Don Cheadle did not receive an Oscar nomination, despite being nominated for a SAG, for portraying Mouse Alexander in Devil in a Blue Dress.
Don Cheadle, despite often being the most noted element of the film, actually does not make his full appearance until the film's final act, other than very briefly hearing his voice in a quick flashback. Cheadle suddenly appears to pull Easy out of a tight spot well after the case has become sordid enough that his own life is on the line. Luckily for Easy Mouse appears wielding two handguns that quickly calms Easy's assailant's aggression. Well once Mouse appears there's only one question that has to be asked, where's Mouse been the whole film? Cheadle in just a few seconds becomes the most interesting thing about the film, and the film is not a bad film otherwise. Cheadle though instantly establishes Mouse's personal style so well from the moment he appears. Cheadle carries himself as though he is a true bad ass in the way he points his gun, and just carries this menacing demeanor as though he is ready to kill any man who dares to cross him one way or another. Cheadle makes the whole thing have this certain ease about it though as though Mouse is the smoothest gunslinger in the old west, the only problem being that Mouse is far from the old west in both space and time.
Of course Mouse is about as problematic as he is useful because of his certain way of dealing with things, one of his first acts in the film is to shoot a man in the arm in order to interrogate him. Cheadle makes for a great hot head by making something quite alarming about Mouse, actually because Mouse isn't as good as he thinks he is. Cheadle is interesting in the way he plays it as though Mouse almost has to get too into that image Mouse has for himself. There is a certain desperation that Cheadle realizes in the whole performance of Mouse's that he pulls off in quite the interesting way. What Cheadle does so well is instead of making this simply make Mouse seem pathetic, and nonthreatening, Cheadle makes Mouse all the more dangerous seeming through his more pitiful qualities because there's such an intensity he brings with Mouse as he is someone who always seems like he has something to prove. One of my favorite moments in Cheadle's performance is when Easy has to calm a drunk Mouse down as he threatens to shoot Easy. Cheadle is great as he manages to be rather funny in portraying Mouse, even when drunk, still putting up that tough guy front, while still keeping a sense of danger as drunk Mouse seems more willing than ever to shoot someone.
What Cheadle capturs so well, and is essential to the part of Mouse is just how unpredictable he is. In his interactions with Easy, when nothing he really going on, Cheadle brings such a friendly demeanor to the man that is wholly honest. What's so good is about Cheadle's work is that he feels just as honest when Mouse threatens to shoot Easy. Mouse can go all over the place in a moments notice and Cheadle makes every one of these transitions, no matter how extreme, wholly natural because of his performance. What's also so remarkable about this is that even with all of his random behavior, which at times presents Mouse as quite the morally dubious man, Cheadle someone how makes him endearing possibly because of just how genuine of a mess that Cheadle makes the guy who can go from your best friend to your worst enemy at a moments notice. Now one could question how little Cheadle is in the actual film. He's only in that last third and even then he's used somewhat sparingly. Although I would have loved to see more of Cheadle's Mouse to begin with, Cheadle certainly does his best to make up for his late entrance. Not only does he makes the most memorable character in the film, in a very short amount of time, he also importantly energizes the last act by becoming the wild card the story needs.
222 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 222 of 222Anonymous: Blue Velvet is his favorite Lynch movie.
Anonymous:
The Usual Suspects
1940's:
The Usual Suspects (1940's directed by Carol Reed)
McManus: James Mason
Keaton: Joseph Cotten
Fenster: Anthony Quinn
Hockney: Trevor Howard
Verbal Kint: Alec Guinness
Agent Kugan: Ralph Richardson
Mr. Kobayashi: Claude Rains
Rabin: Roger Livesey
Redfoot: Jack Hawkins
1950's directed by Billy Wilder:
McManus: Robert Ryan
Keaton: Dirk Bogarde
Fenster: Eli Wallach
Hockney: Lee Marvin
Verbal Kint: Jack Lemmon
Agent Kugan: Karl Malden
Mr. Kobayashi: Burl Ives
Rabin: Lee j. Cobb
Redfoot: Lee Van Cleef
A History of Violence (1930's directed by John Ford)
Tom Stall: Robert Montgomery
Edie Stall: Barbara Stanwyck
Carl Fogarty: John Carradine
Richie Cusack: John Barrymore
Jack Stall: Jackie Cooper
Leland Jones: Boris Karloff
Billy Orser: Elisha Cook Jr.
Anonymous:
1. Blue Velvet - (Lynch is one of the greatest directors of all time, in fact if one said the greatest I probably would not argue with them, because he's actually capable of completely able to create a wholly new tone, and style that is all his own. Lynch succeeded in making Lynchian as his visions are all his own. Blue Velvet is my favorite of all of his as he tells his most realistic thriller (most realistic for Lynch anyways), and really if you removed some of Frank Booth's certain depravities it could be seen as a fairly simple straight forward thriller. It never feels anything like that in that Lynch succeeds in more ways than one would imagine. As a thriller it works in telling a compelling story, while being quite frightening in parts. With that though there is that brilliantly stylized approach to telling the thriller that only amplifies every moment. Remarkably though Lynch has it be so stylized, and actually even very funny, though still never loses the emotional weight to the story either. It's masterful film making.)
2. The Elephant Man - (Again Lynch proves himself worthy of greatest of all time as the same director who brought such depravity with Blue Velvet is able to so beautifully tell this sensitive portrait of man deformed in appearance but not in his mind. It is told in heartbreaking detail yet it always feels hopeful within its sadness, and again the story is wonderfully told. It does not shy from the brutality of Merrick's mistreatment, but in the end it makes the uplifting moments feel all the more earned and poignant. Again masterful film making.)
3. Mulholland Drive - (I believe I've given my thoughts before)
4. The Straight Story - (Again like the Elephant Man Lynch can do a sentimental film so well, that I'd love to see him tackle such a subject again. This is probably his least evidently Lynchian in terms of his choice to go for a straight forward looking film, which is quite fitting. Lynch's hand is still evident in again just how well told this simple story of an old man's trek is. Again every emotional moment is so well earned by Lynch, though certainly helped along by Richard Farnsworth's performance)
5. Eraserhead - (A bare bones showcase of Lynch's talent as a director creating such an atmospheric and compelling film while technically not being much more than a series of images.)
6. Lost Highway - (This film never quite coheres as a effectively as Mulholland Drive, as the madness never quite seems as pure I suppose, though that is not too much of a knock against this film. This film is still quite something as a living nightmare that is horrifying yet fascinating to watch. The visceral effectiveness of the film is astonishing, and though I would not say it is quite as successful as his best films, it's still a pretty brilliant piece of work)
7. Wild At Heart - (Mainly last because of my lack of affection for Diane Ladd's performance, which is the only time one of the extremely stylized performances in his films comes off, to me anyways, as the actor just hamming it up. Nevertheless Lynch once again just proves so capable of making such captivating scenes no matter how barmy they might be, and this case actually manages to make a rather sweet love story at its center. Without having seen Twin Peaks, Dune, or Inland Empire, even Lynch's weakest film is a strong film)
Louis: So Garfield was supposed to play Gary Merrill's role in All About Eve. Would you have liked him better than Merrill? He was also supposed to play Terry Malloy but he died in 1952.
Anonymous:
He probably would have made a better impact than Merrill did who was pretty bland and forgettable. I'm glad he did not play Malloy, and not just because Brando was great. Garfield would have been miscast, and I doubt he would have been as good as Brando was.
Louis: Who do you prefer as an actor? Brando or Burton?
Anonymous:
They're really on a similair level for me, but I suppose Brando.
Louis: Are there remaining Brando performances that you would like to review?
Louis: *see, I meant.
Louis: Well, I guess I have to win a prediction to get my request for a Brando performance that I'd like you to review. By the way, I know you don't care about Burton's Batman films, but you do know Batman used to kill in his first comics, right?
Anonymous:
I do but I don't buy that as an explanation for it since Burton clearly had no passion for Batman as a character, only really caring about the villains in both films. Batman killing may have worked if it fully embraced a style similair to the original comics instead of having Prince songs.
Louis: Since you said that Huston, Welles, Ives, Cobb, Quinn and Mitchum might have been better choices than Peck for Ahab, what about Robinson and Ryan? Or is it because they played Ahab-like villains in The Sea Wolf and Billy Budd?
Louis: I presume that if The Usual Suspects was made in the 1940's in America, John Huston would be the director, right? What about the cast? Who would you choose?
Anonymous: Don't you think you could save the requests until after the next review? They're getting kind of excessive on this page.
Michael: I guess I am. Sorry about that.
Michael *I could
Jack Lemmon as Verbal Kint = perfecto.
Louis: Your Thoughts on Bone Tomahawk and ratings and thoughts on the cast.
Luke: If there's anything more I have to say about metalman091 is that he hates Douglas, Ryan and Widmark (supposedly) and only likes Lancaster.
Louis: So when the next review will come?
?
Anonymous:
I'm sure they would have been better as well.
Luke:
Bone Tomahawk - (I was concerned after hearing Robert's thoughts, as we were in alignment with the last 2015 western I saw. This was also a slow burn, but this time I felt it's purpose. Although I would not quite classify it as a masterpiece, but it is a very good film. It takes its time and develops its characters quite well, helped along by the very strong cast. It works as a western but also as a horror film in its last third which certain has a pretty strong visceral impact, while importantly never losing the sight of its character keeping the emotions honest, which is pivotal the film could have easily fallen into absurdity near the end.)
Saving Jenkins, though I should note I would have saved him even if Psifonian had not asked me to. You know what I'll save Russell to.
Wilson - 4(As the other lead Wilson does some fine work here in offering the bit of heart to the film in his scenes with Simmons. He also is quite good in just realizing the constant physical pain he is throughout the journey. Most importantly though just brings the right honesty to his straight forward character while avoiding ever seeming just like a bland blank slate, next to Russell, Jenkins and Fox)
Fox - 4.5(You know this is getting to be a great year for supporting actor when I'm not saving this performance. Fox is very good here in being so slick and dashing while a healthy dose of sleaze as the proper gunfighter. I love though the way he showed the real emotional pain that motivated his character, and found his final scene with Jenkins quite heartbreaking)
Simmons - 3.5(She has a more limited role but I still liked what she did with performance well enough. Has nice chemistry with Wilson bringing some much needed warmth to proceedings)
Arquette - 3.5(Hmm why is it that if he's in a western that means cannibals are not far away? He does a nice bit of nutty insanity with his performance)
Post a Comment