Peter Mullan is an actor often cast in hard roles given his face that seems to suggest a certain history from the very outset. This film opens with Mullan clearly set in a fitting role it would seem as Joseph who we see go about his average day, well more of his night. Mullan is as one would expect effective in portraying the very worst Joe has to offer as his first action is to kill his own dog in a fit of rage. Mullan himself excels in portraying the animalisitc anger in Joseph in the moment. Mullan portrays this with the needed visceral quality as it overwhelms Joseph. He shows it to be something completely without calculation and just the instinctual reaction of the man. The interesting element in Mullan's performance is the way he displays this anger is often like a dog himself, as shown in a later scene where some locals annoy him. Mullan begins with only this fear suggesting that Joseph is unable to deal with what he is really feeling, and instead falls upon the reaction he has learned over the year. That reaction being just lashing out at whatever is causing him any trouble or merely even making him think about them.
Joseph's usual method though is challenged. First as he comes across Hannah by chance as her initial sunny disposition stands in stark contrast to his own. Mullan and Colman are great together in this early encounter as Colman so well emphasizes only an understanding warmth while Mullan portrays the blunt, though slightly dormant, fury that controls Joseph in the moment. Mullan is remarkable in this scene as he sets up the potential change for Joseph in a very interesting fashion. Mullan does not hold back in portraying the intense venom in Joseph's words as he verbally attacks Hannah for her attempt to comfort him in anyway. Mullan though does not show this to be simple hateful words from a hate filled man. There is something more that Mullan conveys which is a sadness within the vile words. Mullan unveils that hatred hardly defines the man, rather it is emotion of any kind that controls the man. Mullan hows though that the problem with Joseph is that hate simply is the easiest emotion for him to understand.
Joseph's usual behavior does work when he has to face his loneliness while his best friend is dying from cancer. Mullan is incredibly moving in the way he so quietly reveals the very real despair in Joseph as he visits his ailing friend. What's perhaps most powerful in these moments is the struggle that Mullan portrays in dealing with this pain. The apprehension, and even shyness Mullan makes such a natural aspect to Joseph, as he conveys an understanding that his anger did not help, while also portraying a certain confusion as he attempts to find a different way to deal with his feelings. Joseph begins to recognize his own problems in part by attempting to rectify his previous interactions with Hannah. Again Mullan makes this switch so believable as he brings an awkwardness to Joseph. This is as he tries to be wholly courteous and kind to her as he attempts to apologize in his own way as well as gain a bit of her help. This comes first by having her pray for his friend then later on help him find proper clothes for the eventual funeral. Mullan never compromises Joseph, the intensity of the man is always inherent, but he makes the softer qualities that reveal themselves feel wholly genuine.
The film ends up focusing on the hard man who finds a better path, but also focus the good woman who finds a harder path as it details Hannah's relationship with her abusive husband (Eddie Marsan). Hannah eventually comes to Joseph for some sort of shelter after being brutally beaten by her husband. Mullan is terrific in the way he establishes the challenge for Joseph in terms of simply comprehending the situation. Again Mullan is interesting in keeping this timid quality in Joseph as he continues his small steps away from his past, but always keeps the sense that this has been a man who has always been use to people running from him rather coming to him for safety. Mullan's and Colman's chemistry is fascinating as the make the relationship convincing by never simplifying it. The two never play against each other on the exact same wavelength yet they make the connection the two slowly develop honest. They never make the two loving rather there is an underlying understanding that ends up being far more poignant in the end. This is forced to change though as it is revealed Hannah has committed a far more violent act than Joseph ever took part in, though with a different sort of justification involved. What is perhaps Mullan's best scene is found in his heartbreaking reaction as he confronts her over what he saw. Mullan portrays no disgust or judgement, but rather disbelief as Joseph attempts to view the action in context with the woman he has only known to be without hate. The film's final scenes show a reformed Joseph, despite indulging in a violent act though now with an actual reason for it. Mullan does not show us a different man than before, but rather the same man with the needed self reflection. Mullan earns this transition and gives strong depiction of a old dog learning something new.
62 comments:
Ratings and thoughts on Colman and Marsan?
You should watch the film Mullan directed, The Magdelene Sisters. Disturbing as hell, but it packs a huge punch and has a plethora of great female performances.
Louis: Ratings and thoughts on:
Robert De Niro in The Untouchables
Charlton Heston in Touch of Evil
Barry Fitzgerald in The Naked City
Arnold Schwarzenegger in Terminator 1, Terminator 2 and True Lies
Matt Damon in The Informant!
Totally agree with this summation.
In other news, as of last night I've finally seen all the alternates, and I'm pretty sure the only definite fives are Harrelson and Schoenarts. Although Fiennes is still likely to get one and Henshall is a definite possibility.
Michael: Umm.. err.. what are your um.. thoughts on err that film I like and my doppelganger in it lol
Great performance, I'm glad you liked it. I think Colman was even better, one of the most hesrtbresking performances I've ever seen.
heartbreaking*
1. Harrelson
2. Fiennes
3. Banderas
4. Smiley
5. Gierszal
1. Schoenaerts
2. Henshall
3. Mullan
4. Fassbender
5. Gyllenhaal
Here are my thoughts on each year this decade so far in terms of films. Rating for each year will be at the end in parentheses:
1. 2013 - This year had some clunkers at the beginning but it ended as perhaps as the best of the decade to date. 12 Years A Slave, The Place Beyond the Pines, Captain Phillips, Philomena, Inside Llewyn Davis, Mud, Blue Jasmine, The Spectacular Now, Short Term 12, Rush, Prisoners, Gravity, Dallas Buyers, The World's End, The Wolf of Wall Street and Her all stood out this year. Summer wasn't too shabby either, with Man of Steel, We're The Millers, Fast and Furious 6, The Heat, World War Z ,Pacific Rim and Monsters University being entertaining. Iron Man 3 and Thor 2 had their moments.
(5)
2. 2015 - One of the best action movies of all-time, Mad Max: Fury Road came out this year. The summer was decent (Ant-Man, Jurassic World, Mission Impossible 5, Inside Out, Spy, Straight Outta Compton,) Star Wars returned with a vengeance. However, this was a really good year in terms of smaller and prestige movies, with The Big Short, Spotlight, The End of The Tour, Carol, Room, Brooklyn, Love & Mercy, Ex Machina, The Hateful Eight, Bridge of Spies, and Steve Jobs standing out. Creed, The Revenant and Sicario had bigger budgets but still stood out at the end of the year.
(4.5)
3. 2014 - Good year all-around. Gone Girl, Nightcrawler, Fury, American Sniper, Whiplash, Birdman, The Imitation Game, The Grand Budapest Hotel, The Raid 2 all being highlights. Marvel offered two of their best outings to date with Cap 2 and Guardians of The Galaxy. The summer didn't really stood out to me IMO, with Dawn of The Planet of The Apes, Edge of Tomorrow, Days of Future Past, and Guardians of The Galaxy along with Cap 2 being the only highlights IMO.
(4)
4. 2011 - A well-balanced year but I'm not sure if there's a movie that'd be considered a classic other than The Tree of Life. I myself don't like it, but I can see why others do. The Best Picture nominees weren't very strong IMO. However, any year that sees Drive, Source Code, Mission Impossible 4, Rise of The Planet of The Apes, Contagion, Margin Call, Rango, Warrior, Super 8, 50/50, The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo, and Horrible Bosses is fine by me. Summer was only ok, as the only summer movie I remember from that year is the last Harry Potter.
(4)
5. 2012 - I'll be honest: this is the year from which I have seen the least movies. Argo, Silver Linings Playbook, Life of Pi, Seven Psychopaths, Django Unchained, Moonrise Kingdom, The Dark Knight Rises, The Avengers, and Prometheus being the movies that I remember the most from this year. I need to see more from this year but it'll take this spot for now.
(3.5, for now)
6. 2010 - The more I think about it, this year is pretty top-loaded. The Social Network, The King's Speech, The Town, Shutter Island, Inception, Scott Pilgrim, 127 Hours, Toy Story 3, Black Swan all being the movies I remember in particular. I don't much care for the Best Picture nominees I didn't mention, and the summer was ultimately forgettable apart from Inception, Toy Story 3, and Scott Pilgim.
(2.5)
I'd give 2016 a 3.5 so far, btw.
I think 2010 is a good year just for having The Social Network, Animal Kingdom, I Saw the Devil, The Fighter and Toy Story 3.
What did you think of Paddy Considine's direction Louis? I liked that for a debut director he didn't try to flashily force his hand, instead letting the performances flow beautifully.
I liked Mullan a lot here, as well as Eddie Marsan who was surprisingly chilling. Colman was the MVP of course. As this, 'The Night Manager' and 'Broadchurch' have shown, she's such a powerful actress at displaying emotional turmoil in such a heartbreaking, realistic fashion. Her monologue about why she wants to stop Richard Roper in 'The Night Manager' is the finest bit of acting I've seen all year.
I personally liked Colman in Peep Show lol, she was actually a perfect fit for Mark Corrigan, I hated what they did with her character at the end of the series though.
I hope Considine directs more films.
By the way, which is everyone's favourite lead and supporting male performances from last year? (now that it's been a while since Louis established his choices)
performance*
I think Drive is an instant classic.
1. McKellen
2. Tremblay
3. Hardy
4. Damon
5. Segel
1. Stallone
2. Hoult
3. Goggins
4. Del Toro
5. Jackson
Also saw The Witch. Uniformly solid performances, good direction, very good horror film. I wouldn't say I loved it but I certainly can't pick out any flaws.
Michael McCarthy: your thoughts on Schoenaerts in Bullhead?
Calvin: Your rating and thoughts on the cast of The Witch.
Having seen Son Of Saul, what's your rating for Rohrig, as well as what rating Louis' likely to give him.
Michael McCarthy: Your ratings and thoughts on Harrelson, Smiley, Henshall, Fassbender, Fiennes and Gyllenhaal.
Michael McCarthy: And your thoughts on Gierszal.
Luke:
Inseon - 3.5
Thomasin - 4
Scrimshaw - 3
Dickie - 3.5
Rohrig's a 5 for me, and I suspect Louis would give him a 4.5, it's very much a director's film overall but I thought he thrived extremely well in those limits. It's a performance built largely on silent reaction shots and a terrific example of that.
A 3 for Scrimshaw. :(
Louis: Seen anything new in the past week.
Louis: What are your thoughts on Tom McCamus in The Sweet Hereafter?
Watched Jason Bourne.
Anonymous: Your thoughts.
Luke: It's a standard thriller, but has good performances that overcome a rather average script.
Ratings for the cast:
Damon: 3,5
Vikander: 3,5
Jones: 2,5
Cassel: 2,5
Ahmed: 3
Was wondering if you could actually add McCamus to the Best Supporting 2015, Louis, for Room. Small limited role, but I though he was pretty wonderful in that little scene with Tremblay where he slowly gets him out of his shell over a small blow of cereal, and his silent reactions in other scenes also added quite a lot. Although seeing as you gave Allen a 3 for a performance I'd quite easily give a strong 4 to, maybe you didn't see as much to him.
I meant the 2015 supporting ranking.
I also would like to ask where Alesandro Nivola is for A Most Violent Year on the 2014 Supporting rankings. Another small role, but He was my favorite of the film's supporting cast. Grad-A smug condescension.
Louis: Your thoughts on Oliver Reed, Ryan Reynolds and Ben Mendelsohn as actors.
Matt:
Colman - 5(It's an outstanding performance by her. I love how much tenderness and real passion she brings in the moments of her character's prayer. She conveys so well the naturally emphatic nature of Hannah. This makes it all the more heart wrenching when we see the abuse she suffers, which Colman makes all the unbearable through how well she portrays the physical and mental pain to the point of despair. The act her character does take is made convincing by Colman, and she's absolutely amazing in her portrayal of the emotional distress in Hannah in the scene where she attempts to explain herself.)
Marsan - 3.5(The character is limited yet Marsan is very effective in bringing just the sheer brutality of the character in a naturalistic way. These types of roles are often can be extremely overplayed, but Marsan thankfully goes just far enough without going too far with the role.)
Anonymous:
De Niro - 2.5(He's very good in the baseball bat scene bringing an actual menace to Capone in the ferocity he brings to that moment. The rest of the time he's very forgettable though, and I've always found it odd they even cast him in the role given how little they actually use him.)
Heston - 3.5(I much as I love Ed Wood that joke really is unfair given that Heston's the one who apparently lobbied to have Welles be the film's director and it was Welles's idea to have the character be a Mexican. Heston makes the best choice in this case by not attempting any sort of accent. He sticks with his usual accent and offers the needed strong presence for the role. He's indeed overshadowed by Welles, but he works well as straight forward cop in sharp contrast to the duplicitous Quinlan. He's effective in portraying the increasing stress in the character as his enemies close in on him, while still maintaining the usual heroic qualities.)
Fitzgerald - 4(A very good performance that works well in the strict confines of the film which keeps a documentary esque style to the whole investigation. Fitzgerald as per usual brings a nice bit of charm and character yet adapts well to the part of the veteran cop. He's especially good in added a bit of weight when needed such as informing the victim's parents, or certain moments when the case gets murkier.)
Schwarznegger - Terminator 1 - 3(Obviously one note given that he's just playing a killing machine, however his performance is effective in just being a killing machine. He carries the needed menace in his uncompromising body language and purposefully lifeless delivery.)
Terminator 2 - 3.5(A good reprise as he brings the robotic quality back well, but here with just the right bit of variation. He does well in finding just enough of a gradual change in terms of developing some emotional quality as the terminator changes due to John's influence)
True lies - 3(Half action hero/half comedic Arnold. Well probably more comedic half Arnold. Either way it's an enjoyable enough performance from him particularly the scenes where he gives the eye of death to Bill Paxton's character)
Damon - 4(The film did not quite work for me, but I thought Damon succeeded in going completely against type in the film. He's a entertaining hapless schlub throughout the film, and is particularly funny in the moments of attempting to be the cool infiltrator type. In addition to that I felt he was effective in portraying the bizarre mental state of the character who never says exactly the truth no matter what, and when he does it's a weird occurrence.)
Alex:
McCamus - 2.5(I thought he was just fine in the role. Nothing notable though other than his reaction to what his daughter does in the end. The whole abuse subplot I feel is probably the least well developed aspect of the film, and McCamus really doesn't get to do much with it.)
Calvin:
Considine's direction I thought was fairly remarkable. Like you said he really allowed the performances to thrive in the right way while he never overplayed his hand as first time directors, particularly actors turned directors will do. The few flairs he added I thought were rather effective such as the funeral reception sequence.
Luke:
Reed - (Technically I haven't seen that much of him. After all I only recently discovered how charming he could be since for the longest time I only saw his performances in the two best picture winners he appeared in. Now I thought he was a highlight of both Oliver and Gladiator as rougher types, but have found with the Assassination Bureau and the Devils he could be quite the charmer. Other than Bureau, which was meant to have a lighter touch, I've found he had quite the emotional range finding the right nuance in thick skinned characters.)
Reynolds - (I haven't seen a great deal of his performances actually either. Reynolds though with the right material, or perhaps just the right director, is an extremely charming actor who seems to be particularly effective in terms of striking up chemistry with his co-stars. However from everything I've seen whenever there is some dramatic element he absolutely delivers, so I'm very interested to see him in more challenging roles as I think he'd be up to the task.)
Mendelsohn - (I'll grant him a mulligan for his ridiculousness in the Dark Knight Rises, as I've really liked him in everything else I've seen him in. He's a performer who just exudes character with such ease, and the characters he plays almost always feel like they have quite the life outside the margins of the main story.)
Louis: If The Untouchables was made in the 1950's, who would be your cast and director?
The Untouchables directed by Raoul Walsh
Elliot Ness: Paul Newman
Jimmy Malone: James Cagney
Oscar Wallace: William Windom
George Stone: Don Gordon
Catherine Ness: Joanne Woodward
Al Capone: Lee J. Cobb
Frank Nitti: Jack Palance
Daniel:
I thought Suicide Room was curious to say the least…sort of Ordinary People meets Brazil meets Code Lyoko. I suppose my biggest issue with the film was how they chose to portray the behaviors of the suicidal teens as being rather extreme in every way. I understand that cases like Dominik's and Sylwia's definitely do exist in the real world, but since to a degree this film was clearly meant to be a PSA about recognizing the behaviors of at-risk teens, I think it would have been much more effective in studying a variety of characters, especially ones where the signs are much less obvious. Beyond that though, I actually found the concept of the Suicide Room as a fantastical escape to be intriguing. What I found effective about it was that in a way it sort of mirrored the romanticized view these kids had of themselves as tortured souls, only to bluntly de-romanticize the whole concept in the rather haunting scene where Dominik’s mother tells his friends what has happened. I guess you could say I thought Dominik’s story worked on its own, but the film itself would have been far more effective if it had told other varying stories as well.
Gierszal: 4 (This was a hard performance to judge and I could see myself going higher or lower in the future. As I said before, the film chooses to choose a rather extreme case of suicidal behavior as its protagonist, and Gierszal doesn’t really have much of a choice but to play into that. It’s not a perfect performance, as some of his “emo” mannerisms seem a little obvious and a couple of his outbursts are over the top. However, he still does well to show how a lot of his behavior is a cry for attention from his dismissive parents, and he makes good choices to play things down a little bit when he’s interacting with the very manic Sylwia. On top of that, his final scene where he changes his mind too late definitely got to me.)
Calvin:
Schoenarts: 5 (As someone who’s always liked him but was never quite as impressed with him as others on this blog seemed to be, this was the first time I really saw the Matthias Schoenarts everyone’s been going nuts over. He completely disappears into the role of Jacky to the point where I didn’t notice that he was far more muscular than usual or that he had a prosthetic nose. His performance is so lived in that his intense physical transformation for the role doesn’t look like a transformation at all. Beyond that Schoenarts has such a natural intensity from his very first scenes that is incredibly fitting to what is revealed about the character. He is excellent in showing how volatile Jacky is in every scene, which surely is in part because of all of the substances he’s putting in his body but Schoenarts carefully shows that this is also because he is always trying to prove his masculinity to himself. His excellent characterization contributes wonderfully with his relationship with Dandoy’s character. With her, he plays so much vulnerability as he wants to find some kind of connection with her even though he knows the two can never have a truly satisfying relationship. It’s a fantastic achievement as the energy of the performance is just so volcanic it makes me forget how understated it actually was.)
Luke:
Harrelson: 5 (This is an excellent example of a performance that peels away at the layers of what at first seems like a completely straightforward type of character. In his first scenes Harrelson gives what seems like a pretty typical performance for him, albeit with a lot of his charm toned down. He of course is completely convincing in the role of the take no prisoners LA cop but every scene after reveals how much more there is to David. Firstly, there are his scenes with his unconventional family where he actually does have warmth but also a lot of roughness that indicates how he might be a little more concerned with maintaining the illusion of a normal nuclear family than actually taking care of them. As things get worse for him I do think Harrelson shows a growing need in David to start taking care of his daughters, even though he doesn’t really know how to properly do so at this point, and Harrelson is terrific in showing David’s frustration when he doesn’t know how to deal with his daughters’ rejection of his attempts. I actually think the most effective aspect of his performance though is his portrayal of David’s intelligence. In the first scene where he is asked to resign Harrelson is fantastic in the confidence he exudes as he lays out the legal action he will take if his job is threatened. Every scene afterwards that makes reference to his former aspirations as a lawyer are terrific because of the cleverness Harrelson shows, but also the regret that he was never quite good enough to make it as a lawyer. I guess the core of this performance is how brilliantly Harrelson realizes how inadequate David feels in every area; he’s not quite warm enough to ever be a good enough father, he’s not quite smart enough to have made a good lawyer, and most importantly he’s not quite tough enough to be sure that his violent past actions were the right thing to do, even though he desperately wants to believe so.)
Smiley: 4 (Smiley’s very good at being the professional killer with a very casual attitude about what he does. He and Maskell have very strong chemistry that highlights the history that the two friends have even though they couldn’t be more different in their attitudes towards their work. While Jay shows some reluctance at first but falls into a vicious brutality, I actually think Smiley is more effective in showing how Gal has no qualms about being a hitman. When he’s actually on the job, he’s quite chilling in portraying the dispassion Gal has in what he feels is just doing his job. He’s very effective in his growing discomfort at how far off the edge Jay seems to be going, and actually is believable in the warmth he shows with Jay’s wife when he tries to reassure her. This all seems like it will lead to Gal becoming so disgusted with Jay that he decides to change his ways, or to him having to get rid of Jay because of his growing unpredictability, but instead the film decides to do away with his character mid-arc in favor of a flashy, disturbing, out-of-nowhere ending.)
Henshall: 4.5 (Bordering on a 5. I actually didn’t love all of Kurzel’s choices in this film, but I must admit Henshall seemed to be in perfect tandem with Kurzel’s style here. Henshall has so much subtle charisma in this role that it’s easy to see why the family would take to him so fast, and his casual but authoritative presence makes it equally easy to see why Jamie would look up to him in the way that he does. As the film goes on we find out how vile Bunting really is, Henshall doesn’t play his casual nature as any sort of facade but rather that he is so comfortable with his sick beliefs that he just doesn’t need to hide anything about himself. In all of the scenes where Henshall has to show a little more intensity, Henshall is horrifying in showing how Bunting has done such a good job of manipulating everyone (especially Jamie) that they would go along with him in all of his psychopathic acts no questions asked. The films focus on Bunting wavers a bit I think in the second half, But Henshall keeps that from ever really being a problem thanks to his captivating work.)
Fiennes: 5 (Well first I’ll state the obvious and say that Fiennes’s command of Shakespeare’s words is absolutely superb, and between this and Grand Budapest Hotel I’m starting to believe Fiennes might be the go-to actor for stylized dialogue of any kind. What I think is going unnoticed about his performance is mow much he adds with his physical portrayal of Martius. Fiennes is an actor who can certainly play suave characters with ease, but here he does the exact opposite by making every single movement Martius makes look aggressive. Fiennes is not an especially large person, but the way he carries himself as the general makes him look like the goliath that Rome sees him as. And then of course, there’s his pride. Now I’ve seen productions of Coriolanus on stage where the actor portrays Martius’s pride as him simply believing himself to be superior to the common people because of what a great warrior he is. This approach works just fine for the story, but Fiennes refuses to make it that simple. In all the scenes where he resists addressing the people directly, Fiennes shows that Martius may have a bit of post-traumatic stress from all of the time he’s spent in battle, which causes him to see nothing but the worst in most people. When he finally addresses the crowd, Fiennes is incredible in very subtly showing that he’s overcome quite a bit of fear to do so. Because of this, when the people call for his banishment, his fiery tirade makes absolute sense. Yes his shouting is very loud and intense, but that is because he was already a little bit off from his battle fatigue and on top of that he’s receiving scorn from the people who he never felt comfortable engaging in the first place. Once he is banished, Fiennes keeps the same strength that he had before but with an added quality of lostness to Martius. It seems perfectly believable that the first thing he would do is team up with his sworn enemy, because his characterization of Martius is such that pretty much the only way he knows how to solve his problems is through combat. Finally, Fiennes is excellent in his last act where he is finally reached emotionally by the few people he feels any trust for, and breaks down when he realizes that because of this he can never gain back the pride he lost. This leads to one final scene where Martius is ambushed, and Fiennes masterfully shows how this last chance for an act of defiance revitalizes him, at least for a moment. It’s truly great work that brings so much complexity to what is often one of Shakespeare’s simplest tragic heroes.)
Fassbender: 4 (First I have to say that the film belongs to Wasikowska. Having said that, Fassbender does very well in conveying the mystery in the character of Rochester as well as a certain hardness in the scenes before Jane wins him over, and beyond that the haunted nature due to the secret he is keeping. Then after he begins to fall for Jane Fassbender is characteristically charismatic in his big romantic scenes with Jane. I do wish he’d done a little bit more to bridge the gap between these two sides, but he does well enough. He’s very good in portraying the desperation felt by Rochester in the scene where his secret is about to be revealed, and the overpowering defeat when it finally is. His last scene more than makes up for the minor flaws in his performance as he shows that Rochester is completely broken physically and spiritually, but smartly leaves a glimmer of hope that with Jane he can regain some of his strength.)
I haven’t seen Source Code since it first came out on DVD in 2011, so I can’t really give a full comprehensive review of him. I don’t remember anything about his performance standing out as great, but I remember quite liking the film so he must have at least been a solid action lead. For now I’ll say 3.5.
Loved Wasikowska in Jane Eyre. Loved hiw you described ol Matthias as both understated and volcanic. It's a great performance I re-watched today alongside Tinker, and Schoenaerts is now my runner-up to Oldman for the year.
Speaking of Tinker, I appreciated the film and of course Oldman and Strong all the more this time round. I'll also say I'll probably go a bit higher on Dencik and Firth this time round, perhaps I let the memory of the miniseries overshadow them. Though they lack the melodious buffoonery of Hepton and the brilliant, loquacious, seductive talents of Richardson, I'll bump Dencik up to a 3 and Firth a 3.5.
Saw Star Trek Beyond. I really enjoyed. I don't think it's anything great, but I had a lot of fun with it. I like that it actually felt like a Star Trek episode.
Pine-3.5(I still feel like he never really becomes Captain Kirk, but that's kind of impossible when you really think about it. That's really kind of a nitpick, because he gives a truly solid leading man turn.
Quinto and Urban-3.5(Their scenes together were some of my favourites in the film as they have such wonderful chemistry together.)
Pegg-3.5(Well, it's clear he wrote this, because he gets more to do here than in either of the previous movies. Anyway, Pegg's always enjoyable to watch, and that's once again the case here.
Yelchin-3(Tones down the accent considerably and I actually found him to be very likable here.
Boutella-3(Meets the needs of her character, but that's really not that much. I particularly like the odd chemistry she had with Pegg.
Saldana and Cho-2.5(I mean...they're there.)
Elba-1.5(It's not entirely his fault, but the writing and design behind this character is so generic that it really limits anyone's potential to give a good performance. But from a performance standpoint, the voice he used was very uninspired. Now for most of the film I was thinking maybe a 2 for this performance, but I gotta say, I thought he was terrible in his final scenes.
Luke:
Oh I saw Ghostbusters.
The more I think about Ghostbusters, the less I like it. Like, I don't hate it, but it felt like it needed a much stronger edit job. A lot of dead air surrounding the jokes. Maybe there's an R-rated cut that was better, or something. McKinnon was still awesome, though she seemed to come from an Edgar Wright movie.
Robert:
I laughed a few times but it really did not work for me. I'd agree the editing was very off in terms of the comedic timing, also how individual scenes were handled particularly the bizarre way they did the title sequence, and with the way they threw in the extra scenes during the credits. As I suspected, since I felt the same way about Spy, Feig just isn't a good action director especially for a comedy as he never keeps the jokes working with the action. I think Feig was the wrong choice altogether as his style does not really suit Ghostbusters, since there's suppose to be some sort of atmosphere to the ghosts. I never thought they were even slightly scary here.
Louis: Ratings and thoughts on the cast?
The movie has two credited editors. Something tells me there's a better cut somewhere hiding in a vault.
Matt:
McCarthy - 2(Her approach really did not work for me this time. I never felt she exactly chose who she was going to be within the dynamic of the group. She's kinda wacky, yet she's trying to be straight, really I did not get an exact read on her character which is a serious problem for a comedy. What's worse I suppose is I just did not find her funny here)
Wiig - 2.5(I thought she had one terrific scene where her character spoke about her past with ghosts. The rest of the time I also felt she did not exactly make a distinct statement for her position within the group either. She's kind of the straight man, but then has plenty of goofy moments too that did not cohere properly)
Jones - 3(I'm glad she was not one note as the trailers suggested. I felt she did a good job of doing her big moments, which were occasionally amusing, while effectively still establishing an actual person beneath those antics.)
McKinnon - 4(She was in a different film I suppose but a film I preferred. Then again I think if McCarthy and Wiig established the tone of their characters better she could have simply been the Egon of the group. I did thoroughly enjoy her various asides, got the most laughs from her that's for sure, and she was easily the standout.)
Hemsworth - 2.5(I thought he was funny, then I thought he was getting a bit old, then I thought it was just a bit grating. Statham did it better, but really this was one of those examples where he was just a bit too stupid to be in so many scenes.)
Casey - 1(A downright terrible villain. I think he probably would have to have gone full Peter MacNicol to save the dreadful part. As he was he just was extremely bland and every second he was onscreen or even talking was downright boring.)
Murray - 1(The worst performance he's ever given. He's so disengaged that it is painful to watch. He clearly did not want to be there, and really they should just have gotten WILLIAM ATHERTON!!!!!! or cut out all the cameos entirely.)
Robert:
That's a good possibility. I could imagine the improvisation might have often gone a little blue which they had to awkwardly cut out, or use a worse take to keep the PG-13.
I actually sort of liked Ghostbusters. I didn't love it but I thought it was enjoyable enough and, while I would agree that the ghost aren't scary, I thought the action scenes were decent anyway. Mostly, I love the chemistry between the actresses. McCarthy was my least favorite as well but I still thought she more than okay, and Wiig gave a solid performance. I agree that Jones and McKinnon were the standouts (I particularly loved McKinnon as I think that even in the movie's lowest points she managed to be consistently entertaining). I liked Hemsworth a bit more than you but you're right about the fact that considering the character's nature he shouldn't have gotten that much screen-time.
And I also completely agree about the movie's editing.
I like Hemsworth less the more I think about it. JLiked McKinnon a lot as did everyone on here but I am tempted to go higher for Jones. She was really funny too. Also I'm kind of happy the film isn't getting all the hate everyone thought it would have.
Watched a few of the Suicide Squad clips and have to say you're right Loyis. Kinnaman looks like he really could mess up the film somewhat. I can see how Hardy would have brought a lot of character to some of his scenes.
I have high hopes for McKinnon's career after SNL. Also, to those who saw it, how did Cecily Strong fare in Ghostbusters? She and McKinnon are neck and neck IMO for the best actress on the show.
Calvin:
Would you care to elaborate more on Kinnaman? I think he's a good fit for the part, but I don't think I've seen him in anything. Also, apparently the studio considered Kinnaman, Jake Gyllenhaal, Joel Edgerton, and Jon Bernthal for the role after Hardy dropped out.
@94dfk1: I thought she was fine. She didn't do much and she was rather cartoonish but that was the point of the role. Nothing too remarkable and very one-dimensional but enjoyable enough.
94dfk1: He could be a good fit, and I hope I'm completely wrong in the reverse way I was completely wrong about say, Jesse Eisenberg in BvS. The way the character's presented just seems more like a government stiff who's trying to be badass and intimidating in a very particular way to control a bunch of bad guys, and someone like Bernthal or Edgerton would've probably helped with that humorous but intimidating quality.
Not knocking on Kinnaman as an actor though, I thought he was decent in Lola Versus and my friends say he's pretty impressive in The Killing.
Everyone: What are some performances by actors Louis has yet to really be impressed by, you can't wait for him to check out? For me,
Joseph Gordon-Levitt in Mysterious Skin and Brick (I lost a lot of enthusiasm for his performance in 50/50, he's barely in my top 10 now)
Keira Knightley in Pride and Prejudice
Denzel Washington in Man on Fire
Richard E. Grant in Withnail and I
Tom Hiddleston, and Hugh Laurie in The Night Manager (at the very least, check it out for Colman's great performance)
Calvin: That's a difficult question to answer.
Worthington in The Debt
Oh, Tyrone Power in Nightmare Alley.
I'm just waiting for Denzel Washington to get something higher than a 4. I hope he knocks it out of the park with Gences, I know he can do it.
*Fences
Post a Comment