Sienna Miller 'Compromised Her Values' For Playing The 'Baroness' In G.I. Joe: ROC

[The Wire]

Sienna Miller 'Compromised Her Values' For Playing The 'Baroness' In G.I. Joe: ROC

 

View the full article

[Peter]

Weird thing for an "actress" to say, but you gotta give her credit for her honesty.

[synch]

can't read it that stupid COD ad keeps popping up in my face :S

[CLAM]

uh... right.. since when do actors or actresses have values?

 

it was the biggest movie she has been in, and the biggest part she has ever had... she isn't that famous and we all know that all actors and actresses live for the money and fame... so I think she is only saying this now because the movie SUCKED more than she thought it would.... and the producers probably aren't offering her as much money for the sequel because of how crappy the first one was

 

she doesn't like doing silly popcorn movies where she shoots guns.. but she doesn't mind taking her clothes off... those are some great values Sienna.

[Dragon66]

Her "values" didn't stop her from cashing those checks, and those "values" didn't stop her from hooking up with Jude Law while he was married.

[cjflan32]

"I had to wear sunglasses because every time I shot my gun I would blink."

Funny, I thought you had to wear sunglasses because THAT'S WHAT THE BARONESS WEARS!

 

And Clam, I was gonna say something about your post but then I read that last sentence and laughed my ass off. Hats off to Dragon too.

[shokker]

oh damn how little does she know about the character. i am not a big fan of the joe's but not knowing that baroness has glasses, thats like not knowing that apple pie has apple's. oh gee i nearly fall of my chair. oh my, actors. isn't it funny when you hear actors talking about roles in making of's that they are huge fan's and all few years later you get this. it is like they receive a script for the making of's too. lol. oh sienna that was a good one. alone for this you deserve a price of the biggest nut in town. they gave me glasses because i blink. do you guys think that she knows that she had the glasses on in the non action scenes too??? lol

[Superpowers1980]

You would of thought she actually killed people..........it just seems like a little overboard for playing a role in a movie. I could see if she said the character disturbed her, but its more like a stab at the genre, almost making herself into some pampered elitist. If what Dragon said he true then she is totally out of line.........terrible

[Dake]

This is such a weird statement. It sounds mostly like bs - I'd rather an actor said, "I didn't like the movie and don't want to do another one." then carry on with this artistic sounding nonsense. From her further description I'm curious what values were compromised honestly. She says she's not that tough, mean or bad-ass. Well guess what, the character's name isn't Sienna Miller - it's the Baroness. The reason you are an actor is to become people you are not. If you want every character you play to be the same as you are, that's not "acting" it's "being". I honestly thought she wasn't half bad in the film. She was certainly on par with the rest of the actors and was better than Channing (of course, my popcorn bucket was a better actor than Channing).

[Belmont13]

What a load of B.S. this is becoming a trend lately with actors they make a movie they promote it they say they had a great time with it and then after a few years they pull this crap. Shia Lebouff did the same thing with the Indiana Jones movie when it came out only to say Steven Spielberg dropped the ball with the movie a year and a half later. Seriously you get a script in advance for a reason, you know what kind of character you're gonna play and what the role entails, it's simple if you don't agree with something about the role don't take it specially if you're a c list actress who can't get any roles and just do it for the paycheck. It's sad I actually enjoy her performance in the movie. To add what Dragon66 said what makes that situation sadder it's that after they got married Jude Law cheated with the babysitter, they divorced and then got back together only to break up again a while later. They should call her Sienna "Values" Miller.

[hamsterboy]

uh... right.. since when do actors or actresses have values?

 

it was the biggest movie she has been in, and the biggest part she has ever had... she isn't that famous and we all know that all actors and actresses live for the money and fame... so I think she is only saying this now because the movie SUCKED more than she thought it would.... and the producers probably aren't offering her as much money for the sequel because of how crappy the first one was

 

she doesn't like doing silly popcorn movies where she shoots guns.. but she doesn't mind taking her clothes off... those are some great values Sienna.

 

 

Maybe that's how she compromised her values? She didn't get naked as The Baroness.

[SERPTENTORSLAIR]

By values i think she was referring to her standards as an actress not to accept a B-role ..........lol

[Devilbat]

I too get irritated with actors and actresses that try to distance themselves from a given role and deem themselves suddenly above the work whenever it seems popular opinion isn't in their favor. It's as if they jump on the bandwagon so to speak and deride a given film along with everybody else. And it's a shame too since I always felt Sienna Miller's portrayal as the Baroness was great; I felt as if she stole every scene she was in. She was definitely the best villain character in the movie IMHO.

 

And while we're on the subject, I still don't view ROC as a complete failure. It had alot of elements I really like. I do have some misgivings about it like most fans, but it's not the turkey everyone's making it out to be. But I'm not gonna open that can of worms.

[MosquitoCoast]

I'm with Devil Bat. It was a new interpretation of G. I. Joe, not faithful to any version before. Some of it was interesting, some had been better in earlier versions. I think a lot of us would have liked to have seen a film more faithful to the Marvel comic. I think it could have had a more serious tone given the parallels to real world military actions right now, fight against terrorism, etc..

 

As far as the "values" comment, it's clear from the quote in the tni article that she's talking about her own aversion to violence and not about being in a bad movie like some have commented.

[DarthJoe]

After reading the title of this thread, I thought this was going to be about the director making her wear bra inserts to make her boobs look bigger (I remember reading a story about this either during the time the movie was being filmed or right before it came out), because her boobs weren't big enough. But, nope, it's because she had to shoot GUNS. Really?

 

Fake boobs are okay, but playing a violent character in a movie that is based on hi-tech military operations is horrible...

[ARROW]

Fake boobs are okay, but playing a violent character in a movie that is based on hi-tech military operations is horrible...

 

I should tell you about some of the "aversions" I've encountered on some of the shows I have worked on. Sometimes a job is just a job--you bring what's required to it to do it, and when its done you just walk away from it.