Bokeem Woodbine did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Joshua Alexander in Jason's Lyric.
Well Bokeem Woodbine is the only good thing about the film, might as well not beat around the bush. Woodbine being one of those actors who has been around forever, but rarely gets the chance to shine past a certain point. The most notable instance of this being his brilliant work as smooth criminal Mike Milligan in Fargo season 2. This is an earlier example of this, much earlier in his career, this time as a less cunning criminal to say the least. Woodbine plays the classic role of the "bad brother" who we first meet, as an adult, as he's getting out of prison yet another time. He is greeted by his bland brother Jason. Woodbine is wonderful in this first scene in just bringing a nice slice of charisma as he smiles in seeing his brother and offering the proper swagger of a gangster, well very much a wannabe gangster here. More than anything it creates enough of an innate likability, given afterwards we will only hear how bad his character is again and again. He receives a less enthusiastic welcome by his mother who is fed up with his behavior.
Woodbine's good in the scene though in portraying quietly the sense of heartbreak as his expression of fading joy suggests his true sadness over his mother's reaction just as he plays the rest of the moment of casual disregard as though it is nothing. Woodbine finds well the humanity within his character that is easily the most remarkable element of the film. This even as the film is quite repetitive between a lame love story and a lame crime story. The secondary element is better only on the virtues of Woodbine's performance. This even with how we get the same scene of the brother telling the other brother to shape up with the other brother waving off any concerns. Woodbine though is good in developing this sense of lack of responsibility in the character. Woodbine finding an earnestness in the foolishness. This brings the bravado as he says with such bright smiles his intention to continue down the wrong path. Woodbine doing well though emphasizes an underlying potential good nature even in this foolishness in these moments.
This is consistent until a scene where Woodbine's Josh makes a display of affection for his mother through gifts, all which she rejects based on them coming from drug money. Woodbine is great in this scene as his reaction isn't initially that of an angry gangster, but just a son pointedly needing some reassurance of his mother's love. Woodbine is genuinely moving in his reaction being so simply in relating to the man being a child in the moment looking for love from his mother. The rejection though leads Woodbine to naturally double down on the gangster and reveal the intensity of his anger as it spirals out of control in the moment. Woodbine's work then bringing the sort of needed id to the role as Josh gets out of control through car jacks and participating in bank robbery that only leaves him on the bad end of other gangsters. In each though Woodbine brings the certain sense of raw near insanity about Josh as he goes about each self-destructive activity, showing the lack of sense in every action. This importantly though with that thrust of emotion that propels him towards his own demise. This demise that comes from perhaps the film's worst scene that just is ridiculous with how melodramatic it is. Sadly I think it even undercuts the emotion of Woodbine's final moments with just how ridiculous it is. He tries, but can't overcome the shortcomings of the film. Woodbine often does however overall with this performance. He doesn't salvage the film but at least he's convincing within his own work. Certainly an indicator of talent at the very least, it's a shame it seems he didn't really get to show it off again until over 20 years later.
91 comments:
Damn it. :(
Louis: Ratings and thoughts on the rest of the cast.
Luke:
Payne - 2.5(Pretty bland leading man. It doesn't help that his character is so underwritten as the good brother. He's not particularly good whenever there is a scene that really stresses his performance to any great degree.)
Pinkett - 2.5(Largely a bland love interest. She isn't terrible but again her whole performance is built such poorly defined ideas that she has to bring it almost entirely on her own. Like Payne, and unlike Woodbine, she does not deliver that.)
Whitaker - 2.5(You'll get a terrible whiplash watching this performance, by the rush in which it depicts his character. It is such a limited perspective that pre-hammy Whittaker, will still just seem over the top because of how much of an extreme he has to instantly hit.)
I should have mentioned before suggesting him, when I saw Matt Zoller Seitz praise his work here, he did mention the movie was lousy.
Also watched a few 2020 releases.
Let Him Go, which is....you guessed it fine...well maybe a little less once the story gets pretty ridiculous and overcooked. It is anchored well, in fact the central chemistry is so strong I really wish the two would find a much better film to be in soon. In fact when the film is just them it works, but when the family from hell shows up, things fall off a cliff.
Lane - 4
Costner - 4
Manville - 1.5
Brittain - 2
Donovan - 2
Carter - 2
Also watched First Cow, which sadly I never quite caught onto the film's rhythm, which you really need to for such a glacially paced film. I still liked the dynamic between the leads, even if the film ended up leaving me cold about a quarter of the way through making it a bit of an effort to get through it. I don't think it is at all bad, but a film like this you either connect with or you really don't.
Magaro - 4
Lee - 4
All the minor players are good if limited.
I also watched Undine, which I really quite liked. It doesn't achieve the heights of Phoenix by any measure, but I loved the often ethereal quality to the film combined with just a very honest feeling love story.
Beer - 4.5
Rogowski - 4
Louis: Thoughts on the casts. A 1.5 for Manville, that has to be a typo surely.
It's not a typo and don't call me Shirley.
Never expected you to really dislike a performance from Manville. What's funny about it is that Calvin gave her a 4.5.
Wow strong disagree on Manville, I dug her work in it. Glad you liked the leads to First Cow though, and also the leads to Undine.
Louis: thoughts on the ending to Undine? I remember watching it the first time I was like, hm not sure, but when that ending came around I was like okay, wow. Definitely made me re-evaluate the film in a new light compared to when I was watching.
And also, the film here is substandard (though I liked it more than you) but Woodbine more than got me through it.
Luke:
Lane & Costner - (Both just have absolute wonderful chemistry with one another, after that wasn't really all that exploited in Man of Steel. They just absolutely convey the sense of the relationship between the two that both has a sense of complication but also just an outpouring of warmth. Costner is really coming into well as the aged western star, really embodying the theorized Gary Cooper style role here (again in theory). This in not saying much verbally, but saying it all in silence. Lane on the other hand is wonderfully expressive here. This both in terms of just showing the loving character but also the sharper qualities of the character as well. Would love to see the two back together with a much better script.)
Brittain & Carter - (Both just forgettable and mediocre in every regard.)
Donovan - (Typical Donovan overacting, which I think worked in Fargo due to tone, but he really can't adjust himself to anything more low key.)
Manville - (Seemed like she was trying to be every post-win Melissa Leo performance all at once. Just aggressively hammy work from such a traditionally honest performer. Honestly though it feels a bit like she was going for Diane Ladd in Wild At Heart (a performance I'm not big on anyways) but without the Lynchian tone to earn it. If there was any indicator that this film took place in some grease soaked melodrama world, this potentially might've worked, but we're in a naturalistic environment until Manville shows up. She proceeds just to go over the top as the maniacal chain smoking mother, and is out of a completely different movie than Lane and Costner. See Dale Dickey in Winter's Bone is how a performance of this type, in this type of film, should be done. But that's not the case, Manville goes pure evil villain style that is just ridiculous. I do definitely think it is the fault of the director in this instance given her typical output, but nonetheless it is what it is.)
Magaro & Lee - (Both just develop a good off-beat chemistry with another. I enjoyed their interactions and both managed to really create a sense of period in their performances. Both being in a way creating characters who would be side characters in most westerns. Lee as the expected stereotype, here realized with a endearing humanity, and Magaro doing the same as the very meek doomed prospector type.)
Beer & Ragowski - (Both just strike up a wonderful romantic chemistry. This as so much of their romance is in quiet even seemingly meaningless interaction. That is where the beauty of it and it is well realized just in the way they so warmly interact. There's such a palatable sense of affection. There has to be something said about how Petzold films actresses, as with Beer, like was the case for Nina Hoss, there's such remarkable sense of pain while also being luminous in her closeups. This as so much of her work is in observance and reaction. She excels in each and you absolutely understand every step of her struggle. Finding so much power within her eyes, incredible work. This does overshadow Ragowski until the very end of the film, though he's good before then. He makes the most of it though in just giving an earnestly heartbreaking work in showing such a striking expression of despair.)
Calvin:
I think the ending is essential in keeping with the more ethereal qualities alluded to throughout, and which really the film builds towards with the ending. I think it importantly doesn't overplay its magical realism, both in executing the moment, that was just beautifully done in my view by having it be so quiet, but also by following it with the scene of a stricter reality.
Man...I just got flashbacks of those pa and ma Kent scenes from "Man of Steel", and was reminded of how well cast Costner and Lane were. For all the questionable narrative and script choices in that movie, I keep having to remind myself there were was still some quality moments to be found.
Can't wait for 'Mank' thoughts tomorrow.
Also, Louis: I assume Ragowski is co-lead in your opinion for Undine? And would you also consider Lee as co-lead (that was what surprised me most about the film I think, I was expecting him to cede narrative importance at some point but I felt that by the end they were both pretty much on par with one another for importance in the film).
Damn, I thought Woodbine was exceptional particularly in that last scene. I thought shocked “apology” at the end was really powerful.
Louis: Your thoughts on the production design, costume design and cinematography for Ed Wood?
I really liked Woodbines’ final scene too, which is why I thought he was going to get a higher rating. He brought a level of sincerity that was missing from the rest of the film.
Louis: your thoughts on the use of ABBA's music in Muriel's Wedding.
Well watched Ammonite, which is one of those films that certainly came out at the wrong time (and I don't mean due to obvious reasons). Rather it seems like a rip off of Portrait of A Lady on Fire, despite being in production before that film's release. This goes far beyond the lesbian romance at the center of it. It also carries a similar dynamic between the older and the younger, the more free willed with the depressed, many a rocky beach filled with weather, a specific silent musical reaction moment, and the lead having a specific endeavor, here fossil hunting rather than painting. The film has a pace that didn't always earn its deliberate qualities. Occasionally it does, the fossil hunting scenes are good, but some scenes drawn out for the sake of it. The biggest flaw is in the central romance where I felt there was a lack of chemistry and some of the developments of it, particularly in the ending felt a bit haphazard. Though I think the biggest issue I had, surprisingly, was I really didn't care much for Ronan's performance, though I actually rather liked Winslet here.
Winslet - 4.5
Ronan - TBD (Definitely not high)
Calvin:
Yes, due to the last section.
Bryan:
I feel I covered the cinematography before. The production design, much like the cinematography, makes bad and cheap production design look great. As not only does it recreate Wood's "sets" it also takes the approach of having most of the sets have a Wood feel to them. This is quite a neat trick as captures that "cheapness" while never seeming cheap. Finding a stylization through schlock.
I would say the costumes doesn't require too much focus, as it does a fine job of recreating Wood's bad costumes, and otherwise is just some fine period work. Nothing notable but definitely gets the job done.
Bryan & Michael:
I'll admit I was quite checked out at that point, despite doing my best to stay focused for the sake of Woodbine, and was all the more distracted by how ludicrous I felt what happened to Pinkett's character, particularly how the moment was executed in the direction.
Calvin:
Quite well used, for music that I would say perhaps became overused in some other films, while bound to happen when there's whole musicals built around it, but I'll say Muriel's wedding did it better. Just wonderfully accentuating every scene and I think is particularly fitting to the style of Muriel as a character.
So tonight I just went ahead and finished the first season of "The Seven Deadly Sins"...
I'll admit, I wasn't sure how to feel about the show within the first few episodes, primarily because of the egregious fan service I discussed before. I won't say the show completely made up for this, either, since it seemed so out place for the general tone, and the character it's perhaps most directed towards played a rather negatable role overall. What I can say, however, is the show leaves a more than decent impression otherwise. Having familiarized myself with the "Shonen" genre by now, it more or less hits the beats you'd expect, and does so with enjoyable results. The history and combat systems are particularly interesting, I think, and the climactic battle at the end doesn't disappoint.
I'm going to check out Ammonite regardless tomorrow, disappointing to hear about Ronan though.
On a related note, for everyone here, what would be your top 5 favourite anime openings? Not just the songs themselves, but also the opening animations and how they relate to there respective shows.
Hey Louis and guys!
Tell me your TOP 10 of the films would be favorites in the 2021 awards season but were postponed by Covid19:
10º Blonde
9º Last Night in Soho
8º The Tragedy of Macbeth
7º Stillwater
6º In the Heights
5º 007 - No Time to Die
4º The French Dispatch
3º Nightmare Alley
2º West Side Story
1º Dune
Louis: Your rating and thoughts on Scott Glenn in training day
Mitchell: My top 15 anime openings,(5 was way too difficult to narrow down)
1. "Period"-FMAB
2. "Again"- FMAB
3. "Blue Bird"-Bakuman
4. "Bloody Stream"- Jojo's Bizarre Adventure: Battle Tendency
5. "Question" - Assassination Classroom
6. "TANK!" - Cowboy Bebop
7. "In My World" - Blue Exorcist
8. "Snow Fairy" - Fairy Tail
9. "Kimi Ga Inai Mirai"- InuYasha The Final Act
10. "Hikaru Nara" - Your Lie in April
11. "Chain" - Air Gear
12. "Crazy Noisy Bizarre Town" - Jojo's Bizarre Adventure: Diamond is Unbreakable
12. "The Hero" - One Punch Man
13. "BORN" - Le Chevalier D'eon
14. "Dream of Life" - Bakuman
15. "Re:Re"- Erased
In advance, I am probably going to be the contrarian on here and say that I found Mank to be a disappointment, particularly its third act. Not without merit though.
Oldman - 4.5 (not the final rating as I do think he was by far the best thing about the film and actually made it more engaging than I would've found it otherwise)
Seyfried - 4/4.5
Collins - 3
Howard - 2.5
Pelphrey - 3.5
Troughton - 2.5
Kingsley - 2.5
Middleton - 3.5
Cross - 2.5
McShane - 3
Moore - 2.5
Gossmann - 2.5
Dance - 3
Nye not the science guy - was interesting to see him pop up
Oh yeah, and a 2.5 for Burke (decent for the most part but found his penultimate scene awful)
So, I watched Mank. Not the masterpiece I was expecting, but a pretty good movie overall (and great when it came to the scenes with Mank and Marion). The direction is very goos, and the tech aspects of it are flawless. I'm not really good at assigning ratings, but here they are:
Oldman - 5 (Possibly his best performance yet, in my opinion)
Seyfried - 4,5 (Great in every scene, wish she was used more, and a deserving possible winner)
Collins - 3,5/4 (Was actually in the movie more than Seyfried, I felt, and was surprisingly good)
Middleton - 3,5 (The least interesting of the main women, but was okay, and pretty good in her one brief scene to herself)
McShane - 3 (His character goes through such a whiplash in such a short time, but he does it finely enough, but his final scenes were not as good as they should be for another reason)
Rambin - 1 (She's in 2 scenes, but still, she acts like she's in a melodrama or soap opera, and really ruined those scenes, especially with how hard-hitting they should have been. I actually laughed in her first line sayings with how over-the-top they were)
Dance - 4 (Very little in the movie, he had maybe 3 scenes to him. He still exudes a grandeur and dangerousness to the man, and is great in his last scene. His accent could use some work though)
Burke - 4 (Like Hearst, Welles is very little in the movie, maybe even less. He does make a fine friend of sorts to Mank, and is also great in his last scene when the relationship finally breaks)
Howard - 3,5 (Strangely enough Mayer is more of a villain in the film than Hearst. i don't have much to say, other than Howard's okay for a kind of weirdly written character)
Kingsley - 3 (Pretty fine straight-to-the-point businessman)
Pelphrey - 4/4,5 (I thought he did the "lesser" brother really wonderfully, and had great chemistry with Oldman. Also wished he'd appeared more)
Troughton - 3 (Pretty okay proper and posh guy. Also, that accent)
Everyone else is fine.
In the end, I wished Welles was more in the movie and had a more villanous role, like in the original script, because Meyer just wasn't really interesting as a villain, and Hearst wasn't in it enough to compensate, but I liked the script overall.
As for its Oscar chances, I don't think any of the male supporting players are too proeminent enough to warrant a nom, especially with how competitive the category is, but who knows. If I had to pick anybody, it'd be Pelphrey though.
I'm reserving a bit more of my appreciation for Mank for after I've given it a second watch, but I personally thoroughly enjoyed it. Easily my Directing and Cinematography wins so far
Oldman: 4.5
Seyfried: 4/4.5
Middleton: 4
Collins: 3.5
Pelphrey: 3.5
Dance: 4
Troughton: 3
McShane: 3
Cross: 3
Kingsley: 3
Burke: 3 (Siding with Calvin on this one, thought he was solid for most of the film and while I wouldn't say "awful", there was something off about his last scene).
Anonymous: I think the problem with Welles being a "villain" of sorts is that it would be partially inaccurate.
Not sure if I'm reading too much into it, but I think that there is something fairly problematic with the original script being based on an essay that has been dismissed as inaccurate, but what the hell do I know?
I saw Mank. Oldman gives his best work since TTSS, Seyfried was terrific, however the film itself didn't fully meet my expectations, though still very good.
I'm happy they didn't make Welles the villain because by all accounts that's not how it was at all. But it seems like removing that left a gaping hole in the screenplay. Nothing felt earned in the final act in my opinion besides Oldman's performance trying so damn hard to make sense of things.
I also have no idea what you all saw in Dance's performance, frankly I found him as wasted here as he was in say, The Imitation Game.
Calvin: I agree with you on Dance, I thought he'd have a much greater presence than what we got.
Louis: Your thoughts on Winslet and Ronan in Ammonite. And your thoughts on Mank with ratings and thoughts on the cast.
I feel like films nowadays just coast on Dance's presence rather than giving him material to work with. For that I'll always be grateful for you lot getting me started on Game of Thrones. While it ended up being disappointing in the end there was enough of it bringing so much of actors I'd never imagined would hit those heights before, Dance specifically.
Calvin: I thought he delivered the hell out of his one big scene, but I wouldn't even think of going higher than that. It's more of a soft 4, to be honest
Calvin: Agreed.
Calvin: after rewatching that scene, I lowered Burke to 3. I don't think it's bad per se, but it feels unearned becaused Welles was just not built up as a villain. And yes, Dance was wasted, but I liked what he did with what little he had, even if in the end Hearst was no more than American Tywin.
Also, regarding the Welles villain problem, my problem is that they took out a villain and either replaced with Meyer (which didn't work IMO), or simply left it at that, which made Welles' breakup kind of random.
Anonymous: it not only felt unearned, he completely gave up on the Welles voice in that scene. I try not to be a stickler for these kinds of things but it was extremely distracting.
Frankly Welles coming out of the blue in Ed Wood felt more entrenched in a sense of reality.
I'll see Mank later tonight, I have to say the rather mixed reception is actually really intriguing.
And regarding Meyer, what I thought was weird was that in one scene he was portrayed as a savvy and aggressive businessman (like his monologue) and in the other he was a bumbling moron (like his scenes in Hearst's mansion).
Luke, your ratings for the cast of Mank
Given how you guys are talking about it, maybe I ought too check out "Mank" after all.
Also, to Tahmeed's comment about Anime openings, I'm surprised "99" from Mob Psycho 100 didn't make the list.
Mitchell: That completely slipped my mind, "99" would be number 7.
Louis: Your cast and director for...
1960s Let Him Go
1980s The Nest
2000s Ammonite
Oldman - 5
Seyfried - 4.5
Middleton - 3.5
Collins - 3.5
Pelphrey - 4
Dance - 3
Howard - 3
Burke - 3
Everyone else was fine
I just watched Mank and I liked the movie, it is not among the best Fincher films but it is still very good especially in the perfect technical aspects.
Regarding Fincher's favoritism in winning Oscars, I see that he will follow the same trajectory as other directors awarded for wrong films such as: Carol Reed (Oliver!), Robert Zemeckis (Forrest Gump) and Martin Scorsese (The Departed).
I think Mank wins 5 to 9 Oscars: film, director, supporting actress (Amanda Seyfried), cinematography, production design, costume design, sound, score or makeup.
I actually rather liked Mank. It was like if Trumbo didn’t suck. Oldman and Seyfried are great, but I seemed to like Burke a little more than rest of you.
I'm glad I took the time to reflect after watching Mank, which wasn't exactly what I expected, but that's hardly a problem. This is as film's about Hollywood screenwriters go, it's not the masterpiece that is Barton Fink, but exceptional when compared to Mrs. Parker and the Vicious Circle or the particularly alike Trumbo. On its own terms though, I thought it was terrific. Not entirely without reservation, I think McShane's character needed one more scene, and the little bit on Collins's personal story wasn't really needed. Quibbles though, as even those elements I didn't think were bad, just not great. I did think plenty of the film was great though in the examination of the creative who is his own worst enemy and struggles between existing and living up to his own morality. I'll say that the Citizen Kane parts, while technically just a framing device, were a good framing device. But the greatness lied in everything of Mankiewicz in his prime/decline in the studio system, particularly every scene in the Hearst circle, especially those between Mank and Davies. Loved the exploration of the man's struggle there right down till the final scene with Mank and Welles....which I liked upon reflection. This as the simple truth is the scene isn't about Welles, its about Mank finally taking his stand, Welles in the scene is merely a facilitator, I think we wish to apply more importance on Welles's end, because well its Welles. The film's not about Welles in the least however, it's Mank's story through and through, and the film never makes any mistake about that.
Saving Oldman naturally.
Seyfried - 4.5
Collins - 3
Howard - 3.5
Pelphrey - 3.5
Troughton - 3
Kingsley - 3.5
Middleton - 3.5
Burke - 3.5
Cross - 3
McShane - 3
Dance - 3.5
Nye - (Random casting choice that neither hurt or helped the film)
Calvin:
Whitmore, Manville and now this, I guess this is just a week for disagreements.
Louis: Thoughts on Mank's Cinematography, Production Design, Sound (Editing and Mixing), Editing, Makeup and Costume Design.
Louis: Your rating and thoughts on JJL in Mrs. Parker And The Vicious Circle.
Luke, I think Louis might be giving his opinion on many of those on Oscar nominations day, like with 1917.
I'm glad we seem to be in agreement on Oldman.
The way that third act was edited was just SO choppy though. Like his confrontations with Hearst and Welles in succession being cut that way was just so clumsy. Especially from the director of The Social Network.
I’m all for a 5 for Oldman though seeing as the film worked as well for you as it did.
Calvin:
Well given your affection for Wendy I thought you'd like choppy editing...okay I apologize for the jab.
I didn't feel it was choppy though, not Social Network good, but the film itself is paced with more overt deliberation, befitting the period, and though you don't have to love it, I felt it natural to the piece. Including the two dueling confrontations, one where Mank shrinks the other where he stands his ground. The cut between the two extended scenes wasn't the cuts between the past, Zuckerberg v Winklevoss, and Zuckberg v Saverin, but it also wasn't meant to be.
The only part I felt could've been changed a bit was the end of the confrontation where I think the film could've dragged Mank's bit of celebration after standing his ground more, and left out the epilogue on the authorship debate, since the film honestly wasn't about that (I think that could've all just been left in the postscript.)
Ouch! Got me there Louis. But I guess it comes down to subjectivity for where I felt Wendy soar, I felt this sink. Both confrontations felt completely too rushed for me, leaving little impact beyond ‘damn that’s some amazing acting Gary’. The way it faded in and out of those scenes was painful and I usually love that kind of old fashioned homage. And yeah having Lily Collins’ character run up to him with that revelation about her husband was painful to me
I thought Mank was pretty great overall, although definitely uneven. I actually thought the Citizen Kane stuff was the least interesting part of the film, as I found the exploration of early Hollywood through Mank's POV really fascinating. Perfection in all technical elements, easily my win currently for cinematography, production design, sound mixing, costumes and Supporting Actress.
Oldman-5
Seyfried-4.5
Collins-2.5
Howard-4
Pelphrey-3
Troughton-3
Kingsley-3
Middleton-3.5
McShane-3.5
Dance-3.5
Burke-2.5
Nye-N/A (weird)
Pretty much all of those ratings could change on a re-watch, except Oldman, who's secure.
So I came across this great behind the scenes interview about "The Irishman", where de Niro, Pacino, Scorsese and Pesci all discuss the film. It's really quite the treat...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3awjDwwxdc
Luke:
Winslet - (I tend to prefer Winslet when she isn't too big, and that is the case here. Although I do think it takes a minute to get used to her gruff kind of accent, I feel you settle into it and accept it pretty quickly. Winslet effectively doesn't over do any aspect of the character which I liked a lot here. This as her sort of worldly woman of a different nature to the one expected of the time, I felt Winslet avoided easy pitfalls. This as she does deliver the innate sort of confidence within the woman's trade, but as well delivered a nice underlying vulnerability regarding her character's romantic state. This in part making up for the lack of chemistry for me, by making such an honest quality in conveying the needs for her character as related to the relationship. She brings an earnest sense of the need for affection well, while still bringing that edge within her personal confidence. A very good performance, even if I'm not at all crazy about her scene partner.)
Ronan - (Okay, I honestly thought her early scenes of melancholia were just flat out bad. Her expression felt broad, while lacking any nuance or honest insight within the reactions. She seemed stilted and artificial, which was strange to me given Ronan never feels that way. I was quite struck by just how out of place she felt within the scenes, and how I quite simply didn't believe her at all in the role. This only continued though as the film went on. This even as she brings that energy of hers but really too fast actually. The process of the transformation feels dishonest and limited. Ronan's performance feels too often like a put on at every point and there is no real connection that ever makes her character feel tangible beyond a generalized idea of repression. This is all coming from typically a big Ronan fan, so honestly I'm just surprised.)
Seyfried - (This I feel is some strange vindication, as long have I scratched my head at the belittlement of Seyfried by so many for so long. Many times petty, her getting bashed for Les Miserables for playing COSETTE, COSETTE is barely even a vague idea of a character, which she did what she could for. I digress, but I'm glad that nonsense will stop with her fantastic work here. Work that could easily go up in my estimation, because think of how bad this role could've gone in the wrong hands. This with the thick Brooklyn accent and how sympathy must be created for the role. Well Seyfried wonderfully owns the former aspect of the character, making it her own and not all seeming too much at any point with it. This even her "Monkey Business" line I thought she brought the right playfulness into the character being purposefully over the top in the moment. So much of her work here is fantastic though in embodying both a luminous charm with a certain melancholia all the same. Seyfried never wastes a reaction within the group scenes, but also does so much in her scenes with Oldman. This in striking such a wonderful chemistry with Oldman. A specific chemistry though were you grant a mutual sense of their sort of both damaged souls in a very specific ways, as essentially sellouts still filled with so much life. I also adored her final present scene, where she managed to even create a sympathy for Hearst that was rather wonderfully realized through her balanced delivery that brought to life this larger than life actress, but with such genuine emotion with in it. Loved this performance the more I think about it.)
Matt:
I actually do think if the film had simply cut out almost all the Kane stuff, it would've been all the greater for it...though we would've lost the aforementioned scene with Seyfried...so maybe don't entirely mean that.
Collins - (As the somewhat superfluous role, I thought Collins did what she needed to in order to rise above it enough.)
Howard - (To also again defend the film, I entirely bought the two sides of Mayer, as we had him as the lord of his castle in the studio, but the sycophant when the true king was around. Howard I thought was effective as both the blustering fool, though not as good as Michael Lerner, and as the supportive fool. This bringing in both just a vile manner of a man entirely unscrupulous in every regard.)
Pelphery - (Liked his performance in offering the right balance as the more modest and quieter brother. Pelphery bringing the right sort of low key chemistry with Oldman. This showing both a sense of nuanced admiration that slowly segues towards concern in each subsequent meeting. I liked even at the most confrontational though how Pelphery brought an earnest sense of fraternal love.)
Troughton - (Well better than Eddie Marsan was to be sure. Good though more than anything as the sort of quiet facilitator who offers enough of a sense of cunning in his interactions with Oldman.)
Kingsley - (Thought he was good in showing really the opposition in a less simplistic light compared to the purposefully worst possible scenario depiction of Mayer. I liked Kingsley's major scene in debating Oldman by presenting with the right humanistic light within it, showing the passion of his side as earnestly as Oldman.)
Middleton - (Wonderful as the long suffering wife to be sure. Liked her chemistry with Oldman that combined the right sense of frustration and genuine affection. Definitely marked the right comic sense in her state of perpetual dismay at her husband's antics, while also bringing such a tenderness though with it.)
Burke - (Okay his final scene is an outlier, but in a way I think it shows just how amazing his impression was the rest of the time, to the point that I thought they had found some old recordings of Welles or something given how spot on he sounded. He loses it with the emotion but I thought he delivered the emotion itself well. Imperfect in the end, but most it was pretty perfect...so definitely a fan overall.)
McShane - (Although again I feel we needed one more scene with him, I did like his show of a mix with pride and shame in initially showing the films before revealing just the full on shame in his final scene.)
Cross - (Fine in realizing the less personal protege situation compared to Pelphery.)
Dance - (I will say that Dance can do more, and I wished they'd let him. Fincher himself proved that with Alien 3. Having said that this is one of the better examples of what he does well, and I don't think he was coasting with it. This as I liked how he really underplayed much of his reactions towards the more critical actions towards him. This with Dance playing Hearst very much as this king, where his power is just assumed to the point that even hatred is something he wields in a specific controlled way, as he doesn't need to force it out. He of course delivers on his more overtly menacing moment, but what I liked was his more controlled moments of reactions where I did feel Dance found some nuance there. I will say I was hoping for a meatier role, but it is what it is.)
Regarding JJL, as always, best to wait for the results for the sake of future reference.
Anonymous:
Glenn - 3.5(A limited role though I like the hardbitten kind of charm he has in his little bit of early screentime. This giving a sense of a guy who seemingly has it all figured out particularly in his affable presence he takes. This being particularly effective in his later scene in making his conclusion more shocking as he seems likable enough, even if Glenn does bring the underlying sense of grit suggesting that what Alonzo is saying about him is probably all true.)
Bryan:
Let Him Go 1960's Directed by Anthony Mann:
George: James Stewart
Margaret: Donna Reed
Blanche: Jane Darwell
The Nest 1980's directed by Lewis John Carlino:
Rory: Malcolm McDowell
Allison: Blythe Danner
Ammonite 2000's directed by Mike Leigh:
Mary Anning: Imelda Staunton
Charlotte Murchison: Sally Hawkins
Louis would any films be a 5/5 yet for you this year?
No.
Watched Mank. Gave me a lot to think about, though in the end I think I really dug it. Maybe be my favorite of the year so far... maybe...
Oldman - 5
Seyfried - 4.5
Collins - 3.5
Howard - 3.5
Burke - 3.5
Dance - 3.5
Middleton - 3.5
I also saw Ammonite and I'd pretty much agree with Louis except I thought Ronan was not so much bad as just fine, I'd probably go for a 3.5 or so, Winslet was great though. Also I think its Oscar chances are dead in the water, having seen the film it really does not seem like the Academy's type of thing at all.
The Portrait comparisons definitely feel unfair but at the same time every time there was a beach shot I was like, well Sciamma would've done wonders with this wouldn't she?
Luke, which remaining 2020 films do you think have a chance at getting a 5 from Louis?
Anonymous: Nomadland and Minari.
Luke, How many fives do you think Louis will give for Lead Actor and Actress this year.
You know thinking on it, there's no real reason for me to not give Seyfried a 5.
Lead Actress: 4-6 - Buckley, McDormand, Kirby, Mulligan, Davis and Morfydd Clark
Lead Actor: 6-10 - Jackman, Lindo, Rylance, Oldman, Hopkins, Boseman, Mikkelsen, Yeun, Ben-Adir and Ahmed (Who's right on the border for me)
Loved Mank. 9.5/10. Here are my ratings for the cast:
Gary Oldman - 5
Amanda Seyfried - 4.5
Lily Collins - 3
Tom Burke - 3.5
Tuppence Middleton - 3
Tom Pelphrey - 4
Charles Dance - 3
Arliss Howard - 2.5
Sam Troughton - 3
Ferdinand Kingsley - 2.5
Jamie McShane - 3
Monika Gossman - 3
Toby Leonard Moore - 2.5
Leven Rambin - 1.5
Calvin:
I definitely agree it's not the Academy's thing at all, I think the Oscar pedigree of Ronan and Winslet could gain them a little bit of traction still. Probably not enough, but again with this year, the small pool could allow them to push through. This as even though the film isn't their thing, something like "A Promising Young Woman" doesn't really sound like their thing either.
Luke, do you think the 2020 Best Actor lineup could end up equaling 2016? The bigger question is who ends up getting nominated in the fifth slot (Yeun, Ahmed, Firth, Ben-Adir).
Two of my favorite scenes in Mank were actually sequenced back-to-back (the banter about Germany & Mank/Marion in the courtyard). After those two, I thought I was going to loooooove the overall film. Technically, I didn’t, but overall, I still found Mank to be quite good.
(4.5/5)
Louis: are you going to check out Black Bear in the next few days? The more i think about it the more i dislike it, I can’t add much because of spoilers but at the end i felt very frustrated, Plaza is terrific though.
Anonymous: Thinking about it more, I predict Yeun or Ben-Adir for that 5th slot. I'm not sure if Sound Of Metal will gain much traction aside from it's Sound Design and Supernova might be too low-key for them to consider.
And I see great potential in both Yeun and Ben-Adir's performances.
With Firth, I'm hoping for at least a new career best turn from him.
If Judas and the Black Messiah is a major hit, then Kaluuya will be my last minute pick.
Louis: Any thoughts on Sophia Lorens' Oscar nomination chances for The Life Ahead?
Omar:
I'll certainly try to check it out.
Bryan:
Well if she was going supporting (which would not be fraud), she'd have a much better chance. In lead though it could be a case of too many Netflix contenders as they already have Davis and Kirby who seem like better bets to win, so I have a feeling they'll aim on those two in the end. Now Netflix seems to be willing to spend the money to push for every nomination they can get, so I still think they'll push for her. She does have a chance, as the other post top three contenders all have something against them (Well actually not Andra Day who could be a clear 4 if her film is good.). She's in the hunt though given that Winslet and Pfeiffer's films underwhelmed and Mulligan is a fringe contender by design. If Day's film hits, there'll theoretically be one spot left, which could be anyone's including Loren (though if pushed supporting I'd probably be predicting her right now.)
Louis: Do you read up about a film/TV show on TV Tropes after you watch it?
No.
Just finished watching Sound Of Metal. This is, without a doubt, my pick for my favorite film of 2020 by a country mile. The first 10/10 i’ve given to a film this year.
Here are my ratings for the cast:
Riz Ahmed - 5
Olivia Cooke - 3.5
Paul Raci - 4.5
Mathieu Amalric - 3
Sound of Metal gets better and better the more I think about it.
Apparently it’s been confirmed that Kaluuya will be running in Supporting.
Calvin: I'm now switching my winners prediction to Kaluuya.
Louis: Would you be interested in checking out The Queen's Gambit on Netflix? Anya Taylor-Joy is incredible, and it really does have a solid supporting cast.
Tahmeed:
I've been watching it, actually.
Post a Comment