Warm fuzzies

Happy birthday to Jake's big sister, Maggie Gyllenhaal! Maggie turns 30 today.


This makes me happy. Esquire calls Jake Gyllenhaal's performance in Rendition one of six Performances of the Year in their December issue.


Looks like Jeff Wells at Hollywood Elsewhere would have gone with option number three in my poll at right.

It's not that Gyllenhaal plays his Egypt-based CIA guy badly or ineffectively, but that Egypt-based CIA guy is written as such a revoltingly passive wuss....For me, Gyllenhaal's inactivity is infuriating. He's not just a guy doing nothing, but an emblem of do-nothing types the world over.

He sounds like he's blaming Jake for Douglas's actions, or inaction, as the case may be, which misses the point entirely. If you found him infuriating or revolting, Jeff, then he kicked ass, because you were supposed to feel all those things. And Wells's statement about what Douglas's character lacks expresses precisely why Jake's was an incredibly difficult role, and why his performance was that much more worthy of praise. I'm glad the editors of Esquire recognized that, even if Wells doesn't.

Something else that makes me happy: seeing Jake happy. IHJ has posted those photos from Jake and Reese's recent Napa Valley visit, and while the level of paparazzi interest in this relationship still bothers me, seeing Jake so obviously at ease and happy literally brought me to tears. Even Reese smiled at the camera this time. That's the way I like to see them.

Meanwhile, it looks like Jake's about to become the subject of a sniping showdown. Slash writer (it's amazing the things you can learn while browsing around Jake's fandom) royandronnie's opening bid remains the only one so far, and the auction ends at 6 pm EST. At least, I'm sorta hoping it will be sniped. Well, I mean, I totally will understand if no one can afford to bid $5,500, because I can't, but I guess I'd like to see the promise of his company bring in more than the bare minimum for the charity of his choice. Plus it would be fun to watch and see just how crazy Jake can make people.

Update: Well, here's another nice treat I hadn't seen before. This transcript, which the source claims to be from the Los Angeles Rendition press conference, has lots of priceless Jakeisms. I don't understand why I'm just now finding this. This stuff is gold and should have been all over the 'net by now. Some examples:

Reporter: You and Peter shaved your heads in Jarhead. Now, you both have beards.
Jake: Peter and I are dating (laughter). I can see the headlines now.
~~~
Reporter: What qualities do you admire in Reese, as a person and an actress?
Jake: She can grow a mean beard, that's for sure (laughter)! I don’t know if you’ve seen her beard--it's amazing!
~~~
Reporter: Will you comment on rumors that you are dating Reese?
Jake: No. Apparently, I am dating a lot of people, not only of the opposite sex (laughter)--it's very interesting and amusing.
Reporter: The first time we interviewed you, you talked about not having enough sex...
Jake: Are you offering or what? (Laughter)
Reporter: You talked freely during that interview. You have become a star since. So, has your sex life changed?
Jake: I've become an ascetic--I live in a cave now. That's why I am growing a beard. I have no sex, so I’m much more interesting!

Damn, Jake. Could you be any more lovable?

Photo of Maggie thumbnailed from The Internet Movie Database; all others from IHJ.

It's love

What you want and what is the truth are always two different things. -- Jake Gyllenhaal

Sweetheart, I couldn't have said it better myself.

Well, maybe I could have, but I wouldn't have looked nearly as good saying it.

Evidence that Rendition is still playing in at least one major metropolitan area: for whatever reason, this interview with Jake (the source of the quote above), which I'm guessing was taped in Toronto during the film festival, just appeared today on the Chicago CBS affiliate's website. Of course, they may have aired it earlier for all I know, since I do not live in Chicago.

Anyway, as you can see, I'm here, having not killed myself as promised. It's hard to estimate just how strangers reading my words have interpreted my depression; some would say I should not worry about what others think of me, but I'm suddenly feeling the need to express a very important fact about what's been happening to me. I want everyone to know, and understand, the truth: I was not made suicidal by the sudden revelation that Jake Gyllenhaal was romantically involved with someone.

I've been depressed for most of my life, clinically. On medication, which you may have noticed me joking about more than once. When the chemicals in your brain are imbalanced like mine, almost anything can trigger a deep trough, a black period in which life literally loses all meaning. In this case, the last in a series of mental health tripwires was my self-assessment in the wake of my reaction to the relationship "news." Unfortunately, knowing why you are depressed does not, contrary to what might seem logical, make the depression go away. My medication has been adjusted, and while the improvement so far can more likely be attributed to yet another mood swing than the meds, I feel better knowing I will feel better.

Positive signs:

1. I have not cried all day today. No, wait, that's not exactly true. I did weep a little after watching Mask on cable. Oh, and again at the end of Stranger Than Fiction. I was drawn into it by Emma Thompson and Maggie Gyllenhaal (whose performance left me talking back to Jake's image on my computer monitor--Your sister fucking rocks, baby!). Is it just me, or is Will Ferrell the most utterly charmless film star ever? On the Charm Continuum, if Jake Gyllenhaal is at one extreme (given), Ferrell is definitely at the other, infinitely dissipating extreme. But I digress.
2. I'm starting to look forward to moving to California again.
3. Best of all, I found myself smiling uncontrollably while downloading all those images of Jake that I've been meaning to grab...including those featuring him with Reese Witherspoon.

To my great relief, in fact, I have been grinning, laughing and squeeing over Jake all day long. The concept that he might actually be as wonderful as he seems is no longer irrationally unsettling to me. I still love him, more than ever, and I'm grateful all over again for the pleasure he brings to my life. Wanting to be with him won't make it come true, but it fills the gaps with a perfect sweetness.

Photos: jakegyllenhaalfan.com, IHJ.

Laundry list

I never imagined I could be so at home in a completely new place as I was this past weekend with my beloved friend, Charlene. She made me feel welcome, in her home and in her town, and it was the most I've relaxed in a good many years. Thank you, my separated-at-birth other sister, for the vacation I so desperately needed.

Charlene, me, and Powder

From the moment Charlene approached me at the airport, and I burst into tears, I knew the trip was more than worth the effort. It wasn't the last time I wept on her, either, poor woman. Such relief at finally meeting my friend was not something I had expected, but I'm an emotional basket case anyway. Together we laughed, we cried, we squeeed. It was everything I wanted it to be.

Naturally, while I've been escaping from my escapism, events have continued to unfold in Jakedom. He's very inconsiderate sometimes.

Okay, I admit: the foremost development on this front isn't of Jake's doing. Jake Watch have officially announced their impending departure from the blogosphere. And this I had to read while in a hotel lobby, because contrary to what the hotel's online profile stated, there was not, in fact, wireless internet in every room. So there I sat, leaking from the eyes and sucking back snot as I read the kind well-wishings of JW loyalists whose names hadn't been seen around in many months. Jake Watch has been more than a destination; it is an institution, one that Jake and his "people" would have done well to appreciate while they had the chance. But hey, britpopbaby and Prophecy Girl weren't doing it for Jake, they were doing it for themselves and us. Nothing good lasts forever. I salute them.

Someone at San Francisco online alternative zine BeyondChron managed to echo all the frustration that has followed me since the first mainstream Rendition reviews appeared. Marc Norton, a hotel bellman by profession, writes

[T]hat is the point of this movie -- to make you think. That is exactly what all the luke-warm and negative reviewers don't want to do, and don't want you to do.

Yes, I said I felt somewhat unsatisfied by the film myself, but I can now confirm, having seen it a third time, that it does indeed get better with every viewing. It probably should embarrass me to confess this, but I still get a chill every time Isabella El-Ibrahimi shrieks at Corrine Whitman to just tell her that her husband is okay. True, some people get a similar chill when they hear fingernails scraped down a chalkboard, but the moment works for me, and I didn't think it would. Anyway, even if you skip Norton's review, please check out his link to an article from the New York Times about a real-life "war on terror" whistleblower whose efforts prove that perhaps Douglas Freeman's actions were not so far-fetched after all.

Let's see, then we had Jake and Reese attending a Halloween party in the most pathetic non-costumes imaginable. These are people with money. The lack of any effort on their part strongly suggests that either the invitation or the choice to attend came at the last second. That's always the way I want my party guests to be represented to the public at large. Hooray for Hollywood.

What else? Jake's getting down to work on Brothers, and now there's a whisper from Variety linking him to something called Nailed that would also star Jessica Biel. That title connotes such potential, I'm afraid to scoff. It's almost a wet dream unto itself.

Oh, then my internet provider irritated the hell out of me by failing to pick up the new DNS record for IHeartJakeMedia following their domain expiration a few days ago. I'm way behind on downloading Jake images, and that didn't help matters. Things are finally in place as they should be, but it will take me a whole weekend to catch up.

Jake hung out with Robert Downey, Jr. one night. Then he and Reese got video papped on a beach somewhere. Reese appears at one point to be picking something from Jake's teeth. Very romantic. In the past, such intrusive video would have set off my fiercest protective instinct, but the fact that they've probably been together for several months and managed to avoid such paparazzi run-ins for as long as suited their needs leaves me feeling somewhat less sympathetic. And I hate that I feel that way.

I want to continue to love Jake in the way I always have. More than want, I need it; it's something to occupy a dangerously obsessive mind, one that will turn to far less benign thoughts in the absence of this diversion. Most of all, I don't want to come here sounding like a bitter rejected fifteen-year-old, and I'm afraid that's exactly how I sound.


I can't swear off Jake right now. I fear it would literally kill me. Especially when photos like this one make my heart ache.

Photos: Peggy Mitchell, IHJ.

Be nice to me

Yes, I'm going to talk about what I thought of Rendition.

First, go read this interview with Jake from the Telegraph, done while he was in London. On the one hand, it has terrific elements than any good interview should: description of Jake's posture, clothing (guess which well-worn, big-necked ensemble?) and oh god, voice ("gentle with dark undercurrents"--can I cut that phrase out and put it under my pillow?), evidence that the writer has actually done some research, and questions pertinent to the reason they're both there: Rendition. On the other, it's full of extraneous stuff; recycled facts from that research I just mentioned, and a completely unnecessary probing into Jake's sexuality that proves the interviewer is one of those people who...well, he's one of those people. Plus either transatlantic flight made Jake two inches taller, or this guy just guessed it wrong. Everyone does says he seems taller than they imagined.

So, Rendition.

I wish I could rave about it, say that it was unequivocally the best movie I've seen since Zodiac, but this isn't that kind of movie. I attended a Friday night showing and left the theater somewhat unsatisfied. Thinking it was probably due to all the pent up expectation, and the vaguely arctic temperature in the theater that made it hard to focus, I decided to see it again this afternoon. Besides, I really wanted another, undistracted look at Douglas Freeman. Hey, I'm nothing if not honest.

On second viewing, I did feel more involved in the story, but not as much as I thought I should have been. Maybe that's because I wanted it to be something it couldn't: a revelation. Unlike the majority of the intended audience, I have already read enough about the policy of extraordinary rendition and its purported place in the defense of national security. Rendition didn't tell me anything I didn't already know. At least this time, I did feel moved by several scenes, and my overall impression is that this is a movie that will grow on me with each additional viewing, much like Jarhead.

What I can enthusiastically endorse is Jake's performance. My bias notwithstanding, it's a Hollywood irony that while few critics seem to know what the film's motives were, the role of Douglas Freeman struck me as typical Oscar fodder. WDW was right in that this really is Jake's movie, despite its trying to be so much more. His is the character that makes the biggest connection, who reveals multiple dimensions to the audience. All the performances were excellent, but for me no one shone like Jake with his flimsy professional facade after the bombing and barely-contained self-loathing during the events that follow. More than anything else, what I walked out of that theater feeling this afternoon was an intense pride. As with most of his movies, the box office numbers will be irrelevant; Jake Gyllenhaal has proved again that he is a phenomenal actor, and he'll have work in Hollywood for as long as he wants it.

All photos: IHJ.

Release

Another twelve hours before I will finally watch Rendition. That is, if I don't get sent home from work early for doing everything wrong because I am mentally elsewhere. Would that be a good or a bad thing?

Ellen DeGeneres is one of the kindest, sweetest people I've ever seen, so hearing her call Jake Gyllenhaal her friend gave me such a warm mushy feeling I almost cried.* I know that's because of my hormones, but it still made me very happy. Hearing her say what I already knew--that he "might just be the perfect man"--didn't feel bad, either.

Oh, so much to savor in this visit with Ellen, I haven't even absorbed all of it yet. Jake conceding that he'd take off his pants before he took off...what? His shirt? Let the speculation on why begin. Jake dangerously playful with a big knife; Jake like an excited kid in the kitchen, grabbing at the chicken in the refrigerator before the clock started; Jake sounding absolutely sincere when he gushed "I've always wanted to do this!" Jake ordering Ellen around like Gordon Ramsay, only charming; Jake eagerly grabbing the wine and gulping it with both hands on the glass.

Sigh.

There's so much I want to say today, but I'm afraid to keep going on and on...I may never stop.

Ten and a half hours remain now until I see Rendition.

Vanessa Farquharson's interview with Jake finally was published this morning at the National Post. Even if she hadn't declared in so many words her crush on him, she revealed the level of her interest by referring to his "perfectly formed" hand. This is the kind of talk that goes on in the fangirliest of forums, like here, here, and here. I know because I'm one of the fangirls.
(Update: I just noticed that Vanessa has erroneously identified IHJ rather than the brilliant Jake Watch as the originators of the Jake in '08 campaign. Is there no justice for PG and bpb? Should I write to the National Post?)

Following on the heels of these two items in the Washington Post is a similar Q-and-A with Peter Sarsgaard. I'm sure this means there's more with Peter elsewhere in the paper, and I'll go find it later.

What am I avoiding here?

The truth: I am afraid of not liking this movie. This is a rotten side effect of my constant pursuit of news that contains the name Jake Gyllenhaal, because just about every reviewer has indicated their opinion within the title or opening line of their review (as is good practice). No, I don't usually take the word of film critics on any movie, but I have to admit having been affected by the negativity I've exposed myself to over the past week.

More than that, I am irrationally but nonetheless deeply concerned for Jake and his happiness. What shines clear and true through all the interviews we've seen this week is that Jake is very much a genuine, sensitive young man; there is no magical mithril celebrity armor protecting him from the bullshit of Hollywood, he is not slick and polished. He is consistently shy when complimented about his physique and sincerely uninterested in impressing anyone with his own political opinions, preferring to focus on his job as an actor. In short, he appears to be a vulnerable, sweet, uncommon human being. I don't know any men like this personally. None who are available, anyway. Which is why I've been alone all my life.

About nine and a half hours to go.

Perhaps the very thing that I know to be causing all this artificial (yes, I recognize it for what it is) angst will actually help me tonight when I sit down in the theater. I'm so emotionally susceptible right now, it's probably the best time to watch Rendition, because even if it sucks, I'll be swept away.


*In fact I did cry later when Ellen told the car jumper about his Nike deal. I am seriously at the mercy of my endocrine system.


All photos: IHJ.

Conan O'Brien saves the world

Okay, not really. But he did give us the absolute best, most delightfully bizarre moments with Jake so far this week. He's also the first one to even mention Zodiac among Jake's past work. Just about everything that was missing from all the prior interviews was here, starting with a change of clothes for Jake. Whether this was arbitrary or the result of some misfortune befalling the pinstriped suit, we can't say.

Conan cited the Jake Gyllenhaal beard effect, which induced Jake to talk about how he smells. This is very dangerous territory, and once again I wonder if Jake knows what he's doing to some of us when he says these things.

Having (more subtly than on his last visit) trashed his father's judgment on Letterman, it was someone else's turn to be embarrassed by Jake on national television: his friend, the devoted Red Sox fan. Gyllenhaalics can pretty well guess who that is, and being able to picture him as Jake tells the story makes it that much funnier. I always prefer that Jake humiliate himself rather than a loved one when giving interviews, but in this case a little payback for some truly eye-catching behavior was probably in order, so I'm with him here. Plus he's just so damn adorable in telling it; it's Jake's recreation that everyone will see and make fun of, and he knows that.

Conan also managed to ask Jake a somewhat personal question that wasn't invasive. I hope other tv hosts around America were taking notes. Jake said yes, he went a little crazy being between jobs for several months, and then gave us the musical tie-in that we should have had on Letterman with 50 Cent by singing a bit of Gnarls Barkley. Which he parlayed into a Gnarls Barkley duet with Conan. I love this man.

Um, Jake, that is, though Conan has definitely won me over in his own right.

So, will Jon Stewart ask Jake any of the questions sent in by fans? Honestly, it would be more than I hope for. This week's schedule is so full of Jakey goodness it has made the home stretch to Rendition's opening fly by, and the promise of another red carpet appearance (Roma Film Fest) immediately following means my adrenaline--and my pheremones--will be pumping for a while to come.

Rendering truth

Meredith Viera: Brokeback Mountain, did you have any idea when you were making that, what you were sitting on? ...So to speak, I probably shouldn't use that term, actually I apologize...

Jake: Very well put, Meredith.

Well, that was worth waking up for.

So let's recap the promotional tour so far:

Jonathan Ross awkwardly focuses the majority of his interview on Brokeback Mountain and Jake artfully dodges the environmental issue by declaring he swims everywhere. Ross then ratchets the awkwardness up another couple notches by commenting appreciatively about Jake's naked stomach.

Jake tells David Letterman that a shitfaced, belligerent woman in London went from an object of hate to love when she called him Jake Gooberballs. Dave asks the tired old question about growing up in a showbiz family and we are all rewarded with another story demonstrating that Stephen Gyllenhaal is an absent-minded dork. I picture Naomi with her head in her hands listening to this.

The Today interview goes from intense, focused intellectual discussion about Rendition and Jake's (very well articulated, I thought) motivations in choosing roles to embarrassed twitters as Meredith Viera puts her fumbling foot quite neatly in her mouth while yet again bringing up a movie Jake made two years ago. Jake handles it so gracefully I want to kiss him. I'm kidding no one here, I always want to kiss him.

And now, Kelly Ripa thinks the beard is a nice one. Kelly apparently doesn't notice the patchiness that I see, or that gray spot that Jake himself has just acknowledged. Regis Philbin interrogates Jake about his social life like an overprotective mother. Jake struggles to remain polite while avoiding answering questions that are no one's damn business and still comes off charming. Kelly at least manages to ask a decent question about photo shoots, and Jake uses the word fraud regarding those Interview images. I swear I've heard that before.

More on all this later. I'm going back to bed for a few hours.

All photos: IHJ.

Monday morning wake-up call

I discovered something about my obsession this morning: I have not lost all capacity for reason. Here's how I know. There will be a sneak preview of Rendition at University of Miami's Cosford Cinema in Coral Gables tomorrow night at 9 pm. And I'm not planning on going. Coral Gables is about 90 minutes from my home, and it's just too damn far and too much trouble to justify. I can see the movie a few days later as planned if it saves me a trip to south Miami. I'm so proud of myself for being able to say that, it's rather frightening in itself. Let's not focus on it.

In addition to the Supreme Court decision on the ACLU case of Khaled El-Masri, the movie is getting free press courtesy of Amnesty International, who want us to watch Rendition and then go sign up at their Unsubscribe Me campaign site. Will it make any difference? Who knows. But not doing anything will make even less difference.

Also, I found this wonderful discussion with director Gavin Hood about his choices in making the movie and what he hopes to accomplish with it. Bravo, Gavin.

Jake's (mostly) fabulous visit with that wacky Jonathan Ross on Friday is still reverberating through the internet. Posts like this one on the YourLondon Calling blog, entitled "OMG! How cute is he?" are a reminder to me that there are still folks who had not yet succumbed to the Gyllenhaal charm. It's like a revelation to them. Yes, Jake is funny, and adorable, and sexy, and natural, and a cutie, as assorted bloggers have all declared since witnessing this interview. Welcome to my world.

Meanwhile, in case there's anyone else out there who, like the Splash blogger, didn't get it: no, Jake would not want to be a farmer if he weren't an actor. It's called humor. Very dry, deadpanned humor, delivered perfectly as most of his is. Perhaps these folks could benefit from more exposure to Jake's wit. Well, really, who wouldn't?

And we'll all get our next chance tonight when Jake returns to chat with David Letterman. Once again, live blogging is promised over at Jake Watch for those of you who don't receive U.S. broadcast television, though Prophecy Girl warns she may just end up waiting to hit "post" until it's over. Am I the only one who sees phenomenal potential in the scheduling of 50 Cent as the musical guest while Jake's there? I mean, it's not Kanye, but who knows what delicious insanity may transpire. I haven't felt like this since Christmas Eves as a kid. Bring it on, baby, I'm ready.

All photos: IHJ.

Jonny-on-the-spot

Absurd. I've just become giddy with the sight of what appear to be hand wipes in the side pocket of Jake's backpack. More shots of Jake strolling through Heathrow are available at the IHJ Community.

Over and over, I marvel at the strangeness of my obsession. And not just my obsession, but that of the others in my condition, as well. For example, why is it so endearing that Jake Gyllenhaal wears the same casual clothes repeatedly? I do it. You probably do it. Everyone I know does it. But for some reason we assume that a movie star has so much money to burn, and such pressure to be an icon of style or freshness, it's utterly novel that Jake should wear the same goofy shirt with the craterous neckhole that he was snapped in a few weeks ago while valet parking for coffee.

Ah, fandom. I embrace my insanity.

And thanks, Jake, for wearing those boots, too. I love those boots. I want to see those boots propped up on my coffee table. I want them tossed haphazardly under my bed.

I must have finally reached and breached my overload point, because I'm totally back to zen right now, anticipating a live blogging event tonight by JW's britpopbaby. Friday Night with Jonathan Ross begins at 10:35 GMT, which equates to 5:35 EDT, my time. I shall still be in traffic when that happens, more likely than not, but I won't miss more than a few minutes unless there's an accident on the road, and no one would have the effrontery to keep me away from something like this: the vicarious experience of a talk show in another country on another continent by frequent browser refresh. I cannot wait.

Life is weird. Weird is good. I like it.

All photos: IHJ.

Sensory overload

Every single day, I tell myself I'm going to stop spending so much damn time on Jake, and every single day, I fail. Last night while I managed to catch up on House, MD (with that Rendition spot again, yay!) and Dexter, Jake Gyllenhaal was at a premiere for Rendition in Beverly Hills. As you can see, the beard lives. In fact, the beard is once again taking on a life of its own. I love you, you rebellious, furry man. Over 100 new photos up at IHJ.

Steph's also got us some caps from the HBO First Look: Rendition that aired last night. I attempted to transfer the show from my DVR, but the resulting file had audio, no video. Possibly a copy protection issue because it's a pay channel. I was too damn tired to figure out another way last night, and by the time I get around to it, I'm sure someone will have made it available elsewhere. For all I know, they already have. (Update: Silly me, of course they have. IHJ took care of you. Get it here.)

How will I survive Rendition Week if Jake keeps popping up at random in addition to all that's scheduled? As it is, most of my day is spent in contemplation of my goals and needs as inspired by Jake. There are not enough hours in a day, not enough time in the week to get a handle on what it is my brain is trying to tell me. Do I want to take a whack at being a writer? Or am I willing to keep working some job or other and just hope that my interests can be satisfied outside the nine-to-five routine? As it stands, my current job has become nothing more than a nuisance I endure to receive pay. That's pretty bad, and I'm not happy about it. But with Jake scrambling my brain, I'm having a hard time understanding what I do want. All I'm clear on is wanting him.

All photos: IHJ. Nod for post title to BirdGirl.

Fallen

I am still feeling strangely wired, as if I'd had too much caffeine, despite my relative lack of sleep in the past 72 hours. Twice this weekend I discovered well after midnight that I had forgotten to eat anything for dinner, engrossed as I had been in my Jake activities. This is not healthy, and I'm the first to admit it. I am coming apart.

But it's not new, either. I've done it before, will do it again, no doubt. So while it's mortifying and pathetic, I recognize that it is also completely self-indulgent. I wanted to be lost in him, on whatever level, so I let it happen. Now I just have to see if I can make a go of the rest of my waking life while I try to crawl back to the surface for air.

Anyway, the good news in all this is that I did successfully get video out of my DVR, so Rendition Week will be available to those who need it from me. Not that I'm your only source, but a promise is a promise.

I don't feel comfortable talking about what caused my strung-out weekend Jake-bender, but I feel like it would be dishonest to withhold it, too. So much has swirled through my mind, I know it will continue to affect me for quite some time, possibly until the day I forget Jake Gyllenhaal (it will happen, if I live long enough, experience tells me).

Perhaps the most amazing thing is that, as if on cue, Jake has provided a strangely relevant quote to the media as part of his current Rendition promotion. Some Kentucky newspaper quotes him telling Fox News, "I don't hold it against people for wanting to know about our personal lives and reading all those magazines and what not."

Our world is in a very bad place at the moment, so I think it is only appropriate that people look to other things and have an interest in all the drama and happenings of celebrity lives, and I hope that at some point I can help the public sedate and escape what's really happening in the outside world.

Sedate is never a word I associate with my reactions to Jake, but I know he's talking about escapism, and of course that's something I can relate to, as my presence here makes obvious. The quote is probably from this interview, where Jake is asked again about extraordinary rendition, and also about working with actors and others from the varying nations that made up the cast and crew of that film.

His disarmingly benevolent attitude toward the public fascination with celebrity, and celebrity gossip, was neither predictable nor revelatory, though it was characteristic of his philosophical nature. Unfortunately, it also has triggered my protective instincts; I fear that every sleazy creep in the world will consider it an approbation, even an invitation to further probe, invade, stalk. I hope that beefy bald guy Jake tows around has at least one equally intimidating coworker. He's too fucking nice, and I'm so afraid for his safety and his privacy that I'm feeling invasive.

Babble, blather, I tend to run on when I have something on my mind that I don't necessarily feel good revealing. True confession time has come, and while most of the (30 or so) people who will ever read this may shrug or even laugh at the drama of my words, I think one or two will grok this.

I've made no secret of my opinion about fan fiction, and my own ambivalence when against my better judgment I found myself authoring some. Even less appealing than fanfic to me was the morally questionable subset known as RPS. I know in my rational mind that anyone reading these stories is aware it's fantasy, but the use of real people as characters seems abusive somehow.

How then do I explain my random decision last Friday, while bored out of my skull here at work, to seek out and indulge in the one thing I told myself I never would, the most salacious and egregious of fan manifestations? I don't. I can't. I've once again proved myself the queen of irony, my contradictions alive and well. I can tell you that I both regret it, and don't. I read the story that over the past year several friends had recommended to me, despite my protests, as the best. I read it, and I re-read it, and then I went and I found a sequel, and I read that, too. Then, hating myself already, depressed, and completely consumed, instead of moving on to find some distraction, I went and read another.

What the hell happened?

I can tell you it had nothing to do with the plots, which were fantastical, presumptive, and unoriginal--no offense to those authors, I don't mean their writing was bad. It was excellent, or I wouldn't be in this mess. Just that the tale they spun was not one in which I had any emotional investment. So why did I keep reading? And why do I feel raw?

In one word, Jake.

The growing realization that someone else's mental Jake was so completely identical to my own, so vivid, every conversation and action (apart from the plotline) ringing true despite the very fact that this was fiction, knocked all the wind out of me. Not just my Jake, anymore. This was evidence that the myth in my head is a bit more than that. I have spent hours digesting and analyzing this discovery. I can discuss the logical aspects, that we have all formed our image of him from the same sources, all that is publicly available, that I already knew this in large part from my interaction with the fandom. For whatever reason, that has not mitigated the impact of this weekend's reading. Holy shit, I tell myself, is it possible? Can anyone be this...everything that he is? The first author's Jake was funny, a tad immature at times, intelligent, but most of all, direct, and warm. I couldn't get enough. Later, as I tried to recover, I decided to read the comments on her journal by her readers, wanting to see how many other people had been sucker-punched by her Jake. I was perplexed to see only one or two comments that even remotely suggested the impact I had felt. What I did find, though, was her own revelation of her favorite story as a reader, and I'll be goddamned if I didn't go off immediately to find that one, too. Pathetic.

Both the first story and the last one shared a common point of view that certainly contributed to my vulnerability here; namely, that of the other person, the one completely enamored with Jake and feeling hopeless about it. This too was devastatingly authentic; perhaps my reaction is based in insane jealousy, the knowledge that someone else--no, fuck it, almost everyone else--has this longing, here translated into a story where it is embodied in another who would actually have access to Jake. The descriptions of that person's perceptions and responses to him, words I could have written or spoken, given the opportunity.

That's it, but that's enough. It makes no sense, that any of these things should be as an epiphany to me, but making sense is often overrated. I know these were stories, written by someone who no more knows the real Jake than I do. But he was so much my Jake, addictive, I could not stop. What have I done?

Before anyone asks, no, I do not plan to continue reading RPS, or fanfic. I remember having said that there would be no going back, and I do fear its draw, but this has got to stop. I lost an entire weekend, minus a few family hours (in which Jake was with me all the way), to indulgence, and I can't maintain my basic functions this way. It's unhealthy, it's disgusting, it's ridiculous, but most of all, it's too easy.

Fortunately, we shall have more real Jake in the immediate future, which I think will go a long way to bringing me back to health. Watching him be all those things I know he is, witty, charming, thoughtful--it's going to hurt in the way it always does, but it will be real, and if nothing else, I may feel cleansed.


Photo: IHJ.

Whiskery wonder

Wow, that was quick. When I mentioned the other day that I'd like a transcript of the Los Angeles Rendition press conference, I didn't think I would get it. This seems to be a new trend for me. Perhaps I should causually comment that it would be wonderful if Jake Gyllenhaal showed up on my doorstep and asked me to marry him, but it's unlikely. We'll see if that one pans out.

Here, courtesy of the always helpful Wet Dark and Wild, is a transcript of all the discussion which wasn't spoiler-y in nature. For those who don't mind being spoiled, download and listen to the recording of the entire press conference, via Frosty at Collider.

Want pictures with that? Stephanie at IHJ took care of those, too.

More here. Could he be any more beautiful? Okay, so my random guess about when he would shave totally missed, but I don't care. At least he's keeping it trimmed for public appearances. Maybe he wants to look older. Maybe he wants to look less attractive (judging by the reactions of some people, it's working--but not for me). Maybe he thinks it disguises him a little. Maybe he just damn well doesn't feel like shaving it off yet. I'd have guessed he was keeping it for the purpose of his Iran So Far cameo, but he still had it as of Tuesday, when this picture was snapped.

Still waiting for Steph to get her hot little hands on the set, but I know she will in time. Anyway, Jake's beard does not bother me. I'll take him any way he comes.

All photos: IHJ, except that little pap shot.

Nervous yet?

I think I’m more nervous talking with David Letterman, because I know how smart he is, than I am because of all the people watching it. -- Jake Gyllenhaal in Interview, 10/07

TVGuide.com has listed an appearance by Jake on The Late Show with David Letterman for Monday, October 15. Let's hope that Dave can be bothered this time to learn what role Jake plays in Rendition, and that Paul Shaffer will say something just as silly as last time so Jake can zing him again. It should be the kickoff to a week full of Rendition promotion, not unlike the orgasmic leadup to Zodiac we enjoyed in February.

Jake's interviews are always a treat, though the fun factor depends on the interviewer. That's why it seemed odd to hear this entertaiment blogger call Jake's sense of humor "Hollywood's darkest secret." Huh? Since when is it a secret that Jake is extremely witty, with a natural sense of comedic timing? I'm not complaining, per se; Caroline Kepnes is gushing about how funny--and smart--our boy is, but does one really have to be obsessed to notice the qualities that led Brad Silberling to compare Jake to one-time comic icon Jerry Lewis during his commentary on Moonlight Mile?

She goes on to say that "That's why a brilliant, sophisticated comedy writer—like Woody Allen, Mike White, Julie Delpy or Nicole Holofcener—should pen a script for Jake." It's completely unclear from her statement whether she's aware that Jake already had roles in a White (The Good Girl) and a Holofcener (Lovely & Amazing) film.* I concede, those weren't written for him, but they weren't exactly my idea of lighthearted fare. Did she really think The Good Girl was funny? I thought it was tragic. Jake could definitely run away with a Woody Allen script, though, so I'm with her there.

Meanwhile, my number one thought while reading her post was, when do we get to see this press conference? I suppose it's too much to ask that it was recorded for later use, but I'd settle for just a transcript. When it comes to Jake doing press, I'm very greedy. I want it all.

*Edited to add: I know, she did acknowledge The Good Girl in the prior sentence. But her next statement made it sound like she was suggesting something wholly new. Bah, I'm medicated today.

All captures: IHJ.

Hey there, handsome

Everyone's excited over the photos of Jake included with the October issue of Interview magazine. I actually prefer this one, reported to have been taken yesterday in Hollywood, because it's natural. Hell, it's beautiful. More at JJ. Lady, why the scowl? Jake's smiling. You'd better believe if it were part of my job to be walking around talking to and dining with Jake Gyllenhaal, I'd be grinning from ear to ear the entire time. She ought to trade jobs with me. I wonder how she'd do dealing with arcane public policies, employees that refuse to complete paperwork correctly, and callers who can't enunciate, all on a government-peon salary. Maybe then she'd appreciate a little stroll and chitchat with the lovely one.

I certainly don't dislike the Interview photos. But they look about as authentic as this one from W. We know Jake really is an active, sporty guy. Somehow these images manage to make him look like a fraud. I can't decide if the silliness of them was completely intentional, on the part of Jake or photographer Mark Seliger. Maybe I'm just cynical today.

I'll say this: Seliger missed the boat on this one. Jake should have been wearing a tank shirt and working those oars. I've always thought he had the shoulders and arms of a rower.

So, we have no evidence of Jake or anyone else from Rendition having been in New Jersey for the Filmmakers Symposium's opening week. Damn good thing I didn't sell one of my kidneys for travel money. Oh, well. The symposium continues to run through December 4. It might still happen, and if it does, someone, somewhere is sure to report having been there. If there's one universal truth, it is that people who see Jake in person all want to tell the world about it. I can't imagine why.

Nobody is more down-to-earth and genuinely cool than Jake Gyllenhaal. I just like him a lot personally. I feel that he has not been affected much by stardom. -- Jim Nelson, GQ's Editor in Chief

And he wasn't even the one interviewing Jake. Our boy leaves quite the impression.

Photos: Simple Answers to Complex Questions, IHJ, and Just Jared.

Sox watch

Jake's sports tour of the east coast continued yesterday when he attended a Boston Red Sox vs. New York Yankees baseball game at Fenway Park. I'm hoping more pics will turn up soon, but I don't want to be greedy; I mean, here he is, wearing a hoodie and showing off one elegant hand, right?

If you click forward from Jake's photo to the next two on the Boston.com site, you'll see that Adrian Grenier is reported to have been "filming his documentary project on celebrity and paparazzi while the game was going on." No word yet on whether he included Jake in this footage or spoke with him about it, but I'll keep an eye out.

His continued presence here on my side of the country fits my theory that Jake would hang around until the Filmmakers Symposium screening of Rendition in New Jersey. The first session kicks off this Monday, September 17; I'd say chances are pretty good that Rendition will screen this Monday or Tuesday.
Being the intrepid Gyllenhaalic that I am, I tried to confirm my suspicions with a call to the symposium's hotline number a couple of days ago. Don't worry, I didn't reveal that I was only interested in knowing when Jake Gyllenhaal would be there*--I just asked if there were any schedule established so film buffs on a budget could make an informed choice to purchase either the Monday or Tuesday series pass. Unfortunately, as the nice lady who returned my call explained, the organizers are not really solid on a booking even up to the day it might screen, so any given film could at the last moment be moved up or bumped back between the Monday and the Tuesday venues. She also revealed that out of an average 20 potential participating films and filmmakers, they usually end up featuring about five or six.

I'm not as discouraged by that as I might be if Jake were photographed in Los Angeles yesterday. No, I won't be in New Jersey, but surely someone will, and maybe they'll get a nice juicy Gyllenbabble answer out of Jake for us. I think repeated exposure to Jake's...unique style of expression...may be the reason I'm able to understand him now; as I re-read the interview transcript I posted yesterday, I'm shaking my head and laughing to myself. Hey, I know what he meant. I think. The more I learn about him, the more I feel he's got the same empathic tendency to see a topic from all sides that causes me such ambivalence. I know what it's like, Jake.


*Actually, I would love to attend one of these even if Jake wasn't involved. Don't tell anyone.

Boston.com photo by Steve Silva; U.S. Open photos: IHJ.

Gray matter

This is the stuff I've been waiting for. With each new interview, we never know if Jake will be articulate and intellectual, or full of baffling circular phrases and self-interruptions that suggest confusion or avoidance of a subject. Clearly Jake was at the top of his game when he sat down with CNN's Showbiz Tonight and faced the toughest question with lucid fluidity.

Oddly enough, the transcript for the September 12 show is the only one unavailable on CNN's transcript page as I write this. It's a damn good thing I took the time to transcribe the first part of it myself before I left for work this morning.

Jake: I believe that governments, and I think, presidents, should act as parents to a country, you know? And I think that there are things that that country needs to know, and there are things that it doesn't. But I think that honesty is first and foremost, and I think people know when someone's honest or not, really deeply inside them.

AJ Hammer: So in some ways, it can be justifiable, if the ends are proper?

Jake: Yes. I think that's the debate in the movie. I think that's the extraordinary scene between Peter Sarsgaard and Meryl Streep, when they meet and Peter says, 'You're torturing somebody,' and she says, 'But we're keeping five thousand people alive by torturing one person.' So I think the debate is what it's about, I think the debate is what it's always about. I think that that's what makes, you know, that, you can come to a resolution that way, some interesting resolution, whereas, you know, one person takes a stance, just demands that that's how it goes, and then, like, imposes it on the rest of the world.

Already, his fans have begun to debate whether Jake was saying Yes, I believe in torture or Yes, you've asked what the movie asks. I'm thrilled because it's a far more engaging and important topic to discuss than whom Jake is or isn't sleeping with this week. As an amateur psychologist and sociologist, I'm fascinated by the concessions that some folks have made regarding Jake's comments. Why exactly is it more acceptable to believe that Jake thinks the value of torture is open to debate than that he thinks it may have its place? Doesn't the first imply the second? It seems to be all about the morality we personally wish to ascribe to Jake, and for some people there is enough ambiguity in the first interpretation to make it sound like an expression of neutrality on the subject.

For the record, I believe Jake meant exactly what he said: torture can be justifiable. He did not elaborate on under what circumstances he thinks this true; he wasn't asked to do so.

I've spent the last hour trying to figure out how I feel about this answer, and I keep coming back to a single thought: to say that torture is never justifiable would be as arrogant and unconsidered as it would be to say that it is always justifiable. In that sense, Jake has given the only answer that an intelligent man could give.

As if the contemplation of the validity of torture weren't ugly enough in itself, I found a couple of reactions to Jake's comments that disturbed me even further. Someone suggested that because of his answer, "Jake Gyllenhaal might be cool." (Sadly, this blogger appears to have missed the irony behind Fight Club.) Another strangely complimentary post proclaims "Jake Gyllenhaal Talks Like a Hetero Man." With points of view like these, it's easy to understand why a woman like me has a hard time finding a compatible man. How exactly does an acknowledgment that torture is not a black-and-white issue translate into a social perception of masculinity and heterosexuality? I may just die alone, after all.

Photos: Rendition official website, via IHJ.