5. Donald Pleasence in The Greatest Story Ever Told - Pleasence makes a large impact in a few brief moments by granting such an unnerving gentleness to his otherworldly evil.
Best Scene: In the cave.
4. Claude Rains in The Greatest Story Ever Told - Rains gives a worthy swansong for his career through one last go with a performance that realizes a properly entertaining and oh so devious villain.
Best Scene: Fear then a smile.
3. Charlton Heston in The Greatest Story Ever Told - Heston gives his best biblical epic turn in a supporting role, by so effectively depicting the overwhelming even if somewhat mad strength of his John the Baptist's conviction.
Best Scene: Confrontation with Herod.
2. Richard Harris in Major Dundee - Harris gives a marvelous turn that while being actively entertaining also realizes the more complex themes of the film through his vivid portrayal that gives understanding to this gentlemanly yet violent soldier and his specific code of honor.
Best Scene: The deserter.
1. Robert Shaw in Battle of the Bulge - In a year of incredible supporting turns Shaw offers yet another one. Shaw once again creates a truly menacing villain yet he goes further in capturing the complexity of the role by giving understanding, though not sympathy, to his pragmatic Nazi.
Best Scene: The battlefield is home.
Updated Overall
Next: I think I'll take a break before the Official Oscar nominations. However if everyone would like to recommend one film for me to watch from 2017, or a year I've covered in the bonus rounds already, or an animated, documentary or television film from any year. I'll watch them during the interim.
332 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 332 of 332Guys, what ratings would you give to the cast of The Hangover.
Cooper: 3
Helms: 2.5
Galifinakis: need a re-watch
Graham: 2.5
Tyson: 3.5
Jeong: 2
Luke:
Cooper:3.5
Helms:3.5
Galifiankis:3.5
Graham:2.5
Tyson:2
Jeong:1
Cooper - 3.5
Helms - 3.5
Galifianakis - 3.5
Graham - 2.5
Tyson - 2
Jeong - 1 (The sequels made me hate this performance)
Saw The Post...
Luke:
Still need to see more of him on the whole however right now he seems an potentially great actor in search of decent parts. He's been in thankless role after thankless role which is a shame as even a role with just a bit of substance to her can bring a real charm to such as his work as Q, and his work in Cloud Atlas proves that he's quite capable as a dramatic actor as well. He's someone I want to have more opportunities as he's far too young to become the new David Thewlis.
Calvin is correct in Lowden, who reminded me of Ian Charleson even before I learned he played Eric Liddell on stage.
Bancroft - 4.5(Steals the film in about five minutes flat. Bancroft manages to capture the right tone of her work in that she does bring a purposeful element of trashiness to her performance though in a way that is only ever entertaining. She's a great deal of fun just to watch in her scene, but she goes even further managing to create a real dramatic emphasis in her performance. She does suggest sort of the rot of her family as there is a sense of pathos there, but she also makes the movie compelling a bit just through her moment where she encourages Bill Pullman's character to play the game. That moment of encouragement is so beautifully realized in her work as she brings such a quiet delight as she sees potential in causing her daughter's downfall.)
Adjani - 4(I thought he performance was entirely fine though I will say it never quite went beyond just meeting what was expected. She does well enough as the interested and willful young artist. Her decay is perhaps slightly hastened at times however Adjani's performance certainly delivers in her breakdown scenes. She never made me engaged in her character's story though despite the potential in it. It is true it is in part due to the film and her co-star, but still in the end she is the best part of the film though she doesn't completely overcome its shortcomings.)
Giuseppe:
Kidman - 3(She's completely decent as the innocent school teacher though seeming with just a bit of a hidden edge. She's less convincing though as the femme fatale, although I will say she wasn't as bad as she could have been. She doesn't really deliver in that razors edge needed that is widely evident in say a Gene Tierney, or Barbara Stanwyck's similair minded performances. She at least doesn't fall on her face, but she never really captivates as she should either.)
Omar:
Depardieu - 2.5(I have to admit that at the moment Depardieu is this "great actor" that I've yet to find the greatness in. He's entirely okay here as Rodin however I never found he became compelling as this intense artist. He seems bizarrely low key yet doesn't really bring anything within taking this quiet approach. He is quiet but doesn't bring nuance within this. There is no real subtlety about it, rather his work just seems a bit thin. He kind of hits the emotional moments within the central relationship but in a very surface fashion that never seems to dive into really realizing who Rodin is.)
Calvin:
I must say that Newton is a case where I was terribly unimpressed with all of her work until west world. She's amazing there of course but in the rest of her work I found her either forgettable or a bit overwrought. So given that extreme difference I'll be interested to see how she fairs outside of the robotic realm.
Thoughts on The Post and the cast.
And is Bancroft your 93 winner or does that honour still belong to Ricci. If it's still Ricci, where would you rank Bancroft.
*93 Supporting
Luke:
The Post is no All the President's Men, it's no Zodiac, it's no Spotlight. It's better than Truth, but eh that's not doing too much. The film in general seems like it was rushed particularly by the ending, which feels like eh "the end". I will say the biggest problem with the film is actually Spielberg and John Williams. Spielberg just can't help himself. The story itself has plenty of power to it yet he can't help himself to accentuate it to an almost comical degree at times. This also include Williams's score here which often feels out of place, and distracting. The actual procedural elements are decently told, even if there is a bit of hand holding at times, but it doesn't balance this all that well with the personal story of Katherine Graham's attempt to head the Post. I love a good procedural but that was not this film. It felt like obligation of a film as the passion seems stronger in terms of being a reaction to the current political climate rather than for the story it's actually telling.
I'll get to the cast in a moment sans Hanks, I will say that I did like Streep, however if this is the performance that stops the Hanks snubs to quote the better Ben Bradlee performance "I'm going to get mad".
Numero 2 for Bancroft.
I was just thinking about how great Robards and for that matter, John Slattery were as the Bradlees.
Robards up to a 4.5, very nice. :)
Streep - (Haven't decided on a rating. This is the least ticcy she's been awhile and it benefits her performance greatly. She just lightly places upon the sort of refined accent however she actually doesn't focus upon too heavily. What I actually found quite impressive here was that Streep did not take the role in its simplest direction, which would have been the crusader of justice. Streep goes much further than that here in developing the certain insecurities in the character. She actually brings a certain undercurrent of desperation in the early scenes showing the actual learning curve and not just showing her to be fully developed as a fighter from minute one. She actually builds to this rather nicely particularly in her scenes with Bruce Greenwood where she develops the sort of conflict of interest there as something genuinely emotional. I will say not all of her scenes are the most inspired, a few seem there to be Oscar scenes, however Streep makes them work within the character at the very least. It would be some cruel irony if this is THE performance she misses for.)
Odenkirk - 4(I'd actually say his scenes were the most compelling in the film in that they were the most rich in terms of the procedural. Odenkirk does a very good job of giving the right type performance in this vein in the way he very much portrays straight forward scenes yet brings the right urgency in creating the sense of what every development means. He's not quite on Robert Redford's level in this regard, but he's good. I will say though that seeing him and David Kross standing side by side in a serious film was a strange sight.)
Greenwood - 4(Thought he was pretty good in portraying a genuine quality in his moments of speaking McNamara's distress in the release of the documents. He pleads his case in an honest way that takes him beyond any sort of one note straw man to be taken down. Greenwood delivers in creating a sense of why Graham would be sympathetic at all to his position, and even in the sort of threat scene Greenwood plays it as a warning with real concern for a friend not as hate.)
Paulson - 2.5(There's nothing exactly wrong with her own performance however she has zero chemistry with Hanks, and they just don't seem like they are actually married in anyway. Should've just gotten Amy Ryan again.)
Rhys - 2.5(Severely lacking as he really didn't create any sense of the emotional struggle for the character's path. He's very bland in the role, and is particularly underwhelming if you compare him to the main source in All the President's Men or even the other sources. Well actually he's a bit like Jane Alexander.)
The rest of the cast is decent in their minor roles.
Did a rewatch of All The President's Make make you re-think your rating on Robards, or was it Hanks' performance?
Louis: When will you get a chance to see Phantom Thread.
Matt:
I actually had re-watched again it awhile ago and decided that I should upgrade Robards, like so many things in that film it only gets better on repeat viewings. I'll admit I just did not get around to it, but watching Hanks's performance made me rectify that.
Tahmeed:
Hopefully soon, but currently I don't know.
Luke:
Cooper-3.5/4 (really like his quasi straight man turn here)
Helms-3.5
Galifianakis-4 (much better here than in the sequels)
Jeong-2.5 (Same as Galifianakis. Although it must be said he's much more effective playing a similar character in Community).
I didn't LOVE The Post but it seems I liked it more than Louis. I thought Hanks was very good aside from a few moments where he was a little too growly, and I really liked Rhys. I'm glad you liked Odenkirk and Streep though, Streep actually might be my Lead Actress win.
Luke:
Cooper-3.5
Helms-3.5
Galifianakis-4
Jeong-3
Graham-2.5
Tyson-2.5
I did suspect that The Post would suffer from it being rushed, since they barely announced the project in March of last year.
Louis: Your casting for a 2010's Brazil.
Louis: Your top ten Looney Tunes cartoons
Louis: Having just seen Roman J. Israel, Esq. I think you will be a lot angrier if Denzel Washington is nominated lol.
Any more viewings Louis.
Louis: Your thoughts on 22 Short Films About Springfield.
Louis , what are your thoughts and ratings for the Lethal Weapon movies?
Thoughts on Ledger in Lords Of Dogtown.
Louis: Your ratings for Madeline Kahn in Young Frankenstein and Jennifer Jones in The Towering Inferno.
Anonymous:
Sam Lowry: Ben Whishaw
Jill: Lily Collins
Harry Tuttle: Leonardo DiCaprio
Ida Lowry: Miranda Richardson
Mr. Kurtzmann: Mark Rylance
Spoor & Dowser: Nick Frost & Simon Pegg
Dr. Jaffe: Chris O'Dowd
Mr. Helpmann: Brendan Gleeson
Jack Lint: Martin Freeman
Anonymous:
The Great Piggy Bank Robbery
Pigs in a Polka
Rhapsody Rabbit
Daffy Doodles
Back Alley Oproar
Duck Amuck
Horton Hatches the Egg
Rebel Rabbit
Bunny Hugged
Thumb Fun
Anonymous:
Oh a hilarious series of vignettes my favorites being Skinner/Chalmers shenanigans "steamed hams", the differences between McDonalds and Krusty Burger, "do they have partially gelatinated non-dairy gum based beverages? Yeah they call em shakes. Shakes? Don't what'ca you gettin" is in particular an absolute classic. Every single one though is enjoyable and often quite hilarious the overall episode being a great spotlight on the richness of the world of Springfield in general.
Anonymous:
Still need to re-watch them.
Luke:
Ledger - 4(It's certainly the best performance in the film and Ledger makes his little side story far more compelling than the main story of the skaters. Ledger's quite good in portraying I guy trying to hard to be some sort of cool guru and I like the way he kind of both succeeds in this yet fails at the same time as part of the nature of the character. In that he does portray definitely a bit of confidence in the character's bit of wisdom he has, and even a warmth in his support of the boys. He brings a likability but really the right certain slightly pathetic quality in his moments of trying to vicariously live through the younger guys. It's a good performance and I wish the film had focused in more on him as he is absent for far too extended periods of time.)
Luke:
They're 4's.
Louis: Ratings and thoughts on the Dogtown leads?
Louis: Is Bergman a 4,5 or a 5 for Gaslight? By the way, watch The Raid from 1954 with Van Heflin, Anne Bancroft and Lee Marvin. You can find it on YouTube.
Watched Blade Runner 2049 for the third time and I finally see what you all see about Gosling. I'm not surprised it took me this long given that it usually takes me some time to fully appreciate most of his performances.
Matt:
Robinson, Rasuk, Hirsch - 2(I found the first two to be mostly pretty bland and forgettable much of the time. They just didn't define their characters very well in my mind as they seemed built around a singular note, Robinson just being bland, Rasuk having just a one dimensional hot head trait. Hirsch isn't as bland but instead comes off as a bit much particularly when his character gets in a rougher element. All of them leave their characters without the inherent passions one would imagine they should have, and are very much overshadowed by Ledger as well as Michael Angarano.)
Anonymous:
5, I'll keep that in mind.
Louis: Is Stanwyck still your winner or has Bergman taken back the win for 1944?
Anonymous:
Stanwyck's my winner.
Calvin: I actually bumped him and Ford to a 5 each on rewatch. I thought that they brought a lot in the smaller moments, especially Ford in his scene with Leto.
Louis: Your thoughts on the cinematography of Leave Her to Heaven and Cleopatra.
Louis: Glad to see Your Name is your #6 film of 2016 :)
Could I have your thoughts on the film, and the following scenes/songs?
The revelation
The comet
Meeting during Twilight
The ending
'Opening Theme' and 'Sparkle'
Louis: How would you define what constitutes great internalized and externalized performances, and your top 5 actors who work with one of these methods.
Also, your casts and directors for 2000s and 2010s On the Waterfront.
Anonymous: While I can't give a full top 5, Byung-Hun Lee is someone who's terrific at internalised performances. As for great externalized performers, Jack Nicholson and Michael Fassbender are two names that come to mind.
Of course, several actors can pull off both, such as Ryan Gosling, Ben Foster, Viggo Mortensen and so on.
Bryan: I'm still not sure whether I'd go higher on Ford yet. But yeah picked up lots of little things for him second time round, like Pattinson.
Anonymous: He gave his cast and director for a 2010s version once, in the James Mason in North by Northwest review.
On the Waterfront (Michael R. Roskam)
Terry Malloy - Tom Hardy
Edie Doyle - Carey Mulligan
Johnny Friendly - Philip Seymour Hoffman
Charley Malloy - Josh Brolin
Father Barry - Brendan Gleeson
Louis: your thoughts and ratings on the cast of The Trouble with Harry?
Anonymous:
Leave Her to Heaven is an excellent example of sort of the glamorous hard light technicolor approach. The cinematography of the film is somewhat similair, though not quite as extreme in the approach, to Douglas Sirk's films that seem to purposefully emphasizes the colors to create almost a gilded quality to the film to potentially evoke a certain hollowness within the glamor. This has a bit of subtle brilliance in this film with Tierney's Ellen who seems specifically light to look too perfect, and not everyone is nearly as vibrant as her in terms of the lighting.
Cleopatra on the other hand isn't Leon Shamroy's finest hour. Some of the later more moody scenes his work become a bit more expressive and dynamic. The rest of the film is a cut below I'd say as sort of the technicolor grand epics go from the time. It actually looks a bit over saturated in a points, and doesn't compare well to say Ben-Hur or Spartacus in that regard. It's a little strange as the composition of scenes even seems to just look overblown rather than epic. It's unfortunate as it is just another underwhelming aspect of that film, though certainly terrible by any margin.
Tahmeed:
I loved the film, obviously, and I'll grant that it was sort of halfway there just because of the gorgeous hand drawn animation. The film is beautiful to look at especially everything that involves the sky. What is as impressive though is the storytelling which genuinely surprised me with how moving it was. I think this came in part in really the whole rug pull of the film as it begins as seemingly just this entertaining farce, and suddenly becomes something deeply poignant in its examination of this most unique connection between to people.
The Revelation - (One of the greatest rug pulls I've seen in quite awhile. As the impact of the moment itself is quite heartbreaking, but also brilliantly changes your perspective of what you've seen come before it.)
The Comet - (Again particularly awe inspiring just in terms of the visuals alone. The entirety of the scene is something special as it takes just that stunning image and makes it so much more through the emotional connection realized within proper context.)
Twilight - (Loved it in that meets expectations in terms of delivering the emotional impact but also nicely subverts it with the bit of bickering due to past indiscretions.)
The Ending - (I'll admit I thought they were nearing stretching it out too far, but they manage to bring it home in what one can use as a proper example of how to make a happy ending absolutely something special. It just feels wholly earned, and the simplicity of the final moment is quite frankly perfect in its realization.)
"Opening Theme" - (I'd say in the scheme of the film the songs were perhaps my least favorite part of it, but that's not to say I disliked them by any measure. This one though I don't think quite matched the score. It's a fine song on its own, if perhaps a touch overproduced in its blending particularly the full band riffing sort of moments.)
"Sparkle" - (Sparkle though particularly is wonderfully rendered especially the little piano repetition that underlines and is a repeated so poignantly throughout the film. It then does end bring some real grandeur to it all through building with the vocals which is much like the film itself. I felt it to be the best song as it most naturally worked within the score.)
Anonymous:
Well in terms of the approach it first matters what the role really requires, which is sometimes forgotten, as I've often seen any yelling in a performance being conflated to overacting, but that's not the case. If it fits the role, and the tone of the film, it is absolutely fine. What constitutes great performance in either case is a few things. The first being creating honesty within the role, which do you believe the performer whatever the genre may be. This factors into internalized or externalized performances. The key into both is to make whatever the character is doing or going through compelling. Toshiro Mifune is my favorite actor, and he's never bored me onscreen. This can be in a variety of ways to be sure, one need is that aforementioned honesty in terms of whatever is being reflected by their work, but what's also needed is consistency of character. You should feel as though you are getting to know the character through the film, and that often times comes from what the performance brings you. This can be in a more forceful sense which is where you find the externalized performance, which are also performances you'd more likely say are entertaining simply to watch even without context. Internalized tends to be more withdrawn, but what the actor needs to do is convey in a more subtle sense what their personal state is yet drawn in with their more subdued work. There honestly is overlap in both, and often times the most remarkable moments in an extroverted performance can be introverted, Mifune in Rashomon's moment of looking into the sun, or vice versa like Laurence Olivier's "I hated Rebecca" from Rebecca.
My favorite actors are those who tend to excel in both, and I'd say it is one of the signs of a truly great actor.
For Example:
Gary Oldman: Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy/Leon
Daniel Day-Lewis: In the Name of the Father/The Age of Innocence
Richard Attenborough: Seance on a Wet Afternoon/Guns at Batasi
Gene Hackman: The Conversation/Unforgiven
Toshiro Mifune: High and Low/Rashomon
Robert Duvall: Tender Mercies/Apocalypse Now
Laurence Olivier: Rebecca/Sleuth
On the Waterfront 2000's directed by Martin Scorsese:
Terry Malloy - Joaquin Phoenix
Edie Doyle - Michelle Monaghan
Johnny Friendly - Russell Crowe
Charley Malloy - Barry Pepper
Father Barry - Viggo Mortensen
Keep with my original for 2010 but put in Paddy Considine for Friendly.
Louis: Seen any TV films yet and any other 2017 viewings.
Louis: Your rating for Meryl Streep in Doubt.
Deiner:
Gwenn, Forsythe, Maclaine, Natwick - 3.5,3,3,3.5(They are all more than fine in giving a fairly "breezy" performance fitting to the rather breezy tone. Gwenn and Natwick though I find bring just a bit more of a subdued wit within their performance and their relationship feels far less of a plot requirement than MacLaine and Forsythe. Not that the two are bad together, but Gwenn and Natwick find a rather nice warmth in their work that is semi lacking in the others. All four though just give nice likable turns that are not overly dramatic or leave that much of a lasting impact however they all succeed in realizing the film's style.)
Luke:
The Hollow Crown
3
Your Thoughts on The Hollow Crown films and the casts for each.
Louis: your thoughts on Streep in Doubt? It's one of my favourite performances from her.
By the way, I saw Molly's Game and The Post last night. Liked the former for the most part, liked the latter a good deal.
I love Scorsese's movies but I do wish he'd go with Gosling, Hardy, Fassbender, Schoenaerts, Phoenix, Crowe or even Denzel as one his leading men for a change. At least we'll always have Andrew Garfield and Adam Driver in Silence
Bryan L: And Oscar Isaac.
Or Mortensen =D
Louis what are your thoughts on Harry Dean Stanton's cameo in The Avengers?
Luke:
Well let me begin with thoughts on the films themselves.
Richard II was probably the most interesting part for me partially because is a rarely adapted Shakespearean play, but also I think this adaptation realized something very interesting within the work. In it so well realized the juxtaposition of a King bound by privilege against one bound by duty, and manages to find a real emotional core in this certain tragedy in the former. Although I will say this largely comes from the performance in the former. All the films have just a touch of the BBC look, but overall are very well mounted.
Henry IV I will say was not my favorite portion, although I certainly liked it. It's falters in comparison to what Welles did with Chimes at Midnight though which really did trim the fat getting to the heart of the material both in terms of Falstaff's and Hal's story. The extra material involving the rebels, a bit more of the titular King, and technically even a bit of alternative Falstaff is intriguing enough, but on the whole what Welles did with the material feels rather definitive.
Henry V - The biggest challenge I would say since the play was already brilliantly adapted twice in very different ways by Branagh and Olivier. I liked this adaptation as well and it works particularly well in tandem with the overall product. That is it feels like this climax to the other episodes and though I don't think it bests either of the previous adaptations it does offer a fine version of its own.
Omar:
Streep - (The performance for me is actually least impressive in its attempts at more subtle moments. Her overall approach to me might seem a bit much but at least there is a bit of logic within the idea of the monstrous mother superior. She is suppose to fierce some and willful. Streep certainly gets that across well enough though I've never felt it was incredible in that to me it still felt that of an act at times, though not as an act within the sense of the character. What really holds it down for me though are the two major moments that should require a greater degree of nuance. Those being the ending, and the moment of her past sin when in the final argument. Those two moments should allude to more however Streep overcompensates in the moment to far to directly point to some greater unknown importance yet these what should be internalized moments feel ridiculously over the top. I don't hate the performance yet to me it fails to wholly translate the material to a more cinematic form, keeping too closely to broad strokes of the role.)
Matt:
I think I've given my thoughts before but to reiterate. It's a very enjoyable moment as to be expected by Stanton who brings a delightful worldly quality for his brief questions on the nature of the Hulk.
I really hope you've given Whishaw a 5.
Luke:
Richard II's Cast:
Whishaw - 5(The performance of all four parts. Whishaw's work not only realizes the role of Richard II, but takes it to greater heights beyond even the simplest intention. He's terrific in the way he portrays the man in the early scenes portraying the King as a man with an assumed power. His mannerisms, and his delivery is of this attempt at almost an otherworldly quality as though he is above the common needs. Whishaw portrays perhaps with just a minor bit of ego, but mostly as this naivety in the man of someone who seems as though he has been granted a certain right as King. When he deals initially with Bolingbroke and the other men there is little concern Whishaw depicts as a man who believes he is King as well as will always shall be. There is a delusion of grandeur though the delusion within the position. There potential that Richard could be made just to be sort of a "dandy" villain, but Whishaw doesn't do that. As the story goes on he actually brilliantly makes Richard into a truly tragic figure in the idea of a man ill-fitting to his position, though perhaps not evil in heart. The brief scenes where he attempts to inspire his own men against his other throw is a heartbreaking pathetic display of a man attempting to convince himself of a power he's never had, and the moment of his realization of his weakness Whishaw is extremely moving in showing the King coming down to earth. He's incredible in every one of his scenes particular his final scenes where we see the man without delusions but still these sort of gentle ways. Whishaw shows a man not deserving of his final fate, only within it due to the nature of his birth.)
Kinnear - 4(Kinnear's performance is purposefully limited though he is effective in portraying a man of a different spectrum. The king of an iron will who is duty bound to overthrow Richard. Kinnear manages to show the nobleness in his portrayal by not depicting his ambition as greed but rather with this sense of a determination to do what he believes must. Kinnear rightfully defers in his scenes with Whishaw portraying well his observations of his predecessor doing well to depict the right sympathy. In turn he makes his final scene rather moving in itself by depicting the sense of loss, and sympathy for Richard even though he had to be his sworn enemy in life.)
Stewart - 3.5(Stewart speaking Shakespeare is worth something anyways however he works here quite well as sort of the breaking of a man due to his ill-heath in his moment throwing himself fully into the moment revealing this old knight with many days before him still fighting some battle in death.)
Suchet - 4(Suchet is effective in his largely nonspeaking role through his separate depictions of the Duke's interactions with his nephew and Bolingbroke. Suchet realizes well in these moments the internal conflict in the man as he takes in every moment making the act of support to the future King rather than past a particularly powerful one. He importantly doesn't play him as a manipulator rather as he man truly troubled by his sense of duty essentially to his King or to his realm.)
Thank You Louis :)
Henry IV's Cast:
Irons - 4.5(Although I will say the transition from Kinnear to Irons isn't the most naturally physically, I think they actually should have played Hiddleston play the younger IV since I'd say he would've been a believable younger Irons as he is believable as his son. Anyway though Irons does continue that performance though in spirit. In that he brings that same sense of burden in the man, a determination though with that burden to perform his duty. Irons though able to take it further though in portraying the frustrations within his voice as he attempts to teach his son of this same duty. I love the humanity in general Irons brings in such subtle moments, such as his dismay at being awake while his poorest subject would be asleep. He's terrific in realizing what years of this determination would do to a man, though still portraying the value of the determination. He is particularly moving in his scenes with Hiddleston showing the genuine concern of a father, as he depicts a real warmth in his words even when they are words of disappointment. It's terrific work, although that SAG nomination should have been Whishaw's.)
Armstrong - 4(I thought he was quite effective and rather moving in portraying the man's reactions towards the losses of his house over the failures of the rebellion. Armstrong's reactions actually make the fate of the Percy's more than just a little footnote by so affectingly depicting the man's genuine grief over their deaths making them more than just villains through his work.)
Walters - 3.5(I will say all of the performances of Mistress Quickly are more the less the same. She has more material technically speaking then Judi Dench, and Margaret Rutherford. The end result though is still more or less the same. Well I'd say that's really the one possible interpretation so job well done when realized. She, as they did, though brings enough of sort of the brassiness incisiveness needed for the role, with just a touch of pathos as related to the final moments of Falstaff.)
Beale - 2.5(The sour point of the two parts is Bale's portrayal of Falstaff. I will admit I don't think anyone could possibly top Welles's portrayal of the character. Beale however I think takes the wrong approach again and again. The thing is he frankly takes the role too seriously throughout. He makes his Falstaff too aware of himself and ends up taking away the likability of the character. Beale shows that the man seems well aware of his buffoonery without much delusion making him far more contemptible then the character should be. He's too much of a schemer failing to find the appeal of the schemes of the man. He doesn't find enough of a joy in the role bringing instead making his flamboyance unpleasant when he reveals it. Beale makes the man more grotesque and quite the intolerable freeloader. He never shows why Hal would ever have taken a liking to him. The only time his approach works at all though is in the ending as his seriousness works for despair however even in this he is far less affecting then Welles was. Beale doesn't properly hide the pathos only to reveal at the right moment. He doesn't show the two side of Falstaff, just one rather unpleasant side.)
I'll get to Hiddleston with V.
Louis: I will admit, I only saw Henry IV once when first broadcasted so I really need a re-watch for Beale, I'm glad you liked Irons though.
Henry V's Cast:
Hiddleston - 4.5(Hiddleston technically has the rare benefit in terms of being allowed to portray the entirety of Henry's arc from wayward son to true warrior king. He doesn't waste this potential either giving performance worthy to comparison to Olivier's and I'd actually say he bests Branagh. I'd say he's on an even keel with Baxter, who obviously had more limited material to work with. Hiddleston though is very good in depicting each side of the man's story in playing that layabout within the tavern bringing the jovial quality needed in these acts though with that slight sense of responsibility that seems to nag at him even when he brushes off some of the kings men. Every one of his scenes with Irons is great as Hiddleston so effectively depicts that internal struggle as he shows the prince, through his reactions, takes in each and every word of his father even as he initially ignores them. That is until the man's sickness with Hiddleston finally verbalizes his love and is properly heartbreaking in that moment of accepting responsibility from his father. Hiddleston compares this well against his interactions with Falstaff in the way he slowly that joviality and his eyes slowly gain a critical edge until he denounces him. He naturally transitions to the King basically in the Henry V, becoming kind of the original action hero as Henry V is. In that Hiddleston brings the needed passion in every battle, as well as the St. Crispin's day speech, though along with the right emotional undercurrent to portray the weight of the battle even as he launches himself head first into it.)
Teale - 4(Funny seeing him as such a jovial and loyal character here. Teale though delivers in this role in bringing the right combination of humor and genuine passion in the role of Captain Fluellen. Teale brings the right type of sort of atypical character in his work without overdoing it making the Captain naturally endearing and the humor of the role as a natural part to the type of soldier the man is. Along with that final scene bit of charm, that Hiddleston does well to allude a little bit to his wayward days, and effectively makes Henry the romantic lead for one scene.)
Wilson - 3(The old French King just isn't allowed much anyways however Lambert does do what he can to offer a bit of depth to the role portraying well his own concerns with a proper humanity.)
Thierry - 3(She brings the bit of humorous charm needed for the role. Not much more is required.)
Hurt - 3.5(Strong narration as to be expected from Hurt particularly in his one on screen appearance. He doesn't make as much of an impact as Jacobi did in the role, who benefited from his visualized role, however the one moment he does appear Hurt is incredibly moving in granting such a poignancy to the final lines reflecting on the failure of the crown.)
Louis: Will you get around to the second cyle of Hollow Crown films when you'll cover 2016 again.
Another movie I read about: Apparently Marton Csokas was actually good in a 2010 film called The Tree.
I'm very interested in what you would think of Cumberbatch's portrayal of Richard III.
Happy to see Hiddleston get a 4.5 for the first time.
Louis: Your thoughts on the "Yeah, well, that's just like your opinion, man" scene from The Big Lebowski.
Saw "Darkest Hour" last night. Yeah, the "Iron Lady" comparisons aren't entirely off-the-mark, but at least this film had the common courtesy to stick to a few days in Churchill's life rather than trying to span his entire career, so I guess props for that. In a way, this is kind of like the anti-"Lincoln", and it made me appreciate Spielberg/Kushner/DDL's work that much more in retrospect. Joe Wright's directorial choices are... odd, to say the least. And Anthony McCarten really is gunning for Abi Morgan's "worst working screenwriter" crown. With the two of them working in sync (or rather, out of sync), it's amazing that Gary Oldman managed to get anything done. He really is the lifeblood of the movie, and he's as bombastic as ever in the sort of scenery-gnawing part any actor of a certain age desires. His performance is an odd one to actually pin down, because the prosthetics really are distracting; even amidst the sound and fury of Oldman's best scenes, I never feel like I'm watching Winston Churchill. And it has nothing really to do with Oldman's performance but rather everything to do with the moist sheen of his facial appliances, which make him look halfway passable as Churchill in one scene and more like Fat Bastard in the next. The makeup does do its best to hamper Oldman, but his biggest hurdle is the screenplay, which is just awful and reduces Churchill to little more than a crass, blathering bellower that everyone excuses because history will deem him "on the right side" (in this instance, at least). Lily James is useless in the movie and while Kristin Scott Thomas does her best as the stolid Clementine, she scarcely gets more to do other than moon over her husband and say she made the right choice in marrying him. The scenes with Stephen Dillane and Ronald Pickup are actually the best moments in the film and actually hint at a far more intriguing movie about the schemes to subvert Churchill at the height of imminent war, but McCarten isn't competent enough to actually dig into them. Also Ben Mendelsohn is in the movie as well.
I don't begrudge Oldman's impending win, but right now I'd have him over Affleck and Redmayne in terms of the rest of the winners in this category. Funnily enough, I'd have him more or less on the same tier as Chalamet in terms of quality, which I'm sure will incite an angry post or two.
More I think about it, Oldman will actually be my second favourite winner of this decade, behind DDL. I actually agree that Wright's choices were often quite off, but I loved the way he maneuvered around them.
Anonymous:
Pretty much sums this blog up.
Seriously though just a very enjoyable scene in capturing fairly nonsensical friend banter, though of course naturally heightened by the Coens.
Psifonian:
Well you won't find any angry posts for that around here, I imagine.
Honestly I'm probably more negative on Oldman's performance than anyone else here. He has his moments (the phone call with FDR), but stuff like the train scene almost cancels it out.
Louis: Your top ten overrated/underrated actors currently working.
Louis: And your thoughts on the casting for Andrew Davie's (House Of Cards, Pride And Prejudice & War And Peace) adaptation of Les Miserables.
Luke:
Well here's underrated, I tire of the word overrated:
Ben Foster
Brendan Gleeson
Matthias Schoenaerts
Liam Cunningham
Paul Bettany
Jeffrey Wright
Barry Pepper
Guy Pearce
Cillian Murphy
Don Cheadle
Can't say I know what to make of that cast. West hasn't really impressed me all that much from what I've seen him in. Oyelowo is extremely hit or miss. Collins is usually okay, but that's about it. Adeel Akhtar is very strange choice for Thernadier, and I don't mean in terms of his ethnicity. The only one who seems like an obvious choice in conception is Olivia Colman as Madame Thenadier. Otherwise these are all pretty off the wall, and can't say I'm sure that they'll work out.
Oyelowo seems like he'd be a better fit for Valjean. I like the casting of Akhtar and Colman. West seems like a pretty poor choice
Guys, could you name 1 comedy show that you really want Louis to watch. My pick is Blackadder.
Luke: Veep. I don't think he's seen that, but I may be wrong.
Parks & Recreation for sure. He also might like Archer.
Michael: I like P&R quite alot and my personal MVP is Nick Offerman.
Luke: i love Parks and Recreation, and i agree with you, Offerman is the MVP, but i love everyone from the show.
Jeeves & Wooster, or The I.T. Crowd.
Offerman is brilliant, but I think Poehler has the trickier character, and I just love her infectious energy as Leslie.
Community. I think Louis will at least like the first three seasons.
Alex & Omar: Offerman was basically a gun-to-my-head pick. I could easily go with Poehler as well. I actually think that Scott and Jones pulled off the trickiest performances, so I could've gone with one of them as well. Also Ansari. Or Pratt. Anyone really.
In the episodes I've seen, Poehler and Lowe were my favourites.
Calvin: I'm currently watching the series for the third time, and out of everyone in the cast, Lowe has grown on me the most in this particular viewing.
Louis: Thoughts on the cast of The Sons Of Katie Elder.
And any other viewings.
Robert: I think I remember him saying he tried to watch Community at one time.
Louis: Past film roles that Sam Rockwell and Edward Norton would be great in?
Louis: What are your thoughts on the Simpsons episode "Sweet Seymour Skinner's Baadaasssss Song"?
Luke: Community. The first three seasons are some of the best comedy I've ever seen.
Luke: Catastrophe. I can't remember the last time I've ever laughed so hard (especially for the first season).
Louis: Have you had a chance to see Hillsborough?
Louis, what are your thoughts on The Punisher and its cast, as well as how it ranks alongside the other Marvel Netflix TV shows you have seen?
Louis: Is Hamill a 3.5 or 4 for Mask Of The Phantasm.
Louis: Would this be of any interest to you. I really want to see this series since one of the characters was born and raised in my hometown.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=LVbY7GKF7UU
Bryan:
Norton:
Don Birnam (The Lost Weekend)
George Eastman (A Place in the Sun)
Bill McKay (The Candidate)
Rockwell:
Asa Watts (The Cowboys)
Roat (Wait Until Dark)
Ensign Pulver
Matt:
Sweet Seymour Skinner's Baadasssss Song's a hilarious episode and is in that realm Simpsons episode in which there really is laugh after the laugh while still managing to tell a compelling if not emotional story. Here you have such amount funny moments just from Bart bringing his Dog to school from the over enthusiasm of every towards the dog to barrel chested groundskeeper Willie and his reenactment of Dallas in the Air vents from Alien. It transitions though to Skinner's firing where we do get a genuinely warm relationship between the two mortal enemies, though still with hilarious moments thrown in whether it be Flanders as principal, Skinner's terribly named Jurassic Park clone "billy and the cloneasaurus, or my favorite minor character of Leopold. It does though make something genuine out of the Skinner and Bart relationship which again was part of the key to the greatness of old Simpsons which never stopped being funny but bothered to find nuance within its characters.
Michael:
Yes I have it's a great documentary.
Vincent:
The Punisher once again fell into many of the problems I have with the Marvel Netflix shows. One being there are downright awful performances. The pacing is always off. There are too many subplots, too many characters frankly, and it always feels like a chore to reach basically the "good stuff". Once again it should not have been 13 episodes as the subplots don't build anything interesting they unfortunately feel like filler. That's the problem though I don't mind a show where it takes its time but every aspect should be engaging in some way that is never the case for any of the Marvel shows. Having said that, this is a better one as when it gets to the action and set pieces it works, and it is helped greatly by a compelling central character and villain. It's thematically messy however it does mine some interesting ideas here and there it just needed to focus more, as is common for all of the shows.
Bernthal - (A strong reprise of his work in Daredevil. I will say he doesn't reach the heights of his work there, but he does find a similair power within his work. Again he brings the right menace within the character of Frank Castle, and the viciousness within his most intense scenes. He doesn't fully loses his edges but he tempers them a bit here. I think naturally so though through Bernthal's performance that conveys a certain sense of confusion in Frank as he attempts to figure out his next move in life. He brings that right inherent intensity though to the character that he connects technically to a severe emotional break within the core of the man that keeps him compelling even when the series occasionally puts him in on repeat a few times.)
Barnes - (MVP of the series and I have to say I was rather surprised with just how good he is here. Barnes had previously done the smug snake just fine in Westworld however he takes it up a notch here to manipulate into frankly a more intelligent character. He portrays more of a calculation in his moments of levity or ego as though it is just part of Billy Russo's going about his task. He finds a genuine menace this time around though it is interesting how he does this. Where Bernthal portrays the character's wounds as fueling his violence, Barnes compliments this brilliantly by showing the violence as the way Russo hides his emotional wounds. Barnes is surprisingly moving actually in those quiet moments where he does reveal Russo's vulnerabilities particularly in his flashback scenes where we see him with Frank's family.)
Moss-Bachrach - (He's actually pretty good much of the time in bringing just a bit of comparative levity in his performance compared to Bernthal's. His best moments are in his more low key ones where he shares a fairly enjoyable chemistry with Bernthal as the far less broken man of the two. Now he has his own emotional material again and again. This as written is a little repetitive as basically has to go "uh oh my family!" but hey at lest he does deliver this in a genuine way even if it is a bit tired at times.)
Revah - (Problematic role in that her purpose seems to be for exposition that the audience already knows and she's only very very slowly catching up with at any point. I do think she's fine in her role but it unfortunately asks very little of her other than to put up this tough front. I will say she handles this in a fairly limited fashion as well portraying that perhaps too strictly at times, while keeping her more emotional scenes a little vague when breaking that strict style would make sense in moments. It's not a bad performance but she isn't able to give her character purpose.)
Webber - (A very similair performance he gave in 11.22.63 as another former vet who might not be all there mentally. His performance here is basically that one just without the Oswaldisms while being a bit more mentally off all of the time. Webber though once again is rather effective in the role, but it is a shame one could have removed his entire plot line from the series with very little effort.)
Schulze - (Well here is one of the awful performance. He's not good as a smug doofus villain. He's not good as this unemotional force. He's just downright terrible. He doesn't work as a pathetic villain nor does he have any menace to be any kind of villain. Every scene loses a bit of energy when he shows up because of how dull and uninteresting his performance is. He'd be far more detrimental to the series but thankfully for him either Bernthal or Barnes are usually in his scenes to make up for it.)
Moore - (There are a few of these characters in the Marvel shows who basically are there only to offer support in the strictest sense. Moore is a fine example of that but it is almost comical how simply "supportive" the character is.)
Nathanson - (Another pretty bad performance as his attempt at Foggy Nelson style humor is not something someone should really aim for. He's unfortunately just kind of obnoxious whenever he is onscreen to the point that you feel more relief in his final scene rather than disgust or sadness which is a real problem when you consider his exit route.)
Woll - (Doing her usual thing again no real major change in this instance.)
Mastrantonio, Howell, Aghdashloo - (Joining the likes of Sonia Braga in terms of notable actors completely wasted in these series.)
I'd probably go:
Daredevil 2
The Punisher
Jessica Jones
Daredevil
Luke Cage
Defenders
Iron Fist
Luke:
Wayne - 4(A very fine example of western Wayne. It isn't anything overly atypical from him but just a strong example of him playing into his usual type well. It helps that there is that emotional undercurrent of retribution within the film that Wayne brings forth rather well in his work in a rather subtle fashion.)
Martin - 3.5(As usual Martin is actually pretty good if given any sort of substance in his role. Martin here mostly is there for a more comic support which he does, however he goes a bit further in his scenes involving his character's past where Martin effectively conveys a bit of regret and vulnerability)
Hopper - 3(Typically fine for early Hopper, and a typical role for early Hopper as a rather emotional sort. He does this well as to be expected, but his is relatively simple.)
Gregory - 3(He's more than fine as just a pretty straight forward slimy villain. It's nothing too memorable but he gets the job done.)
4.
It looks somewhat interesting I suppose. I mean I like Harris, Menzies and Hinds so that's a plus.
Louis: Your thoughts on Hillsborough.
Louis: There is a much longer trailer for The Terror, but I know that you were annoyed seeing alot of promotional material lately for shows like Game Of Thrones.
And I never imagined you would like Ben Barnes in anything.
Louis:
Here's the longer trailer.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=l328p5sSEmc
Luke:
Well it's a great documentary, it covers the topic well, emotional without feeling exploitative, with a strong investigative bent in terms of examination of the cover up before the truth was recognized. This by the way would be my review for any sort of "certain point in history" documentaries that are well done while not reinventing the form.
Louis: Your thoughts on the Passion of the Christ score.
Louis: Your thought on the new Netflix's series: The end of the fucking world.
Louis are you going to add another blog post just before the Oscar nominations since the final predictions will probably take another 200 or so comments?
Louis: Your cast and director for a 40's After Hours. Calvin said that Eddie Bracken should play Dunne's role. Also thoughts on the Time Fugitives 2-parter from X-Men TAS.
Louis: Watch Manhattan Murder Mystery from 1993. For Woody Allen, Alan Alda and Diane Keaton, for me it's one of Woody Allen's best movies.
Louis: Have you seen either Better Watch Out or Citizen X yet.
Louis: Thoughts on Issey Ogata in The Sun.
Louis: And the rest of the cast of The Sun and the cast of Man In The Wilderness.
Since your watching two recommendations from each, does this mean you'll watch Elizabeth I.
Louis: I hope you do because I thought you were only doing one recommendation from each.
Louis: your rating and thoughts on Lubna Azabal in Paradise Now?
Could you watch also The Broken Circle Breakdown (2012) if you have some time.
For 2011 Supporting Actor, I've heard good things about Noé Hernández in Miss Bala.
Luke:
Now don't get greedy there Luke. The Hollow Crown was four feature length films so try to be content with that.
Although the score to The Passion of the Christ wasn't one that I specifically kept in my memory I will say listening to it again it is rather impressive work. In that it is a successful blend of more of the traditional middle eastern music combined with a grander orchestral score. The combination of the two actually is quite effectively honed into a rather powerful score that feels fitting to the overall style of the film that strives for that period authenticity while still granting sort of that more traditional biblical epic styling within it.
I've seen both.
Ogata - (Warning to anyone interested in the film it is a painfully slow affair. Ogata though gives a terrific performance within the film, even if the film depends a little too much on him. I understand the choice though in that Ogata's physical approach as a performer is unlike most actors and is fascinating in itself. As with sort of his deflation scene in Silence, Ogata doesn't portray the role as merely some standard work. His Hirohito is distinctive as this man who is so isolated among himself, that he seems constantly having this slight fidgets to keep himself sane within this isolation. Ogata's work is fascinating in the way he depicts the man's solemn contemplation as he deals with his precarious situation which is both during and after the war. Ogata brings to life this bizarre circumstances and is compelling to watch him create this man that others are forced to treat as a god, though this just leaves him lonely and detached.)
No one else in the cast is really worth mentioning.
Harris - (Well this version of the tale of Hugh Glass is actually rather strange itself and as contemplative though in its own off-beat 70's fashion instead. Harris is certainly good in the role though in terms of portraying the sheer pain of the character's predicament and his slow recovering. His performance though is not of this drive but rather of this general man haunted by past failures rather than revenge. Harris plays very much, interestingly enough, into the idea of a revenant, of this man coming back from a certain death. Harris in this way portrays more of this growing warmth deep within his more external portrayal of man torn apart by life yet not destroyed by it. It's certainly an intriguing performance, although as with the other adaptation of the story it does not stay with his perspective.)
Huston - 4(Well as usual when Huston is onscreen he is a pretty effortlessly fascinating performer, which is very much needed for his character. Huston's performance is terrific in his realization of the internalized fears of the character, and his distaste for his company while still exuding the right sense of determination to lead his men. Given the film's style his work is particularly needed as just staring randomly in a moment Huston still remains compelling.)
Hebert - 3.5(Well he doesn't quite leave as strong of an impression as Tom Hardy in the equivalent role, but Herbert makes for a decent despicable wretch of his very own. His is a simpler take to be sure but effective in just showing the fearful selfishness of the man.)
Anonymous:
I will be.
Anonymous:
After Hours directed by Preston Sturges:
Paul: Eddie Bracken
Marcy: Veronica Lake
Julie: Joan Blondell
Tom: Ralph Bellamy
Gail: Mercedes McCambridge
Kiki: Virginia Mayo
June: Agnes Moorehead
Pepe & Neil: Chico & Harpo Marx
Horst: Brian Donlevy
Bouncer: William Demarest
Time Fugitives is a great episode of the series that is a terrific representation of the sheer daring of that animated series as it takes not one but two time travelers into the mix with two completely different end goals and motivations. In addition the very idea of ending the cliffhanger with the entirety of the X-men being killed is quite something to be sure. It's a great example of the show's ambition in terms of using the entirety of the X-Men lore and set of characters to its advantage, telling stories you certainly would never expect either out of Saturday morning cartoon.
Louis: I see your point. :) Probably wouldn't have had the time anyway.
Thoughts on both Better Watch Out and Citizen X & the casts.
Louis: And have you seen Story Of Women with Huppert.
Louis: By the way, If we do have this again next year, My recommendation will be War & Peace (6 1/2 hrs) with Paul Dano who gives his best work to date. (Have seen Okja, where he is great but he is amazing in this mini-series)
Louis: Rating and thoughts on:
Dan Duryea in Ministry of Fear
Barry Fitzgerald in None but the Lonely Heart
Thomas Mitchell in The Keys to the Kingdom
Louis: And have you seen any other 2017 films.
I just got around to watching "I, Tonya" and I got to say.. It's really friggen good. It succeeds in not letting Harding off the hook but rather adding the necessary humanity to her story. My only quibbles with it come from the soundtrack, in that any music in a scene without Robbie I found strangely out of place. But thats a minor thing honestly since the movie did its primarily job in making me feel sympathy for a person I previously criticized.
Saving Robbie
Janney - 5 (Yah she's terrific - If I were to think of an equivalent performance just in terms of character type it would honestly pick J.K.Simmons from Whiplash. I mean in a role that could have been such a caricature she succeeds in grounding her performance. I bought her abuse but more importantly I bought her underlying guilt that Janney presents. Janney finds just the right tone with her performance. She's great here and I'm more confident now in the supporting actress race than ever if she's the front runner.)
Stan - 4/4.5 (Probably his most complete performance. The writing obviously has credit in this but Stan does show Jeff to be a person, not a monster. All I can say is I bought everything he did in the part.)
Louis, what are your thoughts on Chris Rock as a standup? I personally think he's a very funny comedian who should probably stop trying to be an actor.
Luke:
Better Watch Out like other horror subversion films I found was pretty good for awhile in playing up this subversion however eventually ran out of steam for a somewhat underwhelming conclusion. I'd certainly describe as good for what does do with this approach for much of the run time, but it just doesn't maintain it the entire time.
I'll save Miller for the moment, though I will say whether I go five or ten on alternate lead all depends on the Oscar nominees, and Christian Bale.
DeJonge - 4(She's pretty good in playing both sorta the final girl type along with more of the straight man within the madness found against her main co-star. She's good though in effectively bringing enough of a real weight in her more horrified reactions while also having enough of a edge to her performance that makes certain comedic moments work without breaking the tone.)
Oxenbould - 3.5(He's enjoyable as the doofus best friend for much of the film then is effective in showing the growing gradual horror in the best friend as these get worse and worse. I like that he maintains his approach though as just the hanger on friend for almost the entire time no matter how insane things get.)
Mikic & Montgomery - (They are both fine but severely miscast. As DeJonge looks like a "teenager" teenager where they look like "movie" teenagers if even that.)
Citizen X is elevated by the performances, and its very compelling story. It's certainly far better than Child 44 at any rate. I don't think it quite captures what it could in that its no Memories of Murder or Zodiac as a film on the whole, as the direction is fairly workmanlike, but it's a good, if definitely a televisual, film.
Rea - 5(An outstanding performance by Rea here in that he goes so much further than merely portraying the dogged detective. He definitely does that well but that is only a minor facet in his overall work. He's equally good in portraying the growing frustrations in the man towards the top brass as they refuse to really help in the case in any real way. What is most remarkable about his work though is his heartbreaking portrayal of the emotional investment of the detective in the case. Rea does this in part in certainly the moments of horror of finding one corpse after another. He goes much further though in portraying the gradual decay of the man's resolve, and mental state as the anguish over the terrors involved the case slowly get the best of them. It is an incredibly moving portrayal of the man's plight even as he also serves the function as the audience's guide through the case.)
Sutherland - 5(Loved his performance here as it is such brilliant subtle depiction of the best kind of "supporting" supporting performance. In that I found the way Sutherland slowly revealed the true character of the man so very effective. In that in the early scenes he reveals the strict manner of the proper soldier though with his delivery to careful words to Rea's detective with a definite attempt to grant a bit of wisdom towards the man. Sutherland portrays so well sort of this regulated warmth of the man genuinely trying to help but only the way he knows he can given his system. This builds to make two scenes particularly powerful first his take down of Ackland's character which Sutherland delivers in such cathartic way in bringing such a distaste in every word, and then his scene of revealing the changes to Rea's character where he reveals outwardly finally the full concerns of the man to the detective. It's fantastic work by Sutherland and one of his best performances.)
DeMunn - 4(Although Chikatilo is viewed mostly from a certain distance DeMunn certainly still makes an impact in bringing the deranged viciousness of the man to life in chilling detail.)
von Sydow - 4(He doesn't have a lot of screen time yet makes the most out of his classic scene stealing type of role. von Sydow's very effective here in portraying almost subdued ego of sort in his portrayal of the character's willingness to take on the challenging case. He's particularly good in his scene with DeMunn as he makes every word quite incisive though through gentle understanding sort of way. von Sydow shows this way of getting the confession by the doctor offering this sympathy as though is just curious to make sure he fully understands the man.)
Ackland - 1.5(His character was suppose to be a bit overblown but Ackland goes a little too far even in that purpose. His bug eyed routine was a just a little too much even for a ridiculous egotistical official.)
Anonymous:
Duryea - 4(It's a very short performance in that his early few scenes are just as a generalized silent unsavory character. He's great in his final scene though in every facets of his performance as he internalizes so well the man's extreme dismay as he realizes he's at his end though doesn't verbalize it directly.)
Fitzgerald - 4(Any performance of a bit substance can be enough for Fitzgerald to make an impact. He certainly does so here in a more subdued role for him, and effectively so in creating the sense of his character's peculiar state as a lost man of a different sort.)
Mitchell - 4(Like Fitzgerald Mitchell is basically almost always good, and that's the case here yet again. Mitchell brings such fine support though in offering a bit of earnest portrayal of a supportive friend yet still a cynical in his genuine portrayal of the character's lack of shared belief.)
Matt:
Not a lot, but I've enjoyed what I've seen from him. I'd also agree he's far better there than in terms of his acting.
YES. I'm absolutely escastic you loved ol Donald. I'm of the belief that if Citizen X had been a cinematic release with cinematic production values (perhaps directed by Fincher) he'd have been an Oscar contender. I loved DeMunn and Rea too, and glad you appreciate Von Sydow as well.
I hope Jackman gets reviewed in any case, his performance gets better on rewatch.
Louis: For 2017, I'd recommend Professor Marston and the Wonder Women, for Luke Evans, Rebecca Hall e Bella Heathcote perfomances
Colour me impressed with any shade of green, because I just say "The Shape of Water" and I rather loved it. I don't think its perfect, and I may not like it as much as "Pan's Labyrinth", but I'll simply say everything del Toro tried to do worked for me. The film has some quite blatant elements of our current political climate but I for one thought they were entirely earned and worked within the story itself. Its probably the most emotionally impacted I've been in a del Toro film, and of course his direction and visual design is as strong as ever.
Saving Hawkins
Jenkins - 4 (I have to say this is the most I've liked Jenkins in a while. I bought the understated nature of his performance as well as the dynamic he shares with Hawkins. Jenkins though really succeeds on his own as well, creating a sincere and likable portrait of a repressed man.)
Spencer - 4 (Similar to Jenkins in that I bought everything she was doing. Yes shes played this type of character many times but here there's a honesty and commitment that was missing in, say, "Hidden Figures".)
Shannon - 4 (Well again this role is in Shannon's wheelhouse but it completely worked for me. He brings the right presence to his more menacing scenes but also doesn't turn him into a cartoon in his more human moments. I feel good saying Shannon gives a grounded and genuinely effective villainous performance.)
Stuhlbarg - 3.5 (He's fairly limited in what he can do here but Stuhlbarg is fine regardless. I certainly prefer his turn in "Call Me By Your Name" but I enjoyed him here as well.)
Jones - 4 (Perhaps a rewatch could up this score but I will say Jones fully succeeds in bringing this creature to life.)
Louis: Rating and thoughts on Katharine Houghton in Guess Who's Coming To Dinner.
Tahmeed: Jackman, Stanton and Gosling are definitely in. This hurts Renner, Hawke and Pattinson more than anything else.
Tahmeed: Also, for me, Jackman had the best death scene of the year.
Anonymous:
Houghton - 1.5(It's a pretty terrible performance as there really is no character to the character other than daughter, but part of that reason is because of Houghton's performance. Her work is paper thin as it gets and there is no real sense of any relationship between her and Poitier's character. There's simply nothing there, and it's really on her end in which she portrays such a vapid character. Houghton, even when speaking on the character's openness, delivers her line wholly as though she hasn't a care in a world as though either the character is absurdly naive, or just stupid. Although the character is largely a plot device to begin with Houghton ensure this fact.)
I finally got to see Phantom Thread today. I'm really gonna have to think about this one.
Louis: Your cast and directors for 2000s and 2010s Grapes of Wrath and why these casting choies.
Post a Comment