Natalie Portman's first nude scene coming to theaters this Friday

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/22/business/media/22darjeeling.html

October 22, 2007
?Darjeeling? to Be Paired With a Short
By LIA MILLER

?The Darjeeling Limited,? Wes Anderson?s fifth feature film, opened to mixed reviews in about 200 theaters on Sept. 29, but for its wider release to almost 800 theaters, next Friday, moviegoers will first see a short film ? one that got rave reviews ? and, the hope is, ?The Darjeeling Limited? will get a bump in ticket sales.

A year before filming ?The Darjeeling Limited,? Mr. Anderson made a 13-minute movie called ?Hotel Chevalier? featuring one of the characters from ?The Darjeeling Limited.? The short, in contrast to the feature, received nearly universal praise when it was shown alongside the longer film at some festivals. After being made available free on iTunes, it quickly became an online hit and has been downloaded nearly 500,000 times.

Now Mr. Anderson and Fox Searchlight Pictures, the film?s distributor, are adding the popular short to the start of the feature as sort of preface to the main movie.

?The Darjeeling Limited? is about three brothers, played by Adrien Brody, Owen Wilson and Jason Schwartzman, traveling together in India on a spiritual quest. ?Hotel Chevalier,? which Mr. Anderson wrote, takes place in a fancy hotel room in Paris and tells some of the ?back story? of Mr. Schwartzman?s character, Jack.

The short also stars Natalie Portman, and though she does not appear in the feature, her character is important to it, Mr. Anderson said in an e-mail message. (And just as important for publicity, the short features Ms. Portman?s first nude scene.)

Mr. Anderson, who paid to make the short himself, said he was not sure how its distribution would be handled. ?The Darjeeling Limited? has a distinct ?opening of the story? sequence that made him ?reluctant to attach the short to it.? But he knew that he wanted audiences to see both films, ?So it was a puzzle for me to decide how I wanted to present them.?

After some discussion with executives at Fox Searchlight the decision was made to offer it on iTunes (and since Mr. Schwartzman?s character pointedly uses an iPod and docking station, there was some inherent synergy there).

Nancy Utley, a chief operating officer of Fox Searchlight, said that her company did not even know about the short until ?The Darjeeling Limited? was completed. Even though Fox was aware of the critical acclaim, the company decided not to release it along with the feature. She said Fox decided to remain ?flexible? on what to do.

?We thought it would be too challenging to moviegoers to be exposed to the short in theaters right at the beginning of the run,? she said. ?We wanted to make sure ?The Darjeeling Limited? got established first as a movie.?

With the wider release looming and ?Darjeeling Limited? doing small business at the box office (just over $2.5 million so far), it seemed the obvious choice to include the film?s more popular little sibling as a bonus. Fox Searchlight also is hoping the short is Oscar-worthy and plans to promote it as a contender in the best live-action short category.

 

I saw it. You don't get to see any of the goods. There's some side-boob. It's quite classily done, unfortunately.

 

*Resists telling terrible Tea related joke.

 

All those basement-dwelling Natalie fanboys will get to finally see the promised land.

 

Odd...I thought showing naked little boys was illegal?

 

Presumably, they'd have downloaded it from iTunes already

 

Yeah it's quite a let down.

 

I think it is a mistake to add Hotel Chevalier to Darjeeling Limited in the theatrical run. The film works without it and I think the inclusion of the short is going to throw off the pacing. As Anderson himself says in his quotation, Darjeeling has a very well done opening sequence. Hotel Chavalier does work as a prologue to the film, but I don't think they should be stuck together.

 

I liked it. The short itself but also Portman nude. She has a nice bum.

 

Does she collect homeless people?

 

Well it sounds like they made the decision thinking about the box-office impact, not the aesthetic integrity of the movie and the short. I mean, I guess they're hoping Natalie Portman fans will show up in big numbers!

 

She has enough boob for side-boob?

 

Errr...you see all of her buns.

 

FTL.

 

"Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter!"

 

*insert comment about headlights here*

 

[image=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v373/jeblataug/Star%20Wars/yoda.gif]

 

Feh. That is all I have to say on this matter.

 

perv

 

To add to that, I find it humorous that geeky fanboys would spend 12 bucks just to see Portman's sideboob, not even knowing what the film is about.

 

Pfft, I wouldn't pay. I'd pirate it.

 

Yeah, watching a Wes Anderson film, even just to see Natalie nude, is not worth it.

 

Have pictures of this already leaked? I think I've seen the aforementioned "nude" scene on the internet already. Nothing much to see.

 

Why would you pay to see side boob when you can see her completely topless for free in those infamous beach photos.