MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Little Miss Hassid?

kit_kittredge_an_american_girl.jpg
Every time I see this one-sheet, I wonder the same thing. The wig is so obviously a wig… either Oscar nominee Abigail Breslin is The New Julia who dies from cancer at the end of this film or she’s playing a Hassidic girl who is marrying very, very young.

Be Sociable, Share!

26 Responses to “Little Miss Hassid?”

  1. nudel says:

    Maybe it’s because you’ve seen her in something else with different hair? I haven’t, and didn’t notice anything more odd about her hair than in any other one-sheet. Nobody’s hair looks natural in movie publicity.

  2. jeffmcm says:

    Do Hassids wear wigs when they get married? I think I’m missing something.

  3. LexG says:

    Is it true, as Owen Gleiberman wrote in an EW sidebar column, that film critics are not allowed to mention stars’ wigs and hairpieces in their reviews?
    Is that a sort of gentleman’s agreement, an actual slander-based law, some sort of journo-ethical thing, or just something Gleiberman pulled out of thin air?
    I’m not saying it would apply here (and that indeed at least looks like a wig in the above picture); I think he was saying it’s some sort of breach of ethics to mention when an A-list actor is clearly wearing a piece.
    Can a film critic get in trouble for pointing out, say, that Cage’s hairline in Weather Man and Ghost Rider was lower than it’s been in 23 years?

  4. LexG says:

    Never mind, answered my own question:
    http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20165487,00.html
    “Current libel law” states a critic can’t bag on an actor’s dubious hair?????

  5. mutinyco says:

    Yes, Jeff. It’s called a sheitel. Some even shave their heads.

  6. jeffmcm says:

    Weird. Thanks.

  7. Chucky in Jersey says:

    Ms. Breslin got her Oscar nom for a movie rated R. “Kit Kittredge” is rated G.
    I’m not part of the Family Values crowd yet I will recoil at such blatant Oscar-whoring.

  8. LexG says:

    Chucky with the most surprising post of the day.

  9. jeffmcm says:

    Will someone please tell me “Chucky is just playing a character and you’re falling right into his hands” because this is getting intolerable.

  10. mutinyco says:

    No, Jeff, weird is refusing to have any physical contact with the opposite sex unless it’s for reproduction — and that’s done with a hole in a sheet…

  11. jeffmcm says:

    I didn’t say that _wasn’t_ weird, but it’s weird on top of weird. The sheet thing at least makes a kind of ‘we’re terrified of our bodies because we live in the 7th century’ sense. Wigs for weddings? Huh?

  12. mutinyco says:

    Not wigs for weddings. Married women wear wigs as a custom on a daily basis.

  13. David Poland says:

    The Hassidic notion is that the hair is meant for the husband’s eyes only… Eva Gabor’s version of a hijab.

  14. IOIOIOI says:

    Chuck in Jersey: He’s the MULDER of OSCAR-WHORING!

  15. Rothchild says:

    I just realized Chucky is a crazy person. I’m sorry. Sometimes I’m late on these things. It’s all become much funnier. I’m going to take a drink every time he mentions the Oscars. Or Oscar baiting. Or Oscar whoring. Or Oscar the Grouch.

  16. LexG says:

    Rothchild, also, don’t forget to take at least a sip every time he mentions theater chains, or a full swig if he mentions a particular multiplex in the Jersey/Western PA region.

  17. LexG says:

    D’oh… I meant Western Jersey/Eastern PA (Philly).

  18. chris says:

    I wonder if they shot the one-sheet after she’d moved onto a different project and had different-colored hair? In any case, I can report that her hair looks fine in the movie itself.

  19. chris says:

    Oh, and I can also report that she has neither a fiance nor cancer in the film.

  20. IOIOIOI says:

    Well good for that chris. Let me also state that he’s Mulder as in he’s always SEARCHING for his SUPPOSED TRUTH… THAT OSCAR WHORING IS REAL! When really… his spectrum of things is a bit silly.

  21. doug r says:

    Roger Ebert makes a great case for LMS wrongly getting a R when it really should have been PG-13.
    Canada gave it a 14A rating, same as the Matrix movies, the newest Bond picture, The Incredible Hulk and The Happening.

  22. jeffmcm says:

    By the way, we do all understand this movie takes place about a hundred years ago, right?

  23. Bob Violence says:

    “Current libel law” states a critic can’t bag on an actor’s dubious hair?????

    He’s either joking or covering for his bosses. There’s nothing in “current libel law” that would prevent Owen from slamming a star’s plugs, especially if s/he actually has them (truth being an absolute defense to libel).

  24. Bartholomew Richards says:

    Canada’s rating system is actually split up into different provinces. I believe most provinces gave LMS a 14A, but whatever. Actually, PG-13 movies are often rated PG in Canada and R movies are often rated 14A.
    Even Kill Bill Vol. 2 was rated 14A in BC (Vol. 1 was 18A on account of the Crazy 88). Only the truely explicit movies (Sin City, Passion of the Christ, Assault on Precinct 13) are rated 18A.
    But srsly, the MPAA is fucked the fuck up. Here’s what Seth Rogen has to say about the matter.

  25. Breslin has said she wore a wig in the movie because she didn’t want to cut her own hair.

  26. …or at least that’s what I read.

The Hot Blog

Geoff on: BYO Post-JOKER

Geoff on: BYO Post-JOKER

SideshowBill on: BYO Post-JOKER

Stella's Boy on: BYO Post-JOKER

Bulldog68 on: BYO Post-JOKER

Hcat on: BYOFall

Stella's Boy on: BYO Post-JOKER

palmtree on: BYO Post-JOKER

Stella's Boy on: BYO Post-JOKER

Bulldog68 on: BYO Post-JOKER

Quote Unquotesee all »

“But okay, I promise you now that if I ever retire again, I’m going to ensure that I can’t walk it back. I’ll post a series of the most disgusting, offensive, outrageous statements you can ever imagine. That way it will be impossible for me to ever be employed again. No one is going to take my calls. No one is going to want to be seen with me. Oh, it will be scorched earth. I will have torched everything. I’m going to flame out in the most legendary fashion.”
~ Steven Soderbergh

I feel strongly connected to young cinephile culture. The thing about filmmaking—and cinephilia—is that you can’t keep hanging out with your own age group as you get older. They drop off, move somewhere. You can’t put together a crew of sixty-somethings. It’s the same for cinephilia: my original set of cinephile friends are watching DVDs at home or delving into 1958 episodes of ‘Gunsmoke,’ something like that. The people who are out there tend to be young, and I happen to be doing the same thing still, so it’s natural that I move in their circles.

In terms of the filmmaking, there was a gear shift: my first movies focused on people around my age, and I followed them for three films. Until The Unspeakable Act, I was using the same actors, not because of an affinity for people at a specific age, but because of my affinity for the actors. I like to work with actors a second time, especially if I don’t feel confident casting a new film. But The Unspeakable Act was a different script, and I had to cast all new people. Even for the older roles, I couldn’t get the people I’d worked with before. But when it was over, the same thing happened: I wanted to work with Tallie again in the worst way, and I started the process all over again.

I think Rohmer did something similar around the time of Perceval and Catherine de HeilbronnHe developed new groups of people that he liked to work with. These gear shifts are natural. Even if you want to follow certain actors to the end of their life (which I kind of do) the variety of ideas that you generate makes it necessary to change. And once you’ve made the change, you’ve got all these new people around.”
~ Dan Sallitt