Jump to content

Ms. Anderson


  • Please log in to reply

3615 replies to this topic

#1

Scrambled Eggs

Scrambled Eggs

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 9, 2004 @ 11:34 AM

Playing By Heart was on A&E last night, so I saw it for the first time. GA was great--kind of funny that her height played a role, and I guess the writers couldn't resist having her speak a line with the word "spooky" in it. But the movie should have had fewer plotlines.
  • 0

#2

bmills

bmills

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 9, 2004 @ 1:52 PM

I saw the movie a while ago and thought that it was flawed, but quite likeable. Of course, my favorite part was the GA/Jon Stewart subplot. I especially enjoy the dinner scene where GA drops something off of her fork. It looks ad-libbed, and it's fun to watch our favorite actress run through about four mood changes in a fraction of a second as she gets embarrassed, wonders whether Jon notices, and decides to keep nonchallantly playing the scene.
  • 0

#3

Kanel

Kanel

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 9, 2004 @ 3:08 PM

Oh, yeah, that was a good one! She's a real pro.

I love that movie (plotline jungle or no). There's so much great acting, it's a joy to watch.
  • 0

#4

greenshirt

greenshirt

    Loyal Viewer

Posted Jan 17, 2004 @ 6:31 PM

GA will apparently be performing in a play entitled "The Sweetest Swing in Baseball" in which her character's name is Dana. Hips before hands anyone?
  • 0

#5

ejluther

ejluther

    Stalker

Posted Jan 18, 2004 @ 9:44 PM

cool. will anyone who posts here be able to see it? and, color me optimistic, but is it possible that GA is doing a play rather than a film because she's got another film role coming down the pike? you know what i mean; a smarty, sassy and sensational redhead who likes to kick ass and kiss foreheads?

Edited by ejluther, Jan 18, 2004 @ 9:44 PM.

  • 0

#6

Kanel

Kanel

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 19, 2004 @ 5:53 AM

I admire your subtlety, ejluther, and let's keep hoping for the best!
  • 0

#7

Glasgow

Glasgow

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 19, 2004 @ 9:25 AM

i'll defs be going to see it.
  • 0

#8

Kanel

Kanel

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 19, 2004 @ 4:07 PM

Great, Glasgow! Keep us posted!
  • 0

#9

pusher

pusher

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 20, 2004 @ 11:26 AM

I went to London in December and got a chance to see GA in What The Night Is For. As much as I'd love to go back to London, I'd be leery of seeing The Sweetest Swing In Baseball. I did not like her performance in WTNIF.

I am curious how she does in the show, though. Please let us know, Glasgow.
  • 0

#10

JimsBride

JimsBride

    Couch Potato

Posted Jan 20, 2004 @ 1:56 PM

I just don't think the play itself looks very interesting. Perhaps it's just the way the description is written or maybe it's my dislike of plays and movies set in psychiatric hospitals.
  • 0

#11

Glasgow

Glasgow

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 21, 2004 @ 4:44 AM

oh, great, it's set in a psych ward? i didn't pick that up, i only scanned the page. ah, well, might be good for a laugh. except the Royal Court is not the sort of place where you can laugh if it isn't intntionally funny.
  • 0

#12

ejluther

ejluther

    Stalker

Posted Jan 21, 2004 @ 1:26 PM

I did not like her performance in WTNIF


Perhaps you've covered this already, if so, I think I missed it. Why didn't you like her performance? The play ultimately closed early, yes? Perhaps you weren't the only one less than thrilled with it and her...
  • 0

#13

pusher

pusher

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 21, 2004 @ 6:08 PM

I honestly don't remember the specifics of what she did and didn't do. I remember not empathizing with her character at all. I didn't believe she was this woman in this moral dilemma (and not in a "she'll always be Scully" way). After 9 years on TV, it's tough to go back to theater and she picked a challenging two-person play. Maybe her next performance will flow more naturally.
  • 0

#14

snarkcake

snarkcake

    Channel Surfer

Posted Jan 21, 2004 @ 6:54 PM

I saw the performance too, and like Pusher, I wasn't thrilled. She was definitely not Scully. As I recall, I found the performance very mannered and actorly (think: Acting! Thank you!) in the first half - the premise is that two lovers are reuniting after 20 or so years, so I think her mannerisms were supposed to reflect her unease and discomfort and the secrets she is keeping. But I found it all very stagey and unconvincing.

She was better in the second half, and had an amazing angry phone meltdown scene. It was somewhat the play, somewhat the performance. I've seen way worse and I'd eagerly see her in another play. Can't afford London this go round, though.
  • 0

#15

pusher

pusher

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 22, 2004 @ 10:27 AM

That was the big thing. Thank you snarkcake. The first half needed to be very subtlely played and she (for lack of a better term) overacted her way through it. I also thought the second act perfoemance wasn't as bad if just for the fact that overacting could be hidden in the "amazing angry phone meltdown scene."
  • 0

#16

ejluther

ejluther

    Stalker

Posted Jan 22, 2004 @ 11:19 AM

I'm just glad to see/hear/know that GA can pull off being "not Scully" - even if the performance itself is not that great, you know? I fear DD always smacks of Fox Mulder when I see him in other roles. Granted, I've not seen too much of him in other things, but his style seems to remain much the same. Not a slam to DD, maybe he just hasn't had a variety of roles offered to him or I've just not seen the "right" projects that he's done that showcase his range.
  • 0

#17

Glasgow

Glasgow

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 22, 2004 @ 11:26 AM

he does sometimes get to do stuff where he smiles. or parts his hair differently. or rides a push bike. or - recently a very good example - he gets to grow a beard. it's not like he's totally limited.

i'm about to start reading HoM, and when i've finished it i'll rent the movie. is it an indication of how small my life is that i'm looking forward to it? no, wait, i'm thinking of how i got home early last night to see the start of new ER.
  • 0

#18

ejluther

ejluther

    Stalker

Posted Jan 22, 2004 @ 11:33 AM

well, if it's any consolation, i did the same thing; purposefully read House of Mirth before seeing the film - anticipating both a great deal. I enjoyed them but felt the film had some easily corrected problems. Still, GA is quite wonderful in it.

As for ER? Can't help you there. Never watched it. But I have been arranging my life around the new season of AbFab lately - does that count?

Edited by ejluther, Jan 22, 2004 @ 11:34 AM.

  • 0

#19

Glasgow

Glasgow

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 22, 2004 @ 12:14 PM

does it count? ten out of ten for effort, i'd say.
  • 0

#20

cmb93

cmb93

Posted Jan 22, 2004 @ 12:33 PM

I'm just glad to see/hear/know that GA can pull off being "not Scully" - even if the performance itself is not that great, you know?


No offense, but that doesn't make much sense to me. If her performance was lousy or she was overacting, that means she can't really pull off anything other than Scully, no? Giving her different dialogue or a different hairstyle or time period (i.e., HoM) does not a versatile performer make.

I think Gillian is a fairly good actress, but definitely not the end-all be-all of acting. There were times in The X-files when I thought she was cringe-worthy, and her crying scenes were so Acting 101 that I couldn't even feel bad for her sometimes. Nothing says emotion like the single glycerine tear gliding down the cheek. *g*

Ah well, I wish her luck with her new play; hope it does better than WTNIF.
  • 0

#21

Ruby Trample of Woody End

Ruby Trample of Woody End

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 22, 2004 @ 1:02 PM

Giving her different dialogue or a different hairstyle or time period (i.e., HoM) does not a versatile performer make.


Neither does showing your ass. But that's just me.

Actually I thought her performance in HOM was wonderful. I've sung this tune before. But as an actor, and somebody who has read HOM numerous times and counts it amongst my fave. novels, I found her Lily true to the source material and quite moving.

I haven't seen her on stage so I can't pass judgment, however I do know that for the most part it was the play that was criticized as being weak and not GA's performance.

I do trust and respect the opinions of those who have posted above who did see WTNIF so I have to take their word on her performance. Which was that it wasn't all bad.

I'm not saying she is the end all and be all of actors but I've said it before and I'll say it again. She can act rings around David "shar-pei!face" Duchovny any day.
  • 0

#22

bmills

bmills

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 22, 2004 @ 1:09 PM

Before you watch House of Mirth, have a friend confiscate all your sharp objects and shoelaces.
  • 0

#23

Crow T. Robot

Crow T. Robot

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 22, 2004 @ 2:11 PM

Watched All Souls on TNT last night. She does a pretty damn good job in that. Remember the autopsy scene?
  • 0

#24

ejluther

ejluther

    Stalker

Posted Jan 22, 2004 @ 2:45 PM

If her performance was lousy or she was overacting, that means she can't really pull off anything other than Scully, no?


I see your point but I guess I was referring to the critique not being along the lines of, "It was like watching Scully on stage, I could never see/hear anything but Scully from GA." Even if all a pony's tricks aren't good, if you've got more than one - you're not a one-trick pony, if you know what I mean, that's all.

And maybe I'm easily impressed but I can't recall any GA scenes on XF that were cringe-worthy. But, as Ruby points out, she may have looked that good to me due in large part to comparison with her co-star. Not that he was always bad, but, to me, he's no GA...
  • 0

#25

snarkcake

snarkcake

    Channel Surfer

Posted Jan 22, 2004 @ 4:04 PM

If her performance was lousy or she was overacting, that means she can't really pull off anything other than Scully, no?


Not really - she constructed a completely separate character, but didn't nail it. I think Pusher said it best by saying she lacked subtlety. I found myself aware I was watching a performance. But I was watching Gillian Anderson, not Scully. Same as in House of Mirth, which I think she hit out of the park. My bet is she's trying to find her stage chops again after 10 years on film.

I've sat through a ton of crappy stage production and WtNiF is easily in the upper half of quality. But I kept thinking it should have been better.

I have the same problem with Duchovny as I have with Colin Firth - I am so enamored of their character, who was a perfect fit for their range, seeing them play someone else creeps me out a little. I saw Firth on stage even and it seemed wrong. Is it related to the fact I would shag Mulder and Mr. Darcy in a heartbeat if they were really real but probably not the actors who play them? Probably.
  • 0

#26

pusher

pusher

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 22, 2004 @ 5:20 PM

I was referring to the critique not being along the lines of, "It was like watching Scully on stage, I could never see/hear anything but Scully from GA."


That's exactly what I meant. Her performance was not Scully-like at all in WTNIF.

Even in Playing By Heart (which I loved) I didn't get any sense of Scully-ness, although she could have gone that way with that character.
  • 0

#27

Kanel

Kanel

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 22, 2004 @ 5:36 PM

I'm not saying she is the end all and be all of actors but I've said it before and I'll say it again. She can act rings around David "shar-pei!face" Duchovny any day.

Hear, hear.

Even in Playing By Heart (which I loved) I didn't get any sense of Scully-ness, although she could have gone that way with that character.

That was my reaction exactly. It was the first non-XF I saw her in, and I was deeply impressed.

I still get blown away every time I see the first "Scully at the counselor's" scene from Irresistable. You only see her face, and her lines are all calm(ish) and controlled, but her face is oh, so expressive.

I think that's when my first love for GAs acting was born, and I've never quite gotten over it. Ergo, the woman can do no wrong acting-wise. No wrong. No. I said no! *fingers in ears* La la la! I can't hear yooooouuuu!
  • 0

#28

Glasgow

Glasgow

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 23, 2004 @ 5:48 AM

*standing up for Duchovny*

predictable, perhaps, but there you go.
  • 0

#29

kschica

kschica

    Fanatic

Posted Jan 23, 2004 @ 5:44 PM

I would imagine GA would struggle a bit on stage. Her ability to convey a range of emotions with her eyes/face are what IMO make her an amazing actress. The film medium, I would imagine, captures this better. I have thought she did well with everything I've seen her do on screen-I read and watched HOM and she absolutely captured Lily Bart IMO.
  • 0

#30

luv2surf

luv2surf

    Couch Potato

Posted Jan 30, 2004 @ 5:38 AM

Neither does showing your ass. But that's just me.

Word and Hee to that.

I was a gushy twit after HoM so I guess I fall on the side of 'capable at non-Scully' acting. OTOH, theater is a different game so I can't really comment.

Ohh, interesting creepy serendipity: just as I hit reply and started typing, my winamp randomly selected the XF theme remix, wierd! I am relatively new to TWOP and just tripped across this section today. Hallelujah, now I have even more to distract me from school. But I am seriously jonesing for the old days with M/S, esp GA softly singing 'Jeremiah was a bullfrog', *sigh* Good times, good times...

In person, GA was awesome, funny, considerate, polite, etc. and DD, not so much. He came off as a pompous, arrogant, self-centered (need I go on?) jack*ss...and yes, I am a fan of both. My opinions of the two were considerably bolstered and lowered (respectively) after that, but I know people have bad days and in hindsight, I'll give DD the benefit of the doubt (GA too for her share of negative press).
  • 0