Saturday 23 November 2019

Alternate Best Actor 1999: Jim Broadbent in Topsy-Turvy

Jim Broadbent did not receive an Oscar nomination, despite being nominated for a BAFTA, for portraying W.S. Gilbert in Topsy-Turvy.

I rather loved Topsy-Turvy, which tells the story of Gilbert and Sullivan attempting to stage a comeback of sorts through the Mikado.

The film borders on an ensemble piece as it does take time with just about every element of the eventual production, focusing on the various characters in and around the Savoy theatre. The man who gets the greatest focus fittingly is the man who without would've made the creation of the Mikado simply impossible, that being librettist W.S. Gilbert played by the always reliable Jim Broadbent. Broadbent having rather a challenge in the character of Gilbert, given that the man is essentially a living contradiction. A contradiction that serves Broadbent's approach to the part which is as a humorous man who takes himself very seriously. This as his most essential professional output involves being a mostly comic wordsmith, who is partial to, as his creative partner Sullivan says, Topsy-Turvy ridiculousness. Broadbent's performance then has two main objectives, one to make sense of this man, and the second to make this man work within the film which takes a lightly comic approach. The sense of the man is within his life that while he has a caring wife (Lesley Manville), he has a troublesome relationship with his father and distant, and all importantly humorless, mother. Broadbent's performance then creates this sense of logic within the character's repression as spurned by such a childhood.

This is as Broadbent presents very much one side a man you would expect from such a life on the surface, which is always interesting for Broadbent for a reason I'll get to on the second part of his challenge. Broadbent though delivers a hardness in manner within the man. This physically stature as a proper businessman despite being an artist first and foremost. When the man discusses his idea with his wife or Sullivan, Broadbent speaks in hard delivery of a man as though he was simply discussing any old financial plan or legal action. This seeming without an obvious passion on the immediate surface. Broadbent carefully though doesn't specifically make Gilbert seem bored however, but this is a hardness seemingly ill-fitting to what it is that he writes. Of course we are party to more than just Gilbert as others see him, as we are given the moments of inspiration that he finds through a Japanese exhibition in England. Although even as this Broadbent portrays only the most careful breaks in the moments of interacting with his wife, which is quite different from when we see him admiring a sword from the exhibition alone in his room. We see him first goofing off alone, where Broadbent suddenly reveals a cheerfulness befitting to a truly topsy turvy sort, as not of that stiffness is evident in the man. Broadbent in this moment is not breaking the character, but rather revealing the humorous man that is at Gilbert's heart that was mostly repressed thoroughly by his childhood. This is further reinforced where we see him admiring the sword and Broadbent has a beautiful moment where his face expresses the true creative spirit in the sincere emotional intensity in his eyes.

Well with that Broadbent brilliantly explains Gilbert, however that still leaves a potentially stiff character in this comedy who needs to exist beyond the emotional revelations of the man, as strikingly performed as those are. Well thankfully Broadbent is the perfect man to deliver this in a way, as he is particularly well attuned actor for both comedy and drama, particularly in his voice that is marvelous in how it manages to both have a comedic light pitch, while still having a dominating depth. Broadbent knows exactly how to use this as he manages to be quite impeccably hilarious as Gilbert. This as even in those scenes of describing his silly ideas, Broadbent is absolutely comic gold in just how directly dry he is about every word, with this underlying conviction of sorts, that is properly, though naturally, ridiculous as Gilbert describes a contrived idea about a transformative potion. Broadbent's delivery of Gilbert's ideas becomes a consistent point of hilarity as he brings such refinement with even the most absurd words in Gilbert's rhythmic expressions. Broadbent's approach is wonderfully entertaining in the earliest scenes of the film, but only broadens as we see the man in action in terms of attempting to realize his project to his vision. Broadbent is fantastic as the seemingly tyrannical man dictating such specific changes along with way with few willing to stand up to his whims. Broadbent carries is this and is incredible in every single scene, particularly an extended one of directing the actors through a scene. Broadbent commands magnificently, and still quite humorously, as he delivers this intensity, without ever raising his voice, in each comment that alludes to a tremendous will to see his achievement to come to life properly. Broadbent so effortlessly delivers the comedy in each scene, while still maintaining the needs of Gilbert as almost a man to be feared by those helping to create his vision. Broadbent makes us see each part of the creative process through his portrayal of Gilbert, whose all his actions are of that of one sort, yet within the frame of existence another This is as Broadbent makes it just a natural part of the contrasting whole of a man who internally is funny truly passionate man, encased within the body of a proper Victorian gentlemen in every respect. In very much the same way Broadbent himself delivers an honest and striking portrait of an artist, encased in a most hilarious nearly deadpan comic turn. I loved this performance.

88 comments:

Luke Higham said...

YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS! I'm one happy motherfucker right now.

Louis: Ratings and thoughts on the cast.

Thoughts on the Cinematography, Production Design, Makeup & Hairstyling, Costume Design, Direction and Screenplay.

Anonymous said...

Very happy to see Broadbent get a five from you Louis.

RatedRStar said...

Louis: Seeing how Broadbent is clearly talented in comedy, have you ever seen a television series called "Only Fools and Horses"?

Aidan Pittman said...

Saw The Irishman in theaters today. LOVED IT! Easily my favorite of the year so far and one of my favorites of the decade in general. Runtime will definitely be a commitment for some, but I found every second to be flawlessly crafted.

De Niro - 5
Pacino - 5
Pesci - 5 (guessing he'll be Louis' win for Supporting)
Paquin - 3.5
Romano - 4

Luke Higham said...

For anyone that ever watches that show, stop after 1996/Time On Our Hands.

Matt Mustin said...

Aidan: What did you think of Stephen Graham?

Michael McCarthy said...

De Niro and Pesci have been sitting great with me but I’m still on Team Pacino. He was wildly entertaining as indicated by the trailers, but what caught me off guard was how sorry he made me feel for Hoffa in his last few scenes.

Calvin Law said...

Knew you’d love this one.

Michael: Agreed. You really feel his presence and the sense of what his character meant to Sheeran through the performance.

Calvin Law said...

Also I’m beginning to think Roman Griffin Davis could be a dark horse in Louis’ top 5.

Matt Mustin said...

Michael and Calvin: You're right, and I agree with you, but I think De Niro also deserves a lot more credit for that than he seems to be getting.

Aidan Pittman said...

Matt: Graham was good, especially in his meeting scene with Pacino, but then again that was Pacino's scene. I do feel that most of the supporting cast was overshadowed by how great the big three were. 3.5 for Graham for now, but I will keep him in mind for when I rewatch the film.

Also agree that De Niro deserves more credit than he's getting right now. The scene he shares with Pacino at the casino party is gonna stick with me for a long time.

Michael: I honestly find it difficult to pick between Pacino and Pesci (which I imagine I'll have to do with the Golden Globes and Oscars quickly approaching) because of how brilliant they both were. They seemed like opposites of each other, with Pacino being the energetic union man desperate for control over it and Pesci being a much more quiet one who's dedicated his life to crime work.

Calvin Law said...

Matt and Aidan: Agree that De Niro isn’t getting the attention he deserves for such an understated role and I applaud him for taking on it. I hope he doesn’t get lost in the mix for campaigning. He’s easily favourite of the true front runners for the category right now.

Jack Narrator said...

After Louis gave Al Pacino a win, I started thinking "Who would be the winners of that year?" So instead of waiting 100 years for what Louis finally posts, why don't we start making predictions soon?

Who wants to participate in this game write the following sentence: "Winners of Louis in the year of ... are:"

Jack Narrator said...

Winners of Louis in the year of 1972 are:

PICTURE: The Godfather
DIRECTOR: Francis Ford Coppola - The Godfather
ACTOR: Al Pacino - The Godfather
ACTRESS: Joanne Woodward - The Effect of Gamma Rays on Man-in-the-Moon Marigolds
SUPPORTING ACTOR: Bruce Dern - The Cowboys
SUPPORTING ACTRESS: Hanna Schygulla - The Bitter Tears of Petra von Kant
ENSEMBLE: The Godfather
PRODUCTION DESIGN: Solaris
SOUND EDITING: The Poseidon Adventure
SOUND MIXING: The Poseidon Adventure
SCORE: The Godfather
EDITING: The Godfather
VISUAL EFFECTS: The Poseidon Adventure
COSTUME DESIGN: Cabaret
CINEMATOGRAPHY: The Godfather
MAKEUP and HAIRSTYLING: Cabaret
ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY: The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie
ADAPTED SCREENPLAY: The Godfather
SONG: "The Morning After" - The Poseidon Adventure

Anonymous said...

Louis: Your thoughts on the production design of Burton's Batman films?

Tahmeed Chowdhury said...

Jack: I know you probably don't realize it (or mean any harm by it), but is there really any need to knock Louis for how often he posts. He does have a life outside this blog, this is only a hobby for him after all.

Calvin Law said...

Agreed. He has no obligation. Plus I like having gaps between posts, lets each one sink in more. It’s like having a week by week offering of a tv series over the Netflix method of throwing all in at once.

Calvin Law said...

Also, prospective 10-man lineups for the upcoming lineups based on the hype so far and what we've seen:

Best Actor

Roman Griffin Davis, Jojo Rabbit
Robert Pattinson, The Lighthouse
Aaron Paul, El Camino
Adam Sandler, Uncut Gems
Paul Walter Hauser, Richard Jewell
George Mackay, 1917
August Diehl, A Hidden Life
Matthias Schoenaerts, The Mustang
Christian Bale, Ford v Ferrari
Noah Jupe, Honey Boy

Alternate: Taron Egerton, Dev Patel, Antonio Banderas

Best Supporting Actor

Joe Pesci, The Irishman
Song Kang-ho/Choi Woo-shik, Parasite
Sterling K. Brown, Waves
Shia LaBeouf, Honey Boy
Robert Downey Jr./Chris Evans, Avengers: Endgame
Taika Waititi/Sam Rockwell, Jojo Rabbit
Jonathan Majors, The Last Black Man in San Francisco

Hugh Laurie, Bill Hader, Robert Forster

Omar Franini said...

Louis: I’ve seen Jojo Rabbit yesterday and loved it, your thoughts on the costumes design? I especially loved Rockwell’s final costume.

Calvin: have you seen Honey Boy?

Anonymous said...

Louis: Thoughts on this clip of the Japanese dub of the first Dirty Harry movie.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F10K7RUAssk

Calvin Law said...

Omar: I haven't yet, can't wait! I was going to see Marriage Story today originally but decided against it - might just wait until Netflix.

Calvin Law said...

And yeah the Jojo Rabbit costume design was stellar, and that outfit spoke volumes, I also loved how they made Stephen Merchant look like an oversized Ronald Lacey from Raiders of the Lost Ark. I think it could be a genuine dark horse nominee and even winner.

Bryan L. said...

Why do I get the feeling that Marriage Story is going to be this year's Manchester by the Sea?

Calvin Law said...

Bryan: I get that feeling too for the board’s response. Baumbach is divisive.

Omar Franini said...

Calvin: I’ve seen Honey Boy a couple of weeks ago and to be honest i really didn’t care about it, i thought it was kinda repetitive and pretentious; both Jupe and LeBeouf are very good but i was expecting more from the movie. Still very curious to read everyone’s thoughts once you’ve seen the movie. It was a double screening with Waves, which i really liked, and somehow have similar themes, but preferred way more the latter.

Calvin Law said...

Omar: can I have your thoughts and ratings for both casts? I’m really interested in Brown’s performance.

Mitchell Murray said...

Haven't seen this movie, but I like Broadbent so I'll add it to the watchlist for the time being. Also, I just wanted to through in my 2 cents on the independent spirit acting nominations:

Bodes well for Dafoe, Shuzhen, Lopez, Zellweger and even Pattinson. Sandler is an interesting surprise as well, as is Schoenaerts, and "Honey Boy" making a splash was really to be expected by the spirit awards.

However...this doesn't bode well for Awkwafina (Strange snub given the overall reception of the film), or any of the "Marraige Story" cast since it was again recognized on the whole.

Omar Franini said...

Calvin: I prefer not giving thoughts on the cast of Waves, it’s quite difficult writing about it without getting into spoilers. The movie i think will be quite divisive here, it has a really stylistic direction, in that Shultes utilises very long tracking shots that follow each character and a constant use of the soundtrack (which might turn someone off, but it really worked for me). I won’t lie i had a bit of headache in the first ten minutes following the movie, but once i get used to this style i started really enjoying the movie. The movie approaches different themes, like toxic masculinity and how a family can overcome a tragedy, and i liked how honest and realistic some situations were portrayed, something that i didn’t found in Honey Boy, and the latter is supposed to be a more personal movie than Waves. I’m not sure about the ending, as i would have ended the movie a few shots before.
Brown is terrific, his screen time is limited in the first half but he’s really effective in his interactions with Harrison Jr, as he portrays this paternal figure that want the best for his son, even putting pressure on him and being the tough parent. At the same time Brown shows how much he cares for him, and you can see that in his interactions with other characters. In the second half he has a terrific emotional scene but can’t say much. I’m very surprised about the independent spirits snubs, i was expecting directing, cinematography and Brown nominations at least.
My ratings for the cast:
Harrison Jr.: 4.5
Russell: 4.5 (she’s leading for me)
Brown: 4.5
Goldsberry: 3.5
Hedges: 3.5
Demie: 2.5

For Honey Boy:
Jupe: 3
Hedges: 3
LaBeouf: 3.5
FKA twigs: 3

Calvin Law said...

I don’t know if Schoenaerts will translate but I hope it does give a little push. And honestly I think Awkwafina is fine, Best Actress is such a thin category this year.

Omar: cheers! Harrison Jr. seems to be having quite a year, I’ll need to make sure to check all he’s in! And completely forgot Lucas Hedges was in there too lol, busy guy.

Calvin Law said...

Also the more I think about Jojo Rabbit I’m really not sure how I’d place it among my ranking, as it probably had the biggest visceral impact of any film I’ve seen this year.

Robert MacFarlane said...

Okay, Watchmen has officially entered “outright retcon” territory (or at least close to it), but... I’m not complaining. It was a brilliant gamble of an episode and Jovan Adepo deserves a Guest Emmy nomination.

Also, I saw It’s a Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood, which I quite liked, especially Heller’s direction and Rhys’s performance.

Tahmeed Chowdhury said...

Louis: Your thoughts on the latest Silicon Valley episode, and your episode MVP.

Calvin Law said...

I mean has to be Matt Ross right?

Tahmeed Chowdhury said...

Calvin: Without a doubt, he knocked that speech out of the park.

Calvin Law said...

With regards to the episode itself, I do think the other subplots are turning the wheels a bit, but I do always enjoy Monica/Gilfoyle interactions, Jared's passive aggressive antics were funny, Russ going Mad Max was hilarious and I do think the central plot is definitely intriguing, though I wonder how they'll wrap it all up.

Calvin Law said...

That Watchmen episode was pretty great, and what they did with Hooded Justice was ingenious.

Luke Higham said...

Saw Frozen 2, it was fine but I really wish I got a Tangled sequel instead.

Aidan Pittman said...

Robert: What did you think of Hanks?

Bryan L. said...

Luke: Your rating for the film and the cast?

Luke Higham said...

Bryan: I'd give it a 3 probably.

Bell - 3
Menzel - 3.5 (I cannot fault her singing performances)
Groff - 3
Gad - 3

Anonymous said...

I agree with you Luke, I've seen bits and pieces from the TV series and it's a huge missed opportunity they didn't use some of the material for a sequel especially regarding Flynn Rider/Eugene Fitzherbert.

Bryan L. said...

Luke: Thanks. Also, would The Personal History of David Copperfield be 2019 or 2020 by the rules? There's a Portugal release date for next month on IMDb, although all the other ones are 2020.

Luke Higham said...

Bryan: I'd take that release date with a grain of salt for the moment. In The Loop and The Death Of Stalin were both released first in the UK.

Bryan L. said...

Luke: Yeah I figured. Wouldn't be surprised to see that date scrubbed in a future IMDb update.

Calvin Law said...

Little Women reviews are very positive and I honestly think Pugh is becoming a very strong contender for a Best Supporting Actress nom, they’ve been singling her out just as much as Ronan.

Louis Morgan said...

Was roped into seeing Frozen 2, which is pretty to look at, with some nice songs (well aside from the pushed for Oscar "Into the Unknown" which I thought was kind of bad), but kind of a mess when it came to its storytelling.

Also saw The Art of Self-Defense, which I wasn't entirely sure of as a whole, however definitely liked aspects of it a great deal.

Luke:

Corduner - 3.5(I might not even say he is co-lead as the less idiosyncratic of the pair, though he does have probably the second most screentime. Corduner provides a nice contrast though to Broadbent in portraying a more overt passion regarding his art, with more direct and easier to empathize with manner in general. His performance works very much as the "normal one", even if in turn technically the less interesting one.)

Manville - 4(Lovely supporting work in providing just the most sincere since of affection against Broadbent. This portraying though an ease in the sense of it, however she does not portray it without nuance. I love her minor bits of portraying her concerns and even frustrations towards her steadfast husband, however all so subtly within the frame of the ever dutiful wife.)

Cook - 3.5(Terrific in providing a sort of balance between Broadbent and Corduner, in his often calmly humorous moments of reacting to the pair's particular way of doing things, with just the right direct delivery whenever the man speaks of needs and requirements of just basic success.)

David - 3(Although brief, I like how well she still managed to convey the relationship between her and Sullivan in just a few key moments.)

Savage - 4(Quite effective in both portraying his parts, but also portraying the part of the rather stuffy, if equally nervous, if equally egotistical actor. Savage balances each element well to grant the right comic energy to the manner of the man, but still within that portraying the very real frailty at times in the man.)

Henderson - 4(Striking as per usual in creating sort of the right duality in creating the expected luminous and gentle manner in the characters she performs, against the sort of anxiety and frustration within her place in a society to which she has been deemed ill-fitting in some way. Henderson is excellent in portraying this sort of distaste so quietly within the frame of the woman who is otherwise so gentle.)

McKidd - 3.5(Quite the enjoyable bit of direct ego, and I have to say I thought he looked just like Nicol Williamson here. Anyway though McKidd delivers on just the boisterous manner of the man, who is right the combination of that bravado while also granting this underlying weakness that alludes to the real state of the man.)

Everyone is good though even if they have but a few seconds of screentime like Andy Serkis for example.

Louis Morgan said...

Well allow me to begin with the first two.

Dick Pope's period cinematography is always a highlight to any period film that he shoots. This is certainly true once again here, in more low key work than his later work in Mr. Turner, yet beautiful nonetheless. This in largely straight forward work though so well rendered in evoking the period interior lighting, that isn't shadow centric, however always active in that such, similar to the work in Amadeus. Not quite as accomplished as that, but quite striking in its own right. It also grants a similar technique in the stage sequences, which it captures well by managing to use subdued movements to grant you the full experience of watching a stage performance while never feeling stagy at any point.

Its production design also reminded of Amadeus, as did the film in general as sort of a lower stakes Amadeus in a way, which I guess should be no surprise that I loved it then I suppose. The production design though is doubly fantastic in granting such beautiful and vivid recreation of both the Victorian areas, theaters, dressing rooms, sitting rooms, whatever you say, but also with the amazing realizations of the stage dressing of the Gilbert/Sullivan productions. Outstanding work on both accounts.

RatedRStar:

Have not.

Anonymous:

As much as I'm not a great fan of the original Batman film, the production design is quite excellent in creating an original and influential Gotham. This being oppressive and stylistic world that is always tangible enough, with some great additional bit in the props particularly the bat-mobile itself. The art deco design is magnificent in both the creation of the exteriors and key exteriors like Wayne Manor and the bat cave.

Batman Returns falters a bit as it leans more towards just Burton weirdness and less towards a distinct "batman" style appearance. This is particularly in some of the penguin lair elements which get a bit goofy, and I'm not even referring to the "kill batman ride". The overused center of Gotham set also bizarrely small, however a lot of the snow addled sets are still fairly striking, though far less consistent than its predecessor.

Omar:

Loved the costume design, and yes Rockwell's final battle digs are quite the highlight. It's terrific work though in sort of Waiti's choice of having everything look pretty,which it certainly does that in all its striking vibrant color glory. I love it though as it does what all great costumes should do though, in it looks good, and alludes to character in some way. Far from general WWII aesthetic, though maintaining that to a degree, it elevates it to its own style magnificently by having those extra touches that makes it its own.

Anonymous:

Well certainly captures the necessary casual intensity of Harry.

Tahmeed:

Loved the return of Russ, and the central plotting all worked, particularly Gavin's schemes, with Ross indeed being an easy MVP. Dinesh really didn't have anything to do, nor Jared unfortunately, though funny in his brief screentime, but I did enjoy the atypical pairing of Monica/Gilfoyle dealing with a common enemy.

Luke Higham said...

Louis: Are you saving Spall then.

Luke Higham said...

Louis: More detailed thoughts on both films and ratings/thoughts on the casts.

Louis Morgan said...

Luke:

Yes.

Frozen 2, had some general ideas that could've been interesting but just didn't come together in any way. That is the other tribe, the reveals, and the four elements remain such vague ideas. The ideas all had potential theoretically, but they didn't do anything with them. Each element was just a set piece without the needed thematic thrust. The character interactions were all super simplistic with each arc being very much the same. Olaf was overused, and the whole difficult proposal gag has been done to death, and this found no new ground with it. Hearing originally about the sequel I questioned what story they could come up with it, they came up with some ideas but fell short of a story.

Cast is all fine, Olaf being overused isn't Gad's fault for example, but they don't have too much to work with here. The new additions are equally fine, but really don't have anything to do of note.

The Art of Self-Defense at its basic level is a great idea of having it be The Karate Kid if Daniel joined Cobra-Kai basically. There are truly some hilarious bits, particularly Eisenberg "Being a man" at work or the "special" custom made black belts, and the whole subversion of the story about becoming a "man" has some rather clever moments. It didn't quite maintain its running time for me, as you do get where it is going about an hour in, and doesn't have one more trick up its sleeve to avoid becoming a little bit repetitious. I also don't think Riley Stearns's direction quite gets the tone perfect, which may have benefited from being just a bit more farcical in terms of style. Although this is all saying I did like the film, I just didn't love it.

Eisenberg - 4(Plays well within his type here though with a different type of intensity. His mostly deadpan work here actually manages to work extremely well in playing so many of the bits since he comes off as the same guy no matter what he's doing, making so many of the things he does hilarious because of that consistency in delivery. The lack of change in his own performance, for the most part, is actually what makes the character work particularly in selling the humor of the film.)

Poots - 3.5(It's unfortunate that Winstead didn't play the part, to which Riley Stearns might say "Oh, you really think so?!!!", but seriously so her innate confidence in her presence would've been more fitting to the needs of the character. Poots just doesn't have that innately in her presence, though I did like her portrayal here in general in portraying the internalized intense frustrations of the character. The specific journey of her character though I think would've been more natural with Winstead, though Poots does acquit herself well.)

Nivola - 4(I mean John Kreese inspired without a doubt, and Nivola too is quite enjoyable in portraying such a steadfast manner in portraying the "zenlike" state of the man. This no matter what nonsense he is espousing. I especially love his sequence of describing his weekend through karate movements or describing the death of his "all powerful" master. Like Eisenberg the consistency is what sells the comedy, as he portrays an insane man by having the same "rational" manner no matter what he is saying.)

Luke Higham said...

Thoughts on Topsy-Turvy's Makeup, Costume Design, Direction and screenplay.

Anonymous said...

Louis, Do you think a Tangled sequel could've had more potential than Frozen 2.

Bryan L. said...

I swear Disney films are starting to get more “product” by each film. It seems as though everyone just forgets them the Monday after the first weekend.

Luke Higham said...

Bryan: Agreed.

Louis Morgan said...

Luke:

The makeup and Hairstyling is fantastic, both in terms of period needs, Broadbent's facial hair in particular is magnificent after all, but all the more in terms of the creation of each and every stage character in the work. Just pristine, and to the point work in every regard.

The costume design very much reaches the same great achievement in being both great in bringing the appropriate style yet believably to the Victorian period, while also just being so wonderfully luscious in its creations/recreations of the stage costumes. The Mikado's various costumes being particularly impressive in that regard. I must give credit in that both were very deserving and inspired wins by the Academy.

Anonymous:

I mean...sure, in that Flynn/Rapunzel had better "chemistry" in terms of their character dynamic and that Maximus is worth 10 Olaf's and Sven's, however any story that ends "happily ever after" is not really prime material for sequels.

Michael McCarthy said...

I’m on Team Frozen over Team Tangled easily, and think Frozen had waaaay more sequel potential. Having said that...yeah, Frozen II was mostly a waste of energy.

Robert MacFarlane said...

I've actually come around to liking Frozen and Tangled equally. I'm not as nuts about Frozen as I was when it came out, but I still mostly love it. That said, I haven't seen Frozen II and feel little obligation to. Also, Louis: Thoughts on the new Watchmen? I think it's my favorite episode so far.

Louis Morgan said...

Robert:

An extremely impressive episode, directing, cinematography and acting (Jovan Adepo being incredible) were all on point of course , but the storytelling here was fantastic. This taking something from Moore's work, which was left ambiguous there, and spinning it obviously in a direction he didn't intend, however completely compelling in its own right in telling its own story while creating its own legacy, but also would not seem opposed to something that could've been in the original series either. I was wondering what they were going to do with The Hooded Justice with those "flashbacks", who was a fascinating brief enigma in the original book just by virtue of being one of the few to stand up to The Comedian, and I must admit they exceeded by expectations there. This being an actual example of doing the mystery box well, that being the series's opening scenes, by actually paying off with something greater than the "box".

Robert MacFarlane said...

Louis: Plus some of the discrepancies to the original canon (such as Justice being a Nazi sympathizer) could be explained as Hollis simply being an unreliable narrator. It fits just well enough that it doesn't feel like a full retcon.

Calvin Law said...

I love how the show undercut the Minutemen and Captain Metropolis in particular as essentially publicity stunts.

Robert MacFarlane said...

Calvin: I almost hope the recreate the "smartest man on the cinder" scene from the comic even thought the movie already did just show what a pathetic, weak-willed loser Metropolis became. Also, LOVED the "black unrest" allusion the episode made to his diorama from that scene in the comic.

Michael McCarthy said...

I saw Honey Boy and Knives Out today. Honey Boy was definitely uneven but I still found the core story compelling, Knives Out deserves to be a classic Thanksgiving movie.

Jupe: 4.5
LaBeouf: 4.5
Hedges: 3.5

De Armas: 5
Craig: 4.5
Curtis: 4
Shannon: 4
Johnson: 3.5
Collette: 3.5
Langford: 3.5
Martell: 3
Evans: 4.5
Stanfield: 3
Plummer: 4

Craig is borderline but I'm pretty comfortable putting him in supporting. De Armas is unquestionably lead.

Mitchell Murray said...

Michael: Glad we have someone who's responded positively to "Knives Out" thus far.

Extended thoughts on the cast?

Michael McCarthy said...

Mitchell: I'm gonna hold off on giving thoughts for the Knives Out cast for now, there are a couple I can't really go into without spoilers.

RatedRStar said...

Hopefully everyone will see Knifes Out within the next couple of weeks or so, as its one of those films where we will have to talk spoilers eventually otherwise there is virtually nothing to discuss.

Luke Higham said...

I'm seeing it tonight.

Mitchell Murray said...

It is thankfully showing in a theatre near me (unlike Jojo Rabbit), but I'll still have to see if I can watch it this week or the next.

Louis Morgan said...

Alright, finally saw The Irishman,and loved it.

Romano - 3.5
Cannavale - 3
Graham - 4
Keitel - 3(Seemed like Takashi Shimura in later Kurosawa)

Luke Higham said...

Louis: Thoughts on the film and the cast.

Louis Morgan said...

Luke:

The film itself, as with most films of the scale isn't completely bereft of flaws. Although extremely minor in my view, in that I can sum them up in that De Niro looked old with the grocer beatdown, and I think it would've benefited him if they hadn't tried to do Sheeran's blue eyes as well. Although I will still say the deaging still worked for him 95% (or more) of the time for him, to the point I did forget about it, but that's just in-comparison to Pacino and Pesci where I really I didn't have a second thought about it. That really is just a minor nitpick, because overall the approach absolutely worked to the point it is a VFX marvel. I also do think they could've expanded Peggy Sheeran a bit more, though I still think that element worked for me on the other end of it anyways. Beyond that I loved it, even the aspects I think could be minor points of contention. The length, isn't something I would say I didn't notice in that the film took a gradual pacing approach overall, however I would say instead that I loved that pacing. This offering a different feel to the gangster life than what we've seen from Scorsese before. On that point I also loved his choices in music here, that were more instrumental, and granted a different feeling to the film. This fitting to the overall approach, which I adored, that being going all the way with a day-to-day gangster, and where that life leads with all said and done. In that I do think some may say Frank is too passive, however I think that wholly worked by creating the story around the man who simply "follows orders", and the experience of that when interacting with such heightened personalities, and history absolutely worked for me by where it slowly narrows to just leave the "soldier" at the end of it all. This angle I found fascinating, amplified of course being the crux of the story in the story of Jimmy Hoffa, which makes Hoffa look like well, Hoffa. I'm obviously going to get more into specifics relatively soon, but sufficient to say it's one of Scorsese's best with the successive trio of Wolf, Silence and this being quite the accomplishment.

Romano - 3.5(Nicely actually adds to the role by bringing the sort of Romano style to some key lines to offer a lot of personality in just a little bit of screen time.)

Cannavale - (Usual thing, but a good example of it.)

Graham - (Fantastic accent first of all, in that you'd never guess the most Italian guy in the film, is by far the least Italian guy in the film. Graham though is terrific in just being a terror of personality, in granting just the boisterous manner and creating a menace within the man's ego. I particularly liked sort of the false decency of courtesy on top, that Graham quickly peeled away any point anyone said anything wrong to reveal the truth psychopath within it.)

Keitel - (Wished he had gotten a bit more to do as Scorsese's original leading man, still manages to do nicely in his one major moment, but do wish there was more of him.)

Also thought every small or bit role, was filled out very nicely.

Calvin Law said...

Of the smaller roles I was particularly impressed by Katherine Narducci and Domenick Lombardozzi. And agreed with the grocery scene looking a bit awkward although I kind of felt it added to the whole, 'this really isn't cool' vibe Scorsese was going for with most of the criminal activities Sheeran partook in. The approach to Peggy has definitely also grown on me, I think Paquin does a lot in the margins.

Louis: Glad you dug Graham as much as I did, he's a master of the gangster accent.

Calvin Law said...

Also your thoughts on Robbie Robertson's theme for the film? It's grown on me a lot.

Calvin Law said...

Also an alternative 1990s Goodfellas:

Jimmy Conway - Jon Bernthal (though would probably be DiCaprio)
Henry Hill - Matthias Schoenarts
Tommy DeVito - Stephen Graham
Karen Hill - Christina Milioti
Paulie Cicero - Joe Mantegna
Billy Batts - Sebastian Maniscalco

Bryan L. said...

Louis: I read somewhere that The Irishman could be described as “Goodfellas filtered through Silence” since it’s quieter and more introspective than its predecessor. Any thoughts on that? Also, is Parasite still #1 for you?

Matt Mustin said...

Louis: What's your rating for Paquin? She's a 3.5 for me now, I thought she made quite an impact with limited time.

Bryan L. said...

Calvin: I think it would indeed be DiCaprio, or maybe even his OUATIH costar if you want to get really “out-or-the-box” with it. Schoenaerts could be great; I’d also consider Oscar Isaac. Love the other choices though

Emi Grant said...

Well, I don't think I can add much to everyone's thoughts, but The Irishman is indeed fantastic. It's hard for me to settle on my favorite out of our 3 main stars, but I'm totally looking forward to everyone's review.

Louis Morgan said...

Also saw Knives Out, which was great fun as a proper classic whodunit. Won't get into more on the film or the cast for obvious reasons at the moment.

de Armas - 5(Unquestionably lead)
Craig - 4.5(Lead for me, though borderline)
Evans - 4
Johnson - 4
Curtis - 3.5
Shannon - 3.5
Collette - 3.5
Stanfield - 3
Langford - 3
Martell - 3
Patterson - 3
Plummer - 3.5
Oz - 3

Nice seeing M. Emmet Walsh, though I wish there had been more of him.

Calvin:

Oh it's terrific theme, and a interesting choice, that in a way set the mood and tone differently from Casino or Goodfellas with that focus less on songs. This though through an actual original piece however, that sounds as almost like a old country western song for an old gangster in in the general music is of that, but filtered to a darker bent in its instrumentation.

Bryan:

I would say that is an accurate enough description in that it is contemplative film particularly in terms of its editing that is closer to a Silence than a Goodfellas, though still connected to the latter in subject matter.

I'll save on such reveals for my eventual Top Ten, which will be revealed probably after I see the December crop.

Matt:

3

Calvin Law said...

Louis: what’re your thoughts on Don Johnson as an actor? He seems to be someone who’s really hitting his stride in his later years.

Calvin Law said...

Not to say he had an unsuccessful early career, Miami Vice and all, but I mean film-wise.

Anonymous said...

Louis: your thoughts on Aaron Paul and Dave Bautista as options for a 2010s Of Mice and Men

Bryan L. said...

A lot of films this year have had pretty good ensembles, it seems. The Farewell, Endgame, OUATIH, Irishman, JoJo Rabbit and of course, Parasite.

Also saw The Irishman. I’ll just join the consensus so far. The three gents are all 5s to me, but if I had to name an MVP, it’s De Niro.

Bryan L. said...

Also, yeah the fight with the grocer took me out of the special effects, but the rest of the time, they were terrific.

And I loved the use of a song that was previously featured in Blue Velvet.

Matt Mustin said...

I thought the VFX on him in the grocer scene were still fine, he just clearly was not making the movements of a younger man. It's noticeable, but forgivable.

Bryan L. said...

Matt: Yeah I should've clarified. It has more to do with the movements than the special effects indeed, but a very small blip otherwise.

Luke Higham said...

Also saw Knives Out, Really enjoyed it, De Armas was amazing. And my ratings are about the same.

Robert MacFarlane said...

By the way, I saw Ford v. Ferrari the other day, and man was it... long. It's entertaining enough and it's nice to see Christian Bale enjoy himself, but there is a good thirty minutes that could have been cut without consequence. Also, I wish it went further with the "capitalism suffocates art" theme that seems to be regulated to the constant interruptions of Josh Lucas doing a Raul Esparza impression.

Michael McCarthy said...
This comment has been removed by the author.