Delroy Lindo did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Woody Carmichael in Crooklyn.
Frequent Spike Lee collaborator Delroy Lindo plays the patriarch of the family, though the use of patriarch might be a bit of stretch, and the father of five children along with his far stronger willed wife/school teacher Carolyn (Alfre Woodard). Lindo's, who is more often cast as a tough guy, is decidedly not that in the early scenes of the film. He's terrific though in establishing really the kind of father he is in such a naturalistic way. This as Lindo just brings a comfort within the scenes of interact with the family, being a bit sloppy at times, and Lindo embraces being a bit goofy in the right way. This just being a dad who very much embraces his place not as the dominant voice of the family when it comes to affair in dealing with his children. Lindo is a good goof finding the right affability in these interactions with his children and his wife. Even when he is yelling about the musical tastes of a neighbor Lindo the right endearing quality. Lindo makes Woody not the best dad, but a good dad just in terms of obviously showing an undercurrent of love for his family that is never in doubt. Of course how he actually handles the situation of his family though is a little different. This as a consistent quality in Woody is his inability to really take charge of his boys and one daughter. Lindo though carries with this the right spirit of a guy who is definitely meaning the best in the warmth he exudes, even if his methods are not great.
As the film goes on we learn more about Woody as he tries to make it as a musician, which he is more than struggling with due to his refusal to compromise this stance. Lindo's moments of explaining these positions are great work in presenting the stubbornness of Woody. This on one hand he brings that stubbornness as directly as he can with the sense as he speaks of a man who might be a little concerning with his own pride and not enough with his family's well being. On the other hand when explaining his reasons for this Lindo is great in making the passion absolutely genuine. In his eyes there is only the sense of a real noble intention, even if the noble intention sadly also results in the former stubbornness. Now his other major struggle is in his place of interaction in being any sort of a "leader" in the family. This when pressed about the lack of power in the building his family lives in and owns, Lindo is terrific in showing really the lack of strength in his delivery. This in just accentuating the evasion of the questions at every turn in such a natural bit of trying to delude the issue as he speaks to a tenet. The biggest instance of this though comes when a situation where Carolyn is trying to discipline the boys' TV watching, and Woody mucks things up by contradicting her. Lindo is great in the scene by showing very earnest good intention in the moment as he speaks with a casual "come on", but also in that moment not standing up to do what is needed. This even in the act of contradiction not being at all insidious rather just a bit foolish in Lindo's quietly diminishing delivery. This though leading to Carolyn turning on Woody instead, kicking him out, and this just a great bit of acting from both Lindo and Woodard. This as their interactions emphasize the ease of the fight, even the lightness of it, despite Woody being temporarily kicked out of his own home, suggests a long relationship of this kind of fight. Lindo's demeanor as he leaves rightfully is that of limited frustration and a bit exasperation. This properly showing that this isn't a life changing situation, just one of many fights low key fights of a long relationship. Although both parents take a backseat for a bit, as the one daughter goes to live with relatives in the suburbs for a bit, we return as Woody is back home but has to deliver some bad news. This being that Carolyn has cancer and could die. Lindo's performance in this scene is exceptional. This is on the surface we see him trying to be the best dad as he tells the kids gently and we as much assurance as possible. Meanwhile though in his eyes that are not quite holding back his tears he reveals the real heartbreak within the man. An equally moving moment is near the end of the film where Woody is comforting his daughter. Lindo is not at all openly distraught, rather emphasizes at every instance a reassuring warmth. He still internalizes the sense of the grief, but projects Woody now really taking up his duties to be the best dad he can be. This is the highlight of Lindo's work, but it is emblematic of his whole performance. This as he gives a performance that is complex in a low key way, by naturally revealing just a normal, though not simplistic dad. Lindo makes it all seem easy, which is really essential in releasing the film's modest tone, and creating his quietly moving performance.
73 comments:
Louis: How would you rank the Spike Lee films you've seen?
Matt:
1. Inside Man
2. 25th Hour
3. Crooklyn
4. Do the Right Thing
5. Malcolm X
6. Blackkklansman
7. Summer of Sam
8. Da 5 Bloods
9. Jungle Fever
10. Oldboy
Louis, Your thoughts on Jean-Luc Godard.
Louis: your ratings and thoughts on the rest of the cast?
Louis: Did you rewatch Da 5 Bloods recently?
I rewatched Da 5 Bloods yesterday, and while the film itself didn't really stay with me, Lindo's performance only improved, and he's now given one of my favorites performances in a Vietnam War movie. Really hope he gets a nom at the very least.
Da 5 Bloods hasn't really stuck with me either but Lindo is still very securely my favourite Lead Actor performance of the year so far.
Also, my current predictions for the Oscars acting categories, with a NGNG in each:
Boseman
Oldman
Hopkins
Lindo
Yeun (NGNG)
Davis
McDormand
Kirby
Day
Mulligan (NGNG)
Odom Jr.
Rylance
Abdul-Mateen II
Cohen
Tucci (NGNG)
Seyfried
Colman
Burstyn
Youn
Bakalova (NGNG)
I rewatched Jackie Brown and Robert Forster is actually a 5 for me now. That movie lives or dies on the strength of his and Grier's performances.
Forster's my win for 1997.
Louis: Your rating and thoughts on Bill Pullman in The Last Seduction?
Also, your 1940s cast & director for that film? While watching it, I kept thinking that Barbara Stanwyck would've crushed it in that role.
Calvin: What did you think of Kenneth Branagh in Tenet and I'm glad we're in agreement on the film though I'd personally go even lower on the rating.
Anonymous:
Jean-Luc Godard I suppose is one director I most would say is strictly a matter of taste. This as there are directors I dislike for being hacks, or static workmen. Godard is decidedly not that he has a distinct vision and voice, I just don't like seeing it or hearing it. I suppose it is his particular technique of confronting the senses often times in favor of the perceived drama of his work. A similar thing I feel from Steven Soderberg whose work I feel a similar apathy to. With Godard the technique feels detached from the drama, for me, and in turn feels stale, dull and at worst excruciating. For example the "scenes from a relationship" sequence in Contempt I can dispassionately observe as a clever way of depicting such an idea, but the whole sequence I was never remotely invested within the relationship. Rather I felt like I was just watching the material present itself in an atypical way, that still left me cold. That is the case for all of his work that I have seen at this point, to the point I question if I should bother to continue given my lack of enjoyment.
Calvin:
Well it is fair to say I do quite like Isabelle Huppert, though perhaps less than some in that I am not quite as infatuated as many with say The Piano Teacher. Still I find there is much to admire in her work, particularly give when she is wrongly pigeonholed as really an "ice queen" style performer. Now she certainly excels in those roles, one of the very best. Her range though is far greater than that however. This both in those roles, were there is typically a greater nuance to them, but also is equally capable in warmer more heartfelt work even if she is less typically cast as such. In fact a wonderfully rounded performer, even if she's another example of the Hollywood "Oh I hear she's good, but uhhh don't know what to cast her as"
Tahmeed:
No, just most of the film hasn't stayed with me or the flaws of the movie I already felt were there have become more prevailing in my mind. Besides, it would've ranked around there upon initial viewing anyways, as despite my feelings on Lee on the whole I actually only actively dislike Jungle Fever (despite the Samuel L. Jackson scenes) and Oldboy from that list.
Lucas:
I have already covered everyone of note, though all the bit players are good in just really short moments.
Bryan:
Pullman - 3.5(Pullman is kind of an actor who I think at his best is typically just fine. Here that is one of those cases in a role I think someone else could've run away with in really playing up the sleazy pseudo villain though in reality more victim. Pullman's good though still in bringing a certain cheekiness to certain moments, such as his opening sloppy criminal activity and in the final sequence. The final sequence that is easily his highlight where Pullman plays the right sense of the kind of internalized joke the character is feeling as he goes through dealing with the strange situation.)
The Last Seduction Directed by Jules Dassin 1940's:
Bridge Gregory: Barbara Stanwyck
Mike Swale: Richard Widmark
Clay Gregory: Ray Milland
Frank Griffith: Thomas Mitchell
Louis: Your thoughts on Kenneth Branagh's death scene in Tenet.
Well, I've had a notable viewing period these last two weeks; They include 3 series and 2 new films, and they are as followed:
“Castlevania”
As someone who isn’t familiar with the original games, I found all three seasons to be quite good (Even though they could’ve easily combined the first two for the sake of storytelling). The show is rather admirable not just for its striking art design and fight sequences, but also for it’s surprisingly in-depth story; Aside from a few questionable pacing and juxtaposition choices, it was still intriguing to see themes of prejudice, hatred and loneliness explored in such a unique - yet historically inspired - setting. The show does this while also having plenty of entertaining moments, and a host of engaging, well voiced characters (Special shout out to Graham McTavish as Dracula, and Bill Nighy as Saint Germain).
“Jojo’s Bizarre Adventures” (Season 2)
Much like the first season, the “Stardust Crusaders” arc does prove to be highly, highly enjoyable. Above everything else, I think the greatest strengths of season two lie in it’s creative writing, colourful animation and consistent hilarity. It’s a real testament that you can laugh at the show’s zany scenarios, as well as invest yourself in it’s familiar but engaging storyline. By the end, I did feel like I had been on a journey with the main characters, and that the interactions between them made it worthwhile. Personally, though, I would’ve still liked the season more if they shortened it somewhat, especially with the two/three part episodes that could’ve reasonably been solo outings. That may just be me, however, because I can understand why they adapted the arc at such length. And honestly, I wouldn’t even say there were true “filler” episodes, thanks to the aforementioned writing, nor would I mind calling it a strong show overall.
“The Witcher”
Like “Castlevania”, I also didn’t play the games (nor read the books) that this series is based on, so this was my introduction to the franchise. Personally, I wouldn’t go as far as calling “The Witcher” a great show, but I also wouldn’t say there was nothing of merit. For the sake of ending on a high note, I’ll go over my negatives first, the biggest of which being it’s storytelling, sadly. I just felt they could’ve done a better job establishing the chronology and setting of this fictional world, as even the most intriguing factions are given rather limited focus. The first season as a whole feels like a lot of interesting character moments rather than a complete, cohesive narrative. Also, the script has its fair share of odd or dull moments that could’ve easily been revised, thereby creating a more consistent tone.
What about the positives, then? Well, even though they spoil the audience by having the best fight scene in the pilot, the action scenes are pretty decent throughout. Someone could argue that the stylistic/content choices are similar to other fantasy shows (“Game of Thrones” being the big one), but considering I haven’t played the games myself, I’m still willing to grant a fair bit of leeway there. Of course the central element holding it all together is Henry Cavill, who gives his best performance as Geralt. This is perhaps a role where an actor’s weaknesses are turned into strengths, but Cavill does a legitimately solid job regardless, and effectively wields both his stature and charisma. On the whole, I can say I enjoyed “The Witcher”: I wasn’t able to love it due to its narrative fumbles, but I was entertained more times than not.
“The Trial of the Chicago 7”
As a mainstream, somewhat routine historical drama, I would say I liked the film. Little side note: Sorkin is a writer who I feel excels with driven, ambitious figures (IE “The Social Network”, “Steve Jobs” and “Molly’s Game”), and is arguably less distinctive with his ensemble pieces. Having said that, this is such a compelling story as is that any competent director could’ve made something out of it, much less one with Sorkin’s focus. But back to the point...the movie certainly does what it needs to do, and has enough substance in it’s script to avoid becoming too standard. Even when it pushes itself into familiar territory (Minus its overwrought conclusion), there’s at least the sense of it’s “heart” being in the absolute right place. Furthermore, there’s a willingness from Sorkin to aim for complexity, which one really should do when discussing the chaotic political/cultural backdrop of 60’s America. While the overarching viewpoint is clear, he still portrays the defendants as people rather than symbols, and the performances obviously help in that regard.
Cohen - 4.5
Rylance - 4.5 (MVP)
Redmayne - 3.5/4
Mateen - 3.5
Levitt - 3.5
Langella - 3.5
Keaton - 3.5
Lynch - 3.5
Strong - 3
“True History of the Kelly Gang”
This is a movie that, to be frank, started off more interesting than it eventually became. For some reason or another, I found the early scenes with the young Kelly more engaging than the ones with the adult version. That’s not to say the latter half isn’t technically sound; The acting is uniformly good throughout, and there’s some decent cinematography and editing on display. That said, I still could’ve done without the seizure inducing strobe light effect, or the scene that makes Kelly look like he’s in a first person shooter. Beyond those technical quips, I also found the movie lacking in any solid thematic statement - or staying power, honestly. In other words, I will remember the film’s performances (of which there are a few too note) far more than the picture surrounding them.
MacKay - 4.5
Crowe - 4.5
Davis - 4.5
Hoult - 4
Schwerdt - 4
McKenzie - 3.5
Hunnam - 3.5
Levy - 3
Watched the Nest, which joins the long list of films with the vocabulary word to describe much of 2020's cinematic output, "Fine". I'll say Sean Durkin is a one trick pony as I guess he only directs film with some sort of foreboding dread, despite it really not making much sense for this domestic drama. A domestic drama he directs like a horror film, I mean it almost felt like a ghost should show up any time (I guess that SEVERELY misleading poster didn't help things in that regard). Still I actually thought it was fine largely due to the performances that managed to carry the drama through.
Law - 4
Coon - 4
Also watched the Gentlemen which is undiluted Guy Ritchie, and I don't care much for undiluted Guy Ritichie. It just seems to want to have so much fun with all its gimmicks, yet I'm never in on it. It doesn't help that the style pretty much obscures any potential character development leaving everything in this sort of nonstop cleverathon that sadly is never clever. I guess I liked it more than Calvin though.
McConaughey - 2.5
Hunnam - 3
Golding - 2
Dockery - 2.5
Strong - 1.5
Farrell - 3.5
Grant - 3
Marsan - 2.5
Luke:
Comical not sure intentionally or not, I mean Memento and the Dark Knight have genuinely funny moments so Nolan can do comedy, but I don't think that was the point here. Hard to tell, but just goes along with the whole film's sort of "Stuff happens" tone I guess.
Louis: Thoughts on the performances.
And I'm dying for a masterpiece to remember this year by.
Luke:
Side Note: I'm pretty sure the Nest was purposeful dramatization of the Scorpio episode of the Simpsons, I mean the plot is almost the same, just no awesome supervillain boss at the center of it.
Law & Coon - (Both are good in developing essentially the slow burn frustration. This stemming from their early scenes where they both portray enough of a stale type of familiarity, this even in their sex scene that isn't passionless but rather refined. Their performances then create the gradual sense of sort of separation. Coon portraying well this quiet depression and Law this sort of aggravation that builds. Both cultivate it well in a naturalistic way that skirts excessive melodrama, even when I don't think the film offers any major insights in the end.)
McConaughey - (Felt like autopilot from him. I just didn't really feel he tried to offer anything in the role that was out of the ordinary.)
Hunnam - (On the good side of his typical thing, but his typical thing nonetheless.)
Golding - (As a show of range, this wasn't good, didn't buy his cockney nor his supposed menace. Very forgettable work, and I'll sadly say from this, it doesn't seem like he can do much more than a generalized charm.)
Dockery - (Basically just there to be atypical to her typical expected presence, which I don't have the greatest knowledge of. Nothing notable, but I didn't find her actively bad either.)
Strong - (Well after those 2 Succession episodes I watched, I perhaps improperly forgot about classic Strong. Well here is some classic terrible Strong. Over the top mannerisms, voice and wholly unbelievable in every regard, if not also more than a little grating, check check check check.)
Farrell - (Best part of the film with ease. Just really delivered an honest bit of fun while bringing just the right amount of quiet intensity all the same. Highlight being his coffee shop beat-down where he carried the right menace while offering the right actual comic timing. A performance that really found what should have been the tone for the material I think.)
Grant - (I'm glad he got to show a bit more of his range, after being pigeonholed for so long, and he doesn't fail in my mind. Sadly his exposition machine character is terribly repetitive and I don't think he really has all the good of material to work with despite, how clever the screenplay seems to think his character is. Still Grant I felt managed to not fall flat here, which I'll give him some credit for.)
Marsan - (One note role, but I didn't particularly like how he played it here.)
Luke: Branagh was terrible though I’d say entertainingly so.
Glad you didn’t like The Gentlemen either, and would go lower for most of the cast to be honest especially McConaughey. Golding killing off Tom Wu’s mobster felt like the Boltons to me (though of course much lesser scale of quality), was disappointing. And Grant has faded for me a bit especially since he has so many of those ‘look at me I’m Guy Ritchie and I don’t enjoy woke culture’ lines.
Louis: Was Succession any good, from the two episodes you watched?
Succession is the best thing McKay has ever done imo.
Also I watched Sound of Metal last night and have to say it’s growing on me a lot, it’s almost certainly going to be Louis’ win for Sound Mixing and Ahmed is terrific as per usual. Paul Raci could also use a review.
Matt:
I liked the first two episodes well enough, though basically all sources tell me it gets great soon afterwards, so probably should return to it sometime.
RIP David Prowse
I associate Succession way more with Jesse Armstrong than with Adam McKay. A lot of its comedy feels like "In The Loop" (especially the Tom/Greg dynamic).
RIP David Prowse
Please guys, do yourself a favor and watch sucession. The dialouge is amazing and its so well at subverting expectation. I definiteley is Biran Coxs best performance, same for Rory Culkin and Jeremy and macfayden
Calvin: Any reason why you've taken Hamilton out of your rankings.
R.I.P. David Prowse
R.I.P. David Prowse
Louis: While I do think she did well, how do you think Garbo would have fared in Dunne's role in I Remember Mama? Stevens originally wanted her in that role.
Anonymous:
Well given Dunne almost seemed to play the role as Garbo, I think she would've been well suited for it.
RIP David Prowse
Also watched Babyteeth, which I'll admit from the outset, despite hearing a good word or two on it, I was concerned about as sick teen, drug dealer, sounds like a bad indie waiting to happen. Thankfully that was not the case, as even that perspective I think is played with a bit, this as it examines the very real concerns with the central relationship just as it explores it. This not making it purely positive or negative, and in turn creating a fairly affecting coming of age drama.
Scanlan - 4
Wallace - 3.5
Davis - 4
Will save Mendelsohn.
Speaking of bad indies Uncle Frank, which I'm surprised rebounded in its critical reception after Sundance. This as I thought it was pretty bad. Directed with as much subtlety as you'd expect from the writer of American Beauty, but the real problem with the film is the script. The film wishes to explore much about a "closeted to his family" college professor, and does so poorly in every regard. There is no depth in all the elements touched upon, from the initial relationship the film is built on between niece and Uncle, where she describes him as saying clever things, these clever things we never hear. This is every facet that Ball tries to cover, which there are many, particularly the apparent central point of coming out to his family, which is wrapped up with almost comical expediency.
Bettany - 3.5
Lillis - 2.5
Macdissi - 2.5
Zahn, Greer, Root, Smith - 2
Martindale - 2.5
Louis: Thoughts on the casts?
Louis: Shocked Davis isn’t higher for Babyteeth, I thought she’d be at least a 4.5 for you.
Luke: have realised I find it difficult to compare to other films just by its very nature.
Glad to see Mendelsohn being saved. I’m very much looking forward to him, Laurie, Dennehy, and Hoult’s reviews.
Bryan:
Scalan - (Thought she managed to rather effectively internalize much of the character's state for much of the film without seeming vague. Showing well the undercurrent of the certain detachment at times along with the quiet joy in her actual seeming interactions of affection. This slowly building though the sense of the more potent undercurrent of distress. This until her more explosive moments that are wholly earned by the first two acts of her work. This building towards these moments which she earns but also delivers on the intensity in outwardly revealing the emotional distress of the moment. Afterwards she's great though in conveying sort of a more overt command of herself, even as her situation is more dire, showing this natural confidence of self.)
Wallace - (I'll admit a particularly tricky role in that I did quite hate him early on, as I thought of him as a punk. Although I would actually say mission accomplished this as it set the stage for the growth of the character. This as Wallace does deliver a slow emotional maturity particularly in his interactions with Scalan which begin with more a curiosity then slowly segue towards genuine care. It's a good performance particularly as he genuinely convinced me of the young man turning around just as he does the main characters.)
Davis - (Notable that she delivers two strong, rather different, mothers in the same year. I honestly think there was much to fall into pits within the performance that could've fallen towards hysterics or just seemed off in the wrong way. Davis though is wonderful here in balancing this real naturalism within granting a sense of a situation. This in finding moments of real tenderness and care, just as she does the moments of distress. Her performance manages to create the combination of the two in her reactions towards her daughter and how she also interacts with her husband almost in reflection of that. Finding real an honest sense of every scene by making the state of the character so convincing. She excels in all of her individual moments of course, particularly her final scene where she absolutely earns and delivers on the scene of heartbreak.)
Bettany - (His accent is not entirely convincing, and I honestly thought he was kind of bad in one major scene, though not helped by Ball's absurdly melodramatic directing. Bettany though I think is more than fine much of the time in portraying the character's quiet kind of distress and state of the man. I don't think the writing ever allows him to go too far. Bettany though is good in presenting the sort of forced reserved state that borders on an ever growing depression. It is a decent performance overall, but he can't quite fully avoid the pitfalls of the film.)
Lillis - (Accent is also a bit wonky, but more of the problem is her character, that seems important then ends up being almost perfunctory despite being co-lead. The film really never gives her anything interesting to do. Rather she's just kind of there.)
Macdissi - (Character is a little over the top as written, not in personality, but rather just how much it wants him to be this ideal partner that goes to the point of being a bit corny. Macdissi doesn't help thing entirely by playing so hard into, I do like the warmth he brings, but at the same time the character is never quite convincing.)
The rest - (Caricatures all, which none escape from, Martindale just happens to look the least bad.)
Robert:
Error in posting, though Scanlan is also leaning towards a 4.5 for me.
I forgot Uncle Frank was a thing and now I'm definitely not going to see it. Alan Ball is a big no no for me.
Liked, didn't love the Fargo finale. Episode MVP to Buckley.
I watched Happiest Season. I really, really hate to jump on the easy bandwagon, but Stewart TOTALLY should have ended up with Plaza (easy MVP) at the end. As a result, an awkward-yet-sincere film ends on a note that truly feels unearned.
Stewart’s performance is vulnerable enough to anchor it, but poor Davis is stuck with a character that comes off as emotionally manipulative. A for effort in terms of trying to build empathy for Harper, but some characters are hard to salvage. Plaza easily takes the cake for best in show, building off her casual style and mixing it with a clear internalized pain.
Everyone else varies, though I did think Dan Levy’s speech was well done in between his usual thing. Also, one really minor thing that bugs me is that they gave Mackenzie Davis a wig to make her look like Dakota Johnson and Alison Brie a wig to make her look like Rose Byrne. I’ve noticed they’ve done that in other movies (“Let’s make X actor look like Y actor”) and it just annoys me.
Louis: your top 20 michael b. jordan acting moments
Also, just for fun, here's my cast ranking for Fargo season 4:
1. Jessie Buckley
2. Ben Whishaw
3. Timothy Olyphant
4. Jack Huston
5. Salvatore Esposito
6. Glynn Turman
7. Gaetano Bruno
8. E'myri Crutchfield
9. Chris Rock
10. Kelsey Asbille
11. Rodney L. Jones III
12. Anji White
13. J. Nicole Brooks
14. Karen Aldridge
15. Jason Schwartzman
16. Andrew Bird
That Fargo finale was absurdly rushed, I can't help but feel COVID had something to do with it in terms of them maybe not getting to film everything they wanted,as I did feel some of these last few episodes had a problem of rushing a bit too much in too short a span of time, and I will wholeheartedly admit the departures in this episode didn't hit as hard as the previous episode's which is honestly very surprising in a way. Everyone was pretty good though, Buckley (MVP I'd say) and Rock were great with what they were given but I can't help feel a bit shortchanged overall in terms of how it concluded their arcs. Maybe a careful edit could've put all of these events into the previous episode? I don't know.
I sound very disappointed but on the whole I did find this season very good, I guess I'm just disappointed at some of the potential left on the table. Not going to blame them though because I do feel it was due to circumstances beyond their control.
Also that mid-credits scene was great, for obvious reasons.
And my ranking:
1. Jack Huston (controversial choice perhaps)
2. Ben Whishaw
3. Jessie Buckley
4. Salvatore Esposito
5. Glynn Turman
6. Timothy Olyphant
7. Gaetano Bruno (low-key was my favourite character for the first few episodes before he became a bit simplified, still great though)
8. Francesco Acquaroli
9. Chris Rock
10. James Vincent Meredith (I'd say he was the one who made the most out of the least)
11. Kelsey Asbille
12. Karen Aldridge
13. Corey Hendrix
14. Matthew Elam
15. E'myri Crutchfield (bit mixed in that I thought she had some great moments but also some really stilted ones)
16. Rodney L. Jones III (same as Crutchfield)
17. Anji White
18. J. Nicole Brooks
19. Jeremie Harris
20. Jason Schwartzman (I'd bumped him higher after the previous episode, right back down after this one)
21. Stephen Spencer
22. Andrew Bird (he should never act, or at least get an acting coach. I'm sorry it's mean, but true)
I really liked the finale, and compared to Legion's finale, this might as well have been something by Tarkovsky. Although the season as whole never achieved the heights in writing of the first two (few things do, but there were definite opportunities left on the table), I thought the directing in particular definitely made up for a lot of it. On the whole I definitely preferred it to season 3 based on that. It's not great Fargo, but it definitely was good Fargo, which is more than enough for me. Also loved the mid-credits scene, despite the reveal being obvious (so obvious I think they should've just had that player play the "old man" as well, given I thought his silent acting in the ending was better than anything Rock did all season).
1. Jessie Buckley
2. Ben Whishaw
3. Jack Huston
4. Timothy Olyphant
5. Glynn Turman
6. Salvatore Esposito
7. Gaetano Bruno
8. Francesco Acquaroli
9. Sean Fortunato
10. Karen Eldridge
11. Chris Rock
12. J. Nicole Brooks
13. Kelsey Asbille
14. James Vincent Meredith
15. Jeremie Harris (Definitely felt they could've done more to build him up.)
16. Matthew Elam
17. Corey Hendrix
18. Stephen Spencer
19. Rodney K. Jones III
20. Anji White
21. Jason Schwartzman
22. E'myri Crutchfield (Honestly thought she was pretty stilted the whole time, her character just was passive enough it didn't matter as much.)
23. Andrew Bird
Calvin:
Wise move.
Louis: Your overall thoughts on Buckley, Whishaw, Huston, Olyplant, Turman, Esposito, Rock, Schwartzman and Bird.
Louis, Buckley can do no wrong it seems. Happy that Whishaw was received very well.
Where would you rank these turns in their careers.
Anonymous:
Top ten feels appropriate at the moment.
1. "Not a mistake" - Creed
2. Learning about Rocky's diagnosis - Creed
3. First scene - Black Panther
4. In the jail - Creed
5. Herb scene - Black Panther
6. First meeting with Rocky - Creed
7. Arriving to the royal chamber - Black Panther
8. Trying to get his job - Fruitvale Station
9. Explaining his scars - Black Panther
10. Proposal advice - Creed II
Louis: also your thoughts on Gaetano Bruno and Francesco Acquaro.
Louis: aaaaaand also on Sean Fortunato, Karen Aldridge and Kelsey Asbille.
Question: Has anyone here seen "The Seven Deadly Sins" and/or "Kill la Kill"? I was thinking about watching one or the other, and while I'm aware of the latter's reputation (IE fan service), I have spoken to a co-worker who said it was still good.
Also Louis: What would be your thoughts on Henry Cavill as an actor? He's someone who I would say has/can be an underwhelming presence, but usually in correlation with roles that are already very bland. This as when one see's Cavill in projects like "Man of Steel", "Man from Uncle" and "The Witcher", there's still the sense of a more than decent performer, with a rather notable charm and physicality.
Luke:
Buckley - (Well put another feather in her cap as this is another brilliant turn from her. This as even though I think in some ways the character was under-exploited plot wise it didn't at all matter, because every second she was onscreen I loved...thanks to Buckley. This playing such wonderfully demented glee her performance. This as her eyes alone create such a chilling quality of this sort of vapid kind of evil. This against though in presenting herself as the overly sweet Nurse that she runs away with as the sole Minnesota accent in the season. Buckley honestly doesn't waste a single second in making the most out of the insanity. Whether that is her impeccably bizarre scenes with Schwartzman or just even the moment of pounding her end in a fit of madness. Buckley manages to find an immaculate dark comedy while also being wholly disturbing all the same. My favorite moment of hers probably being her final scene with a certain request that she speaks with such blissful quality, and her reaction afterwards I found bone chilling in that joy she portrays before seguing to her returned state of a cursed kind of mind.)
Whishaw - (Terrific work in probably the most grounded performance of the season. This as Whishaw does depression just wonderfully well in conveying the state of his character who is essentially caught between worlds and left at nothing. Within that Whishaw is wonderful in his quiet deliver of the consistent humanity of the character. Really internalizing effectively the character's consistent actions at trying to do the right thing, within a world that really pushes for anything but that. Whishaw's portrayal consistently delivering just the right understated warmth of someone still within his life, but also a sense of a morality two many of his compatriots lack.)
Huston - (Managed to really make the fidgeting of his character seem an essential part of the character by the end. This as I frankly got used to it and it just only amplified the state of his character. Huston owning the eccentricity is only part of the strength of his performance however. This as he excels in every one of his scenes with Olyphant in creating a comical dynamic in his reactions of frustrations and anger against Olyphant's steadfastness. Huston though is exceptional in revealing more within the character and the moments of explaining the character's tragedy are exceptionally performed. This showing so well in just his eyes the quiet heartbreak that underlies all of the character's manner, and shows the real pain within it all.)
Olyphant - (Wonderfully deft work in just bordering on being too much, while never falling over the edge. This in absolutely going headfirst in portraying the character's overly polite manner with such strict sincerity. This though in playing it up just enough that he's funny by his presence while also strangely striking at the same time. This showing almost the manner in which the character is empowered by just how straight laced he is in morality. This particularly his one scene with Rock where he is simply great as Olyphant delivers the monologue with such a persuasive and demanding power despite keeping this upbeat manner throughout.)
Turman - (The character I wish had most stuck around as his performance very much showed what was lacking in another. Turman this in carrying just the right presence of gravitas within his work. This sense of the man's power but also intelligence that he just carries with him. He's outstanding in his one major scene in granting so much detail to the character's story of really being treated as nothing. This creating such a palatable sense of frustration in every word, and almost this mania at the end that defines the man turn to crime within the description. Turman makes the most out of every one of his scenes, speaking or silent, and gave the "boss" quality that was more lacking in a few other performances.)
Esposito - (His performance is a lot as the crazy brute wildcard, however I thought it wholly worked. This with Esposito just carrying the intensity as this constant weapon, as almost this time bomb in every sequence. Esposito playing almost as like a classic sort of barbarian and just embracing that wonderfully so. I will say though he wholly makes the most of his later scenes with Schwartzman, this in creating a sense of the real sense of loyalty in the end that he brings a strange, yet believable tenderness to. This though making the absolute most of his final scene, in naturally revealing the bit of humanity within such a brute.)
Rock - (His performance really breaks down into a few parts. When he has lines and when he doesn't. When he has lines Rock carries himself with enough intensity, enough emotion and delivers enough. When he doesn't there's moments he's fine, but most of the time he just doesn't deliver enough on the innate presence the character should have. He just lets scenes sit too often and doesn't do enough silently within them. He's too often just there, where that shouldn't be the case for his character, he should be the center of any scene whether he's speaking or not. Rock doesn't do that. He's not bad here at all, in fact there are some strong individual moments in there, but the role had far more potential than he realizes on the whole.)
Schwartzman - (Speaking of wasted potential, Schwartzman should've been the weasel who becomes dangerous in a corner, but instead he's just kind of a joke. He has some decent moments with Esposito later on when they play the fraternal angle but that's really it. Most of the time Schwartzman seems like he's going for comedy when he shouldn't be and is just consistently hard to take seriously. You never buy him even as the son of a powerful gangster. He's just a joke, but doesn't really work as just a joke either. There's no emotional honesty in his scenes, no sense of even a man broken by his past, just kind of Schwartzman doing his usual thing which is woefully mistaken for this character.)
Bird - (What performance? I mean I thought the father was originally supposed to be unloving to his daughter or something, but no just Bird honestly doesn't really act. He just kind of stands there and says his lines with little to no emotion. It's just an awful bit of stunt casting, I guess, because Bird simply seems out of his depth every second he's onscreen and not in the way as intended.
Anonymous:
Just behind Wild Rose and I'm Thinking of Ending Things for Buckley, and behind Richard II and Cloud Atlas for Whishaw.
Calvin:
Bruno - (Loved really the style he brought to the performance. This just doing his most in every silent moment to convey the character who takes pride as an assassin. He's good though early on when the conflict of the character more so exists. This in his quiet balanced reactions towards both brothers where he does really convey a sense of confused loyalty as he seems cautious around one brother and seemingly wondering "what's he going to do next?" for the other. I do wish more had been made from his role in the end, as I liked everything about what he did with what he had.)
Acquaro - (Well made the most of his final scene in showing the true power of not needing to show his power in a way. Excellent sort of companion performance to Turman in a way, though given less to do, in showing the quiet presence of the man and the reason and intelligence of him. He gets less to do, but is terrific throughout in showing the sane mane within it all at every turn.)
Razor:
Fortunato - (A hilarious and heartbreaking one episode wonder in my view. This as he brings such a forlorned quality to his few minutes creating well the sense of the character's racing conflict and successfully making me feel rather sorry for what was almost just a "featured extra' kind of role.)
Eldridge & Asbille - (I'm not sure how much we were supposed to like them, as I certainly didn't at all. Having said that though I did think what they did largely worked in creating the sense of almost this lustful manner they bring to everything as this sort of joy of crime just for the sake of it.)
Mitchell:
From what I've seen from him, he's got presence, but he's limited. And there's not much more to be said at the moment, you definitely notice him when he's onscreen, but only has so much range. It works when he's within that, but I don't know if he can stretch much beyond it.
Luke, you've mentioned that you've seen both of Andrew Davies' adaptations of War & Peace and Les Miserables. Which did you prefer.
Anonymous: War & Peace. What helped it to a degree was I've seen very few adaptations of it whereas it's the exact opposite for Les Miserables. On average, I liked the ensemble a great deal more overall and on a more recent viewing, I've fallen more in love with Dano and Buckley. And I love the Score and costume design. With Les Miserables, it's definitely better than Hooper's adaptation with Lily Collins easily being my favourite Non-Musical Fantine and West was fantastic but I'm still divided over Oyelowo as Javert.
Louis: I was definitely expecting Calamita/Milligan to have something more of a Miller’s Crossing-esque showdown and for him to have something more of a conflict later on. I feel like there were scenes left on the cutting floor.
Also funnily enough I think we disagree on Rock. I had issues with a few of his line deliveries but I thought a lot of his silent acting was very good, especially when the character was at his most vulnerable. You’re right about the presence though.
Calvin:
I should note I think his "We had a deal" in the finale was terribly performed, and I'll grant his moment of contemplating killing the kid was well done. Again though these are scenes where even though he doesn't have lines, the emotion is very direct, which with more subtle or nuanced was where he really struggled I felt.
On the note of "cutting", I have to imagine there was something major excised involving Milligan, as within the actual execution there is honestly very little explanation for why Satchel would take on that surname, I mean his last scene with Rock honestly suggests the opposite reaction.
Louis: there was apparently a monologue scene with Woodbine they cut out. I would love to have seen it. But yeah feels like there was an episode missing in my opinion. I almost think they juggled too many balls this season but overall preferred it to Season 3 which I thought was very underwhelming.
And again I can’t help but feel it was COVID which caused a lot of stuff to have to be cut short.
The ambition of it alone makes it better than season 3 for me.
Louis: There is the possibility that he wanted to make a name for himself and not live in the shadow of his father's name.
Matt:
I mean, sure, perhaps that was conveyed in the supposedly excised monologue mentioned by Calvin, but as the series left it, his father didn't have much of a shadow by the end of it....also why I think he probably should've lived...though as a pawn.
Yeah, that's fair. I do wonder how much we were meant to be surprised by that reveal, because it really was a foregone conclusion to me.
I feel like everyone knew Satchel was going to be Mike, I don't have that much of an issue with the buildup throughout. I do have to say I certainly wouldn't mind Woodbine himself coming back in another season...if there is one.
I guess there also is kind of the sense of him overall having a closer bond with Milligan than with Loy.
Louis: who would you have cast in Schwartzman's place? I actually think Adrien Brody might've worked.
Calvin:
Well based on Peaky Blinders...I'm not so sure.
Kieran Culkin would've been ideal...sadly already used...maybe B.J. Novak.
die Vorstellung, dass jeder Film https://xcine.online jeden Zuschauer fesseln kann, weil er wie ein Motiv ist
Post a Comment