Jacki Weaver joins cast of horror movie Pendulum
Jacki Weaver has joined the cast of horror movie 'Pendulum'.
The 77-year-old actress - who has featured in the likes of 'Silver Linings Playbook' and 'Animal Kingdom' - is expected to line up alongside Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Phoebe Dynevor and Norman Reedus in the motion picture.
According to Deadline, Weaver will portray mystical healer Ella-Rose in the scary movie, which is written and directed by Black Swan's Mark Heyman.
The forthcoming film will see 'Bridgerton' actress Dynevor and 'Inception' star Gordon-Levitt play young couple Abigail and Patrick, who head to a retreat in New Mexico following a traumatic event.
However, things take a turn for the worst when Abigail falls under the spell of the new-age retreat's leader Ella-Rose.
The Darren Aronofsky-produced horror film has started filming in New Mexico.
One of Weaver's latest movies saw her appear in biographical drama film 'Father Stu', which featured Mark Wahlberg as boxer-turned-Catholic priest Stuart Long.
Jacki's previous film credits include her roles in 'Animal Kingdom' and 'Silver Linings Playbook', both of which earned her Academy Award nominations for Best Supporting Actress.
What's more, she has starred in 'The Disaster Artist', 'Bird Box' and 'Penguin Bloom'.
'Pendulum' is one of many upcoming films for Dynevor, who will appear in thriller 'Beneath the Storm' later this year, and she is to star opposite Diane Lane in thriller 'Anniversary'.
What's more, the 'Fair Play' actress recently wrapped on another thriller movie, 'Famous', which will see her star opposite Zac Efron, and she has joined the cast of M. Night Shyamalan's next film alongside Jake Gyllenhaal.
In January, Dynevor starred in Neil Burger's spy movie 'Inheritance', which was filmed entirely on an iPhone, and she admitted the process was a "daunting" challenge.
Speaking to Collider, she said: "I was very confused and baffled by it."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Age
2 hours ago
- The Age
A new kind of drama is set to unfold with changed privacy laws
An Australian scandal is a like a sudden southerly on a clear summer's day – unexpected, jarring and liable to leave everyone shivering in its wake. From political pitfalls to celebrity slip-ups and the ever-rumbling corridors of Parliament House, we are a nation that guards privacy with one hand and refreshes newsfeeds with the other. Little wonder, then, that a show like Bridgerton – with its heaving corsets, whispered secrets and illicit entanglements – has a devoted fan base here. It's not just the drama that captivates us, but the tension between the private and the public, discretion and spectacle. While fans must wait until 2026 for the next episode, take heart 'dearest gentle reader': whispers among case-starved defamation lawyers suggest a new kind of drama is set to unfold. From Tuesday, a new statutory tort of privacy makes its debut on the Australian legal stage – and it's expected to dance to a familiar tune. Australians who suffer a serious invasion of privacy may claim up to $478,000 in damages and seek remedies including injunctions. As the age of unchecked intrusion draws to a genteel close, Lady Whistledown herself might remark that society's most prominent figures will breathe easier behind their velvet curtains. Or so they may think. As far back as 1960, US professor William Prosser identified four privacy torts: intrusion upon seclusion; public disclosure of private facts; false light portrayal; and appropriation of likeness. By 1977, all four were recorded in the US Restatement of Torts, a treatise issued by the American Law Institute. While not uniformly adopted there, intrusion and disclosure are well established – especially in celebrity-laden California. Britain took longer to get there. In 1991, two Sunday Sport photographers posed as doctors to snap a British actor in his hospital bed. The Court of Appeal famously declared: 'In English law, there is no right to privacy'. By 2000, however, the House of Lords changed course in Naomi Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers. The action for 'misuse of private information' was born. By 2014, it was recognised as a tort, and today, privacy suits in London have become de rigueur. New Zealand recognised a general tort of privacy in 2004. By 2012 it recognised intrusion into seclusion as a standalone tort when a young woman was secretly filmed in the shower and awarded damages. That same year, Canada did likewise when a bank employee whose financial data had been improperly accessed received damages. Australia, by contrast, wasn't even at the races. It relied on defamation and breach of confidence – a patchy and much-criticised regime. This nearly changed a quarter-century ago in the Lenah Game Meats case. The chief justice urged better protection for privacy; the Australian Law Reform Commission echoed this in 2014. Lawyers even tried to open cracks left by the Lenah case, but these mostly faltered. In 2016, former High Court judge Michael Kirby said the inertia made Australia a ' laughing stock '.
Sydney Morning Herald
2 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
A new kind of drama is set to unfold with changed privacy laws
An Australian scandal is a like a sudden southerly on a clear summer's day – unexpected, jarring and liable to leave everyone shivering in its wake. From political pitfalls to celebrity slip-ups and the ever-rumbling corridors of Parliament House, we are a nation that guards privacy with one hand and refreshes newsfeeds with the other. Little wonder, then, that a show like Bridgerton – with its heaving corsets, whispered secrets and illicit entanglements – has a devoted fan base here. It's not just the drama that captivates us, but the tension between the private and the public, discretion and spectacle. While fans must wait until 2026 for the next episode, take heart 'dearest gentle reader': whispers among case-starved defamation lawyers suggest a new kind of drama is set to unfold. From Tuesday, a new statutory tort of privacy makes its debut on the Australian legal stage – and it's expected to dance to a familiar tune. Australians who suffer a serious invasion of privacy may claim up to $478,000 in damages and seek remedies including injunctions. As the age of unchecked intrusion draws to a genteel close, Lady Whistledown herself might remark that society's most prominent figures will breathe easier behind their velvet curtains. Or so they may think. As far back as 1960, US professor William Prosser identified four privacy torts: intrusion upon seclusion; public disclosure of private facts; false light portrayal; and appropriation of likeness. By 1977, all four were recorded in the US Restatement of Torts, a treatise issued by the American Law Institute. While not uniformly adopted there, intrusion and disclosure are well established – especially in celebrity-laden California. Britain took longer to get there. In 1991, two Sunday Sport photographers posed as doctors to snap a British actor in his hospital bed. The Court of Appeal famously declared: 'In English law, there is no right to privacy'. By 2000, however, the House of Lords changed course in Naomi Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers. The action for 'misuse of private information' was born. By 2014, it was recognised as a tort, and today, privacy suits in London have become de rigueur. New Zealand recognised a general tort of privacy in 2004. By 2012 it recognised intrusion into seclusion as a standalone tort when a young woman was secretly filmed in the shower and awarded damages. That same year, Canada did likewise when a bank employee whose financial data had been improperly accessed received damages. Australia, by contrast, wasn't even at the races. It relied on defamation and breach of confidence – a patchy and much-criticised regime. This nearly changed a quarter-century ago in the Lenah Game Meats case. The chief justice urged better protection for privacy; the Australian Law Reform Commission echoed this in 2014. Lawyers even tried to open cracks left by the Lenah case, but these mostly faltered. In 2016, former High Court judge Michael Kirby said the inertia made Australia a ' laughing stock '.
Perth Now
10 hours ago
- Perth Now
Ridley Scott reveals Bee Gees biopic will start filming in November
Sir Ridley Scott will start shooting his Bee Gees biopic in November 2025. The 87-year-old director is to tell the story of the band of brothers, comprised of Barry Gibb, Maurice Gibb and Robin Gibb, on the big screen and filming is tentatively scheduled to begin at the end of the year. When asked if he is shooting any movies in 2025, Ridley answered: "I am… the Bee Gees in November. "I think so. That's what I dare say." Ridley says the movie from Paramount Pictures will tell the story of the trio from their childhood right up to the present day, covering their incredible impact on disco due to the soundtrack they created for 1977 movie 'Saturday Night Fever' - which starred John Travolta as dancer Tony Manero - and the deaths of Maurice and his fraternal twin Robin. In an interview with website Collider, he said: "It's really about the brothers and how close the brothers were as a gifted family. They're really very much a family. I think Barry very much was the leader of them, but then Robin also had the voice initially and was also a very good writer. They were a fulfilled team. "It is lovely to see this drawn out from scratch. We'll go from eight years old to the end." Scott has started the casting process for the three siblings but is remaining tight-lipped on who may take on the roles as the 'Night Fever' hitmakers. He said: "I've already got my footprints and handprints, or requests is a better way of putting it, on those names. And no, I can't say who they are." Scott also has a Western movie in the pipeline. The 'Alien' director has bought the rights to the script and has described the story as "the best Western I've ever read". He said: "I have a Western, which is the best Western I've ever read. It was on a shelf of an author who had died. It's from his estate. We tracked it. I bought the script, so I own it, and the moment will come to make it. "I still have to do a musical. I still have to do a pirate movie. I still have to do a Western."
