A Star Is Borne
(by Sharon Waxman)
LOS ANGELES -- For two years now we have been trying to love Gwyneth
Paltrow. We know we're supposed to. And we've been trying, honest.
Clearly, she must be something special if every attitude-dispensing
arbiter of What's New and Hip says so.
And they all say so.
In 1994 the New York Times Magazine counted Paltrow as one of the 30
artists most likely to "change the culture for the next 30 years."
Vanity Fair put her on the cover of its April 1995 Hollywood issue
along with eight other up-and-coming starlets. This April Harper's
Bazaar called her "Hollywood's newest and most promising star."
Harpers & Queen said she was "white-hot" in June. And now Vogue has
put her on the cover of its August issue, complete with photo spread,
interview and editorial.
"Gwynethis well known as the actress every designer wants to dress,"
Vogue Editor Anna Wintour writes in the editorial. Paltrow, she
remarks, qualifies as "simultaneously chic, accessible, natural,
friendly and warm."
Notably absent from Wintour's editorial is any mention of Paltrow's
acting successes. That's because the actress hasn't had many. Or, for
that matter, many failures. The fact is, Paltrow has had only a half-
dozen roles of any significance, several of which almost nobody saw.
So this year we have been waiting for Paltrow to redeem the promise of
her relentless promotion. And Paltrow is making back-to-back films.
For those of us hoping to add our voices to the clamor of the cultural
cognoscenti, here -- finally -- is our chance to get it.
But alas, what are we offered thus far? "Seven," a nail-biting
thriller starring Brad Pitt (now her boyfriend) and Morgan Freeman,
with Paltrow playing the wise, stoic wife of a cop for a total of
perhaps 15 minutes. Then "The Pallbearer," a romantic comedy in which
Paltrow has her first quasi-leading role as the object of David
Schwimmer's obsession. In it, however, she is more mousy than
mesmerizing; the film quickly vanished.
Now comes "Emma," a film that Paltrow dominates as a well-intentioned
but immature, scheming daughter of England's 19th-century upper class.
The latest Jane Austen novel committed to celluloid, "Emma" lacks the
wit and sparkle of its Oscar-winning predecessor, "Sense and
Sensibility," but it at least gives Paltrow a chance to display her
talents.
She may be a wonderful actress; she may, on the other hand, be just
plain average. Up to now it's been hard to tell. But never mind.
Either way, Gwyneth Paltrow seems destined for celebrity and,
probably, stardom.
To the Manner Born
There's a little bit of Emma in Gwyneth Paltrow. The actress projects
innocence and girlishness -- after all, she's only 23 -- along with a
worldliness that is beyond her years.
Right now she is curled up like a cat on an armchair in her hotel
suite. Behind her the bed is rumpled, as if she just woke up and
couldn't be bothered to straighten the sheets; she strokes her loose,
straw-blonde hair as she languidly smokes a cigarette and considers
all the attention she gets.
"When there's somebody new, people get really excited," Paltrow is
saying. "But I've been lucky. No matter what they've said about my
family, my boyfriend, I've always been fortunate in that people who
criticize movies -- well, I've always come out pretty well."
Austen's Emma is naive in her sophistication; she has a wealth of
breeding but no experience to qualify her for the pastime of romantic
meddling. In some ways, that is a caricature of Paltrow, who teeters
on the cusp of stardom with little knowledge of the vagaries of the
acting trade (though some of the vagaries of stardom). Emma and
Paltrow also share the right education and upbringing; it's no
coincidence that the actress was skilled enough in archery, horseback
riding and singing to do all three in the movie without coaching or a
stand-in.
Paltrow is Hollywood royalty, her mother the esteemed stage actress
Blythe Danner, and her father, Bruce Paltrow, a successful television
producer of hit shows including "St. Elsewhere" and "The White
Shadow." Paltrow's childhood was not the Beverly Hills experience;
her family had a big house and back yard in Santa Monica before
moving to New York when Paltrow was 11. There her mother insisted she
attend an upper-crust girls' school, Spence, mixing with the children
of New York's wealthy circles.
But show business contacts and acquaintances were always there to
help. One of Paltrow's first roles -- granted, a tiny one -- was
offered by a family friend, Steven Spielberg, as she stood in line at
the movies with her father. She played Wendy in Spielberg's "Hook." A
TV mini-series role and a couple of plays later, Paltrow was adopted
by a well-connected agent, Rick Kurtzman at Creative Artists Agency,
who sent her to see key producers, directors and casting agents in
Hollywood.
And then there's Pitt, who had already been dubbed "the sexiest man
alive" when he and Paltrow met on the set of "Seven" last year. It
became, you might say, a well-documented love affair. The two have
been pursued mercilessly by paparazzi (photos of them naked and
kissing on the beach in St. Bart's were published this year in the
little-known Celebrity Sleuth magazine, then uploaded onto the
Internet), and they are constantly mentioned in the tabloid press as
married or about to be. All of this, while unpleasant, has certainly
helped keep Paltrow in the public eye.
Oddly enough, the actress is much prettier in real life than on
screen. While the lens seems to emphasize the downward slope of her
eyes, giving her a look of permanent melancholy, she lacks this in
the flesh, except during certain moments of reflection. In person
Paltrow has delicate, almost childlike features, a translucent
complexion and bottomless pale blue eyes. She passes from attitudes
of girlish timidity -- knees folded, head tilted to one side -- to
ones of graceful self-possession, gliding across the room to pour
coffee for a visitor. (And at this point -- 130 interviews into her
press junket -- any act of graciousness is worthy of note.)
Asked about the small number of roles in her career, Paltrow says:
"It's purposefully so. As a young woman, a young actress, I'm very
aware that there's a lot to learn. I was in no rush. I found I could
derive great lessons and value from very diverse, small roles."
She pauses. "I turned down a bunch of lead roles -- I didn't feel
ready." And why "Emma"? Paltrow looks up in astonishment. "Isn't it
obvious?" she asks. "I mean, roles like that just don't come along
for a woman in her early twenties. It's such an exception. She's
such a wonderful, flawed heroine, and she learns and grows from her
mistakes."
Paltrow's name is often mentioned with a few other rising (and more
accomplished) young actresses, but she feels no competition with
them. "I'm so the least competitive person. I'm not that ambitious,"
she protests. She is friends, however, with actresses who have been
built up and then torn down by the publicity machine, such as
Jennifer Beals, who has struggled to come back after "Flashdance,"
and she is close with Jennifer Jason Leigh, who has deliberately
rejected mainstream roles for darker, more tortured characters.
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.twbbs.org)
◆ From: h5.s96.ts30.hinet.net