Even supporters wonder whether it's time for the Queen of Pop to cede her movie fiefdom.





By Mary McNamara , Times Staff Writer


According to the cover story in October's Vanity Fair, Madonna has written a children's book. This is not a good sign. For one thing, celebrity children's books are so last Thursday and, John Lithgow's notwithstanding, they invariably signal a certain stage in a person's career, a luftpause often filled by publicists' comments about "taking stock" and "rethinking priorities."

Part of this is logistics -- it's hard to be concerned with much when starring in a red-hot TV show or sold-out concert -- but what can it mean that the Queen of Pop is following in the footsteps of Jamie Lee Curtis? Perhaps the same thing it meant for Jamie Lee Curtis -- the movie thing is not going so well.


To say that "Swept Away," her recent film done in collaboration with new husband-director Guy Ritchie, is not doing well is like saying Ken Lay has had a bad fourth quarter. Never has the word "stink" appeared in so many typefaces across so many mediums.


"Soggy and superfluous" said the New York Times, calling the film a rare opportunity to "feel sorry for Madonna." "The kind of bad movie that only talented people make," countered the Chicago Tribune, "a colossal misfire." "How about 'Stay Away'?' opened E!Online's review. Rolling Stone called it a shipwreck.

(Already rumors are spreading of a Vanity Fair curse -- just as bagging the cover of Sports Illustrated has heralded disaster for more than a few athletes, the coveted VF cover has become a sometimes dicey deal -- remember "Pearl Harbor's" Josh Hartnett? Neither do we.)

Opening in 196 theaters, "Swept Away" managed to bring in just $354,000, slightly less than Adam Sandler's new movie, which played on five screens.


It's gotten so bad that Liz Rosenberg, the star's publicist, took to the New York Post to stop the insanity.

"It's a public hanging," she said, "an assassination. Stop being so mean!"


Certainly Mrs. Ritchie nee Ciccione is used to bad reviews. She's gotten them for every movie she has ever made -- 16 of them, mind you (not counting the many films in which she played herself) -- with the single exception of her first, "Desperately Seeking Susan." And she just came off a limited London engagement of "Up for Grabs," which drew mostly negative notices.

The thing is, the woman cannot act. And unlike some of her initially wooden peers who went on to achieve excellent performances -- Farah Fawcett comes to mind, as does Cher -- she seems incapable of learning on the job. So the question is not, Why is everyone being so mean? It's, Why does Madonna keep doing this?

Things have gotten so bad that even longstanding Madonna champion Camille Paglia is concerned.

"Madonna is a dancer and musician, not an actress," the author said in an e-mail interview. "She has no ear whatever for speech -- hence, subtle vocal inflections escape her. This is partly because she has no conversational skill. In every social occasion, she must flirt, dominate or act up like a teenager. She's too restless to sit and talk."

Such behavior can be played as "caged panther" in one's 20s and even 30s, but by 40, it's starting to look more like a tic or a mental affliction.

"Madonna is in frenetic circus mode," Paglia said, "as shown by that awful 'Drowned World' tour, which threw everything at the audience but the kitchen sink. The jerky, manic 'Swept Away' suffers from the same problem -- Madonna and Guy Ritchie seem to confuse art with attention-deficit disorder."

Certainly anyone watching the star's recent interview with Larry King might have a few similar reactions. King himself has a bad relationship with the noun-verb-noun construct, but scanning the transcript, one is hard pressed to find a complete thought, or sentence.

King: So remake -- why do a remake?

Madonna: Well, we didn't intend to make a remake, and I don't -- I think Guy probably said in one of his interviews he'd never do a remake of a movie. But we saw it together and he -- and I don't know. It just somehow evolved and he ended up wanting to make it. He thought it would be great as a remake. He thought he could do something

King: Something that wasn't done ...

Madonna: Yes. Yes. I thought, I, he thought -- I think he thought he could make it more modern and funnier. It is a great story. The premise of the story is great.

Indeed.

Early success is always risky and Madonna has been better than most at reinventing herself to accommodate the voracious appetite of an easily bored demographic. But dancing around in your underwear and having sex with a lot of people is essentially a young person's sport, and if the film career is a dead-end, then perhaps it's time to genuinely reflect.

For most of us, it would seem an excellent time for retirement, for seeing the world from a vantage point other than a stage. But the woman who famously refuses to take a vacation is probably not going to cash out at 45. Still, maybe it is time for some real reflection.

Paglia would like to see her get off "this crazed, workaholic, sleep-deprived express train she's been on her whole professional life" and concentrate on her music. "The number of major songs that Madonna has contributed to world music is staggering. That great talent ... has nothing to do with looks and, therefore, will not age with her."

But according to career consultant Kenneth Blanchard, it is time for Madonna to make a bigger change, to move from success to significance. For too long, she has defined her self-worth by her performance and what other people think about her, says the co-author of the life-changes book "Who Moved My Cheese."


It's time for her to move past the Grammys and the Golden Globes, the platinum records and multimillion-dollar homes. "The opposite of success is generosity; the opposite of recognition is service; the opposite of power and status is loving relationships," said Blanchard in soothing tones. "She could take up where Princess Diana left off. [Madonna] has such a following: Think of how much she could do for the world. We have enough of greed and success. You become an adult when you realize you are not here to get, you're here to give."

Perhaps Madonna should have a little sit-down with Cher, who if nothing else, has proven that a successful acting career does not necessarily lead to happiness, or even good business sense. Still, Cher recently announced she is retiring from the music business, about five minutes past not a minute too soon.


Imagine: A world with no new Cher songs or Madonna movies. A world swept away.


* * *


A selected movie scorecard

"Desperately Seeking Susan" (1985)

Madonna played Susan, a free-spirited, bangled, braceleted rock star and object of Rosanna Arquette's envious desire. It brought Madonna, director Susan Seidelman and the black lace bustier as outerwear out of the dive-club scene into the zeitgeist.

"Dick Tracy" (1990)

After she played torch singer Breathless Mahony, many fans were shocked to learn that not only couldn't Madonna act, she really couldn't sing all that well either.

"Evita" (1996)

After years of hype, the film version of this musical was anti-climactic at best. Although Madonna won a Golden Globe, the only remarkable aspect of her performance was the fact that she had, through the miracle of modern contact lenses, brown eyes.

"Next Best Thing" (2000)

Madonna's portrayal of a yoga instructor who sort of accidentally gets pregnant by her gay best friend underwhelmed audiences and proved that even the chiseled features of Rupert Everett can't save a film from instant obscurity.





http://www.calendarlive.c...l%2Dmovies

She Needs Too.I Give Her Music Props for Doing Her Thing but on the Big Screen Somebody Bring the SandMan&Put Her Film Career Asleep.Madonna barely goes Wood at the Box Office.Master P, could do that on a Off Week&Ice Cube easily among tons more.She Should do the Michael Jackson&Pull a Cameo&Leave the Acting Gig Alone.

SkletonKee said:

Madonna will make as many movies as the powers that be allow. And as long as she has successful recordings she'll be sought after. Even if it's only by her own husband.

Btw, I saw that one, I didn't think she stunk, but it WAS underwhelming. Her performance and the movie. I only gave it the time of day because of Benjamin Bratt.


Cut me...
[This message was edited Wed Oct 16 20:14:59 PDT 2002 by Supernova]

I didn't realize that Madonna has made 16 films. That's a lot of roles for somebody who is not a trained actress.

Maybe this latest film flop will convince her to either concentrate on her music career, or if she wants to stay in movies, she could move into the behind-the-scenes area like producing.

I don't agree with people who say that Madonna should retire or leave show business and become a new Princess Diana doing charitable works. Nobody ever says that about male entertainers who start to get older.

Look at the Rolling Stones. If anybody should be kicked off the stage and told to retire its the Stones. How long can those geezers keep releasing greatest hits CDs?

NikkiDarling said:

They're working in a forum that isnt a flop for them..buy a clue ok?

___
"Madonna is in frenetic circus mode," Paglia said, "as shown by that awful 'Drowned World' tour, which threw everything at the audience but the kitchen sink. The jerky, manic 'Swept Away' suffers from the same problem -- Madonna and Guy Ritchie seem to confuse art with attention-deficit disorder."
___

I made a post about that concert in another thread that when I saw it on HBO it was stupid and overblown. That woman is not a good live performer!!! Take away all the props and broadway dance numbers she is average!!! She is strictly a video artist.

___

"Dick Tracy" (1990)

After she played torch singer Breathless Mahony, many fans were shocked to learn that not only couldn't Madonna act, she really couldn't sing all that well either.

___


Absolutely!!!

gman1966 said:

Janets All For You tour blew Madonnas artiste cirque de soleil crap right outta the fuckin water...

rdhull said:

but still...these guys are a lil bit too old to be on stage..i love what grace slick said about aging, "rock and roll is for the young...somebody shoot me if i ever get back on stage like some of the old men out there" (paraphrased of course)

rdhull said:

Learn to read and buy yourself a clue. The article in question implies that Madonna should not only retire from films but from music as well and become a Princess Diana-like figure who supports charitable causes.

My point is that no one suggests that old male artists retire and become saintly figures, so why suggest it for females?

The Stones are old and they've released more greatest hits compilations than anybody needs. Mick Jagger's solo CD went no where. If anybody needs to retire, it's the Stones, who are way more tired than Madonna.

FORTUNE Exclusive: Inside the Business of the Rolling Stones

Story Reveals Why Stones Keep Touring--and How They Make More Money Than Any Other Band

NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Sept. 17, 2002--What CEO of a large, multinational company can swivel-hip his way through "Midnight Rambler?" The Rolling Stones' Mick Jagger, that's who. And though some may think he's getting a trifle old to rock and roll--he'll turn 60 next July--from a business perspective Jagger and the Stones are at the top of their game. The band, far and away the most successful act in rock and roll today, is a thriving enterprise--"a combustible mix of talent and intense labor," writes FORTUNE editor-at-large Andy Serwer in "Inside the Rolling Stones, Inc.," an in-depth look at how the band dominates the business of rock and roll.

The story appears in the September 30 issue of FORTUNE, available on newsstands September 23 and at www.fortune.com


Since 1989, the Rolling Stones have generated more than $1 billion in gross revenues, a total which includes record sales, song rights, merchandising, sponsorship money and touring.

The Stones have made more money than U2, Bruce Springsteen, Michael Jackson or the Who--more than any band, with the possible exception of the Beatles. And unlike some groups, says Serwer, the Stones carry no "Woodstock-esque, anti-business baggage." Instead, they have deep roots in American business, cutting deals with Anheuser-Busch, Microsoft, and Sprint. And like many other large businesses, the band is global, pays taxes--grudgingly--and litigates.

"Spend time with the band's senior entourage and you quickly realize how the Stones got so market-wise," says Serwer. Though Mick Jagger attended the London School of Economics, "his greatest talent, besides strutting and singing, is his ability to surround himself and the band with a group of very able executives."

The Rolling Stones, reports Serwer, are a private and secretive organization, and many of their executives, such as chief financial officer Joe Rascoff, tour manager Michael Cohl, and Prince Rupert Lowenstein, a London-based banker who has been the band's business advisor for over 30 years, stay out of the public eye. But they are crucial when it comes to "interlocking" the various businesses linked to the band: touring, merchandising, publishing rights, etc. They oversee a group of four companies--based in the Netherlands, which has a more favorable tax code than the U.K.--each dedicated to a particular side of the business

Touring, which today is totally professionalized, complete with immigration lawyers, a staff of travelling accountants, and real-time budgets, is the biggest money-making part of the Stones' operation. Since the 1989 Steel Wheels tour--when Cohl took over managing the band's shows--the Stones have grossed over $750 million on the road. Though exact profit margins are hard to come by, it's safe to say that tens of millions of that total flowed directly to the band members, according to Serwer.

When Cohl took over, new streams of revenue were created by selling skyboxes, bus tours, and TV deals, as well as through innovative merchandising. Cohl also brought in corporate sponsors like Volkswagen and Sprint. Most importantly, he stitched these operations together, through cross-promotion and the like, to maximize their earnings power. The Steel Wheels tour itself made over $198 million, a record for a rock tour.

On the new Licks tour, which kicked off in Boston last week, the band will play three types of venues: stadiums, arenas and small clubs, each with a unique set of songs (they've rehearsed over 130 for this tour), staging and lights. Revenues from Licks won't approach the monster Voodoo Lounge tour in 1994/1995, which brought in close to $370 million, nor the 1997/1998/1999 Bridges to Babylon tour, which did over $390 million. But merchandising will be more sophisticated than ever, with about 50 items available.

But with tours only happening every few years, the steady profits--"the Microsoft part of the Stones business empire," according to Serwer--come from performing rights. The Stones have dozens of songs that are played on FM radio, still a vibrant medium. And anytime a song is played--at a skating rink, on a jukebox, at a club--the Jagger/Richards cash register goes "ca-ching," says Serwer. All this--the tours, the records, the rights--have made the Stones the wealthiest rock band on the planet. Jagger alone is said to have a fortune of some $500 million.

"So what keeps the Stones going?," asks Serwer. "Money, yes. But the band could make big bucks simply by licensing commercials instead of touring. Going on the road is about ego gratification." And when the Stones stop touring, concludes Serwer, "it will mean not only the end of the world's greatest rock band, but also a winding down of the most successful enterprise this crazy business has ever known."

OH PLEASE!! These movie critics need to get a life.So Madonna has another flop movie.Big freakin deal! She has survived many flop movies and she is STILL around.Another thing is,"Swept Away" cost only $10 Million to make,and it is only playing on 196 theatres in the U.S.So,clearly,it wasn't meant to be a big Hollywood blockbuster.I think it's meant to be a smaller,independent film,so naturally,it's not gonna become a critic's favorite and make $100 Million!! But for critics to suggest that she should retire after this film,that's just absurd.Her new single "Die Another Day" just debuted at Number 41 on the charts (based on airplay alone) and it's a foregone conclusion that it will become another Number One hit for her.It's the highest debuting song of 2002,so far.(This week,it moves up to Number 28 with a bullet).

Movies are really just a "side project" for her anyway,just something to do in-between hit albums and sold-out world tours.To those people who wish she would retire,Madonna addresses them in her new single..."I guess I'll Die Another Day,it's not my time to go".
[This message was edited Thu Oct 17 0:46:42 PDT 2002 by DavidEye]

gman1966 said:

So,you hate Madonna but you couldn't resist the urge to see the "Sex" book,and you watched her HBO concert last year.And that says what?

DavidEye said:

Look here man just because you kiss Madonna's ass and she can't do no wrong in your eyes, I don't hate Madonna I said she is a strong brilliant woman and is totally in tune with pop culture but the woman simply can't fucking sing!!! and is a average live performer. I watch that concert to see what all the hype was about and she is boring!!! I glanced thru the Sex book to check what kind body she has and she has NONE!!! As far as the concert even her own BIOGRAPHER said the concert sucked but to you it was the most brilliant show you ever saw in your life

I warmed the cockles of my heart to see this movie panned many times over.



.lose the edit
[This message was edited Thu Oct 17 5:30:53 PDT 2002 by Ifsixwuz9]

Supernova said:

I thought Maddy's performance in "The Next Best Thing" was embarassing to watch.Why,why,why was she using a fake British accent during the early part of the film?? And her appearance throughout the movie...why didn't someone hand her a hairbrush?? That movie is one of her worst.Hell,even "Who's That Girl?" and "Body Of Evidence" had SOME redeeming qualities.

Btw,I haven't seen "Swept Away" yet but I guess I'd better hurry while it's still in theatres,huh?

gman1966 said:

"I watched that concert to see what all the hype was about"

"I glanced thru the Sex book to see what kind of body she has"

Admit it,you're a closet Madonna fan
[This message was edited Thu Oct 17 5:53:59 PDT 2002 by DavidEye]

DavidEye said:

Yeah right!!! Anyway...

DavidEye said:

Damn!!! DavidEye I thought that would be a brilliant performances for you I mean I am sure if it was up to you
those performances would mean Tony and Oscar nominations!!!

gman1966 said:

I've never said Madonna was a great actress.In fact,I piss off ALOT of fans on the Madonna boards when I say this,but I think she should stick to smaller,supporting roles instead of trying to "carry" a film by starring in it.Madonna is just not a convincing lead actress.She CAN act,just not very well.Another problem is,her own superstar persona is so strong that,it's hard for anyone to accept her in any other role.Out of all the movies she has done,my personal favorite is "Truth Or Dare" because she is simply playing Madonna.

So,there!! You can't call me a Madonna asskisser,now can you?

DavidEye said:

It's cool, just trying to give you a hard time about your girl!!!

No problem,I enjoy giving YOU a hard time too when you criticize her

NikkiDarling said:

Nobody doubts that the Stones are old geezers but like many reports say-they are at the top of their game and are the most successful rock n roll band ever. Plus the spread of time before this last release of official greatest hits has been ...30 years. Madonna makes flops every 3-4 in film. If its a sexist issue thats your main point, nobody has said that Madonna should stop touring or acting in film because she as a woman is over the hill...they say she should stop acting because she sucks at it. The Stones tour every few years and continue to be successful at it. Thanks for the clue.

SkletonKee said:

And Mick has went on record for the famous saying that he didnt want to be singing satisfaction when he's 40. But what has happened is they honed their act down and it isnt the vulgar display of youth crawling around on the floor getting naked, apeing the sixties-seventies Jagger etc. The moves are down and constricted to bring the focus on the music and deliver a great performance. So in that aspect they have turned from sloppy freaks live, to a solid music maschine that doesnt embarrass. Thats what Prince has done as well, so while they are old , they still are able to do what they do ...and do it the best than anyone out there. Plus the minute the people do not come is the moment they will stop. Big difference in having two careers where one doesnt pan out. Like Madonna and the movies.

DavidEye said:

davideye, davideye, davideye...

your post further proves that madonna fams make up facts just to support their famanticism...

point 1) this article points out many other people's annoyance (Camille Paglia!!!) other then the critics...

point 2) Die Another Day is *not* the biggest debuting song this year (sales *and* airplay)..*THAT* honor would go to Elvis' song which debuted at #1 or that Kelly Wiggim song which is the biggest selling debut (just sales..her airplay debut at 57, the following week with sales it reached #1) since 1996.

point 3) indi films are too made to please audiences *and* critics...My Big Fat Greek Wedding was made for 8 million and has grossed over 150 mill so far...Guy Richie was chasing the fame and creed w/ his films since day 1. Dont tell me just because he married Madonna he changed his tune.

Or, should we loose all objectivity to keep Maddy on this high pedestal?

Ok I didn't read this whole thing because it's too long. But I have to agree (Sorry David) Madonna is a horrible actress. She's a great singer/song writer, dancer and performer, but give up the acting.

SkletonKee said:

"Die Another Day" IS the highest debut of the year. It debuted at number 41 on the Billboard Hot 100, beating out Brandy's "What About Us" which came in at number 42 early in the year.

http://www.billboardradio...rtbeat.jsp

Check under "The 'Die' is Cast."

SkletonKee said:

And subsequently did an about-face and gigged more with the Starship.

Supernova said:

Bingo..and if Starship ever got the accolades or had the audience size that the Stones have live, her ass would be out there right now singing White Rabbit and Somebody To Love.

Moonbeam said:

i stand corrected..but this is still based on airplay alone...and to register a few points above brandy isnt something one should be bragging about.