To get you started, Darcy dear ;-)

Wow!!! Thanks, Nan! They're fabulous! Isn't he hunky? When I first saw Russell in "The Quick and the Dead" a few years ago, I was like, whoa--who are you? Unfortunately, we Yanks don't get to hear his own Aussie accent too much. I am indebted to you, Nan! Russell is so yummy!!

(darcy) Thanks, Nan! They're fabulous! You're most welcome, dear...but they came from "The Crowe's Nest", so you should thank the person who runs that page. Terrific place--everything you could want to know about RC. Go take a looky if you haven't been there already: The Crowe's Nest (darcy) Isn't he hunky? Mercy yes! Look at these (also from "The Crowe's Nest"):

hmmm... very hunky indeed!!! he played a great villian in virtuosity with Denzel also!!

Yowza! Whew! *fanning myself* Yummmmmmmmmmmy! Yes, RC did play a great villain. Did anyone see him in L.A. Confidential? He was terrific!

Did anyone see Russell in The Sum of Us? He was so cute and sweet. In Romper Stomper, however, he was a reprehensible neo-Nazi skinhead. He was so convincing it was scary! I guess it just shows his real talent.

Yes, he was cute in 'The Sum Of Us'. Did 'Proof' ever show in the States? Its a cool film, and Crowe is good in that too.

"Proof" did make it here; saw it on TV. I liked it a lot. RC seems to have done many projects but we sure don't see too many here, at least I don't find them.

Now this is a real man. I'll take Wendel, Bud, Russell whatever you want to call him any day.

AAAAAH, MEC...you made it! Excellent. Now that there's some movement here I can post some more Russell photos :-) You might want to check out the Droolworthy Sports Figures topic, too...you'll love it. It's topic 69 (yes, that was purposeful). Go here: Droolworthy Sports Figures Great to see you, babe!

Here ya go...

I just finished watching LA Confidential again. This is the man Nan. I am telling you. I know.

(MEC) I just finished watching LA Confidential again. Now, stop tryin' to manipinate me ;-p (Sorry, I couldn't help it) Okay, okay...I'll watch it. Do you own it? If you do, I can make you some bee-yew-tee-ful Snappies. We can even make it your wallpaper :-)

And, btw, MEC...if you'd download ICQ we can do this much faster ;-D

I realize this topic is pretty much defunct, but this is just too funny: Roman Holy/Slayer What Saturday Night Fever did for Quiana, Plexiglas dancefloors and bad hair, Gladiator will do for killing Christians. Sitting in my stadium seat listening to an uncouth secular audience raucously cheer Gladiator, I felt like a rabbi at the Nuremberg rallies. But instead of the crowd whooping it up for an unattractive little man who, all for the want of a fistful of Prozac, killed off half of Europe, the audience at Gladiator was screaming for Christian blood. My blood. Using men with bulging biceps, bulging chests and, well, things that were bulging that no Christian woman should ever have thrust in her face, Gladiator will do more for homoerotic Christian mayhem than anything since Caligula first sashayed into the Colosseum. Gladiator, a film that manages to be crafty without craft, is littered with offensive antifamily propaganda and a level of vulgarity not commonly seen outside of Nevada. But what do you expect from a movie featuring an emperor called "Commodus" -- Latin for "toilet"? Russell Crowe stars as General Maximus, a downwardly mobile Roman who is forced into the most base of all professions -- show business. He entertains at amphitheaters throughout suburban Rome by decapitating Christians with an unrefined swagger too gruff to remind one of any genuine heterosexual males. Indeed, his technique clearly draws on the exaggeratedly robust manliness that can only be found in Women's Professional Basketball. What will every True Christian despise about this movie? Let's start with the vulgar name attached to the project. It doesn't take a cryptographer to unlock the salacious wordplay of the title to this trashy homage to amorality. Of the seven women from Bringing Integrity To Christian Homemakers who attended the screening with me, only one did not immediately pick up on the shockingly lewd subliminal message glaring down on us in twelve-foot letters. As my dear Sister-in-Christ, the 81-year-old Mrs. Helen Floribunda pointed out: "It really takes a sick, sick secular mind to give a movie a title like that just to get a puerile giggle out of good, wholesome Christians going around town saying 'Glad He Ate Her.'" Russell Crowe, here working in a Roman Temple Prostitute Superstore, shows that the film's budget was spent on special effects, not fabric. Let's talk about the sick way that the men dress for a minute. Most eschew the modesty of an ankle-length belted senatorial toga for a more racy gladiator miniskirt with leather/armor kick-pleats. It is a "look" perversely Jean Paul Gautier in its decedent homoeroticism and sassy mix of fabrics. Of course, there is a sick purpose behind the Carnaby Street altitude of the men's skirts, which are far too short for even a the most brazen female -- such as, say, a Catholic schoolgirl. The skirts provide ample opportunity for the voyeuristic Steadycam operators to brazenly play peek-a-boo with half the cast's crotches. Mrs. Bowers counted 86 salacious "genital bulge" shots -- 7 of which were in a decidedly turgid state. In fact, there may well have been more, but Mrs. Bowers was so utterly overwhelmed by how the character Maximus lived up to his name, she simply lost count. Thank the Lord I was proactive enough to pack a moist towelette in my Prada clutch. Yes, the film is prurient. But what can we expect from an amoral smut-mill like Hollywood? With Gladiator, Hollywood has shed any pretense that it has not been co-opted as the Joseph Goebbels of the Homosexual Agenda. The movie is confected of two things notoriously homosexual: (a) sweaty, muscular men impaling each other within moments of meeting; and (b) an exquisite placement of period furniture. This is Dream Works project -- a studio owned by three men who are, not coincidentally, all either Jewish, homosexual -- or both (just don't tell his wife). And the anti-Christian pedigree shows in every frame. There can only be one reason why Gladiator was made. It was conjured to whet the appetite of jaded Americans hungry for better production values in their Christian persecution. In a country anesthetized by virtual killing, what could be more exhilarating than a coliseum full of secular humanists drinking beer and watching real people of the Only True Faith dismembered? You don't need Diana Ross flying out in a helicopter during half-time after that! No doubt, the director hopes that once given a flavor for the buzz that follows watching godly Christians torn into pieces no larger than a Mariah Carey gown, bloodthirsty teenagers from Concord to Carmel will soon corral Pentecostals in high school gymnasiums every Friday night to watch them be mauled by pit bulls and livestock. Russell Crowe and a fellow gladiator use their swords to make a crucifix -- solely to mock the faith of the beautifully costumed Christians they are about to slaughter. History has been filled with Christian persecution. Sure, Christians have returned in kind. And, thanks to the Catholic Inquisition, done so with �lan and a flare for the diabolically painful that makes the Romans, frankly, appear somewhat amateurish. But our persecution was done for God, and therefore we tortured with love. By selling tickets at the Colosseum, the Romans invented the use of Christian persecution as a vehicle for making money. But the fact that they have left modern Christian television ministries this inventive legacy for financial growth does not mean we should let them off the hook! Surely, we are only a year away from devoted, yet wiry, Christians being pummeled on the mat at World Wide Wrestling in "Baptist Slapdowns" -- to the delight of atheist hillbillies with access to cable. Mark my words: when Ticketmaster begins selling seats to ball fields throughout this once great land to "Christians vs. Visiting Lions," you will look back and know that this "sport" was all started by that seemingly harmless homo movie Gladiator. Mrs. Bowers gives it a thumb down. A modern gladiator mocks a Baptist missionary with John 3:16 moments before snapping his head off to the delight of the trailer trash in the audience. � Betty Bowers 2000 All Rights Reserved The above was courtesy of Mrs. Betty Bowers from the award winning website Betty Bowers Is a Better Christian Than You. http://www.bettybowers.com/

Saw it last night. My DH could not wait to see it. He was very disappointed poor chap, expected a lot more. He loves the philopher Marcus Aurelios. Will have to make him read this.

Hi everyone: I'm a fairly new Crowe fan, and an old Colin Firth one. I could not wait for Gladiator to open, and I saw it yesterday. I was very disappointed in it, though Russell was great in his part. No one else could have done it, IMO. I have my own review and post it here. Would be interesting to see if there is a discussion on the film after it opens in the UK: Gladiator - Spoilers My husband and I saw it Saturday afternoon. There were about 12 people in the audience -- after my frantic trip to the theater for tickets when it opened at noon! Russell Crowe was everything we have read about, looming large on the screen, fighting with skill and vigor, saying little a husky voice, moving much, looking mucho masculine. I can't think of another actor today who could have pulled it off. He looked stocky and strong, like he could take a thousand wounds and still get up if he had too, until his job was done. The other actors were also quite good. We thought Richard Harris did a great job in a small role, with no sign to us of "Guinness" or pubs. Oliver Reed was swarthy and had soul. You could believe he was a former gladiator. Joaquin Phoenix made a satisfyingly swarmy emperor, and Connie Neilson, new to me, was full of dignity and was beautiful despite some dowdy costumes. But the picture itself -- was not what I hoped it would be. As someone said in his review the lighting was the worst I have seen since Branagh's mystery set in the South. I forget its name. The opening battle was stirring, and probably the best thing in the film. There the murky light fitted the atmosphere of cold and forest and death. I also liked the scenes there in the emperor's tent. But even in the desert later, the sun didn't shine, and I don't think the real Rome lacked bright Italian sunlight, but I could be wrong. The first view of Rome and the Coliseum was so obviously part computer to me -- living as I do on line much of the day. I never once believed I was watching a Roman Street, or seeing thousands in the arena. The scene where the gladiators come out of the depths into the arena was well done, as was the 160 degree look as you saw what they saw. Later, though, the light again was so murky you couldn't really see all the people in the stands. Even the royal rooms looked dark and gloomy, as forbidding as Commodus himself. The sound in our local theater was pretty bad, and I hope it wasn't the soundtrack. The voices had a tinny disjointed sound, and sometimes it was so loud you couldn't hear what they were saying. My poor husband had to go to bed with a headache after this one! And finally too many battles too confusing to see who was doing what to whom. Do me a favor and rent Spartacus again if you haven't watched it in a long time. Despite Kirk Douglas, it still stands for me as the best that Rome had to offer. Ridley tried, but he didn't succeed with me. I wonder if it will indeed be the blockbuster the studio hopes it will be. As hubby said, it has Dreamworks high minded speeches about justice and right. But it is a dark film (in more ways than one), though not as violent as I was led to believe. The violent acts move quickly and happen mostly off camera. I wonder if the young men audience will go to see it. I never felt like cheering the gladiators. They were a sad bunch, fighting out of desperation, caged like animals, and led by a man whose life meant nothing to him any more, other than seeking revenge -- Very sad, really. I never once felt caught up or lifted up by excitement. There were no winners, since Rome after this time completely fell apart. Score: Liked the music very much. Liked Russell, liked Harris and Jacobi and Neilson. Thumbs down for the picture. Mary Murphy (murph)

Murph, you might be interested in this link to an interview with Russell Crowe. http://mrshowbiz.go.com/interviews/544_1.html

Good Morning America Review Crowe Soars Russell Crowe on Proof of Life, Gladiator Dec. 8 - What a year: one hit movie and one on the way suits Russell Crowe just fine. The Academy Award-nominated actor and star of the summer's smash hit Gladiator, Crowe recently sat down to talk about Proof of Life, his newest film, co-starring Meg Ryan. In the film, Crowe plays Terry Thorne, an expert in terrorist negotiations dealing with kidnap and ransoms. He is hired by Alice Bowman (Ryan) after her husband (David Morse) is snatched by rebels in Latin America. GMA.MOVIES.COM: Tell us about your experience working on Proof of Life: RUSSELL CROWE: The experience of working on this film was amazing. First, there was a great group of people to work with. I was just having a little chat the other day with David Morse who has my friendship and respect. Usually it's me who gets all the crap poured on his head during a film and this time I was lucky enough that it was somebody else. David Caruso is crazy and that comes out really well in the movie. I really wanted to do the film because Meg wanted me to be in it and I never realized that "K and R" (Kidnap and Ransom) was a multibillion-dollar business. Basically it's on the rise and very much directed toward American citizens who work for multinational companies, particularly in Eastern Europe and Latin America. It was an amazing experience going from England to Poland to South America. We were four months in Ecuador and it's really an unpredictable place. You don't really know what's going to happen from day to day, let alone within a day. We got through it though. GMA: How were your interactions with Meg Ryan? CROWE: Meg is a great actress. That was one of the big reasons for me to do the movie in the first place. It came to me with the information that Meg would do the film if I would do the film. I was a big fan of hers in her dramatic work in Courage Under Fire and When a Man Loves a Woman. And that to me was the attractive thing about it. It wasn't me going to do something with her that she's particularly known for in America: romantic comedies. This was Meg being put into a situation as an actress that she had never actually been through and she was challenging herself in a big way. GMA: You seemed to fit well into the role of a soldier and negotiator. How did you integrate that into your part? CROWE: I think the thing is that not every soldier can do this job, regardless of what his skills are in soldiering. As we say in the movie, it isn't about rescues. You know, 98 percent of these situations are solved through nogotiations and that's what it's about. The skills and military background are for that other 2 percent. Part of what I tried to do with the character was internal. This man is an insurance agent and part of what he does with it is his bedside manner. He goes into these situations and he's very calm and centered and he has a kind of a mellifluous cadence, which calms the room. Because he cannot work in hysteria. GMA: Many think you should have won Best Actor for your work in Michael Mann's The Insider. With two big movies this year in Gladiator and now Proof of Life, what sort of view are you taking to the Oscars this year? CROWE: I've had a really busy year. The last 12 months have felt like five years. I believe that Gladiator is a great movie. I believe that the movie does deserve to be acknowledged. The fact that it reached a big commercial audience does not lessen its quality. And I've heard that - that since it was commercially successful it shouldn't be recognized by the Academy. I mean, come on. Let's look at the history of the Academy Awards - Gone with the Wind or Dances with Wolves or Titanic. The reality is that that's where the art meets the commoners and that's a great thing. It's a wonderful thing that somebody like Ridley Scott [the director of Gladiator] can create a world like this and the audience responds to it. You show me another filmmaker's movie that combines traditional filmmaking techniques and cutting-edge technology as well. Just show it to me. Ridley deserves recognition - the editors, the sound guys, the special effects people all deserve it as well. Joaquin Phoenix deserves recognition. (Phoenix lays the evil Commodus). If Phoenix wasn't prepared to be as loose a cannon and as strange a counterpoint to where I was, my character would be nowhere near as powerful to the audience. It was because Joaquin was committed to being the crazy guy that the role was so great. It's like "show me where the edge is and I am going to take it a little bit further." GMA: What's next on your agenda? CROWE: Personally, I need some time off. I start my next film in March. It's a new Ron Howard film called A Beautiful Mind. It's an action film about schizophrenia - that was a joke! That was the fight sequence. This awards season in this country just goes on and on and on. I just need to go home and spend some time with my couch. GMA: Growing up, what was Christmas like for you in Australia? CROWE: Santa doesn't come on a sleigh - he comes on a surfboard and most people have seafood on Christmas Day. We still post up all the Christmas stuff with the snow on it, but we don't get the snow. GMA: What would you pursue if you had a shot at another profession? CROWE: I am an actor. I am just lucky that the time I get to walk on the planet you get paid for it and I don't have to drag around a cart like a Gypsy from place to place trying to convince people that I've got some performance that they really need to see. As recently as Shakespearean times, acting was not a respected profession - but I am a performer, and I really wouldn't know what to do with another profession.