Most of us are already waiting for “Alice in Wonderland”, the live action version of the Lewis Carroll novels Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland and Through the Looking-Glass, and the last project of the director Tim Burton for Walt Disney and to be released this March around the world and starring Johnny Depp as The Mad Hatter, Helena Bonham Carter as The Red Queen, and Anne Hathaway as The White Queen.

I know, Tim Burton is one of our favorite directors and besides who got one of the most stunning Michelle Pfeiffer’s performances in her career. Batman Returns‘ Pfeiffer-Catwoman is already a classic among the villains in superhero movies and of course an icon in the history of the cinema.

Now with the upcoming “Alice” generating so much positive buzz, its easy to see the attraction for Disney. It’s been proven that retelling a story from the “villain’s” point of view can work extraordinarily well, so the las month Ain’t It Cool News reported that Burton might be adapting another classic tale soon, but this time from the point of view of the villain. The site says that Burton is interested in making a live action feature based on Maleficent from Disney’s 1959 adaptation of the fairy tale Sleeping Beauty. Burton’s Dark Shadows, a film which had previously been told would shoot this year is “stumbling,” according to AICN, so Maleficent could possibly be his next project, and even the studio registered the domain name www.maleficentmovie.com some time last summer.

AICN offers appealing ideas for the plot, “she was always the most interesting character in that story, but we never knew why she hated those three little fairy wenches… or what indignity she suffered at the hands of Aurora’s parents. Yeah, I’m on board… if only it ends with Maleficent with a sword in her heart in dragon form. Cuz that’ll rule. Think about how long this plot-line was carried out over. She has quite a tale to tell.” Don’t do you think it sounds interesting?

Well, nothing is officially said by the studio neither Burton yet, but blogs and forums are already raving and speculating about the “possible” project and of course about who would be the “perfect” actress to play so interesting role. They are going with someone around her 40’s, 50’s and names on the air are Meryl Streep, Nicole Kidman, Angelina Jolie, Glenn Close (who was Cruela De Vil in ‘101 Dalmatians‘), Susan Sarandon (was Queen Narissa in ‘Enchanted‘), Tilda Swinton (was White Witch in ‘The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe‘)… and of course our Michelle Pfeiffer although she has too recent her Lamia in ‘Stardust‘. Ah! … and Johnny Deep! LOL ;-P.

Looking for stuff about this subject, I found surprisingly this review about Stardust at Suit101 and the comparison of her performance with Sleeping Beauty’s Magnificent:

“Pfeiffer portrays Lamia with a regal disdain reminiscent of the wonderfully wicked Maleficent in Disney’s Sleeping Beauty (1959). Where actresses of any age might squawk at portraying a hideous, balding old hag, she revels in the role, playing it to full effect without overdoing it. She’s only haggish in a few scenes, though; she’s her usual drop-dead gorgeous self throughout most of the film.”

Well, I don’t know if Michelle Pfeiffer would like to play a Witch again, in spite of every one of them were great performances. Let’s remember it would be the fourth one after The Witches of Eastwick (1987) and Stardust (2007), and counting Sinbad, The Leyend Of The Seven Seas (2003) where Michelle just put her voice to Eris, the Goddess of Chaos, and anyway she was a witch.

It wouldn’t be her first villain either in her career, besides the latest two movies, Michelle already worked with director Tim Burton in Batman Returns (1992) playing one of her most successful and famous performances, Catwoman, and considerating as a villain as well, her Ingrid Magnussen in White Oleander (2002)

Without a project on the board for Michelle coming soon, I guess that any new buzz about a possible project for the actress does that our heart beats quicker. Anyway, as I’ve said above it is simply a rumor… so…

… well, now your opinion. After reading the entire post… what would you like? Take the poll and opine! ;-)

Anyway we all know if it happens, Helena Bonham Carter automatically = Maleficent.

Sources: Ain’t It Cool News, SlashFilm, IMDb, BroadwayWorld, DenDen, Suit101,

Our pfriend and pfan Tim lets’ know his actual thoughts about the current position of Michelle Pfeiffer as a star and actress. It has been the answer to the answers-thread of last entry in PfeifferTheFace, “Michelle Pfeiffer on the “alternative” cover of Fotogramas magazine!!”.

It’s the thought of a pfan, so it must be respected!… I, as a pfan, am agree with Tim in the most of his whole post, but I can understand that wholehearted pfans couldn’t.

You know, they’re right though. She’s not famous anymore. She’s not on anyone’s radar. And that’s because she’s just not working. Plain and simple.

After 2007 she basically went back into retirement. She worked for what, a month in Personal Effects? And Cheri was a quick shoot too. Meanwhile, look at other actresses’ IMDBs, Sandra Bullock, Meryl Streep, Julia Roberts, their schedules are packed. They are still stars. Michelle Pfeiffer chooses not to be a star right now, and we can’t hold it against her, it’s her choice not to work. I really wish she would though. I think she’s been too comfortable in her money for a long time now and maybe just doesn’t have a passion for it. Or it could be from disappointment.

I Could Never Be Your Woman, Personal Effects, and Cheri were all huge flops. None of them even REALLY made it into theaters.

ICNBYW would’ve done better if it were released now because Paul Rudd is actually a star now.

Personal Effects would’ve been better if they did something colorful and funny and changed the whole look and story. AshtonKutcher’s audience likes to see him in something bubbly, not in something where he’s struggling to pass as a “real” actor. They also want to see him in something where he looks attractive, that means brighter colors, not the washed out look on his face with the perpetual blue tone.

I’d like to see Michelle Pfeiffer in something with nice color too, but not OVERcolored like in ICNBYW, I don’t know what they were thinking in post production. Something normal, like “Failure to Launch” (the movie sucked but it LOOKED nice for a light film).

Cheri sucked because they ran out of money and just threw a movie together with the little they had. Plus, no one knows who Rupert Friend is. If she did this movie with Orlando Bloom, it would have been seen by actual people.

Michelle Pfeiffer can’t head a film by herself anymore. Julia Roberts won’t even dare to do it, Duplicity had Clive Owen also, and that movie still didn’t do too well. The only one who’s succeeding is Sandra Bullock. She really made a great choice with The Proposal, making a funny, accessible movie. The Blind Side was a great choice too, definitely something different than she has ever done. Better than Personal Effects, that’s for sure

At this point, I think Michelle Pfeiffer should just rely on ensembles if she wants her movie seen… It’s sad as hell but it’s true. And I know that unless the part is really something great, she’ll never go for it.

She used to be A list, but she’ll never be again if she doesn’t WORK. She needs to fill up her schedule and actually do stuff. Right now her IMDB is still completely empty. And I have a feeling also that whatever she does decide to do will be a movie we won’t even like. Like “Chasing Montana“… yuck.

Anyway I wanted to take back that last statement, it was way too harsh. I’m sure we’ll enjoy whatever project she signs on to do next, if there is a project at all. Gotta stay positive.

I love her no matter what and will always be a pfan : )

I’d like to remind Tim is the autor of the amazing and exhaustive study “Aging Gracefully“, the debate whether or not Michelle Pfeiffer has had plastic surgery.

At the moment, nothing about the “new project” How To Make Love Like An Englishman seems official, at least if Michelle Pfeiffer has finally signed to be or not (although it seems sure that Pierce Brosnan has done).

From ScreenDaily it’s coming news about the international distribution of the project, if this week we talked about the distribution in Germany and Benelux countries by Splendid Film, it is now the distribution company DeAplaneta which has acquired the rights of the project to launch the movie in Spain.

But the news just talks about Brosnan… I guess that the coming days we will get news about if Pfeiffer finally is into.

On the other hand, DeAplaneta is one of the lead distribution companies in Spain. They were the distributors of I Could Never Be Your Woman in the country and even with a little publicity campaign the movie opened on the 2nd place of the box-office and it was moving along the top 6 places for 5 weeks. I’ve always thought that Pfeiffer is very loved in Spain.

Source: ScreenDaily
Thanks Laura for the News.

It seems that finally there’re news about a new project for Michelle Pfeiffer.

The news’ just jumped on Variety, it was talked that Splendid Film, the German distribution company, had acquired several films for German-speaking territories and the Benelux countries. Among them a a romantic comedy titled “How to Make Love Like an Englishman” set to star Pierce Brosnan and Michelle Pfeiffer. So it could seem that the project is ready to be filmed

Of course quickly I’ve been looking for this project on the net, but at the moment there’s very little info about it:

It is a project developed by Inferno. The movie tells the story of a Brit Lit professor and one-time playboy Richard Haig (Pierce Brosnsn) finds himself on Love’s battlefield when his trophy wife takes off for L.A. with their son to marry a wealthy young entrepreneur. Richard takes over the guest house and launches a campaign to win them back but finds out that his mother-in-law (Michelle Pfeiffer) can be a very “engaging” opponent. It has been written by Matthew Newman (worked in the TV series “Young Blades”, according IMDb) and will be directed by Gill Junger (who has worked on series as “Dharma & Greg” and “The Golden Girls.” Nominated for an Emmy and a Director’s Guild Award for directing the episode of “Ellen” in which the lead character reveals that she is a lesbian and he broke into feature film directing with “10 Things I Hate About You”, more on IMDb)

Well, and that’s all folks! This time I won’t judge the choices of Michelle… this time I’d like to reserve my opinion… but of course, you can feel free to do it! ;-)

But I’m sure only of a thing, the chemistry between Pfeiffer & Brosnan can be tremendous…

I just will say that this project could be on the line of other romantic comedy with a great expectation these days, “It’s Complicated” starring Meryl Streep, Alec Baldwin and Steve Martin, and all of them mature actors… But, also I have to say that this movie has been written and directed by Nancy Meyers who also directed such titles as “The Holiday” and “Something’s Gotta Give” (with a plot pretty looked like “Englishman“)

Well, now comes to mi mind those words about playing a mother-in-law told by Michelle during the promotion of Chéri the last Spring (Wales Online – April 24, 2009):

“… I do think there’s a small transitional period for actresses aged between 40 and 50 where you can only play the psychotic mother-in-law or the wife. Most people pick the psychotic mother-in-law because it’s kind of interesting. A number of those have come across my desk, but it was during that four-year period when I wasn’t working.”

If Pfeiffer has picked this role is because perhaps it is more interesting… Who knows? … And on the other hand, Brosnan let know his interest on starring a movie with Michelle when he was asked about whom he would recommend for the female lead in one of his Bond films:

“I would love Michelle Pfeiffer for the next Bond film — or any film I do. I hope there’s at least one film with Pfeiffer in my future.”

So it seems that wishes can come true!

About Inferno, it is a self financed production company with studio distribution, launching its operation in 2002. The company is headquartered in Los Angeles and has additional offices in Germany and Taiwan. Among the movies by Inferno, we can find: The Women starring Meg Ryan, Annette Bening and Eva Mendes; The Good Night with Penélope Cruz, Gwyneth Paltrow and Danny DeVito; and Smother with Diane Keaton and Liv Tyler. And you can find more upcoming at the site of the company.

Since I watched Robert Pattinson in Twilight and I felt in love with him and his alter-ego, the vampire Edward Cullen (Twilight is, perhaps, the movie which I’ve watched more times after Ladyhawke and Dangerous Liaisons -OMG! I look like a teenager-girl!!)… well, I’ve actually been a vampires fan since I discovered my own sexuality… So, of course, one of my dreams would be to see to Michelle Pfeiffer playing a vampire…

And now, our dear Nathaniel -in his The Film Experience- brings to us an amazing buzz about our Michelle and the possibility of a new project about VAMPIRES!!! Wouldn’t be it wonderful?

These have been the words of Nathaniel, you can find the news in his wonderful blog:

Exclusive Buzz: Pfeiffer with Pfangs

Rumor Alert!
Or, rather, ‘Possiblity Alert’! And one you haven’t heard yet. The other evening at a dinner party, I chatted briefly with writer/director Amy Heckerling (of Clueless fame). Since her very last feature I Could Never Be Your Woman starred Michelle Pfeiffer, you know I couldn’t resist gushing about my favorite actress. The conversation quickly drifted to Saoirse Ronan, who played Pfeiffer’s daughter in that film. Heckerling was very proud to have discovered her (…Woman preceeding Atonement, production-wise) and wouldn’t you be?

Leaving the party later, I wished Heckerling well on her new comedy Vamps which should go before cameras in the spring. Remembering me as that weirdly obsessed pfan-guy, Heckerling clasped her hands together in supplication and said ‘I hope I get Pfeiffer for it.’

[Collective Pfan Gasp!]

Has an offer gone out? Could Pfeiffer finally have a vampiric role? The movie is still in preproduction with only Kristen Ritter signed. IMDB describes the comedy like so…

Two female vampires in modern-day New York City are faced with daunting romantic possibilities

One assumes with Ritter in the lead that the two vamps are young women… but perhaps Pfeiffer could be a ruling bloodsucker? A vampire queen? Pfeiffer has been leaning towards the wicked and showy supporting bits since her comeback (Hairspray, Stardust) and I know one or one-hundred pfans* who have long fantasized about Michelle sinking her teeth into that sort of role. There’s just something about her ferocity. The closest we ever got was her lupine beauty in Wolf.

*This post is dedicated to my pfellow uber-pfans on the net: Fran, Noelle, and Morrissey

I just can say… Nat, I love u!

I remember now, the latest news around about Michelle as a vampire… Michelle Pfeiffer in True Blood?

Source: The Film Experience

It seems that  Megan Fox has finally signed up to play Catwoman in the next Batman film, according The Press Association.

The Transformers sex symbol will thrill fans by donning a tight PVC catsuit to play Selina Kyle in director Christopher Nolan’s next instalment about the comic book hero, The Sun reports.

Megan, 23, follows in the footsteps of Michelle Pfeiffer, who played Catwoman in Batman Returns, and Halle Berry, who played the vixen in flop spin-off movie Catwoman. Christian Bale will return as millionaire Bruce Wayne/the Caped Crusader and Sir Michael Caine will be back as his faithful butler Alfred. Filming is due to begin next year with the movie expected to hit screens in 2011.

I’d like to remember the amazing Catwoman played by our Michelle in Batman Returns in 1992 with this stunning video made by Videoxhammy on YouTube: Catwoman Movie Trailer

Source: The Press Association

I can’t believe it! Is Michelle Pfeiffer talking about the Chasing Montana project?… From Buzzine, written by Emmanuel Itier, comes this wonderful interview with the actress talking about Chéri, the filming set, joining the new Hairspray movie, painting, and finally… about new projects…

Michelle Pfeiffer Interview | Cheri

Michelle Pfeiffer returns to the big screen in Cheri, a film based on the novel by Colette. Buzzine had a chance to sit down with her to discuss what drew her into this Parisian role, why she loves to act, and what may or may not be in store for the future.

Emmanuel Itier: Rupert Friend was talking about you and the caliber of talent you bring to the role. Do you find yourself intimidating your fellow actors?

Michelle Pfeiffer: It never occurs to me that I carry any weight. In fact, sometimes I’ll be really perplexed about the way someone is behaving and I’ll think, “Oh, I must have done something. I don’t think they like me.” It never occurs to me that someone might be nervous around me. I guess you can take the girl out of Orange County, but…

EI: What was the mood like on the set?

MP: It was fun. We laughed a lot. Stephen (Frears) set the tone, and he’s funny. He walks around like a Detective Colombo all day, scratching his head and looking confused, getting in everyone’s business. He never sits still — always on the move, and Rupert is really funny. I think it was a fun set.

EI: Being a period piece, everything was so beautiful, especially the bed. Did you want to take that bed home with you?

MP: I know — everything was so lush, and the photography — Darius (Khondji, the cinematographer) — was so beautiful. The design team in every department and every level were meticulous perfectionists down to every minute detail — even my costumes by Consolata (Boyle), who is one of the true geniuses of our time. She is such a purist, and down to the second, she never stops. I was literally headed to the set and she’s going, “Wait, wait, oh, oh…” And she brings this tiny little bow that she would stick at the nape of your neck that nobody was going to see.

EI: Were those actual locations?

MP: Some of them were locations — all of the boudoir, in the bedroom, the staircase…

EI: How was it reuniting with Stephen? It’s been awhile since Dangerous Liaisons…

MP: I did Dangerous so long ago and had a smaller part, I don’t honestly remember him paying that much attention to me. He was more focused on John (Malkovich) and Glenn (Close), and Christopher (Hampton, the screenwriter/executive producer) was there almost every day, which is unusual for writers to be on the set. This is probably their fourth project together, and what I remembered is that over the years, they’ve formed a real partnership. In a way, they almost co-direct, work off each other. So that was something I noticed that worked differently.

EI: Between this and Stardust, you really had to de-glamorize yourself. Is that tough as an actress?

MP: No, not really. I started to say that when I first put on those prosthetics, it was really upsetting. It was just so hideous, but there’s a part of you in there because they sort of take your face and then go, “If she was 200 years old…” and you see your mother and your grandmother in there. But I did have a rather strong reaction in the beginning, seeing all those prosthetics on me.

EI: This character is from a hundred years ago, but do you see a contemporary element in her?

MP: Only if you reduce it down to its most essential element that is love, really, and staying true to your passion. For all intents and purposes, these people are really made to be together, but because of the social mores of the time, even in that insular set of people where they had their own rules that they followed… In any period movie, you try to [relate it in a contemporary way] and boil it down to its most essential elements that are universal and timeless.

EI: Can you talk about your exchanges with Kathy Bates in the movie?

MP; We’ve worked together before where I also played the lover of her son. Kathy and I, our planets are crossed in some weird way I don’t understand. I love her and have loved working with her on both films. She’s really smart and all those other things you think she’s going to be. All the things that are great about her come through in all her performances.

EI: What was it about the character Lea that made you want to bring her to life?

MP: Honestly, primarily, it was working with Stephen again, and then I loved the script and it was a great part. They don’t come along very often.

EI: You did a brilliant job of portraying someone whose exterior no longer matches her inside…

MP: Remember Christopher is brilliant, but he had Colette guiding him. He stayed really close to the novel. We all paid homage to what she wrote. Whenever there was any doubt and we’ve be on the set, Stephen would say one thing and Christopher would say something, and it was quite satisfying it was always in the novel. Can I talk about the novel? First of all, I was really daunted by the fact that it was a piece of French literature that I’d have to claw my way through. You know, “This is going to be really dense.” And then I got this tiny little novel, at first blush kind of frothy. I read it in a day. The second time through it, you realize how profound — it is so specific and so economical that you miss the wisdom and the depth. It’s like watching a Jeff Bridges performance — he is so good, it makes it look so easy. Her writing is the same way. He’s so good, that he’s overlooked over and over again and he’s one of the greatest actors of our time. That’s what her writing is to me.

EI: What would you say to the person you were 20 years ago, in terms of advice about the business? How have you evolved?

MP: Twenty years ago? I would have been 30 then. It wouldn’t have done any good because basically, what I have now, I enjoy the process a lot more. A couple of different reasons: I don’t have anything to prove to anyone but myself, but I’m pretty harsh, and I guess there are other harsh critics out there. But you learn not to be so affected by that, because I have family. Before I had a family, my work was everything to me and I didn’t feel balanced unless I was working, but now I do. As a result of that, I think I enjoy my work a lot more, so it is a lot different in that respect.

EI: How was it doing Hairspray?

MP: It was a lot of fun.

EI: Is there going to be a sequel? I heard they are working on it…

MP: I hear. You guys were probably talking to Adam (Shankman).

EI: Do you have any inclination to sing more?

MP: No, not really, because my first love is really acting. If you’re going to be a singer, you have to really commit and put a lot of time into it. I don’t have a natural gift. I’m a crammer. In fact, when I took Hairspray, I had to take in a voice coach, and also with The Baker Boys. So I do a lot of cramming. Hence, I probably don’t enjoy it as much because I feel pressured. The vocal chords are a muscle that can develop only so quickly, whereas if I trained year round, I’d not only sing better, but it would be more fun. I’ve never really been able to split my artistic inclinations. I’m a painter, but when I act, I don’t pick up a paintbrush.

EI: Who sees your paintings?

MP: My family or whoever happens to wander into my basement.

EI: What is your painting style?

MP: I love impressionistic, but I’m more realistic and I can’t seem to paint any other way, as much as I try.

EI: You must have some amazing family portraits then…

MP: No, I don’t. I painted one picture of my kids and it’s sort of cartoon-y.

EI: Age-wise, there seems to be a paragon shift in movies like The Reader. ”Cougar” has become a popular slant word.

MP: It seems that either the public or our industry doesn’t want people of the same age being together in a love relationship. They just don’t like that. One or the other has to be 20 years older. Maybe that’s why I didn’t work for four years. I had to wait until it shifted so I could be the older woman.

EI: Where does your passion for acting come from?

MP: I don’t know. I think it’s a hard thing to put words to because it’s visceral. I remember (I’m quoting from Jeff Goldblum) him saying — his advice to actors starting out — that if there isn’t anything else in the world you can do, be an actor. It’s something I just have to do and I don’t know if you can explain it.

EI: Is there one film you’re most proud of?

MP: There is, but I wouldn’t want to say and make a lot of people feel bad. Sometimes my favorite film is my favorite performance. I might like a performance of mine that was in a film that wasn’t so good. Usually, it’s favorite elements or favorite scenes.

EI: In today’s scene, people are doing more comedy, such as people like DeNiro…

MP: For me, comedy is harder because it’s about music. With drama, anything goes as long as it’s real. With comedy, there’s a certain rhythm that the writers write with and you have to find that. It’s a bit more challenging.

EI: Do you have any upcoming projects?

MP: Yes, I do. I have a drama that nobody wants to make.

Source: Buzzine

I know, I know… it is simpy a buzz… but at the moment some sites in the net echoes about it, such as Celebrity Drop and Series & TV. I guess it is just a wish by the person who writes the news, Ausiello at Celebrity Drop. Anyway it is already on the board:

Alan Ball and Co. are currently talking to “name” actresses to appear in just one episode this season (and more in future ones). The character? No less than Sophie-Anne, the 500-year-old queen of the Louisiana vampires.

If everything goes according to plan, Michelle Pfeiffer could be landing that role, and man could that be awesome!

According the sources, Her Highness is as bright and witty as she is powerful and dangerous. (Isn’t that always the way?)

What do you think about Michelle Pfeiffer on True Blood?

Source: Celebrity Drop and Series & TV

New Updated: March 20, 10:00 am GMT

Well guys, I think that definitely the false-buzz finishes here: I’ve just read that Sophie Anne is supposed to be 14 to 16 years old!!, at least in the book which the series is based in. You can find at True Blood’s IMDb forums

Among pfans, I’ve read some voices opposite to see to Michelle Pfeiffer doing television. Well, let’s talks about it.

In my opinion, about whether Pfeiffer should made TV or not, well, it is a hard question. I think Michelle is too big for TV, yeah, and I prefer that she goes on doing movies, but at the moment she has got an status that she could allow herself to do some SPECIAL cameos in IMPORTANT-PRESTIGIOUS TV series (such as True Blood). I have to say that I’d like she did if it was in True Blood, I’m a fan of this show and I’d really love to see her here, at least for an episode.

Besides Television has changed, at the moment an actor who is doing television isn’t less prestigious that another who only makes movies. Television is having got prestigious shows… look at HBO who can compete with the most of movies currently… What do you prefer? a TV film in HBO (such as “Georgia O’Keefe” – which Joan Allen is doing it for this channel) or another movie like Personal Effects? Come on…

Did you remember Muppets Tonight? I loved that she was there, I think she was great. So I’d love that she did again. I think it would be at least a new chance to see her again…

What dou you think?