Monday, 5 October 2009

Liebe Kruger!

The September issue of interview is seemingly even more savvy than per. Natalie Portman graces the cover in all of her quirky magnificence. I must admit that I have been quite the Portman admirer since 2005, the year in which she shaved off her hair for her role in V for Vendetta (I admire a woman who can carry off bald!) and so naturally, I was thrilled. In my excitement however, I didn't notice that there was also a Diane Kruger editorial so when I opened the magazine at home in anticipation of learning a few life lessons from Ms. Portman, I shrieked a little upon noticing that Kruger was too gracing the pages of Interview. Similarly, I have always admired Kruger's indubitable, comely beauty and the fact that she always appears so refined and classy. She comments to Blanks that she definitely wants to appear as someone who "has a certain class" and she more than succeeds in her endeavour. What shocked me was how bolshy she appeared. Her demure beauty is deceptive and her intolerance throughout the piece with Blanks' supposition that simply put, beautiful actresses must "play against their outer aspect" in order to be successful actresses, made for intriguing and intellingent repartee. Even the most zealous of feminists may have relished Kruger's comments. She has certainly defied one New York Times critic who remarked that Kruger was "too beautiful to play a role of any substance." In her latest project, Tarantino's Inglourious Basterds her character Bridget Von Hammersmark is portrayed with intelligence and intrigue whilst Kruger's "outer aspect" is undeterred, naturally.

No comments:

Post a Comment