot spans over two decades and clumsily tries to fit a ridiculous amount of uninteresting events into its overtly melodramatic structure, yet the problem isn't how over the top everything is but how inefficiently Hooper puts it on film. The film is supposed to be grand, sweeping, majestic etc. but the myriad of topics covered in Victor Hugo's historical fiction simply slip through Hooper's fingers. Les Misérables is an epic and simply put, Tom Hooper is no David Lean. He makes it seem as if the historical context exists exclusively in the service of the romantic plots and the Valjean/Javert dynamic. Things just happen and we never truly understand why. But he also fails in giving all these characters a true emotional background. They too, exist there only to serve the director's vision.

Hooper and DP Danny Cohen shoot every scene as if it was being viewed through a smartphone picture application, creating distasteful compositions that contribute nothing more than "style" to a movie that should've been ruled by substance. If the songs weren't loud and dramatic enough, Hooper's camera zooms so close to the actors' faces that it seems he's trying to make a statement about their tonsils. His stylistic choices (why try to develop an auteur vision if it's so inefficient?) often take you out of the movie and you begin to question everything that surrounds it. Why don't characters seem to age if it's been 20 years? Why are Sacha Baron Cohen and Helena Bonham Carter still playing their Sweeney Todd characters? Why does Éponine seem to have been written to be the heroine in a telenovela? Why isn't Russell Crowe's fantastic Javert (the only character who seems to have a moral ambiguity) featured in more scenes where he's not being reduced to a sneering villain?

Les Misérables is sure to make viewers just as miserable as its characters, unless they're willing to pretend the movie's over after "I Dreamed a Dream". During the key sequence Hathaway is shot like Falconetti and she does so much with her face and your emotions, that her work should be considered nothing if not truly miraculous.

I Bet You Like to Walk in the Rain.

Don't you hate it when you're rooting for your movie heroine to pick the guy she'll obviously never pick? This happens to me mostly in musicals. I always yearn for Eliza to pick the lovely Freddy over the obnoxious Professor Higgins, for Giselle to pick Prince Edward over the dull Robert and for Maria to pick God over the Captain.

By the fifth time you've seen these movies you get used to the plot remaining the same, but few times do I cross my fingers hoping that this will change, as much as I do during Easter Parade. Why on earth can't freaking Hannah (Judy Garland) realize that Johnny (Peter Lawford) is so much better than Don (Fred Astaire)? Not only is he less of a sadistic co-worker, he's also not as much a misogynist as Don. 

Have you realized how women in musicals tend to have a thing for men they would oppose in social feminist dramas?

Don might dance better and sing better, but he does not inject Hannah with the same kind of life Johnny does. This is especially obvious during the scene in which they meet:

The worried young man sees a damsel in distress and literally dances in the rain to protect her.

If the Technicolor in this movie wasn't gorgeous enough, Johnny finds a lemony yellow umbrella (whatever happened to subdued black?).

As they walk under the rain the clever young man is able to figure out who this woman is by asking key questions. Completely taken aback by his insistence, Hannah asks "Yeah but you haven't told me a thing about yourself", which leads to the response which provides my favorite shot in the movie: 

"I'm just a fella, a fella with an umbrella"

I'm sorry but Fred Astaire never gets that smile out of Judy at any other point during the movie. This shot is perfect not only because it highlights that Garland magic we've all learned to worship but also because it shows the way in which studios were in complete control of everything that happened onscreen. The beauty of classic musicals is how they are always able to suspend our disbelief. Nowadays nobody would believe that a man who saves you from getting wet and curiously matches your outfit isn't a stalker. In the movies, it doesn't matter. This crazy array of coincidence makes for something our ancestors knew as "romance".

The way in which the strings swell, Lawford's voice comes out and Judy reacts with such joy makes for a scene that rivals much more famous musical numbers in the canon.

 Of course, Judy ends up revealing she loves someone else later but "Fella with an Umbrella" will be the song you'll find yourself humming for weeks to come.

This is part of Nathaniel's "Hit Me With Your Best Shot" series, go read the other fabulous entries here!

While Watching "The Harvey Girls"...

...I realized I'm always surprised when I realize Angela Lansbury was young at some point in life.
I always think of her as being old.

A Woman's Right to Shoes.

Given the strain under which fashion culture has been placed lately I couldn't help but wonder if people have always been so critical of clothes and accessories.

My first thought took me to one of my favorite films, for what is The Wizard of Oz if not a feminist stance on a woman's right to shoes?


When we first meet Dorothy Gale (Judy Garland) she's a preadolescent living in a sepia Kansas. Her clothing is limited to a simple jumper and white puffy shirt, complete with inconsequential Mary janes.
Threatened by the lack of meaning in her dull life and the menace of her evil neighbor Mrs. Gulch (Margaret Hamilton) she dreams of going to a place over the rainbow, where problems not only melt like lemon drops but she can actually enjoy the color of said fruits.

As we all know, a tornado takes her to the far away land of Oz where she encounters a fierce enemy in the Wicked Witch of the West and the endless possibilities of a Technicolor palette.
The minute she arrives, her view of life is transformed because she has achieved color. Her simple jumper now in pale blue becomes a symbol of serenity and achievement.
Did you know that the color blue is meant to symbolize high ideals?
With this simple color choice we determine that the filmmakers are placing an importance in the way Dorothy looks, in her expression through what she wears.

It's also interesting to point out the fact that for the film, the slippers were changed as well. In the book they are made out of silver but once they are tinted in red for the movie they acquire the properties of what some call the color of life.
Red is supposed to increase energy levels in those who see it while also representing confidence to chase your dreams and protection from fear.

What has lacked in most commentaries on Oz is the notion that Dorothy's struggles also represent a woman's self discovery through fashion.



When Dorothy's house lands on the Wicked Witch of the East, her death doesn't become reality until she's ridden of her powerful ruby slippers.
Notice how her socks shrink only until the good witch Glinda (Billie Burke) magically removes her shoes. Before that moment for all we know she could still lift the house with a magical spell.
With this, the movie isn't validating her life expressly through her footwear but makes a remarkable commentary on the ability of a thing as simple as a shoe to give women means of liberation.

Once I read an article on Vogue in which a woman who hated high heels takes on the enterprise of trying them out to see what she's missing. After an experimental phase she decides heels are still just not the thing for her.
Her views are changed however once she meets a woman who confesses that like her, she could do without the pain of heels but she uses them to reach the same height of her male co-workers at the office.


Judy Garland was quite short and given Dorothy's age, one would also expect her to be lacking in height. But once she puts the slippers on she is on par with her eventual, all male, travel companions.
She may not tower over them but she's practically their equal and instead of being seen as a meek figure, it's Dorothy herself who becomes their protector.

And that's without even mentioning the fact that the slippers have magical powers.

Then again, what is magic if not the ability to transform the ordinary into the extraordinary?
A woman's shoes may not have the power to transport her to other worlds or grant her wicked witch exterminating skills but they are much more than means of protecting your feet.

I'm sure when Dorothy woke up back in Kansas, she grabbed the first bus to the city and made her way to a department store to get her first pair of heels.



This post is part of the musical blog-a-thon hosted by the awesome Andrew of Encore's World of Film & TV.

She Said It Better Than Anyone.

May you all have a fantastic Christmas.

Song Time.

A few years during the Oscars there was a special performance featuring some of the winners in the Best Song category.
I was more than surprised to realize that some of the most beloved English songs of all time actually came from the movies. Some of these songs have survived time even when the films they were featured in are practically forgotten. Watching "Swing Time" I remembered this all over when Fred Astaire sits to play the piano and the lovely "The Way You Look Tonight" comes out of his mouth.
The first time I remember hearing, and instantly falling in love with this song, was in "My Best Friend's Wedding" when I was eleven years old. And even though this post could steer into "Songs from movies featured prominently in other movies" (I'm looking at you "Ghost"), for now I'll just concentrate on the Oscar winning songs.
While it's true that Fred Astaire wasn't the best singer ever (neither was Gene Kelly), his performance has something extra; a little bit of melancholy and innocence that make the song feel more available to everyone who wants it.
We know not everyone can be Sinatra and his performances sometimes are better left off to be seen and heard, but with Astaire you wanna join him and sing.
That must be the reason why "The Way You Look Tonight" ended up winning the Oscar in 1936.
Here are some other songs I was stunned to discover came from films:
"I've Got You Under My Skin" from "Born to Dance" (1936)
"They Can't Take That Away From Me" from "Shall We Dance" (1937)
"The Last Time I Saw Paris" from "Lady Be Good" (1941)
"That Old Black Magic" from "Star Spangled Rhythm" (1943)
"Long Ago and Far Away" from "Cover Girl" (1944)
"I Fall In Love Too Easily" from "Anchors Aweigh" (1945)
"Mona Lisa" from "Captain Carey, U.S.A" (1950)
"A Kiss to Build a Dream On" from "The Strip" (1951)
"That's Amore" from "The Caddy" (1953)
"Unchained Meoldy" from "Unchained" (1955)
"Whatever Will Be, Will Be (Que Será Será) from "The Man Who Knew Too Much" (1956)
"All the Way" from "The Joker is Wild" (1957)
"The Look of Love" from "Casino Royale" (1967)
"Say You Say Me" from "White Nights" (1985)
"Nothing's Gonna Stop Us Now" from "Mannequin" (1987)

How long has it been since a song from the movies made it big?

- This post is part of "Musical of the Month" hosted by Nathaniel Rogers of "The Film Experience".

"...if the wizard is a wizard who will serve."

"The prettiest cab driver I've ever seen".

Fella With an Umbrella.

Another Reason Why I Love Musicals.

Despite being highly discriminated against nowadays, they are the most inclusive of film styles, as seen in this picture from "The Band Wagon" where they do film noir.

The Moment He Saw Her Smile...

From Liz and Richard to Russell and Meg, people making movies and falling in love is as common as their eventual separations.
One of the most well known film to real life romances was Vincente Minnelli falling for Judy Garland while he directed her in "Meet Me in St. Louis". It's funny now considering the fact that Judy tried hard not to make the movie (she wanted adult roles), Minnelli eventually convinced her and the rest as they say is history.
The musical became one of the most beloved examples of classic Hollywood and a huge moneymaker back in the day (as well as perhaps the first completely modern film musical, but that's another story). In one of the interviews included in the DVD, the legendary Liza Minnelli expresses how you can see her dad falling for her mom throughout the film because of the way she is photographed.
And it is actually true; watching her specifically you realize it's more than mere Golden Age beautifying, sometimes the camera seems to caress Judy's face (she never looked more beautiful in any of her other films) and he, always, frames her (even using her hands as means of framing) as if trying to grasp her essence for a moment (as proved in the following pictures).
When she performs "The Boy Next Door", her Esther wasn't the only one sighing, apparently Vincente came to direct a movie and lost his heart instead.



- This post is part of "Musical of the Month" hosted by Nathaniel Rogers of "The Film Experience".

Anything they can do...

Citizen Slade.

"It doesn't matter what a man does with his life, what matters is the legend that grows up around him"
Curt Wild (Ewan McGregor) in "Velvet Goldmine".

If someone had told Orson Welles in 1941 that his "Citizen Kane" would be remade more than half a century later as an ode to glam rock, he probably wouldn't have believed it...or he would've loved the idea and endorsed it completely.
Todd Haynes' "Velvet Goldmine" is supposed to share only the narrative structure with Welles' masterpiece, but on a closer look, the film is a precise dissection of what many consider to be the greatest film ever made.
While the tag of tribute, reinterpretation or copy is subjective, truth of the matter is that Haynes owes to "Kane" much more than a backbone; and the beauty of "Goldmine" lies not only in watching how he touches a holy grail, but how his views reexamine the classic film and even help us watch it with different eyes as he "dares" to question Welles' choices.
"Kane" was written by Herman J. Mankiewicz and Welles after Mankiewicz came up with the idea of telling the life of a public figure through the eyes of those who knew him as opposed to traditional, chronological biographies.
They settled on media mogul William Randolph Hearst who for the screenplay became Charles Foster Kane: tycoon, womanizer, debaucher, greedy, insecure and madly ambitious.
The film, which begins with Kane's death, follows a reporter as he interviews people from his past including his former business manager (Joseph Cotten), his ex-wife (Dorothy Comingore) and some of his advisors in order to discover what his last words meant.
"Velvet Goldmine" also begins with a death, that of glam rocker Brian Slade, who at the height of his popularity stages his own demise, a fake one, but a death nevertheless (Although technically the film begins with Haynes introducing the idea that an other worldly Oscar Wilde was the first glam rocker).
Reporter Arthur Stewart (Christian Bale) is sent a decade later to investigate whatever happened to him after that event by interviewing people from his life, including his former business manager (Eddie Izzard), his ex-wife (Toni Collette) and former glam rock star Curt Wild (Ewan McGregor).
We first learn about Slade through a television show (Kane's life is revealed to us through a newsreel) and then the plot moves backwards as each character reveals a piece of his life.
It's widely known, or at least understood, that Slade is shaped after David Bowie (especially during his Ziggy Stardust era) while Curt is a hybrid between Iggy Pop and Kurt Cobain (think of him as a sensitive streaker).
So the first thing to ask ourselves is if this is a direct comparison between Hearst and Bowie, Kane and Slade, or if Haynes is simply finding equivalents in terms of influential power during different eras.
The individual cases might come off looking shallow, especially because they live up to being similar only in small, random details like the fact that both Kane and Slade marry flashy, trashy girls (who are later interviewed in the same fashion in the remnants of a bar) who have grown to become jaded women.
Neither film tries to hide the identity of the people who inspired them (note how they stress the words American and trailer park when Slade first sees Curt, as if to make clear it can't be other than Iggy), matters which were incendiary in terms of the fact that Hearst tried to destroy every copy of "Citizen Kane" and Bowie asked none of his songs to be featured in the film despite acknowledgment that this was a completely fictionalized version of a period in his life.
If there was nothing of the truth to be found in any of the films why would someone go to the lengths of trying to stop its release? Slade himself endorses activities of the kind when he says "Nothing makes one so vain as being told one is a sinner."
And for the filmmakers what truth was to be found in these stories?
"Kane" was supposedly a revenge against Hearst on part of Mankiewicz (after the tycoon stopped inviting him to his parties), Welles just played along for subversive fun's sake, but nothing in Haynes filmography or biography tells us that he had any special interest in Bowie or Iggy.
Curiously the effect is reversed in the histories of the narrators. The reporter investigating Kane remains anonymous throughout the film, we never even see his face, he's more of a device if anything; while Arthur Stewart not only was a fan of glam rock (fact which seems to embarrass him in the 80's) but was also emotionally involved with the movement so much that one of the film's most haunting scenes has him masturbate to a Brian Slade record cover as if it was a religious experience.
What difference does it make then how much we know about the subject we're investigating about? How do our perceptions and objectivity change when we have any emotional connections to our subject?
For the reporter in Kane, albeit fascinating, the mogul ends up being nothing more than an assignment. For Arthur on the other side, the investigation becomes the completion of a soul search he began decades before.
But in the end it's debatable if the reporters learn more about their subjects or about themselves.
On a stylistic level "Kane" is still unrivaled in terms of technical prowess (the only thing missing in it is CGI, but Welles probably was already machinating something similar in his mind), while "Goldmine" evokes the qualities of 60's and 70's filmmaking.
From Richard Lester to exploitation and quasi documentaries (technique which also proved effective in "Kane"), but perhaps the film is better known for its dazzling musical sequences, which like a loophole into the characters' minds and emotions, threads them to the rest of the narrative.
Watching "Velvet Goldmine" should feel like both the hangover and the drunkenness, its observations on hedonism as fascinated as they are opposed to it.
What's true is that both films concentrate on eras that had gone by, or would soon (Hearst died ten years after "Kane", same time that the characters in "Goldmine" take before they start investigating Slade) and both look at them as if to find relevance with the present and the future.
After all what is "Goldmine" other than a nostalgic take on artistic evolution?
For Haynes it's obvious that some of the best things have already been done and what better way to prove it than to use a classic film as model to talk about an almost vanished music genre?
Another of the issues to explore about "Kane" is how much of Welles was in Charles Foster Kane. From his upbringing to certain tics and specific details about his life, which lead you to ask why would he decide to create a hybrid of himself and someone he obviously didn't like that much?
Haynes isn't as notorious a character as Welles was, but one can guess that he must have put a little of himself into the characters. Then again he has Curt utter the line "a real artist creates beautiful things and puts nothing of his own life into it".
But maybe this is looking too much into things that are better left off as experiences. After all Haynes himself washes his hands, or triggers our imagination, when he quotes Nathan Brown in the fact that "meaning is not in things, but in between them".

- This post is part of "Musical of the Month" hosted by Nathaniel Rogers of "The Film Experience".

Random Prayer.

Please G-d, let this film be as good as these women deserve.

High School Musical 3: Senior Year ***

Director: Kenny Ortega
Cast: Zac Efron, Vanessa Hudgens, Ashley Tisdale, Lucas Grabeel
Corbin Bleu, Monique Coleman, Olesya Rulin, Bart Johnson, Alyson Reed

Following three years of complete media ubiquity "High School Musical" has made it to the silver screen and lo and behold, to the surprise of those unfamiliar with the television films and albums, it makes for a fantastic movie!
Set in East High in Albuquerque, the film jumps straight to the action as we meet or rekindle with Wildcats', the basketball team, captain and school heartthrob/jock Troy (Efron), his girlfriend, the smart, lovable Gabriella (Hudgens) and the rest of the gang including the deliciously wicked diva Sharpay (Tisdale), her brother Ryan (Grabeel), Troy's best friend Chad (Bleu) and the introverted musical composer Kelsi (Rulin) as they approach graduation day.
Most of the plot centers around Troy's decisions regarding his future, as he must choose between his basketball career, following Gabriella or reveal his actual love for performing arts and the possibility of a scholarship at Juilliard.
As all of them face turning point stress, drama teacher Ms. Darbus informs them they will be part of the spring musical which will be based on their experiences as they face the near future.
"We'll call it 'Senior Year'!" she announces, setting the meta mood, which fueled the previous entries in the series and relieves the plot from coming up with an actual musical to be created.
Consequently the musical moments are either inspiration or rehearsal for the final show as well as a sort of show in itself with us as the final audience (who eventually watches the audience watching the show...).
It's like Charlie Kaufman meets Hannah Montana as the explosive, hyper energetic dance and song moments explore teen angst through the eyes of a chaste boy band lyricist.
Being a Disney product the film couldn't be more manufactured and predisposed for massive consume even if it came in a fat free, shiny, plastic wrap.
The songs are catchy but forgettable, the dialogues aren't exactly Shakespeare, yet you can't help but enjoy its sincere need to entertain and even better, not feel as if it should be a guilty pleasure.
Most of this is owed to the cast, especially Efron who, as the reincarnation of Gene Kelly in a boy band member, owns this movie in every single way and perhaps could convince you of anything relying on pure movie star charm.
He is a fantastic dancer and whenever he's onscreen you can not take your eyes off him, if the screenplay wasn't already rooting for him, he'd somehow make his personality win you over.
Grabeel and especially Tisdale often come close to stealing the movie from the star as the Evans siblings.
Gabreel's ability to pull off Ryan's style and personality without recurring to cheap clichés is remarkable. Tisdale on the other side makes an artform out of her bitchy giddiness and in a subplot with a British student (Jemma McKenzie-Brown) gets her very own "All About Eve" moment during which she falls, gets her comeuppance and later shines all over again.
In their showcase number "I Want It All" Gabreel and Tisdale evoke Marilyn Monroe, Bob Fosse and Busby Berkeley as they celebrate the wonder of overachieving celebrity dreams with a production so sleek and perfect that their ability to preserve a sort of joyful innocence is miraculous.
The same can be said for the rest of the film which seems to occur on an alternate universe.
"High School Musical 3" has teenager parties without beer kegs and bongs, tongue-less kisses, boyfriends who sneak into their girlfriend's rooms to take them pizza and absolutely no bullies. The weird part is that the film doesn't even try to pretend we have to believe this, we somehow just do. The energy of the performers is so positive that cynicism isn't even an option.
It's not as if they're performing with a wink and they're not suggesting some sort of nostalgic throwback either.
Their political correctness is part of the appeal and the film's nostalgia only comes in the realization that this might be the last time to get on the bandwagon with these actors.
One in college there is obviously no more high school musical and although the film suggests that a sequel is probable (with McKenzie Brown and Efron redux Matt Prokop in major roles) it's the end of a mini era for fans of the original.
"This is the last time to get it right" sings a commanding Efron during one electric sequence and for talking about the transition from this to other kinds of roles he perhaps couldn't be more right.
It's not by chance that the film ends with a falling curtain, after all it's up to us to deem who of the performers are worthy of following to other projects, but for a bunch of hopeful stars of tomorrow they do put on quite a show.

My Beautiful Showerette.

Read this story and join me in disapproving of the celibate execs over at Disney who thought a showering Zac Efron in "High School Musical 3" would've been scandalous.
He's legal for crying out loud!
Then again, they might just be thinking about us and saving it all for a gigantic, splendiferous, gargantuan DVD box set.
Considering that the two previous films have come in the shapes of an "Encore Edition", a "Remix Edition" and a "Extended Edition" among others, and more to come, one can only wonder how will they name the one with Zac's extended scene...
The "Bathhouse Fun Edition".
The "Don't Drop the Soap Edition".
The "Can't Stop the Beat(ing) Edition".

Do you think "High School Musical 3" will have a longer life on DVD if they include this? And if so what would you name the edition?

Go Wildcats!

Curious as to what the hype was all about, I watched "High School Musical" yesterday.
I'd obviously assumed that since it was for children, it was going to be yet another of those prefabricated, easy to digest, instantly forgettable pieces of junk entertainment they're served every day.
It wasn't. For one, it felt refreshing even if it was released two years ago (which in tween entertainment years is like B.C), the music is fun, the characters are appealing (Ahsley Tisdale steals every scene and proves, the blonde, villainous girls always have more fun), but the best part of it all is how it dares to do what very few films do nowadays: unashamedly proclaim they're musicals!
The style is even in the title! (Give me a contemporary musical that showed its style in its trailer...even "Moulin Rouge!" was made to look like camp drama) And still people flock to it! Which makes all those cries of "people hate musicals" completely obsolete.
In fact one of the best things about the script is that it uses this for comedic, meta effect. The plot sometimes revolves around the fact that nobody in school can believe that the jock (Zac Efron) and the geek (Vanessa Hudgens) are auditioning for their high school musical.
And what is the best way to complain about this? A song of course!
Therefore we have basketball teams performing unselfconscious choreographies, entire cafeterias twirling and singing about status quo and an altogether sense of joy that infects anyone watching it. I, for one, can't wait to see the other two now.

Another Reason Why I Love Musicals.

"No one could teach you to dance in a million years".
- Penny (Ginger Rogers) to Lucky (Fred Astaire) in "Swing Time".

I Just Died a Little...

Academy Award winners Marion Cotillard and Sophia Loren joined by Fergie outside a London restaurant a few nights ago in order to celebrate the filming of "Nine".
They were also joined by Kate Hudson and Dame Judi Dench who was probably giving Fergie a run for her money in the hip department.
In what's definitely becoming my favorite shooting project, "Nine" is a musical adaptation of one of my favorite films of all time "8 1/2".
Missing in the party were Nicole Kidman and Penélope Cruz (hmmm...) who, along with the other ladies, will be wooing Daniel Day Lewis in the movie.
OK how on Earth can this get any better?