Channing Tatum in Foxcatcher
Tom Hardy in The Drop
Shahid Kapoor in Haider
Ethan Hawke in Predestination
Dan Stevens in The Guest
Predict Those Five, These five or both:
Jesse Eisenberg in The Double
Jeremy Renner in Kill the Messenger
Tom Cruise in Edge of Tomorrow
David Gulpilil in Charlie's Country
Oscar Isaac in A Most Violent Year
199 comments:
Note: I am not done with my 2020 endeavor, I just was honestly getting a little exasperated over the debate over the lineup. If the intention is to cover all 5's, I'm not going to wait on that, unless it is just not feasible.
Also Note: If that was curt I apologize, but I like to make sure to include the performances I'm personally most interested in reviewing as well.
That's okay Louis.
1. Hardy
2. Tatum
3. Stevens
4. Kapoor
5. Hawke
1. Gulpilil
2. Isaac
3. Renner
4. Cruise
5. Eisenberg
Louis: Look, whatever happens, it's your blog and I can accept it but if you see a five outside the lineup, I know you'll save it for the next backlog.
Louis: My apologies if it got a little heated from my side, at the end of the day, it's your choice.
1. Hardy
2. Tatum
3. Kapoor
4. Stevens
5. Hawke
1. Isaac
2. Gulpilil
3. Renner
4. Cruise
5. Eisenberg
Understandable, Louis. I'm just gonna leave my predictions and make sure to not complicate anything further. My apologies.
1. Tatum
2. Hardy
3. Stevens
4. Kapoor
5. Hawke
1. Isaac
2. Renner
3. Gulpilil
4. Cruise
5. Eisenberg
Also, just want to clarify: It has not been my intention to come off as heated at all. This line-up is just one I've been quite anxious and eager about. Doesn't help that I've through a personal struggle as of lately. I do appreciate everyone's patience and consideration about this.
*been through
Let's get onto a positive note shall we. 2014 could surpass 73 with the most fives in a Lead year.
1. Tatum
2. Hardy
3. Stevens
4. Kapoor
5. Hawke
1. Gulpilil
2. Isaac
3. Renner
4. Cruise
5. Eisenberg
Lotsa good movies came out this year.
Apologies, Louis (and you all) for that last minute switcheroo that got me feeling all Howard Ratner throwing things into a mess - thank heavens for you being more of an Arno than Phil. And as previously reiterated I would feel really bad if you missed out reviewing a performance you really wanted to cover.
1. Hardy
2. Tatum
3. Kapoor
4. Stevens
5. Hawke
1. Isaac
2. Gulpilil
3. Renner
4. Cruise
5. Eisenberg
Very looking forward to all these reviews (and once again apologies lol)
1. Tatum
2. Hardy
3. Kapoor
4. Stevens
5. Hawke
1. Isaac
2. Gulpilil
3. Cruise (really hoping for an upgrade)
4. Renner
5. Eisenberg
I heard Driveways was a good 2020 film. Swan song for Dennehy.
1. Kapoor
2. Hardy
3. Tatum
4. Hawke
5. Stevens
1. Gulpilil
2. Isaac
3. Renner
4. Cruise
5. Eisenberg
Prepare yourselves for a long Films to watch list.
1.Hardy
2.Tatum
3.Kapoor
4.Hawke
5.Stevens
1.Isaac
2.Gulpilil
3.Cruise
4.Renner
5.Eisenberg
1. Hardy
2. Tatum
3. Stevens
4. Kapoor
5. Hawke
1. Isaac
2. Gulpilil
3. Renner
4. Cruise
5. Eisenberg
1. Kapoor
2. Hardy
3. Tatum
4. Stevens
5. Hawke
1. Gulpilil
2. Isaac
3. Renner
4. Cruise
5. Eisenberg
Correcting my previous comment
1. Hardy
2. Kapoor
3. Tatum
4. Hawke
5. Stevens
1. Isaac
2. Cruise
3. Gulpilil
4. Renner
5. Eisenberg
5) Stevens
4) Kapoor
3) Hawke
2) Tatum
1) Hardy
5) Eisenberg
4) Gulpilil
3) Cruise
2) Isaac
1) Renner
Aaaaand yet another off-topic Question for everybody:
What are your least favorite Razzie-"winners" of all time?
I never really understood the hate for Pierce Brosnans Performance in Mamma Mia. Yes, he should definitely not have become a singer, but at least he delivered every emotions the character had to bring to the table and i actually Kind of like his relationship with Streep within the compounds of the not really Deep or complex movie. ALso his facial expressions during his Songs are killing me so blow me Golden Raspberry
Tim: Hey small nitpick, but can you list your predictions in #1-5 order instead of #5-1? It makes it easier for Louis to check up on after he finishes a lineup.
ok
1) Hardy
2) Tatum
3) Hawke
4) Kapoor
5) Stevens
1) Renner
2) Isaac
3) Cruise
4) Gulpilil
5) Eisenberg
1. Tom Hardy
2. Channing Tatum
3. Shahid Kapoor
4. Ethan Hawke
5. Dan Stevens
1. Oscar Isaac
2. Jeremy Renner
3. David Gulpilil
4. Jesse Eisenberg
5. Tom Cruise
Louis: On a different note, I've been going through top 10s to do a points system to see which actors are most nominated and are higher in rankings. Kinda hard to explain.
Anyway, through 1960 I've come across 5 different actors with multiple nominations missing from your nominations page:
Michel Simon: L'Atalante & Port of Shadows
William Demarest: Miracle of Morgan's Creek & Hail the Conquering Hero
Walter Slezak: Lifeboat & Born to Kill
Thomas Gomez: Ride the Pink Horse & Force of Evil
Everett Sloane: Lady from Shanghai & Patterns
I collate any others I find and list them all later on.
Tim: He didn't win, but Mel Gibson getting nominated for The Expendables 3 is nonsense, since he's really the only good thing about the film.
Calvin: Don't worry. Like Howard Ratner during basketball games, I think we'll all be having a good time throughout this lineup.
Tim: I would second your thoughts on Brosnan and Bryan's thoughts on Gibson. Honestly, though, I do dislike the Razzies in general as they so often recognize the "most popular" bad films with the most notable stars, rather than the absolute worst movies of the year.
And on another random note, I just saw "Chasing Amy" for the first time and thought it was alright. I must admit, I think I've outgrown the "frat boy" humour shown in its genre of film - I'm not saying that to sound snobbish, mind you, but rather to say I didn't find the movie all that funny. And for having a great deal of sexual/social dialogue as a 90's comedy, there are undoubtedly some dated ideas that I'm going to have to mull over. Credit be given where credit is due, however; There are small scenes where Smith has something to say, and the central dynamic between Alyssia and Holden is decent enough.
Affleck - 4 (Certainly one of his better early performances, and just more evidence that with the right script and direction, he can be a solid leading man.)
Adams - 3.5
Lee - 2.5
Ewell - 3
Jay and not so silent Bob - 3.5
I was just thinking about some comments about the Spider-Man movies on a very recent post. I have to say I mostly agree, as much as I may not want to. I find the writing of the Raimi movies pretty poor a lot of the time, but they have a lot of heart, and are ultimately quite entertaining.
I love the chemistry between Garfield and Stone in the "Amazing" set, but they try so hard to get villains in that the movies are scattered and lackluster.
I make no secret of my love for the MCU. I think they are fun and entertaining. But the Spider-Man movies, while entertaining at the time, are always too overblown in hindsight. They never utilize Tom Holland's performance, which is the best of the bunch, instead opting for spectacle and such.
This all leads to one of the highest things on my wish list: a Jim Jarmusch Spider-Man movie
the Raimi films are actually pretty bad, but i love them anyway
Louis, what are your thoughts on the 3 spidermen (Maguire, Garfield and Holland so far)? Can you give an average rating to each of them?
Birds of Prey I found to be pretty bad actually. It is better than Suicide Squad, but then again most films are. It too is a complete mess. The plot is both convoluted and overly simplistic. Character motivations are either extremely basic or vague. The humor fell almost uniformly flat for me, and the development of the characters is just sloppy. The attempts at meta humor was perhaps the most obnoxious element of the film with used of Harley Quinn that made her a lot to take very quickly. The action is at least decent, though oddly they had the worst action scene be the climax, but I cannot call this a good film even with the broken scale by virtue of what it is a pseudo sequel of.
Robbie - 2.5
Winstead - 2
Smollett-Bell - 2.5
Perez - 2.5
Messina - 2.5
McGregor - 2
Basco - 1.5
Color Out of Space I thought was largely effective, particularly its psychedelic imagery, which I felt managed to carry it through the somewhat predictable path of the narrative. I'll say I wish the family dynamic didn't so get thrown out of the window in the last act, but still I found it overall to be more than decent trip into Lovecraftian insanity.
Guess I'll save Cage at this venture.
Richardson - 3
Arthur - 3.5
Meyer - 3
Knight - 2.5
Chong - 3
Michael:
To defend the Raimi films in general, I think there is becoming a little bit of troubling problem with blockbusters where it is the view that films must exist within a certain tone, the Raimi films are broader and more say 60's comic booky as written as directed, or it's a problem. I have for one prefer a range of styles for any type of film including blockbusters, or lest they start feeling like a product, which is how I feel about the Marvel Spider-man films in particular.
Louis: Your thoughts on the casts.
Louis: Are you saving Bad Education and THOTKG till last.
Louis: Thoughts on the direction & cinematography for Color Out of Space?
Also, 80s cast & director for that film?
Although I definitely liked Winstead more than Louis, I can completely understand his dislike of "Birds of Prey" in general.
Honestly, the responses to the film have been so scattered - from admiration to loathing - and the funny thing is I can't really argue against either camp.
The new Harley Quinn cartoon is actually inexplicably excellent. It’s Venture Bros-styled comedy to a fault at times, but I won’t deny it hits its mark more often than not.
1. Kapoor
2. Tatum
3. Hardy
4. Hawke
5. Stevens
1. Isaac
2. Renner
3. Cruise
4. Gulpilil
5. Eisenberg
Also I'll say this in defense of Winstead and McGregor:
In the film Huntress was so hilariously sidelined that it really didn't matter who was in the role. That said, Winstead still strikes me as an inspired choice, and I would pay good money to see her in a solo outing as the character.
McGregor, meanwhile, had a pretty thankless, one dimensional villain role that the movie couldn't care less about. Like Winstead, though, I did like the basic idea of McGregor's casting, and the energy he did show in the part. Is he at all menacing? Most certainly not, but at the same time I didn't really hate him in the film, as I was generally amused by his antics.
Michael:
Also all for that Jim Jarmusch Spider-Man
"ADAM DRIVER IS SPIDER-MAN"
"BILL MURRAY IS NORMAN OSBORNE"
and "TOM WAITS AS THE GHOST OF UNCLE BEN"
Anonymous:
Not fully adjudicate things too much, but just to over each a bit with reflection.
Maguire I think is by the far the most honest to Peter Parker as a character. This as this awkward guy where there is the real sense of weight of really living up to "With Great Power Comes Responsibility" (I line they should not have retired in the reboots), but more than anything properly embodies the underdog/average man nature of the character. He's not the most extreme nerd, just a nerd, and more than anything just a guy trying make it as a hero. He is lacking though in finding the humor of spider-man, though in the scheme of the films, I don't really care that much, I'd rather care about the character, and I do with his spider-man.
Garfield is the worst possible Peter Parker, far too cool for school even as the nerd. He technically better captures the humor of Spider-man as a hero I guess, but I think Parker is far more important than the Spider-man persona as a character. As Parker, he's all wrong for it but to be fair he is in the worst films. He does have the best chemistry with his romantic lead though.
Tom Holland is a likable, charismatic and talented performer. Although, despite other claims, I'd say he's the least faithful to the comic character. In his version of the character is just a punk who wants to be other superheroes...well really just Iron Man. There is no motivation ever given to him other than that, and I hate the fact that Uncle Ben doesn't seem to exist. (I didn't need to see the full thing of the Uncle Ben, but just recognition that he exists would've been nice). I don't like his Spider-Man in conception, as basically this ADHD adrenaline junkie when you break him down. Holland though is good as that version of the character.
I don't think there is a perfect version of the character yet, but I've come to find Maguire's to be truest to the spirit of the character so far.
Luke:
Robbie - (Her routine this time just gets tiresome very quickly. She goes all in and there are some slightly emotional moments that she shows off her chops. Most it though is just being cwazzy, which is so self-assured yet sadly fails to be entertaining or engaging.
Winstead - (She'd be a 2.5, but her "I'm angry" joke delivery I thought was just atrocious. The rest of the time she is just in a terrible role and can't make anything of it. This in just a generally disinterested expression and "I'm going to kill you lines". I typically like Winstead a lot, but here she fails to connect.)
Smollett-Bell - (I mean she's fine in just a general sort of way, in an extremely underwritten role, as you'd be hard-pressed to figure out why her character is doing anything. She at least is fine at the in the moment performance in silence.)
Perez - (Doing what has largely become her typical thing, and a rather forgettable example of that.)
Messina - (Standard sleaze, nothing to note one way or another.)
McGregor - (Well his role is one note flamboyance, to which felt ridiculous. That is in part the point, but it doesn't work in either in creating menace through insanity nor humor through it. He's just prancing around while being over the top, seems to be having fun himself, but he doesn't bring us into sadly.)
Basco - (Oooh, just a lot of stilted deliveries, and her attempts in the emotional moments are painfully inadequate.)
Richardson - (Somewhat limited however she is effective in portraying the extreme ravages of the insanity effectively.)
Arthur - (Portrays the extreme ravages of the insanity effectively, but is also good though in creating at least a minor sense of the more sympathetic protagonist. She delivers well in creating a sense of the growing horror particularly well, which compliments Cage's performance in an important way.)
Meyer - (Effective in just being a doofus screwup, in finding enough of a comic energy and a sense of befuddlement of someone entirely out of their element.)
Knight - (Kind of forgettable in the scheme of things, but he's fine enough, particularly in his horrified reactions later on.)
Chong - (He's definitely doing his usual thing, but with a slight twinge of dread infused in that is rather effectively done.)
Bryan:
Well I'm glad Richard Stanley finally found a way to make another feature film, after all that was in Moreau, where he still needs to be played by Sharlto Copley in a telling of that story, but I digress. Anyways, while the script I think could've a had bit more to it. Stanley's direction is fantastic. I like that he plays it fairly straight early on and slowly then builds towards the insanity. Using the surreal imagery sparingly at first just to create a sense of dread, and grant the sense of the deterioration of the family first. This before exploding into insanity, where his choices regarding the effects, and the intensity of that insane imagery are most effective.
The cinematography by Steve Annis is fantastic, in his choices in terms of the wide shots that establish a sense of place, and grants sort of beautiful tranquility early on. This making the introduction of the artificial light all the more dynamic and really unforgettable in its distinctiveness. His work is particularly notable as the film goes on by creating such a particularly captivating neon bit of insanity in utilizing the VFX/lighting to craft some rather memorable imagery.
Color Out of Space 1980's directed by Alex Cox:
Nathan: Harry Dean Stanton
Theresa: Polly Bergen
Lavinia: Olivia Barash
Benny: Emilio Estevez
Ezra: Tracey Walter
Ward Phillips: Laurence Fishburne
Having seen Haider and Charlie’s Country now I’m very confident this will be A Most Excellent Lineup
Need to check out Color Out of Space and agree strongly with all the Spidey thoughts, Louis.
Also for that Jarmusch cast: Roberto Begnini as Doc Ock.
Louis: I agree there's not a perfect live-action version of Peter Parker yet, but in animation we have The Spectacular Spider-Man TV show, which *is* perfect, and Josh Keaton is almost as synonymous with that role for me as Kevin Conroy is with Batman. Almost.
I mostly agree with Louis, though I’m a little more enthusiastic about Maguire. But I also agree Josh Keaton’s Spider-Man was a perfect depiction. (Also, by far my favorite handling of Venom)
Louis: Your cast/director for a 1950s version of Back to the Future?
Apparently, Richard Stanley is currently working on a second Lovecraft adaptation too.
The characterization of the Tom Holland version is why I like the idea of a Jim Jarmusch version. His presence within the MCU pigeonholed the character. I just want to watch him go around being his friendly neighborhood Spider-Man and struggling with his Uncle's death, not trying to be an Avenger.
Louis: Since your obviously not a fan of the film's execution (Nor am I, to be perfectly frank), who would you have chosen to direct and write "Birds of Prey"?
Also, I asked this question on the last post, but what do you think of the voices of Eva Green and Leonard Nemoy?
1. Tom Hardy
2. Channing Tatum
3. Dan Stevens
4. Shahid Kapoor
5. Ethan Hawke
1. David Gulpilil
2. Oscar Isaac
3. Jeremy Renner
4. Tom Cruise
5. Jesse Eisenberg
Michael: Your ratings for the two lineups.
Louis: I've just seen "Mister 880", and can't really imagine you gave 2.5 to Gwenn. This is a great role, in my humble opinion, with so many details to observe. Have you considered rewatching movies you reviewed some time ago, as this one?
Mitchell: I really missed Leonard Nimoy when I played Kingdom Hearts 3. He was easily the perfect Xehanort.
Louis: Out of all the 2010s films that you saw Christian Bale in, which one would technically be your favorite? Looking it over, it's not...great.
Bryan: I'd probably choose Ford V Ferrari and Hostiles is by far the most disappointing of the bunch.
Luke: Agreed on Hostiles, since it just kept frustrating me more and more as it went along.
Luke: I thought Rutger Hauer did his best but sadly was not quite right as Xehanort although still had a bit of power in his voice in certain scenes, however I really liked Christopher Lloyd when he did the DLC version of Xehanort.
Very excited about Dan Stevens getting reviewed, this is definitely his star making turn.
RatedRStar: The Ralph Fiennes of his generation. Honestly, I lost much of my investment in Downton Abbey when he left and he's certainly great in The Guest. Legion is easily his best work to date though.
I watched The Guest today. Stevens is an incredibly strong 4.5 for me in it, the film wouldn't have been any good without him in it.
Films To Watch
Olive Kitteridge
The Normal Heart
Birdman (Potential Upgrade for Duncan)
Fury (Potential Upgrade for LaBeouf)
Stretch (Final rating for Chris Pine)
Big Hero 6
The Lego Movie
Song Of The Sea
How To Train Your Dragon 2
When Marnie Was There
Maleficent (One of Jolie's better turns)
The Maze Runner
Neighbors
22 Jump Street (Just as good as the first)
The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Part 1
300: Rise Of An Empire (Must watch for Eva Green's performance)
Exodus: Gods And Kings
A Girl Walks Home Alone at Night
The Raid 2
Noah
The Water Diviner (Two very solid turns from Crowe)
'71 (Jack O'Connell)
Belle (Gugu Mbatha-Raw)
Beyond The Lights (Gugu Mbatha-Raw)
Under The Skin
Clouds Of Sils Maria (Juliette Binoche/Kristen Stewart)
Camp X-Ray
Mommy
Tom At The Farm
Winter Sleep
Leviathan
Force Majeure
Timbuktu
Phoenix
Gett: The Trial Of Viviane Amsalem
Jauja (Viggo Mortensen)
A Second Chance (Nikolaj Coster-Waldau)
Pasolini (Willem Dafoe)
The Trip To Italy (Steve Coogan)
The Hundred-Foot Journey
Get On Up
Black Sea (Jude Law)
The Way He Looks
Girlhood (Celine Sciamma)
While We're Young
Jimmy's Hall
Night Moves (Jesse Eisenberg)
The Salvation (Mads Mikkelsen)
Lucy (Johansson/Min-Sik)
Cold In July (Sam Shepard/Don Johnson)
Horns (Daniel Radcliffe)
Housebound
Northern Soul
Kajaki
The Tribe
Coming Home
Lilting (Ben Whishaw)
Tracks (Mia Wasikowska)
Trash
Eden
In Order Of Disappearance (Stellan Skarsgard)
A Hard Day
The Grand Seduction
Listen Up Philip
Bird People
The Wonders
Saint Laurent
White God
Veronica Mars
Breathe In (Guy Pearce)
A Pigeon Sat On A Branch Reflecting On Existence
Breathe
Dear White People
Jimi: All Is By My Side
The F Word
The Monuments Men
Devil's Knot (Atom Egoyan)
Felony
Half Of A Yellow Sun
Mary Queen Of Scots
The Stag
Love, Rosie
Obvious Child
Non-Stop
I Origins
Magic In The Moonlight (Woody Allen)
God Help The Girl
Serena
Miss Julie
God's Pocket
The Admiral: Roaring Currents
Palo Alto
Grace Of Monaco
Jesus Christ, Luke. I get we’re all quarantined but just... Jesus.
Robert: He doesn't have to watch them all. I made the list as well for future reference.
Damn almost forgot about Pigeon Sitting on a Branch, that’s another to add to the watchlist. Cheers Luke! Although I feel bad for Louis if he ends up watching that awful 300 sequel.
Calvin: I really want to get his thoughts on Eva Green though.
I'd love it if Louis did a joint review of Tatum's work in 22 Jump Street alongside Foxcatcher, even though it's unlikely. I'd give him a strong 4 for that though.
Tahmeed: I'd be happy if he gave his thoughts on his work in 22 Jump Street in his review, 2014 was a fairly strong year for him.
Luke:
Hardy: 5
Tatum: 5
Stevens: 4/4.5
Kapoor: 4
Hawke: 4
Gulpilil: 5
Isaac: 5
Renner: 4.5
Cruise: 4.5
Eisenberg: 4/4.5 (could use a rewatch on that)
My ratings would be, Hawke unseen:
Hardy: 5
Tatum: 5
Stevens: 4.5
Kapoor: 4.5
Gulpilil: 5
Isaac: 5
Cruise: 5
Renner: 4.5
Eisenberg: 4.5
My rating predictions
Hardy - 5
Stevens - 4.5
Kapoor - 4/4.5
Hawke - 4
Gulpilil - 5
Renner - 5
Cruise - 4.5/5
Eisenberg - 4.5
Luke: that’s fair but it really is an awful film, and I’d rather Louis spent the time watching quality stuff he’d want to watch.
Calvin: I suppose he could watch it during the Supporting round instead to get the more positive experiences out of the way.
True. It’s just that the previous post got me thinking that we (myself definitely included) lump a bit too much pressure to get Louis to try and watch everything while we can kind of pick and choose what to watch at leisure, which can be a bit stressful + the fact he has to give thoughts and reviews to so many of them. I’m definitely going to be more aware with the next year comes round not to be so insistent on films to check out. Rant over sorry haha
Luke: Here here. As someone who tried blogging before, and understands how it can make you feel having to cram so much into so little time, it does put a certain weight on you. Louis is doing a great job regardless, and so I'm going to keep giving him all the breathing room he needs to keep doing what he enjoys.
On a different note - and I do apologize if asking this seems inappropriate - but has anyone seen the trailer for "Unhinged"? While I have problems with its release time, and the subject matter itself will undoubtedly cause backlash, I just got to say.....welcome back Russell Crowe.
Mitchell: experience is definitely what’s making me say this here. I’ve been trying to do a film a day and a short writeup a day in these quarantine times with a lot of free time and even that is draining, so I can’t imagine having to go take requests to watch so many films (so many of them first-time watches) and doing long write ups for a great deal of them (plus taking our requests for thoughts and such).
Calvin: I've been trying to do the same sort of thing, and it is indeed quite draining. I mean, my plan for today was to watch "Coal Miner's Daughter" for the first time, but I find myself debating about whether or not to do that now.
I've also got a list of best actor/actress years that I'm slowly completing, but it's still going to take a fair amount of time.
Calvin: I don't mind him taking his time with this year to be fair. Also, Not many will agree with me here but a 10 lineup for Supporting might be feasible if you add Clement or Darby from What We Do In The Shadows, Shepard and Johnson in Cold In July, Matthias Schoenaerts in The Drop and Shia LaBeouf in Fury but yet again, it's up to Louis.
Luke: again, that’s fair enough, and I agree that I won’t mind a bit more time being taken since I prefer that anyway (more time to read each review and let the critical appraisal sink in). Sorry if I sounded snippy.
Calvin: That's Okay.
Having watched Charlie’s Country for the first time last night I just wanna say Louis, if you haven’t seen it yet I’d say you’re in for a treat. Let’s just say it would be fair to describe Gulpilil’s presence as “Harry Dean Stanton-esque.”
Just going to throw in a documentary rec
Lost Soul: The Doomed Journey of Richard Stanley's Island of Dr. Moreau (A companion piece to Hearts of Darkness)
Luke, having seen Downton Abbey, what would be your thoughts on Dan Stevens’ performance there?
Well I did get around to watching "Coal Miner's Daughter" after all, and liked it just fine. I have some issues in its ending and portrayal of the central relationship, but overall, its certainly a stronger example of the musical biopic genre.
Spacek - 4.5
Jones - 4
D'Angelo - 3
Helm - 3
Anonymous: I stopped watching after the 2013 Christmas Special, so my memory's pretty hazy. From what I can recall, he gave a strong performance that had great chemistry with Michelle Dockery. I also really liked the relationships between Brendan Coyle/Joanne Froggat and Jim Carter/Phyllis Logan.
I was just skimming that "Films to watch" list and I wanna just say that Cold in July is awful.
Matt: Oh is it, nevermind then.
Matt: What did you think of Shepard and Johnson though.
Luke: Shepard's fine, because he's a great actor, but not special. Johnson's kinda bad.
Luke: I watched Downton from start to finish, though I haven't made time for the movie yet. The Jim Carter/Phyllis Logan relationship became easily to most compelling relationship in the show for me. Dockery, despite her inconsistent writing and character's dislikability, was easily the dramatic MVP once Stevens left (I'd have them on equal footing before his departure). Dame Maggie was consistently great, but was even more sidelined to the quips as the series progressed. The Coyle/Froggatt relationship quickly soured for me, with Coyle's character constantly meeting new challenges in the same self-destructive ways he did before (his reaction to Froggatt's rape being a particular example). It also doesn't help that Coyle's voice annoyed the hell out of me. Froggatt, however, was consistently winning.
Outside of the out-and-out soapiness of the later parts of the show, which created melodrama via somewhat ridiculous circumstances, rather than coming about it in the more natural way it did in season 1 and (less so) season 2, I had problems with how it would develop characters only to leave them out in the cold. The biggest example that comes to mind is Rob James-Collier's character, who's antagonism toward everything good are barbs he uses to protect himself from the pain of his own closeted homosexuality and both inward and outward cowardice. James-Collier is terrific in showing this during seasons 1 and 2. But then Fellowes simply ignores the characterization and makes him a straight villain with no redeeming qualities. It's a massive shame.
Michael: I think we're more or less in agreement despite only seeing 2 thirds of its run.
Louis: What Background image did you use for 2014 because I don't recall it being from your top ten.
What’s the film with the background image of silhouettes, the sun and some cacti? Beneath Days of Heaven and next to Valhalla Rising.
Bryan: It must be The Right Stuff.
Luke: I think it is, since it was posted right before/during ‘83. Also, there’s a plane in the pic, which is a giveaway.
Luke: I'm pretty sure the 2014 pic is from Mr. Turner.
Matt: I'd completely forgotten about it.
That reminds me, that was brilliant work by Dick Poop.
Luke: ...they had one job.
Okay, I'm going to tweak my predictions slightly.
1) Kapoor
2) Stevens
3) Tatum
4) Hardy
5) Hawke
1) Gulpilil
2) Isaac
3) Cruise
4) Renner
5) Eisenberg
I can honestly imagine Cruise getting a 5, since the performance really is a great subversion of his usual action role. A re-watch of "Edge of Tommorow" could easily do that for me too.
Driveways is a sweet little film. Other than the final scene, which is rather outstanding, its just a nice mostly breezy tale. Gives a chance for Hong Chau to show a more naturalistic side of her talent, as one of the more underrated up and coming talents around, and gives a worthy sendoff to an ever reliable character actor.
Definitely saving Dennehy.
Chau - 4
Jaye - 3
Adler - 3
The Hunt isn't particularly good, but easy enough to watch thanks to a strong anchor at the center of it, a brief running time and some half way decent thriller moments. The satire, which skewers the extremes of either side, isn't all that decent to begin with, but is made worse by the direction that struggles with the dark humor in the piece. Honestly though it feels like Lindelof wrote an hour long twilight zone style episode, since it isn't even 90 minutes, and there feels like filler in those minutes, particularly the stretched out "reveal" behind the plot.
Gilpin - 4
Barinholtz - 2.5
Madigan - 3
Suplee - 3
Swank - 2
Blair - 2.5
The Golden god - 3(Sadly underused as usual)
Aidan:
Calvin and I, discussed one here: http://actoroscar.blogspot.com/2015/07/alternate-best-supporting-actor-1989_14.html
Bryan:
Sounds good to me.
Mitchell:
I mean not every film needs an established writer/director. I think more than anything they should've cleaned the slate even more, maybe even keep Robbie but the stink of Suicide Squad still was there in my mind.
Eva Green - (One of the most naturally sultry and sexy voices around. She exudes in all parts, her voice helps greatly.)
Nimoy - (Fittingly the voice of logic. That is his voice though which is this wonderful American refined, that just exudes certain intelligence)
Bryan:
The Fighter....which oddly is the O. Russell film I always forget about.
Michael:
Well looking forward to it all the more then.
Ah, so not enough Golden God to warrant the watch then? Although I am a fan of Gilpin. Very interested in Driveways now.
Also even though Bale has mostly been in really mediocre films, I love his work and really like Ford v Ferrari and The Fighter, so I guess he bookended the decade with strong turns and films, IMO.
Louis: Thoughts on Chau and Gilpin.
Louis: If you love Gulpilil, which I'm sure you will, then you should consider reviewing him for The Tracker (2002) as well.
Louis, thoughts on the rest of the casts?
1. Hardy
2. Tatum
3. Stevens
4. Kapoor
5. Hawke
1. Gulpilil
2. Isaac
3. Renner
4. Cruise
5. Eisenberg
1. Tatum
2. Hardy
3. Kapoor
4. Stevens
5. Hawke
1. Isaac
2. Renner
3. Gulpilil
4. Cruise
5. Eisenberg
Louis: You've given thoughts on Howerton, Day and McElhenney's performances in It's Always Sunny before, but could I also have your general thoughts on their work as writers on the show?
Anonymous: How much of it actually is even written? They seem to improvise A LOT.
Luke:
Chau - (Just a gentle earnest performance from her. This as we've seen her do broad successfully with Watchmen, Downsizing and Inherent Vice. Her she is low key and successfully so. Her role does not call upon too much overt dramatic, but she just delivers an honesty in this mother just trying to make things best for her and her son. Effectively just to the point and genuine in these interactions throughout the film.)
Gilpen - (I'd say her performance perhaps best captured the tone the film was attempting, that it didn't quite reach. In that her performance manages to be both comical and appropriately earnest. This in her often quite hilarious reactions to the idiocy or lunacy of others, with her terrific directness of her performance. She barely has much of a character to work with, but in her sort situational performance she shines so effortlessly. This creating a protagonist you do root for in her earnest doggedness within her performance, low key intensity, but the right sense of humor. If the rest of the film had hit her mark, it might've worked entirely, but she does make it quite watchable on her shoulders.)
Anonymous:
Jaye - (Not a great child performance by any measure, but a decent one. He at least find a degree of naturalism in his work finding the right chemistry with Dennehy.)
Adler - (Just an enjoyable slightly comical but largely earnest turn.)
Barinholtz - (I'm still trying to figure out what his appeal is exactly, but I thought he wasn't aggressively bad at least. He kind of grants the weight of the situation but not much else.)
Madigan - (The spirit of her performance perhaps is what the film needed more as she managed to do a deranged "dogooder" effectively, with the right wholesome qualities just above psychopathy.)
Suplee - (As expected reliable in a tired role, but he definitely delivers.)
Swank -(Okay her character is slightly underwritten in that there is no reason that she's the "big boss" other than she is. She kind of tries to do what Gilpen does, but just isn't remotely as successful in her attempt. Her broadest moments are her worst sadly, and just doesn't deliver on the menace or comedy needed.)
Blair - (Underused, though fine in his 30 seconds or so of screentime)
Howerton - (Alas, in his performance as a less psychotic Dennis, he is enjoyable and also gets the tone, but they sadly barely use it. They really disrespected him those little IDIOTS IDIOTS IDIOTS SAVAGES, IDIOTS, IDIOTS.)
Anonymous:
They're funny.
Louis: Thoughts on the editing and cinematography for Little Women (2019)
Escape from Pretoria is just kind of eh. Nothing overtly bad about it, but there's nothing particularly good about it either. Unfortunate as it seems to have an engaging true story behind it, but sadly doesn't come across on screen.
Radcliffe - 3
Webber - 2.5
Hart - 3
Winter - 3(Who looks like combination of Billy Mitchell and Daniel Day-Lewis from The Crucible)
The Invisible Man is an effective thriller largely thanks to Moss's performance and Leigh Whannell's atmospheric direction. Like Upgrade however, his script is kind of stupid, really stupid in parts, however the virtues of the film carry it past those issues.
Moss - 4.5
Jackson-Cohen - 2.5
Aldis Hodge - 2.5
Dyer - 2.5
Dorman - 3
Anonymous:
Have I not covered that before?
Thoughts on Radcliffe and Moss.
Anonymous: he definitely has coveted those, try looking it up.
Oops! I found the cinematography and direction thoughts, where the editing was kind of covered in the latter. Sorry about that!
Gonna change my predictions a bit...
1. Hardy
2. Tatum
3. Stevens
4. Kapoor
5. Hawke
1. Isaac
2. Gulpillil
3. Cruise
4. Renner
5. Eisenberg
Louis: Thoughts on the rest of the casts and would you place Webber in lead or supporting?
Louis: Who do you think would’ve been a more natural fit instead of Tim Roth for Guildenstern?
Louis: could Butler go up to at least a 4 for The Vanishing? I watched it today and while I agree with most of your reservations about the film (though I think they were definitely going in the right direction), thought that him and Mullan were both equally excellent.
And thoughts for Swindells? While he wasn’t nearly as good as the other two I’d still probably give him a 3.5 or so.
your thoughts on Julie Walters in Billy Elliot? i watched it yesterday and thought she was really good (as i am generally trying to get some more Supporting Actress nominees). I espeially liked how she is neither openly cruel like a Fletcher-type character, but rather nice and understanding, while still giving enough strictness and command when needed. I just sadly wished for more of a Closing Scene for her.
RIP Fred Willard. One of the funniest ever.
R.I.P. Fred Willard and Lynn Shelton
well, i just saw The Road and loved it, even though it depressed the hell out of me. I especially loved the cinematography which was shamefully snubbed from most big Awards.
Pierce: 3
Williams: 3.5
Theron: 3
Duvall: 4/4.5
Smit-McPhee: 4
Mortensen: absolute 5, it is almost mean that they didn't nominate him but Morgan Freeman.
R.I.P. Fred Willard
Tim: The cinematography is amazing and it's one of the best examples of how to make "ugly" look beautiful.
Luke:
Radcliffe - (His performance is fine, however it alludes to limits of the material that keeps his character as this generalized political prisoner. Radcliffe shows the needed passion of the cause combined with the sense of intensity in the wear of the situation. Sadly there is no character there for him to take it any further.)
Moss - (Her performance more than anything sells the horror, that which I think could've built up her mental decay just slightly in terms of the narrative, as they put her near the edge almost instantly. To Moss's credit though she absolutely delivers on this idea with a real sense of the anxiety of the situation and the ptsd of the relationship within her performance. This effectively portraying early on the fear combined with paranoia, though that which slowly shifts from paranoia to a certain degree of conviction within the mental exhaustion. It's terrific performance that overcomes even the sillier moments by giving such an honest portrayal of it as this abusive relationship not just a "supernatural" evil.)
Razor:
Webber - (He's lead I guess, but if Radcliffe's character seemed limited he is at an even greater extreme that regard. He's fine with this extreme limitation put upon him, but no more than that unfortunately.)
Hart - (Again so limited him as the man set upon staying a prisoner to theoretically do good later on. Hart portrays this effectively particularly the sense of desperation within the conviction. Again though so little to work with overall.)
Winter - (Manages to perhaps give the most emotionally resonate work by portraying well the certain need of the character to find comfort within the escape, and his final expression is particularly good. Again though the character needed more to it.)
Jackson-Cohen - (His just voice work isn't even that good. His main performance though fails to kind of fill in the blank of a challenge presented in the script, that being why would this hyper genius decide to use all his wealth just to do this one time consuming thing. This might've made sense if we saw a real egomaniac genius in his performance, unfortunately he comes off as just a dolt doofus who couldn't possible event a thing.)
Hodge - (Hard to get that much of a sense of his character unfortunately, he's okay, but again all the supporting roles are very poorly written.)
Dyer - (A bit less than fine in a very limited part.)
Dorman - (A more effective creep turn actually than the "lead" creep, in fact why not have him be the main villain to "avenge" his brother, but I digress. Dorman though at least does the sleaze effectively with the right tint of menace along with the earlier scenes of a false affability.)
Anonymous:
Well really just needed someone more equal to Oldman's presence, so a Ralph Fiennes, Alan Rickman, or even the way to pair him with Day-Lewis...though then it would've also needed a far more adapted version of the play to do justice to that pairing.
Calvin:
No, I think it is a better than usual Butler, but let's remember what standard Butler is like. I'll say he is good though, but I think he falls into the film's major flaw. That being the third act feels extremely rushed, particularly the descent of the character. Butler's Bogart in Madre, descent, just sort of happens instantly as written, leaving his performance just to instantly switch. Again not his fault, but it leaves a gap there.
Swindells I thought was fine but was dealing with the least of the characters as the other guy, akin to Tim Holt in Treasure, although less of that straight forward earnest presence. He's still fine in effectively conveying sort of the sense of greed and danger that reveals itself in the situation.
RIP Fred Willard & Lynn Shelton
Hoping for a Willard review for Best in Show. "Let me ask you a question. And this may be a bit off the path. How much do you think I could benchpress?"
RIP Fred Willard
to get back on my Question, i would really like hearing your thoughts on Julie Walters in Billy Elliot
Tim:
I believe I've covered her before.
Rest in peace, Fred Willard and Lynn Shelton.
ah shoot. Somebody know where?
Louis: I can't find any thoughts on Walters but you did give her a 3.5.
Louis: Your thoughts on the casts for today's viewings.
Louis, what makes a successful film critic or in your case, blogger.
Anonymous: Well first, you need to be a talented writer, second, you don't insult your readership and third, always have an open mind when you're going to view, play or listen to an entertainment product.
Louis, and who do you think could potentially be the next Sean Bean or John Hurt in terms of on-screen deaths.
Anonymous: Dean-Charles Chapman would come to mind as of late. His survival rate is quite bad.
Luke: See, I'm really glad I didn't know that about him before I saw 1917.
I might be mistaken but I think Chapman's the only actor to die twice on Game Of Thrones.
Luke: Technically, I think Richard Dormer’s in there as well.
Michael: Okay, fair enough. But the difference being Chapman played two roles.
Onward, ahh shall I be the Pixar troll again? Well it is another film about two companions learning about each other by going on a road trip, not to get home this time, but almost, and in the end I'm still correct. I can't wait for Soul, about two companions and someone trying to get home....man Pixar with those creative plots every time. Anyway, though Pixar uses that same boilerplate, there is some fun to be had in the world and the family relationship aspect provides enough weight, though I felt the structure was absurdly repetitive this time, "what spell does Ian need to cast next". Definitely middling Pixar, from the Pixar grump that I am, but I'd qualify it as enjoyable enough.
Holland & Pratt - 3.5(Both are cast squarely in their pigeonholes, but hey that provides a nice shorthand for their characters. This that they definitely each find that side well, and do hit their more emotional moments effectively. Not anything new from either of them, but a good example of their presences in voice form.)
Louis-Dreyfus - 3(For some reason she never sounds like herself in voice acting...anyway, fine work as to be expected from her)
Spencer - 3(Decent enough more broadly over the top voice work from her.)
Extraction's plot is very thin, if not rather flimsy, and takes a bit too long to literally get to the chase. The action though is good and you can very much see the John Wick influence, and not just because the film is by another stunt coordinator. The action, and Hemsworth carry it just enough to be a decent thrill ride, though I really hated the color palette.
Hemsworth - 3.5(No comedy to grasp onto, but I have to say this is one of his better purely dramatic turns. This as he manages to really find the emotion of the action scenes here. This in delivering a far stronger performance that he has. Although I still think he's best off bringing humor into his work, this was a fine turn where he avoided it.)
Jaiswal - 3(A more than decent performance in just offering a emotional scene partner in a few scenes with Hemsworth. Nothing quite amazing but he delivers on his end.)
Harbour - 3(I mean you know instantly where things are going to go with his character, but Harbour still delivers on the switch effectively.)
For the record I have three films left to watch:
Bad Education (which I'm counting in standard competition this year due to the Academy streaming rule)
True History of the Kelly Gang
and the most important film in history obviously:
Bad Boys For Life (though as it is well I haven't seen Bad Boys 2, I hope I'm not lost).
Also I'd gladly watch David Copperfield, but it doesn't appear to be available anywhere yet.
Luke & Tim:
For quick thoughts then. I think she is effective in finding sort of the duality of the harsh but caring teacher. This in finding the right way to funnel the intensity of her performance with this sense that she is always doing it for the betterment for the student. Giving this hard edge in her performance though always within that finding the nuance in the sense of someone who is doing through that passion rather than cruelty.
Anonymous:
Well successful doesn't always equal to good, but Luke's rules are a fine set. To add to that, one needs to be able to articulate their thoughts, have a true passion for film and offer their own perspective.
Anonymous:
I have to agree with Luke, with The King, 1917 and Game of Thrones (x2), he's got quite the head-start.
Just a random question for everyone here; What would you say is your favourite Arnold Schwarzenegger performance?
For myself, it might honestly be "True Lies". In terms of pure entertainment value, I feels it's one of his most assured turns, simply for how comfortable he seemed in the part. It's also makes great use of that strange Schwarzenegger charm, along with a surprising amount of comedy, in what is simply a funny, consistently enjoyable performance.
Mitchell: The Long Goodbye.
In all seriousness though, either Terminator 2 or yes, True Lies which I agree with you on. I also hear that he's really good in Maggie.
1. Tom Hardy
2. Channing Tatum
3. Dan Stevens
4. Shahid Kapoor
5. Ethan Hawke
1. David Gulpilil
2. Oscar Isaac
3. Jeremy Renner
4. Tom Cruise
5. Jesse Eisenberg
Louis: could you watch Never Rarely Sometimes Always for 2020 as well?
Louis: I'm pleased you've decided to make Bad Education eligible as I'd very much like to see a Jackman review.
Also, hopefully a copy of David Copperfield will be up by the end of next month with its upcoming UK DVD release.
Omar:
Sure.
Mitchell:
Terminator 2
Luke:
Well hopefully they put it for streaming somewhere before then, or else they've bungled things big time.
Louis: Would you ever consider returning to Deadwood once the bonus rounds are finished. I would like to have a full analysis of McShane's work there.
So I watched "Bad Education" just now and thought it was effective. On it's own the film is a well done handled recreation of the 2002 Roslyn scandal, though it obviously shines with its script and cast.
Jackman - 5 (Arguably the most textured performance he's ever given.)
Janney - 4.5
Viswanathan - 3.5
Ashford - 3
Romano - 3
Wolff - 2.5
*Well done*
Christopher Nolan allegedly wanted Robin Williams to play the Joker; thoughts?
Also your thoughts on the direction of My Fair Lady
Tim: Don't think he'd reach the level of Ledger's work but after coming off of One Hour Photo and Insomnia (Which they collaborated on), I'm sure Nolan would've got something tremendous out of him.
Louis and Luke, what do you think went wrong with The Snowman?
Does Bad Education's pending release on HBO Max mean that it will be eligible for both the Oscars and the Emmys? God this year is weird.
Tim and Luke: It would have been a completely different take than the one Ledger had, but he probably could've been brilliant in his own way.
Michael: Just the Emmys. The catch for the rule change is that they’re only eligible for the Oscars if they were originally intended to have a theatrical release. Bad Education was bought by HBO after it premiered at a fall festival.
The more I think about it, the more I realize that Bad Education is the film that The Front Runner SHOULD have been.
Bryan: I think I read somewhere that HBO was planning some sort of minor theatrical release before releasing it, so it's still a grey area.
Bryan: That's a loss for the oscars then, I suppose. Don't get me wrong, I like Jackman in "Les Miserables", but I do feel his work in "Logan" and "Bad Education" would've been worthy in their own right.
Tahmeed: Oh...well in that case they still have time to correct that.
Tahmeed: Hhmmm I hadn’t heard of that. They’ll definitely want contenders for any type of awards season this year, so they could maybe still work things out.
Also, how would you rank Jack Davenport in The Curse of the Black Pearl? Not that i expected anything from that, a solid 2.5/3, normal supporting Performance for me. I just cannot find him in your overall rank for 2003, even though Rush is there.
Never Rarely Sometimes Always has a great scene, the titular one. Sadly that is all that I can praise. This being another independent film that confuses naturalism with being inert. This as there is potential there, but it chooses not to develop the characters, lest it be inauthentic. This to be naturalistic I assume, as I guess real people are only ever boring, poorly developed, and you're given very little of their background? It also fell a bit into the condescending qualities of near constant misery of the downtrodden central characters, particularly with the endless parade of creeps we see them encounter. Again I'll praise that titular scene, but it seems like that was a great idea for a short film, extended with a whole lot of nothing. There's a great version of this film called 4 months, 3 weeks and 2 Days, which frankly this felt like a ripoff of...but you took out everything that made that film great (and I will not be accepting requests for further thoughts on that film until I get to 2007 again).
Flanigan - 3.5
Ryder - 2.5
Bad Boys For Life is very stupid, and gets way too melodramatic in its plot twists that suggest that Will Smith has it in his contract that a worthy foe can only be himself. Still there is fun to be had I have to admit, with some good action scenes, and the occasional enjoyable banter.
Smith - 3.5
Lawrence - 2.5
Nunez - 2.5
Hudgens - 2.5
Ludwig - 2
Melton - 2
Scipio - 2.5
Castillo - 2
Pantoliano - 3
Finally I thought Bad Education was terrific, finding just the right tone for the true story, as both an effective procedural of unraveling it all, along with a compelling off-beat character study, that puts The Wizard of Lies to shame, a horrible shame honestly. As this was just terrific, blending within it the right touch of a comic satire, however not overplaying that element either.
Saving Jackman.
Janney - 4
Romano - 3.5
Viswanathan - 3.5
Wolff - 3
Casal - 3
Spinella - 3
Luke:
Probably not. It just didn't hook me, which I really need a series to do to get the will to take the investment for a series. Again not that I thought it was bad, but it didn't pull me in unfortunately, despite liking the performances.
Anonymous:
Hard to say exactly, I could play the clip of Krusty the clown in the recording booth, but apparently that was the case according to Alfredson. I mean it doesn't add up, as you have a talented cast, talented screenwriters, a talented director, great editors (though I think they were probably hired because the film was incomplete) and what was churned out was nearly incomprehensible garbage, well Dion Beebe did his job, almost deserves a special award for that. Almost all else is aggressively incompetent, that I wish there was a behind the scenes documentary to explain how that happened exactly.
Tim:
I mean what direction? George Cukor could deliver a terrific film, often with remarkable atmosphere and a sense for performances. That is hard to see here, as the sets couldn't look more like sets, the staging couldn't be more stagnant of the songs, and the whole approach to the film is just of the dullest possible presentation of a stage work. He doesn't just shoot a stage production, but he might as well have done so by how lifeless his work is in it. Few moments do you sense any inspiration other than to flatly put on screen what had been on stage.
Would've been entirely different, but Nolan got career best work from Williams before, so I could definitely see it working out. It would've created a very different dynamic however as this aged boogeyman for Bale's Batman, rather than the vibe Leger brought as the contemporary anarchist seemingly created from the forces of nature.
Well when originally noting that I was doing alternate supporting with the full rank, it was with the idea that I would not rank performances I could not remember. At the time, I didn't really remember his. Although watching the film more recently, he's decent enough in the thankless "other man" role, although I'd say he's the only person to get a more interesting role in the sequel, even though they entirely squandered that in the third film.
Ooh very interested to hear that you loved 4 Months, can't wait until 2007 for that. And glad to hear Jackman is being saved, I'll be getting on that soon enough.
Louis: Your thoughts on Janney.
Louis: Your thoughts on the cast of Bad Education.
Louis: Thoughts on Flanagan and Smith.
Luke, would you agree with what Louis said about The Snowman? I asked you as well.
Anonymous: Yes, he summed up my feelings perfectly on the matter.
The True History of the Kelly Gang I found to easily be Justin Kurzel's best film. In that I found he finally made his style wholly support the story he was telling, rather than displace it at times, which I thought was the case in his previous films to at least some extent. This breathing life into the story in a unique and nearly always effective way, didn't love the go pro "Ned's face" shots, but so much I did love that I can easily overlook it.
Saving McKay and Hoult (who could cause one to have the side effect of greater reservations towards Sam Claflin in the Nightingale.)
Crowe - 4
Davis - 4.5
Hunnam - 3.5
McKenzie - 3
And a collective 3 for the gang members.
Luke:
Janney - (Her performance is both a preview and alternate to Jackman's performance in a certain sense. In that she finds this right sort of blithe manner to the character as she speaks of the crimes initially almost without a second thought and thought it was just something they did. Janney though is terrific though in unveiling this though at least with a modicum of humanity, if very questionable, in portraying the sort of "easy way" manner in her explanations, but at least some minor sense of guilt at the same time.)
Flanigan - (Also all about that central scene where she delivers a great deal of nuance and suggestion of other things in just a single word. That is terrific work. The rest of the time though she is in a role that is passive to a fault as we see her just seemingly be slightly depressed while being treated in questionable ways. She's more than decent in that portrayal of that state, but it is rather inert in its scope.)
Smith - (This is Smith where he should be in a way, in his wheelhouse. He's best when he is having fun and can just be charming. Well thankfully we do get plenty of that and thrives in that sort of role. Of course the twists seem almost Smith demands at his insistence of being treated as a premiere dramatic actor, which are ridiculous. I'll say though he's more than fine in that regard here, but he is best when he is more closely relying on his presence.)
Tahmeed:
Romano - (Very good as the normal man in the situation in effectively conveying the sense of disbelief but even a sympathetic purpose for going along with an initial cover up of sorts. Romano though is great in his final scene with Jackman in portraying so well just unleashing the disbelief at where the man has gone.)
Viswanathan - (A good straight man performance actually in a way. This in portraying the near confusion in the moment of sort of unraveling the strange cover up and crimes of the central characters.)
Wolff - (Decent enough in just a few brief moments of support for Viswanathan)
Casal - (I'll say more than anything a nice show of range from him. This in that I didn't at all recognize him from Blindspotting but he fulfills this role well, though limited as it is.)
Spinella - (Limited part but I did like how he struck up some genuine old history style chemistry with Jackman in their one scene together.)
Louis how would you rank all the films from 2020?
Louis: Thoughts on the cast.
And please take your time with 2014.
Hoult really must relish playing these antagonistic roles.
Anonymous:
1. True History of the Kelly Gang
2. Bad Education
3. The Invisible Man
4. Emma
5. Color Out of Space
6. Driveways
7. The Way Back
8. Onward
9. Bad Boys For Life
10. The Hunt
11. Extraction
12. Never Rarely Sometimes Always
13. Escape From Pretoria
14. Sonic the Hedgehog
15. Birds of Prey
16. Capone
Luke:
Crowe - (Hey you got to give them credit for making Crowe singing work entirely on screen, that has to be something special in itself. Crowe though I thought was very good here in bringing just this particular presence, that manages to be wily, warm but also a little menacing if not questionable. He has this almost fatherly grace but with a little bit of a hateful glint in his eyes all the same. Crowe finding sort of a bitterness needed for a cold blooded outlaw, though still with the sort sense of a teacher.)
Davis - (Her performance I thought was particularly strong in sort of avoiding a simplification of the tale. This in that in one part we do get a sense of the sort intensity needed for this part. This conveying the idea of the fierce and passionate woman. Her performance though is not simple in this. As she also though portrays a degree of bitterness though that goes beyond just earned anger at a point. Davis conveying as this real festering hate, that does her harm just as it seems to give her character a certain strength. This in balancing though also with granting sense to the mother who both loves her children while being nearly a desperate mess herself. Davis finds balancing in her work in portraying those moments of direct affection as sort of the internal heart of the woman, though covered in desperation through the hardships of her life.)
Hunnam - (Thought he managed to be a fairly memorable sleaze ball here, and managed to get a bit further than just one note. This particularly in his scene with Crowe.)
McKenzie - (She could use a performance to shake things up a bit, as this did feel a little too similar, though I still thought she was effective in her final scene to be sure.)
Louis, thoughts on the rest of the cast of Bad Boys for Life?
“Saving MacKay”
I wonder if there’s anyone here who’ll be very happy about that...
Bryan: Well, I'm glad to say it's not a one-off and if Calvin wants to big him up then by all means since we all have soft spots for certain actors. For me, Tom Hardy and Michael Fassbender who I've known about much earlier than most here.
Luke: *John Fitzgerald voice* You came all this way just to brag about liking Hardy & Fassbender before their breakouts, huh?
:)
Bryan: :) not at all, my friend. The first role I recall seeing Fassbender play was Guy Fawkes in Gunpowder, Treason and Plot (2003) and Tom Hardy as Robert Dudley in The Virgin Queen (2005, I also saw him play a POW in Colditz that same year). Just goes to show how much of a History nut I was then.
By the way, you should check out The Virgin Queen at some point, I think it along with Stuart: A Life Backwards are his best Pre-Bronson performances.
So I actually watched "Field of Dreams" for the first time today, and I thought it was good. It was rather interesting how the story had a sort of faith based premise, but instead choose to emphasize it's small town setting/tone rather than become heavy handed. Also I'll echo the point Robert made a while back, as there was an earnesty and breezy innocence in many 80's films that just can't be found in the current cinema.
Costner - 3.5
Madigan - 3.5
Jones - 4
Lancaster - 3.5
Liotta - 3.5
Hoffmann - 3
Busfield - 3
Liotta’s an easy 5 for me in Field of Dreams, it’s actually my favorite performance of his. I’d like to see him get reviewed when we get back to 1989.
I really didn't get the love for him, honestly, but he was still predictably good in his role. Out of the entire, Jones would be my MVP without question.
I should also say that Lancaster gave a very sweet turn, and perhaps I should bump him to a 4 as my only complaints revolve around his screen time.
I’d be all for a Liotta review if the year doesn’t end up being competitive enough.
Glad you dug Kelly Gang Louis. And agree on the whole cast, and so glad you saved my two favourite performances of the year so far.
And where would Wendy be on your list ranking?
Anonymous:
Lawrence - (He has some decent chemistry moments with Smith, and some okay dramatic moments. A lot of it though he just goes way too broad and not all that effectively so.)
Pantoliano does his usual thing, briefly, well. Everyone else is bland and forgettable.
Calvin:
Knew I forgot something, Wendy would be #6.
I’m glad! And thanks for the viewings, going to make my way through some 2020 releases accordingly.
Your thoughts on this scene from Paths of Glory, by the way? https://youtu.be/89y7pcYTQy4
Also: thoughts on Da 5 Bloods trailer.
Louis: Your thoughts on Tropic Thunder as a movie?
And your ratings and thoughts on the cast, apart from RDJ, Cruise and McConaughey?
So I watched "Save The Tiger" for the first time, and honestly, I thought it was alright. I agree with Louis, though, in that it just isn't much of a film, and mostly serves as a showcase for its star. Speaking of which...
Lemmon - 5 (A great, complex performance in a pretty awards bait role.)
Gilford - 3
Hansen - 3
Heineman - 3
I guess I should mention that I watched the original Taking of Pelham One Two Three, which I thought was great.
Luke, from what Louis has seen so far, who do you think are locked in for reviews.
Anonymous: With many projects being moved into Early 2021, I'd have to say.
Hoult
Dennehy
Jackman
MacKay
By the way, I don't have a problem if anyone decides to make requests for this year since Louis is seperating the Alternates into two sections.
1. Shahid Kapoor
2. Tom Hardy
3. Channing Tatum
4. Dan Stevens
5. Ethan Hawke
1. David Gulpilil
2. Oscar Isaac
3. Jeremy Renner
4. Tom Cruise
5. Jesse Eisenberg
I really hope that for the sake of all our predictions, Kapoor is one of the first two to be reviewed. That being said, I'm excited to read his review, regardless of the rating.
Will get to thoughts on the next post.
Post a Comment