Paul Newman did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Henry Gondorff in The Sting.
I ought to open with a few complete asides and just re-state my enjoyment of this film. It's just a wonderfully entertaining and fun film. I always love when the same people who decry a best picture win like this, also decry the academy not recognizing comedy. The Sting is not a great serious drama, it's great entertainment. Anyways, one of the major reasons for this quality is in the star-pairing of Robert Redford as young up and comer con man Johnny Hooker, and Paul Newman as the old pro Henry Gondorff. Redford was the only actor recognized for the film, perhaps as the "hotter" commodity at the time, which given the academy's love for the film the lack of Robert Shaw as the chief villain Doyle Lonnegan and Paul Newman does feel a bit of an oversight strangely enough. Now it has to be said, despite Newman's star theoretically fading when compared to Redford at this point (though it wasn't really), Newman might as well be in his prime here. In fact while they make for a give and take duo in their previous collaboration Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, Newman takes ownership of this film despite definitely not being lead, and...actually on this watch I had to admit something that I couldn't quite believe...Newman is supporting in the film. Now hear me out, Gondorff's role is specifically as the supporting mentor to Hooker, and though he has a few scenes to himself, so do Robert Shaw and Harold Gould as other con pro Kid Twist. Like those two, his scenes are almost exclusively in service to the creation or motivation of the con, that is technically all for Hooker's story. To kind of seal it I did a rough screentime count, where I was generous if anything, and from that I was surprised to learn Newman only has a few minutes more than 15 minutes of screentime, making him in a grand total of about 15% of the film, hard to call him a lead, particularly when Redford is an unquestionable lead standing right there with his over an hour of screentime. If the role wasn't played by Newman, I might've come to this conclusion a lot quicker.
That of course speaks to the strength of this performance and the star power of Newman in this role. This as we open with Newman's entrance into the film being a classic sort of anti-star entrance as we meet the "great Henry Gondorff" as he's sleeping off a hangover between a wall and his bed. This followed by being awoken through a cold shower, and we start with not the best introduction for this supposed ultimate con artist. Newman is of course great at being sloppy just as he is at being smooth. This as he instantly endears a bit to Henry in just showing his lack of pretense in his interactions with Hooker. Newman brings a nice bit of warmth just as he attempts to guides Hooker and even cautions him about revenge. Newman does it with really such a naturalistic way that makes Gondorff instantly endearing as this mentor to Hooker. Now as we follow Gondorff as he goes about recruiting his crew to set up Lonnegan, we get full movie star Newman in all his glory. This is just Newman at his most in that regard. Newman could be a great actor, but here he is a great movie star. This just in every one of his interactions, and nose flicks, there's a sheer sense of a joy of performance there. This as it is hard not to have the fun right along Newman every step of the way. Of course Newman does balance this in showing a sense of intelligence as he discusses the plan, pausing on moments to show regarding Lonnegan's potential wrath, but also just bringing so much energy to the build of the plan. He has such a wonderful zest within figuring out each bit of it. Newman making for a great leader for the plan that it is hard not to get wrapped up into the plan, and wish you could be part of his con in some way.
Now the planning of the con leads to what is the best scene of the film, remember this is a film I adore, largely because it solely focuses on the two best performances in the film, that being Shaw and Newman going to toe to toe in a poker game. Before that though we do get a quick moment that kind of sums up Newman's performance a bit here, and what makes him just so likable. This as he shows off his card tricks to Hooker. This as he shows them off he is so impeccably smooth in his manner, but then when he fumbles a bit, Newman sort of "oops" reaction is perfection. This as Newman brings the right bits of subversion within the confidence to make him all the more likable actually. Now onto the poker game that is amazing in every regard and I love every minute of it. This as Newman is terrific in portraying Gondorff play the poker lout "Shaw". His whole manner being a mess, and being as abrasive and obnoxious as possible. He is hilarious in just how sloppy he is and particularly in stark contrast to Shaw who just is getting more and more angry in his reactions throughout. They make great foils for one another throughout the scene. I especially love one moment where Shaw finally verbally lashes out, and Newman's "aw crap" face (which apparently might've been genuine thinking Shaw was about to actually punch him) is the perfect moment of Gondorff losing his bearings just a bit. Newman's great though in showing in that sloppiness the casual confidence about the performance Gondorff is doing, making it seem all too easy. I especially love his rather comical way of glancing at his final hand, while also eyeing Lonnegan's henchman with a certain suspicion. Newman is hilarious throughout the scene, and against Shaw's reactions, you have a truly classic scene.
That scene is Newman's highlight however Newman doesn't waste a moment from that point in portraying Gondorff trying to make it all work. This as there's actually a nice balance. This in moments of portraying his concern for Hooker's safety. Newman's actually fairly moving in portraying this low key concern wholly earnestly as he remains uncertain of the kid's life throughout the affair. This while also portraying a nice duality in the moments of the actual sting. This in capturing the degree of stress as Newman portrays a lack of confidence in the moment of running around trying to make it work and creating a good sense of the pressure of it. This against his moments of still playing Shaw as this cocky and mean employer of a corrupt race betting room. Newman though creates a good character in these moments with stiff and dismissive anger he brings in playing the part of the boss you'd believe Hooker's character supposedly hates. Of course this all being just part of the game and in the moments of success where you get that carry over chemistry of Redford and Newman from Butch and Sundance. This as when the two share joy it just seems all the brighter. The final sequence in particularly being all the more joyous just in their mutual jubilation being just so infectious. Even in his supporting screentime, Newman seems the lead just by his presence throughout once he appears. He makes for the proper con man of all con mans. I'll say though watching the film again, I must've had a little bit of a case of Oscar sickness in my evaluation of Robert Redford's work, that is being overly dismissive of it largely due to my love of the Oscar snubbed Newman and Shaw. I will correct that of course. Nonetheless though still, Newman and Shaw do steal the film, Shaw through his vicious and volatile presence and Newman through his charming one. This may not be the technically best acted performance by Paul Newman, but it is perhaps his most entertaining and the clearest example of his star power.
126 comments:
I've said this before, but it's worth repeating:
"You owe me fifteen grand, pal" is one of my favourite Paul Newman lines. Likewise, this is certainly one of my favourite performances of his.
Also, I finished season four of “The Seven Deadly Sins”, and interestingly enough, that means I’m up to date in regards to the Anime (A new season is premiering this year, but it hasn’t been added to Netflix).
I’ll be honest...I found this season to be less interesting and enjoyable than the first two. Matter of fact, it’s made me downgrade the series in my previous ranking so it’s now below “Akame ga Kill”. Honestly, there was a point where my investment simply dwindled, and I found myself passively watching the episodes rather than truly being enraptured. This as there are some character moments that should've been more impactful, and some repeated/predictable story elements from the previous seasons. The show’s still okay, don’t get me wrong, but if someone addressed their dislike for it, I wouldn’t feel the need to go the bat.
i certainly did noz see this coming ... i mean, he is 15. in the overall rank, i just didn't expect that to still be the realm of 5. Jesus Christ
But yes, he is supporting, like, definitely.
I predict him to go 3rd in the Supporting ranking.
Tim: He actually did confirm that when he finished 1973.
Is Redford still a 3?
Luke: yup, just found it. Still flabberghasted
Robert: He's up to a 3.5.
Pleeease tell me I'm not the only who notices the irony of the Shaws being used for this very specific review.
Bryan: Well Spotted :)
Luke: Good to hear, because I think most of us can agree it's a more than decent performance from him. He isn't Newman or Shaw, but he's still good in his own way.
Lovely, and I can certainly buy the supporting argument. What are your thoughts on the score to this film by the way Louis? It seems like such an obvious thing to ask but I don't believe anyone has. I guess I just take it for granted as being great.
Louis: your thoughts on Michael Covino in News of the World?
Louis: Your thoughts on the score from Out Of Africa.
Louis: Are you 100% certain about Jackie Earle Haley's category placement for Watchmen.
Luke: I’d say it’s fitting.
Capaldi, on the other hand...
Robert: I agree though had to ask because Calvin has him in Lead.
I think both Watchmen and In the Loop are ensembles.
I’ve always felt In The Loop is an ensemble. No one really *leads* it. Peter Capaldi is the cast MVP for me, but the film isn’t exactly about HIS maneuverings in D.C, as all the other characters have equal or slightly lesser-so importance.
I'd argue Hollander and Capaldi are leads. They're arbiters of the plot, with Hollander making the mess and Capaldi being the one to clean it up. Not to mention they probably have the most screentime.
Calvin:
The score is really the masterstroke of George Roy Hill's direction of the film. This as the ragtime provides both the time setting and really the tone of the film. It grants the film so much of its energy in such artfully used preexisting pieces throughout. Take for instance though a lot of the scenes of Hooker running for his life, these could be pretty dark, but their entirely fun largely due to the music that so much grants the film its spirit in a way.
Anonymous:
As much as I find the film dull, this is a typically beautiful score by John Barry. Very much part of his sweeping later. The main theme being a beautifully rendered emotional work, that I only wish actually was found in the actual film. It carries itself that kind of potent grandeur in his splendid balance between the traditional carrying strings, mixed with a notable bass measure of the orchestra, but also mixed in with the gorgeous segues into the quieter upper register. Outside of the film, fantastic. I'll admit it doesn't do as much within the film as I'm quite checked out when watching it, but on its own, striking work.
Luke:
Yes, Watchmen is an ensemble pretty clearly for me. The technical leads are Manhattan, Rorschach, Laurie and Dan. There are enough detours in the flashbacks, for Ozymandias, even little side business with like Nixon, to make it a pure ensemble for me, even with the four focal points. Rorschach is the strongest focal point in the first half of the film, but even his story is very clearly set aside, and even used often as an entry point to the rest, that he doesn't separate from the rest to me.
Calvin:
Covino - (His performance is just ridiculous. I mean the character itself feels ridiculous, I mean they're that hard-bent pedophiles as a group? Feels like they'd quit after the first guy bites it. Anyways though Covino doesn't help things by over selling every line as ridiculous caricature. He comes off as more silly than scary, and I don't think that was really the point. I mean casting like this I always take exception to anyways, "hey he was good for a goof off friend, great choice for psycho pedophile!", well statement doesn't make sense nor does this performance.)
Louis: And in regards to In The Loop, what about Hollander and Capaldi.
Luke:
For me it's ensemble, as you have enough scenes devoted to all the other players, particularly Hollander's assistant, and Gandolfini, to make it an ensemble piece, even if Capaldi and Hollander are the largest players within it.
Louis: Just wondering, have you watched any of Burnham's stand up specials so far?
Also, what are your thoughts on *that* scene not turning out so well for Cassie in Promising Young Woman?
Louis: Thoughts on The Dark Horse with ratings and thoughts on the cast.
Louis: regarding Watchmen, do you prefer the novel- or the movie-ending?
Emi Grant:
I haven't seen any of his specials, just some short sets.
Well I was quite thrown off, genuinely surprising but not a cheap twist, part of the reason though why I really need to re-watch the film though is I'm not 100 percent sure how I feel about it, this is to the point even to just give complete thoughts on the moment.
Luke:
I liked The Dark Horse, though I think it was just slightly imbalanced towards the darkness, just a bit, and made it drag slightly in parts. Still overall found it largely effective portrait of a true story of being able to triumph through much adversity.
Curtis - 4.5(Well I always wondered what would happen if the always reliable Curtis actually had a substantial role, and here we are. This is terrific performance from him. This in his overarching state of the man that he so naturally realizes. This in this constant push pull of his mental disorder. This making his moments of random outbursts feel wholly true just to the jumbled mental state of the man that continues even when he's in better circumstances. With that though Curtis is terrific in portraying though how the man is when at his worst in just this broken shell of a mess without focus against his scenes of chess, where he shows the optimism and energy, even if still messy, pointed in a way that suggest purpose. It is a striking performance as he wholly reveals both the man's demons and his value.)
Rolleston - 3.5(Interesting in that in some ways he's playing the very straight and slightly grown up version of his performance in Boy. Although I kind wanted a bit more of him, he's rock solid here again. This in portraying well just the quiet discontent of someone constantly beaten down by society, and then the slow reconditioning that occurs when given the chance to do something else. Once again a good performance from him, here with a less overtly comic quality to it.)
Whatuira - 3.5(Just a sincere and moving performance. This portraying just the sort of hapless energy that is a little funny, but also just sweet in showing what the goofy teenager gets from it all.)
Tim:
The comic book ending without exception. The series proved that the squid could've wholly worked in the cinematic form, and frankly it being left off proved Snyder's lack of inspiration to an extent.
With that aside though, I think the movie ending actually doesn't make logical sense to the purpose of the act. This as it theoretically should create a Fail-Safe/Strangelove situation, since Dr. Manhattan is known to be an agent of the US, therefore the US still should receive the blame even if accidental and wouldn't create world peace. If only NY had been hit, like in the comic, then it would've worked a little better, but that's not the case, making it not really work.
To anyone familiar with the games, who would cast if there were making a live action film of "Red Dead Redemption"?
I always thought that Josh Brolin as John, W. Earl Brown as Bill and Jeffrey Dean Morgan as Dutch would've been perfect.
Other potential castings:
Kurt Russell - Marshal Johnson
Pedro Pascal/Diego Luna - Javier Escualla
Brian Doyle Murray - West Dickens
Domhnall Gleeson - Irish
DJ Qualls - Seth
Jim Beaver - Uncle
Luke: How do you know when Louis is finished watching a recommended film.
Anonymous: I regularly check both overall rankings.
With The Act Of Killing coming up next, I'll probably ask for thoughts tomorrow night.
Final rank:
1. Shaw
2. Newman
3. Ryan
4. De Niro
5. Robinson
Anonymous: You may want to read Ryan's review. There's no way Newman's taking the runner-up spot.
Rating/thoughts on Wayne Hapi in The Dark Horse?
The Act of Killing is great. Would love to see it crack the top ten.
Watched the second episode of Wandavision, okay now the lack of it being a parody or satire I have more of a problem with, because if it is being played mostly straight, I've seen more than a few episodes of Bewitched, they're usually funnier than this....I guess it is a Dick Sergeant episode. Otherwise I guess hoping for more "breaks" which other than the Strucker watch advertisement (that I honestly thought was pretty effectively creepy) haven't been particularly interesting to me. Due to the length of episodes, and just liking Bettany and Olsen in general, I'll probably stick with it, but once again I do wish there was a bit more bite to Marvel.
Razor:
Hapi - 4(Found his bitterness and despair quite powerful. This just in the intensity of it by combining both sense of the feelings and showing it in such a raw and potent fashion. This though with an earned sense of perhaps slight reconciliation in his reactions near the end of the film. Brief but makes a rather powerful impact to be sure.)
Louis: I gotta be perfectly honest, I'm getting really sick of everything having to be a parody of satire. I appreciate the earnestness of it.
Matt:
Again I actually don't mind it, but I just wish it was a bit stronger as one, if that's what it's going to be.
Louis: your top 10 dog performances in a film? As in live-action dogs.
Louis: OK, fair enough.
Also, I'm watching The Maurittanian today so will report back if there's potential for Foster to be a late Supporting Actress dark horse.
I’ll give WandaVision a complete pass if when they get to the 00’s/10’s section, they’re suddenly enrolled in a certain Colorado-based community College.
(It’s probably going to be The Office/Modern Family fake docu style, but I can dream dammit)
Louis: your top 10 tony dalton acting moments
Luke: It's my opinion man. The only thing you can do is respect it.
Anonynous: I meant no disrespect.
Anonymous: I never outright attacked your opinion either. All I said was to check Ryan's review and compare that with Newman's. Ryan had the more impactful work.
Anonymous, I don't think he meant any harm by it. We all respect each other's opinions round here.
I personally predict:
1. Shaw
2. Ryan
3. Newman
4. De Niro
5. Robinson
Can fonfirm The Mauritanian is not particularly good, Foster's awards buzz goes on her name alone (though she's perfectly fine), and Benedict Cumberbatch needs to be banned from playing Americans. Tahar Rahim is excellent though.
Calvin: Cumberbatch is one of those actors that although I greatly appreciate his talent he's so much more effective with his natural accent.
And what rating would you give Rahim.
Calvin: Is Rahim lead.
Calvin and Luke: I would say Cumberbatch's accent for "Doctor Strange" actually worked pretty well (Though I might be a little favorable since he was so ideally cast). That is the exception, however, and for most of his other attempts, there is unfortunately that Eddie Redmayne in "Chicago 7" thing of being able to "see the gears".
Some performers just take to it more than others, honestly, because goodness knows how many American actors have butchered non-American dialects.
I would also add that many British performers who struggle with the American accent are those who do a "Generalized American" accent; You know, the one that comprises of a bit more upspeak and hard R sounds - and that's about it. The actors that can do it very well instead target specific dialects related to their characters IE Bale, Hardy, Oldman...etc
Mitchell: I'll give you Doctor Strange, it does work well with the character.
Luke, as you posted your alternate Supporting picks, what are your choices for Lead.
Anonymous: If the official lineup is Hopkins/Boseman/Lindo/Oldman/Ahmed then my picks are:
Jackman
Rylance
Mikkelsen
Yeun
Kim
Ben-Adir
Patel
Stanfield
Rahim
Firth/Tucci or MacKay
I personally would prefer to see the entire eligibility period merged into one lineup.
Yeun and Kim could easily be reviewed together. Ideally not though because...well, you know why ;)
Luke: yep easily Lead.
your thoughts on Elijah Wood as an actor?
Louis: If you're seeing it today, thoughts on The Act Of Killing.
Question about Jackman since I seem to have missed the answer to this earlier...why is he being considered for this lineup again? As far as I can tell it was already going to be a TV movie before Covid-19, was it just that Louis decided to include TV movies in this particular year so there’d be more competition?
Michael: I think that's it.
Michael: He took streaming into account for this year only.
And both Bad Education and Mangrove are in his top 20 so I don't see him changing his mind this late.
My major conflict this year is over Hamilton, I’m considering maybe including it in my rankings for film/direction/editing but it just feels hard ranking the performances alongside film performances. I’m certainly very interested to see how the reviews for Diggs and Groff are like.
For the Actors on Actors features on Variety, Glen Close is being paired with Pete Davidson, for whatever reason Jamie Dornan for Wild Mountain Thyme is being paired with Redmayne, and John David Washington will have to sit through Jared Leto. Hilarious.
Calvin:
1. Marvin - Paterson (Classic villain)
2. Brandy - Once Upon a Time in Hollywood
3. Max's Dog - The Road Warrior
4. Asta - The Thin Man
5. Milo - The Mask
6. Jack - The Artist
7. Samanatha - I am Legend
8. Rocco - The Drop
9. Edward - The Accidental Tourist
10. Pardo - High Sierra
Anonymous:
1. Lalo visits Saul and Kim
2. Kim visits Lalo
3. The Raid
4. "You wouldn't get it"
5. Arrival at the compound
6. "You know this name, Werner Ziegler?"
7. Visiting Hector
8. Reaction to Saul's family resemblance line
9. Visit to the travel agency
10. Million dollar bail
Luke:
I will not be merging the lineups, the only way I will include a 2021 performance is if they are both worthy and their co-star is Oscar nominated. It just doesn't make sense, there's been review worthy performances early in the year in other years, and I haven't included them. Frankly, based on that it appears that there might be one maybe two films in the extended period that might even be contenders, the academy really didn't need to extend.
Also having re-watched Minari, which I lost no affection for, I can give my thoughts on Kim right now.
Tim:
You know, I'm not exactly sure. This as I in general like his performances and it stops there. This isn't that I think he's really underwhelming in any actual way, I think he serves his role well, but he's always a bit of utility player in so many ways, even as Frodo in some ways oddly enough. I guess with him I get kind of enough, and don't really need more, but at the same time I suppose that is somewhat limiting
Louis: Fair enough.
Rating and thoughts on Kim.
I'm gonna have to pray for a Patel bonus review.
Scared me a bit there Louis 😂
that's ... really not what i expected ...
I just got the idea from watching Ryan Hollinger's video on Maniac, and given the comments he seems somewhat beloved, at least with horror fans
also, has anyone here read A Song Of Ice And Fire? i got all five for Christmas, am currently reading Clash Of Kings and i must say that i am grateful that up to thois point Dany only has a chapter ever 200 pages or so. Please tell me we do not get more of her late on ...
Tim:In the horror community he's beloved because his production company distributes small, weird horror movies that otherwise probably wouldn't have been seen, like Mandy.
Tim: I've read them. You'll be glad to know there's an entire book which doesn't give her a POV chapter. That same novel is also easily the worst of the 5 books in my opinion.
Tim: She was one of the 5 most important characters in the show so yeah, you'll get much more of her I'm sure.
Luke:
Kim - 4(I originally saved him in part because I wanted to watch the film again to see how his performance is really used. Well Lee Isaac Chung's direction is what I think makes his performance works. This isn't to say Kim is a bad actor, but I would say it is possible he is a very limited one. This as any great emotional scene largely is focused upon someone else, rather brilliantly by Chung, to sort of create the emotion around his performance. For example, take when he refuses to sleep next to his grandmother, the shot is squarely on Yeun and Han for them to create the emotional state, or even his moment regarding concerns for his own life, where after his brief delivery it shifts quickly to Youn. He's natural and more than decent in creating the family dynamic, and just a believable kid. He's not a Jacob Tremblay or Abraham Attah, where he carries or creates the emotions of a given scene within his own work. He's fine, but the character is carried by direction, and I mean exactly from what we see on screen, not by the amount of takes or whatever, rather this is based solely on what we actually see.)
Tim:
Well he comes off as quite approachable and likable in interviews which always helps.
Luke: yeah, sure, i just meant that i like the pace we're at in COK. 2 Chapters in 400 pages while Tyrion got like (didn't count, just estimating) 7 or 8? i can live with that; Hoping i will not get more in relation, as i utterly HATED her in the show.
Tahmeed: Do you mean the 4th one? I've heard some worrying thoughts about it ...
Louis: Thoughts on The Act Of Killing. Nice to see it in the top 5.
Luke:
Act of Killing is a powerful and disturbing film. Although while I understand the film scenes could seem blithe to some, I think they were probably essential to try to get the men to reflect upon their crimes, with anything other than a joyful reflection. It's portrait of the way different men, a variety of different types of horrible, could thrive with impunity with certain circumstances. This as it is equally damning of the way propaganda, and films can be used so fiendishly to create mentalities that pardon evil.
It's not an easy watch, I'm glad you found it compelling though Louis. Even though it's technically one of the most 'controlled' documentaries in a sense I feel like the reactions it captured are some of the most authentic.
Louis: Thoughts on the "Cookie full of arsenic" and "You're a national disgrace, Mr. Hudsucker" scenes from Sweet Smell of Success?
Everyone: What would be your favourite performances in french language films?
On a related note, I've been using Duolingo to teach myself the language, and despite its limits, it has helped to reinforce the basics thus far.
Mitchell: Not gonna lie, my 3 years of having French in High School made me sour on the language itself.
That said, I would go with the leads from BITWC and the main trio from Mommy. Even if some of those didn't quite resonate with Louis.
Also, for Robert/Tahmeed: Which is your favourite opening song from "Fullmetal Alchemist"?
I'm inclined to say 2 or 4, but that may just be because I like a lot of punk rock. It also doesn't hurt that they have similar guitar riffs/beats to the second opening of "Naruto" - which is frankly the best part of that season.
Mitchell: Ready Steady Go is the best one.
Emi: Can't really blame you, although I was only mandated to take one year myself. I'll also admit, the history of English/French relations in Canada has...umm..."soured" a lot of people as well - many from the older generations, in my experience.
Nonetheless, I've always liked the sound of the language personally, and as English speaker, I do feel a sort of responsibility to be as multilingual as I can. When you realize how convoluted English actually is from a technical standpoint, and how many millions of people have to learn it as a second language...it kind of puts things in perspective.
Matt: No arguments there.
Louis: Your thoughts on Duel Of The Fates.
Luke, do you think Brendan Gleeson will keep the 98 Lead win whenever it is finalized.
Anonymous: No, I don't even think he'll be runner-up to be honest.
Louis: Thoughts on Early Summer and ratings & thoughts on the cast.
I'm absolutely ecstatic that Early Summer made the top 5.
I think there's no doubt that by the time he gets through his filmography Ozu is going to be one of Louis' favourite directors of the era. He's just so in line with Louis' tastes that it's rather extraordinary.
Luke, who do you think will take brendan gleesons win?
Anonymous: I can't say for sure but there's 5 contenders:
Hugo Weaving in The Interview
Christopher Lee in Jinnah
Bob Hoskins in Twenty Four Seven
John Hurt in Love And Death On Long Island
Peter Mullan in My Name Is Joe
Michael Caine is a really strong 4.5 for Little Voice, his rendition of Roy Orbison's 'It's Over' is one of his greatest moments.
Louis: watched Falling and yes, it was terrible. Henriksen is 100% lead, right? I feel like essentially every flashback, hell almost every scene until the final few were from his perspective and the film ends on him. On that note there's something interesting that could've been found there...but that might be one of the worst screenplays of last year.
Louis: Why do you think the Academy pays less attention to foreign language performances, as compared to the 60s and 70s? Seems odd to say this, but I'm not sure if Marcello Mastroianni or Sophia Loren would get their nominations/wins in this day and age, even though the Academy itself has become more diverse.
Tahmeed: Have you seen Blackadder The Third yet.
Luke: As a matter of fact, finished it yesterday. I thought it was excellent, although I did prefer Blackadder II slightly more in terms of comedic value.
Cast ranking:
1. Laurie (having gone on with no idea of what George's portrayal would be, Lauries makes for an incredibly endearing and hilarious idiot. His third-best performance in my opinion, after House and David Copperfield.)
2. Atkinson (A much colder approach to be sure, but it fits the character and he knocks it out of the park. Again, I slightly preferred his work in Blackadder II due to sheer laughs, but he's amazing in a different way here)
3. Robinson (A terrific sidekick once again, and I actually think he has more to do in this series. Like Atkinson, amazing in how he differentiates his characters while still honoring his core portrayal)
4. Wood (A limited part to be sure, but I thought she was more than decent as playing perhaps the one good person in the cast)
Loved the cameos of Richardson, Fry and Coltrane.
Tahmeed: Do you think Atkinson is one of the best when it comes to eye-rolling.
Luke: An all-time great at it, I'd say. His death glares and reactions get a lot of laughs out of me.
And I will say, it's such a shame that Mr Bean is his most iconic work, because he's such a master of sardonic wit, as evidenced by Blackadder and his stand-up.
Tahmeed: Agreed, I liked Mr. Bean when I was alot younger but it really grew stale for me later in life. The only thing I love about it is the theme tune by Howard Goodall.
And he really does excel with dialogue than without it.
Also, I never expected Richard Curtis of all people to be one of the creative minds behind Blackadder.
Tahmeed: He and Atkinson came up with the idea but it was Ben Elton who gave it the spark it needed.
Christopher Nolan is ending his partnership with Warner Bros.
Louis: Any thoughts.
David Jones:
I'm quite sure I've given those before.
Luke:
Naturally a companion piece to Late Spring, though the variation is granting a greater kind of levity to the piece, though still deeply emotional in that specific low Ozu kind of way, that doesn't make a big sound but makes a big impact. In this instance so vividly just realizing these people, and the nature of the relationship with such a poignancy, while technically within an often comical plot of finding a suitor.
Hara - 4.5(Her performance here is interesting as the companion particularly as both are being pushed to marry, however they feel so dissimilar in this instance, even as Hara carries herself with that same strict naturalism of hers. Her though in a way portraying a character with a less obvious of a conviction and almost a blithe quality in part when she makes her decision. Hara makes this natural, yet still emotional in creating the sense of the woman kind of essentially setting herself different standards for a relationship others. This in her moments of decisions being atypical yet wholly convincing within her performance.
Ryu - 3.5(Less of a focal performance here, though still good here in portraying just the naturally concerned family member.)
Miyake - 4.5(Moving work wholly in portraying the best friend/sister in law and creating a such a powerful sense of the specific empathy in her scenes with Hara. This in every one of her interactions there is such a striking sense of the connection the two share, and their scenes are powerful together by just how strictly real every interaction of theirs feels.)
Sugai - 4(In a way takes over Ryu's role of the father, though given less of an overt focus. Sugai's performance though is moving in showing the strict sort of warm support of the father, even while carrying this undercurrent of distress towards the potential future. Truly moving work as he creates such a loving expression while still expressing the doubt within it.)
Higashiyama - 4(Like Sugai is very moving in creating such a powerful sense of the loving parent, even when not wholly with their daughters decision. They show the weight of the relationship though both in terms of their love and support, but also their certain distress.)
Nihonyanagi - 3.5(Really wonderful in his scene with Hara, in not really expressing an obvious love between them, at least in a romantic sense, rather showing the shared sort of memory as connected by both of their losses. This also with his moment of reacting to the arrangement with a certain surprise, and also even reservation. Painting doubt on the relationship without them a truly unloving either.)
Calvin:
100% lead. And I agree, there's some potential there, largely I find based on Henriksen's efforts, but man Mortensen's writing is just abysmal.
Tahmeed:
I mean yes they do, although I think that Loren/Mastroianni period, also relates to the academy/and the world kind of embracing the Italian cinema of the period as kind of the "hip"/"cool" thing to do. This as you also see that in the screenplay win for Divorce, Italian Style, the multiple writing/directing noms for Fellini, its dominance in the foreign language category, even in De Sica's random nomination for supporting actor. It seems films were simply in contention, whereas now they need to be pushed beyond belief to get recognized, like Parasite and Roma or for performers there almost has to typically the sense of a carry over, as a foreign performer who will be in English films as Loren and Mastroianni. This remains even largely true with the nominations for Banderas, Huppert and Cotillard.
Luke:
Not surprising, given it seemed they didn't consult anyone over the whole "straight to streaming" plan. Nolan, even with Tenet's return, is the clout in his projects, so I don't think it will slow him down in anyway.
Louis: Would Miyake be your #3 in 51 Supporting Actress.
Luke:
She'd be my #4, Hara would be runner-up in lead.
I must admit, I'm really looking forward to your thoughts on Life Is Sweet. I always thought it was released in 1990 until now when David recommended it.
Louis/Luke: Although Loren and Mastroianni got the ball rolling, I honestly see the early/mid 70's as a high water mark for Italian-American cinema. There was of course the incredibly successful Godfather films and the rise of Pacino and de Niro, as well as the emergence of partial Italian stars like Stallone and Travolta.
I don’t really feel like Loren and Mastroianni had anything in direct correlation with Italian American cinema.
Calvin: Not directly, no, but seeing as how they pre-date the rise of those 70's stars, I wouldn't be surprised if they helped open some doors here or there. Or at least, if there fame contributed to the growing interest with Italian filmmaking and performers overall.
Louis have you ever seen Robert Aldrich's Twilight's Last Gleaming? Really good performance from Charles Durning as the US President, a decent guy a little out of his depth in a crazy situation.
Louis: Do you still stand by your 1.5 for Bridges in Starman, or will you reevaluate that one?
Houndtang:
I have not, but I'll certainly keep it in mind for 77.
Robert:
I probably could give that one another chance.
For some reason I always think it’s Kurt Russell and not Jeff Bridges who’s in Starman lol
Louis: Thoughts on Life Is Sweet and ratings & thoughts on the cast.
Hey folks. I have a question. I want to start watching some of Robert Altman’s films. What film do you guys consider a good starting point for him?
Matthew: The first one I saw was The Player, so I'd recommend that one.
Matthew:
I'd say early period Nashville or later period The Player, and go from there.
Luke:
Life Is Sweet was a bit mid tier Leigh for me, and I guess I'd say I don't love his domestic comedies. Although I did prefer this to Happy Go Lucky, some of the more extreme characters, namely the daughters, I found a bit granting. I took a long time to warm up to, and one of them I never did. Still enjoyed much of it, and thought when it went more emotional it succeeded quite well.
Steadman - 4.5(Classic kind of matriarch Leigh performance. This with a sweeter resilient disposition. This to the point where it showed the holes in another performance to me. This as she makes sort of the brightness genuinely endearing and wholly honest. Making the moments of really even "combating" her negative daughter, or dealing with a drunken fool, she brings a brisk honesty within still a largely sunny disposition. Finding this natural balance as she sort of pulls back on one side, though always showing this certain inherent nature about her. Wonderful work to be sure.)
Broadbent - 4(Broadbent pretty much is always appreciated this instance no different than the rest. Broadbent though is just a lovable sort of lump in a way. Broadbent finding though again just sort of the same type of nature as Steadman, but perhaps without the ability to sort of break that affability to take the right stands.)
Rea - 3.5(Splendidly silly as a proper drunken fool. His little glances all are quite enjoyable, I just wish there had been more of him, as it seemed a wasted opportunity of having Rea collaborate with Leigh to a certain extent. Still he makes a good impression with what he has.)
Horrocks/Skinner - 3.5/2.5(Both start as grating as all get out, and probably with some intention, but still. This as they just came off as incredibly phony though as these caricatures, of the excessive straight arrow and the anything but that. Both playing into each to to the nth degree. Skinner stayed that way throughout for me, but when Horrocks finally brought some subtly to it, it made up for it nicely. This in finding the real sadness behind the constant anger of the character. She ends up finding a real poignancy in it, and managed to really bridge character into the caricature.)
Spall - 4(Now he is a caricature as well, but we're talking about Timothy Spall here. He's great in playing into the caricature, and is just pretty hilarious. I especially loved his weird football handling of the pineapple, and just his constant weirdness. Spall for me importantly I think had purpose, and he's a hoot as just weirdness upon weirdness with this blithe shamelessness at all times. Wonderful work from him as usual in his collaboration with Leigh.)
Louis: Where would Steadman rank in your Lead Actress top 15 for 91.
Luke:
#9
Louis: I want to ask, what was the performance you were referring to in Steadman's thoughts.
Luke:
Skinner's performance.
lol, apparently Malcolm and Marie is about how Sam Levinson is upset critics didn’t like Assassination Nation
Louis: Which version of The Act of Killing did you watch? Seems like there’s two of them.
Louis: Can Tadanobu Asano go up for Silence?
Bryan:
The original cut.
Tahmeed:
Probably not.
Post a Comment