|
Post by agentf on Jan 16, 2013 20:46:01 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by paca on Jan 17, 2013 1:05:42 GMT -5
apparently they asked for changes to be made and none of them were considered. ROFL so they can't exercise their usual censorship and nw they are throwing a hissy fit. I didn't think much of the movie to begin with, but it is starting to grow on me
|
|
|
Post by agentf on Jan 17, 2013 6:55:35 GMT -5
They should perhaps have taken a page from the Vatican and not fueled controversy. They've given it more importance now than necessary. frankly, I thought Monaco was involved, to keep Grace's legend alive. In the image war of the tabloids however, Grace's children do not have the moral high ground to pass judgment because dirt can be raised each time to discredit their opinion. It was better to let sleeping dogs lie. Kidman hasn't had a hit in a while and this is not a typical Tim Roth star turn. It might have gone straight to video IMO. Not worth the breath.
|
|
|
Post by paca on Jan 17, 2013 7:49:37 GMT -5
I think that is what everyone thought. ANd the way MC matin reported about it there was no way to think any different. They were given plenty of support for the movie. If they were against it, all they had to do was deny filming. But those hypocrits wanted the money first before saying they don't approve. Typical MC. And typical PR fail too. Such a bunch of losers. No one will ever bother making a movie about them, apart from maybe a bad comedy.
|
|
|
Post by paca on Jan 17, 2013 9:01:24 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by grimnir on Jan 18, 2013 10:37:27 GMT -5
And it makes me wonder if it's not all a marketing ploy...
|
|
|
Post by taz on Jan 19, 2013 6:41:34 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by agentf on Jan 19, 2013 11:29:53 GMT -5
I think Rainier is stretching an arm from the grave to hit them upside the head.
|
|
|
Post by margarita on Jan 20, 2013 6:37:24 GMT -5
I really think that this film might remind people way too much of the glamour and aura Grace had - which makes Charlene's lack of personality, intelligence and willingness to work even more obvious ...
After all this film was never ment to be a documentary. So nobody and nothing can hinder them to change or interpret-anew some historical facts.
The Palace should have filed many lawsuits on many journalists and media for comparing Charlene to Grace. Because stating that Charlene has anything in common with Grace (except of the blond colored hair) is historical untrue and in fact did and does harm to Monaco: morally and financially.
|
|
|
Post by margarita on Jan 22, 2013 4:25:29 GMT -5
www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/grace-monaco-director-defends-film-414049'Grace of Monaco' Director Defends Film' Olivier Dahan acknowledges historical inaccuracies but says his film about Grace Kelly, played by Nicole Kidman, is not a biopic. (...) “I am not a journalist or historian. I am an artist,” Dahan told French newspaper Le Journal de Dimanche. “I have not made a biopic. I hate biopics in general. I have made a human portrait of a modern woman who wants to reconcile her family, her husband, her career, who gives up this career to invent another role.” (...) “I think we have a misunderstanding,” Dahan also said following an article in weekly magazine Paris Match that seemed to imply the Monaco royal family was involved in the project. “We never asked them to endorse anything.” (...) Dahan said he had met with the Monaco royals, worked with them on filming permits in Monaco and did address some of their script concerns at the time. He added that he has had a good relationship with the family since May, though it appears they have suddenly changed their minds. “When I met with the [family], I had the feeling of being listened to,” he said, emphasizing that he felt they understood that he was not shooting a biopic. Dahan said that the family wanted changes in the political tone of the film, which is only a background for his more personal story of the princess. (...)" Any idea why the seem th have changed their mind so sudden? One point might be the problem they can't name: the films points out the period in Grace' life when she had to master a transition - give up her Hollywood career to invent the role of Princess of Monaco. The film makes very obvious that Grace had a real career and there was in fact something to give up, while ... Charlene reached the end of her sportive road when she came to Monaco and there was no alternative for her (no job, no high school degree, no plan B). Many athletes work on their "after-sports-life" while still competing. Unlike Charlene. She seems to have spend her ENTIRE time to catch a Prince... That's the big fat difference between these woman. IMO that's what makes people most of all doubt in a love story Albert/ Charlene. He always feared most to end up with a woman who wanted the easy life and not him ... and now look what he's got + no French language, no support, no baby... only trouble and bad press...
|
|
|
Post by margarita on Jan 22, 2013 13:00:33 GMT -5
BRAVO!!! Monaco managed to be mentioned in one line with China when it comes to censorship of films! "Thanks" to their reaction on the new Grace-film. OMG - they have nobody talking truth-to-power. Poor MC Zensur im Kino (Censorship of cinema-films) China korrigiert sich James Bond zurecht (The Chinese "correct" a James Bond film) Chinas Behörden haben den Agentenfilm "Skyfall" manipuliert. Aber politische und kommerzielle Zensur ist auch im Westen üblich: Die Beispiele reichen von Cary-Grant-Filmen bis zu Patrick Swayze. Von Hanns-Georg Rodek Chinese authorities manipulated the thriller "Skyfall". But political and commercial censorship happens in Western countries, too. See: Cary-Grant-films and films with Patrick Swayze. author: Hans-Georg Rodeck www.welt.de/kultur/kino/article113052618/China-korrigiert-sich-James-Bond-zurecht.html(...) Kritik des Fürstenhauses an "Grace of Monaco"Der Film legt den Schwerpunkt auf die Jahre 1961/62. Grace Kelly hatte ihre Hollywood-Karriere längst beendet und regierte als Gracia Patricia neben ihrem Mann Fürst Rainier III. Die Beziehungen zwischen Monaco und Frankreich steckten in einer Krise. Man stritt sich um die Steuerfreiheit des Ministaates. Gracia soll bei der Kompromissschließung eine wichtige Rolle gespielt haben. Die Dreharbeiten fanden mit Genehmigung des Fürsten in dem Staat an der Côte d'Azur statt. "Albert, Caroline und Stéphanie haben das Drehbuch zweimal gelesen. Ihre Sprecher verlangten keine bedeutenden Veränderungen", erklärte Ende Dezember Produzent Pierre-Ange Le Pogam noch zuversichtlich. Der Grund für den jetzigen Eklat könnte ein Artikel im französischen Magazin "Paris Match" sein, in dem der Regisseur Olivier Dahan andeutete, das Fürstenhaus stehe inhaltlich zu dem Film. Nun heißt es, man habe sich im Palast über das Drehbuch gewundert und Veränderungen verlangt, die nicht alle seien berücksichtigt worden seien."
|
|
|
Post by agentf on Jan 22, 2013 17:31:48 GMT -5
"längst"! Looks like moviedom wants to claim Grace back. Maybe because they fear her legacy is being trashed by Albert's actions, his cosmetically obsessed wife, etc - they want to highlight that she was a movie star, just as much as Princess of Monaco. That's sad when you think about it, that outsiders should want to pry your mother away from you because you're sullying her image.
|
|
|
Post by margarita on Jan 23, 2013 2:56:01 GMT -5
www.femalefirst.co.uk/movies/movie-news/oliver-dahan-276290.htmlOliver Dahan Defends Grace of Monaco After Royal AttackAnd now Dahan is firing back, insisting the film, starring Nicole Kidman and Tim Roth, was never intended as a biopic. He tells French newspaper Le Journal de Dimanche, "I am not a journalist or historian. I am an artist. I have not made a biopic. I hate biopics in general."
|
|
|
Post by margarita on Jan 23, 2013 4:53:55 GMT -5
www.panarmenian.net/eng/news/142339/And more papers print Olivier Dahan's point of view... "(...) Grace of Monaco" follows Kelly's personal story during the 1962 politics. It stresses on a six-month period in which the newly minted Princess of Monaco maneuvered behind the scenes in an effort to save the city-state from a coup."Uuuups: the film shows, a woman, who had an own career before she went to Monaco and shortly after becoming Princess of Monaco is already 'maneuvering behind the scenes' (and speaking French, which is a matter of fact) ...
No way people won't compare that to Charlene who lived so many YEARS in Monaco before she became POM (ooouuutch) and still behaves like an alien landed all of a sudden on a new planet"I have made a human portrait of a modern woman who wants to reconcile her family, her husband, her career, who gives up this career to invent another role." ... so with Charlene Monaco wanted to represent and reinvent itself with a young, fresh face and image in 2011 but ... catapulted itself back into Stone Age. BRAVO Albert & Stahl!
|
|
|
Post by agentf on Jan 23, 2013 13:19:55 GMT -5
Personally I think she had given up acting before the period they refer to. So they are now portraying her as a dissatisfied woman, wife, mother etc I'm not sure Grace would have gone for that definition of herself. She may have been frustrated by some of the imposed limitations her role as princess entailed, but she took the high road. The only purpose I see this serving is to wrack up sympathy for CC's ineptitude and unwillingness to embrace her duties. They can always point to Grace and say oh, how hard even for an icon. This director is perhaps opening a can of worms by bending Grace to fit his story, but not for the reasons that have Albert balking.
|
|
|
Post by margarita on Jan 25, 2013 14:30:00 GMT -5
The German newspapers article mentioning China in one line with Monaco was translated into English and published in: www.worldcrunch.com/culture-society/china-censors-james-bond-but-movie-manipulation-is-a-worldwide-feature/grace-kelly-skyfall-censorship-red-dawn-north-korea/c3s10723/China Censors James Bond, But Movie Manipulation Is A Worldwide FeatureBy Hanns-Georg Rodek DIE WELT/Worldcrunch BERLIN - Chinese censors have made some significant changes to several parts of the latest James Bond film “Skyfall.” One scene, showing a French hitman killing a Chinese guard in a Shanghai skyscraper, was cut out entirely. So was a mention of prostitution in Macau. Other changes are reflected in the subtitles. In the original version of the movie, Bond asks a hostess if she got her tattoo because she was forced into prostitution as a child. The Chinese subtitles change this and have Bond asking the young woman if she has connections to the Mafia. The subtitles also leave out entirely what bad guy Javier Bardem has to say about the torture he suffered at the hands of Chinese police. And yet making substantive changes when a movie is translated into another language is hardly limited to the Chinese. Right after the end of World War II, the Germans censored Alfred Hitchcock’s “Notorious” (1946). In the film, Cary Grant finds uranium powder hidden in wine bottles in the cellar of a Nazi who has fled to Rio de Janeiro and smuggles German war criminals into Brazil. In Germany, the movie came out in 1951 bearing the title “Weißes Gift” (White Poison). Right after the war, the German distributors didn’t want a story about Nazis – so when the movie was dubbed the entire plot was changed into a story about drug trafficking, and even the names of the German characters were changed to non-German names. In 1969, when a restored version of the movie was released in Germany, there was still no mention of IG Farben (a conglomerate of German chemical companies involved in many World War II war crimes) that in the original version of the film is the force pulling the bad guys’ strings. Monaco slams “fictional” biopic This type of commercial censorship – which is not any better than political censorship – has not disappeared in the West. On the contrary, it’s becoming more prevalent. Those born after 1984 might not remember the day the Soviet Union invaded the United States. It began when parachutists descended on the small town of Calumet. They shot the place up, burned books and even occupied the drive in. Similar scenarios were going on all over America. Fortunately some high school students were able to get away to the mountains where, led by Patrick Swayze and calling themselves the Wolverines, they embarked on a guerilla war against the invaders. “Red Dawn” is now nearly 30 years old. In the 2012 remake, the invaders are the Chinese, supported by the Russians. That is, they were Chinese when the movie was shot – but when it was released the Chinese had become North Koreans. With the help of the new digital eraser (and at a cost of $1 million to MGM) all Chinese flags and other symbols had disappeared and had been replaced by North Korean ones. The changes weren’t even prompted by any official Chinese complaint. A few feature articles in Chinese state-owned newspapers and critical comments on Chinese websites were enough to make MGM change its mind: after all, a lot was at stake: the movie studio was hoping for big-time profits from the distribution in China of “The Hobbit” and "Skyfall." After all, the last Bond brought in $21 million in China, which is the fifth biggest movie market outside North America. Hopes were dampened however when China postponed the premiere of “Skyfall” from November (which is when it opened in the rest of the world) to December – presumably to make room for their own November blockbusters like Feng Xiaogang’s “Remembering 1942” and Lu Chuan’s “The Last Supper.” The postponement led to the ironic fact that the uncensored Bond film in China can only be seen on pirated copies. We can now look forward to the biopic “Grace of Monaco,” due out next year. Although shooting isn’t even over yet, Prince Albert of Monaco and his two sisters have released a statement that reads in part: "For us, this film does not constitute a biographical work but portrays only a part of [Grace Kelly’s] life and has been pointlessly glamorized and contains important historical inaccuracies as well as scenes of pure fiction." Despite the angry tone of the press release, there has so far been no talk of bringing a suit against the moviemakers. The film focuses on the 1961-1962 years, when Kelly had ended her Hollywood career and reigned as Princess Grace in the tiny Mediterranean principality alongside her husband Rainier III. At the time, relations between Monaco and France were strained because of the former’s tax policies. Grace is said to have played an important role in finding a compromise to the conflict. "Albert, Caroline and Stephanie read the script twice, and didn’t request any major changes," producer Pierre-Ange Le Pogam said last month. The reason for their apparent change of mind could be an article that appeared in French magazine Paris Match in which the film’s director Olivier Dahan implied that the Monaco royals had approved his script. Now the palace is saying that it requested changes that weren’t made. Read the article in the original language. Photo by - Eon Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures All rights reserved ©Worldcrunch - in partnership with DIE WELT Crunched by: Gail Mangold-Vine"
|
|
|
Post by agentf on Jan 25, 2013 14:42:01 GMT -5
Totally unrelated but apparently, Nicole Kidman's husband has brought up the topic of divorcing to which she seemingly answered they'd talk about it after the movie tour.
Heck, Albert, at this point, this would be a step up if you pursued the woman who personified Grace on screen. She survived the "Church" of Scientology, a gay first husband, has had enough cosmetic surgery to fit right in in Monaco and has children - adopted and natural - so, she'd make a great step-mom.
|
|
|
Post by agentf on Jan 27, 2013 3:21:13 GMT -5
Well, they're churning out for a public opinion battle: www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2268816/Grace-Kelly-marriage-claims-anger-Monaco-royal-family.htmlIt's one thing to have pundits like us, and another to go make a movie about speculations. I feel someone is going to town on Monaco with a personal agenda, deploying much money and effort. There's no need for us to be quoted by newspapers now, we're being blown out of the water by someone using our schtick. I wonder who among Monaco's rich is trying to pull the plug by going for the jugular. The movie IMO fails to acknowledge Hollywood studios put Grace on the throne, why try to whitewash their hands by saying now it offered her an escape? Deceitful approach in the highest.
|
|
|
Post by margarita on Jan 27, 2013 4:19:36 GMT -5
Well, they're churning out for a public opinion battle: www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2268816/Grace-Kelly-marriage-claims-anger-Monaco-royal-family.htmlIt's one thing to have pundits like us, and another to go make a movie about speculations. I feel someone is going to town on Monaco with a personal agenda, deploying much money and effort. There's no need for us to be quoted by newspapers now, we're being blown out of the water by someone using our schtick. I wonder who among Monaco's rich is trying to pull the plug by going for the jugular. The movie IMO fails to acknowledge Hollywood studios put Grace on the throne, why try to whitewash their hands by saying now it offered her an escape? Deceitful approach in the highest. I really don't know... Maybe there is no agenda for Monaco but the simple attempt to have a "sensational" film. It is hard to build - it's easy to destroy . In MC Grace/ Rainier are glorified way too much IMO - but this film black-writes the whole story completely. Why not finally let them rest in peace, beware what they builded and realize that each person has its own book to write? PLEASE!!! "The family’s real fear, it seems, may be that the film has broken a long-standing Hollywood taboo about bringing the truth about the marriage to the big screen – and it may set the stage for more embarrassing projects." ... maybe not about the one marriage - but how about the other ? Why should Albert & family fear a film about Charlene? I wonder how a film would try to whitewash her. She lived in MC sooo many years before the wedding and knew Albert so much better than Grace knew Rainier before she became his wife. So there is no excuse for her - she was fine with everything. Charlene might have become a somehow positive figure in a reveal-the-cruel-truth-of-Monaco-film IF SHE WOULD HAVE WENT AWAY (LONG) BEFORE THE WEDDING. Then one could have made a plot about her catharsis ect. but - what would be the plot about the true Charlene be like? Her misery is that she has nothing to put on her part of the weighting scale. You have an extremly rich reining Prince which is at least of average intelligence and got some education + a tiny country with strict rules on the one side ... ... and a girl of far-below average intelligence who nobody knew before she hooked up with a famous Prince, a girl who has not finished even high school, has not learned any profession, had no career to build her future life on, no natural beauty or extraordinary good and strong personality on the other side. This film would not be about Monaco but about an ordinary asymmetric relationship. That's all. Plus: Charlene could have worked on herself and got some education, learn languages, learn about people and culture and everything it takes to make a relationship less asymmetric during all those years she lived in MC and had nothing to do. Instead she spent her time on surgery and fashion. So IF ALbert & sisters are clever ... they go for a fast separation now and then just wait until someone reveals the truth about gold digger Charlene With luck ... and a little sponsoring Albert comes out as the poor romantic Prince who waited soo long for true love but couldn't find Bad, bad Monaco curse... And he has his catharsis, rules with Caroline, makes Charlene look like the scapegoat, fires a few persons (=cleans up Monaco a bit) and gets at least some pages written of his own story . (Guess the Monegasque people -and not only- would rather forgive Albert if he separates now for a Soraya kind of reason stated as the official. With Tatiana's & Andreas baby and wedding soon; with Carolines + Stephanies children getting out in the spotlight now ... it's THE moment to cut the losses ) And: don't you think people would be way more interested in a film or at least scandal with a living person starring? It's 2013!! Not 1983! Hello! Start writing a script about Charlene! OK - maybe script is too much ... but articles, yes!!! Come on! And don't forget to mention her army of trolls, and the closed forums, the letters that didn't reach Albert, Stahl's ridiculous campain to make her POM! And the snake she putted on her friends shoulder. And all the lies she couldn't get straight.
|
|
|
Post by agentf on Jan 27, 2013 8:13:42 GMT -5
Who's to say the Wittstocks didn't supply the filmmakers with information? I just remembered CC's solo trip to Los Angeles with only her brother for entourage...
|
|