Claude Laydu did not receive an Oscar nomination, despite being nominated for a BAFTA, for portraying Priest of Ambricourt in Diary of a Country Priest.
Diary of a Country Priest follows a young priest attempting to deal with a parish, doubts and a physical ailment.
Claude Laydu, making his film debut, portrays the priest merely known as his title of the priest of Ambricourt, the town in which he has been assigned. Laydu, who was in his mid twenties when making the film, immediately evokes a curious dynamic within the film, as the man's manner is that of a older more burdened man even being so youthful in terms of his actual age. It is a fascinating place, though fitting to the character's state that is with trouble even before his trials have even begun. Laydu's initial scenes are the man going about his duties, while also habitually writing in the titular diary to relate his experiences and his internal monologue. Laydu's performance is an interesting one for a debut, in that so much of the film is a burdened upon his shoulders, that which is furthermore within an extremely subdued performance. Such thoughts though should be forgotten when witnessing the performance. This as Laydu's work immediately not only captures the spirit of the priest initial state, but simply seems within the man from the outset of the film. His work realizing this state of a quiet anxiety, that being the basic state of the man, this man who has a weight of the world, and perhaps even more upon his shoulders, yet still technically being such a young man. This even the idea of his physical ailment being ever present, though withdrawn and internalized in his work. This living pain being an innate train, just really within the glint of his eyes, when it is not manifesting more overtly to punish the man.
There is more to his performance that just that state of anxiety however though as Laydu portrays within his soft eyes this certain curiosity but also soulfulness. This being essential because as the man is suffering it is not that of a purely downtrodden individual. It is within this sense of interest that senses the man of the priest as someone whose burden is beyond the physical as he attempts to deal with affairs both the worldly and otherworldly within his mind. This reflected within his journal entries that Laydu performs with the sense of a solemn duty as though is respecting some sense of history and record, though that which he himself is confused for its exact purpose. The man's purpose though being paramount within this performance, and so much of the power of this work being within his reactionary work within the film. This as Laydu does deliver the expected empathetic sense within his presence, and compassionate eyes. The reactions though are not simplified by him, but rather particularly engaged within the film. This in creating in fact a greater sense of the pain of the man as no circumstance is merely just that in Laydu's work. There is rather this greater connection, or at least attempt of connection at congregation that creates that burden within the man. This as Laydu realizes a man who cares, however this is even with a difficult inadequacy in his conviction.
This in that his portrayal of doubt is a remarkable one, of his presentation of the man's state. This is not in a simple foundational doubt, but rather this striking sense of apprehension of this inability for comfort. Laydu's work is astonishing in the way he is able to lean towards an extreme emotional distress yet in this he never actually goes beyond it, yet never does it feel inadequate. He rather finds such an impact within the reserved nature of the man. When he hears of a death his performance is incredible in the way he creates the nature of the reaction. This in the onlooker could assume a certain detachment, however Laydu rather crafts a man who is too attuned towards humanity in a way. This as he borders immediately on falling apart entirely through any loss. This in the man whose examination cannot comfort him, as he too much feels for those he sees suffer, or even if he is not able to find quite the appropriate connection to it. Laydu's work finding the increasingly difficult state of the man who cannot exist without this connection yet the connection is in a way leading towards his death. Laydu creating this penetrating obsession of a unique sort of his eyes. An obsession of duty, as he speaks towards others so drawn within their world, which is so profoundly reflected in his eyes more befitting of an elderly man than a young priest.
The priest's connections do not reward him as he becomes strangely implicated within the death, and in a way as oddly ostracized more so than already existed the distance between the priest and his "flock". Laydu's own manner working in this near constant physical distance, though this too is fascinating in the intensity of it. This as the way he looks away is not a man who is truly alien, but rather forcing himself to be in this attempted state lest he suffer all the more or at least fail to fulfill his duties. Laydu's performance is one that even as he only listens in a scene, it is difficult not to watch him in a given scene. This as his performance has such a power within the man's terrible state. This as his words comforting, or critical others, along with his reactions to them, is that of a quiet ferocity in a certain sense. This as Laydu shows a man in a way who is both devout despite being a doubter. This as Laydu portrays the method as pure within the man, within that state of ever lasting spiritual anxiety, but also suffering through the lack of comfort that spirituality actually grants himself. Laydu's work is outstanding in the way he is able to create a certain, wholly sympathetic, hypocrisy in a certain sense. This in a man who is so fashioned by his beliefs, yet in the same way struggles to be a believer. Laydu's work then is this creation of an internalized chaos that is the man. This while being so reserved, yet never limited. This in showing the man's state of unwellness as ever present within the man attempting to live his calling, a calling he claims he cannot hear the voice of. It is a brilliant work as this strange quality is given sense, but also exudes so notably from his work. This as the man's journey is so tangible, while being so difficult. Laydu grants a real sense, understanding a poignancy within the man however. This in a portrait of essentially of the priest imploding within himself by being unable to reconcile his existence. The man dying from the inside, both mentally and physically. Laydu's work being a descent marked by that ethereal intensity, that always grants you a real sense of the character. This is never just an idea as Laydu's performance humanizes it in to such a truly stunning portrait of a most idiosyncratic self-destruction.
88 comments:
Does anyone know which songs Psifonian used in his videos for best picture, director, actor, actress, sup. Actor, sup. Actress and the runner-ups for those categories? I'm talking the videos that he were on his channel that are now deleted. If anyone knows the names of those songs I'd apprecciate it a lot.
Lucas:
I can't remember them all, but I recall him using the "Main Title" from Gettysburg and "End Title" from Cloud Atlas.
Louis: When you have the time, re-watch The Song Of Bernadette.
Louis: Your thoughts on the peach scene montage from Parasite? The expression on Song's face when he pulls the napkin from the trash can is just priceless.
Finally saw 1917. Incredible film.
MacKay-5
Chapman-4.5(The son of a bitch made me cry)
Scott-3.5
Cumberbatch-3.5
Strong-3
Firth-3
Madden-3.5
Louis: Your ratings and thoughts on the rest of the cast of Wild Rose? I believe you only covered Buckley.
Louis: Thoughts on this clip from Cavett's interview with Hitchcock?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBRZ6GEFjG4
Anonymous:
You can find my thoughts on the "Belt of Faith" sequence in 52 update.
Anonymous:
I gave my thoughts on Walters below where I gave them on Buckley.
Anonymous:
Funny little interview, particularly the little aside on laxatives and nudity, though also insightful with Hitchcock offering his explanation of a few of his tricks and a mcguffin with an honesty.
Louis: Your thoughts on the Planet Krypton theme from Superman (1978).
Louis: Your thoughts on the Better Call Saul episode '50% Off'
Louis: Thoughts on the cinematography of the 1934 Cleopatra film?
Louis: thoughts on the voice of Bob Einstein? And I’m enjoying Seinfeld so far (halfway through season 2) though I don’t think I’ve gotten to the best of it yet. And I actually don’t think Seinfeld is that bad? Like he’s clearly the weak link in the main cast but I’ve seen much worse sitcom leads in my time, and I actually think he plays off the rest of the cast well.
Louis: Could I have your thoughts on this episode from Courage the Cowardly Dog? (if you have the time)
https://youtu.be/0vRWR8LvxKo
Anonymous:
Great episode in showing the descent towards Saul, while minor attempts at Jimmy, but what stole it was everything involving Nacho, that is Breaking Bad level of intensity honestly, with Michael Mando being an easy MVP for the episode.
Anonymous:
Well Victor Milner's cinematography is in the typical DeMille line, where there is typically a bit of an inconsistency of effort. This is the composition, framing and lighting of shots of the big grandiose moments is gorgeous, and downright incredible. Any shot where they want to show off the size of the production they are successful. When not though the work borders on bland. I mean it is well lit, in the general ways of the time, but just talking scenes are kind of flat typically.
Calvin:
RIP, but honestly his voice is best taken in through small doses in my view, where it is quite hilarious in its loud crassness, but perhaps a little much for an extended period.
Well you made it through the rough patch, so enjoy. Anyway, I don't disagree about Seinfeld himself, and his worst season by far is season 1.
Louis: Thoughts on 'Planet Krypton' from Superman (1978).
Fuck didn't even realise there was a new Better Call Saul episode out. Will get onto that asap. And yeah agreed on the Funkhouser, I actually think his performance works best when he was more relaxed and shooting the breeze with Larry.
Yeah the rough patch wasn't that bad. I actually think I'm a pretty easy mark for the Seinfeld/David style of humour if I'm honest. I actually did find Jason Alexander mildly amusing enough in the initial episodes anyway, if in a bit of a generic way, so looking forward to the rest.
Louis: Your rating and thoughts on Melissa Benoist in Whiplash.
Folks
Is Howard Hawks' El Dorado from 1966 or 1967?
Louis: Your present film roles for Vivien Leigh?
Louis: Also, your 50s cast and director for Carol & Brooklyn?
Louis: thoughts on this 2020s Se7en cast directed by Denis Villeneuve?
Detective Mills: John Boyega
Detective Lieutenant Somerset: Giancarlo Esposito
Tracy Mills: Mackenzie Davis
John Doe: Steven Yeun
Just curious about something, guys: Has anyone here actually seen "Birds of Prey", or am I the only person who has as of right now?
Mitchell: I saw it 3 weeks ago, just forgot to talk about it. I thought it was decent and a definite improvement over its predecessor. Robbie was rather strong again, McGregor was better than I expected and Winstead had the most interesting role yet underused. It did slip from my mind for too long but I'll try to elaborate further once I get the chance to re-watch it.
Yah that was pretty much my reaction to those three; I'll admit that I was never that enamored by Robbie's first turn as Quinn, as she was always one step away from a complete caricature for myself. Thankfully she does dial it back enough in "Harley Quinn" and for the most part is just very fun and spirited in the part. McGregor, meanwhile, has a pretty one dimensional role but does a surprising enjoyable job with it, and even adds a genuine menace when needed. And Winstead absolutely had the most intriguing character, so its just bizarre to me that she's so underutilized, because I'd certainly watch an entire movie devoted to her Huntress.
Honestly, I think I would've liked the movie more if I also liked the rest of the "birds", because everyone else in the cast was kind of forgettable.
I saw The Invisible Man last night. A rare case of a remake being better than the original. I’d give it an 4.75 out of 5.
Here are my ratings for the cast:
Elisabeth Moss - 4.5
Aldis Hodge - 3.5
Storm Reid - 3
Harriet Dyer - 2
Michael Dorman - 2.5
Oliver Jackson-Cohen - 2.5
Mitchell: Birds Of Prey: 3.5/5
My ratings for the cast:
Margot Robbie - 4
Mary Elizabeth Winstead - 3
Jurnee Smollett-Bell - 3
Ewan McGregor - 3.5
Rosie Perez - 2.5
Ella Jay Basco - 2
Chris Messina - 2
Well on a different note, I just watched "The Prince of Tides" for the first time, and the main question I have is "why"? - Why did I want to watch the film to start with, but also why did it get nominated for best picture over "Thelma and Louise" or "Boyz in the Hood"???
Needless to say, I thought the film was pretty boring and melodramatic, and a lot of that probably comes from the source material. Even still, the uneven screenplay, overbearing music and Streisand's direction don't help in the slightest; They all contribute to the general "saccharine" tone conveyed by the movie, and for a romance that's already verging on cliche, that is not a good approach to take. Moreover, the film has this baffling habit of treating its dramatic moments so "matter-of-factly", only to follow them up with a bit of random comedy. Through this the character's start of with serious intent, yell their most ugly, flustered thoughts, then go about their merry way as if nothing had happened. There's no real sense of dramatic weight being achieved in these scenes, and that makes the already scant arc from the narrative all the more dissatisfying. Now in fairness to the movie, there's not a lot many romantic films - at least of this particular type - that I've been truly swept up in. It already had that hump to get over for myself, which it failed to do, and even as a general experience it left far to much to be desired for me to call it a decent film.
As for the cast, well...
Nolte - 3 (I might be more forgiving towards him than others, because this performance has its problems, but a lot of those can be traced back to the film itself. Nolte almost seems swept out to sea at moments because this character so doesn't fit his usual range; He's isn't really an actor that you might think of as a great romantic lead, and he never quite overcomes that miscasting. Additionally, the film rarely allows him to convey Tom's repression all that much; It's most often told through dialogue rather than shown through Nolte's acting. He certainly could've done more to show this pain within Tom, but at the same time, I can't entirely fault him because he was barely asked to. Now when he is finally allowed to reveal those repressed emotions, that's when this performance gets better. The confession scene itself is a genuinely well handled sequence by Nolte, and yet it never has the power you'd expect because of the film's ineffective attempt to build up to it. Oh, and don't even get me started on his dynamic with Streisand. Neither actor really convinces in their on screen courtship, both in the sense of them lacking chemistry, and also the love story itself being painfully forced. Even still, I would say Nolte's performance is rarely the root cause of the movie's problems. He's okay for the most part, but its simply a performance that doesn't overcome the weaknesses of the story, or the problems of his miscasting.)
Streisand - 2.5 (Same deal as Nolte, which is most strange as you would think the director of a film would have the clearest idea of the material/character. Streisand just isn't all that good here as she kind of goes through the motions of the part without truly inhabiting it. She's simply not that convincing, because she never finds the romantic angle of the role, and isn't that impressive in the more routine scenes she does have. Also, she has some noticeably bad line readings during one louder scene, and it hurts what is already a contrived sequence.)
Nelligan - 2.5 (She's just kind of there, so this is yet another oscar nomination the film didn't need.)
Danner - 2.5 (See thoughts on Nelligan minus the oscar nomination.)
Luke:
Planet Krypton theme is beautifully done by Williams as it manages to capture both a majesty and ominousness within it. This though combined with the main theme, being building in as this opening, that so brilliantly sets the stage with such grandiose power. This though again building with the dread of zod, with instrumentation that emphasizes the sort of mythic qualities of the sequence, that is rather well utilized to grant the right alternate touch to the different setting.
Tahmeed:
I think I probably gave thoughts on her in 2014, but to reiterate, I like the sort of blunt naturalism she brings in just an effortless sweet charm, that develops her well as sort of collateral damage in just a normal person in the way of obsession.
Bryan:
Abigail (The Favourite) or Lady Sarah depending on early or later Leigh.
Jasmine Francis (Obviously)
Amazing Amy
Carol 1950's directed by Douglas Sirk:
Carol: Barbara Stanwyck
Therese: Lee Grant
Abby: Mercedes McCambridge
Tommy Tucker: Martin Landau
Harge: Fred MacMurray
Brooklyn 1950's directed by John Ford:
Ellis: Claire Bloom
Tony: Cliff Robertson
Jim: Richard Harris
Father Flood: Barry Fitzgerald
"Ma" Kehoe: Mildred Natwick
Calvin:
Love the Esposito and Yeun choices. Not sure about Davis, as I just haven't seen a performance I've loved of hers yet. Boyega I think could work though, I don't think he's proven he has quite the right gear for Mills...yet, he could we just haven't seen it (I mean who would've ever pegged Esposito for his Gus Fring performance based solely on his early output).
Louis: Not going to lie; I thought you were going to pick Brando as Tony, then I realized he looked a little too “grown up” in that decade, even in The Men.
Lastly, your choice of cinematographer for both of those films?
Louis: What are your thoughts on the direction of Unforgiven
Louis: I've read that just before his death, Gregg Toland was working on a lens which he dubbed the "ultimate focus lens". It was a lens with a very small aperture with a depth of field that could extend from less than six inches to infinity. Thoughts on this?
Luke, could you predict which performances from the remaining bonus rounds could get fives.
Louis: Not sure if it's been asked before, but could Pat Morita go up for either of the first two Karate Kid films?
Anonymous: I'll do my best and I'll go decade by decade.
1920s (I need a little help with this decade)
Lon Chaney in The Phantom Of The Opera and The Hunchback Of Notre Dame
Charlie Chaplin in The Gold Rush
Any performance from Emil Jannings or Lillian Gish.
1930
Lew Ayres in All Quiet On The Western Front (Upgrade)
1931
Boris Karloff in The Criminal Code (Upgrade), Edward G. Robinson in Five Star Final and Raimu in Marius are also possibilities but I predict 4.5s for them
1932
Maybe Michel Simon in Boudu Saved From Drowning
1933
Greta Garbo in Queen Christina
1936
Choko Iida in The Good Son
1939
Jean Gabin in Le Jour Se Lève
Robert Donat in Goodbye, Mr. Chips (Upgrade)
A Cast member from The Rules Of The Game
Lon Chaney Jr. in Of Mice And Men
Bela Lugosi in Son Of Frankenstein
Louis: What are your thoughts on the rather divisive song "Mmm Mmm Mmm Mmm by Crash Test Dummies? it was in Dumb and Dumber.
Calvin: If Hopkins goes up for TROTD, what rating do you think he'll get.
Luke, what’s your rating for Hopkins’ performance in TROTD?
Anonymous: 4.5
Louis, I would like it if you rewatched The Remains Of The Day before moving onto 43.
Luke: Can I have your overall thoughts on Fanny & Alexander as a film? And which version would you recommend to watch?
RatedRStar: It was used in Dumband Dumber but it wasn't written for it.
Bryan: Well, I don't want to reveal too much because it really needs to be experienced. I've only seen the five hour cut which was shown in Swedish Theatres sometime after the initial three hour theatrical cut and is considered the superior version. It's Ingmar Bergman's Magnum Opus and honestly, it's in my top ten films of all-time. Has one of the top five greatest ensemble casts of all-time with one of the greatest supporting performances I've ever seen in Jan Malmsjö's Bishop Vergérus. The Cinematography, Production Design and Costume Design are all astounding and is the best written work of Bergman's career which is really saying something.
I love The Secret Of NIMH but I'll be gutted if it doesn't win Best Picture.
Luke: Thanks. I’m not too sure when I’ll see it, but I can give you my ratings for the cast then, if you want.
Also, my David Lynch ranking is now up, if anyone wants to take a look.
RIP James Lipton
Bryan: Sure, been wanting to get someone else's opinion on that for awhile now.
Louis: Where would Laydu's performance rank among your top ten debut performances. For me, it'd be #2, behind Haing S. Ngor's work in The Killing Fields.
Luke: a 4.5 I think. And RIP James Lipton.
Louis: thoughts on the voice of Jason Alexander? I think it might be the most entertaining and strangely endearing ‘annoying’ voice ever. Every episode I look forward to him raising his voice.
Calvin: And what about Burt Lancaster in From Here To Eternity and Atlantic City.
Bryan:
Brando I don't think would be ideal for such a "straight" role anyways, he did best with a challenge.
Carol: Russell Metty
Brooklyn: Winton C. Hoch
Anonymous:
Eastwood's direction is as essential to the greatness of the film, as is the masterful work of David Peoples's script. This right in his paring down the script, just a bit, mainly removing Munny's return home, where Eastwood wisely knew exactly when the film should end and where a touch more ambiguity would be warranted. This is then though with this incredible blend of new and old western techniques, to the point where I can see one granting the definitive label on the film. This is in that Eastwood does capture the grandeur of the west in the shot both in lush landscapes but also the isolation they create. This though in making most use of the elements, namely in sort of marking the transformation of William Munny, notably rainfall, though I especially love, the happy accident, of the snow after the recovered near death William recuperating, as though the killer in hibernation just before his full return. A touch fully ripped off by that remake, which only properly worked when ripping off Eastwood directly. Again though it is that with the combination of the new with the old. This as he also takes the idea of reinvention, in that as much as he captures the grandeur he manages to balance this with a blunt reality. This in his unromantic way of showing Little Bill's most brutal moments, also just a sign of a great director which is showing when to restrain to allow the acting to do its job. Little Bill/Beauchamp/English Bob in the jail, is brilliantly restrained direction, in that every touch Eastwood does use amplify what is there, but his overall choice is a wise one which is to let Hackman deliver with the great material in hand. The reinvention though is too found in just the way he shoots the night scenes, almost neo-noir esque, with the light quietly illuminating faces but darkness most other places. His way of framing not only beauty, by garnering emotion with the landscape is simply incredible, for example the harshness, if still stunning, of the aesthetic when William hears the news of Ned. This with leaving no score in the scene, just the wind, as we watch William make his final turn, which in turn brilliantly makes the storm of the climax, where William unleashes, and in a way Eastwood unleashes as a director. This in making the final shootout a nearly biblical moment of judgment, as this visit of the angel of death, as much as we have the moment of a visceral revenge, it is that of horror scene from the cuts to the witnesses, the torrential down-pouring, and how Eastwood shoots himself almost a demon from hell. It is masterful work from Eastwood, and shows just how great heights he can achieve when he's comfortable with the material.
Anonymous:
I mean given his love of deep focus that isn't surprising, shame he was unable to perfect the invention at the time, as much as he was the craftsman, he was a pioneer.
Anonymous:
I mean possibly, it is a performance that Cobra Kai in particular makes you appreciate all the more.
Tahmeed:
Probably #6 just underneath Jason Miller.
Anonymous:
I'd say that is pretty apt description, although that is technically his Costanza voice which is a touch different than his real voice, which is a bit less harsh, though that works so wonderfully for George.
Louis: Your cast for a 2020s The Omen.
Louis: Your choice of director for 2010s versions of these films? Since you've given casts for them before.
The Godfather
Saving Private Ryan
Braveheart
A Bridge Too Far
Louis: your thoughts on the Pepe Silvia scene.
Luke:
Robert Thorn: Viggo Mortensen
Katherine Thorn: Keri Russell
Keith Jennings: Ben Whishaw
Mrs. Baylock: Kathryn Hahn
Father Brennan: David Wenham
Carl Bugenhagen: David Warner
Bryan:
The Godfather - David Fincher
Saving Private Ryan - Christopher Nolan
Braveheart - Gareth Evans
A Bridge Too Far - Denis Villeneuve
Louis: thoughts on the Better Call Saul episode? Thought it was great once again, and loved the returns.
Calvin:
One of the most hilarious scenes ever created based on dyslexia. This hilarity of the rant performance of Day, as Charlie as this madness conspiracy all built around not being able to read Pennsylvania. Made by the conviction of Day's, and McElhenney straight man work, also random "classic spy" Barney is a fantastic touch.
Thought it was a great episode again, particularly in bringing Saul into the cartel plot, with Dalton being the smooth Salamanca I didn't know I wanted, and loved his dynamic with Saul in the episode. On top of that, love the lower key ongoing story of Kim's Verdictesque crisis of the lawyer. Also enjoyed the returns, which re-watching their original interaction, actually doesn't break continuity after-all, though maybe stretching ever so slightly.
Louis: Apparently, the Coen brothers were set to film an adaptation of James Dickey's novel "To the White Sea", about an American gunner shot down over Tokyo in 1942 and who tries to make his way back to America. Brad Pitt was to play the lead, and the film set for production in 2001, but budget concerns prevented the film from being made. Thoughts on this lost project?
So I just watched "The Fisher King" for the first time, and I enjoyed it more than I was expecting to. Stylistically and thematically speaking, its certainly a more interesting film than the likes of "Bugsy" or "The Prince of Tides", even if that's not a high bar. Really, though, the story held my interest throughout thanks to Gilliam's direction - however unusual some of his choices might've been - and I even found some of the quieter scenes rather stirring. Sure, not everything works in the film; some of the dialogue isn't all that believable, and certain sequences can feel a bit unneeded or dragged out. Still, the movie was a consistently interesting experience for myself, and one I'd definitely consider revisiting.
And as for the cast:
Bridges - 4 (Just a very solid performance from him, and my personal favourite of the cast, and Bridges conducts himself rather well here. This is by first doing a surprisingly believable job playing the "shallow jerk", giving an especially blunt cynicism to Jack's behaviour, but also being strangely moving in his subsequent fall from grace. Then when Jack meets Parry we also get a nice "straight man" performance from Bridges, drawing on his trademark relaxed charisma, but with a good dose of naturalism in his exasperated reactions. Bridges really just finds Jack as a character throughout, and effectively realizes his emotional arc beyond the direction and editing of the film itself.)
Williams - 3.5 (Okay, there are definitely moments where Williams does his usual Williams comic routine, voices and mania included. They are there, and when they're noticeable they kind of lessen the impact of his portrayal, but they still don't feel too out of place given the film's tone. More importantly, Williams does enough to suggest more within Parry, and succeeds at going beyond the grand gestures to show the history behind the man's mental state. Also, it should be said that in a great deal of his filmography, Williams had this uncanny way of projecting warmth and earnestness to the screen. There was just this calming sincerity he could show when properly directed, and he gets to use that here in Parry's quieter scenes. Two that stick out to me are his actual "Fisher King" speech, and Parry's admission of love for Lydia, both of which are nicely handled by Williams. So not an amazing turn, necessarily, but still a good performance overall.)
Ruehl - 3.5 (Eh, I'm not crazy about this performance, but it is a decent piece of work from Ruehl. The role itself isn't that complex but she does leave an impression regardless, effectively shifting between broad comedy and emotional longing, while still making them feel like the same character.)
Plummer - 3 (Some shaky moments here or there, perhaps, but still an okay performance, especially in her dynamic with Williams.)
Jeter - 3 (It's a broad character, to be sure, but for me Jeter bridged the fine line with the role. It's not a great turn, mainly because of the writing and screen time, but it is an entirely serviceable performance.)
Also, "The Fisher King" completes the 1991 best actor line up for myself, and my ranking would be as followed:
5) Beatty (2.5)
4) Nolte (3)
3) de Niro (3)
2) Williams (3.5)
1) Hopkins (5) - For the record, it's absolutely a supporting performance, but I certainly don't begrudge his win.
Louis: The Caretaker is 1964 instead of 1963.
Luke: Damn, I really wanted Sellers to stay in the top 5 for Dr Strangelove :(
Oh well, it'll be interesting to see where Pleasance and Shaw end up.
Tahmeed: Pleasence #2 Shaw #7
Louis: Your 2020s cast for The Way Back (Peter Weir).
Louis: thoughts on the Seinfeld episode The Tape?
"The Way Back" is getting decent enough reviews, and as expected, Affleck's performance is being praised first and foremost.
Honestly...good for him. He really needed something like this after his disappointing - though externally limited - turns in the DCEU.
Louis: Your thoughts on the 'Coors/You can't read it from the outside!' scene from It's Always Sunny?
Louis: Although all of us will agree that film-making is an inherently collaborative process, which theory about the "authorship" of a film do you personally find more convincing- auteur theory, or Schreiber theory?
So, The Last of Us is getting an HBO live action adaptation.
Glad its not a film, now I don't have to see it lol.
Tahmeed: Well then...didn't think they'd actually go through with that, but I guess we'll see how it pans out.
Everybody: What would be your dream casts for "The Last of Us" adaptation? For myself it would be:
Joel - Josh Brolin (I mean, he's played a number of Texans before, he's of the right age, and we know he can play grizzled trauma - this really is a perfect choice, I my opinion.)
Ellie - Well its a little less obvious, but I could see Hailee Steinfeld or Elle Fanning in the part (Ideally you'd want an actual teenager, though).
Tommy - Anson Mount?
Marlene - Naomie Harris
Tess - Now, I got the impression from the game that Tess was notably younger than Joel, so if we we're doing that, Mary Elizabeth Winstead would be an easy choice. If she's the same age, then Carrie Anne Moss.
Bill - W. Earl Brown is already the perfect choice
Henry - Lakeith Stanfield
Sam - Not sure. Again, you would need an actual teenager for this one, not some 20 year old pretending to be 13.
David - John Hawkes (No question, since I could swear they used his "Winter's Bone" appearance as an inspiration for the character.
I hope it'll translate well to the TV medium but that's one game I'd rather see left untouched. Can't wait for Part II to be released though.
Luke: What are your top 5 games you are most excited to play in 2020?
RatedRStar:
The Last Of Us Part II
Cyberpunk 2077
Ghost Of Tsushima
Assassin's Creed Ragnarok
Resident Evil 3: Remake
I hope Fable 4, Batman: Arkham 5 and the Harry Potter RPG come out at the end of the year.
I'd assume you're really looking forward to FFVII: Remake but I'm gonna wait awhile on that as it's being launched incomplete.
Luke: I am looking forward towards FFVII:Remake but purely because I like the idea of a 40 plus hour game taking place solely in Midgar. I would throw in The Last of Us Part II, Cyberpunk 2077, Resident Evil 3:Remake and Ghost of Tsushima as my other 4.
I wasn't really a huge fan of Fable III (liked II) so I hope if there is a fourth that it is way better, Batman Arkham 5 won't be done by Rocksteady I don't think instead it will probably be the ones that did Origins which I didn't like at all.
Luke, if you’ve played it, your thoughts on Red Dead Redemption 2 as a video game?
Anonymous: I've played about 1 3rd of it thus far. It's an extraordinary technical feat and has some of the greatest writing in any video game to date.
They’ve tried several times to make good movies out of video games: maybe television is the answer?
It’s being helmed by the folks who made Chernobyl, so they’ve proven they can make a compelling narrative out of a post-disaster world, at least.
Luke, fair enough. With Louis being a big fan of Westerns and all, do you think he’d like Red Dead 2? Although he doesn’t really play much video games.
Anonymous: I've played the first "Red Read Redemption" about 3/4 times now. I think its an excellent game that makes its Western setting feel so lived in, its characters so vividly realized, and its game play engaging at almost every turn. The dialogue and voice acting is also superb, and in some ways, it helps that the voice cast doesn't have that many "recognizable names" in it ala Christopher Plummer in "Skyrim".
As for the second....well....I actually don't have the right platform for it, but its a game I'm quite interested in playing nonetheless.
Mitchell: Maybe I'm wrong but wasn't Max Von Sydow in Skyrim. I recall him narrating a trailer for it.
Luke: He was. The game actually had a few notable names in its voice cast, from Plummer and Von Sydow, to Joan Allen and Lynda Carter.
Anonymous: If he were interested, he really needs to play the original first.
Anonymous:
Sounds quite different for them, but in lieu of Intolerable Cruelty I would've been all for it. A different take though in terms of being a survival, potentially one man show, however Coens have shown their capability within different genres/tones, so I'd certainly take it.
Luke:
Seems legitimate as the 63 date lines up with Berlin Film Festival date for that year. Will update when I get back to 64.
Hopefully with a punchier script however:
Janusz: Joe Cole
Mr. Smith: Viggo Mortensen
Irena: Thomasin McKenzie
Valka: Robert Pattinson
Andrei: Tobias Menzies
Calvin:
A very much getting into its element episode, even if unfollowed up dynamics, though used for great comedy of George's discomfort/arousal throughout, and most notably just the ending shot of the three's "interest" that is hilarious all by its own.
Tahmeed:
Just a downright hilarious, and extremely simple but perfection type of bit. This with the sheer confidence in Charlie as he explains his routine ending on putting on the "coors" side.
Anonymous:
Well will reiterate the collaborative process, as any member of a film crew can be essential and add to the final product. The idea of the unique vision that drives it though, between those two, is unquestionably the auteur theory however. I will say though this in part has to deal with the nature of how films are made, and in most instances a director is able to more easily cultivate power than a screenwriter is. The trademark of the vision is sharing traits between films, which is more often within the director, partially also as film is a visual medium, that language of the unsaid is as essential as the words on the page. Spielberg/Scorsese are rarely screenwriters, yet their vision can be found within every one of their films, no matter what screenwriter they're working with. There are "auteur" screenwriters, just as there even "auteur" actors (Tom Cruise, for example), but these are far rarer than the directors, and usually these screenwriters attempting directing at some point. For example, one of the most obvious recent examples is Aaron Sorkin, who has a distinct voice in almost all of his material, however even that the auteur director David Fincher, has as much of an influence on The Social Network. In that one can as easily identify it as a Fincher film, as a Sorkin film, in fact maybe even the former as part of Fincher's contribution was the reduction of Sorkin's trademark excesses. It is no surprise however that Sorkin has turned to directing his scripts. There are a few example of the screenwriter vision traveling from project to projects, but it is far more common for that overarching quality to forgotten, particularly in favor of the directors whose vision carries from each of their projects.
Louis: Maybe James Gray for director? (Just double-check the script to prevent another Ad Astra)
Bryan:
Well I'd gladly keep Peter Weir, who I thought managed to still make a decent film despite the thin script, who isn't retired, sadly he apparently just can't get funding.
I suppose. Plus, Mortensen is in that 2020s cast, so it could be a mini-Witness-reunion of sorts.
Post a Comment