Showing posts with label Geoffrey Rush. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Geoffrey Rush. Show all posts

Sunday, April 15, 2018

Geoffrey Rush / Why have we become this way?

Geofrrey Rush
Photo by Alex de Brabant

gEOFFREY RUSH

“WHY HAVE WE BECOME THIS WAY?”


OCTOBER 18, 2012

SHORT PROFILE
Name: Geoffrey Roy Rush
DOB: 6 July 1951
Place of Birth: Toowoomba, Queensland, Australia
Occupation: Actor


Mr. Rush, how much do you enjoy wearing tights?
I could probably show you there are as many films where I am not wearing tights. But most obviously yes, there are some films like Shakespeare in LoveLes MisérablesQuills. Once you wear an old-fashioned wig, everyone will think that's what you do.
Well, you have put those tights on a bit more often than other actors.
Costume drama is a very difficult phrase for me. I want to be taken into the inner lives and the world and the political forces, the inner and outer worlds of the narrative with an immediacy that makes me not even think about the costumes. But a costume drama is more aligned with my theatrical experience. When you do the great classical repertoire, like Shakespeare or Goethe or Wedekind – I'm dropping all my German references for you! (Laughs)
I appreciate it.
When you do those plays… More often than not the reason they are classic plays is that they deal with human experience on a very big emotional and geopolitical scale. King Lear is not about some loser living in a very sort of downbeat suburban life. He is the king, he is the definitive leader who is losing his marbles, he's got domestic problems with his daughters. Everything in that play is pushed, the characters are taken to a point in extremis.
“You have to be a devoted mystic to understand the full value of your life, as you’re living it.”
Has your work helped give meaning to your life?
Geez, it’s only 9 o’clock in the morning!
Sorry, I’ve already had my third coffee…
I don't know… Maybe you have to be a devoted mystic to understand the full value of your life at any given moment, as you’re living it. Sometimes you have those little treasured moments of insight and creativity and you think, “That expresses something about the picture of the world and my role in it.” And then the rest of it you are dealing with marketing and disappointments, all of the stuff that goes on around it.
So you just kind of go with the flow?
A lot of my decisions are made by instinct – you have a hunch. But if I look back now at the sort of things that, randomly, I've chosen to do in a very haphazard way, with some hindsight they actually map out a certain set of experiences that have been fairly important to me. I don't know whether that makes the meaning of my life any clearer…
It’s certainly a question afforded by privilege…
I read something the other day about how privileged and rich some people or some countries are and how poor others are. The comment made by this writer was, “Well, you just can't say that's the way it is, that's the way it happened throughout history.” You now have to address the fact that we might live in so-called wealthy countriesat the expense of people who live in poor countries. Our wealth is maybe dependent on somebody else from the poverty side of the equation, suffering on our behalf.
Is that an uncomfortable fact for someone working in the film industry?
For me it's primarily an aesthetic question. I tend to shape my life through aesthetic principles rather than economic ones – I've never been very good at maths. (Laughs) By following an aesthetic principle, I can look at something like Hollywood and think: it gets bloated, it gets misdirected – it's an industry. But our film industry in Australia is not run on big corporate principles. It's a much more home grown, hit-and-miss… I don’t want to use the term cottage industry because that sounds kind of patronizing, but every film we make is pretty much an independent film. We're not there under the banner of big business principles.
When did you break into the mainstream?
I did a lot of work in the theater, which is a very low level of media interest, particularly in Australia, and suddenly when Shine came out all of the films that I was in came out at the time and I met a lot of wonderful colleagues. The films I was nominated around were things like Lars von Trier's Breaking the WavesSecrets & Lies by Mike Leigh, The English Patient… they were all very economically compact, but highly imaginative movies.
But you never turned into a full-fledged movie star.
There was no, “Oh, we can get Geoffrey Rush for an interview. This is a scoop!” But I noticed within a year or two of that experience, suddenly the surge of independent filmmaking that gained some prominence was absorbed into the studio system. Independent film became a kind of studio genre, because they are trying to make the next best car.
So did studios start offering you stuff back then?
Do you know who Liberace is?
Of course.
This famous cocktail pianist… I got offered a role to play Liberace after Shine because they went, “He’s great at doing piano stuff!” And I sort of went, “Well no, I’m actually going to do Victor Hugo Les Misérables because Bille August asked me to.” And it was such a daring, confrontational challenge that I had to do it to sort of prove that it's not going to be… I didn't want to choose to enter the product machine.
I understand.
24/7 entertainment news has become part and parcel of the TV world… It's hard to maintain that amount of entertainment showbiz reporting. It’s sort of a joke if we think that Tolstoy or Hugo would have been constantly interviewed: “Why did you write this? How did you feel while you wrote it?” No one goes to Heinrich Böll and says, “Why did you write this novel?” He probably went, “Read the novel – and you work out why I wrote it!” But now people would be saying, “We’ve got Heinrich Böll here with us. Mr. Böll, what do you think…” and whatever.
99% of it is such vapid nonsense.
Associated with that has been a kind of youth culture, it's leaked in now with reality TV, which sometimes we have to look at it and go, “Why have we let ourselves become this way?” Someone like Ricky Gervais, as a great satirist, has picked up on that notion and thought, “That's where our vulnerabilities and our vanities and delusions lie,” and he makes great comedy out of it.



Tuesday, April 10, 2018

Geoffrey Rush 'virtually housebound and barely eating', claim actor's lawyers


Geoffrey Rush 


Geoffrey Rush 'virtually housebound and barely eating', claim actor's lawyers

Legal document says veteran actor ‘wakes up every morning with a terrible sense of dread about his future career’
Maya Oppenheim
Apr 9, 2018

Geoffrey Rush is virtually housebound and scarcely eats after a Sydney newspaper claimed he took part in inappropriate behaviour at a theatre, according to the actor’s lawyer.
The Oscar-winning actor is suing Sydney’s Daily Telegraph and the journalist Jonathon Moran for defamation over articles alleging he behaved inappropriately to a colleague during a Sydney Theatre Company production of King Lear in 2015.
The Australian stage and screen veteran has endured “tremendous emotional and social hardship” since the paper’s coverage in 2017, according to an affidavit by Rush’s solicitor which was filed in the federal court in Sydney on Monday.

Rush, who won an Oscar for Best Actor for playing concert pianist David Helfgott in Shine, has denied any wrongdoing.
Rush was “virtually housebound” and in the first three months after the publication “rarely left his home”, according to the legal document.
It added that he “feels uncomfortable when in public and will rarely attend public events”, “barely eats”, and “wakes up every morning with a terrible sense of dread about his future career”.

It also said the actor, who starred in Pirates of the Caribbean and The King’s Speech, suffers from loss of sleep and deems his worth to the theatre and film industry is “now irreparably damaged”.
The affidavit said that as a direct result of the report, which prompted global headlines, Rush found he was “constantly associated” locally and internationally with the global #MeToo movement against sexual assault.
The hashtag was created by civil rights activist Tarana Burke a decade ago in an attempt to support sexual assault survivors in disadvantaged communities but exploded after the Harvey Weinstein allegations surfaced last autumn.
Rush stepped down as president of the film industry organisation Australian Academy of Cinema and Television Arts which he had led for several years after the allegations against him were published.
The Telegraph denies the articles depicted Rush as a pervert and a predator and submits that no allegations of a sexual nature were made.
The News Corp tabloid has said previously it accurately reported the alleged complaint against the actor and would seek to defend the case in court.
Rush, one of the few stars to have won what is known as the “Triple Crown of Acting” – Academy Award, Emmy Award and Tony Award – has also worked extensively in theatre. 
In 1996 he became the first actor to win the Oscar, Bafta, Critics’ Choice Movie Award, Golden Globe Award, and Screen Actors Guild Award for a single performance in film for his role in Shine.
The Independent contacted a representative of Rush for comment.

Friday, February 28, 2003

Salma Hayek / Frida



FRIDA
***

Andrew Pulver
Friday 28 February 2003

Long in gestation, the Frida Kahlo biopic, produced by and starring Salma Hayek, finally reaches our screens, bearing with it an Oscar nomination for best actress. Was it worth the wait? Well, it's pretty stodgy stuff, by and large, that covers all the expected bases, distilling Kahlo's relatively short, incident-packed life into the conventional parameters of the artist biography - lots of wine-drinking, dramatic gestures and arguments about communism. Director Julie Taymor takes considerable pains over small, animated interpolations that briefly illustrate and draw on Kahlo's own work; however impressive these are, though, they're not enough to offset the heaviness of the rest of the film.


Kudos must go to Hayek for persisting with the project over a number of years, and she is generally relaxed and effective in the lead role. She is still let down by her rocky English, unfortunately; as hard as she tries, the jokier lines just sound lame. Alfred Molina does a big bear of a performance as Diego Rivera, Kahlo's eternal foil, grabbing every line as if his life depended on it. Geoffrey Rush, on the other hand, does a terrible cameo as Trotsky, complete with one of those awful movie R-r-r-ussian accents.
But this is still a substantial film, its story told with economy and clarity. And Taymor makes much of what opportunities there are for distinctive design, what with carefully arranged Mexican interiors, Kahlo's affectation for traditional dress, and picturesque incidents aplenty. Kahlo's iconic value - both as a poster girl for 1980s western bohemianism and for Mexico's own sense of pride - is well established, and the movie doesn't let them down.