FASHIONS OF THE EMMYS 2014: Star-Maker Gowns, Beach-y Babes + Duds

Lizzy Caplan in Donna Karan Atelier. Photo courtesy of Getty Images

I paid a lot of attention to the red carpet last night. It was an emotional journey–one that I live-tweeted my way through (are you following @BlackBook!?) and, in the process, became really flustered by how many women wore red gowns. The Emmys being a bigger event than the humble VMAs, there were a lot of looks to take in, and a lot of reactions to process.

If you didn’t watch, feel free to trust my sartorial judgment, and if you did, feel free to tweet me and tell me how wrong or right I am! Cool? Here goes!

The Winner: Lizzy Caplan
That Donna Karan Atelier dress was a starmaker. Caplan’s long been on the rise, but a look like this one is iconic, and she wore it with perfect grace.

 

Reds on the Red Carpet: Julia Louis-Dreyfus
I got in a bit of a tizzy when I realized just how under-utilized half the rainbow was on this year’s red carpet, but Julia looked flawless in Carolina Herrera. Some people are lucky enough to work wonders in the simplest of garments and this was a lovely example of that. The crowd was practically a sea of red, but Uzo Aduba also looked radiant in Christian Siriano’s design in the bright hue.

 

The Object of the Male Gaze: Sofia Vergara
Sofia Vergara both embraces and laughs at her own overt sexuality and is pretty lovable in the process. Her strapless, curve hugging Roberto Cavalli was gorgeous in spite of her declaration that she couldn’t bring boyfriend Joe Mangienello because he is too hot.

 

The Can-do-no-wrong-in-my-book: Lena Dunham
Was it a dress? Was it a top and a skirt? (It was the latter and it was by Giambattista Valli). Who knows but I love Lena Dunham so much that I will let her wear whatever she damn pleases. Though proportionally speaking the Peter Pan collar pink blouse was too much fabric in conjunction with that ombré-d wedding cake of a skirt, I loved seeing Lena explore new color palettes to complement her new bleach-blonde ‘do. I think she would have stunned in a strapless top with all that skirt going on, but like I said, in this case, my fandom supersedes my critical ability and I will be the first to admit it! Theoretically speaking, Sarah Hyland’s was probably the better of the cake-invoking skirts, but Lena’s comes out on top for its loud personality.

 

The Minimalist Bride: Kristen Wiig
This dress would make a very pretty wedding gown (it’s Vera Wang after all), but oh well, white is a nice color, it’s August, and many celebs choose longer lengths for the red carpet. It fit her well, but in a casual way, and in some pictures she almost looked like an edgy Jen Aniston. Very chic.

 

Sleekest: Robin Wright
Ralph Lauren suit, androgynous hair– the whole thing was so simultaneously effortless and polished. Absolutely love.

 

Best Departure: Julie Bowen
The Modern Family star usually sticks to solid colors that accentuate her killer body. They look good and that’s cool. But last night’s ‘70s-inspired Peter Som gown was the definition of a pattern done right. It’s not easy, so major kudos to Bowen for owning it.

 

The Secret Beach Goddess: Amy Poehler
It’s easy to forget that Amy Poehler is kind of a bombshell underneath the barrage of suits Leslie Knope wears on Parks and Recreation. But then the Emmys (or the Globes) come around and there’s Amy with The OC-worthy beach waves in a silver Theia gown.

 

Bland but Beautiful: Taylor Schilling
Taylor Schilling, that’s Piper to anyone with a Netflix account, wore a beaded nude Zuhair Maurad gown that hit in all the right places. Props, too, to the gorgeous racerback.

 

Undecided: Kiernan Shipka
Kiernan Shipka is a red carpet favorite, and objectively speaking, this Antonio Berardi dress (put on hold by Rachel Zoe’s styling team minutes after it hit style.com) is a stunner. Still, Shipka is still just 14 and I thought a little more color and youthfulness would have been lovely on the young starlet.

 

The Makeover: Gwen Stefani
OK, so it wasn’t quite a makeover, but I don’t think I was alone when it took me a moment to recognize Gwen Stefani tonight. Clad in metallic Versace and pin straight blonde hair, Stefani looked sleek and semi-futuristic.

 

The Try-Again-Next-Year Crew

Debra Messing: Honestly, if I had that red hair I would put on an emerald colored gown and never take it off. Sometimes you just shouldn’t mess with perfection. This black sheer thing was shapeless and did nothing for Messing who is a beaut!

 

Sarah Paulson: #Sorrynotsorry that this is the stuff of nightmares. It looks, quite frankly, like Paulson had an accident in a tulle factory, or got caught in a swarm of ladybugs.

 

Laura Prepon: She could have looked so good, and yet, she looked like she got stuck in the prom department at a Midwest department store. Sigh.

OK, Showtime, You Got Me: I Will Watch A Show About Sex Starring Lizzy Caplan

Oh, Showtime. Oh, bravo, really, well done. I’m not sure how you figured out that all I’ve been dying for in my televisual diet is something where Lizzy Caplan studies human sexuality while wearing alternatingly prim and glamorous 1950s-era outfits. I truly can’t imagine you coming up with a show like Masters of Sex unless you decided to scrap the focus groups altogether and just secretly scan my dreams.

The series allegedly focuses on “William H. Masters and Virginia E. Johnson, a research team who began investigating human sexual responses in 1957 at Washington University in St. Louis,” but we both know it’s going to be a lot more about Lizzy Caplan’s burning yet somehow sarcastic stare, and all the things she understands about carnality that her partner never will. Who even plays the other guy? Doesn’t matter. 
 
 
Uncle, mercy, I give! I am hopelessly skewered on the hook, all right? Just promise me you’ll go easy on me, I don’t want to come out of the first season writing fan fiction about this stuff. Only give me the gentle illusion that I am maybe cool enough to hang out with Lizzy Caplan, that’s all I ask. Any more might kill me—i.e., your entire demographic. And then who would moderate the Facebook page? Exactly. 

Lizzy Caplan and Michael Sheen Starring in Showtime’s ‘Masters of Sex’

Lizzy Caplan has made many a fan through memorable appearances on premium cable shows, from the hilarious and gone-too-soon Party Down to her V-juice-addicted traveler on True Blood. This fall, she has top billing in one: Masters of Sex, a new Showtime series in which she stars alongside Michael Sheen.

Masters of Sex centers on the lives of William Masters and Virginia Johnson (played by Sheen and Caplan, respectively), two real-life researchers who, for decades, pioneered key research on human sexuality and relationships. Naturally, the first teaser for the show focuses on these questions, with some discussion about key matters, such as faking orgasms. The show will premiere on Showtime on September 29th, 2013, and in the meantime, you can catch the very short, inquiry-packed trailer below.

Lizzy Caplan in ‘Fashion Film’

The best part of fashion, I think, is the ads, because they are always nice and hazy and vague and always feature a pretty lady twirling and looking at things with intent and usually have some soothing music that make you fall asleep and dream things about fashion, which I think is how they get you to buy things. Hypnotism! I figured it out! Anyway, Lizzy Caplan stars in her own fashion film, called Fashion Film, and it pretty much nails the genre of fashion advertisements. And also, weirdly, what it’s like to go to the Brooklyn Flea on a Saturday. Now, if you’ll excuse me, I’m off to buy a romper. 

[via Gawker]

Follow Tyler Coates on Twitter.

Showtime Debuts ‘Masters Of Sex’ Trailer

It’s true, 2013 will bring us a reality show about drunk 19-year-olds riding ATVs in the mud. But click over to Showtime and there’s a new drama about sexuality researchers, Masters Of Sex, starring Michael Sheen and Lizzy Caplan.

Sheen plays Dr. William Masters, an OB-GYN teaching at a Midwestern college, and Caplan is his research assisant, Virginia Johnson. The series will be based on the nonfiction book Masters Of Sex, by Thomas Maier, and explains how these two became the foremost sexuality experts in a time before Dr. Ruth, Loveline, and Dan Savage. In addition to researching the sex lives of others, Masters and Johnson became romantically entangled with each other.

Showtime hasn’t yet announced when Masters Of Sex will begin its 12-episode run. The network will also debut Ray Donovan, a drama starring Liev Shrieber about a "fixer" in Los Angeles (which is also seen in the trailer below).

Contact the author of this post at Jessica.Wakeman@Gmail.com. Follow me on Twitter.

Fred Willard and Lizzy Caplan Skewer ‘Free To Be… You and Me’

Four decades ago, Marlo Thomas—with the help of the Ms. Magazine Foundation and a number of willing celebrities—launched Free To Be… You and Me, the television special and album that encouraged generations of kids to be themselves, embrace diversity and not get too bogged down in strict gender roles. The likes of Carl Reiner and Rosey Grier taught kids it was alright to cry, it was okay for boys to want to play with dolls and that prissy princesses who acted with an unwarranted sense of entitlement were fed to hungry tigers.

But now it is 2012, and today’s kids have different needs and different lessons to learn. And Marlo Thomas’ flower-power opus is getting an anniversary skewering from a number of funny people. Rooftop Comedy’s upcoming compilation, It’s OK To Do Stuff, features an all-star lineup of comedians and musicians, including Jane Wiedlin of The Go-Gos performing the title track, Eugene Mirman, Wyatt Cenac, Samantha Bee, James Urbaniak, Megan Amram, a parody of “William’s Doll” called “Wally Wants a Real Doll” and Collin Hanks and Kimmy Gatewood performing a number called “Divorce Makes A Family Twice As Big.”

The album drops today, and you can sample two tracks online. Former Barenaked Ladies frontman Steven Page offers the folky “Be Yourself… Unless,” advising kids to express themselves, but not overshare, with couplets like “Be yourself will be in awe / but keep that self under wraps when meeting your in-laws.” Elsewhere, Lizzy Caplan and Fred Willard assume the roles of Marlo Thomas and Carl Reiner, altering the original dialogue between babies to feature discourse that transcends the gender binary, and is decidedly more NSFW. Listen below.

Two Gorgeous New Books Explore The Unconscious and Inevitable

Sleep, according to those who don’t like to do much of it, is just practice for death. Two terrific new monographs, one from German fashion photographer Jork Weismann and the other by Mexican crime photographer Enrique Metinides, contemplate both the nightly practice for the afterlife and the real thing.

Weismann’s slightly ridiculous book, Asleep at the Chateau, (Damiani, $50) is, predictably, a series of portraits of celebrities asleep at the Chateau Marmont. The Chateau, for those uninitiated into the mysteries of show biz, is a Hollywood hotel where celebrities go to do drugs and contemplate the importance of their lives. It has a nice pool.

The images are pretty and provide insights into the lives of the dozers. Eva Longoria sleeps nude. So does, somewhat less attractively, Purple magazine’s Olivier Zahm. Lizzy Caplan sleeps with her sunglasses on. John Hodgman sleeps with his glasses off. RZA sleeps with a blunt in his hand, and Patti Smith (pictured above) evidently finds James Joyce a snooze.

If sleep is shallow death and celebrities inhabit the shallow depth, 101 Tragedies of Enrique Metinides (Aperture, $50) plumbs more profound pools. Metinides, often called the Mexican Weegee, spent his career photographing crime scenes for Mexican nota roja, the daily papers whose pages drip with victims’ blood. This book consists of 101 of the most striking selections from his gruesome oeuvre.

metinides

The slumber from which his subjects suffer was rarely arrived upon gently and never in a less–than–spectacular manner. Perhaps one of the best images—if best can be a word used in connection with human calamity—is the portrait of Adela Legarreta Rivas, a Mexican journalist killed in an automobile accident in 1979. Rivas, the book notes, was on her way to a press conference, her hair and make–up done, when she was struck by a white Datsun.


Many of the other images from the book depict the notably less manicured: Buses aflame, car crash victims impaled, the shot atop the irregular crimson outflow of blood. Most of the images are of the dead, but some, including one Metinides shot in flagrante delicto of a supermarket shootout, push the viewer into the uncomfortable position of feeling awe at the capturing of a moment, admiration of the beauty of it, and horror at the human misery it depicts.


Though Metinides has slowed down with age, a new generation of Mexican photojournalists have had more than enough carnage to capture. There have been 5,037 murders in Mexico so far this year alone. But taken as an unlikely pair, these books drive home the point that death can visit you anywhere; in a car, the street, the supermarket, or even at your suite at the Chateau Marmont.

Lizzy Caplan, Charlie Hunnam, and Ron Perlman Talk Their New Comedy ‘3, 2, 1…Frankie Go Boom’

What do you get when you mix a fresh-out-of-rehab lunatic brother, a broken-hearted one-night stand, a transsexual computer hacker ex-con, and a sex tape gone awry? Surprisingly, an absolutely charming and genuinely hilarious (not so) romantic comedy. Writer/director Jordan Roberts’s new semi-autobiographical comedy, 3, 2, 1…Frankie Go Boom, is a film about overcoming humiliation wrapped inside a farcical tale—with a love story buried somewhere underneath.

The film follows Frankie, a reclusive hot dude and overall good guy (played by Charlie Hunnam, in a role that strays from his typical psychotic badassery) who reunites with his brother Bruce (played by the always funny Chris O’Dowd) when he gets out of rehab and decides to get serious about his directing career. A drunken bike-riding incident ensues and Frankie meets Lassie, a vulnerable and slightly imbalanced woman played by Lizzy Caplan. After the two end up spending a very sexually straining night together, Frankie later finds out that his brother caught the whole thing on tape and has sent off the DVD. The next series of events is one pratfall after another while maintaining a sweet, very real relationship between Frankie and Lassie. Somewhere along the line, Phyllis, a transsexual computer hacker played by the ever-delicate Ron Perlman, comes to Frankie’s aid, and the story continues to unfold misstep by misstep into something that feels refreshing, authentic, and laugh-out-loud-alone-in-the-dark hilarious.

I caught up with Charlie Hunnam, Ron Perlman, and Lizzy Caplan to chat about what attracted them to the bizarre story, taking on roles that make people uncomfortable, and just what Sons of Anarchy fans have to look forward to.

How did you become involved with the film?
Ron Perlman: My buddy Charlie Hunnam was doing the movie and he passed the script along at the behest of the filmmaker with the idea that I would hopefully be playing the role of Jack (which ended up being played by Chris Noth). I was reading the script and I got to the role of Phyllis and I said, “Hmmm, wouldn’t this be the tables turning.” So I pursued it and it turned out that it worked out, and so I crossed that one off my bucket list.
Charlie Hunman: Somewhere along the line, Jordan decided that I was the actor he wanted to play the role. He wrote me a letter just saying he was a fan of my work, and it was a really lovely way to be approached. I read the script and just thought it was fantastic and warm and weird and beautiful. But I couldn’t really see myself in it. I’m not a comedian, and it felt like the dynamic between those two brothers was a bit too much of a stretch for me. For the last five or six years, I’ve been in the midst of being really nothing but head-crackin’ thugs, and it felt like a huge departure for me. I told Jordan he seemed like a passive guy, and I’ve been playing these characters where if anyone tries to put upon them, he knocks them out. So he said, “Here’s the thing: that’s the way everybody reads the script, I don’t blame you. But it’s a very obvious way to play it, what’s much much more interesting dynamic is that you’re a regular dude the type of dude that in the past you definitely punched a few guys in the face but you’re a regular dude every guy in the audience is going to be able to relate to, who just happens to have a lunatic for a brother.” And when he articulated that way, it just started to feel a little bit more accessible to me. 

What did you think the first time you read the script?
RP: Oh, I knew by page two that I wanted to be in the movie. It was just really well-executed and was really great writing, really funny. I mean, laugh-out-loud funny. It’s very hard to laugh out loud when you’re quietly reading a script in a room by yourself, but this one was amazingly well-written. I didn’t know I was going to be a chick until like page 55.
CH: I just thought it was really kind of beautiful in a really kind of wacky, dark, larger-than-life way with very accessible themes. The film is semi-autobiographical; a lot of the stuff here is taken directly from Jordan’s life. And it just speaks to his essence that the film comes off as a comedy. It’s just what he’s interested in. We were dealing with real stuff but in a way that was intended to make people laugh instead of cry, which is probably the only way to deal with these things because if you deal with this stuff in a traumatic way, it would have felt heavy-handed and melodramatic.

Something I really liked was that amidst this craziness, Frankie and Lassie had a very real chemistry and human connection.
Lizzy Caplan: So what you’re saying is…we found love in a hopeless place. I mean, it was great. He’s a very, very ideal co-star in that he’s very low-key. We had a great time and an easy rapport from the get-go. Yeah, we jut hit it off. I guess we knew we were going to have to do this highly embarrassing shit together and really got along. 
CH: I really loved her and thought she was just wonderful. We had much more of a brother/sister relationship than any kind of romantic connection. We’d go in to do a kiss and she’d be like, “Dude, you should really eat some more onions.” There was nothing romantic between us in, and yet, somehow when the camera was rolling, I was definitely conscious that we had a connection and that was like a tangible interest in each other. The way Jordan wrote the script,  there were moments where he dialed the comedy down and just let the characters in the world breathe for a second, which I thought was really smart. 


Ron, did you always know you wanted to play a woman?

RP: I never knew how badly! I guess I always did, I just didn’t know it at the time. 

And was your character based off of Jordan’s sister?
RP: Well, in the writing it was, but I didn’t know that Jordan had a brother that was now his sister. I didn’t know that this character was based on somebody real; I just thought it was another comic invention by our brilliant screenwriter/director. And I don’t think I found out that it was based on somebody real until we were pretty much done filming, and I was kind of grateful that I didn’t know because it might have intimidated me to know that I needed to portray a character that was actually existed in the universe.

Has she seen the film?
RP: According to Jordan, not only did she see the film but she endorses it.

Lizzy, I heard you say something once about how you like playing characters and taking on roles that make people uncomfortable—why is that?
LC: Yeah. I do. There are some people—when they go to a movie or watch a television show—that just want to check out. They want to see something that doesn’t make you feel any real emotion—it’s just comforting. And listen, I have plenty of TV shows that serve that purpose, but when I am choosing roles and things that I want to do, I’d rather make people feel something. And it doesn’t always have to be the most positive, as long as it’s a real reaction, a real emotion.

How long were you guys filming?
RP: I did everything in one day.
CH: It was just a single day of work for the two of us. I think it ranks up there as possibly my favorite day of filming in the history of my career so far. We had such a blast together.

In working in very low-budget projects like this, do you feel like you have more freedom to give yourself over to it? Is there something different about working in this environment?
LC: I think there is something more free about it, beyond the fact that usually the directors are more open to hearing your improv ideas or open to rewrites on themes or whatever because they don’t have to answer to studio heads, and you don’t have to go through fifty people to change one line in the script. I think that offers a lot more freedom there, but if the movie is truly terrible and doesn’t work, nobody sees it. So you can pride in your job because if people see it, it means something is working.
CH: The fact that it was low-budget definitely factored into me being comfortable enough to take the risk, stepping completely out of my comfort zone and taking this role on, because when you work in this kind of budget, the film has to be good for anyone to see it. It’s just never going to get out there otherwise, and I felt like, good if people see it, if it sucks then no harm no foul. So the size of it definitely played into the decision. But then of course it is slightly difficult to work under those conditions. We have to work very quickly, and when I found myself doing comedy for only the second time in my life, I would have loved to be able to have had three or four takes. But the reality is, when you’re working that quickly, you get two takes and then you have to move on. 

Ron, you’re the main image in most of the promotion for the film. When you watch the film at first, you’re waiting for you to show up, and then it’s such a surprise when you do. Did you enjoy the element of surprise of the whole thing?
RP: I must admit, it was the element of Charlie Hunnam and Ron Perlman who are known for having a slightly different background dynamics meeting in this capacity; that kind of got my fancy tickled. And so then I began entertaining the idea, but was truly sold when I saw how well the character of Phyllis was executed throughout the whole rest of the film. I became kind of obsessed with trying to figure out if I had it in me to play this character, this chick.

How was it working with each other in such a different way and having to do much different scenes together than you’re used to?
RP: It took no small amount of bravery for Charlie to play a character like Frankie, who is outside of his purview, and for me to play Phyllis, clearly. And the fact that we had this history of being friends—having been in a lot of tight spots together in terms of executing dangerous material—probably made it a lot easier to get us through that day.
CH: It was really wonderful. We got to be friends, you know? Ron is such a sensational actor; he’s absolutely fantastic and really effortlessly turns his mojo on and off. I have to work at it a little harder and don’t have the experience and same bag of tricks. So any given day on Sons of Anarchy, our relationship is so contentious because we’re working these scenes over the course of the day where I have to believe that I despise him and want to murder him. It’s not easy for me to just switch that off and joke around and be pals between takes. So although I love Ron as a man and respect him immensely as an actor, I kind of don’t have a great relationship with him on the set of Sons. I really hold him at an arms length, which is really difficult for him and really difficult for me, too, but it’s just the reality of what I have to do to deliver the performance that I want to deliver. So this was a real opportunity for us to be just pals and to hang out and laugh and have fun and that’s what it was. 

And when you were filming a lot of those close scenes between the two of you, were you laughing a lot and being really playful with everything? I imagine it must have been in order to keep things from getting too weird.
RP: There were a couple of times when we cracked each other up. We went to places that caused no small amount of amusement on both our parts and that also made the day go by quite pleasantly. And there are moments, to this day, that I just think about where I actually just fall off my chair. 
CH: For Sons of Anarchy fans, this is going to be a pretty interesting thing to see.

Have you heard any fans’ reactions to the film?
RP: Actually, Jordan tells me that he’s been following all the sites that deal with both Sons fans and fans of Frankie Go Boom, and there’s a lot of crossover and a lot of very positive feedback from the Sons people about Charlie and me. There’s also been a pronounced amount of negative, which one might expect. 
CH: Yeah, I don’t think anybody ever anticipated that Jax and Clay would be making out. So people will either think it’s hilarious or absolutely hate it. 

Lizzy, something I’ve always loved about you as an actor was your sense of comedic timing and your willingness to take on these ballsy, funny roles for women. Would you say comedy is your preferred genre to work in?
LC: I think that the comedy acting community is where I feel the most comfortable right now. But I am doing a drama television show coming up, so I’m really pumped to be able to do that because I think it’s an intimidating prospect. Honestly, I just like attempting to do something that’s different than what I’ve done before and different types of genres, like, the more I can chop off the better. I just don’t want to have to do one thing.

Charlie, did you end up enjoying comedy and liking the challenge?
CH: I enjoyed the challenge as a one-off experience. I don’t think I’m going to do comedy any time soon. My dad was a very well-known gangster in Northern England; I come from, like, a crime family, and so I stepped away from that and I have nothing to do with that at all. But my area of interest still seems to be drawn to that. I write a great deal, I have a few projects in development, and all the time I feel drawn to those stories.

The film had a very authentic message to it about dealing with humiliation and getting something positive out of it. That’s something the characters went through, but also, in acting it, I feel like you must have gone through a lot of that as well.
RP: You’re absolutely right. There was a lot of life imitating art and vice versa. You had to be willing to humiliate yourself in order to even just step up to the plate. But I ain’t complaining; it makes for some really interesting work and some really interesting challenges, and I’m happiest as an artist walking on the tightrope. 
CH: A couple people asked me, “Do you think it would be easier or more difficult, that scene with Ron, if it was your friend or someone you don’t know?” Now listen, having a man twice my age with very coarse stubble [embracing me]—you hope it’s your friend because that’s going to be pretty fucking awkward to do.
LC: I think the profession is just one where you’re signing up to be embarrassed and be humiliated on a regular basis, you know? If you don’t get a sort of joy out of that, you probably shouldn’t be an actor.

I feel like it’s hard for some actors to navigate between television work and film careers, but all of you are successfully doing both simultaneously. Do you want to keep doing that?
LC: I definitely want to keep doing that. You’re starting to see more and more actors that the public considers to be film actors starting to do more television because the quality of TV has just improved so dramatically in the past bunch of years. A lot of the shows that they’re making are just as good as films, if not better. They’re just like really long, thirteen-hour-long movies. And so I think being able to move back and forth is completely ideal.
CH: The process of it is very similar. We shoot an episode of Sons in seven days, so we’re still working with that rapid-fire, day-to-day schedule. The difference is just the information you get; you get the whole picture when you’re going into a movie and you can arc the performance accordingly. In television, you’re doing it incrementally so you have to be adaptable; you can’t go into the process with all the information in front of you. You can kind of go down where you think something’s going, and then all the sudden you get a script and you have to make the changes and go in a different direction. It can be difficult, but I think all of these chapters that you face teach you something, and you grow and get better and better because you’re overcoming these challenges. 
RP: I just really like working on smart material with smart actors. I happen to have a real soft spot for independent cinema, it seems to be artist-generated more so than studio-generated, and the artist seems to have more of a say in how it’s executed and carried out and what the vibe is. I really love being around young creative people who don’t know the meaning of the word “no,” who don’t know the meaning of the word “hard.” They’ve got nothing to lose, and they’re shooting from the hip all the time. I find that’s why I continue to do all these low-budget feature films with young, fresh filmmakers. My first example of that was Guillermo del Toro’s first film. And now I’ve done five movies with him. So you try and make lightening strike twice by finding the next Guiellermo and marching to the light with him.

I’m a huge fan of Drive and Nicolas Winding Refn, and he’s someone that, as you say, shoots from the hip and does what he wants to do.
RP: I keep hoping that every time my phone rings it’s NWF calling me about doing his next film, but that hasn’t happened yet. He’s absolutely brilliant; he’s absolutely born to make films. He makes them not like anybody else. I was really, really lucky that he entertained all the lobbying I did to win that role. I don’t think he had me on his radar for the role; I don’t think he had anyone particularly on his radar. But he did put me through some paces in order to convince him.

Lizzy, you’ve been acting for a while now, but in the past two years or s, you’ve really been doing a ton of work and people have really started to taking notice. How has that been—is that still sort of new for you?
LC: I notice that I’m getting to do projects that I really like and I want to do and really believe in. I’ve gotten to play the most interesting characters in the last two years than I’ve ever gotten to play. But I think my fixation on success has declined as any sort of success I’ve gotten has inclined. I kind of don’t give a shit. I guess you have to pay attention to it but for me, it just matters if I can I keep working, do the job I want to do, and be as successful as I need to be. 

‘Bachelorette’ Trailer Promises ‘The Hangover’-Slash-‘Bridesmaids’ But With Chicks (And Adam Scott)

Feminism has won, everybody! Hollywood is now making the same film over and over again but doing it with ladies. Not that I’m complaining — especially if it means Bachelorette puts Rebel Wilson, Adam Scott and Isla Fisher all in the same film. Check out the trailer after the jump.

Bachelorette stars Kirsten Dunst (in the bitchy Rose Byrne role from Bridesmaids), Lizzy Caplan and Isla Fisher (apparently reprising her manic drunk girl role from The Wedding Crashers) as high school friends of Rebel Wilson’s character, who is getting married. You know who is not happy that their 10-whole-dress-sizes-larger friend is getting hitched before they do? These girls. James Marsden and Adam Scott are also on hand, seemingly as extraordinarily hot members of the wedding party.

 

 

Bachelorette comes to video-on-demand on August 10, says the ol’ IMDB, and will have limited release in theaters September 7.