Advertisements

What the Hell Happened to Rosanna Arquette?

Rosanna Arquette

Rosanna Arquette

Rosanna Arquette was the first of several siblings to break into Hollywood.  Throughout the 80’s, Arquette seemed constantly on the brink of stardom.  But her big break never materialized.  There’s some memorable films on Arquette’s resume, but she was rarely the star.  Over time, the actress who inspired a hit pop song was relegated to supporting roles.  After a decade of buzz, Arquette’s spotlight faded.  Now she’s gone and I have to say…

What the hell happened?

Oh and also, meet you all the way, Rosanna, yeah!

The Arquette siblings

The Arquette siblings

Arquette was born into a family of entertainers.  Her mother was a renaissance woman who was an activist, a teacher and a therapist in addition to writing and acting.  Her father, Lewis Arquette, was a writer and actor best known for his recurring role on the TV show, The Waltons.  Her paternal grandfather was vaudeville comedian, Cliff Arquette known for his character, Charley Weaver.  The point I’m trying to make is that Arquette comes from good stock.  There’s show biz in her bones.  So it’s no wonder that she and her four younger siblings have all been bit by the acting bug.  Her Oscar-winning sister, Patricia, and youngest brother David are the most famous of her siblings.

Arquette - Having Babies II

Rosanna Arquette – Having Babies II – 1977

Arquette’s acting debut was playing a teen obsessed with boys in the 1977 TV movie, Having Babies II.  The second movie was the Empire Strikes Back of the Having Babies trilogy.  Yes, there were three TV movies from 1977-1978 and they are about exactly what you would think given the title.  All three movies are about couples having babies.  The movies were successful enough to spawn a short-lived TV series.  The TV series was also titled Having Babies but was later renamed after its lead character, Julie Farr, M.D.

Here’s a look at an 18-year-old Arquette in Having Babies II:

Arquette comes in at 2 minutes and forty seconds.

Rosanna Arquette - The Dark Secret of Harvest Home - 1978

Rosanna Arquette – The Dark Secret of Harvest Home – 1978

In 1978, Arquette started showing up all over the dial.  First she appeared in the creepy mini-series, The Dark Secret of Harvest Home.  Arquette plays the fifteen-year-old daughter of a couple that moves out to the country to get away from it all.  They end up in a idyllic town with a dark secret.  Bette Davis stars as the stern community leader who may or may not be over-seeing Satanic rituals (spoiler alert: she totally is), future Growing Pains star, Tracey Gold, plays the requisite freaky kid and Danny Noonan himself (aka actor Michael O’Keefe) plays a country boy who is sweet on Arquette.

The whole 4-hour mini-series is available on YouTube.  But here’s a clip:

Skip ahead to the 13-minute mark to see O’Keefe in a lumberjack competition.  When he falls off his pole, Arquette has an asthmatic episode and it’s Bette Davis to the rescue.

Davis gave the young actress some words of advice that stuck with Arquette:

I remember a day where a camera broke. We were in Ohio, and it was hot. The heat was really hellacious. And she kind of grabbed me, gave me a hug, and sat me on her lap, and said, ‘This is Hell. And just remember, you cannot have a career and a relationship. It will never work.’ And it haunted me all my life! And you know what? God, she was right!

Rosanna Arquette - James at 16 - 1978

Rosanna Arquette – James at 16 – 1978

Arquette also appeared in TV shows like What Really Happened to the Class of ’65? and James at 16 (pictured).  Arquette played a classmate who befriends James.  When he invites her to his house for dinner, he finds out that she is an alcoholic.  Because this was a 70’s TV program, that meant Arquette got to go completely crazy while everyone around hr politely tried to take her home and ignore her problem.

Rosanna Arquette - ABC Afterschool Specials: Mom and Dad Can't Hear Me - 1978

Rosanna Arquette – ABC Afterschool Specials: Mom and Dad Can’t Hear Me – 1978

Wow, this article is turning out to be a treasure trove of 70’s goodness.  I feel like heating up a boiling pot of fondue and taking in an Afterschool Special.  Fortunately, Arquette starred in one of those too!  In the episode Mom and Dad Can’t Hear Me, Arquette played a teenage girl who is embarrassed by her deaf parents.  It’s all right there in the title, people!

My kids are writing their own Afterschool Special titled My Dad Blogs About Actors I’ve Never Heard Of.  I’m hoping to be played by David Duchovny but I’m thinking it’s more likely to be Jim Belushi.

Next: Zuma Beach and S.O.B.

Advertisements

Posted on May 30, 2015, in Movies, What the Hell Happened?, WTHH Actress and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink. 63 Comments.

  1. Nice appreciation of Rosanna Arquette’s career. I finally watched Desperately Seeking Susan for the first time earlier this spring and found it delightful. Arquette and Madonna are both very good and the movie is extremely entertaining.

    Silverado is the only one of Arquette’s films that I saw during the mid-1980s (I was a grad student on a tight budget). I’ve always suspected that she must have had a lot of scenes that were edited out; that would account for her being third-billed despite a small role. It’s a pretty decent Western but she doesn’t really have that much to do with the main plot.

    Like

    • Oh, and one more thing I forgot to add. If Rosanna Arquette was truly the inspiration for Peter Gabriel’s “In Your Eyes,” then she indirectly contributed to one of my favorite romance films ever, Say Anything.

      Like

      • To be completely honest, I strongly doubt Arquette was the inspiration for either song. As much as I would like to believe both songs were written about her, it seems unlikely. She may have dated a member of Toto, but not the one that wrote the song. At best, they borrowed her name because it fit the needs of the song. I saw a pretty convincing post from one of the producers of Peter Gabriel’s So that said that he hadn’t met Arquette when he wrote In Your Eyes. Since Gabriel has never gone on record about it, this quote from one of the album’s producers is about as authoritative as you can get. I think the idea that either song was actually written about Arquette is probably just an urban legend.

        Like

  2. daffystardust

    Some good laughs in this one, Lebeau. I also appreciated the photo of Arquette with Elvis Costello.
    It seems like quite a few of her projects involved psychics…or is that just an indication of how many films and TV shows in general fall back on psychics?
    If the audience’s reaction to her in that Kilborn clip is any indication, it seems like there was always a market that was enthusiastic for Arquette, but filmmakers just couldn’t consistently figure out how to use her effectively.
    It’s possible that at some point she made the choice to be a “working actress” over being a big star, and that’s a very valid choice when you’re a parent. Her experience with the Playboy photos and cover certainly could have spurred on a decision like that.

    Like

    • I had some fun writing this one. Got a few chuckles. I always hope that when I laugh that means the reader will at least crack a smile. The choice of Costello for that picture was made with you in mind. I almost did a joke where I was going to pretend not to know who he was, but I figured that was too much of an injoke for 99.9% of readers to get.

      Something I did not touch on as much as I might have is Arquette’s family life. She’s been divorced three times, remarried in 2013 and has a child with her third husband. Obviously, she also comes from a big show biz family. And she’s friendly with a ton of people in movies. This is one of those things I have noticed writing the series. If you’re surrounded by movie people your whole life, there seems to be a lot less of a sense of urgency about becoming a big, big star. Your Liv Tylers, Bridget Fondas and Arquettes seem content to work without necessarily having to become big A-list stars.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. Some good laughs in these pages 🙂
    “Desperately Seeking Susan” was required viewing at the time. It was all the rage, and Rosanna Arquette was envied (the whole, getting to hang out with Madonna kind of thing).

    I’ve always thought of Arquette as a steady working character actress in TV/movies, as opposed to a WTHH movie opener. She has actually been featured in more big name productions than I would have guessed prior to reading the article.

    BTW they are certainly large for how thin she is.

    Like

    • One thing I have observed writing the series is that people’s perception of who is actively working and who is not depends largely on what entertainment you follow. As someone who doesn’t watch a lot of TV, Arquette completely fell off my radar post Pulp Fiction. Writing this article, I was utterly shocked by how steadily she has worked over the last few decades. I was not expecting anywhere near that many projects.

      The projects are large or her endowments?

      Arquette has been very vocal about shunning plastic surgery. But looking at pictures, I couldn’t help but wonder. If she hasn’t had any help at all, then she has amazing genes. Which looking at her siblings, she does. But still. Arquette has held up remarkably well.

      Like

  4. Wonderful entry, very funny! 🙂

    I’m stunned by how busy Arquette seems to have been since basically day one. I seen a few of her movies (notably ‘After Hours’ which is an underated gem), heard of others (‘Amazon Women on the Moon’) and not heard of most of the rest (‘8 Million ways to Die’ – incidentally will Andy Garcia ever get a WTHH article?)

    Like

    • Garcia is someone I have definitely considered. He’s basically a supporting player, but for a short while he looked like he might be a leading man. One of the problems with writing about supporting actors is that the nature of the work means they take on a lot more roles than lead actors so you end up with much longer articles. That’s more research and more hours to get the article written. I think I will cover him eventually, but probably not this year.

      Like

  5. Great entry! How you can make me read 10+ pages about actors I don’t give a fig about I’ll never know. 😉

    I’ve seen her here and there but seeing her photos here, I felt like she was in something I had watched many, many times. Not just something like Pulp Fiction or DSS, like maybe she was in a series I watched frequently. I knew there was something she was in I’d seen a LOT. Then I was pages in, thinking maybe I was just confusing her for another actress. Until you mentioned I Know What You Did. DINGDINGDING. I was obsessed with a nobody actor when I was younger–Lochlyn Munro–who was also in that movie. Pretty sure I still have it on a Lifetime movie VHS I made.

    Sad but true.

    Also boy was she in a lot of fun moral stories. One of few WTHH where it makes me want to check out something I hadn’t seen. Namely that Bette Davis Satan number. That’s something I cannot possibly go on without having seen.

    Anyway. No real point besides this was a great read! Thanks!!

    Liked by 1 person

    • I was aiming for the 10-12 page range with this one. I really had no idea Arquette had been so prolific when I started the article. Really, I chose her because I had the Toto song stuck in my head. And then I start researching the article and find out that 1. This is going to be a lot longer than I thought it was going to be and 2. Toto didn’t even really write the song about Arquette. Bummer. But then there were unexpected surprises like her suing Playboy. I mean, that’s just awesome.

      As I was writing this article, I was having an internal debate over how comprehensive it should be. If I had written this article a couple of years ago, it would have been about 6 pages long and would have skipped from Pulp Fiction to a few highlights here and there. I never used to cover direct to video, TV guest appearances or movies that just played the film festival circuits. But over the years of doing this, my feelings have changed. I suppose I have become a lot more sympathetic to the actors I’m writing about. I feel like you get a much fuller picture of an actor’s career if you scroll through pictures of all the work – even the stuff most people have never heard of.

      I have read some criticism on line that my articles are too long or too many pages. And I get that. As comprehensive as the articles are these days, I still make the decision to skip over some projects. And once we hit the direct to video phase I hit the fast forward button. At that point, it’s a picture and a blurb and that’s about it. I just feel like that paints a more vivid picture than what I used to do which would be to say “after Pulp Fiction, Arquette made a lot of movies you haven’t heard of, had guest appearances on a ton of TV shows and showed up in little roles in movies like Gone Fishin'”. A summary approach like that is really all the info you need. But there’s something about seeing it all laid out there and seeing the actor’s face change over time.

      The Dark Secret of Harvest Home is available in its entirety on YouTube. I haven’t watched it start to finish. But what I have watched is pretty dang crazy.

      Like

      • You won’t hear me complaining about the length of the articles (now, if I watched every video inserted into certain articles, I probably would’ve grown long fingernails and be permanently glued to this chair); i just take me time, it isn’t like anyone being tested on the content (wait, they are!).
        Wow, “Gone Fishing”; that is a sad piece of work there. Joe Pesci and Danny Glover work in the Lethal Weapon sequels, but that deal is just D.O.A. from the beginning. What a dull picture (going fishing would be more exciting).

        Like

        • I didn’t mention it in the article, but their was an accident making Gone Fishin’ and a stunt-person was killed. I think everyone involved was likely embarrassed to be associated with the movie.

          I figure all the clips and things are supplemental material. If a particular movie grabs your attention, you can watch a clip. I try to get original theatrical trailers when they are available because they give you a really good idea of how the movie was sold to audiences at that time.

          It’s possible to get through a WTHH article pretty fast. You can pick and choose what to read and what to skim. Although I am constantly impressed by the number of people who read all the way through. The idea is that readers can experience the articles in whatever way suits them.

          Recently, I read some not-too-charitable assessments of the series. A common criticism among them was that the articles were too long or too many pages. A lot of readers were looking for a short answer to the WTHH question. Another criticism is that the answer is frequently “they got old”. That’s the thing. The short answer isn’t all that interesting. Fading careers for an actor is a very common and natural thing. Actress gets old, plays mom parts. Tale as old as time. But I think when you actually see the progression one movie at a time, you really get a sense of what the subject has been up to.

          That’s the idea anyway.

          Like

        • Bad Movie Beatdown: Gone Fishin’

          Film Brain reviews a Disney movie that almost was, a feeble comedy that gasps like a fish, featuring the dubious comic stylings of… Joe Pesci and Danny Glover? Contains mild lanaguage, sex references and slapstick comedy. This work is protected by Fair Use.

          Like

        • I find such criticism unfounded, really; there’s nothing wrong with being thorough. Besides, the length of the article depends on the subject, so if you wrote about, say, Mario Lopez, I bet the article wouldn’t get past page 4. That’s like complaining about someone’s IMDB filmography being too long, or someone’s employment history being too extensive.
          Thing is, sometimes people complain about things that are fine, yet at other times do nothing about something that has some holes in it.

          Like

        • I will actually acknowledge some legitimacy to the criticism that articles are too long. 17 pages on Rosanna Arquette is kind of insane. A couple of years ago, this article would have been about six pages long and would have skipped around an awful lot after 1986. Over the years (yes, I’ve been doing these for years now!) my feelings on what to include and what to leave out have changed. I still don’t include everything. I think some people would be shocked by how much I left out of this. (Although this article is far more comprehensive than the Wikipedia page on Arquette. Just sayin’.) Some people come to the series expecting a very intellectual analysis of the subject’s creative output. I would be interested in reading articles like that. But that’s not what I’m going for. I may offer an opinion or two or some personal experience, but mostly I’m trying to be objective. I’m looking to recreate the experience of following the subject’s career as it was unfolding while filling in the blanks that the reader (myself included a lot of the time) may have missed.

          Bottom line, the series is what it is. Every choice is made very consciously. It’s what I want it to be. Anyone who thinks it should be something else is free to write their own series. I will say I took all the criticism I read to heart and I have tried to improve as a result. This article reflects some of the changes I decided to implement.

          Like

        • I don’t know what you would change. I didn’t mind spending a rainy afternoon reading all 17 pages, especially now that I have a phone where you can actually do this.
          I guess you could always compress a bit of the direct to video descriptions, but I respect that you preferred to represent all aspects of the person’s career. Besides, direct to video is a market that provides work to a lot of people.

          Like

        • That’s just it. I didn’t used to include direct to video at all. I also used to omit TV movies and guest spots. That’s why the Michelle Pfeiffer article recently doubled in size when I brought it up to my current standards.

          I think some of the criticism stems from the title. People read “What the hell happened” and they have certain expectations. They are expecting a take-down for one which I rarely deliver. Also, they are expecting the article to answer the question which is a completely fair expectation. But the answer to the question is usually fairly mundane. She had kids, she got old, she decided the rat race wasn’t worth it anymore. Any time I see one of my articles posted on FB or a forum, someone thinks they are clever when they respond with “They got old!” While that is often a contributing factor, I find it to be boring and too facile.

          My preference, obviously, is just to lay it all out there. Everything or darn near everything. Then the reader can invest as much or as little time as they like. You can skip to the end if you want to read a short summation. Or you can watch every single clip. It’s up to you how much time you want to spend and how deep you want to go. I feel like that paints a more vivid picture than looking at a filmography on IMDB or “they got old”.

          While there are people who have been very harsh about the series (the word “boring” was used a lot) plenty of people enjoy it and I enjoy doing it. So I just try to take the criticism I find useful and use it to improve as I have always done. That’s all you can do.

          Like

        • Well, with so many social formats out there these days, people like to express their opinions more than ever. When those opinions sound dismissive or rude just for the sake of being rude, I tend to move on. Constructive criticism I’m all for though; the right kind of input is very important.

          Like

        • Absolutely. On the rare occasion that I get a “you suck” type of comment, I’m either going to ignore them or make fun. But I feel I have to be open to thoughtful criticism. I can’t write a series poking fun at celebrities and turn around and be thin skinned. Traditionally, this series has been guided by feedback both positive and negative. If not for criticism, it wouldn’t be what it is today. For the most part, I welcome it. Especially here. The regular readers are always constructive. It’s when I venture out into the greater interwebs that I occasionally want to curl up in a little ball and rock myself gently to sleep.

          Like

        • Yeah, that sounds about right. Usually those outside sources are are less informed about the “What The Hell Happened…” articles and this website in general.

          Like

        • I don’t mean to brag, but I will put WTHH up against Wikipedia any day. The articles here are both more complete and more accurate than most of the Wiki entries I look at anymore. I actually corrected a few Wikipedia entries myself recently. I got a little frustrated with some of the policies for making changes and updates. I very quickly ran into moderators who would rather have inaccurate or uncited entries than have accurate information from a blog. I understand the reason for the policy but it’s frustrating to see Wiki entries that are flat out wrong or missing important info. Ultimately, I decided to let others worry about fixing Wikipedia. I’ll just focus on being a better resource all on my own.

          Like

        • One thing I forgot about Rosanna Arquette was her cameo in “Buffalo ’66”. Wow, I remember when that picture was being filmed. See, I live in Angola, about 30 minutes from downtown Buffalo, but a lot of the early outside shots are places by the Ford stamping plant, and my uncle owns a car wash a few blocks away from that area. Back then, I worked at his car wash, although I don’t remember seeing any crew in the area, but a Few people did see a setup further downtown.
          Nowadays, that “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles” deal is being filmed here (man, the residents are complaining), but the film I also remember being shot in Western New York was “Henry’s Crime”, that starred Keanu Reeves and the excellent Vera Farmiga (i thought the film itself was alright; nothing special).

          Like

  6. Busy, busy, busy actress. I’m glad that Rosanna, Rosanna was the choice, since I just recently visited her IMDB page, reading the bio and many of the comments (I was inspired by a weekend showing of “Desperately Seeking Susan”).
    My favorite films in which she’s prominent are the afformentioned Susan, “The Executioner’s Song”, “After Hours”, “Silverado”, “8 Million Ways to Die” (I mentioned on this site in another comment that that period of Jeff Bridges career was my favorite, and I don’t know, I just like the flick in general), and “Floating Away” (I don’t count “Pulp Fiction”, since that film is a cast of thousands and she has one of the smaller parts. That film belongs everyone, but also no one in particular).
    Overall, I’ve always considered her an offbeat actress with an interesting look, who I definitely believe inspired two hit songs.

    Like

    • I give Arquette credit for taking on challenging material. She works across genres. She doesn’t seem to be intimidated by anything. I’m not exactly sure how to feel about it, but Arquette has done a ton of nude scenes. A lot of actresses would have stopped doing them once they reached the “inspired a pop song” phase of their careers. But Arquette just does whatever the role calls for. I’m sure it doesn’t hurt that she looks amazing naked.

      Like

      • Yeah, she was one of those performers who were interviewed for that sex in movies series IFC ran a few years back; she seems rather frank about nudity and very comfortable naked on camera. Some people are shy about nudity, some aren’t. I’m fine with either perspective, as long as they’re being honest with themselves.

        Like

        • We used to have some pretty critical discussions around here about actresses who would pose for sexy photo shoots and then make comments about being objectified. There’s no hypocrisy in Arquette’s stance. She’s comfortable with it. And by god she should be!

          Like

  7. I hereby confess my sins! I’ve seen one of the DTV movies talked about here; namely Poison (aka Tease) from a late-night broadcast on TV. Granted, I wasn’t expecting top-notch material – the fact that it was a 2000 movie starring Arquette (and featuring none other than Murdoc from MacGyver as one of the leads) pretty much gave it away. But boy, was that shit formulaic to a tee! The only reason which kept me going through that ordeal was to check out the actress who played Arquette’s daughter, Mandy Schaffer, naked – I figured she had to be, given we were dealing with a standard-issue DTV thriller and she looked so hot (Google her; she totally is)!. Alas, even that was pretty much a non-existing thing, thus making that experience particularly painful! And doing a little bit of research, I found out even those blink-and-you-miss-it nude scenes were played by a body double!

    Like

    • I’ve come to realize a lot of the television nudity I was enthralled with as a youngster was tainted by the use of body doubles. Case in point: the bathtub scene in “Nightmare on Elm Street” (Heather Langenkamp was my first film or television crush was wasn’t Jem or She-Ra) when the Nancy Thompson character gets pulled under; I think it’s a cameraman’s sister the viewer sees.

      Like

  8. She definitely does not seem to be intimidated by anything, well said!
    I plan to check out “After Hours” and “8 MIllion Ways to Die” the latter for, as Glu mentioned, Jeff Bridges, and also because I’m intrigued by Hal Ashby, a true free spirit if there ever was one. However, a couple of his projects suffer from a little too much freedom and it sounds like this might be one of them.

    Like

    • I like “8 Million Ways to Die”, but it was a troubled production and may be a little too loose for some people (studio did have final cut though). One outstanding scene is the improvised shouting dialogue between Bridges’ Scudder and Garcia’s Angel characters at an abandoned warehouse towards the end of the film.

      Like

      • Actually I have to retract my comment about Hal Ashby because I did some supplemental reading yesterday and the tension between him and the studio really may have compromised what he was able to do best, and that’s a shame. The same article had some excellent points to make about the impact of the blockbuster on 80s movies, money, and influence. Much food for thought.

        Like

        • The film still contain some Hal Ashby touches, and as usual I never heard any of the actors complain about the shoot or doing the film since then (more than likely, they really enjoyed themselves). I think it’s better than its given credit for, but maybe I’m just seeing what I want to see (but like what I see).

          Like

  9. CINEMADONNA: Desperately Seeking Susan

    A new series looking at the cinematic ouevre of the Material Girl herself, starting with her desperately overrated debut, Desperately Seeking Susan.

    Like

    • Leo, I actually watched all 9 minutes of that clip this morning. While the guy is mildly entertaining, I don’t think he’s being altogether fair in his criticism of the movie. He is of course got just as much right to an opinion as anyone and RB will never contend otherwise. (Although I think that’s fairly well understood at Leblog and I probably don’t need to give that disclaimer so often..) Anyway. “Desperately Seeking Susan” isn’t a movie that has any pretense; it doesn’t try to pretend to be anything other than what it is. Yet he analyzes it as if it does. Come on, no one was drawn to this movie for the plot elements. He even acknowledges as much by giving Madonna props for her performance, where she played a street-smart, sexually confident variety of 80s icon – in short, herself – nothing wrong with that either, plenty of actors do – yet he complains over and over about the movie’s limitations. He wasn’t all that kind to Arquette either, and she was playing the role exactly as it was meant to be. if “Susan” pretended to be anything other than an enjoyable iconic 80s extended music video romp, I’d concur with his assessment, but even as he admits to enjoying it for that very reason, he has to trash it, so again, not entirely a fair or honest treatment of the movie on his part.

      Like

      • I think this guy was just flexing his critic muscles here. Sometimes that means that the critic in question stretches things father than they need to go. I mean, it’s “Desperately Seeking Susan”, not “Shanghai Surprise” (good thing it isn’t “Single White Female” either, because that would be awkward).

        Like

  10. Thankyou so much for this amazing blog! You always manage to be witty without being insulting, and you’re always very informative & entertaining. Keep up the great work, i hope this blog keeps going for a long time yet! From a fan

    Like

    • Thanks for the kind words, Maree. You’ve brightened a dreary morning. Glad you like the site. I definitely plan to keep things going for a long time. We’re in our fifth year here and I’m just getting started!

      Like

  11. I tried to find why Arquette hated van damme,but couldn’t find any references to it got any links?
    I think no where to run was quite ok movie for her.She really didn’t have all that much going for her anyway.
    YEAH! She cute and got a great smile and great rack.But 85% of her movies are train crash.
    Van damme was king of the direct to video MA marked back then so he had the upperhand on drawing audience by name.
    But It says a lot about roseanne’s acting qualities when she can fake all that chemistry they show on the screen.So she definitely have good acting skillz.
    Its just the movies she is in that are really,really bad

    Like

  12. Ah, Rosanna Arquette. She may not have had the huge career she deserved, but she never really sank into true obscurity either – even when the movies (and TV shows) are bad, she never is.

    Great piece, even if it did remind me of how utterly miserable “After Hours” and “The Wall” made me when I saw them (SPOILER ALERT if anyone reading these comments hasn’t seen them)… her character committing suicide in the former and getting killed by a Nazi in the latter did not go down well with teenage me. Mid-40s me wouldn’t be thrilled either, truth be told.

    Like

  13. Rosanna Arquette:
    https://www.datalounge.com/thread/7725838-rosanna-arquette

    She had show business connections. Her father was an actor and her grandfather was the comedian Cliff Arquette.

    She’s a druggie. If you Google her, an image pops up of her looking incredibly haggard and hideous; no makeup, yellow-grey complexion, acne on her face, with an expression that suggests she either drunk or stoned.

    She’s a mediocre actress, at best.

    I for one never found her even the least bit attractive. Her face looks weird and off-kilter. She played Gary Gilmore’s girlfriend Nicole Baker in “The Executioner’s Song”; it is one of the few examples where the actress is much less attractive than the actual person she’s playing. Nicole Baker is stunningly beautiful compared to Arquette.

    —Anonymous

    reply 12 04/04/2009

    She was good in After Hours and Pulp Fiction. I guess she can be really good in the hands of a good director.

    —Anonymous

    reply 13 04/04/2009

    Like

  14. Just FYI, “gorp” was originally (’60s-’70s) an acronym for “good old raisins and peanuts,” a classic hiking snack, and it eventually evolved into a synonym for what we now usually refer to as “trail mix.” By picking a food name they were probably trying to piggyback off the success of ‘Meatballs,’ but given the subject matter I’m a little surprised they didn’t go with a more traditionally Jewish food. It’s not like folks are eating a ton of meatballs out in the woods . . .

    Like

  15. Infamous Queer: Crash (1996)

    Infamous Sphere revisits the world of David Cronenberg and talks sex, porn and car crashes.

    Like

  16. Elliott Berger

    I found ” Baby It’s You ” a while back and it transported me to a different world. I am so in love with this movie ! I want to scream from the rooftop for people to watch it.. Rosannas’ performance is just fabulous. Her portrayal of a high school kid morphing into a young woman is perfect. She is sexy, sassy , funny and sensitive. It hurts me that this great actress never reached her potential but at least in this movie she was given a chance to act and WOW, did she deliver. Just watching her flashing eyes makes it worth seeing this movie and the great music doesn’t hurt. Check out her stoned laugh. It’s to die for. And she keeps changing her appearance as she twists her hair around. Rosanna. a fascinating person and a great movie.

    Like

    • Elliot I can tell you that I find myself into this same “Baby it’s you” trap!…Rosanna is amazing in this movie. It’s the kind of movie that makes you fall madly in love for the character (in this case Jill Rosen played by Rosanna). After that I started to look for Jill Rosen in other movies but I could not find there was just Rosanna Arquette pushing herself more and more into a very aware sexy-persona, that in my opinion just broke all the enchantment around Jill Rosen. I think Rosanna could have protected more her beautiful image and make better choices during her carrier, but again, maybe that would be a Jill Rosen attitude….In the end there is this haunted smile of Jill/Rosanna looking to us in despair….

      Like

      • Elliott Berger

        Thanks so much for your comment. I thought I was going crazy over this movie. I watch it every night to get my Jill – Rosanna – Amy fix. Yes, that’s the real Jill, Amy Robinson. You can see her in ” Mean Streets ” as Harvey Keitels’ squeeze. I’m happy for Jill that she became an actress and a successful Hollywood producer. As for Rosanna, what can I say. Those eyes ! And the way she keeps changing in every frame. Amazing. It’s sad that she didn’t take the advice that Betty Davis gave her, to concentrate on her acting and not persue relationships. I try to watch her in other movies but it just doesn’t work. It’s like you said, she’s trying to be a sex pot. Her beauty is in her personality and being herself.Jill Rosen was the role of a lifetime for her. She also had a young John Sayles to direct and Michael Ballhaus to photograph her. The movie had a wonderful cast of professional actors many of them young and acting their hearts out. I keep trying to turn people on to this movie and Rosannas’ spectacular performance but its a tough sell. All they want today is special effects , moronic sex and violence. Not art. As for me I’m hopelessly in love with a movie character who doesn’t exist. Thank you so much for reaching out. I know what I saw and am so happy that someone else appreciates it.

        Like

  17. Meet you all the way, Rosanna !!!!!!!!!!!!

    Like

  18. Whatever happened to David Arquette?

    http://www.looper.com/17471/whatever-happened-david-arquette/

    In the late ’90s, actor David Arquette seemed virtually on top of the world. He was a main member of one of Hollywood’s most well-known acting families. He was in a relationship with one of TV’s biggest actresses (Friends star Courteney Cox), and he boasted a major role in Wes Craven’s wildly popular Scream film series. Even though he seemed primed for the big time, Arquette has since slipped far from the spotlight. Here’s what he’s been up to since his all-too-brief tenure in the limelight.

    Like

  19. Alexis Arquette Dead: Transgender Actress Dies at 47, Siblings Patricia and Richmond Arquette Pay Tribute

    http://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/alexis-arquette-dead-transgender-actress-dies-at-47-w439001

    Alexis Arquette, a transgender activist and actress best known for playing a Boy George-inspired character in The Wedding Singer, died on Sunday, September 11, her brother Richmond Arquette confirmed. She was 47.

    Like

  20. Rosanna Arquette

    http://www.avclub.com/article/rosanna-arquette-63250

    The actress: The phrase “show business is in my blood” is a bit of a cliché, but it certainly applies to actress Rosanna Arquette, whose grandfather (Cliff), father (Lewis), and siblings (Patricia, David, Alexis, and Richmond) have all worked in Hollywood in various capacities. Although she started in theater and slowly built a foothold on television, earning an Emmy nod for her work in the 1982 TV movie The Executioner’s Song, the majority of Arquette’s career has been in film, where she made her mark with such classic films as After Hours, Desperately Seeking Susan, and Pulp Fiction, which is newly out on Blu-ray.

    Like

  21. https://web.archive.org/web/20120608112246/http://www.homunculus.com:80/eikona/arquette.html

    Rosanna Arquette is one of those actresses that I’ve been dimly aware of since 1985’s Desperately Seeking Susan but to whom I never really gave that much thought. Perhaps this is because her career seems to have stubbornly avoided the Hollywood mainstream for so long (and hasn’t had very many recent hits in the indie world, either) that, without a good video store or extensive cable lineup, it’s easy to forget that it’s there. Or perhaps her narrow face combined with that wide, almost duck-like mouth and Simpson-esque overbite didn’t much appeal to me at first. But recently I’ve been catching myself watching Voodoo Dawn every time I come across it while channel surfing, and I realize now that I shouldn’t have been so quick to dismiss her all those years ago. And though I had actually decided that I liked her some time ago, it’s been a while since I’ve thought of her and it took seeing her nude in another film for me to remember that she was someone I should add to The Iconophile.

    Something else I should point out about Rosanna: I don’t know if it’s because of the party lifestyle or what, but a lot of actresses and models seem to hit the beauty wall in their late thirties, after which they start to fall apart more rapidly and dramatically than civilian folk. Rosanna, who was nearly 40 when she made Voodoo Dawn, still looks great in that film and has generally been holding up remarkably well. (Sure, she’s had some off-puttingly scary pictures taken of her recently, but in all fairness she’s had scary pictures taken of her since high school; she can still clean up well when she needs to.)

    Like

  22. Harvey Weinstein accused of raping Italian star Asia Argento and forcing himself on Rosanna Arquette and Mira Sorvino who say their careers suffered after they rejected his advances

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4966816/Harvey-Weinstein-accused-raping-Asia-Argento.html

    Rosanna Arquette says she met Weinstein in a hotel room and he asked her to give him a massage then tried to have her touch his erect penis

    Both Sorvino and Arquette said that their careers suffered after they refused these sexual advances

    Arquette says that her encounter with Weinstein happened int he early 1990s, when she had been sent to pick up a script from the producer at a restaurant in Beverly Hills.

    Soon after she arrived, she was asked to instead meet Weinstein in his hotel room.

    Once inside the room, Arquette said that Weinstein asked her for a massage, and eventually pulled her hand towards his erect penis.

    ‘I will never do that,’ Arquette said that she told Weinstein.

    Weinstein soon exacted his revenge she claims, saying: ‘He made things very difficult for me for years.’

    Arquette and Sorvino were arguably both at the heights of their career during the moments when these incidents occurred, and their careers did noticeably cool down with less roles in fewer prestige pictures.

    Like

  23. Welcome to the Basement: Desperately Seeking Susan (1985)

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: