Jude Law fights back at Charlie Brooker & Marina Hyde - Repo Men Interview with Forest Whitaker

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 29 сер 2024
  • Jude Law & Forest Whitaker talk to Paul Byrne for www.Movies.ie
    I think I may have hit a nerve. Jude Law is on a roll. It might even be a rant. Sitting beside the Zen-like Forest Whitaker, Law is coming across like a yapping terrier being allowed to yank on his leash for a few minutes by his patient, stoically silent master.
    The reason Jude Law is letting off a little steam is Marina Hyde. And Charlie Booker. And all those other media smartasses who have dared suggest that, when it comes to the world's trouble spots, perhaps celebrities aren't the best and brightest to send in on rescue missions.
    Booker's rather fine BBC2 show Newswipe had a swipe at such celebrity charity work on a recent episode, Hyde being invited along to discuss the issue in particular, Law's recent trips to Afghanistan with English filmmaker-turned-activist Jeremy Gilley, founder of the Peace One Day project which aims to declare one day a year free of conflict and war.
    Law is clearly unimpressed with Hyde's work both her Lost In Showbiz column in The Guardian, and, perhaps more significantly, her recent book, Celebrity: How Entertainers Took Over The World And Why We Need An Exit Strategy.
    It's a book that takes some well-aimed shots at such popular celebrity past times as pets, politics and parenthood; our glamourous heroes' strong hold on the media and their loose understanding of medicine; their own feisty-verging-on-fabulous wars on terror, and their sterling work in the field of making a tragedy sexy.
    The reason we're gathered in this Claridge's hotel room in London though is Repo Man, a blackly comic sci-fi thriller set in a future where a good heart might just cost you your life. If you can't make the repayments, that is. And that's where Law's Remy and Whitaker's Jake come in, being hitmen for The Union, organ merchants who believe that their fine artificial hearts, livers and kidneys are worth much more than just an arm or a leg. Director Miguel Sapochnik is making the leap from music videos.
    Here the duo discuss new movie Repo Men - talking about the comparisons between the story & the American Health Care system. Both of them talk about their acting career.
    Jude discusses the recent episode of Charlie Brooker's Newswipe which criticized his charity work for Peace One Day with Jeremy Gilley.
    Recent movies from Jude Law include Repo Men, Sherlock Holmes, The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus & Sleuth. Coming up he's got Contagion.
    Forest Whitekar has recently appeared in Repo Men, Our Family Wedding, Hurricane Season, Where The Wild Things Are, The Last King Of Scotland and more. Coming up he has Taxi Wars, A Single Shot, Little Treasure, Lullaby for Pi and more...
    For more movie news visit www.Movies.ie

КОМЕНТАРІ • 43

  • @DanzNewz
    @DanzNewz 14 років тому +13

    It's nice to see how passionate Jude Law is about important issues... +10 respect points for him...

  • @SomeIrishGuy19
    @SomeIrishGuy19 14 років тому +7

    he starts talking about the subject at 6:20

  • @brandiialize
    @brandiialize 14 років тому +5

    I love Jude in whatever role he plays. He was good in Repo man.

  • @255ad
    @255ad 14 років тому +9

    newswipe was also trying to make the point that it's harder to criticise celebrities because they can get away with more the spokes persons because the people interviewing them don’t wont them too leave because they don’t just wont to talk about the charities

  • @TulseLuper
    @TulseLuper 14 років тому +2

    People forget that the Charlie Brooker on Screenwipe/Newswipe is a character. He's not really that cynical and bitter in real life. I don't think Brooker dislikes Jude Law in any way. Plus, as everyone has already said, the point wasn't to insult these celebrities point blank, it was to point out that we shouldn't need celebrities to care about said charities.

  • @neil865
    @neil865 14 років тому +7

    Jude Law looks a lot like Eminem in the poster!

  • @faraday200
    @faraday200 14 років тому +3

    @fallingstar169 Absolutely agree. Law makes a good point that charities need to have celebrity figureheads in order to be recognised, but this doesn't negate the wider point that Brooker and Hyde were making: It's sad we seem to need an actor to reassure us that a certain cause is worthy of our attention.

  • @Ricardoloslambos
    @Ricardoloslambos 14 років тому +2

    fair play to aul judy, got his point across at the end without losing his cool...Ive a bit more respect for him than i did before.

  • @SwingRiots
    @SwingRiots 14 років тому +4

    Charlie Brooker is right about everything.

  • @itchcitizen2
    @itchcitizen2 14 років тому +4

    Brooker is the man !

  • @The420Gov
    @The420Gov 14 років тому +3

    ...but to be fair, I enjoyed the hell out of this movie, especially the music. I had to track down tons of it, 'cause a lot was omitted from the actual soundtrack. :~)

  • @dreadeh
    @dreadeh 14 років тому +3

    I think Jude has some valid points, however Charlie's points to me seemed more a criticism of society as a whole manifested in a dig at the celebs, as per newswipe's role.

  • @fallingstar169
    @fallingstar169 14 років тому +1

    What jude law does appear to be missing is the fact that charities and issues shouldn't NEED celebrity support to be seen as important or, actually, to be seen at all. That we live in a culture that's so celebrity obsessed, we see their actions and thoughts as more important than the those of the campaigners, NGO's and politicians who do the real work. I think that's the point Charlie Brooker and Marina Hyde were trying to make.

  • @mattcast44
    @mattcast44 4 роки тому

    The word "Diddums" springs to mind.

  • @Mattgotsoul
    @Mattgotsoul 14 років тому +4

    I seriously doubt people like Angelina Jolie or Jude would do these things for charity if they knew it would have no bearing on their careers or public persona. But why do we need Celebrities getting involved in these things, when ultimately the message has been used for celebrity gain or lost completely in order to build on a celebrites profile. I know this says more about our society, but they play towards this and the media have manipulated this without restraint for years.

  • @nojohanny
    @nojohanny 14 років тому +1

    way to go Jude!!

  • @Fingermush
    @Fingermush 14 років тому +2

    @impcirca1988 dumbed-down bland un-aesthetic re-hash; is a perfect description of Repo: the genetic opera

  • @32371
    @32371 14 років тому

    @SomeIrishGuy19 Thank you so much! You saved 6 minutes of my life

  • @AliasNeo92
    @AliasNeo92 14 років тому +1

    I can see where Jude is coming from and I surpose it does help get attention but they all do it for such well known charities so it seems pointless.
    If they really do care why not just anonymously send loads of money.
    The reason they do "celebrity charity work" is because they want everyone to know the good work they are doing.

  • @ScrewAttackEurope
    @ScrewAttackEurope 14 років тому

    What a waste of time, there wasn't a single mention of Brooker in that video.

  • @SugarSnaps37
    @SugarSnaps37 14 років тому +4

    Go Jude, Go! He's right. Why would you put down the good things that people do. There are plenty of other things to rag on. If we put down the good things what are we left with?
    Major respect for Jude.

  • @ingrogies1
    @ingrogies1 14 років тому

    Celebrities who help charities arent doing anything wrong. Fair enough, many celebrities help charities to boost their own profiles but plenty more help out for the right reasons. The fact that charities rely on celebrities to raise awareness for their cause says more about society itself than it does about the actors involved. Bono and Angelina Jolie work so hard on projects that take over their own careers, they don't do to feed their own egos. Its a bit unfair to write them all off

  • @DemonicElric
    @DemonicElric 14 років тому +1

    I saw this movie and I thought it was good even though.. the ending

  • @sLAUGHTER115
    @sLAUGHTER115 14 років тому +2

    good for him. he's got the money. he's using it help others.

  • @funkmasterflex
    @funkmasterflex 14 років тому +2

    Jude has got a point

  • @JoeStunner
    @JoeStunner 14 років тому +3

    Jude Law is a good guy. He's right about the right-wing cynics and slags who put down celebs for using their fame for better purposes than just lining their own pockets. Keep doing what your doing mate.

  • @greenycrimson
    @greenycrimson 14 років тому

    @faraday200 Exactly this: they seem to have misinterpreted a criticism of modern celebrity-obsessed culture as an actual personal attack on them for doing something worthwhile. Now, to insinuate that they only heard about the article, or only saw their name & that it was a critique & then drew their opinions without actually reading it would be rather churlish of me - especially if I then went on to imply that this rather shows a staggering level of self obsession.
    Good thing I haven't, really.

  • @noisyneil
    @noisyneil 14 років тому +1

    marina hyde is sharp but conceited. charlie brooker, despite his misanthropic vitriol, generally appreciates good where it's done. i think jude law probably does have the best intentions, but that doesn't stop him coming across as a bit of a bell-end.

  • @rastabus
    @rastabus 14 років тому

    Maybe I would have some respect for Jude Law, if he didn't just call Angelina Jolie Angie, no, but I wouldn't, not really...

  • @EmptySD
    @EmptySD 14 років тому +2

    is jude law a robot, at 6:25 ive never seen anyone stay still for so long

  • @FranMSK
    @FranMSK 14 років тому +2

    @fallingstar169 I think Marine Hyde is just a stupid gossip, but I do see your point. I don't think Jude Law would deny the fact that charities should be recognised on their own terms, but since we don't live in a world like that, I applaud the work people like him and Angelina Jolie do.

  • @jackbullough9825
    @jackbullough9825 14 років тому

    its not political it just involves the un and politics

  • @RobinDylanJones
    @RobinDylanJones 14 років тому

    We find it hard to raise funds without people like "Angie"?? I work in the charity sector (for a small NGO) and can vouch that it is definitely not an imperative to have celebrity backing. It can be useful, but we wouldn't find it hard to run without them like Jude thinks.

  • @gman8471
    @gman8471 14 років тому

    @impcirca1988 I kind of agree with that. He makes it sounds she makes a fortune but she probably doesn't, she certainly won't be as rich as him, what right has he got to criticize her for keeping the money she earned? I don't mean to sound like a selfish Conservative/Republican but why should someone HAVE to give away loads of money to charity when they haven't got much more than they need?

  • @mrteatime
    @mrteatime 14 років тому

    @SethMcFartlane
    Trololololol

  • @ST91111
    @ST91111 14 років тому +6

    i intensely dislike Marina Hydes contributions to the Guardian.

  • @nojohanny
    @nojohanny 14 років тому +1

    way to go Jude!!