Adams Heads to TV With 'Sharp Objects'
Monday, April 4, 2016 at 8:06AM Manuel here with some actressexual news to get your week started. Jean-Marc Vallée, who’s been busy lately helping Reese Witherspoon nab her second Oscar nomination, filming the HBO TFE dream-cast miniseries Big Little Lies with his Wild star, Nicole Kidman, and Laura Dern, and letting loose with Jake Gyllenhaal (in the soon to be seen Demolition) is teaming up with Amy Adams for another HBO show: the adaptation to Gillian Flynn’s Sharp Objects. The project, which has been in talks for a while, finally landed at the cable network after a heated bidding war (we almost got a chance to binge it with Netflix narrowly missing this acquisition!)
Per Deadline’s description:
Sharp Objects centers on reporter Camille Preaker (Adams) who, fresh from a brief stay at a psychiatric hospital, must return to her tiny hometown to cover the murders of two preteen girls. Trying to put together a psychological puzzle from her past, Camille finds herself identifying with the young victims a bit too closely.
Amy, with a sharp object
I’m most intrigued because it sounds like a welcome departure for Adams. Not only does it mark her return to television (let us not forget she was Jim’s girlfriend on The Office), but she hasn’t really yet played within the psychological thriller genre. I have an inkling it might give us a chance to see the actress anew, a nice welcome change from her recent work. Also, we know Vallée is great with actors so I'm curious to see what he brings out in Adams.
The project, ordered to straight-to-series (we're getting 8 episodes), will be executive produced and co-written by Flynn and Marti Noxon, who’s been on a roll lately what with UnReal and Girlfriend’s Guide to Divorce. Speaking of Noxon, she’s readying her directorial debut, To The Bone, a film based on her own experiences with anorexia. Lily Collins has signed on to play the leading role of Ellen, while Keanu Reeves will be playing Dr. William Beckham who’s intent on getting the young woman to get better. As someone who’s loved Noxon’s work for close to two decades—this is the woman, after all, who gave us Buffy’s “The Wish” and Mad Men’s “The Gypsy and the Hobo”—I’m excited to see what she does with this very personal story.
Reader Comments (20)
I can't quite tell from the press-is this a regular series or a miniseries?
Interesting. Actresses over 40 have to go where the work is, and at the moment it feels like that means a series at HBO or Netflix. Good luck Amy.
Yes. Looks like a nice juicy role for Adams to sink her teeth into. And we know from experience, when she has one of those she does not dissapoint.
I just cannot wait for this and the one with Nicole and Reese too!!!
I am pleased that "Sharp Objects" got the go ahead with an actress and director I like, and Gillian Flynn doing the adaptation. Looking forward to this.
I don't happen to think the choice to go with HBO is because Amy Adams is over 40, I think cable & Netflix are way more open to financing female oriented projects. Also, Gillian Flynn can write a more faithful adaptation, with 8 episodes there's no need to eliminate characters and sub-plots.
There's a lot of advantages to going long form instead of a 2 hour film.
Surely we are past that stage where we think it's age dependant. Look at Tom Hiddleston in "The Night Manager", or any number of projects going these days.
Cable & Netflix have more money for mid-range dramas, Period.
I wish that were completely true Lady Edith, but I don't see Jennifer Lawrence, Scarlett Johansson, Kristin Stewart, Emma Stone, or even Jessica Chastain doing cable projects. The good parts for women get more scarce over 40, so you see more 40+ women going to cable. Amy is just 40, so I assume she did this because it was a great part and she likes the director. So maybe it's a bit of both (age and opportunity)?
@LadyEdith,
I totally agree with you ... also, I think movie theaters are going to be a thing of the past rather soon....The Screening Room allows you to buy main box for $150.00 , and then on Fridays when the new features come out, you pay $50 to see the movie at home.. at first, sounds expensive, but if you have a family at ? per ticket... and the the popcorn stand, you pay that and more....
Lately, IMO the miniseries or specials on TV are better quality than at the movies..
The times, they are a changin'
And instead of the Oscar we will have the best on-demand home viewing experience? Agree that everything is being blurred together.
@Anne - Netflix is outbidding everyone for new content, recent deals with Will Smith show that it's not just Actresses. I dread this change but there's no denying that a tipping point has been reached.
When reading Deadline, every other deal is for Netflix/Amazon or Cable. If it's a studio then it's a comic book picture or a sequel.
@Rick - "The People v O.J. Simpson" is one of the best things I have seen anywhere and what an audience !! Directors, Actresses, and Actors can no longer resist the lure of great content, financing, plus a larger audience.
Has anyone else read the book? THis really is the darkest of darkest stories and the character that Adams will be playing is by far one of the most effed up characters I have ever read.
There is also an extremely juicy part there for her mother on the show who is even more screwed up - so interested to see how this pans out. (Hint - Michelle Pfeiffer would be amazing for this)
I will believe all this "TV is better than film" hype when a movie as ambitious as The Tree of Life or Under the Skin makes it onto the small screen.
My feeling is that TV is better than film only for episodic television (series or multipart adaptations, like Angels in America). The cinema big screen format will always have a more profound impact, and like concerts or plays, it is a great form of communal entertainment. But I know movies may become just as antiquated as old Victtola recordings. I hope not in my lifetime, but it is coming.
AnneBoils - All the A lists are coming to TV. Emma Stone is doing a Netflix series. Scarlet Johannsson is doing a series for Sony TV (in development). Jessica Chastain will do a cable series in the future (she said so herself) if the material is right.
Jennifer Lawrence is on a league of her own. She doesn't need this.
So they are really B-list, right?
The sad truth is that all women parts are consolidating to cartoons or comic book. So, you really are witnessing the Hunger Games. But look at Mirren and Streep. They don't bother with a cable series when they are highly in demand. That aspect is awesome. They can do whatever they want. Good luck to Mrs. Adams
Who are these random actresses? Everyone is B list. Mrs. Chastain, Mrs Adams and Ms Stone can all kiss their careers goodbye.
Anne Boils, Emma Stone is actually doing a series for Netflix with Jonah Hill. Cary Fukunaga is directing.
So, you have Amy Adams doing a television series. You have Reese Witherspoon, Nicole Kidman and Shailene Woodley doing a miniseries. The aforementioned Emma Stone and Jonah Hill are doing a series. Cate Blanchett has a project set up at HBO that she's intending to star in that Julie Delpy is writing. Rooney Mara almost did a TV series with Fincher until his deal fell through. Mirren and Streep have done both series (Prime Suspect) or miniseries (Angels in America). Streep was actually going to do a film/miniseries for HBO about Maria Callas with Mike Nichols before he passed away. Matt Damon has done cable. Cumberbatch has Sherlock and The Hollow Crown is coming up. Scarlett Johansson is developing and starring in a miniseries adaption of "Custom in the Country". Julia Roberts has done HBO and is planning to do another project with them.Tom Hardy has a television series coming up that looks fantastic. Casey Affleck and Matthias Schoenaerts have a series about Lewis & Clark in development. Naomi Watts is doing the Twin Peaks revival. Daniel Craig is doing a television series as his next project for Showtime (with Todd Field!).
In-demand directors/auteurs like Fincher, Allen, Valleé, Scorsese, Soderbergh, Fukunaga, Campion and DuVernay are doing television. I really could go on and on.
This idea that television is somehow a lesser medium and is only done when the artist in question can't get proper film work is so passé. It simply isn't the case anymore. At this point it's almost like saying that doing stage work is a step down from FILM ACTING. No one with a clue says stuff like that anymore. Any actor worth their weight has done it.
Right, and of course I look forward to anything goid, but doesn't this support the argument that there is no longer a distinction between television and film? Why bother having the Oscars. Maybe we are at a weird what is cinematic content phase.
Of course there's a distinction. The distinction is in how we consume it. Long form vs. short, large screen vs. smaller. There's a distinction between live theatre and film due to the immediacy of one medium but that doesn't mean one has more merit than the other (though I know some would argue otherwise). Television has always been like the ugly stepchild and some continue to ignore the fact that this isn't the case anymore. "Film" stars are crossing over to TV just as easily as "television" stars are crossing over to movies. That line is blurring more and more and will continue to do so, I think.
So an Emmy is equal to an Oscar? No!