Too big a budget because of their salaries? Advised against doing it by their people? Personality conflicts?
Why don't Sandra Bullock and Julia Roberts do a film together?
|by Anonymous||reply 84||10/23/2013|
probably hard to find a property with two good women's roles
|by Anonymous||reply 1||11/28/2012|
They could be in a remake of "Thelma and Louise". Who would be who?
|by Anonymous||reply 2||11/28/2012|
I'm sure neither feels the need to do a film with the other, though I suspect Bullock would be willing to work with Roberts if the script was good. Roberts on the other hand...
There are a lot of star pairings that might sound good on paper, but would never happen due to the egos involved.
I remember the film HEAT with DeNiro and Pacino. They only had one scene together, and the way it's shot, I'm not sure they were on the set at the same time.
|by Anonymous||reply 3||11/28/2012|
Roberts must be a little mad that she quit The Proposal over money and then Sandra took the script took a pay cut, produced it to huge profits, and made one of the few money making star vehicles of that summer. The theory was Sandra got that Oscar not so much for the movie but for being a smart business woman who made money for Hollywood and not just herself as Julia was trying to do.
|by Anonymous||reply 4||11/29/2012|
Sandra and Julia could remake "Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?"
|by Anonymous||reply 5||11/29/2012|
[quote] I'm sure neither feels the need to do a film with the other, though I suspect Bullock would be willing to work with Roberts if the script was good. Roberts on the other hand...
I'm sure you've heard about Roberts' quote that she's never seen a Sandra Bullock movie. I thought someone was making it up the first time I read that. Why comment on Bullock at all if she's never seen one of her movies? She had to have known how bitter it made her look, but was apparently so bitter she didn't care.
|by Anonymous||reply 6||11/29/2012|
I probably am a bit too happy that Bullock, who, for a good decade, was the distant number 2 to Roberts, has not only surpassed her, but lapped her.
|by Anonymous||reply 8||11/29/2012|
Who would prop them up? Remember, neither of them can act.
|by Anonymous||reply 9||11/29/2012|
R4 it was The Blindside that Sandra took on and won the Oscar for.
Even though Julia also allegedly passed on The Proposal as well which Sandy picked up and drove to huge success.
So Julia passed up 2 roles in 1 year that Sandra took, both which went on to do huge box office and win Sandra an Oscar.
Will they ever work together? Fuck no. Julia's probably still fuming to this day over her decisions and Sandra's subsequent successes.
|by Anonymous||reply 10||11/29/2012|
Why don't they do a film together?
Because sometimes the gods are kind to us.
|by Anonymous||reply 11||11/29/2012|
What about Jessica Lange and Meryl Streep? I was thinking they'd be good in A Delicate Balance.
|by Anonymous||reply 12||11/29/2012|
That would be a nice pairing R12, but no one is going to make another film of that play (the first one with Hepburn and Scofield is so badly directed it hurts).
Also, both actresses would want to play the alcoholic sister Claire rather than Agnes. Claire is the role that tends to win awards.
|by Anonymous||reply 13||11/29/2012|
I think Sandy and Jules should do a screwball comedy. Can you imagine the press? People would have a field day. The lines at the theaters would be divided into Camp Sandra and Camp Julia.
|by Anonymous||reply 14||11/29/2012|
Bullock has the actual charm we were conned into thinking Roberts had. Bullock would be game, Roberts would not do it for some lame reason when the actual reason is fear of direct comparison. She won't have another Cameron Diaz-snatches-the-movie situation.
|by Anonymous||reply 15||11/29/2012|
[quote]Roberts must be a little mad that she quit The Proposal over money and then Sandra took the script took a pay cut, produced it to huge profits, and made one of the few money making star vehicles of that summer. The theory was Sandra got that Oscar not so much for the movie but for being a smart business woman who made money for Hollywood and not just herself as Julia was trying to do
Sandra is a smart cookie while Roberts is a high school dropout who I suspect was only semi-literate when starting out. She has the tendency to use big word-of-the-day calendar words that don't mesh with the level of the other words in the sentence. Huge sign of intellectual insecurity. Woody Allen's scripts sometimes have the same issue if you listen closely.
|by Anonymous||reply 16||11/29/2012|
r10...I phrased it wrong. I was talking about The Proposal for most of my post and meant they give her the award for the Blind Side in part because she did so well financially with The Proposal
I didn't know Roberts turned down blind side too
|by Anonymous||reply 17||11/29/2012|
OP and everyone else: name a *single* successful film -- aside from "Thelma and Louise" -- that starred two fairly well-known Hollywood actresses better known for their beauty than their talent. Ensemble films don't count, nor do foreign films (including British films). By "successful" I mean made at least double its production cost at the domestic box office. Finally, only films with both actresses as a LEAD protagonist count.
Name one. Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?
|by Anonymous||reply 18||11/29/2012|
[quote] better known for their beauty than their talent.
Bullock never fit that category nor did Roberts really....they were known for their likability and comedic timing.
|by Anonymous||reply 19||11/29/2012|
Single White Female
|by Anonymous||reply 20||11/29/2012|
From Justin to Kelly, r18.
|by Anonymous||reply 21||11/29/2012|
|by Anonymous||reply 22||11/29/2012|
The Children's Hour
|by Anonymous||reply 23||11/29/2012|
The Turning Point
|by Anonymous||reply 24||11/29/2012|
|by Anonymous||reply 25||11/29/2012|
|by Anonymous||reply 26||11/29/2012|
|by Anonymous||reply 27||11/29/2012|
|by Anonymous||reply 28||11/29/2012|
Desperatly Seeking Susan
|by Anonymous||reply 29||11/29/2012|
Death Becomes Her
|by Anonymous||reply 30||11/29/2012|
|by Anonymous||reply 31||11/29/2012|
R18, they're not made because Hollywood is run by overgrown frat boys (and a lot of corporate asshole-type women)who truly, truly don't think that women go to the movies. Every time there is a female-centered hit, the exact same story runs that "wow, women go to the movies". Then everytime its called a fluke and movies for teen boys are a sure thing for the bottom line.
The directors, writers, actors, etc, are mostly smart and sometimes brilliant, but the studio people are often MBAs and legacy hires who know nothing more about film than what won the box office last weekend. Truly some of the dumbest people you could meet. And why should they change? They have the big job and all the other climbers will "yes" them and agree that America is dying for a remake of Tron.
This article on Hollywood's shifting attitude towards "Inception" is a good example. Basically, they thought it would bomb and was "too smart". When it was a huge hit, it didn't mean they were wrong, it meant it was a fluke.
|by Anonymous||reply 32||11/29/2012|
Sorry, I meant to state "from the past 20 years"! That would exclude many, if not most, of the films mentioned. R25, "Chicago" is the very *definition* of an ensemble piece. R28, that film *starred* Winona Ryder and had Angelina in a supporting role. R31, "sidekick" roles don't count - I mean equal leads (and nobody in any "Alien" film is a co-lead with Sigourney).
|by Anonymous||reply 33||11/29/2012|
I think it would be more fun to see Sandra and Jm. J. Bullock make a movie together--and they could use the same plot that they would have if Julia had been the co-star.
|by Anonymous||reply 34||11/29/2012|
Why don't they braid each other's hair and gossip about American Idol? I guess we'll never know...
|by Anonymous||reply 35||11/29/2012|
R32 is spot on. I'd add agents at bigger agencies, especially those who venture into producing. Truly the most vapid, opinion lacking, dumb people you will ever meet.
|by Anonymous||reply 36||11/29/2012|
Sandra has done a few movies with another female lead, including Nicole Kidman.
|by Anonymous||reply 37||11/29/2012|
Sandy is supposedly a joy to work with. Julia, on the other hand...
|by Anonymous||reply 38||11/30/2012|
Here's Julia Roberts' biggest problem in terms of her career:
Most of the US audience under 35 years old does not connect with Julia Roberts anymore. "PRETTY WOMAN" is pretty much the only film of hers that is still popular amongst the younger crowd. None of her other films has stood the test of time in terms of popularity with those under 35.
Basically, Julia Roberts is viewed as "Too 1990s". She barely has a connection with the younger audience. It's a major reason why most of her films in the 2000s have disappointed or flopped.
Interestingly, Sandra Bullock's films from the 1990s and early 2000s may have been considered crap and grossed less than Roberts' films at the time, but they have remained popular or become more popular.
Cable channels play Bullock's films non-stop, and the younger crowd enjoys them.
"Speed", "While You Were Sleeping", "A Time To Kill", "Practical Magic", "Miss Congeniality", "Two Weeks Notice", "The Proposal", and "The Blind Side" are always on TV on constant rotation. Sad but true
Bullock is older than Roberts, but she's still viewed as 'fun', 'cool', 'hilarious', 'sweet', and 'adorable'. People root for Bullock because she seems nice and down-to-earth - the underdog.
Roberts projects bitchiness and narcissism.
|by Anonymous||reply 39||12/02/2012|
"Bullock is older than Roberts....
but everyone thinks Julia is older.
|by Anonymous||reply 40||12/02/2012|
People think that Julia Roberts is older because she became famous in the late 1980s, and Sandra Bullock became famous in the mid-1990s.
Sandra was 30 years old when SPEED was released, and that made her a star.
|by Anonymous||reply 41||12/20/2012|
Julia also looks older.
|by Anonymous||reply 42||12/20/2012|
Julia Roberts and Sandra Bullock may both be nominated for Best Actress at the Oscars for their films this year.
Bullock - GRAVITY
Roberts - August: Osage County
|by Anonymous||reply 43||08/06/2013|
And who would want to see that movie, OP? I'd go see a movie because Sandra Bullock's in it if I like the idea, but I don't care much for Julia Roberts. Except perhaps Notting Hill and Best Friend's Wedding, which I genuinely wanted to see for Roberts.
|by Anonymous||reply 44||08/06/2013|
R39 for President!!!
|by Anonymous||reply 45||08/06/2013|
Interesting what happens when the "sexiness" factor fades out. Sandra Bullock was never so much "sexy" as "the good friend" (with a lot of charm!), and that lasts a lot longer, as time is proving.
|by Anonymous||reply 46||08/06/2013|
Because Julia is a cunt.
|by Anonymous||reply 47||08/06/2013|
This one is easy enough... Julia is an insecure cunt and would never do it.
|by Anonymous||reply 48||08/06/2013|
Julia is too busy doing commercial voiceovers for Nationwide insurance to make a movie these days.
|by Anonymous||reply 49||08/06/2013|
Why would Bullock be interested in such a project? Roberts would only bring her down.
|by Anonymous||reply 50||08/06/2013|
R3, You just brought up a fav film, "Heat." Just compare it to the current crop of action movies. Whatever happened to Michael Mann? Loved some of his other thrillers too.
|by Anonymous||reply 51||08/06/2013|
I don't watch Julia Roberts' films and if I do see a Sandra Bullock film it's usually on an airplane.
|by Anonymous||reply 52||08/06/2013|
R32, Good article. So why aren't studios making movies like An Officer and a Gentleman and Body Heat anymore?
|by Anonymous||reply 53||08/06/2013|
Most of the best material is on cable. I'd love to see Sandra do a well-written TV show.
|by Anonymous||reply 54||08/06/2013|
R39, Thanks for the analysis. It's obvious when you see the list of Bullock films that she benefited from not being just a romantic comedy lead. Roberts rarely had major box office success outside of romantic comedies which no one watches anymore.
|by Anonymous||reply 55||08/06/2013|
Sandra would be great on a well-written TV show, R54.
|by Anonymous||reply 56||08/07/2013|
Seriously, is Julia Roberts still relevant?
|by Anonymous||reply 57||08/24/2013|
It would have to be a comedy. Both of them require more skilled actors to play up to in a drama.
|by Anonymous||reply 58||08/24/2013|
I think While You Were Sleeping was Bullock's breakthrough and it very quickly propelled her to the A list, much like Pretty Woman and Roberts. She had 3 high profile movies that year (scarily almost 20 years ago), also The Net and Speed.
|by Anonymous||reply 59||08/24/2013|
While You Were Sleeping was AFTER Speed and Demolitian Man. Sandra was already established.
|by Anonymous||reply 60||08/24/2013|
Nope. You're wrong.
|by Anonymous||reply 61||08/24/2013|
Seabiscuits: All The Pretty Horses
|by Anonymous||reply 62||08/24/2013|
Sandra Bullock is a true Hollywood movie star who climbed up to the stratosphere of the film industry due to her charisma and sheer determination.
Roberts, on the other hand, while also incredibly loveable onscreen, received the biggest free pass into Hollywood when her brother, Erik, who stared in a number of pictures in the 1980's (action, martial arts), opened the door for her to enter the arena.
Pretty Woman was successful equally to Richard Gere's performance. I think Gere made Pretty Woman and any other actress, including Bullock, could have pulled off the role of Vivian.
Regardless of the divergent paths the aforementioned actresses took in achieving their legendary and iconic status in the entertainment industry, they are both household names.
It's improbable they'll ever star in a film together. There can only be one star in their eyes. Remember that many years ago, Bullock left the Creative Artists Agency for a while because they had signed on Roberts and there would be a subsequent conflict of interest in what projects would be packaged for whom.
In the end, Roberts got cocky and it showed in her work. Her arrogance probably interfered with her choices and she ended up starring in films that probably weren't too relevant or high concept enough (like her early work). She probably just tried to appease her male costars. When the late 90's arrived, Roberts became the same person onscreen in every film. Her range froze because, rightfully so, she probably felt that she had to stay the same to achieve the success of her previous films.
Sandra Bullock, on the other hand, has the broadest acting range in Hollywood history. She has successfully negotiated almost every genre -- from action to drama to comedy to voice over animation. I think her name is now synonymous with movie star.
Bullock captured my heart when I watched her in While You Were Sleeping and I'll always be incredibly in love with her onscreen persona.
Roberts, on the other hand, entertains me in her films but leaves very little long term impression because -- like a previous poster mentioned -- I know she's on screen to earn her 20 million a movie salary and that's it. I don't sense genuine immersion in the films she's in.
GRAVITY is Bullok's tour de force and I hope it makes a ton of cash at the box office and gets Sandra a 2nd Academy Award.
I think Bullock's potential is endless in terms of the success she can now bring to the film industry. She'll never be outdated and is the most fantastic movie star in the world.
|by Anonymous||reply 63||10/21/2013|
Speed was great until one of the stupidest endings of all time ruined it.
ALl Jack had to do when the subway train was careening out of control was to have the cop on the other end of his radio arrange to hvae power to the third rail cut.
Same problem with "Under Seige 2"
|by Anonymous||reply 64||10/21/2013|
R63, I completely agree!
Your first and second paragraphs are perfect summaries and encapsulate the obvious, however in Hollywood, casting by publicist and connections is what is practiced.
It is the same in the news business, and to a lesser extent, the music business as well.
|by Anonymous||reply 65||10/21/2013|
What a fabulous post, R63! I agree with everything you said.
|by Anonymous||reply 66||10/22/2013|
Speed should have ended with the bus.
|by Anonymous||reply 67||10/22/2013|
[all posts by tedious troll removed.]
|by Anonymous||reply 68||10/22/2013|
[all posts by tedious troll removed.]
|by Anonymous||reply 69||10/23/2013|
"Sandra Bullock, on the other hand, has the broadest acting range in Hollywood history."
Only on DL
|by Anonymous||reply 70||10/23/2013|
All that said, Sandra is infinitely more likeable.
As actresses, they're probably both equally limited. I'm willing to bet Sandra Bullock's a more interesting, complex person.
|by Anonymous||reply 71||10/23/2013|
Fuck Thelma and Louise. R5 nailed it!
|by Anonymous||reply 72||10/23/2013|
R83 = Sandra Bullock
|by Anonymous||reply 73||10/23/2013|
R7 nails it on the head
|by Anonymous||reply 74||10/23/2013|
[quote]I think Bullock's potential is endless in terms of the success she can now bring to the film industry. She'll never be outdated and is the most fantastic movie star in the world.
|by Anonymous||reply 75||10/23/2013|
[quote]Sandra Bullock, on the other hand, has the broadest acting range in Hollywood history.
Yes, she can play Sandra Bullock and Sandra Bullock!
|by Anonymous||reply 76||10/23/2013|
Two inexplicably mediocre actresses??? Yeah, I would plunk my hard earned money down to see them. Not.
|by Anonymous||reply 77||10/23/2013|
No, they should do something groundbreaking: they should play a couple! Seriously! The first lesbian screwball comedy!!
|by Anonymous||reply 78||10/23/2013|
Personally, I would never do a film with my rival.
|by Anonymous||reply 79||10/23/2013|
Me either, G. I don't do made-for-television movies.
|by Anonymous||reply 80||10/23/2013|
Shut up cunt or I'll show you damages.
|by Anonymous||reply 81||10/23/2013|
Connie White and Barbara Jean never appear together onstage.
|by Anonymous||reply 82||10/23/2013|
R68 - No. Exhibit A: Infamous.
|by Anonymous||reply 83||10/23/2013|
I only did it because of the scene where I got to kick the living shit out of that cheap whore.
|by Anonymous||reply 84||10/23/2013|