Anthony Hopkins did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Ted Brautigan in Hearts in Atlantis.
The very same year Hopkins returned to his best known role, to the general public, as the sinister cannibal Hannibal Lecter, in a somewhat absurd reprise (Note: I've seen parts of that film, enough to know that there's no reason to return to it), he played a complete 180 of that part both perhaps in terms of quality and of course the nature of the role here. Hopkins portrays Ted Brautigan the newly arrived border to the home of widowed mother Liz Garfield (Hope Davis) and her young son Bobby (Anton Yelchin). There's something fascinating about Hopkins, and a testament to his range, as just as much he set one so easily on edge with his performance, he can as easily set one at ease. The idea of the older man interacting with the young boy, must be carefully realized, and any second thoughts are immediately assuaged by Hopkins's performance. There is a wonderful lack of concern as the somewhat shabby Ted arrives as the new border, just introducing himself with the impeccable demeanor of a kindly old man. This isn't the terrifying serial killer so many had come to know him for, but rather there is that grace about him that creates a wholly different presence. Hopkins finding this seemingly with such ease and sets up immediately that Ted will be a welcome guest for the rest of the film.
The essential element of the film though, and what really is unquestionably the strongest element of the film, is the relationship between Bobby and Ted. Again this being something already so naturally realized by how Hopkins approaches this part. This will a welcoming manner, a quietly assuring voice, even almost a slight shyness though a shyness that creates a sense of honest humanity to Ted. His first scene major scene with Yelchin is just about perfect, and like in Shadowlands, it shows that Hopkins is natural when it comes to working with as well as helping to bring out the best of child actors. Hopkins exudes just this incredible warmth that is just part of his being as Ted that is something so very remarkable. Everything Hopkins does assures this real interest Ted has in the young boy, just as a friend, while offering a bit of mentoring in his own way. This as Ted encourages Bobby to enjoy his library card, a technically cheap gift from his mother, through his own knowledge of literature. Hopkins manages to be inspiring without becoming sentimental in his honest yet eloquent delivery. This as he accentuates but never overplays it. It is of course helped as Ted throws in a fart joke Bobby is sure to enjoy. That moment even though is so sincerely performed by Hopkins, as this natural bit of jest and true affability, which realizes the beginning of the relationship so effectively.
Given that this is a Stephen King adaptation, not named The Shawshank Redemption, there ought to be a bit of the supernatural. That is found within Ted who seems to have a bit more natural of a foresight than even a well educated elderly man should have. This something he initially passes off as just a bit of insight, however early on Ted notes to Bobby he will have increasing moments of distance that seems connected with his unique abilities. These moments of being lost are especially well performed as Hopkins portrays just as possibly being lost to dementia as being lost to a supernatural power. Hopkins grounds that aspect, as he does the entirety of the power, which I love that Hopkins doesn't overplay his hand in this regard. Hopkins, instead, rather brilliantly, wielding his known intensity in a rather unique way. Obviously we've seen Hopkins brandish this most overtly in roles like Hannibal or as Richard the Lionhearted, but here Hopkins adjusts it naturally within the part of Ted. Hopkins has the intensity however he internalizes within himself and through very quiet, yet oh so incisive delivery. This most notably when confronting a bully of Bobby, where Hopkins calmly commands the moment. Again he does so with a stare that pierces right through the boy, similar to Lecter, but not quite as the righteous disgust defines Hopkins's modest method here.
As good as Hopkins is in those moments of the supernatural, it is the down to earth relationship between Bobby and Ted that is so special. This is honestly that even as the film struggles itself to create something overall, each scene between Hopkins and Yelchin stand on their own. This largely dependent on the performances. Hopkins so carefully approaching every scene, even the moment of telling Bobby about his eventual proper first kiss, he avoids making remotely creepy in the abundance of warmth and understanding in his eyes. Hopkins accentuates a man who above else cares to help and encourage. This in part showing this careful joy in his face that grants the sense of an appreciation for the moment of just human interaction that Ted enjoys so greatly. Honestly quite a few of the lines given to Hopkins could've gone very wrong with the scenario however Hopkins finds his way around each of them. He gives a masterclass on line delivery really, as he knows exactly when to adds a bit of comical edge, a little silliness, a bit of inspiration or the most direct honesty to each scene. Although I do wish there was a little bit more of a film around Yelchin and Hopkins overall, what they do together elevates the threadbare narrative. This as I found myself caring very much for their relationship and specifically for the quite old man that is Hopkins's Ted. This leading to the more dramatic moments rather powerfully. One being Ted consistently asking Bobby to watch out for "low men" looking for him, which finally realizes itself when the men appear while the two are visiting the city together. I love how Hopkins approaches this moment, as he manages to show how scared Ted is of being caught in the moment, while still being reassuring to Bobby as he helps him think "away" the men. The same is true for when Ted helps treat Bobby's friend Carol, after she is attacked by the bully Ted and they earlier had the confrontation with. Hopkins is fantastic in the scene by being so reassuring in his tone, and manner. This is showing a man unquestionably of goodwill trying to help an innocent abused, as he talks her through and Bobby through the difficult situation. Anthony Hopkins succeeds in creating such vibrant portrait of the kindly old man, that avoids the cliche of the supernatural mentor by bringing just that earnest humanity in every aspect of the character. This is probably one of Hopkins's most low key performances, but with that I think he shows his considerable range by making it is also one of his best.
47 comments:
Louis: Do you think Tarantino could also be a good bet for a Best Director win? I feel like they may opt to award him there instead, since he already has two Original Screenplay statues. And he did miss out for The Hateful Eight, although I suppose they could rectify that with at least a nod for OUATIH.
I see where you’re getting at with a 2nd Scorsese win though.
Bryan:
I mean technically yes, in that his film is also "firing on all cylinders" so to speak in terms of being a "craft" achievement as well. Perhaps incorrectly, I can't help but feel though the popular perception is that he's seen more as a writer first, wrongly as he's as much of a talent behind the camera, making it so another Original Screenplay win could suffice, or maybe they'll say he has enough wins for the moment since he does have the two against Scorsese's one or maybe even Mendes's one. I don't see the narrative building for the win for him there just, though I could be wrong, but then again I could even see him being the big snub potentially. He didn't get in for Django after all, which was a top five contender in the end, and I could see miss out in favor of the director branch pushing for something unexpected as they often do. Say losing out in favor of a Bong Joon-ho, though I don't want to jinx that.
Happy to see Hopkins get another five.
Louis: your top 20 Anton Yelchin acting moments
I feel like you underestimating Lopez in Supporting Actress. I think she’s got a Julia Roberts/Sandra Bullock/Matthew McConaughey narrative to work off that will aide her chances more than we realize.
I loved El Camino. I thought everything made sense for Jesse as a character and it never felt like it was cheap or a cash grab. Also, if we're considering it eligible for Oscars on this blog, it's easily my cinematography win right now.
Paul-5
Baker-3.5
Jones-3
Hankin-3
MacArthur-2.5
Shepherd-3
Bower-3
Spoilers, in order of appearance (good idea, Louis)
?-3
?-4
?-4.5
?-3.5
?-3
Lucas:
How about a top ten:
1. Reacting to the attack - Hearts in Atlantis
2. Ending - Green Room
3. Getting hit the head - Thoroughbreds
4. Final confrontation with his mother - Hearts in Atlantis
5. Going "crazy" - Green Room
6. Final talk with Ted - Hearts in Atlantis
7. "Arms" exchange - Green Room
8. Seeing the "low men" with Ted - Hearts in Atlantis
9. At the party - Thoroughbreds
10. The kiss - Hearts in Atlantis
Robert:
Well I would be surprised if she misses out on a Globe nod or a SAG nod for that matter, given the film's potential populist clout. I will say BAFTA probably will be difficult for her. My hesitation to predict her for the win though stems from seeing how the film will perform outside of her and if it can maintain the needed momentum for her. Also as much as the Academy can love a comeback/reinvention in the cases you mentioned she could instead end up being a Stallone/Rourke or maybe even a Hugh Grant/David Carradine.
Good to see a 5 in this ranking finally, though my fingers are still crossed for Gandolfini to make it 2.
Also I watched El Camino and really liked it, my only nitpick is that we didn't get to see Jesse shout "BITCH" at anyone during the entire movie.
I'm so glad I'll be able to see The Irishman on the 8th of November. :)
Louis: Rating and thoughts on Debbie Harry, Sonja Smits, Jack Creley, Peter Dvorsky and Reiner Schwarz in Videodrome.
Louis: Your thoughts on the sound design of Blue Velvet.
Louis: Your thoughts on this opening from the anime "Erased"?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9G20wV0KHE
Even though I probably won't get the entire line up right, I'm glad that I was correct about Hopkins as the winner. Specifically, Louis picked up on two things that I've thought for a long time; The amazing range of Hopkin's repertoire, from the absolutely unnerving to the incredibly endearing, and his wonderful ability with child performers.
Louis: Thoughts on the "our hearts break in two" scene?
Mitchell: Wait until Gandolfini is up before calling Hopkins the winner of the line-up. Anyway, in terms of the overall, I do think it's between Hopkins and McKellen (An easy 5 for me on re-watch).
Luke: I only say that because from what I've heard/seen, "The Mexican" is not especially good, and Gandolfini's role is somewhat small. Its hard for me to imagine him as the winner given with likes of Holm and Hopkins, but that said, I do like any chance we can to appreciate the man's underrated talent.
My top 10 prediction
5
1. McKellen
2. Hopkins
3. Bean
4.5
4. Gandolfini
5. Law
6. Bettany
7. Kingsley
8. Holm
9. Cox
10. Theroux
Louis: Have you seen James Dean or Anne Frank: The Whole Story yet.
I really hope Bean keeps his win, actually.
Mitchell: You’re actually not wrong on either count there. The Mexican is overall not a very impressive film (even though it’s a tad funnier than people give it credit for) and Gandolfini has a relatively small amount of screen time. He’s my win though because of what he manages to do in such a short time. He brings such a low key earnestness to the role that actually reminded me a bit of Brendan Gleeson In Bruges, along with some additional nuance to the character that’s portrayed honestly and without all of the default mannerisms of other, similar performances from that time. I love Hopkins as an actor, but I gotta say Gandolfini’s performance affected me much more deeply than Hopkins.
Hopkins is the best of the year and already deserves a win on this blog.
Louis what's the problem with not rewarding an actor from The Lord of the Rings series?
Anonymous: Enough of that garbage, Louis can choose whoever the hell he wants.
Yeah Louis could’ve picked Christensen to win for all I care, his blog his opinions. I’d be very happy with Hopkins with winning and was pleasantly surprised by a 5, but yeah Gandolfini was great too and I wouldn’t mind seeing him pull a surprise 5. I will say for someone who was famous for playing Tony Soprano he was remarkably good at playing such likeable characters as well.
Louis: Thoughts on the Bombshell trailer.
Luke: Yah after watching the trailer.....I'll admit, it did very little for me. There certainly not going for a subtle approach on the subject matter, and nor should they. Also, the filmmakers undoubtedly have a provocative story on their hands, and one that definitely should be told. However, the two things I've just said are more related to the premise of the film, rather than the clips we've been given so far.
Simply put, I just got a strange vibe from the trailer, almost like a lack of confidence on the part of the film (Side Note: I hope that's not indicative of the screenplay considering its got one of the writers from "The Big Short"). It's weird for me to say that as I want to be supportive of such a movie, but from what I was shown, I'm mildly interested at best. I think most of us can agree on the talents of the three leading women, but at the same time, I also think we can also agree that a movie with timely themes doesn't "always" translate into greatness.
I’m about 90% sure Bombshell will choose to gloss over Carlson’s and Kelly’s racism so that they’re easier to root for. Which means I’m going to hate it.
I wasn’t horribly impressed with the Bombshell trailer either, which is a shame because I thought the silent acting in the teaser was pure fire.
Anonymous:
I believe I've covered most of them, at the very list Harry and Smits.
Anonymous:
All Lynch's films obviously have great care within the sound design, which sometimes even throws in the occasional ridiculous sound for the sake of comedy. Lynch's work here is a little more straight forward, well for Lynch, in that there are more specific moments of Lynchian brilliance regarding sound specifically lined within the idea of the ear below the grass so to speak. That scene in particular, along with Jeffrey's trysts with Dorothy create the most lurid and effectively off-putting atmosphere as Lynch plays into madness and the darkness below, even in the idea of the festering skin with a legion of ants.
Tahmeed:
Song a touch repetitive I felt, even if not bad. Interesting and detailed animation though that certainly is nice to look at particularly the moments with backgrounds which are pretty stunning. I'll say even created a sense of place while I have no idea of the context.
Mitchell:
A proper representation of the failing of the film in my mind and the success of Hopkins. This is as Hopkins delivers such richness within his brief monologue even if it doesn't really create a proper greater context within the film's dour bookends, and inserting the title, sort of, isn't so natural as written however I'll say Hopkins's performance overcomes it at least on his own end.
Luke:
I've seen James Dean.
Bombshell doesn't look particularly good, though the performances could very well be, well outside of Kate McKinnon who needs to tone it down a bit. I mean at least it's not Adam McKay, but Jay Roach is only a minor, mostly workmanlike, step up when it comes to his dramas. It could be okay, but from this look doesn't suggest it will be anything more than that.
Louis: Thoughts on James Dean and Rating & Thoughts on Franco.
Please get around to Anne Frank: The Whole Story if you could. Kingsley is tremendous there.
Luke:
I didn't think much of the film itself. It's not horrible, but it's just kind of a "then this happens, then this" type of biography film, with the only depth being offered is Dean wanted his father to show him love. Sadly everything is pretty perfunctory offering no real insight despite not being terrible in its excessively straight forward scenes, and also didn't care much for the Raymond Massey bashing but I digress.
Franco - 4.5(Having said that this is a bit of a Chaplin situation where the lead performance is so spot on you wish the film had made better use of its star. Although Chaplin is a better film than this, it's a similar situation in the way it mostly just tries to hit the general beats of the man's life. This is indeed one of James Franco's best performances as he does embody Dean, which is no small feat. This in capturing that curious charisma and intensity, mixed with this extreme shyness and retiring quality. Franco hits his marks in capturing the man's manneristic ways while showing why they worked for him, and in turn not just becoming mannered himself. He disappears into the role and manages to even balance between the idea of affected while not becoming just affected. He's effective in creating the difference between the performance and the man, that is similar but not the same. This in the moments of performance being more directed and with more purpose, against the man who is shyer even if that magnetic quality is still there is such a unique way. It's great work, and with better material I think Franco could've made this something truly unforgettable.)
I mean I should get around to that, I just don't feel like getting more than at least a bit depressed at the moment.
For Fincher's next film Tom Burke will be playing Orson Welles (which is a great casting choice, and great actor too in War and Peace). Charles Dance will be playing William Randolph Hearst apparently which should be amazing.
Louis: What would you say to a David Lynch version of Doctor Strange? I think he would have been perfect to tackle that kind of material.
Am I the only person who does this on Twitter? when I see a celebrity that usually wouldnt be trending, I automatically think for some reason that they have passed away.
RatedRStar: Same here, although I think either that or that they must have said something controversial lol.
Anonymous: I don't really see him pulling it off, since his big-budget foray into sci-fi/fantasy didn't go well, and Lynch is at his best with the intimate, which wouldn't be quite right for the grandness needed for Doctor Stranges' universe.
Zombieland: Double Tap is doing better than I expected on Rotten Tomatoes. Fleischer should probably just stick to Wernick-Reese scripts.
My bet for Louis's new Overall Rank:
1. Anthony Hopkins in Hearts in Atlantis
2. Ian McKellen in The Fellowship of the Ring
3. Sean Bean in The Fellowship of the Ring
4. Raul Cortez in To the Left of the Father
5. Jude Law in A.I. Artificial Intelligence
6. Brian Cox in L.I.E.
7. Justin Theroux in Mulholland Drive
8. Ben Kingsley in Sexy Beast
9. Ian Holm in The Fellowship of the Ring
10. Tsutomu Yamazaki in Go
Anonymous:
I'll have to disagree with Bryan, and say that could've been a good fit for Lynch. This is as Strange is less "space" and more about the realms of "reality" something he did brilliantly with Twin Peaks. It is also worth noting that Dune was not a satisfactory experience for Lynch in terms of dealing with studio meddling anyways. Even with Dune being what it was anyways, I also think that didn't play into Lynch's typical approach. This is as his films are typically building the world around the protagonist. Dune doesn't have this approach even though there is a lead character technically speaking, he isn't the same focal point that Lynch protagonists typically are. Strange on the other hand slowly discovers the world in his story, which would play into Lynch's strengths. That's also another reason that I wish we had gotten Batman as Lynch's studio film rather than Dune.
Louis: About Lynch, he has said in many interviews that his films are meant to be experienced rather than being understood. Would you say that's the number one reason why he's misunderstood as a filmmaker? Some people even think there's more meaning behind the scene where Frank asks Ben what kind of beer he likes beyond just being a funny scene, when it's only really supposed to be a funny scene and nothing else.
Anonymous:
I'm not sure Lynch is *that* misunderstood, however to me, what I think Lynch means by that is that he wants you to truly watch his films. In that you take it in without trying to break apart of single little thing while you are watching it, and kind of give yourself to the experience so to speak. I don't think that means there are no hidden meanings within his films, there obviously are given his clues to solve Mulholland Drive for example. Mulholland Drive though is brilliant as an experience, of just taking it in first and foremost, though then one can think about what they saw later. Lynch doesn't explain his films, but that doesn't mean they're meaningless, although like any filmmaker there is always the possibility for over interpretation, like the scene you mentioned, however even in that I think that is part of the fun of loving films. I appreciate Lynch not robbing one of their own interpretations by just bluntly explaining every little thing, but letting one take what they will from it instead. He doesn't rely on that though, as first his films do work as that experience.
Louis: Could I have your rating and thoughts on Izabela Vedovic in Wonder?
That last episode of Sunny was top notch.
Louis: Paul Dano's playing The Riddler. Thoughts on this.
It’s about time we get another Riddler, and Dano sounds like a great choice. Maybe a twitchier, more maniacal version of Jay (Okja)?
Calvin: Agreed on IASIP, and I also really liked last weeks "Dee Day." A solid start to the season.
Oh, and I'm glad Finchers' making a new film, along with Oldman getting leading roles back after his Oscar win.
Dano sounds like an amazing choice.
Louis: Your thoughts on this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htqJUNyOOBc
Tahmeed:
Vidovic - 2.5(I think there is frequent fine work from her in the more naturalistic family interaction scenes, however she occasionally slides into slightly sitcomy broadness in the boyfriend scenes. These are not so much that she's bad, but a little over the top.)
Luke:
Potentially a fantastic choice, in that he's definitely the right fidgeting type for the part, and I could see him and Pattinson facing off as a something special.
Anonymous:
One of the reasons why she's the best in her eloquent descriptions of each with such a quite passion and that special unique charm of hers. This being as always just having that honesty here in the interview as she always does onscreen. Although I especially love her talking about the Help, where basically the director admitted that she needed to create something out of a nothing part.
Post a Comment